Article Critique help

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education21(1) 2021 3

Relationship Between Class Size and Academic Achievement of Students with Learning Difficulties in Kakamega County, Kenya

Naomi Khakasa Wafula Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kenya

Eric Kiago Kabuka Maseno University, Kenya

N. K. Bota Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kenya

Abstract

Class size is an essential factor in student academic achievement. Small class sizes improve student achievement and teacher morale. For this reason, the researchers of this study set out to determine the relationship between class size and academic achievement among students with learning difficulties in secondary schools in Kakamega County, Kenya. The researchers used descriptive survey and correlational research designs. The target population was 36,453 third form and 37,532 fourth form students (eleventh and twelfth grade); 1,288 class teachers; and 12 sub-county education directors. Stratified random, purposive, and saturated sampling techniques were used. Data collection tools included questionnaires, interview schedules, and focus group discussion guides. Data were analyzed using percentages, means, standard deviations, Pearson’s (r) correlation and ANOVA. Findings indicated a statistically significant relationship between class size and academic achievement among underachieving students. Findings show that increase in class size leads to decrease in academic achievement among these students.

Keywords: class size, academic achievement, students with learning difficulties

INTRODUCTION

As they implement education for all and the Sustain- able Development Goals (SDGs), many governments in developing countries have been faced with the challenge of aligning available physical structures and personnel with the student population (UNESCO, 2010; Katiwa, 2016; Njenga, 2019). For instance, the Ken- ya government introduced a free secondary schooling education program whose target was to increase student enrollment to 1.4 million by the end of 2008. Enroll- ment increased from 1.18 million in 2007 (639,393 boys and 540,874 girls) to 1,701,501 (914,971 boys and 786,530 girls) in 2010 (Katiwa, 2016; Kapelinyang & Lumumba, 2017). The 100% transition policy led to a population explosion in secondary schools, thus putting strain not only on the physical facilities, but also on the personnel (Njenga, 2019; Teachers Service Commis- sion, 2019). The teacher-student ratio increased sig- nificantly, thus reducing the close interaction between teacher and learner.

Notably, efforts towards inclusive education have raised concern about students with learning difficulties in large classrooms. Inclusion is a policy and practice of

placing students with disabilities and special education needs in a regular class for the purpose of instruction (Zigler et al., 2017; Lerner, 2009). The basis of inclu- sion is that homes, schools, and society at large should be restructured to ensure that all individuals, regardless of their differences, have the opportunity to interact, play, learn, work, and experience the feeling of be- longing, and develop in accordance with their potential and difficulties (Kenya Ministry of Education, 2018). Therefore, implementing inclusive education calls for accommodating students with learning difficulties with- in all schools and all classrooms. However, concerns are growing about the influence of increasing class size on the academic achievement of students with learning difficulties.

Students with learning difficulties tend to learn and acquire skills at a slower rate, compared to typical- ly-developing students (Abosi, 2007; Ndani & Muru- gami, 2009; Sebastian, 2016). Sebastian (2016) further elaborated that students with learning difficulties do not keep pace with the teaching-learning process. Williamson and Ryan (2012) described students who have learning difficulties as being characterized by poor concept formation, with difficulties in reading, writing,

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education 2021 21(1)4

and arithmetic skills. These learners struggle to grasp the curriculum, and some may have mild intellectual disabilities with characteristically below-average cogni- tive abilities and scholastic performance (Borah, 2013; Reynolds & Fletcher-Janzen, 2006; Vasudevan, 2017; Qian, 2008).

Environmental factors such as poverty are argued to have direct and circumstantial impact on learners’ academic achievement (Bota, 2007; Ferguson et al., 2007; Olszewski-Kubilius & Corwith, 2017). Poverty limits students’ access to financial, emotional, mental, and physical resources, as well as appropriate support systems and role models (Lacour & Tissington, 2011). Furthermore, schools in rural and urban poor environ- ments are characterized by inadequate personnel and poor infrastructural development, resulting in large class sizes (Kihoro & Kabunga, 2016). This leads to the contention that poverty increases the chances that students with learning difficulties will be placed in large class sizes.

