EFFECTS OF PRINCIPALS’ ALTERNATIVE DISCIPLINARY METHODS ON

STUDENTS’ DISCIPLINE IN PUBLIC SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN KITUI

COUNTY, KENYA

Mulwa Janet Kavula

A Thesis Submitted in Fulfilment of the requirements of

the Doctor of Philosophy Degree (Ph.D) in Educational Administration

University of Nairobi

2014
 DECLARATION

This thesis is my original work and has not been presented for award of a degree in any

other university.

………………………………………………………………………..

Janet KavulaMulwa

Reg. No.E80/92421/2013

This thesis has been presented for examination with our approval as University Supervisors

………………………………………………………………………………………

Prof. Winston J.Akala

Associate Professor

Department of Educational Administration and Planning,

University of Nairobi

……………………………………………………………………

Dr. Jeremiah M. Kalai

Lecturer

Department of Educational Administration and Planning,

University of Nairobi

ii
 DEDICATION
I dedicate this thesis to my beloved husband Daniel Mulwa and our children Pauline Ngute,

Daniel Nguku, and Grace Mawia for their support and encouragement throughout the study.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I thank the almighty God for giving me good health and strength to undertake and

accomplish this study. To my supervisors Prof. Winston Jumba Akala and Dr. Jeremiah

Mutuku Kalai, your inspiration and critical guidance in this thesis was very crucial to me.

To Prof. Samson Okuro Gunga, Dean school of Education and Dr. Grace Nyagah, Chairman

Department of Educational administration and Planning for their encouragement and for

giving me the opportunity to pursue my postgraduate studies at the University of Nairobi.

To my dear husband Daniel Mulwa and my loving children Pauline Ngute, Daniel Nguku,

and Grace Mawia, for their understanding, support and patience with me as I undertook

my study. To my dear mother Grace Mukola, my brothers, sisters and all relatives for

tremendous moral support.

I wish to thank all the respondents to this study who include BoM chairmen, Principal,

Deputy Principals and teacher counsellors for according their dear time to respond to the

research instruments for they made my study a success.

Thank you and God bless you all.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Content Page

Declaration…………………………….………………………………………… ii

Dedication………………………………….……………………………………. iii

Acknowledgement …………………………….………………………………… iv

Table of contents………………………………..……………………….............. v

List of tables ……………………………………….……………………………. x

List of figures………………………………………………………….................. xii

Abbreviations and acronyms…….……………………..……................................ xiii

Abstract………………………………………………………………..…………. xv

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the study……………………………………..…….......... 1

1.2 Statement of the problem…………………………………….....………. 21

1.3 Purpose of the study………………………………………..…….............. 22

1.4 Objectives of the study………………………………………..……......... 22

1.5 Research questions ………………………………………….…................ 23

1.6 Significance of the study…………………………………..……….......... 23

1.7 Limitations of the study…………………………………………….......... 24

1. 8 Delimitation of the study………………………………………..….......... 24

1.9 Basic assumptions of the study…………………………………..……... 25

1.10 Definition of significant terms ………………………..………................ 25

1.11 Organisation of the study…………….…………………………..……… 27

v
 CHAPTER TWO

REVIEWED LITERATURE

2.1 Introduction........……………………………………………….................. 29

2.2 An overview of school discipline………………………………………… 29

2.3 Peer counselling and students’ discipline………………………………... 33

2.4 Suspension and students’ discipline…………………………………….. 52

2.4 Students’ expulsion and students’ discipline. …………………………….. 61

2.5 Collaborative decision making and students’ discipline……………….. 66

2.6 Summary of related literature review ……………………………………. 74

2.7 Theoretical framework………………………………………………….. 77

2.8 Conceptual framework………………………………………………….. 80

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction……………………………………….………………............ 82

3.2 Research design……………………………..…………………………..... 82

3.3 Target population…………………………………………..……………. 82

3.4 Sample size and sampling procedures………………………………........ 83

3.5 Research instruments……………………………………………………. 86

3.6 Instrument validity………………………………………………….......... 86

3.7 Instrument reliability…………………………..………………………. 87

3.8 Data collection procedures…………………..………………………........ 89

3.9 Data analysis techniques………………………..……………………....... 90

3.10 Ethical considerations…………………………………..………………... 91

vi
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………... 92

4.2. Questionnaire return rate………………………………………………... 92

4.3 Demographic characteristics…………………………………………….. 94

4.3.1 Principals’ and deputy principals’ demographic data…………………. 94

4.3.2 Distribution of respondents by age……………………………………… 96

4.3.3 Professional qualification of principals………………………………… 97

4.3.4 Teaching experience of respondents and students’ discipline……….… 99

4.3.5 Principals and deputy principals’ length of service in a school……….. 101

4.4 Principals’ response on effects of peer counselling on students’

discipline…………………………………………...................................... 103

4.4.2 Circumstances under which students sought peer counselling………… 110

4.4.3 Principals’ response on effects of peer counselling on students’ discipline 110

4.5 Effect of suspension of indisciplined students on students’ discipline…. 112

4.5.2 School intervention programmes after students’ suspension…………. 119

4.5.3 Challenges faced by principals in suspension of indisciplined students... 121

4.5.4 Respondents’ recommendations on use of suspension in schools……. 125

4.6 Students’ expulsion as an alternative disciplinary method and

students’ discipline………………………………………………………. 126

4.6.1 Circumstances leading to expulsion of indisciplined students……….… 133

4.6.2 Proportion of students expelled in the last two terms…………………... 134

4.6.3 Challenges encountered due to expulsion of indisciplined students…….. 136

4.6.4 Principals’ suggestions on how to use of expulsion as an

alternative disciplinary method………………………………….……... 138

vii
4.7 Principals’ use of class meetings with students for collaborative

decision making and students’ discipline……………………………… 141

4.7.2 Effects of holding class meetings on students’ discipline………………. 146

4.7.3 Challenges faced by principals in use of class meetings

with students’ for collaborative decision in public secondary schools… 148

4.7.4 Respondents’ recommendations on use of class meetings with

students to improve students’ discipline………………………………... 150

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………. 152

5.2 Summary of the study………………………………………….……… 152

5.3 Summary of findings…………………………………………………… 154

5.4 Conclusions…………………………………………………………….. 163

5.5 Recommendation……………………………………………………… 166

5.6 Suggestions for further research………………………………………. 167

References……………………………………………………………… 168

viii
 APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Introduction letter to the respondents………………………… 180

Appendix II Questionnaire for headteachers……………………………...... 181

Appendix III Questionnaire for deputy principals………………………….... 189

Appendix IV Questionnaire for heads of departments...................................... 197

Appendix V Interview guide for board of management chairpersons........... 205

Appendix VI Interview guide for county director of education…………….. 207

Appendix VII Interview guide for Kitui law courts………………………….. 208

Appendix VIII Secondary schools which participated in the study…………... 209

Appendix IX Research authorization………………………………………... 211

Appendix X Research authorization County Commisioner............................ 212

Appendix XI Research authorization County Director of Education…….... 213

Appendix XII Research permit………………………………………………... 214

ix
 LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

Table 1.1 Deatails of destruction /attempted arson in secondary

schools in Kitui County in 2013………………………………… 10

Table 3.1 Details of respondents….……………………………………….. 85

Table 3.2 Reliability results………………………………………………… 89

Table 4.1 Questionnaire return rate………………………………………... 93

Table 4.2 Distribution of principals and deputy principals by gender……. 95

Table 4.3 Distribution of principals and deputy principals by age……….. 96

Table 4.4 Principals and deputy principals by their highest

professional qualifications……………………………………… 98

Table 4.5 Distribution of principals and deputy principals by

teaching experience………………………………………….….. 100

Table 4.6 Distribution of principals’ by length of service in schools……. 102

Table 4.7 Principals’ responses on use of peer counselling and

students’ discipline……………………………………………… 104

Table 4.8 Chi-square test on peer counselling and students’ discipline….. 109

Table 4.9 Principals’ response on effects of peer counselling on

students’ discipline……………………………………………… 111

Table 4.10 Principals’ responses on suspension and discipline of students... 113

Table 4.11 Chi-Square test on suspension of indisciplined students

and students’ discipline…………………………………………. 118

Table 4.12 Principals’ responses on intervention programmes used by

school after readmission of suspended students ………………. 120

x
Table 4.13 Principals’ responses on challenges facing them in using

suspension as a disciplinary method………………………….... 122

Table 4.14 Principals’ suggestions on use of suspension as an

alternative disciplinary method…………………………………. 126

Table 4.15 Principals responses on expulsion of indiscipline students……... 128

Table 4.16 Chi-Square test on students’ expulsion and students’ discipline.. 132

Table 4.17 Distribution of the Principals’ responses on circumstances

for expulsion of indiscipline students…………………………… 133

Table 4.18 Principals’ response on the proportion of students expelled in

the last two terms………………………………………………... 135

Table 4.19 Principals’ responses on challenges faced in

expulsion of students………………………………………….… 136

Table 4.20 Principals’ recommendations on use of expulsion………………. 139

Table 4.21 Principals’ responses on holding class meetings and

students’ discipline………………………………………………. 142

Table 4.22 Chi-square test on use of class meetings and students’ discipline. 145

Table 4.23 Principals’ response on effects of holding class meetings on

students’ discipline……………………………………………….. 146

Table 4.24 Principals responses on challenges faced in use of class

meetingswith students for collaborative decision making……... 148

Table 4.25 Principals’ suggestions on use of class meeting as an

alternative disciplinary method…………………………………... 150

xi
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Alternative disciplinary methods and students’ discipline….… 80

xii
 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ACRWC African Charter on Right and Welfare of the Child

AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

ATCP Alternatives to Corporal punishment

BA Bachelor of Arts

BEd Bachelor of Education

BoG Board of Governors

BoM Board of Management

BSc Bachelor of Science

CBE Curriculum Based Establishment

CDE County Director of Education

CED County Education Board

CRC Convention on Rights of the Child

CSO Community Service Order

DC District Commissioner

DEO District Education officer

DoE Director of Education

EMIS Education Management Information Systems

G&C Guidance and Counselling

HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus

HoD Head of Department

ICT Information Communication Technology

MA Master of Arts

MEd Master of Education

MoE Ministry of Education

xiii
PGDE Post Graduate Diploma in Education

PTA Parents Teachers Association

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences

TSC Teachers Service Commission

UNCRWC United Nations Convention on Rights and Welfare of the Child

UNESCO United Nations Educational Scientific and cultural Organization

USA United States of America

xiv
 ABSTRACT
Students’ discipline is a major concern to many stakeholders globally. However, despite
commitment of the government of Kenya to uphold both international and local trends of
recognizing the rights of the child, the management of students’ discipline by use of
alternative disciplinary methods in schools still remains largely unexplored. This study
sought to investigate the effects of principals’ alternative disciplinary methods on students’
discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County, Kenya. The study objectives sought
to establish the effect of principals’ use of peer counselling; suspension of indiscipline
students; students’ expulsion and use of class meetings with students for collaborative
decision making on students’ discipline. The study was based on the Systems theory. Ex
post facto research design was adopted. The target population for the study was 333 public
secondary schools consisting of 333 Principals, 333 Deputy principals,1665 HoDs Guidance
and Counselling, Board of Management (BoM) chairpersons, the County Director of
Education and Kitui law courts Resident Magistrate. The sample size was obtained by
stratified proportionate sampling procedure, purposive sampling and simple random
sampling. The study sample size consisted of 101 public secondary schools consisting of
Principals, Deputy Principals, HoDs Guidance and Counselling, 15 Board of Management
members, Kitui County Director of Education and Kitui Law Courts Resident Magistrate.
Purposive sampling was used to select some schools, HoDs guidance and Counselling, Kitui
County Director of Education and Kitui Law Courts Resident Magistrate because of their
number and because they had useful information in relation to this study. The total
respondents for the study were 320. A test-re-test technique was used to test reliability. Data
collection tools included questionnaires and interview guides. Data was analysed using
SPSS. Descriptive statistics was used to analyze, tabulate and present data. Results of data
gathered from closed ended and open ended items were reported in frequency tables, cross
tabulation tables and explanation of the findings were made based on themes. The Chi-
square(x2) test was used to determine the strength of association between alternative
disciplinary methods and students’ discipline and to test whether the observed relationship is
significant or not. The significance level was set at alpha = 0.05. The study established that
peer counselling had the highest p-value 0.518. Students’ expulsion was rated second with
p-value 0.491. Holding class meetings with students for collaborative decision making was
rated third with a p-value 0.373 while suspension of indiscipline students was rated fourth
with a p-value 0.351. It was concluded that principals’ use of alternative disciplinary
methods had no significant effect on students’ discipline. However, the study has revealed
that Peer counselling has the strongest association with students discipline with a p-value
0.518 whereas suspension has the weakest relationship with students’ discipline with p-
value of 0.351. The study recommends: review of disciplinary methods in schools and
provision of policy guidelines on the best alternative disciplinary methods; strengthening the
use of alternative disciplinary methods in management of students’ discipline. The study
suggested a comparative study on perception of teachers and parents on corporal
punishment and alternative disciplinary methods in the management of students’ discipline.
This study could be significant in that it could provide an insight on the best practices and
choices of appropriate alternative disciplinary methods to be used on students’ discipline in
schools.

xv
 CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the study

Students’ discipline is a major concern in many parts of the world (Cotton, 1990;

Blandford, 1998; Stewart, 2004; Kindiki, 2009; Kiprop, 2012; Simatwa 2012;

Maphosa & Shumba, 2010; Nene, 2013). According to Blandford (1998), there is a

perceptible breakdown of school discipline worldwide. However, according to

Reynolds (1989), the quality of students’ discipline is an important factor in

determining the intellectual outcome of students and schools. This implies that school

discipline is a key determiner of achievement of organizational goals.

Stewart (2004) notes that students’ discipline problems in Australia do manifest

themselves in form of bullying, failure to pay attention in class, disrespect for other

learners and staff or their property, fragrant breaching of school rules and regulations

like inappropriate clothing. This is in conformity with Nene (2013) who said that

learners are becoming more unruly and less respectful than they used to be in the past.

Learner discipline problem has been characterised as serious and pervasive,

negatively affecting student learning (Kasiem, Du Plessis & Loock, 2007; Leigh,

Chenhall & Saunders, 2009; Tozer, 2010 & Rizzolo, 2004). This problem manifests

itself in a variety of ways which include vandalism, truancy, smoking, disobedience,

intimidation, delinquency, murder, assault, rape, theft and general violence (De Wet,

2003). This is consistent with Blandford (1998) who argued that indiscipline in

schools could be caused by factors such

as drug abuse, child abuse and neglect, community and media related violence all of

which reverberate in many classrooms worldwide.

1
According to Cotton (1990), lack of discipline in public secondary schools in the

United States of America (USA) has been identified as the most serious problem

facing the nation’s educational system. The School discipline problems present

themselves in form of drug usage, cheating, insubordination, truancy, intimidation

which results into countless classroom disruptions. Cotton (1990) also argues that

such discipline problems are responsible for a significant portion of loss of

instructional time in USA for half of the classroom time is taken up by activities other

than instruction. This implies that students spend much of their time servicing

punishment hence compromising academic achievement.

Naong (2007) described indiscipline problems in South African schools

asdisproportionate andan intractable part of every teacher's experience of teaching.

Marais and Meier (2010) reported that teachers in South Africa are becoming

increasingly distressed about disciplinary problems in schools. It has been suggested

that teachers link the growing problem of indiscipline in schools to the banning of

corporal punishment in schools brought about by legislation, such as (The

Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 & The South African Schools Act,

1996).

According to the South African Schools Act (1996), corporal punishment was banned

in South Africa since 1996. Despite its ban, recent studies in South Africa reveal that

majority of learners still receive corporal punishment 14 years later after the ban of

corporal punishment (Olivier, 2010). Kubeka (2004); Maphosa and Shumba

(2010)argue that in the absence of corporal punishment, educators generally feel

disempowered in their ability to maintain discipline in schools. This is consistent with

Kivulu and Wandai (2009) noted that there is a growing concern that some teachers
2
are preoccupied and even obsessed with corporal punishment. Kilimci (2009)

observes that teachers who use corporal punishment argue that the power to control

learners is taken away from parents and teachers and this has also contributed to the

high failure rate as there is a link between discipline and learner achievement. The

teachers feeling of disempowerment after the ban of corporal punishment is an

indicator of overreliance on corporal punishment in the management of school

discipline in schools. This mplies that the chances of reverting back to use of corporal

punishment in order to manage students’ discipline are very high. However, in

schools where there are no provisions for alternative disciplinary methods, the

educators ought to explore other alternative disciplinary methods that could be

deemed fit in the management of students discipline in schools in the absence of

corporal punishment.

Corporal punishment was replaced by a discipline strategy called Alternatives to

Corporal Punishment (ATCP) (Tungata, 2006). Alternatives like in- school

suspension, more counsellors, psychologists, support groups and parental involvement

were preferred by teachers as alternative discipline procedures (Cicognani, 2004).

Tungata (2006) adds that teachers preferred positive alternatives to corporal

punishment like parental involvement, manual work, application of school rules,

enforcement of school code of conduct and educational counselling. Despite the

introduction of ATCP research has shown that indiscipline in schools has continued to

grow (Maphosa & Shumba, 2010). This implies that the ban of corporal punishment

did not improve the state of school discipline nor the introduction of alternatives to

corporal punishment.

3
Cicognani (2004) conducted a study which sought to explore teachers’ attitudes

towards the ban of corporal punishment as well as the alternate discipline strategies

teachers are using to discipline their learners in South Africa. The study indicated that

although ATCP had been introduced, teachers were however not in favour of

alternatives that needed to be supervised by them. The teachers were however

concerned about their personal safety and felt that administering corporal punishment

would ensure their safety. This implies lack of support for ACTP hence persistent use

of corporal punishment in South Africa schools. This also means that teachers did not

embrace the use of alternatives to corporal punishment hence an indicator of teachers’

resistance to change from use of corporal punishment.

Khewu (2012) conducted a study that sought to interrogate the consistency that

prevails between disciplinary practices and principles of alternatives to corporal

punishment and the implications of this for school leadership. The study found that

principals’ roles in instilling discipline were focused mainly on reactive

administrative and management functions rather than on giving leadership designed to

inspire alternative ways of behaving. The principals and teachers’ belief in the use of

alternatives to corporal punishment revealed ambivalence and lack of understanding.

Disciplinary measures to instil discipline, even though they were said to be based on

alternatives to corporal punishment, placed heavy emphasis on inflicting pain and

relied on extrinsic control. This implies that although ATCP was introduced in

schools, the implementation of alternatives to corporal punishment encountered

challenges such as resistance to change especially from teachers who were not willing

to change and adapt to new practices. Another underlying reason could be lack of

4
adequate information as apertains to the implications of use of corporal punishment

and the significance of using ACTP.

The abolition of corporal punishment in California, a state in Australia was replaced

by suspension and expulsion (Brister,1996). It is reported that between 1972 and

1973, one out of 13 students in United States had faced suspension (Harris &Benett,

1982). However, in some jurisdictions, corporal punishment is still used in Australia

(Stewart, 2004). For instance, in the USA, there are still 30 states where corporal

punishment is used (Brister, 1996). According to Nene (2013), alternative measures

to corporal punishment were not very effective in curbing learner discipline in

schools for it is difficult to choose and implement the correct alternatives to corporal

punishment. This indicates that even after many years since the ban of corporal

punishment in many states, use of alternative disciplinary procedures has not been

fully embraced to manage students’ discipline in schools.

Corporal punishment is prohibited byInternational Instruments of which Kenya is a

signatory. These include the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child

(ACRWC) of 1990 and the United Nations convention on the Rights of the child

(UNCRC) of 1979. It is also prohibited by the local laws on Childrens’ Rights, and

Basic Education Act ((Republic of Kenya, 2001 and Republic of Kenya, 2013). This

implies that as a member, Kenya has to keep with international trends of recognising

the rights of the child and the Kenyan laws on rights of the child. Therefore, the ban

of corporal punishment implied an automatic switch to use of alternative disciplinary

methods in the management of students discipline in secondary schools.

5
Ajowi and Simatwa (2010) in a study that sought to establish the role of Guidance

and Counselling in promoting students discipline in secondary schools in Kenya

noted a lack of teacher knowledge on alternative methods of maintaining discipline in

schools. Kimani, Kara and Ogetange (2013) in a study that sought to investigate

teachers’ views on persistent use of corporal punishment in managing discipline in

primary schools in starehe division Kenya which observed that corporal punishment

was a regular school experience for the pupils. The study by Kimani, Kara and

Ogetange (2013) also concurred with Ajowi and Simatwa (2010) that administrators

and teachers are not thoroughly prepared to deal with indiscipline in the absence of

corporal punishment. However, Kimani, Kara and Ogetange (2013) suggested that

teachers should be trained on alternative strategies to deal with discipline problems

other than use of corporal punishment. This implies that corporal punishment is still

used as a disciplinary method to deal with learner discipline in Kenya, 13 years since

its ban.

Simatwa (2012) did a study on management of students’ discipline in secondary

schools in Bungoma County which observed that headteachers used a wide range of

methods managing student discipline in schools. These included expulsion,

suspension, caning, physical punishment, detention, and reprimanding, kneeling,

guidance and counselling, fining, rewards, wearing school uniform at all times, self-

commitment in writing to maintain good conduct, pinching, slapping and smacking. It

was concluded that methods of establishing and maintaining student discipline in

schools could not be applied wholesale, but they were contingent upon the

environment and the effectiveness of each method depended on the traditions ethos of

6
schools and their environments. Implying that the judgement on the type of

disciplinary method to be used to handle students’ discipline depended on individual

schools

A study by Busienei (2012) was conducted to investigate the alternative methods

which teachers use instead of corporal punishment and the efficacy of these methods

on student behaviour management in Eldoret Municipality of Rift Valley province.

The study observed that cases of indisciplinehave not reduced in schools with the use

of alternative methods to corporal punishment with 71 percent of the respondents

agreeing that the use of other alternative methods to corporal punishment have not

reduced indiscipline in schools. Research findings by (Tungata, 2006; Ajowi &

Simatwa ,2010; Olivier, 2010; Simatwa, 2010; Busienei, 2012; Khewu, 2012;

Simatwa, 2012; Kimani, Kara & Ogetange, 2013) have therefore revealed a

knowledge gap on effects of principals’ use of alternative disciplinary methods on

students’ discipline in public secondary schools in kitui County, Kenya. However,

investigations in this study were based on effects of independent variables such as

principals’ use of peer counselling, suspension of indiscipline students, students’

expulsion and use of class meetings with students for collaborative decision making

on students’ discipline.

The ban of corporal punishment in Kenya has never improved the state of students’

discipline in secondary schools either. Students’ indiscipline in Kenya has escalated

since the ban of corporal punishment in 2001. Kindiki (2009) observed that the level

of discipline in secondary schools in Kenya is very low. Between 2000 and 2001, at

least 250 schools had experienced unrests of students. In 2001, 68 students were burnt

7
to death at Kyanguli secondary school, Machakos District (Republic of Kenya, 2001).

Between June and July in 2008, violent strikes affected more than 300 secondary

schools in the country (Opondo, 2008). According to Kiumi, Bosire and Sang (2009),

the conditions of students discipline in secondary schools in Kenya are disheartening

as violent behaviour incidences are wide spread and frequent. Medlen (2012) adds

that the issues that confront educational institutions are different, sophisticated,

frequent and complex. This implies that corporal punishment was only among the

disciplinary methods that were used to manage students’ discipline in the past and

was banned by the government in order to comply with the requirements of human

rights. This implied an automatic switch to use of alternative disciplinary methods in

managing students’ discipline in schools.

Kitui County is one of the 47 Counties in Kenya. It is in the former Eastern Province

of Kenya. The county has an area of 24,385.1 km². It consists of 16 Sub-Counties

and 333 public secondary schools. Since the devolution of governance to the

Counties in 2012, public secondary schools in Kitui County have been experiencing

students’ discipline problems of various forms (Kitui County Education Office, 2013).

Kitui County was chosen for this study, owing too its cases of students indiscipline in

public secondary schools which are characterized by destruction and attempted

arsons, unrests, burning of school structures, refusal to take exams and walkout to

Sub-County Education offices (Kitui County Director of Education(CDE), 2013).

According to Kalanza (2010) and Musyoka (2011), public secondary schools in Kitui

Central Sub-County experience students’ discipline problems of various magnitudes.

However, those indiscipline cases have been replicated in other Sub- Counties in

8
Kitui County. Kitui County Director of Education (2013) reported that three public

secondary schools from three Sub-Counties in 2012 respectively experienced

attempted destruction of school structures through students’ unrests and fires during

the second term. The indiscipline cases increased in 2013 in that 7 out of 16 Sub-

Counties in Kitui County experienced students’ unrests of various forms in which 15

public secondary schools were affected (Kitui County Director of Education, 2013).

The indiscipline cases included attempts to burn school structures like school stores

and administration block, destruction due to fire wherestudents personal effects were

burnt, walking out of school to Sub- County Education office, students’ refusal to take

exams, stealing school property and stoning buildings.

Although some of the indiscipline cases according to Kitui CDE (2013) were handled

depending on the magnitude of the offences commiteed by the students, some of the

culprits were suspendend in order to meet with BOMs, others students were talked to

with a hope that they would reform and others were araigined in court. However,

some of the cases involving students are still pending in court meaning that they have

not been concluded. According to Kitui Law Courts Resident Magistrate (2013),

students who involve themselves in indiscipline issues such as burning of schools or

attempts to burn school structures or destruction of school property are taken to court

by some secondary schools and face charges of conflict with law or are charged for

criminal offences. Consequently, some students are either counselled or disciplined by

use of Community Service Order (CSO) or by asking the parents to reconcile with the

school. The details of destruction or attempted arson in public secondary schools in

Kitui County are a shown in table 1.1.

9
Table 1.1 Deatails of destruction /attempted arson in secondary schools in Kitui County
in 2013

District Number of Gravity / type of offense Disciplinary action taken

schools that
experienced
destruction/ars
on
Matinyani 2 Attempted dormitory Suspension of two boys
arson; Fire put off immediately
Attempt to burn a school
store
Katulani 3 Dormitory razed down Two boys suspended
Dormitory put on fire, Suspect send for parent but
students personal effects never came back,
burnt investigation in prograss
Kitui central 5 Dormitory burnt down. Implicated students
Destruction of personal advised to look for
property. alternative school.
Students went on rampage, Others given manual
stoned buildings, punishment
vanadlised an d strore Impsistion of a fine.
school machines. School clsure. Suspects
arrested and arraigned in
court. Investigations still
on.
Watchman and a student
implicated.
Suspension and appearance
before the BOM
Mutomo 2 Dormitory burnt down Students suspended. Others
Students refused to sit for transferred to another
an exam and walked out to school
Deos office Students Persuaded to go
back to school
Laboratory set on fire Implicated boy suspended
Lower yatta 1 Boy cott of exams Suspension
Dormitory lazed down Suspended students were
suspects. All were picked
and arraigned in court.
Kisasi 1 Dormitory destroyed by Implicated students
fire suspended
Migwani 1 Dormitory on fire put off Suspension
immediately
Total 15
Source: Kitui County Education office (2013).

10
However, this study sought to establish the effect of alternative disciplinary methods

such as peer counselling, suspension of indiscipline students, students’ expulsion and

use of class meetings with students for collaborative decision making on students’

discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui couty.

Peer counselling is one of the alternative disciplinary methods that could be used to

manage students’ discipline in learning institutions in Kenya. According to Ndichu

(2005) the modern society has changed very much. The social safety nets that existed

in the traditional societies and ensured somewhat stable environment for children to

grow up in have all but gone. Students express many difficulties through withdrawal,

unhappiness, annoyance, anger, and inability to meet needs, lack of knowledge,

anxiety and hyperactivity. This implies that such difficulties could easily be portrayed

in form of indiscipline among students hence peer counselling could be used to

manage such students’ problems.

According to Wango (2006), most of the school activities concentrated on guidance

rather than counselling. There was more career guidance rather than counselling.

Guidance and counselling programme content was not generally coordinated. Teacher

counsellors and schools seemed to have their own programmes rather than there being

a coordinated national programme on guidance and counselling and progression was

not monitored. In addition, schools did not appear to have built on peer counselling.

Slightly over a half of the students (52.7%) appeared to understand who is a peer

counsellor or even think it is simply a peer or age mate (29.2%). However most of

the students had an

11
idea of who is a peer counselor. Schools did not appear to have built on peer

counselling foundation and this was evident in that majority of students did not seem

to seek help from peer counselors. The study recommended that schools could build

on this knowledge and ensure that peer counsellors are trained to assist students.

This implies that although peer counselling was among the guidance and counselling

programmes in schools, it was not used to manage discipline of students.

According to Kindiki (2009), peer counselling is a component of guidance and

counselling. Peer counselling is achieved in America through coaching and training

students who are trained in basic listening and helping skills of problem solving and

decision making (Borders & Drury, 1992). Lines (2006) observed that the best

alternatives for addressing adolescent needs are peer counselling. In peer counselling

students identify with their peers and address problems at home and at school which

may include substance abuse and career planning. Mutie and Ndambuki (2004)

observed that peers in the African communities had control over each other’s

behaviour through open disapproval of an unacceptable behaviour, continuous

rebukes till unacceptable behaviour ceased.

Peer counselling in Botswana is based on the understanding that students tend to

relate more to those with whom they are comfortable with (UNESCO, 2002). The

peer counsellors assist in identifying students with problems and making referrals to

the school counsellors (Chireshe, 2006). Peer counselling in Uganda enables students

to discuss freely and express personal problems about parents, the authority and

themselves in a free frank manner. Peer educators provide information that the adults

would normally not be prepared to discuss (Rutondoki, 2000). According to Hendrix

12
(1986) teacher counsellors act as peer coordinators by providing supervision for peer

group members. The teacher counsellors also act as mediators within the group when

problems arise and deal with difficult issues within the group. This implies that the

peers played a supervisory role in shaping each others’ behaviour.

Peer education concept in Kenyan schools is a recent phenomenon that is rapidly

gaining momentum (KIE, 2004;Were, 2003). It was also recommended by the Kenya

development plan (1997-2000) to be enhanced in learning institutions. As a result,

peer education and counselling clubs have been established in school and training

colleges (KIE, 2004). Republic of Kenya (2001) in a report of the task force on

students’ discipline and unrest in secondary schools in Kenya recommended the

inauguration of peer counselling groups in every school and training of peer

counsellors to enable them acquire skills and knowledge that would empower them

to perform their roles of managing discipline issues in schools.

Chireshe (2013) conducted a study that study sought to establish the status of peer

counselling in Zimbabwean secondary schools as perceived by school teachers. The

study used 26 teachers who participated in the study. The results revealed that most of

the secondary schools from which the respondents came from, did not have peer

counsellors. The peer counsellors were involved in HIV and AIDS and related issues

such as unwanted pregnancy, sexual abuse, drug abuse, problem solving and

overcoming peer pressure. The peer counsellors were reported to be lacking in peer

helping training. The peer counsellors faced challenges such as: peer counselling

underrating; resistance and discouragement from other students. This implies that peer

counseling was not used to deal with learner discipline but it was used to handle other
13
aspects hence a knowledge gap on effects of use of peer counselling on students

discipline in public secondary schools.

Wango (2006) obsedrved that despite the emphasis on guidance and counselling in

schools, the provision of guidance and counselling services is highly variable and

somewhat fragmented in scope and largely depending on individual schools. Schools

that had peer counsellors had trained and oriented them into counselling while others

had not. This study has left out a gap on effects of use of peer counselling on students’

discipline in this study.

Bett (2013) noted that peer counselling is an interactive relationship within age groups

aimed at influencing positive behaviour change. The peers discuss their problems

amicably without getting involved in bad behaviour and consequently improve their

academic performance. From the information discussed in this paper, it was hoped

that the school management, among other stake holders, could see the need of

promoting effective implementation of peer counselling programmes in order to

reduce vandalism, truancy and school drop-outs among students in secondary schools.

Although the discussion in this paper was basically theoretical it deemed it fit to use

of peer counselling to manage some students indiscipline issues hence a knowledge

gap on effects of use of peer counselling on students’ discipline in this study.

The second alternative disciplinary method that could be used in the management of

students’ discipline is suspension. Stewart (2004) noted that suspension is a

temporary exclusion of a student from school. Suspension in USA is a popular tool

for administrators because it takes less time than other alternatives and school

14
officials feel that it is effective. Harris and Bennet (1982) observed that Suspension

rarely encourages conrol of students to control of students’ behaviour. Stewart (2004)

argues that out of school suspension is used in United States of America (USA) for

serious misconducts such as drug possession, the carrying of illegal weapons, poor

attendance and truancy. However Suspension of misbehaving learners should be

treated with caution for they might not reflect accepted international principles and

practices and should only be exercised in the most extreme circumstances.

According to Mutua (2004); Kindiki (2009) and Simatwa (2012) suspension was

commonly used as a discipline method by headteachers. Mugo (2006) adds that

suspension of indiscipline students was used in extreme cases and for habitual

offenders. Kindiki (2009) in a study on effectivenss of communication on students

discipline in in public secondary schools in Kenya observed that suspension was the

most common discipline technique used to deal with students’ discipline. However,

suspended students rarely change their behaviour but would continue with the same

delinquent behaviour even after suspension. Republic of Kenya (1980) stipulates that

a pupil may be suspended from attendance at a school if his language or behaviour is

habitually or continuously endagers the maintenance of proper standards of moral and

social conduct in the school or or if any single act or series of acts subversive of

discipline is committed. A suspended student shall not be allowed to attend classes

and shall be required to be physically away from the school precincts until he/she is

informed of the outcome of the case to the parent or legal guardian through a letter.

