RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUPILS STEALING BEHAVIOUR DISORDER AND

THEIR ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN PUBLIC PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN KIBWEZI

ZONE, MAKUENI COUNTY, KENYA.

BY
JULIUS MULU KISENDI
REG. NO. E55/CE/23783/2012

RESEARCH PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL

EDUCATION IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE
DEGREE OF MASTERS OF EDUCATION AT KENYATTA UNIVERSITY

NOVEMBER 2014

i
ABSTRACT

Stealing is a relatively common behaviour amongst young children. Experimentation with

stealing is considered to be a temporary, age-normative act for most children, and most children
learn from their experiences and cease stealing. However, for some children, isolated incidents of
stealing can become persistent problem behaviour patterns. Serious problem stealing is a
behaviour included in Conduct Disorder in the DSM-IV which states “more than one instance of
stealing within a six month period is sufficient to be considered an important diagnostic criterion
of a childhood conduct disorder. There is limited research in the area of stealing and therefore
our study will will investigate the relationship between stealing behavior disorder of pupils and
their academic performance in public primary schools in Kibwezi zone, Makueni County.
Descriptive survey design was used in this study. The research instruments that will be used in
this study includes questionnaires which will contain both structured closed -ended questions
provided with a list of responses from which to select an appropriate answer and also open ended
questions which will enable the researcher to have detailed information. To validate the research
instruments, piloting will be done and also validity of the instruments will be tested. Data will be
analyzed using the SPSS package and results will be later presented.

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................ii

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................1

1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................1

1.1 Background of the study........................................................................................................1

1.2 Statement of the problem.......................................................................................................3

1.3 Purpose of the study...............................................................................................................5

1.4 Objectives of the Study..........................................................................................................5

1.5 Research questions.................................................................................................................5

1.6 Significance of the study........................................................................................................5

1.7 Limitations of the Study.........................................................................................................6

1.8 Delimitations of the study......................................................................................................7

1.9 Assumptions of the study.......................................................................................................7

1.10 Theoretical Review..............................................................................................................7

1.10.1 Social Learning Theory.................................................................................................7

1.10.2 The broken windows theory..........................................................................................8

1.11 Conceptual framework.......................................................................................................10

1.12 Operational definition of terms..........................................................................................11

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW..............................................................................12

2.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................12

2.1 Child Stealing Behaviour.....................................................................................................12

2.2 Development of Child Stealing Behaviour..........................................................................13

2.3 causes of stealing behavior..................................................................................................14

2.3.1 Peer Influence................................................................................................................14

iii
 2.3.2 Parenting Practices........................................................................................................14

2.3.3 Parental Mental Health..................................................................................................15

2.4 Impact Of Stealing On Educational Achievement...............................................................15

2.5 Possible Interventions..........................................................................................................16

2.6 Summary and Conclusion....................................................................................................18

CHAPTER THREE : METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................19

3.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................19

3.1 Research Design...................................................................................................................19

3.2 Location of the Study...........................................................................................................19

3.3 Target population.................................................................................................................19

3.4 Sample Size and Sampling Procedures................................................................................20

3.5 Research instruments...........................................................................................................20

3.5.1 Questionnaires...............................................................................................................20

3.6 Piloting.................................................................................................................................20

3.7 Validity.................................................................................................................................20

3.8 Reliability.............................................................................................................................21

3.9 Data Collection procedure...................................................................................................21

Reference...................................................................................................................................23

iv
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction
This chapter presents the background of the study, statement of the problem, purpose of the
study, objectives of the study, research questions, and significance of the study and operational
definitions of terms.

