Implementation of Senior High School History Curriculum: A focus on teaching methodology and resources

Abstract The study looked at how the history curriculum was implemented in senior high schools in the Asuogyaman District of Ghana. The research used a mixed-methods research strategy, particularly the convergent design. The cluster sampling technique, proportional allocation and simple random sampling technique were used to choose a sample size of 200 Form 2 history students and censused 5 history teachers from four public senior high schools in the district. For the students, a 28-item questionnaire was used for data collection. The teachers were interviewed and their lesson delivery was observed. The qualitative data was organized into narrative themes, whilst the quantitative data were analyzed using means and standard deviations. The quantitative data was integrated with the qualitative data throughout the data integration process. From the findings, history teachers frequently used discussion, lecture, and question and answer methods of instruction. The teaching and learning aids used were supplementary textbooks and wall maps. The findings of this study point to the need to improve history teaching. As a result, head teachers of schools should encourage their teachers to lay emphasis more on the use of learner-centred teaching methods. Again, Ministry of Education should provide adequate instructional resources, especially audio and audio-visual resources to the schools.


Introduction
Education is a vital tool for promoting a country's political and socio-economic growth. In most countries, it promotes human welfare. A curriculum is an important tool in meeting a country's educational needs (Acquah, 2012). According to Adobaw-Bansah and Essah-Ntiful (2017), quality and relevant education depends on how the curricula are designed and implemented to achieve the curricula aims. This is because the curriculum is an integral part of any educational endeavour. To Tamir (2018), no educational process can be adequately described without reference to its curricula components. The educational process entails dealing with certain curricula contents, which include information and knowledge, feelings, values, and skills that assist individuals in fulfilling socially endorsed roles and tasks. Education and curriculum are inextricably linked because "curriculum" is frequently heard when the subject of "education" is discussed.
The scope of curriculum theory has gradually expanded to include, among other things, the process of curriculum development, implementation, and evaluation. The selection and statement of objectives, the selection and design of learning activities, the organization of learning activities, and the evaluation of objectives are all part of curriculum development (Wheeler, 1967;Tamakloe, 1992;Annobil, 2017). The selection and organization of objectives are frequently based on a thorough assessment of the people for whom the curriculum is intended, as well as their needs, purposes, and resources. After it has been completely designed, the curriculum becomes a document or a programme (Shawer, 2017); and ready for implementation. Depending on the educational system, Snyder et al. (1992) outlined three techniques for implementing any educational programme. The fidelity approach is appropriate for centralised educational systems, whereas the mutual adaptation approach is appropriate for flexible systems and the enactment approach is appropriate for decentralised educational systems.
Since Ghana's educational system is centralised, the fidelity approach is the preferred approach to curriculum implementation. Though the Ghana Education Service, through Curriculum Research and Development Division (CRDD), now National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NaCCA) plans and prepares the school curriculum to fulfill the overall aims, the likelihood of reaching any remarkable results is dependent on the classroom teacher (Marsh & Willis, 2003). However, fidelity which requires the teacher to be faithful in implementing the curriculum in terms of using the recommended teaching methodologies and resources as stipulated in the history curriculum have proved ineffective. For example, Arthur (1999) investigated the degree to which an educational programme was implemented in the Ashanti Region. According to the study's findings, the majority of teachers did not always organise their lessons according to the suggested teaching methods and resources.
Empirical studies have been conducted on teaching methods that teachers used during classroom instruction. The selection and use of teaching methods determine how classroom success can be achieved. In an attempt to understand how the Social Studies curriculum was implemented in the classroom, Adu-Yeboah (2008) conducted a study on the implementation of the social studies programme in Junior High Schools in the Obuasi Municipality in the Ashanti Region of Ghana. The results of the study indicated that classroom-centered teaching methodologies were mostly used by the social studies teachers and there were few opportunities for inquiry and fieldwork activities. In a similar study, Oppong (2009) examined the teaching and learning of history in the Central Region of Ghana and concluded that the most prominent methods of teaching history were the question-and answer method, discussion and lecture methods.
In Nigeria, Soneye and Agbonluare (2013) assessed the effective implementation of the new Senior High School (SHS) curriculum. The study revealed that the former Nigeria SHS curriculum was fair but not effectively implemented due to factors such as theory-based teaching methods, and insufficient specialist teachers. Also, in Nairobi, Iraki (2014) investigated school-based factors influencing implementation and the results revealed that teaching methods were not well varied. Discussion, demonstration and lecture methods were the teaching methods frequently used by the teachers. It is expected that at that level, student centred methodologies would be employed to teach children. The researcher concluded that failure of the teachers to vary the teaching methods affected the curriculum implementation. Based on the findings obtained by these researchers, it could be deduced that teaching methods selected by teachers for classroom instruction were not impressive. Muchilwa (1998) conducted a study on the availability and use of instructional materials for teaching history in Kenya. Findings from the study revealed that most of the schools did not have adequate instructional materials. Although majority of the schools had the recommended textbooks, other instructional materials needed for teaching history were very few. Furthermore, in Oppong's (2009) study, it was unearthed that SHS history teachers in the Central Region of Ghana used the history curriculum and the recommended textbooks to teach. The teachers had no other resources at their disposal to facilitate the teaching of history. In Turkey, Çakir (2015) conducted a study on the instructional materials commonly employed by foreign language teachers at elementary schools. The results indicated that most of the teachers were reluctant to use many of the highly beneficial materials due to reasons such as overcrowded classes, limited technological knowledge, lack of time for preparation, curricular time constraints and heavy work load.
The foregoing review shows that majority of the studies carried out on the fidelity of implementation focused on teachers' perspectives. For instance, this was found in the works of Arthur (1999), Adu-Yeboah (2008), andOppong (2009). Again, studies conducted on curriculum implementation have been largely situated in the Central, Western, and Ashanti Regions of Ghana. This makes it difficult to fully appreciate the faithful implementation of the history curriculum from a broader perspective. Methodologically, most of the studies were approached quantitatively giving little knowledge about the depth of the faithful implementation of the curriculum. In employing both quantitative and qualitative approaches, the current study examines history teachers use of the recommended teaching methods and teaching/learning resources implementing the history curriculum.

