HOW CAMBODIAN PEDAGOGICAL REFORM
HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED:
A MULTI-LEVEL CASE STUDY
By
Takayo Ogisu

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Curriculum, Instruction, and Teacher Education—Doctor of Philosophy
2014

ABSTRACT
HOW CAMBODIAN PEDAGOGICAL REFORM HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED:
A MULTI-LEVEL CASE STUDY
By
Takayo Ogisu
Reforming teaching practices is a challenging mission. This multi-level case study aims
to explore the complexities inherent in a pedagogical reform by shedding light on the dynamics
and tensions within and across communities of practice at three levels—international, national,
and local—in the case of an on-going pedagogical reform implemented in Cambodia. I was
particularly interested in the social process in which various actors take part in constructing and
reconstructing this reform named Effective Teaching and Learning (ETL) that is based on the
globalized student-centered pedagogies. Informed by social constructivist theory and vertical
case study framework, I designed this research as a multi-level case study that focuses on
communities of practice as the primary unit of analysis. I conducted interviews, observations,
and archival search in Prey Veng province, Cambodia, from November 2012 until July 2013.
This research explores a puzzle, in which pedagogical reform fails to change teaching
practices substantially even when teachers seriously and actively engage in it. I identified the
nature of Cambodian pedagogical reform as follows: (1) it is a social practice where various
actors with different backgrounds and interests actively construct and reconstruct the meaning,
mediated by tools; (2) it is a reversible process that involves dynamics and tensions both within
and across levels; (3) it is not just a pedagogical project, but it has political, social, and cultural
facets that define its shape and scope. In particular, I found that policy messages were expanded,
modified, and even transformed in the communities of practice at different levels, as a result of

actors’ negotiation of meaning. It produced contradictions with ETL policy itself, and further
facilitated local practices that strengthens—rather than changes—existing ideas about teaching
and learning even though I did not observe any overt contestations.
These findings suggest the necessity to re-conceptualize a pedagogical change as a
political, social, and cultural enterprise that requires us to revisit fundamental assumptions in
education, ranging from the theory of knowledge, the socially appropriate relationship between
teacher and students, to the purposes of education. The current reform, however, fails to address
these assumptions with which pedagogical practices are governed and thus may not produce
substantial changes at the classroom level.

Copyright by
TAKAYO OGISU
2014

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

At the point of writing this acknowledgement, a lot of things come to my mind. My
deepest gratitude and respect go to my two advisors, Dr. Jack Schwille and Dr. Lynn Paine, who
guided me through my PhD journey. Dr. Jack Schwille, my first advisor, was always supportive
in everything and I never left his office without feeling confident. He introduced me to numerous
people at MSU based on his 40 plus years of active networking, which helped me, a lonely
international student, build a network in and outside the College of Education. Dr. Lynn Paine,
my second advisor and the chair of my committee, supported me both academically and
psychologically especially when I was away from the campus to collect data in Cambodia and to
write this dissertation in Japan. She actually helped me “construct” knowledge that is presented
here by giving me a lot of insightful comments and questions on my draft chapters. I cannot
express fully how much I thank Jack and Lynn. My gratitude also goes to Dr. Cheryl Rosaen, Dr.
Dorothea Anagnostopoulos, and Dr. Peter Youngs for being on my committee. I am very lucky
to have such a supportive, constructive, and cheerful committee.
I am also deeply thankful to the people in Cambodia. To name a few, Mr. Dara Kim, also
a MSU graduate, had been my Khmer language teacher and a best friend who offered me an
insider’s perspective. I am so blessed to be able to meet him, as he was the only Cambodian
student at MSU when we first met. Dr. Chinhh Sitha gave me a lot of hints and tips to conduct
fieldwork in rural schools in Cambodia. I am also grateful for those in Prey Veng province, who
contributed to this research as participants. Teachers were especially generous to allow me to sit
in their classrooms and ask a lot of questions. Schools principals and district/provincial officers
were also kind enough to accept me and share invaluable insights. I also would like to thank my
Prey Veng friends. Sineth, who happened to be my neighbor, helped transcribing interview data.
v

We became best friends and explored various places in the province together. Sota also helped
me overcome homesickness by the language exchange.
My deep gratitude goes to my family. Without their countless support, I could not reach
this point. My husband, Shinya, helped me go through rough times I had in completing this
dissertation with his encouragements and patience. I thank him for being such a tremendous
emotional support to me. My father, mother, and especially my grandmother, who passed away
just before I came to Michigan in 2009, supported me directly and indirectly with their love. So I
am more than thankful to my family.
Last, but not least, I would also want to express my gratitude to MSU and its College of
Education for their generous support to my research. I received Summer Research Fellowship
from the College of Education and a Dissertation Completion Fellowship from the university.
These financial supports were vital to complete this research.

vi

PREFACE

Because this study involved human beings, this study required approval from The Michigan
State University’s Institutional Review Board (MSU-IRB).

The IRB log number was x12-875e.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................................... xi
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... xii
KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................................................... xiii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................1
Research Background ................................................................................................................. 1
Theoretical Framework............................................................................................................... 5
Conceptual Framework............................................................................................................... 7
Globalization in Education ..................................................................................................... 7
Conflict Within ..................................................................................................................... 10
Policy Appropriation/Negotiation of Meaning/Sense-making ............................................. 11
Review of Literature ................................................................................................................. 13
Globalized Student-centered Principles? .............................................................................. 14
Research on Student-centered Pedagogies in Cambodia...................................................... 16
Questions to Be Explored ......................................................................................................... 18
Structure of the Thesis .............................................................................................................. 19
CHAPTER TWO: RESEARCH DESIGN ....................................................................................22
Introduction............................................................................................................................... 22
Research Context ...................................................................................................................... 22
Cambodia and Its Education System .................................................................................... 22
Quality Issues in Primary Education .................................................................................... 24
Challenges Related to Teachers............................................................................................ 26
Research Design ....................................................................................................................... 28
Vertical Case Study .............................................................................................................. 28
Vertical comparison.......................................................................................................... 28
Horizontal comparison...................................................................................................... 29
Multi-level Case Study Focusing on Communities of Practice............................................ 30
Case: An Ongoing Pedagogical Reform............................................................................... 32
Levels.................................................................................................................................... 33
International level ............................................................................................................. 34
National level.................................................................................................................... 34
Local level ........................................................................................................................ 35
Locale ................................................................................................................................... 36
Research Procedures ................................................................................................................. 40
Data Collection and Participants .......................................................................................... 41
Interview ........................................................................................................................... 42
Participant observation ..................................................................................................... 44
Teacher interactions...................................................................................................... 45
Teaching practices ........................................................................................................ 45
viii

Documents ........................................................................................................................ 46
Methodology of Data Analysis ............................................................................................. 46
Challenges in the Process ......................................................................................................... 49
Positionality .......................................................................................................................... 49
Reactivity .............................................................................................................................. 50
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................................... 51
CHAPTER THREE: SITUATING PEDAGOGICAL REFORM IN CONTEXTS......................53
Introduction............................................................................................................................... 53
History of Education in Cambodia ........................................................................................... 54
Before the French Came (-1863) .......................................................................................... 54
Before Independence (1863-1953) ....................................................................................... 55
From Independence to the Khmer Rouge (1953-1975) ........................................................ 57
From the Khmer Rouge to Paris Peace Agreement (1975-1993) ......................................... 60
Recent Development (1993-Present) .................................................................................... 61
Student-Centered Pedagogies in the Context of Educational Development ............................ 63
Changing Pedagogy, Transforming Society ............................................................................. 66
Student-Centered Principles in CFS Framework: A Global Model ......................................... 68
Content of ETL ..................................................................................................................... 72
Area 1: Classroom management ....................................................................................... 73
Area 2: Questioning .......................................................................................................... 74
Area 3: Learning games.................................................................................................... 75
Area 4: Classroom resources ............................................................................................ 76
Area 5: Reading skill ........................................................................................................ 76
Area 6: Writing skill ......................................................................................................... 77
Area 7: Assessment........................................................................................................... 77
Area 8: Reflection............................................................................................................. 78
Transformation Model of Education .................................................................................... 78
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................................... 79
CHAPTER FOUR: SOCIO-CULTURAL ANALYSIS OF A PEDAGOGICAL REFORM .......81
Introduction............................................................................................................................... 81
Constructing the Meaning of ETL ............................................................................................ 84
Universal Pedagogy in Question: Development partners ..................................................... 84
ETL Meets “Effectiveness” Discourse: Ministry ................................................................. 91
Whose Voice Got Reified ..................................................................................................... 94
Meanings Reified in Policy Tools ............................................................................................ 97
Checklist ............................................................................................................................... 97
Design ............................................................................................................................... 98
Content.............................................................................................................................. 99
Underlying assumptions ................................................................................................. 100
Perceived limited teacher capacity ................................................................................. 102
Paradox ........................................................................................................................... 104
Helping Slow Learners Manual.......................................................................................... 105
The problem.................................................................................................................... 105
Solutions ......................................................................................................................... 108
Local Meaning .................................................................................................................... 110
ix

Local meaning made from the checklist. ........................................................................ 110
Koon ot ceh: Helping Slow Learners.............................................................................. 116
Negotiation of meaning mediated by tools ..................................................................... 120
Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................... 120
CHAPTER FIVE: LOCAL RESILIENCE IN THE FACE OF PEDAGOGICAL REFORM....122
Introduction............................................................................................................................. 122
Unpacking the Logic That Governs Local Meaning .............................................................. 123
Paccekteeh as a political-social-cultural logic.................................................................... 124
Paccekteeh as a means to transmit knowledge ............................................................... 125
Paccekteeh and the teaching occupation ........................................................................ 126
Paccekteeh in the Act of Teaching ..................................................................................... 129
Vignette 1: professional development day ..................................................................... 129
Vignette 2: a math class. ................................................................................................. 132
Vignette 3: a Khmer class............................................................................................... 136
Making sense of ETL with the logic of paccekteeh ........................................................... 140
Teaching Conditions that Shape Local Meaning.................................................................... 141
Teaching Conditions as a Basis for Expectations for Teachers.......................................... 142
Low salary ...................................................................................................................... 143
Resource constraints ....................................................................................................... 144
Practices in Different Teaching Conditions........................................................................ 147
Is Pedagogical Change Possible?............................................................................................ 150
Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................... 152
CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION..............................................................153
Introduction............................................................................................................................. 153
Multiple Rationales of Cambodian Pedagogical Reform ....................................................... 154
Revisiting Findings............................................................................................................. 154
Multiple Rationales............................................................................................................. 157
Revisiting the Literature ......................................................................................................... 160
Globalization in Education ................................................................................................. 160
Gaps between Policy and Practice ...................................................................................... 162
Pedagogical Changes .......................................................................................................... 164
Revisiting Methodology ......................................................................................................... 166
Multi-level Case Study ....................................................................................................... 166
Positionality ........................................................................................................................ 168
Conclusion and Implications .................................................................................................. 170
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................173
Appendix A: Interview Protocol A......................................................................................... 174
Appendix B: Interview Protocol B ......................................................................................... 177
Appendix C: Observation Rubric ........................................................................................... 182
Appendix D: List of Themes Appeared in the Analysis......................................................... 185
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................187

x

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Six Dimensions of Child Friendly School...................................................................... 33
Table 2. Basic Characteristics of Schools in Prey Veng Cluster, 2012/13................................... 40
Table 3. Research Participants...................................................................................................... 43
Table 4. Number of Lessons Observed......................................................................................... 46
Table 5. Types of Activities Listed in the Checklist .................................................................. 100
Table 6. Difficulties Slow Learners May Face, Identified in the Manual .................................. 108
Table 7. Observation Rubric....................................................................................................... 182

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Structure of Cambodian Education System .................................................................. 24
Figure 2. Net Enrolment Rate, Primary Education (%)................................................................ 25
Figure 3. Administrative Structure at the Local Level ................................................................. 36
Figure 4. Map of Cambodia and Prey Veng Province.................................................................. 38
Figure 5. Eight Areas under ETL ................................................................................................. 73
Figure 6. Levels of Cognitive Skills ............................................................................................. 75
Figure 7. A Student Working on Calculation ............................................................................. 133
Figure 8. Multiple Rationales of Cambodian Pedagogical Reform............................................ 159

xii

KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS

CFS

Child Friendly School

CITA

Cambodian Independent Teachers Association

DTMT

District Training and Monitoring Team

EFA

Education for All

ESWG

Education Sector Working Group

ETL

Effective Teaching and Learning

JICA

Japan International Cooperation Agency

KAPE

Kampuchean Action for Primary Education

MDGs

Millennium Development Goals

MoEYS

Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports

NEP

NGO Education Partnership

NGO

Non-governmental Organization

PRK

People’s Republic of Kampuchea

PTTC

Provincial Teacher Training Center

RGC

Royal Government of Cambodia

SIDA

Swedish International Cooperation Agency

xiii

SOC

The State of Cambodia

UNESCO

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization

UNICEF

United Nations Children’s Fund

UNTAC

United Nations Transitional Authority of Cambodia

USAID

United States Agency for International Development

VSO

Voluntary Service Overseas

VVOB

Flemish Association for Development Cooperation and Technical
Assistance

xiv

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Research Background
Reforming teaching practices is a challenging mission. Cambodia has worked on
this mission since the 1990’s in order to replace teacher-centered teaching with more
student-centered teaching, but it has been documented that teacher-centered practices are
still prevalent at the classroom level (Courtney, 2008; Wheeler, 1998). My interest that
guides this research emerged from a simple question: Why does such a persistent gap exist
between policy and practice?
Research about student-centered reforms in the context of developing countries
provides various explanations for the persistence of traditional practices, such as teachers’
misunderstanding or inability to understand the policy, limited resources, and aspects of
local culture that are incongruent with Western-origin pedagogies (Brodie, Lelliott, &
Davis, 2002; Guthrie, 1990; Pontefract & Hardman, 2005). Another explanation for the gap
between policy and practice is offered by a group of researchers who claim that local actors
are not passive policy implementers but, instead, actively engage in applying, interpreting,
and sometimes contesting the policy (Brook Napier, 2003; Cuban, 1998) and that we thus
cannot assume that an education policy can and must be disseminated and implemented “as
is” (Anderson-Levitt & Alimasi, 2001, p. 51).
Building on these existing explanations, my predissertation research explored what
the series of student-centered reform has been about by examining the documents related to
the reforms. I found that this series of student-centered reforms, which the Cambodian
ministry of education has undertaken since 1996, involves contradictions in itself: the ideal
1

of teaching and learning advocated in the reform contradicts what it requires teachers to do.
Overall, this reform is informed by a participatory model of learning on the part of both
teachers and students, which replaces teacher-centered “chalk-and-talk” types of
pedagogies with modern, student-centered and active-learning pedagogies. Teachers are
supposed to learn the set of teaching strategies through monthly teacher meetings where
teachers from nearby schools get together and help each other (Kingdom of Cambodia,
2007). But what this reform actually requires teachers to do is implement highly scripted
tasks, based on which their performance is checked and evaluated (Bunlay, Wayne, Sophea,
Bredenburg, & Singh, 2010). The pedagogical reform is thus informed by a participatory,
bottom-up approach of teaching and learning but a paternalistic, top-down approach is
taken to bring such changes at the local level.
Given these contradictions within the reform policy, it is no wonder teachers
interpret and practice this reform differently from its original intentions. Anderson-Levitt
(2003) has already pointed out that such contradictions, or conflicts, within a single
education reform can be seen in many places, but few researchers have actually explored
these contradictions as a possible factor that maintains or even widens the gap between
policy and practice, or even more fundamentally, tried to identify why such contradictions
exist in one reform. Therefore in this research, I investigate conflicts within Cambodian
pedagogical reform in order to understand more fully the gap between policy and practice.
More specifically, I want to explore the following two questions: 1) why contradictory
ideas coexist in this reform; and 2) how various actors make sense of these contradictions
and enact this reform, within the historical, cultural, and material contexts in which they

2

work.
In order to answer these questions, Cambodian pedagogical reform should be
looked at from “both near and afar simultaneously” (Anderson-Levitt, 2002, p. 20). From
afar, we must pay particular attention to the historical contexts that have shaped how
current education system is structured and implemented in Cambodia. Such contexts have
significant implications for what made Cambodia adopt student-centered pedagogies. We
also cannot ignore the influence Cambodian education has received from global discourse
about education, because student-centered pedagogies are some of the most widely
circulated ideas in education world-wide (Ginsburg, 2009). Cambodian education also
relies heavily on financial and technical assistance from various aid agencies
(Steiner-Khamsi, 2000). Understanding the pedagogical reform from afar (both historically
and geographically) guides us to explore how and why this reform was initiated.
At the same time, we cannot dismiss the importance of the cultural and material
world in which the current pedagogical reform is implemented, together with active roles
played by various actors—national policymakers, provincial and district education officials,
school principals, and especially teachers—because they do not passively accept globally
circulated practices (Anderson-Levitt & Alimasi, 2001). Rather, they actively engage in the
construction of this reform by interpreting and enacting student-centered pedagogies.1
Exploring contradictions involved in this reform will help us deepen our understanding
about the complexities involved in the process of changing local practices in a globalized
1

As Kim and Rouse (2011) lamented, the active roles of teachers have been particularly
sidelined in Cambodia: teachers have been treated as employees at “relatively low
education levels,” and they have “not been trusted to use their professional ability or
discretion,” and thus need “further development and training” (p. 12).
3

world (Steiner-Khamsi, 2010).
The objective of this research is to understand better the complexities involved in
reforming teaching practices through this exploration of the ongoing reform experience in
Cambodia. I investigate how various actors from international, national, and local levels
make sense of and enact a pedagogical policy reform, known as Effective Teaching and
Learning (ETL), by examining, in particular, the contradictions involved in it. Reforming
teaching practices is already a challenging task in itself. Difficulties and challenges
involved in pedagogical reforms have been well documented from both an institutional
perspective (Cohen, 1988; Cuban, 1998; Kennedy, 2005) and the perspective of teacher
learning and professional development (Cohen, 1990; Schwille, Dembélé, & Schubert,
2007; Spillane, Reiser, & Gomez, 2006). Especially in the context of developing countries,
existing research has reported economic and cultural barriers to expanding student-centered
pedagogies (Brodie et al., 2002; O’Sullivan, 2002, 2004).
Although there exists extensive literature on the gap between written policy and its
implementation, little is known about the process in which even conflicting ideas are
absorbed in a single pedagogical reform and how various actors interpret and enact them.
ETL is an exemplary case for this purpose because it is a relatively new policy (ETL was
first implemented as pilot in 2002 and then expanded throughout the country in 2007) and
is currently being undertaken. ETL is also good as a case to situate this process within a
matrix of globalization and local diversification. Understanding how various actors in
Cambodian education reform make sense of ETL and how the
political/economic/organizational contexts shape the meaning of ETL will enrich our

4

knowledge about the dynamics that this pedagogical reform brings about. The current
research is thus not to evaluate how extensively ETL is actually implemented as stated in
the policy documents, but to understand the gap between the written policy and practice by
focusing on why contradictions in this reform exist and how various actors interpret and
enact a reform that contains contradictions within itself.
Theoretical Framework
This research draws on a social constructivist perspective to explore the Cambodian
education reform experience. How we conceptualize knowledge and the process of
knowing have evolved in the twentieth century, and one of the biggest evolutions was a
sociocentric perspective suggested by anthropologists and scholars in the sociology of
knowledge (Soltis, 1981). According to Soltis (1981), from a sociocentric perspective,
“knowledge must be viewed as both individual and social, personal and public
constructions designed to make sense of and provide for effective action in a reactive,
malleable yet independently existing reality,” and “knowledge cannot be separated from
knowers, that human beings construct different knowledge systems, and that all knowledge
is imbedded in the fabric of social life” (p. 98). This social constructivist perspective
informs how I understand the knowledge I am trying to produce through this research, as
well as how I try to understand a pedagogical reform in Cambodia and its contradictory
ideas.
I conceptualize pedagogical reform as a complex social practice that is intended to
foster pedagogical changes, in which various actors construct and reconstruct meanings of

5

teaching and learning.2 A social constructivist perspective suggests that the meaning of a
certain policy is not given, but it is shaped by the interaction among the written policy,
people, and places (Honig, 2006). This perspective means that all actors actively construct
the reform by interpreting and sometimes contesting the idea of student-centered
pedagogies and enacting what they understand as the demands of it within the cultural,
historical, social, and political contexts to which they belong (Sutton & Levinson, 2001).
Pedagogical reform is thus neither monolithic nor normative. Cognitive scientists also
suggest that the policy message supplements rather than supplants agents’ prior knowledge
and practice (Spillane et al., 2006). Therefore different actors make sense of and enact ETL
in totally different ways, even when they all actively engage in it.
Social constructivism informs how I see the roles of various actors and their
interactions in the current Cambodian pedagogical reform. As stated earlier, social
constructivism sees all individual actors actively engaging in constructing meaning. This
perspective especially challenges the policymakers’ common understanding about
Cambodian teachers, who have been referred to as both instruments and obstacles to
changing teaching and learning (Kim & Rose, 2011). In Cambodia, teaching has also been
trivialized into techniques and, as a result, complexities and uncertainties inherent in
teaching have been undermined in education policies. Instead, social constructivism
suggests that teachers are the key agents who hold specialized knowledge and skills based
on which they construct and enact the pedagogical reform. They are playing roles as
2

Education policy researchers who have anthropological orientations have suggested that
we should conceptualize education policy not as a normative text but “as a complex social
practice, an on-going process of normative cultural production constituted by diverse actors
across diverse social and institutional contexts” (Sutton & Levinson, 2001, p. 1).
6

important as donors, policymakers, and school administrators in constructing this reform.
Moreover, this co-construction of meaning should be understood as a social and
situated process (Lave & Wenger, 1991) rather than as an individualized and isolated
process. It is necessary to pay attention to the meaning constructed through interactions
among various actors in order to understand the process through which ETL is interpreted
and enacted. For example, donors negotiate the meaning of this reform in annual donor
meetings, and ministry officials try to figure out what they want from donors and what
donors want them to do in their business meetings. Cambodian teacher meetings at the
cluster level are also an important mechanism to administer formal interactions among
teachers specifically around this reform, aside from more informal interactions between
teachers before or after classes, or during school-level meetings. These meetings and
interactions among actors within and between different levels can be considered as a social
setting where negotiations over the meaning of ETL could occur.
Thus, this research does not seek to reveal universal truth about pedagogical reform
policies per se. Rather, this paper’s aim is to uncover complexities and contingencies that a
specific pedagogical reform entails in a specific time and place, involving specific
individuals. We can better understand the complexities and possibly reveal patterns of
pedagogical reform by accumulating this type of knowledge.
Conceptual Framework
There are several important concepts that should be explored.
Globalization in Education
The proposed research is informed by and intended to contribute to existing theories

7

of globalization in education because the current Cambodian pedagogical reform (ETL) is
inspired by the idea of student-centered, active-learning pedagogy, which has been widely
circulated across the globe.
As in other aspects of our social, cultural, and economic lives, globalization has
brought many similarities in education across nations. World culture theory, or
neo-institutionalist theory perceives globalization as a process in which principles, methods,
goals, motives, and values become more pervasive and intense throughout the world (Boli,
1985). From this perspective, these world-cultural elements “are woven into the
taken-for-granted fabric of everyday life, thereby becoming invisible” (Boli, 1985, p. 385)
and homogenize the globe. Based on this perspective, proliferation of student-centered
instructional reforms can be understood as a process in which student-centered pedagogies
become an element of world culture.
Although world culture theory helps us capture the process of globalization in
education, it fails to explain why certain ideas and practices, such as student-centered
pedagogies, are legitimized and circulated more than others. In contrast to world culture
theory, externalization theory more carefully attends to the semantic construction of the
process of globalization from local perspectives. Its focus is on discursive space where
transnational educational knowledge is filtered for selecting, channeling, and transforming
it into a national meaning structure (Schriewer, 2003). Externalization is a reasoning
characteristic in education literature, and Schriewer & Martinez (2004) identified two forms
of externalization: “externalization to world education” and “externalization to tradition” (p.
31), by which people refer to foreign education and history/tradition respectively, as a filter

8

to legitimate or reinterpret urgent educational concerns.
Other researchers have paid close attention to the politics and conflicts inherent in
the diffusion of a global model or models, which are silenced in world culture theory
(Anderson-Levitt, 2002). Steiner-Khamsi (2000) suggested that we should distinguish
borrowing, lending, and imposition, based on how certain educational ideas and practices
are transferred. This is because educational transfer may involve “patronizing aspects” (p.
179) especially when it occurs from donors to developing countries. Therefore, as
comparative education researchers, we must ask why, how, and by whom educational
policies are transferred internationally (p. 164).
I am trying to understand globalization in education using Steiner-Khamsi (2000)’s
theory of politics and economics of global circulation of educational ideas and practices.
This is because in the case of ETL in Cambodia we cannot dismiss the influence of donors,
most significantly from UNICEF, as well as internal pressures to adopt student-centered
pedagogies in Cambodia. As I will discuss later, the current reform framework was first
launched by UNICEF and many other bilateral aid agencies and local and international
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have taken part in the effort to change pedagogies
based on the student-centered principles. Cambodia also had a good reason to adopt
student-centered pedagogies in the early 90’s. Politicians tried to use democratic
connotations of student-centered pedagogies in order to appeal to the international
communities by demonstrating that they made an effort, at least on paper, to build a modern,
democratic nation after nearly 30 years of ideological disruption. Cambodian instructional
reform is, therefore, a good case to explore “politics and economics” (Steiner-Khamsi,

9

2010) in the global circulation of educational ideas. However, a question still remains: why
do contradictory ideas coexist in ETL?
Conflict Within
Anderson-Levit (2003) argued that education reforms are not necessarily led by
coherent and uniform reform ideals. She claimed that although sociologists identify
decentralization, teacher autonomy, and student-centered instruction as transnational reform
ideals, anthropologists have found that there are other movements toward increasing
national control such as standardized tests, control of teachers, and content-centered
instruction within the same nations (Anderson-Levitt, 2003). These conflicts are explained
either as a phenomenon of conflict within a nation and a group that promotes a single but
inconsistent reform, or as conflict between “opposing groups of actors who are promoting
competing reforms” (Anderson-Levitt, 2003, p. 15). Conflict within suggests
inconsistencies in a single reform model, whereas conflict between implies multiple models
of education reform. Although this point—whether there exist a single model or multiple
models of education—is at the center of the current debate about globalization, I explore
only conflict within here because my focus in this research is to understand the
contradictions within one pedagogical reform.
Globalization literature helps us better understand conflict within with more
concrete examples. Takayama (2010) extended externalization theory by revealing the
conflicting discursive groups that promote single education reform. Based on the analysis
of Japanese discourse about education reform, he discussed how two conflicting discursive
groups, in this case progressives and conservatives, project their own political agendas on

10

the same construct, Finnish education, as a means of addressing existing educational
concerns. Finnish education became a “multi-vocal symbol” (p. 67) that could be used by
different groups, even though they actually used this symbol with distinctive meanings and
projected different agendas onto it. This construct also highlights power dynamics and
conflicting political agendas that are usually hidden and “naturalized” (Takayama, 2010, p.
53). Different actors can work together under the same reform even when their educational
and/or political orientations vary because they may construct different meanings from the
same symbol, such as Finnish education (Takayama, 2010). In the current case, ETL can be
a multi-vocal symbol that allows actors at the international and national level to project their
political, economic, educational, and/or cultural interests and work together without really
agreeing on what ETL means. We can understand contradictions that appeared in ETL
documents as an expression of multiple voices in this reform.
Therefore, in this research, I investigate what similar or different meanings ETL has
for different people and how different meanings are negotiated and reified into policy tools,
focusing especially on the contradictions involved in this reform. However, in order for
actors at the local level to make sense of this reform, these contradictions within ETL may
require them to interpret and negotiate the meanings in more overt ways. We cannot
dismiss the active involvement of local actors, most significantly teachers, in this process in
order to understand the complexities of pedagogical reform.
Policy Appropriation/Negotiation of Meaning/Sense-making
Steiner-Khamsi (2000) argued that we should investigate “how a borrowed policy
has been locally recontextualized, modified, or indigenized” (p. 171), rather than assuming

11

that borrowed policies are embraced and implemented as is. Ethnographic policy studies
offer epistemological and methodological accounts for the local agencies involved in the
process of policy implementation, or what Sutton and Levinson (2001) called appropriation.
Contrary to the traditional notion of policy implementation, by which we assume a
dichotomous relationship between policy formation and implementation, with policy
appropriation Sutton and Levinson (2001) tried to address simultaneously how a policy
shapes practices and how practices shape the meaning of policy. Policy appropriation is a
construct that is particularly useful to understand local actors not as passive implementers,
but as active agents who apply, interpret, and even contest the policy in their institutional
contexts (Sutton & Levinson, 2001).
The idea of policy appropriation suggests the importance of contemplating how
certain policy is transformed when it is implemented in different institutional contexts.
Brook Napier (2003), for example, tried to understand how "outcome-based education" is
appropriated at global, national, provincial, sub-provincial, and school levels in South
Africa. By shedding light on the interface between reform as policy and reform as practice,
she found that "instead of trickling down, at every level ideas can be transmitted and
sometimes blocked" (Brook Napier, 2003, p. 52).
In addition to these vertical comparisons,3 Anderson-Levitt and Alimasi (2001)
address the necessity of examining how certain policy is transformed horizontally. By
investigating actual meanings given to the mixed method teaching by actors in multiple
3

Vavrus and Bartlett (2009) criticized qualitative research in comparative education for
not having paid enough attention to the influence from international and national levels on
local educational practices. They contended that vertical comparisons are necessary to
better understand the local practices.
12

layers at international, national, sub-national, and local levels in Guinea, they found that
even actors within a single level, such as donors or teachers, were not monolithic in terms
of how much they were motivated to embrace mixed method teaching.
Variations within the same level suggest the situative and social nature of policy
appropriation. For example, by exploring how teachers collectively make sense of new state
policies on reading instruction and how they implement them, Coburn and Stein (2006)
revealed that teachers negotiated meanings of instructional policies with pedagogical
assumptions and preexisting practices shared in the multiple professional communities they
participated in, such as grade level groups, department within school, and study groups
across schools. The process of policy appropriation, therefore, should be understood within
multiple layers of context that affect how active agents make sense of policy.
Given that policies are appropriated by all actors, how can we understand the
process in which actors negotiate meanings and construct somewhat shared understandings
about a policy? How has the meaning of ETL been negotiated among donors and ministry
officials while maintaining contradictions? Especially at the local level, when a policy
involves contradictions in itself, like ETL, it is predictable that local actors will understand
such policy differently from policymakers’ original intentions. But how do the local actors
react to the contradictions within ETL in the process of negotiating the meaning of ETL in
the multiple “communities of practice” (Wenger, 1998) to which they belong, such as
cluster-level groups, their own schools, and more informal networks?
Review of Literature
The World Conference on Education for All held in Jomtien, Thailand, March 1990,

13

was influential in expanding student-centered approaches in developing countries
(Ginsburg, 2010). A document prepared in this conference referred to active and
participatory approaches as “particularly valuable in assuring learning acquisition and
allowing learners to reach their fullest potential” (Interagency Commission, 1990, Article
4), and various developing countries as well as aid agencies enthusiastically adopted
student-centered pedagogies as a means to improve the quality of education. These
countries include Namibia (O’Sullivan, 2002, 2004), South Africa (Brodie et al., 2002),
Nigeria (Hardman, Abd-Kadir, & Smith, 2008), Cambodia (Bunlay et al., 2010; Kingdom
of Cambodia, 2007), and more.
Globalized Student-centered Principles?
The fact that many countries across the globe have adopted student-centeredness
invites consideration of what the common characteristics of this pedagogical approach are.
Tabulawa (2003) identified the following characteristics: (a) more flexible and relevant
curricula; (b) activity as the core of learning; (c) placing learners at the center of education;
and (d) constructivist epistemology as the common principles that characterize
student-centeredness. He further contended that aid agencies play a central role in diffusing
learner-centered pedagogies in low-income countries and that aid agencies always have a
hidden political agenda “to alter the ‘modes of thought’ of those in periphery states” so that
they embrace democratic and neoliberal ideology (Tabulawa 2003, p. 10).:
… learner-centred pedagogy has social, epistemological and
philosophical foundations. For this reason, the pedagogy is not
value-neutral. It is a view about the world, about the kind of people
and society we want to create through education. However, this
nature of the pedagogy is often not recognised. This is because it is
14

often presented as if it were value-free and merely technical
(Tabulawa, 2003, p. 9).
Similarly, neocolonialists critically examined the diffusion of student-centered
pedagogies in non-Western contexts. For example, Guthrie (1990) asseted that it is
problematic to transport student-centered approaches to low-income countries without
having solid scientific evidence that shows such approaches produce higher cognitive
achievement. Scholars have also warned that the “wholesale adoption” of Western-origin
student-centered pedagogies may result in academic ineffectiveness and perpetuating the
dependency (Nguyen, Elliott, Terlouw, & Pilot 2009, p. 123). Although these
neocolonialists are very critical about these phenomena, they suggest that there exists a
kind of globalized student-centered principles at least on the policy level.
However, many studies that explored the impact of student-centered reforms in
developing countries documented the persistence of teacher-centered, “chalk and talk”
types of pedagogies. Major factors identified as constraints on these instructional reforms
are (a) teachers’ lack of capacities to use new pedagogies appropriately (Brodie et al.,
2002); (b) mismatch with local culture and physical conditions (O’Sullivan, 2002); and (c)
lack of incentives to encourage teachers to use new pedagogies (American Institutes for
Research, 2006). Based on her action research in Namibia, O’Sullivan (2004) further
suggested that it is necessary to take “adaptive approach” that is to add changes based on
the realities within which teachers work rather than expect teachers to implement the
student-centered policy as it is (p. 599).
Other researchers, in contrast, especially those who explore local meaning, have
reported that student-centered pedagogies are localized and contextualized rather than just

15

adopted as they are. For example, Vavrus and Bartlett (2013) found that although
Tanzanian teachers embraced student-centered pedagogies, they held “a persisting sense of
knowledge as something pre-determined to be ‘given’ or transferred from teachers (or
books) to students” (p. 72). They unveiled the contingency of pedagogy to the cultural and
material contexts in which teaching and learning take place. These findings suggest that
globalized student-centered principles have impacts only on the policy level and local
practices diverge rather than converge.
Research on Student-centered Pedagogies in Cambodia
Although there are only a limited number of studies available that explored the
student-centered pedagogies in Cambodia, researchers and aid agencies reported mixed
results on how extensively ETL has changed in teaching practices. Wheeler (1998)
observed lessons taught by 212 teachers and found that only 4% of them (eight teachers)
actually taught in a student-centered style, compared to 74% who taught in traditional
teaching styles and 22% who taught using mixed approaches. In the academic year 2007/08,
USAID project reported that 74% teachers demonstrated satisfactory improvements in their
student-centered teaching (American Institutes for Research, 2008).4 Other researchers
used teachers’ reflections as evidence of positive changes. These changes include increased
use of active-learning techniques, increased use of cooperative learning, and increased

4

There exists a huge gap in the data on the popularity of new instructional practices in
these studies. Possible reasons for this gap are (i) 10 years of time difference, during which
donors and the ministry invested a great deal of resources, (ii) differences in purposes: the
main purpose of Wheeler’s study was to draw implications for future projects whereas the
purpose of USAID report was to evaluate their project, and/or (iii) different evaluation
methods. Therefore, simply comparing the results of these two studies may yield inaccurate
results.
16

knowledge of techniques for encouraging students (Bunlay et al., 2010). It has also been
reported that traditional, teacher-centered “chalk-and talk” types of instruction are still
prevalent in classrooms (Bunlay et al., 2010; Courtney, 2008). Courtney (2008) noted that
teachers implement student-centered activities only when they are observed by inspectors.5
These studies indicate that we do not have rigorous comparable data to examine how
extensively ETL has brought changes at the classroom level.
Within the limited range of research about cluster-level teacher meetings,
researchers agree that these meetings have some positive impacts but these impacts are still
limited. A researcher who conducted research at the very early stage of this reform saw the
potential of these meetings: “Instead of always waiting for mandates from above to provide
guidance, teacher collaboration stimulates a beginning sense of confidence that solutions
can be found at the local level” (Wheeler, 1998, p. 15). However, he also noted that these
meetings are often the place where traditional beliefs and practices are disseminated and
reaffirmed, rather than replacing them with student-centered pedagogies (Wheeler, 1998).
Other researchers who conducted research saw more positive signs recently, and claimed
that teacher meetings are effective to disseminate knowledge about the student-centered
approach throughout the country (Bunlay et al., 2010). But based on interviews with
teachers, they also claimed that teacher meetings would have only minimum impacts on
teacher learning and their professional development without more systematic and extensive
follow-up support.

