Designing for Responsiveness: What We Learned from Piloting Targeted Instruction Tools in Nigeria and Botswana
The Global Problem of Targeted Instruction
Across classrooms globally, a common challenge persists: how can teachers meaningfully adapt instruction to meet the diverse learning needs of their students? In many low-resource settings, this challenge is further complicated by large class sizes, language diversity, and limited instructional support. Teachers often lack tools that allow them to adjust teaching in real time, leaving many children behind, particularly those at the lowest learning levels.
At the heart of Teaching at the Right Level (TaRL) is the idea of targeted instruction—grouping children by their current learning level and tailoring activities accordingly. While this concept is simple in theory, the day-to-day realities of implementing it are far more complex. To address this, TaRL Africa and Youth Impact jointly explored how practical, classroom-based tools could support teachers in adapting instruction more responsively. The result: two tools—Checkpoint (ChP) and Check for Understanding (CFU)—piloted in Botswana and Nigeria, respectively. These tools aim to equip teachers with just enough data, at the right time, to guide grouping decisions and lesson planning. They are built not to add burden, but to enhance clarity and promote action. This blog shares the insights from our learning journey—what worked, what didn’t, and why context and co-creation matter so much in designing solutions that last.
TaRL learners in Botswana
The Tools: Same Purpose, Different Realities
At the core of the TaRL approach is the idea that instruction should match a child’s current learning level, not their age or grade. Yet, even with this principle in place, teachers often struggle with the “how.” How do I know where each child stands? How do I regroup them without losing momentum? How do I plan the next session when my classroom has such wide variation?
To support teachers in answering these questions, Youth Impact in Botswana designed a classroom tool called Checkpoint (ChP)—a simple, low-tech strategy that enables teachers to run quick mastery checks at the end of each lesson. The idea is straightforward: if most students understood the day’s lesson, move forward; if not, adjust the pace or content. These quick checks double as data points, creating a feedback loop that informs both student grouping and daily instruction. In Nigeria, TaRL Africa adapted this idea into Check for Understanding (CFU)—a bi-weekly process embedded within the TaRL instructional cycle. CFU goes beyond quick checks by incorporating structured regrouping and planning time based on learner performance. Teachers assess students individually or in small groups and reorganize them as needed. It was designed not just to test comprehension, but to institutionalize reflection and action within TaRL classrooms. Though both tools share a common goal—strengthening targeted instruction through data-informed decision-making—their implementation diverged due to contextual realities:
TaRL Learner in Kaduna State, Nigeria
In both cases, the tools were introduced through iterative pilots, supported by mentoring, and refined based on feedback from teachers and field observations. While Checkpoint emphasized frequent, low-effort checks, CFU focused on depth and instructional adjustment. Both approaches reinforced a central idea: if we want teachers to act on data, we must design tools that are easy to use, contextually relevant, and valuable.
What We Learned: Insights from the Field
Piloting CFU and ChP across two very different contexts offered rich learning about what makes targeted instruction work—or falter—in real classrooms. Despite differences in tool design and delivery, four common insights emerged:
a. Simplicity and Flexibility Drive Adoption
Teachers embraced tools when they were intuitive and adaptable. In both countries, when CFU or Checkpoint felt like a helpful part of their teaching routine, not an added burden, teachers used them more consistently. Nigeria’s CFU shifted from a fixed, two-hour exercise to a more flexible format where teachers could assess over multiple days, prioritize students needing more support, and choose the language of assessment based on student needs.
“It helps us plan better because now we know who is struggling, and with what,” shared a mentor in Kaduna, Nigeria.
b. Tools Are Only as Good as the Support Around Them
Both tools improved when embedded within broader mentoring and training structures. In Botswana, weekly mentoring and refresher training helped clarify the use of Checkpoint and improved data submission. 80% of teachers reported that it made their TaRL lessons more effective, and among those who received additional training, over three-quarters confirmed feeling more equipped to use it effectively. In Nigeria, mentoring visits ensured CFU implementation quality and created space for teachers to reflect on student progression data.
c. Data Use Must Be Immediate and Actionable
CFU and Checkpoint worked best when teachers saw a clear use for their collected data. Teachers felt more confident in diagnosing learning challenges. Rather than being filed away, results were used the same week to regroup students or adjust instruction. This immediate relevance motivated teachers and gave data a clear purpose.
d. One Size Doesn’t Fit All—Context Matters
Large class sizes in Nigeria made 1:1 assessments time-consuming. Multilingual classrooms added complexity. In Botswana, low Pupil Teacher Ratio and single-language instruction enabled quicker use of Checkpoint. These variations reinforced that tools must be adapted, not just adopted, to work across diverse education systems.
These insights don’t just validate the tools—they reaffirm a deeper truth: strengthening targeted instruction isn’t only about assessments. It’s about creating the right ecosystem for teachers to notice, understand, and act on what their students need.
Learner groups in Nigeria
TaRL Student at Front of Class
Early Signals of Impact
While both CFU and Checkpoint are still being refined, early results point toward promising outcomes, particularly in terms of improving instruction, teacher engagement, and student learning progression.