Methods of teaching and learning history
Teaching strategies are the most important mechanisms that teachers can and must use to achieve a lesson's objective(s). As a result, teachers from all disciplines, including history, use teaching methods to accomplish lesson objectives. Teaching methods, according to Tamakloe et al. (2005), are the processes used by both the teacher and the students to induce learning in the teaching-learning interaction. In their view, teaching methods are the processes through which learning takes place.
Learner-centered teaching strategies have been supported by current educational ideas in educational philosophy and particularly, educational psychology. Learning is more effective when learners are included as active participants in the teaching-learning process. According to Oppong (2009), the lecture method is the most common teaching approach in history classes, and it is usually accompanied by note-taking and silent reading, followed by questions. These activities are commonly described by Crookall (1975) and Adu-Boahen (2011) as poor techniques of teaching history. Students become inactive in the teaching/learning process as a result of such teaching practices. Nevertheless, the nature of history as a subject, demands that teachers use an array of teaching methods to achieve the purpose for which history is taught, which of course is the ability to think critically (Oppong, 2009). Such methods will enable students to test, question, explore and challenge the construction of historical knowledge (Mathew, 1966). Concerning the methods of teaching, it is suggested in the history curriculum that the following methods be used in teaching the subject: discussion, question and answer, project method, dramatization, brainstorming, field trip, discovery, role play, and debates. Such methods will invariably help learners to put historical events into proper categories and compare them, thereby developing in learners the act of critical thinking (Ministry of Education, 2018).