1.1 Background of the study

Stealing is a risk behavior which affects public order and safety. For young people however, they
may have positive benefits in terms of providing a sense of belonging and control over one’s life,
Stavrou (2002). It is costly and interferes greatly with academic achievement. It impact
negatively on the pupils, teachers and the community. Pupil engaged in theft feel emotionally
and physically unsafe in school and therefore very difficult to concentrate on learning. In the last
20 years there has been remarkable crime drop in America. This could have been contributed to
by the official response to school crime with greater recourse to arrest and the juvenile courts
rather than school based discipline. This trend has been dubbed the’ criminalization’ of student
misbehavior. Hirschfield (2008) Studies conducted in Latin America show differences between
countries and levels of schooling For example 11% of students in Mexican primary schools have
stolen something from or threatened a classmate Roman M.Y Murillo, F.Javier (2011)
In Africa victimization surveys in several countries as well as qualitative observations, suggest
delinquent among young people (12-25 years) is increasing at a much higher rate than in the
developed North Stavrou (2002)
According to Stavrou (2002) Gangs and groups of young people engaging in delinquent or
criminal behavior are found in most countries. The greatest majorities are male and in most cases
they are in a transition stage. Their formation is often a reaction to exclusion and marginalization
in society and they serve to provide alternative legitimacy and support. Many youths in Nairobi,
Kenya lack support from their families or other institutions making the transition out of the
groups/gang much more difficult. This has resulted in an increase in criminal gangs whose
specialization ranges from petty theft to violent crime and the arm trade Assiago et al. (2002)
The absence of consensual definition of stealing is possibly the greatest obstacle to the
assessment of stealing in children. This has brought about tolerating many theft acts in children

1
and or ignored because of the feared ethical and legal ramifications of labeling a child as a thief.
There are long term detrimental effects for children associated with their gaining a reputation as
a thief, unfortunately appropriate diagnosis and treatment is dependent upon the consistent use of
an over inclusive definition of stealing that ensures the labeling of suspected as well as
documental theft acts. Patterson (1982), Reid, (1975).

In Kenya the majority of the crime recorded about children is stealing and robbers. Majority of
such cases are attributed to poverty. Stavrou (2002) the major grounds on which young people
are arrested are theft drug possession mugging and manslaughter with theft taking 45%. The
harmful nature of stealing begins to develop at age 5-7 years. Internal motivation of conscience
and guilt at the middle childhood years. The recognition of proper boundaries develops and
stealing became an internal act to be addressed more deliberately. When pupils steal more than
once there is suspicion of underlying emotional problem that might be causing stealing. In
Kibwezi zone of Makueni county stealing behavior among the primary school pupils is
addressed by the teachers, administrators and parents together with little educational
intervention. Majority of the pupils found stealing are punished by the parents, teachers and the
provincial administration while other pupils drop out of school. These cases are not documented
due to the fear of victimization and labeling, however there were some cases in several schools
that went beyond the teachers control and the pupils landed in the police, these pupils are taken
to correctional centres, are excluded from the mainstream school system and are stigmatized.
School administrators (2014).

The relationship between behavior and academic achievement has been demonstrated in a
number of studies. The balance of evidence from long-standing research suggests that
problematic behavior and academic failure are clearly associated both concurrently and
predictively in western literature (see Hinshaw, 1992 for a review). Generally, the link between
the two variables is explained from two points of view. The first is the “common-developmental-
antecedent” explanation. People who hold this view think that the association between academic
achievement and behavior problems is influenced by either genetic/intrapersonal factors (Gayan
& Olson, 1999; Rhee & Waldman, 2002) or environmental antecedents (Ary, Duncan, Duncan,
& Hops, 1999; Richman, Stevenson, & Graham, 1982).

