This is to inform candidates, parents/guardians, stakeholders and the general public that the 2012 KCSE examination results for the 436,349 candidates who sat this examination will be released on Friday 1st March 2013 by KNEC and the Minister for Education Hon. Mutula Kilonzo. 

Examination results for the 42,457 candidates who sat the 2012 November Series Business and Technical examinations will also be released on the same day. 

The exercise will be held at Mitihani House Calendonia off Denis Pritt Road starting at 9.00 a.m. In preparation for this, candidates, principals and parents/guardians are advised as follows:

1.0 After the release, candidates are advised to collect their examination results from the respective examination centres where they registered for the examination.

The examination results can be received by sending the candidate’s index number through a short text message (sms) to 5052 immediately after release.

2.0 Upon receipt of their examination results, the candidates, principals and parents/guardians are advised to thoroughly scrutinize their results for correctness and ensure accuracy of the following:

2.1 candidates’ particulars i.e. names, index number and gender;

2.2 school name and code; and

2.3 individual subject grades.

3.0 Any discrepancy noted should be communicated to KNEC as a query within one month (30 days) of release of the examination results. This includes appeals for remarking.

4.0 Candidates who have their examination results withheld will receive a letter through their head teacher explaining why the examination results have been withheld. Such candidates must submit the required documents through their respective schools and NOT directly to the Council, by Monday 1st April 2013.

5.0 Candidates who were involved in any form of examination irregularity will have their examination results cancelled and they will be advised in writing through their respective head of schools on release of the examination results. Principals are expected to inform candidates, whose results have been cancelled and parents/ guardians are asked to get this information from the principals instead of travelling all the way to the Council. The Council wishes to advice that cancelled results are never re-marked.

6.0 Through this notice, Directors from the Ministry of Education as well as National representatives from the following relevant stakeholders based in Nairobi are also invited:

6.1 Kenya Private Schools Association (KEPSA)

6.2 Kenya Secondary School Heads Association (KESSHA)

6.3 Kenya Union of Post Primary Education Teachers (KUPPET)

6.4 Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT)

6.5 Kenya National Parents and Teachers Association (KENPTA)

6.6 Kenya Union of Special Needs Teachers (KUSNET

6.7 Kenya Association of Technical Teacher Institutes (KATTI).

COUNCIL SECRETARY/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ON LOANS OFFERED BY THE HIGHER EDUCATION LOANS BOARD

I. The Higher Education Loans Board (HELB) was established in 1995 under the Higher Education Loans Board Act CAP 213A of the Laws of Kenya
 

II. The Board is mandated by the Act to manage a fund for granting loans to students pursuing higher education in institutions recognized by the Commission for University Education (CUE).
 

III. Section six of the Act details the functions that the Board is legally bound to carry out. These include disbursement and Recovery of loans, sourcing of funds, among other
 

IV. The Board awards loans to both undergraduate and postgraduate students. For undergraduate, the Board offers two types of loans to students in public and private universities as follows:
 

(a) Loans for direct entry students; These are students joining public or private universities within the East African Community directly from high school either through the Joint Admission Board (JAB) or are self sponsored. This category of loans attracts interest at 4%p.a. The loans range from a minimum of Kshs 35,000 to Kshs. 60,000.00. Upon completion of studies the Board expects the beneficiary to repay the loan.
 

(b) Continuing Education Students; these are students who upgrade their academic qualifications by undertaking undergraduate studies while in employment. This category of loans attracts interest of 12% p.a.
 

V. The Act empowers the Board to recover mature loans from the beneficiaries upon completion of the university education. The law provides that a loanee shall be required, subject to and in accordance with this Act or any regulations made thereunder, within one year of completion of his studies or within such a period as the Board decides to recall its loan whichever is the earlier to commence repayment of the loan.
 

VI. It should be noted that loan repayment is not pegged on formal employment and hence beneficiaries should work towards self employment to ensure their loans are being serviced.
 

VII. Any default beyond the grace period attracts a monthly penalty of Kshs 5,000 as stipulated in the Act.
 

VIII. Loanees are urged to continually update the Board on their whereabouts and seek to discuss and implement the repayment plans, more so when one is in the informal sector employment. This will ensure that the account is activated and that the monthly penalty does not accrue.