The authors of this paper argue that students with learning difficulties are entitled to meaningful learning experiences that enhance feelings of belonging along- side academic achievement. However, obstacles in the school undermine these goals (Bota, 2007; Borah, 2013; Metto & Makewa, 2014; Vasudevan, 2017). Class size is one of the major risk factors in academic achievement of the general student population (Monks & Schmidt, 2010; Owoeye & Yara, 2011; Mirani & Chunawala, 2015). Notably, Sebastian (2016) ob- served that mass enrollment—and the resulting lower teacher–student ratio—is a risk factor in the academic achievement of students with learning difficulties who generally require more personal attention in classroom instruction.

Wapula (2011) observed that opportunities for stu- dents with learning difficulties are almost non-existent in both public and private schools in Botswana. The author of the current paper further noted that children with learning difficulties either perform poorly or drop out of school because they are demotivated and dis- couraged by large class sizes where they cannot have quality contact with teachers. Furthermore, Williamson and Ryan (2012) argued that because of their “between- ness,” students with sheer learning difficulties are not eligible for special education programs. Mwangi (2013) concurs that such students are rarely identified for prop- er placement. These students eventually quit school or just hang on with little hope of good performance. This is a common scenario in most African countries.

Class Size and Academic Achievement Class size is a risk factor in academic achievement

(Mirani & Chunawala, 2015). Generally, overcrowded classes are linked to falling education standards (Owo- eye & Yara, 2011; Sebastian, 2016). It is argued that student achievement decreases as class size increases. Monks and Schmidt (2010) established that class size had a negative and statistically significant impact on student course evaluation. Similarly, Bandiera et al. (2009) found a statistically significant negative (but non-linear) effect of class size on testing results of stu- dents in a northeastern university in the United States of America. The famous STAR program in Tennessee involved classes that ranged in size between 15–17 and 22–25 students. It was observed that students from small classes performed better on standardized tests in mathematics and reading in kindergarten to third grade (Monks & Schmidt, 2010). In a follow-up program in North Carolina, with classes ranging between 15–25 students, it emerged that students in smaller classes achieved test scores of .45 and .56 standard deviations higher than peers in larger classes on mathematics and reading tests respectively (Vandenberg, 2012). These findings were supported by Whitehurst and Chingos (2011) who noted that elementary students assigned to small classes outperformed their classmates in larger regular classes by .22 standard deviations.

In a study carried out in Nigeria, Yara (2010) ob- served that class size influenced academic achievement in mathematics, with those in smaller classes perform- ing better than those in larger classes. Owoeye and Yara (2011) further argued that small class sizes led to less retention, fewer referrals to special education, and few- er dropouts. Notably, Bye (2017) observed that large class sizes hinder the effective working of a teacher as a facilitator who needs to cultivate the learner’s self-mon- itoring and self-regulation skills to achieve learning outcomes. Monks and Schmidt (2010) similarly sup- ported the view, noting that large classes allow students to be more disruptive and give room for disengagement while small classes lend themselves more to pedagogi- cal activities that improve academic achievement.

Arguments in support of smaller class sizes abound. Smaller class sizes not only increase teacher-student contact, but also increase the morale of teachers and reduce stress. Furthermore, teachers are likely to be more creative and less likely to burn out (Yara, 2010). Vandenberg (2012) notes, “Finding engaging, high- ly-qualified teachers is not enough; the number of students assigned to a teacher is important.” (p.12). He

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education21(1) 2021 5

further argues that small class size facilitates individu- alized instruction and lessens indiscipline cases in class. Blatchford et al. (2007) and Cakmak (2009) assert that larger classes make it harder to differentiate instruc- tion and maintain student discipline. The overriding argument is that class size has a direct influence on the eventual academic achievement of students in general and those with learning difficulties in particular.