2
An alternative view is the “causal relation” explanation. Three plausible models have been
proposed to explain the causal association between school performance and problematic
behavior. The first is that underachievement leads to problematic behavior (McGee, Williams,
Share, Anderson, & Silva, 1986; Stevenson, Richman, & Graham, 1985). Thus, low academic
achievement leads to a loss of self-esteem, low commitment to school, and frustration, which in
turn, results in delinquency, and antisocial behavior. The second is that problem behavior
precedes and causes underachievement (Dishion, 1990; Jorm, Share, Matthews, & Maclean,
1986; Sanson, Prior, & Smart, 1996). This mechanism is explained as follows. The amount of
time children are engaged in meaningful learning activities is reduced due to their time spent
acting out or being disciplined for aggressive behavior. Additionally, aggressive children may
also develop negative relationships with teachers and peers or negative feelings about school,
and as a consequence be less inclined to exert effort on academic work (Arnold, 1997; Wentzel
& Asher, 1995). The third is that each domain leads to the other (Arnold, 1997; McMichael,
1979), in other words, the causal relations between school performance and problematic behavior
are bidirectional instead of unidirectional. This view holds that when poor learners become
increasingly frustrated, their antisocial behavior increases, which in turn disrupts the processes of
learning, which then creates more antisocial problems, and so on. From this evidence, it might be
predicted that high academic achievement would be clearly associated with lack of problematic
behavior and either “common-developmental-antecedent” or the “causal relation” mechanisms
should be applicable to explaining the relation between the two variables. However, two news
reports (Kang & Saar, 1996) have argued that some Asian students in the USA involved in
violence had attained top grade-point averages, which indicates that high academic achievement
is not strongly associated with a lower level of problematic behavior among Asian Pacific
Islander American youth compared with other racial and ethnic groups of youth

1.2 Statement of the problem

While we all intuitively know what stealing means, it is difficult to measure a covert activity, as
most instances of stealing are not directly observed. Recurrent theft generally has a low base rate
of suspicion and detection. Adults rarely admit to knowing about stealing behaviour perpetuated
by their children (Miller & Klungness, 1989; Tremblay & Drabman, 1997) and many instances
of theft are overlooked because the child’s explanations of stealing are accepted (Loeber &

3
Schmaling 1985; Miller & Klungness, 1989), for example, ‘finding’ an object. Parents of
children who steal often label only extreme property violations as stealing (Miller & Klungness,
1989; Patterson 1982).

Inconsistent detection and punishment leads to stealing being intermittently punished (Miller &
Moncher, 1988), while stealing is typically immediately positively reinforced by access to or
consumption of the thing stolen. Behaviour that is maintained by a positive reinforcement
schedule is extremely difficult to eliminate (Cooper, Heron & Heward, 1987; Miller & Moncher,
1988), especially by intermittent punishment. In other words, not knowing when a punishment
might occur increases the likelihood of the punished behaviour recurring. Correct diagnosis and
treatment of stealing is dependent on the use of a more inclusive definition that ensures the
labelling of suspected, as well as documented, theft acts (Miller & Moncher 1988; Patterson
1982; Reid & Patterson, 1976). Due to the problems in observing stealing behaviour, the
inclusion of suspected incidents of stealing is critical (Miller & Klungness, 1989; Pawsey 1996).
So, in practice, what is recorded is the parent’s (and other adult’s) suspicions that stealing has
occurred.

Stealing is the taking of things or being in possession of things that belong to someone else
without their permission. Stealing is a common behavior in young school aged children. Almost
all children take things that don't belong to them at one time or another. Stealing, however, is a
behavior that can be quite upsetting to parents. Many parents who have caught their children
stealing worry that their children are on the road to becoming hardened criminals. These parents
should be relieved to know that the vast majority of children who occasionally steal grow up to
be law abiding citizens. While stealing is often considered a normal or common behavior in
young children, it must still be addressed and corrected. Here are some things that parents can do
to prevent and deal with stealing behaviors in their children. There have been no studies done in
Kenya on stealing among students in primary school. Therefore our study will look at the
relationship between pupils stealing behaviour disorder and their academic performance in
public primary schools

4
1.3 Purpose of the study
The purpose of the study is to establish the relationship between stealing behavior disorder and
academic achievement of primary school pupils with an intension to suggest possible special
education measures to address stealing behavior problem. This would reduce dropout rate,
promote concentration in class and resolve any internal conflicts brought about by the behaviour
among standard 4 - 8 pupils in public primary schools in Kibwezi zone of Makueni county,
Kenya.

1.4 Objectives of the Study

The study will be guided by the following objectives;-

1. To identify the causes of stealing behavior disorder among pupils in public primary
schools.
2. Identify the characteristics of pupils with stealing behavior disorder.
3. To find out whether there was any relationship between stealing behavior disorder and
academic achievement of public primary school pupils.
4. To suggest possible special education intervention measures to address the stealing
behavior problem.