5

This suggests the importance in this study of setting up classroom observations very
carefully in order to observe as natural classrooms as possible (See Chapter 2 for more
discussion).
17

Only limited research has focused on the contradictions and inconsistencies within a
pedagogical reform. Courtney (2008) reported that the materials used to promote and
evaluate student-centered practices were inconsistent and misleading. For example, she
pointed out the problems inherent in the checklist prepared by the ministry, with which
school inspectors observe teachers’ practices annually. This checklist approach only helps
observers check which activities (group work, questioning, lecture, etc.) are implemented
but does not allow them to see the quality of a lesson as a whole. Therefore, she argued,
school inspectors would obtain only superficial understanding about instructional practices
with this checklist. This study directly speaks to the issue of reification that hinders people
from making sense of what this reform actually tries to do. Although her argument is
persuasive, it remains unclear why there exist these contradictions and inconsistencies in
the documents prepared by the ministry.
Another question that needs to be addressed is how local actors make sense of the
contradictions within this policy. Local actors may not be aware of contradictions, or may
not regard them as contradictions at all. Or they may be aware of and make use of
contradictions in order to achieve their interests. Local actors do not passively accept ETL
and follow what ETL tells them to do. Rather, they negotiate the meaning of ETL or even
reject ETL. But it is still unclear how local actors make sense of contradictions in ETL and
react to them.
Questions to Be Explored
The aim of this research is to better understand the gaps between policy and practice
by focusing on the conflicts within an ongoing Cambodian pedagogical reform. Because

18

various aid agencies have significantly influenced this reform (ETL), I situate this research
in an axis of global-local, and explore the process in which conflicting ideas are absorbed in
a single education reform policy at international and national levels, and how local actors
appropriate this policy. My overarching research question is: How is the idea of
student-centered pedagogies (ETL) constructed by local, national, and international actors
engaged in education reform in Cambodia? I divided this question into two parts.
I.

At the international and national levels, how are conflicting ideas put together in ETL?
(a) How similarly or differently do donors and national policymakers interpret and
rationalize ETL?
(b) How are the different meanings negotiated?
(c) How are the negotiated meanings reified in ETL-related policy tools?

II.

At the local level, how do actors react to ETL?
(a) How do they make sense of ETL? Do they see the conflicts within ETL as
conflicts at all?
(b) How are these meanings negotiated mediated by policy tools?
(c) How are the negotiated meanings expressed in practice?
(d) How do political/economic/organizational contexts shape the meaning of ETL?
Structure of the Thesis
My dissertation consists of six chapters. Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the

whole research, explains theoretical and conceptual frameworks I draw on, explores the
existing literature, and concludes by presenting the research questions to be explored. In
Chapter 2, I explain methodologies employed in this research and provide a brief

19

introduction to the research site and participants.
Findings of this research are presented in Chapters 3, 4, and 5. Chapter 3 situates
Cambodian pedagogical reform in its historical, social, and political milieu as well as in the
context of globalization that shapes how the current formal education system is structured
and operated. Looking at the pedagogical reform “both near and afar simultaneously”
(Anderson-Levitt, 2002, p. 20), in terms of both temporally and geographically, helps us
understand what pushed Cambodia to adopt globalized student-centered principles.
In Chapter 4, I discuss how the meaning of ETL is constructed by various actors. I
particularly focus on the mechanisms through which different actors (or stakeholders)
negotiate the meaning of student-centered pedagogies and develop ETL policy, especially
at the international and national levels. Also, by analyzing two policy tools, I identify
contradictions, twists, and paradoxes involved in the policy tools. I also examine how these
tools mediate local actors’ understanding and practice of the ETL policy, and present local
meanings made from the policy tools.
Chapter 5 investigates the underlying “logic” that governs Cambodian pedagogy.
This involves exploring how Cambodian people, especially local actors, talk about
knowledge, teaching and teacher development, and teaching conditions, as well as
examining actual practices. Based on the observation and interview data, I argue that
paccekteeh (techniques/technical) plays the central role in governing how Cambodian
education should be organized and operated.
Finally, in Chapter 6, I present the whole picture of Cambodian pedagogical reform
by synthesizing findings presented in Chapters 3, 4, and 5, and discuss how my findings

20

could further contribute to the literature that this research draws on, both theoretically and
methodologically.

21

CHAPTER TWO: RESEARCH DESIGN

Introduction
Just as a theory shapes how things could be understood, so does a methodology. As
discussed in the previous chapter, this research is primarily based on social constructivist
tradition with which I aim to understand how Cambodian pedagogical reform is constructed
by various actors and situated in contexts. Methodologically speaking, this research is
informed by a great deal of comparative education literature. Most significantly, a book
titled Critical Approaches to Comparative Education: Vertical Case Studies from Africa,
Europe, the Middle East, and the Americas edited by Frances Vavrus and Lesley Bartlett in
2009, provided me with a compass with which I could see where I stood in the middle of
the process.
In this chapter, I discuss how I designed this multi-level case study by building on
the vertical case study framework. But before starting to discuss methodological details, I
first want to provide an overview of the setting in which this research was conducted.
Finally, I want to discuss methodological efforts I made in collecting and analyzing data.
Research Context
As discussed, this research about the case of ETL is designed based on vertical
comparison across international, national, and local levels. I want to introduce Cambodia
and its education system briefly and explain basic characteristics of each level, so that I can
set the stage for this research.
Cambodia and Its Education System
The Kingdom of Cambodia is a county located in Southeast Asia, surrounded by
22

Thailand to the northwest, Lao PDR to the northeast, and Vietnam to the east. Nearly 15
million people inhabit its tiny area of about 70,000 square miles. More than 90% of its
population engage in farming, but they have recently been experiencing rapid economic
growth (7.3% in 2012), according to the World Bank (2013). Aside from Khmer,
Vietnamese, and Chinese, there are ethnic groups called Khmer Loeu, the majority of
whom live in the mountainous areas located in the northeast part of the country. Khmer is
the official language and has strong Sanskrit and Pali influences.
The current education system took its form in 1996, when it was divided into four
levels: pre-school education, primary education, secondary education (lower and upper),
and higher education. Six years of primary education and three years of lower secondary
education constitute the country’s basic education cycle, as shown in the Figure 1
(UNESCO, 2008). Having financial and technical support from international aid agencies,
the Cambodian Ministry of Education (known as Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport,
MoEYS) has set three priority areas in the education sector: 1) to improve access to
education, especially to ensure nine years of basic education to all children; 2) to improve
the quality and efficiency of the system, especially to reduce dropout and repetition and
improve transition rates from primary to lower secondary schools; and 3) to strengthen the
capacity of educational administrators and staff (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports,
2010).

23

Figure 1. Structure of Cambodian Education System

Source: UNESCO (2008). Secondary Education Regional Information Base: Country Profile—Cambodia, p.2

Quality Issues in Primary Education
This research is concerned about the second priority, i.e. quality and efficiency,
because the current pedagogical reform, in particular, is expected to address issues of
quality (Kingdom of Cambodia, 2007). Figure 2 shows how access to primary schools was
improved over 20 years, but challenges still remain in retaining students in school: on
average, more than 10% of students actually do not complete six years of primary
education and this figure is worse (nearly 18%) in remote areas (Ministry of Education,
Youth and Sports, 2014). One of the important factors that severely affects high dropout
rate is repetition, especially in lower grades, because those students who repeat grades often
become fourteen or fifteen years old, which is regarded as old enough to start working,
when they are still in primary school. As of 2013, nearly 28% of primary school students

24

were over-aged, which means older than 11 years old. These students are at high risk of
dropping out.
Figure 2. Net Enrolment Rate, Primary Education (%)
100.0

97.4
95.6

95.0

92.0

95.3

94.6

90.0
86.5
85.0

82.7

80.0
Both sexes

75.9
75.0

Female

70.0
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2013).

Issues of quality are not limited to student retention, but recent assessments revealed
that students do not really learn the content that they are supposed to be taught. The results
from Khmer and Math assessment conducted in 2006 for sampled Grade 3 students were
particularly shocking: students answered correctly in only 40.4% of the items for Khmer
and 37.5% for Math, which require only minimum skills that should be acquired by the
time they enter Grade 3. In contrast, Grade 6 students responded to nearly 70% of the items
correctly in Khmer and 53% in Math in another survey conducted in 2007. This gap
suggests, according to MoEYS, that students in Grade 6 are those who could survive and

25

thus become a more selective group than those in Grade 3 (Ministry of Education, Youth
and Sports, 2008a). It implies that primary education especially before Grade 3 does not
succeed in equipping students with necessary knowledge and skills to survive in primary
schools.
Challenges Related to Teachers
It was similarly very troubling in the 2006 assessment that teachers who taught in
Grade 3 had only limited pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in Math. In the assessment,
teachers were asked to answer the same items to which their students responded as well as
additional items that asked teachers to analyze examples of students’ errors and diagnose
problems. It turned out that most of the Grade 3 teachers had lower-order knowledge (they
answered correctly on 90.1% of the items), but their PCK level was assessed as 3.4 point on
average out of maximum 6 point. More than 10% of them could not provide any responses.
Although the research found only small correlations between teachers’ PCK and students’
test scores, these results ended up posing critical questions about the effectiveness of
teaching and learning.
Recruiting and retaining good teachers is another big issue. The current education
system offers teaching certificates for the primary level to those who complete two years of
training at Provincial Teacher Training Centers (PTTC), but the preparation focuses
primarily on upgrading student-teachers’ content knowledge that they are going to teach.
This means that primary school teachers basically have content knowledge up to upper
secondary level when they start teaching. A survey also revealed that teacher training is not
necessarily the favorite option for many students in teacher training programs. Actually,

26

most of the student-teachers come to teacher training only because they have failed
university entrance exams (Benveniste, Marshall, & Araujo, 2008).
Retaining qualified teachers is probably more difficult than attracting students to the
teaching profession, mainly due to low teacher salaries with a starting salary as low as
US$50 per month. To put this amount in context, an individual needs US$19.5 just each
month to purchase the absolute minimum food to meet basic calorie requirements. It is
impossible to make ends meet if he/she has two or more family members and has to pay
living expenses. As a result, many teachers have second or even third jobs to maintain
enough income, or they just try to seek other employment opportunities. According to a
recent survey that explored demographic characteristics of pre-service and current teachers,
there was a significant portion of teachers who try to get bachelor’s degree, not for their
professional development purpose but for seeking a chance to get better jobs (Williams &
Kitamura, 2012). After the Khmer Rouge period, failure in retaining qualified teachers has
resulted in maintaining nearly 10% of “contract teachers” who are un- or under-qualified in
order to address the chronic teacher shortage (Geeves & Bredenburg, 2005).
The current pedagogical reform is implemented in this context and expected to
address issues of quality that are directly linked to teaching and learning. However,
problems that it needs to address have been changing over time as people (mainly in aid
agencies) keep discovering new problems as discussed above. In this sense, actors involved
in this reform need to keep shaping and reshaping its meaning to address and respond to
new problems, and this is where we can observe macro-micro dynamics.

27

Research Design
As discussed, this research tries to explore the gap between a written policy and
practice. There are many ways to tackle this question, ranging from an empirical approach
to assess how a written policy is implemented, to a more explanatory approach to
understand why a gap exists. Given that my interests are about the processes in which a
policy-practice gap emerges and that this research is informed by social constructivist
theory, I employ an explanatory approach and trace the policy from international to local
levels.
Vertical Case Study
In the field of comparative education, understanding the dynamic interplay between
macro and micro is a relatively new approach. There has been a growing concern about the
validity of the nation-state/country as the sole unit of analysis in educational research, as
the border between one education system and another became more blurred under
globalization (Arnove & Torres, 2003; Carney, 2009; Steiner-Khamsi, 2010). Identifying
countries of origin of certain education policies and practices also became more difficult,
because many of them are circulated across the globe at least on the surface. The enormous
influences of globalization on local educational practices are now widely recognized by
comparative education researchers, who started to think that exploring only macro or micro
would not be sufficient to understand either of them. In this context, Vavrus and Bartlett
(2009) proposed vertical comparisons across micro- and macro-levels as an essential
approach to understand local educational practices in relation to the broader contexts.
Vertical comparison. Local practices are of particular significance in this research

28

because its aim is to explore a pedagogical reform in which teachers are the most important
actors. However, as Vavrus and Bartlett (2009) warned, “there has been a tendency to take
the macro for granted and focus exclusively on a single-site locality rather than carefully
exploring how changes in national and international institutions, discourses, and policies
are influencing social practice at the school level” (p. 9) Understanding the dynamics or
tensions between macro and micro in the process of pedagogical reform provides us with a
better sense about why local practices take certain shapes. Vertical case study is defined as
“a multisited, qualitative case study that traces the linkages among local, national, and
international forces and institutions that together shape and are shaped by education in a
particular locale” (Vavrus & Bartlett, 2009, pp. 11–12). Such an approach allows me to
compare vertically—international, national, and local—the sensemaking of participants in
an ongoing pedagogical reform in Cambodia, which, in turn, helps me understand how the
dynamic interplay among different levels shapes local practices that are somehow different
from the original intentions of this reform. This approach further enables me to avoid
overestimating national and international forces as determinants of local practices or
underestimating them merely as contexts. Rather, by shedding light on the relationship
across vertical levels, I can examine the reciprocal relationship between global-local and
national-local. In other words, I can go beyond examining the impact of national and global
discourses and trends on local practices and think about how local educational practices
shape policies and discourses.
Horizontal comparison. As Vavrus and Bartlett (2009) contended, vertical case
study also allows us to compare horizontally across sites through multisited research.

29

Various authors have pointed out the importance of horizontal comparison. For example, a
study conducted by Anderson-Levitt and Alimasi (2001) revealed that even actors within a
single level, such as donors or teachers, were very differently motivated and committed to
implementing a globalized pedagogy, and that such differences were brought by both
personal background and social contexts. In this study, horizontal comparison is
particularly important to explore how ETL is variously understood and how such diverse
meanings are negotiated within each level.
Horizontal comparison should not be limited to “research through” multiple sites on
a particular case, but it should be open to comparison “through the juxtaposition of cases
that follow the same logic to address topics of common concern” (Vavrus & Bartlett, 2009,
p. 14). My current research involves horizontal comparison across sites (such as schools)
within the case of ETL, but I do not intend to compare across cases (such as other
student-centered reforms).
Multi-level Case Study Focusing on Communities of Practice
I design this research as a multi-level case study about an ongoing pedagogical
reform in Cambodia. Although my current research is strongly informed by the idea of
vertical case study, I tried to go beyond it. Critical ethnographies, through which Vavrus
and Bartlett (2009) understood the macro-micro dynamics, have contributed a great deal to
the advancement of comparative education. For example, in an ethnographic study on the
career choice of lower class youths, Willis (1981) vividly illustrated how schools reproduce
social class even when lower class youths themselves resist such school culture. MacLeod
(1995) also explored a low-income neighborhood in the US and found that the students in

30

this neighborhood did not hold high aspirations and that these students were “not making it”
in their later lives. These ingenious studies shed light on the relationship between individual
agency and the social structure, but too often these studies emphasize the limitation of
individual agency within the larger processes (such as capitalism). The vertical case study
approach has its strength in the capacity to illuminate the interplay between individual
agency (micro) and broader contexts (macro).
This current research, however, does not draw on this critical perspective. Instead,
informed by social constructivist theory, this research focuses on the communities of
practice where multiple actors work together to change (or not to change) pedagogies. With
a social constructivist perspective, agencies can be understood not only as individual but
also as social: social processes, such as schooling or pedagogical reform, are constructed,
changed, contested, or rejected by professional communities as well as individuals.
Communities also need to be conceptualized in a more flexible ways because, in reality,
individuals belong to multiple communities with different people and in different social
settings. Vertical case study tends to, as it is practically inseparable from critical
ethnography, assume the dichotomy between the structure and agency and rarely pays
enough attention to the communities of practice within which individuals make sense of
and react to certain things, e.g. education policy.
In order to overcome these limitations of vertical case study, this research is
designed as a multi-level study that focuses on communities of practice at different levels.
Communities of practice offer a more practical unit of comparison than individual agency
and are more tangible than the social structure. They are also more open to the possibilities

31

that an actor can belong to multiple communities at different levels (such as an official
from a donor agency belonging both to the donor community and the local teacher
community). Comparing the meanings made in different communities of practice helps us
understand better the processes in which a written policy is appropriated and transformed
by various actors.
Case: An Ongoing Pedagogical Reform
The case I am exploring in this research is an ongoing Cambodian pedagogical
reform called Effective Teaching and Learning (ETL), currently being implemented,
especially at the primary education level.6 ETL is a part of Child Friendly School (CFS)
models that are based on globalized student-centered principles. CFS framework was
originally developed by United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and more than 50
countries across the globe as well as many Southeast Asian countries have adjusted and
implemented CFS models. Cambodia also made some adjustments to CFS framework and
included six dimensions that cover “all parts of school work including school management,
health and safety, gender, school-community relationship and support for education system”
(Kingdom of Cambodia, 2007). Table 1 below summarizes six dimensions of CFS, in
which ETL is the second dimension and the main focus of this research.

6

CFS was originally started in primary education, but it was expanded to lower secondary
level in 2013.
32

Table 1. Six Dimensions of Child Friendly School
Dimension 1

All children have access to schooling (schools are inclusive)

Dimension 2

Effective teaching and learning

Dimension 3

Health, safety, and protection of children

Dimension 4

Gender responsiveness

Dimension 5

The participation of children, families and communities in the
running of their local schools

Dimension 6

The national education system supports and encourages schools
to become more child friendly

Source: Kingdom of Cambodia. (2007). Child Friendly School Policy, pp. 5-6

I particularly focus on ETL, the second dimension of the Cambodian CFS model,
because this dimension directly touches upon how teaching and learning should be
conducted inside classrooms. It is not only the place a lot of researchers and practitioners
have found the most difficult to change, but also where we can observe the dynamics
brought by globalized student-centered principles at the local level. In Cambodian context,
the second dimension is the most important in terms of quality of education (one of the
priority areas in education sector, as I discuss later). At the same time, however, there is yet
to be agreement on what effectiveness means and how it should be measured. Therefore,
setting ETL as a case of vertical comparison makes it easier to trace the linkages between
different levels and help achieve the goal of this research, which is to understand better the
complexities involved in the process of pedagogical reform.
Levels
As I discussed in Chapter 1, I conceptualize ETL not as an object but as a practice
(Sutton & Levinson, 2001), which is socially conducted and situated in specific contexts.
Therefore, I identified social settings—or communities of practice—where actors negotiate
33

the meaning of ETL at different levels: donor communities at the international level,
ministry working group and committees at the national level, and District Training and
Monitoring Team (DTMT) and cluster-level teacher meeting at the local level.7
International level. There are a variety of donor agencies, ranging from United
Nations organizations, international NGOs, to bilateral international cooperation agencies,
which engage in the current pedagogical reform. Donors (or Development Partners, as they
are called) form communities such as Education Sector Working Group (ESWG) and
EDUCAM, where they discuss a wide range of issues in education sector and make policy
recommendations to the MoEYS. ESWG meetings are held once every three months with
relatively bigger development partners (such as UN agencies, bilateral agencies, and
representative of NGOs) whereas EDUCAM meetings are held monthly with smaller
partners such as NGOs. These communities work as platforms that facilitate interactions
among different development partners. Although ETL is not the only topic of discussion in
these two communities, these mechanisms to some extent facilitate negotiation of meaning
over ETL among participants.
National level. At the national level, there is the CFS national steering committee
and several working groups that work on pedagogical reform. The national steering

7

I should note that boundaries between levels are not so clear and simple. Although not
many researchers have pointed out its challenges, it is very difficult to define levels as the
basis for vertical comparison because many actors move across levels. For example, there
was an actor who basically belongs to the donor community but stays in schools and
regularly joins teacher meetings. This kind of difficulty remained until I finished analyzing
data, but as can be seen in later chapters those actors who belong to multiple social settings
at different levels have hands-on experiences working in the dynamics between levels.
34

committee, led by the minister, holds meeting twice a year. Working group meetings,
which are led by the director of General Education Department, are held more frequently to
discuss specific issues. Representatives from four departments mainly take part in these
communities: Primary Education Department, Teacher Training Department, Curriculum
Department, and Education Quality Assurance Department. These are an important
mechanism to adjust new policies like ETL to the existing policies and plans. In this sense
the meaning of ETL is negotiated in these communities within the ministry.
Local level. The main focus of this research is on the local practices that shape and
are shaped by the discourses at the international and national levels. For local practices, I
am particularly interested in understanding how local actors, including teachers, school
principals, and district and provincial education officials negotiate the meaning of ETL and
implement it.
There are three sub-national bodies that administer public primary schools under
MoEYS. These are provincial education offices, district education offices, and school
clusters (Figure 3). Due to the recent movement toward decentralization, district education
offices and school clusters play more and more important roles in the whole education
system. Currently, around 7,000 primary schools are grouped into 1,200 school clusters
across the whole country (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, 2014). Each cluster has
one core school, which is usually the biggest one, and five to eight satellite schools with
annex schools in some cases. Schools in a cluster share resources, hold professional
development sessions, and organize monthly teacher meetings. In the cluster,
representatives of school principals and district education officers organize a District

35

Training and Monitoring Team (DTMT), which monitors and evaluates teaching practices
and school management, and reports it to the province. The negotiation in these
communities have direct impact on how teachers are told about ETL and evaluated.
Figure 3. Administrative Structure at the Local Level

Source: Developed by author based on Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (2008a).

The monthly cluster-level teacher meeting is regarded as a platform where all
teachers in the cluster get together on the last Thursday of every month. A typical meeting
is organized in the following schedule: 10-30 minutes information sharing in the whole
group; grade-level small group meeting for 90-120 minutes; and 10-30 minutes of wrap-up
in the whole group. In the grade-level small group meeting, teachers who teach in the same
grade are supposed to share their experiences and struggles with each other and jointly
prepare lesson plans (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, n.d.). Under these
administrative bodies, actual teaching and learning take place at the school level.8
Locale
Because the purpose of this research is to reveal the dynamics brought about by
ETL to the local level, I chose one of the six provinces where CFS model was piloted
8

Although in principle a school-based meeting is also held every month, the focus of this
type of meeting is more on administrative information sharing rather than discussion about
teaching and learning.
36

directly by development partners as a locale of the vertical comparison. In particular, I
selected Prey Veng province, which is located about 90 miles away from Phnom Penh,
surrounded by Kampong Cham, Kandal, Svay Rieng provinces and Vietnam to the south
(Figure 4.). Having nearly 950,000 population in its 1,885 square miles area, Prey Veng is
one of the most populated provinces in Cambodia. Most of the population engages in
agriculture and fishing in the shore of Mekong River, and the province is a part of what is
called the “great green belt” of Cambodia. The province has worked closely with UNICEF
since the 2001/02 academic year, when UNICEF launched a CFS pilot project in three out
of 12 districts in this province. It achieved 100% coverage of CFS in its public primary
schools in 2009, just two years after the CFS policy was issued.

37

Figure 4. Map of Cambodia and Prey Veng Province

Source: Maps Open Source (n.d.) and WebKyom (2011), retrieved in June 2014.

Out of 34 clusters in the province, I selected Prey Veng cluster in Prey Veng district,
which is the provincial capital. I selected this cluster because it allows me to conduct
horizontal comparison due to the diversity it entails. Although the cluster is located in the
capital, it is consists of 10 primary schools that represent a wide range in size from a city
school with nearly 800 students to a remote school with little more than 100 students. As
can be seen in Table 2, schools also vary on how well they accept and retain students.
These variations within the same cluster, which shares resources and administration in
principle, are the key to understand the divergence in local practices.
Because of the huge geographical area covered by this cluster, schools are divided
into two sub-clusters. Schools #1 to #5 are in the group where School #1 is the core school,
and schools #6 to #10 are in a group headed by School #6. Cluster-level teacher meetings

38

are held in two different locations, but both of them are taken care of by the same District
Training and Monitoring Team. Although School #1 plays a role of core school in the first
sub-cluster, this school gets fewer students than before and school facilities are not as good
as School #6. Similar to the situation in the whole country, all of the schools except School
#6 operate a double-shift, which means that students come to study either in the morning or
in the afternoon and spend only four hours in school per day. Such double-shift operation
was introduced in order to meet the rapid expansion of primary school enrolment with
limited classroom capacities and number of teachers. As far as I observed, however, some
schools open only in the morning because they do not have such a large number of students.
School #6, which offers classes the whole day, is thus regarded as the most advanced
school in the cluster.

39

Table 2. Basic Characteristics of Schools in Prey Veng Cluster, 2012/13
Location1

Teachers

Intake2

Students

Repetition3

Dropout

1

City

6

105

20%

6.4%

1.7%

2

City (PTTC)

12

293

--

--

--

3

Remote

10

297

89.4%

14.1%

0%

4

Rural

6

121

100%

6.6%

2.5%

5

Remote

6

182

100%

0%

26.6%

6

City center

23

788

99.2%

6.4%

0.4%

7

City

10

203

--

--

--

8

Rural

8

206

93.8%

--

--

9

Rural

12

298

140%

6.4%

1.7%

Remote

8

277

--

--

--

101

2770

--

--

--

10

144

Note: 1) Location is divided based on the accessibility. City schools are located within 10 minutes drive from
the city center, where are it takes less than 30 minutes to get to rural schools from the city center, yet more
than 30 minutes to remote schools. School #2 is located inside Provincial Teacher Training Center where
student-teachers observe classes and practice teaching. 2) Intake rate is the percentage of newly enrolled
students out of 6-year-old children in the school district. School #1 achieved only 20% intake rate probably
because either 6-year-old children chose other schools or not to enroll. 3) Repetition rate and dropout rate are
calculated based on the number of students repeated or dropped out during the academic year out of the
number of students enrolled in each school.
Source: Data obtained from Prey Veng District Education Office.

Research Procedures
Drawing on the vertical case study in the case of ETL, I set my overarching research
question as follows: How is the idea of student-centered pedagogies (ETL) constructed by
local, national, and international actors engaged in education reform in Cambodia? This
question is divided into two parts based on the levels.
II.

At the international and national levels, how are conflicting ideas put together in ETL?

40

(e) How similarly or differently do donors and national policymakers interpret and
rationalize ETL?
(f)

How are the different meanings negotiated?

(g) How are the negotiated meanings reified in ETL-related policy tools?
III.

At the local level, how do actors react to ETL?
(a) How do they make sense of ETL? Do they see the conflicts within ETL as
conflicts at all?
(b) How are these meanings negotiated and mediated by policy tools?
(c) How are the negotiated meanings expressed in practice?
(d) How do political/economic/organizational contexts shape the meaning of ETL?

