1. Introduction

Primary schooling is important for the achievement of national development and access to primary school has been formally accepted as a basic human right for over half a century [13]. However, many nations have not achieved Universal Primary Education, and about 101 million children are out of school. There are many reasons hampering the achievement of Universal Primary Education [13]. The major concern in basic education is ensuring that students stay in school until they complete their education. Dropping out is a serious problem because it denies individual students their fundamental human right to education. Internationally, the individual right to education has been repeatedly affirmed in many treaties and conventions such as The 1948 Convention on the Rights of the Child and the 1990 World Conference on Education for all [13]. There is general consensus that the school dropout problem has reached epidemic proportions internationally and has become a global problem confronting the education industry round the world [10]. In this regard, a UNESCO report (2000) on the state of the world’s children, points out that about 130 million children in the developing world are denied their right to education through dropping out. According to [9], the problem of dropping out should be the concern of every member of society since it has negative consequences at both the individual and social level. Thus dropout is not a mere problem that affects or impacts an individual but it is a problem that affects the entire community as it has been noticed that certain dropouts get involved in crime.

In Africa, the achievement of 100 percent child retention index in the primary schools is a hard task for countries like Chad with 72% child attrition rate, Angola and Uganda both with 68%, Ethiopia with 71% child repetition rate and Kenya with 76.8% child survival rate to last grade [8]. The retention gap indicated in this study bring into mind the need to study education inequalities that hinder child retention in the primary schools (World Bank, 1980). Countries such as Lesotho, Mozambique, Ghana, Kenya, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Cameroon, Malawi, and Uganda have adopted the Free Primary Education with the aim of increasing equal opportunity in education provision [8]. This education provision is hoped to achieve its focus through increased access, retention and attainment of 100% enrollment as per the Education For All strategies in the countries that embrace the recommendation [2]. Despite embracing Free Primary Education (FPE) as early as 2002 none of these countries have achieved a hundred percent primary school child survival rate to the last grade. Ethiopia is one of the countries with the lowest primary school enrollment rates, thus attaining universal primary education in the country requires greater efforts. Furthermore, low quality of school and a high dropout rate, as well as gender and rural-urban disparities remain the major challenges of the country. Theoretically, school enrollment and dropout are determined by household’s demand for education and the supply of education services [4]. The above study further reported that demand for education is determined by parents’ decision on the amount of schooling for their children, which was based on assessments of the costs and benefits of education.

In 2003, the government of Kenya declared Primary Education free and compulsory. This was in line with the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) and Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Empowerment Creation goals of achieving Universal Primary Education and Education For All by 2015 [5]. To date, achieving a hundred percent child retention in the primary schools is far off as the disparity between the Gross and Net enrollment ratio indicates low child retention in the public primary schools in Kenya [8]. In Mbita Sub-County, the introduction of FPE has not resulted to Education For All, as the fate of many primary school children who walk home for lunch cannot be explained [8]. In Kenya, the introduction of Free Primary Education (FPE) was to make education accessible to all children. However, very many pupils still drop out of school (MOE, 2003). Despite the introduction of Free Primary Education in 2003 by the Kenya government in its quest to increasing access, retention and equity in education provision, child survival rate in primary schools in Mbita Sub-county is still 85.2% and is below the national survival rate of 97.1%. [1].

The study is informed by the systems theory developed by Bertalanffy in 1968. He defined a system as a set of interrelated elements where each element has an effect on the functioning of the whole and each is affected by at least one other element in the system. A major assumption of the theory is that all systems are purposeful and goal directed. Under school related cluster, in USA, [9] observed factors such as; low socioeconomic status of school population, high level of racial or ethnic discrimination of students, school phobia, school violence, conflicts (with teachers, school mates) among others. Studies in India (Rani, 2011) found financial difficulties, child not interested in studies, parents not interested in studies, lack of education facilities in the nearby village, lack of quality education, imposition of parents ‘choices upon adolescents, lack of privacy, and toilet facilities for girls in school and security reasons as reasons cited by adolescent for dropping out. In Pakistan, [6] noted the weak primary education system, non-availability of trained teachers, and parent teacher relationship as the major causes of dropouts while in the USA. Stewart (2008) strongly contends that schools attended by students have the sole responsibility and task of reducing dropout rates. In this regard, Machingambi (2003) contends that lack of diversity in the school curriculum can predispose students into dropping out while [12] underlines the influence of school-related factors that are central to the dropping out problem, namely: policies and practices; student teacher relationships; the nature of the school curriculum; resources and quality of learning.

