Despite the Ministry of Education’s insistence that KJSEA does not rank learners and that placement under CBE is non-discriminatory, the release of recent Grade 10 placements has sparked debates over whether academic ranking persists under a new label.
Following public outcry, the Ministry allowed requests for school transfers, but the review process largely reinforced merit-based placement patterns.
Of 117,000 transfer requests received in the opening two days, only about 20,000 have been processed so far.Most approved transfers are within the same cluster or to lower clusters (e.g., C2 to C2).Learners placed in C4 seeking transfer to C3, C2, or C1 are largely being rejected, exposing hidden stratification.The outcome raises questions about whether CBE has removed ranking in practice or merely rebranded it.
The Ministry of Education has repeatedly assured parents and the public that the Kenya Junior Secondary Education Assessment (KJSEA) does not rank learners and therefore does not discriminate on the basis of performance. Under the Competency-Based Education (CBE) framework, placement into senior schools is meant to be guided by competencies, pathways, and learner interests rather than exam scores.
Education Cabinet Secretary Julius Ogamba, speaking during stakeholder engagements on the transition to senior school, framed the reform as a deliberate break from academic labelling.
“We deliberately removed ranking because we did not want children to be labelled early in life. KJSEA is about identifying competencies and nurturing potential, not deciding winners and losers at the age of fourteen,” Ogamba said, emphasising that placement was intended to be “a matching process, not a reward or punishment.”
Yet, events following the release of placement results and subsequent review process suggest that the promise of non-discrimination is colliding with entrenched institutional practices.
This pattern has fuelled perceptions that the system permits flexibility only where it does not disturb existing hierarchies.
Permanent Secretary David Bittok, speaking previously on the philosophy behind competency-based assessment, cautioned against such outcomes.
“The learner profile is descriptive, not comparative. It is designed to inform instruction and support, not to rank learners against one another or to deny them access to institutions,” Bittok explained. “Any use of assessment data to quietly filter learners defeats the spirit of competency-based education.”
However, in practice, learner competency profiles — detailing pathway readiness and subject-level achievement — have become a silent screening tool. National and extra-county schools, under pressure to maintain academic outcomes and institutional prestige, interpret these descriptors to assess risk and readiness. Without explicitly citing performance, the system can reject applicants on grounds of pathway mismatch, lack of facilities, or capacity constraints.
Vacancy scarcity further entrenches exclusion. Where only a handful of slots exist, schools apply informal filters, prioritising learners perceived as academically stable and independent. Learners viewed as requiring additional support are quietly sidelined — not by rank, but by inference.
Parents feel the contradiction most acutely.
“They say there is no ranking, but once your child is placed in C4, every door above you is closed,” lamented one parent seeking a transfer to a C2 school.
“If CBE is flexible, why does this placement feel permanent?” asked another.
For many families, national and extra-county schools represent more than prestige; they symbolise exposure, opportunity, and mobility. Being confined to a C4 school — often with limited infrastructure and narrow pathway options — is perceived as educational containment rather than placement.
The Ministry has urged patience, with CS Ogamba acknowledging that the current cycle represents the first full transition under CBE.
“This is a transition year. There will be pressure points, but our commitment is that no learner will be condemned by a single placement decision,” he said.
Yet the evidence emerging from the transfer window suggests otherwise. CBE may have abolished numerical ranking, but it has not dismantled academic stratification. Instead, hierarchy has been repackaged through clusters, pathways, and administrative discretion.
Until national and extra-county schools genuinely diversify pathways, make transfer decisions transparent, and strengthen learner support across all clusters, the assurance that “performance does not matter” will remain more rhetorical than real.
For now, the struggle of learners placed in C4 schools to move upward stands as a sobering reminder: education reform succeeds not when rules change, but when opportunity truly becomes mobile.
Follow johnkhabamba.blogspot.com for insights on all matters education
Comments