According to Okumbe (1998) suspension helps the educational management to gain

enough time for thorough investigations. According to Kitui County Director of

15
Education (2013) when students are suspended from school, some parent side with

their children claiming that their children are innocent.

According to Smit (2010) suspension pushes students out of school and may only

contribute to the broader problem of violence. Harris and Bennet (1982); Smit (2010)

and Kindiki (2009) also found that suspended students rarely changed their

behaviour but would most likely carry on with the same delinquent behaviour after

suspension. This is inconsistent with Nyang’au (2013) who noted that suspension

from school was effective in improving student behaviour. Liu (2013) argued that

lengthy and repeated suspensions results in lost learning; it also contributes to

students’ feelings of alienation from school and perhaps most importantly does little

or nothing to address the root cause of the behaviour. This study identified a

knowledge gap on effects of suspension of indiscipline students on students’

discipline hence a research gap that the study sought to fill.

Students’ expulsion as an alternative disciplinary method of managing students’

discipline according to Brister (1996) and Oosthuizen (2003) is the permanent

removal of a learner from a school or hostel where the child is enrolled. Expulsion of

a student is pegged on recommendation to the Board of Education to uphold or reject

recommendation to expel a student. According to Harris and Bennet (1982) grounds

for expulsion of students included wilful defiance, vandalism, drugs, stealing, truancy,

violence, force, repeated violation of school rules. Expulsion of learners in South

Africa is done to a learner by permanently refusing admission to the school where the

learner is enrolled. Learners can only be expelled in cases of serious misconduct by

the head of Department after a fair hearing and not by the principal or the school (The

South African Schools’ Act, 1996).

16
Smit (2010) in a study that focused on the role of discipline in the establishment and

maintenance of a safe school environment for learners and educators in the East

London Region of the Eastern Cape Province observed that expulsion may have an

effect of pushing students out of school or fostering school drop outs and by doing so

only contributes to the broader problem of violence and warns that expulsion as a

method of instilling discipline on students should be used with caution.

Students’ expulsion in Kenya is done as a last resort after a school has tried other

disciplinary procedures like suspension in extreme indiscipline cases (Republic of

Kenya, 1980). According to the Republic of Kenya (2003) the Cabinet Secretary may

make regulations to prescribe expulsion or the discipline of a delinquent pupil for

whom all other corrective measures have been exhausted and only after such a child

and parent or guardian have been afforded an opportunity of being heard provided

that such a pupil shall be admitted to an Institution that focuses on correction in the

context of Education.

Simatwa (2012) in a study on management of students’ discipline in Bungoma County

noted that many infractions were experienced in secondary schools and

headteachers used a wide range of methods to manage students’ discipline. Expulsion

was one among the many methods that were used by headteachers to manage

infractions but the effectiveness of expulsion depended on traditions, ethos, and

schools and their environment.This study has identified a knowledge gap on effects of

students’ expulsion on students’ discipline in public secondary schools hence a

knowledge gap that the study sought to fill.

17
Principals’ use of class meetings for collaborative decision making is the fourth

alternative disciplinary method that could be used to manage discipline of students in

schools. The need for students’ involvement in secondary school administration began

in 1960s in the United States of America (Powers &Powers, 1984). According to

Lethoko, Heystek and Maree (2001) lack of dialogue between the administration and

students has been identified as a factor leading to indiscipline in secondary schools in

Kenya. Wekesa (2005) noted that learners do not use dialogue when they are

aggrieved. In most cases they resort to strikes when they assume that no one is

listening to their grievances.

Republic of Kenya (2001) stipulated that schools should plan and involve students in

planning, implementation and evaluation of appropriate governance activities in

schools. This is consistent with the Republic of Kenya (2013) which stated that BOM

could encourage a culture of dialogue and participatory democratic governance at the

learning institutions.This practice is inconsisted with a study by Muchelle (1996)

which sought to investigate attitudes of secondary schools towards the involvement of

students in school administration found that the amount of participation in school

administration allowed in the school was not sufficient to give students a chance to

practice democratic skills.

In addition, headteachers had a negative attitude towards involvement of students in

school administration due to fear of uncertainties. The headteachers also lacked

commitment towards participatory administration which was manifest through double

standards. This concurs with Muchiri (1998) and Waweru (2008) who found that

Students’ involvement was only minimal. Students’ involvement in school

18
governance through prefects was quite inadequate and was visibly below avereage.

This implies that since students are key stakeholders in schools, their participation in

decision making is would nurture decision making capabilitie among students hence

promotion of critical thinking skills in collaborative decision making practices

hence improved discipline in schools.

According to the Republic of Kenya (2013), students are important stakeholders in the

education sector and they could effectively contribute positively to decision making

activities on very key issues in schools. This could be effectively implemented during

class meetings with students for collaborative decision making. However, Republic of

Kenya (2001) and Kindiki (2009) found that there were poor channels of

communication used by school administrators.

Undemocratic school administration did not consider meetings as important channels

of communication. This concurs with Kiprop (2012) who established that principals

adopt master/servant superior/inferior attitude in dealing with students. They rarely

listened to students’ grievances because they believe that they have nothing to offer.

This creates a lot of tension, stress and misunderstanding and eventually leads to

frustrations and violence as manifested in strikes. This is inconsistent with Kibet,

Kindiki, Sang and Kitilit (2012) found that principals frequently or sometimes

involve, students in their schools, they communicate clearly to students but frequently

retained the final authority over most issues. The study found the existence of a

significant relationship between leadership approach and student discipline. However

this study has identified a research gap on effects of pricnipals’ use of class meetings

with students and students’ discipline in public secondary scholls.

19
This study sought to establish the effects of principals’ use of alternative disciplinary

methods on students’ discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County, Kenya.

In this study, the independent variables under investigation included principals’ use of

peer counselling, suspension of indiscipline, students’ expulsion and principals’ use

of class meetings with students for collaborative decision making. These independent

variables were the indicators that capturd the measures on effects of students’

discipline and to determine the significance levels and strengths of relationships. This

was used to determine the number of students who underwent peer counselling,

number of indisciplind students who were suspended, number of students’ expulsion

cases and number of class meetings held for the last two terms in a school and vice

versa.

On the other hand, students’ disciplines formed the dependent variables in this study.

Studies available on students’ discipline have revealed a knowledge gap on effects of

principals’ use of alternative disciplinary methods such as peer counselling,

suspension of indiscipline students, students’ expulsion and use of class meetings with

students for collaborative decision making on students’ discipline in public secondary

schools in Kitui County (Muchelle, 1996; Muchiri, 1998; Wango, 2006; Waweru

,2008; Kindiki, 2009; Kibet, Kindiki, Sang & Kitilit, 2012; Smit,2010; Bett,2013;

Chireshe, 2013;Simatwa, 2012). This is because none of the cited studies was

undertaken on effects of principals’ alternative dsicplinary methods on students’

discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County. This justifies the need for the

study hence a knowledge gap which the study sought to fill.

20
1.2 Statement of the problem

This study chose Kitui County because public secondary schools in Kitui County

experience students’ discipline problems of various forms. Kitui County Director of

Education (CDE, 2013) reported that in 2012, three secondary schools from three

districts respectively experienced destruction and attempted arson. Such cases

increased in 2013 whereby 15 public secondary schools from 7 districts respectively

experienced destruction and attempted arson in Kitui County. According to Kitui

CDE (2013) students’ indiscipline problems in public secondary schools in Kitui

County manifest themselves in form of truancy, incitement by students from other

schools, defiance to school authority, rudeness, use of hard drugs, attempts to burn

schools for flimsy excuses, burning of schools and destruction of school structures

and stealing of school property.

Research findings by Musyoka (2011) on effects of secondary school prefects’

involvement in management of students discipline in kitui Central established that all

public secondary schools in Kitui Central District (Sub-County) experience students’

discipline problems of varying magnitudes. Kalanza (2010) on factors influencing

principals in the administration of public secondary schools in kitui ( Sub-County)

District noted that much of the challenges faced by principals in Kitui Central District

included poor time management by students, strike incidences and sneaking out of

school. The two studies by Musyoka (2011) and Kalanza (2010) have left out a gap on

effects of principals’ alternative disciplinary methods on students’ discipline in public

secondary schools in Kitui County. This is because findings by Kalanza (2010) and

musyoka (2011) on students’ indiscipline isuues were replicated in 7 sub-counties out

of 16 sub-counties in Kitui County. The studies were conducted in only one Sub-

County (district) whose sample size is limited. In this study, investigations on effects
21
of principals’ alternative disciplinary methods on students’ discipline were conducted

in 16 Sub-Counties) Districts in Kitui County. This justified the selection of Kitui

County for my study. This study sought establish the effects of principals’ alternative

disciplinary methods on students’ discipline in public secondary schools such as peer

counselling, suspension of indiscipline students, students’ expulsion and principals’

use of class meetings with students for collaborative decision making in public

secondary schools.

1.3 Purpose of the study

This study sought to investigate the effect of principals’ alternative disciplinary

methods on students’ discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County, Kenya.

1.4 Objectives of the study

The following were the objectives of the study

i. To establish the extent to which principals’ use of peer counselling influences

students’ discipline in public secondary schools.

ii. To determine the effect of suspension of indisciplined students on students’

discipline in public secondary schools.

iii. To establish the effect of students’ expulsion on students’ discipline in public

secondary schools.

iv. To determine the extent to which principals’ use of class meetings for

collaborative decision making with students influences students’ discipline in

public secondary schools.

22
1.5 Research questions

This study sought to answer the following research questions

i. To what extent does the principals’ use of peer counselling affect students’

discipline in public secondary schools?

ii. What is the effect of suspension of in disciplined students on students’

discipline in public secondary schools?

iii. What effect does students’ expulsion have on students’ discipline in public

secondary schools?

iv. To what extent does the principals’ use of class meetings with students for

collaborative decision making influences students’ discipline in public

secondary schools?

1.6 Significance of the study

It was hoped that the findings of this study could benefit different stake holders like

BoMs, principals, teachers, parents who could be sensitized with new information on

alternative disciplinary methods to be used on students’ discipline in schools. The

researcher could also be assisted to make recommendations which could perhaps help

policy makers at national level to come up with a new policy on use of alternative

disciplinary methods. The study findings could add to the existing knowledge on

effects of alternative disciplinary methods on students’ discipline in schools. It may

also serve as a basis from which other researchers could carry out further research.The

study could be significant on the practical, methodological and theoretical value of the

concept of alternative disciplinary methods and could provide an insight on the best

practices and choice of appropriate alternative disciplinary methods to be used on

students’ discipline in schools

23
1.7 Limitations of the study

The concept of alternative disciplinary methods is relatively a new concept in the

management of students’ discipline. It has gained momentum after the ban of corporal

punishment in 2001. However the literature available on alternative disciplinary

methods in the management of students’ discipline was insufficient for a

comprehensive literature review.

1.8 Delimitations of the study

This study was confined to 16 Sub-Counties in Kitui County. It was also confined to

333 public secondary schools in Kitui County. Public secondary schools outside

Kitui County were not investigated. The study location was Kitui County. The study

included all types of public secondary schools in Kitui County. The study respondents

included Pincipals, Deputy Principals, HoDs Guidnce and Counselling, Board of

Management chairpersons, Kitui County Director of Education and Kitui Law Courts

Resident Magistrate. Private secondary schools and other learning institutions were

left out.

The study was restricted to the factors under investigation which included peer

counselling, suspension of indisciplined students, students’ expulsion and principals’

use of class meetings with students for collaborative decision making. This was done

in order to control other factors which were beyond the researcher’s control and could

have brought about inaccurate results hence influencing the quality of the study.These

factors included: students’ exposure to media facilities; students’ characteristics;

students’ interaction with members of the community; use of other disciplinary

methods by teachers to instil discipline on students.

24
1.9 Basic assumptions of the study

The study held the following basic assumptions:

All secondary school principals were sufficiently informed about effects of

various alternative disciplinary methods and could therefore respond adequately to

the items in the questionnaire.

All secondary schools used alternative disciplinary methods in addressing

students’ discipline.

All secondary schools had a code of discipline to be adhered to by all students.

Principals involved all stakeholders in management of students’ discipline in

secondary schools.

Alternative disciplinary procedures such as peer counselling, suspension of

indiscipline students, students’ expulsion and principals’ use of class meetings had

a significant effect on students’ discipline.

1.10 Definition of significant terms

A child refers to a person who has not attained the age of 18 years.

An alternative disciplinary methods refers to other discipline procedures that are

used on students’ discipline in secondary schools apart from corporal punishment that

was banned in 2001.

Basic Education refers to the educational programmes offered and imparted to a

person in an institution of basic education and includes education offered in pre-

primary educational institutions and centres and post primary institutions.

25
Collaborative decision-making (Group decision-making) refers to a situation

whereby individuals such as teachers and students collectively make a choice from the

alternatives before them. The decision made for purposes of this study is no longer

attributable to any single individual who is a member of the school community.

Collaboration refers to involvement of students by teachers in decision making to

achieve discipline related goals in public secondary schools.

Corporal punishment refers to a form of physical punishment that involved the

deliberate infliction of pain as retribution for an offence or for purposes of

disciplining or reforming a wrongdoer, or to deter attitudes or behaviour deemed

unacceptable in secondary schools.

Expulsion of students refers to permanent exclusion of a student from a secondary

school following the order of the Director of Education.

Children’s right refers to legal, social or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement

of children in a secondary school.

Community refers to persons residing in the neighbourhood of a secondary school in

this study.

Learner refers to individuals undergoing a course of study and instruction in a

secondary school in Kenya leading to the attainment of a Kenya Certificate of

Secondary Education (KCSE). It has been used interchangeably with the word student

in this study.

Parent refers to a mother, father or guardian of a child and includes any person who

is responsible under the law to maintain a child or is entitled to a child’s custody.

Peer counselling refers to a student to student talk as an alternative disciplinary

method in secondary schools.

26
Peer refers to a person, who is equal to another in terms of age, education and

abilities and they include students in a school.

Punishment refers to the authoritative imposition of a penalty on a student for an

offence or fault committed in a secondary school

School discipline refers to the system of rules, punishments and behavioural

strategies appropriate to the regulation and maintenance of order in schools. Its aim is

to control the students’actions and behaviour.

Stakeholder refers to a person, a public or private institution or organization involved

in an education institution and with vested interests for the benefit of such an

institution.

Suspension of students refers to a temporary exclusion of a student from attendance

at school by the principal for two 14 days (two weeks).

Unit of analysis refers to the major entity that is being investigated in the study.1.11

1.11 Organization of the study

This study was organized into five chapters. Chapter one consisted of introduction,

background to the study, statement of the problem, purpose of the study, objectives of

the study, research questions, significance of the study, limitations of the study,

delimitations of the study, basic assumptions of the study, definition of significant

terms and organization of the study. Chapter two dealt with literature review of

aspects explored under the effects of use of peer counselling, suspension, expulsion

and use of class meetings for collaborative decision making on students’ discipline,

Summary of literature review, theoretical framework and a conceptual framework.

27
Chapter three consisted of the research methodology that was used in conducting the

research study. It specifically dealt with research design, target population, sample

size and sampling procedures, research instruments, instrument validity, instrument

reliability, data collection procedures and data analysis techniques. Chapter four

consisted of data interpretation, analysis techniques and discussion of research

findings. Finally, Chapter five consisted of the summary, conclusions and

recommendations of the study.

28
 CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Introduction

This chapter comprised of literature review of aspects explored under the effects of

alternative disciplinary methods on students’ discipline in public secondary schools

under the following: principals’ use of peer counselling; suspension of indisciplined

students; students’ expulsion; holding class meetings with students for collaborative

decision making; summary of related literature review; theoretical framework and

conceptual framework.

2.2 An overview of school discipline

Discipline refers to educating someone to acquire desired behaviour for both

remediation and prevention purposes (Cotton, 2005). The quality of students’

discipline in schools is an important factor in determining the intellectual outcome of

students and schools (Reynolds, 1989). According to Rogers (2001), discipline has to

do with guidance and instruction to teach and enhance a social order where rights and

responsibilities are balanced. Discipline is about positive behaviour change (squelch,

2000). Rossouw (2003) observes that when educators discipline learners, they are

making disciples or disciplined persons. In this sense, discipline is regarded as

training that develops self-control.

According to Oosthuizen (1998), discipline must always be prospective and directed

at the development of the adult of the future. Discipline is the action by management

to enforce organizational standards. In an educational organization, there are many set

standards or codes of behaviour to which learners must adhere or uphold in order to

29
successfully achieve the objectives of the school (Okumbe, 1998). Any serious learner

misconduct involving violent or criminal behaviour defeats achievement of

educational goals (Gaustad, 2005).

According to Nyongesa (2007), discipline is a learning process and entails a

willingness to put forth all the effort that is required to achieve a chosen objective. It

is a system of guiding the individual to make reasonable decisions. It is also a mode

of behaviour that ensures the smooth running of an organization. Chiuri and Kiumi

(2005) allude that discipline plays the vital role of influencing and furthering learning

goals in a school. Rogers (2002) also states that discipline enables individuals to take

ownership of and be accountable for their behaviour to enable learners to develop

self- discipline in school as well as building a workable relationship between teachers

and learners. The aim of school discipline is to create an environment conducive for

learning (Gaustad, 2005). This means that discipline is prerequisite to effective

teaching and learning in schools and should mainly aim at controlling students’

actions and behaviour.

The management of school discipline is however a corporate responsibility between

the principal, the teachers and parents. School heads should therefore create a

democratic managerial environment in schools so as to enhance teachers and parents’

capacity to play their role expectation of shaping the behaviour of learners in the

desired direction (Bosire, Sang, Kiumi & Mungai, 2009). This view is consistent with

Sheldon and Epstein (2002) who maintained that an active partnership between

parents and schools has great benefits and parents can have a powerful effect on

children behaviour. Huczynski and Buchanaan (2001) noted that managing students’

30
behaviour requires a concerted effort of the parents, teachers and school principals as

the key players. This means that there are many key players in shaping the discipline

of students in schools. If effective learning is to be realized in use of alternative

disciplinary methods in schools, all stakeholders who include MOE officials, parents,

teachers, BoM members and the students themselves ought to participate in shaping

the desired school discipline hence realization of organizational goals.

According to Kivulu and Wandai (2009); Okumbe (1998), there are two types/

approaches to discipline which include methods that have a potential to cause pain or

discomfort punitive/deterrent and methods that do not cause physical discomfort

normative/ preventive. Preventive type of discipline focuses on establishing a set of

standards of behaviour, that is, norms, values and beliefs that are looking at

relationship–building, self-determination, self regulation, intrinsic control and

commitment to morals and ethics whereas the punitive approach is mainly

characterized by rules, extrinsic control, inspection and policing and is intended to

punish to discourage further infringement of a rule (Okumbe, 1998; Longman, 2003

& Mkhatshwa, 2000).

Presently a range of measures exists from preventive action by individual teachers to

punitive measures such as suspension and expulsion (Stewart, 2004). In this study,

preventive discipline methods consisted of peer counselling and principals’ use of

class meetings for collaborative decision making whereas corrective alternative

disciplinary methods consisted of suspension of indiscipline students and students’

expulsion.

31
Although secondary school principals play a very important role in the management

of school discipline in all learning institutions in Kenya Odundo (1990) observes that

schools are expanding especially in developing countries and teachers are becoming

more qualified professionally. Therefore according to Rarieya (2007), appointment to

school leadership in Kenya is currently based on merit where one has to be

interviewed before appointment by the Teachers Service Commission (TSC). This

implies that despite the challenging role played by principals in management of

students discipline byusse of alternative disciplinary methods, they must be

professionally qualified whether male or female for them to occupy such leadership

positions.

The responsibility to implement school discipline policies in learning institutions is

vested on principals and this justifies the critical role played by the principals in

management of school discipline. Kiprop (2012) underscores the importance of the

role played by principals in maintaining discipline in schools which they achieve by

setting the tone and morale of the school through their remarkable influence over the

teachers and students. Bosire, Sang, Kiumi and Mungai (2009) however underscores

the need for school heads to create democratic managerial environments so as to

enhance teachers and parents’ capacity to play their role expectation of shaping the

behaviour of learners in the desired direction.

However, this view is consistent with Sheldon and Epstein (2002) who maintain that

an active partnership between parents and schools has great benefits and parents can

have a powerful effect on children behaviour. Bosire, Sang, Kiumi and Mungai

(2009) support this by noting that the management of school discipline is a corporate

32
responsibility between the principal, the teachers and parents. This view is constistent

with Huczynski and Buchanaan (2001) ; Kiprop 2012) who note that managing

students’ behaviour requires a concerted effort of the parents, teachers and school

principals as the key players for effective management of school discipline. This

implies that the principal is a very crucial figure in the management of school

discipline and appropriate efforts should be made to bring on-board all the other

stakeholders and ensure that they are properly equipped with relevant information

pertaining the use of alternative disciplinary methods on students’ discipline in

schools.

This could however be achieved by ensuring that principals posses basic

qualifications for appointment as school heads. According to Kart (1995)

administrators require technical skills, human skills and conceptual skills to perform

their duties effectively and efficiently. Eshiwani (1993) adds that training provides

knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary for effective performance of one’s roles and

responsibilities to accomplish tasks. Research findings by Joubert and Serakwa (2009)

indicate that most educators have not received formal training with regard to

discipline strategies and their applications. Cicognani (2004) agrees by reporting that

the training that is provided at colleges and universities is inadequate and could not

enable teachers meet their needs in the classroom situation.

2.3 Peer counselling and students’ discipline

Peer counselling can be used as an alternative disciplinary method of instilling

discipline on students in public secondary schools. It is a component of guidance and

counselling. Guidance and counselling traces its roots to the development of

psychology in the USA. It came about as a reaction to change in the industrialised

33
society. In 1911, Goodwin organised a wide range of programmes in guidance and

counselling in high schools in America (Were, 2003). Guidance and counselling in

Kenya was formally introduced under the Ministry of education in 1967 and was

coordinated from the head office. In 1971, the guidance and counselling unit was

moved to the inspectorate.

Peer counselling in America is achieved through coaching and training students who

are trained in basic listening and helping skills of problem solving and decision

making (Borders & Drury, 1992). Corey (1991) maintains that effective peer

counselling is characterized by quality leadership, excellence in training and

consistent supervision. Peer counsellors assist school counsellors in showing new

students around the school, listening to peers who have concerns and providing

outreach activities (Chireshe, 2006). Davidoff (1997); Perold ( 2000); Steynand Van

Wyk (1999) allude that due to a long history of oppression and struggle, teachers also

lacked the necessary motivation and were not easily motivated to participate in new

projects that would expect more effort from them. Despite the underlying challenges

in the implementation of peer counselling programmes, this implies that if peer

counsellors are properly equipped with training they could carry out their

responsibility very well if proper supervision is undertaken by school counsellors.

Peer counselling in Botswana is based on the premise that students tend to relate more

to those with whom they are comfortable with (UNESCO, 2002). The peer

counsellors assist in identifying students with problems and making referrals to the

school counsellors (Chireshe, 2006). Peer counselling in Uganda enables students to

discuss freely and express personal problems about parents, the authority and

34
themselves in a free frank manner. Peer educators provide information that the adults

would normally not be prepared to discuss (Rutondoki, 2000). Mutie and Ndambuki

(2004) aver that peers in the African communities had control over each other’s

behaviour through open disapproval of an unacceptable behaviour, continuous

rebukes till unacceptable behaviour ceased. This implies that the peers played a

supervisory role in shaping each other’s behaviour.

Guidance and counselling movement was started in the United States of America

(USA) as a reaction to changes in the industrial society due to humanitarian concern

to improve the rights of those people who were adversely affected by the industrial

revolution of the mid to late 1800s. It aimed at offering occupational guidance to

workers in order to cope up with challenges in life (Gladding, 1988). Literature on

formal guidance and counselling in African countries traces the guidance and

counselling movement in Africa in the fifties in Nigeria and sixties in Botswana,

Nigeria, Tanzania, Zambia and Switzerland (Biswalo, 1969). Peer counselling as an

alternative disciplinary method is embraced globally to manage discipline in learning

institutions.

Peer counselling is achieved in America through coaching and training students who

are trained in basic listening and helping skills of problem solving and decision

making (Borders & Drury, 1992). Corey (1991) maintains that effective peer

counselling is characterized by quality leadership, excellence in training and

consistent supervision. Peer counsellors assist school counsellors in showing new

students around the school, listening to peers who have concerns and providing

outreach activities (Chireshe, 2006). Peer counselling in Botswana is based on the

35
premise that students tend to relate more to those with whom they are comfortable

with (UNESCO, 2002).

The peer counsellors assist in identifying students with problems and making referrals

to the school counsellors (Chireshe, 2006). Peer counselling in Uganda enables

students to discuss freely and express personal problems about parents, the authority

and themselves in a free frank manner. Peer educators provide information that the

adults would normally not be prepared to discuss (Rutondoki, 2000). Mutie and

Ndambuki (2004) aver that peers in the African communities had control over each

other’s behaviour through open disapproval of an unacceptable behaviour, continuous

rebukes till unacceptable behaviour ceased. This means that various countries have

embraced peer counselling for it is characterized by students ability to interact freely

hence the supervisory role played by peers in shaping each other’s behaviour.

Guidance and counselling was formerly introduced in Kenyan institutions of learning

in 1971 (Mutie & Ndambuki, 2004). The MoE through a report of the presidential

working party in Education and Manpower Training for the next decade and beyond

Republic of Kenya (1988) and the Commission of inquiry into the Education system

of Kenya Republic of Kenya (1999) recommended the establishment of peer

counselling services in all educational institutions to motivate the youth to express

their desire to protect themselves against HIV/AIDS and other social and

psychological problems. Peer counselling was therefore integrated into the guidance

and counselling program as a remedy for clients whose struggle revolve around

problems in coping with demands of life and learning.

36
Were (2003) and KIE (2004) stated that peer education concept in Kenyan schools is

a recent phenomenon that is rapidly gaining momentum. Wango and Mungai (2007)

says that it is among the wide diversity of changing counselling practices that the

educational system has adapted to with an aim to develop individual’s intellectual,

social, physical and spiritual capabilities. Peer counselling is one of the strategies that

have been adopted to help students who are in need of counselling. It was also

recommended by the Kenya development plan (1997-2000) to be enhanced in

learning institutions. As a result, peer education and counselling clubs have been

established in school and training colleges (KIE, 2004).

Republic of Kenya (2001) in a report of the task force on students’ discipline and

unrest in secondary schools in Kenya solicited for information from various

stakeholders through written memorandum, oral presentations, previous reports,

News papers and data collection which coverd the period between 2000 to 2001. The

report pointed out the importance of inauguration of peer counselling groups in every

school and training of peer counsellors to enable them acquire skills and knowledge

that would empower them to perform their roles. However, as an alternative

disciplinary method, secondary school principals are expected to implement peer

counselling programmes as a policy requirement by the government hence this study

seeks to establish the effects of peer counselling on students’ discipline in public

secondary schools. Despite the methods and procedures used in the report, this study

has identified a research gap on effects of principals’ use of peer counselling on

students’ discipline in Kitui County.

37
Chireshe (2013) did a study that sought to establish the status of peer counselling in

Zimbabwean secondary schools as perceived by school teachers. The study used

qualitative design. 26 secondary school teachers participated in the study. An open-

ended questionnaire was used in the study as a tool for data collection. Data was

thematically analysed. The results revealed that most of the secondary schools from

which the respondents came from, did not have peer counsellors. Some participants

mentioned peer counsellors in the form of peer educators from HIV and AIDS related

organizations or Non-Governmental Organizations who sometimes visited secondary

schools. The few teachers whose schools had peer counsellors revealed that the peer

counsellors were selected on the basis of their good characters.

The peer counsellors were involved in HIV and AIDS and related issues such as

unwanted pregnancy, sexual abuse, drug abuse, problem solving and overcoming peer

pressure. They entertained other students through dramas, poems and presentations.

Although the peer counsellors had some HIV and AIDS training, they were reported

to be lacking in peer helping training. The peer counsellors faced challenges including

peer counselling underrating, resistance and discouragement from other students, lack

of faith by other students and shortage of time. The teachers wished the peer

counsellors could receive training in managing depression, study and listening skills,

ethical issues and managing disputes among students. This implies that that many

challenges were encountered in peer counselling and this could affect its effectiveness

negatively. Despite the research methodology used, it had limited sample size, data

analysis techniques, data collection tools and in terms of locale of the study compared

to my study hence a knowledge gap on effects of principlas alternative disciplinary

methods on students’ discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

38
Kindiki (2009) conducted a study on effectiveness of communication on students’

discipline in secondary schools in Naivasha District, Kenya.The study utilized

qualitative approach.Questionnaires, interviews and documentation were used as

instruments for collecting data. Purposive sampling was used to identify Naivasha

district as the location of the study. Stratified and simple random sampling was used

to identify 8 secondary schools and 200 respondents from these schools. Twenty (20)

students and 4 teachers in each sampled school were given the self administered

questionnaires while all the 8 head teachers were interviewed. The data collected was

analyzed descriptively.

The study found that most schools with guidance and counselling programmes have

reduced indiscipline cases compared with schools without. Guidance and counselling

programme was seen to be an effective way of communication to assist students

change their behaviour. The study recommended the utilization of guidance and

counselling in handling low levels of discipline in secondary schools which was rated

the best method of approach. Despite the appropriateness of the research

methododlogy, the study used a smaller sample size compared to my study and it was

also limited in terms of data analysis techniques used. However, the study has left out

a gap of effects of principals’ use of peer counselling and students discipline in the

management of students’ discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

Busienei (2012) conducted a study that sought to investigate the alternative methods

which teachers use instead of corporal punishment and the efficacy of these methods

on student behaviour management. The study was conducted in Eldoret Municipality

39
of Rift Valley province. The study population comprised of secondary school teachers

in Eldoret Municipality. Proportionate sampling technique was used to select 161

teachers from the 10 public secondary schools representing all the 3 strata of

secondary schools in the Municipality. The respondents included 10 head teachers, 10

deputies, 10 guidance and counselling masters/mistresses, 40 class teachers and 91

classroom teachers. Data was collected using a closed-ended questionnaire. Data

collected was analyzed using frequencies, percentages, mean and standard deviation.

It was found that, although teachers use alternative methods to corporal punishment,

they believe that they are less effective compared to corporal punishment. Guidance

and counseling and positive reinforcement were suggested as alternative methods to

corporal punishment. In view of the findings, the study recommended urgent need to

create awareness on alternative methods to corporal punishment and also on the

overall effects of corporal punishment on the child. Despite the effectiveness of the

research methodology, this study has identified a gap on effects of principals’ use of

peer counselling on students discipline in Kitui County.

Visser (2005) conducted a study on the implementation of a peer support programme

in 13 secondary schoolsTshwane. The programme was aimed at establishing support

for learners with psychosocial problems in order to prevent and reduce high-risk

behaviour related to HIV/AIDS, substance abuse, and various forms of crime. The

study used action research. Data was analysed descriptively. In a situation analysis

done before the intervention programme, a questionnaire was used to obtain data

about high-risk behaviour from a stratified sample of 873 secondary school learners

(13–19 years) who represented the population composition in the area.The following

forms of high-risk behavior were identified: Peer supporters were identified, trained
40
and supported to implement the programme in their schools with the assistance of a

teacher and student facilitators. Peer supporters identified learners with problems,

supported them or referred them to helping agencies. They also started awareness and

information activities to prevent and reduce high-risk behaviour. Through the

evaluation of the implementation process, crucial challenges were identified that

needed to be addressed for the programme to function optimally and to enhance its

sustainability. It was however found that learners did not trust these teachers enough

to talk to them about their personal problems, as the teachers occupied an

authoritarian position (Visser, 2001).

Likewise, many of the teachers felt that they were not properly equipped to deal with

the emotional problems of the learners. They also carried a heavy burden in the

schools and experienced high levels of stress (Davidoff, 1997; Jeevanantham, 1999;

Mabeba & Prinsloo, 2000; Steyn, 1999; Steyn & Van Wyk, 1999; Vorster & Sutcliffe,

2000). They simply did not see counselling as part of their job description (Visser,

Schoeman, & Perold, (2004). The study recommended that much more attention

should therefore be focused on the involvement of teachers who are willing to assist

the peer supporters. However, despite the research methododlogy used in the study,

the study has left out a gap on effects of principlas use of peer counselling on

students’ discipline in public secondary shools in Kitui County.

Chireshe (2006) conducted a study that attempted to assess the effectiveness of the

Zimbabwean secondary school guidance and counselling services from school

counsellors’ and students’ perspective. The survey method was used in the empirical

study. A questionnaire was used to collect data. The respondents for the study

41
included 314 school counsellors and 636 students. Chi-square(x2) tests were also

calculated. The study revealed that there were differences between the level of the

school guidance and counselling services in Zimbabwean secondary schools and the

international arena. The Zimbabwean school guidance and counselling services were

not always planned for at the beginning of each year. Students and parents were not

frequently involved in needs assessment while the services were not frequently

evaluated in comparison with those in the international arena. The study also revealed

that some biographical variables significantly influenced the way the respondents

responded to given items while others did not.

The study revealed that the majority of both school counsellors and students viewed

the school guidance and counselling services as beneficial and school counsellors as

effectively playing their role. The study further revealed that the effectiveness of the

Zimbabwean secondary school guidance and counselling services was negatively

affected by lack of resources and training in guidance and counselling and non-

counselling duties performed by school counsellors. Despite the importance of

guidance and counselling programme, it is faced with challenges which need to be

addressed hence a research gap of effects of peer counselling on students discipline.

