the effect of grade repetition on pupils’ academic

Vol. 2(2) pp. 007-016, April 2016 Available online http://transconpublishers.org/icjergs/ Copyright © 2016 Transcontinental Publishers

Full Length Research Paper

The effect of grade repetition on pupils’ academic performance in public primary schools in Bungoma

North sub-county, Kenya

Imelda Nafula*, Lydia Wamocha and Epari Ejakait

Masinde Muliro University, Kenya

Accepted 11 April, 2016

Grade Repetition is an issue of concern globally. The National Association of School Psychologists view the practice to be so ineffective. The study objective was to examine the effect of grade repetition on pupil’s academic performance in public primary schools in Bungoma North Sub-county. The study employed descriptive survey design. This study used Questionnaires, interview schedules and document analysis. The analysis of data was done using Statistical Package for Social Sciences. The findings show that first attempt accounted for 76.6% of variation in pupils KCPE performance in second attempt as indicated by coefficient of determination of 0.766 for 88 cases; showing that it improves performance. The negative effects of repetition were dropout from school, drug abuse and early marriages. The researcher recommends policy review on repetition and use of birth certificates with pupil’s pictures. The researcher further suggests a similar research carried out in other sub- counties in the county. Keywords: Grade repetition, academic performance, Public Primary schools Bungoma–North sub-County

*Corresponding Author E-mail: [email protected]; Mobile No.: 0712976012

INTRODUCTION According to Jere (2006), “Grade repetition” (sometimes referred to as “grade retention”) occurs when students are held in the same grade for an extra year rather than being promoted to a higher grade along with their age peers. In some school systems grade repetition is seen as a valid corrective action that should be taken in cases of academic failure.

The introduction of Free Primary Education (FPE) in Kenya in 2003 resulted in improvement of school enrolment in all public schools. The FPE hoped that poorer students who previously often had intermittent school attendance due to lack of school levies be able to attend school without disruptions caused by the financial burden of school fees. However, it has been observed

that the funds meant for FPE have been consistently delaying to reach schools. Situational analysis by a Task Force (TF) on the re-alignment of the education sector to the constitution of Kenya 2010, (Odhiambo, Keiyoro, Maneno, Leshao, Wangari, Sihanya, Ochieng,…Nkanata, 2012) revealed that delayed remittances of school fund force school management to impose levies to parents in order to purchase urgently needed learning materials at the beginning of each year. The schools in the Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASAL) and pockets of rural poor and urban informal settlements still witness pupil repetition.

The issue of school ranking after the release of KCPE results contributes positively to pupil repetition. The

008 Interlink. Cont. J. Educ. Res. General Stud.

average pupils were forced to repeat the grades so that schools obtain the best in terms of ‘mean score.’ The mean scores are mean Kenya Certificate of Primary Education (KCPE) standard scores at school level compared to all schools nationally. The mean score issue was taken with a lot of seriousness in response to KCPE League tables that were initially disseminated by the Kenya National Examination Council (KNEC) in 1976 after the 1976 Certificate of Primary Education (CPE) examination, (Somerset, 2007). They were used in the ranking of pupils in National examinations, and therefore, all schools strived to attain the best position on the league table, and thus forcing weak pupils to repeat. Therefore schools did not allow weak pupils to move to higher classes especially examination classes. Pupils who had failed to win a place at their first attempt were encouraged to return to Grade 7 for a second trial. Judging from the results of the Nyeri study, this strategy was very successful (Somerset 1974). The results of the study indicate that candidates repeating the examination class were four times likely to get a chance in a secondary school as compared to those sitting for the first time.

Primary education in Kenya has been particularly characterized by high repetition rates and frequent dropout before completion of grade 8, (last grade of primary education). According to Abagi and Odipo (1997), for those pupils who entered standard one in 1988, only 42. 6 % (42.1% of girls and 43.0% of boys) completed standard 8. Although enrolment increased over the years with the introduction of the FPE in 2003 and later Free Day Secondary Education (FSDE) in 2008, completion rates are still worrying. The completion rate for 2007 was 81.0%, while in 2008 the rate dropped to79.5% MOE (2009) and in 2010 the completion rate dropped to 75.8%. Low completion rates could be attributed to dropout and repetition. Abagi (1997) notes that loss of interest in school; poor performance and repetition are factors that lead to low completion rates at standard 8 level.