Azzam (2007) contends that many dropouts would have attended schools that have poor facilities and inadequate resources, conditions that affect the performance of the children and ultimately their decision to leave school. Sang, Koros and Bosire (2013) studied dropout levels of public secondary schools in Kericho district and found out that dropout levels were higher in Day compared to Boarding schools, Mixed compared to Single Sex schools and Single Stream compared to more than one stream schools. [7], examined school related factors and circumstances that lead to students dropping out of rural day secondary schools in Zhomba cluster, Gokwe, Zimbabwe. Data analysis showed that poverty and financial constraints are the major reasons for dropout of school among students. Most parents in the Zhomba area are peasant farmers who rely on cotton farming for survival as a result of the drop in cotton prices on the international market the proceeds from farming are so meager that parents cannot afford to pay for the education of their children. [10] identified a number of factors under each cluster as influencing student dropping out of school. The factors identified under family cluster include; low family socioeconomic status, low family support for education, low parental education, conflicts between work and school, having to work and school, having to work or support family, substance use and pregnancy among others. Another study in India by [6] on girls’ drop outs in rural schools identified causes of dropping out of girls from school in rural areas as reluctance of parents and participation in domestic activities.

A report from Mbita Sub-County education office [8] indicates primary school child attrition rate of 11.8% and is far above the national rate of 4.9 %. [1], analyzed important causes of drop out from formal schools in Kenya. The study established that among other causes, were parental poverty, irregular school attendance, lack of proper guidance in school, teenage pregnancy/early marriages, harsh environment, negative peer influence, family instability and enrolment of over-age children who fail to concentrate on schooling. While the reviewed study was on causes of drop out, it was carried out before the Free primary schooling was formally launched in Kenya. Moreover, the study did not cover Mbita Sub-county where the present study was carried out. Hence, the present study therefore filled in this gap in literature.

2. Research Methodology

The Correlational survey research design was adopted. The target population comprised of 108 Head teachers of primary schools, 864 class teachers and 2931 class 8 pupils in 108 primary schools. The sample size comprised 96 class teachers which is 11.1% of the target population. Class teachers were given questionnaires. Interviews were carried out from 10 class eight pupils and 10 head teachers. This research employed the use of questionnaires, interviews to collect data. Face and content validity of questionnaires was ensured by expert judgment by the help of research supervisors at CUEA. To ensure reliability of questionnaires, the internal consistency was used and a reliability co-efficient of r = 0.881 was reported. Data from questionnaires were analyzed quantitatively using descriptive statistics with the use of Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to analyze the relationship between variables. Qualitative data from interviews was analyzed by using the thematic framework.

3. Findings & Discussion

The study investigated the influence of school based factors on drop out among pupils in primary schools within Mbita Sub-County. This objective was addressed by use of a 5-point Likert scaled (SA-Strongly Agree, A-Agree, N-Neutral, D-Disagree and SD-Strongly Disagree) questionnaire. The respondents were presented with three sub-scales (teacher centric factors, curriculum related factors and leadership related factors) composed of items measuring the constructs of each sub-scale. The results were presented in descriptive analysis of the views of the respondents and inferential statistics to test hypothesis. Table 1 presents the views of the teachers on the influence of teacher centric factors as an aspect school based factors on school dropouts among the pupils.

Table 1. Respondent Views on Teacher Centric Factors

The findings of the study indicate that teacher centric factors have a great bearing on student school dropout. For example, two thirds (64) of the teachers who took part in the survey were in agreement those at times, teachers’ uncaring behaviour makes pupils to drop out of school. In addition, it was established that sometimes teachers’ negative comments makes certain pupils to drop out of school (M=4.02, SD=.86). This fact was confirmed by more than four out of five, 82 (85.4%) of the teachers who held a general opinion that negative and discouraging comments which some teachers make towards pupils is enough to make some pupils drop out of school. Only 4 (4.2%) of the teachers who participated in the study strongly rejected the assertion that teachers negative comments towards the students make them drop out of school, they argue that comments alone cannot make a serious pupil dropout of school. This finding agrees with [2] who contends that many dropouts would have attended schools that have poor facilities and inadequate resources, conditions that affect the performance of the children and ultimately their decision to leave school.

