Abstract

The problem under consideration was “Teachers’ perception regarding determinants primary school students’ dropout at Khyber Pakhtunkhwa”. Sample of eight schools, four male and four females was drawn/selected from selected district. Thus, a total sample of one hundred and ninety-two schools was selected randomly from all the twenty-four districts. A questionnaire entailing of thirty-one items was developed and administered to the stakeholders for the purpose of data collection. Percentage statistics was used for the analysis of the data. Mostly teachers opinion that determinants of the dropouts comprise uneducated parental, deprived financial position of the parents, overburden courses, absence of governmental attention, absence of students’ attention, nonexistence of co-curricular deeds, students absenteeism from school, school and home distance, same class repetition, absence of the somatic services, absence of the efforts to abstain students from being drop out, lack of paternal interest, paternal over affection and rising expenses.    

Key Words

Perception, Determinants, Dropout, Students

Introduction

Education in our country aches from the worst forms of inattention, indifference and lethargy.. All the struggles to enhance the primary education,s quality in the country have often . proved that there is general restlessness and absence of the national spirit in the people. .

Usually, school dropout in our community is not the result of unreasonable conduct; it should rather be seen as a rational choice process, depending on the value of the school, the family, and the community (Kunjufu, 2014). The difficulties and sacrifices involved and the resources available to schools and households. The existing research is an educational endeavor to enhance the quality of education (Karande & Kulkarni, 2015).

Karande and Kulkarni (2017) Mostly teachers opinion that the causes of dropout include the overburden curricula, the uninteresting teaching material, the poor financial position, absence of interest in teaching learning process, paternal illiteracy, helping parents, the absence of somatic lavatories, the absence of co-curricular happenings, students’ absentees, school-home distance, the absence of efforts to abstain the students from being drop out, the absence of paternal interest, paternal over affection and rising expenses and the absence of governmental attention.

Rahamneh (2016) examines the reasons deprived educational attainment among the students of the main stages in the selected schools. To fill in a thirty-items questionnaire, hundred teachers were selected randomly and the result of the study were  the absence of governmental attention, the absence of interest in teaching learning process, paternal illiteracy, helping parents, the the absence of physical facilities, the absence of other than curricular actions, students nonattendance, school and home remoteness (Lacour & Tissington, 2011).

Begg (2017) suggest that the main reasons of the dropout from the schools are lack of co-curricular happenings, overburden curricula, deprived paternal financial position, uninteresting courses, absence of governmental attention, absence of physical services and absence of student’s interest, students absenteeism, helping parents, paternal illiteracy, school-house distance, paternal over affection and rising expenses (Lockhead, 2003).




Problem Statement

In this study, we investigated the determinants of the drop out in the primary schools of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as perceived by the teachers.

Research Objectives

The following research objectives were confirmed: 

1. To explore opinions of the teachers about determinants of dropout.

2. To examine the gender and the location differences in the opinions of teachers about determinants of dropout.

3. To suggest measures for the improvement of the situation.




Research Significances

The study may identify the factors, which cause dropout and may. help to ensure the development of effective dropout’s prevention programs and strategies. It may make aware the high authorities in government. to identify the variables causing dropping out and then,to address these variables early and systemically and . support. the students who are coping with the decision of leaving school early. 

In the present decade, both the personal and social cost of dropping out of school have increased but with no significant gain. If the results of the study are implemented it will check the wastage of money, what we see in the primary education and a part of significant education resources will be applied to student retention efforts (Lockhead 2017).   

Drop is a very bad thing for the school and also for the society, by implementing the findings of the study we may control the ration of dropout and may enable our students and teachers to reach and meet the higher learning standards. (Schwartz & Orfield, 2001).  

As related to dropout prevention, these efforts include adequate funding, professional development and training in effective practices, on-going evaluation, and planned sustainability of the efforts. School and society through joint efforts would share roles, which are associated with the development of programs and practices to improve education and attendance. This study may lead to permanent institutional arrangements where every child may be able to complete the Primary education (Mbugua & Nkonke, 2012).




Limitations / Delimitations

The study was undertaken subject to the following limitations and delimitations.

1. Only eight schools four of boys and four of girls, two each from either area of urban/rural were included from each district.

2. Sample of one hundred and ninety-two schools was considered as sufficient representations of all the population.

3. Interview schedule for parents, head teachers and teachers were considered as the only suitable data gathering instrument.

4. Data for Five years (2014-2018) was considered as sufficient to indicate trends in gross and net attendance and dropout.