I collected and analyzed data in the way that allows me to compare within and across three
levels.
Data Collection and Participants
In order to explore the above questions, I made three trips to Cambodia to collect
data in the period of November 2012 to July 2013. In these trips, I (a) conducted
semi-structured interviews with teachers, school administrators, district and provincial
education officials, NGO officials, ministry officials, and donors, (b) observed cluster-level
monthly teacher meetings in both of the two sub-clusters in Prey Veng cluster, (c) observed
classroom practices of Grade 1 and 2 teachers in the cluster, and (d) collected artifacts such
as meeting minutes, policy tools, reports published by donors and NGOs, and lesson plans
and teaching aids used in the classes observed.
The first visit took about three weeks in November and December 2012, when I

41

conducted a series of interviews of international actors from major donor agencies and to
do archival search at the National Archives of Cambodia and Hun Sen library at the Royal
University of Phnom Penh, where major historical and current policy documents are
archived. The second visit was from January to March 2013, when I mainly interviewed
ministry officials and familiarized myself with the local community in Prey Veng province.
During the second visit, I started visiting 10 schools in the cluster and interviewing school
principals and teachers. After one month I went back to Prey Veng province for more
comprehensive data collection at the local level. I spent three and half months from
mid-April to July 2013 and observed classes almost every day in different schools. Even
when I collected data at the local level, I made several trips to Phnom Penh to interview
ministry officials or informants in donor agencies.
Interview. Interviews are one of the important sources of data for this research. In
order to explore similarities and differences of actors’ perceptions toward ETL, I conducted
semi-structured interviews with officials from major donor agencies, ministry officials,
provincial and district education officers, school administrators, and teachers in Prey Veng
school cluster. I developed a set of questions (see Appendix A) to be asked to actors from
all levels around the following themes: (i) their understanding about ETL and Child
Friendly School (CFS), (ii) perceived roles they play in this reform, (iii) their perceptions
about conflicts within ETL, and (iv) their evaluations of ETL and CFS. I also interviewed
teachers several times in order to get a deep understanding about the logic with which
teachers make sense of ETL. For this purpose I also developed an independent interview
protocol that included more specific questions about eight areas of ETL and about actual

42

teaching practices (see Appendix B). I occasionally changed and/or added questions in
Interview protocol B based on the previous interviews and observation. In total, I
interviewed 59 participants from three levels (21, 4, and 34 from international, national,
and local levels respectively). The summary of the participants can be found in the Table 3
below.
Table 3. Research Participants
Level

Category
Multi-lateral
(3)

Bi-lateral (3)

International

NGO (4)

Consultant

Affiliation
UNICEF

1

World Bank

2

UNESCO

1

US Agency of International
Development (USAID)

1

Japan International Cooperation
Agency (JICA)

3

Flemish Association for
Development Cooperation and
Technical Assistance (VVOB)

1

World Education

2

Kampuchean Action for Primary
Education (KAPE)

2

Save the Children

1

Voluntary Service Overseas
(VSO) Cambodia

1

--

2
Total

National

Ministry (4)

#

21

Primary Education Department

1

Teacher Education Department

1

Curriculum Department

1

Education Quality Assurance

1

Department
43

Table 3 (cont’d)
Total
Provincial

Local

District

Provincial Education Office

2

Provincial Teacher Training
Center

1

District Education Office

1

District Training and Monitoring
Team (DTMT)

8

School director -Teacher

4

10

--

13
Total

Grand Total

34
59

I conducted most of the interviews with actors at international and national level in
English, while I used Japanese with native Japanese speakers (especially those in JICA) and
Khmer with actors at local levels. On two occasions when I interviewed the director of
provincial education office, a Cambodian friend of mine from local NGO accompanied me
and helped translate some of the questions. But in other cases I conducted the interview on
my own.
Participant observation. In order to understand how various actors actually
negotiate the meaning of ETL, I observed meetings where multiple actors get together and
discuss issues related to ETL. Although I first planned to observe ESWG and EDUCAM
meetings, it turned out to be quite difficult to arrange without special permission from the
minister. Instead, I ended up collecting meeting minutes of these meetings. But I did
observe three monthly teacher meetings in Prey Veng cluster. Also, in order to understand
how the negotiated meanings of ETL are expressed in practice as well as how practices

44

shape the meaning of ETL at the local level, I observed Grade 1 and 2 Khmer and Math
classes (at least one from each school in the cluster).9
Teacher interactions. I conducted participant observation in cluster-level teacher
meetings every month as well as school-level meetings in each school. Observing both
cluster- and school-level meetings allowed me to get a better sense about how teachers
negotiate meaning of ETL in multiple professional communities (Coburn & Stein, 2006).
My predissertation research experience suggested that teachers discuss different topics in
these meetings—mainly about student affairs in school meetings and more about teaching
and learning in general in cluster meetings—and this observation was confirmed in the
current research. Therefore, I focused more on cluster meetings. In cluster meetings, when
teachers were divided into grade groups, I stayed in either Grade 1 or Grade 2 groups.
Teaching practices. In order to understand how negotiated meaning is expressed in
practices, I observed teaching practices of teachers who taught in Grade 1 and 2 in the
cluster. Based on the lesson plans and ETL tasks listed in a checklist (see Chapter 4), I
mainly explored the following questions: (i) how similarly or differently teachers
implemented ETL tasks; (ii) what and how ETL philosophy and tasks in general were
incorporated in their daily teaching practices; and (iii) to what extent cultural and material
contexts matter in implementing ETL. I used descriptive observation instruments focusing
on the eight areas represented in ETL documents (Appendix C, Observation rubric). I also
conducted 5-10 minutes short interviews before and/or after the class in order to ask
questions about the particular lesson I observed. Because some teachers allowed me to

9

Khmer and Math classes consist of 20 hours out of 25-30 hours of instruction per week.
45

observe their classes several times, I could observe 32 lessons taught by 13 teachers from
all of the 10 schools in the cluster (Table 4).
Table 4. Number of Lessons Observed
Grade 1
Grade 2

Khmer

14

Mathematics

1

Khmer

13

Mathematics

4

Documents. In order to explore how various actors represent ETL similarly or
differently, I collected written documents, such as policy papers and reports written by
donor agencies, policy related documents written in both English and Khmer, and agendas
and materials prepared for/in meetings. Some official reports written by major donor
agencies, such as UNICEF and USAID, are available online, but information available only
in Khmer was particularly useful to understand better how the ETL and CFS framework
have been translated. Also, in order to situate ETL in historical contexts, I collected a series
of policy-related documents that have been published since 1996, when Cambodia first
approved an education reform based on student-centered approaches. At the local level, I
collected artifacts prepared for teaching, such as lesson plans, teaching aids, posters, and so
on. These documents were very useful in understanding the ways in which the meaning of
ETL was “reified” through negotiation (Wenger, 1998, p. 58).
Methodology of Data Analysis
The primary method of data analysis for this study is comparative and interpretive.
Comparison can be a tool to understand the context rather than abstract from it
(Steiner-Khamsi, 2010) and interpretive analysis allows us “to find constructs, themes, and

46

patterns that can be used to describe and explain the phenomenon” (Gall et al., 2006, p.
466).
Before analyzing data, I transcribed all of the interview data. This process of
transcription was a major challenge in this study, because I used three languages—Khmer,
English, and Japanese—in data collection. Because I am less fluent in Khmer, I had to first
transcribe every single word in Khmer and check it with a native Khmer speaker, then
translate everything into English in order to make it easy to handle. But there exist concepts
and words that cannot simply be translated. In these cases I just left such concepts in
Khmer and used them as they are in this dissertation. In total, it took me nearly three
months just to get everything transcribed.
My data analyses went through three phases—horizontal comparison, interpretation,
and vertical comparison. Using Dedoose, an online qualitative data analysis software, I first
analyzed data from each level (international, national, and local) horizontally in order to
explore similarities and differences within levels. More specifically, at each level, I coded
interview transcripts from the common protocol and explored the patterns (such as what
themes many people frequently discussed and what they did not). I also coded notes and
minutes of meetings of different communities of practice, so that I can see how actors
discussed ETL similarly and differently. This process was essential to understand the
diverse meanings made and negotiated. I also analyzed artifacts and documents produced in
each community in order to understand how various meanings of ETL are reified. Together
with pre-defined codes from policy documents (such as eight areas of ETL) as well as from
literature review (such as Shulman’s categories of teacher knowledge), 81 codes emerged

47

from my data set.10 After repeating the coding process several times, I grouped the code set
into 20 larger categories (see Appendix D).
Building on the code set and categories I obtained in the first phase of analysis, I
moved on to interpret what ETL means at each level. For each of the three levels, the
categories were mapped out in order to identify key themes which appeared in my data set.
At this point I devoted a lot of time and energy to understand local meaning. First, I
conducted a descriptive analysis of quantitative data, which was collected with classroom
observation rubric (Appendix C), and identified what typical teaching practice looks like.
Next, I analyzed and compared observation notes and transcripts of in-depth interview data.
This was done for the purpose of both exploring the underlying “logic” of teaching
practices and checking the reliability of my interview data. I identified seven themes at the
international level, seven themes at the national level, and eight themes at the local level
(see Appendix D).11
For the last phase of data analysis, I conducted a vertical comparison across levels.
More specifically, based on the themes that I obtained in the second phase, I identified the
following five cross-cutting themes that commonly appeared in all of the three levels: (1)
politics within and between communities; (2) learning achievement; (3) teachers, teaching,
and professional development; (4) theory of knowledge; and (5) centrality of materials. By

10

I started data analysis from the international level, where I first completed data
collection. I applied the same code sets to national and local data, and some codes were
added and changed in the process. In the end, I got 81 codes as my code set.
11
In order to confirm the importance and relevance of these themes in the current
pedagogical reform, at the end of my fieldwork I brought up these themes in the
conversation with some of my participants and got feedback. I also discussed my findings
with some of the participants over phone and email after I left Cambodia.
48

comparing the excerpts of each theme, I aimed to understand how similarly or differently
each theme appeared in three levels. These five cross-cutting themes are of particular
significance in this research, because I organize the discussion in this dissertation with
themes instead of levels.
Challenges in the Process
This research involved several challenges that needed to be confronted. These
include issues of positionality and reactivity, which I now turn to discuss.
Positionality
The issue of positionality was one of the biggest concerns throughout the process of
collecting and analyzing data and writing up. Especially in the field, I needed to be very
strategic in constructing good research relationships with participants due to my age,
gender, marital status, nationality, and all other aspects of who I am. When I chatted with
local teachers, one of the comments that I most frequently got from them was I was too
young to travel by myself. As soon as people knew my nationality as a Japanese, some of
them assumed that I was a JICA officer who visited Prey Veng to select project sites, and
pleaded with me for facilities and school materials. Others asked me to donate money to the
library that was under construction. Although I made a small contribution, I had to explain
to them that I was just a student who conducts research and was not able to make any
significant monetary contributions.
In the process, I learned that talking about my own teaching experiences was very
helpful to put myself in the similar position as Cambodian teachers. I talked about my
struggles to manage a class with 25 Japanese kids when I was teaching Grade 3, and

49

teachers started to share their struggles as if I was their colleague, or to ask questions about
how teaching in Japan is different from that in Cambodia. Such conversation worked as an
icebreaker and I could smoothly move on to explain purpose of my research and get
consent.
Even when teachers accepted me to take part in casual conversations, they
sometimes did not agree to be observed. I learned that teachers were usually observed by
DTMT members and school principals only for the purpose of monitoring and evaluation.
They also knew that I had an approval letter from the minister to conduct research in
schools, and thus they thought I was an external evaluator sent from the ministry. Therefore
they felt uncomfortable when I observed their classes without giving them any feedback.
As a result, when I was asked to give feedback, I first explained that evaluation was not the
purpose of my research, and tried to talk about the strengths of his/her teaching practice.
Making three trips to Cambodia with a short break also worked positively in
strengthening good relationships with the participants. Every time I went back to the
province and visited schools, teachers welcomed me by saying “We had lots of visitors who
said they would come back, but you are the only one who actually came back to us!” My
participants saw how serious I was about this research based on the fact that I went back to
the same sites.
Reactivity
I needed to pay close attention to the reactivity in Cambodian school contexts. As
Courteny (2008) warned, teachers may have implemented ETL only when they were
observed. In order to observe as natural teaching practices as possible, I explained clearly to

50

teachers that my observation was not for evaluating or reporting their practices and that it
was very important to observe their daily practices for the purpose of this research. In
addition, I did not notify them of the specific date and time when my observation would
take place, so they could not prepare anything special beforehand. I simply asked
permission each time just before class began. Still, there was an occasion when a teacher
suddenly asked students to form small groups as soon as I went into the classroom. She
started an impromptu game that was not directly related to the content she was teaching.
Although this was an exception to the more common experience I encountered, the issue of
reactivity was unavoidable to some extent.
In order to address this issue, I went back to observe several lessons taught by the
same teachers. Although there were some teachers who refused to be observed more than
once, I was able to observe two or more classes for five teachers. By repeating observation,
teachers as well as students got familiar with my presence in class and teaching and
learning seemed to get closer to “normal.” Also, I found that observing non-normal
teaching practices could be a window through which I could understand the kinds of
teaching and learning teachers thought good to show to an outsider.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, I aimed to set the stage by introducing how this research is designed
and conducted. This research is based on a multi-level case study of an on-going
pedagogical reform implemented in Cambodia. Prey Veng cluster in Prey Veng province is
the locale in which I explore how local practices are shaped by and shape the reform that is
based on globalized student-centered principles. I explained the methods of data collection

51

and data analysis, and discussed issues of positionality and reactivity.

52

CHAPTER THREE: SITUATING PEDAGOGICAL REFORM IN CONTEXTS

Introduction
The meaning of education is not static across time and space. In Cambodia, which
experienced both flux and reflux over time, education has strongly reflected political
circumstances of the times. Education as a human right is a very new idea: it was, and still
is to a significant extent, a privilege that cannot be enjoyed by the majority of the
population. In such context, we need to closely look at how basic assumptions about
education—its purposes, organizational structure, and of course pedagogy have changed (or
not changed) over time. At the same time, given the fact that Cambodian education to a
significant extent has been financed by external support, the influence of the international
development agencies as well as the global development agendas such as Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) and Education for All (EFA) cannot be dismissed.
The goal of this chapter is to situate Cambodian pedagogical reform in the historical,
social, and political milieu as well as in the context of globalization that shape how the
current formal education system is structured and operated. Looking at the pedagogical
reform “both near and afar simultaneously” (Anderson-Levitt, 2002, p. 20), in terms of both
temporally and geographically, helps us understand why Cambodia “imported” the
globalized student-centered policy. In particular, I argue that Cambodian student-centered
reform, by replacing the basic assumptions about education, reflects desires to create a
democratic society.

53

History of Education in Cambodia
The history of Cambodian education can be understood in five different stages.
During the first stage, there were no formally operated schools although informal
educational venues were there even before the sixteenth century under the Angkor. These
informal educational venues played key roles to perpetuate Angkor kingdom through an
educated population. The second stage is during the French colonial period from 1863 to
1953, during which Cambodian formal education system (education in public schools) was
established. In the process of building the state after the independence, the education
system was developed and expanded, and then largely destroyed. I put this dramatic period
(1953-1975) as the third stage of Cambodian history of education. From 1975 to 1993, until
the Paris Peace Agreement was declared, Cambodian education system experienced
reconstruction and rehabilitation after the devastation brought by the Khmer Rouge.
Following this fourth stage, Cambodian education finally reached the development stage, in
which the current education system was introduced and access to primary education shows
rapid growth.
Based on this dynamic history, Effective Teaching and Learning (ETL), which this
study tries to explore, has been developed and implemented as a way to change not only
education but also the society as a whole. In the sections that follow, I discuss how
education has been associated with the social and political circumstances in each of the five
stages and how it is connected to the desires to change the society.
Before the French Came (-1863)
There are few resources available that I can draw on to discuss how education has

54

traditionally been organized and functioned in Cambodia, but it is clear, there was no
formal education system in Cambodia before the French colonial period. The only
educational opportunities people had access to were those provided in Buddhist temples
called wat, and there were even limited to boys. In temple schools, monks taught
educational poems and proverbs for the purpose of the children’s moral and spiritual
development rather than pragmatic skills such as literacy and numeracy.
As Ayres (2000a) pointed out, temple schools played the central role in perpetuating
the monarchic hierarchy with the God-King on the top, monks in the middle, and peasants
(who constituted more than 90% of the population) at the bottom. It was done through
concentrating knowledge in temples: only written texts were considered as knowledge and
written materials were stored in temples. Monks transmitted such written knowledge orally
to be memorized by heart. By doing so, temples monopolized knowledge and determined
“what texts were worth knowing” (Ayres, 2000a, p. 14). Oral transmission of knowledge
also defined the proper teacher-student relationship as the storyteller and the audience
(Needham, 2003), in which the audience was expected to listen to stories quietly and recite
information correctly. A great deal research has illuminated the continuities of the Buddhist
tradition in the current educational practices in both tangible and intangible ways (Needham,
2003).
Before Independence (1863-1953)
Cambodia was under French protectorate for about a century from 1863 until 1953,
and it was the French who brought the structured “modern” public education system. But it
was not exactly mass education that was open to the general public, because the French

55

largely ignored the peasantry. French schools catered to the royal families, Chinese
merchants, and Vietnamese government officials to educate their kids to serve in the
administration in Cambodia. In contrast, temple schools were still operated to cater for the
children from the peasantry. The Governor-General of Indochina approved temple schools
(école de pagoda) as public schools in 1906 (Sasagawa, 2010). In temple schools, boys over
aged eight were taught by monks, who got trained and officially employed as teachers, but
the focus remained moral development rather than academic subjects.
Behind such dual education system, the French protectorate government made a big
shift in its approach to govern the Indochina area. At first, the French tried to introduce all
over its Indochina colonies and protectorates the same education system that is identical to
the one in France. In this assimilation approach, the French tried to deny the legitimacy of
the monarch system by replacing all the temple schools with French schools. Their
intention failed because they met a lot of protest from both elites and peasants whose social
world was so fundamentally defined by monarchic hierarchy. Ayres (2000a) argued that the
French failed to acknowledge the cultural and geographical diversity in the area. They
gradually changed the approach and tried to introduce French system building on the local
systems and ended up maintaining traditional temple schools and reforming them instead of
replacing them with French schools. But the dual education system actually worked as a
mechanism through which the French could stratify students into those who would govern
and those who would be governed (Sasagawa, 2010). Nevertheless, nearly a thousand
schools were opened by 1939, which accelerated the expansion of access to public
education.

56

The dual education system during this period created a social contradiction between
embracing modernity and maintaining tradition, in which elites enjoyed the fruits of
modernization and development while at the same time they also benefited from traditional
patron-client relationship (Ayres, 2000a, p. 186). It created the social divide between the
“modern” elites who were educated in French schools and the general public (“traditional”
peasantry) who got only temple education or no education at all. The divide has
long-lasting implications both for the education system and for the Cambodian society as a
whole. Modern elites actually utilized such divide to legitimate traditional patron-client
relationship in local communities that have been maintained since Angkor period. This
patron-client relationship is one of the many things that the French first tried to terminate
but failed. Such “traditional” social hierarchy was associated with the great Angkor Empire
and was idealized as a symbol of Khmer nationalism. Interestingly, however, it was
“modern” elites who revived and exploited the hierarchy after Japan took over the
Indochina area from the French occupancy.
From Independence to the Khmer Rouge (1953-1975)
After achieving independence in 1953, the Cambodian education system saw a great
development under the strong initiative of Prince Norodom Sihanouk and Prime Minister
Lon Nol (Maeda, 2003), although these two leaders took very different approaches to
educational development with opposite ideologies. In both cases, however, education
policies and practices in this period did not successfully respond to the goals of both
nation-building and individuals’ social mobility.
Sihanouk tried to modernize Cambodian education by building on the “modern”

57

system that was introduced under the French protectorate. He showed strong commitment
to education by investing around 20% of the GDP to the education system, and he gradually
replaced temple schools with formal primary schools. The number of students who were
enrolled in some form of formal education in 1969 was 1,160,456, whereas only 432,649 in
1956 (Ayres, 2000a). Such rapid growth in the education sector produced large number of
unemployed graduates, who thought they were entitled to get “modern” jobs instead of
farming. One of the failures of Sihanouk’s approach was that he failed to respond to the
desire of newly educated population for social mobility.
Another failure was due to the contradiction between the modernization ideology
based on the French system and the reorientation toward rural economy in the curriculum
that Sihanouk’s government developed. On the one hand, Sihanouk and his government
could not get away from modernization ideology (i.e. colonial education system) because to
do so would undermine their legitimacy (Ayres, 2000a).12 On the other hand, they had to
emphasize “practical activities” in policies and curriculum in order to prepare educated
population who work in the agriculture sector rather than in the very small modern sector.
The contradiction between modernity and rural reorientation confused and impeded the
important goal of Sihanouk: building a modern state. It resulted in frustration especially
among the university students and graduates, and a lot of political protests happened
throughout the 1960’s.
The 1970’s was “a period of division” as Ayres (2000a) described (p. 69). In March
1970, Sihanouk was disposed by the National Assembly and he joined the Communist

12

Sihanouk himself was educated in the French system.
58

movement. The Khmer Republic, led by the Prime Minister Lon Nol, was the biggest rival
who embraced participatory democracy with support from the West. According to Ayres
(2000a), division during this period was:
between supporters of Communism and republicanism; between
supporters of the political left and those of the political right;
between inhabitants of the city and those of the country; between
the rich and the poor; between the beneficiaries of corruption and its
victims; and between those Cambodians whose conception of
nationalism constituted the notion of social equality and those
whose conception supported the status quo (p. 69).
In such circumstances, education policies were not fully implemented and counterpolicies
and criticisms were launched solely to criticize the other side. But anyway, the Khmer
Republic improved its presence while Sihanouk was in decline.
Lon Nol’s approach to education was so called neo-Khmerism (Ayres, 2000a). He
first tried to remove images of the past under Sihanouk both symbolically—removing his
portrait from school buildings—and substantively—localizing French colonial education
system by replacing the language of instruction from French to Khmer.13 He also tried to
involve students in the national campaign and direct actions against Vietnamese and
Communism through civic and political education. However, these attempts failed because
Lon Nol and the Khmer Republic gradually lost their legitimacy toward 1975. The
government territory was shrinking and the majority of schools were closed, abandoned, or
destroyed.

13

The national assembly decided in 1967 that language of instruction should be Khmer in
all levels of education and Lon Nol government strengthened the “Khmerization
(Khmergo-ka)” (Sasagawa, 2010, p. 117).
59

From the Khmer Rouge to Paris Peace Agreement (1975-1993)
Cambodian education cannot be understood without referring to its tragic history, or
the Khmer Rouge period (April 1975-January 1979) more specifically. Pol Pot, a leader of
the Khmer Rouge, denied access to education as he believed it is a source of
inequality—between educated white color and illiterate peasants. In a sense, Pol Pot tried to
cut down the link between education and power. Therefore during this period, the
Cambodian education system was totally destroyed. 75% to 80% of teachers were killed
just because they were literate. School buildings were occupied to be used as prisons
(Ayres, 2000a).
After the Vietnamese army overthrew the Khmer Rouge on January 7, 1979,
Vietnamese-sponsored People’s Republic of Kampuchea (PRK, later changed the name to
the State of Cambodia, SOC) started reconstructing public education system based on the
Soviet socialist ideology (Tully, 2005). PRK’s attempt failed, because the West stopped all
of the financial and technical support to Cambodia in the midst of Cold War (Gottesman,
2003). Gottesman (2003) sharply described the situation as follows:
No Berlin Wall ever fell in Cambodia. No Vaclav Havel or Lech
Walesa came to power. The regime did not collapse; it negotiated
the terms of its survival. Impoverished and isolated, the SOC
understood that it needed legitimacy and assistance from the United
Nations and from the West. This meant complying with the
expectations of the international community, when necessary, and
protecting power in undemocratic and frequently violent ways,
when possible (p. 348).
After the Paris Peace Agreement in 1991 and the first election in 1993 under the
United Nations Transitional Authority of Cambodia (UNTAC) supervision, the new

60

coalition government14 seriously started to reconstruct its formal education under the
pressure from the international community (Chandler, 2008). The coalition government
embraced the provision of formal education as a way to build a nation-state that looks
modern and at the same time to legitimate and sustain its leadership (Ayres, 2000b).
Similar to other sectors, however, the Cambodian Ministry of Education did not
have autonomy over education during UNTAC period. Political scientists stated that
Cambodian political culture during this period can be characterized as follows: politicians
concerned about maintaining their legitimacy and complying with expectations from
international communities, but rarely about the Cambodian people (Kusakabe, 2009).
Having experienced the cut of international aid during PRK, and having relied on
international aid for more than half of its budget, the Ministry of Education tried to accept
as many development projects (Shimizu, 2007). Although a lot of efforts had been made,
education in this period was based on “donor-driven” projects that resulted in discrete,
inconsistent, and unsatisfactory development (Shimizu, 2007, p. 2).
Recent Development (1993-Present)
In contrast to the UNTAC period, the share of external assistance in Cambodian
education has gradually been decreased as low as 27% (66 million out of 364.8 million
US$) of total education expenditure in 2009/10 (Government-Donor Partnership Working
Group 2004). This decrease of the share of external assistance is mostly because of the
increasing share of public expenditure in education. Cambodia spent only 7.9% of total
government expenditure on education in 1999, whereas the figure reached 13.08% in 2010.
14

FUNCINPEC and the Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) shared control in this coalition
government.
61

These trends indicate that the Ministry of Education has gradually regained ownership in its
education, although it continues receiving significant amount of assistance from donors—or
what they now call “development partners”—in various sub-sectors.
The latest two decades have produced major development in Cambodian education.
During the 1990’s, the main target was the quantitative aspect of education, or improving
access to primary education more specifically. According to the official statistics, net
enrolment rate in primary education has increased from 77.8% in 1997, 91.3% in 2005, to
96.4% in 2011 (MoEYS, 2012). Given these improvements in access to education, the
quality of education gradually attracted more attention from development partners and the
Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) during the 2000’s (Shimizu, 2007). Improving the
quality of education was included in the National Plan of Action for Education for All
2003-2015 and other major policies as one of the three policy priorities in education
(MoEYS, 2003).15 Therefore, we saw a huge shift in the priorities of educational
development—from quantity to quality.
It is in this context that quality of education, especially quality of teaching and
learning processes, started to be discussed in Cambodia. As the very initial effort to
improve quality, there was a significant structural reform undertaken in 1993. In the
structural reform, with support from Redd Barna (now known as Save the Children),
Swedish International Cooperation Agency (SIDA), and UNICEF, RGC introduced the
school cluster system. Usually, six to nine nearby schools were grouped together into a
school cluster, which consists of a core school and the other satellite schools. This reform
15

Other two priorities are (1) to improve access to nine years of basic education and (2) to
develop institutional capacity and improve effectiveness of education management system.
62

aimed to address both imbalance of school resources and poor quality of its teaching force,
by sharing resources and improving technical capacity of teachers through cluster-level
meetings on every Thursday (Wheeler, 1998). However, as Wheeler (1998) reported, this
reform was more effective in school construction and resource allocation than in changing
teaching practices.
Student-Centered Pedagogies in the Context of Educational Development
This brief overview of Cambodian educational development helps us understand the
fact that political circumstances have significantly affected the system and content of
Cambodian education. Especially after the Khmer Rouge period, both national and
international political circumstances affected it. It has been functioning as a mechanism
through which political power is legitimized and strengthened. Student-centered pedagogies
also emerged in Cambodian education discourse as a way to legitimate the government. I
now turn to discuss both national and international circumstances in which student-centered
pedagogies were brought to Cambodian education.
The term student-centered pedagogies first appeared in official documents as early
as 1995 in guidelines for the curriculum development. According to Va (2006), the ministry
officials were exposed to student-centered pedagogies at the World Conference on
Education for All held in Jomtien, Thailand in 1990, in which three representatives from
the Ministry of Education participated. These officials later took leading positions in the
Ministry,16 and brought student-centered pedagogies back to the country. The biggest
interest of the RGC to adopt a student-centered framework was mainly political at first. In
16

One of the participants became a minister (Mr. Im Sethy), and another one became a
secretary of state (Mr. Nath Bunroeun).
63

Cambodia, modernizing pedagogy was not just a matter of education. It has been a national
political project to appeal to international communities that Cambodia got rid of the
ideological disruption in the country—from monarchism, republicanism, communism, and
finally to Soviet socialism—since its independence from French colonial occupation in
1965 (Ayres, 2000b). For the RGC, it was necessary to reconstruct the country with
democratic principles, and education is the sector through which democratic society could
be built. Replacing traditional authoritative teaching methodologies with the ones that are
based on democratic principles was one of the key strategies for the RGC (Va, 2006).
Student-centered pedagogies, which carry a democratic connotation, were, in fact, a useful
tool for the political leaders to show their efforts toward democracy, albeit at least on
paper.17
Along with this political interest, student-centered pedagogies were a channel for
the RGC to attract external assistance to its education. Cambodian education during the
1990’s can be characterized by its heavy dependence on external assistance, which
contributed 57.9% of total educational expenditure in 1994-1999 (Government-Donor
Partnership Working Group 2004). Under this circumstance, development partners (among
others, UNICEF, Redd Barna, Kampuchean Action for Primary Education: KAPE, VSO
Cambodia, and Japan International Cooperation Agency: JICA) launched emergency and
development projects that touched upon student-centeredness, emphasizing different
aspects and with different labels: child-centered approach (UNICEF and Redd Barna);
17

Although all teachers were required to use student-centered teaching methodologies
regardless of subject or grade level, there was neither shared understanding about
student-centeredness among the higher-level officials nor enough learning opportunities for
in-service teachers (Reimer, 2012).
64

cooperative learning (KAPE); student-centered learning (VSO Cambodia); and
inquiry-based learning (JICA).18 Redd Barna, for example, stressed critical thinking skills,
while KAPE’s cooperative learning emphasized emotional aspects, such as attitudes and
communication skills. The government accepted these similar but different projects with
very limited coordination, as discussed above. These projects not only allowed the RGC to
present its education as a channel for democratic society, but also to secure funding to
reconstruct the education system.
In terms of educational intentions, the purpose of adopting student-centered
pedagogies at its early stage was quite instrumental. It meant accommodating a growing
number of students in primary schools, which increased 19.7% in three years (from 2.0
million in 1997/98 to 2.4 million in 2000/01).19 In order to meet the demands, the ministry
employed two solutions: hiring contract teachers with emergency license and introducing
multi-grade teaching (Geeves & Bredenburg 2005).20 Various manuals for active and
participatory teaching methods were produced during the 2000s as part of multi-grade
teacher training programs (Teacher Training Department 2007). These programs valued the
student-centered methods as an effective approach that enables one teacher to keep a group
of students on task while he/she teaches another grade. In this sense, student-centered
pedagogies provided a solution for the realistic problems in Cambodian education.
The current pedagogical reform emerged as an elaboration of the experiences from

18

JICA’s inquirty-based learning (IBL) is mainly for secondary level science.
During the same period, number of primary school teachers (teaching staff) increased for
only 4%, from 43,282 to 45,152 (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, 1998, 2001).
20
According to Geeves and Bredenburg (2005), contract teachers composed 9% of total
primary school teachers at its peak.
19

65

various projects during the 90’s. Because multiple development partners had been involved
in this reform, it should also be understood as a product of interaction and negotiation
between the Ministry and development partners. There must be some kinds of power
relationship, but as I discuss in the following chapter, it may not as simple as what
neocolonialists usually imagine. We should also take into account multiplicity of agencies
within donor communities or within the ministry that further complicates the relationship
(Steiner-Khamsi 2006), which I explore more in Chapter 4.
Changing Pedagogy, Transforming Society
The current pedagogical reform under Child Friendly School (CFS) framework is
based on student-centered principles, which were not totally new when UNICEF first
brought CFS models to Cambodia. Almost a decade of experiences had been accumulated
through various projects implemented by several development partners at the point of
Cambodia’s encounter with student-centeredness. However, since the term student-centered
did not mean the same for each development partner, and as these projects were
uncoordinated and geographically scattered, student-centered pedagogies could not gain
momentum to make it a national movement. A gradual move occurred since 2000, when the
Ministry representatives participated in CFS workshop held in Thailand (Bunlay et al.
2010). Since then, the Ministry seriously started introducing student-centered principles in
Cambodian education and especially in teaching and learning, and organized pilot projects
in collaboration with development partners. Although UNICEF’s influence was
undoubtedly huge, the current pedagogical reform was developed building on the past
experiences within Cambodia, rather than simply imported from elsewhere.