1.5 Research questions

1. What are the causes of stealing behaviour disorder among pupils in public primary
schools?
2. What are the characteristics of pupils with stealing behavior disorder?
3. What is the relationship between stealing behavior disorder and academic achievement of
pupils in public primary schools?
4. What special education intervention measures can be put in place to address the stealing
behavior problem and promote academic achievements?

1.6 Significance of the study

Academic performance is a major indicator of quality education. Quality education, in turn, is
considered the key to economic and industrial growth and ultimately development. The national
goals of economic recovery and industrialization are jeopardized by students’ stealing behavior

5
in public primary schools. The information provided by this research is important for the
Ministry of Education and other stakeholders who have an interest in quality education. The
public and the parents also have an interest in education having invested heavily in it. The
society expects good returns for its investment in terms of good academic performance.

This study will help stakeholders in the county to identify areas of intervention to help increase
the performance of primary schools in Kibwezi. This will play a great role in helping the
community address socioeconomic problems such theft among others which can be attributed to
performance in schools.

Academics in their quest for further knowledge and in mapping out ways for future research
work in similar fields and in dissimilar organizations, extension of the research work to other
sectors of the economy and for future reference and referral. Academicians will also use the
study in generation of ideas and extension of the existing theory work, falsification of early
results or application of results to different job setups. The results of the study may furthermore
trigger other studies which may validate among other issues the methodology used in the study.

1.7 Limitations of the Study

Some schools may find the study to be sensitive and become suspicious of the findings but the
researcher will assure them that the findings of the study will not be reported on the basis of
individual schools but rather on the overall reports of respondents in the different schools. Some
respondents can express only the socially acceptable views and during qualitative data collection,
some of the respondents to be interviewed can be defensive when asked questions relating to
their area of service. Some schools may take too long to respond to the letters written to them
seeking Permission to use their schools for the study. The researcher will make every possible
effort to visit the selected institutions to familialise himself with them and explain clearly the
purpose of the study.\
Due to financial limitations, the study covered a small sample of public secondary schools in
Kibwezi Zone, Makueni County, Kenya. Therefore, the findings of the study will not be
generalized to the entire country because the sample selected from Makueni county.

6
1.8 Delimitations of the study
The study will be confined to primary schools in Kibwezi Zone, Makueni County, Kenya and
will involve students’ and teachers who will offer an opportunity for a rich source of data. The
researcher will have significant knowledge of the primary schools and is known to some of the
staff making it easier to collect the necessary information.

1.9 Assumptions of the study

1. Stealing behavior affects students’ performance
2. Stealing behavior is rampant in public primary schools

1.10 Theoretical Review

1.10.1 Social Learning Theory.

Social Learning Theory (SLT) emerged from the work of B.F Skinner on operant behaviour and
Albert Bandura on observational learning. Social Learning Theory explains how children learn
new behaviours through observing models in their environment. Bandura stated that “Human
behaviour is learned observationally through modelling; from observing others, one forms an
idea of how new behaviours are performed , on later occasions this coded information serves as a
guide for action” (Bandura, 1977).

Social learning is believed to be important in understanding antisocial behaviour across

generations (Kunkel, Hummer, & Dennis, 2006; Widom & Toch, 1993). Social Learning
theorists believe that individual differences in antisocial behaviour are the result of daily
experiences of children with people in their environment (Reid, Patterson, & Snyder 2002). For
example, abused persons and observers of abuse may become abusers (Gelles, 1994); children
learn to be aggressive by observing aggression in their environments (Widom & Toch, 1993);
and by observing stealing behaviours by family members a child may learn that it is acceptable
to steal (Patterson, 1982).

Patterson (1982) constructed a specific social learning model for the explanation of the
development of antisocial behaviour from childhood to adolescence. It is based on the idea that
prosocial and deviant child behaviours are direct results of social exchanges with family

7
members and peers (Patterson, Reid & Dishion, 1992). This model has been termed the “Vile
Weed Model”. Although it is divided into different stages, the stages are descriptive, relating to
particular effects at different ages.

