Teachers ́ Perception of Coherence in High School Biology Textbooks in Zambia

  • Kwangaika Mwala Sinjela Asia-Pacific International University
  • Jimmy Kijai School of Education, Andrews University
  • Josephine Esther Katenga Faculty of Education and Psychology, Asia-Pacific International University
Keywords: Textbook coherence, Textbook-syllabus coherence., Biology textbook assessment, Teacher´s perception, Assessment of textbooks in Zambia


Textbook coherence is an important aspect of effective teacher ́s instruction and performanceof students. However, the subject has not been explored regarding school textbooks inZambia. This study involved assessing coherence of senior biology high school textbooks(MK Biology10, Longman Biology11 and Pupil ́s Biology12) and the extent to which thesebooks are aligned with the biology course syllabus. Using quantitative research design,coherence was conceptualized as a unit of three constructs: alignment and organization, rigor,focus and relevance of contents and connections among ideas. A questionnaire instrumentwas developed which teachers in Mufulira and certain other districts in Zambia (n = 82) usedto assess textbook and textbook-syllabus coherence. Data was analyzed using statisticalmethods, independent t-tests and One-way ANOVA. Results show that teachers weregenerally uncertain about coherence levels in the textbooks. Concerning textbook-syllabusalignment, Pupil ́s Biology12 was viewed as most coherent with the course syllabus and MKBiology10 as the least. Assessment of coherence is a complex process but it focuses on fewcommon elements. Identifying these elements may help teachers improve teaching practice,curriculum developers design coherent curricula and educational activities, and authorsproduce coherent textbooks. Further research studies are recommended that would extend thescope of this study to include teachers in all provinces in Zambia, include a mixed method toexplore perceptions about coherence, compare coherence of same grade level textbooks, orevaluate coherence of the syllabus and that of other science or non-science textbooks.
Article Metrics


Download data is not yet available.


AAAS. (2002). AAAS Annual Report 2002. Retrieved from


AAAS. (2005). High School Biology Textbooks: A Benchmarks-Based Evaluation: Project

Analysis Procedure. Retrieved from


AAAS. (2019). Project 2061. Retrieved from https://www.aaas.org/

Adibelli-Sahin, E., & Deniz, H. (2017). Elementary teachers’ perceptions about the effective features of explicit-reflective nature of science instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 39(6), 761-790.

Ainsworth, S., & Burcham, S. (2007). The impact of text coherence on learning by selfexplanation. Learning and Instruction, 17(3), 286-303.

Avis, J., Clintheroe, F., Mudenda, K., & Ritchie, E. (2015). Longman Biology. Learner’s book Grade 11. Lusaka: Longman Educational Publishers Ltd.

Barlow, D. (2011). Designing Coherent Science Education: Implications for Curriculum, Instruction, and Policy. Education Digest, 76(7), 72-72.

Barry, S. (2003). Why Schools Matter: A Cross-National Comparison of Curriculum and Learning. William H. Schmidt Curtis C. McKnight Richard T. Huong HsingChi Wang David E. Wiley Leland S. Cogan Richard G. Wolfe. In (Vol. 96, pp. 218) Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Belcher, C. D., & Williams, W. (1995). Middle School Science Teachers' Perception of

Textbook Congruency with Classroom Needs. Retrieved from

http://ludwig.lub.lu.se/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true &db=eric&AN=ED389696&site=eds-live&scope=site

Bergqvist, A., & Chang, R., Shu-Nu. (2017). The Influence of Textbooks on Teachers' Knowledge of Chemical Bonding Representations Relative to Students' Difficulties Understanding. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35(2).

Bhat, A. (2018). Cross-sectional study- definition with examples. Retrieved from https://www.questionpro.com/blog/cross-sectional-study/

Blyth, W. A. L. (1966). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain B. S. Bloom. In (pp. 119): Faber & Faber Limited.

Bybee, R. W. (2003). The Teaching of Science: Content, Coherence, and Congruence. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 12(4), 343.

CDC. (2013a). Biology Syllabus Grade: 10-12. Lusaka: CDC.

CDC. (2013b). The Zambia Education Curriculum Framework 2013. Lusaka, Zambia: Curriculum Development Center.

Chabalengula, V. M., Mumba, F., Lorsbach, T., & Moore, C. (2008). Curriculum and Instructional Validity of the Scientific Literacy Themes Covered in Zambian High School Biology Curriculum. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 3(4), 207-220.

Crowe, A., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2008). Biology in bloom: implementing Bloom's

Taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 7(4), 368-381.