66

Experiences in the projects both before and after 2000, especially those
implemented by non-government organizations (NGO), were actually a big push for the
student-centered pedagogies. For example, Redd Barna launched an emergency education
project called Schools of Hope in 1991. This project stressed student-centeredness in terms
of child participation in school management as well as in teaching and learning. It
especially focused on critical thinking as a means to regain peace in minds of the people
and in the country after decades of chaotic political circumstances. A local education expert
from Redd Barna, who was one of the writers of the policy documents, recalled,
I was not supposed to use my mind… During 30 years of civil war,
my mother told me, “Keep silent. Don’t talk. Listen where the
bullets come, where the enemies come.” This was the thing that
parents taught to their kids. Don’t talk, listen. It was for survival.
But you can imagine, from generation to generation, we trained our
kids, trained our people, don’t talk, listen, for everything. If you tell
them or give them a tool, they enjoy using it. They just follow [the
instruction] exactly. But if you ask them to talk about their ideas,
they don’t know because this was a kind of culture. We were
trained by the regime. We were, and still, trying to remove these.
This cannot be done by training them, or telling them to do this or
that. (Interview, I1021)
Many local experts echoed him and associated traditional teaching with their experiences
during the Khmer Rouge regime, when they were trained to do anything they were told but
nothing other than that.
Student-centered pedagogies were the response after the Khmer Rouge period to

21

All participants are numbered based on who they are (I: participants from international
organizations or NGOs; N: ministry officials or national education consultant; S:
provincial/district education officials or school principals; T: school teachers).
67

overcome such residual effects. An education expert said, “I can easily imagine why
Western people first thought they must replace traditional teaching with student-centered
one” (Interview, I12). According to her, it is because,
When they [Western education experts] first came to Cambodia,
they must have wondered why Cambodian people didn’t resist
against Pol Pot when he forced to move all people from Phnom
Penh to countryside. Especially for French people, who have good
history of resistance, should have wondered. Then they must have
thought ‘Oh why Cambodian people cannot think by themselves?
Probably we need change how kids are taught in school. Teaching
should be more student-centered and we need to give kids more
room to think.’ (Interview, I12)
Another participant described student-centered pedagogies as a means to educate students
to become a citizen with good attitude:
If they [students] have critical thinking skills, they change their
minds. It is very difficult for someone to change their mind, if they
cannot think or cannot make decisions by themselves. …If they
know how to help each other, they know how to be kind to and care
with each other. If they think a lot, their decisions may be good
ones. … These things cannot be done just telling students to do so,
but letting them work together and engaging them in the learning
process …student-centered pedagogies … make this happen.
(Interview, I9)
For those who actually engaged in the rehabilitation projects, student-centered pedagogies
were a symbol of a peaceful, democratic, and cooperative society.
Student-Centered Principles in CFS Framework: A Global Model
CFS models22 are the pragmatic and comprehensive approach to address the total

22

UNICEF (2009d) repeatedly emphasized that CFS should be regarded as a pathway to
68

needs of the child as a learner, and to improve both access to and quality of education.
Suggested by UNICEF, the models were evolved based on the past experiences with its
“single-factor approach”—interventions to teacher education or supply of textbooks
independently—by which only limited improvements could have been observed. They are
based on the notion of education as a human right and “a child-centered ideology that
regards the best interest of the child as a paramount at all times” (UNICEF, 2009d, p. 2).23
In addition to child-centeredness, “democratic participation” and “inclusiveness” are also
the basic principles that underlie CFS models (UNICEF, 2009c, p. 1). These principles are
further developed as key components such as pedagogy, health, gender sensitivity,
community participation, inclusiveness and protection (UNICEF, 2009c).
As UNICEF (2009b) reported, CFS models have been implemented in 56 countries
globally in 2007, and in 20 countries out of 28 nations under UNICEF’s East Asia and
Pacific Region, including Thailand, Philippines, Lao PDR, and Cambodia. In Thailand,
CFS has been implemented in northern and northeastern provinces, which are particularly
disadvantaged, since 1990’s. Although CFS is not a national policy per se and thus local
governments can decide whether they apply CFS model or not, Thailand started to accept
study visits and offer training titled ‘Child-Friendly Schools: Theory and practice’ to
neighboring countries including Cambodia (UNICEF, 2009a).
Thailand played a significant role to disseminate CFS models in the region. Since
the early 2000’s, Philippines, Lao PDR, Cambodia, and other countries started to

educational quality rather than as a rigid blueprint, and described it as “models”.
23
The child-friendly school concept was first used as an “equivalent of the ‘baby-friendly
hospitals’ that contributed to quality standards in health” (UNICEF, 2009d, p. 7).
69

incorporate CFS models into their education system. For example, the Philippines started
Child Friendly Schools System (CFSS) initiative in 2001, after the regional conference on
CFS environment was held in Chiang Mai, Thailand (UNICEF, 2009b). Philippines model
defines 1) effective with children, 2) healthy for children, 3) protective of children, 4)
gender sensitive and inclusive, and 5) family and community involvement as the five
dimensions of CFS. Lao PDR launched “Schools of Quality (SoQ)” framework based on
CFS models in the early 2000’s, when the ministry officials were exposed to the concept of
CFS through regional workshop and UNICEF-funded study visits to Thailand. Although
SoQ basically follows CFS models in Thailand, it is structured based on two guiding
principles: “child-seeking school” and “child-centered school” (UNICEF, 2011). These
examples indicate that there was a regional movement toward CFS and countries launched
different “models” with CFS principles.
Together with the perceived need to replace teaching approaches to more
democratic and participatory ones, such regional CFS movement inevitably affected
Cambodia as an external pressure to meet the regional (albeit not global) standards.
UNICEF, KAPE, and SCN piloted CFS projects in six provinces in the early 2000s. CFS
steering committee, established in 2002, was a mechanism to accumulate pilot experiences
in order to expand CFS to many more provinces. It consisted of representatives from
UNICEF, KAPE, Save the Children, and other NGOs as well as key departments in the
Ministry and was primarily responsible for overseeing the program and ensuring the
consistency with the broader education system (Bunlay et al. 2010). Successes in the pilot
projects reported by the committee members were, definitely, a driving force to convince

70

the Ministry about the effectiveness of CFS framework. In 2005, when then-Minister of
Education, Im Sethy, decided to make CFS a national policy,24 this committee took the
authorship of policy and related manuals. Therefore, CFS policy and its related documents
directly reflect views of NGOs—as one of the participant stated “this is the part I wrote” by
pointing to one of the manuals (Interview, I10).
Similar to other CFS models, Cambodian CFS policy is based on the rights-based
approach that is “very centrally concerned with the intrinsic value of education and the
quality of educational processes,” more than with outcomes of education that facilitate
achievement of other rights (Barrett, 2011, pp. 123–124). It touches upon the children’s
right to develop to their fullest potential (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, n.d.).
Based on this legally binding principle,25 teachers are expected to accommodate different
learning needs and styles of their students. Cambodian CFS policy consists of six
dimensions. Although in many cases, CFS models consist of five dimensions that are 1)
inclusive access, 2) student-centered pedagogies, 3) attention to health and safety, 4) gender
sensitivity, 5) community participation, Cambodian CFS policy adds education
management as the sixth dimension. This reflects the fact that education administration did
not have good capacity to manage its system effectively (Interview, I2).
What UNICEF (2009d) called “child [student]-centered ideology” also informs
Cambodian CFS policy. It describes student-centered approach not just as a teaching
methodology. Rather, it is “very significant and overarching educational methodologies
which are vital to all aspects of its implementation” that is characterized by:
24
25

Child Friendly School Policy was signed and has been in effect since 2007.
Cambodia signed the Convention of the Rights of the Child as early as 1989.
71

Teaching and learning through creative idea
Participation and co-operative learning
Research, analysis and critical thinking
Problem solving
Innovation and encouragement of creative and divergent thinking (Kingdom of
Cambodia, 2007, p. 8).
Through this educational methodology, the policy emphasizes developing students’
knowledge and attitudes to be able to live together (Ministry of Education, Youth and
Sports, 2005). It clearly reflects the desires of NGOs to build a democratic society based on
the student-centered principles.26 ETL is the second dimension of Cambodian CFS
framework and has strong inclination for transforming the society to become more peaceful
and democratic.27 I now turn to discuss what ETL is and how it consists of the main
component of Cambodian CFS policy.
Content of ETL
Based on this notion of student-centered approach, ETL provides more practical
pedagogy. It is divided into eight areas as shown in the Figure 5. By representing eight
areas based on ETL Training Manual (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, n.d.), I
unpack the nature of ETL.

26

See Chapter 1 for the discussion about globalized student-centered principles.
From this perspective, education quality is not limited to learning achievement but it is
expected to enhance both cognitive and non-cognitive development of students.
27

72

Figure 5. Eight Areas under ETL

Source: Created by the author based on ETL Training Manual

Area 1: Classroom management. Area 1 lays out the principles of difference and
equity that are fundamental of CFS framework. Two basic notions are discussed under the
section of classroom management. The first is the idea that all children are different and
teachers must employ various teaching methods to help all students to learn.
Children are all different and learn in different ways. Therefore,
teachers have to provide as many of these possible ways as we can
to understand ways of learning of these children. We cannot just
rely on one or two methods all the time. We can use other methods
to help students to learn. (p. 8)
It clearly states that teachers must understand different ways of learning of their students in
order to help them to learn. It also implicitly criticizes teaching that relies solely on
dominant methods, most probably on lecturing or rote learning, which may dismiss other
possible ways of teaching/learning and thus leave some children behind.

73

Related to this, the notion of “natural learning” is introduced (p. 9). ETL Training
Manual presents it as an approach different from the traditional one, in which learning
happens in formal classroom setting where students absorb and memorize knowledge in the
textbooks as it is. The manual’s description of ETL touches upon the sources of knowledge,
including families, friends, and students’ own experiences.
Most effective learning can take place without formal teaching
using textbooks and teacher manual, writing things down and so on.
It is what might be called "natural learning". … Teachers can use a
lot of these ways of learning in their own classrooms at school. (p.
9)
The discussion goes on to valuing what individual children know from their lives,
regardless of their ethnicity, gender, or family backgrounds. It further draws our attention to
the fact that a traditional teaching method that primarily relies on lecturing impacts
negatively “the bottom line” students (p. 7).
Area 2: Questioning. By directing our attentions to the cognitive process involved
in learning, Area 2 makes us think about how students know, rather than what they know.
Asking questions is described as an important strategy to foster students’ cognitive
development by checking students’ understanding, getting students to talk and expressing
their ideas and opinions, and to make the instruction more student-centered (p. 11). ETL
Training Manual categorizes levels of questions into memory, understanding, and critical
thinking questions (p. 12, see Figure 3.2.). It places critical thinking as the highest level and
most important. Critical thinking is defined as “…requires children to think about one or
more pieces of information or ideas and produce a new piece of information or idea as a
result” (p. 48). It is more than just recalling information (memory) or explaining the

74

meaning of information (understanding), but critical thinking requires application, analysis,
synthesis, and evaluation of one or more pieces of information.
Figure 6. Levels of Cognitive Skills

Source: Created by the author based on MoEYS. (n.d.-b). ETL Training Manual. p. 12

ETL Training Manual suggests research assignments as a possible method to
develop students’ critical thinking skills. It states, “organizing simple research tasks for
students is an excellent way of stimulating critical thinking. This is because the children are
"creating" knowledge for themselves by the research they do, not by simply hearing about
or reading something” (p. 17). These assignments also cover communication and
presentation skills in addition to critical thinking. ETL even acknowledges critical thinking
as a skill that is as important as reading and writing (p. 1).
Area 3: Learning games. Area 3 discusses a range of learning games as a way to
develop skills discussed in Area 1 and 2. ETL Training Manual pays particular attention to
the social aspect of these games, which contribute to nurture students’ non-cognitive skills
that are necessary to learn to live together.
Children enjoy playing games and this can help make the classroom
atmosphere lively and fun. ... children are also developing their
skills in speaking, listening and co-operating with others (social
skills and values). Many children also learn best when they have a
chance to discuss new learning with other children (peer learning)
(p. 11)
Games can also reinforce and enrich what students have learned, and stimulate critical

75

thinking by encouraging students to apply what they know.
Area 4: Classroom resources. This area introduces the idea of rich environment
for learning, which is healthy (clean), attractive, and stimulating (p. 29). In such classrooms,
stimulating materials are displayed and used in the lessons, in order for children to be
happy to come everyday. ETL Training Manual particularly discusses posters and maps as
useful materials because they contribute to develop students’ listening and speaking skills
and critical thinking skills, if used in participatory ways. Using posters and maps is also
described as effective classroom management strategy when teachers need to give
additional assignments for students who finish tasks earlier.
Area 5: Reading skill. Area 5 particularly discusses approaches to develop
students’ reading skills. ETL emphasizes basic literacy skills as important both for students’
educational prospects and for their social lives. In this area, teachers are encouraged to help
students acquire understanding about basic rules of written texts (conventions of print)
because Cambodian children do not often see adults reading and usually come to school
without knowing these rules. Developing basic reading skills also has social importance.28
In rural Cambodia, having someone in the family who can read is a
very important resource. The ability to read gives access to many
different kinds of information. Some of this information, such as
directions or warnings on medicines, agro-chemicals and other
products, could be life saving. Literacy is also a vital skill in
accessing information about legal rights and citizen's rights. This is
why many people describe literacy as the most important "life skill"
of all (p. 38).
28

Cambodia’s adult literacy rate was 73.9% in 2009 (UNESCO Institute for Statistics,
n.d.) and the ministry has set the goal to double its spending to adult literacy programs by
2015.
76

Reading skills are not limited to basic literacy: teachers are expected to help children
understand texts as a whole and introduce various types of texts such as advertisement,
recipe, and manuals for electric devises are also encouraged as a way to help broaden
students’ reading experiences. This is based on the concerns about pervasive practices
where teachers “concentrate heavily in their teaching of reading on letters and words rather
than on the whole texts” (Logbook, p. 21) and as a result students do not have the chance to
understand and think critically about the texts as a whole.
Area 6: Writing skill. The vision introduced in this area is the importance of
original writing that communicates meaning clearly and economically. The two documents
define writing skills more than just knowing letters and being able to write neatly and spell
correctly.
It is important for the teacher to provide opportunities for even the
youngest children to produce their own writing. This means that the
writing contains the children's own ideas, it is not copied from the
blackboard or a book. Children who do original writing will grow in
confidence as they practice. One sentence will become two and then
three and then a paragraph and then each one a text (MoEYS, n.d., p.
25).
The strategies recommended based on this vision are “negotiating texts” (MoEYS,
n.d., p. 25) and the process of drafting and re-writing. Negotiating texts means teachers and
students, or a group of students, develop a text collaboratively on a certain topic by
discussing what they want to say. By doing this, students can get a sense of ownership of
the text they develop and understand the process to write their own texts. Drafting and
re-writing is another strategy to help students develop their writing skills.
Area 7: Assessment. ETL Training Manual introduces a vision that good teachers
77

use various types of assessment as part of their daily routine. Both informal and formative
assessments are important, because teachers need to understand the characteristics of
students as learners and identify growth each student makes. These types of assessment are
particularly necessary to “identify children who need more help and what kind of help is
most useful” (Logbook, p. 28). The recommended assessment strategy is portfolio, by
which teachers collect examples of students’ work during the year to assess their progress
and use as evidence when they have conference with students and parents.
Area 8: Reflection. The idea of reflection is introduced in this area as a routine
that “most good teachers do as a habit” (MoEYS, n.d., p. 39). The main purpose of doing
reflection is to think about the ways in which teachers can change their teaching practice to
improve the learning of students. A list of questions that guide teacher reflection is
provided as follows:
!
!
!
!

Is everyone learning well?
Which students are struggling? What are the causes of their difficulties?
Is everyone in the class interested in the lessons?
Are all the children attending school regularly and enjoying what they learn?
(Logbook, p. 39)

This section also explains the cycle of reflection, in which teachers continuously plan, teach,
and reflect about their teaching practices.
Transformation Model of Education
Overall, although it is presented as a variety of methods and ideas that seem to be
discrete and unrelated, ETL represents globalized student-centered principles that Tabulawa
(2003) identified: (a) more flexibility and relevance; (b) activity as the core of learning; (c)
placing learners at the center of education; and (d) constructivist epistemology. By

78

contrasting new ideas with traditional teaching practices, ETL emphasizes new teaching
methods as more effective and high quality. New methods are an antithesis to the common
teaching practices in Cambodia, where rote memorization of textbook is a dominant
teaching strategy (Ogisu 2009). They even touch upon the fundamental conceptions about
knowledge and the process of learning. In ETL, knowledge is not limited to one in
textbooks and teacher manual. Students learn not only by writing things down or listening
to the teacher. Rather, they create knowledge by themselves through active, creative, and
critical processes of learning, which involve doing something together, talking with peers,
recording and presenting what they learn. These notions inform activity-based, cooperative,
and hands-on teaching techniques that are promoted as alternatives to the “chalk-and-talk”
practices and as a teaching approach that fosters higher-level cognitive skills.
We can say ETL represents a change from transmission model to transformation
model of education. These two models have different orientations in how they perceive
knowledge and knowing/learning. In transmission model, knowledge is seen as invariable
and universal. Thus learners are supposed to absorb knowledge as it is. In contrast, ETL
presents constructivist notions of knowledge and learning, where knowledge is more
dynamic and learning leads transformations of information.
Chapter Summary
The goal of this chapter was to situate Cambodian pedagogical reform in its
historical, social, and political contexts. I discussed that changing pedagogy was not just a
matter of education, because education is so closely linked to politics and power. At first,
student-centered pedagogies were introduced as a national political project that attempted

79

to build the modern nation-state. Although the MoEYS’s motivation for the pedagogical
reform was mainly political and economic at the beginning, experiences in the
rehabilitation projects as well as desires to transform the society gave a big push to make
student-centered pedagogies into a national policy. Geographically speaking, Cambodian
pedagogical reform is based on the global model called Child Friendly School (CFS),
which was originally brought by UNICEF. The expansion and success of CFS model in
Southeast Asia were another big push for the then-minister to decide making a national
policy based on the model. Finally, I discussed that the orientation toward transformation
underlies the eight areas of ETL.

80

CHAPTER FOUR: SOCIO-CULTURAL ANALYSIS OF A PEDAGOGICAL
REFORM

(ETL was started), mostly, a dumbed down version of it, I would
probably say, but it did help. I don’t know if it was right or wrong.
(Interview, I5)

Introduction
The meaning of a certain policy is not given. It is shaped by the interaction among
written policy, people, and contexts in which people do the policy (Honig, 2006). From this
perspective, pedagogical reform is a complex social practice in which various actors
construct and reconstruct the meaning of teaching and learning. In the case of pedagogical
reform in Cambodia, all actors actively construct the meaning by interpreting and
sometimes contesting the idea of student-centered pedagogies and enacting what they
understand as the demands of the policy within cultural, historical, social, and political
contexts in which they belong (Sutton & Levinson, 2001). Pedagogical reform is thus
neither monolithic nor normative: Different actors make sense of and enact a pedagogical
reform policy in totally different ways, even when they all actively engage in it.
The goal of this chapter is twofold. First, I want to discuss how the meaning of ETL
policy is constructed by various actors. I particularly focus on the mechanisms through
which different actors (or stakeholders) negotiate the meaning of student-centered
pedagogies and develop ETL policy, especially at the international and national levels. By
doing so, I try to unpack what particular aspects of student-centered pedagogies got

81

emphasized and what aspects were silenced, and to examine why ETL policy was
developed as it is today. Second, based on the analysis of two policy tools, I want to
understand how these tools mediate local actors’ understanding and practice of the ETL
policy. I present local meanings made from the policy tools and shed light on the gaps
between the policy intentions and local meanings. I argue that two policy tools involve
paradoxes in its transformation orientation and its transmission approach, which actually
hinder, not enhance, fundamental pedagogical changes.
Social constructivism informs how we can understand the roles of various actors
and their interactions in Cambodian pedagogical reform. Social constructivism sees all
individual actors actively engaging in constructing meaning. This perspective especially
challenges the policymakers’ common understanding about Cambodian teachers, who have
been referred to as instruments and obstacles to instructional reform (Kim & Rose, 2011).
Teaching has also been trivialized into techniques and, as a result, complexities and
uncertainties inherent in teaching have been undermined in education policies. Instead,
social constructivism suggests that teachers are the key agents who hold specialized
knowledge and skills based on which they construct and enact the instructional reform.
They are playing role as important as development partners, policymakers, and school
administrators in constructing this reform.
Moreover, this co-construction of meaning should be understood as a social and
situated process (Lave & Wenger, 1991) rather than as an individualized and isolated
process. Therefore, it is necessary to pay attention to the meaning constructed through
interactions among various actors in order to understand better the process in which a

82

policy is interpreted and enacted. For example, donors negotiate the meaning of this reform
in annual donor meetings, and ministry officials try to figure out what they want from
donors and what donors want them to do in their business meetings. Cambodian teacher
meetings at the cluster level are also an important mechanism to foster discussions among
teachers specifically around this reform, aside from more informal interactions between
teachers before or after classes, or during school-level meetings. These meetings and
interactions among actors within and between different levels can be considered as a social
setting where negotiations over the meaning of the policy could occur.
In co-constructing the meaning of a policy, tools play a significant role to mediate
the process. Cognitive psychologists who take socio-cultural perspective suggest that
cognition is distributed not only to individuals but to various artifacts, such as physical and
symbolic tools, and that these tools are an integral part of activities (Putnam & Borko,
2000). For example, Putnam and Borko (2000) refer to Hutchins’s (1990) example of the
navigation of the US Navy ship:
Six different people with three different job descriptions and using
several sophisticated cognitive tools were involved in piloting the
ship out of the harbor. The distribution of cognition across people
and tools made it possible for the crew to accomplish cognitive
tasks beyond the capabilities of any individual member (Putnam &
Borko, 2000, p 5).
Tools, as well as people, play important roles in accomplishing cognitive tasks such as
piloting a ship. Wenger (1998) further posited that cognitive tools do not just assist people
to do activities, but they are the “reification” of a meaning that gives fixed forms to the
meaning negotiated in social interactions, or “participation” (p. 59). He conceptualized

83

participation and reification as indivisible and interplaying with each other, because tools
shape and define how participation could be organized. These perspectives are very helpful
to illuminate socio-cultural and even political meanings that are embedded in and extracted
from the policy tools, such as manuals, worksheets, and checklists.
Constructing the Meaning of ETL
In the previous chapter, I discussed how student-centered pedagogies have been
closely linked to the desires to change the Cambodian society. But, as we can easily
imagine, not everyone assigns the same meaning to ETL, which is broad and vague. I want
to reveal such multiplicity of perspectives held by various actors who have stakes in
Cambodian pedagogical reform. I organize this section based on the levels—particularly
international and national levels—in order to highlight the socio-cultural aspect of the
process in which diverse meanings are negotiated within and across these levels.
Universal Pedagogy in Question: Development partners
While the Cambodian education sector is very successful in “coordinating” a lot of
donors, the coordination mechanisms do not necessarily facilitate engaged discussions
among donors to construct shared understanding about ETL. A mechanism called
Education Sector Working Group (ESWG) and the more informal platform called
EDUCAM are the venues for the coordination among donors, each of which organizes
representatives of donors to get together once a month. ESWG plays “a critical role in
coordinating donor assistance, promoting a common, integrated program approach, and
exchanging information about program implementation” (Government-Donor Partnership
Working Group, 2004, p. 10). It allows various actors to take part in the pedagogical reform

84

without an overlap—“coordination” has been the norm of development projects. It was also
agreed that in the education sector all external assistance projects should be aligned with
and support a single education sector policy, called Education Strategic Plan and Education
Sector Support Program, developed under government leadership.
The two mechanisms—ESWG and EDUCAM—have slightly different functions.
Based on the meeting minutes, it is clear that aid effectiveness is the central concern in
ESWG. This is also clear from its background: the unsatisfactory progress before 2000,
which saw only limited improvement even though education sector received a total of $244
million in donor assistance in 1994-99, was “attributed to the lack of an integrated policy
framework and the proliferation of discreet and ill-coordinated donor-funded projects”
(Government-Donor Partnership Working Group, 2004, p. 8). In contrast, EDUCAM is an
informal platform where donors, including major NGOs, share information about concrete
projects. For instance, almost every meeting for which I could obtain minutes was
structured with two presentations from participating donors. It is also important to note that
more NGOs participate in EDUCAM than ESWG.
ETL and its mother framework Child Friendly School (CFS) became national policy
in 2007 and were incorporated into the Education Strategic Plan in 2009, and thus all
development partners support ETL in principle. It has actually been repeatedly brought up
as a topic of discussion in EDUCAM. Technically speaking, EDUCAM can be regarded as
an important venue for negotiation of meaning and co-construction of ETL policy. For
example, at the meeting in January 2007, four different NGOs presented their experiences
in pilot projects on ETL approaches, and participants had a discussion about its core

85

principles. According to the minutes, a participant shared his ideas about learning real life
skills from local people by saying that one can teach kids fine finger motion with origami
but without using such unfamiliar and costly material, “one can accomplish the same things
by teaching them to weave palm fronds into baskets for sticky rice, with the added benefit
that the kids can be sent to village elders to learn how to do it” (EDUCAM, 2007). Another
person commented that, although it is good to mobilize local resources, “it also increases
the need for more and more varied capacity-building” (ibid). Building on these discussions,
yet another participant raised a question regarding the elder teachers and school directors
who tend to be reluctant to employ new ideas, especially in city schools.
However, from interviews, it became clear that participants from various donor
agencies did not necessarily construct shared understandings about ETL. Rather, they held
quite diverse perspectives toward its student-centered principles. At one end of the
continuum, participants who belong to the agencies that commit to expanding
student-centered teaching stressed its principles as universal: “I think the concept behind
the learner-centered methodologies is quite international. Right? … It is activity-based,
cooperative, inquiry… and students develop their ability to apply knowledge” (Interview,
I8). But there were people at the other end who questioned the relevance of
student-centered pedagogies specifically in Cambodian context.
An informant described ETL as follows:
ETL, to my understanding, is to teach children what they want to
learn in order to achieve their goal, their ultimate goal. … Quality
in our definition is to give education in which students apply what
they had learned to their lives in the community. Quality of
education does not mean that students know theories … just
86

copying the board or answering questions is not the quality I’m
talking about. Students should, we should encourage students, think
out of a box. Think out of a box. This is what we want to see in
students. (Interview, I9)
In the above excerpt, transformation model of education (“think out of box” and application
of knowledge in daily life) is sharply contrasted to the traditional notion of teaching and
learning, in which students learn theories and memorize what the teacher tells them. For
him, the transformation model of education is necessary to help individual students to
“achieve their ultimate goal” and to “live productive lives.” Another participant from
bi-lateral agency that implements teacher education projects described student-centered
pedagogies as “better methodology” to equip students with the “whole range” of knowledge,
skills, and attitudes;
If we talk about the pupils in the classrooms in the ends, there is of
course stronger understanding of a subject, that should be a result of
better methodology. Better understanding of the subject contents.
The ability, it is actually, the ability to apply these knowledge, and
the ability to go on to the higher levels, creativity to use the content
that they have learned, and transform it into new things, to create, to
analyze … If they don’t, you don’t get the knowledge, the students
will never be able to analyze or to apply … It is not one particular
thing that we want, it is the whole range. It is also social skills, for
instance. We also want to develop more social skills, cooperative
attitudes, it is not only about knowledge and skills, but also about
attitudes (Interview, I8).
In contrast, there were participants from development partners who perceived
pedagogies as appearing on a continuum rather than embracing student-centered
pedagogies as the best and universal teaching approach: “in some cases student-centered
approach is much better than lecturing. But lecturing is also important, so I cannot say
87

which approach is better, so combination of all approaches is the best” (Interview, I12).
Another participant complained about what he frequently witnesses when he goes to
schools, “I hate it when they do it, when I come into a classroom, they all start moving
around and they shift the classroom setting just to show that they are doing some of the
learner-centered methodologies” and he contended that “for some parts of a lesson you
have to do teacher-centered” (Interview, I13).
Others went on to share uncertainty about student-centered pedagogies in the
Cambodian context. For example, a consultant, who is originally from Cambodia,
explained the cultural mismatch, “in student-centered approach, students feel they don’t
learn anything from the teacher. They go to school to learn, not to share information among
themselves. And teachers are supposed to teach students” (Interview, I14). Another
participant shared his concerns about teachers’ insufficient knowledge about the content
and said, “as long as [teachers] don’t understand the content it is very dangerous to use
student-centered methodologies because it might bring confusions” (Interview, I13).
Furthermore, an education expert at one of the development partners questioned the
relevance of pursuing such higher-level skills at the primary level. For him, we must first
improve more basic aspects in education, such as instructional hours, to meet international
standards.
I think it is too early to think about these things [higher cognitive
skills] in ETL. Rather, we should first work on more basic things,
such as making sure teachers come to school every day. Seriously.
Children have only 600 to 650 instructional hours per academic
year… this too low compared to the international standard. You see,
in this week, we had Water Festival [national holiday] from

88

Tuesday to Thursday, but many schools were closed for the whole
week… (Interview, I3)
He even suggested that “teacher-centered approaches might be more effective to teach basic
knowledge that is needed to enhance technology in this country.” These comments help us
understand even those who take part in ETL policy, not to mention less involved actors,
shared uncertainty about student-centered pedagogies and a transformation model of
education because of institutional, cultural, and human resource contexts in which
Cambodian schools exist.
The above analysis clarifies a wide range of perspectives held by the major
development partners. It is striking that many participants expressed uncertainty about
student-centered pedagogies, contrary to the common assumption that donors are the ones
who actually “export” student-centeredness to many of the low-income countries.
It also became clear that many donors did not willingly support ETL policy because
it is so strongly associated with UNICEF. Donors other than UNICEF and NGOs regarded
it as owned by UNICEF, not necessarily by the Cambodian ministry of education, even
though they acknowledged that it is a national policy and included in Education Strategic
Plan, to which they have voices on what to include. The question about who owns a policy
seems to have great implications for how donors engage in it. One participant stated, “We
regard this ETL thing as UNICEF project. I don’t think other major partners are proactive
to do this policy, if not overtly oppose it. We just try not to make our projects inconsistent
with the policy” (Interview, I7).
My evidence suggests that donors do not proactively promote a policy when they
regard it as someone else’s or too closely associated with a particular donor. A JICA expert,

89

for example, expressed that they promote the inquiry-based learning (IBL) approach by
differentiating it from ETL (Interview, I13). According to him, IBL bridges subject content
(mainly science) and pedagogy, whereas ETL focuses primarily on pedagogy and falls
short in strengthening teachers’ content knowledge. Another expert from VVOB also
explained that their program is unique for its emphasis on TPCK, which incorporates ITC
into pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). Those partner agencies that work on
pedagogical reform, which is actually very similar to ETL in their student-centered
principles, did not claim they directly engage in, apply, or implement ETL policy. Rather,
they try to differentiate themselves from ETL and emphasized unique contributions of their
projects. If they say so [doing ETL], it means they are doing UNICEF project but not their
own project: “Our project is not ETL per se. They seem, similar from your viewpoint, it
might be true, but there are differences or originalities in our project” (Interview, I8).
Here the issue of visibility comes into play (Steiner-Khamsi 2006). Especially for
the bi-lateral agencies like JICA and VVOB, making their projects visible and unique is
crucial to hold accountability to taxpayers. At the same time, the norm of coordination does
not allow them to ignore the core direction of ETL firstly because it is a national policy,
and secondly, it is based on the student-centered principals which many—not all—donors
do not oppose. Donors work in such an ambivalent balance among coordination and
visibility.
The above evidence suggests that donor coordination does not lead various actors to
construct a shared understanding. Although mechanisms like ESWG are often referred to as
best practices of the MoEYS to promote its ownership and donor coordination (Hirosato &

90

Kitamura 2009),29 having mechanisms does not necessarily ensure that different actors
have engaged in discussion about the reform process and that RGC and MoEYS actually
“own” an education policy. One participant shared his concerns about this area by
characterizing what they do in the Working Group as just information sharing and said,
“there is no one taking the lead and putting the noses to the same direction” (Interview, I8).
The flip side of such loose coordination is to allow diverse actors to operate harmoniously
on the surface. It also helps diverse actors participate in the pedagogical reform while
maintaining an ambivalent balance.
ETL Meets “Effectiveness” Discourse: Ministry
Participants from the ministry departments took a more nuanced position regarding
pedagogies. A ministry official made sense of ETL as a broader idea that subsumes both
transmission and transformation models of education: “ETL is more than just
student-centered pedagogies. It includes whatever methods that are effective, effective in
terms of learning achievement” (Interview, N1). Ministry officials described ETL as a
means to improve students’ cognitive learning outcome, which they emphasized as the
national agenda.
“Effectiveness” was strongly emphasized by all ministry officials whom I
interviewed. Effectiveness gained momentum in Cambodia especially after the results from
2005/06 reading assessment was declared.30 The World Bank supported the assessment as

29

Establishing the ownership of developing countries and the partnership among donors
was set as the model for international cooperation in the Paris Declaration on Aid
Effectiveness, adopted in 2005 (Hirosato & Kitamura 2009, p. 41).
30
It is based on EGRA (Early Grade Reading Assessment), which has been implemented
in Latin America with strong initiative by the World Bank.
91

the nation’s first ever attempt to ascertain how much students learn in primary schools. The
result was quite shocking: only 40% of the Grade 3 students answered correctly in reading
and 41.7% in writing (World Bank, 2006). It also found a huge gap between students in
large urban schools (highest) and small rural schools (lowest). Although this assessment
was limited to reading instruction, its results actually placed effectiveness—in terms of
students’ learning outcome measured by test scores—at the center of educational discourse
in Cambodia.31
Such unsatisfactory results in the 2005/06 assessment exposed student-centered
teaching approaches that had been associated with modern (and therefore good) methods to
teach students to critical eyes from the ministry. Then-minister Im Sethy announced that
“the teaching of reading would be a national priority, and that it would be taught according
to the Chet Chhem method” which he had been taught in primary school and which enabled
him to read for life (Seymour 2012, p. 3). Chet Chhem method is, according to a ministry
official, “an indigenous method” that “most of the literate Cambodians in my age (mid 40s)
and above had been taught” (Interview, N4). The method, named after Mr. Chet Chhem,
who was a teacher educator and published several teaching guides during the 50’s, is based
on phonics teaching. The method is described as didactic approach (Courtney & Gravelle
2013) that emphasizes rote learning as the primary method to teach reading and writing.
Although the Chet Chhem method had not been used since the 90’s due to the rise
of “teaching for meaning” types of methods that involve activities and games, which are

31

Similar reading assessments have been conducted for Grade 6 in 2007, Grade 9 in 2008,
and again Grade 3 in 2009. As of July 2013, Cambodian ministry of education was working
on expanding similar early grade assessment in Math.
92

associated with student-centered pedagogies, growing consideration of effectiveness as a
result of EGRA 2006 results brought it back to education discourses. The minister’s
announcement was, therefore, not only to prioritize effectiveness in teaching and learning
but also to revive “indigenous” methods for Khmer literacy teaching. It also indicates the
ministry’s anxiety about the “effectiveness” of student-centered pedagogies—“Ministry
was not convinced enough about it” (Interview, I8).
Quite interestingly, however, ministry officials did not necessarily abandon ETL
that emphasizes student-centered principles. For one official, the Chet Chhem method falls
under ETL if it produces a better learning outcome:
I think, the method [Chet Chhem method] and ETL, there is no
contradiction between them at all. But from 1979 up to now,
Cambodian students have difficulties in learning Khmer language.
May students are under the standard. We did not have such
problems before [with Chet Chhem method]. In the classrooms, as
you know, we need to help children practice more in the classroom.
We take our familiar method just because it helps students learn
how to read and write. So that is a part of objectives of ETL.
(Interview, N4)
Based on the comparison between the past and present, this informant assessed the Chet
Chhem method as effective in producing better students’ learning outcome (in this case
students’ ability to read and write). And because of this, she regarded it as consistent with
ETL—Effective Teaching and Learning.
Another official from the Curriculum Department considered any effective methods
as ETL:
We develop the national curriculum, which all departments,
including primary education department, need to follow. ETL was
93

developed as a means to deliver the national curriculum … but the
curriculum does not define how things should be taught. We don’t
really care how the curriculum is taught, by Chet Chhem or other
methods. But we do care whether students actually learn it. Then we
call it effective, ETL. (Interview, N3)
Although he did not necessarily claim that Chet Chhem method is effective per se, he
certainly did not problematize the different orientations between Chet Chhem method and
ETL. The case of the Chet Chhem method indicates that student-centered, transformation
orientation in ETL was not necessarily brought up by ministry officials whom I interviewed.
Instead, they used the term ETL to indicate any methods that produce good learning
outcome. In other words, epistemological substance was mostly detached from the
discussion about teaching methods within the ministry.
Whose Voice Got Reified
Similar to the broadened notion of ETL among ministry officials, policy statements
are also indicative of the changes added to CFS policy and its major component, ETL, at
the national level. Policy on Child Friendly Schools (2007) reconfirmed that CFS activities
“which are implemented in schools throughout the country will improve and develop each
school” (p. 6) and “The implementation of CFS is the essential strategy that needs to be
strengthened and expended widely in all schools” (p. 10). As these statements suggest, the
ministry emphasizes CFS as a national policy that all schools across the country must
implement. This highly centralized Cambodian education system has significant
implications for CFS policy.
Even the fundamental elements of the pilot CFS projects were turned around and
embedded in the centralized system in the process of making a national policy. In the pilot