Research Methodology

Research Population

All the government Primary schools in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa formed the population of the study.

 There are 22466 schools for boys and girls (urban and rural areas) of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as per statistics of EMIS (2007).




Research Sample

Sample of eight schools, four male (two rural and two urban) and four females (two rural and two urban) was drawn from each district. Thus, a total sample of one hundred and ninety-two schools was selected randomly from all the twenty-four districts. Keeping in view the aims and objectives of the study, urban, rural, male and female schools were equally represented in the sample. 




Research Instrument

Thirty-one items questionnaire, related to information about the teachers and determinants of the dropout was advanced and directed to the teachers for the purpose of collecting relevant data. The questionnaire was prepared by the researcher and the experts of IER Gomal University. A research team was prepared to visit the schools and collect the data regarding physical facilities.   




Procedure of the Study

First of all, the above stated questionnaire was pilot tested in some schools of male and female. The purpose of pilot testing was to improve research instrument in order to collect relevant data and to get a clear image of the difficulties and field experiences. In the light of the pilot testing, the instrument was changed accordingly.

Just after validation of research instrument, the data was collected. The research team actively participated in this gigantic task of national importance. In some cases and in some districts, it took much time due to the worst situation of law and order. Members of the research team visited the selected schools and physically checked the data regarding the school statistics and the absence or presence of the physical facilities was checked on the spot.

Statistical analysis

Collected data was analyzed with the help of tables; Comparisons were made with the help of percentages.

 

Data Presentation and Analysis

Table 1. Showing Distribution of Teachers in Relation to the Institution they Earned Diploma from      

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
TTI	40	42	34	33	149	77.6041667
AIOU	8	5	13	14	40	20.8333333
OTHER	0	1	1	1	3	1.5625
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 1shows that 77.60% teachers guard their diploma/certificate from government teachers’ training schools and 20.83% from AIOU, a distance mode of education. The female proportion of earning diploma from AIOU is greater than the male teachers.

 

Table 2. Showing Training Courses as Conducive  

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	34	44	36	43	157	81.7708333
To Some Extent	13	4	12	5	34	17.7083333
Not at All	1	0	0	0	1	0.52083333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 2 shows that 81.77% teachers found the courses they studied in their training institutions as conducive up to greater extent. Proportion of rural male and female teachers is greater in the relevant category of great extent than the other categories.

 

Table 3. Showing Participation in in-Service Training Program

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
Yes	36	44	42	38	160	83.3333333
No	12	4	6	10	32	16.6666667
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table.3 shows that 83.33% teachers participated in in-service training courses against 16.67% teachers who did not attended it. Number of urban males and rural females who do not receive in-service training is greater than rural males and urban females.

 

Table 4. Showing the Number of Students in a Class

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
Overcrowded	8	13	11	11	43	22.3958333
Reasonable	38	31	33	32	134	69.7916667
Less	2	4	4	5	15	7.8125
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 4 shows that 70% teachers got students with a reasonable number in their classes against 22% who teach to overcrowded classes. Only 8% teachers found their classes below the normal capacity. Urban male teachers exceed all others in finding reasonable strength of students in their classes.

 

Table 5.  Showing Teacher’s Preparation for Lesson

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	24	36	32	25	117	60.9375
To Some Extent	22	11	16	21	70	36.4583333
Not at All	2	1	0	2	5	2.60416667
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 5 shows that 60.93% teachers prepare their lessons before they came to class to greater extent against 36.45% teachers who prepare their lessons to some extent. Rural male’s proportion followed by urban females is greater in the category of great extent against urban males and rural females.

 

Table 6. Showing Provision of Educational Guidance to Students

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	33	41	39	41	154	80.2083333
To Some Extent	15	7	9	7	38	19.7916667
Not at All	0	0	0	0	0	0
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 6 shows that 80% teachers provide educational guidance to students to great extent against 19.79% teachers in the category of some extent. There is almost the same distribution across the categories.

 

Table 7. Showing Teacher’s voice  

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	36	37	31	33	137	71.354166
To Some Extent	12	10	17	15	54	28.125
Not at All	0	1	0	0	1	0.52083333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 7 shows that 71.35% teachers use their voice according to class size to a greater extent against 0.52% teachers in the category of not at all. There is almost the same distribution of the sample in all four categories.