BOARD SECRETARY/ CEO

Teachers Service Commission

PRESS STATEMENT ON THREATENED INDUSTRIAL ACTION BY THE KENYA NATIONAL UNION OF TEACHERS

Issued under Article 35(3) of the Constitution

The attention of the Teachers Service Commission is drawn to reports of threatened industrial action by the
Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT).

The main reason given by the Union is the purported failure by the Government to degazette Legal Notice No. 16 of 2003, and thereby revert to Legal Notice No. 534 of 1997 which, among other things, had proposed payment of a House Allowance of 50 percent of the basic salary, medical allowance at 20 percent of basic salary and a commuter allowance pegged at 10 percent of a teacher’s basic pay.

The Commission would like to address all teachers, parents and the general public as follows:

I. The 1997 recommendations on the rates and mode of payment of teachers’ allowances was renegotiated by a Tripartite committee between September 2002 and December 2002.

The committee’s meetings were convened by the Ministry of Labour and comprised the KNUT, the Teachers Service Commission and the Ministry of Labour. High level Government officials from the Treasury, Directorate of Personnel Management and the Central Organization of Trade Unions (COTU) also attended all the meetings of the Tripartite committee.

It is noteworthy that at every stage, KNUT, through its officials was involved in the development and subsequent gazettment of Legal Notice No. 16 of 2003. This is contrary to the impression created by the KNUT that they were excluded from the process and negotiations that led to the legal notice.

II. It is should be noted that for 10 years since Legal Notice No. 16 of 2003 was gazetted, teachers have immensely benefitted from the same gazette notice which KNUT now claims to be irregular and unlawful.

The legality of this Notice was one of the reasons KNUT called a strike in September last year.

III. Following the strike, a Return-to-Work formula proposed that the contentious issue of Legal Notice No. 16 of 2003 be referred to Parliament for interrogation in order to establish its legality. Both the Commission and the Union agreed to honour the decision of Parliament.

During the deliberations of the Select Parliamentary Committee on Delegated Legislation, the Minister for Education who gazetted Legal Notice No. 16 of 2003, did not make any representation for consideration by the Committee, although it had promised to give him an opportunity to do so before compiling its report.

The Commission is aware that the Minister had asked to meet the Committee on 17th December 2012 but was not given the opportunity to do so on that date or any other subsequent date.

Likewise, key stakeholders in the matter, including the Treasury, the Attorney General, Salaries and Remuneration Commission, Ministry of Labour, and the TSC did not make presentations on the same.

Their input would have been critical considering the nature of issues in question and the financial implications that would arise from the reversal of Legal Notice No. 16 of 2003.

IV. The Commission has scrutinized the report of the Committee and other relevant records on this matter. Further, it has extensively consulted with the relevant Government agencies, including the Ministry of Education, the office of the Attorney General, Salaries and Remuneration Commission, Ministry of Labour and the Treasury on the report of the Parliamentary Select Committee on Delegated Legislation. 

In all these, the Commission has been advised that the Report of the Committee cannot form the basis for any demand since it has not been subjected to debate by the House, which is a prerequisite to its adoption. Indeed in its report dated 19th December 2012, the Committee itself acknowledged that the Report needed to be debated before formal adoption. This had not been done by the time the life of the 10th Parliament expired. This position was communicated to KNUT by the Clerk to the National Assembly. The Commission anticipates that the next Parliament will take up the matter when it convenes.

V. It is also important to note that the TSC has established a consultative committee on new Terms and conditions of service for teachers as stipulated in TSC Act 2012. It was also an item in return to work formula. Discussions are ongoing and a proposal has already been submitted to Salaries and Remuneration Commission for advice. The Union may reconsider their position and use the current negotiation framework to address the issues including allowances under dispute.

VI. The Commission has endeavoured to promote the spirit of dialogue in resolution of industrial disputes. In this regard, the Commission held meetings with KNUT on 6th and 11th February 2013 to address the issues raised by the Union. In both occasions, we impressed on the Union to allow time for consultations with other Government agencies. Indeed, even on the day the Union called for industrial action, the Commission had met KNUT officials in the morning and promised to continue with consultations.