Cuevas, N. M., Matveev, A. G., & Feit, M. D. (2009). Curriculum Mapping: An Approach to Study the Coherence of Program Curricula. Department Chair, 20(1), 23.

Cullinane, A., & Liston, M. (2016). Review of the Leaving Certificate biology examination papers (1999–2008) using Bloom’s taxonomy–an investigation of the cognitive demands of the examination. Irish Educational Studies, 35(3), 249-267.

ECZ. (2018). Biology 5090. Lusaka: Examination Council of Zambia

Edling, A. (2006). Abstraction and authority in textbooks: the textual paths towards specialized language: Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis: Uppsala University Library [Uppsala universitetsbibliotek] [distributör], 2006.

Fortus, D., & Krajcik, J. (2012). Curriculum Coherence and Learning Progressions. Second International Handbook of Science Education In (pp. 783-798). Berlin, Germany: Springer, Dordrecht.

Fortus, D., Sutherland Adams, L. M., Krajcik, J., & Reiser, B. (2015). Assessing the Role of Curriculum Coherence in Student Learning about Energy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(10), 1408-1425.

Gagné, P., Dumont, L., Brunet, S., & Boucher, G. (2013). Curriculum Alignment: Establishing Coherence. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 6, 7-12.

Gardner, A. L., Bybee, R. W., Enshan, L., & Taylor, J. A. (2014). Analyzing the Coherence of Science Curriculum Materials. Curriculum & Teaching Dialogue, 16(1/2), 65-86.

Gurung, R., & Landrum, R. E. (2012). Comparing Student Perceptions of Textbooks: Does Liking Influence Learning?. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 24(2), 144-150.

Ho, A. D., & Yu, C. C. (2015). Descriptive Statistics for Modern Test Score Distributions:

Skewness, Kurtosis, Discreteness, and Ceiling Effects. Educ Psychol Meas. 75(3), 365-388). doi: 10.1177/0013164414548576

Hsueh, K.-H., & Chang, Shufang. (2012). Readability Analysis and Curriculum Coherence of Readings between Junior High School and Senior High School English Textbooks in Taiwan. In 國民中學三年級與高級中學一年級英語(文)教科書課文適讀性與銜接度之探究. China: Department of Education National Taichung University.

Ibáñez, R., Moncada, F., & Cárcamo, B. (2019). Coherence Relations in Primary School Textbooks: Variation across School Subjects. Discourse Processes. 56(8), 764-785.

Retrieved from

http://ludwig.lub.lu.se/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true &db=edselc&AN=edselc.2-52.0-85060577240&site=eds-live&scope=site.


Katete, L., Hanyuma, F., Katambala, P. L., & Mwale, R. (2012). Biology 12. Pupils Book. Senior Secondary Course. Lusaka: Mwajionera Publishers.

Kellerman, S. E., & Herold, J. (2001). Physicians responses to surveys: A review of the literature. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 20(1), 61-67. doi:


Khine, M. S. (2013). Analysis of Science Textbooks for Instructional Effectiveness. In: Khine M. (eds) Critical Analysis of Science Textbooks. Dordrecht: Springer.

Krajcik, J., McNeill, K. L., & Reiser, B. J. (2008). Learning-Goals-Driven Design Model: Developing Curriculum Materials That Align with National Standards and Incorporate Project-Based Pedagogy. Science Education, 92(1), 1-32.

Landrum, E. R., & Hormel, L. (2002). Textbook Selection: Balance Between the Pedagogy, the Publisher, and the Student. Teaching of Psychology, 29(3), 245-248.

Matseleng, A. S., Dempster, E. R., & Barlow-Zambodla, A. (2008). Learning from Africa:BiologyA report of Umalusi’s researchcomparing Biology syllabuses andexaminations in South Africawith those inGhana, Kenya, and Zambia. Retrieved from Pretoria, South Africa:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273703361_Curriculum_comparison_Biol ogy

Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learners as information processors: Legacies and limitations of educational psychology's second metaphor. Educational Psychologist, 31(3), 151161.

McBurney, D. H., & White, T. L. (2009). Research Methods: Cengage Learning.

McKeachie, W. J. (2002). McKeachie's teaching tips: strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers: Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., cop. 2002 11. ed.

Michael, W. B., & Coffman, W. E. (1956). Book Reviews: Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain, by Benjamin S. Bloom (ed.). New York: Longmans, Green and Company, I956. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 16(3), 401.