However, there are conflicting findings on the effect of class size on academic achievement. Studies carried out in Tennessee (USA) by that state’s Department of Education indicated that reducing class size increased student achievement; however, subsequent studies, especially in Asia, contradict the findings (Woessman & West, 2006). Essentially, studies from Asia suggest that reducing class size does not improve academic perfor- mance. Jepsen and Rivkin (2009) argue that studies on the effect of class size have limited clarity, while some revealed mixed findings.

In essence, some studies indicate that reducing class size has a large effect on academic performance, while others depict little or no effect. Moreover, other studies have indicated that class size reduction works in some cases, but not in other similar circumstances (White- hurst & Chingos, 2011; Chingos, 2010). Whitehurst and Chingos (2011) further noted that elementary students assigned to smaller classes performed better than those in regular large classes. However, it emerged that the effect was more visible with boys and economical- ly-disadvantaged children. The study further revealed that class size reduction may have meaningful long- term effect on student achievement only if introduced in lower grades and for children who are less advantaged. Equally, Bandiera et al. (2009) argued that class size had significant impact on student performance but only at the very top and bottom of class-size distribution. Despite many studies on the influence of class size on learners’ academic achievement, the findings are incon- clusive; hence the need for continuous research.

Intuitively, smaller classes make sense for teachers working with struggling students (Korir & Kipkemboi, 2014; Vasudevan, 2017; Whitehurst & Chingos, 2011). However, as outlined, this assumption is supported by some studies and disputed by others. Furthermore, most of the studies have been undertaken in developed coun- tries and involve the general student population. This study, on the other hand, gives a developing country perspective by examining the influence of class size on the academic achievement of students with learning difficulties in Kakamega County.

METHODS The study used descriptive survey and correlational

research design because the intent was to establish and describe the relationship between class size and aca- demic achievement of students with learning difficul- ties. Descriptive survey method allows the collection of both qualitative and quantitative data. The design is fairly economical and allows data collection from a large population at minimal cost (Punch & Oancea, 2014; Mertler, 2019). Correlational research design was used to determine the relationships between class size and academic achievement among slow learners. The target population was 73,985 students, 36,453 of whom were from third form and 37,532 of whom were from fourth form (equivalent to eleventh and twelfth grade); 1,288 classroom teachers from forms three and four; and 12 sub-county Directors of Education from Ka- kamega County.

Stratified random sampling was used to select the schools because they are not homogenous (Kothari, 2004). The strata consisted of schools based on the school type (sub-county, county, extra-county, and national). Saturated sampling was used in selecting the national schools. This study adopted a 10 percent sample size drawn from the target population. A sample of 35 schools was selected, including 129 classroom teachers and two Sub-County Directors of Education. Fisher’s formula was used to determine the sample for slow learners because the exact population was not known. The sample of students with learning difficul- ties was therefore 246. From each selected school, slow learners were selected from the low achievers based on achievement tests. Teacher nomination was key in identifying slow learners to participate in the study. Data were analyzed using percentages, means, standard deviations, Pearson’s (r) correlation, and analysis of variance (ANOVA).

RESULTS

To determine the relationship between class size and academic achievement of students with learning diffi- culties, the researchers first sought to describe the state of class sizes among secondary schools in Kakamega County. The results are provided in Table 1.

Table 1 shows that most class sizes in the study were large, ranging between 31 and above 60. The majority of classes (35%) were 46 students and above. Notably, results from teachers’ questionnaires indicated that 18.0% felt that large class sizes negatively influenced the academic achievement of students with learning difficulties to a very large extent while 54.1% felt that

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education 2021 21(1)6

class size negatively influenced the academic achieve- ment to a large extent. This implies that 72.1% of the teachers felt that large class sizes are a risk to the aca- demic achievement of students with learning difficulties in secondary schools in Kakamega County. Most of the teachers indicated that large class size made them resort to the use of passive teaching methods that are more teacher-centered than learner-centered, such as the lec- ture method. Conversely, the learners interviewed felt that class size does not affect their academic achieve- ment. Indications were that the students with learning difficulties were contented both in large and small class sizes. As one learner put it, “so long as the teacher can be able to offer me assistance when I need” it. This shows that the learners were not aware that a large class size may hinder the teacher from giving them needed assistance.