Resources for teaching and learning history
Teaching-learning resources are the primary vehicles for delivering content knowledge to students. These resources, to a large extent, determine what students learn and do not learn. Those resources include audio materials, visual materials, and audio-visual materials. The California Department of Education (2003) claims that history instruction is presented as a well-told story with continuity and narrative coherence, based on the most recent data. As a result, they affirm that instructional resources such as documents and images should be incorporated into narratives to portray the account in a realistic picture of the period.
The history curriculum recommends the provision of specific resources for the effective implementation of each topic. These include textbooks, visual aids such as maps, charts, and pictures, audio-visual aids such as films, and the use of museums as well as resource persons. The history textbook is essential for history teaching and learning because it contains in-depth information on the themes covered in the history curriculum. Adeyinka (1990), maintains that textbooks are the most common aids for teaching history. As a result, history textbooks are the major tools that teachers use to organize their lessons and provide students with content knowledge and skills (Oakes & Saunders, 2002).
Another important type of instructional resource is visual materials such as maps, charts, atlases, pictures, among others. This category of resources conveys information through the sense of sight. Such instructional materials ensure effective teaching and learning of history since they give a clear picture of past events. Audio-visual materials also form a major type of instructional resource used for the teaching and learning of history. According to Tamakloe et al. (2005) audio-visual materials are those, which cater for both audio and visual perceptions. Instructional resources that fall into this category include television, slide projectors, film strips and resource centers. These resources are most important in the teaching and learning of history because they help to make events that took place long ago look real to students and indeed reduce the abstract nature of the teaching of history. The curriculum also recommends resource persons as important instructional resources. The utilization of resource persons in history teaching helps to make lessons more practical and efficient because they are usually practitioners in the topic. Indeed, the use of these resources will enhance the teaching and learning of history whose very nature is abstract. Tamakloe et al. (2005) shares the view that such resources are generally suitable for class teaching than individual teaching. The types of instructional resources mentioned above are the most common ones recommended in the history curriculum for efficient teaching and learning.

Theoretical review
Fidelity of implementation relates to the degree to which teachers abide by a curriculum's original design when implementing it. The underlying assumptions of fidelity approach to curriculum implementation relates to curriculum knowledge, curriculum change and the role of the teacher. The advocates assume that curriculum experts primarily create curriculum knowledge outside the classroom for teachers to implement in the way the experts have decided is best (Snyder et al., 1992). The second assumption states that curriculum change is a rational systematic and linear process. The more the curriculum team and implementers identify the factors that either facilitate or inhibit the smooth operation of the linear process, the better the administration of the process (Fullan, 1991;Hoyle & Bell, 1972). The final assumption under the fidelity approach relates to the role of the teacher. The teacher is more of a consumer, who should follow the directions and implement the curriculum just as the experts have designed it (Snyder et al., 1992).
The degree of success of the implementation of the curriculum is, therefore, attributed to the degree of faithfulness of the teacher in the implementation process. This is to say that fidelity, in terms of implementation of curriculum, is the implementation of the history curriculum just as designed by the curriculum planners. The teachers' role becomes critical to the success of the curriculum. Therefore, a deviation in the implementation of the dictates of the history curriculum reduces the degree of faithfulness to the curriculum.
The fidelity approach is appropriate for centralised educational systems, whereas the mutual adaptation approach is appropriate for flexible systems and the enactment approach is appropriate for decentralised educational systems. In Ghana, education is centralised. And so, the curriculum is centrally planned by experts who create it in the manner that they believe is most appropriate.

Research methods
The mixed method approach, particularly the convergent parallel design was used for the study. The use of the mixed method, with focus on convergent parallel enabled me to converge quantitative and qualitative data to provide a comprehensive analysis of the research problem and that both quantitative and qualitative data were collected at the same time (see, for example, Creswell & Clark, 2017). In line with the convergent parallel, the quantitative data was used to confirm the qualitative data. The population for the study comprised 4 public senior high schools (those who offer History as a subject), specifically Form 2 students in the Asuogyaman District in the Eastern Region of Ghana. Form 2 students were considered because during the time of data collection, the Form 3 students were writing their final exams and so they were not available. Also, Form 1 students had not had enough experience of their teachers' teaching methodologies and resources they (teachers) adopt in teaching. Hence, they might have little knowledge about the teachers' teaching methods and the resources that are used in teaching History. The total population of students and teachers in these four schools was 398 and 5 teachers respectively. The distribution of the number of students in each school is given as: Akwamuman (212), Anum Presby (132), Apeguso (21) and Adjena (33).
The census sampling technique was adopted since the number of teachers was small and easily assessable (see, for example, Ogah, 2013), to include all the 5 teachers in the study. Out of the total student population of 398, 191 sample size was determined. This sample size was based on Krejcie and Morgan's (1970) sample size determination table. The cluster sampling technique was used because the schools were dispersed in the district (Cohen et al., 2018). In order to ensure fair representation of each cluster, the proportional allocation was used to determine and allocate the total number of students from the population to each school. The proportional allocation was used in that the distribution of students in the schools was not even. That is, the method ensured students selected from each school reflected the total number of students in the population of each school the opportunity of being selected. This was done by dividing the population in each school by the total population for all the schools multiplied by the sample size for the study (n × S/ N). However, the sample size was increased to 200 to address the rippling effect of 'non-response, incomplete or spoiled responses, attribution and sampling morality" (Cohen et al., 2018, p. 226).
Questionnaires were used as the quantitative research instrument to generate data from the students (see Appendix A), whilst interview and observation guides were used to gather qualitative data from the teachers. The questionnaire was adopted from Fullan and Pomfret (1977). Responses to the questionnaire were organized on a five-point Likert scale and the interview and observation guides were developed from the conceptualisations of previous studies (e.g., Oppong, 2009;Adu-Yeboah, 2008. Pilot study was conducted and the questionnaire reliability was measured at 0.81, indicating that it was highly reliable for data collection (see ;Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). The quantitative data were coded and analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS version 20). Descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation were used in analysing the data. The data from the observation guide was also coded and analysed qualitatively together with the interview data and reported narratively. An obtrusive observation was carried out directly and twenty-five (25) history lessons were observed; that is, each teacher was observed on five different occasions. The observation guide was used to gain insight into the various teaching methods, teaching and learning resources used by history teachers in the district as already prescribed in the history curriculum. An interview was conducted purposely for the history teachers in the district. Wallen and Fraenkel (2013) explain that interviews are taken to find out from people things that we cannot directly observe or notice. A formal face-to-face interview with the five history teachers was conducted (see, Appendix B details).

