By Ali Mohamud Adan

The renewed public debate following remarks by the former Deputy President on Grade 10 admissions to national secondary schools has reopened long standing questions about fairness, access, and standards in Kenya’s education system.

At the centre of this discussion lies the delicate balance between merit-based selection, regional equity, the timely expansion of national schools, and the often-overlooked responsibility of political leadership.

Supporters of strict merit-based admissions argue that national schools exist to uphold academic excellence. From this perspective, admission should be determined solely by performance in national examinations, without geographical considerations.

Introducing quotas or reservations, they warn, risks lowering standards and undermining the competitiveness that defines national schools.

National schools are funded through public resources drawn from across the country. They are, therefore, national assets that should serve all high performing learners equally.

Any departure from merit-based selection risks politicizing education and eroding public confidence in the system.

Community aspirations

Many national schools are situated within communities whose learners strongly aspire to attend these prestigious institutions. For parents in these areas, it is often distressing to see their children posted to schools far from home while a well-resourced national school exists within their immediate surroundings.

Distance creates financial, emotional, and social challenges, and in some cases leads to missed opportunities, simply because attending a nearby school is not guaranteed. This reality reinforces the argument that host communities should not be entirely excluded from the benefits of institutions situated among them.

Preserving a modest percentage of admission slots for local learners while maintaining clear academic thresholds would promote inclusion and shared ownership without diluting standards. Education should reward merit while also recognizing context and lived realities.

Beyond admissions, the debate highlights the timely need to increase the number of national schools. As the number of high-performing learners continues to grow, pressure on existing institutions has intensified.

Expanding national school status in already advantaged regions where infrastructure, staffing, and academic culture are well established offers a practical short-term solution.

However, this approach demands serious caution. Names and labels are easy to assign; meeting and sustaining national standards is not.

National status must be earned through clearly defined minimum thresholds in infrastructure, governance, academic performance, and learner welfare not through political declaration or meeting a demand.

Unavoidable question

While national discourse often fixates on quotas and admissions formulas, the responsibility of local leadership in disadvantaged regions like Northern Kenya remains largely unexamined. Many schools in these areas still lack basic amenities, including water, sanitation, safe classrooms, electricity, and adequate learning materials.

Some continue to rely on water trucking year after year because no boreholes have been drilled and no long-term solutions have been planned.

This chronic neglect has prompted well-off families to transfer their children to schools in better-equipped regions, further deepening inequality.

The influx of students from outside communities has created immense pressure on these better-resourced schools overcrowding classrooms, straining limited facilities, and overwhelming teachers.

In some cases, local learners struggle to secure places in their own schools due to the rising competition from outsiders, effectively displacing the very children these institutions were meant to serve.

Widening divide

Meanwhile, the disadvantaged regions are left with under-enrolled, under-resourced schools, perpetuating a cycle of educational poverty. With declining enrolment and little public attention, there is reduced incentive for both local leaders and national agencies to invest in infrastructure or teacher deployment in those areas.

The outcome is a widening regional divide where one part of the country continues to advance through concentrated educational investment, while another remains trapped in structural neglect.

Ultimately, this pattern not only disadvantages local communities but also undermines the national vision of equitable development and inclusive education.

More troubling is the absence of clear development pipelines. In many cases, leaders have done little beyond rhetoric. There is limited evidence of sustained advocacy, budget prioritisation, or strategic planning to improve school infrastructure. Equity cannot be demanded nationally while neglect persists locally.

Communities in Northern Kenya must therefore engage their leaders in honest conversations and demand timelines, budgets, and measurable outcomes. Preferential access to national schools means little if foundational learning conditions remain ignored.

Ultimately, political leadership must go beyond responding to the views of others. Leaders should demonstrate what they have done and the standards they have set within their own counties and constituencies.

It is unacceptable to engage in public debates while schools continue to operate without water and other basic amenities due to years of inaction.

This is the time for honest internal discussions about priorities, failures, and practical solutions. The moment for deflection has passed. The time for accountability, planning, and decisive action is now.

___________________

The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Wajir Today. The article is intended to contribute to public debate, promote responsible leadership, and inclusive discourse. Any reference to individuals or events are made in good faith and in the public interest.