At the first stage of the Vile Weed Model during preschool and early primary school, parents
exhibit poor monitoring and discipline of their child (Patterson, Reid& Dishion, 1992). This
breakdown of effective monitoring and discipline results in an increase in coercive exchanges
between the child and the rest of the family. This poor monitoring and discipline leads to stealing
being intermittently punished, which can lead to an increase in the child’s stealing behaviour
(Cooper, Heron & Heward, 1987). Over time, these children also become less responsive to
positive social reinforcers and increase their coercive behaviour when punished or threatened
(Patterson, 1982). In addition, rejection by ‘normal’ peers drives them to align with deviant
peers, where their antisocial behaviours increase (Farrington, 1996; Patterson, Reid & Dishion,
1992), at least in part through modelling effects (observing other delinquents being antisocial)
and through social reinforcement of delinquent behaviour by their peers (Reid, Patterson &
Snyder, 2002).

1.10.2 The broken windows theory

The broken windows theory is a criminological theory of the norm setting and signaling effect of
urban disorder and vandalism on additional crime and antisocial behavior. The theory states that
maintaining and monitoring urban environments in a well ordered condition may stop further
vandalism and escalating into more serious crime. Consider this example, an abandoned building
with a few broken windows. Alone it poses no threat however a few vandals come along and
spot these broken windows and decide to break more of them. The building because of its
condition later gets tagged with spray paint. Looking completely run down a few homeless
people break in. With time they light fires, destroy the inner working of the building, and
become squatters. This domino effect is the premise behind the broken windows theory. Minor
crimes, if left unnoticed, will eventually escalate into bigger, more serious crimes.

This is the same theory that the New York Police Department (NYPD).The NYPD intends on
stopping people in high crime areas to search for weapons and other substances. The program’s
purpose is to remove guns off the street before they are used on more serious crimes. In the

8
context of this metaphor, the NYDP aims to fix the broken windows before the squatters get in.
Kelling et al. (1982) Viewing disorder and pretty criminal behaviour leads people to perpetuate
such actions. If, so this has implications for local officials who want to “clean up” their
neighborhoods. The scientists had demonstrated that an obvious petty violation of the law
encouraged further petty violation of the law. They further wanted to test whether the presence of
graffiti, or litter encouraged people to steal.

The obvious is that thorough enforcement of social norms and laws may be of use to hinder
inappropriate behavior by the public (Keizer K et al. 2008) It simply implies that cleaning up the
neighborhood and gently enforcing minor laws controls pretty crime which might out grow
correction in relation to this study stealing could have been due to factors in the cultural and
structural settings which might have been assumed. The effect of stealing on education is
significant and ought to be addressed adequately and appropriately. In connection to the study on
stealing behavior disorder, if this behavior is identified and remediated early in advance its likely
that it will not escalate into a more serious crime in the adult life of the pupils in the zone.

9
1.11 Conceptual framework
Relationship between pupils stealing behavior disorder and their academic performance

Independent variables Dependent variables

Causes

Stealing behavior

Characteristics

Academic achievement

Measures to be taken

10
1.12 Operational definition of terms
Academic performance refers to the ability to attain success in studies given the mainstream
conditions. Academic performance shall be based on the Teacher based tests and the school
based examinations. Performance shall be classified as High academic performance-70% and
above, Average academic performance-50-69% and bellow average academic performance-
bellow 50%.
Stealing is also called theft, in the criminal law it is the illegal taking of another person’s
property without that person’s free will.
It is shorthand for all major crimes against property.
Stealing-It is an antisocial behavior disorder that is repetitive/regular and is done without
remorse, guilt or understanding of the impact.
Behaviour disorder is a deviant, frequent and a severe behavior portrayed by a child and which
adversely affects the Childs academic and social life and that he/she cannot succeed without
help.
Professional break-ins refers to a state where by offenders use high level of skills to enter the
school, break into the storage rooms containing expensive equipment and remove bulky items.
They may receive a lot of money from the stolen goods.
Motivation is the desire to do things.
Reparation is the making pay back arrangement for what has been stolen.
Shoplifting is also known as boosting; five finger discount or shrinkage within the retail industry
and refers to the theft of good from retail establishment .It is one of the most common property
crime delt with by police and courts.
Graffiti is litter
Deviance is any criminal or non criminal behavior that violates social norms and is usually of
sufficient severity to warrant disapproval from the majority of the society.

