F1000Research F1000Research 2046-1402 F1000 Research Limited London, UK 10.12688/f1000research.137430.1 Brief Report Articles Enhancement of private schools for collaboration to address gender equity gap of STEM education: Case study in Mbeya city of Tanzania

[version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]

 Kibona Isack Ephraim Conceptualization Data Curation Formal Analysis Investigation Methodology Project Administration Writing – Original Draft Preparation Writing – Review & Editing https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0479-5173 a 1 Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Mbeya University of Science and Technology, Mbeya, Mbeya Region, 00255, Tanzania iechibona@gmail.com

No competing interests were disclosed.

 31 10 2023 2023 12 1423 20 10 2023 Copyright: © 2023 Kibona IE 2023 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Investment in education to guarantee gender equity in most developing countries has focused on modern teaching pedagogy, teaching and learning facilities, cultural issues and the likes. However, performance in private schools do set learnable examples of which if not ignored, a nation in question may take lessons and improve gender equity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Private secondary schools may serve as on way to enrich girls' enrolment in STEM for future career opportunities by scoring qualifiable grades in STEM subjects, provided that education investment environment not only favors public schools but also be in favor of private schools. In the study conducted in Mbeya city of Tanzania, the author investigated 58 secondary schools of which 32 were private schools. From these schools 7936 candidates sat for Certificate of Secondary Education Examination (CSEE) of 2022 in Mbeya city. 2232 candidates were from private schools. The analysis indicated that more girls with a potential to enter into STEM education came from private schools, and it is about twice the number of girls from public schools regardless of more girls candidates from public schools.

Chi-square testing of pass in STEM subjects between boys and girls verified that performance in private schools had no gender equity gap between boys and girls. On the other hand, boys outperformed girls in public schools.

Moreover, an estimation of 2202 candidates of which 999 were girls had at least a minimum pass in basic mathematics. Private schools contributed 626 (63%) of passes in basic mathematics.

Thus, appropriate collaboration with private schools might revamp not only girls’ enrolment but also clear gender equity gap in performance of STEM subjects if policy makers in education investment can do more improvement in the environment for education investment through private schools.

 STEM education gender equity Mbeya city of Tanzania Private schools The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Introduction

Establishment of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by the United Nations (UN) in September 2015 placed the world to ensure gender equity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education ( Koehler, 2016; Leal Filho et al., 2022; Zorzano, 2020). Gender is commonly representing female or male, however, in this study, added to that describes the socio-cultural characters of masculinity and femininity according to practices by individual based on their culture, while sex describes the biological characteristics of women and men ( Unicef & others, 2020). In this regard, gender may change with time and place depending on roles taken by women and men, whereas sex never change. Before 2016, sub-Saharan Africa had a substantial number of secondary schools whose quality of education was questionable according to United Nations, this being one of the reasons to launch SDG4 ( Unterhalter, 2019).

Some regions of the world are closing gender equity gaps in STEM education like USA, and Europe ( Kamberidou & Pascall, 2019), but gender inequity in STEM education is substantial in sub-Saharan Africa, the Arab states, and south and west Asia ( Ismail, 2018; Loyalka et al., 2021). Emphasis to enhance STEM education in literature has centered resolution on pedagogical skills, low teacher student ratio, incompetent teachers, and education facility availability ( Allen et al., 2016; Huang et al., 2022; Teo & Ke, 2014). Moreover, girls' poor participation in STEM subjects in secondary schools especially in sub-Saharan Africa are more associated with cultural practices and other reasons associated with masculinity ( Adams & Baddianaah, 2023; Lewin, 2009).

Education policy makers in Tanzania engaged private sectors to run private schools along with public schools ( Komba, 2017). This lead to contribution in containing not only enrolment issues in STEM education but also great improvement of gender equity ( Weaver, 2011). Evaluation of private schools’ contribution is indispensable, this fact holds following the reality that graduates from private education sectors become part of the nation decent and future human resource capital ( Achoui, 2009; Budhwar & Sparrow, 2002; Sebola, 2023). Table 1 presents the performance of students from 32 private schools in Mbeya city. Majority of students in privates’ schools passed in first and second division. Unlike in private schools, candidates in public schools' majority were in the fourth division Table 2.