 

Table 8. Showing use of A.V aids

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	16	19	20	21	76	39.5833333
To Some Extent	28	24	23	21	96	50
Not at All	4	5	5	6	20	10.416666
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 8 shows that 50% teachers use A.V aids to some extent against 39.58% teachers who use it to great extent. Rural female teachers use A.V aids to great extent against rural males, urban females and rural female teachers.

 

Table 9. Showing asking Questions   

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	29	39	41	27	136	70.8333333
To Some Extent	18	9	6	18	51	26.5625
Not at All	1	0	1	3	5	2.60416667
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

 Table 9 shows that 70.83% teachers keep on asking questions during teaching-learning process to greater extent against 26.56% teachers who ask it to some extent. Frequency of urban female teachers followed by rural male teachers is relatively greater than their relative counter parts.

 

Table 10. Showing evaluation of students     

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	30	42	36	33	141	73.4375
To Some Extent	17	6	12	12	47	24.4791667
Not at All	1	0	0	3	4	2.08333333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 10 shows that 73.43% teachers evaluate students at the end of the lesson to greater extent against 24.47% teachers who do it to some extent. Rural male’s proportion followed by urban females is greater than rural males and rural females.

 

Table 11. Showing School’s Internal Environment

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	3	4	7	9	23	11.9791667
To Some Extent	26	21	14	18	79	41.1458333
Not at All	19	23	27	21	90	46.875
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 11 shows that 46.87% teachers opined that school internal environment is not the determining factor of drop out against 41.14% teachers who consider it a probable cause to some extent. Proportion of urban females in this category is greater than all others.

 

Table 12. Showing Corporal Punishment    

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	6	5	5	15	31	16.1458333
To Some Extent	24	16	13	10	63	32.8125
Not at All	18	27	30	23	98	51.0416667
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 12 shows that 51% teachers don’t consider corporate punishment as factor responsible for drop out against 16.14% teachers who consider it responsible to great extent. There is almost equal proportion of the respondents in the same category.

 

Table 13. Showing over Burden Curricula     

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	7	14	3	9	33	17.1875
To Some Extent	25	22	28	25	100	52.0833333
Not at All	16	12	17	14	59	30.7291667
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 13 shows that 52% teachers think that student leave school due to over loaded curricula against 30.72% teachers who don’t think so. Rural males consider this as a determining factor to great extent than urban females.

 

Table 14. Showing Harsh Treatment of Teachers

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	7	11	11	15	44	22.9166667
To Some Extent	24	14	15	10	63	32.8125
Not at All	17	23	22	23	85	44.2708333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 14 shows that 44.27% teachers were of the view that students don’t leave school because of harsh treatment of teachers against 22.91% teachers who consider it to great extent. Urban males consider it as a determining factor to some extent in the same proportion of rural females who consider it as not at all.

 

Table 15. Showing Poor Financial Position of Parents

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	31	24	26	15	96	50
To Some Extent	13	19	19	31	82	42.7083333
Not at All	4	5	3	2	14	7.29166667
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 15 shows that 50% teachers opined that students leave school due to poor financial position of parents to great extent against 42.7% teachers who consider it to some extent. Frequency of urban male and rural female teachers is greater in the category of great extent and some extent respectively.

 

Table 16. Showing Absence of Student Interest

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	12	19	21	23	75	39.0625
To Some Extent	32	27	25	20	104	54.1666667
Not at All	4	2	2	5	13	6.77083333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 16 shows that 54.16% teachers view that to some extent students leave school because of their absence of interest in studies against 39% teachers who think students drop out is to great extent due to this factor. Urban males and rural female teachers’ proportion is greater in the category of some extent and great extent respectively.

 

Table 17. Showing helping Parents

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	16	16	24	20	76	39.5833333
To Some Extent	30	25	20	22	97	50.5208333
Not at All	2	7	4	6	19	9.89583333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 17 shows that 50.52% teachers consider that helping parents lead to drop out to some extent against 39.58% teachers who think it as a responsible factor to great extent. Urban males viewed it to some extent against urban females who termed it as a determining factor to great extent.

 

Table 18. Showing Paternal Illiteracy/Ignorance

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	30	28	33	32	123	64.0625
To Some Extent	18	18	11	12	59	30.729166
Not at All	0	2	4	4	10	5.20833333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 18 shows that 64.06% teachers opined that paternal ignorance causes dropout to great extent while 30.72% teachers consider it to some extent. There is almost the same distribution across four categories share the one of great extent.