Results and discussions
The results and discussions are presented in sections to address the research questions per the context of the study. From Table 1, out of the 200 students, the majority (N = 145, 72.5%) of the students were female with only 55 (27.5%) being male. It is not surprising that the female students are more than the male students. This is quite expected since literature has shown that male students prefer to read courses which involve calculations whilst female students have preference for reading courses, of which History is part (Kiptum et al., 2013).

Teaching methods employed by teachers
It was gathered from the interview that history teachers used the discussion method, question and answer method, debate, and lecture methods often during teaching. The study found that teachers used the lecture method, where a particular topic was difficult or in situations where the topic lends itself to that method. This is what some of the teachers had to say: "I use discussion method. At times I use lecture method depending on the topic and then question and answer method. Occasionally we do student presentation on certain relevant topics" (T2:011-012) "It varies, sometimes I go for discussion, role play, field trip and debate depending on the topic" (T5:005) Some teachers also used the discussion method based on the topics to be taught. A teacher stated that: Because of the nature of the things we teach so is mostly discussion, group work and research which they come to present in class" (T4:014-015) Other teachers used the discussion method due to the class size. In the words of one teacher: "Sometimes I lecture, sometimes I allow the students to do the discussion then I moderate them" (T1:027-028) To know why teachers normally used the aforementioned teaching methods, the teachers gave various responses to justify the use of the methods. Some of the responses are captured in the ensuing extracts: "I choose these because of the abstract nature. For instance, if you are teaching slave trade and they were not there but the thing has been written in books so when they research and brainstorm and discuss in class, they are able to bring out new things which are not in books" (T4:017-019) "The class size at times does not even allow for effective discussion method because at times the class size will be very large, the least will be 70. I remember some time ago we had 80, 90" (T2:014-016) "When I see that a particular topic is difficult, I lecture a bit and get their attention into it" (T1: [24][25] This clearly shows that teachers combined several teaching methods when teaching the various topics in the curriculum. Teachers did not often use role-play. Only one teacher indicated that he used role play but not regularly. This is what the teacher had to say: To confirm what the teachers said about the methods employed in the teaching of history, an observation was also carried out. The results from the observation showed that the history teachers often used the question-and answer, discussion and lecture methods. The problem identified with the use of these methods was that most of them were not employed based on the topic being taught as prescribed in the history curriculum and this practice made them less faithful in the implementation process of the history curriculum. Where the history curriculum suggested a particular method for the teaching of a specific topic, the history teachers were found using different methods. This was observed in each of the lessons the history teachers taught. For instance, a lesson on the topic: the Role of Local Medicine in the Past and Present Time required the use of a resource person. However, the teaching method that was used was the lecture method.
Other history lessons observed on the Religious Dimensions of Traditional Medicine found few history teachers to be using the discussion method whilst most of them used the lecture and question-and answer methods. Ideally, the suggested teaching method for this topic was the discussion method. One could say that some of the history teachers might not be pedagogically inclined and so adopted methods that were not prescribed by the curriculum. No matter the case, history teachers were not faithful to the prescribed curriculum, which guided their teaching even though they were seen using learner-centred methods of teaching.
To corroborate the findings obtained through the interview and the observation, students were also surveyed. This was particularly important because the students had obtained much teaching from their history teachers and were in the position to further tell which method they usually experienced. Therefore, students' responses on the methods teachers normally used during teaching were also captured and this is presented in Table 2.

