Teachers are paid well, just like the other public servants.

As you mention the teacher student ratio is apparently different, but I think I got my comparison wrong then, its more of kids who have great resources vs those who do not. I guess the classic example is the kid in the urban area vs one in the rural area.

But as I mentioned I am not advocating for parents to be forced to take their kids to the public schools in rural areas, nor do we choose where we are born, all I am saying is that, secondary education should be a basic need and as such categorizing kids based on the kcpe exam is flawed since some are way better in terms of resources available in preparation for the same.

If we need public funded centers of excellence it should be based on the standardized IQ tests, that way most academically gifted kids get a chance.

But I think if we really wanted we can make sure all public primary schools have corresponding secondary school component and as many kids as possible enjoy secondary education, without classifying them on what they scored in a single test.

I mean this national schools thing is a colonial relic.

You clearly have no idea of what you are talking about. Just look at the data, and you will notice the kids in the public rural areas tend to do well compared to the kids in the urban public schools more so in the city. I should assume the kids in urban public schs have better "resources" than those in the rural areas right?. What are these "resources" in private/urban schools that may not be available in rural public primary schs?

Everywhere in the world, top performers attract the attention from top schools. Have you tried to figure out how it is done elsewhere?

Some of the comments here are suggestive of Socialism. That horse bolted two decades ago.
We can't be equal but we should be given equal chance to prove how unequal we are.

If you are talking about media reports (where parents called reporters to brag about their kids results) then you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Those kids who walk to sch and have hse chores also perform very well; they just dont brag and display their results online. Again talk about something you know. There are kids who had everything in those private schools but did not even get half the mark. Performance in primary sch mainly is a reflection of the caliber of teacher the student had and the motivation they receive.

As for secondary sch. There needs for "cut-off points" measures but also there should be consensus. Private schools are stakeholders in the sector andthe kids who choose to go to these schools should not be punished for performing well because after all if they scored the same marks while in public schools they would have made it in those "good national Schools". That said, the govt - both county and national, should equip and upgrade all schools to be of the same status. The private sector too can get involved