Grade repetition has been frequently debated in developed countries such as; Switzerland, Belgium, and USA, and developing countries of Africa and Latin America as to whether it has any positive effect on those who practice it. Studies conducted over the last few decades suggest that the practice of grade repetition does more harm than good (Holmes and Mathews, 1984, Smith and Shepard, 1987, Holmes, 1989). From the analysis of retention practices in many countries in the world, grade retention is commonly used in poor countries (Paul, 1997).

This study seeks to examine the effect of grade repetition on pupils’ academic performance in public primary schools in Bungoma North District. The research question was:

(i) What are the effects of grade repetition on pupils’ academic performance?

Review of Literature Effect of Grade Repetition and Academic Achievement Negative Effects of Repetition According to Roderick (1995), retention as a mean of remediation does not work, but it leaves students who were already lagging behind their peers even further behind. Moreover, retention has negative effects on measured achievement, particularly in later grades.Reitor (1973) in an extensive research review reports that retention appear to produce long-term damaging effects and neither provide remedy to the problem of low –achievement nor contributed to future improvement supported by Haddad (1979) who concluded that repetition does not provide remedy to the problem of low achievement and consequently, does not contribute to future improvement.According to Cooke and Stammer (1985) after their review of research on effects of grade retention, and discussing two models for making decisions about promotion, neither grade retention nor social promotion necessarily solved the academic difficulties of low-achieving students.

Bernard, J.M., Simon O, and Vianon K. (2005) conclude that repeaters learn less than promoted learners. Magliro and Owings (1998) note that retained students are more likely to drop out of school than those who are promoted and may impact negatively on their long-term achievement. Verspoor (2006, p.5) states that grade repetition is not an effective way of improving learning in sub –Saharan Africa. Research from both the African continent and the United States shows that there are strong links with repeating pupils more likely to drop out of school in later years (Bernard et al., 2005, p.69).

Research from France states found that learners who repeat are more likely to feel marginalized, have lower self-esteem and poor attendance. In the United States (US), grade 6 children ranked repetition as second most stressful life event after bereavement (Anderson et al., 2002) supported by Troucin (2006).According to Hacsi and Rothstem (1998) classes which include significant number of previously retained students present more serious student motivation and classroom management challenges to teachers. Positive effect of repetition A study carried out in a single location by Somerset (1974), indicates that those pupils who repeated examination grade performed far much better than those doing the examination for the first time. A study done by Gottfredson Al (1994), that compared retained students and promoted students that existed prior to retention with comparable academic achievement in math and reading sections, through Standardized tests found that grade retention has positive effects on the student attitudes and attachments. Another study by Alexander et al (1994)

that examined the effects of retention in a sample in Baltimore City schools concluded that retention was beneficial for students.

Studies of grade retention that compare teacher’s beliefs about the benefits of retention demonstrate that teachers believe retention to be an effective remedial strategy (Doyle, 1994; Overman, 1986). Some studies by Gomes-Neto and Hanushek (1994) confirm that positive results can be obtained from pupil grade repetition.Conventional wisdom holds that students retained at a younger age tend to benefit from an additional year in the same grade. (Hong and Yu, 2008; Jimerson, Carlson, et al., 1997; Mantzicopoulos and Morrison, 1992; Pianta, Tietbohl, and Bennett, 1997; Shepard and Smith, 1989). Research Design The study adopted the descriptive survey research design in trying to establish effect of grade repetition on pupils’ academic achievement. Descriptive survey research design is most appropriate when the purpose of study is to create a detailed description of an issue (Mugenda and Mugenda, 1999). Sample Size Sample size of class eight pupils was determined using the simplified formula Provided by Yamane (1967:886) as shown.

n = = 370 pupils

Sample size required = N is the population

size, and e is the level of precision expressed as a decimal 0.05.

Using the formula shown the sample size for pupils was 370 sampled from the accessible population of 4890 pupil. The study was carried out in 21 public primary schools (30%)of 66 schools; involving 21 head teachers, 21 deputy head teachers, 49 class eight class teachers from the sampled schools, the Director Quality Assurance and Standards Officer (DQUASO) and the Teachers Advisory Centre Tutors (TAC Tutors) now referred to as Curriculum Support Officers from the three zones. The sample size therefore consisted of 464 respondents.