94

phase of CFS, NGOs employed a “menu-based” approach, in which local actors could
decide what they need and want. Based on their own definition of child-friendliness, they
could choose and implement their own versions of CFS from a list of activities suggested
by education experts in each project (Bredenburg 2009). Another characteristic of the pilot
projects was voluntary participation. Teachers themselves could decide whether they want
to participate in the project, and once they completed a training successfully, the project
gave them a small grant to renovate their classrooms.
These approaches taken in the pilot projects and transformation model of education
have many characteristics in common. For example, service recipients (local actors and
students respectively) are expected to participate actively, experts (staff of an
implementation body and teachers) play a role of facilitators rather than being providers of
knowledge, and a bottom-up, rather than top-down, approach was taken. According to
Bredenburg (2009), pilot projects were quite successful in the sense that locally developed
programs were more relevant to the local needs.
However, the menu-based and voluntary approaches were abandoned to allow the
policy to be embedded in the centralized education system (Bredenburg 2009). It was
essentially a political rather than educational decision. Having been a key advocate of CFS
model, an educational advisor lamented,
When the ministry found this [voluntary participation] out, they
were very unhappy. Very unhappy that we were approaching in this
way. How dare are you to tell the teachers that this is voluntary?
They could do it or not do it. Now CFS is a policy and everyone has
to do it. I was trying to explain that, I know that it is a policy that
everyone must do it, but the problem is that they won’t do it. And

95

they said they must do it. But [I said] they won’t do it. But [they
said] they must do it. So no more voluntary approach. … Doing in
the way we were doing was realistic, but it was politically incorrect.
… I can understand the ministry’s point of view, because if the
ministry agreed to our approach, basically they acknowledge that
they have no control over teachers. Publicly admitting that they
have no control over these teachers. For very centralized,
hierarchical government culture that they have, it cannot, they can
never accept that. … For the ministry, it meant a political statement
about the real situation in the schools, which they can never accept.
… It is really hard to make approach politically consistent and
acceptable. (Interview, I1)
Difficulties to make an education policy both educationally and politically correct are, to
some extent, associated with how Cambodian education has been linked to power and
legitimacy. As discussed in Chapter 3, having “control” over education, including teachers
and schools, has great significance in the Cambodian political context throughout the
country’s history (Kusakabe 2009). Cambodian high-level politicians have used education
as a political “tool” to maintain their legitimacy, and such politics have undermined
educational goals and commitments (Ayres 2000a). In this political contexts, giving a lot of
autonomy to teachers and schools, as CFS projects originally did, not only reduces the
ministry’s legitimacy, but also negatively impact the government’s legitimacy.
Similarly, although in its original objective of ETL is to let teachers teach in flexible
and creative manners in order to respond to students’ needs and to enhance students’
non-cognitive and critical thinking skills, the ministry does not necessarily present ETL in
that way. Rather, the ministry provides detailed instructions that all teachers—regardless of
geographic locations or grade levels—must implement. I now turn to an examination of

96

how ETL is constructed in policy tools.
Meanings Reified in Policy Tools
Reification is a very useful concept to discuss the process of negotiation of meaning
in the pedagogical reform. According to Wenger (1998), reification refers to “the process of
giving form to our experience by producing objects that congeal this experience into
‘thingness.’ In so doing we create points of focus around which the negotiation of meaning
becomes organized” (p. 58). In the case of ETL, certain understanding about ETL is given
form as various cognitive tools, which become “a focus for the negotiation of meaning,”
people use them to perform an action (p. 59).
The notion of reification sheds light on the social process through which the tools
were created. It helps us understand the mismatches or a paradox as a reflection of multiple
meanings negotiated in the process of making the policy tools. At the same time, policy
messages must be translated into accessible and concrete language in order for the local
actors to be able to understand and implement the policy. In this sense, these tools actually
define how ETL can be understood within the local contexts. In the sections that follow, I
discuss how multiple meanings are negotiated mediated by the tools, drawing on the
perspectives shared by the participants.
Checklist
One of such tools is a checklist. Teachers, school principals, and District Training
and Monitoring Team (DTMT) use a comprehensive checklist to monitor and evaluate the
improvement of the quality of teaching and learning. This checklist plays a vital role to
present ideals of ETL policy for local actors in an accessible and measurable manner. In

97

other words, it mediates between policy statements and practices. With Wenger’s words,
the checklist shapes the experiences of the people who use. Therefore, examining the
checklist is a necessary step to understand what aspects of ETL policy are emphasized,
undermined, or even twisted, and how it shapes and is shaped by local realities and
practices.
Courtney (2008) has already pointed out that the checklist is inconsistent and
misleading. According to her, it only helps inspectors check which activities (group work,
questioning, lecture, etc.) are implemented but does not allow them to see the quality of a
lesson as a whole. Therefore, she argued, school inspectors would get only superficial
understanding about instructional practices with this checklist. This study directly speaks to
the issue of reification that hinders people from making sense of what this reform actually
tries to do. My analysis supplements this claim with evidence about what meaning local
actors actually make out of the checklist.
Design. The checklist is a 10-page long table. The table is divided into two
dimensions: the first dimension is classroom organization and administration, which
consists of three main activities with 27 detailed activities and the other dimension is
divided into 10 main activities with 52 detailed activities related more directly to teaching
and learning. Four to five items are provided for each detailed activity in the next row, as
many as 345 items in total! For example, under the dimension of classroom organization
and administration, one of the main activities is classroom decoration and display. Nine
detailed activities fall under this category, one of which is “displaying the national motto
and the King’s photo.” Next to this activity, four items are listed: 1. The national motto is

98

written correctly; 2. There is a photograph of the King; 3. The photograph is displayed
properly; and 4. This photo is well maintained and cleaned. Inspectors are supposed first to
check whether a teacher implements each item, and then rank the activity based on how
many items a teacher implements (A: four or more; B: three; C: two; D: only one) in the
right column.
At the very bottom of the checklist, there are columns in which inspectors provide a
total performance result. For these columns they need to put total scores of A, B, C, and D.
Finally, on the last page of the checklist, there is a space where inspectors can provide a
paragraph of written feedback. In principle, inspectors visit classrooms repeatedly until
teachers reach an A or B grade in all activities. At that point, teachers are regarded as fully
student-centered and advanced.
Content. Looking closely at the content of the checklist provides us with some
insights about how the ideals of ETL policy are reified. Table 5 below shows a result of my
interpretive analysis. Three categories emerged from the analysis: material/physical
conditions, process, and content/quality. It is clear that arranging physical conditions and
preparing necessary materials (such as lesson plans and teaching aids) are regarded as
significant elements that constitute high quality teaching and learning.
In contrast, activities related to the content/quality, including the content of a lesson
plan, content of a question, or content of homework, are not emphasized as strongly as the
other two types. For example, out of five detailed activities under “use of materials in
teaching and learning,” two activities are about materials (teacher prepares teaching aids;
teacher uses simple environment resources) and all of the remaining three activities are

99

related to processes (students use the materials; students understand how to use the
materials; teacher explains and facilitates the use of the materials if necessary). It means the
checklist sets standards for using materials in particular ways, but does not necessarily
include criteria for evaluating the content and quality of such materials.
Table 5. Types of Activities Listed in the Checklist
Types of Activities
Material/Physical Conditions

# of Activities
-

37
(10)

Teaching Processes

27
(27)

Content/Quality

15
(15)

-

Examples
Displaying students work.
Teacher uses simple environmental
resources as teaching aids.
Teacher spends time as appropriate to
the content of the lesson.
Teacher uses various activities
(learning games, role plays, songs) in
teaching.
Teacher links the lesson with the
community’s livelihood.
Teacher uses standard curriculum.

Source: created by the author.
Note: Numbers appeared in apprentices are those in dimension 2.

Underlying assumptions. The checklist uses a lot of student-centered
terminologies such as “real life experience,” “critical thinking,” “facilitate,” “pair or group
work,” “role play,” “games,” “reinforce students’ answers and good work,” and so on,
which parallel with the transformation model of education presented in the policy. However,
as I explain below, assumptions that underlie this checklist are more based on the
traditional images of teaching and learning.
Assumption 1: Teaching as no more than a set of activities
First, this checklist frames teaching as a set of activities or actions initiated by
teachers. Teachers must listen to the students, think various ways to present the content,
and make decisions before actually taking actions. But the checklist allows inspectors to
100

focus only on the activities, and thus undermines complexities involved in teaching. Verbs
used in the checklist are also indicative of this point: to arrange, to explain, to summarize,
to question, to help, and so on. Teaching is framed with active verbs. In contrast, among the
few items that hold students as the subject, verbs include to understand, to complete, to
work, etc, which indicate that students are expected to respond to the activities in
predictable ways. For example, the checklist does not expect students to raise questions or
to share ideas other than answers to the questions raised. It conveys highly predictable
image of teaching and learning, in which teachers hold most of the control.
Assumption 2: To be student-centered, the teacher has to implement ALL the activities on
the list
Second, the checklist provides minimal standards for student-centered teaching.
Student-centered teaching is defined as a set of activities on the list. Rather it is not
regarded as student-centered if some activities are absent. It means, not implementing the
listed activities is regarded as a problem that needs to be fixed. It leaves no room for
teachers to choose but they have to implement all of the 79 activities and 345 items on the
list, regardless of the subject content or the students they teach. It has strong inclination to
standardize teaching practices in great detail.
Assumption 3: Certain materials and resources in the classroom are essential to
student-centered teaching
Third, the checklist defines physical and material conditions as a prerequisite for
student-centered teaching. Because all activities are valued equally by determining the total
performance, teachers who do not have colorful posters, teaching and learning materials,

101

and time and money to make or buy these materials would never be considered advanced or
good. Actually, a teacher who works in a remote school in poor neighborhood lamented,
“My teaching is not student-centered yet… You see, my classroom doesn’t have walls.
Where should I put posters? I can’t!” (Interview, T1)
Assumption 4: Deficit-oriented linear approach is key to teacher development
Finally, the checklist takes deficit-oriented approach to teacher learning and
development. The basic logic underlying it is that identifying shortcomings is necessary in
“helping improve the performance of teachers” (MoEYS, 2008a, p. 7). Information
collected with this checklist is to be used to identify training needs, which are predefined in
the list rather than emerge from the challenges teachers face in daily practices. Moreover, it
implies that teachers who are able to implement all activities at one point have already
overcome their problems and mastered student-centered teaching. The checklist assumes a
linear process of teacher learning, in which teachers never have problems once they master
student-centered teaching.
Perceived limited teacher capacity. All of the four assumptions, i.e., teaching as
activities; good teaching as implementation of all activities; physical and material
conditions as a precondition for good teaching; and teacher development as linear process,
imply that teachers are the objects of the policy that is decided in Phnom Penh, rather than
as active and autonomous professionals who can think and decide how they teach. The
following comment made by a ministry official sharply illuminates how Cambodian
teachers are perceived as barriers:
You know, I think in the context of Cambodia they [teachers] are
different from other places, because after we started from 1979, we
102

used the people with more knowledge to teach people with less
knowledge. People with less knowledge taught people without
knowledge. Until now, teachers who completed up to Grade 4 still
teach in schools. … So the quality of teachers varies. … Improving
teacher quality is essential to improve quality of education, and
ETL is one way to achieve it. (Interview, N3)
According to him, it is difficult to make sure that all teachers, even those with the lowest
education level, are able to apply student-centered pedagogies.
Similar concerns about limited teacher capacity were shared by a lot of national and
international actors. Education experts in donor agencies and a ministry official who is in
charge of teacher training particularly concerned that Cambodian teachers in general do not
have enough content knowledge necessary to make proper decisions in teaching. A
university-based, domestic consultant further stressed that teachers do not possess
higher-order thinking skills with which they interpret the policy messages and put them into
practice, and which they should actually teach to their students. The perceived limited
teacher capacities may have contributed to the mismatches in the checklist.
However, there were participants who were skeptical about the effectiveness of the
checklist to translate the policy message:
It [checklist] is extremely long … and many of which are about
physical aspects, right? It asks whether they put posters, prepare
lesson plans, or use teaching aids. They are all important, but can
we say checking all of these equals to student-centered teaching? I
don’t think so. There are more … I mean, deeper changes should
occur. But in this country, in the centralized education system,
many teachers still misunderstand student-centered as checking all
the items, and it became priority. (December 18, 2012)
She criticized that the checklist leads misunderstandings and becomes a barrier for

103

“deeper changes.” This claim parallels Brodie, Lelliott, and Davis (2002)’s claim: activities
“can be enacted in ways in which the substance of learner-centered teaching … is not a
focus” (p. 544). The checklist runs this risk by describing student-centered pedagogies as a
list of activities. One of the participants from an NGO described checklist as a “dumb down
version” of the ideals of ETL, as cited at the beginning of this chapter. But she admitted
that simplifying the theoretical and philosophical ideas into concrete list of activities
actually helped to make changes at the local level. This is what Wenger (1998) warned as
double edge of reification. The tools make policy messages succinct, portable, persistent,
and more focused, on the one hand, but it has a risk to ossify or mask what the policy
actually means, on the other (p. 61).
Paradox. It seems that there are mismatches between the student-centered
philosophy that underlies ETL and the assumptions that inform design and content of this
checklist. ETL documents conceptualize learning as active participation to the process of
constructing knowledge, whereas the checklist focuses on teachers’ activities rather than
students. Teachers are supposed to make decisions in class based on the students’ learning
needs and different learning styles, while the checklist predefines what every teacher must
do in great detail. ETL policy emphasizes the importance of materials and teaching aids,
but they are supplemental resources, not a precondition, to teach diverse students. Teacher
development is defined as a continuous and cyclical process that is based on reflection
according to the documents, rather than as a linear process.
It is even paradoxical that teachers are evaluated on their student-centered teaching
with this checklist, which is more directly associated with transmission approach. It lacks

104

necessary flexibility to teach diverse students who have different learning needs and styles.
Also, its design and content are to impose activities on teachers without stimulating their
critical and creative thinking, which they are supposed to teach to their students. These
characteristics are mostly informed by transmission approach, from which ETL policy tries
to bring changes to transformative, constructivist approach.
Helping Slow Learners Manual
Another tool that I want to discuss is the manual called Helping Slow Learners,
which was disseminated to all school principals and classroom teachers in 2008, after a
year of implementation of CFS policy. The CFS steering committee created this 33-page
booklet as a supplementary material for ETL. Although this manual is for the reference
rather than as a daily tool, it is an important material that identifies what problems are and
how these problems should be addressed in ETL. In this sense, it is also a cognitive tool
with which policy messages are negotiated.
The problem. Helping Slow Learners is, as the name suggests, a manual about
how to teach slow or weak learners to catch up with others. It defines high repetition and
dropout rates as “the major concerns of MoEYS” (MoEYS, 2008b, p. 1) in its effort to
improve the quality of education. Repetition and dropout rates remain high, according to
the manual, because there are many slow learners especially in Grades 1 and 2 and “they
are not helped on time” (ibid, p. iii). The manual summarizes the benefits of providing
timely support to slow learners as follows:
-

Students to remain hopeful and motivated in their learning
because they are supplemented knowledge to help them pursue
their interests and continue their study;
105

-

-

Teachers to reduce the number of slow learners in their class
and school thereby reducing dropout rate and increasing the
promotion rate as planned;
Families to be happy with their children’s performance at
school and to save money and time by avoiding the repetition
of classes (p. 2).

As a result, helping them to perform better and be promoted would contribute to achieving
the universal primary education by 2015, as stated in the National Plan on Education for All.
Therefore, it states, all the stakeholders, including school principals, teachers, community
members, and even students themselves, are supposed to take responsibility to help slow
learners. This manual is to inform the ways in which different actors could help slow
learners.
There are important twists in how Helping Slow Learners manual sets out the
problem. First, it narrows the idea of different learning needs and styles down into “slow
learners.” According to the ETL Training Manual, which describes overall ETL principles,
it is discussed that all students are different and teachers must employ various teaching
methods in order to fulfill every student’s right to learn. Equity is one of the key principles
of ETL, as discussed in the previous chapter. In contrast, Helping Slow Learners focuses
only on slow learners, who have difficulties in learning, rather than attending to the
differences that each student has. The manual identifies different reasons for students to
learn slowly. These reasons include students’ physical impediments, students’
psychological problems (nervous or negligent), family situations, and teachers’
inappropriate teaching such as not having lesson plans or not employing student-centered
teaching approaches. This way of framing the problem dismisses the fact that culturally and

106

socially diverse students are often disadvantaged structurally and institutionally, such as in
schooling. Rather, it frames the problem at the personal level such as physical impediments.
By focusing on difficulties instead of differences, the manual undermines the principle of
equity in ETL.
Helping Slow Learners also frames the problem in economic terms. It uses these
rates as the indicators of educational quality, which are common to many developing
countries that face strong pressure to show the improvements with measurable evidence to
the donors. The manual states that reducing repetition would contribute to “save money and
time” (MoEYS, 2008b, p. 2). But again, ETL and the overall CFS framework are based on
the notion that education is a human right. Although it is understandable that ensuring the
minimum learning standards in early grades is important to retain students in later grades,
and in this sense it is to ensure students’ right to learn, the manual does not make this point
explicit. Rather, it frames the problem in economic terms such as effectiveness and
efficiency.
Strong emphasis on the basics is another twist that we can see in Helping Slow
Learners manual. The manual identifies difficulties that slow learners may face especially
in early grades (see Table 6 below). As the list illuminates, it only focuses on the basic
cognitive skills rather than higher-order thinking and critical thinking, which ETL policy
states as important as reading and writing skills. There is no discussion about non-cognitive
aspects of learning as well, even though the policy emphasizes the need to develop students’
attitudes to be able to live together (Kingdom of Cambodia, 2007). The manual as well as
other materials fail to provide how to achieve critical thinking and non-cognitive

107

development, which consist of the central components of the transformation model of
education.
Table 6. Difficulties Slow Learners May Face, Identified in the Manual
Khmer

Math

- Cannot distinguish letters correctly
- Cannot distinguish sounds correctly
- Cannot combine sounds and spell correctly
- Cannot read words and sentences correctly
- Read without understanding the content
- Write letters incorrectly
- Spell many words incorrectly and give
wrong meanings (know little vocabulary)
- Cannot write phrases, sentences and
articles well (their ideas are not clear)

- Do not know the real numbers
- Do not know how to add or subtract
- Do not know how to add or subtract
number by vertical line method
- Cannot remember multiplication tables
- Do not know how to multiply
- Do not know how to divide

Source: MoEYS (2008b). Helping Slow Learners. p.8-14

Solutions. Three types of solutions are discussed in the manual. The first type is
providing special support to slow learners according to their learning needs. It includes
avoiding insulting language or punishment, allocating front seats to slow learners, assigning
them appropriate homework or exercises, and not forcing them to participate but encourage
voluntary participation. It also includes offering special review sessions on Thursdays.32
The manual states that Thursday teaching should be focused on slow learners, so that they
could get opportunities to practice what they have learned in regular class. It is advised that
teachers give practical exercises and tasks rather than lecturing in these sessions, so that
slow learners could “fill their gaps” (MoEYS, 2008b, p. 5). When assigning tasks, teachers
32

Before 2009, public schools are closed on Thursdays as these were kept for professional
development days.
108

should divide students into two groups based on their ability and provide more support to
the slow learner group.
The second type of solutions is to help slow learners outside study time.
“Student-helping student activities” are the major solutions discussed in this section. These
activities include assigning Student Council members from Grade 4, 5, and 6 to work with
slow learners in the lower grades during breaks. Elder students are supposed to provide
hands-on support, such as holding slow learners’ hands to practice writing letters or helping
reading textbooks.
Lastly, the manual discusses helping slow learners outside school. Organizing
learning clubs and self-study are the two solutions to be taken outside school. Learning
clubs refer to the groups of students who get together, aiming to help slow learners in the
village. The club should be led by the leader from the Student Council with help from
teachers, parents, and volunteers. Self-study is another solution basically done at home,
with direct assistance from parents and siblings of slow learners.
These are not so radical solutions to address inequalities as they sound. One of the
characteristics is the involvement of various actors in solving the problems of slow learners.
Teachers, school principals, parents, and even students are supposed to take responsibilities
in helping slow learners. This echoes with the core idea of CFS framework, in which
“participation” is one of the six dimensions. However, compared to the notion of
participation in CFS that assumes an equal relationship, involvement of various actors in
helping slow learners is based more on the dichotomous relationship between
elder-younger or faster-slower. I should also point out that the solutions are basically

109

described as techniques to be employed in addition to the daily practices, rather than as
alternative methods that could replace existing practices. For example, Thursdays are added
to the normal school days and the student-helping-student activities and learning clubs are
new initiatives introduced to the existing school operation. Given that ETL policy tries to
change the existing education system into more transformative and constructivist system,
emphasizing repetition and dropout rates may hinder such substantial changes.
Local Meaning
When policy messages got reified in the way that narrows down the possibilities to
bring intended changes or even involves paradoxes, it is no wonder teachers and other local
actors would understand the policy as a totally different thing from its original intentions.
The reified messages in policy tools (such as checklist and Helping Slow Learners manual)
need to be decoded within local socio-cultural and material contexts. In the following
sections, I discuss how policy messages already narrowly reified in the checklist and
manual got farther filtered through severe material constraints in schools and the difficulties
associated with slow learners. I also argue that it is not so much the actual material
constraints or slow learners that hinder pedagogical reform, but how these difficulties are
addressed in policy tools and perceived by local actors.
Local meaning made from the checklist.
Working with this checklist helps teachers improve their practices.
If teachers want to improve, they can see what they should improve
… from the list. I think teachers gradually improve their teaching.
They improve year by year, and someday they would complete all

110

of them. (Interview, S9)
As this comment by a school principal suggests, completing the checklist became an end
rather than a means to achieve deeper changes. In other words, local actors considered the
checklist as a set of activities that suffices for student-centered teaching, rather than as
minimal standards. In the case of physical/material conditions for teaching, they saw
materials as a parameter of teaching quality, not as a precondition for good teaching as the
checklist implies. This is very slight difference, but it represents a disjuncture between
checklist and meaning assigned to it by local actors.
Eight DTMT members are responsible for inspecting 10 schools in the cluster of the
city of Prey Veng. In each semester, two or three members are grouped together and visit
five schools for inspection. They basically spend half day in each school and observe each
classroom to complete the checklist. Because of the time limitation, they sometimes cannot
spend the whole lesson hour (45 minutes) in each classroom. They also cannot check all the
345 items on the list within that short period of time. Therefore, they select and focus on
certain more important activities. One of the DTMT members listed activities related to
physical and material aspects as his priority:
When I go to observe [for inspection], … I see materials that the
teacher uses. Does the teacher have a lesson plan? … All teachers
need to have lesson plans. They cannot teach random. Then I see
teaching aids. Does he have teaching aids? What kind of teaching
aids? (Interview, S1)
As this comment illuminates, DTMT members particularly emphasized lesson plans and
teaching aids as part of physical and material conditions. These two materials were always
grouped together and considered as the most important elements for good teaching,

111

compared to the classroom organization or the use of textbook.
However, what material conditions mean for DTMT members is slightly different
from the checklist. DTMT members are the ones who understood the local contexts very
well, and thus they know the difficulties that teachers face in preparing various materials
stated in the checklist. Even preparing lesson plans and teaching aids requires a lot of
energy in the reality of teachers’ working conditions. DTMT members were sympathetic
with teachers:
… that is the barrier for them. They have to prepare teaching aids
by themselves for every subject. So we [district education office]
help schools to buy materials, and school principals should take
care of it. They have money to buy materials and they have to help
teachers. …Children of rich people come to this school [the largest
school located in the city center] and parents help the school. But in
Baray [the school in the poorest neighborhood] people are not so
rich and they don’t contribute much money to the school. These
problems, most of them, are not the problems of teachers.
(Interview, S6)
For the teachers who do not have enough materials, it
[implementing activities] is difficult. They have to prepare their
own stuffs. … But for those who already have materials, it is not
difficult. If you have teaching aids and lesson plans, then it is not
difficult. (Interview, S4)
In the cluster, schools do not have enough resources to be used for teaching aids,
except for one in the city center, where the community donates a lot of resources. Most of
the teachers hold second or even third jobs to complement their salary, which leaves little
time for them to prepare for the class (for more detailed discussion about teachers’ working
conditions, see Chapter 5). As cited, DTMT members emphasized that barriers for ETL

112

implementation stem from local contexts—not from teachers’ education levels or limited
capacity. Given these difficult local realities, having lesson plans and teaching aids signals
a good effort that a teacher makes for the class. In this context, preparing lesson plans and
teaching aids is regarded as a parameter of how well teachers teach, and thus the actual
quality of these materials is not as important.
Teachers further internalized these expectations as their mandates, both through
using the checklist by themselves and through inspections given by DTMT and school
principals. In the cluster, school principals are responsible for distributing the checklist to
all individual teachers in order for them to self-evaluate their own teaching. Teachers are
supposed to complete it before DTMT members come to observe, and DTMT members
observe classes based on the completed checklist. Therefore, the checklist is a document
that teachers frequently referred to and worked with. This was particularly evident from the
fact that all of the 13 teachers I interviewed referred to the checklist when I asked what they
do for ETL.
A teacher who taught Grade 1 commented, “… we have to have lesson plans. We
also have to prepare teaching materials, such as in Khmer, we have to prepare consonant
cards. We also have to have posters. These are all stated in the list” (Interview, T13). This
teacher clearly perceived preparing materials as her mandates, or what she has to do, rather
than as what she thinks important to do in order to teach well. Only a few teachers could
share why they thought these materials were important in their teaching:
I think preparing teaching aids is the most important [in ETL]…
because not all students can see textbook together. If a student
doesn’t have textbook, that students cannot learn. I have a lot such

113

students in my class. With these aids and posters, students could see
them at once… they all can learn with these materials. (Interview,
T11)
For her, teaching aids are to overcome shortage of textbooks that affects many of her
students. In this difficult condition, teaching materials are necessary to assure that all of her
students can learn. She, similar to other teachers, placed teaching materials including
textbooks at the center of teaching and learning.
The centrality of materials is very apparent in a sample checklist I obtained, the first
round of which had been completed by both the teacher in question and DTMT. It is for an
experienced female teacher who teaches in Grade 1 (T13). Quite interestingly, all of the
activities ranked C or D fall under the category of material/physical conditions, and all
activities in process and content ranked A. It suggests that her teaching has several
problems in physical/material aspects, like she did not file students’ portfolios or write
report cards daily, but not in more intangible aspects. Although this is just a case, there
seems to be a significant gap between my observation and local actors’ evaluation, if this
pattern holds in other evaluation.
This gap is mostly due to what the users of the checklist and I looked for. The teacher
evaluated in the checklist was one of the most eager to employ ETL techniques, yet for my
eyes she implemented them only superficially. She prepared and used various posters and
teaching aids, but not necessarily implemented the substance of ETL—transformation
model of education. Therefore in my observation her class was scored higher in material
conditions than in process and contents. I was trying to look for the substance behind her
teaching. The users of this checklist, in contrast, looked for concrete activities the teacher

114

actually implemented, or forms. In this sense, she completed most of the activities over
time and thus got A in many categories. As discussed, checklist itself enhances such simple
interpretations of ETL policy messages. Given that getting Cs or Ds is considered as
problems, such evaluation can also be seen as an expression of local actors’ understanding
about ETL, in which they concerned more about the existence of objects (physical/material
conditions) than the process and content of her teaching practices.
In a more controversial case, the teacher actually devoted a lot of energy to design
and prepare worksheets for group work. It was a Grade 1 Math class, where students
studied subtractions between 2-digit and 1-disit numbers. The teacher was very creative in
preparing the worksheets, which present eight subtraction problems on the left side and a
3-by-3 table with nine possible answers on the right side of a paper. Students were
supposed to calculate eight problems on the left, and find the answers from the table. They
finally needed to find the fake answer from the table. This game was very well designed
and a good way for the students to practice what they had learned. The teacher highly
evaluated this activity, stressing how much effort she had devoted to prepare worksheets.
These activities follow nine detailed activities on the checklist. These are: students
complete activities in groups; boys and girls work together; the teacher provides
instructions before activities; teacher takes part in facilitating student activities; teacher
prepares teaching aids; students use the materials; students understand how to use the
materials; teacher explains and facilitates the use of the materials; and teacher uses various
activities in teaching and learning. However, “due to time limitation and the cost to make
photocopies” (Interview, T1), the teacher prepared only three worksheets for the class with

115

37 students. What happened was, as we can easily imagine, only some students actually
calculated and others just observed. Even though the teacher tried to use teaching materials
in more participatory manner, and she liked it a lot, she did not necessarily consider how
students experienced the worksheets as much as the efforts she made to prepare them.
Overall, local actors in my study actually placed high priority on completing the
checklist. But completing the checklist does not necessarily bring substantial changes that
ETL policy tries to achieve. It is partly due to the design and content of the checklist itself.
Policy messages were oversimplified, or dumb down, in the process of reifying them into
checklist. It got further recontextualized at the local level. Local actors perceived the
checklist as the things that are sufficient for student-centered teaching, rather than as
necessary conditions as the checklist implies. Completing the checklist was regarded as an
end by itself rather than as a means for teachers to change their teaching practices.
Koon ot ceh: Helping Slow Learners. “Oh, he doesn't know how to write. He is
slow.” (Observation, May 20, 2013) One day when I observed a student practicing spelling
a word, the teacher said this to me in front of her class. I was embarrassed and deeply
regretted that I chose to observe this particular student, but it was when I started to
understand what slow learners actually mean in the local context.
Cambodian teachers described their students using the dichotomy between koon ceh
(student who knows) and koon ot ceh (student who does not know) or between koon puukae
(smart student) and koon ksaoy (weak student). Based on his comprehensive study about
Cambodian communities, Kobayashi (2011) pointed out that Cambodian people frequently

116

use dichotomous languages and they have significant implications in people’s daily lives.33
The divide perceived with such dichotomous languages felt as obvious, predetermined, and
unchangeable—these are seen as calma, or consequences of people’s previous lives. People
act upon the perceived difference and construct patterns of social relationship based on it.
These dichotomous languages by themselves represent people's worldview (Kobayashi,
2011, p. 492). Therefore, the distinction between koon ceh and koon ot ceh can be used as a
window through which I explore teachers' worldview.
It became clear that koon ot ceh does not simply mean students who achieve less. It
includes students who are frequently absent or who do not have necessary stationary such
as pencils and notebooks and thus do not (or cannot) fully participate in class. Some
participants explicitly linked the problem of koon ot ceh with students' socio-economic
backgrounds. For instance, a school principal admitted that her school has a lot of koon ot
ceh, mainly because there are many students from poor families, who tend to be absent
frequently and do not have educated guardians who can tutor at home, in her school district
(Interview, S14). Koon ot ceh embodies mostly negative expectations that people hold to
the students with low socio-economic backgrounds. In this sense, koon ot ceh should be
understood as a social construct with which socio-economic disparities in Cambodian
society are manifested and acted upon in the classroom.
In many cases, teachers referred to koon ot ceh as barriers to teaching. Teachers
employed the similar rhetoric to the Helping Slow Learners manual to this problem. For

33

One of the well-known dichotomies is between neak mien, people who have or rich

people and neak ot mien, people who do not have or poor people.
117

example, a Grade 1 teacher pointed out how difficult it is to help koon ot ceh within class
time:
[I have] problems... koon ot ceh. I usually try to help them but they
still cannot read and write. I try to help them every day, every class.
… But they still cannot write anything … If I can use a lot of time
to help them, they would be able to write… there are too many of
koon ot ceh in my class. (Interview, T10)
The teacher described koon ot ceh as difficulties that need to be addressed, as in the
Helping Slow Learners manual. For her, and for many other teachers as well, it is a
question of efficiency rather than that of equity or social justice. This also echoes with the
manual’s rhetoric. But teachers concerns were mostly about whether they could cover
lesson content within given teaching hours rather than about the loss of time and money
that repetition and dropout cause. Their concerns about efficiency are understandable,
because they get strong pressure to teach at a certain pace and finish the national
curriculum by the end of academic year. Teachers partly admitted that it is impossible to
teach without failing some koon ot ceh, not because of their teaching but because of the
students' socio-economic backgrounds. Again, teachers conceptualized koon ot ceh as
mostly static and unchangeable deficits students bring to classrooms.
Furthermore, koon ot ceh has strong implications for teaching. Many participants,
not limited to the local actors, indicated that koon ot ceh is frequently brought up as a topic
of discussion during teacher meetings. In such sessions, teachers “discuss techniques to
help koon ot ceh” (Interview, T5). One of such techniques is pairing koon ot ceh with koon
ceh in the same group (MoEYS, n.d.). When I asked a Grade 2 teacher to reflect about her
practice, in which she led the students read a short text in pair, she said,

118

[The objective of the activity was] to let the students read the text, even
koon ot ceh. I paired them with koon ceh, who can read and help them.
Students need to help each other because [there are] many koon ot ceh
in my class. (Interview, T11)
It is interesting that the teacher said “to help each other” in the excerpt. But she actually
meant that koon ceh is expected to be like a student tutor for koon ot ceh. Many other
teachers similarly said that they usually group slow learners with fast learners so that
students “help each other,” and as a result they can teach faster. These practices were
already part of teachers’ repertoires, most probably because of the Helping Slow Learners
manual, although such practices may create particular relationships among students and
have negative psychological consequences particularly to koon ot ceh.34
Here I observed an example of very important recontextualization (or appropriation)
of the ETL in local socio-cultural contexts, mediated by Helping Slow Learners manual.
Preventing koon ot ceh from dropping out and repetition was perceived as one of the central
components of ETL policy. However, as I have discussed, Helping Slow Learners
narrowed the idea of differences in the ETL policy into difficulties, but it basically states
that all students can learn if teachers teach well. At the local level, the idea about slow
learners was incorporated and connected to generally low expectations teachers hold on
koon ot ceh, which connotes socio-economic background, not just academic performance. It
directs to strengthen and fix the divide between koon ceh and koon ot ceh rather than
overcoming it, even though teachers actually implemented some of the recommended
activities to help slow learners.
34

One of the Cambodian informants explained, “I think teachers assume that koon ot ceh
would work harder when they know they are thought as koon ot ceh. They have no ideas
about psychological aspects of learning.” (Mar 26, 2014)
119

Negotiation of meaning mediated by tools. Examining two policy tools, i.e.
checklist and Helping Slow Learners manual, reveals the common characteristics of how
problems are addressed in these tools and how these problems are actually worked out at
the local level. First, both policy tools take an approach, in which it first leads the users
(especially local actors) to identify their problems and provides solutions. Both tools set out
the problems and their solutions very concrete, and as a result detach them from the
substance of the ETL policy—transformation model of education. Second, because tools
are detached from the bigger policy messages, they do not successfully enhance local actors’
understanding about why and how they are supposed to use tools. Although I did not
observe overt contestations from local actors to the policy, and they actually took the policy
seriously and tried to implement what they were supposed to do, tools enabled teachers to
make sense of the policy only superficially. Third, the deficit-oriented approach taken in
the policy tools promotes the idea that material constraints and slow learners are the
obstacles for good teaching, even though the policy tools are to address such problems.
These characteristics suggest that it is not so much the actual material constraints or slow
learners that hinders pedagogical reform, but the bigger barrier is how these difficulties are
addressed in policy tools and perceived by local actors.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, I tried to map out various meanings that different actors held about
ETL policy. Socio-cultural theories, especially Wenger’s theory about community of
practice, help us understand how such various meanings were negotiated and reified into
policy tools through the mechanisms such as Education Sector Working Group and Joint

120

Technical Working Group. As exemplified in the checklist and Helping Slow Learners
manual, the fundamental message of ETL, which is to replace transmission with
transformation model of education, was narrowed down and even twisted in the process of
reification. I identified a paradox, in which these policy tools were primarily based on a
transmission approach.
These tools were actually used to pinpoint “problems” rather than to support actors
to solve them. In particular, because policy tools were perceived as sets of tasks that are
sufficient (not the minimal expectation) for good teaching, material constraints and slow
learners were perceived as barriers out of local actors’ control. School principals and
DTMT members were sympathetic to teachers and held very basic expectations of them.
Teachers’ perspectives toward slow learners further evidenced that there was a huge gap
between policy intentions (to help slow learners to catch up with others) and teachers’
expectations (slow learners are not solely based on their academic performance and
therefore they cannot be helped to some extent). In such minimalistic circumstances, it is
quite difficult to expect dynamic changes to happen at the local level.