However, although the study used a very large sample size compared to my study the

study has left out a gap on effects of principals’ use of peer counselling on students’

discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

Mbugua (2006) did a study that investigated the attitudes of teachers and students to

student-peer counselling in Starehe Division Nairobi Province. Research methodology

involved the use of ex-post design. Stratified and cluster sampling was used to obtain

42
a sample of seven second secondary schools and 20 teacher counsellors who

participated in the study. The study used a questionnaire as the main research

instrument. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyse data and

conclusions were drawn based on the findings. The findings indicated that students

experienced a myriad of problems while in school. They were more comfortable

opening up their concerns to peer counsellors than to teacher counsellors. Peer

counsellors existed in only 56% of the schools but were largely dormant. Schools that

had peer counsellors 51% of them were untrained. This could perhaps explain why

the guidance and counselling departments in secondary schools is not effective in

handling students’ counselling needs. The study recommended the need to identify

and train peer counsellors who would be equipped with helping skills enabling them

to reach out to their fellow students. Although the research methodology is similar to

that of my study, the study by Mbugua (2006) has a limited sample size compared to

my study. However, the study has left out a gap on effects of principals used of peer

counselling on students’ discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

Wango (2006) conducted a study which sought to explore the Policy and Practice in

Guidance and counselling in secondary schools in Kenya. The study used qualitative

and quantitative approach. Questionnaires and systematic observations were used to

collect data. The study was conducted in three stages with an initial survey at stage

one in 43 schools, case studies at stage two in three schools and at third stage,

discussions were held with various stakeholders including focus group discussions

with students. The study observed that despite emphasis on guidance and counselling

in schools, the provision of guidance and counselling services is highly variable

and somewhat fragmented in scope and largely dependent on individual schools. Out

43
of the sampled schools 32(74%) had peer counsellors and 10 schools had trained or

oriented peer counsellors into counselling while others did not have. Although there

were peer counsellors in some schools, the mode of selection was a matter of concern

for the peer counsellors were selected by the school administration and teachers. Lack

of commitment among teachers who were expected to help the teacher counsellor was

also noted for they were never there. Some students did not seek peer counselling.

This could be explained by the fact that not all schools had peer counsellors or they

were not active. Others said that they could not go to persons of the same age for they

had nothing to tell them. Others said that they went for peer counselling because they

could discuss issues that could not be discussed with teachers or parents.

The study however recommended the need for a more comprehensive guidance and

counselling policy in education which are related to appointment of counsellors,

professional issues like code of conduct for counsellors and the need for more

comprehensive programme that is learner friendly. Although the selection of peer

counsellors relied heavily on the school fraternity, this could explain the reason why

peer counsellors encountered some challenges with other students. Despite the

methodology used and the challenges encountered by peer counsellors the study has

however left out a gap on effects of use of peer counselling on students’ discipline in

public secondary schools in Kitui County.

A study by Ajowi and Simatwa (2010) sought to examine the role of guidance and

counselling in promoting students’ discipline in secondary schools was in Kisumu

district Kenya. The study population comprised of 4,570 students, 65 head teachers,

65 deputy head teachers, and 65 heads of Guidance and Counseling Department from

44
all the 65 secondary schools in the District. Out of this, a sample of 22 head teachers,

22 deputy head teachers, 22 heads of Guidance and Counseling and 916 students from

22 secondary schools was selected through the simple random sampling technique.

Two instruments were used to collect data for the study. These were interview

schedule and a questionnaire. The data collected through questionnaire were analyzed

using descriptive statistics in form of frequencies and percentages. While data

collected using interview schedule were audio taped and transcribed into themes,

categories and sub-categories as they emerged from the data. They were analyzed

using summary Tables for the purpose of data presentation and interpretation. The

findings showed that guidance and counseling was minimally used to promote

students’ discipline in secondary schools in Kisumu District.

Punishments especially corporal punishment was widely used to solve disciplinary

cases in all schools. It was however; found that there were no policy guidelines from

the Ministry of Education on how the schools could use guidance and counseling to

manage the student disciplinary cases. Based on the findings, it was recommended

that the Ministry of Education should provide policy guidelines on the use of

guidance and counseling for the management of discipline in secondary schools. It is

however noted that these findings are inconsistence with the ban on corporal

punishment through legal Notice No. 56/2001. Corporal punishment is against the

provisions provided for in international instruments on child protection to which

Kenya is a signatory. The two instruments are in agreement with child protection and

welfare provision as contained in the Children Act No. 8 of 2001. This implies that

every secondary school principal must obey the law and any contravention of the Act

(Legal Notice No. 52/2001) may result to prosecution. Although the study was

45
conducted 9 years after the ban of corporal punishment, the study revealed that

corporal punishment is illegally practiced in schools to deal with learner indiscipline.

However, despite the research methodology used, the study did not use inferential

statistics to establish relationships between observed variables and the sample size

was also limited since it was conducted in only one district whereas investigations for

my study were conducted in 16 Districts in Kitui County. However, the study has left

out a gap on effects of principals’ alternative disciplinary methods on students’

discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

Marangu, Bururia and Njonge (2012) did a study that sought to find out challenges

faced by peer counsellors in their effort to effect behaviour change in secondary

schools in Maara District, Kenya. The study used descriptive survey research design.

The target and accessible population was 27 guidance and counselling heads of

departments and 1700 form three students in 27 secondary schools. It was important

in mentoring other students as they addressed issues related to the youth in secondary

school in Maara district. Out of these, 7 girls’ school with 583 students, 4 boys’

schools with 434 students and 16 mixed secondary schools, with 683 students formed

the study. Questionnaires were used as tools for data collection. The methodology was

effective. The study established that peer counselling had been accepted as an

important contributor to behaviour change among learners in learning institutions.

Most peer counsellors were academically above average making them academic

tutors.

Despite the important role played by peer counselling in behaviour change, it may be

particularly important for principals in public secondary schools to ensure that peer

counsellors are properly guided on use of peer counselling as alternative disciplinary

46
method hence achievement of school objectives in management of students’

discipline. The findings by Marangu, Bururia and Njonge (2012) also indicated that

peer counsellors are established in many schools giving them the opportunity to

model good behaviour. The study recommended that peer counsellors require

adequate orientation on their roles like basic counselling skills. The MOE to ensure

that peer counselling programme is established in all secondary schools. It should also

develop a peer counselling curriculum that would be used to train the peer

counsellors. The study further recommended that the appointed guidance and

counselling teachers should be friendly and interacts well with the other students. The

guidance and counselling teacher should appoint peer counsellors who are

academically above average and who are respected by other students.

Peer counsellors should be shown their responsibilities. Students need to be sensitized

on the roles and responsibilities of peer counsellors and proper recording system

should be developed so that work done by peer counsellors can be recorded. This

implies that appointment of competent peer counsellors would make them focused on

issues that could shape the behaviour of other students positively. It is however noted

that this study was conducted in only one district whose sample size is limited.

Despite the effectiveness of the research methodology for the study, the research

design is different from that used in my study and the study was limited in sample size

since it was conducted in only one disctict while my study was done in 16 districts in

Kitui County. However, this study has left out a gap on effects principals’ use of peer

counselling on students’ discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

47
Mbabazi and Bagaya (2013) conducted a study which sought to demonstrate that

guidance and counselling strategies play a central role in school efforts to improve

learners’ levels of conformity with the code of conduct in Gulu Municipality in

Uganda. A cross sectional parallel sample survey design was used with a total of 366

respondents who comprised of 226 teachers and 140 prefects, in secondary schools

who were selected through simple random sampling. Questionnaires were used as

data collection tool. Three hypotheses were formulated to guide the study and were

tested using descriptive statistics and Chi square tests.

The study revealed that individual guidance and counselling strategy was commonly

used and that learners’ level of conformity with the code of conduct is moderate. The

results further revealed that learners’ level of conformity with the code of conduct

does not significantly depend on the guidance and counselling strateg. The study also

found that there were other methods which were used to ensure learner conformity

with the school code of conduct apart from guidance and counselling. Based on these

findings, the researchers recommend that school administrators should adopt the use

of both individual and group counselling strategies and the Ministry of Education and

Sports (MoES) should conduct in-service training for all teachers on techniques of

guidance and counselling. The study proposes areas for further research including

investigating the effectiveness of guidance and counselling. Despite the effectiveness

of the research methodology used, the study has left out a gap on effects of peer

counselling on students discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

Bett (2013) undertook a review of issues that have been raised on the importance of

promoting effective peer education and counselling in secondary schools with a view

48
to sensitizing the teachers, head teachers and other education stakeholders on the role

of Peer Educators (PEs) and Peer Counsellors (PCs) in students’ lives in secondary

schools. The methodology adopted was theoretical. The paper engaged in discussing

the importance of promoting the value and the role of peer counselling among

students. It was noted that peer group interactions enabled both peer educators and

students experience increased self-esteem and greater ability to deal with adolescence

related problems.

Effective peer counselling in schools supplements the provision of guidance and

counselling services hence promoting positive behaviour change and improvement

among students in academic performance. The discussions however recommended

that schools should be more involved in conducting students’ needs assessments and

developing comprehensive guidance and counselling services. This means that if peer

counselling is properly managed, as an alternative disciplinary method, it could

enhance students’ discipline in schools. However, despite the methodology used, this

study has left out a gap on effects of principals’ use of peer counselling on students’

discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

Ngotho and Zani (2014) conducted a study that sought to establish the influence of

different counseling methods in promoting indiscipline in district public secondary

schools in Kikuyu District, Central Kenya. The study was guided by four objectives.

A simple random sampling procedure was used to identify four secondary schools in

the four educational zones in the study area. The study sample consisted of 132 form

four students, four head teachers and four heads of guidance and counseling masters

from four schools. The research compared several counseling methods.

49
The study by Ngotho and Zani (2014) established that group counseling was the most

acceptable compared with individual counseling and peer counseling. The study also

found that the promotion of school discipline was hampered by lack of parent

participation in their children’s discipline. The head teachers and counselors

complained of limited resources and poor ministerial support in the implementation of

successful and effective school guidance and counseling programs. The study

recommended proper communication between all education stakeholders in order to

develop a sound school guidance and counseling program. The study also

recommended a continuous teacher training program for teacher counselors. Despite

the research methodology used in this study, the study was limited in sample siaze for

it was conducted in only one district compared to my study which was conduted in 16

districts in Kitui County. However, the study has left out a gap on effects of

principals’ use of peer counselling on students discipline in public secondary schools

in Kitui County.

From the findings (Kindiki, 2009) noted that most schools with guidance and

counselling programmes have reduced indiscipline cases compared with schools

without. This is in agreement with Wango (2006) who observed that the provision of

guidance and counselling services is highly variable and somewhat fragmented in

scope and largely dependent on individual schools in that Schools which had peer

counsellors had trained and oriented them into counselling. This is consisted with

Mbugua (2006) who observed that those schools that had peer counsellors, 51% of

them were untrained. Marangu, Bururia and Njonge (2012) noted that effective peer

counselling in schools supplements the provision of guidance and counselling

50
services. Peer counselling is important in mentoring other students as they addressed

issues related to the youth. This could be achieved through coaching and training

students in basic listening and helping skills of problem solving and decision making

(Borders & Drury, 1992).

Mbugua (2006) argued that students went for peer counselling because they could

discuss issues that could not be discussed with teachers or parents. This is consistent

with (Mbugua, 2006; Marangu, Bururia & Njonge, 2012). It is argued that effective

peer counselling is characterized by quality leadership, excellence in training and

consistent supervision (Corey, 1991). However, Ngotho and Zani (2014) established

that group counseling was the most acceptable compared with individual counseling

and peer counseling. According to (Chireshe, 2006) the challenges encountered by

peer counsellors included lack of resources and training in guidance and counselling

and non-counselling duties performed by school counsellors which negatively

affected the effectiveness of the guidance and counselling services. Peer counselling

was negatively affected by peer underrating; resistance and discouragement from

other students; lack of faith by other students and shortage of time (Wango, 2006;

Chireshe, 2013).Visser (2005) concurs by noting that some teachers simply did not

regard care for the emotional well-being of learners as part of their duty as teachers.

Wango (2006) adds that students did not seek peer counselling and others said that

they could not go to persons of the same age for they had nothing to tell them.

Reviewed literature has identified a gap on effects of use of peer counselling as an

alternative disciplinary method for none of the conducted studies investigated the

effects of peer counselling on students’ discipline in public secondary schools hence

the need to fill the knowledge gap.

51
2.4 Suspension and students’ discipline

Suspension can be used as an alternative disciplinary method on students’ discipline

in public secondary schools. Suspension is popular as a tool for administrators in

United States because it takes less time than other alternatives and school officials

feel that it is effective. In 1971, the Ohio law allowed a principal to suspend students

for up to ten days from school for misconduct. Notification had to be made to parents

within 24 hours of the suspension stating the reason for the action (Harris & Bennet,

1982).

According to Stewart (2004), out of school suspension is used in United States of

America (USA) for serious misconducts such as drug possession, the carrying of

illegal weapons, poor attendance and truancy. Suspension of students from schools

involves temporary exclusion of a student from school. However there is considerable

debate over just how effective excluding a learner from the school setting really is

(Dettman, 1972; Cahoon, 1989; Pyke, 1993 & Slee, 1995). Stewart (2004) argues that

measures such as the exclusion of misbehaving learners should be treated with caution

for they might not reflect accepted international principles and practices and should

only be exercised in the most extreme circumstances.

Stewart (2004) observed that in Australia, a range of measures which teachers use to

ensure appropriate standards of learner behaviour presently range from preventive

action by individual teachers to punitive measures such as suspension. Most

Australian education authorities have passed regulations providing principals with the

power to exclude misbehaving learners from their school and this power includes

suspension. Suspension from school has commonly had the major objective of
52
removing an offending learner from the classroom and thus allowing the teacher to

get on with the lesson in hand. It also provides an opportunity to require parents to be

involved in any review of a learner’s behaviour problems and it can be used as a

mechanism for punishing unacceptable behaviour. It can be argued, that the major

consequence for some learners is that any suspension becomes a reward and thus it

serves to reinforce the form of behaviour the teacher or school was trying to

eliminate. Moreover, there is also evidence that suspended learners receive support

from many of their classmates (Slee, 1995). This implies that as an alternative

punitive disciplinary method, suspension has no effect on learner behaviour. This

means that use of suspension to manage students’ discipline may not change the

behaviour of learners.

Nyang’au (2013) did a study that sought to study the effects of disciplinary strategies

on students’ behaviour in public secondary schools in Matungulu District, Machakos

County. The study sample size consisted of 9 schools with a total population of 3433

and a proportionate total sample population of 1043 was selected representing 30% to

ensure selection of a statistically significant sample. Systematic sampling was used to

select the schools and simple random sampling was used to select teachers and

students. Key informant respondents like the Deputy Head Teachers and Heads of

Department Guidance and Counselling were included in the study due to the key role

they play in maintaining appropriate student behaviour as well as being custodians of

student behaviour records. Data was collected using questionnaires, interview of key

informant respondents and document review. Data collected was analysed using

descriptive statistics through the determination of measures of central tendency to

53
determine the distribution of data as well as calculation of measures of dispersion to

determine variability in data.

Data was also analysed through content analysis. Quantitative data was presented

using percentages and frequency tables with explanations while qualitative data was

presented in thematic narratives. The study established that 58.6% of the respondents

were of the view that suspension from school was effective in improving student

behaviour. The study recommended that schools should incorporate parents and

guardians in tackling student behaviour problems and all teachers should receive

training in guidance and counselling. Thus according to the study, suspension was an

effective discipline strategy on students’ behaviour. This means that its use could be

enhanced by incorporation of other stakeholders and training of those charged with its

use could guarantee them of appropriate competencies on use of suspension as an

alternative disciplinary method. Despite the effectiveness of the research methodology

used in this study, this is limited in sample size since it was only conducted in a single

district while my study was conducted in 16 districts. However, this study identified a

knowledge gap on effects of suspension of indiscipline students on students’

discipline in public secondaryschools in Kitui County.

Guidelines on the suspension of in disciplined students in Kenya are contained in the

Education Act Cap 211 on school discipline regulations. Republic of Kenya (1980)

stipulates that suspended students shall not be allowed to attend classes and shall be

required to be physically away from the school precincts until he/she is informed of

the outcome of the case to the parent or legal guardian through a letter. When a

headteacher finds it necessary to suspend a student from school, the headteacher

54
should inform the student’s parents or guardian of the suspension, the length of the

suspension and the specific reasons for it by formal notification. Particulars for the

formal notification should include sufficient reason for suspension and relevant

circumstances which should be fully understood by the students, parents and

guardians. The headteacher should inform the BoM members of the punishment at

once and convene a meeting within 14 days to discuss the discipline issues. Although

suspension of indiscipline students consumes time, these legal provisions entails

good legislative practices in administering suspension as an alternative disciplinary

method and procedures to be followed in dealing with students’ discipline.

A study by Harris and Bennet (1982) on Student Discipline: Legal, Empirical and

Educational Perspectives found that those students who are repeatedly suspended

sometimes make the discipline problem appear greater than it is. Suspension rarely

encourages students to control their behaviour although it gets the parent into the

school. The study recommended that school officials should make every effort to help

students learn to control their own behaviour and designing and utilization of

disciplinary approaches that could directly address the discipline problems.

Mutua (2004) did a study that sought to investigate alternative strategies of discipline

in the absence of Corporal punishment in public secondary schools in Matungulu

Division, Machakos District Kenya. The instruments for data collection were

questionnaires and an interview schedule and an observation schedule. The study used

survey method and random sampling to get a sample of four headteachers and 60

classroom teachers. Data was analysed by descriptive statistics where means,

percentages and frequencies were used. Chi-square(x2) was used to measure the

55
relationship between alternative strategies that teachers preferredto use and the

independent variables.

The findings by Mutua (2004) indicated that teachers had a range of alternatives that

they used. These includesguidance and counselling, manual work, extra class work,

having a set of school rules, withdrawal of privileges, kneeling down, dialogue and

suspension was used at times. The study recommended that teachers should use

alternative methods of behaviour modification which have a positive impact on

students’ behaviour instead of using punishment which only suppressed behaviour.

From the findings, suspension as an alternative strategy had not been given

prominence as the chi square value is 0.17 meaning that the method is not statistically

significant for it was rarely used. This was also confirmed by the other range of

alternatives which were used to modify learner behaviour. Despite the appropriateness

of the research methododlogy, this study has however identified a research gap on

effects of suspension of indiscipline students on students’ discipline in public

secondary schools in Kitui County.

Mugo (2006) did a study on participatory processes used by headteachers in

enhancing students discipline in public secondary schools in Kiambu Division,

Kiambu District. Questionnaires were used as tools for data collection. The study

used ex post facto design. The target population was five headteachers, 25 teachers

and 150 students. The study found that suspension of indiscipline students was used in

extreme cases and for habitual offenders. Guidance and counselling were identified

coupled with punishment as leading methods of enhancing discipline in secondary

schools. The study recommended development and implementation of proper

56
guidance and counselling programmes in all schools by school management and

parents should be informed of proper parenting and the relevance it has to school

discipline in our contemporary society. This implies that suspension was used

subjectively based on students’ indiscipline cases. The study has however identified a

knowledge gap on effects of suspension of indiscipline students on students’

discipline in public secondary schools in kitui county Kenya.

Smit (2010) did a study on the role of school Discipline in combating violence in

schools in East London region. The study sample was composed of four primary

schools and five high schools. The respondents to the study included principals or

senior members of staff and 330 learners. Data was collected by use of a

questionnaire and an interview guide. The findings indicated that suspension pushes

students out of school and may only contribute to the broader problem of violence.

The study recommended addressing alternatives to suspension in order to find ways of

helping children who have shown signs of misbehaviour problems. Counselling and

focusing on problem solving relating to behaviour issue and community services

could achieve more effective discipline. These results imply that suspension of

students is counterproductive in dealing with indiscipline of students for it does not

bring positive results. This study has however identified a research gap on effects of

suspension of indiscipline students on students’ discipline in public secondary schools

in kitui county Kenya.

A study done by Kindiki (2009) on effectiveness of communication on students’

discipline in secondary schools in Kenya was conducted in Naivasha District. The

study utilized qualitative approach with questionnaires, interviews and documentation

57
as instruments of collecting data. Purposive sampling was used to identify Naivasha

district as the location of the study. Stratified and simple random sampling was used

to identify 8 secondary schools and 200 respondents from these schools. 20 students

and 4 teachers in each sampled school were given the self administered questionnaires

while all the 8 head teachers were interviewed.

The data collected by Kindiki (2009) was analyzed descriptively. The study revealed

that suspension was considered the most common technique used to deal with

indiscipline in secondary schools. The study further revealed that suspended students

rarely changed their behaviour and will most likely carry on with the same delinquent

behaviour after suspension. The study recommended effective guidance and

counselling for students would realize their mistakes and initiate behaviour change

aimed at being better disciplined. Guidance of students on proper use of information

Communication Technology (ICT) would also minimize antisocial behaviour among

students. This implies that the executors of suspension get a little relieve for a while

as the student services the suspension period but the student may come back with

worse indiscipline issues than they left the schools. Although the research

methodology used in the study was appropriate for the study, this study has identified

a knowledge gap on effects of suspension of indiscipline students on students’

discipline in public seconda

A study by Simatwa ( 2012) on management of students discipline in secondary

schools in Kenya which was carried out in Bungoma County used questionnaires and

an interview schedule and document analysis to collect data. The study population

consisted of 125 headteachers, 125 deputy headteachers, 1575 teachers and 2075

58
prefects managing 20107 students in 125 secondary schools. Descriptive statistics was

used to analyse data. The findings revealed that many infractions were experienced in

public secondary schools and headteachers used a wide range of methods managing

students discipline in schools including suspension. The study indicated that

Headteachers had powers to suspend students for fourteen days and no absolute

powers to suspend students for a period exceeding fourteen days. It was further

revealed that most students and the society in general were against the use of

suspension as a sanction. The affected students could come back to school determined

to revenge.

The study by Simatwa (2012) concluded that suspension as a sanction should be used

sparingly. The recommended way forward for using these sanctions included prompt

resolutions on suspensions whereby students were to be kept out of schools as little as

possible since the use of these sanctions had drastic consequences and suspension was

only used as the last resort in which case the school administrators first considered use

of alternative sanctions. This means that suspension was not an effective sanction of

dealing with students’ discipline issues. From these findings, this study has identified

a research gap on effects of suspension of indiscipline students on students’ discipline

in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

Ouma, Simatwa and Serem (2014) conducted a study on Management of pupil

discipline in Kenya: A Case Study of Kisumu Municipality. Descriptive survey

research design was adopted for this study. The study population consisted of 115

head teachers, 115 deputy head teachers, and 460 class teachers of standard seven and

eight, 2530 prefects and one Municipal Quality Assurance and Standards Officer.

59
Simple random sampling technique was used to select a study sample that consisted

of 37 head teachers, 37 deputy head teachers, 152 class teachers of standard seven and

eight and 370 prefects. Saturated sampling technique was used to select one

Municipal Quality Assurance and Standards Officer. In-depth interview schedules,

questionnaire and document analysis guide were used for data collection. The data

was analyzed using descriptive statistics in form of means, percentages and frequency

counts. Qualitative data collected from open-ended items in the questionnaire and in-

depth interviews were analyzed and organized into themes and sub-themes as they

emerged.

The study by Ouma, Simatwa and Serem (2014) revealed that Pupil discipline

problems experienced in primary schools included; noise making which was rated 3.7,

failure to complete assignment 3.8, truancy 4.0, lateness 4.0, theft 3.5, and sneaking

3.5. However, the study established that effective methods of dealing with indiscipline

were; Involving parents who was rated 4.2, Guidance and counselling 4.2, manual

work 4.0, caning 3.3 suspensions 2.5 and reprimanding 2.4. The study recommended

that appropriate pupil discipline management methods be used in schools to create

peace and harmony. Despite the appropriateness of the research methodology used in

the study, this study has identified a research gap on effects of suspension of

indiscipline students on students discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui

County.

From the findings Stewart (2004) observed that suspension is a punitive measure used

as a mechanism for punishing unacceptable behaviour. Kindiki (2009) says that

suspension was the most common technique used to deal with indiscipline in

60
secondary schools. Any suspension becomes a reward and reinforces the form of

behaviour the teacher or school was trying to eliminate. Simatwa (2012) observed

that suspension was among a wide range of methods used to deal with the many

infractions that were experienced in public secondary schools by headteachers.

In conclusion on suspension of indisciplined students and students’ discipline, Mugo

(2006) observed that suspension of indiscipline students was used in extreme cases

and for habitual offenders. This is consistent with Mutua (2004) who found that

suspension was used at times as an alternative strategy meaning that it had not been

given a lot of prominence. Smit (2010) argues that suspension pushes students out of

school and may only contribute to the broader problem of violence. Kindiki (2009)

agrees in that suspended students rarely changed their behaviour and will most likely

carry on with the same delinquent behaviour after suspension. This is not consistent

with Nyang’au (2013) who established that 58.6% of the respondents were of the

view that suspension from school was effective in improving student behaviour. The

revealed literature has identified a gap of effects of suspension as an alternative

disciplinary method on students’ discipline hence a research gap that this study sought

to fill.

2.4 Students’ expulsion and students’ discipline

Expulsion can be used on students as an alternative disciplinary method in public

secondary schools. In the United States of America, the law allowed an expelled pupil

the right to a hearing before the Board of Education (Harris and Bennet, 1982). Brister

(1996) noted that teachers in Victoria, a state in Australia felt that corporal

punishment had been replaced by expulsion in schools. Expulsion of learners in South

61
Africa is done to a learner by permanently refusing admission to the school where the

learner is enrolled. Learners can only be expelled in cases of serious misconduct by

the head of Department after a fair hearing and not by the principal or the school (The

South African Schools’ Act, 1996). This means that principals could not expel a

student from school. This implies that grounds for expulsion could be instituted after a

thorough investigation to establish a student’s misconduct beyond any reasonable

doubt.

A study by Bennet and Harris (1982) on Students’ Discipline, Legal, Empirical and

Educational perspectives in Indiana University found that during the 1979-80 school

years, high school students had been expelled for wilful defiance and vandalism.

Grounds for expulsion of students included drugs, stealing, truancy, violence, force,

repeated violation of school rules. Expulsion of a student is pegged on

recommendation to the Board of Education to uphold or reject recommendation to

expel a student. However, this practice is almost similar to what happens in Kenya in

that expulsion of students in Kenya is usually done as a last resort after a school has

tried other disciplinary procedures like suspension in extreme indiscipline cases. The

director of education may order the expulsion of the pupil in which case the pupil

shall not be readmitted to a maintained or assisted school without the special sanction

of the Director of Education (Republic of Kenya, 1980). This means that principals

are not allowed to expel students from school unless they are authorised by higher

authorities.

Smit (2010) did a study that focused on the role of discipline in the establishment and

maintenance of a safe school environment for learners and educators in schools in

62
East London. Qualitative and survey methods were used in the study. Data was

collected by use of interviews and questionnaires. Three hundred and thirty

questionnaires were completed by learners from the selected schools. Nine interviews

were conducted with either the principal or a member of the senior Management team

of each school. The researcher also conducted further in-depth interviews with twenty

learners from four schools (two primary and two high schools). Data was analyzed

qualitatively in accordance with accepted procedures for qualitative data processing.

The findings revealed that expulsion is a punitive measure used in schools. It may

have an effect of pushing students out of school or fostering school dropouts and this

may only contribute to broader problem of violence in their country. The study made

recommendations for a fair hearing to a learner before a learner is expelled from a

public school and that the Department of Education should support cases where

expulsion is required for the sake of learner safety. This means that an expelled

student may not be given another chance by the school. This may deny the student a

chance to access education hence denial of a basic human right to the student. This

implies that the behaviour of an expelled student may worsen due to desperation and

hopelessness as a result of expulsion from school.

Simatwa (2012) did a study on management of students discipline in secondary

schools in Kenya which was carried out in Bungoma County. The study population

consisted of 125 headteachers, 125 deputy headteachers, 1575 teachers and 2075

prefects managing 20107 students in 125 secondary schools. Data collection

instruments included questionnaires, an interview schedule and document analysis.

Descriptive statistics was used to analyse data. The study revealed that had no

absolute powers to use expulsion as a sanction in schools without consulting Boards

63
of Governors, Provincial Director of Education, Director of Higher Education and the

Education secretary. Expulsion was one among the many methods that were used by

headteachers to manage infractions that were experienced in public secondary

schools. The effectiveness of expulsion depended on traditions, ethos, and schools and

their environment. This implies that the choice to use expulsion as a disciplinary

method depended on individual school judgement. Despite the methodology used in

this study, the study did not explore the effects of each method in managing students

hence a research gap on effects of students’ expulsion on students’ discipline in Kitui

County.

The literature review has established that expulsion is done to a learner by

permanently refusing admission to the school where the learner is enrolled (Brister,

1996). Learners can only be expelled in cases of serious misconduct by the head of

Department after a fair hearing and not by the principal or the school (The South

African Schools’ Act, 1996). This is consistent with Kenyan practice in that expulsion

of a learner is usually done as a last resort after a school has tried other disciplinary

procedures like suspension in extreme indiscipline cases. It is done upon

recommendation by a full BoM meeting to the director of education. The director of

education may order the expulsion of the pupil in which case the pupil shall not be

readmitted to a maintained or assisted school without the special sanction of the

Director of Education (Republic of Kenya, 1980) and (Republic of Kenya, 2013).

Grounds for expulsion of students included drugs, stealing, truancy, violence, force,

repeated violation of school rules (Harris & Bennet, 1982).

64
Nthiga (2014) conducted a study that sought to establish the strategies adopted in

enhancing learners retention in public secondary schools, in Embakasi district Kenya.

The study purposed to determine how parental involvement and learners sponsorship

in education has been in enhancing learners‟ retention in secondary schools.The study

adopted both quantitative and qualitative design. The research instruments used were

questionnaires. The target population was 1 DEO and 148 public secondary school

teachers in Embakasi District, Nairobi County. Sample size was selected randomly.

One DEO and 75 teachers were used in the study.

The data collected by Nthiga (2014) was analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively by

use of descriptive statistics such as, mean, mode, median and standard deviation. The

study found that there was positive support from parents to the school administration,

parental support to school disciplinary measures, parents come to school when

required, parents contribution to learners activities and parents support of academic

needs. Learners are retained in school throughout, learners’ access to education,

students non- expulsion due to school fees, learners’ ability to meet their educational

needs and learner‟s expectations for a bright future. In regard to discipline influence

on learners’ retention, the study found that behaviour problems led to expulsion,

parents did not notify the school administration on learners absenteeism, inconsistent

allocation of bursary funds disrupts leaning, and parents support discipline given by

school administration and stakeholders’ ignorance of bursary allocations information.

The study conducted multiple regression analysis which showed that learner

sponsorship was a significant factor followed by discipline and the least influencing

factor to learner retention was parental involvement.

65
The study by Nthiga (2014) recommended adoption of information and

communication techniques in schools and communities in order to foster participation

of all stakeholders. These measures include strengthening the Parent teacher

Association incorporating formal and informal interaction between the parties. The

study recommends reinforcement of guidance and counseling services in secondary

school as per the Ministry of education recommendations. These will assist in dealing

with discipline issues by adopting proactive approaches such as peer counsellin and

mentorship. Despite the effectiveness ofthe researchmethodology that was used, this

study identified a research gap on effects of students’ expulsion on students’

discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

In conclusion on students’ explusion and students’ discipline, the findings from Smit,

(2010) revealed that expulsion may have an effect of pushing students out of school or

fostering school dropouts and this may only contribute to broader problem of violence

in their country. According to Simatwa (2012) the effectiveness of expulsion

depended on traditions, ethos, and schools and their environment. On the hand, Nthiga

(2014) indicated that behaviour problems led to expulsion of indisciplined students.

Reviewed literature has identified a knowledge gap from these studies of effects of

students’ expulsions as an alternative disciplinary method on students’ discipline in

public secondary schools as none of the studies investigated the effects of students’

expulsion on students’ discipline hence a research gap that the study sought to fill.

2.5 Collaborative decision making and students’ discipline

Class meetings for collaborative decision making can be used as an alternative

disciplinary method on students’ discipline in public secondary schools. The need for

66
students’ involvement in secondary school administration began in 1960s in the

United States of America (Powers & Powers, 1984). Gathenya (1992) argues that

secondary school students are looked at as people who are mature enough to take

responsibility of any administrative task assigned to them by the school

administration. According to The Education Review office (2003) the government of

New Zealand allows learners to exercise some decision making over how they learn

within the limits set by the Government and individual schools. Thus, allowing

students’ participation in decision making could enhance ownership of decisions

made and could also help students in the development of decision making skills hence

promotion of critical thinking skills.

Muchelle (1996) conducted a study that sought to investigate the attitudes of

secondary school headteachers towards the involvement of students in school

administration in Vihiga District, Kenya. The study used ex post - facto design and

consisted of a sample of 72 headteachers in Vihiga District. The study used a

questionnaires and an observation checklist as instruments for data collection. Data

was analysed using one-way analysis of variance and the t-test and frequencies and

percentages were also used.