To test for the null hypothesis—the possibility that there is no significant relationship between class size and academic achievement of students with learning difficulties—the study used the One-Way ANOVA tech- nique. Results are provided in Table 2 and Figure 1.

Results for the ANOVA test, as shown in Table 2, were F(4, 126) = 2.166, p = 0.047 < 0.05. This indi- cated that the class size has a significant influence on the academic performance of students with learning difficulties. For class sizes of 1–15 students, the average or mean score was 45.7813; for class sizes of 16–30 students, the mean score was 42.7857; for class sizes of 31–45 students, the mean score was 39.37; for class siz- es of 46–60 students, the mean score was 40.2; and for class sizes of 60 or more students, the mean score was

20.8125. The mean plot (see Figure 1) also indicates a decrease in academic performance as class size increas- es. The study therefore concludes that having a very large class size is likely to lead to poor performance among students with learning difficulties in secondary schools in Kakamega County.

The correlation analysis indicated a statistically significant relationship between class size and academic achievement of students with learning difficulties. Class size was found to have a negative significant relation- ship, (r = -0.199, p = 0.023 < 0.05). This implies that as class size increases, the academic achievement of students with learning difficulties decreases.

DISCUSSION

The study results indicated large classes, ranging between 31 and above 60 (Table 1). The majority of classes (35%) were 46 students and above. Inciden- tally, Chokera (2014) found a similar scenario in the study carried out in Akithii Division, Meru County. The majority of class sizes (41%) ranged between 41–50, while 29% ranged between 51 and above. Similarly, Waseka and Simatwa (2016) found the average class sizes in Kakamega County as follows: 18–45 (60.8%) and 50–60 (37.5%). This implies that generally speak- ing, class sizes are large in parts of the country and in Kakamega County in particular. Comparatively, studies carried out in developed countries depicted classes that ranged between 15–17 and 22–25, such as the STAR research program (Monks & Schmidt, 2010; White- hurst & Chingos, 2011). It is argued that class size is a key factor in academic achievement (Mirani &

Table 1 Descriptive Findings on Class Sizes.

Statement 1–15 16–30 31–45 46–60 60 and above Class size for the common subjects

5% 15% 45% 25% 10%

Class Size for optional subject 1

13% 34% 25% 17% 11%

Class Size for optional subject 2

13% 29% 29% 19% 10%

Class Size for optional subject 3

10% 34% 30% 18% 8%

Class Size for optional subject 4

10% 30% 35% 14% 11%

Class Size for optional subject 5

12% 27% 39% 17% 6%

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education21(1) 2021 7

Chunawala, 2015). Commonly, overcrowded classes have been linked to falling academic standards (Owo- eye & Yara, 2011; Sebastian, 2016). It is argued that student achievement decreases as class size increases. This study lends credence to that supposition.

Yara (2010) observed that academic achievement in mathematics was influenced by class size in a study carried out in Nigeria: students in smaller classes per- formed better than those in larger classes. Whitehurst and Chingos (2011) also noted that elementary students

Figure 1 Mean Plot for Academic Achievement Across Class Sizes.

Table 2 Results of One-way ANOVA Test.