According to Mugenda and Mugenda, (1999) when time and resources allow the researcher should take as big a sample as possible.

Nafula et al. 009 Methods of Data Analysis The analysis of data was done using both descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. In descriptive statistics data was analyzed by use of means, percentages, frequencies and graphs. In inferential statistics the researcher used Pearson regression to analyse the relationship between grade repetition and pupils academic performance. Qualitative data was organized in themes and sub themes as they emerge from content analysis. The coded data was transferred to a computer sheet and processed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20. Research Instrumentation The research instruments that were used in this study were Questionnaire, document analysis and interview schedule. There were four sets of questionnaires; the head teacher’s questionnaire, class eight teachers’ questionnaires, pupils’ questionnaires, deputy head teachers’ questionnaires and education officers’ questionnaires. The questionnaires for the head teachers, teachers and pupils respondents had two sections. Sections 1 Section A sought general background information. Section B consisted of closed and open ended questions which sought information related to effect of grade repetition on pupils academic performance. Questionnaires for the deputy head teacher sought repeaters for the previous years and their achievement after second attempt.

The interview schedule was administered to the quality assurance officer and TAC (Teachers Advisory Center) tutors. The interview schedule was in two sections. Section sought background information. Section B consisted of open ended questions related to effect of grade repetition on pupils’ academic performance and possible solutions to improve retention. The documents to be analyses consisted of school official records on student enrolment per class for the years 2009- 2013. These enabled the researcher to get information concerning repetition and academic performance. Another document was K.C.P.E nominal rolls where we extracted max for pupils who had repeated. Effect of Grade Repetition on Pupils Academic Performance The researcher sought to find out effect of grade repetition on pupils academic achievement. The responses from head teachers, teachers and pupils are presented in form of figures.


Figure 1. Head teachers’ responses on effect of repetition on girl child academic Performance The results were presented on likert scale very much, slightly, not sure and not at all.

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

very much

slightly

Not sure

not at all

Figure 2. Head teachers’ responses on boy child academic achievement

From figure 1, it can be noted that 8 (38.1%) of the

head teachers’ feel that when girls repeat grades their esteem is very much lowered, 10(47.60%) said the pupils self-esteem is slightly lowered, 12(57.2%) cited drop out of school; 15 (71.7%) cited early marriages, 7 (33.3 %) cited drug abuse. Other effects of repetition as mentioned by head teachers include; the dropout from school, child labour,early pregnancy infection of HIV /AIDS, depression, withdrawn and lose of interest in learning. However, 18 (85.7%) of head teachers noted that when girls repeat grades they improve in performance.

From figure 2 it can be seen that 5(23.8%) of head teachers feel that the self-esteem is very much lowered when they repeat, 10 (47.6%) feel the esteem is slightly

lowered, 14 (66.5%) assert that repetition leads to boys drop out from school, 15(66.9%) the drop is slight, 17 (80.9 %) said pupils get involved in drug abuse and 15 (81.4%) feel that the pupils self-esteem is lowered. According the self-efficacy theory, Pajares (2009) asserts that self –efficacy beliefs are judgments individuals hold about their capabilities to learn at designed levels. When pupil’s self-esteem is lowered their self-efficacy is negatively affected.Total of 11 (52.4%) of the head teachers noted that the boys’ class performance slightly improves while 8 (38.1 %) said that the pupils’ performance very much improves when they repeat grades

Nafula et al. 011

57.10%

26.50%

40.80%

32.70%

51.00%

26.50%

63.30%

49.00%44.90%

34.70%

10.20%6.10% 6.10% 6.10%

10.20%6.10%

4.10% 4.10%6.10%

4.10%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

low self esteem improve

performance

drop from school early marriage drug abuse

very much slightly Not sure Not at all

Figure 4. Class eight class teachers’ responses effect of repetition on boy child academic achievement

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

low esteem improved

performanc

e

drop school early

marriage

drug abuse

very much 32.70% 54.90% 21.90% 23.20% 3.50%

slightly 20.30% 18.40% 18.60% 16.50% 8.00%

not sure 16.80% 9.70% 15.70% 23.00% 30.80%

not at all 28.10% 14.10% 40.50% 34.60% 41.40%

Figure 5. Class eight pupils’ responses on effect of grade repetition on girl child academic achievement

