Let’s treat Form One selection headache

This past week, the government released the results of Form One admissions for the Kenya Certificate of Primary Education (KCPE) examinations. The number of parents I have heard requesting a change of schools for their children demonstrates that there is something amiss. The bigger question is whether the problem is with the system or with expectation.

Several of the original national schools had more than 100,000 students who applied for admission against a capacity of around 400 students. Basic statistical analysis demonstrates that the chances of one landing in such a school is less than one percent.

If you add onto it the requirement to ensure equity in allocations by avoiding the past complaints that children who went to private schools were disproportionately favoured over their public-school counterparts, one realises the chances may be less.

It is necessary that there is some change. From the recent exercise, several changes are necessary. Parents do not fully understand the categorisation of national schools. Even though such schools were expanded, parents still only consider the original national schools as such and see the new ones as not being of the same calibre.

Consequently, when a child is selected to go to those newer national schools, most parents express unhappiness, even if their children chose them as either second or third options.

The time may be ripe to review the classification of the schools and ask whether the expansion of the number of national schools solves or makes worse the admission problem.

The second issue is making public the criteria. Speaking to some parents, it is clear that a majority are ignorant of the criteria for selection. However, on deeper discussions the disappointment for me is that they lacked information on what to expect and, therefore, prepare for it.

Thirdly, consensus on the purpose of education and the place of allocations to secondary schools in this process. When the selection results were announced, one of the highlights was the efforts to ensure that children who sat for their examinations in slums got a chance to join schools of choice.

While it is recognised that education is an equaliser, it is interesting that this action faced a backlash from certain quarters. This should not be the case. Instead, the expectation is that such a practice will be sustained.

Fourthly, the private and public divide in the education system. Over the years, the number of children who attend private schools at the primary level have been rising.

When the results of the primary examinations come out, such children expect to go to public schools but get disappointed when they get admitted to far-flung parts of the country.

The response to most of these parents has been why they should not consider private schools even at the secondary level. Several parents turn to this option once the reality of the nature of the schools their children have been admitted to sinks in.

Since education is a constitutional right, it is important to interrogate this divide and seek policy action around it.

Policy change

Covid-19 demonstrated that this public-private dichotomy in a system where children do the same examination run by the government requires a policy rethink. We cannot as a country continue with expansion of our privatisation of the education sector and expect that this problem of admission will be resolved.

Secondly, for sustainable development and transformation of the Kenyan society, education is a priority investment.

It is necessary that we re-evaluate the investment in the education sector at all levels to ensure that students across the country can be guaranteed equitable access to quality education.

This is the only way that a sustainable solution to the admission complaints by parents will be resolved in a satisfactory manner.

The time is ripe for policy interventions.