 

Table 19. Showing Repeated Failure in the Same Class

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	7	11	6	10	34	17.7083333
To Some Extent	23	20	19	21	83	43.2291667
Not at All	18	17	23	17	75	39.0625
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 19 shows that 43.2% teachers viewed that, to some extent repeated failure in the same class is determinant of drop out against 39% who don’t think so. Urban females don’t consider it as determining factor in greater proportion against their male counterparts whose proportion is greater in the category of some extent.

 

Table 20. Showing over-Crowded Class Rooms

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	5	8	12	9	34	17.7083333
To Some Extent	22	12	13	17	64	33.3333333
Not at All	21	28	23	22	94	48.9583333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 20 shows that 48.95% teachers viewed over-crowded class rooms as no problem causing drop out against 33% who deemed it as determining factor up to some extent. Rural male’s proportion is greater than that of others whereas urban males viewed it as a determinant to some extent in greater proportion than others.

 

Table 21. Showing Absence of Provision of Physical Facilities

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	10	15	13	15	53	27.6041667
To Some Extent	27	22	20	22	91	47.3958333
Not at All	11	11	15	11	48	25
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 21 shows that 47.39% teachers opined that to some extent students leave school due to absence of physical facilities against 25% teachers who viewed liked it not at all. Urban male teachers fall in some extent category in greater number than the others.

 

Table 22. Showing Absence of Co-Curricular Activities  

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	10	10	12	5	37	19.2708333
To Some Extent	28	20	30	32	110	57.2916667
Not at All	10	18	6	11	45	23.4375
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

 Table 22 shows that 57.23% teachers consider that to some extent absence of co-curricular activities is a determining factor of drop out against 23.43% teachers who don’t hold this factor responsible. Females fall in greater proportion in the category of some extent than their male counterparts.

 

Table 23. Showing Students Absenteeism   

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	17	19	18	15	69	35.9375
To Some Extent	27	25	25	25	102	53.125
Not at All	4	4	5	8	21	10.9375
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 23 shows that 53.12% teachers viewed that student’s tendency towards absenteeism is held responsible for drop out to some extent against 35.93% who take it up to great extent. Almost one and similar proportion of the respondents in the category of some extent

 

Table 24. Showing Teacher’s Absenteeism

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	6	13	7	17	43	22.3958333
To Some Extent	20	12	14	12	58	30.2083333
Not at All	22	23	27	19	91	47.3958333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 24 shows that 47.33% teachers don’t view teacher’s absenteeism as a factor of drop out against 30% who consider it responsible to some extent. Female proportion of considering it not at all is greater than their male counterparts.

 

Table 25. Showing Long Distance Between School and Home 

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	6	8	5	13	32	16.6666667
To Some Extent	20	25	33	20	98	51.0416667
Not at All	22	15	10	15	62	32.2916667
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 25 shows that 51% teachers view that student leave school because of long distance between home and school against 32% teachers who don’t think so. Urban females exceed other groups in considering this factor as to some extent.

 

Table 26. Showing Absence of Governmental Attention  

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	23	24	22	20	89	46.3541667
To Some Extent	18	19	21	17	75	39.0625
Not at All	7	5	5	11	28	14.5833333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 26 shows that 46.35% teachers opined that student’s drop out is due to absence of

governmentalattention against 32.29% teachers who do not think so. Almost the same distribution of the sample

in all four categories

 

Table 27. Showing Absence of Efforts to Abstain Students from Being Dropped out 

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	16	22	23	17	78	40.625
To Some Extent	28	19	18	24	89	46.3541667
Not at All	4	7	7	7	25	13.0208333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 27 shows that 46.35% teachers opined that student’s drop out, to some extent, is due to absence of efforts to abstain them from doing so against 40.62% teachers who consider this factor to great extent. Urban male’s proportion followed by rural females is greater in category of some extent than their counterparts in rural and urban areas respectively.

 

Table 28. Showing Absence of Paternal Interest

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	29	31	18	21	99	51.5625
To Some Extent	16	16	24	22	78	40.625
Not at All	3	1	6	5	15	7.8125
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 28 shows that 51.58% teachers were of the view that students leave school incomplete to a great extent because of absence of paternal interest against 40.62% teachers who shared the same view to some extent. Male’s proportion is greater in the “great extent” category against females.

 

Table 29. Showing Increase in Educational Expenses

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	15	11	10	12	48	25
To Some Extent	21	20	26	21	88	45.8333333
Not at All	12	17	12	15	56	29.1666667
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 29 shows that 45.83% teachers thought that students leave school incomplete to some extent because of increase in educational expenses against 29.16% teachers who don’t think so. Female proportion is greater in “some extent” category against males.