From figure 3, 31 (63.3%) of the class eight teachers

indicated that girls slightly improve their academic performance when they repeat grades, whereas 14 (28.6%) said they improve very much. However, other effects of repetition on girl child academic achievement mentioned were ; low self-esteem by 42 (85.8%) class teachers, drop out from school by 42 (85.7%) teachers, early marriages by 31(75.5%) teachers and drug abuse cited by 20 (40.9%) teachers. From the self-efficacy theory when an individual’s self-esteem is low the individual lose interest in learning. The learner can drop out of school get into early marriage or even start abusing drugs. These findings concurs with Anderson et al (2005) who reports that problems commonly associated with involuntary grade repetition include reduced self-esteem, impaired peer relationship and increases in behavior problems, negative attitudes towards school and absences from school.

From figure 4 it can be noted that 41 (83.6%) of the class eight teachers feel that boys self-esteem is lowered when they repeat grades, 44(89.8%) cited improve in performance. other effects of repetition as mentioned by teachers, were drop out of school by 44 (89.8) teachers, early marriage by 38 (77.6%) and drug abuse by 42(85.7%) teachers.

There are different patterns of teachers and head teachers’ responses across the categories. On average 90% of the respondents (teachers and head teachers) feel that repetition improves academic achievement. A study by UNESCO (1998a, p.39) found that in places where repetition is a common practice, teachers are generally opposed to automatic promotion as it undermines teaching methods they have used for many years. Although teachers view repetition as a way of improving performance the negative part of it out weigh the positive.


26.2

54.9

20

0.3

25.4

29.7

20.522.7

16.318.65

15.7

6.2

16.5

2321.65

25.1

14.3

34.9

44.1

31.15

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

low esteem imro perfm drop frm sch early mrges drug abuse

very

muchslightly

not sure

Figure 7. Class eight pupils’ responses on effect of grade repetition on boy child academic achievement

Figure 5 shows class eight pupils responses on effect

of repetition on girls, 196 (53%) pupils said their self-esteem is lowered, 271 (73.3%) pupils said they improve in performance, 150 (40.5%) said they drop out of school, 147 (39.7%) cited early marriage, while 43 (11.5%) cited drug abuse.Majority of the class eight pupils’ responses show that girls are not at all affected by drug abuse cited by 153 (41.4%) pupils. Other effects of grade repetition on academic achievement as mentioned by 12 (3.2%) pupils were; early pregnancies, becoming rude, child labour and not concentrating on academic work.

From figure 7, it can be noted that 207 (55.9%) of pupils said repetitionlowers self-esteem, 279 (75.4%) said they improve in class performance, 158(42.7%) cited drop out fromschool, 39.3 % cited early marriages and 163 (44.05%) cited abuse of drugs.

From the three categories of respondents it can be concluded that more boys abuse drugs than girls when they repeat grades. Girls are mostly affected by early pregnancy and early marriage as they repeat grades. The Education Officers’ Responses on Grade Retention and Pupils Academic Achievement The education officers cited the major cause of repetition as mean score issue where many schools in the sub-county struggle to attain high mean score and desire by parents to get national and other well performing schools for their children. The officers further noted that due to poverty some parents are unable to pay school fees for their children even though they had passed. Such parents advice their children to repeat as they wait for the older siblings to complete secondary.

The Naitiri zone TAC tutor noted that the forms of repetition practiced in the sub-county county are voluntary and forced repetition by teachers. The Ndalu

acting TAC tutor cited request by parents whereas Tongaren TAC tutor cited voluntary and request by parents as forms of repetitions commonly practiced in the sub- County. The DQUASO noted that repetition is mostly involuntary either forced by parents in agreement with teachers.

The four education officers felt some pupils who repeat the examination class improve their performance especially those who had problems such as sickness, and loss of relatives at the time of examination. They also noted that pupils who are forced to repeat drop in performance or drop out of school and other consequences such as drug abuse, early marriage and behavior problems. The education officers noted that grade repetition leads to wastage and low self-esteem among pupils. This concurs with Psacharopolus and Wood hall (1985) who notes that one of the factors influencing school wastage is poverty which may lead to illness, malnutrition, absenteeism and high opportunity costs of schooling. Deputy Head teachers’ Responses on Previous Year’s Repetition The deputy head teachers were able to provide marks for pupils who repeated in different years and the marks obtained after attempting K.C.P.E for the second time. The deputy head teachers also filled a table showing pupils enrolment from 2006-2013. What was noted from the tables was that enrolment narrowed from classes one up to class six then increased in class seven. It laterdropped in class eight.

