The worth of a planned curriculum is ascertained through arnthorough inquiry into its practicality and ultimate benefit.rnIn view of this, the purpose of this study is to evaluate thernimplementati on of grade eight mathematics syllabus and tornident i fy the outcomes as well as the problems encountered inrntranslating it into practice.rnTo this effec~, four juniorrnselected as sources of informationrnSidama zone in SNNPR . Within thesernsecondary schools werernfrom the nine weredas ofrnschools all mathematicsrnteachers of grade eight who are twenty in number , the schoolrndirectors, and a total of 440 students were taken as actualrnsources of information. Questionnaires , classroom observation,rnand achievement test were the data collection instruments usedrnto obtain information from the sources .rnThe results of the study indicate that the majority ofrnteachers exhibited unfavourable attitudes towards thernspecifications of the syllabus. There are a considerablernproportion of teachers who are assigned to teach mathematics atrngrade eight without the necessary qualification. Thernspecifications of the syllabus are not also implemented inrnfull . Most of the instructional procedures observed in thernclassrooms are teacher - centered . The dominantly used teachingrnstrategies in the class rooms are writing on the black-boardrnand teacher- directed explanation. Most of the mathematics classrntime is used for writing and copying facts of mathematicsrnrather than doing mathematics.rnConsequently , the impleme ntation process of the syllabusrnis not effective in enabling students to have mastery of thernsubject matter .Beauchamp (1968:132) ana ~'ullan 101011:b=>1 aescrlDeCl LlldLrnthe success of curriculum implementation is weak; that is, manyrncurriculums have been planned but much fewer have beenrnsystematically implemented . Many curriculums , even t he wellrnplanned ones, will not be effectively implemented unless equalrnattention like their planning is given by planners for theirrnimplementation . Effective implementation requires parallelrnpolicies and procedures, to those that are addressed routinelyrnfor development. Many excellent curriculums have hadrninsignificant results because their designers limited theirrnhorizon to the development of curriculum without a seriousrnconsideration of implementation (Pratt, 1980; Girox , 1981;rnSounders and Graham, 1983; Gene, 19 ~)-.--rnIn addition to this, as Gene and Carter (1995:174 - 17 5)rnnoted it historically , the development of curriculum receivedrnthe bulk of the resource, time , and attention. But f orrnimplementation to be successful, there must be a balance in therna l location o f resource, time and attention . Deve l opment a ndrnimplementation must be recognized and supported in terms ofrnwhat they really require and cost.rnImplementation require s recognizing and adjusting persona lrnhabits, ways of behaving, programme emphasis, and learningrnspace. Ornstein and Hunkins (1998:293)elaborated this idearnthat successful implementation of curriculum results fromrncareful planning, and planning in turn focuses on threernfactors : people, programmes, and organizations. Thus,rnimplementation in its very essence seeks the coming together ofrnpeople , material and programme into a cohesive organizationalrnunit so as to carry out a curriculum ' s stated aims . This showsrnthat the statement of good behavioural objectives, thernselection and organization of contents and learning experiencesrnalone will not bring about the desired behavioural changes inrnthemselves unless it is implemented using appropriat ernstrategies.rnThe implementation of a curriculum depends on manyrnfactors, such as people, programme, and organization . However