 

Table 30. Showing Paternal over Affection   

Responses	‘Males’		‘Females’		Total	Percentage
	‘Urban’	‘Rural’	‘Urban’	‘Rural’
To Great Extent	14	19	16	18	67	34.8958333
To Some Extent	26	24	26	24	100	52.0833333
Not at All	8	5	6	6	25	13.0208333
Total	48	48	48	48	192	100

 

Table 30 shows that 52% teachers opined that to some extent students drop out is because of paternal over affection against 34.89% who think so to great extent. No difference among the categories means convergence in opinion that paternal over affection is a determining factor to some extent.  

Findings

The findings of research are listed below:

1. 78% teachers of Government primary schools got their diplomas from teachers training institutions and 21% from AIOU. Proportion of male teachers graduated from teachers training institutions is higher than female teachers. (see table 1)

2. 82% teachers are found satisfied with their training courses to a great extent. The rural teachers found their courses conducive in higher proportion than their urban counterparts. (see table 2)

3. . 83% teachers found an opportunity to participate in in-service program with almost no difference across all the categories. (see table 3)

4. 70% teachers got reasonable number of students in their classes. The  urban male teachers slightly vary in having most adequate number of students than the others. (see table 4)

5. 61% and 36% teachers claim that they come to class well prepared to a great and some extent respectively. The rural male teachers followed by urban female teachers are proportionally more prepared for their classes. (see table 5)

6. 80% teachers are found providing guidance service to their students. Urban males devote comparatively less time for guidance than all the others. (see table 6)

7. 71% teachers are found with adequate voice corresponding to class size. Male teachers’ voice is comparatively more adequate than the females. (see table 7)

8. Av aids are used in teaching by 50% and 40% teachers to some and great extent. Theurban males’ proportion is higher in some extent but less in great extent response category. (see table 8)

9. Majority of teachers 71% and 27% ask questions from the students to keep them involved in the lesson to great and some extent. Rural males and urban females are found in higher proportion in the response category of great extent who asks questions. (see table 9)

10. All teachers with exception of 2% evaluate their students at the end of the lesson to great and some extent. Interestingly rural males surpass all others who do it with a higher proportion in the response category of great extent. (see table 10)

11. School’s internal environment is not considered as determinant of dropout as per the response of 47% teachers and is considered to be a factor by 41% to some extent. All the teachers except urban males are in higher proportion in the response category of not at all. (see table 11)

12. 51% teachers do not use corporal punishment while 33% still use it to some extent. Except for urban males, all teachers fall in higher proportion in response category of not at all. Majority of urban females do not use it against their male counterparts whose majority use it to some extent. (see table 12)

13. Over burden curricula is to some extent a determining factor for dropout as viewed by 52% and not at all as considered by 31% teachers. (see table 13)

14. Harsh treatment of students by their teachers is not at all a determining factor as per the response of 44% teachers. 33% still believe this as a responsible factor to some extent. Urban males vary in response categories from all others. (see table 14)

15. Poor paternal financial position is a probable cause to dropout as stated by 50% and 43% teachers to great and some extent. Rural females differ from the response pattern of all others. (see table 15)

16. Absence of students’ interest in studies is seen by 54% and 39% teachers as a determining factor to some and great extent. Urban males’ response is not consistent to that of all others. (see table 16)

17. The students who help their parents, dropout their schools as viewed by 51% and 40% teachers to some and great extent. Urban males’ proportion is higher in the response category of some extent than urban females whose majority falls in the category of great extent. (see table 17)

18. The illiterate parents are considered as a determining factor for dropout to great and some extent by 64% and 31% teachers. The temale proportion in the category of great extent remained higher than the males. (see table 18)

19. Aimless education is not termed as .a responsible factor by 40% teachers. However, it is . viewed as determinant by 39% to some extent. Majority of the rural females did not find it as a determining factor. (see table 19)

20. Repeating the same class is considered as a determinant by 43% and not at all by 39% teachers. No significant variation is found in the response categories of all the respondents. (see table 20)

21. Over enrolment is not found to be a determining factor as per the response of 49% and is a cause to dropout to some extent as seen by 33% teachers. Rural males conceived it in higher proportion in the response category of not at all. (see table 21)