In Nigeria:
TaRL Africa piloted CFU across ten schools (five treatment, five comparison) between February and July 2024. While the sample size was small and not representative, ASER data revealed encouraging patterns. In treatment schools:
-
The share of children reading at the paragraph level rose by 17 percentage points (pp).
-
The proportion of non-readers (unable to read even a word) dropped by 23pp.
-
In numeracy, children able to solve subtraction problems increased by 17pp, while those unable to identify 2-digit numbers reduced by 6pp.
These results suggest that CFU may have helped teachers identify and address learning gaps more effectively, especially among lower-performing students. In addition, teacher feedback highlighted improved lesson planning and deeper student engagement. CFU also sparked unplanned but welcome peer-learning behaviors: school-level review meetings and collaborative planning emerged organically, indicating growing teacher ownership of the process.
In Botswana:
Youth Impact’s A/B test spanned 54 schools across seven regions. While the Checkpoint tool did not directly translate into statistically significant learning gains, it did lead to:
-
Improved teacher understanding and confidence in assessment-based lesson planning.
-
Stronger routines around monitoring and data reporting.
Teachers reported time constraints as the most common barrier, not in conducting the assessment itself, but in reviewing responses and recording data. To address this, Youth Impact is piloting a WhatsApp-based chatbot (Glific) that simplifies data sharing and reduces teacher workload. Both cases offered proof of concept that classroom-based tools, when well-supported and contextually responsive, can drive more meaningful instructional decisions and enable targeted support for students who need it most.
Why This Matters Beyond One Program
The challenge of helping teachers deliver targeted instruction is not unique to TaRL, nor sub-Saharan Africa. Around the world, educators are grappling with how to tailor teaching to children’s diverse needs, especially in under-resourced classrooms with limited time, large class sizes, and varying levels of teacher preparation.
The CFU and Checkpoint pilots highlight a broader truth: global learning goals are local classroom problems. If we want children to learn, we must equip teachers with tools that are both practical and actionable—tools that support reflection, enable regrouping, and help teachers course-correct in real time. Yet, these tools must also be adaptable to local languages, pacing calendars, school structures, and instructional norms.
This work also reaffirms a critical insight from the field of implementation science: data alone does not drive change, but usable data, embedded within structures of support and decision-making, can. Whether it’s a weekly regrouping tool or a daily checkpoint, what matters is that teachers understand, value, and use the information they collect. This is especially urgent as countries attempt to move from pilot to scale, and from program-led to system-led TaRL. For data-driven targeted instruction to take root, we need tools that governments can adopt, adapt, and sustain without needing high-touch external support.
From Pilot to Possibility
CFU and Checkpoint are more than tools—they represent a learning model: one that values iteration, local ownership, and problem-solving grounded in the realities of the classroom.
For TaRL Africa and Youth Impact, the collaboration didn’t just test a hypothesis—it built shared conviction that solutions to persistent instructional challenges can be designed, tested, and transferred across contexts when grounded in teacher voice and guided by data. This partnership, supported by SALEX and the Jacobs Foundation, created space to co-learn, adapt innovations, and stress-test assumptions across two very different systems.
The path forward is clear. We’re refining tools for greater simplicity. We’re strengthening mentoring systems to make data use sustainable. And we’re working with governments—especially in Côte d’Ivoire and Zambia—to adapt and integrate these processes into national models. But we also know that targeted instruction is a global challenge. Classrooms around the world share similar struggles—grouping, pacing, planning—and the promise of CFU/ChP lies in their potential to become globally relevant, locally adaptable solutions.
The next phase is about scaling not just the tools, but the thinking behind them: that teachers, when equipped with the right support and simple, actionable tools, can drive real learning gains for all children. As we continue to learn, we invite others to join us—to adapt, to test, and to build a collective movement for smarter, data-driven teaching that truly is at the right level
Authors: Anjali Shandilya (TaRL Africa), Tendekai Mukoyi Nkwane (Youth Impact)
Acknowledgement:
We would like to sincerely thank the Jacobs Foundation and the SALEX network for their generous support and for creating the opportunity to undertake this work. We are also deeply grateful to Daniele Ressler, Chavi Jain and Karen Clune for their invaluable guidance and encouragement. We would also like to thank Aisha Adamu, Williams Bangajiya and Konstantin Büchel for their collaboration throughout this process.
References
ASER Centre. (2022). Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) – India. https://www.asercentre.org
Banerjee, A., Banerji, R., Duflo, E., Glennerster, R., & Khemani, S. (2010). Pitfalls of participatory programs: Evidence from a randomized evaluation in education in India. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.2.1.1
Pratham. (2018). Teaching at the right level: Achieving quality learning at scale in India. https://www.pratham.org
TaRL Africa. (2023). TaRL implementation guide. https://teachingattherightlevel.org/resources
TaRL Africa. (2024). CFU pilot summary – Kaduna, Nigeria [Unpublished internal report]. Teaching at the Right Level Africa.
Youth Impact. (2024). Checkpoint A/B test pilot report – Botswana [Unpublished internal documentation]. Youth Impact.
Fix, J., & Larkan, F. (2022). Improving foundational literacy and numeracy through Teaching at the Right Level (TaRL): A review of evidence and practice. Jacobs Foundation.