CSEE results of the 32 private schools in Mbeya city.
Divisions Total Girls Boys
Div I 715 359 356
Div II 569 270 299
Div III 406 206 200
Div IV 480 267 213
Div 0 62 34 28
All Students 2232 1136 1096
CSEE results of the 26 public schools in Mbeya city.
Divisions Total Girls Boys
Div I 280 83 197
Div II 775 372 403
Div III 926 457 117
Div IV 2896 1711 1185
Div 0 827 370 457
All students 5704 2993 2711

In Tanzania, efforts to solve gender issues in STEM education is historical ( Samoff, 1987). Several bodies like United States Agency for International Development (USAID) have supported to ease the tension of gender inequity in STEM education ( Stromquist, 2006; Swainson, 2000).

This report unleashes aspects of private schools’ contributions in gender equity in STEM education following credible educational policies by the Tanzanian government and promotes improvement in education investment for harmonization of public and private schools. This study illustrated by concrete examples the contribution of private schools in STEM education. Contribution is not only an increase in number of students specializing in STEM subjects but also significant improvement in diminishing of gender equity gap of STEM education.

Figure 1 depicts performance in STEM subjects of biology, chemistry, physics and basic mathematics of 2232 candidates from 32 private secondary schools in Mbeya city. Comparable performance of 5704 candidates from 26 public schools Figure 1 indicated deprived performance in STEM subjects. In parallel to more girls’ enrolment over boys, more girls passed every STEM subject in private schools except for physics. However, regardless of more girl’s enrolment in public schools, boys outperformed girls in every STEM subject except for biology.

CSEE 2022 results of STEM subjects in private schools. Objective

The study is for enhancing education investment policies along with engaging private school investments for collaboration to address challenges of gender equity in STEM education.

Specific objectives

Stimulate harmony and more collaboration between education policy makers and private schools investors to enrich gender equity in STEM education.

Compare private schools and public schools’ performance of girls and boys in STEM subjects.

Methods

Methodologies in this study undertook over form four secondary school examination results for Mbeya city, Tanzania. In this regard, this study dealt with secondary data, already processed for student placement to the next education level, in this situation, analysis of sex or gender was not applicable from the raw data. That is study design, data collection and data analysis carried out free of considerations due to sex or gender. Thus, this study is about what is observed in the examination results and not how teachers reach these results. On the other hand, this study calls for more insights as to how these results are reached, which is not the scope of this study. Therefore, the scope of study is to examine whether gender has influence in the examination performance.

Study design

The author collected secondary schools’ performance data from National Examination Council of Tanzania. The data involved 58 secondary schools of which 32 were private and 26 public schools. The data tabulated in separation of private and public schools as in Table 3 and Table 4 respectively, indicating number of girls and boys in every STEM subject. The researcher processed the data, analyzed by employing chi-square test for interpretation, and eventually reported the finding.

CSEE 2022 results of the STEM subjects in 32 private secondary schools. (Source: NECTA 2022).
Gender Pass in Biology Pass in Chemistry Pass in Physics Pass in Mathematics Total
Girls 1020 (1032) 549 (544) 393 (412) 626 (601) 1136
Boys 1008 (996) 520 (525) 417 (398) 555 (580) 1096
Total 2028 1069 810 1181 2232
CSEE Students performance of 26 public schools in STEM subjects.
Gender Pass in Biology Pass in Chemistry Pass in Physics Pass in Mathematics Total
Girls 1616 (1737) 560 (697) 234 (396) 373 (536) 2993
Boys 1695 (1574) 768 (631) 520 (358) 648 (485) 2711
Total 3311 1328 754 1021 5704
Data collection