Academic Achievement (out of 100%) Class Size Count Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Minimum Maximum

1–15 16 45.7813 19.60439 4.90110 26.00 80.00 16–30 35 42.7857 20.58636 3.47973 15.50 79.50 31–45 50 39.3700 24.32933 3.44069 .00 90.00 46–60 22 40.2045 16.01759 3.41496 15.00 73.50 60 and above 8 20.8125 6.38602 2.25780 15.00 30.00 Total 131 40.0725 21.23550 1.85535 .00 90.00

ANOVA

Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 3771.731 4 942.933 2.166 .047 Within Groups 54851.331 126 435.328 Total 58623.061 130

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education 2021 21(1)8

assigned to smaller classes performed better than those in regular large classes. Cakmak (2009) observed that in larger class sizes, teachers spent most of the time meant for academic instruction on class management. In contrast, Smith et al. (2003) noted that while some researches have indicated a negative relationship be- tween class size and academic achievement, their study revealed that reading and mathematics achievement had positive correlation with class size (r = 0.328, p <0.01, r = 0.308, p <0.01, respectively), meaning that as class size increased, reading and mathematics scores also increased. This was contrary to the popular assumption that as class size increases, academic achievement will decrease. The current study findings (r = -0.199, p = 0.023 < 0.05) similarly contradict the findings of Smith et al. (2003) with an indication of a negative correla- tion between class size and academic achievement of students with learning difficulties.

Comparatively, Vandenberg’s (2012) preliminary correlational analysis of results showed a positive rela- tionship between class size and academic achievement. However, this was based on the practice of assigning students with learning difficulties to small classes. Consequently, lower performance in classes with fewer students was primarily based on the fact that they had learning difficulties. Vandenberg’s 2012 study ultimate- ly indicated that many teachers believe that smaller classes have a positive impact on student achievement, indicating that class sizes of 20 students or fewer are ideal. Incidentally, Monks and Schmidt (2010) observed that class size had a statistically significant negative relationship on student course evaluation. Students in a small class had a favorable evaluation of the course compared to those in a large class. Similarly, Bandiera et al. (2009) found a significant negative (but highly nonlinear) effect of class size on the test results of students. Monks and Schmidt (2010) asserted that a reduction of class size will lead to significant improve- ment in student outcomes.

Owoeye and Yara (2011) recommended a max- imum class size of 40 students while Vandenberg (2012) advocated for a class of 20 or fewer students. The current study findings depicted that 72.1% of the teachers viewed large class sizes as a risk to the aca- demic achievement of students with learning difficulties in secondary schools in Kakamega County. Most of the teachers indicated that large class sizes made them resort to the use of passive teaching methods that were more teacher-centered than learner-centered, such as

the lecture method. Essentially, large class sizes reduce personal teacher-learner interaction, thereby hindering the academic achievement of students with learning difficulties.

Whitehurst and Chingos (2011), Korir and Kipk- emboi (2014), and Vasudevan (2017) have pointed to the logic of smaller classes for teachers dealing with struggling students. This study supports the findings that small class sizes are likely to benefit students with learning difficulties because they enable teachers to build a rapport with individual learners and facilitate individualized attention. Conversely, large classes are impersonal and increase class management problems, undercutting the academic achievement of students with learning difficulties. Teachers may need to divide the class into small, manageable groups or use collabora- tive, cooperative teaching techniques and peer tutoring to overcome the challenge posed by large class sizes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The study findings led to conclusions. Most class sizes in Kakamega County were large, ranging between 31 learners and above. The findings show a statistically significant relationship between class size and academic achievement (r = -0.199, p = 0.023 < 0.05). This im- plies that as class size increases, there is a correspond- ing decrease in the academic achievement of students with learning difficulties.

The conclusions led to recommendations. Teachers should use collaborative and cooperative techniques to assist students with learning difficulties. Peer tutoring should be encouraged to counter the negative impact of large classes. The Ministry of Education in Kenya should strive to keep class sizes at 35 and below, as rec- ommended by the Teachers Service Commission report (2005), in order to facilitate individualized attention and closer interaction between learner and teacher. This is likely to improve the academic achievement of students with learning difficulties.

REFERENCES

Abosi, O. (2007). Educating children with learning disabilities in Africa. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(3), 196–201. doi:10.1111/j.1540- 5826.2007.00242.x

Bandiera, O., Larcinese, V., & Rasul, I. (2009). Hetero- geneous class size effects: New evidence from a panel of university students [Discussion paper CEPR #7512].