The researcher then carried out regression analysis to ascertain the relationship between Grades Repetition and pupils’ academic achievement. This was done by comparing KCPE marks for different years between first

Nafula et al. 013

Table 1. Paired Samples Statistics

AGE KCPE

YR

GENDER FIRST

ATTEMT

SECOND

ATTEMPT

AGE

Pearson Correlation 1

Sig. (2-tailed)

N 88

KCPEYR

Pearson Correlation -.675** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 88 88

GENDER

Pearson Correlation -.055 .027 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .609 .800

N 88 88 88

f1STATTEMT

Pearson Correlation .031 -.179 -.017 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .771 .095 .874

N 88 88 88 88

s2NDATTEMPT

Pearson Correlation .010 -.046 -.093 .766** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .929 .674 .391 .000

N 88 88 88 88 88


Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Pair 1 Fisrt Attempt 224.4091 44 57.35541 8.64665

Second Attempt 267.7500 44 58.78464 8.86212

Table 3. Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.

44 Pair 1 Fisrt Attempt and Second Attempt .715 .000

attempt and second attempt. Table 11 shows paired sample statistics.

Pearson’s correlation was run to determine the relationship between first attempt and second attempt of the 88 cases for different years using SPSS. The results for first attempt and second attempt indicate positive correlation since there is either slight improvement or very much improvement. Looking at the results for first attempt and second attempt out of 88 cases only one case indicated no improvement and one case indicated a drop in performance.

The SPSS reports that the p-value for this test was 0.000 which is less than the set p- value of 0.05 and thus we can say we have strong evidence to believe in 2

nd

attempt. This gives evidence to believe that first attempt and 2

nd attempt in KCPE are linearly correlated. Since r

(the significant Pearson correlation Coefficient) is 0.766 we can say that there is strong positive correlation between 1

st and 2

nd attempt in KCPE. Table 15 shows

female performance for first attempt and second attempt.

It can be noted that the female first attempt had a mean performance of 224.4091 and the mean improved to 267.7500 after second attempt with standard deviation of 57 and 59 respectively. This shows that girls improve in performance when they repeat examination class.

From table 3 the correlation coefficient of 0.715 shows a strong positive linear correlation between first attempt and second attempt at .000 level of significance after performing a significance test. The existence of strong correlation does not however imply that repetition improves performance. There are hidden intervening variables which can hinder performance such as age and gender.

The researcher further ran a Pearson correlation for males and the results are shown in table 17. The paired statistics shows means for first attempt and second attempt. It can be noted that boys improve more than girls when they repeat grades although the standard error mean is higher in boys than in girls.


Table 4. Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper

First Attempt –Second Attempt

-43.34091 43.89890 6.61801 -56.68740 -29.99442 -6.549 43 .000


Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

224.1020

Pair 1 FisrtAttempt 49 64.68457 9.24065

second Attempt 276.3673 49 69.69299 9.95614

Table 7. Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.

Pair 1 First Attempt and Second Attempt 49 .814 .000

Table 8. Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper

First Attempt – Second Attempt -52.26531 41.30213 5.90030 -64.12866 -40.40195 -8.858 48 .000

It can also be noted that more boys repeat than girls.

This supports what was found out by the ministry of Education 2004- 2006 in all years more boys repeat than girls. The studies done on drop out of pupils also show that more boys drop out than girls. It can be concluded that repetition leads to drop out of pupils. Table 18 shows correlation coefficient of performance among boys for first attempt and second attempt.

The correlation coefficient r for first attempt and second attempt for boys’ performance of 49 cases was 0.814

then was be 0.663. The coefficient of determination

0.663 means that 66.3% of the total variation in second attempt can be explained by the linear relationship between first and second attempt. This shows that boys improve their performance when they repeat grades. The coefficient of correlation r shows there is strong linear relationship between first attempt and second attempt. Table 20 shows paired sample test.

Table 7 shows the model summary of the tests. It can be noted that age, gender and second attempt affect academic performance. The coefficient of determination 0.601 shows 60.1% of total variation can be explained by the linear relationship among the variables (age, gender and second attempt). The coefficient of correlation 0.775 shows there is strong linear relationship among the variables.