The findings of the study indicated that: the amount of participation allowed in the

school was not sufficient to give students a chance to practice democratic skills;

headteachers had a negative attitude towards involvement of students in the areas of

school curriculum, electoral processes due to fear of uncertainties; there was lack of

commitment among the headteachers towards participatory administration which was

manifest through double standards the headteachers had for those headteachers with

67
suggestion boxes felt that criticism deemed harsh to the school administration should

be punished. Based on the findings, the study recommended the following: attempts

should be made towards the establishment of elaborate students’ participation

policies, regulations and procedures; students’ participation in school administration

should be made an important component in teacher training and in-servicing of

teachers and the need to elaborate institutional devices through which students can be

incorporated in school administration procedures. This implies that the there was fear

of unknown aspects by headteachers as a result of their negative attitude and this

could have been caused by lack of prior information on the importance of students’

participation in school administration. This implies that students were not given a

chance to participate in decision making activities yet they were expected to adhere to

school rules and regulations which they never participated in making. Failure to

involve students in school administration procedures as an alternative disciplinary

method could make the students remain as strangers to school matters hence

compromising the school discipline. Despite the effectiveness of the research

methodology, this study has identified a research gap on effects of principals’ use of

class meetings with students for collaborative decision making in Kitui County.

Muchiri (1998) conducted a study that sought to examine participatory processes used

by headteachers to enhance students discipline in public secondary schools in Nairobi

Province, Kenya. The study was ex-post facto in design. The target population

consisted of secondary school headteachers and teachers. Random sampling was used

to obtain a sample size of 360 respondents. The study used a questionnaire as a tool

for data collection. Two - tailed t-test and one- way analysis of variance were used to

test the hypothesis.

68
The findings by Muchiri (1998) indicated that the most frequently occurring

discipline problem among students was drug abuse and addiction. The most

frequently applied method of dealing with indiscipline was punishment which was

interspersed with guidance and counselling and parental involvement. About 97.1% of

the headteachers involved other members of their schools in solving discipline

problems. Disciplinary methods applied in secondary schools were seen to have

various shortcomings of which the major ones were excessive use of punishment

coupled with leniency and laxity in handling students’ discipline. Students’

involvement was only minimal. The most frequently suggested methods of enhancing

discipline were guidance and counselling, dialogue, and parental involvement.

The study by Muchiri (1998) recommended that: headteachers should be encouraged

to use alternative methods of behaviour modification such as dialogue with students,

parental involvement and student involvement in the administration of the school

which have a positive impact on student behaviour instead of using punishment. It

also recommended that headteachers should increase involvement of other members

of the community and increase their participatory ideals in school administration.

Thus, the high frequency of occurrence of discipline problems is signified by use of

punishment to correct infractions. This could have been instigated by minimal

students’ involvement to enhance students’ discipline hence students’ involvement

could have helped students to reflect on their beliefs by enlightening them about the

right things to do hence cultivating a sense of responsibility among students hence

improved management of students discipline. However, this study has identified a

69
research gap on effects of principals’ use of class meetings with students for

collaborative decision making.

A study done by Kindiki (2009) on effectiveness of communication on students’

discipline in secondary schools in Kenya was conducted in Naivasha District. The

study utilized qualitative approach with questionnaires, interviews and documentation

as instruments of collecting data. Purposive sampling was used to identify Naivasha

district as the location of the study. Stratified and simple random sampling was used

to identify 8 secondary schools and 200 respondents from these schools. 20 students

and 4 teachers in each sampled school were given the self administered questionnaires

while all the 8 head teachers were interviewed. The data collected was analyzed

descriptively.

The study by Kindiki (2009) found that there were poor channels of communication

used by school administrators and undemocratic school administration did not

consider meetings as important channels of communication. The study advocated for

use of meetings and assemblies as main channels of communication because they

improved the interaction and relationship between the administration and the students

hence leading to unity and peace in the school. This implies that stepping up effective

communication by use of class meetings for collaborative decision making could

improve on students’ discipline in secondary schools for important ideas could be

discussed effectively through communicating to the students. However, despite the

effectiveness of the research methodology used, this study has identified a research

gap on effects of principals’ use fo class meetings with students with students for

collaborative decision making on students’ discipline in Kitui County.

70
According to Republic of Kenya (2001) in a report of the taskforce on students’

discipline and unrests in secondary schools, there was lack of clear channels of

communication in a school and where the freedom to express opinions was curtailed,

mistrust between students and administration is created. It breeds a situation where

students have no way of expressing their grievances leading to frustrations and

resulting into disruptive behaviours.The task force recommended that where there is

need for any change in school policy for example changes affecting uniforms; charges

and diet, the principals should make adequate consultations and records the same in

the school logbook. The principals should also cultivate a democratic and

participatory environment in the school and encourage as regular ‘’barazas’’where

teachers and students are encouraged to express their views, suggestions and

grievances and where the school administration can get an opportunity to expound on

policies. The task force further recommended that the principals should not use

students to spy on teachers or other students, but instead should make use of

“barazas” and the suggestion boxes. This implies that students could vent off their

frustrations and express their concerns instead of misbehaving as a way of expressing

their anger.

According to Kiprop (2012) in a paper on discussion of the role of various

stakeholders in the management of discipline in schools in Kenya observed that most

principals adopt master or servant superior or inferior attitude in dealing with

students. They rarely listened to students’ grievances because they believe that they

have nothing to offer. This creates a lot of tension, stress and misunderstanding and

eventually leads to frustrations and violence as manifested in strikes. The study

71
recommended a creation of opportunities to enable teachers, students and

administrators to sit down and discuss issues affecting their school freely without

inhibition, intimidation or victimization. Hence, for effective management of school

discipline the cooperation between the principal, staff, students, parents and the

community is a prerequisite. Thus, where students are denied a chance to express their

views and vent out frustrations, it breeds a situation where students have no way of

expressing their grievances leading to frustrations and resulting into disruptive

behaviours and such incidences could be prevented by involvement of students for

collaborative decision making during class meetings. This study has however

identified a research gap on effects of principals’ use of class meetings with students

for collaborative decision making in Kitui County.

Kibet, Kindiki, Sang and Kitilit (2012) conducted a study to establish the relationship

between leadership approach and students’disciplinein secondary schools in Koibatek

district, Kenya. The study used descriptive survey design. The study was carried out

in 40 secondary schools with a population of about 8492 students. The breakdown of

the 40 schools is as follows; 4 boys’, 7 girls’ and 29 mixed schools. The target

population consisted of principals, teachers and students in the schools in Koibatek.

Data was presented by descriptive statistical techniques. The study found that

principals frequently or sometimes involve other stakeholders, particularly teachers,

students and to some extent parents, in the management of their schools. They

communicate clearly to students but frequently retain the final authority over most

issues. The study found the existence of a significant relationship between leadership

approach and student discipline. It is recommended that principals embrace

democratic leadership in their capacities as school leaders by involving teachers,

72
students and other stakeholders in decision making processes. Although headteachers

involved other stakeholders in the management of their schools, the findings imply

that headteachers used their veto power to determine the final direction of decisions

made in their schools. Despite the effectiveness of the research methodology, this

study has identified a research gap on effects of principals’ use of class meetings with

students’ for collaborative decision making.

Republic of Kenya (2001) observed a lack of clear channels of communication in

schools and where the freedom to express opinions was curtailed, mistrust between

students and administration was created. Muchelle (1996) concurs in that the amount

of participation allowed in the school was not sufficient to give students a chance to

practice democratic skills. A negative attitude towards involvement of students by

headteachers was noted. Headteachers lacked commitment towards participatory

administration. This was manifested through double standards by the headteachers

who had suggestion boxes for they felt that criticism deemed harsh to the school

administration should be punished. This is consistent with Muchiri (1998) who found

that Students’ involvement was only minimal and the most frequently suggested

methods of enhancing discipline were guidance and counselling, dialogue, and

parental involvement. This concurs with Kindiki (2009) who found that there were

poor channels of communication used by school administrators and undemocratic

school administration did not consider meetings as important channels of

communication. This concurs with Kiprop (2012) who noted that most principals

adopt master/servant superior/inferior attitude in dealing with students. They rarely

listened to students’ grievances because they believe that they have nothing to offer.

This creates a lot of tension, stress and misunderstanding and eventually leads to

73
frustrations and violence as manifested in strikes. This is inconsistent with Kibet,

Kindiki, Sang and Kitilit (2012) who found that principals frequently or sometimes

involve other stakeholders, particularly teachers, students and to some extent parents,

in the management of their schools. They communicate clearly to students but

frequently retain the final authority over most issues. Literature review has revealed

that although the above studies used a variety of research methodologies, none of the

studies investigated the effects of principals’ use of class meetings for collaborative

decision making on students discipline as an alternative disciplinary method hence a

knowledge gap that this study sought to fill.

2.6Summary of related literature review

The first alternative disciplinary method discussed under literature review is Peer

counselling as a component of guidance and counselling. Kindiki (2009) found that

most schools with guidance and counselling programmes have reduced indiscipline

cases compared with schools without. According to Wango (2006) the provision of

guidance and counselling dependent largely on individual schools. Some schools had

peer counsellors, had trained and oriented them into counselling while others had not.

This is consistent with Mbugua (2006) who said that schools that had peer

counsellors, 51% of them were untrained. According to Mbabazi and Bagaya (2013)

effective peer counselling in schools supplements the provision of guidance and

counselling services and promotes positive behaviour change hence improvement

among students in academic performance.

Marangu, Bururia and Njonge (2012) note that peer counselling is important in

mentoring other students as they addressed issues related to the youth. Mbugua

74
(2006); Marangu, Bururia and Njonge (2012) noted that students went for Peer

counselling because they could discuss issues that could not be discussed with

teachers or parents. Effective peer counselling could be achieved through coaching

and training students in basic listening and helping skills of problem solving and

decision making (Borders & Drury, 1992). Challenges that could negatively affect

peer counselling include lack of resources and training in guidance and counselling;

peer underrating; resistance and discouragement from other students; lack of faith by

other students and shortage of time (Chireshe, 2006; Wango, 2006 ; Chireshe, 2013).

Other challenges include: lack of peer counsellors in some schools; lack of active peer

counsellors in schools that had peer counsellors and lack of commitment among

teachers who were expected to help the teacher counsellors for they were never there

(Visser, 2005; Mbugua, 2006; Marangu, Bururia & Njonge, 2012).

Reviewed literature on suspension as the second alternative disciplinary method on

students’ discipline indicates that Suspension for some learners becomes a reward

and thus it serves to reinforce the form of behaviour the teacher or school was trying

to eliminate (Stewart, 2004). Suspended learners receive support from many of their

classmates (Slee, 1995). This is consistent with Kindiki (2009) who said that

suspended students rarely changed their behaviour and will most likely carry on with

the same delinquent behaviour after suspension. Simatwa (2012) observed that the

effectiveness of suspension as a method depended on traditions, ethos, and schools

and their environment but as a sanction, it should be used sparingly. This concurs with

Mugo (2006) who found that suspension of indisciplined students was used in

extreme cases and for habitual offenders. Mutua (2004) concurs in that suspension

was used at times as an alternative strategy meaning that it was not prominently used.

75
Literature review on students’ expulsion as the third alternative disciplinary method

indicates that expulsion is done to a learner by permanently refusing admission to the

school where the learner is enrolled (Brister, 1996). Grounds for students’ expulsion

included wilful defiance and vandalism (Harris & Bennet, 1982). Expulsion of

students is usually done as a last resort after a school has tried other disciplinary

procedures like suspension in extreme indiscipline cases (Republic of Kenya, 1980) ;

(Republic of Kenya,2013). Smit (2010) observed that expulsion may have an effect of

pushing students out of school or fostering school dropouts and this may only

contribute to broader problem of violence in their country. Simatwa (2012) revealed

that the effectiveness of expulsion depended on traditions, ethos, and schools and their

environment and concluded that that expulsions as sanctions in schools were to be

used sparingly.

Reviewed literature on principals’ use of class meetings for collaborative decision

making on students, discipline as the fourth alternative disciplinary methods shows

that there is lack of clear channels of communication in schools. Most principals

rarely listened to students’ grievances because they believed that students have

nothing to offer. This creates a lot of tension, stress and misunderstanding and

eventually leads to frustrations and violence as manifested in strikes (Republic of

Kenya, 2001; Kindiki, 2009; Kiprop, 2012). Muchelle (1996); Muchiri (1998)

concur by noting that the amount of participation in school administration allowed in

the schools was not sufficient to give students a chance to practice democratic skills.

Headteachers lacked commitment towards participatory administration. This is

inconsistent with Kibet, Kindiki, Sang and Kitilit (2012) who found that principals

76
frequently or sometimes involve other stakeholders, particularly teachers, students

and to some extent parents, in the management of their schools. They communicate

clearly to students but frequently retain the final authority over most issues.

Reviewed literature on the four independent variables which include: peer

counselling; suspension of indiscipline students; students’ expulsion and principals’

use of class meetings for collaborative decision making has identified a research gap

on the effects of principals’ use of the above variables as alternative disciplinary

methods on students discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County and this

justified the need for the study in order to fill the knowledge gap.

2.7 Theoretical framework

This study was based on the systems theory. The Systems theory is an approach to

organizations which likens an organization to an organism with interdependent parts,

each with its own specific function and interrelated responsibilities. Systems theory

was first introduced by Von Bertalanffy (1968). Systems can be closed or open.

Closed systems do not interact with the environment. All parts of the organization are

interconnected and interdependent. If one part of the system is affected, all parts are.

The school as an organization is an open system, which interacts with the

environment and is continually adapting and improving.

Real systems are open to, and interact with, their environments, and it is possible to

acquire new properties through emergence, resulting in continual evolution. Core

(1996) and Scott (2008) aver that open systems have the following characteristics:

they receive inputs from the environment, they transform these inputs into outputs and

they discharge their outputs into their environment and receive feedback from the

77
environment. This theory is beneficial in that open systems are interrelated and

interdependent. A disturbance in one part of the organization affects other parts of the

organization hencethe whole organization. Continuous feedback and responses results

in better understanding by leadership and management of the organizations structure

within the environment.However,the theory fails to specify the nature of relationship

and interdependence between organizations and its environment. The theory is

applicable in a school set up as an organization in that the school as an open system

receives inputs from the environment (Okumbe, 2001). Thus, the inputs include

students from the external diverse environment. This implies that students from the

larger societal environment go to school with a host of their own believes, goals and

hopes but become changed individuals as a result of educational experiences in school

which are acquired through interaction with the school administration, teachers and

students which also include monitoring and correcting learner discipline issues.

The interaction between teachers’ and students and other stakeholders also

incorporates monitoring of students’ behaviour and appropriate correction of any

discipline problems that may be noted among the students. This transforms them to

educated citizens capable of contributing towards societal development. This means

that if the school as an organization is to be effective in the management of school

discipline, it must pay attention to changes in the external environment and take steps

to adjust itself to accommodate the changes in order to remain relevant. Some of these

changes may include policy changes, policy requirements and legislative requirements

that may require principals’ appropriate response or implementation of external

demands or influences which could affect students’ discipline either positively or

negatively. These may include the ban of corporal punishment in Kenya in 2001,

78
government policy on peer counselling (Republic of Kenya, 2001), the children’s Act

(Republic of Kenya, 2001) and the basic education Act (Republic of Kenya, 2013).

For instance, media influence, easy availability and easy accessibility to internet

materials, interaction of students with members of the community, technological

advancement and receiving information from students who have been suspended or

expelled may also affect students’ discipline. In order to realize educational goals, the

school transforms students’ discipline through the use of alternative methods of

instilling discipline on students which include peer counselling, suspension of

indiscipline students, students’ expulsion and use of class meetings with students for

collaborative decision making. This means that the organization influences and is

influenced by the environment in which it operates. This depends on the nature and

quality of students’ discipline produced as a result of use of alternative disciplinary

methods used in schools hence the suitability of the theory in the study.

79
2.8 Conceptual framework

Figure 2.1 Alternative disciplinary methods and students’ discipline

The following conceptual framework was used to show the interaction of variables.

Peer counselling;

Choice /selection
of alternative Disciplined students
disciplinary (Decrease or increase
Suspension of indiscipline of students’ unrests)
methods
students;
Appropriate Enhancedproblem
solving abilities or lack
disciplinary
of it
procedures, Sociallyadjusted
Students’ expulsion; students or social
Adherence
misfits
Legislative
requirementsand High or low dropout
policy guidelines rates and reduction of
conflicts between
Holding class meetings for teachers and students)
collaborative decision making

Environment

Positive or negative feedback on students’

discipline

The independent variables included peer counselling which consisted of aspects such

as training, induction and democratic election of peer counselors; suspension of

indiciplined student which included incorporation of parents in handling students

siscipline issues, review of students’ discipline and thorough investigation of

indiscipline cases; students’ expulsion which included thorough investigation of

80
indiscipline cases, fair hearing and judgment by BoM members and Ministry of

Education officials and holding class meetings with students for collaborative

decision making which included students’ participation in decision making activites,

collective ownership of decisions made, prompt implementation of decisions made

and continuous feed back. The intervening variable was formed by principals’

practices such as: selection or choice of various alternative disciplinary methods,

appropriate disciplinary procedures, adherence to legislative and policy requirements.

This determined the number of students who underwent peer counselling, number of

indiscipline students who were suspended, number of students expelled and the

number of class meetings held in a school per term. The expected students’ discipline

outcome included: an improvement in students discipline or lack of it, decrease or

increase of students’ unrests; enhanced problem solving abilities or lack of it, socially

adjusted students or social misfits, high or low dropout rates and reduction of conflicts

between teachers and students.

81
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter dealt with research methodology that was used in conducting the

research study. It specifically dealt with the research design, target population, sample

size and sampling procedures, research instruments, instrument validity, instrument

reliability, data collection procedures and data analysis techniques and ethical

considerations.

3.2 Research design

The study adopted the ex-post-facto (after-the-fact) research design. Best and Kahn

(2000) define ex-post- facto design as descriptive in nature where variables that exist

have already occurred with non-intervention of the researcher. In this design, the

researcher examined naturally existing relationships in which treatment is done

through natural selection rather than by manipulation (Oso & Onen, 2005). The

design attempted to determine the cause or consequences of differences that already

exist between alternative disciplinary methods and students’ discipline in public

secondary schools in Kitui County. Since Kitui County is composed of many schools,

the research design was used to establish the situation of students’ discipline at the

ground. The design was appropriate in this study since it was used to establish the

effect of alternative disciplinary methods on students’ discipline in public secondary

schools in Kitui County.

3.3 Target population

The total population that the researcher specifies in research is referred to as the target

population (Mugenda, 2011). During the time of the study, Kitui County comprised of
82
16 Districts with a total of 333 public secondary schools. Among the secondary

schools included were 242 mixed day; 33 Girls’ boarding ; 16 mixed boarding ;18

boys’ boarding ;16 mixed day and boarding ; two girls’ day ; two girls’ day and

boarding ; two boys’ day ; two boys day and boarding (Kitui County Education office,

Education Management Information System (EMIS) June, 2013). The target

population for this study was 333 public secondary schools in Kitui County. The

study therefore targeted 333 principals, 333 deputy head teachers, 1665 heads of

departments (HoDS) and 333 Board of Management (BoM) chairpersons as units of

analysis in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

3.4 Sample size and sampling procedure

A sample is a small proportion of a population selected for observation and analysis

(Best and Kahn, 2000). A sample of 30 or more is to be considered a large sample

(Best & Kahn, 2011) and large enough to detect a significant effect (Kerlinger& Lee,

2000). The sample size for this study was obtained by a stratified proportionate

sampling procedure and purposive sampling. Stratified proportionate sampling

involves sub-division of the population into smaller homogenous groups or strata

when the population is composed of dissimilar groups (Kerlinger & Lee, 2000;

Kothari, 2011) in order to get more accurate representation (Mugenda, 2011). The

sample size was however made up of nine categories of schools which was drawn

from 242 mixed day secondary schools; 33 girls’ boarding secondary schools ;16

mixed boarding secondary schools ;18 boys’ boarding secondary schools ;16 mixed

day and boarding secondary school ;2 girls’ day secondary school s; 2 girls’ day and

boarding secondary schools; 2 boys day and Boarding secondary schools and 2 boys

day secondary schools. Thus to obtain the sample size per stratum, if pi represents the

83
proportion of population included in stratum i and n represents the total sample size,

the number of elements selected from stratum i is n. pi (Kothari, 2011). When a

sample of 101 is to be drawn from a population size N= 333 which is divided into

nine strata of school types N1= 242 Mixed Day;N2= 33 Girls’ Boarding secondary

schools ;N3= 16 Mixed Boarding secondary schools ;N4= 18 Boys’ Boarding

secondary schools ; N5=16 Mixed day and Boarding secondary schools ;N6= 2 Girls’

Day secondary schools ;N7= 2 Girls’ Day and Boarding secondary schools ,N8 2 Boys

day and Boarding secondary schools and N9= 2 Boys Day secondary schools.

Proportional allocation of the strata was adopted in order to get a sample size of 101

public secondary schools which were drawn from a population size of 333 public

secondary schools. It was divided into nine strata based on school types to ensure

equal representation of all school types and the sample size was as under; p 1 =

30(242/333) =72 mixed day schools ; p2 =30(33/333) =10 girls’ boarding secondary

schools; p3=30(16/333) = 5 mixed boarding secondary schools; P4 =30(16/333) = 5

mixed day and boarding secondary schools; p5 30(18/333) = 5 boys’ boarding

secondary schools; p6 =30(2/333) = 1 boys day and boarding secondary schools; p7

=30(2/333)= 1 Girl’s day secondary schools; P8 =30(2/333) =1 Girls’ day and

boarding secondary schools and p9 =30(2/333)=1 Boys’ day.

In order to get the schools that participated in the study, a list of public secondary

schools in Kitui County was obtained from the County Education office to enable the

researcher get the number of schools from the county. The school names were written

according to types of schools. To give every school type a chance to participate in the

study, simple random sampling procedure with or without replacement was used to

84
select the sample size.The respondents for the study included 101 principals, 101

deputy principals and 101 HoDS guidance and counselling. The Hods guidance and

counselling were purposively selected. It was not possible to use stratified

proportionate sampling for boys’ day secondary schools and boarding, girls’ day

secondary schools, pure boys’ day and girls’ day and boarding because of their

number. Thus, purposive sampling was used to pick one boys’ day school, one boys’

day and boarding, one girls’ day and boarding and a girls’ day schools because

(Mugenda, 2011) avers that they have the required information with respect to the

objectives of the study. At least 15 BoM chairpersons were interviewed. One County

Director of Education and one Kitui Law Courts Reisdents Magistrate were also

purposively sampled.The total respondents for the study were 320 respondents.

Table 3.1 Details of respondents

Respondents Target population Sample size Percent

Principals 333 101 30.3

Deputy principals 333 101 30.3

HOD Guidance and 333 101 30.3

Counselling

BOM 333 15 4.5

CDE 1 1 100%

Kitui Law Courts resident 1 1 100%

magistrate

85
3.5 Research instruments

The purpose of a tool or instrument in research is to measure the variables of the study

(Mugenda, 2011). This study used questionnaires and an interview guide as tools for

data collection. It administered three sets of questionnaires and three sets of interview

guides. Appendix IIconsisted of a questionnaire for principals, Appendix III had a

questionnaire for deputy principals, Appendix IV had a questionnaire for HoDs

guidance and counselling, Appendix V had an interview schedule for Board of

management (BoM) chairpersons Apppendix VI had an interview guide for Kitui

County Director of Education, and Appendix VII had an interview guide for Kitui

Law Courts Resident Magistrate.The questionnaires were divided into sections.

Section A contained items on personal characteristics.Section B, contained items on

school characteristics, section C contained items on peer counselling, section D

contained items on suspension, section E contained items on expulsion and section F

contained items on class meetings for collaborative decision making. The

questionnaires contained both open and closed ended items. Closed ended questions

were used because they deal with facts and are less time consuming. Open ended

questions were used in order to give detailed information on effects of various

alternative disciplinary methods used on students’ discipline in public secondary

schools. The interview guides had open ended items on alternative disciplinary

methods.This allowed respondents to express their views freely and allow the

researcher an in-depth understanding of the responses obtained.

3.6 Instrument validity

Validity is the degree to which results obtained and data analyzed represent the

phenomenon under investigation (Orodho, 2009). Validity refers to whether an

instrument provides adequate coverage of a topic. Content validity of the research

86
instruments could be enhanced through expert judgment (Best & Kahn, 2011). The

researcher prepared the instruments in close consultation with the supervisors in order

to ensure that the items in the questionnaires covered all the areas under investigation.

Expert judgement enabled the researcher to identify weaknesses of the instruments

and make appropriate adjustments. Instrument validity was established by pre-testing

of data collection tools by a pilot study. The instruments were administered to three

types of respondents from nine types of public secondary schools that did not

participate in the main study giving a total of 27 respondents. The instruments were

modified as follows: in appendix II items 8-15; 23-30;39-44 and 52-56 which were

initially in a Likert scale had five options whose responses included strongly agree,

agree, disagree, strongly agree and not at all. Those responses with “strongly agree’’

and “agree’’ were categorized under Yes responses and those items which had

“disagree’’ and ‘’strongly disagree’’ responses were put under No responses on a

cross tabulation table and this enhanced the determination of the relationship between

the dependent variable and the independent variable.

3.7 Instrument Reliability

Reliability is a measure of the degree to which a research instrument yields consistent

results or data after repeated trials (Mugenda & Mugenda, 2003). Reliability of a

research instrument is its level of internal consistency or stability over time (Borg &

Gall, 1989). A measuring instrument is reliable if it provides consistent results (Miles

& Huberman, 1994; Kerlinger & Lee, 2000; Kothari, 2011) and whether the process is

reasonably stable overtime (Miles & Huberman, 1994). According to Roscoe (1969),

a pilot study is useful in testing research instrument reliability in one way by helping

to establish possible causes of error variance which could occur as a result of wording

of the instrument, respondents’ mood during instrument administration, ordering of

87
the instrument items or may be because of the content of the instruments. Instrument

reliability was established by a pilot study which was carried out in 9 types of public

secondary schools in Kitui County that did not participate in the main study.These

included one mixed day secondary school; one girl’s boarding secondary school; one

mixed boarding secondary school; one mixed day and boarding secondary school; one

boys’ boarding secondary school; one boy’s day and boarding secondary school; one

Girl’s day secondary school; one Girls’ day and boarding secondary school and one

Boys’ day secondary school. From each school 3 respondents were purposively

selected that is, the principal, deputy principal and the HoD G&C. Purposive

sampling was done in schools because the respondents had relevant information in

relation to the study. The actual test was done on 27 respondents.

Instrument reliability was determined by a test-re-test technique. The questionnaires

were administered to three respondents from the piloted schools. The same three

respondents per school were allowed a time lapse of two weeks between the first and

the second test. The Pearson’s Product- Moment correlation(r) formula was used to

correlate the pre-test and post- test results in order to determine the coefficient of

reliability or stability based on the formula below according to (Best & Kahn, 2011).

r = N∑XY-(∑X) (∑Y)

√N∑X2-(∑X) 2 √N∑Y2-(∑Y) 2
Where;

∑X = sum of X scores

∑Y = sum of Y scores

∑ X2 = sum of the squared X scores

∑Y2 = sum of the squared Y scores

88
∑XY=sum of the products of paired X and Y scores

N=number of paired score.

If the coefficient of 0.7 is obtained, for closed ended questions, it implied that there is

high degree of reliability of data (Best & Kahn, 2011; Mugenda, 2011) and the

instrument has high test-re-test reliability. The reliability test results are as shown in

Table 3.2.

Table 3.2

Reliability results

Respondents Reliability

Principals 0. 71

Deputy principals 0.80

HOD guidance and counselling 0.70

This implied that the instruments were reliable.

3.8 Data collection procedures

Permission and authority to conduct the study was sought from the National

Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation, Kitui County Director of

Education and Kitui County commissioner were respectively contacted and all

principals from the sampled schools were contacted by paying a courtesy call to their

schools. The researcher personally visited the sampled schools and gave the

respondents the questionnaires to fill within the agreed schedule. Those respondents

who did not complete the questionnaires in time were allowed more time to complete

the questionnaires.

89
3.9 Data analysis techniques

Data analysis is the process of bringing order, structure and meaning to the mass of

collected information (Mugenda & Mugenda, 2003). Once data was collected, it was

post-coded and analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS).

Quantitative data gathered from closed ended questions were first post-coded and

organized into similar themes as per the research questions. It was analysed, tabulated

and presented by using descriptive statistics. To integrate qualitative data gathered

from open ended questions into inferential data, it was post coded and tallying of

similar responses of each item was done. Frequency counts were made of all

responses making similar responses. Results of data gathered from closed ended and

open items were reported in frequency tables, cross tabulation tables and explanation

of the findings were made based on themes.

The Chi-square (x2) test was used in this study to establish the strength of association

between the independent variables and the dependent variables. It was also used to

test whether the observed and expected frequencies is significant or not. The test thus

determined the degree of association between principal’s alternative disciplinary

methods and students’ discipline.The significance level was set at alpha = 0.05. This

was used to determine the significance of peer counselling, suspension of indiscipline

students, students’ expulsion and principals’ use of class meetings for collaborative

decision making on students’ discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County.

90
3.10 Ethical considerations

According to Mugenda (2011), ethics in research focus on the application of ethical

standards inthe planning of the study, data analysis, dissemination and use of the

results. This means thatthe study addrresses logistical, ethical and human relations

issues to ensure successful completion of a research project (Orodho, 2009). To

ensure that there was informed consent and voluntary participation of the respondents

who participated in the study, permission to conduct the research from respondents

who participated in the study was sought from the secondary school principals. Each

respondent was served with a copy of the introduction letter informing them about

the nature, purpose and importance of the research. The respondents were further

assured of treatment of their identities with utmost confidentiality and privacy.This

was enhanced by asking them not to write their names on the data collection tools.

91
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 Introduction

This chapter consists of data presentation, interpretation and discussion of research

findings. The study sought to investigate the effects of alternative disciplinary

methods on students’ discipline by head teachers in public secondary schools in Kitui

County, Kenya. The study utilised both descriptive statistics and inferential statistics.

The analysis was based on findings from four research objectives which sought to

establish: the extent to which principals’ use of peer counselling influences students’

discipline; the effect of suspension of indisciplined students on students’ discipline;

the effect of students’ expulsion on students’ discipline and the extent to which

principals’ use of class meetings for collaborative decision making with students

affects students’ discipline in public secondary schools.

4.2. Questionnaire return rate

Questionnaire return rate refers to the number of respondents who returned usable

instruments for the study out of the total number contacted for the study (Mugenda &

Mugenda, 2003).The questionnaires were administered on principals, deputy

principals and Heads of departments (HoDs) guidance and counselling. The interview

guides were administered on 15 Board of Management (BoM) chairpersons, one

County Director of Education (Kitui County Education Office) and one Resident

Magistrate (Kitui Law Courts). Analysis of data was on the basis of these

questionnaires and interview guides. The results of questionnaire return rate are as

shown in Table 4.1.

92
Table 4.1
Questionnaire return rate

Population Sample Percent

Principals 101 101 100.0

Deputy Principal 101 101 100.0

HOD G & C 101 101 100.0

Total 303 303 100.0

From table 4.1, all the principals, deputy principals, HoDS guidance and counselling

returned the questionnaires. The total respondents in the study were 318 (100) percent

return rate. The return rate became possible because the researcher personally took the

questionnaires to the sampled public secondary schools in Kitui County and a time

limit of two weeks was given to the respondents. A total of fifteen 15 (100.0 percent)

BoM participated by responding to an interview guide. After two weeks, the

researcher personally went round the schools collecting the questionnaires and extra

time was given to those found not to have completed them. This went on until all

questionnaires were completed as some schools had to be visited several times. Data

analysis and interpretation was based on these returns. Mugenda and Mugenda (2003)

observed that a 50 percent response rate is adequate for analysis and reporting. A

response rate of 60 percent is good and a response rate of 70 percent and over is very

good. Since the response rate was 100 percent, it was considered very good (Mugenda

& Mugenda, 2003). This would provide the required information for purposes of data

analysis hence this could enhance sample representation and meaningful

generalization for the response rate implies a very good representation.

93
4.3 Demographic characteristics

The principals, deputy principals and HoDs guidance and counselling were asked to

indicate their gender, age, highest academic qualifications, number of years served as

a principal both within and without the current station, and number of years served in

the currentstation.The inclusion of these variables in the study is important because it

enabled a clear understanding of the background characteristics of the respondents.

Some characteristics like gender provides a bearing on the way teachers handle

disciplinary issues. Work experience is also likely to determine the principal’s

exposure to disciplinary issues.

4.3.1 Principals’ and deputy principals’ demographic data

The principals’ gender is important since it would show the proportion of the

respondents per gender and whether the leadership positions were all dominated by

male or there were female too. Gender is also understood as a variable that has a

bearing on the way teachers handle disciplinary issues. In a study by Khewu (2012)

most participants who are school principals were male. According to Bosire, Sang,

Kiumi and Mungai (2009), female principals were more likely to be inclusive by

involving teachers and parents in managing students’ discipline matters. This impies

that since the ban of corporal punishment in 2001 in Kenya, principals and teachers

who have worked for at least 15 years may have been acquainted with use of

alternative disciplinary methods due to their involvement in the transition between

corporal punishment and implementation of alternative disciplinary methods in

schools. However, the Principals and the Deputy Principals were asked to indicate

their gender. The results are as shown in table 4.2.

94
Table 4.2

Distribution of principals and deputy principals by gender

Principals Deputy principals

Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

Male 69 68.3 61 60.4

Female 32 31.7 40 39.6

Total 101 100.0 101 100.0

From table 4.2, there is no gender parity since there are more male principals than

their female counterparts. This is also observed in the gender of deputy principals.