Similarly, a significant majority 83 (86.5%) of the respondents accepted that cruelty and unreasonable harshness of the teachers also make pupils drop out of school (M=4.22, SD=.86). Likewise, the study show that very high teacher expectations from the pupils is enough to make slow pupils drop out of school, this point of view was held by 69 (71.9%) of the respondents. This finding agrees with [4] who observed factors such as high level of racial or ethnic discrimination of students, school phobia, school violence, conflicts (with teachers, school mates) among others. On the contrary, the study findings show that there was a mixed opinion of the teachers who took part in the survey on whether teaching methodology can make pupils drop out of school or not. For instance, whereas 41 (42.7%) of them held the opinion that poor teaching methods could influence students’ drop out, 31 (32.3%) others were of the contrary opinion, they observed that teaching methodology cannot make pupils drop out of school. However, a quarter (24) of the respondents was not sure whether teaching methodology can make pupils drop out of school. This finding concurs with [9] who reported that poor teaching methodology can make pupils drop out of school.

Table 2 presents the views of the teachers on the influence of curriculum based factors on school dropouts among the pupils. On curriculum related factors, the findings of the study show that forced repetition of classes is the greatest contributory factor towards pupils’ school dropout. This was reflected by more than nine out of ten 89 (92.7%) of the teachers who took part in the survey who were in full agreement (m=4.33, SD=.83) that forcing students to repeat classes usually make some pupils to give up from school.

Table 2. Respondent Views on Curriculum Related Factors

Coupled with that, is the nature of curriculum which the findings of the study established that can discourage pupils to the extent of resorting to drop out. A majority of 62, translating to 64.9%, of the teachers who participated in the survey held that complex curriculum can make pupils drop out of school and more than a half 51 (53.1%) others were of the opinion that at times, congested syllabus occasionally make pupils to drop out of school. This finding agrees with [2] who contends that poor quality of education and the schools themselves act as depressant on the demand for education by children. On the flip flop, it emerged that 21 (21.9%) of the respondents remained noncommittal on whether syllabus congestion has a bearing on students’ dropout, while one out of every four (24) of the teachers who were sampled for the study rejected the insinuation that syllabus content can make students to drop out of school. On the same note, a significant proportion 29 (30.2%) of the respondents were not sure whether or not an irrelevant content in class can make a pupil to drop out of school. Similarly, [10] observed that poor content delivery can make pupils abandon schooling.

However, what came out clearly from the study is that only minority 30 (31.3%) of the teachers who took part in the survey accepted that irrelevancy of content can cause dropout among the students compared to a majority of 37 (38.5%) who negated the assertion. On the same vein, although majority 59 (61.4%) of the respondents alluded that too much homework and class assignments can make a pupil drop out of school, a significant proportion 25 (26.0%) of them disagreed with the claim that the amount of homework and class assignments can make a pupil drop out of school (M=3.63, SD= 2.41). This finding agrees with [10] who reported that home chores can make pupils drop out of school.

Table 3 presents the percentage frequencies on the views of the teachers on the influence of curriculum based factors on school dropouts among the pupils in Mbita Sub-County.

Table 3. Respondents’ Views on Leadership Related Factors

Finally, on the school leadership related factors, it emerged that leadership style that create school environment to be unfavorable to the pupils usually make pupils to drop out of school. The study established that more than three quarters 75 (78.1%) of the teachers who took part in the survey accepted that very harsh school climate can make a pupil drop out of school and another 60 (62.5%) of them also held that a harsh head teacher can make pupils drop out of school. Similarly, it came out that the repetition policy in a school is a cause for pupils to leave school prematurely, especially when the policy allows forced repetition of a class. This point of view was expressed by 65 (67.7%) of teachers whose views were sought on the item, it attracted a mean of 3.66 (SD=1.20). This finding agrees with [2] who contends that many dropouts would have attended schools that have poor facilities and inadequate resources, conditions that affect the performance of the children and ultimately their decision to leave school. On the other hand, it came out that a relaxed school environment can significantly reduce pupils dropout of school, as was indicated by 49 (51.1%) of teachers who took part in the survey. Likewise, presence of adequate relevant resources is important in reducing students’ dropout from school. This fact was confirmed by 57 (60.4%) of the respondents who supported the assertion that inadequate resources can make pupil to drop out of school. Similarly, [12] reported that inadequate resources can make pupils abandon schooling.