CONCLUSIONS Basing on the findings the researcher achieved the stated objective and concludes that repetition is still rampant in primary schools in Bungoma North Sub-county. Incidences of repetition are prevalent in seven in primary schools. It also reveals that most pupils who had repeated grades had repeated more than once and are overage. Most of the class eight children who had repeated lack basic reading and numeracy skills. There was a strong correlation between first attempt and second attempt. The first attempt accounted for 76.6 % of variation in pupils KCPE performance in second attempt as indicated by coefficient of determination of 0.766 this could explain why there is forced repetition in schools. RECOMMENDATIONS Basing on the research findings the researcher gives the following recommendations:

(i) Although the respondents’ views and Pearson’s ‘test prove that repetition at KCPE improves performance of pupils, it is ineffective in lower classes as mentioned by respondents. Pupils who repeat grades develop behavior problems and do not improve at all and that is why pupils

repeat several times. So repetition in lower classes should be completely discouraged as it lowers pupils’ self-esteem. This makes pupils to drop out of school and some engage in drug abuse.

(ii) The government to enforce the policy of automatic promotion especially in lower classes because repetition is still rampant in schools. REFERENCES Abagi O, Odipo G (1997). Efficiency of Primary Education in Kenya:

Situational Analysis and Implications for Educational Reform: Institute of Policy Analysis and Research Ambank House, University Way.

Alexander K, Entwisle D, Dubois S (1994). On the success of failure: An assessment of the effects of retention in primary grades. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Alexander K, Entwisle D, Kabboni (2001). The dropout process in life course perspective: early risk factors at home and school. Teacher College Record, 103, 760 and 822.

Anderson G, Jimerson S, Whipple A (2005). Student’s ratings of stressful experiences at home and at school: loss of a parent and grade retention as superlative stressors. J. appl. school psychol. 21:1 – 20

Brophy J (2004). Motivating students to learn. (2rd edition) Mahwan, NJ: Eribaman.

Brophy J (2006). Grade repetition Education Policy Series 6. Paris: International Academy of Education and International Institute of Education Planning.

Cooke G, Stammer J (1985) Grade retention and social promotion practices. Childhood Education, March-April, p. 302- 308.

Draft April (2012)..A Policy Framework for Education: Aligning Education and Training to the Constitution of Kenya (2010) and Kenya Vision 2030 and beyond.

Deoliker AB (1998). Public Spending Education in Kenya: International comparisons, World Bank Washington D.C, Mimeo.

Doyle RP (1989). The resistance of conventional wisdom to research evidence: the case of retention in grade. Phi Dealta Kappan. v. 71, n.3, Nov. p. 215- 224.s on grade repetition in the United States.

Gay LR (1992). Educational Research: Competences for Analysis and Application. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.

Gottfredson DC, Fink CM, Grahan N (1994). Grade retention and problem behavior: Am. Educ. Res. J. 31(4): 761-784.

Gomes-Neto J, Hanushek E (1994). Causes and consequences of grade repetition: Evidence from Brazil. Economic Development and Cultural Change. 43:117-148.

Holmes T (1989). Grade level retention effects: A meta-analysis of research studies. In L. Shepard and M. Smith (Eds.), Flunking grades: Research and policies on retention (pp. 16-33). London: Falmer.

Ikeda M (2005). Grade repetition and its effect on performance in SACMEQ countries, Paper presented at 2005 SACMEQ. Research Conference, Paris, France.

Israel Glenn D (1992). Sampling the Evidence of Extension Program Impact. Program Evaluation and Organizational Development, IFAS, University of Florida. PEOD-5

th October.

Jimerson S, Carlson E, Rotert M, Egeland B, Sroufe L (1997). A prospective, longitudinal Study of the correlates and consequences of early grade retention. J. School Psychol. 35: 3-2

Jimmerson SR, Kaufman AM (2003). Reading, Writing and Retention: A Primer on grade retention research. The Reading Teacher. 56:622-635.

Karweit N (1999). Grade retention: Prevalence, timing, and effects (Report No. 33). Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk, Johns Hopkins University.

Kothari CR (1995). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques, New Delhi, Wiley

Lovell K, Lawson KS (1971). Understanding Research in Education. London: London University Press.

