- The CBE framework calculates teacher staffing needs based on curriculum workload rather than simple pupil-teacher ratios.
- The framework stipulates that a one-streamed junior school requires six teachers, derived from 154 total lessons (123 curriculum lessons plus 31 administrative shortfall lessons) divided by a standard 27-lesson teaching load.
- The guidelines have set out distinct staffing requirements for primary, junior secondary and special-needs levels, with a 15-point checklist provided to help school leaders verify their staffing establishment.
Kenyan schools are entering a more structured era of curriculum planning in which the timetable, the number of teachers required and the learning programmes offered must increasingly be linked through one system: Curriculum-Based Establishment (CBE).
The framework is important because teacher establishment is no longer simply a matter of counting classrooms or comparing enrolment with the number of teachers available. Schools must consider the approved learning areas, the number of lessons required, the number of streams, administrative teaching loads and the specific needs of learners. At the centre of the framework is a simple principle: a school should have enough teachers to deliver its approved curriculum effectively.
What does CBE actually mean?
CBE stands for Curriculum-Based Establishment. It refers to the number of teachers a school requires to implement its approved curriculum effectively. In other words, CBE answers the question: how many teachers does this school need, based on the teaching workload created by its curriculum? This is different from the pupil-teacher ratio (PTR), which broadly compares the number of learners with the number of teachers. CBE goes further by examining what those teachers actually have to teach. For example, two schools may each have 450 learners but require different numbers of teachers if they have different numbers of streams, learning areas, specialised programmes or administrative responsibilities.
CBE is also different from teacher workload. Workload refers to the number of lessons assigned to an individual teacher, while CBE converts the total teaching workload of a school into the number of full teacher positions required. A teacher-equivalent is therefore not a person; it is a mathematical expression of how much of one full teacher’s weekly teaching capacity is required. This distinction is essential when interpreting the staffing formula.
Schools are expected to constitute a timetabling committee chaired by the deputy head and involving the senior teacher, representatives from the relevant school levels, heads of subjects or learning areas and heads of departments. The committee should meet at the beginning of every term, prepare the timetable and submit it to the head of the institution for approval. Once approved, it should be displayed, and teachers should extract their individual timetables. The timetable therefore becomes more than a schedule of lessons; it provides the evidence needed to determine whether the school has sufficient teachers.
At pre-primary level, learners have five lessons a day and 25 lessons a week, including PPI and religious programmes, with each lesson lasting 30 minutes. Grades 1 to 3 have six lessons daily and 31 lessons weekly, while Grades 4 to 6 have seven lessons daily and 35 lessons weekly. The timetable should balance learning across the day, provide appropriate breaks and avoid unnecessary double lessons at the lower levels. Grades 7 to 9 have eight lessons daily and 41 lessons weekly, including PPI, with each lesson lasting 40 minutes. At junior school, selected double lessons are permitted where practical work requires more time, including Integrated Science, Creative Arts and Sports, Pre-Technical Studies and Agriculture. A double lesson should not become a convenient way of filling the timetable; it should serve a genuine pedagogical purpose, particularly where practical activities cannot reasonably be completed within a single period.
The framework also provides specific arrangements for learners with special educational needs. Foundation programmes have four lessons a day and 20 lessons a week, while intermediate programmes have six lessons daily and 30 lessons weekly. Pre-vocational programmes have eight lessons daily and 40 lessons weekly. The emphasis is not simply on the number of lessons but on individual learner needs, mastery and the nature of the disability, meaning a special-needs school should not be expected to apply ordinary class-size assumptions mechanically.
ALSO READ:
How the number of teachers is calculated
The junior school example provides a useful illustration. A junior school teacher has a standard teaching load of 27 lessons per week for purposes of the CBE calculation. In a one-streamed junior school, the three grades together require 123 curriculum lessons per week. The basic mathematical calculation is 123 ÷ 27 = 4.5556 teacher-equivalents, rounded to 4.56 teacher-equivalents. This is the mathematically clean aggregate calculation.
However, the guidelines’ illustrated calculation breaks the 123 lessons down by individual learning areas. For example, English has five lessons in each of Grades 7, 8 and 9, giving 15 lessons: 15 ÷ 27 = 0.5556 teacher-equivalents. The same process is applied to the other learning areas, and the source illustration presents the resulting subject fractions as 4.551 teacher-equivalents. That figure should not be confused with the exact aggregate result of 123 divided by 27; the small difference arises from rounding the individual subject fractions in the illustration before adding them together. The difference between the two figures, approximately 0.005 teacher-equivalent, does not alter the final establishment.
The curriculum workload is only one part of the calculation. Some teachers also hold administrative positions, meaning they cannot teach the full 27 lessons. In the example, the principal teaches at least 10 lessons, leaving a shortfall of 17 lessons (27 − 10). The deputy principal teaches at least 20 lessons, leaving a shortfall of 7 (27 − 20), and the senior master also teaches at least 20, leaving another shortfall of 7. The combined administrative shortfall is 31 lessons (17 + 7 + 7), which converts to 31 ÷ 27 = 1.1481 teacher-equivalents. Using the rounded subject-by-subject figure presented in the guidelines, 4.551 + 1.148 = 5.699 teacher-equivalents, which rounds up to 6 teachers.