This could therefore explain the nature of schools that were headed by male teachers

which seemed to be more than those headed by female teachers. These results agree

with Buckland and Thurlow (1996); Bush and Heystek (2006) ; (Khewu) 2012 ;

Onderi and Makori (2013) who report that there is considerable evidence that women

are greatly under-represented in management positions. This is consistent with Ikoya

(2009) who noted a clear disparity between male and female principals as the

application of preventive discipline was very low. Most of the male sampled

principals used corrective approach to the management of school discipline whereas

more female principals used the preventive approach when compared with their male

counterparts. According to Jackline (2009) male teachers are mostly in headship

positions than female.

The findings are inconsistent with Kenya National Policy on Gender and

Development (NPGD) (2000) spells out a policy approach of gender mainstreaming

95
and empowerment of women. It clearly states that it is the right of women, men, girls

and boys to participate in and benefit equally from the development process where

men and women enjoy equal rights, opportunities and a high quality of life. Although

there were many public secondary schools in Kitui County which could be headed by

both male and female principals including mixed gender public secondary schools

like mixed day, mixed boarding and mixed day and boarding secondary schools this

study has revealed underrepresentation of female principals in headship positions

hence a reflection of dispariries in the management of school discipline by use of

alternative disciplinary methods between the male principals who are the majority

and female principals who are the minority.

4.3.2 Distribution of respondents by age

The age category could be a pointer to the competency level, skill and physical

maturity rate of a teacher. The principals and the deputy principals were asked to

indicate their age and the results are shown in table 4.3.

Table 4.3

Distribution of principals and deputy principals by age

Principal Deputy Principal

Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

Below 30 Years 1 1.0 18 17.8

31-39 12 11.9 28 27.7

40-49 79 78.2 50 49.5

50-59 9 8.9 5 5.0

Total 101 100.0 101 100.0

96
From table 4.3, majority of the principals were aged between 40-49 years while on the

other hand slightly below half of the deputy principals lies between the age 40-49

years and some below 30 years of age. On the other hand, a few of the principals and

the deputy principals are above 50 years of age. This is an indication of a mixture of

experience and skill in administrative duties held by both principals and deputy

principals. This implies that as people advance in age they are given leadership

positions owing to experience gained as they advance in age hence the principals and

the deputy principals had the experience to concentrate on administrative functioning

hence prioritising students’ discipline. Professional qualification of teachers could

also determine how students discipline is managed in schools which the study also

sought to establish.

4.3.3 Professional qualification of principals

Professional qualification of principals is very important for it determines the

professional development of a teacher. Odundo (1990) alludes that teachers are

becoming more qualified professionally. In addition, Rarieya (2007) says that

appointment to school leadership in Kenya has undergone several phases. Initially,

principals were appointed on recommendations by the stakeholders. Later it was

based on seniority and currently it is based on merit where they have to be

interviewed before they are appointed by the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) in

leadership positions. This implies that head teachers are not just handpicked to head

secondary schools, but there is more emphasis on the professional qualification of

teachers in such appointments to a reasonable level.

97
This study sought to know the highest professional qualifications of the principals and

deputy principals. The results are as shown in Table 4.4

Table 4.4

Principals and deputy principals by their highest professional qualifications

Principals Deputy principals

Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

B.Ed 65 64.4 73 72.3

M.Ed 20 19.8 5 5.0
M.A 3 3.0 3 3.0
B.Sc with PGDE 3 3.0 4 4.0
Diploma in Education 3 3.0 7 6.9
S1 2 2.0 3 3.0
B.A with PGDE 2 2.0 4 4.0
MBA- Strategic Management 2 2.0 0 0
BA 0 0 2 2.0
M.Sc 1 1.0 0 0
Total 101 100.0 101 100.0

From Table 4.4 although B.Ed was the major qualification for both the principals and

the deputy principals,a number of principals had attained a M.Ed degree. This shows

that there was a deliberate attempt by some principals and deputy principals to pursue

further studies. This confirms arguments by Odundo (1990) who observed that

teachers are becoming more qualified professionally. The findings also indicated that

a number of deputy principals had a diploma in education. This implies both the

Principals and Deputy Principals had basic professional qualifications which were

considered when they were promoted. This implies that professional qualifications

were considered when both the principal and the deputy principals were promoted.

Research findings by Imonje (2011), established that the quality of teaching does not
98
only depend on the academic background but also on professional development of a

teacher. The professional status of the teacher is revealed through the duration,

content covered during pre-service and in- service training. These results agree with

Kart (1995) in that school administrators require technical skills, human skills and

conceptual skills to perform their duties effectively and efficiently. Although about 15

years have lapsed since the ban of corporal punishment, it is expected that both pre-

service and in-service training that is offered to teachers should prepare teachers

adequately by offering courses which may enable practicing teachers to use

alternative disciplinary methods while dealing with students discipline in schools.

This in turn should enhance effective and efficient use of alternative disciplinary

methods on students’ discipline in public secondary schools.

4.3.4 Teaching experience of respondents and students’ discipline

The work experience of a teacher is usually determined by the number of years

worked. Imonje (2011) observed that teaching experience is considered in terms of

enhancing the mastery and application of pedagogical skills. Khewu (2012) also noted

that the work experience of school managers determines their exposure to learner

disciplinary issues and their familiarity with different disciplinary approaches.

Principals who have worked between six years and more than 10 years of managerial

experience is an indication that the principals have been exposed to both disciplinary

approaches. Likewise, principals with more than 10 years’ experience were part of

managing transition from corporal punishment. The principals and the deputy

principals were asked to indicate the number of years they had served as principals in

their career. The teaching experience of a principal and the deputy principal is very

important in his/her career. This study sought to determine whether the principals and

their deputies had enough teaching experience. The results are as shown in Table 4.5.
99
Table 4.5

Distribution of principals and deputy principals by teaching experience

Principal Deputy principal

Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

1-5 8 7.9 19 18.8

6-10 9 8.9 13 12.9

11-15 35 34.7 27 26.7

16-20 41 40.6 27 26.7

21-25 8 7.9 12 11.9

26-30 years 0 0 3 3.0

Total 101 100.0 101 100.0

From table 4.5, it is clear that both the principals and the deputy principals had served

as teachers for a long period. Majority of the headteachers had served as teachers for

over 15 years. This has enabled them to gain a lot of experience in dealing with

students’ discipline in schools because this period is an indication that they were still

serving as teachers when corporal punishment was being banned and could effectively

implement alternative disciplinary methods to handle students’ discipline in schools.

Such length of service also meant that they could also effectively induct young

teachers on handling of students discipline in schools. The findings concur with

Onderi and Makori (2013) who noted that a significant number of principals had

substantial experience to deal with issues arising among students. However, teaching

experience could be a very valuable asset to a teacher. It helps one to become

knowledgeable of issues surrounding them. It also enables a teacher to acquire certain

commendable characteristics which include promptness, adaptability and efficiency,

100
arousing and maintaining interest of the subject. They are able to handle different

issues including discipline of students diligently. This implies tha such teaching

experience would expose them to adapt and implement alternative disciplinary

procedures in the management of students’ discipline in public secondary schools.

According to Bosire, Sang, Kiumi and Mungai (2009), headship experience has a

bearing on the extent to which a principal will involve teachers and parents in the

management of students’ behaviour. Principals who had more years of headship

experience were more likely to be inclusive by involving teachers and parents in

managing students’ discipline matters. However, the level of teachers and parental

input and the level of student discipline were comparatively higher in more

experienced principals for they applied inclusive management approach compared to

the less experienced principals. This implies that principals and teachers who have

worked for at least 15 years may have been acquainted with use of alternative

disciplinary methods due to their involvement in the transition between corporal

punishment and implementation of alternative disciplinary methods in schools.

4.3.5 Principals’ and deputy principals’ length of service in a school

The number of years that a principal and a deputy principal have served in a current

station is a measure of how much influence on the station could be attributed to him

/her in the management of school discipline. On the other hand, overstaying in one

station is also likely to make one dormant by as a result of one’s failure to manage

school discipline. The principals and their deputies were asked to give the number of

years they had served in their current stations. The results are as shown in Table 4.6.

101
Table 4.6

Distribution of principals’ by length of service in a school

Principals Deputy principals

Number of years Frequency Percent Number of Frequency Percent

years
1-5 years 80 79.2 1-5 76 75.2
6-10 years 16 15.9 6-10 15 13.9
11-15 years 2 2.0 11-15 9 8.9
21-30 years 2 2.0 16-20 1 1.0
No response 1 1.0 21-25 1 1.0
Total 101 100.0 Total 101 100.0

From Table 4.6 majority of the principals and their deputies had served for 1-5 years.

This implies that they had not overstayed in their current stations hence they had

much to offer to the school and the students. It also implies that they might have been

newly posted in their current stations. This could also imply that majority of the

principals were in the upcoming day schools and were probably implementing new

rules and regulations, learning or building a new culture in their schools and also

acquainting themselves with the parents, teachers and the rest of the school. This

would enable them make the best choice in cases of indiscipline hence implement the

best alternative disciplinary methods that they could use in their schools.

Peer counselling is one of the variables under investigation in this study which the

study sought to establish the extent to which it influenced students’ discipline in

public secondary schools.

102
4.4 Principals’ use of peer counselling as an alternative disciplinary method

and students’ discipline

Peer counselling is an alternative disciplinary method that is embraced globally to

manage discipline in learning institutions. This study sought to establish the extent to

which principals’ use of peer counselling as an alternative disciplinary method

influences students’ discipline. The results of cross tabulation are as indicated in table

4.7 on principals’ response on use of peer counselling in their schools.

103
Table 4.7 Principals’ responses on use of peer counselling and students’
discipline

Students attended peer counselling Total

Yes No
Frequenc Frequenc Frequenc
y % y % y %
Peer Yes 59 67.0 29 33.0 88 100
counselling No 7 63.6 4 36.4 11 100
should be No
2 100.0 0 0 3 100
embraced in response
management of Total
school 68 67.3 33 32.7 101 100
discipline
Operational Yes 60 67.4 29 32.6 89 100
guidance and No 7 63.6 4 36.4 11 100
counselling No 100
0) 0 1 100.0 1
department in response
school Total 68 67.3 33 32.7 101 100
Guidance and Yes 40 72.7 15 27.3 55 100
counselling No 28 60.9 18 39.1 46 100
teacher had Total 100
been trained to
68 67.3 33 32.7 101
carry out the
job
Guidance and Yes 17 70.8 7 29.2 24 100
counselling No 51 67.10 25 32.9 76 100
teacher is not No 100
0 0 1 100.0 1
conversant response
with peer Total 100
68 67.3 33 32.7 101
counselling
Full Yes 35 67.3 17 32.7 52 100
implementation No 33 68.8 15 31.3 48 100
of peer no response 0 0 1 100.0 1 100
counselling in a Total 100
68 67.3 33 32.7 101
school
Peer Yes 29 74.4 10 25.6 39 100
counsellors No 39 62.9 23 32.1 62 100
trained to carry Total 100
out their 68 67.3 33 32.7 101
responsibility

104
 Students attended peer counselling Total

Yes No

Frequenc Frequenc Frequenc

y % y % y %
Guidance and Yes 17 70.8 7 29.2 24 100
counselling teacher is No 51 67.1 25 32.9 76 100
not conversant with No
0 0 1 100 1 100
peer counselling response
Total 68 67.3 33 32.7 101 100
Peer counselling Yes 56 67.5 27 32.5 83 100
enhances a workable No 12 66.7 6 33.3 18 100
relationship between Total 100
68 67.3 33 32.7 101
learners
Guidance and Yes 17 70.8 7 29.2 24 100
counselling teacher is No 51 67.1 25 32.9 76 100
not conversant with No 100
0 0 1 100 1
peer counselling response
Total 68 67.3 33 32.7 101 100
Students feel free to Yes 36 67.9 17 32.1 53 100
seek peer counselling No 32 66.7 16 33.3 48 100
services from their Total 100
68 67.3 33 32.7 101
peers
Peer counselling Yes 57 67.1 28 32.9 85 100
enhances a sense of No 11 68.8 5 31.3 16 100
belonging Total 68 67.3 33 32.7 101 100

This study has established two sets of attributes which included both practical and

attitude attributes that the principals had towards effects of peer counselling on

students’ discipline. The practical attributes included: full implementation of peer

counselling in school; operational guidance and counselling department in a school;

training of both the peer counsellors and teachers to carry out the responsibility. The
105
attitude attributes included embracing peer counselling in the management of school

discipline, guidance and counselling teacher is not conversant with peer counselling;

peer counselling enhances a sense of belonging; students feel free to seek peer

counselling and peer counselling enhances a workable relationship.

About 67.4 percent of the principals stated that there were operational guidance and

counselling departments in their schools. On the other hand the principals

recommended that peer counselling could be embraced in the management of school

discipline. These results concur with Kindiki (2009); Ajowi & Simatwa (2010) who

emphasized on use of guidance and counselling in management of minor discipline

issues. The study revealed that 67.3 percent of the principals had implemented peer

counselling in their schools. This agrees with Mbugua (2006) who emphasized on use

of peer counsellors in schools to provide counselling to their fellow students. The

findings concur with Wango (2006); Chireshe (2013); Marangu, Bururia and Njonge

(2012) and Bett (2013) who noted the importance of peer counselling as an important

contributor to behaviour change although not all schools had established peer

counselling programs.

The study also revealed that 72.7 percent of the guidance and counselling teachers had

been trained to carry out the job. This implies that they had the knowledge of handling

students’ issues and could effectively train the peer counsellors. On the hand, the

findings established that 70.8 percent of the principals stated thatguidance and

counselling teacher were not conversant with peer counselling. This implies that peer

counsellors maynot have received the required training from the guidance and

counselling teachers. These findings agree with Wango (2006) who observed that

106
guidance and counselling programs were planned to enhance academic results. Some

schools had peer counsellors, had trained and oriented them into counselling while

others did not have. Where there were peer counsellors, the mode of selection was a

matter of concern for the peer counsellors were selected by the school administration

and teachers. Lack of commitment among teachers who were expected to help the

teacher counsellor was also noted for they were never there.

The findings indicated that 67.4 percent of the schools had implemented peer

counselling programmes while others had not. The principals also said that peer

counsellors had been trained to carry out their responsibility. This implies that the

implementation of peer counselling could have been effective in the presence of

trained peer counsellors in schools. However, students felt free to seek peer

counselling services from their peers. This could have resulted in the realization that

peer counselling enhanced a sense of belonging which could have led to the

assumption that peer counselling enhanced a workable relationship between learners.

This agrees with Mbugua (2006) who found that students were more comfortable

opening up their concerns to peer counsellors than teacher counsellors.This implies

that in schools where peer counselling was effective, the principals would have

embraced it to curb indiscipline cases among the students.

These results from the principals agree with those of Marangu, Bururia and Njonge

(2012) who established that peer counselling had been accepted as an important

contributor to behaviour change among learners in learning institutions. It was

important in mentoring other students as they addressed issues related to the youth.

This is not consisted with Wango (2006) who found that students did not seek peer

107
counselling and others said that they could not go to persons of the same age for they

had nothing to tell them.On the other hand, although guidance and counselling

teachers had been trained to carry out the job and peer counsellors had been trained to

carry out their responsibility, this had resulted into positive impact on students

discipline especially in institutions where the same was practiced. The results of the

principals agree with those of the deputy principals, teacher counsellors and the

BoMs.

The deputy principals were also asked to rate how peer counselling took place in their

schools. All the deputy principals (101respondents) agreed with the principals when

they said that peer counselling was being embraced in management of school

discipline. They also noted that peer counselling enhanced a sense of belonging which

led to a workable relationship between the school management and students where

peer counselling services were offered. Hence since the deputy principal is the

discipline master, they are able to tell whether the programme has been effective in

managing discipline of students or not especially where the programme had been

implemented. This study then contradicts the results of Bettand Sigilai (2013) who

noted that principals and teacher counsellors had a negative perception on the

effectiveness of peer counselling among students. Since the principals, deputy

principals, teacher counsellors and BoM chairpersons had reported that it had an

effect on students discipline in their schools.

A Chi- square test is an important test among the several tests of significance

developed by statisticians. It can be used to test the significance of association

between two attributes (Kothari, 2011). A Chi- square test was undertaken to establish

108
the significance of association between peer counselling and students’ discipline in

schools. The results are as shown in table 4.8.

Table 4.8

Chi-square test on peer counselling and students’ discipline

Value df P-value

Guidance and counselling teacher had been trained to 1.601 1 0.206

carry out the job

Peer counsellors trained to carry out their 1.428 1 0.232

responsibility

Guidance and counselling teacher is not conversant 2.196 2 0.333

with peer counselling

Peer counselling enhances a sense of belonging .018 1 0.346

Full implementation of peer counselling in a school 2.105 2 0.349

Peer counselling should be embraced in management 1.042 2 0.594

of school discipline

Operational guidance and counselling department in .554 2 0.758

school

Students feel free to seek peer counselling services .018 1 0.893

from their peers

Peer counselling enhances a workable relationship .004 1 0.947

between learners

From the chi-square table, the p-value 0.206, 0.232, 0.333, 0.346, 0.349, 0.594, 0.758,

0.893 and 0.947>0.05 giving an average p-value of 0.518. This means that there is no

significant difference between the principals who used peer counselling and those

109
who did not use peer counselling in their schools. This is because the two variables

are different, that is principals who used peer counselling felt an effect on students’

discipline while those who did not use it felt no effect.

Although this study indicated that there is no significant difference between peer

counselling and students’ discipline, the study has established that the attribute under

peer counselling that states that Peer counselling enhances a workable relationship

between learners with a p-value of 0.947 has the strongest relationship with students

discipline whereas the attribute that states that guidance and counselling teacher had

been trained to carry out the job with a p-value of 0.206 has the weakest relationship

with students’ discipline. Although guidance and counselling teachers had been

trained to carry out the job and peer counsellors had been trained to carry out their

responsibility, this had resulted into positive impact on students discipline especially

in institutions where the same was practiced.

4.4.2 Circumstances under which students sought peer counselling

The principals and the deputy principals were asked to indicate circumstances under

which students sought peer counselling. Both the principals and the deputy principals

indicated that students sought peer counselling due to family problems, adolescent

challenges, when students did not want to confide to teachers, minor issues arising in

classroom, and in the dormitory, absenteeism conflicts, relationships, spiritual issues,

indiscipline and academic issues.

4.4.3 Principals’ response on peer counsellingeffects on students’ discipline

The respondents were asked to indicate the effect of peer counselling on students

discipline in schools. The results are as shown in Table 4.9

110
Table 4.9

Principals’ response on effects of peer counselling on students’ discipline

Frequency Percent

Improves discipline of students 74 73.3

Helps in mentorship 1 1.0

Promotes open communication 5 5.0

Improves academic performance 3 3.0

Students are able to realize their mistake and reform 3 3.0

Makes students have a sense of belonging 1 1.0

instils confidence and positive self-esteem among 4 4.0

students

No response 10 9.9

Total 101 100.0

About 73.3 percent of the principals said that peercounselling had an effect of

improving students’ discipline while five percent of the principals said that it

promotes open qualifications. . This implies that the principals whose students went

for peer counselling services had improved in discipline. On the other hand, one

percent of the principals said that peer counselling helps in mentorship and makes

students have a sense of belonging respectively. The results agrees withWango

(2006); Chireshe (2013); Marangu, Bururia and Njonge (2012) and Bett (2013) who

noted the importance of peer counselling as an important contributor to behaviour

change although not all schools had established peer counselling programs.

111
The results of the principals agree with those of the deputy principals, the BoM and

the teacher counsellors who noted that it promotes open communication, it instils

confidence, and positive self-esteem among students hence resulting to improved

academic performance among students and it has also helped the students to have a

sense of belonging. Peer educators provide information that the adults would normally

not be prepared to discuss. Mutie and Ndambuki (1999) also observe that peers in the

African communities had control over each other’s behaviour through open

disapproval of an unacceptable behaviour. Bett (2013) found that that peer group

interactions enabled both peer educators and students experience increased self-

esteem and greater ability to deal with adolescence related problems. Effective peer

counselling in schools supplements the provision of guidance and counselling services

hence promoting positive.

4.5 Effect of suspension of indisciplined students on students’ discipline

Suspension is a punitive measure used as a mechanism for punishing unacceptable

behaviour (Stewart, 2004). Suspension was the most common technique used to deal

with indiscipline in secondary schools (Kindiki, 2009). Suspension was among a wide

range of methods used qto deal with the many infractions that were experienced in

public secondary schools by headteachers (Simatwa, 2012).Mugo (2006) argues that

suspension of indisciplined students was used in extreme cases and for habitual

offenders. This is consistent with Mutua (2004) who found that suspension was used

at times as an alternative strategy. Suspension helps the educational management to

gain enough time for thorough investigations (Okumbe, 1998). This study sought to

establish the effect of suspension of indiscipline students as an alternative disciplinary

method on students’ discipline. The results are shown in Table 4.10.

112
Table 4.10

Principals’ responses on suspension and discipline of students

Suspension related for the last two terms Total

There is
suspension No suspension
Frequenc Frequenc Frequenc
y % y % y %
The school Yes 63 69.2 28 30.8 91 100
readmits students No 5 50.0 5 50.0 10 100
back to school Total 100
68 67.3 33 23.7 101
after suspension
Parents should Yes 62 68.1 29 31.9 91 100
accompany No 6 66.7 3 33.3 10 100
suspended Total 100
students back to 68 67.3 33 23.7 101
school
My school Yes 58 70.7 24 29.3 82 100
encounters No 10 52.6 9 47.4 19 100
discipline Total 100
problems that
68 67.3 33 23.7 101
require
suspension
The school has a Yes 55 66.3 28 30.8 91 100
readmission No 13 72.2 5 27.8 10 100
criteria for Total 100
suspended 68 67.3 33 23.7 101
students

113
 Suspension related for the last two terms
There is Total
suspension No suspension
Frequency % Frequency % Frequency %
Some parents opt Yes 33 66.0 17 34.0 50 100
to take their No 35 68.6 16 31.4 51 100
children to other Total 100
schools once 68 67.3 33 23.7 101
suspended
Suspension gives Yes 21 77.8 6 22.2 27 100
the indiscipline No 47 64.4 26 35.6 73 100
students a chance No 100
0 0 1 100 1
for further response
misconduct Total 68 67.3 33 23.7 101 100
Suspension does Yes 29 42.6 13 39.4 42 100
not effectively No 37 68.5 17 31.5 54 100
control students No 100
2 40.0 3 60.0 5
discipline response
Total 68 67.3 33 23.7 101 100
Parents of Yes 23 79.3 6 20.7 29 100
suspended No 43 61.4 27 38.6 70 100
students don’t No 100
2 100 0 0 2
own up response
suspension of Total 100
68 67.3 33 23.7 101
their children

From the results it’s clear that principals who subscribed to suspension noted that the

school readmitted the students back to school after suspension. This implies that

although a student was liable to suspension as a punishment, the school was required

to readmit them back to school after the expiry of the stipulated period of time as per

the Kenya Education Act Cap 211 on school discipline regulations. Republic of

114
Kenya (1980) stipulates that suspended students shall not be allowed to attend classes

and shall be required to be physically away from the school precincts until he/she is

informed of the outcome of the case to the parent or legal guardian through a letter.

The suspension shall be reported to the Board of Governors within 14 days and after

consideration report to the director of Education who may terminate the suspension or

confirm the suspension and determine the conditions on which the pupil may be

readmitted to the same school or to any other school. This implies that suspension

takes a better part of students’ time which could translate to loss of learning time

hence a decline in academic performance.

About 68.1 percent of the principals also reported that parents should accompany

suspended students back to school. The findings are consistent with Sheldon and

Epstein (2002) who maintained that an active partnership between parents and schools

has great benefits and parents can have a powerful effect on children behaviour.

Bosire, Sang, Kiumi and Mungai (2009) support this by noting that the management

of school discipline is a corporate responsibility between the principal, the teachers

and parents. Huczynski and Buchanaan (2001) and Kiprop (2012) concur by noting

that managing students’ behaviour requires a concerted effort of the parents, teachers

and school principals as the key players for effective management of school

discipline. Although the principal should make some effort to bring all the other

stakeholders on board in the management of school discipline he/she should ensure

that they are properly equipped with relevant information pertaining the use of

alternative disciplinary methods on students’ discipline in schools. This implies that

parents take responsibilityof their children misconduct hence it could have some cost

implications in many aspects.

115
The principals further agreed that their schools encountered discipline problems that

required suspension although the schools had readmission criterion for suspended

students. This implies that schools suspended students and readmitted them at will

after the time of suspension had erupted. On the other hand, the principals disagreed

that suspension gives the indiscipline students a chance for further misconduct. This is

consistent with Nyang’au (2013) who established that suspension from school was

effective in improving student behaviour. This implies that the principals had

developed a positive attitude towards suspension since they felt that it did not give

indiscipline student a chance for further misconduct. This may have resulted where it

was practiced for students may have changed because after suspension they came to a

realization that they would not have too much time in the same school since if the

misconduct continued then they could be expelled from school. This is inconsistent

with Smit (2010) who argues that suspension pushes students out of school and may

only contribute to the broader problem of violence. Kindiki (2009) agrees in that

suspended students rarely changed their behaviour and will most likely carry on with

the same delinquent behaviour after suspension.

Majority of the deputy principals (78.2%) also agreed that the school encountered

discipline problems that required suspension with 53.6 percent of them citing that

some parents opt to take their children to other schools once suspended, 40.6 percent

of them noted that parents of suspended students don’t own up suspension of their

children with another 32.7 percent. This concurs with Kitui CDE (2013) who reported

that the parents side with their children and deny that their children could have ever

done anything wrong at school. Others said that suspension does not effectively

116
control students discipline in school and 32.7 percent indicating that suspension gives

the indiscipline students a chance for further misconduct. This contradicted the

findings of the principals.However, the 60.2 percent of guidance and counselling

teachers corresponded with the deputy principals views that the school experienced

discipline problems that required suspension, 48.2 said that some parents opt to take

their children to others schools once suspended, 32.6 percent noting that parents of

suspended students did not own up suspension of their children and 30.0 percent

noted that suspension of indisciplined students gave the indiscipline students a chance

for further misconduct and suspension did not effectively control students’ discipline

in schools.

All the BoM members also agreed that the schools encountered students’ discipline

problems that require suspension. This implies since the principal, deputy principal,

teacher counsellors and the BoM were in agreement on issues within the school that

required suspension, they also noted that suspension did not aver avenues for students

to become more indiscipline. Although this would still cause other issues such as

drop out cases. Liu (2013) disagrees by noting that lengthy and repeated suspensions

for disruptive behaviour such as speaking disrespectively to a teacher or fellow

student results in lost learning, it also contributes to students’ feelings of alienation

from school and perhaps most importantly do little or nothing to address the root

cause of the behaviour. Dropping out of school is associated with life-long negative

impact to the individual and at societal levels. Hence this means that the school had to

introduce intervention programme after suspension to help the student cope with their

new behaviour and also to encourage them to maintain their new adopted behaviours

117
if they had to attend other interventions which may have included psychological

counselling.

A chi-square test was done to determine the significance of association between peer

counselling and students’ discipline in schools. The results are as shown in table 4.11

Table 4.11

Chi-Square test on suspension of indisciplined students and students’ discipline

Value Df P-Value
My school encounters discipline problems that 2.297 1 0.130
require suspension
Parents of suspended students don’t own up 3.971 2 0.137
suspension of their children
Suspension gives the indiscipline students a 3.689 2 0.158
chance for further misconduct
The school readmits students back to school 1.515 1 0.218
after suspension
Parents should accompany suspended students 2.089 2 0.352
back to school
Suspension does not effectively control 1.789 2 0.409
students discipline
The school has a readmission criteria for .239 1 0.625
suspended students
Some parents opt to take their children to other .079 1 0.778
schools once suspended
Average p-value 0.351

From the Chi-square table, the p-value 0.130, 0.137, 0.158, 0.218, 0.352, 0.409, 0.625

and 0.778>0.5. The average p-value for all attributes is 0.351. This indicates that

there is no significant difference between suspension of indiscipline students and

students’ discipline. The highest attribute under suspension is that some parents opt to

118
take their children to other school with a p-value of 0.778 which is not significant

while the lowest attribute is that my school encounters students’ indiscipline problems

that require suspension with a p-value 0.13 which is not significant. This implies that

even if the principals used suspension as an alternative disciplinary method, it may

have some weak impact on students’ discipline since the findings have revealed that

the parents of the suspended students did not own up suspension of their children,

suspension did not give the indiscipline students a chance for further misconduct and

suspension did not effectively control students’ discipline.

4.5.2 School intervention programmes after students’ suspension

Intervention measures are very important after students have been readmitted in

school. School suspension alienates a student and re-orientation would be necessary.

The researcher sought to know from the respondents the intervention programmes

used by the school after readmission of suspended students to ensure that they settle

down in school. The results are as shown in Table 4.12.

119
Table 4.12

Principals’ responses on intervention programmes used by school after

readmission of suspended students

Intervention measures Frequency Percent

Guidance and counselling 76 75.2

Exemption for manual duties to cover up lost time 2 2.0

Reporting to the deputy principal everyday 4 4.0

Punishment 3 3.0

Dialogue with the student 1 1.0

Follow up on student conduct 3 3.0

Apology letter 4 4.0

No response 8 7.9

Total 101 100

From Table 4.12 majority of the principals agreed that they had put guidance and

counselling in place to help the student change. On the other hand they noted that the

students were supposed to be punished, there was follow up on student’s conduct,

exemption from manual duties to cover up lost time, and dialogue with the students

was given a chance. The results implies that the principals may have in several times

used guidance and counselling in their schools and had probably found that it works

well in managing discipline of students. Hence they still felt that it would work well

as intervention program for the suspended students. The results concurred with

Kindiki (2009) who recommended that guidance and counselling for students would

help them realize their mistakes and initiate behaviour change aimed at being better

disciplined. The results also agreed with those of the deputy principals who noted that

120
the students were referred for guidance and counselling and follow up programs were

instituted althoughAjowi and Simatwa (2010) found that guidance and counselling

was minimally used to promote students’ discipline.

The deputies also noted that the students were also asked to write an apology letter

after which they could do a punishment. There was also close supervision by the class

teachers and a rewarding program for disciplined students was put in place. The

teacher counsellors also agreed with the principals and the deputy principals by

indicating that students were referred for guidance and counselling to help them

change. The students were rewarded for good behaviour, they could also be asked to

write an apology letter. The students could also be asked to meet with the discipline

committee and the parents are involved in disciplining their children and follow up

programme was also in place.

4.5.3 Challenges faced by principals in suspension of indisciplined students

The principals may encounter several challenges while instilling discipline on

students in schools. This study sought to know from the principals whether

theyencountered some challenges while using suspension method in instilling

discipline on students in a school. The results are as shown in Table 4. 13.

121
Table 4.13
Principals’ responses on challenges facing them in using suspension as a
disciplinary method
Challenge Frequency Percent
Uncooperative parents 61 60.4
Time wasting 38 37.6
Refusal of students to tell parents the truth 8 7.9
Some students don’t change but like it that way 7 6.9
Students inciting others and refusal to go home 6 5.9
Constitutional rights of a child 3 3.0
Fear of legal implications 3 3.0
Instead of bringing parents/ guardians some hire 3 3.0
parents or bring in siblings
N= 101

Majority of the principals indicated that the parents were uncooperative for they

requested for reduction of suspension period, the parents also sided with the students

and parents failed to report back to school on the given date. This implies that parents

were not willing to admit that their children could make mistakes instead they

supported the students’ misconduct. The results concurs with Kitui CDE (2013) who

noted that some parents feel embarrassed while others deny whether their children

could do anything wrong in school. This means that the parents sided with their

problematic children and the suspended students also deny having done anything

wrong completely.

Another factor that featured well was time wastage for the student, time taken by

BoM to make decisions on the discipline case, time taken by the discipline committee

and time taken on settling discipline issues. This concurs with Liu (2013) who noted

that lengthy and repeated suspensions for disruptive behaviour results in lost

122
learning, it also contributes to students’ feelings of alienation from school and perhaps

most importantly do little or nothing to address the root cause of the behaviour.

Dropping out of school is associated with life-long negative impact to the individual

and at societal levels.Suspension rarely encouraged students to control their behaviour

although it gets the parent to school.

Kindiki (2009) also agrees by saying that suspended students rarely changed their

behaviour and will most likely carry on with the same delinquent behaviour after

suspension. This concurs with Smit (2010) who said that suspension pushes students

out of school and may only contribute to the broader problem of violence. The study

recommended addressing alternatives to suspension in order to find ways of helping

children who have shown signs of misbehaviour problems. Schools should make

every effort to help students learn to control their own behaviour. They should also

design and utilize disciplinary approaches that could directly address the discipline

problems. Counselling and focusing on problem solving relating to behaviour issue

and community services could achieve more effective discipline.

Other challenges encountered included the constitutional rights of the child, fear of

legal implications and some students instead of bringing parents /guardians hire

parents or bring in siblings. This prompted the researcher to ask the respondents

whether there were other alternative discipline methods considered to be effective for

instilling discipline on students. The responses included instant punishment, manual

work such as cutting firewood, digging holes, joint counselling between the school

and parents, guidance and counselling combined with peer counselling, withdrawal of

privileges, calling parents to school, giving a lot of assignments and giving a time

123
limit, detention of students and canning. An explanation for the following responses

was that once punished the students will avoid misconduct; the parents involvement

will encourage the child to correct their mistakes; manual work is constructive and

discourages misconduct; parents gets to understand their children better; guidance and

counselling helps the students realize their mistakes and many students don’t like

being seen by their colleagues getting punished. This concurs with Cicognani (2004)

and Tungata (2006) who noted that alternatives like in- school suspension, more

counsellors, psychologists, support groups and parental involvement were preferred

by teachers as alternative discipline procedures, application of school rules,

enforcement of school code of conduct and educational counselling.