The Author conducted data collection by reading and recording from the report by NECTA of CSEE for the year 2022, particularly, selecting all Mbeya city secondary schools participated in the form four national examinations of year 2022. In addition to division-wise performance as organized by NECTA, the author went further by listing overall performance of every STEM subject and eventually bar charts plotted as in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

CSEE 2022 results of STEM subjects of public school in Mbeya city. Data analysis

The author used the chi-square approach to determine whether there was a significant difference in the passing of STEM subjects between boys and girls. The focus of the STEM subjects was biology, chemistry, physics and basic mathematics. The degree of freedom evaluated leads to a critical value (p) from statistical tables, a test statistic computed for each group of students separately, and the decision made based 95% confidence interval. Records of number of passes in STEM subject are as listed in Table 3 and Table 4. No software were involved and all computations conducted manually, aided by Casio scientific calculator.

Calculation of Chi – square , χ 2 :

Numbers in parentheses of Table 3 are theoretical expectations of gender equity. The author went through five steps to justify whether gender has an effect in the performance of STEM subjects.

Step 1: Define Null ( H 0 ) and Alternative Hypotheses ( H 1 ):

H 0 : For the students in Mbeya city from private secondary schools, gender has no effect to pass in STEM subjects.

H 1 : For the students in Mbeya city private secondary schools, gender has effect to pass in STEM subjects.

Step 2: State the confidence interval: α = 0.05

Step 3: Calculate degree of freedom (df) and state the critical value (p):

df = rows − 1 columns − 1 = 2 − 1 4 − 1 = 3 , so critical value, p = 7.81473.

That is if chi-square ( χ 2 ) is greater than 7.81473, reject H 0 .

Step 4: Calculation of test statistic χ 2 = ∑ f o − f e 2 f e , where f e = f c f r n and f 0 = observed frequence , f e = expected frequence , f c = frequence of the column , f r = frequence of the row , n = total number of subjects .

Step 5: Calculation of theoretical pass expectations: Girls expected to pass biology in first cell of Table 3, Girls biology 11 = 2028 ∗ 1136 / 2232 = 1032 χ pr 2 = ∑ f o − f e 2 f e χ pr 2 = 1020 − 1032 2 1032 + 1008 − 996 2 996 + 549 − 544 2 544 + 520 − 525 2 525 + 393 − 412 2 412 + 417 − 398 2 398 + 626 − 601 2 601 + 555 − 580 2 580 = 4.28

χ pr 2 = 4.28 < 7.81473 = p . Therefore, the null hypothesis is true.

The author applied a similar testing to candidates of public schools.

With similar calculations as Table 3 of private schools, χ p 2 = ∑ f o − f e 2 f e = 318.33425 for Table 4. However, χ p 2 = 318.334 > 7.81473 = p . Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis.

 Analysis of STEM prospects

The author went further to ascertain every student with a pass of at least D grade (minimum pass) in both physics and basic mathematics and classified this group as minimum pass in STEM. Moreover, students with at least two C grades and one D pass grade in any of three subjects: physics, chemistry and biology (PCB) or same passes in any of three: physics, chemistry and mathematics (PCM) classified as potential PCM or PCB candidates. A collection of students with minimum passes in STEM and/or potential PCM or PCB candidates grouped as potential STEM candidates.

 Results

The degree of freedom for each group is three with α =0.05 of which the collected critical value, p =7.81473. Computed chi-squares were χ pr 2 = 4.28 for private schools χ p 2 = 318.334 for public schools. In addition to chi-square testing of the data, student performance in STEM subjects were listed in tabular ( Table 3, Table 4) form along with plotting the bar charts ( Figure 1, Figure 2).

