Influence of Parent's Level of Income on Student's Enrolment in Secondary Schools in Rachuonyo East Sub-County, Homabay County, Kenya

  • Janet Achieng Ngito Mount Kenya University
  • Jacob Gekonge Kwaba, PhD Mount Kenya University
Keywords: Parents' Level of Income, Students' Enrolment, Cognitive Assessment Methods, Family Income, Home School Transition, Household Size, Parental Involvement, Parents' Education Level
Share Article:

Abstract

Low enrolment rates in secondary schools have been experienced in Homabay County, in particular Rachuonyo East Sub-County. The purpose of the study was to establish the influence of family socioeconomic status on the enrolment of students in Secondary schools in Rachuonyo East Sub-County, Homabay County. A total of 13,786 respondents were targeted comprising 25 Principals, 9 Chiefs, 1 Sub-County Education officer, 5400 parents, and 8350 students. A sample of 355 respondents comprised of 14 Principals, 1 Sub-County Education Officer, 9 Chiefs, 15 parents, and 316 students was sampled for this study. The researcher used simple random sampling to sample the Secondary schools' students, while purposive sampling was applied to sample the principals, Chiefs, and the Sub- County officer. The study depended on questionnaires for students, while an Interview guide was used for Principals, Chiefs, Sub-County Educational officers, and parents. Piloting of research instruments was done in Rachuonyo East Sub-County, on 10% of the sample size. Test-retest technique was used to test for the reliability of the instruments; Cronbach Alpha was used to compute the instruments' reliability at 0.7. To ensure the validity of the research instruments, the instruments were developed under the close guidance of the supervisors. Dependability and credibility are enhanced in the research instruments. After data cleaning, the quantitative data was coded and entered into the computer for analysis using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 21 for windows which was analysed through descriptive and inferential statistics which was presented using percentages, frequencies, and coefficient correlation, respectively. Qualitative data was analysed in themes and presented in narrative form. Based on the findings received from the study, it was evident that the socioeconomic status of families had an effect on the enrolment of students in the Rachuonyo east sub-county. There were two strong positive correlations under the level of income objective. There was a high likelihood that students who came from low-income backgrounds would have challenges in enrolling on the next term or class. Additionally, lack of support from parents, demotivation, and indiscipline issues contributed to a decrease in the enrolment of students. It was also vital to note that the two most vulnerable issues that would decrease the enrolment of students were low-income levels and the lower level of education of parents

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Brownell, M. T., Ross, D. D., Colón, E. P., & McCallum, C. L. (2005). Critical features of

special education teacher preparation: A comparison with general teacher education. The Journal of special education, 38(4), 242-252.

Cox, R. D. (2005). Online education as institutional myth: Rituals and realities at community colleges. Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1754.

Desforges, C., & Abouchaar, A. (2003). The impact of parental involvement, parental support and family education on pupil achievement and adjustment: A literature review (Vol. 433). Nottingham: DfES publications.

Deutskens, E., De Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., & Oosterveld, P. (2004). Response rate and response quality of internet-based surveys: an experimental study. Marketing letters, 15(1), 21-36.

Epstein, J. L. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Westview Press, 5500 Central Avenue, Boulder, CO 80301.

Epstein, J. L. (2005). A case study of the partnership schools comprehensive school reform (CSR) model. The Elementary School Journal, 106(2), 151-170.

Fransoo, R., Ward, T., Wilson, E., Brownell, M., & Roos, N. (2005). The Whole Truth: Socioeconomic Status and Educational Outcomes. Education Canada, 45(3), 6-10.

Graetz, B. (1995). Socioeconomic status in education research and policy. Socioeconomic status and school education, 23-51.

Grolnick, W. S., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2009). Issues and challenges in studying parental control: Toward a new conceptualisation. Child Development Perspectives, 3(3), 165-170.

Kahlenberg, R. (2001). All Together Now: Creating Middle-Class Schools through Public School Choice. Willhington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Majoribanks, K. (1996). Family Learning Environments and Students' Outcomes: A Review. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 27(2), 373-394.

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

Mugenda, O. and Mugenda, A. (2003). Research Methods, Quantitative and Quantitative Approaches. ACTS Press, Nairobi, Kenya.

Muricho, W. P., & Chang'ach, J. K. (2013). Education reforms in Kenya for Innovation.

Secker, C. (2004). Science achievement in social contexts: Analysis from national assessment of educational progress. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(2), 67-78.

Sirin, S. (2005). Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Review of Research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417-453.

Stacks, A. M., & Oshio, T. (2009). Disorganised attachment and social skills as indicators of Head Start children's school readiness skills. Attachment & human development, 11(2), 143-164.

Weinreb, B. (2001). Measures of infant development and socioeconomic status as predictors of later intelligence and school achievement. Developmental Psychology, 15(2), 225-227.

Published
20 September, 2022
How to Cite
Ngito, J., & Kwaba, J. (2022). Influence of Parent’s Level of Income on Student’s Enrolment in Secondary Schools in Rachuonyo East Sub-County, Homabay County, Kenya. East African Journal of Education Studies, 5(3), 17-28. https://doi.org/10.37284/eajes.5.3.851