Mikk, J. (2000). Textbook: Research and Writing. Baltische Studien zur Erziehungs und Sozialwissenschaft, Band 3 (Baltic Studies for Education and Social Sciences, Volume 3). NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.

MKBiologyPanel. (2014). Senior Secondary Biology. Learners’ Book Grade 10. Lusaka: MK Publishers Ltd.

Muller, J. (2009). Forms of knowledge and curriculum coherence. Journal of Education and Work, 22(3), 205-226.

Mumba, F., Chabalengula, V. M., Wise, K., & Hunter, W. J. F. (2007). Analysis of new Zambian high school physics syllabus and practical examinations for levels of inquiry and inquiry skills. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3(3), 213-220.

Mumba, F., & Hunter, W. (2009). Representative nature of scientific literacy themes in a high school chemistry course: the case of Zambia (Vol. 10).

NewZealandOnlineCurriculum. (2015). Coherence. Retrieved from


Nwafor, C. E., & Umoke, C. C. (2016). Evaluation of Some Approved Basic Science and Technology Textbooks in Use in Junior Secondary Schools in Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(14), 69-78.

Ocak, G., & Baysal, E. A. (2016). Evaluation of English Textbooks in Terms of Textuality Standards. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(12), 36-44.

Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using IBM SPSS (6 ed.). New York: Open University Press.

Pedersen, S., & Liu, M. (2003). Teachers’ beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(2), 57.

Pressbooks. (2018). Defining Content Structure. Content Organization. Authoring open textbooks. Retrieved from


Richard, E. M., Kathryn, S., Gregory, B., & Rebecca, M. (1995). A Generative Theory of Textbook Design: Using Annotated Illustrations to Foster Meaningful Learning of Science Text. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(1), 31.

Roseman, J. E., Linn, M. C., & Koppal, M. (2008). Characterizing curriculum coherence. In Y. Kali, M. C. Linn, & J. E. Roseman (Eds.), Designing coherent science education: Implications for curriculum, instruction, and policy. New York: Teachers College Press.

Roseman, J. E., Stern, L., & Koppal, M. (2010). A Method for Analyzing the Coherence of High School Biology Textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(1), 47-70.

Schaeffer, N., & Presser, S. (2003). The Science of asking questions Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 65-88.

Schmidt, W. H. (2003). The Quest for a Coherent School Science Curriculum: The Need for an Organizing Principle (Vol. 20).

Schmidt, W. H. (2010). Are National Standards the Right Move? Educational Leadership, 67(7), 24-24.

Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2012). Curricular Coherence and the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Educational Researcher, 41(8), 294-308.

Schmidt, W. H., & Prawat, R. S. (2006). Curriculum coherence and national control of education: Issue or non-issue? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(6), 641-658.

Schmidt, W. H., Wang, H. C., & McKnight, C. C. (2005). Curriculum coherence: an examination of US mathematics and science content standards from an international perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(5), 525-559.

Seale, C. (2004). Researching Society and Culture. London: Sage publications Ltd.

Shin, N., Stevens, S., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Learning Progressions to Support Coherence Curricula in Instructional Material, Instruction, and Assessment Design.

Shwartz, Y., Weizman, A., Fortus, D., Krajcik, J., & Reiser, B. (2008). The IQWST Experience: Using Coherence as a Design Principle for a Middle School Science Curriculum. Elementary School Journal, 109(2), 199-219.

Sikorova, Z. (2012). “The Role of Textbooks in Lower Secondary Schools in the Czech Republic.” IARTEM E-Journal, 4(2), 5–20.

Sikorski, T.-R., & Hammer, D. (2017). Looking for Coherence in Science Curriculum. Science Education, 101(6), 929-943.

Spector, P. E. (2019). Do Not Cross Me: Optimizing the Use of Cross-Sectional Designs. Journal of Business & Psychology, 34(2), 125-137.

Valverde, G. A., Schmidt, W. H., Bianchi, L. J., R.G, W., & Houang, R. T. (2002). Textbook Structure. According to the Book. Berlin, German: Dordrecht. Springer.

Yadava, S., & Pruya, R. y. c. (2017). A study of the perception of teachers towards NCERT science textbooks at upper primary stage. International Journal of Current Research, 9(7), 53738-53741.

How to Cite
Sinjela, K., Kijai, J., & Katenga, J. (2019). Teachers ́ Perception of Coherence in High School Biology Textbooks in Zambia. Abstract Proceedings International Scholars Conference, 7(1), 1466-1489. https://doi.org/10.35974/isc.v7i1.926