121

CHAPTER FIVE: LOCAL RESILIENCE IN THE FACE OF PEDAGOGICAL
REFORM

“Cheap things are in your hands, Expensive things are in your mouth”
(Slogan put on the wall in a classroom)

Introduction
Many comparative education researchers have tackled the question of how we could
understand the relationship between social and cultural contexts and education. Based on
the criticisms to School Effectiveness research that prospered during the 1980’s,
researchers started to pay closer attention to the embeddedness of education in the broader
contexts (eg. Fuller & Clarke, 1994).
It seems that pedagogy has a rather stronger relationship with its contexts than other
aspects of education. Actually, pedagogy itself cannot be defined without referring to the
social, political, and cultural aspects of teaching, as it is contingent upon them. According
to Robin Alexander’s definition, pedagogy “encompasses both the act of teaching and its
contingent theories and debates—about, for example, the character of culture and society,
the purposes of education, the nature of childhood and learning and the structure of
knowledge” (Alexander, 2001a, p. 53). Building on Alexander’s notion of pedagogy, an
international research group led by Frances Vavrus and Lesley Bartlett developed the
notion of contingent pedagogy (Vavrus & Bartlett, 2012, 2013; Vavrus, 2009). By
examining learner-centered pedagogy in a Tanzanian context, they revealed that Tanzanian
teachers’ pedagogical practices are shaped by their working conditions such as noise, class

122

size, and preparation time, and by their views about knowledge and how students should
learn. They contended that “pedagogy is deeply influenced by the cultural and material
conditions in which teachers teach” and by “perspectives on knowledge production and
dissemination” (Vavrus & Bartlett, 2012, p. 636). They contended that, constructivism, on
which learner-centered pedagogies are based, is not universally applicable nor relevant, and
thus we should examine it from the perspective of epistemological diversity. These research
help us understand the extent to which pedagogies (both its theoretical and pragmatic
aspects) are inseparable from the local contexts.
Therefore, in this chapter I want to unveil the situated nature of a pedagogy that
narrows down (or opens up) the possibility to bring changes. More specifically, I explore an
underlying logic and teaching conditions that govern local practices and thus define what
meanings can be made out of ETL. By doing so, this chapter aims to draw some
implications for the Cambodian pedagogical reform.
Unpacking the Logic That Governs Local Meaning
It is now widely acknowledged that pedagogy—both theory of knowledge and the
act of teaching—cannot be separated from political, social, and cultural contexts because
they constitute fundamental assumptions about education. Although pedagogy has not been
the major topic of comparative inquiry, there exists a line of research that explored how
pedagogy is culturally embedded. For example, Preschools in Three Cultures is an
innovative comparative study that unveiled how much culture, which is implicit and
unconscious, informs day-to-day practices in the US, China, and Japan. It examined culture
as an alternative to “social and political forces” in explaining each nation’s systems of early

123

childhood education (Tobin, Hsueh, & Karasawa, 2009, p. 224). Employing “video-cued
multivocal ethnography” (p. 5), they revealed “implicit cultural logic” (p. 19) that shapes
national characteristics of early childhood pedagogies. Alexander’s famous book, Culture
and Pedagogy, is another attempt to unveil the contingency of a pedagogy to broader
contexts by examining primary education in five countries (England, France, India, Russia,
and the USA). His comprehensive analysis revealed “cultural models of pedagogy”
(Alexander, 2001b, p. 556) that are a creation of political, historical, social, cultural and
organizational characteristics. For example, he characterized Russian values in primary
education as “teaching as competitive yet collaborative”, “teaching as both individualistic
and collaborative” in England, and “teaching as individualistic” in French primary
education (p. 223).
Shedding light on the “logic” or “model” that governs local practices not only helps
us understand the national characteristics of a pedagogy, but also allows us to explore the
ways in which local actors make sense of and enact a globalized pedagogy. For example, in
her study about reading lessons in Guinea, France, and the US, Kathryn M.
Anderson-Levitt clarified that lesson structures are deeply rooted in national cultural
differences even though the local teachers in three countries have similarly adopted global
mixed method in reading lessons (Anderson-Levitt, 2004, p. 229). Informed by this line of
research, I explored a logic that governs discourses about education as well as the act of
teaching based on ethnographic fieldwork in 10 primary schools in the Prey Veng cluster.
Paccekteeh as a political-social-cultural logic
Paccekteeh, meaning technique or technical (Headley, 1977, p. 473), is both one of

124

the most frequently heard terms in discussion and, at the same time, the one that troubled
me most during the fieldwork. Participants in my study held that teaching is a technical
process to transmit knowledge from teachers to students. The term paccekteeh has its root
in paccek, a Pali word that means single, different or individual, used in words such as
paccek-piek meaning separate or individual parts. In the context of teaching, it is similar to
repertoire but paccekteeh particularly focuses on problem solving. For example, one of the
youngest participant of this research mentioned, “I have difficulties to manage my kids. I
need to have paccekteeh to keep my kids be quiet and listen to me” (Interview, T15).
Paccekteeh is a set of legitimate steps that lead you to arrive at the solution to the problem.
Paccekteeh as a means to transmit knowledge. In order to unpack the idea of
paccekteeh, I need to touch upon the importance of religions (Hindu and Buddhism) in the
history of Cambodian education. From earlier than the late thirteenth century toward the
French colonial occupation, children of the laity were educated by monks at temples in
Cambodia. Written texts were stored in temples and monks orally transmitted written
poems and proverbs. As a result, temples monopolized written texts and played “a
significant role in determining what texts were worth knowing” (Ayres, 2000a, p. 14). This
tradition defines education as “predominantly moral enterprise” rather than equipping
people with basic literacy and skills that are applicable to people’s daily lives (Reimer,
2012, p. 289). Oral transmission of knowledge also defined the proper teacher-student
relationship as the storyteller and the audience (Needham, 2003), in which the audience
was expected to receive and recite information correctly. Paccekteeh is a set of techniques
to enable effective knowledge transmission. This type of thinking is still in effect among

125

many of the participants in this study.
The question about what counts as knowledge is a question of power. In the
pre-colonial Cambodia, monopoly of knowledge, together with oral mode of teaching,
perpetuated the hierarchical social order having a God-King on the top (Ayres, 2000a).
Currently, the national curriculum defines knowledge that is worth teaching. According to a
MoEYS official, “The national curriculum states what should be taught in schools. You can
find more detailed knowledge and skills to be taught in the curriculum standards. All
teachers must teach based on these standards” (Interview, N1). The curriculum embodies
knowledge and teachers throughout the country are supposed to teach it as it is. Actually,
“very little outside the taught curriculum has value as learning” (Pearson, 2011, p. 14). In
this system, teachers are expected to transmit predefined knowledge in the curriculum
effectively and correctly.
At the same time, possessing legitimate knowledge is regarded as power. A slogan
hung on the wall in one primary school classroom read “Cheap things are in your hands,
Expensive things are in your mouth,” as I cited at the beginning of this chapter. This slogan
exemplifies a norm that values possession over application of knowledge. In this sense,
teachers are associated with power because of their familiarity with paccekteeh. According
to Pearson (2011), teachers try to prevent others from acquiring the same or higher level of
knowledge by taking “know 10, teach 7” approach, as in the Cambodian adage (p. 14).
Paccekteeh and the teaching occupation. Teachers are assigned technical
(paccekteeh) or even mechanical roles in this system. Pearson, reflecting on her experience
of working with teacher trainers, described Cambodian teaching culture as follows:

126

Trainers expect, indeed are hungry for, new tools, techniques, and
materials, but their expectations are of a conveyor belt approach,
within which they will receive new content or rules from someone
who already knows it and then they will transfer it to others in the
same way. There is no perceived need to analyze, or practice the
use of, learning in other that delivery be based on real
understanding and practical experience. (Pearson, 2011, p. 14)
Teachers are expected to be like a “conveyor” that does not have creativity and flexibility.
This theory of knowledge has implications for the preferable relationship between
the teacher and the students. A member of District Training and Monitoring Team (DTMT)
defined the roles of teachers and students as follows: “Teachers give (aoy) knowledge to
students. Students receive (totuul) knowledge” (Interview, S-1). A consultant suggested, in
this context,
parents would say, children go to school to learn from the
teacher, not from their peers … [in] child friendly school,
student-centered approach, students feel they don’t learn anything
from the teacher. They go to school to learn, not to share
information among their group. … Teachers are supposed to teach
students. (Interview, I14)
With the traditional theory of knowledge that is quite different from constructivist
epistemology, people may feel it is useless to organize discussion among children who do
not possess legitimate knowledge nor the techniques to transmit knowledge.
The theory of knowledge also has implications for teacher learning and
development. A ministry official described Cambodian teacher training as equipping
teacher candidates with paccekteeh to teach. By comparing it with Japanese teacher
education, he said,
We have quite different pre-service training from Japan, because in
127

Japan you train teachers at universities, right? But in Cambodia, no.
We train teachers at teacher training centers. This is quite different
because we call in Cambodia, teacher training, not teacher
education like you do in Japan. … teacher education and teacher
training are quite different. In Japan you use teacher education
because, before teaching in the classrooms, the candidates apply to
the universities to become a teacher. In the university they don’t
focus on the teaching techniques, but mostly focus on upgrading
their [content] knowledge. What we do is teacher training, so we
don't focus so much on [content] knowledge, but we focus more on
techniques to teach, so that they can teach after two years [of
training]. (Interview, N3)
Contrary to our understanding about “pedagogical knowledge” and “pedagogical content
knowledge” (Shulman, 1987) as important knowledge domains that teachers need to have,
this official does not count teaching techniques (paccekteeh) as knowledge. For him,
subject content is the body of knowledge that all teacher candidates are supposed to have
when they enter teacher training centers. Paccekteeh are the ways to enable such
transmission of knowledge effectively, which teacher candidates need to learn during their
two years of training.
Professional development is also organized based on paccekteeh. In-service teachers
have school- and cluster-based professional development opportunities where teachers get
together in their own school or in the school cluster. These teacher meetings are called
procham paccekteeh (technical meeting). The primary objective of this meeting is to
provide professional development opportunities more frequently and closer to classrooms,
and to nurture collegial relationship among teachers. During the meeting, teachers are
supposed to reflect about their teaching experiences and exchange ideas about teaching and

128

learning (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, n.d.). Usually technical meetings are
organized without having someone who can provide professional consultation, and teachers
rarely have opportunities to observe each other's classrooms. Therefore, technical meetings
tend to work as a platform where familiar paccekteeh is transmitted from experienced
teachers to novice teachers (Wheeler, 1998).
Investigation of the discourses about knowledge and teaching makes it clear that
paccekteeh is a logic that provides a basis for the fundamental assumptions about education.
It is not just rooted in the local culture, but also in the power structure and the norms of
social relationship. Paccekteeh is, in some sense, a means to maintain existing power
structure where those who control knowledge are at the top, those who possess legitimate
knowledge in the middle, and those have less access to knowledge are at the bottom. It also
sustains and strengthens existing social relations such as that of teacher and students.
Paccekteeh in the Act of Teaching
The technical (paccekteeh) view toward teaching and learning is also apparent in the
other aspect of pedagogy, i.e. the act of teaching. The three vignettes below illustrate how
this logic underlies actual practices.
Vignette 1: professional development day. After I observed a cluster-level
technical meeting, in which teachers created exam problems, I noted, “It was a complete
division of labor, one teacher worked on Khmer, the other on Math, and the rest three
teachers on Science/social studies,”
three teachers started working on creating Science/Social
Studies exam. Because the textbook is written in open-ended style,
the teachers must create their own questions that are accessible to

129

their kids. It seemed that teachers found this quite difficult and they
discussed it a lot. They were quick to choose the topic/unit that they
wanted to put in the exam. The topic they chose was about chicken.
But the problem was how they make exam questions out of the
topic. A teacher first wrote an open-ended question, “What do
chickens eat?” and showed it to the leader teacher. The leader
teacher said, “This might be too difficult. We should give choices
so that students can choose the correct one. How about putting like,
A: Chickens eat worms and grains, and B: Chickens eat meats.” The
three teachers agreed and started writing them on the paper. But still
they found it difficult to format these choices and finally created
two “true” statements! (Observation, May 30, 2013).
Technical meeting was officially institutionalized in 1993, along with the organization of
cluster school system. Although teachers were paid a daily allowance when they
participated in this meeting before 2009, MoEYS stopped providing monetary incentives
because the participation became a mandate. This negatively affects the motivations of
teachers to bother to spend a day in school, when they could earn money elsewhere. As a
result, only about two thirds of teachers in the cluster actually showed up in both of the two
meetings that I observed.
Usually DTMT organizes technical meetings on the last Thursday every month in
one of the schools in the cluster, and all other schools are closed the whole day. It lasts
about three hours, in which all teachers first get together to share schedule and information,
then work in grade-level groups, and finally come back to the whole group to wrap up. In
the grade-level groups, teachers are supposed to develop a “teaching program” for each
subject that provides a rough idea about what content they should cover in the following
month. Sometimes teachers need to work on other tasks, such as generating exams, in

130

addition to teaching programs, or need to participate in training sessions provided by
DTMT.
The vignette described above is from the scene where Grade 2 teachers just finished
generating teaching programs and worked on the additional task to generate exams that
would be used in all Grade 2 classes in the cluster at the end of the semester. The name
“technical” is a perfect descriptor of what I observed—teachers worked on practical tasks
(in this case creating exams) by division of labor most of the time. They talked about the
questioning techniques, such as multiple choice or open-ended. What they might have
learned in this meeting was procedural techniques to convert statements in the textbook to
exam questions.
What surprised me most during the meeting was that there were very limited
interactions among teachers. One of the teachers worked on preparing Khmer exam
completely by herself, although other teachers were physically in the same room. She even
did not check whether others were okay with the topic she chose. She passed her draft to
the leader teacher for check, and left the room without waiting for the other teachers to
finish. No group discussion that involved all of the five teachers was initiated when they
were working. Although teachers engaged in more casual chatting when DTMT members
distributed lychees for a snack, the topic was mostly about the election scheduled in July. In
the end, therefore, teachers did not talk about their own teaching or about their students at
all.
Even when they interacted, the discussions centered around procedures (how to)
rather than on the content (what) or the purpose (why) of the exam. It was as if content and

131

purpose were given a priori, or just creating exam questions itself was the purpose of this
meeting. Three teachers who prepared Science/Social Studies exam did not discuss, for
example, what knowledge and skills of their students they want to assess with this exam,
what certain questioning techniques allow students to think about, or why understanding
chicken’s feeding behavior is important for the students. All the questions they created
were what they call “memory questions” to make students recall what they have been
taught. No possibilities were discussed to put “critical thinking” or even “understanding”
questions—which is one of the most significant assets to the ETL.
Such a technical view toward teaching and learning is woven into their daily
classroom practices, which I now turn to discuss. The following two vignettes are from
math and Khmer classes. One is based on more traditional teaching approach mainly based
on lecturing, whereas the other is more activity-based and ETL techniques were applied.
But both vignettes equally illuminate how much procedures are emphasized in the daily
practices.
Vignette 2: a math class.
The teacher (T3), a young male teacher, who taught 29 students in
his G2 class, first wrote an exercise problem from the last period:

The teacher asked the students to solve this problem by themselves
on their slates (there were around eight students who did not have
their own slates and they worked it on their notes). Some students
used their fingers, or wrote bars on the slate, in order to calculate
subtractions between two-digit and one-digit numbers, such as 16-8
132

and 14-7. Because in doing 16 minus 8, students need to write 16
bars and cross 8, and then count the remaining, some students got
confused in the process.
Figure 7. A Student Working on Calculation

Source: Photo taken by the author

Some students forgot to reduce one when they borrowed from the
five in the tenth digit or four in the hundreds digit. Students around
me, therefore, did not get correct answers at first.
After a while, the teacher led the students put up their slates so that
he could see whether students got correct answers or not. He looked
around the classroom and nodded, then appointed a girl (Neth) to
come up to the blackboard and show what she got.

The teacher started to explain the procedures step by step while
posing short questions:
T: “Okay, thanks Neth. Do you remember how to solve this? Where
should we see first? From left or right?”
Unknown (S): “From right.”
T: “Correct. So at first, we should calculate 6 minus 8. Can we
133

subtract 8 from 6?”
Unknown (many): “No!”
T: “No, so we should borrow one from 5. We should change 5 as 4.
Now we have 16. 16 minus 8 equals?”
S (in the front): “Eight.”
T: “Okay, so I write 8 here. Next, can we subtract 7 from 4? No. So
we should borrow one from 4. Here we should change 4 into 3,
because we borrowed one, and now we have 14. What is 14
minus 7?”
S (in the front): “Seven.”
T: “Yes, so we write 7 here. Now we subtract 2 from 3 and get 1.
So the answer is 178. Clap your hands for Neth!”
T: “Okay, before moving on to other exercise problems we should
tackle, I want to make sure that you know how to calculate this
problem. I explain the procedure once again, and you should
repeat after me. I start from the right.”
All students: “I start from the right.”
T: “Eight cannot be subtracted from six. I borrow one from five and
change it into four.”
All students: “Eight cannot be subtracted from six. I borrow one
from five and change it into four.”
T: “Now I calculate 16 minus 8 and I get 8.”
All students: “Now I calculate 16 minus 8 and I get 8.”
T: “Seven cannot be subtracted from four. I borrow one from four
and change it into three. Now I calculate 14 minus 7 and I get 7.”
All students: “Seven cannot be subtracted from four. I borrow one
from four and change it into three. Now I calculate 14 minus 7
and I get 7.”
T: “Now I calculate 3 minus 2 and I get 1. My answer is 178.”
All students: “Now I calculate 3 minus 2 and I get 1. My answer is
178.”
T: “Very good! Now we are moving on to other exercise problems.
You can solve these problems unless you follow the steps we just

134

learned.”
This class was one of the most traditional in terms of how the content was delivered. Tables
were arranged in rows and students sat directly facing the blackboard, where the teacher
stood most of the class time. But there existed a clear and logical link between the purpose
(students become able to calculate subtractions between 3-digit numbers) and the flow of
the lesson (review and exercise), which I did not see in many more activity-based classes.
The teacher succeeded in making a good classroom atmosphere by praising students and
letting students to praise others. He also involved students in the process by posing a lot of
questions.
It was intriguing to see that the teacher made the students verbally express all the
steps they should take in calculation. It was very strange for me at first because it sounded
like a song and the students murmured it while calculating other exercise problems. But
after I spent some time in various classrooms, I learned that this is a quite popular strategy
found across grade levels and subject areas. This practice is called sourt, to recite or to
chant, which consists of the core of teaching method used in temples known as soutrien,
meaning to learn by heart (Needham, 2003). An informant cynically pointed out that
Cambodians learn chants to access the highest knowledge, Buddhism, but in many cases
people chant a mantra without knowing what it means.
The perspective that underlies the practice of chanting is that knowledge is
primarily transmitted verbally. Needham (2003) pointed out that repetition, memorization,
and verbal performance are the norms of classroom practices, based on her ethnographic
study about Khmer literacy lessons. She observed “recital elicitation” as the dominant form
of learning activities, in which “students are called on to recite an extended portion of the
135

lesson by repeating after the teacher” (Needham, 2003, p. 33). Although this observation is
about Khmer literacy, it also applies very well to Math teaching described above. The
teacher spent almost half of the lesson hour (about 20 minutes) for the recital elicitation
about calculation procedure, which was much longer than the time students actually worked
on exercise problems.
The chant also indicates the centrality of procedural knowledge in doing
mathematics. As Gu et al. (2004) contended by examining Chinese mathematics teaching,
repeating procedural teaching is not necessarily a rote drill when it involves “procedural
variations” (p. 322).35 The chant involved procedural variations that help “students arrive
at solutions to a problem” (Gu, Huang, & Marton, 2004, p. 322). It transformed a
challenging problem (456 minus 278) into a set of familiar problems (such as 18 minus 8)
as the small steps (paccek) that guide students to arrive at solutions to the problem. Yet it is
limited in its ability to develop students’ conceptual understanding because no explanation
was provided in the chant (and in the lecture) about why the problem should be calculated
from the right to left. It also left no room for the students to think, or be aware of, possible
approaches to calculate 456 minus 278. Therefore the chant reduced the amount of
mathematical thinking that is required to solve the problem by dividing the procedure into
small steps.
Vignette 3: a Khmer class. A female teacher (T2) in her late 30s taught her 36
students in one of the two G1 classes in the school. Below is an excerpt from one of her

35

Teaching with procedural variation introduces multiple methods to solve a problem in
order to help students “form a hierarchical system of experiencing process through forming
concepts or solving stages of problems” (Gu, Huang, & Marton, 2004, p. 324).
136

Khmer classes.
The class worked on composing words in groups. They worked on
creating a word with given cards, on which letters (sometimes a
combination of a consonant and a vowel, or a consonant alone)
were written. Each group got three cards that are necessary to create
a word.
The students were divided into three groups, each group with more
than 10 students. Students got together around a table, which was
too small for 11 or 13 students, and they had only one set of cards.
In one group, which worked on the word book, siavpau, students
started identifying the cards one by one:
S1: “Is this consonant វ / vou /?”
S2: “That is វ / vou /. This one is consonant ស / so /.”
S3: (looking at the letter table) “Vowel ៀ / ia /. Consonant ស / so /
and vowel ៀ / ia /, សៀ / sia /. What is the next one?”
S1: “Consonant… ភ / pou /?”
S3: “And vowel… ៅ / au /.”
S1: “So ភៅ / pau /. Isn’t it សៀវភៅ / siavpau /?”
Students succeeded in identifying all the cards and the word they
were making. They started to look for the word on the blackboard
and in the textbook, so that they could know where the consonant វ
fits in.
After each group successfully found what the word was, the teacher
asked them to read the word aloud.

137

After class
Takayo: So, what were the things that you wanted them (students)
to learn in the game you did today?
Teacher: The game I used today was to make sure that my kids are
able to decompose combinations of consonants and vowels in
order to read words.
Takayo: How do you evaluate it?
Teacher: It was good. Good, because they enjoyed it and all of them
could read words in the end. They like to study in that way and
also learn a lot when they are happy, you know.
Managing a relatively large class, compared to 27.4 students per class on average in Prey
Veng city, the teacher succeeded in creating an organized but warm learning environment
in her room. The teacher employed one of the ETL methods—working on a game in
groups—and led the students practice what they had learned. In the group I was with, at
least some of the students initiated discussion and worked together to figure out the word.
Because Khmer language has a phonologically based writing system with 67 letters
including 21 vowels, early grade Khmer reading instruction is generally based on phonics
teaching. Students first learn the shape and sound of each of the consonants and vowels,
and then learn the combinations of them (Courtney & Gravelle, 2013; Needham, 2003).
Students followed the steps they had been taught—first to decode letters into sounds, and
then combine them together—and finally figured out the word siavpau. Things actually
happened as the teacher intended.
Furthermore, even though the vignette 3 looks a lot different from the vignette 2, in
terms of grade level, subject matter, and teaching approach, the core ideas about teaching
and learning are surprisingly similar: Procedures were at the center of teaching and learning.

138

The game was designed to establish procedures to read words that involve decoding letters
and combining sounds. This fits very well with the overall objective of this lesson, which
was “to make sure that students are able to read words that contain consonant-vowel
combinations” according to the lesson plan. Students were to follow the steps to read,
relying on their memory about letters (or a letter table). In fact, the game left no room for
thinking and discussions even though it took the form of group work. This parallels what I
observed in the math class (vignette 2) as well as in many other classes.
Another important aspect of the vignette 3 is the teacher’s high evaluation of the
activity. As noted, there were many students who could not, or did not, join the discussion
during the group work. It was partly due to the lack of the cards that the teacher prepared
by herself. She “wanted to prepare additional card sets” at least for five or six groups, but
she could not because there were no thick papers left. As a result, each group had more than
10 students including both koon ceh and koon ot ceh. In the group I was with, three koon
ceh dominated the discussion and others just observed. But the teacher evaluated, “all of
them [students] could read words in the end.”
The above three vignettes sharply illuminate the fact that the logic of paccekteeh
(technique) underlies local practices. Creating exam (vignette 1), doing subtractions
between 3-digit numbers (vignette 2), or reading words (vignette 3), were all divided into
small steps (paccek). It also allows teachers and students to arrive at solutions with less
thinking. Such techniques, often presented as the only effective and thus correct method,
make teaching and learning predictable and even mechanical process.

139

Making sense of ETL with the logic of paccekteeh
Paccekteeh is a logic that provides a basis for the fundamental assumptions about
Cambodian education. This logic also worked as a hidden frame of reference within which
ETL could be understood and practiced at the local level. Interestingly, local actors are the
ones who most strongly supported what they think as student-centered principles and thus
seriously engaged in what they think as ETL, compared to international and national actors.
They held the idea that student-centered teaching involves a lot of questions, activities and
games, and group work that is based on a well-written lesson plan. It is also to ensure that
students know (ceh) the basics: “before we just cared about whether teachers cover the
content, but [in student-centered teaching in Khmer subject] we care more about whether
students know how to read and write” (Interview, S2). Student-centered teaching was
placed at the opposite end of teacher-centered teaching, which a teacher described,
“[classroom discourse was] all dominated by teachers and students listened to the teacher
all the time. [This was a] typical teaching approach 30 years ago” (Interview, S8).
But ironically, the way local actors constructed ETL was so fundamentally based on
the logic of paccekteeh that their serious commitment was directed toward sustaining, not
changing, their pedagogies (both theoretically and pragmatically). In particular, local actors
constructed ETL as 1) a set of techniques that automatically lead them to student-centered
teaching and 2) additional tasks rather than alternatives to their familiar practices.
Local actors understood that ETL is a set of techniques. According to a district
education official, “ETL helps teachers. It helps teachers identify problems in their teaching
and also gives them paccekteeh to improve their teaching” (Interview, S6). Teachers further

140

connected ETL techniques to student-centered teaching. For example, one of the
participants evaluated her teaching as student-centered because she has known “how to use
ETL techniques for many years” and has “completed all the items on the checklist already”
(Interview, T7). In relation to the first point, local actors also perceived ETL as additional
techniques. This meaning is expressed in the following excerpts from interviews: “now that
we have ETL, we have to implement all the items on the checklist. We have more things to
do but get the same amount of money” (T3), “I try to use different types of games at least
once in a day. Sometimes I cannot especially when I am behind the schedule” (T11). These
comments suggest that teachers perceived ETL as techniques that they need to add to their
day-to-day workload, which is already quite heavy, rather than replace their familiar
teaching.
Local actors constructed these meanings of ETL fundamentally based on the logic
of paccekteeh. They focused more on the procedure and small steps rather than conceptual
understanding about ETL or multiple ways to arrive at student-centered teaching. This
parallels with what underlies the mathematics lesson I discussed in vignette 2. The second
meaning also represents resilience against change that is also a characteristic of the logic of
paccekteeh. Therefore, although local actors embraced what they think as student-centered
teaching, they ended up sustaining and strengthening transmission approach rather than
replacing it with transformation approach.
Teaching Conditions that Shape Local Meaning
Examining teaching conditions has been established as an approach to explore how
teaching and learning are conceptualized and enacted. Lortie (1975), in one of the classics

141

of this approach, identified the nature of teaching profession by examining various aspects
of teaching conditions. Kennedy (2005) also found that school organizational rules and
norms hinder effective teaching both physically and culturally. Especially regarding
low-income countries, researchers have identified large class size, lack of basic facilities,
and limited availability of teaching/learning materials as obstacles to teaching. Those who
study pedagogical changes have claimed that student-centered pedagogies are not relevant
to the difficult working conditions for teachers in low-income countries (Guthrie, 1990;
O’Sullivan, 2002, 2004).
Although it is clear that these obstacles similarly narrow the possible teaching
options that Cambodian teachers can employ in their classrooms, situative theory further
suggests that their implications are much more fundamental to pedagogical changes. The
theory posits that sense making—not just decoding the information—cannot be
independent from social and physical contexts in which it happens (Putnam & Borko, 2000).
It means, teaching conditions close down (or open up) the possible meanings that people
can make about certain stimulus. An understanding of how local actors make sense of ETL
in their world of work thus helps us better understand the local meaning and practice of
ETL.
Teaching Conditions as a Basis for Expectations for Teachers
In Chapter 4, I discussed local actors’ holding only minimum expectations to
teachers, which had significant implications for how ETL is understood and practiced. It
turned out that teaching conditions, especially low salary and resource constraints, had
significant implication for the ways in which local actors, as well as some national and

142

international actors, understood what teachers must do in this pedagogical reform.
Low salary. As is the case for any workplace, salary is an important factor to
motivate or de-motivate teachers extrinsically. According to the study done by NEP (NGO
Education Partnership) and VSO (Voluntary Service Overseas), with 213 teachers, salary
was nominated as the biggest cause of dissatisfaction in their job (NEP & VSO, 2008, p.
23).36 Participants in my study also complained about their low salary. For example, a
school principal described the situation as follows. “They [teachers] don’t get enough
salary. Only 10,000 Riel for one day, it is only 2.5$. They have children to feed and they
need to fill the gas for their motorbike to come to school… And they have to prepare
teaching aids out of their own pocket” (Interview, S8). An NGO official also explained how
low salary negatively impacts teaching:
The problems is their [teachers’] salary is too low. I know this is
something what people say again and again. Nobody wants to listen
to it but it is important. It’s important. If people, when you are
talking about the basic needs, and when you don’t have things to eat
or money to send your ill child to the hospital, how can you think
about [your job]? … If teachers don’t have money to send their own
kids to school, or if they don’t have enough food, how can they
36

