This study sought to determine the relationship between monitoring and evaluation (M&E) practices and academic staff motivation in higher education, from a Rwandan perspective. Particularly, the study aimed at describing the M&E practices applied, assessed how quality of feedback affects academic staff motivation, and determined the relationship between M&E practices and academic staff motivation. The study employed a mixed-methods approach to collect data from academic staff. A total of 105 faculties were sampled. The study established that M&E practices, including staff self-evaluation, students-staff evaluation, peer evaluation, and evaluation by supervisor, are applied at varying emphasis. Furthermore, both the supervisees and supervisors agreed that the quality of feedback provided during evaluation is fairly effective, although recognition of their performance is rarely appreciated. It was further established that weak to moderate correlations exist between M&E practices and academic staff motivation with "r" varying from 0.268 to 0.4460. Although some indications for the direction of influence have been generated, the study, however, does not permit one-way final conclusion about the effect of any of the M&E practices to academic staff motivation. Based on the findings, this study recommends that policy makers design a policy on M&E, which would guide supervisors in M&E exercise.

Most of research conducted on Learner-Centered Pedagogy (LCP) in sub-Saharan region recommend further exploration of its implementation. This study sought to look into it with particular interest in learner-centred application at University of Rwandan - College of Education.The study adopted a mixed method approach with a sample size of 278 teacher educators and student teachers.The findings revealed teachers’ positive perceptions of learner-centred pedagogy with a grand mean of 3.70 and students’ moderate perceptions with a mean of 3.01. Likewise, the findings highlighted the implementation of LCP at a moderate level with a mean of 3.23. Results bespeak that LCP was influenced by teachers’ heavy workload (Mean: 4.07), limited resources and facilities (Mean: 4.00), students’ reluctance to be active participants (Mean: 3.47), insufficient time allocated to lessons (Mean: 3.47), lack of funding (Mean: 3.33) and perceived students’ low ability (Mean: 3.17). Coping with any of these challenges will yield effective LCP implementation in higher education.