Title: The relationship between subject reduction (from 43 to 21 subjects) and depth of content mastery in the Lower Secondary Curriculum
Authors: Dr. Arinaitwe Julius, Dr. Twinomujuni Rosebell, Asiimwe Isaac Kazaara
Volume: 10
Issue: 6
Pages: 253-261
Publication Date: 2026/06/28
Abstract:
The reform of Uganda's secondary education system from a content-heavy 43-subject curriculum to a competency-based Lower Secondary Curriculum (LSC) offering 21 subjects was intended to reduce learner overload and deepen mastery of core competencies. This study examined the relationship between this subject reduction and the depth of content mastery achieved by learners under the LSC. A quantitative, comparative cross-sectional design was adopted, drawing on secondary assessment records and primary survey data from 380 learners and 42 teachers across 18 purposively selected secondary schools in Central Uganda, supplemented by archival cohort data spanning the pre-reform (43-subject), transitional (32-subject), and post-reform (21-subject, LSC) phases. Depth of content mastery was operationalised using a composite cognitive-depth index derived from Bloom's taxonomy-aligned item analysis, while subject load was treated as both a categorical cohort indicator and a continuous covariate. Data were analysed using univariate descriptive statistics, bivariate correlation and comparison-of-means tests (Pearson's r, independent t-tests, and one-way ANOVA), and multilevel mixed-effects linear regression models with learners nested within schools to account for clustering, term-level repeated measures, and school resourcing as a moderating variable. The results indicated a statistically significant inverse relationship between the number of concurrently examined subjects and depth-of-mastery scores, with mean mastery rising from 58.4% under the 43-subject system to 71.6% under the 21-subject LSC (p < 0.001). The mixed-effects model confirmed a significant fixed effect of curriculum phase on mastery depth (? = 9.7, p < 0.001) after controlling for school resourcing, term, and learner-level covariates, while revealing a significant interaction between subject load and school resourcing, such that under-resourced schools benefited less from subject reduction than well-resourced schools. The study concluded that subject reduction under the LSC was associated with measurable gains in depth of content mastery, but that these gains were conditional on adequate school-level resourcing and teacher capacity. The study recommends sustained investment in teacher pedagogical retraining, equitable resource allocation to under-resourced schools, and continuous monitoring of cognitive-depth indicators alongside coverage-based assessment to safeguard the intended benefits of the curriculum reform.