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education21(1) 2021 9

Blatchford, M. V., Russell, A., Bassett, P., & Martin, C. (2007). The effects of class size on the teaching of pupils aged 7–11 years. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 18(2), 147–172. https://doi. org/10.1080/09243450601058675

Borah, R. R. (2013). Slow learners: Role of teachers and guardians in honing their hidden skills. Internation- al Journal of Educational Planning and Administration, 3(2),139–143.

Bota, K. N. (2007). Grade repetition in Kenyan primary schools: Issues of learning disabilities. Transaction.

Bye, R. (2017). The teacher as a facilitator for learning: Flipped classroom in a master’s course on artificial intelligence. [Paper presentation]. 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education–Vol- ume 1: CSEDU, 184–195, Porto, Portugal. https://doi. org/10.5220/0006378601840195

Cakmak, M. (2009). The perception of student teachers about the effect of class size with regard to effective teaching process. The Qualitative Report, 14(3), 395– 408. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/R/QR14-3/cakmak.pdf

Chingos, M. M. (2010). The impact of a universal class-size reduction policy: Evidence from Florida’s statewide mandate. Economics of Education Re- view, 31(5), 543–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econ- edurev.2012.03.002

Chokera, K. M. (2014). Influence of teacher charac- teristics on pupils’ academic performance in public primary schools in Kenya: A case of Akithi Division, Meru County, Kenya [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Nairobi.

Ferguson, H. B, Bovaird, S., & Mueller, M. P. (2007). The impact of poverty on educational outcomes for children. Paediatrics & Child Health, 12(8), 701–706. https://doi.org/10.1093/pch/12.8.701

Jepsen, C., & Rivkin, S. (2009). Class size reduction and students’ achievement: The potential tradeoff be- tween teacher quality and class size. Journal of Human Resources, 44(1), 223–250.

Kapelinyang, R. P., & Lumumba, K. P. (2017). Deter- minants of academic performance in public secondary schools in Kapenguria Division, Kenya: Assessing the effect of participation in selected co-curricular activi- ties. African Journal of Education Science and Technol- ogy, 4(2): 164–174. https://www.ajest.info/index.php/ ajest/article/view/15

Katiwa, A. K. (2016). Factors influencing pupils’ tran- sition rates from primary to secondary schools in Kitui central sub-county, Kitui County, Kenya [Unpublished thesis]. University of Nairobi.

Kihoro, M. F., & Kabunga, A. (2016). Class size and learning outcomes: Perceptions of in-service teachers. Journal of Education, 4, 1–7. http:erepository.mku. ac.ke/handle/12345689/5644

Korir, K. D., & Kipkemboi, F. (2014). The impact of school environment and peer influence on students’ academic performance in Vihiga County, Kenya. Jour- nal of Education and Practice, 5(11), ISSN 2222-288x (online).

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods & techniques (2nd rev. ed.). New Age International. ISBN: 9788122415223

Lacour, M., & Tissington, L. D. (2011). The effects of poverty on academic achievement. Educational Re- search and Reviews, 6(7), 522–527. http://ww.academ- icjournals.org/ERR

Lerner, J. (2009). Educational intervention in learning disabilities. Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 28(6), 325–342.

Mertler, C. A. (2019). Introduction to educational re- search (2nd ed.). Sage.

Metto, E., & Makewa, N. L. (2014). Learner-cen- tered teaching: Can it work in Kenyan Public Primary Schools? American Journal of Educational Research, 2(11A), 23–29. doi:10.12691/education-2-11A-4

Mirani, S., & Chunawala, S. (2015). Teachers’ percep- tion of dealing with mixed ability classrooms [Confer- ence paper]. epiSTEME 6: International Conference to Review Research on Science, Technology and Math- ematics Education, HBCSE, Mumbai, India. https:// www.researchgate.net/publications/292513387

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education 2021 21(1)10

Mwangi, L. (2013). Special needs education (SNE) in Kenyan Public Primary Schools: Exploring govern- ment policy and teachers’ understanding [Doctoral thesis, Brunel University]. https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/ bitstream/2438/7767/1/FulltextThesis.pdf

Ministry of Education, Republic of Kenya. (2018). Education and training sector policy for learners and trainees with disabilities.

