In 2003, the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan stated that:
There is no tool for development more effective than the education of girls. No other policy is as likely to raise economic productivity, lower infant and mater- nal mortality, improve nutrition and promote health. (cited in UNICEF 2008)
Kenya has made commendable strides towards providing education for all at primary and secondary school levels. Education in the Kenyan context is juxtaposed with developmental goals. It is associated with the development of human capital and human capabilities that enhance peo- ple’s well-being and the status of the nation state in terms of productivity, industrialisation and competitiveness on a global scale (Bloom et al.
2006; Sefa 2008; Wangenge-Ouma 2010). In considering the
B. Akala (*)
Education and Curriculum Department, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa
importance of education, this chapter argues that no form of marginalisa- tion is acceptable. Furthermore, tolerating marginalisation and exclu- sionary tendencies exposes learners and students from peripheral communities and groups. They are denied opportunities to develop and participate meaningfully in society. The debates advanced in the chapter are based on secondary data that investigate the state of the education sector in Kenya. In particular, the chapter has taken great interest in ana- lysing the extent to which rurality and gender affect the education of girls and women in Kenya. The chapter has concluded that female learners from poor and rural backgrounds face a plethora of challenges that inhibit their progression in education. The chapter has suggested various inter- ventions such as providing sanitary products, dealing with poverty, reduc- ing the cost of school uniforms, harmonising the cost of education, tackling sexual abuse and harassment and securing the learning environ- ment as possible avenues of ensuring that girls access and succeed in education.
The developments alluded to are attributable to the education reforms that have been undertaken in the last two decades. Current data from higher education indicate an upward trajectory in enrolments in public and private institutions of higher learning. Records from the Commission for University Education (CUE) (2017) indicate that Kenya has 30 pub- lic universities, 5 Public University Constituent Colleges, 18 Private Chartered Universities and 13 Institutions with Letters of Interim Authority. Although this is the case, there are instances of gender skewing especially when deviations are explicit in areas of study (Onsongo 2009;
Sifuna 2006). Women are underrepresented in science streams (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics- STEM) as compared to arts and humanities (Sifuna 2006; Shabaya and Konadu-Agyemang 2004). I argue that this kind of skewing whether intended or otherwise is perva- sive as it is used to propagate ideologies that view women as infe- rior to men.
Other interventions targeting primary and secondary education have been implemented. They include the introduction of free basic education in 2003 and Subsidised Free Secondary Education (SFDSE) in 2008.
These policy manoeuvres were meant to encourage learners who would have left school to remain in classrooms and on school playgrounds
(Ngware 2015). Furthermore, the government has been robustly pursu- ing advancing day secondary education with the view of boosting enrol- ments and learner retention. The ideal of advancing day secondary schooling was to assist the poor and marginalised rural students who struggle to pay high fees that are charged by boarding schools. However, although these reforms are laudable as they have boosted enrolments, James, Simiyu, and Riechi (2016) argue that the vision for learner reten- tion and expanded participation has been stifled by an acute shortage of teachers. In addition, Mutegi, Muriithi, and Wanjala (2017) argue that the cost of school uniforms is a major hindrance to progression in sec- ondary school. These observations call for further investigations to be undertaken in order to establish the extent to which factors other than tuition fees hamper the progression of learners in the Kenyan context.
Whereas the progress that has been realised is notable, education is still a pipe dream for the majority of Kenyan learners and students whose dreams continue to fade away due to their contexts and the prevailing harsh economic circumstances. The cost of education has been high- lighted as a major impediment to learners from poor family backgrounds.
Achoka (2007) opines that the high dropout rates at high school are attributable to the inability of parents to shoulder the burden of paying fees for their children due to poverty. According to the Ministry of Education records, out of the 70% of learners who complete the primary education cycle and join secondary schools, 9% drop out annually.
Subsequently, 30% proceed to higher education (Ministry of Education 2014). I argue that this is a worrisome trend that should rally educational practitioners and stakeholders to think of probable solutions that will bolster progression and completion at various levels of the education cycles in Kenya. I also note that the low retention levels significantly impact the developmental trajectory of a nation. It does not only occlude the goals and aspirations of young people who are leaking out of the sys- tem, but the country loses on key developmental objectives.
Literature emanating from Kenya is replete with examples of how the political, economic, ethnic and social factors affect learners’ progression in education (Onsongo 2009; Sifuna 2006). Nonetheless, very little attention has been paid to the extent to which the intersection between rurality and gender contribute to the current impasse in the education