Nafula et al. 015 Lorence J (2006). Retention and academic achievement research

Revisited from a United States. Retrievedon 7-7-2012 from: http://ehlt.flinders.edu.au/education/iej/articles/v7n5/Lorence/paper.pdf

Lorence Jon, A Gary Dworkin (2004). Grade Retention and School Dropout Behavior in Texas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, San Francisco, CA, and August 2004.

Lorence Jon, Anthony Gary Dworkin (2006). “Elementary Grade Retention in Texas and Reading Achievement Among Racial Groups: 1994–2002.” Rev. Policy Res. 23(5): 999–1033

Magliaro S, Owings W (1998). Grade Retention: A History of Failure. Educational Leader. 56 (1): 86 – 88.

Mantzicopoulos Panayota Y, Delmont C Morrison (1992). “Kindergarten Retention: Academic and Behavioral Outcomes through the End of Second Grade.” Am. Educ. Res. J. 29(1): 182–198

Martin K, Acuna C (2002). SPSS for Institutional Researchers. Bucknell Lewisburg, Pennsylvania: University Press.

Ministry of Education (2005). Session Paper No 1 of 2005 on a Policy Framework for Education, Training and Research. Nairobi. Government Printers.

Ministry of Education (2012). Taskforce on the Re-alignment of the Education Sector to the Constitution of Kenya 2010: Towards a Globally Competitive Quality Education for Sustainable Development Report of the Task Force.

Mugenda OM, Mugenda AG (1999). Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Nairobi: ACTS Press. J. educ. practice. 5 (16):69-80. www.iiste.org.

Nagaoka Jenny, Melissa Roderick (2004). Ending Social Promotion: The Effects of Retention. Chicago, L: Consortium on Chicago School Research.

Njeru M (2012). A Situational Analysis of Grade Wastage in Public Schools. Embu County

Kombo DK, Tromp DLA (2007). Proposal and Thesis Writing-An Introduction. Kenya: Paulines Publications Africa, Nairobi.

Pianta Robert C, Phillip J Tietbohl, Elizabeth M Bennett (1997). “Differences in Social adjustment and Classroom Behavior between Children Retained in Kindergarten and Groups of Age and Grade Matched Peers.” Early Educ. Devel. 8(2): 137– 152.

Paul J (1997). Le redoublement à l’école: une maladie universelle? Int. Rev. Educ. 43:611-627

Psacharapoulous GG, Wood hall M (1985). Education for development: An analysis of investment choices, New York: oxford university press.

Peterson Sarah E, James S DeGracie, Carol R Ayabe (1987). “A Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Retention/Promotion on Academic Achievement.” Am. Educ. Res. J. 24(1): 107–118

Reiter R (1973). The promotion /retention dilemma: what research tells us? School District Office of Research and evaluation. (ERIC ED 099 412).

Republic of Kenya (2003). Daft Bill of the constitution of Kenya review commission: Republic of Kenya.

Republic of Kenya (2012a). Sessional paper No.14 of 2012 on realigning education and training to the constitution of Kenya 2010 and vision 2030and beyond. Ministry of education science and technology, Kenya.

Roderick M (1993). The Path to Dropping out: Evidence for Intervention. Westport, CT. Auburn House. Report: Philadelphia

Roderick M (1995). Grade retention and school dropout: policy debate and research questions. Phi Delta Kappa Research Bulletin. 15:1-6

Somerst A (2007), Create pathways to Access. Research Monograph No.9.

Somerset A (1974). who goes to secondary school: Relevance, reliability and equity in secondary school selection. Chapter 7 in Court, D. and Ghai, D (Eds) Education, Society and Development: New Perspectives from Kenya Nairobi and London: Oxford University Press.

Shiefelbein E, Wolff L (1992). Repetition and inadequate achievement in Latin America’s primary schools: a review of magnitudes, causes, relationships and strategies. Paper n.31.Washington: World Bank.

UNESCO (2004). Global monitoring report 2003/4. Paris. UNESCO.

016 Interlink. Cont. J. Educ. Res. General Stud. World Bank (2004). Strengthening the Foundation of Education and

Training in Kenya: Opportunities and Challenges in Primary and General Secondary Education. Report No. 28064-KE.

Yamamoto K, Byrnes D (1987). Primary children’s ratings of the

stressfulness of experiences. J. Res. in Childhood Educ. 2: 117-121.

the effect of grade repetition on pupils’ academic

Documents