Statement Mean SD
We (students) are engaged in the teaching and learning through sharing of ideas on the topic.

1.01
We (students) and our teacher visit places in and out of the school to see and practice things that they have learnt in the classroom.  Table 2 shows that the majority (mean = 4.71) of the students indicated that their history teachers almost anytime used question and answer method and carried out through probing and divergent questions (mean = 4.05, standard deviation = 1.13). The students were homogeneous in their thinking (standard deviation = .62). The students further claimed that not only do teachers used question and answer method but very often they used the lecture method. The discussion method was seen to be normally used by the teachers as well (mean = 4.21, standard deviation = 1.01). Interestingly, the students further declared that history teachers very often put them into groups to prepare and do oral presentations. Brainstorming was also reported by the students to be frequently used by the history teachers (means = 3.85, standard deviation = 1.10). It was found out that field trips (mean = 1.63, standard deviation = 1.06) and role-play (mean = 1.66, standard deviation = 1.23) were rarely used in the school, even though the inquiry method or the activity method was occasionally used in teaching history.
It can be noticed from the foregoing information from both the interview and the observation confirmed the questionnaire that discussion method, lecture method, and question and answer method are normally used by history teachers in their lesson delivery. This finding accords with earlier findings (Oppong, 2009;Iraki, 2014;NSW Quality Department, 2003), they identified lecture method, discussions, and question and answer method to be predominantly used by history teachers. The similar findings presented here means that history teachers have adopted these prototypical teaching methods. These methods seem to be two of the appropriate ways in which learners could be made part of the instructional process. Even if the lecture method is relevant, it can be used with the question-and-answer method or the discussion method.
Educational trip was the least method employed by teachers. The absence of educational field trip might make students not see what they learn in the classroom as meaningful and practical. This is because it has been argued that when students are able to link what they learn at the school to what happens outside the school, they see their learning to be relevant. The quality teaching model strongly supports this notion with its significance dimension and more specifically the element of connectivity under the dimension. Confining learning to only the four corners of the classroom or the school environment is likely to stifle students' interest and creativity (NSW Quality Department, 2003). Exploiting other avenues of learning outside the classroom is likely to make learning more fun for students to enjoy. The results from the questionnaire corroborate with the results from the interviews and the observations carried out. All these data established that history teachers employ discussion, question and answer, and lecture methods. Basically, teaching and learning usually cannot take place without questioning, discussing or lecturing. It was, therefore, not surprising that the teachers claimed the use of these methods on regular basis. Every good teacher would be expected to use question and answer method in order to test students understanding of what is being taught. However, the discovery, role play, field trip and brainstorming methods which are also suggested teaching methods in the curriculum were not often used. The non-use of these methods was partly explained by the challenges teachers faced in the classroom.
It is clear that the teachers were using discussion, lecture, and question and answer methods. The history teachers were not faithful to the implementation of the history curriculum as far as teaching methods are concerned. Fidelity of curriculum implementation was, therefore, undermined. Instead, the teachers were accustomed to mutual adaptation, The curriculum emphasised participatory methods of teaching history to make learning meaningful to students. This is why Francis and Bryne (1999) indicated that students taught in conventional lectures and sometimes those who perform very well in the assessment are often quite unable to apply their knowledge effectively in real world situations. As such, Crookall (1975) classify the lecture method as a bad way of teaching history. Despite the numerous teaching methods that provide students with the opportunity to be actively engaged in the teaching/ learning process, teachers have fully not explored them. Nacino-Brown et al. (1990), for example, indicated that the use of field trips provides students with the opportunity to see in reality what they have learnt in class. However, such methods and others were not found to be used in the teaching of history.