The study sought to find out whether there was any statistical significant influence of school based factors on school dropouts among the pupils in Mbita Sub-County. This was done by testing the null hypothesis that, “there is no statistical significant relationship between school based factors and drop out among pupils in public primary schools in Mbita Sub-County.” A Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient was computed at 0.05 significant levels to establish the relationship. The results were as shown on Table 4.

Table 4. Correlations between School Based Factors and School Dropout

From Table 4 it is evident that there was a statistically significant negative, though weak relationship between school based factors and school dropout (r= -.328, n=96, p=.001), with positive improvement in school based factors associated to decrease in school dropouts and vice-versa. Therefore the null hypothesis, “that there is no statistically significant relationship between school based factors and school dropout in Mbita Sub-County” was rejected. Hence, it was concluded that there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between school related factors and school dropout, with positive improvement in school based related factors associated to drop in school dropout rates. This finding disagrees with [10] who observed factors such as; low socioeconomic status of school population, high level of racial or ethnic discrimination of students, school phobia, school violence, conflicts (with teachers, school mates) among others. This relationship was further shown by scatter plot in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Scatter Plot- School Based Factors and School Dropouts

The scatter plot indicates that there was fairly weak negative correlation between school based factors and school dropout among primary school pupils. This was shown by pattern of dots which seem to incline from lower right to upper left, demonstrating a negative correlation between the two variables. The trendline further reveals that there was correlation between the variables; the coordinate points are clustered along the line, forming almost visible pattern. This further implies that the relationship was real and not by chance.

In addition, the study sought to establish the relationship between school dropout and the individual aspects of school based factors, as indicated in Table 5.

Table 5. Correlation between Aspects of School Based Factors and School Dropout

The findings of the study show that there were statistical significant negative correlation between school dropout and two aspects of school based factors; curriculum related factors (r= -.352, n=96, p<.05) and leadership related factors (r= -.291, n=96, p=.004). However, the study did not establish statistically significant relationship between teacher centric factors and school dropouts [r= -.108, n=96, p=.295 (ns)]. In agreement, [10] observed factors such as high level of racial or ethnic discrimination of students, school phobia, school violence, conflicts (with teachers, school mates) among others. From the qualitative data from interviews, School based factors that influence dropout rate were also identified. The themes were as follows:

School Corporal Punishment

School corporal punishment refers to causing deliberate pain or discomfort in response to undesired behaviour by students in schools. It often involves striking the student either across the buttocks or on the hands, with an implement such as a rattan cane, wooden paddle, slipper, leather strap or wooden yardstick. Most participants reported that in certain schools, there are teachers who still cane pupils and this has scared away many pupils from attending school. Some respondents reported that:

“there are some teachers and even head teachers who still cane pupils so much and this has really scared away pupils, some shy and leave school altogether”(pupil, 8)

From the excerpts above, the school corporal punishment by teachers and head teachers made some pupils to abandon schooling and drop out eventually. This finding agrees with , Chirtes (2010) who observed factors such as; low socioeconomic status of school population, high level of racial or ethnic discrimination of students, school phobia, school violence, conflicts (with teachers, school mates) among others.

Forced Class Repetition

Forced Class repetition is the process of having a student repeat a grade, because last year, the student experienced developmental delays which made the student fail the grade and/or grade-level class. Students who repeat a grade are referred as "repeaters". Repeaters can be referred to as having been "held back". Students do not necessarily repeat the grade in the same classroom, but it will be the same grade. In the present study, some participants reported that there were cases of forced repetition which made pupils to drop out of school. Two respondents reported that:

“Some teachers have a policy in their schools where they force pupils to repeat classes if they don’t obtain certain set marks. This is a common practice among head teachers who want better mean grades for class eight pupils” (pupil, 4)

“In my school, we have set pass mark for pupils in each class and no one can be promoted unless they perform well in their respective classes. It has at times made some pupils to shy away from school if they can’t cope” (class teacher, 8)

From the excerpts above, forced class repletion made pupils to abandon school. This finding agrees with [2] who contends that the poor quality of education and the schools themselves act as depressant on the demand for education by children. Thus if schools are to keep students in schools then there is need to pay particular attention to the quality of education that the children get from such schools.