The Cambodian Independent Teachers Association (CITA) is “the only independent,
nonpartisan, non-profit, non-governmental teachers’ union” in Cambodia, which was
established in March 2000. It advocates for “a living wage, safe and sanitary working
conditions, continuous professional development, for legal and democratic rights” of
teachers (CITA, 2010, p. 3). They report that Cambodian teachers make from US$50 to
US$80 every month, which is not enough for them to support their daily living. We can
easily imagine what this salary means in Cambodian context by comparing it with
US$19.80, which is the cost of purchasing the absolute minimum food to meet basic calorie
requirements for an individual. Although MoEYS has made efforts to increase teachers’
basic salary by 20% annually since 2010, it would take long time to reach to the minimum
basic salary of US$250, as recommended by Cambodia Independent Teachers Association
(CITA, 2010).
143

think about teaching and learning, or effectiveness, or
student-centered? They don’t even use their time to prepare for
class. Because they already have lesson plans that they made two or
three years ago. Just use it. How can they spend 500 or 1,000 Riel
[10-25 cent] to buy books to read? No. With 1,000 Riel they can
buy a cup of coffee. (Interview, I9)
This comment makes a case that a low teacher salary is not just a problem of motivation but
is about survival and maintaining a basic living. Low teacher salaries lead to problematic
consequences such as second job and corruption (CITA, 2010).
Aside from these pragmatic issues, low salary is a basis for the minimum
expectations to teachers. As exemplified in the comment cited above (I9), some national
and international actors held that the current level of teacher salary is already low for what
teachers are doing, and expecting more to them is “not realistic and appropriate” (Interview,
I7). Local actors also had the same concern. For example, a teacher complained, “we don’t
get much salary but there are a lot of work!” (Interview, T4). School principals and DTMT
members were very sympathetic to teachers and emphasized the most basic tasks such as
preparing a lesson plan and teaching aids, because preparing these materials itself actually
requires a lot of efforts in this condition: “They [teachers] usually have one or two jobs
other than being a teacher. Some of them do farming, others sell stuff at the market, or
drive a motodop [motor taxi]. So they don’t have time to prepare lesson plans” (Interview,
S3). Therefore, expecting less is a kind of norm that is shared among local actors due to the
low salary that teachers receive.
Resource constraints. As I have discussed in Chapter 4, local actors, mediated by
policy tools, made sense of ETL by placing particular emphasis on material aspects such as

144

posters, lesson plans, and teaching aids rather than on the aspects of process or content.
This is because they perceived materials as the prerequisite for learning, as a teacher
suggested in the following comment: “if a student doesn’t have textbook, that student
cannot learn” (Interview, T11). Lack of textbooks or necessary materials for creating
teaching aids was perceived as the biggest barriers for student-centered learning.
Given the centrality of materials in the local meaning and practice, resource
constraints also provide a basis for the norm of minimum expectations. This results from
the idea that teachers are not responsible for addressing resource constraints because that is
the job of school principal. Particularly the roles of school principals were stressed not only
by local actors but also by international and national actors. A participant explained that
school principals are at the top of the pyramid, and they take top-down approach and not
willing to see changes from teachers (Interview, I3). Therefore, in general, school
principals take responsibility to address resource constraints rather than teachers themselves
explore resources available outside schools.
In contrast, principals themselves perceived that material constraints in their schools
are due to the limited contributions from the community they serve. Every public primary
school has a community organization that is called sahakaa, or school support committee,
consists of administrative officers, teachers, community leaders, and volunteers
(Kambayashi, 2008). Sahakaa shares responsibilities with its supporting school especially
in mobilizing resources.37 Resources are usually raised through bon pukaa, literally

37

As Kambayashi (2008) explained, people perceived that schools cannot collect money
directly from students, but they can raise money from community. As a result, monetary
contribution from communities shares as much as 40% of Cambodia’s total education
145

translated flower festival, in which school offers light snacks and drinks and community
members donate money in response. The amount of monetary contribution from sahakaa
makes a difference in school resources, such as library and classroom construction or
facility repairs. I was able to participate in two such festivals in different schools (School
#1 and #6), and my field note reads,
Compared to the last one [held in School #6], there were fewer
people and monks. Last time I met the head of Provincial Education
Office but this time he didn’t show up. The principal [of School #1]
came to me and said this bon pukaa is for building new library but
he needs much more money. (May 27, 2013)
The gap I observed in the two schools was also pointed out by the principal of School #1 in
the interview. “They [School #6] do much better than us [in terms of school conditions].
They have a good sahakaa that contributes a lot to the school. We don’t have that strong
support” (Interview, S12).38
In any case, teachers are not expected to take initiative to address resource
constraints that they perceive as the biggest barrier. They are expected to do what they can
do with the resources available to them inside school, contrary to the ETL policy and policy
tools that encourage teachers to bring in locally available resources in order to supplement
resources.
Teaching conditions provide a basis for low expectations for teachers, which
actually work as a filter that narrows down the possible meaning of ETL into a set of
expenditure.
38
In School #3, which was described as the poorest by a DTMT member, the principal
complained: “In my school, sahakaa contributes very little. They donate a lot of money to
the temple not to this school. I always ask help but they care about their next lives but not
about educating kids” (Interview, S3).
146

minimum things to do.
Practices in Different Teaching Conditions
As was confirmed by the participants of this study, teaching conditions have
significant negative impacts on local practices. But my observation suggests that although
teaching conditions (especially resources) are important, their impact is not as deterministic
as people may imagine. Rather, I observed much more flexibility and creativity in “difficult”
classrooms where there were more students but fewer resources than in classrooms in the
city school, which people typically described as wealthy and thus the best primary school in
the province. By comparing these two classrooms, I want to shed light on the
complex—even contradictory—realities that I have observed.
Classroom A in the “advanced” school (School #6)
Prey Veng people, ranging from Provincial Education Office staff
to my landlord, said this is one of the best primary schools in the
province. Actually, its appearance is quite different from other
schools because it has a big school gate and a lot of colorful animal
statues. It has more than four school buildings, a big playground,
and an assembly hall. The school offers 23 classes and caters for
788 students in total. It is particularly unique for its after-school
English classes that most students take for US$5 per month
(out-of-curricular program).
One morning I observed one of its four Grade 2 classrooms.
Twenty-eight kids fit in 15 tables and each has his/her own chair,
with which they can move. The class started exactly on time: no
tardy student is accepted and students who come late should go to
see the principal, according to the teacher. She showed me the
“official” copy of a lesson plan, which her co-worker had developed
and the vice principal approved. She said, “I have to follow this
because I cannot teach faster or slower” than other Grade 2 classes.
147

It was a Khmer class, in which students learned to spell words that
appeared in a text that they learned the day before. The teacher had
the kids prepare their slates for the dictation. There were two or
three students who did not have slates, but she did not take care of
them even though medium size chalkboards were stocked in the
cabinet. She pronounced a word slowly for the kids to write it on
the slate, and made them raise slates high enough, so that she could
check if there are students who spelled it wrong. When she found
mistakes, she just pointed to the students and let them correct with
help from nearby students. After these mistakes were corrected,
students “chant” how they spelled it. (Feb. 23, 2013)
Classroom B in a “basic” school (School #8)
This school is located in the middle of a vast rice field, with only
eight teaching staff. 206 students were packed in a two-story
building. The rain often floods its playground and roads to the
school especially during the rainy season, and makes it difficult for
both kids and teachers to come to school on time. The principal
described his school as “basic,” because the school is categorized C
(basic or below average) according to the DTMT evaluation.
After a heavy shower, I visited the school and observed Grade 1
classroom. There were 36 students at the beginning, but the teacher
was not there yet. Five minutes later the teacher arrived and she
made the students sing two songs and welcomed three more
students who came late. Ten minutes late from the schedule, she
started a Khmer class by showing a poster that shows all consonants
(the only laminated poster in her class) and said, “Today we are
going to study consonant yo” and pointed the consonant on the
poster. Then she took her earrings (royaa) off and asked what these
were, then taped her earrings and a piece of paper on which she
wrote the word on the blackboard. After similarly introducing three
more words, she removed papers and asked students to put them
under the objects that they represent.
She was reluctant to show me her lesson plan (although she did not
148

call it a lesson plan), which was as simple as the unit name and the
list of questions that she planned to ask and of course there was no
stamp from the school principal. (Feb. 13, 2013)
It is clear that classroom A is more rigid and follows the norms of Cambodian education.
Such rigidity does not allow teachers to mobilize resources for the kids who are in need,
even though there are things that can be used more flexibly (such as spare chalkboards). In
contrast, classroom B and the school are in difficult conditions that restrict how teaching
can be organized. But the teacher cared about her students more than the norms and rules
and effectively used available resources.
These examples suggest that it is not so much the availability of resources that limit
the range of teaching methods that teachers can employ in classrooms. Rather, teachers’
creative and flexible use of available resources is an important determinant about how
things can be taught. Comparing these two classrooms confirms the fact that the teaching
conditions constitute an important aspect of Cambodian pedagogy, but it is just one of
many aspects. We should pay attention to the teachers who work in severely
under-resourced classrooms but managed to teach in ways that engage students in teaching
and learning processes, and vice versa. Pedagogy is contingent to teaching conditions but
they are not absolute.
I should also note that for many local actors classroom A is more effective and
advanced. This even applies to the teacher of classroom B, who does not evaluate her own
teaching very high, “It is worthless to observe my class. I don’t teach well” (Interview, T9).
For the local actors, rigid and structured practices such as in classroom A are valued as
more effective than creative and flexible practices like those in classroom B. The logic of

149

paccekteeh (techniques) informs such evaluation. As discussed, paccekteeh is to provide
step-by-step procedures in order to reach to the solution with minimum uncertainties.
Flexibility and creativity, which are to respond to uncertainties, are placed at the opposite
end of rigidity and structure, and thus regarded as ineffective. Discussing the difficult
teaching conditions as if teaching practices cannot be changed without overcoming such
difficulties runs the dual risks: (1) undermining the active and creative roles played by the
local actors who somehow manage to teach in such conditions and (2) ignoring the logic
that governs how teaching and learning should be operated and evaluated at the local level.
Is Pedagogical Change Possible?
It turns out that both logic of paccekteeh and severe teaching conditions play
important roles in determining what kind of meaning can be made about ETL and how such
meaning can be expressed in practice. Although it is impossible to conclude which is the
more important “barrier” for Cambodian pedagogical reform, I would argue that these two
factors are strongly intertwined and make Cambodian pedagogies resilient in the face of
change.
On one hand, teachers’ working conditions provide a rationale to the logic of
paccekteeh. Chanting and recitation, which is rooted in political social, as well as cultural
norms, are also the practices to address resource constraints. This must particularly be so
when there are only limited textbooks available. Low teacher salary also provides
explanations about why simple, even “dumb down” procedures should be provided. That is
to say, teachers are not necessarily expected to do much in ETL, mainly due to the
minimum amount of money they earn. With such low expectations, it is better not to let

150

teachers have autonomy to think and decide by themselves. Rather, it is safer to make
things “teacher-proof” as much as possible. The logic of paccekteeh is, to some extent, a
consequence of difficult conditions in which Cambodian teachers work.
On the other hand, it is also true that the logic of paccekteeh shapes how people
perceive teachers’ working conditions. As discussed, local actors discussed that teaching
conditions including low teacher salary and limited resources are the major barriers for
“effective” teaching, which is to be rigid and structured. Teaching conditions are barriers
for them because they prevent teachers from performing all the small steps and procedures
as planned, or from making things organized and structured. From another angle, the status
of not having these conditions enables local actors to exercise autonomy—by changing
school time table or producing original teaching aids, because there are no paccekteeh to
deal with such situations. But again, flexibility and creativity are perceived as inferior or
incomplete where paccekteeh is much appreciated. In this sense, teachers’ world of work is
very strongly governed by the logic of paccekteeh.
It is unlikely that improving teaching conditions leads teachers to employ more
creative and flexible teaching methods. It is likely rather to strengthen rigidity and enhance
practices based on paccekteeh. It is also difficult to imagine changing the logic of
paccekteeh, which is deeply held by teachers, without improving teaching conditions. If we
seriously try to replace “traditional” teaching practices that emphasize recitation and
reproduction of knowledge with the one that values critical thinking and production of
knowledge, it is inevitable to tackle both the logic and norms and teaching conditions
simultaneously.

151

Chapter Summary
In this chapter, I have explored the logic and norm that underlies local meaning and
practice of ETL. I highlighted how the logic of paccekteeh consists of the core of the
Cambodian pedagogy in terms of both discourse about teaching and learning and the act of
teaching. Local actors also held the norm of minimum expectations for teachers that has a
basis in the teaching conditions in which teachers work. I argued that the logic of
paccekteeh and teaching conditions are closely linked and even strengthen with each other.
Therefore, although currently political-cultural-social logic and norm and teaching
conditions are taken as independent factors that hinder pedagogical changes, we need to
consider and tackle these simultaneously if we seriously want to bring substantial changes
in local processes.

152

CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Introduction
Reforming teaching practices is a challenging mission. In this multi-level case study,
I aimed to understand the complexities inherent in a pedagogical reform by shedding light
on the dynamics and tensions within and across communities of practice at three
levels—international, national, and local—in the case of an on-going pedagogical reform
implemented in Cambodia. I was particularly interested in the social process in which
various actors take part in constructing this reform, i.e. ETL. It turned out that actors did
not necessarily agree on what ETL means and ETL covers a wide range of pedagogical
approaches. Moreover, it was constructed not only as a matter of renewing pedagogies, but
also as a matter of political, social, and cultural change. In other words, actors employed
political, social, and/or cultural rationales to make sense of ETL.
In this concluding chapter, I want to take a step back and discuss what larger picture
I can draw by combining smaller discrete findings. In addition to presenting the bigger
picture, I want to achieve three more goals in this chapter. First, by revisiting the literature
on which this research draws, I want to discuss how my findings could speak back to the
existing discourses. I will also discuss theoretical contributions of this research to the field
of comparative education and teacher education. Second, I want to reflect about and
explore how the knowledge presented in this dissertation was constructed through
interactions with the participants in my study. This serves as a discussion about
methodological issues, especially focusing on how this multi-level case study supplements

153

vertical case study. The last goal of this chapter is to provide practical implications to the
current and future pedagogical reforms in Cambodia.
Multiple Rationales of Cambodian Pedagogical Reform
In Chapters 3, 4, and 5, I illustrated how actors involved in Cambodian pedagogical
reform made sense of it with political, social, and/or cultural rationales that define the
current education system and practices. Moreover, they actively constructed and
reconstructed its meaning through social interactions with others and policy tools. I first
want to revisit and summarize my findings in these chapters, then turn to a discussion of the
bigger picture of this reform.
Revisiting Findings
As I described in the first chapter of this dissertation, my research interests emerged
from a question about why it is so difficult to change teaching practices even when well
written policies exist. There exists an extensive amount of research that reveal failures and
difficulties that various low-income countries have experienced in the process of reforming
pedagogies based on student-centered principles. Several scenarios could be drawn from
this body of research. The most frequently seen and probably the most persuasive scenario
is that local cultural and physical conditions are not necessarily compatible with
student-centered pedagogies. This explanation also applies to the literature on the
pedagogical reforms in Cambodia (Bunlay, Wayne, Sophea, Bredenburg, & Singh, 2010;
Wheeler, 1998).
Yet the story is not this straightforward because ETL is more than just a matter of
pedagogy. In Chapter 3, I situated ETL in historical and political contexts of Cambodian

154

education and examined how Cambodian education has been explicitly linked to political
power. In fact, original intention of the RGC to adopt student-centered pedagogies was to
appeal to the international community about progressive and democratic orientation of new
government and RGC did not show any commitment to the pedagogical reform. In contrast,
from the perspectives of advocates of the current pedagogical reform, i.e. ETL, because it
was developed based on the experiences of NGOs and UNICEF, its official policy strongly
reflects the desire to transform Cambodian society as a whole. I also pointed out that such
desires could also be situated in the Child Friendly School (CFS) movement in Southeast
Asia and other places. In this sense, ETL is not only a pedagogical, but also a
socio-political project that was shaped under the global forces that promote
student-centered principles.
Chapter 4 sheds light on the dynamic interplay, within and between international
and national levels particularly, by exploring communities of practice at these levels. At the
international level, I found that there were numerous development partners involved in the
current pedagogical reform but many of them supported ETL only indirectly—by making
their own projects consistent with the basic student-centered principles of ETL but not
necessarily implement ETL itself—because ETL was so strongly associated with UNICEF.
The norm of coordination within the donor community allowed many aid agencies to be
involved in the current reform, without seriously negotiating and constructing shared
understandings about new pedagogy.
At the national level, because of the growing concerns about effectiveness, ministry
officials including the minister of education are not fully committed to student-centered

155

pedagogies in terms of producing good learning outcome. In response, the traditional
teaching approach called Chet Chhem method, which are phonics-based approach
involving a lot of didactic teaching, were revived. What was intriguing here is that ministry
officials did not see ETL and Chet Chhem method as contradictory with each other, but
they expanded the range of ETL to include any teaching approaches that are effective to
produce good learning outcomes. Examining two policy tools further revealed twists and
paradoxes that emerged through the interplay between international and national levels. It
turned out that although, in principle, ETL tries to introduce a transformation model of
education that promotes critical thinking and individualized teaching, two policy tools took
a transmission approach that does not value creativity and flexibility in teaching and
learning. These findings make it clear that the ministry was very active in constructing
globalized pedagogies by making “politically correct” decisions, which resulted in
inconsistencies and paradoxes within a policy.
Chapter 5 revealed that local practices are governed by a cultural logic with which
student-centered principles were directed to sustain and strengthen transmission model of
education rather than promoting transformation model. Based on the interviews and
observation, I illustrated the ways that paccekteeh (techniques) is a logic that underlies
Cambodian pedagogy. This logic is based on the idea that knowledge should be transmitted
and absorbed as it is, and that paccekteeh are the methods that help make knowledge
transmission easy and correct by minimizing the room for each individual to think by
oneself. The logic of paccekteeh actually hinders pedagogical changes from transmission
model to a transformation model.

156

Also, from local actors’ perspective, teaching conditions—in terms of both low
teacher salary and bad school management—are the major barriers to changing practices.
However, comparing teaching practices in different conditions further revealed the fact that
improved conditions (such as with more materials and better school management) does not
necessarily result in more creative and flexible teaching. Rather, just improving material
conditions may strengthen and reproduce practices that appreciate rigidity and reproduction
of knowledge. Similarly, because culture, i.e. the logic of paccekteeh, has been linked to
teaching conditions throughout the history, changing this logic without improving material
and monetary conditions for teaching may not produce substantial change.
Multiple Rationales
Based on the above summary of findings, I could identify three rationales—political,
social, and cultural—that actors used to construct the meaning of ETL. The shape and
scope of ETL are defined based on these rationales.
A) Political: ETL is a political project. Donors strategically take part in ETL having
political agendas such as improving presence in their community. For the Royal
Government of Cambodia (RGC), it is a political project to legitimize itself both
domestically and externally. These politics have significant implications for the twists
and paradoxes involved in the policy tools.
B) Social: ETL is also a social project. For international and national actors, it is to
promote economic and social development of the country. Similar to other policies in
Cambodian education, ETL cannot be independent from national development goals.
Moreover, especially for the advocates of student-centered pedagogy in early years, it

157

was an embodiment of their desires to make Cambodian society democratic and
peaceful. Making and doing ETL reform is also a social process in which various
actors negotiate and reify its meaning.
C) Cultural: ETL is a cultural project that concerns Cambodian epistemology, which
values correctness and rigidity over flexibility and creativity. The logic of paccekteeh
governs various aspects of local practice and in the course of the reform it actually was
sustained and strengthened rather than changed.
Each of these three is an important rationale that defines how ETL could be understood and
practiced, and things get more complex because these rationales are entangled with each
other. Figure 8 below attempts to illustrate this complexity.

158

Figure 8. Multiple Rationales of Cambodian Pedagogical Reform

Goals and
Epistemological
objectives of
schooling
PEDAGOGICAL CHANGE

Norms of
teaching and
learning
Source: Developed by author

In political-social intersection, there exist goals and objectives of public schooling
that strongly reflect both political and social circumstances. They have strong implications
for a pedagogical reform by defining what kind of education should be offered in order to
prepare students for contributing to the maintenance and advancement of the society. In
Labaree’s (1997) terminology, ETL policy documents are based on “democratic equality”
whereas the actual reform promotes “social efficiency” by emphasizing effectiveness (p.
42). It should be noted that the current reform lacks attention to “social mobility”, by which
Labaree means education as a means to equip students with competitive advantage (p. 42).
In a social-cultural milieu, there exist norms of teaching and learning that are primarily

159

defined by the clear relationship between teacher as a storyteller and students as the
audience. New pedagogies introduced by ETL are filtered through the social-cultural logic
that supports and sustains social structure and culture. Because knowledge and power are so
strongly linked in Cambodia, epistemology—a theory of knowledge production and
dissemination—exists in the intersection of cultural-political milieu. Epistemology governs
what knowledge and skills should be taught and how, which sometimes hinder pedagogical
changes. Together, these three rationales become stronger in interaction with one another,
and define the shape and scope of ETL.
Revisiting the Literature
With the findings discussed above, this research can speak to the existing literature
mainly on three points. First, this research contributes to developing our knowledge about
globalization in education by exploring deeper complexities in this phenomenon. Second,
based on the social constructivist theory, my findings speak to the literature on the gap
between education policy and practice. Related to the second point, my findings also build
on what we know, more broadly, about the nature of changing pedagogies.
Globalization in Education
This research is informed by theories of globalization in education. In Chapter 1, I
have discussed that the purpose of this research is to investigate “conflict within” a single
pedagogical reform (Anderson-Levitt, 2003) by unpacking “politics and economics” over
student-centered pedagogies. With vertical and horizontal comparisons, this research
provided evidence that complicates the relationship between global and local.
The dynamic interplay between different levels is evident in the case of ETL. But

160

the relationship between donors and the ministry was not as simple as neo-colonialists have
imagined because MoEYS did not passively adopt external support. Although the Child
Friendly School model was originally brought by UNICEF, social and political
circumstances in the 1990s as well as experiences in nearby countries prepared the
Cambodian ministry to introduce it as a means to improve the quality of education. MoEYS
was also very strategic in adjusting the model and its student-centered principles by making
“politically correct” decisions, rather than simply adopting it. Donors also had to be
strategic in selling their projects/program to MoEYS in order to improve their presence in
the donor community. Under the norm of ownership and coordination, donors and the
ministry had to be wise enough to achieve their political and economic interests. Moreover,
especially at the international level, it turned out that student-centered pedagogies were not
necessarily perceived as the best pedagogies per se, but uncertainties were shared by
participants from development partners. These kinds of dynamics between and within
different levels led to a condition where even contradictory ideas could be subsumed under
ETL.
This research also reveals an interesting phenomena where the ambiguity of a policy
enabled actors with various political/social/cultural backgrounds and interests to be
involved without seriously agreeing on what it actually means. In the case of ETL, MoEYS
has been using ETL as a symbol of effective teaching but actually twisted its political
orientation from transformation to transmission. In this sense, ETL is a “multi-vocal
symbol” on which multiple donors and the ministry can get involved while maintaining
different understandings and different agendas (Rappleye, 2006, p. 233; Takayama, 2010, p.

161

67). Conflict within ETL can be understood as a consequence of lack of committed
negotiations among multiple actors.
My findings suggested the resilience of local practices to the global forces even
though there were no overt contestation or denial by the local actors. Although the impact
of the globalized student-centered pedagogies was evident in classrooms (because I
observed many teachers employed groupwork and games), local practices were primarily
governed by a cultural logic that was very local and traditional. Local actors did not oppose
or complain about ETL. Rather, they actually worked hard to complete all the tasks listed in
the checklist. Nevertheless local actors did not simply accept globalized pedagogies, but
constructed and reconstructed them through interacting with others and policy tools.
Gaps between Policy and Practice
As I have noted repeatedly, this research draws on the social constructivist theory.
Informed by this theory, I conceptualized Cambodian pedagogical reform as a complex
social practice, not a normative text, in which various actors construct and reconstruct
meanings of teaching and learning. I also conceptualized actors involved in the
reform—from donors to local teachers—as active agents who contribute to constructing
ETL through negotiating and reifying the meaning. Given that negotiation and reification
take place in a socially situated manner, this perspective posed an important question to the
basic assumption of an education policy: Is it really possible to implement an education
policy as it is written? Researchers in this tradition have focused on the situated nature of
policy appropriation and have contended that a written policy cannot be conveyed as it is
because personal/collective experiences and repertoire work as a filter (Coburn, 2001;

162

Spillane, Reiser, & Reimer, 2006).
My findings suggest that this line of research underestimates active roles that actors
play in constructing and reconstructing the meaning of a policy. In the case of ETL, policy
messages are not only filtered down, but ETL subsumes a lot of meanings that are even
contradictory to its original goals. For example, in addition to the student-centered
principles advocated in the written policy, ministry officials extended the meaning of ETL
to any teaching approach that produces better learning outcome in the context of growing
consideration about effectiveness in education. Local actors also twisted the meaning of the
checklist by considering it as a set of techniques that suffice as effective teaching instead of
minimum requirements. These findings suggest that actors play more active roles than just
absorbing certain meanings from a written policy. They engage in constructing the meaning
of a policy by adding emerging issues in the scope of a policy and reconstructing the policy
by selecting, twisting, or changing key messages.
This research also highlights the significant roles that tools play in a policy (as a
social practice). As Wenger (1998) pointed out, cognitive tools do not just assist people to
do the activity, but they define what meanings can be made about the activity itself. In the
case of Cambodia, Courtney (2008) examined the observation checklist and contended that
it hinders changes in practice due to its bad design. My findings develop this point further
and suggest that policy tools would let actors construct a policy in the way that is quite
opposite to the original intentions of a written policy. Policy tools used in ETL, such as the
checklist and manual, were developed to promote a transformation model of education. But
their content was based on a transmission approach and thus conveyed very contradictory

163

ideas. Mixed with minimalistic circumstances at the local level, the design of these tools
also led local actors to use them to strengthen rigidity and correctness (transmission) rather
than to promote flexible and creative practices (transformation). Therefore, rather than just
hindering changes, a policy tool could promote adverse meaning especially when its design
and content are not well developed. It is not surprising that the gap emerges between the
written ETL policy and practice.
Pedagogical Changes
In relation to the second point, my findings speak to the existing literature about
pedagogical changes. Many researchers have revealed the difficulties in changing local
teaching practices (Cohen, 1990; Cuban, 1998) and identified a range of obstacles to
pedagogical changes (American Institutes for Research, 2006; Brodie, Lelliott, & Davis,
2002; Guthrie, 1990; O’Sullivan, 2002). These obstacles include (a) teachers’ lack of
capacities to use new pedagogies appropriately; (b) mismatch with local cultural and
physical conditions; and (c) lack of incentives to encourage teachers to use new pedagogies.
So far, we know a lot about difficulties and barriers, but not much about the nature of
pedagogical changes. One of the objectives of this research was therefore to unveil the
nature of pedagogical changes.
Comparative education researchers have revealed that pedagogy is contingent to
local culture (Alexander, 2001a, 2001b; Tobin, Hsueh, & Karasawa, 2009; Tobin, Wu, &
Davidson, 1989) and local physical contexts in which teachers work, especially in
low-income countries where only limited materials are available (Brodie et al., 2002;
O’Sullivan, 2002; Vavrus & Bartlett, 2012, 2013). My findings reaffirmed the contingency

164

of pedagogy to local culture, but further suggested that culture is not the only factor that
affects pedagogical changes. Rather, a pedagogical change is multifaceted by nature. ETL
is not just a pedagogical project; political, social, and cultural rationales define the scope
and shape of this reform. In Cambodia, teaching and learning is strongly linked to political
circumstance, socially appropriate relationships, and cultural norms and value. Also, these
rationales are closely entangled with each other and work as a mechanism through which
student-centered principles are changed and twisted to be incorporated into local practices.
This suggests that we need to re-conceptualize a pedagogical change, and see it as a
political, social, and cultural enterprise that requires revisiting fundamental assumptions in
education, ranging from the theory of knowledge, the socially appropriate relationship
between teacher and students, to the purposes of education.
My findings also reaffirmed the contingency of pedagogy to working conditions in
some schools in Prey Veng cluster, where the range of teaching approaches possibly taken
by the teachers was limited due to the severe working condition. This research also
provided evidence, however, that suggests improved material conditions by itself does not
necessarily foster pedagogical changes. Rigidity and correctness were sustained and
strengthened in a classroom where more resources were available, whereas difficult
conditions necessitated flexible and creative practices in another one. It suggests that local
material conditions and a political-social-cultural logic that governs local practices are very
closely intertwined and that we need to address both the logic and conditions at the same
time, in order to foster substantial changes in teaching and learning.

165

Revisiting Methodology
I turn to discuss methodological aspects of this research.
Multi-level Case Study
This research exemplifies the potential of the vertical case study as a research
framework to be applied in research that draws on theoretical traditions other than critical
theory. Informed by social constructivist theory, I focused on communities of practice as
the primary unit of comparison while applying the framework of vertical comparison,
which involves international, national, and local levels. By reflecting about my experience
in this study, I want to discuss how this study supplements vertical case study.
One of the strengths of a vertical case study framework is its power to capture both
global convergence and local divergence. Vertical comparison across levels helped me
investigate the process of policy borrowing (convergence) and explore appropriation of a
borrowed policy (divergence) in the same case. This was particularly helpful for me to
understand the dynamic interplay between macro and micro over the meaning of ETL.
However, with its close linkage with critical perspectives, vertical case study does not
allow us to illuminate the social aspect of an education policy, which is in-between
individual agency and the structure. Therefore, in this study, I focused on communities of
practice in order to understand the social process of changing pedagogies. It turned out that
communities, such as donor meetings, ministry steering committee and working groups,
and local teacher meetings were not necessarily the place where shared understandings
were made and disseminated. Rather, these communities involved actors with different
interests who expanded the scope of ETL (such as the ministry officials referred to ETL as

166

any pedagogies that are effective) or modified the meaning of key terms (local actors
changed the meaning of slow learners to koon ot ceh, who cannot learn). Therefore, both
global convergence and local divergence need to be explored with more nuanced
understanding about individual agencies and the structure than critical theories often
imagine.
My experience in this research also confirms the necessity of more nuanced
understanding about levels, whose boundaries are not so clear and self-evident. Many
participants of this research belonged to different levels simultaneously, such as an
international official from a donor agency with rich experiences as a project manager in the
local schools, and was accordingly, both international and local. In my analysis, I found I
needed to make decisions about whether I should assign Cambodian participants who work
in donor agencies to international or national level. I decided to assign both of these
participants to international level because they participated in donor meetings but did not
join cluster meeting or ministry working groups. I divided levels based on the communities.
Had I decided differently, the results of this research might have changed. Although not
many researchers have pointed this out, assigning the methodological decision regarding
levels have implications for analytic findings. Assigning individuals to levels requires
methodological care because such work has the potential to undermine the possibility that
an individual may belong to multiple levels.
I used communities of practice as the primary unit of comparison instead of levels,
which vertical case study uses as its basis for comparison, because I could not clearly
define levels. Having identified this unit of analysis helped me effectively deal with a large

167

amount of data throughout the process of collecting, organizing, and analyzing it. I
prepared a common interview protocol that I addressed to all participants, and it helped me
to see how actors make sense of ETL similarly or differently within and across
communities. Also, before analyzing data, I organized all of the data based on the
community. Communities actually worked as an important descriptor of each interview and
observation data. In the analysis, I first applied codes on the data and started with
horizontal comparison within the communities in each level, and then moved on to vertical
comparison across levels.
However, as Vavrus and Bartlett (2009) contended, vertical case study as a research
framework opens up a possibility to further compare “through the juxtaposition of cases” (p.
14). Although the juxtaposition of cases is not part of the scope of this research, employing
the framework of vertical case study allowed me to compare my findings with existing case
studies. These comparisons helped me deepen my understanding about the processes in
which local actors actively construct and reconstruct the meaning of a policy. It also
suggests that this research has a potential to be the basis for comparison across cases, which
may contribute to a deeper understand better the issues addressed in this research.
Positionality
Social constructivism informs how I understand my role as the author of this
research. The knowledge produced in this study cannot be separated from myself, as a
researcher, and the social interactions I have had in the research sites. Because I have been
educated both in Japanese and US universities, being exposed to two interrelated but
different academic cultures shapes my unique positionality as an educational researcher.

168

How I relate to teachers is strongly influenced by Japanese culture in which teachers are
more socially respected than in the US. My undergraduate training was in a Japanese
university where educational researchers were perceived as learners who accompany
teachers, not advisors, helpers, or evaluators. Studying in Michigan State University, one of
the leading teacher education programs in the US, helped me become aware of this unique
perspective and the importance of understanding academic cultures that may produce and
value different kinds of knowledge. These experiences helped me acquire a perspective that
enables me to understand educational phenomena in comparison to both Japan and the US.
Therefore the knowledge generated in this study is unique to me and not reproducible by
others.
My experience in the field also shapes how I interpreted the stories and how I
represented them in this dissertation. Actually, only a few components went as I had
planned in the research proposal. It was various people I met in the field who guided me, by
connecting me to unexpected but important informants and sharing stories that were not
originally within the scope of my research but caught my interest. Sometimes I became
quite irritated by the ways teachers treated students, but these phenomena frequently led to
breakthroughs in the fieldwork and data analysis. People who were not included in this
research, such as the landlord of my apartment in Prey Veng province or a young woman
who was my neighbor and happened to be a student-teacher, also played an important role
to help me understand how ordinary Cambodians think similarly or differently about
education from those inside the education system. I always felt that this research itself was
constructed through the interactions I had in the field with various people.