22. The absence of provision of physical facilities is considered to be a factor as viewed by 47% teachers to some extent and 28% to great extent. Urban males surpass in proportion than others in the response category of some extent. (see table 22)

23. Absence of co-curricular activities is considered to be a factor as viewed by 57% to some extent and not at all as per the response of 23% teachers. Female’s contribution to the response category of some extent is higher than males. (see table 23)

24. Students’ absenteeism is a determining factor as viewed by 53% and 36% teachers to some and great extent with almost no difference in opinions across all the respondents in all the response categories. (see table 24)

25. 47% teachers do not think that teachers’ absenteeism is a cause to dropout against 30% who think it to some extent. Proportion of teachers in the response category of not at all is higher among all the respondents. (see table 25)

26. 51% teachers hold distance between school and home as to some extent as a responsible factor, while 32% did not think so. Urban females surpass all others in the response category of some extent. (see table 26)

27. 46% and 39% teachers think that absence of government attention can be hold responsible for drop out to great and some extent without much difference found among their opinions. (see table 27)

28. 46% and 41% teachers consider that absence of efforts to refrain the students from being dropout, can be a determining factor to some and great extent. Interestingly, urban males share similar views with some proportion with rural females and urban females with rural males. (see table 28)

29. 52% and 41% teachers viewed absence of paternal interests as a determining factor to great and some extent. Urban and rural males share the same views in equal proportion. Almost the same is the case with urban and rural females where no divergence of opinion is observed. (see table 29)

30. 46% teachers are of the view that increase in educational expenses is to some extent a determining factor. 29% teachers do not think so at all. Urban females’ proportion is higher in the response category of some extent than all others. (see table 30)

31. Paternal over affection is seen by 52% and 35% teachers as responsible for dropout to some and great extent. Almost no difference in response category of some extent is observed among all the respondents. (see table 31)

Research Conclusions

Mostly teachers opinion that determinants of dropout include students not taking interest, absence of somatic facilities, paternal illiteracy, overburden curricula, helping parents, repeating the same class, co-curricular happenings, students absenteeism, school-house distance, nonexistence of governmental consideration, poor paternal financial position, absence of efforts to refrain students from being drop out, paternal interest looks missing, paternal over affection and rising expenses.    

Recommendations

1. Serious efforts on the part of teachers are required to discourage dropout by refraining those students who intend for it and encourage re-admission once students are dropped out. Teachers must counsel with the parents on this important issue.
2. Determinants of drop out as, identified by teachers need to be seriously addressed to. Those who are at the helm of affairs must heed to issues/problems faced by different stakeholders for improving primary education in the province and eliminating drop out.
3. Further studies involving greater size of sample need to be conducted to highlight aspects not covered by this study.   

References

• Begg, G. A., & Sellin, M. J. (2017). Age and growth of school mackerel (Scomberomorus queenslandicus) and spotted mackerel (S. munroi) in Queensland east-coast waters with implications for stock structure. Marine and Freshwater Research, 49(2), 109-120.
• Karande and Kulkarni (2017) Micro-consequences of high fertility: The case of child schooling in rural Pakistan, Pp. 415-444.
• Karande, S., & Kulkarni, M. (2015). Poor school performance. The Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 72(11), 961-967
• Kunjufu, J. (2014). Developing Positive Self-Images and Discipline in Babsence Children Chicago, IL: African American Images.
• Lacour, M., & Tissington, L. D. (2011). The effects of poverty on educational achievement. Educational Research and Reviews, 6(7), 522-527.
• Lockhead, M. E (2017) Schools and classroom effects on student learning gain: The case of Thailand. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C. April, 20-24.
• Lockhead, M. E. (2003). The Condition of Primary Education in Developing Countries. In Levin & Lockheed, Schools in Developing Countries. London: Flamer Press, pp. 20-40.
• Mbugua, Z. K., Kibet, K., Muthaa, G. M., & Nkonke, G. R. (2012). Factors contributing to students' poor performance in mathematics at Kenya certificate of secondary education in Kenya: A case of Baringo County, Kenya.
• Rahamneh, K. F. A. (2016). Reasons for The Low Educational Achievement Among The Students Of The Main Stages In Selected Schools In The Province of Al-Balqa. Ozean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(1), 31-40.
• Schwartz, R. & Orfield, G. (2001). News Release of The Civil Rights Project on dropout's conference at Harvard. Commissioned and cosponsored with Achieve, Inc. to study the nation's dropout problem. [Online], Graduate School of Education News Boston, MA: University Press.