A cleaner way to demonstrate the arithmetic combines the school’s 123 curriculum lessons with the 31 lessons arising from administrative teaching-load reductions, giving 154 lessons. Dividing 154 by 27 produces 5.7037 teacher-equivalents, which again rounds up to 6 teachers. This aggregate calculation is mathematically consistent and removes any suggestion that 4.551 is the exact result of dividing 123 by 27. The practical conclusion remains unchanged: the one-streamed junior school requires six teachers under the illustrated CBE calculation.
Schools should not interpret a teacher-equivalent such as 0.555 as meaning that a school should employ half a teacher. It means that the relevant learning area consumes approximately 55.5 per cent of one teacher’s available weekly teaching capacity. The final establishment must be converted into whole teacher positions, which is why the calculation ultimately moves from workload fractions to an actual number of teachers.
The workload increases as the number of streams increases. A school with two streams has twice the curriculum workload of a comparable one-stream school, assuming the same learning areas and timetable requirements. The general principle is to divide total curriculum lessons by the standard teacher workload to obtain curriculum teacher-equivalents, then add the teaching-load shortfalls created by approved administrative positions, and finally round the resulting teacher-equivalent upward to establish the required number of teachers. The calculation must be based on the school’s approved streams, learning areas and enrolment rather than informal or unverified figures.
ALSO READ: Bomet University invites applications for 2026/2027 work-study programme
Primary school and special-needs staffing considerations
At primary level, the framework recommends a class size of 45 learners and generally links teacher establishment to the number of classes, alongside approved leadership positions. A one-streamed primary school covering six classes would therefore require six class-teacher positions plus the headteacher, giving an establishment of seven before other applicable staffing considerations. As streams increase, the number of classes and corresponding teaching requirements increase, with the headteacher retaining a teaching responsibility while deputy and senior-teacher positions are provided according to the applicable school size and staffing structure.
Junior school staffing similarly recognises the teaching responsibilities of principals, deputy principals and senior masters. A principal is expected to teach at least 10 lessons per week, while deputy principals and senior masters are expected to teach at least 20. The difference between their full teaching capacity and their prescribed minimum teaching load becomes part of the workload that must be covered elsewhere, preventing a school from overlooking the lessons lost when teachers take on legitimate administrative responsibilities.
Special-needs education demonstrates why a simple pupil-teacher ratio cannot always provide an accurate picture of staffing needs. For foundation and intermediate levels, the framework provides a 1:1 ratio for severe autism, severe cerebral palsy, deafblindness and multiple disabilities, while mild-to-moderate intellectual disability is assigned a higher ratio. At the pre-vocational level, the specified categories generally use a 1:4 ratio. The message is clear: the complexity of learner needs can be as important as the number of learners when determining staffing requirements.
A practical CBE checklist for school leaders
Before submitting or reviewing a school’s CBE, headteachers and principals should be able to answer several key questions: is the school officially registered for the streams and programmes being offered; how many learners are currently enrolled; how many classes and streams are operating; which learning areas or subjects are officially approved; how many lessons does each learning area require per week; what is the school’s total weekly teaching workload; and what is the standard teaching load used for the relevant level, which for the junior school illustration is 27 lessons per teacher per week.
Further considerations include how many lessons each administrator can actually teach, accounting for the prescribed minimum teaching loads of the principal, deputy principals and senior masters; what the resulting administrative teaching shortfall is; whether special-needs staffing ratios are applicable where learners have significant disabilities; and whether the timetable actually supports the CBE calculation, with the number of teachers requested visible in the lessons that must be covered. School leaders should also check for unallocated lessons or teachers with excessive free periods, ensure double lessons are being used only where justified, review whether the CBE has changed because of new enrolment, an additional stream or a new learning programme, and keep all registration documents, enrolment data, class and stream information, approved learning areas, timetable and staffing details ready for verification.
Kisii: 40 schools in Kitutu Chache North benefit from NG-CDF infrastructure funding
CBE should not be reduced to a mathematical exercise. Its real purpose is to ensure that curriculum promises are matched by the human resources required to deliver them. A school cannot effectively implement a curriculum if it has too few teachers, but it is equally important to ensure that teacher deployment is based on verified workload rather than assumptions. For school leaders, this means treating the timetable as a management and accountability tool. For education officials, it means verifying enrolment, streams and curriculum requirements carefully. For teacher-employment authorities, it provides a more evidence-based basis for determining where additional teachers are required.
The most important lesson is therefore simple: CBE asks not merely how many learners a school has, but how much teaching the approved curriculum requires and how many teachers are needed to deliver that workload. When properly applied, the framework can make teacher deployment more transparent, strengthen timetable planning and expose genuine staffing shortages, but the mathematics must be applied consistently. For the one-streamed junior school example, the clearest calculation is that 123 curriculum lessons plus 31 lessons arising from administrative teaching-load reductions produce 154 lessons, and dividing 154 by 27 gives approximately 5.70 teacher-equivalents, rounded up to six teachers. That is the figure school leaders, education officials and stakeholders should be able to understand, reproduce and verify. Ultimately, effective curriculum implementation depends on more than policy documents; it requires enough qualified teachers, sufficient instructional time, realistic timetables and accurate school data.
By Hillary Muhalya
Get more stories from our website: Education News
To write to us or offer feedback, you can reach us at: editor@educationnews.co.ke
You can also follow our social media pages on Twitter: Education News KE and Facebook: Education News Newspaper for timely updates.
>> Click here to stay up-to-date with trending regional stories