Peer Group Pressure

Peer pressure is direct influence on people by peers, or an individual who gets encouraged to follow their peers by changing their attitudes, values, or behaviors to conform to those of the influencing group or individual. This type of pressure differs from general social pressure because it causes an individual to change in response to a feeling of being pressured or influenced from a peer or peer group. Social groups affected include both membership groups, in which individuals are "formally" members’. In the present study, participants reported that peer group pressure made some pupils to drop out of school since they were influenced by others who had opted out. Some participants reported that:

“Some pupils who have dropped out of school always influence others to do the same. This happens in homes where parents are not strict and thus they allow children just to leave school. This has led to drop outs among pupils” (class teacher, 6)

“Peer pressure is real in this village as many pupils have opted out of school due to that. This happens when parents are weak and the child gets away with such behaviors. Like in the school where I am a member of board, this happens a lot” (pupil, 10)

From the excerpts above, peer group pressure made the pupils to abandon school due to bad influence of the others. [11] also reported that dropout levels were higher in Day compared to Boarding schools, Mixed compared to Single Sexschools and Single Stream compared to more than one stream schools and this was due to peer pressure experienced by other pupils in schools.

Harsh School Climate

A school climate, defined as “the quality and character of school life,” profoundly affects student learning and achievement. According to the National School Climate Center, a safe and caring school environment is one in which students feel positively connected to others, feel respected, feel that their work is meaningful, and feel that they are good at what they do. School climate is a group phenomenon that reflects the school community’s norms, goals and values, and school climate emerges based on ways in which students, parents and school staff experience school life. In the present study, there were cases where there were drop outs due to harsh school climate. Some respondents reported that:

“Some schools have very autocratic leadership styles, teachers are very harsh and not understanding. This has scared away pupils from attending school.at times the head teachers are extremely harsh with pupils and some are forced to leave school” (head teacher, 5)

“In our school, the head teacher is strict and harsh and this has scared away many pupils from the school. Some teachers too are never friendly to pupils due to how they give out punishments to them” (pupil, 8)

From the interview excerpts above, harsh school climate caused dropout rate among pupils in primary schools. In agreement, [10] observed factors such as high level of racial or ethnic discrimination of students, school phobia, school violence, conflicts (with teachers, school mates) among others.

Extra School Levies

Participants also reported that some schools charge so much extra levies which has also made some pupils to lose hope in their education. Some schools charge remedial monies, teachers’ money and others which has made many pupils to leave school because the parents cannot afford to pay for the levies, one respondent reported that:

“We charge extra money here in school and many parents are not able to fulfill these requirements in school. This has affected the attendance to school by the pupils. Others eventually drop out of school due to this” (teacher, 9)

From the interview data above, extra school levies charged in schools made some pupils to drop out of schools. This finding agrees with [7] who found out that identified under family cluster include; low family socioeconomic status, low family support for education, low parental education, conflicts between work and school, having to work and school, having to work or support family, substance use and pregnancy among others.

High Academic Expectations

In education, the term high expectations, or the phrase common high expectations, typically refers to any effort to set the same high educational standards for all students in a class, school, or education system. According to (1), educational expectations and aspirations reflect a fundamental difference between what one wishes to achieve and what one realistically expects to achieve. In the present study, one participant reported that:

“There are so much academic expectations in our school and pupils who don’t match to the standards, are forced to drop out from school. There are so many strict expectations about performance and it’s a challenge to many pupils who cannot work hard” (head teacher, 7)

From the interview data above, high academic expectations made some pupils to drop out f school. This finding agrees with [5] who reported that when there are very high academic expectations, then this can make pupils to drop out of school.

4. Conclusions and Recommendations

The study reported that there was a statistically significant negative, though weak relationship between school based factors and school dropout, with positive improvement in school based factors associated to decrease in school dropouts and vice-versa. There were statistical significant negative correlation between school dropout and two aspects of school based factors; curriculum related factors and leadership related factors. However, the study did not establish statistically significant relationship between teacher centric factors and school dropouts. The scatter plot indicates that there was fairly weak negative correlation between school based factors and school dropout among primary school pupils. This was shown by pattern of dots which seem to incline from lower right to upper left, demonstrating a negative correlation between the two variables. The trendline further reveals that there was correlation between the variables; the coordinate points are clustered along the line, forming almost visible pattern. This further implies that the relationship was real and not by chance. Qualitative results revealed that the themes on school factors were: School Corporal punishment, Forced class repetition, Peer group pressure, harsh school climate, Extra school levies, and High academic expectations. Governments should plan some special polices to improve female education like introducing special stipends for female students and also making education free for them.