11
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW.

2.0 Introduction
This chapter summarizes the information from other researchers who have carried out their
research in the same field of study; therefore it provides literature on pupils stealing behaviour
disorder and their academic performance.

2.1 Child Stealing Behaviour

Stealing is a relatively common behaviour amongst young children (Sanders & Markie-Dadds,
1992). Experimentation with stealing is considered to be a temporary, age-normative act for most
children (Loeber, Keenan, & Zhang, 1997; Miller & Zimprich, 2006), and most children learn
from their experiences and cease stealing. However, for some children, isolated incidents of
stealing can become persistent problem behaviour patterns. Serious problem stealing is a
behaviour included in Conduct Disorder in the DSM-IV (American Psychiatric Association,
1994) which states “more than one instance of stealing within a six month period is sufficient to
be considered an important diagnostic criterion of a childhood conduct disorder” (American
Psychiatric Association, 1994).

In the literature, theft is usually included under the general heading of delinquency (Henderson,
1981). The act of stealing may be described with the use of a behavioural chain. The offensive
chain of events that results in a child stealing may be similar to the model of general offending
proposed by Ward, Louden, Hudson, and Marshall (1995). This model includes background
problems and factors that make the offender vulnerable, a series of steps including active and
passive planning, and cognitive and affective consequences to lapses or relapses (Ward et al.,
1995).
Childhood crime is influenced by a number of risk factors including antisocial peer groups and
poor parenting practices (Farrington, 1996; Miller & Klungness, 1989; Patterson, 1982; Widom
& Toch, 1993). Poor parenting is one of the strongest predictors of childhood stealing and
antisocial behaviours (Miller & Klungness, 1989, Miller & Zimprick, 2006). As a logical
response, teaching parents techniques to change their children’s behaviour is one of the most

12
commonly used intervention strategies to combat antisocial behaviour problems (Beauchaine,
Webster-Stratton & Reid 2005; Stouthamer-Loeber & Loeber, 1988). Current interventions for
the treatment of antisocial behaviours include Behavioural Family Interventions, which aim to
change a child’s behaviour by changing aspects of the family environment that maintain a child’s
problem behaviour (Sanders & Markie-Dadds, 1992). This form of intervention has documented
efficacy, and produces significant changes in both parents and children immediately following
treatment (Morawska & Sanders, 2006). However, families of children who exhibit covert
antisocial behaviours such as stealing are less likely to benefit from such interventions than
families whose children exhibit overt behaviour problems (Moore & Patterson, 2003; Reid &
Patterson, 1976; Sanders, Markie-Dadds, Tully & Bor, 2000).

2.2 Development of Child Stealing Behaviour

In order to intervene in childhood antisocial behaviours, it is important to understand how
behaviour develops over time. There is evidence that a genetic link is involved in the
development of antisocial behaviour in children (Burk, Loeber & Birmaher, 2002). However,
explanations for antisocial behaviour that appeal to more malleable influences are more
amenable to intervention. Therefore, this review concentrates on psychosocial factors rather than
biological factors.

The development of antisocial and delinquent behaviour is not the result of one social process. It
is influenced by many variables, and these variables can change over time (Thornberry, 1996).
There is little agreement regarding what theory explains the emergence and development of
antisocial behaviour most adequately. Indeed, no one theory is a fully comprehensive
explanatory model of the development of delinquent behaviour (Widom & Toch, 1993). By
encompassing aspects of numerous theories, a better understanding of the development of
antisocial and delinquent behaviour can be obtained. Two of the most prominent theories used to
explain antisocial behaviour are Social Learning Theory and Attachment Theory. There are also
many risk factors that have been established as predictors of children’s antisocial behaviour.