169

Conclusion and Implications
To conclude this dissertation, I summarize the nature of Cambodian pedagogical
reform as follows.
!

It is a social practice where various actors with different backgrounds and
interests actively construct and reconstruct the meaning, mediated by tools.

!

It is a reversible process that involves dynamics and tensions both within and
across levels.

!

It is not just a pedagogical project, but it has political, social, and cultural
facets that define its shape and scope.

Several practical implications for Cambodian pedagogical reform can be extracted from the
nature of ETL.
First, we have to reconceptualize the roles of actors—especially teachers. As Kim
and Rose (2011) pointed out, Cambodian teachers have been referred to as instruments and
obstacles for quality education. This research also reaffirmed that international- and
national-level actors emphasized teachers’ limited capacity as the major issues in quality of
teaching and learning. My findings suggest that such perception promoted the idea that
teachers need teacher-proof, scripted tasks and techniques with which they can transmit
subject contents to their students like a conveyer belt. However, we need to acknowledge
teachers as active agents in ETL who also engage in constructing the meaning of ETL
within political, social, and cultural circumstances in which they work. Reconceptualizing
teachers as active agents, not as implementers, helps us be aware of the importance of
seriously listening to the voices of teachers.

170

Moreover, we also need to consider communities of practice as an important place
to initiate changes. The current reform utilized communities, especially cluster teacher
meetings, just as a place to disseminate the policy messages to individual actors. But this
research reveals that the meaning of ETL was constructed and reconstructed—expanded,
twisted, or transformed—in the communities of practice rather than by individuals. It is,
therefore, necessary to facilitate teacher learning in cluster meetings by engaging teachers
in the discussion and tasks that require critical and creative thinking, instead of scripted and
individualized tasks.
Related to the second point, this research implies the necessity to facilitate more
direct and committed interaction among actors. Although I found that actors participated in
communities of practice where they negotiated meanings of ETL, it turned out that there
were only superficial interactions. Opportunity for the direct interaction between
levels—particularly between international actors and local actors—was limited to very few
occasions. Limited interaction within and between levels made it more difficult for the
actors to hold similar—albeit not the same—understanding about ETL. Linking existing
communities within and across levels and facilitating their working as a bigger community
of practice is a feasible policy option. It is particularly important to involve teachers from
the beginning of constructing a policy, which process has often been dominated by
international and national actors.
Finally, in order to bring about substantial changes in local practices, we should
rethink the fundamental assumptions about education. Pedagogical changes cannot be
achieved by just discussing teaching and learning inside classrooms, because they require

171

political, social, and cultural changes. In the case of ETL, although there are interventions
to improve material conditions inside classrooms and capacity of teachers, no intervention
has focused on the broader changes. This imbalance resulted in strengthening “traditional”
teaching practices rather than enhancing pedagogical changes.
Therefore, if we seriously want to see substantial changes in local practices, we
should address both specific issues of teaching and learning and broader political, social,
and cultural assumptions about education simultaneously. This can be done by having more
open discussions about education—more than just its effectiveness—that involve various
stakeholders. Educational research should play an important role to prepare a shared
foundation for this discussion by unveiling the hidden and often unconscious forms of logic,
thereby making them visible and thus debatable.

172

APPENDICES

173

Appendix A: Interview Protocol A
This interview does not have correct answers or intend to assess or evaluate your answers.
If I talk about what you said, I will give you another name, so that it will be difficult to
know that it was you who said it. Please express your frank opinions and feelings when you
answer questions.
This interview is to understand how similarly and differently various stakeholders take part
in the current education reform. First part of this interview is about general characteristics
of the work of your organization and about Child Friendly School (CFS). I won’t ask you
about specific laws and policies. Rather I am mostly interested in your experience and
perceptions of these reform initiatives.
1.

First I’d like to know about general characteristics of the work of your organization in
Cambodian education. What does your organization do in Cambodian education?
What are the goals/priorities of the work of your organization in Cambodian
education?

2.

I’d like you to tell me about CFS. How would you describe the goals and general
characteristics of CFS?

3.

How significant CFS is in Cambodian education and in the work of your organization?

4.

Could you locate the areas of your work (and the work of your organization) using the
CFS framework (the table attached)?

5.

What roles or responsibilities do you think you (or your organization) play in CFS
reform?

6.

Could you (i) name other major donors/ministry departments and (ii) indicate which
areas they work, using the CFS framework (the table attached)?

174

The next part is to understand how similarly and differently various stakeholders perceive
the current instructional reform. I would like to ask you about your understandings about
Effective Teaching and Learning (ETL), regardless of your knowledge about specific laws
and policies. I am mostly interested in your experience and perceptions of these reform
initiatives.
7.

How would you describe the goals and general characteristics of ETL? How
significant ETL is in Cambodian education and in your own work?

8.

What roles or responsibilities do you think you (or your organization) play in
promoting ETL?

9.

Which stakeholders do you think play major roles in this instructional reform? Could
you (i) name them and (ii) tell me how they work?

10. Now I would like to ask specifically about the teaching and learning that is promoted
in ETL.
(i) How would you describe the general philosophy or principle of teaching and
learning promoted in ETL?
(ii) How similar or different ETL philosophy is, comparing with other methods of
teaching and learning you know from your own experience or from other
countries?
(iii) What changes do you think ETL tries to bring in teaching and learning?
(iv) What challenges or difficulties do you see in bringing such changes?
(v) How would you evaluate the progress that the current reform has made so far in
terms of changing teaching and learning in your school/cluster/project
sites/country as a whole?
11. Lastly I would like to know how you perceive the roles of teachers in ETL reform.
(i) Could you talk about the roles of teachers that this reform expects teachers to
play?
(ii) How does this reform try to change (or try not to change) the roles and/or the
status of teachers?

175

(iii) What challenges or difficulties do you see in bringing such changes?
(iv) How do you observe such changes happen in ETL?
Thank you very much for your cooperation. All the information you gave and the final
product of this research can be shared with you upon request.

176

Appendix B: Interview Protocol B
B-1
This interview does not have correct answers or intend to assess or evaluate your answers.
If I talk about what you said, I will give you another name, so that it will be difficult to
know that it was you who said it. Please express your frank opinions and feelings when you
answer questions.
This is the first interview in a series of interviews I will conduct with you in order to
understand how your experience and feelings about the current instructional reform. In this
first interview, I would like to ask you about your learning experiences as a teacher and
your thoughts about the current education reform.
First, I would like you to talk about your past experiences in teacher training.
1. How long have you been teaching?
2. What type(s) of pre-service teacher education have you ever received?
3. Have you ever received any type(s) of in-service teacher training last three years? If so,
what are they?
4. When did you first hear about ETL? In what occasion? What was your first reaction to
ETL?
5. Have you ever participated in the workshops and/or training sessions that focused
exclusively on Child Friendly School (CFS) and/or ETL? If so, what are they?
(i) Could you describe your experience in one of such opportunities?
(ii) What are one or two most memorable things that you learned in such
opportunities?
Next, I would like to ask you about your experience in cluster-level teacher meetings and
school-level teacher meetings. First I will ask questions about cluster-level teacher
meetings.
6. Could you talk about what you usually do in cluster-level teacher meetings? Please
pick up a typical meeting and describe it.
7.

How would you describe the purpose of having these meetings both for you and for
177

teachers in general?
8. What roles and responsibilities do you think you play in your grade-level group?
(i) What roles and responsibilities do you think does each of the group members
play?
(ii) Which stakeholders do you think play major role in cluster-level meetings other
than teachers? What do they do?
9. Could you tell me your thoughts on the relationship between cluster-level meetings
and ETL?
Next, I will ask you about school-level teacher meetings.
10. Could you talk about what you usually do in school-level teacher meetings? Please
pick up a typical meeting and describe it.
11. How would you describe the purpose of having these meetings both for you and for
teachers in general?
12. What roles and responsibilities do you think you play in school-level teacher
meetings?
(iii) What roles and responsibilities do you think do other people play, school
principal, leader teachers, other teachers, for example?
(iv) Which stakeholders do you think play major role in school-level meetings other
than people in this school? What do they do?
13. Could you tell me your thoughts on the relationship between cluster-level meetings
and ETL?
In the last set of questions, I will ask you to share your thoughts about education in general
and the current education reform. You can, if necessarily, refer to the policy documents,
textbooks, teaching guides, and so on.
14. You have experienced a series of reform that are intended to improve Cambodian
education. What do you think are the major problems in education that need to be
improved through reforms?
15. How would you describe the goals of ETL? What do you think are the problems that
we try to address in ETL?
16. What do you think is the nature of ETL? How would you compare ETL with other
pedagogies you know?
17. Could you raise one or two examples of teaching practice that you think as

178

student-centered or active-learning pedagogies?
18. What do you think you are required to do in ETL?

Thank you very much for your cooperation. All the information you gave and the final
product of this research can be shared with you upon request.

B-2
This is the second interview in a series of interviews I will conduct with you in order to
understand how your experience and feelings about the current instructional reform. In this
second interview, I am mostly interested in your thoughts about one of the eight areas of
Effective Teaching and Learning (ETL).
This interview does not have correct answers or intend to assess or evaluate your answers.
If I talk about what you said, I will give you another name, so that it will be difficult to
know that it was you who said it. Please express your frank opinions and feelings when you
answer questions.
First, I would like you to talk about your thoughts about one of the eight areas of ETL. You
can, if necessarily, refer to the policy documents, textbooks, teaching guides, and so on.
1. How would you describe the main idea(s) of this area? You can, but do not have to,
describe it in comparison to other ideas you are familiar with or have heard of.
2. What activities/practices do you think does this area encourage you to implement?
Now I would like you to reflect about your own practice in this area. I am particularly
interested in hearing the concrete details of your present experience.
3. Could you talk about how you usually plan activities/tasks in this area?
(i) What do you consider when you plan, or decide not to do activities?
(ii) Do you usually discuss your plan with someone else? Who are they? Could you
describe such occasions?
4. Could you tell me what you have done in your classroom or in other places in relation
to this area?

179

(i)

5.

Please talk about one or two most successful practices that fit well in this area.
How successful was it? When do you usually think you succeed?
(ii) Please talk about one or two least successful practices in this area. Why were
these less successful for you?
Do you usually discuss your own practices in this area with someone else? How would
you describe such occasions?

Thank you very much for your cooperation. All the information you gave and the final
product of this research can be shared with you upon request.

B-3
This interview does not have correct answers or intend to assess or evaluate your answers.
If I talk about what you said, I will give you another name, so that it will be difficult to
know that it was you who said it. Please express your frank opinions and feelings when you
answer questions.
This is the last interview in a series of interviews I have conducted with you in order to
understand how your understanding about the current instructional reform evolves over
time. In this last interview, I am mostly interested in your opinions on overall Effective
Teaching and Learning (ETL).
In the previous interviews, you have shared with me your experience in practicing ETL and
learning and development as a teacher. Now I would like you to elaborate your opinions on
ETL based on what you have shared with me. You can of course refer to things that you
have not said before, but I would like you to think about how your experience informs your
opinion.
1. How significant ETL is in your own work? Why?
2. Based on your experience, what do you think is ETL for?
3. How would you evaluate ETL in terms of
(i) improving quality of education in Cambodia?
(ii) your learning and development as a teacher?

180

4.

(iii) achieving the goal(s) of this reform?
If you were asked to identify things that you want to change in ETL, what would they
be? How would you change?

Thank you very much for your cooperation. All the information you gave and the final
product of this research can be shared with you upon request.

181

Appendix C: Observation Rubric
Table 7. Observation Rubric
I. Classroom Management

1.

Arranging furniture

II. Questioning

1.

2.

Posing different levels of
questions

Relevance of questions

III. Learning Games
1.

2.

Design

Use of games

Substantial

Formal

Minimal

Furniture is arranged in the way that
accommodates different learning
styles. Teacher makes effective use
of space to achieve goals of this
lesson.

Furniture is arranged in the way that
accommodates different learning
styles, but teacher does not
necessarily use space effectively.

Furniture is not arranged in the way
that accommodates different
learning styles. Classroom space is
not effectively used.

Substantial

Formal

Minimal

Teacher effectively poses different
levels of questions with clear
pedagogical intentions. Students
also pose questions to teachers
and/or classmates.
Most questions enhance students’
thinking and understanding about
the content. Most questions are
closely connected to the objectives
of this lesson.

Teacher poses different levels of
questions but these questions are
not necessarily based on clear
pedagogical intentions.

Teacher does not pose questions or
poses only certain level of
questions. Teacher does not allow
students to ask questions.

Many questions enhance students’
thinking and understanding about
the content. Many questions are
closely connected to the objectives
of this lesson.

Only a few questions enhance
students’ thinking and
understanding about the content.
Only a few questions are closely
connected to the objectives of this
lesson.

Substantial

Formal

Games are innovative and designed
to enhance students’ understanding
about the content.
Teacher uses games with clear
pedagogical intentions and explains
purpose and rules of the games
clearly. Students actively engage in
them.

Games are not prepared well.
Games do not connect to the
lesson.
Teacher does not make effective
use of games nor explain purpose
and rules clearly. No or only a few
students participate.

182

Minimal
No game is used.
No game is used.

Table 7 (cont’d)
IV. Resources

1.

2.

Posters/Maps

Use of everyday materials

V. Reading Skill

1.

2.

Reading for meaning

Real-time text

Substantial

Formal

Classroom is attractive and
interesting with posters, maps,
students’ work, and other materials.
These materials are informative and
used to enhance teaching and
learning.
Teacher is creative and innovative
in using newspapers, magazines,
ads, and other everyday materials
and relates students’ lives with the
content of this lesson.

Classroom is attractive and
interesting with posters, maps,
students’ work, and other materials,
but not frequently used or
mentioned.

No posters, maps, students’ work,
and other materials are put on the
wall or classroom is not attractive
and interesting.

Teacher displays newspapers,
magazines, ads, and other everyday
materials and incorporate students’
lives in classroom.

Teacher does not use newspapers,
magazines, ads, and other everyday
materials.

Substantial

Formal

Minimal

Teacher provides opportunities for
students to analyze the whole text
by posing relevant and thoughtful
questions about the whole text.
Teacher uses texts from everyday
life, such as ads, instructions,
recipe, etc. and helps students
understand different genres of
writing. These texts are used to
enhance students’ learning about
the content.

Teacher provides opportunities for
students to analyze the whole text
by posing a set of questions
appeared in Logbook (p. 21).
Teacher uses texts that are not so
relevant to the students’ lives. There
are little connection between texts
and objectives of this lesson.

183

Minimal

Teacher focuses on letters and
words and does not help students
analyze the whole text.
No real-time texts are brought into
the lesson.

Table 7 (cont’d)
VI. Writing Skill

1.

2.

Negotiated text

Original text

VII. Assessment

1.

2.

Formative assessment

Differentiated instruction

Substantial

Formal

Teacher uses creative and
innovative approach to produce
negotiated text that is closely related
with the content of this lesson. All
students are involved in the
process.
Teacher provides opportunities for
students to produce their own
writing. Assignments are clear and
closely related with objectives of this
lesson. Teacher focuses on
meaning.

Teacher follows the negotiated text
format but only a few students are
involved in producing text.

Teacher does not use negotiated
text.

Teacher provides opportunities for
students to produce their own
writing. Assignments are clear and
related with objectives of this
lesson.

Teacher makes students copy texts
from book or blackboard and does
not provide opportunities to produce
their own writing. Teacher focuses
on spelling.

Substantial

Formal

Minimal

Teacher assesses students’
understanding about the content by
asking questions and collecting
students’ work.

Teacher does not assess at all or
uses assessments that are not
closely connected to the objectives
of this lesson.

Teacher assures many students’
opportunities to learn by giving
additional support to slow learners
or by giving challenging tasks to fast
learners.

Teacher assures only a few
students’ opportunities to learn.

Teacher frequently assesses
students’ understanding about the
content by asking questions and
collecting students’ work.
Assessment is consistent with
objectives of this lesson.
Teacher assures all students’
opportunities to learn by giving
additional support to slow learners
and by giving challenging tasks to
fast learners.

Minimal

Source: Developed by the author based on ETL Logbook
Note: I scored Substantial = 3, Formal = 2, and Minimal = 1 for the purpose of quantitative analysis.

184

Appendix D: List of Themes Appeared in the Analysis
International Level
(1)

Relationship among donors

(2)

Various kinds and types of student-centered projects

(3)

Uncertainty about student-centered pedagogies

(4)

Necessary knowledge and skills

(5)

Learning achievement

(6)

Education level of teachers, teacher education

(7)

Physical/material constraints

National Level
(1)

ETL as a national policy

(2)

Relationship between donors and the ministry

(3)

Necessary knowledge and skills

(4)

Learning achievement

(5)

Chet Chhem method and student-centered pedagogy

(6)

Education level of teachers, teacher education

(7)

Physical/material constraints

Local Level
(1)

Use of the checklist

(2)

Relationship between the ministry and the provincial/district education offices

(3)

Relationship between the provincial/district education offices and the cluster

(4)

Technical view of teaching and learning

(5)

Slow learners as the problem in teaching

(6)

Teaching as a transmission of knowledge

(7)

Teaching conditions (salary and facility)

(8)

Centrality of materials (lesson plans and teaching aids)

185

Cross-cutting
(1)

Politics within and between communities

(2)

Learning achievement

(3)

Teachers, teaching, and professional development

(4)

Theory of knowledge

(5)

Centrality of materials

186

REFERENCES

187

REFERENCES
Alexander, R. J. (2001a). Culture and pedagogy: International comparisons in primary
education. Wiley-Blackwell.
Alexander, R. J. (2001b). Border Crossings: Towards a Comparative Pedagogy.
Comparative Education, 37(4), 507–523.
American Institutes for Research. (2006). Issue paper: Challenges to promoting
active-Learning, student-centered pedagogies. US Agency of International
Development. Retrieved from
http://www.equip123.net/webarticles/anmviewer.asp?a=518
American Institutes for Research. (2008). ESCUP final report. US Agency of
International Development. Retrieved from
http://www.equip123.net/equip1/escup/publications.htm
Anderson-Levitt, K. (2002). Teaching culture as national and transnational: A response to
Teachers’ work. Educational Researcher, 31(3), 19.
Anderson-Levitt, K. (2003). Local meanings, global schooling: Anthropology and world
culture theory. Palgrave Macmillan.
Anderson-Levitt, K. (2004). Reading lessons in Guinea, France, and the United States:
Local meanings or global culture? Comparative Education Review, 48(3),
229–252.
Anderson-Levitt, K., & Alimasi, N.-I. (2001). Are Pedagogical Ideals Embraced or
Imposed? The Case of Reading Instruction in the Republic of Guinea. In M.
Sutton & B. A. Levinson (Eds.), Policy as practice: Toward a comparative
sociocultural analysis of educational policy (pp. 21–58). Ablex Publishing
Corporation.
Arnove, R. F., & Torres, C. A. (2003). Comparative education: The dialectic of the
global and the local. Rowman & Littlefield Pub Inc.
Ayres, D. M. (2000a). Anatomy of A Crisis: Education, Development, and The State in
Cambodia, 1953-1998. University of Hawaii Press.
Ayres, D. M. (2000b). Tradition, modernity, and the development of education in
Cambodia. Comparative Education Review, 44(4), 440–463.

188

Barrett, A. M. (2011). A Millennium Learning Goal for education post 2015: a question
of outcomes or processes. Comparative Education, 47(1), 119–133.
doi:10.1080/03050068.2011.541682
Benveniste, L., Marshall, J., & Araujo, M. C. (2008, June). Teaching in Cambodia.
World Bank and Ministry of Education.
Boli, J. (1985). Global patterns of educational institutionalization. In J. H. Ballantine
(Ed.), Schools and society: A reader in education and sociology. Mayfield.
Bredenburg, K. (2009). The Child-Friendly Schools movement and its role in promoting
stakeholder-driven development throughout the Southeast Asian region.
Presented at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Comparative and International
Education Society, Charleston, SC.
Brodie, K., Lelliott, A., & Davis, H. (2002). Forms and substance in learner-centered
teaching: Teachers’ take-up from an in-service programme in South Africa.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(5), 541–59.
Brook Napier, D. (2003). Transformations in South Africa: Policies and practices from
ministry to classroom. In K. M. Anderson-Levitt (Ed.), Local meanings, global
schooling: Anthropology and world culture theory. Palgrave Macmillan.
Bunlay, N., Wayne, E. W., Sophea, H., Bredenburg, K., & Singh, M. (2010).
Active-learning pedagogies as a reform initiative: The case of Cambodia.
American Institutes for Research.
Carney, S. (2009). Negotiating Policy in an Age of Globalization: Exploring Educational
“Policyscapes” in Denmark, Nepal, and China. Comparative Education Review,
53(1), 63–88.
Chandler, D. (2008). A history of Cambodia (4th ed.). Boulder, Colo: Westview Press.
CITA. (2010). Teachers’ Salary and Terms & Conditions Position Paper 2010-2012.
Phnom Penh: Cambodia Independent Teachers Association.
Coburn, C. E., & Stein, M. K. (2006). Chapter 2: Communities of practice theory and the
role of teacher professional community in policy implementation. In M. I. Honig
(Ed.), New directions in education policy implementation: Confronting
complexity (pp. 25–46). State University of New York Press.
Cohen, D. K. (1988). Teaching Practice: Plus Que Ca Change. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.),

189

Contributing to educational change: Perspectives on research and practice (pp.
27–84). California: McCutchan Pub Corp.
Cohen, D. K. (1990). A Revolution in One Classroom: The Case of Mrs. Oublier.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 311–329.
doi:10.3102/01623737012003311
Courtney, J. (2008). Do monitoring and evaluation tools, designed to measure the
improvement in the quality of primary education, constrain or enhance
educational development? International Journal of Educational Development,
28(5), 546–559.
Courtney, J., & Gravelle, M. (2013). Switching Sides: The Struggle Between National
Identity And Globalized Pedagogy In The Development Of An Early Literacy
Programme in Cambodia. Citizenship Teaching & Learning, 8(3), 309–325.
Cuban, L. (1998). How Schools Change Reforms: Redefining Reform Success and
Failure. Teachers College Record, 99(3), 453–77.
EDUCAM. (2007). EDUCAM Meeting Minutes. Unpublished document.
Fuller, B., & Clarke, P. (1994). Raising School Effects While Ignoring Culture? Local
Conditions and the Influence of Classroom Tools, Rules, and Pedagogy. Review
of Educational Research, 64(1), 119–157.
Geeves, R., & Bredenburg, K. (2005). Contract teachers in Cambodia. UNESCO.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2006). Educational Research: An Introduction
(8th ed.). Pearson.
Ginsburg, M. (2009). Active-Learning Pedagogies as a Reform Initiative: Synthesis of
Case Studies. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
Ginsburg, M. (2010). Improving educational quality through active-learning pedagogies:
A comparison of five case studies. Educational Research, 1(3), 062–074.
Gu, L., Huang, R., & Marton, F. (2004). Teaching with variation: A Chinese way of
promoting effective mathematics learning. In How Chinese learn mathematics:
Perspectives from insiders. Singapore: World Scientific.
Gottesman, E. R. (2003). Cambodia after the Khmer Rouge: inside the politics of nation
building. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Government-Donor Partnership Working Group. (2004). Practices and lessons learned in
190

the management of development cooperation: Case studies in Cambodia. Phnom
Penh, Cambodia: Cambodian Rehabilitation and Deelopment Board and Council
for the Development of Cambodia.
Guthrie, G. (1990). To the defense of traditional teaching in lesser-developed countries.
In V. Rust & P. Dalin (Eds.), Teachers and teaching in the developing world
(Vol. 8, pp. 219–232). New York: Garland.
Hardman, F., Abd-Kadir, J., & Smith, F. (2008). Pedagogical renewal: Improving the
quality of classroom interaction in Nigerian primary schools. International
Journal of Educational Development, 28(1), 55–69.
doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2007.02.008
Headley, R. K. (1977). Cambodian-English Dictionary. Catholic University of American
Press.
Hirosato, Y., & Kitamura, Y. (Eds.). (2009). The Political Economy of Educational
Reforms and Capacity Development in Southeast Asia: Cases of Cambodia,
Laos and Vietnam (Vol. 13). Springer.
Honig, M. I. (2006). New directions in education policy implementation: Confronting
complexity. State Univ of New York Pr.
Interagency Commission. (1990). WEF (Jomtien Declaration). Retrieved October 20,
2013, from
http://www.unesco.org/education/wef/en-conf/Jomtien%20Declaration%20eng.s
htm
Kambayashi, S. (2008). What Promotes Community Participation in School
Management? A Case Study from Siem Reap Province, Cambodia. Nagoya
University, Nagoya, Japan.
Kennedy, M. M. (2005). Inside teaching: how classroom life undermines reform. Harvard
University Press.
Kim, C.-Y., & Rouse, M. (2011). Reviewing the role of teachers in achieving Education
for All in Cambodia. PROSPECTS. doi:10.1007/s11125-011-9201-y
Kingdom of Cambodia. (2007). Child Friendly School Policy.
Kobayashi, S. (2011). Kanbojia Nosonshakai no Saisei (Reconstruction of Cambodian
Rural Communities). Kyoto University Press.
Kusakabe, A. (2009). Education policy in Cambodia, 1991-2006: A study of political
191

power and policy stability. Studies in Politics, 40, 1–32.
Labaree, D. F. (1997). Public Goods, Private Goods: The American Struggle Over
Educational Goals. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 39–81.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge University Press.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study (Second Edition.). University
Of Chicago Press.
MacLeod, J. (1995). Ain’t No Makin’ It: Aspirations and attainment in a low-income
neighborhood. Boulder: Westview Press.
Maeda, M. (2007). Power relations among actors in development cooperation: Patterns,
concepts and approaches in a Japanese-assisted teacher training project in
Cambodia. University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Maps Open Source. (n.d.). Cambodia Map [Map]. Retrieved from
http://www.mapsopensource.com/.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (2003). Education for All National Plan
2003-2015.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (2008a). Roles and Tasks of District Training
and Monitoring Teams.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (2008b). Helping Slow Learners.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (2012). Education Statistics and Indicators
2011/2012.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (2014). Education Statistics and Indicators
2013/2014.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (n.d.). ETL training manual.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (n.d.). ETL logbook.
NEP, & VSO. (2008). Teaching Matters: A Policy Report on the Motivation and Morale
of Teachers in Cambodia. Phnom Penh: NGO Education Partnership and VSO.
NEP. (2005). Effective Teaching Hours in Primary School: A report on the group
research project. Phnom Penh: NGO Education Partnership.
192

Needham, S. (2003). “This Is Active Learning”: Theories of Language, Learning, and
Social Relations in the Transmission of Khmer Literacy. Anthropology &
Education Quarterly, 34(1), 27–49.
Nguyen, P.-M., Elliott, J. G., Terlouw, C., & Pilot, A. (2009). Neocolonialism in
education: Cooperative learning in an Asian context. Comparative Education,
45(1), 109. doi:10.1080/03050060802661428
O’Sullivan, M. (2002). Reform Implementation and the Realities within which Teachers
Work: a Namibian case study. Compare: A Journal of Comparative Education,
32(2), 219. doi:10.1080/03057920220143192
O’Sullivan, M. (2004). The reconceptualisation of learner-centred approaches: a
Namibian case study. International Journal of Educational Development, 24(6),
585–602. doi:10.1016/S0738-0593(03)00018-X
Pearson, J. (2011). Creative Capacity Development: Learning to Adapt in Development
Practice. Kumarian Press.
The Phnom Penh Post. (2006, July 28). Corruption and Poverty Get School Dropout
Blame. The Phnom Penh Post.
Pontefract, C., & Hardman, F. (2005). The discourse of classroom interaction in Kenyan
primary schools. Comparative Education, 41, 87–106.
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What Do New Views of Knowledge and Thinking
Have to Say About Research on Teacher Learning? Educational Researcher,
29(1), 4 –15. doi:10.3102/0013189X029001004
Rappleye, J. (2006). Theorizing Educational Transfer: toward a conceptual map of the
context of cross-national attraction. Research in Comparative and International
Education, 1(3), 223. doi:10.2304/rcie.2006.1.3.223
Reimer, J. K. (2012). Local Negotiation of Globalised Educational Discourses!: The Case
of Child Friendly Schools in Rural Cambodia. University of British Columbia.
Retrieved from https://circle.ubc.ca/handle/2429/43691
Sasagawa, H. (2010). Angkor no Kindai [The culture and politics in colonial Cambodia Modern Encore]. Chuo Koron new company.
Seymour, J. M. (2012). Final Report: Cambodia EGRA (Early Grade Reading
Assessment) Test Results for 2010 and 2012.

193

Schriewer, J. (2003). Globalisation in Education: process and discourse. Policy Futures
in Education, 1(2), 271. doi:10.2304/pfie.2003.1.2.6
Schriewer, J., & Martinez, C. (2004). Constructions of internationality in education. The
Global Politics of Educational Borrowing and Lending, 29–53.
Schwille, J., Dembélé, M., & Schubert, J. (2007). Global perspectives on teacher
learning: improving policy and practice. UNESCO, International Institute for
Educational Planning.
Shimizu, K. (2007). SWAp ni yoru kyoiku sector kaikaku no seika to kadai [Progress and
challenges of education sector reform through SWAp: A case of Cambodia].
GRIPS Development Forum, 21.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform.
Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.
Soltis, J., F. (1981). Education and the concept of knowledge. In J. Soltis F. (Ed.),
Philosophy and education (pp. 95–113). Chicago: National Society for the Study
of Education.
Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., & Gomez, M. L. (2006). Policy implementation and
cognition: The role of human, social, and distributed cognition in framing policy
implementation. In M. I. Honig (Ed.), New directions in education policy
implementation: Confronting complexity (pp. 47–64).
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2000). Transferring Education, Displacing Reforms. In J. Schriewer
(Ed.), Discourse Formations in Comparative Education (pp. 155–187).
Frankfurt/M & New York: Lang Publishers.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2006). Educational import: local encounters with global forces in
Mongolia (1st ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2010). The politics and economics of comparison. Comparative
Education Review, 54(3), 323–342.
Sutton, M., & Levinson, B. A. U. (2001). Policy as practice: Toward a comparative
sociocultural analysis of educational policy (Vol. 1). Ablex Publishing
Corporation.
Tabulawa, R. (2003). International Aid Agencies, Learner-Centred Pedagogy and
Political Democratisation: A Critique. Comparative Education, 39(1), 7–26.
Takayama, K. (2010). Politics of Externalization in Reflexive Times: Reinventing
194

Japanese Education Reform Discourses through “Finnish PISA Success.”
Comparative Education Review, 54(1), 51–75.
Teacher Training Department. (2007). Learning Games. Ministry of Education, Youth
and Sport.
Tobin, J. J., Hsueh, Y., & Karasawa, M. (2009). Preschool in three cultures revisited:
China, Japan, and the United States. University of Chicago Press.
Tully, J. A. (2005). A short history of Cambodia: from empire to survival. Crows Nest,
N.S.W: Allen & Unwin.
UNESCO. (2008). Secondary Education Regional Information Base: Country
Profile—Cambodia. UNESCO Bangkok
UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2013). UIS Data Centre. Retrieved on June 2014 from
http://www.uis.unesco.org/datacentre/pages/default.aspx
UNICEF. (2009a). Child Friendly Schools Evaluation: Country report for Thailand.
UNICEF.
UNICEF. (2009b). Child Friendly Schools Evaluation: Country report for the Phillipines.
UNICEF.
UNICEF. (2009c). Child Friendly Schools Programming: Global Evaluation Report.
New York.
UNICEF. (2009d). Child-friendly schools manual. UNICEF.
UNICEF. (2011). Child Friendly Schools Evaluation: Country report for Lao People’s
Democratic Republic. UNICEF.
Vavrus, F. (2009). The cultural politics of constructivist pedagogies: Teacher education
reform in the United Republic of Tanzania. International Journal of Educational
Development, 29(3), 303–311.
Vavrus, F., & Bartlett, L. (2009). Critical Approaches to Comparative Education:
Vertical Case Studies from Africa, Europe, the Middle East, and the Americas
(1st ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
Vavrus, F., & Bartlett, L. (2012). Comparative pedagogies and epistemological diversity:
social and materials contexts of teaching in Tanzania. Comparative Education
Review, 56(4), 634–658.

195

Vavrus, F., & Bartlett, L. (2013). Teaching in Tension: International pedagogies,
national policies, and teachers’ practices in Tanzania. Rotterdam; Boston:
SensePublishers.
Va, V. (2006). The development of basic education in Cambodia 1979-2003: A critical
review. (Thesis). Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
WebKyom (2011). Province Prey Veng [Map]. Retrieved from
http://webkyom.free.fr/en/php/cambodge.php
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity.
Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Wheeler, C. W. (1998). Rebuilding Technical Capacity in UNICEF/Sida Supported
School Clusters: A Study of UNICEF’s Capacity-Building (Education) Project
01. UNICEF.
Williams, J. H., & Kitamura, Y. (2012). Privatization and Teacher Education in
Cambodia: Implications for Equity (REPORT PREPARED FOR PERI
RESEARCH PROGRAM). PERI.
Willis, Paul E. (1981). Learning to Labor: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class
Jobs. Morningside ed. New York: Columbia University Press.
The World Bank. (2013). World Economic Prospects. Retrieved on July 2014 from
http://data.worldbank.org/

196