Teaching learning resources
Research question two sought to find out the teaching and learning resources that teachers in the Asuogyaman district of the Eastern region used. This was meant to determine the extent to which teachers used teaching and learning resources suggested in the history curriculum to enhance faithful implementation of the history curriculum. From the interviews, it was gathered that the history textbooks (both the government supplied and the supplementary), curriculum, and wall map were the only available teaching and learning resources. However, in terms of usage, the teachers used the supplementary textbooks (authored by individual subject specialists) and maps. These are what some of the teachers had to say in terms of the resources that were made available to them. Though all the teachers admitted that the history curriculum and the government supplied textbooks were available in the school, the findings suggest that teachers did not make frequent use of them in their teaching. They relied greatly on the supplementary textbooks. They expressed diverse sentiments about the history curriculum and the government supplied history textbooks. One teacher explicitly stated that: "The curriculum will even scare you. Me for instance, I go strict to the textbook because there are notes, past questions and how to even answer the questions so the curriculum to me is no longer relevant" (T3:055-057) Others also intoned that: "The history curriculum has been altered so when they use the government supplied textbook it will go against the students during examination" (T4:037-040) "That book is not good (referring to the government supplied); everything is compressed and one paragraph will contain almost five points" (T3:080-081) All five teachers mentioned that the curriculum is available. Four of the teachers mentioned that they use it but students do not have access to it. One teacher said: "We do not give the complete one to them, what I do is that each term I write topics on the board and tell them this is what we are doing for the term so they should copy it and prepare before coming to class" (T1:068-070) However, one teacher expressed a different opinion on the use of the curriculum: " . . . from a realistic point of view, me as a teacher of history I don't even need curriculum" (T3:047-048) On the subject of history textbooks as teaching/learning aids, most of the teachers reported that the history textbooks are not adequately available for students at the library. They, therefore, relied on supplementary ones. One teacher said:

"Students buy textbooks on their own now that there is a policy that we should not sell textbooks to students" (T2:027-028)
With the use of audio, visual, and audio-visual resources, two teachers indicated that the only visual material which was available in the school and used was the wall map whereas the others were not available. This is what one teacher had to say: " . . . because of the Geography department, we get the map" (T2:022) The observations carried out for this study showed that history supplementary textbooks were the resources that teachers often used when teaching. On few occasions, wall maps were also used. The failure of history teachers to use the teaching curriculum may have a negative impact on their teaching, which may affect students' learning. This was observed in the topics that were taught. In all the lessons observed, it was noticed that the history teachers did not use the suggested teaching and learning resources in the curriculum. For instance, a lesson observed on the Role of Local Medicine in the Past and Present Time required the use of resource personnel who had expert knowledge in that field but no resource person was invited to teach the lesson. Another observation on Factors that Led to the Rise of States and Kingdoms in pre-colonial Ghana required the use of a map to show where the states and kingdoms were located. The map was not used, the teachers rather read from the textbook. The instructional material used frequently in all the lessons observed was the supplementary history textbook as the interview data revealed. There was, therefore, over reliance on history textbooks during history instruction. The non-use of other teaching and learning materials could be their unavailability as established earlier. This implies that the history textbook is the only material that remains central to the teaching of history. The use of history textbooks as revealed by the observation corroborates with the earlier findings from the interview.
In other to triangulate responses obtained from the history teachers, data gathered from students also maintained that the curriculum/textbook and visual materials were the resources that their teachers often used when teaching. This can be deduced from Table 8. From Table 3, the history teachers were found often making references in the history curriculum and other history textbooks (supplementary textbooks) whenever they teach (mean = 4.11, standard deviation = 1.19). It was also revealed in the study that history teachers rarely use materials like wall maps, charts, globe, and pictures when teaching (mean = 2.49, standard deviation = 1.62) as well as video clips and film shows (mean = 1.64, standard deviation = 1.14). The use of resources such as resource persons (mean = 1.33, standard deviation = .82), tape recorders and cassettes (mean = 1.19, standard deviation = .69) were never found to be used in teaching history.
It is believed that students learn in various ways and therefore employing different ways of presenting content to students is likely to positively impact on students' understanding and academic performance. Diversity in the teaching and learning of history, through the use of various teaching and learning resources, is limited or absent in history lessons. It can be argued that teaching of history lessons is likely to be monotonous and boring. This result confirmed the interview and observation data. It was evident from the results that the most common teaching and learning resources available were history textbooks and curriculum. The non-use of audio or audio-visual resources by history teachers also corroborate with the views of the history teachers that such materials were absent in the teaching of history lessons.
In sum, the implementation of the history curriculum was devoid of requisite teaching and learning resources needed to facilitate the teaching of history lessons. As seen from the results, only supplementary text books were found to be used by the history teachers. This negatively affected fidelity of curriculum implementation. Though all interviewees admitted that the curriculum was available, they indicated that the examination curriculum by the West African Examination Council (WAEC) was what they referenced when they had to teach. Perhaps, this practice is as a result of the educational system being controlled largely by external examinations, which make teachers depend largely on the examination curriculum in order to prepare students for the final examination. This was a possible reason for teachers' use of the examination curriculum just to make sure that students were well prepared for the final examination. This suggested that history teachers seem to be accustomed to the examination curriculum which does not specify the teaching and learning resources to use in teaching a particular topic. This corroborates Arthur's (1999) study that teachers did not plan their lessons within the framework of the recommended teaching curriculum. Owusu (2014), affirms this by saying that 94.4% of teachers did not use the teaching curriculum as a reference material for teaching.
Audio and audio-visual materials such as tape recorders, televisions and filmstrips were not available for teaching history. The non-availability of these resources affected students learning and comprehension of history lessons since those materials are considered to be relevant in teaching history. Audio and audio-visual resources in history lessons make events that took place in the past look real to students and this reduced the abstract nature of the subject. This was why Tamakloe et al. (2005) mentioned that such resources were generally more suitable for class teaching. And so, their absence was a serious setback in the teaching and learning of history because those are the basic instructional resources that can reduce the abstract nature of the subject, and further, make the history classroom lively and interesting (Oppong, 2009). The absence of these resources made it unlikely that students will have the necessary experience that would facilitate their understanding of history lessons. Students might also not have adequate opportunities to learn. For these reasons, the faithful implementation of the history curriculum was not adhered to since the prescribed audio and audio-visual resources were rarely used. This confirmed earlier studies (Adeyinka, 1990;Oppong, 2009;Ruto & Ndaloh, 2013) that history teachers used textbooks frequently and did not make use of other instructional and technologically oriented resources such as audio media, visual media and audiovisual media in history lessons. In current teaching and learning dispensation, such resources are very necessary if students learning can be impacted positively.

Conclusions and recommendations
From the discussion, teachers were not faithful in the implementation of the history curriculum because they adopted the methods and teaching /learning resources arbitrarily without recourse to the various topics and their corresponding teaching methods and, teaching/learning resources in the history curriculum. Rather, they focused on mutual adaptation with attention on the lecture method as well as the use of visual aids (maps) in lesson delivery. The implication of mutually adapting the curriculum could yield positive results, however, in the Ghanaian context, the centralized education system does not allow for this practice. Again, learning was only confined to the classrooms and therefore students might not realise how their learning connect to the real world because of the absence of educational field trips. This is likely to make the teaching and learning of history boring. The presence of the lecture method and absence of the educational field trip by the history teachers' affects their degree of faithfulness (fidelity) in implementing the history curriculum.
It is recommended that head teachers of schools should encourage their teachers to use more learner-centred methods rather than teacher-centred methods. Also, Ministry of Education should specifically provide funds for schools to embark on educational field trips to augment classroom learning. Further, the Ministry of Education should provide adequate instructional resources, especially audio and audio-visual resources to the various schools. Head teachers should ensure that the teaching curriculum is used instead of the WAEC examination curriculum. Finally, Ghana Education Service (GES) through National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NaCCA) must give maximum attention to the writing of textbooks by employing a group of history teachers, lecturers, and professionals to write standard textbooks for the subject instead of the current situation where supplementary textbooks entirely replace the recommended government supplied textbooks.

Suggestions for further research
The present study focused on the fidelity of implementing the history curriculum in the Asuogyaman District of the Eastern region of Ghana. Further studies should be conducted in other regions of Ghana where there is little or no such studies. This will provide a comprehensive view of the fidelity of curriculum implementation.