Impact of performance of STEM subjects in STEM education prospects

Performance in STEM subjects determines number of candidate placements in high school PCB or PCM combinations and prospects of STEM career candidates in higher education institutions. Out of 2232 candidates, private schools contributed 783 (35%) candidates of which 380 were girls able to further studies in STEM education ( Table 5). On the other hand, out of 5704 candidates, public schools contributed 699 (12%) candidates of which 206 were girls with potential to advance in STEM careers in higher education ( Table 6).

Estimated CSEE 2022 candidates to enter STEM career or major science from 32 private schools.
Gender Pass in mathematics Pass in physics and mathematics Potential PCM or PCB Potential STEM candidates Total
Girls 626 380 379 380 1136
Boys 555 396 403 403 1096
Total 1181 776 782 783 2232

PCM: physics, chemistry and mathematics; PCB: physics, chemistry and biology; STEM: science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

 Estimated CSEE 2022 candidates to enter STEM career or major science from 26 public schools.
Gender Pass in mathematics Pass in physics and mathematics Potential PCM or PCB Potential STEM candidates Total
Girls 373 206 205 206 2993
Boys 648 493 375 493 2711
Total 1021 699 580 699 5704

PCM: physics, chemistry and mathematics; PCB: physics, chemistry and biology; STEM: science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

 Discussion

Based on the data analysis, we calculated critical value, p = 7.81473 and a test statistic computed χ pr 2 = 4.209 for all students’ performance in STEM subjects for private schools and χ p 2 = 318.33425 for public schools. It is clear that χ pr 2 = 4.28 < 7.81473 = p , and χ p 2 = 318.33425 > p . Recall the null and alternative hypothesis:

Null ( H 0 ) and Alternative Hypotheses ( H 1 ):

H 0 : For the students in Mbeya city from private/public secondary schools, gender has no influence to pass in STEM subjects.

H 1 : For the students in Mbeya city from private/public secondary schools, gender has influence to pass in STEM subjects.

In this regard, we do accept the null hypothesis for private schools and reject the null hypothesis for public schools. Therefore, private schools in Mbeya city resolved the gender equity gap in performance of STEM subjects. On the other hand, gender equity gaps are unresolved between girls and boys in STEM subjects’ performance for public schools. That implies that the gender equity gap shall extend to the future STEM careers of graduates from public schools, and therefore, spread to the whole nation and worldwide at large.

We suppose education policy had had recognized private sectors contribution and further promote teamwork along with private schools then more output that is stunning would surface. Thus, in so speaking, this study saves to encourage education policy makers to enrich policy mechanism for collaboration and possible embolden of private schools for more enrolment in STEM education. This is in parallel with the implementation of SDG4 realization in 2030. It is also clear that passing in both physics and basic mathematics determines the potential of STEM career prospects from secondary schools ( Table 5, Table 6).

 Conclusion and recommendations

Private schools’ reflection of balancing gender in STEM education in the case of Mbeya city offers a great step toward achieving SDG4 of the United Nations. The author recommends policy makers to engage private schools to address the challenges of gender equity in STEM education in a collaborative manner rather than existing in with public schools. STEM education stakeholders need to stress not only STEM careers position in the 21st century of job placements but also the importance of passing both basic mathematics and physics as determinants of STEM career for secondary school students. Basic mathematics alone is not enough.

This study is calling for further investigation as to why in the same nation with likely the same environment, private schools outperformed public schools to such great extent. The researcher will explore both parties separately to acquire reliable information to share experiences to avert the situation in public schools.

 Data availability

Data used in this study are available and accessible for reproducibility. Information about public and private schools involved are all associated to Mbeya city CSEE results of 2022. Specifically, the Author used the data published by the National Examination Council of Tanzania (NECTA) from all test centers of the year 2022 ( NECTA of CSEE for the year 2022).