Cicognani (2004) observed that teachers were not in favour of alternatives that needed

to be supervised by them but were concerned about their personal safety and felt that

administering corporal punishment would ensure their safety (Cicognani, 2004).

Simatwa (2012) revealed that headteachers used a wide range of methods managing

student discipline in schools which included expulsion, suspension, caning, physical

punishment, detention, reprimanding, kneeling, guidance and counselling, fining,

rewards, wearing school uniform at all times, self-commitment in writing to maintain

good conduct, pinching, slapping and smacking. This concurs with Kimani, Kara,

Ogetange (2012) who found that corporal punishment was a regular school experience

for the pupils and was administered by everyone in authority at school including

prefects.

The most prevalent forms of corporal punishment used among pupils at school were

canning, slapping, kneeling down, pinching, pulling hair/ears and forced manual

124
work. The study concluded that school administrators and teachers in Kenya are not

thoroughly prepared to deal with indiscipline in the absence of corporal punishment.

Ajowi and Simatwa (2010) concur by decrying a lack of teacher knowledge on

alternative methods of maintaining discipline in schools. Kimani, Kars and Ogetange

(2013) lament that administrators and teachers are not thoroughly prepared to deal

with indiscipline in the absence of corporal punishment and are of the opinion that

teachers should be trained on alternative strategies to deal with discipline problems

other than use of corporal punishment. This implies that the future of school

discipline could be at stake if teachers as policy implementers are not properly

prepared through training to handle emerging pedagogical issues in the society.

Therefore proper training on all educators could effectively and efficiently initiate

implementation of alternative disciplinary methods in all learning institutions in

Kenya.

4.5.4 Respondents’ recommendationson use of suspensionin schools

The principals, deputy principals and the teacher counsellors were asked to make

recommendations on how suspension could enhance management of students

discipline as an alternative discipline method. The results are as shown in Table 4.14.

125
Table 4.14

Principals’ suggestions on use of suspension as an alternative disciplinary

method

Suggestions Frequency Percent

To be used when other methods have failed 57 56.4

Should be scrapped 9 8.9

Useful to involve parents in disciplining of their 8 7.9

children

Enhance guidance and counselling 8 7.9

Reframe regulations 6 5.9

It contravenes children’s act 2 2.0

Students to seek alternative schools 3 3.0

Launch awareness campaign for parents and guardians 2 2.0

on suspension

Inculcate moral values on students to help manage their 3 3.0

discipline

Intensify manual work 3 3.0

No response 3 3.0

N= 101

Although 56.4 percent of the principals indicated that suspension could be used when

other methods have failed, eight point nine (8.9) percent of the principals said that it

should be scrapped while seven point nine (7.9) percent said that it should be

scrapped and it is useful to involve parents in disciplining their children respectively.

This implies that before a student is sent home; all the other alternative methods of

disciplining students should have been used and proved to have failed. This is despite

126
the fact that some principals used guidance and counselling. Hence the study shows

that majority of the principals were ready to use suspension as an end results after all

the other available methods had failed. These recommendations concur with Kindiki

(2009) who observed that suspension was considered the most common technique

used to deal with indiscipline in secondary schools. Mugo (2006) concurs in that

suspension of indiscipline students was used in extreme cases and for habitual

offenders. Although the study recommended effective guidance and counselling,

students would realize their mistakes and initiate behaviour change aimed at being

better disciplined.

4.6 Students’ expulsion as an alternative disciplinary method and students’

discipline

Students’ expulsion as an alternative disciplinary method is also used in schools to

curb indiscipline cases among the learners. Smit (2010) notes that expulsion as a

method of instilling discipline on students may have an effect of pushing students out

of school or fostering school drop outs and by doing so only contributes to the broader

problem of violence. This study sought to identify the effects of students’ expulsion as

an alternative disciplinary method. The results are as presented in table 4.15

127
Table 4.15
Principals’ responses on expulsion of indisciplined students

Students Expelled for the last

two terms in school

Expelled Not Expelled Total

Frequ Frequ Freque

ency % ency % ncy %
My school faces Yes 9 28.0 41 82.0 50 100
students No 3 6.1 46 93.9 49 100
indiscipline cases No response 0 0 2 100 2 100
that that require Total 100
12 11.9 89 88.1 101
expulsion
Yes 11 12.2 79 87.8 90 100
Expelling an
No 1 16.7 5 83.9 6 100
indiscipline student
No response 0 0 5 100 5 100
from school takes a
Total 12 11.9 89 88.1 101 100
long process
Yes 12 14.3 72 85.7 84 100
The MOE insists
No 0 0 15 100 15 100
on retention of
No response 0 0 2 100 2 100
students in school
Total 12 11.9 89 88.1 101 100
Expulsion of Yes 9 10.2 79 89.8 88 100
indiscipline No 3 25.0 9 75.0 12 100
students denies No response 0 0 1 100 1 100
them access to Total 100
12 11.9 89 88.1 101
basic education

128
 Students Expelled for the last
two terms in school

Expelled Not Expelled Total

Frequ Freq Frequ

ency % uency % ency %
There are other Yes 11 10.2 82 88.2 93 100.0

effective methods No 4 100.0

0 4 100.0
of instilling
No response 1 25.0 3 75.0 4 100.0
discipline on
Total 100.0
101
students 12 11.9 89 88.1

Expulsion of Yes 7 10.3 61 89.7 68 100.0

indiscipline No 5 16.1 26 83.9 31 100.0

students brings No response 2 100.0

0 2 100.0
about animosity
Total 12 11.9 89 88.1 101 100.0

After crossing tabulation of principles practices and attitudes with the cases of

indiscipline that the school had dealt with in the last two terms, it was noted that there

were more principals who were against expulsion. Majority of the principals felt that

that there were other effective methods of instilling discipline on students. This

implies that other disciplinary methods were readily available before expelling such

as students. The principals also felt that expulsion of indiscipline students denied

them access to basic education and expelling students from their school took a long

process. This implied that they realised expulsion had a negative impact on the

students access to basic education and also the process was long. These results agree

with those of Oosthuizen (2003) who felt that expulsion is the permanent removal of a

129
learner from a school or hostel. It is a form of punitive measure aimed at correction

and not at retribution as in the case of corporal punishment. Smit (2010) notes that

expulsion as a method of instilling discipline on students may have an effect of

pushing students out of school or fostering school drop outs and by doing so only

contributes to the broader problem of violence. This implies that it may not solve the

intended problem but may only aggravate the indiscipline problem.

Another factor that was discussed was the attitude of principals towards expulsion of

indiscipline students as it was thought to bring about animosity in school. This

implied that the principals’ assumption was not based on facts for majority of them

felt that expulsion did not bring animosity in school. Hence this may imply that the

students had come to a realization that once caught up as an individual in indiscipline

cases; one had to carry their own cross. In a broader perspective, the principals were

divided about the idea that their schools had indiscipline cases that required

expulsion. This implied that expulsion came in as the last option. The results agrees

with the Republic of Kenya (1980) which stipulates that expulsion of students in

Kenya is usually done as a last resort after a school has tried other disciplinary

procedures like suspension in extreme indiscipline cases. The director of education

may order the expulsion of the pupil in which case the pupil shall not be readmitted to

a maintained or assisted school without the special sanction of the Director of

Education.

The findings of the principal agreed with those of the deputy principals, with all them

indicating that there were other effective methods of instilling discipline on students

while 95 percent of them also said that expelling an indiscipline student from school

130
takes a long process since the MoE insists on retention of indiscipline students in

schools. Expulsion of indiscipline students from school was considered to deny

students access to basic education. Another factor was that expulsion of indiscipline

students brings about animosity in schools. However, a small percentage felt that the

school faced students’ indiscipline cases that required expulsion compared with

students who had been expelled for the last two terms.

The responses of teacher counsellors also corresponds with these findings that there

are other effective methods of instilling discipline on students while 82.6 percent said

that expelling an indiscipline student from school takes a long process and 82.5

percent of them noting that the MoE insists on retention of indiscipline students in

school. This implies that the teacher counsellors were in agreement with the MoE

directives. They also felt that there were other ways of instilling discipline other than

expelling the students. About 75.7 percent of them noted that expulsion of indiscipline

students from school denies them access to basic education, 54.0 percent of them also

felt that expulsion of indiscipline students brings about animosity and 52.5 percent

said that the school faced students’ indiscipline cases that required expulsion.

The researcher also asked the BoM whether their school faced students’ indiscipline

cases that required expulsion with 40 percent of them saying that they required

expulsion of some students. The researcher noted that all the respondents agreed that

there were other effective methods of instilling discipline on students other than

expulsion. These results agree with the Republic of Kenya (1980) which states that

expulsion of students in Kenya is usually done as a last resort after a school has tried

other disciplinary procedures like suspension in extreme indiscipline cases. Simatwa

131
(2012) concluded that that expulsions as sanctions in schools were to be used

sparingly.

This implies that expulsion as a punitive method could be avoided under all

circumstances in order to enhance access and retention of students in schools by

ensuring that if it has to be used, all other disciplinary methods have been tried and

have been proved ineffective in dealing with learner indiscipline.

A chi-square test was done to determine the significance of association between

students’ expulsion and students’ discipline in schools. The results are as shown in

table 4.16.

Table 4.16

Chi-Square test on students’ expulsion and students’ discipline

Value Df P-Value

The MoE insists on retention of students in 2.756 2 0.252

school

Expulsion of indiscipline students denies them 2.337 2 0.311

access to basic education

My school faces students indiscipline cases that 3.610 2 0.550

that require expulsion

There are other effective methods of instilling 1.197 2 0.550

discipline on students

Expulsion of indiscipline students brings about .815 2 0.616

animosity

Expelling an indiscipline student from school .968 2 0.665

takes a long process

132
From the Chi-square table, the p-value 0.252, 0.311, 0.550, 0.550, 0.616 and 0.650>

0.05 gives an average p-value of 0.491 indicating there is no significant difference or

effect between students’ expulsion and students’ discipline in schools. The attribute

with the highest p-value under expulsion is that expelling an indiscipline student from

school takes a long process with a p-value of 0.665. The attribute with the lowest p-

value (0.252) MoE insists on retention of students in school. This implies that even if

the principals used expulsion as an alternative disciplinary method, it may have a

weak impact on students’ discipline.

4.6.1Circumstances leading to expulsion of indisciplined students

The principals, deputy principals, guidance and counselling teachers and BoM were

asked to indicate the circumstances for expulsion of indiscipline students in their

schools. The results for the principals are as shown in Table 4.17.

Table 4.17

Distribution of the Principals’ responses on circumstances for expulsion of

indiscipline students

Circumstances Frequency Percent

When other options fails 23 22.8
Chronic indiscipline issues 16 15.8
Recommendation by BoM 3 3.0
Truancy and stealing 5 5.0
Incitement 9 8.9
Violence attack 4 4.0
Drug and substance abuse 3 3.0
No response 40 39.6
N=101

133
The circumstances which led to expulsion according to a number of principals

(22.8%) included when all the other options had failed. This implies that when

expelling a student from schools all the other options should have been found to have

failed to change learner behaviour. Another reason for expulsion also included

students with chronic indiscipline issues. These results concurred with deputy

principals and the guidance and counselling teachers who noted that students were

expelled when a student had been suspended for more than two suspensions with no

change. Other reasons included: incitement for the school students to go on strike;

chronic stealing; fighting with teachers and attempts of school arson. The BoM

members noted circumstances such as arson in the school, pregnant students, and

chronic indiscipline cases and upon recommendation by BoM to the director of

education. Others said that they had not expelled any students in their schools because

their schools were still young and had not experienced indiscipline problems of high

magnitude. The findings agree with those of Bennet and Harris (1982) who found that

during the 1979-80 school years, high school students had been expelled for wilful

defiance and vandalism. Grounds for expulsion of students included drugs, stealing,

truancy, violence and force, repeated violation of school rules. Expulsion of a student

is pegged on recommendation to the Board of Education to uphold or reject

recommendation to expel a student.

4.6.2 Proportion of students expelled in the last two terms.

This prompted the researcher to request the respondents to indicate the number of

students expelled for the last two terms for those schools that had expelled. The

results are as shown in Table 4.18.

134
Table 4.18

Principals’ response on the proportion of students expelled in the last two terms
Number of students Frequency Percent
1-5 6 5.9

6-10 4 4.0

16-20 2 2.0

None 80 79.2

No response 9 8.9

Total 101 100.0

A large number of the principals (79.2%) had not expelled any student in the last two

terms. This implies that although expelling was an option as an alternative

disciplinary method, it was not commonly used. School expulsion though less widely

studied, appears to be used relatively infrequently in relation to other disciplinary

techniques (Heaviside, Rowand, Williams and Farris (1998). This agreed with the

deputy principals, guidance and counselling teachers and the BoM members. This

implies that expulsion is not commonly used since only a few schools had expelled

students from their schools in the study.

The researcher then asked the effect of expulsion as an alternative disciplinary method

of instilling discipline on students in schools. These results agreed with the deputy

principals and guidance and counselling teachers who noted that it instilled discipline

among students for fear of expulsion. Others indicated that it had a positive effect of

improving discipline of students while others stated that it was not effective for it had

a negative effect. Other respondents said that it led to destruction of the image of the

135
school due to suspicion and hardened indiscipline students as well as denying students

access to education and refrains students from breaking school rules and regulations.

4.6.3 Challenges encountered due to expulsion of indisciplined students

There are different challenges encountered by principals and the schools at large

because of expulsion. This study wished to identify the challenges encountered by

principals due to use of expulsion as an alternative disciplinary method of instilling

discipline on students in schools. The results are as shown in Table 4.19.

Table 4.19

Principals’ responses on challenges faced inexpulsion of students

Challenges Frequency Percent

Bureaucratic process which wastes learning 19 18.8

Resistance from MoE officials and parents 17 16.8

Reduces school enrolment 7 6.9

No access to basic education 4 4.0

Its legal implications 2 2.0

Instigate an unrest in school 2 2.0

It’s against TSC Act 1 1.0

Loss of bright students 1 1.0

Animosity from the community around the school 1 1.0

No response 41 40.6

Total 101 100.0

A number of the principals (18.8%) said that bureaucratic process for expulsion

wasted learning time as one of the challenges they encountered. Another challenge

encountered was the resistance from MoE officials and parents and reduction of
136
school enrolment. This implies that the school enrolment was at stake because of the

expulsion of students. Slightly above half of the deputy principal (55.4%) noted that

expulsion lacked support from the BoM, parents, politicians and MoE officials hence

the parents were hostile and needed explanations for expulsion of their children.

There was also resistance from parents and the community around the school with

about seven point nine (7.9) percent noting that it was time consuming as time was

wasted listening to students cases and five (5.0) percent of them noting that expulsion

had not been used in their schools. The guidance and counselling teachers concurred

with the deputy principals. The BoM chairmen also noted that expulsion was time

wasting and had a negative effect on students’ performance, there was political

interference, human rights, defiant parents and the process was long and tedious.

These findings agree with Kitui CDE (2013) who alludes that the BoMS make

recommendations for expulsion of indiscipline students from school, but laments that

even when such recommendations are made, the MoE insists on retention of students

in school. This means that very little may be done on the indiscipline students and is

likely to promote further misconduct in school.

Smit (2010) notes that expulsion is a punitive measure used in schools and it may

have an effect of pushing students out of school or fostering school dropouts and this

may only contribute to broader problem of violence in their country. This implies that

if students could be given a fair hearing by school BoM many school dropouts could

be minimised hence a reduction of possibilities of creating more violence problems

which may emanate from frustrated school dropouts.

137
The researcher sought to know other methods used by schools to instil discipline on

students and were also considered effective. Slightly below half of the principals

(47.5%) indicated that guidance and counselling was used to rehabilitate students,

while 38.6 percent of the deputy principals concurred on the same. For suspension

15.8 percent of the principals and 15.6 percent of the deputy principals suggested its

use. Another factor that was used was manual work with 27.8 percent of the

principals and five (5.0) percent of the deputy principals. About five point nine (5.9)

percent noted parental involvement and five (5.0) percent of the principals supported

this. Other methods used included canning, mentorship programmes, peer

counselling, advising parents to change the environment, taking problematic students

to a court of law and involving the provincial administration to discipline the students.

These results concurred with those of the guidance and counselling teachers who

noted that guidance and counselling was used, the school also used manual work

punishment, suspension and peer counselling were used.

4.6.4 Principals’ suggestions on how to use of expulsion as an alternative

disciplinary method

The study also sought to know from the principals, deputy principals, guidance and

counselling teachers and the BoM to make recommendation on use of expulsion to

instil discipline on students in public secondary schools. The results from the

principals are as shown in Table 4.20

138
Table 4.20
Principals’ recommendations on use of expulsion
Recommendations Frequency Percent

Used as a last option 49 48.5

Abolish it 19 18.8

Restores school sanity 3 3.0

Maximise guidance and counselling 12 11.9

BoM mandated to expel problematic students 9 8.9

Should discourage transfer from one school to 3 3.0

another

Involve stakeholders 4 4.0

No response 5 5.0

N= 101

Slightly below half (48.5%) of the principals noted that expulsion should be used as a

last option while 18.5 percent said that it should be abolished. This implies that none

of the principals had expelled students for the sake of it but after trying all the other

alternative methods of discipline and had failed. The principals also recommended

that expulsion should be abolished and guidance and counselling should be

maximized.

The deputy principals also noted that expulsion should be discouraged because it

denies students access to basic education. Schools should explore the use of other

alternatives and use expulsion sparingly hence this view agreed with that of the

principals. Expulsion should be abolished and the students should be retained in

school by being given a second chance and guidance and counselling should be

enforced. This concurs with Muchiri (1998) who found that the most frequently
139
suggested methods of enhancing discipline of students were guidance and

counselling, dialogue, and parental involvement. This study also recommends that

students should be give manual punishment where necessary and the expulsion

process should be reviewed and shortened. Some students who want to drop out of

school take advantage of it and others recommended that it should be banned since it

hardened the indiscipline students.

The guidance and counselling teachers recommended that expulsion should be done

as the last resort after all other methods of instilling discipline on students have failed.

Expulsion should be discouraged since it denies students access to basic education

and denies them a chance to build their future hence leading to a waste and failure to

develop potential human capital to full potential. Expulsion should be avoided and

can work well with the involvement of parents. The BoM also agreed with the

principals, deputy principals and the guidance and counselling teachers, in that

expulsion should be used as a last resort. All stakeholders should be involved

including the MoE before expulsion and parents should be involved and there should

be an open discussion between the parents, teachers and students on school

regulations. The researcher observes that all the respondents agreed that expulsion

should be used as a last resort, and that all stakeholders should be involved including

MoE. There should also be an agreement on the involvement of parents before any

decision is made about their children.

140
4.7 Principals’ use of class meetings with students for collaborative decision

making and students’ discipline

Use of class meetings for collaborative decision making can be used as an alternative

disciplinary method on students’ discipline in public secondary schools. Republic of

Kenya (2001) observed a lack of clear channels of communication in schools and

where the freedom to express opinions was curtailed, mistrust between students and

administration was created. Waweru (2008) concurs in that students’ involvement in

school governance was quite inadequate and was visibly below average except in co-

curricular activities and maintenance of school plant. However, the study

recommended a unique method of school governance during group meetings such as

class meetings, club meetings and religious meetings. Hence this studysought to

establish if principals’ use of class meetings for collaborative decision making with

students as an alternative disciplinary method affects students’ discipline. The results

are as shown in table 4.21.

141
Table 4.21
Principals’ Responses on holding class meetings and students’ discipline
Class meetings Total
No Class
Class meetings meetings Total
Freqenc Freqenc Freqe
y % y % ncy %
School holds Yes 82 83.7 16 16.3 98 100.0
class meetings No 1 100.0 0 0 1 100.0
with students for No 100.0
collaborative respons 0 0 1 100 1
decision making e
Total 83 83.0 17 17.0 101 100.0
School discipline Yes 79 82.3 17 17.7 96 100.0
policies are No 4 100 0 0 4 100.0
communicated Total 100.0
during class 83 83.0 17 17.0 101
meetings
Learners' Yes 82 82.8 17 17.2 99 100.0
concerns are No 0 0 2 100.0 2 100.0
communicated Total 100.0
during class 84 83.2 17 17.0 101
meetings/barazas
Yes 82 83.0 16 16.3 98 100.0
Class meetings
No 1 50.0 1 50.0 2 100.0
with students Total 100.0
enhances 83 83.0 17 17.0 10
dialogue
Yes 83 83.0 16 16.2 98 100.0
Class meetings No 0 0 1 100.0 1 100.0
with students No 100.0
enhances respons 1(100.0) 100 0 0 1
decision making e
Total 84(83.2) 83.2 17 17.0 101 100.0
Key ( ) - Percent

From table 4.21 it is clear that all factors were highly rated with the principals factors

all pointing out what is done within the school set up to enhance discipline. The

principals reported that class meetings enhanced decision making and learners

concerns were communicated during Class meetings. This implies that both the

learners and the principals had an opportunity to converse together hence sharing
142
concerns that were affecting learners at that particular moment. These results are

consistent with Kibet, Kindiki, Sang and Kitilit (2012) who found that principals

frequently or sometimes involve other stakeholders, particularly teachers, students

and to some extent parents, in the management of their schools. They communicate

clearly to students but frequently retain the final authority over most issues. The

results are however inconsistent withMuchelle (1996) who found that the amount of

participation allowed in the school was not sufficient to give students a chance to

practice democratic skills. Kindiki (2009) concurs by noting that there were poor

channels of communication used by school administrators and undemocratic school

administration did not consider meetings as important channels of communication.

Kiprop (2012) also established that most principals rarely listened to students’

grievances because they believe that they have nothing to offer but adopted a master

servant relationship which creates a lot of tension, stress and misunderstanding and

eventually leads to frustrations and violence as manifested in strikes.

Kindiki (2009) advocated for use of meetings and assemblies as main channels of

communication because they improved the interaction and relationship between the

administration and the students hence leading to unity and peace in the school. This

implies that during class meeting the school administrators had a close contact with

the individual students hence this would enable a bonding that would help them to

trust and open up on issues that were of concern to them. The class meeting also

enable them to hold meetings with students for collaborative decision making. Hence

this may enable the students to take responsibility of their actions. This is because

during these class meetings students enhance dialogue with the school administration.

143
On the other hand class meetings helped the principal to communicate to the class on

school discipline policies.

The deputy principals also strongly agreed and agreed that class meetings with

students enhances dialogue with students and class meeting enhances students’

participation in decision making. Another 94.0 percent of the principals strongly

agreed and agreed that school discipline policies are communicated during class

meetings, 90.1 percent of them strongly agreeing and agreeing that learners’ concerns

were communicated during class meetings and 89.1 percent strongly agreed and

agreed that their schools held class meetings with students as a preventive discipline

measure.

These results also agreed with those of all the guidance and counselling teachers who

strongly agreed and agreed that learners’ concerns were communicated during class

meetings, 95.2 percent of them strongly agreed and agreed that school discipline

policies were communicated during class meetings, with 93.2 percent strongly

agreeing and agreeing that class meetings with students enhances dialogue with

students and class meetings enhance students’ participation in decision making and

90.1 percent strongly agreed and agreed that their school held class meetings with

students as a preventive discipline measure. Majority of the BoM (93.4%) indicated

that their schools held class meetings with students for collaborative decision making.

The issues discussed during class meetings according to the BoM included strategies

for enhancing good performance and general discipline of the students. The students

were also able to raise their grievances during class meetings. The persons who

attended such meetings according to the BoM include class teachers, BoM members,

144
PTA class representative, principal and deputy principal but in most cases according

to the principals, deputy principals and the guidance and counselling teacher, the class

teachers carried the day most of the times.

A chi-square test was done to determine the significance of association between

principals’ use of class meetings for collaborative decision making and students’

discipline in schools. The results are as shown in table 4.22

Table 4.22

Chi-square test on use of class meetings with students and students’ discipline

P-value

Class meetings with students enhances decision making 1.792 2 0.075

Class meetings with students enhances dialogue 1.575 1 0.209

School holds class meetings with students for 5.175 2 0.408

collaborative decision making

Learners' concerns are communicated during class .853 2 0.520

meetings/barazas

School discipline policies are communicated during class .413 1 0.653

meetings

From the Chi-square table, the p-value 0.075, 0.209, 0.408, 0.520 and 0.0.653>0.5 has

an average P-value of 0.373. This indicates that the relationship is not significant

meaning that there is no significant difference between class meeting and students

discipline. The lowest attribute is that class meetings with students enhances decision

making with a p-value of 0.075 which is not significant while the attribute on school

145
discipline policies are communicated during class meetings has a p-value of 0.653

which is not significant.

4.7.2 Effects of holding class meetings on students’ discipline

The principals, deputy principals, teacher counsellors and the BoM were asked to

indicate whether class meetings had any effect on students’ discipline. The results are

indicated in Table 4.23

Table 4.23

Principals’ response on effects of holding class meetings on students’ discipline

Frequency Percent

Improves discipline 54 53.5

Decisions made are owned up 21 20.7

Enhances mutual understanding between students and 3 3.0

teachers
Students are free to express their views 6 5.9

Instils a sense of responsibilities 12 11.9

Improves academic performance 6 5.9

Total 101 100

Slightly above half of the principals (53.5%) indicated that the effects of holding class

meeting was improved discipline whereby on the other hand a handful of them felt

that it helped the students to own up decisions made and it instilled a sense of

responsibility. This implies that students had to take responsibilities for their own

actions if they decided otherwise on issues discussed in class. The researcher

146
observes that when one participates in decision making, they are bound by it hence

they have to take responsibilities of their actions.

The deputy principals also noted that the effect of holding class meetings with the

students for collaborative decision making was to improve on discipline of students,

make students feel part and parcel of decisions made, it reduces indiscipline cases,

improves academic performance in school, solves minor issues before they spill over,

leads to effective communication and understanding between teachers, students and

the administration and the school administration becomes aware of the real

challenges.

These findings were supported by the guidance and counselling teachers and

BoM.This disagrees with Waweru (2008) who observed that students’ involvement in

school governance was quite inadequate and was visibly below average except in co-

curricular activities and maintenance of school plant. Kindiki (2009) concurred in

that there were poor channels of communication used by school administrators and

undemocratic school administration did not consider meetings as important channels

of communication. The study advocated for use of meetings and assemblies as main

channels of communication because they improved the interaction and relationship

between the administration and the students hence leading to unity and peace in the

school. This means that if effectively implemented, holding class meetings with

students for collaborative decision making as an alternative disciplinary method could

enhance students’ discipline in schools.

147
4.7.3 Challenges faced by principals in use of class meetings with students’ for

collaborative decision in public secondary schools

Some of the challenges of using class meetings with students for collaborative

decision in public secondary schools in this study are as shown in Table 4.24.

Table 4.24

Principals responses on challenges faced in use of class meetings with students

for collaborative decision making

Frequency Percent
Students come up with unrealistic demands that antagonize
21 20.8
school
Some students shy away from stating their concerns/fears 20 19.8
Time consuming due to tight school schedule 13 12.9
Some teachers are uncooperative and fail to attend the class 9 8.9
Divergent opinions and expectations which may not be to the 8 7.9
Some discussions may lose focus especially if an unpopular d 4 4.0
Some teachers are embarrassed by some students' allegations 4 4.0
Some students are just passive 4 4.0
It has minimal effect and does not bring about instant change 2 2.0
Some bad students may influence others to sabotage decision 2 2.0
Absenteeism due to misconduct of indiscipline students and
2 2.0
lack of fee
Monotonous because the same teachers meet same group of
2 2.0
study
All parties are supportive 1 1.0
Cover up of some mistakes 1 1.0
Poor communication skills 1 1.0
No Response 7 6.9
Total 101 100.0

148
Although several challenges were identified by the principals, about 20.8 percent of

the principals noted that students come up with unrealistic demands that antagonize

school administration, and that some students (19.8 %) shy away from stating their

concerns/ fears. This implies that since the students are able to approach the school

administration, the demands made do not have to be met there and then but the

decisions have to be made by the principal in consultation with other stakeholders.

Most of the deputy principals (29.7%) felt that decision making takes long time to

reach a consensus due to frequent meetings while 20.8 percent noted that some

students declined speaking out of fear of being ridiculed by others, 16.8 percent said

that students had too many unrealistic demands which are not easy to implement

while eight point nine (8.9) percent of them noted that some students were not

cooperative for they did not participate during class meeting and five (5.0) percent

noted that some teachers did not take class meetings seriously and did not even

attend them. Another challenge that was posed was of delays by the school

administration to resolve some issues. Only issues affecting some classes are tackled

while others are left out.The principal and the deputy principal may not get time to

attend the meetings. They also noted that too many unrealistic demands that could not

be easily implemented were mentioned and class teachers withheld some information

that implicated them.The guidance and counselling teacher and the BoM also agreed

with the said results.

Other types of meetings held in school in order to manage students discipline apart

from class meetings with students for collaborative decision making as mentioned by

the principals, deputy principals, guidance and counselling teacher and the BoM

149
included students’ “barazas’’or open forums, guidance and counselling by

motivational speakers, religious meetings, general assemblies, dormitory meetings,

family meetings, Students council meetings, stakeholders meetings, and suggestion

box was provided hence students would write and drop their grievances. This implies

that schools had a wide range of methods that could be used to dialogue with students.

4.7.4 Respondents’ recommendations on use of class meetings with students’

toimprovestudents’ discipline

The recommendations on how class meetings could be improved in the management

of students’ discipline in public secondary schools by the principals are as shown in

Table 4.25.

Table 4.25

Principals’ suggestions on use of class meeting as an alternative disciplinary

method

Frequency Percent

Should be highly recommended in all schools and decision 72 71.3

reached acted on

Should be encouraged since it promotes democracy 17 16.9

Enhances communication among teachers, students and 8 7.9
administration
Students ideas to be censored before implementation 2 2.0
No response 3 3.0
Total 101 100.0

A large number of the principals highly recommended the use of class meetings in

all schools and decisions reached to be acted on. This implies that holding class

150
meetings could enable principals to have a one on one conservation with the classes

hence they would be able to know how to tackle challenges of each class since could

have unique issues. On the other hand majority of the deputy principals and the

guidance and counselling teachers also agreed with the principals that class meetings

should be used in all schools and decisions reached acted on appropriately. Class

meeting is an avenue where students can talk freely on issues affecting them and peers

can effectively check on indiscipline student amongst themselves and it was seen as

an important disciplinary tool. The BoM noted that students felt like part and parcel

of the decision making process and the practice should be encouraged by holding

class meetings regularly. Students should be encouraged to talk about issues affecting

them since this would help the students to solve their issues and proper guidelines on

the meetings should be provided.

151
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter presents a summary of the study and the conclusions drawn from the

findings of the study. Finally, recommendations made from findings and suggestions

for further research are presented.

5.2 Summary of the study

This study sought to investigate the effects of principals’ alternative disciplinary

methods on students’ discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County, Kenya.

The following were the objectives of the study: to establish the extent to which

principals’ use of peer counselling affected students’ discipline; to determine the

effect of suspension of indiscipline students on students’ discipline; to establish the

effects of students’ expulsionon students’ discipline and to determine the extent to

which principals’ use of class meetings with students for collaborative decision

making affects students’ discipline in public secondary schools.

Chapter two covered a literature review of aspects explored under alternative

disciplinary mrthods. These included peer counselling and students’ discipline,

suspension of indiscipline students and students’ discipline, expulsion and students’

discipline and collaborative decision making and students’ discipline. It also consisted

of a summary of literature review, theoretical framework and a conceptual

framework. Chapter three dealt with research methodology that was used in

conducting the research study. It specifically dealt with the research design, target

population, sample size and sampling techniques, research instruments that were

152
divided into sections, instrument validity, instrument reliability, data collection

procedures data analysis techniques and ethical considerations.

The study adopted the ex-post-facto (after-the-fact) research design. The design

attempted to determine the cause or consequences of differences that already exist

between alternative disciplinary methods and students’ discipline in public secondary

schools in Kitui County. Since public secondary schools in kitui County experience

students discipline problems of various forms, the research design was used to

establish the state of students’ discipline at the ground. The study targeted 333 public

secondary schools which included principals, Deputy Principals and Guidance and

Counselling Heads of Departments (HoDS), Board of Management (BoM)

chairpersons, Kitui CDE and Kitui Law Courts Resident Magistrate. Nine public

secondary schools that represented various types of schools that participated in the

main study were selected for a pilot study.

The sample size was obtained by a stratified proportionate sampling procedure and

purposive sampling. A sample of 101 public secondary schools were selected which

included principals, deputy principals, HoDs guidance and counselling and BoM

chairpersons who participated in the study. The total respondents for the study were

320.The study used questionnaires and interview guides as tools for data collection.

The questionnaires for the principals, deputy principals, HoDs guidance and

counselling were all divided into sections. The pilot study was used to identify those

items that could be misunderstood and such items were modified accordingly.

Once data was collected, it was post coded and analysed using SPSS. Descriptive

statistics was used to analyze, tabulate and present data. Quantitative data gathered
153
from closed ended questions was first coded and organized into similar themes. To

integrate qualitative data gathered from open ended questions into inferential data, it

was post coded and tallying of similar responses per item was done after which

frequency counts were made of all responses making similar responses. Results of

data gathered from closed ended and open items were reported in frequency tables,

cross tabulation tables and explanation of the findings were made based on themes.

