In a strong stance against the proposed government amendments that seek to merge Junior Secondary Schools (JSS) into the primary school framework, the Kenya Union of Post-Primary Education Teachers (KUPPET) has issued a resounding rejection. The union argues that JSS should remain a distinct educational level to safeguard the unique developmental needs of junior secondary students and maintain clear boundaries in teacher roles and mobility. This sentiment was expressed during the KUPPET Kericho Branch Annual General Meeting, where the union’s position was made clear amidst ongoing discussions about the structural and logistical future of Kenya’s educational system.
KUPPET’s Position on Maintaining JSS as Separate Entity
Ronald Tonui, the KUPPET Assistant Treasurer, emphasized that merging junior secondary with primary education could undermine the purpose of this distinct educational level. During his speech at the AGM, Tonui underscored the importance of keeping JSS separate from primary schools, advocating for a structure that respects the different developmental, emotional, and academic needs of junior secondary students. According to Tonui, the integration plan would not only disrupt teacher mobility but would also compromise the quality of education, as it assumes that primary and junior secondary students have similar educational needs, which is not the case.
KUPPET’s stance is built on the constitutional distinction between primary and secondary education frameworks in Kenya, a distinction Tonui believes should be upheld. He argues that creating a “comprehensive school” model could dilute the specialization and focus required at the junior secondary level. Tonui’s arguments resonate with many teachers and education stakeholders who believe that the unique nature of JSS demands tailored resources, teaching approaches, and environments that cannot be achieved if merged with primary school systems.
The Government’s Proposal and KUPPET’s Concerns
The government’s proposed amendment seeks to streamline the educational process by integrating JSS within primary schools, labeling them as “comprehensive schools.” Proponents argue that this integration could reduce the administrative burden, maximize use of infrastructure, and improve access to education by leveraging the primary school network. However, KUPPET and other critics point out that this restructuring risks weakening the junior secondary level’s purpose, which was created to bridge the gap between primary and senior secondary education.
Tonui highlighted that by making JSS part of the primary school structure, the government might inadvertently neglect the level-specific resources and attention that junior secondary students need. As students transition from childhood to adolescence during this stage, he argues, they require a supportive learning environment that acknowledges their evolving cognitive and emotional capacities. This necessitates specially trained teachers, distinct resources, and facilities geared towards early adolescence—a combination that KUPPET fears will not be adequately provided if JSS is merged into primary schools.
Teacher Mobility and Career Progression at Risk
One of KUPPET’s primary concerns about the integration is the potential impact on teacher mobility and career progression. By treating junior secondary teachers as part of the primary education framework, KUPPET fears that teachers may face limitations in transferring between schools, accessing promotions, and receiving appropriate compensation for their qualifications and roles. This change would disrupt the current structure, where teachers are able to progress through a clear hierarchy from junior to senior secondary education, benefitting from career advancement opportunities and specialized training that aligns with the age group they are teaching.
Tonui also emphasized that teacher retention and motivation are closely tied to opportunities for career progression. If JSS were to be integrated into the primary framework, it would blur the lines of teacher classification, creating a bottleneck effect that could lead to job dissatisfaction among junior secondary educators who are keen to move up the professional ladder within the secondary school system.
Implementation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and Promotion Demands
Mary Rotich, the Kericho KUPPET Branch Executive, voiced support for the government’s confirmation of 46,000 JSS teachers, recognizing this step as an acknowledgment of JSS as a critical part of the education system. However, she expressed that KUPPET still has several unmet demands, particularly regarding the promotion of all qualified teachers this year.
The 2021-2025 Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) is a cornerstone document that sets forth provisions for teacher welfare, including regular promotions, fair compensation, and professional growth. Rotich noted that despite the agreement’s framework, many teachers have yet to receive the promotions and benefits promised under the CBA. She emphasized that the union would continue to push for these provisions to be upheld, particularly in the current context where teachers face increased demands due to the restructuring of the educational system.
In line with this, Rotich highlighted the need for acting allowances for teachers currently serving in acting capacities as principals, deputy principals, and heads of departments. This request is part of the Return-to-Work Formula, which was established to ensure fair compensation and acknowledgment of teachers’ additional responsibilities. Rotich argued that these allowances are necessary to reflect the added responsibilities and pressures that these acting roles entail. With the new demands arising from the government’s proposed structural changes, ensuring fair compensation for teachers in leadership positions is even more critical.
Discontent with KUPPET National Office and the Handling of Recent Teachers’ Strike
While addressing the Kericho KUPPET members, Rotich also took the opportunity to express dissatisfaction with how the KUPPET National Office handled the teachers’ strike in September, which was called off after a meeting with the Teachers Service Commission (TSC). Many KUPPET members, including Rotich, felt that the national office did not sufficiently advocate for the teachers’ demands, which contributed to the strike’s lackluster outcome.
The strike was called to address multiple issues, including teacher shortages, inadequate remuneration, and the need for more support in implementing the new education reforms. However, the abrupt suspension of the strike left many teachers feeling unheard and unsupported. Rotich’s comments reflect a sentiment that the KUPPET National Office must be more assertive in representing the needs of its members, especially during a time when the government is pushing forward with sweeping reforms that could have far-reaching implications for teachers’ roles, responsibilities, and career trajectories.
The Larger Implications of Integrating JSS into the Primary School Framework
The debate over integrating JSS into primary schools reflects a larger discussion about the purpose and direction of Kenya’s education system. As the government continues to pursue reforms aimed at expanding access and improving quality, KUPPET and other stakeholders are urging for a more nuanced approach that considers the specific needs of students at different developmental stages.
For the education sector, the decision to integrate JSS into primary schools could have a profound impact on teaching methodologies, curriculum delivery, and the overall learning environment. Supporters of KUPPET’s position argue that treating JSS as a distinct level allows for a tailored approach that respects the transition from childhood to adolescence, providing students with the academic and emotional support they need during this formative phase.
Conversely, proponents of integration argue that resource constraints and administrative inefficiencies can be addressed by merging JSS into the primary school system. They contend that creating “comprehensive schools” would facilitate smoother transitions and reduce the burden on already-stretched educational resources. However, critics maintain that these benefits should not come at the expense of student well-being and quality education delivery.
The Way Forward: Dialogue and Collaborative Solutions
In light of KUPPET’s strong stance, the future of JSS in Kenya’s educational system remains a topic of active discussion. Education policymakers, teacher unions, and other stakeholders must now work collaboratively to ensure that any structural changes support both teachers and students. This may require exploring hybrid models that respect the distinct needs of junior secondary students while also addressing the practical considerations raised by the government.
At the heart of the debate lies a shared goal: improving the quality of education for Kenya’s youth. As discussions continue, KUPPET has reaffirmed its commitment to advocating for a system that values and supports teachers, respects the developmental needs of students, and upholds the standards that Kenyan education has worked hard to build.
The government now faces the challenge of balancing reform objectives with the demands of teachers and unions like KUPPET. Whether through integration or preservation of the existing structure, the outcome of this debate will shape Kenya’s educational landscape for years to come, with far-reaching implications for students, teachers, and the nation as a whole.