Monks, J., & Schmidt, R. (2010). The impact of class size and number of students on outcomes in higher edu- cation. https://hdl.handle.net/1813/74628

Ndani, M., & Murugami, M. (2009). Children in need of special protection. Longhorn.

Njenga, N. M. (2019). Institutional determinants of implementation of the 100 percent transition policy in public secondary schools in Nyandarua Central Sub-County, Kenya [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Uni- versity of Nairobi.

Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Corwith, S. (2017). Pover- ty, academic achievement and giftedness: A literature review. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(1). https://doi. org/10.1177/0016986217738015

Owoeye, J. S., & Yara, P. O. (2011). Class size and academic achievement of secondary schools in Ekiti State, Nigeria. Asian Social Science, 7(6), 184–194. doi:10.5539/ass.v7n6p184

Punch, K. F., & Oancea, A. (2014). Introduction to research methods in education (2nd ed.). Sage.

Qian, J. (2008). English classroom interaction between slow learners and teachers: A case study of slow learn- ers at primary level in Suzhou District, China [Unpub- lished master’s thesis]. University of Oslo.

Reynolds, C., & Fletcher-Janzen, E. (2006). Encyclo- pedia of special education: A reference for children, adolescents and adults with disabilities and other exceptional individuals. Wiley.

Sebastian, V. (2016). Ensuring learning in slow learn- ers. Educational Quest: An International Journal of Education and Applied Social Sciences, 7(2), 125–131. doi:10.5958/2230-7311.2016.00029.5

Smith, P., Molnar, A., & Zahorik, J. (2003). Class size reduction: A fresh look at the data. Educational Lead- ership, 72–76. Retrieved from www.asu.edu/educ/eps/ EPRU/documents/EPSL-0309-110-EPRU.doc

Teachers Service Commission. (2005). Study on teacher staffing norms. Republic of Kenya, Ministry of Educa- tion Science and Technology.

Teachers Service Commission. (2019). Strategic plan for the period 2019–2023. Republic of Kenya, Ministry of Education Science and Technology.

Vandenberg, K. C. (2012). Class size and academic achievement. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. http://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd/408

Vasudevan, A. (2017). Slow learners: Causes, problems and educational programs. International Journal of Applied Research, 2(12), 308–313.

Wapula, R. (2011) Education for children with learning difficulties using Botswana as a case study. Journal of Innovative Research in Education, 1(1), 67–85.

Waseka, L. E., & Simatwa, M. W. E. (2016). Student factors influencing academic performance of students in secondary education in Kenya: A case study of Ka- kamega County. International Research Journals, 7(3), 72–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.14303/er.2016.138

Whitehurst, G. J., & Chingos, M. M. (2011). Class size: What research says and what it means for state policy. https://www.brookings.edu/research/class-size-what-re- search-says-and-what-it-means-for-state-policy/

Williamson, J., & Ryan, J. P. (2012). The “slow learner” as a mediated construct. Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, 1(3). https://doi.org/10.15353/cjds.v1i3.59

Woessman, L., & West, M. (2006). Class-size effects in school systems around the world: Evidence from be- tween-grade variation in TIMSS. European Economic Review, 50(3), 695–736.

Yara, P. O. (2010). Class size and students’ mathematics achievement of senior secondary schools in southwest- ern Nigeria. The Social Sciences, 5(2), 108–112. doi: 10.3923/sscience.2010.108.112

Zigler, R., Lusweti, S., Macmbinji, V., Jumba, V., Kag- gi, B., & Namirembe, B. (2017). Situational analysis and development of inclusive education in Kenya and Tanzania. The Journal of the International Association of Special Education, 17(1), 11–26.

Copyright of Journal of the International Association of Special Education is the property of Journal of the International Association of Special Education and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.