The Chi-square test was used to determine the strength of association between the

independent variables and the dependent variable and to test whether the observed

relationship is significant or not. The significance level was set at alpha = 0.05 which

was used to determine the significance ofalternative disciplinary methods and

students’ discipline in public secondary schools in Kitui County. In chapter four, data

was analysed, presented and interpretations were made based on four research

questions. Chapter five dealt with a summary of the study, conclusions were drawn

from the findings of the study, recommendations and suggestions for further research

were also made.

5.3 Summary of findings

Effects of principals’ use of peer counselling as an alternative disciplinary

method on students’ discipline

The results of students’ attendance to peer counselling and students’ discipline were

generated from cross tabulation results. The study established that majority of schools

(67.4 %) had operational guidance and counselling departments in secondary schools.

The study also established that some schools had implemented peer counselling

programmes in their schools while others had not. The findings also indicated that

67.3% of the principals felt that peer counselling should be embraced in the

154
management of school discipline. On the other hand, a high number of students

according to the principals attended peer counselling in their schools while a few did

not seek peer counselling.

The study alsoestablished that students sought peer counselling services due to family

problems, adolescent challenges, when students did not want to confide to their

teachers and minor issues arising from students in schools. The findings also indicated

that not all schools had peer counsellors. Some of the schools that had peer

counsellors had no active peer counsellors. However, some students’ outrigtly refused

to seek peer counselling services by saying that they could not go to persons of the

same age because they had nothing to offer. On the other hand, the respondents stated

that students sought for peer counselling services (67.9 %) because they could discuss

issues that could not be discussed with their teachers. This was despite the fact that in

some schools peer counsellors only existed and lacked or were largely dormant and

untrained. The study recommended the need to identify and train peer counsellors

who would be equipped with helping skills that could enable them to reach out to

their fellow students. This implies that although peer counselling had been used in

some schools, it was used for socially related aspects instead of using it as per the

government policy on use of peer counselling to control students’ discipline in

schools. The study also recommends that the MoE to review peer counselling

practices in schools and reinforce full implementation of peer counselling

programmes in all public schools.

155
A Chi- square (x2) test was undertaken to establish the significance of association

between peer counselling and students’ discipline in schools. The Chi square test gave

an average p-value of 0.518. This means that there is no significant difference

between the principals who used peer counselling and those who did not use peer

counselling in their schools.

Although the study revealed that there is no significance difference between peer

counselling and students’ discipline, the study established that a strong relationship

exists between the attribute under peer counselling that states thatPeer counselling

enhances a workable relationship between learners which has a p-value of 0.947. On

the other hand, the study has revealed that theattribute under peer counselling that

states that guidance and counselling teacher had been trained to carry out the job with

a p-value of 0.206 has the weakest relationship with students’ discipline.

However, the strong relationship could be attributed to the fact that peer counselling

improved on students disciplinewith 73.3% of the principals noting that it promoted

open communication, instilled confidence and a positive self esteem among learners.

Students were free to seek peer counselling services from their peers hence this would

encourage more students to seek the services from peer counsellors hence improving

on academic performance. Therefore, effective peer counselling in schools promotes

positive behaviour change among students hence an improvement among students in

academic performance. The study however recommended that schools should be more

involved in conducting students’ needs assseement and provide comprehensive

guidance and counselling services.

156
Effects of Suspension of indisciplined students and students’ discipline in public

secondary schools

The study has established that secondary schools encountered students’ discipline

problems that required suspension. However, students were suspended upon

recommendation to suspend a student by the school discipline committee, due to gross

misconduct, after guidance and counselling had failed to work for a student, refusal to

take punishment, fighting, abusing teachers and truancy criminal offences, sneaking

in school with a mobile phone, drug and substance abuse, incitement, unrest and

cheating in examinations, after warning a student several times and with no change

and if a students’ indiscipline was beyond control, fighting and during school unrest.

Although indiscipline students were expelled after trying other disciplinary methods,

some principals disagreed that suspension gives the indiscipline students a chance for

further misconduct. This implies that the principals had developed a positive attitude

towards suspension as an alternative disciplinary method This may have resulted in

schools where suspension of indiscipline students was practiced for students may

have changed because after suspension, they came to realise that they would not have

too much time in the school since if misconduct continued, they would be expelled

from school.

The study also established from majority of the principals (60.4%) that the parents

were uncooperative for they requested for reduction of suspension period.The parents

also sided with the students and parents failed to report back to school on the given

date.This means that the parents sided with their problematic children and the

suspended students also denied having done anything wrong completely. This implies

that although suspension got the parent to school, it rarely encouraged behaviour

157
change. The study recommended addressing alternatives to suspension in order to

find ways of helping children who have shown signs of misbehaviour.

The study also revealed that public secondary schools had put in place readmission

criteria for suspended students to ensure that they settled down in school. This

included a wide range of intervention programmes that were used by public secondary

schools after readmission of suspended students. The intervention methods as noted

by majority of the principals (75.2%) included guidance and counselling which had

been put in place to help the students change their behaviuor. The study establishe

that students were referred for guidance and counselling after which follow up

programs were instituted. Students could also be asked to write an apology letter after

which they could do a punishment. There was also close supervision by the class

teacher and a rewarding program for disciplined students was put in place. This also

included asking the indiscipline student to meet with the discipline committee. Parents

were also involved in disciplining their children after which a follow up programme

was instituted.

The study also established that there were other alternative disciplinary methods

considered to be effective for instilling discipline on students as indicated by the

respondents. These included: instant punishment; manual work such as cutting

firewood, digging holes; joint counselling between the school and parents; guidance

and counselling combined with peer counselling; withdrawal of privileges; calling

parents to school; giving a lot of assignments and giving time limit; detention of

students and canning. The respondents justified their responses by stating that once

punished, the students could avoid misconduct, parental involvement could encourage

the child to correct his/her mistakes, manual work is constructive and discourages
158
misconduct, parents get to understand their children better, guidance and counselling

helps the students realize their mistakes and many students don’t like being seen by

their colleagues getting punished and canning corrects the mistake instantly.

Although public secondary schools had a wide range of alternatives for dealing with

learner indiscipline, corporal punishment in form of caning was also used in this

study. This implies that despite its ban and the underlying legal implications to the

users, corporal punishment is still used illegally in public secondary schools in Kenya.

Therefore apart from suspension of indiscipline students, the study has established

that there were sufficient disciplinary methods that could be combined to effectively

instill discipline on indiscipline students including corporal punishment which was

illegally practiced.

The results of chi-square(x2) test on effects of suspension of indisciplined students

and students’ discipline had a p-value 0.351 indicating that there is no significant

difference between suspension of indisciplined students and students’ discipline.

Although the study revealed that there is no significant difference between suspension

of indiscipline students and students’ discipline, the findings have established that

there is a strong relationship on the highest attribute under suspension of indiscipline

students which states that some parents opt to take their children to other schools once

suspended which has a p-value of 0.778 which has the strongest relationship with

students’ discipline. On the other hand, the lowest attribute under suspension of

indiscipline students that states that my school encounters studensts’ discipline

problems that require suspension with a p-value of 0.130 has the weakest relationship

with students’ discipline. The weak relationship is attributed to the fact that the

159
parents of the suspended students did not own up suspension of their children,

suspension did not give the indiscipline students a chance for further misconduct and

suspension did not effectively control students’ discipline.

Expulsion and students’ discipline

After crossing tabulation of principles practices and attitudes with the cases of

indiscipline that the school had dealt with in the last two terms, it was noted that there

were more principals who were against expulsion. The findings revealed that for the

last two terms there are those schools that expelled students from school and others

did not expel indiscipline students from their schools. However, majority of the

principals (79.2%) had not expelled any student in the last two terms while 5.9

percent had expelled between 1-5 students.

The circumstances which leads to expulsion as indicated by 22.8 percent of the

principals was when other options failed with 15.8 percent of the principals noting

that it is due to chronic indiscipline issues. Other grounds for expulsion included

drugs, stealing, truancy, violence and force, repeated violation of school rules and

upon recommendations by the school BOM to uphold or reject recommendations to

expel a student.

The study also established that although students’ expulsion refrains students who had

been left behind from breaking school rules and regulations, students’ expulsion had

its own underlying challenges. The challenges of expulsion were attributed by 18.8

percent of the principals to bureaucratic process which wasted learning time with 16.8

percent noting that principals encounterd resistance from MoE officials and parents.

It also left the school enrolment at stake especially where it was practiced and it

160
denied students access to basic education. This implies that very little may be done on

the indiscipline students and is likely to promote further misconduct in school.

Although there were cases of indiscipline facing the schools that required students’

expulsion, the principals were divided on the idea that their schools encountered

indiscipline cases that required expulsion. This is because majority of the principals

felt that there were other effective methods of instilling discipline on students. This

means that there were other disciplinary methods that were readily available for use

before expelling an indiscipline student from school. However, the study has

established that, expulsion of indiscipline students from school could be avoided

under all circumstances for this could enhance access and retention of students in

school. However, this could be enhanced by ensuring that all other disciplinary

methods had been tried and had been proved ineffective in dealing with learner

indiscipline before students’ expulsion is instituted.

The results of chi –square (x2) test on effects of students’ expulsion and students’

discipline had an average p-value 0.491 indicating that there is no significant

difference between students’ expulsion and students’ discipline. Although this study

has established that there is no significant difference between students’ expulsion and

students’ discipline, the study has found that there is a strong relationship between the

highest attribute under students’ expulsion which states that expelling an indiscipline

student from school takes a long process with a p-value of 0.665 which has the

strongest relationship with students’ discipline. However, the lowest attribute under

students’ expulsion that states the MoE insists on retention of students in school with

a p-value (0.252) shows the weakest relationship with students’ discipline. This

161
implies that even if the principals used expulsion as an alternative disciplinary

method, it may have a weak impact on students’ discipline.

Collaborative decision making and students’ discipline

The study has established that majority of the principals held class meetings with

students for collaborative decision making. Although holding class meetings with

students for collaborative decision making encountered some challenges withabout

20.8 percent of the principals stating that students come up with unrealistic demands

that antagonized school administration, 19.8 percent stated that some students shy

away from stating their concerns/ fears. However, wherever holding class meetings

with students for collaborative decision making was practiced, slightly above half of

the principals (53.5 %) percent stated that it improved on school discipline whereby

20.7 percent of the principals felt that it helped the students to own up decisions

made. In addition, holding class meetings with students enhanced dialogue with

students. The study also found that students were able to open and inform both the

class teacher and the principal of their impeding fears hence improving dialogue

between them. This implies that there was participatory involvement of both students

and the school administration in decision making practices hence enhanced

implementation of decisions made because they were collectively owned by the

students, teachers and the school administration.

The results of chi-square test on effects of holding class meetings with students for

collaborative decision making and students’ discipline had a p-value 0.373 indicating

that there is no significant difference between holding class with students for

collaborative decision making and students’ discipline. Although the study found that

162
there is no significant difference between holding class meetings with students for

collaborative decision making and students’ discipline, the study has established that

there is a strong relationship on the highest attribute under principals’ use of class

meetings with students for collaborative decision making which states that school

discipline policies are communicated during class meetings with a p-value of 0.653

which shows the strongest relationship with students’ discipline. However, the lowest

attribute under use of class meetings with students for collaborative decision making

which states that class meetings with students enhances decision making with a p-

value of 0.075 has the weakest relationship with students’ discipline.

Although some schools did not use class meetings withstudents for collaborative

decision making, majority of the principals 71.3 percent highly recommended use of

class meetings in all schools and decision reached to be acted upon

5.4 Conclusions

The following conclusions were drawn from the study:

The study established that majority of the schools had operational guidance and

counselling departments in their schools. Some schools had implemented peer

counselling programmes in their schools while others had not. Although Peer

counselling had been implemented in some schools, the programme had not picked up

properly in public secondary schools for it was established that peer counselling was

done for socially related aspects istead of using it to handle students’ indiscipline.

The study also established that majority of the principals were ready to use suspension

as an end result after all other available disciplinary methods had failed. In addition,

163
schools had put in place intervention measures after suspension of indiscipline

students to ensure that readmitted students settled down in school. However, apart

from suspension of indiscipline students, the study established that there were

sufficient disciplinary methods which were considered effective enough in instilling

discipline on indiscipline students including corporal punishment which was illegally

practiced. These could be combined together to manage students discipline in public

secondary schools to ensure change of learner discipline hence positive improvement

in academic performance. The Chi-square(x2) results have indicated that suspension

has no significant effect on students’ discipline with a p-value of 0.351.

The study established that students’ expulsion had an effect on students discipline by

refraining those students who had been left behind from breaking school rules and

regulations. Wherever practiced, students’ expulsion left the school enrolment at stake

and denied students access to basic education. The study also established that apart

from expulsion, there were other methods of instilling discipline on students such as

guidance and counselling, giving manual work and more assignments, reporting to the

deputy on weekly basis among others. This means that other disciplinary methods

were readily available for use before expelling a student from school hence student’s

expulsion came about as a final option for a school. Chi-square (x2) test has indicated

that there is no significant relationship between students’ expulsion and students’

discipline.

The study also found that although holding class meetings with students for

collaborative decision making was practiced in some schools, it enhances dialogue

among the participants, it enhances class participation in decision making and learners
164
are able to communicate their concerns. However, holding class meetings with

students for collaborative decision making enhanced participatory involvement of

students, teachers and school administration in decision making practices.

This study has established that peer counselling had the highest p-value 0.518 while

students’ expulsion was rated second with a p-value 0.491. In addition, holding class

meetings with students for collaborative decision making was rated third with a p-

value 0.373 while suspension of indiscipline students was rated fourth with a p-value

0.351. This indicates that there is no significant difference between alternative

disciplinary methods and students’ discipline. This is consistent with Busienei (2012)

who observed that the cases of indisciplinehave not reducedin schools with theuse of

alternative methodsof corporal punishment with 71% of the respondents agreed that

the use of other alternative methods tocorporal punishment have not reduced

indiscipline inschools.

However, the study concluded that alternative disciplinary methods such as peer

counselling, suspension of indiscipline students, students’ expulsion and principals’

use of class meetings with students for collaborative decision making have no

significant effect on students’ discipline. Although the study established that there

was no significant difference between alternative disciplinary methods and students’

discipline, the study found that there was a strong association between peer

counselling with p-value 0.518 and students’ discipline whereas suspension of

indiscipline students with p-value 0.351 had the weakest relationship with students

discipline in public secondary schools.

165
5.5 Recommendations of the study

The following were the recommendations of the study:

In terms of policy, the government should review the use of all disciplinary methods

in pubic secondary schools and provide policy guidelines on the best alternative

disciplinary methods to be used in the management of students’ discipline in all

learning institutions.

In terms of practice, the government should strengthen the use of alternative

disciplinary methods through sensitization of all stakeholders on the significance of

each alternative disciplinary method in order to enhance ownership of decisions made

at institutional levels by all stakeholders.

In terms of policy, the government should review reintroduction of corporal

punishment but with more guidelines and consider its combination with other

alternative disciplinary methods in the management of students’ discipline in public

secondary schools.

166
5.6 Suggestions for further research

The following were the suggestions for further research.

A comparative study should be carried out in other counties on effects of alternative

disciplinary methods on students’ discipline by principals in public secondary schools

in Kenya so as to compare the results with those of Kitui County.

A study on effectiveness of other disciplinary methods that have not be researched on

in this study to be carried out to determine their effects on students’ discipline in

secondary schools in Kenya.

A comparative study on perception of teachers and parents on corporal punishment

and alternative disciplinary methods in the management of students’ discipline in

schools.

A study on students’ views on effectiveness of alternative disciplinary methods in the

management of students’ discipline in secondary schools should be carried out.

167
 REFERENCES

Ajowi, J.O. & Simatwa, E. M. W. (2010). The Role of Guidance and Counselling in
promoting student discipline in secondary schools in Kenya. A case of Kisumu
District Educational Research Review Vol.5 (5) pp 263-272.Accessed 4th
December, 2012.

Bertalanffy, L.V. (1968). General system theory: Essays on its foundation and
Development, rev. ed. New York: George Braziller.

Best, J.W. & Kahn, J.V. (2000).Research in Education. (7thed). New Delhi: Prentice
Hall of India Private limited.

Best, J.W. & Kahn, J.V. (2011).Research in Education. (10thed). New Delhi: PHI
Learning Private limited.

Bett, J.C. (2013). The importance of promoting the value of the role of Peer
counselling among students in secondary schools. The international journal of
Economy, Management and Social Sciences.2(6) June 2013, pages: 477-484.

Bett, J. C. & Singilai, R. M. (2013). Difference in Perception between Headteachers

and Teacher Counsellors of the Effectiveness of Peer counselling among
students in public secondarySchools in Molo sub-county, Kenya. International
journal of Humanities and Social science.Vol.3 No.10 [special issue-May,
2013].Accessed 12th December, 2013.

Biswalo, (1969).An introduction to Guidance and Counselling Diverse African

Contexts. Dare salaam: Dare salaam University press.

Blandford,S. (1998).Managing discipline in schools: London and New York:

Routledge.

Brister, C. (1996). Corporal punishment in Australian schools: A Northern Territory

Perspective [on-line]: Research paper No.13. Darwin Northern Territory
library: Available Url:http://www.nt/nt.gov.au/-data/.../Research paper no13
corporal punishment.pdf.accessed 13 August, 2009.

Borders,L.D.& Drury, S. M.(1992).Comprehensive school counselling programmes.

A Review for policy Makers and Practititioners. Journal of Counselling and
Development, 70(4)487-498. Accessed 4th, June,2012.

Booyse, J. & Davidoff,S. (1997). School organization development in a changing

political environment. In: S Hollingsworth (ed.). International Action
Resear0ch: A casebook for educational reform. London: The Falmer Press.

168
Bosire, J. Sang, A.K. Kiumi,J.K. & Mungai,V.C. 2009). Relationship between
principals’ managerial approaches and student discipline in secondary schools
in Kenya(pp.339-413). African Research Review.An International Multi-
Disciplinary Journal. Ethiopia vol. 3(3), April 2009. Accessed 2 January,
2014.

Buckland P &Thurlow M 1996.An Audit of EMD Needs and Resource s in South

Africa. Pretoria: Department of Education.

Bush, T. & Heystek, J. (2006). School leadership and management in South Africa:
Principals’ perceptions.International Studies in Educational Administration,
34 .Accessed 4 December, 2011.

Busienei,A.J.(2012). Alternative Methods to Corporal Punishment and Their Efficacy.

Research Institute Journals, 2012 (ISSN: 2141-6990) jeteraps.scholarlink
research.org. Accessed 28 October 2014

Cahoon, p. (1989). Peer mediation. Journal of social education, October. Cited in

Stewart 2004.

Cameron, M. & Sheppard, M. (2006). School Discipline and Social Work Practice:
Application of research and theory to intervention.National Association of
Social Workers, 28 (1), 15-22. Accessed 4 December, 2011.
Cicognani, L. (2004). To punish or Discipline? Teachers’ attitude towards the
Abolition of corporal punishment.M.Ed Research Report, University of
Witwatersrand: Johannesberg. Accessed 5, November, 2011.

Chireshe, R. (2006). An Assessment of the effectiveness of school Guidance and

CounsellingServices in Zimbabwean Secondary schools.PhD
Dissertation.University of South Africa.

Chireshe, R. (2013). Peer Counselling in Zimbabwean Secondary Schools.Int J Edu

Sci, 5(4): 349-354 (2013) Department of Psychology of Education, University
of South Africa. Accessed 7 May, 2014.

Chiuri, L.W and Kiumi, J.K.(2005). Planning and economics of education.Nairobi:

Pangolin publishers.

Core, G. A. (1996).Management Theory and Practice.(5thed Counselling).

Educationallow priced texts: Great Britain.

Corey, G. (1991). Theory and Practice of Counselling and psychotherapy. 4thed.

Pacific Grove. California: Brooks/ Core Publishing Company.

Cotton, K. (2005). School wide and classroom discipline: school improvement

research series, North West Regional Education Laboratory, Close-up #9.
http://www. nwrel.org /scpd /sirs/5/cu9.html.accessed 4 November, 2011.

169
Davidoff, S. (1997). School organization development in a changing political
environment. In: S Hollingsworth (ed.). International ActionResearch: A
casebook for educational reform. London: The Falmer Press.

Dettman, H. (1972). Discipline in secondary schools in Western Australia: Report of

the Government Secondary School Discipline Committee. Perth: Education

Department of Western Australia. Cited inStewart,2004.

De Wet, C. (2003). Free State Educator’s Perception of the Scope of Learners’

Crime.South African Journal of Education, 23 (3), 168-175. Accessed 28
October 2014

Education Review office, (2003).Student participation in school Decision Making.

New Zealand: Wellington.

Gathenya, T.W. (1992). Management of Secondary schools in Kenya. Unpublished

MastersThesis London: university of Bristol.

Gaustad, J. (2005). School discipline: Eric digest 78. http://www. Eric facility.net/
Eric digests/ ed350727. Html. Accessed 5 October, 2011.

Gladding, S.T. (1988). Counselling; A Comprehensive Profession. Merrill Publishing

Company.

Harris, J.J. & Bennet, C.(1982). Student Discipline: Legal, Empirical and
Educational Perspectives. Indiana: Indiana University Bloomington.

Heaviside, S., Rowand, C., Willliams, C., & Farris, E., (1998).Violence and
Discipline problems in U.S., Public Schools: 1996-97. (NCES 98-030).
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Centre for
Education Statistics.

Hendrix, N. R. (1988). Guidance and Counselling for schools and colleges.

London prentice.

Huczynski, A & D. Buchanan. (2001) Organizational Behaviour: An

Introductory Text (4th ed.). Harlow: Prentice Hall.

Ikoya, P.O. (2009) Gender Difference in the Application of PreventiveDiscipline

Practices among Principals of Secondary Schools in Nigeria SocSci, 20(1):
49-53 (2009). Accessed 2April, 2014.

Imonje, R.M.K. (2011). Factors influencing teacher performance on implementation

of free Education in City Council Primary schools in Nairobi Province Kenya.

PhD thesis: University of Nairobi.

170
Jackline, H. (2009).Teachers, identities and space.[on-line]. South Africa: Available
url:http//.www.oerafrica.org.Accessed: 08 March 2011.

Jeevanantham, L.S. (1999). Towards 2005: proposals for curriculum change. South
African Journal of Education, 19:49-54. Accessed 29 December 2011

Jeruto, T. B &Kiprop, C. J. (2011). Extent of student participation in Decision

Making in secondary schools in Kenya.International Journal of Humanities
and social science.Vol.No.21 [special issue-December 2011].Accessed 4
January, 2013.

Johnson, B., Vergnani, T. & Chopra, M. (2002). The challenges of introducing

HIV/AIDS education into primary schools in South Africa.XIVInternational
AIDS Conference, Barcelona.

Joubert, R. & Serakwa, J. (2009). Establishing discipline in the contemporary

classroom. Journal of Educational studies. 8(1),125-137. Accessed 3 May,
2013.

Kalanza, P. M. (2010). Factors influencing principals in the administration of public

Secondary schools in Kitui District, Kenya.M.Ed Research Project,
Universityof Nairobi.

Kamotho, K. (2001). Unfinished Business in headteachers meeting. The East African

Standard June 25.

Kart, R. L. (1995).Skills in effective Administration. U.S.A.: Havard

Business Review.

Kasiem, A., Du Plessis., P. & Loock, C. (2007).Discipline is a Challenge for most

Teachers. Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg.

Kerlinger, F. N & Lee, H. B. (2000).Foundations of Behavioural Research

(4thed).California State University: Northridge.

Khewu, P.D.N. (2012). A study of practices in the alternatives to corporal punishment

Strategy being implemented in selected primary schools in buffalo city metro
municipality: implications for school leadership. PhD Dissertation.University
of Fort hare.Accessed 5, may,2014.

Kibet, M.J., Kindiki J.N.,& Sang, J.K( 2012). Principal leadership and its impact on
student discipline in Kenyan secondary schools: a case of Koibatek district.
Inkanyiso, Jnl Hum &SocSci2012, 4(2).Accessed 10 May, 2014.

KIE (2004).Guidance and counselling.A teacher Handbook. Nairobi, Kenya

institute of Education.

171
Kilimci , S. (2009).Teachers’ Perceptions on Corporal Punishment as a Method of
Discipline in Elementary Schools.The Journal of International Social
Research Volume 2 / 8 Summer 2009. Accessed 9 May, 2014.

Kindiki, J. N. (2009).Effectiveness of Communication on Students Discipline in

Secondary Schools in Kenya.Education Research Review vol.4 (5) pp. 252-
259.Accessed 4 Decmber, 2011.

Kimani, G.N., Kara,A.M. & Ogetange,B.T.(2012). Teachers and Pupils Views on

Persistent Use of Corporal Punishment in Managing Discipline in Primary
Schools in Starehe Division, Kenya. International Journal of Humanities and
Social Science Vol. 2 No. 19 [Special Issue – October 2012]. Accessed 3, may,
3014.

Kiprop, C. (2012). Approaches to management of discipline in secondary schools in

Kenya. International journal of Research in Management, issue 2,vol 2
(March-2012). Accessed 3 June, 2013.

Kitui County Education office, (2013).Education Management Information System

(EMIS) June 2013.
Kiumi, J., Bosire, J.& Sang, A. (2009).Relationship between principals management
approaches and Student discipline in public secondary schools in Nyandarua
and Laikipia Districts, Kenya. Global journal of educational Research vol.
8(1&2)2009,p.29-38. Accessed 4, December, 2013.

Kivulu, M. & Wandai,M. (2009). Spare the rod and save the child, Most South
Africans Believe: A study to investigate changes in attitudes towards methods
of disciplining school pupils amongst South African Aged 16 years and older.
Human and social Research council, 7(1), 1-5. Accessed 10 June,2012.

Kothari, C. R. (2011). Research Methodology Methods and Techniques. (2nded). New

Age International Publishers: New Delhi.

Kubeka, W. M. (2004). Disciplinary measures at the Moduopo primary school in

Tembisa, Gauteng Province, South Africa after 1994.(Unpublished MTech
dissertation). Pretoria: Tshwane University of Technology.

Laws of Kenya. (1980). Education Act Cap211.Nairobi: Government printer.

Leigh, K. E., Chenhall, E. & Saunders, C. (2009).Linking Practice to the Classroom:

Teaching Performance Analysis. Paper presented at the Academy of Human
Resource Development: Americas Conference, Washington, DC .

Lethoko, M., Heystek, J. &Maree,J. (2001). The Role of Principal, Teachers and
students in restoring the Culture of learning, teaching and service (COLT) in
Black secondary school in Pretoria region. South African Journal of Education
Vol.21 (4). Accessed 3,December, 2011.

Lines, D. (2006).Brief counselling in schools. Working with young people from 11 to

172
 18. London: Sage Publications.

Liu.J. (2013). The suspension spike: changing the Discipline culture in NYC’S
middleschools. New York City. Comptroller.

Mabeba, M.Z. & Prinsloo, E. (2000). Perceptions of discipline and ensuing discipline
problems in secondary education. South African Journal ofEducation, 20:34-
41. Accessed 2 December 2014

Marangu, G.P., Bururia, N.D. & Njonge, T. (2012) Challenges Faced By

Peer Counsellors in Their Effort to Effect Behaviour Change in Secondary
Schools in Maara District, Kenya. American International Journal of
Contemporary Research Vol. 2 No. 11; November 2012. Accessed 3 May,
2014.

Marais, P. & Meier, C. (2010). Disruptive Behaviour in the Foundation Phase of

Schooling.South African Journal of Education, 30, 41-57. Accessed 30
December 2011

Maphosa, C. & Shumba, A. (2010). Educators’ disciplinary Capabilities after the

banning of corporal punishment in South African schools. South African
journal of Education, 30,387-399.Accessed 10 December, 2011.

Mbabazi,G.K.& J. Bagaya, J. (2013). Guidance-Counselling Strategies and

Conformity with Code of Conduct in Secondary Schools in Gulu
Municipality,Uganda.International Journal of Education ISSN 1948-5476
2013, Vol. 5, No. 2.Accessed 5 May, 2014.

Mbugua, S. M. (2006).Teachers and students attitudes to peer counselling in public

secondary schools in Starehe Division, Nairobi Province Kenya. M.Ed
Research Project: Kenyatta University.

Medlen, P. (2012). Schools face more challenges than ever before. ABC News.
[http://www.abc.net au/nes/2012-10-09.education-features/4303856 (Accessed
on 09/10/2012)]

Miles, B. M. & Huberman, A.M.(1994). An Expanded Sourcebook Qualitative Data

Analysis (2nded) SAGE publications: New Delhi.

Ministry of Education.(2009). Training Module for Guidance and Counselling. Heads

of Department in Secondary schools, Nairobi : Jomo Kenyatta Foundation.

Muchelle, T.P.(1996). Attitudes of secondary school Headteachers towards the

involvement of students in school administration in Vihiga District Kenya.
M.Ed Thesis. University of Nairobi.

Muchiri, P.W. (1998). A study of processes used by headteachers to enhance student

discipline in public secondary schools in Nairobi province. M.Ed Thesis.
University of Nairobi.

173
Mugenda, O. M. & Mugenda, A.G. (2003). Research Methods, Quantitativeand
Qualitative Approaches. Nairobi: Kenya; Acts Press.

Mugenda, A.G. (2011). Social Science Research.Theory and Principles. Nairobi:

Applied Research & Training Services Press.

Mugo, w. M. (2005).Paper presented on Guidance and counselling in secondary

schools to Heads of Departments held at Machakos T.T.C. Machakos: Kenya.

Mugo,F.W.(2006). Participatory Processes used by headteachers in enhancing

students’ discipline, Kenya. M.Ed. Research project.University of Nairobi.

Musyoka, P. D. (2011). Effects of secondary school prefects’ involvement in

Managementof students’ Discipline in Kitui Central District
Kenya.Unpublished M.Ed Research Project, University of Nairobi.

Mutie, E. K. &Ndambuki, P. (2004).Guidanceand counselling for schools and

colleges. Nairobi: Oxford University Press.

Mutua, J.N. (2004). An investigation into Alternative Discipline in the absence of

Corporal punishment in public secondary schools in Matungulu Division,
Machakos District Kenya.Research project.M.Ed.University of Nairobi.

Nakpodia, E.D. (2010). Teachers‟ disciplinary approaches to students‟ problems in

Nigerian secondary schools.International NGO Journal, 5(6).Accessed 2
December, 2011.

Naong, M. (2007). The Impact of Corporal Punishment on Teacher Morale: 1994-

2004. South African Journal of Education, 27, 283-300. Accessed 30 June
2013

Ndichu, D. (2005). Guidance and counselling: Handbook for schools. Nairobi:

Career Ventures.

Nene,F.Z. (2013).The challenges of managing learner discipline: the Case of two

schoolsin pinetown District. A Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of
the requirements for the degree of Master of Education in Educational
leadership, management and policy in the School of Education. University of
KwaZulu-Natal (Edgewood Campus).Accessed 2 May, 2014.

Ngotho,S. & Dr. Zani, A.P. (2014).The Impact Of Counseling Methods In Promoting

Student Discipline In Public Secondary Schools In Kiambu County, Kenya

Journal of EducationVol. 2 | No. 2 February | 2014 ISSN 2347-8225
Accessed 26-10-2014.

Nthiga, N. (2014). Strategies adopted in enhancing learners’ retention in public

secondary schools, in Embakasi District, Kenya. Research project for master
of business administration: Kenyatta University
174
Nyang’au, E.O. (2013).Effects of disciplinary strategies on students’ behaviour in

Public Secondary schools in Matungulu district, MachakosCounty in Kenya.

M.Ed Research project report. University of Nairobi.

Nyongesa, B. J. M (2007). Educational Organization and Management.

Nairobi: Jomo Kenyatta Foundation.

Nziramasanga, C.T. (1999). Report of the Presidential Commission of inquiry into

Education and Training.Harare: Government Printers.

Odundo, P.A. (1990). School personnel management (A Nigerian perspective).

Nigeria: University of Lagos press.

Okumbe, J. A. (2001). Human Resources Management.Educational Perspective.

Nairobi: Educational Development and Research Centre.

Okumbe, J. A. (1998). Educational Management Theory and Practice. Nairobi:

University Press.

Olivier, G. H. (2010). Education Perception of Corporal Punishment. Submitted in

Partial Fulfilment of the requirement for the degree Magister Educationist
(Education leadership) in the Department of Education Management and
Policy Studies, Faculty of Education. University of Pretoria: Pretoria.

Onderi, H. &Makori, A. (2013). Secondary school principals challenges in Nyamira

Countyin Kenya: issues and challenges.EducationalResearch
International.Vol. 1 NO.1 February 2013.

Opondo, O. (2008 July 23). Toughnew rules to curb school strikes. Nairobi. Nation
Media Group.

Orodho, J. A. (2009). Elements of Education and Social Science Research Methods.

(2nded).Maseno: Kenya; Kanezja.

Oosthuizen, I., Jwolhuter, C.C., & Dutoit.P. (2003). Preventive or punitive

disciplinarymeasures in South African schools: which should be favoured?
Potchestroom University for CHE.Koers68 (4).pp.457-479.Accessed 3
December, 2011.

Oso, W. Y. & Onen, D. O. (2005). A General Guide to Writing Research Proposal

andReport. Kisumu: Lake Publishers

Ouma,M.A; Simatwa , E.M.W and Serem,T,D.K. ( 2014). Management of pupil

disciplinein Kenya: A Case Study of Kisumu Municipality.Educational
Research (ISSN: 2141-5161) Vol. 4(5) pp. 374-386, May 2013 Available
online@ http://www.interesjournals.org/ER Copyright © 2013 International
Research Journals. Accessed 26.10.2014.