 Acknowledgements

First, I do appreciate Mbeya University of Science and Technology leadership for their strength and determination. Secondly, I do acknowledge the support in ideas by all colleagues in the Department of mathematics and statistics, to mention a few are; Mr. Justin Kisakali, Mr. Paulo Ngayekamwe and Ms. Tatu S. Irunde, who as well offered their time to work on behalf for some of the office routine activities. That gave a room for me to concentrate on writing. The whole members of the Department were willing to teach more classes, this boosted ending in small teaching load and therefore ability to write. Finally, my family support is indispensable in this task. They have been patient to all my late coming at home to ensure I am okay with this task. I must point out my youngest son, David.

 References Achoui MM : Human resource development in Gulf countries: An analysis of the trends and challenges facing Saudi Arabia. Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 2009;12(1):35–46. 10.1080/13678860802638826 Adams A-M Baddianaah I : Factors affecting female enrolment in technical and vocational education and training institutions in sub-Saharan Africa: Insights from north-western Ghana. International Journal of Training Research. 2023;1–24. 10.1080/14480220.2023.2179096 Allen M Webb AW Matthews CE : Adaptive teaching in STEM: Characteristics for effectiveness. Theory Pract. 2016;55(3):217–224. 10.1080/00405841.2016.1173994 Budhwar PS Sparrow PR : An integrative framework for understanding cross-national human resource management practices. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2002;12(3):377–403. 10.1016/S1053-4822(02)00066-9 Huang X Erduran S Zhang P : Enhancing teachers’ STEM understanding through observation, discussion and reflection. J. Educ. Teach. 2022;48(5):576–591. 10.1080/02607476.2021.2006571 Ismail Z : Benefits of STEM education. 2018. Kamberidou I Pascall N : The digital skills crisis: Engendering technology–empowering women in cyberspace. European Journal of Social Sciences Studies. 2019. Koehler G : Tapping the Sustainable Development Goals for progressive gender equity and equality policy? Gend. Dev. 2016;24(1):53–68. 10.1080/13552074.2016.1142217 Komba AA : Educational accountability relationships and students’ learning outcomes in Tanzania’s public schools. SAGE Open. 2017;7(3):215824401772579. 10.1177/2158244017725795 Leal Filho W Kovaleva M Tsani S : Promoting gender equality across the sustainable development goals. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2022;1–22. Lewin KM : Access to education in sub-Saharan Africa: Patterns, problems and possibilities. Comp. Educ. 2009;45(2):151–174. 10.1080/03050060902920518 Loyalka P Liu OL Li G : Skill levels and gains in university STEM education in China, India, Russia and the United States. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2021;5(7):892–904. 33649462 10.1038/s41562-021-01062-3 Samoff J : School expansion in Tanzania: Private initiatives and public policy. Comp. Educ. Rev. 1987;31(3):333–360. 10.1086/446695 Sebola MP : South Africa’s public higher education institutions, university research outputs, and contribution to national human capital. Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 2023;26(2):217–231. 10.1080/13678868.2022.2047147 Stromquist NP : Gender, education and the possibility of transformative knowledge. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education. 2006;36(2):145–161. 10.1080/03057920600741131 Swainson N : Knowledge and power: The design and implementation of gender policies in education in Malawi, Tanzania and Zimbabwe. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 2000;20(1):49–64. 10.1016/S0738-0593(99)00047-4 Teo TW Ke KJ : Challenges in STEM teaching: Implication for preservice and in service teacher education program. Theory Pract. 2014;53(1):18–24. 10.1080/00405841.2014.862116 Unicef & others: A rigorous review of global research evidence on policy and practice on school-related gender-based violence. 2020. Unterhalter E : The many meanings of quality education: Politics of targets and indicators in SDG 4. Global Pol. 2019;10:39–51. 10.1111/1758-5899.12591 Weaver NE : Educational policy in Tanzania from independence to the present: Continuity and transformation. University of Pittsburgh;2011. [PhD Thesis]. Zorzano M-P : Gender balance in Mars exploration: Lessons learned from the Mars Science Laboratory. Sustainability. 2020;12(24):10658. 10.3390/su122410658 10.5256/f1000research.150590.r404704 Reviewer response for version 1 Okeke Uchenna Kingsley 1 Referee University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park, Gauteng, South Africa

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

 10 9 2025 Copyright: © 2025 Okeke UK 2025 This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. recommendation approve-with-reservations

TITLE: Enhancing Gender Equity in STEM Education: A Comparative Study of the Impact of School Ownership on Females' Enrollment in STEM. (Remove the demographic information from the title. You can talk about it in the abstract and methodology.    