VII. It is already in the public domain that in October 2012, the Government awarded teachers a salary increment of Ksh17 billion to bring them at par with civil servants. This increased the teachers annual wage bill from Ksh120 billion to Kshs137 billion. The financial implication for the current demand by KNUT amounts to an additional annual amount of Kshs.41 billion, which the Kenyan taxpayer would be required to shoulder.

VIII. There has also been a wrong impression created through media reports that before its life ended, the 10th Parliament voted money to go to the remuneration of teachers. The truth of the matter is that Parliament did not allocate any additional resources for that. The allocation that Parliament approved in December was to regularize and meet the expenditure incurred in funding the harmonization of teachers’ salaries with those of civil servants. This was part of a Return-To-Work Agreement arrived at in order to end the teachers strike.

In view of these, the Commission would like to inform all teachers and the general public that the threat of industrial action is premature. All teachers are, therefore, advised to continue with their teaching duties in line with their employment contract with the Teacher Service Commission.

Once again, we appeal to KNUT to give dialogue and due process a chance. This is especially important during this decisive moment in the history of the country especially at this time when the country is bracing for general Elections. 

It is important to note further that the form one students are expected to report on the day of commencement of the intended strike. This intended strike will therefore infringe on the rights of the children as stipulated in the Children’s Act and the Constitution.

On its part the Commission will continue to pursue dialogue as a meaningful and productive avenue to resolve the dispute.

To this end the Ministry of Labour has appointed a Conciliator, who has convened a meeting on 19th February 2013 to look into the issues raised by the Union. 

TSC has confirmed attendance.

GABRIEL K. LENGOIBONI, EBS, CBS
SECRETARY/CHIEF EXECUTIVE

The Minister for Education, Mutula Kilonza will release the KCPE results on Monday 28th January 2013 at Mitihani House, off Caledonia Road, Nairobi at 9.00AM.

811,930 candidates sat the Kenya Certificate of Primary Education (KCPE) examination last year.

Parents and candidates will also be able to get the results through the mobile phone by sending their index numbers to 5052 and on the website www.knec.ac.ke. This service will, however, be available only after the completion of the minister’s official event.

Upon receipt of the results, candidates will have 30 days to scrutinise them and lodge complaints with Knec, including all forms of discrepancies in the details of the result slips.

A big scramble is expected for places in the 78 national schools most of which were only recently upgraded. As of 2002, Kenya had just 18 such schools.

Traditionally, KCPE results are released towards the end of December. The delay was caused by the teachers’ strike last year.

Government statistics indicate that the transition from primary to secondary education currently stands at 73 per cent, from 43 per cent in 2003.

Of those who make it to high school, though, only 74 per cent complete their education which is, however, an improvement from 46 per cent in 2008.

VISA OSHWAL PRIMARY SCHOOL

(Owned and Managed by: Shree Visa Oshwal Community, Nairobi)

STATUS OF VISA OSHWAL PRIMARY SCHOOL

Dear Students, Parents & Stakeholders,

The Visa Oshwal Primary School started operating on 2nd January 1952 at the Visa Oshwal Mahajanwadi on Limuru Road. Certificate of Registration of Schools was issued in 1954. Visa Oshwal Primary School is presently located on Plot No. LR 209/5996 on Mpaka Road. The Lease of 99 years for LR 209/5996 was granted to Visa Oshwal Community in 1954. The buildings were funded and constructed by Visa Oshwal Community.

Since its inception, the School has always been owned and managed by the Visa Oshwal Community. The School has been open to all Communities irrespective of cast, creed or race. Immediately after the Independence of Kenya, the Education Act was enacted which required that the Asian and Arab Primary Schools to accept Teachers seconded by Local Authorities and Ministry of Education.

In addition to the seconded teachers, the Visa Oshwal Community continued to employ extra academic, administration and support staff. We improved the infrastructure including the furniture and fittings and all other necessary tools for learning. When the 8-4-4 system was introduced the Visa Oshwal Community from its own resources expanded the School and constructed extra classes and sporting facilities. 

In addition a Computer Laboratory was constructed.