175
Perold, J.J. (2000). Paradox and pedagogy: The double bind in South African

schools. Master's dissertation. Pretoria: University of Pretoria. Rhodes JE,

Ebert L & Fischer K 1992.Natural mentors: An overlooked resource in the
social networks of young African American mothers. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 20:445-462. Accessed 1 November, 2011.

Powers, D.R. & M.F. Powers, M. F. (1984) Making participatory management

work. San-Francio: Cossey-Bass

PYKE, N. (1993).Banished to the exclusion zone. The Times Educational

Supplement, 6, April,2.

Rarieya, J.F.A. (2007). School leadership in Kenya. The lived realities of women
heads of schools. Unpublished PhD Dissertation.Keele University.

Republic of Kenya, (1976). Education commission on Educational Objectives and

Policies. (Gachathi Report).Nairobi: Government Printer.

Republic of Kenya. (1988). Report of the presidential Working Party on education

and manpower Training for the next decade and beyond( Kamunge, J.M
Report). Nairobi: Government printer.

Republic of Kenya. (1999). Report on totally Integrated Quality Education and

training for Unity, Equity and Development (Koech D. K.). Nairobi:
Government printers.

Republic of Keny. (2000). National Policy on Gender and Development. Nairobi:

Government printers.

Republic of Kenya.(2001). Children’s Act 8 of 2001. Nairobi: government printers.

Republic of Kenya (2001).Report of the Task Force on Students Discipline and

Unrest in secondary schools. Nairobi: Jomo Kenyatta Foundation.

Republic of Kenya (2013). The basic Education Act. No.14 of 20013. Government
Printers.

Republic of South Africa. (1996). The South African Schools Act. Pretoria:

Republic of South Africa. 1996. The Constitution of South Africa. Pretoria:

Government Printers.

Reynolds, D. (1989).effective school and pupil Behaviour.London; The Falmer press.

Rizzolo, A. (2004). Discipline Problems, Unruly Behaviour Seriously Threatening

Student Achievement: 2011 Public Agenda. [Online]. South Africa: Available
url:http//www2011 Public Agenda. Accessed: 30 December 2011.

176
Robinson, B. D. (1996). School Counsellors in England and Wales,1965-1995: A
flawed innovation? Pastoral Care in Education, 14(3):12-19.

Rogers, B. (2001). Behaviour Management.London : Chapman.

Rogers, B. (2002). What changesand what stays the same in behaviour management.
In teacher leadership and behaviour management, B. Rogers ed. London:
Chapman.

Rutondoki, E. N. (2000). Guidance and Counselling. Makerere University,

Institute of Adult and Continuing Education.

Scott, R.W. (2008). Organizations and Organising: Rational natural and Open
systems Perspectives. Upper Sandle River: Prentice Hall.

Sheldon, S.B. & Epstein, J.L. (2002). Improving Student Behaviour and School
Disciplinewith Family and Community Involvement.Education and Urban
Society, 35, 4-26. Accessed 4 October, 2011.

Slee, R. (1995). Changing theories and practices of discipline. London: Falmer

Simatwa, E.M.W. (2012).Management of student discipline in Secondary

schools in Kenya, a case Study of Bungoma County.Educational Research
(ISSN: 2141-5161) Vol. 3(2) pp. 172-189 February 2012 Available online@
http://www.interesjournals.org/ER Copyright © 2012 International Research
Journals. Access date 4.5.2014.

Smit, M. E (2010).The Role of School Discipline in combating violence in schools in

The East London Region. M. Ed Report at the university of Forte Hare : East
London. Access 3 November, 2012.

Squelch, J.M. (2000). Discipline. Pretoria: Centre for Education Law and Education
Policy (CELP).

Stewart, D. (2004). Learner Discipline: An Australian Perspective. Koers, 69(2),317-

335.

Steyn, A.G.W.( 1999). The elimination of inequalities in the provision of school

education.In South Africa.South African Journal of Education, 19:66-73.
Accessed 20 November, 2012

Steyn,G.M. & Van Wyk, J.N. (1999). Job satisfaction: perceptions of principals and
teachers in urban black schools in South Africa. South African Journal of
Education, 19:37-4. Accessed, 1 November, 2011.

Teneja, B. K.(1999). Educational thoughts and practices. Nairobi: oxford

University press.

177
Tindi, O. &Silsil, P. (2008).Guidance and Counselling. Topics and Programmes for
schools.Nairobi: phoenix Publishers Ltd.

Tozer, J. (2010). 'We're Letting the Pupils Take Over': Teacher Cleared over

Confrontation with Girl, 13, Warns of Anarchy Threat. [Online]. South Africa:
Available url:http//.www.mailonline. Accessed: 30 December
2011

Tungata, M. (2006).Maintaining Discipline in schools in the Post –corporal

punishment Era.M.Ed Research Report, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan
University.Accessed 4 October, 2011.

UNESCO.(2002). Terms of Reference. The first International Conference on

Guidance, Counselling and Youth Development in Africa, 22-26 April 2002.
Nairobi, Kenya.

Visser, M.J. ;Schoeman, J.B. & Perold, J.J. (2004). Evaluating an HIV/AIDS
prevention
programme in schools. Journal of Health Psychology, 9:263-280.Accessed 28
October 2014

Visser, M.(2005). Implementing peer support in secondary schools: facing the

challenges.South African Journal of Education Copyright © 2005
EASAVol.25(3)148–155 accessed on 4/5/2014.

Von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory: Essays on its foundation and
development,rev. ed. New York: George Braziller.

Vorster, P.J. & Sutcliffe, C.M. (2000). The role of teachers in the identity formation
ofadolescents restrained in their becoming. South African Journal of
Education, 20:10-15.

Wango, G. M. (2006). Policy and practices in guidance and counselling in secondary

Schools in Kenya.PhD Thesis; University of Birmighan.

Wango, G. M. &Mungai, E. K. (2007).Counselling in school.A Handbook for

Teachers.Nairobi: Jomo Kenyatta Foundation.

Waweru, J.C. (2008). Assessment of levels of student participation in secondary

School governance in Thika District Kenya.PhD Dissertation Catholic
University ofEast Africa.

Wekesa, P. (2005). Bring Back the Cane in schools to enhance Discipline. The
standard http//www. East standard. net/print/news.php? artcleid= 24085.

Were ,N.M.W.(2003). Discipline guidance and counselling in schools. Nairobi Strong

Wall Africa.

178
Wilkinson, A.M.(1991). The scientist’s Handbook for Writing papers and
Dissertations.EanglewoodCliffs, Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Yahaya, A., Ramli, J., Hashim, S., Ibrahim, M.A., Rahman, R.R.A., &Yahaya, N.,
(2009). Discipline Problems among secondary school students in Johor Bahru,
Malaysia.European Journal of Social Sciences 11(4).Accessed 2 October,
2011.

179
 APPENDICES

APPENDIX I

INTRODUCTION LETTER TO THE RESPONDENTS

University of Nairobi,

Department of Educational Administration and planning,

P O Box 30197-00100,

NAIROBI.

Dear Sir/Madam,

RE: RESEARCH VISIT TO YOUR SCHOOL

I am a Post Graduate Student at University of Nairobi. I am conducting a study on the

effects of principals’ alternative disciplinary methods on students’ discipline in public

secondary schools in Kitui County, Kenya. The respondents for the study are

headteachers, deputy headteachers, HoDs guidance and counselling and BoM chair

persons inKitui County.

The purpose of this letter is to seek your participation in the study. The information

gathered from respondents will be used for purposes of this study only. To ensure

confidentiality of your identity, please do not write your name on the questionnaires.

Thank you for your co-operation.

Yours Faithfully,

Janet K. Mulwa.

180
 APPENDIX II
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HEADTEACHERS

INSTRUCTIONS

You are kindly requested to complete this questionnaire honestly by inserting a tick

(√) against your option in the appropriate box and offer explanations for the questions

that require your answer through a word of explanation. For confidentiality purposes,

you need not write your name on the questionnaires. Your cooperation and assistance

will be highly appreciated.

SECTION A. Personal profile

a. Please indicate your gender:

Female [] Male []

2. Please tick the age category that applies to you:

Below 30 years [] 31-39 years [] 40- 49years []

50-59years [] 60 years and above []

3. Please indicate your highest professional qualifications.

B.A [] B.A with PGDE [ ] B.Ed [ ]

M.A [ ] M.SC [ ] S.1 [ ] M.Ed [ ]

Diploma in Education [ ] B.SC with PGD []

4. How many years have you served as a).A teacher…...........................................

5. How long have you served in this school?...........................................................

SECTION B: School characteristics

6. Please indicate the type of your school.

Mixed day and boarding [ ]; Boys Boarding [] Girls Boarding [ ];

Girls day [ ]; Boys day [] Girls’ day and boarding []

Mixed boarding [ ]; Boys’ day and Boarding [] Mixed day []

7. How many streams does your school have?.......................................................

181
SECTION C. Peer counselling and students’ discipline
Please tick the number that best describes your opinion about peer counselling in your

school. The numbers represent the following responses strongly agree (5); Agree (4);

Disagree (3); Strongly Disagree (2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

8 The school has an operational guidance and counselling department

9 The guidance and counselling teacher has been trained to carry out the

responsibility

10 Peer counselling programme has been fully implemented in my school

11 Peer counsellors have been trained to carry out their responsibility

12 Students feel free to seek peer counselling services from their peers

13 Peer counselling enhances a workable relationship between the learners

14 Peer counselling enhances a sense of belonging

15 Peer counselling should be embraced in management of school discipline

16. Do students seek peer counselling services in your school? Yes [ ] No [ ]

17. If your answer is Yes under what circumstances do students seek peer

counselling services in your school?....................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

18. How many students have undergone peer counselling in your school for the

last two terms? ...................................................................................................

182
19. What effect does peer counselling have on students’ discipline in your school?

..................………………………………………………………………………

20. What challenges does your school encounter in use of peer counsellors on

students’ discipline?

.............................................................................................................................

21. Apart from peer counselling, what other methods of preventing students’

indiscipline does your school use?

..............................................................................................................................

22. What are your recommendations on how the use of peer counsellors in

management of students discipline could be enhanced in secondary schools?.

………………………………………………......................................................

SECTION E Suspension and students’ discipline

In a rating scale, please tick the number that best describes your opinion about

suspension of indiscipline students in your school. The numbers represent the

following responses strongly agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3); Strongly Disagree

(2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

23 My school encounters students’ discipline problems that require

suspension

24 The school readmits students back to school after suspension

25 The school has a readmission criteria of suspended students

26 Parents should accompany suspended students back to school

27 Parents of suspended students don’t own up suspension of their

183
 children

28 Some parents opt to take their children to other schools once

suspended

29 Suspension gives the indiscipline students a chance for further

misconduct

30 Suspension does not effectively control students’ discipline in public

secondary schools

31. Do you suspend indiscipline students from school? Yes [ ] No [ ]

32. If your answer is Yes under what circumstances does your school suspend

problematic students?

…………………………………………………………………………………

……………………..............................................................................................

33. How many students have you suspended for the last two terms?

……....................……………………………………………………………

34. How long does the suspension of indiscipline students in your school last?

……......................................................................................................................

Please explain the reason for your response

………………………………..………………………………………………

..............................................................................................................................

35. What intervention programmes does your school use after readmission of

suspended students in school to ensure that they settle down in school?

..............................................................................................................................

36. What challenges does your school encounter when using suspension as a

method of instilling discipline on students in your school

184
 …………………………………………………………………………………

37. Apart from suspension, what other effective methods of instilling discipline

does your school use to correct students’ discipline?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

Please explain your response

…………………………......................................................................................

38. How best can suspension be used in public secondary schools to manage

students’ discipline?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

SECTION D. Expulsion and students’ discipline

In a rating scale, please tick the number that best describes your opinion about

expulsion of indiscipline students in your school. The numbers represent the

following responses strongly agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3); Strongly Disagree

(2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

39 My school faces students indiscipline cases that require expulsion

40 Expelling an indiscipline student from school takes a long process

41 The MOE insists on retention of indiscipline students in school

42 Expulsion of indiscipline students from school denies them access to

basic education

43 There are other effective methods of instilling discipline on students

185
 44 Expulsion of indiscipline students brings about animosity

45. Does your school expel indiscipline students from school? Yes [ ] No [ ]

46. If your answer is Yes, under what circumstances do you expel students from

school?

…………..............................................................................................................

47. How many expulsion cases have you had for the last two terms?

..............................................................................................................................

48. What effect does use of expulsion as an alternative method of instilling

discipline have on students’ discipline in your school?

.................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................

49. What challenges do you encounter in use of expulsion as an alternative method

of instilling on students in your school?

........................................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................................

50. Apart from expulsion, what other effective methods of instilling discipline on

students does your school use on problematic students?

.................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................

51. What are your recommendations on expulsion as an alternative method of

instilling discipline on students in public secondary schools in order to enhance

the management of students’ discipline in schools?

.................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................
186
SECTION F: Class meetings and students’ discipline

In a rating scale, please tick the number that best describes your opinion about class

meetings in your school. The numbers represent the following responses strongly

agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3); Strongly Disagree (2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

52 My school usually holds class meetings with students as a

preventive discipline measure

53 Class meetings with students enhances dialogue with

students

54 Class meetings enhances students’ participation in

decision making

55 School discipline policies are communicated during class

meetings

56 Learners’ concerns are communicated during class

meetings

57. Do you hold class meetings with students for collaborative decision making in

your school? Yes [] No []

58. If your answer is Yes, how often do you hold class meetings in your school?

..............................................................................................................................

59. Who usually attends the class meetings?

..............................................................................................................................

60. What effect does holding class meetings with students for collaborative

decision making have on students discipline in your school?

……………………..............................................................................................

187
61. What challenges does your school encounter in use of class meetings with

students for collaborative decision making in your school?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

62. Apart from holding class meetings with students, what other types ofmeetings

does your school hold with students in order to manage students’discipline?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

63. What are your recommendations on use of class meetings to enhance the

management students’ discipline in schools?

..........................................................................................................……………

…………………………………………………………………………………

Thank you for your cooperation

188
 APENDIX III

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE DEPUTY HEADTEACHER

INSTRUCTIONS

You are kindly requested to complete this questionnaire honestly by inserting a tick

(√) against your option in the appropriate box and offer explanations for the questions

that require your answer through a word of explanation. For confidentiality purposes,

you need not write your name on the questionnaires. Your cooperation and assistance

will be highly appreciated.

SECTION A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1. Please indicate your gender:

Female [ ] Male [ ]

2. Please tick the age category that applies to you:

Below 30 years [] 31-39 years [] 40-49years []

50-59years [] 60 years and above []

3. Please indicate your highest professional qualifications.

B.A [ ] B.A with PGDE [ ] B.Ed [ ] M.A [ ] M.SC [ ] S.1 [ ]

M.Ed [ ] Diploma in Education [ ] B.SC with PGDE [ ]

4. What is your teaching experience as a teacher?........................................

5. How long have you served in this school?................................................

SECTION B: School characteristics

6. Please indicate the type of your school.

Mixed day and boarding [ ]; Boys Boarding [ ] Girls Boarding [ ];

Girls day [ ]; Boys day [] Girls’ day and boarding []

Mixed boarding [ ]; Boys’ day and Boarding [ ] Mixed Day [ ]

189
7. How many streams does your school have?

..............................................................................................................................

SECTION C. Peer counselling and students’ discipline

Please tick the number that best describes your opinion about peer counselling as an

alternative method of instilling discipline on students in your school. The numbers

represent the following responses strongly agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3);

Strongly Disagree (2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

8 The school has an operational guidance and counselling

department

9 The guidance and counselling teacher has been trained to carry

out the responsibility

10 Peer counselling programme has been fully implemented in my

school

11 Peer counsellors have been trained to carry out their

responsibility

12 Students feel free to seek peer counselling services from their

peers

13 Peer counselling enhances a workable relationship between the

learners

14 Peer counselling enhances a sense of belonging

15 Peer counselling should be embraced in management of school

discipline

16. Do students seek peer counselling services in your school? Yes [ ] No [ ]

190
17. If your answer is Yes, under what circumstances do students seek peer

counselling services in your school?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

18. How many students have undergone peer counselling in your school for the

last two terms?

..............................................................................................................................

19. What effect does peer counselling have on students’ discipline in your school?

..............................................................................................................................

20. What challenges does your school encounter in use of peer counsellors on

students’ discipline?

..............................................................................................................................

............................……………..............................................................................

21. Apart from peer counselling, what other methods of preventing students’

indiscipline does your school use?

..............................................................................................................................

22. What are your recommendations on use of peer counselling in management of

students’ discipline in secondary schools?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

SECTION E: Suspension and students’ discipline

In a rating scale, please tick the number that best describes your opinion about

suspension of indiscipline students in your school. The numbers represent the

following responses strongly agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3); Strongly Disagree

(2); not at all (1)

191
 STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

23 My school encounters discipline problems that require

suspension

24 Parents should accompany suspended students back to

school

25 Parents of suspended students don’t own up suspension

of their children

26 Some parents opt to take their children to other schools

once suspended

27 Suspension gives the indiscipline students a chance for

further misconduct

28 Suspension does not effectively control students’

discipline in my school

29. Do you suspend indiscipline students from school? Yes [ ] No [ ]

30. If your answer is Yes, under what circumstances does your school suspend
problematic students?
..............................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................

31. How many students have been suspended from your school for the last two

terms?

..............................................................................................................................

32. How long doesthe suspension of indiscipline students in your school last?

..............................................................................................................................

192
 Please explain the reason for your response

………………………………………………………………………………......

..............................................................................................................................

33. What intervention programmes does your school use after readmission of

suspended students in school to ensure that they settle down in school?

…………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………......................................................

34. What challenges does your school encounter in use of suspension as a method

of instilling discipline on students in your school?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

35. Apart from suspension, what other effective methods of instilling discipline

does your school use to correct students’ discipline?

...........................................................................................................................

………………………………..............................................................................

Please explain your response

…………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………......................................................................................................

36. How best can suspension be enhanced in public secondary schools to manage

students’ discipline?

..........................................................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................................................

193
SECTION D: Expulsion and students’ discipline

In a rating scale, please tick the number that best describes your opinion about

expulsion of indiscipline students in your school. The numbers represent the

following responses strongly agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3); Strongly Disagree

(2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

37 My school faces students indiscipline cases that

require expulsion

38 Expelling an indiscipline student from school takes a

long process

39 The MOE insists on retention of indiscipline

students in school

40 Expulsion of indiscipline students from school

denies them access to basic education

41 There are other effective methods of instilling

discipline on students

42 Expulsion of indiscipline students brings about

animosity

42. Does your school expel indiscipline students from school? Yes [ ] No [ ]

43. If your answer is Yes, under what circumstances do you expel students from

school?..............................................................................................................

How many students have been expelled from your school for the last two terms?

........................................................................................................

194
51. What effect does expulsion of indiscipline students have on students’

discipline in your school?

............................................................................................................................

52. What challenges do you encounter in use of expulsion as an alternative

method of instilling on students in your school?

.................................................................................................................……

53. Apart from expulsion, what other effective methods of instilling discipline on

students does your school use on problematic students?

....................................................................................................................................

54. What are your recommendations on how expulsion as an alternative method of

instilling discipline on students in schools could be enhanced to manage students’

discipline in public secondary schools?

.................................................................................................................…………

SECTIONF: Class meetings and students’ discipline

In a rating scale, please tick the number that best describes your opinion about class

meetings in your school. The numbers represent the following responses strongly

agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3); Strongly Disagree (2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

49 My school holds class meetings with students as a preventive

discipline measure

50 Class meetings with students enhances dialogue with students

51 Class meetings enhances students’ participation in decision

making

52 School discipline policies are communicated during class

195
 meetings

53 Learners’ concerns are usually communicated during class

meetings

54. Do you hold class meetings with students for collaborative decision making in
your school?

Yes [] No []

55. If your answer is Yes, how often do you hold class meetings?.

..............................................................................................................................

56. Who usually attends the class meetings?

………………………………….........................................................................

55. What effect does holding class meetings with students for collaborative

decision making have on students discipline in your school?

..............................................................................................................................

56. What challenges does your school encounter in use of class meetings with

students for collaborative decision making in yourschool?

..............................................................................................................................

.............……….....................................................................................................

57. Apart from holding class meetings with students, what other types of meetings

does your school hold with students in order to manage students’ discipline?

..............................................................................................................................

60 What are your recommendations on use of class meetings to enhance the

management of students’ discipline in schools?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION

196
 APPENDIX IV

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE HOD GUIDANCE AND COUNSELLING

INSTRUCTIONS

You are kindly requested to complete this questionnaire honestly by inserting a tick

(√) against your option in the appropriate box and offer explanations for the questions

that require your answer through a word of explanation. For confidentiality purposes,

you need not write your name on the questionnaires. Your cooperation and assistance

will be highly appreciated.

SECTION A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1. Please indicate your gender: Female [ ] Male [ ]

2. Please tick the age category that applies to you:

Below 30 years [ ] 31-39 years [ ]40-

49years [ ] 50-59years [ ] 60 years and above [ ]

3. Please indicate your highest professional qualifications.

B.A [ ] B.Awith PGDE [ ] B.Ed [ ] M.A [ ] M.SC [ ]

S.1 [ ] M.Ed [ ] Diploma in Education [ ] B.SC with PGDE [ ]

4. What is your teaching experience as a teacher?..................................................

5. How long have you served in this school?.................................................................

What post do you hold in this school?.............................................................................

Apart from teaching, what other duties do you carry out in this school?.........................

SECTION B: School characteristics

6. Please indicate the type of your school.

Mixed day and boarding [ ]; Boys Boarding []

Girls Boarding [ ]; Girls day [ ]; Boys day []

Girls’ day and boarding [] Mixed boarding []

Boys’ day and Boarding [] Mixed day []

197
7. How many streams does your school have?..........................................

SECTION C. Peer counselling and students’ discipline

Please tick the number that best describes your opinion about peer counselling as an

alternative method of instilling discipline on students in your school. The numbers

represent the following responses strongly agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3);

Strongly Disagree (2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

8 The school has an operational guidance and counselling department

9 As a guidance and counselling teacher I have been trained to carry out the

responsibility

10 As a guidance and counselling teacher, I am not conversant with peer

counselling

11 Peer counselling programme has been fully implemented in my school

12 Peer counsellors have been trained to carry out their responsibility

13 Students feel free to seek peer counselling services from their peers

14 Peer counselling enhances a workable relationship between the learners

15 Peer counselling enhances a sense of belonging

16 Peer counselling should be embraced in management of school discipline

17. Do students seek peer counselling services in your school? Yes [ ] No [ ]

18. If your answer is Yes, under what circumstances do students seek peer

counselling services in your school?...................................................................

198
19. How many students have undergone peer counselling in your school for the

last two terms? ...................................................................................................

20. What effect does peer counselling have on students’ discipline in your school?

..............................................................................................................................

21. What challenges does your school encounter in use of peer counsellors on

students’ discipline?

..............................................................................................................................

22. Apart from peer counselling, what other programmes does your school use

under guidance and counselling department to manage students’ discipline in

your school?

..............................................................................................................................

23. What are your recommendations on how peer counselling should be enhanced

in management of students’ discipline in public secondary schools?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

SECTION E: Suspension and students’ discipline

In a rating scale, please tick the number that best describes your opinion about

suspension of indiscipline students in your school. The numbers represent the

following responses strongly agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3); Strongly Disagree

(2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

24 My school encounters discipline problems that require

suspension

25 Parents of suspended students should accompany them

back to school

199
 26 Parents of suspended students don’t own up suspension

of their children

27 Some parents opt to take their children to other schools

once suspended

28 Suspension gives the indiscipline students a chance for

further misconduct

29 Suspension does not effectively control students’

discipline in public secondary schools

30. Does your school suspend problematic students from school? Yes [ ] No [ ]

31. If your answer is Yes, under what circumstances does your school suspend

problematic students?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

32. How many students have been suspended from your school for the last two

terms?

..............................................................................................................................

33. How long does the suspension of indiscipline students in your school last?

..............................................................................................................................

Please explain the reason for your response

..............................................................................................................................

34. What intervention programmes does your school use after readmission of

suspended students’ in school to ensure that they settle down in school?

........................................................................…………………………………

…..........................................................................................................................

200
35. What challenges does your school encounter in use of suspension as an

alternativemethod of instilling discipline on students in your school?

.............................................................................………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………

36. Apart from suspension, what other alternative disciplinary methods does your

school consider effective for instilling discipline on students and are instead

used on students who would otherwise deserved a suspension?

..............................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................

Please explain your response...............................................................................

37. What are your recommendations on use of suspension as an alternative

disciplinary method of instilling discipline on students in public

secondaryschools?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

SECTION D. Expulsion and students’ discipline

In a rating scale, please tick the number that best describes your opinion about

expulsion of indiscipline students in your school. The numbers represent the

following responses strongly agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3); Strongly Disagree

(2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

38 My school faces students indiscipline cases that require expulsion

39 Expelling an indiscipline student from school takes a long process

201
40 The MOE insists on retention of indiscipline students in school

41 Expulsion of indiscipline students from school denies them access to

basic education

42 There are other effective methods of instilling discipline on students

43 Expulsion of indiscipline students brings about animosity

44. Does your school expel problematic students from school? Yes [ ] No [ ]

45. If your answer is Yes, under what circumstances are students expelled from

your school?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

46. How many students have been expelled from your school for the last two

terms?

…………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………..………………

47. What effect does expulsion of indiscipline students have on students’

discipline in your school?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

48. What challenges does your school encounter in use of expulsion as an

alternative method of instilling on students in your school?

..............................................................................................................................

202
 49. Apart from expulsion, what other disciplinary methods does your school

consider effective for instilling discipline on students and are used on

problematic students?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

50. What are your recommendations how use of expulsion as an alternative

disciplinary method in public secondary schools could be enhanced in the

managementof students’ discipline?

……….....................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................

SECTION F: Class meetings and students’ discipline

In a rating scale, please tick the number that best describes your opinion about class

meetings in your school. The numbers represent the following responses strongly

agree (5); Agree (4); Disagree (3); Strongly Disagree (2); not at all (1)

STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5

51 My school holds class meetings with students as a preventive

discipline measure

52 Class meetings with students enhances dialogue with students

53 Class meetings enhances students’ participation in decision

making

54 School discipline policies are communicated during class

meetings

55 Learners’ concerns are usually communicated during class

meetings

203
56. Does your school hold class meetings with students for collaborative decision

making? Yes [ ] No [ ]

57. If your answer is yes, how often do you hold class meetings?..........................

58. Who usually attends the class meetings?

………………………………………..................................................................

59. What effect does holding class meetings with students for collaborative

decision making have on students’ discipline in your school?

…………………………………………………..................................................

60. What challenges does your school encounter while using class meetings with

students for collaborative decision making in your school?

…………………………………………….…….................................................

61. Apart from holding class meetings with students, what other types of meetings

does your school hold with students in order to manage students’ discipline?

..............................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

62. What are your recommendations on how use of class meetings for

collaborative decision making could be enhanced in the management students’

discipline in public secondary schools?

..............................................................................................................................

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION

204
 APPENDIX V

INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR BOARD OF MANAGEMENT CHAIRMAN

1. What is your highest academic qualification?.....................................................

2. What type of school are you a BOM chairman?.................................................

3. Does your school encounter students’ indiscipline problems that require

suspension of students yes [ ] No [ ]
4. How do you manage indiscipline of students who have been suspended from
school?
……......................................................................................................................
5. What effect does suspension have on students’ discipline?................................
6. What challenges does the BOM face in handling indiscipline of suspended
students?
..............................................................................................................................
..
7. What are your recommendations on how to enhance suspension as an alternative
disciplinary method in management of students
discipline?............................................
8. Does your school encounter students’ indiscipline that requires expulsion?

Yes [] No []

9. If your answer is Yes, under what circumstances does the BOM/BOG expel

students?

…………………………………………………………………………………

10. How do go about the expulsion of indiscipline students?...................................

11. What effect does expulsion have on students’ discipline?...................................

12. What challenges do you encounter in expulsion of indiscipline

students?.............................................................................................................

205
13. What are your recommendations on how to enhance use of expulsion as an

alternative disciplinary method to enhance management of students’

discipline?............................

14. Does your school use peer counselling as an alternative disciplinary

method?.................................................................................................................

15. Under what circumstances is it used?...................................................................

16. What effect does peer counselling have on students’ discipline?

…………….............................................................................................................

17. What challenges does the school encounter in use of peer counselling to manage

students’ discipline?...............................................................................................

18. What are your recommendations on how to enhance peer counselling to manage

students’ discipline?...............................................................................

19. Does your school hold class meetings with students for collaborative decision

making? Yes [] No []

20. If your answer is Yes, what challenges does the school face in use of class

meetings for collaborative decision making to manage students discipline?

…………………………………………..........................................................

21. What effect does use of class meetings for collaborative decision making have

on students’ discipline?...................................................................................

22. What are your recommendations on how to enhance use of class meetings for

collaborative decision making?..........................................................................

23. What other alternative disciplinary methods does the school use to discipline

students?...............................................................................................

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION

206
 APPENDIX VI

INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR COUNTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION

Date: 9th July 2013

Name of researcher: Janet K. Mulwa

1. What kind of indiscipline problems do public secondary schools in

Kitui County encounter?

2. What are your opinions on the following disciplinary methods.

(a). Peer counselling

(b). Suspension of indisciplined students

(c). Students expulsion

(d). Use of Class meetings for collaborative decision making

3. What are the parents reactions towards

a) Suspension of indisciplined students

b) Students expulsion

4. What is the stand of the Ministry of education on

a) Suspension of indisciplined students

b) Students expulsion

5. What complains are presented to your office by parents pertaining their

children indiscipline cases?

207
 APPENDIX VII

INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR KITUI LAW COURTS RESIDENCE

MAGISTRATE

1. What kind of students’indiscipline problems do public secondary schools

bring to court?

2. How does the court handle students’ indiscipline problems that are presented

to the courts by the schools?

3. What role do parents play when their children are brought to court?

4. How do the schools react to the judgement passed by the court pertaining

indisciplined students?

208
 APPENDIX VIII

SECONDARY SCHOOLS WHICH PARTICIPATED IN THE STUDY

1. A.I.C Miambani sec. 45. Kyuso girls sec.sch.
2. Engineer ngilu sec. School 46. Kyaani girls sec. School
3. Gai secondary school 47. Kyangunga sec. school
48. Kyamani secondary school
4. Ilako mututa sec.school
49. Kyatune girls sec. sch.
5. Ilalambyu secondry school 50. Kyethani secondary school
6. Ilika secondary school 51. Kyome boys sec school
7. Ithiani secondary school 52. Kyome girls sec. sch.
8. Itiva nzou sec. School 53. Kyondoni girls sec. sch.
9. Kaai girls sec. Sch 54. Kyondoni mixed
10. Kairungu secondary school 55. Kyulungwa secondary
11. Kakeani secondary school 56. Masavi boys sec. school
12. Kakongo secondary school 57. Matinyani boys sec.
13. Kakululo secondary school 58. Matinyani Mixed sec.
14. Kalisasi secondary school 59. Mbitini sec. school
15. Kalatine sec. Sch 60. Mbondoni sec. school
16. Kamandio sec. School 61. Muangeni secondary sch.
17. Kamuwongo sec. school 62. Mumbuni sec. school
63. Munyuni secondary school
18. Kandwia secondary school
64. Musengo sec. school
19. Kangalu secondary school 65. Muslim secondary school
20. Kangungi sec. Sch. 66. Musuani secondary school
21. Kang’utheni sec. School 67. Mutanda secondary school
22. Kaningo secondary school 68. Mutendea secondary
23. Kanyuuni sec.school 69. Muthale girls sec. sch.
24. Kasavani secondary school 70. Muthale mixed sec. school
71. Muthamo secondary school
25. Kasevi girls sec. School
72. Mutonguni boys sec. sch.
26. Kasue secondary school 73. Mutitu girls sec. sch.
27. Kasyalani sec. School 74. Mutukya secondary school
28. Kathungi secondary school 75. Muunguu secondary school
29. Katalwa secondary school 76. Mutwangombe secondary
30. Kaundu secondary school 77. Mwambiu sec. school
31. Kauwi secondary school 78. Mwingi boys sec. school
32. Kavaini secondary school 79. Ndaluni secondary school
33. Kea secondary school 80. Nguutani sec. sch.
34. Kilonzo secondary school 81. Nzalae secondary school
35. Kimangao girls sec. sch 82. Nzambani sec. Sch ool
36. Kisovo secondary school 83. Nzatani secondary school
37. Kithumula sec. school 84. Nzauni secondary school
38. Kitui school 85. Nzeluni boys’ sec.
39. Kivou sec. Sch 86. Nzeluni girls’ sec.
40. Kitungati sec. Sch. 87. Nzuli secondary school
41. Kitulani secondary school 88. Precious blood nthangani
42. Kikiini secondary school 89. Precious blood tyaa
43. Kiomo secondary school 90. St. Charles lwanga
44. Kyanika secondary school 91. St. Pauls kasyala sec. Sch
209
92. St. Patrick Ithimani sec. 97. Yakalia secondary school
93. Syomikuku sec.school 98. Waita secondary school
94. Syungii secondary school 99. Yenzuva secondary school
95. Thokoa secondary school 100. Yumbe secondary school
96. Tyaa kamuthale sec. school 101. Yumbisye secondary

210
 APPENDIX IX
RESEARCH AUTHORIZATION

211
 APPENDIX X

RESEARCH AUTHORIZATION COUNTY COMMISSIONER

212
 APPENDIX XI

RESEARCH AUTHORIZATION COUNTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION

213
 APPENDIX XII

RESEARCH PERMIT

214