ABSTRACT: There is a need to rework the abstract. What is the design of the study? How was the data collected and analyzed? What are/is the findings, conclusion, and recommendations?

INTRODUCTION:

Opening paragraph should be "The adoption of the Sustainable Devepment Goals..

Please, which of the goals aligns with the focus of your study? Be specific and discuss it in details

I am a bit confuse about the objectives of the study, especially the first object.

There is need to include Research Questions in the study,

The Methods section need to be overhauled. What is the design of the study? Meta-analysis? 

Method od data collection and data analysis should be enhance for clarity

The result is faulty. What was highlighted in the objective is not same as the result presented. Please, make sure that both sides align. Besides, there is a need to raise research question to guide the study.

I am wondering how you have Null and Alternate hypothseses in the same study and both are framing the same issue? How?

Conclusions and Recommendations should be based on the result of the study. So, with a questionable result, the basis for conclusion and generalization will be faulty too

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

No

If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly

Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly

Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

No

Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

No

Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly

Reviewer Expertise:

Physics education, gender inclusivity, science pedagogy

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Kibona Isack Ephraim Mathematics and Statistics, Mbeya University of Science and Technology, Mbeya, Mbeya Region, Tanzania

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

 16 10 2025

TITLE: Enhancing Gender Equity in STEM Education: A Comparative Study of the Impact of School Ownership on Females' Enrollment in STEM

 10.5256/f1000research.150590.r242769 Reviewer response for version 1 Alonso de Castro María Goretti 1 Referee Regional Council of Education, Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

 22 2 2024 Copyright: © 2024 Alonso de Castro MG 2024 This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. recommendation approve-with-reservations

While the study's objectives are clearly delineated and the methodologies are thoroughly explained, there remains a need for a clearer rationale behind the chosen analysis method. Furthermore, the study lacks an explicit discussion of its limitations and fails to address the variables that could potentially impact the observed differences between public and private educational centers. It is essential to delve into the analysis of contextual variables such as methodologies utilized, available resources, family support systems, socioeconomic status, and cultural influences to better comprehend the disparities in outcomes between these educational settings. A more comprehensive examination of the study's limitations and the myriad factors influencing the differences outlined in the article is warranted. This would significantly enhance the depth and rigor of the research, providing a more nuanced understanding of the observed discrepancies.

Regarding replicability, the text references the state test database; however, it lacks clarity on the selection process, sample criteria, and the variables considered in the presented tables. A more detailed explanation of the methodology behind selecting the state test database, the criteria for sample inclusion, and the specific variables incorporated into the tables would significantly enhance the transparency and replicability of the study.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes

If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly

Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly

Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly

Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly

Reviewer Expertise:

Education, Technology, ICT, Educational European projects; Educational Inspection

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Kibona Isack Ephraim Mathematics and Statistics, Mbeya University of Science and Technology, Mbeya, Mbeya Region, Tanzania

Competing interests: No competing interests available to this review process.

 27 2 2024

The Author has responded by including a section informing limitations of the study, see an attachment. Moreover, the data involved (CSEE 2022) in the study enabled the study to reveal unfair prevailing situation in secondary schools but on the other hand situation about contextual variables such as methodologies utilized, available resources, family support systems, socioeconomic status, and cultural influences shall need more data pertaining to tools such as questionnaire and interview. 

On selection criteria, all schools in the city in the given year of study went into participation in this study, therefore, the study involved city school population. Thus, for reproducibility of the study, one shall need to study all secondary schools in the city that participated in the CSEE 2022.