In 2003, the Nairobi City Council took possession of the School from Visa Oshwal Community. Visa Oshwal Community subsequently took the matter to Court for determination. The judgment in Civil Case No. 1474 of 2005 in favour of Visa Oshwal Community was given on 2nd March 2007. Nairobi City Council’s application to set aside the judgment was dismissed on 6th March 2012. The School Management Committee’s application to set aside the ruling was also dismissed on 21st September 2012. The School was handed back to Visa Oshwal Community by the Director of Education – Nairobi City Council on 27th December 2012.

It has been brought to our attention that the parents are apprehensive that:-

a) The school will be closed down,

b) The Visa Oshwal Community will increase the fees to exorbitant levels,

c) The School will be converted to another learning institute.

Visa Oshwal Community wishes to assure all the parents and the students that:-

a) It is the wish of the Visa Oshwal Community to manage the Visa Oshwal Primary School on the same basis as before (8-4-4 system) and continue to improve the standards.

b) Visa Oshwal Community intends to meet the cost of employing all academic, administration and support staff. Consequently, the fees charged will not be increased unreasonably, if at all.

c) Visa Oshwal Community will provide necessary text books, stationery and other learning aids.

d) In the near future the computer lab as well as the School Library will be re-habilitated for the benefit of the students.

We sincerely appeal to all the parents to extend their full co-operation and support for the well being and bright future of their children.

The School will re-open on Monday, 7th January 2013 and Visa Oshwal Community looks forward to your support.

VISA OSHWAL COMMUNITY

Ref: 003/2013 - 5th January 2013

The Government spending on public primary education has over the years increased significantly. Unfortunately this increased funding has not been followed by similar gains by students in public primary schools in terms of performance in national examinations. Students from private academies have eclipsed their counterparts in public schools sparking fears that they will yet again fill a larger proportion of the few available slots in the best secondary schools in the country.

Many have decried the performance based selection system that seems to only favor the private academies whose Social Economic Status (SES) is arguably higher than of most public schools.

However some analysts have rushed to the defense of the private academies arguing that underperformance in public schools cannot be attributed to SES. They opine that with the advent of Free Primary Education (FPE); SES plays an insignificant role in the performance of many poor students performance in public schools.

This view remains highly contentious and it is very unlikely that it can be satisfactorily resolved. It becomes trickier considering the fact that many of its proponents view resources available in schools so much in terms of finances, which is, only but a component of the entire resource base.

If that be the case then one can confidently argue that the bare minimum Government funding of FPE has not in any way, led to increased resource base in public primary schools.

It is because of this reason that policy analysts insist that the critical question in Kenya 's education system is to have far reaching education reforms which must focus on resource allocation.
Take for instance, the availability of qualified teachers to meet the rising enrolment in public primary schools across the country. Unlike many private academies that boast of teacher- student ratio of 1: 30 or even less; public primary schools have to grapple with a startling ratio of up to 1: 100!

What this means is that whereas the small size class in private academies make substantially faster gains in learning, their counterparts in public schools do not even have that bare minimum individualized attention from the few available teachers. From the foregoing it is highly unlikely to expect public schools to compete favorably with private academies.This will not happen. Not even when we absurdly think that doing away with school vacations will make a difference!.

It is in the same vein that the public is demanding of the Government that "smaller classes, and not FPE vouchers alone, can increase student achievement in public primary schools. Professor Fredrick Moesteller of Harvard University affirms that "there is no longer any argument about whether or not reducing class size in primary grades increases student achievement. It does."

In our context, smaller classes mean hiring or employing more teachers depending with the outcome of the pending court case. It also means building more classrooms. However, with the current budget deficit, it is doubtful whether these problems can be addressed the soonest. What this means is that the glaring inequalities between private and public primary schools shall persist.


Ceteris Paribus, a quota system would be needless, however, given our context, as for now, just as we use it in addressing regional disparities, so must we use it when considering admissions for the few available slots in the top performing secondary schools in the country.

Of course, I am not saying that teacher –student ratio is the only panacea, it is only but a piece of the jig- saw. I also agree in entirety with those who opine that the ministry of basic education must ensure effective and quality assurance exercises in schools are regularly undertaken to prevent laxity taking toll of some of our teachers, managers and administrators. That we need committed manpower in our schools cannot be denied.