13
2.3 causes of stealing behavior

2.3.1 Peer Influence.

Peer influence is an important factor in the intermediate and later stages of the development of
child delinquency (Coie & Miller-Johnson, 2001). Children who are rejected by their peers are at
significant risk for chronic antisocial behaviour compared to those who are not rejected (Coie &
Miler-Johnson, 2001). Conversely, as a result of the child’s antisocial behaviour, the social
environment produces two sets of reactions: rejection by normal peers, and academic failure
(Patterson, Reid & Dishion, 1992). Children rejected by their normal peers seek out and gravitate
towards other children who are similar to themselves, which provides the base for the formation
of deviant peer groups. These peer groups then provide a training ground for both covert and
overt delinquent behaviour (Elliot, Huizinga & Ageton, 1985; Coie & Miller-Johnson, 2001;
Elliot & Menard, 1996; Krohn, Massey & Skinner, 1987). Once having been accepted into such
a peer group, children are likely to engage in further acts of stealing in order to gain further peer
approval (Coie & Miller-Johnson, 2001). Children below the age of 12 who steal, tend to do so
in small delinquent peer groups (Farrington, 1996).

2.3.2 Parenting Practices.

Poor parenting competence including inadequate supervision of the child, poorly defined rules,
and harsh and inconsistent discipline. These factors have been consistently associated with the
development of antisocial behaviour, including stealing (Johnson, Smailes, Cohen, Kasen &
Brook, 2004; McCord, 2001; Loeber &Dishion, 1983; Miller & Klungness, 1989; Miller &
Zimprich, 2006; Patterson, 1982; Sanders 2003a). Children who live in highly coercive families
are at risk for developing antisocial behaviours such as stealing (Farrington & Loeber, 2000;
Krohn, Thornberry, Rivera & LeBlanc, 2001). There are a number of parenting practices
associated with children’s antisocial behaviour, including involvement, supervision and
monitoring, and behaviour management.

Parents of children who steal have been characterised as more detached, less motivated and less
insightful regarding their child management role than parents of either normal or aggressive
children (Patterson, 1986; Reid &Patterson, 1976). For example, they tend to ignore rule
violations that occur in the home, for example, taking money from mum’s wallet, and they are
often willing to accept their child’s explanation for how they acquired an item in question, for

14
example, ‘finding’ or ‘borrowing’ (Patterson 1982). It has been observed that families of
children who steal offer and provide little support or praise for any pro-social behaviour (Miller
& Klungness, 1989; Moore & Patterson 2003). In one study, Snyder, Schrepferman and St.Peter
(1997) noted that the relative rate of positive reinforcement observed in family interactions
predicted the likelihood of future police contact.

Low supervision and monitoring of children leads to an increase in behaviour problems

(McCord, 1982; 2001). Parents of children who steal are generally inconsistent in monitoring
and supervising their children, and in applying consequences to any of their child’s behaviours
(Miller & Klungness, 1989; Miller & Moncher, 1988). Children are more likely to steal if they
spend a large amounts of time unsupervised (Sanders, Turner & Markie-Dadds, 1996). Research
has found strong negative correlations between parental monitoring and official records of
antisocial behaviour and the number of self reported stealing episodes (Patterson & Stouthamer-
Loeber 1984).

2.3.3 Parental Mental Health

Poor parental mental health has serious consequences for many children, and increases their risk
for a number of developmental problems. Children of depressed mothers are at risk for
behavioural disturbances (Downey & Coyne, 1990). It has been observed that depressed mothers
use coercive parenting practices, and that they are less consistent in their discipline and more
rejecting of their children, which may contribute to the development of conduct problems
including stealing (Downey & Coyne, 1990; Susman, Trickett, Ianotti, Hollenbeck, & Zahn-
Waxler, 1985). Lovejoy, Graczyk, O’Hare and Neuman (2000) found depression in mothers to
be associated with disengagement from their child, more specifically low involvement and poor
supervision. As noted earlier, poor supervision is a risk factor for stealing.

2.4 Impact Of Stealing On Educational Achievement

A substantial body of literature documents that students with emotional behavioural
disorders( EBD )manifest a wide range of problems from, impulsive antisocial and aggressive
behaviour to social withdrawal and isolation. Those problems can adversely affect students’
academic performance as well as impinge on their social relationships. Academic factors-
especially in the critical area of reading, places students on a slippery slope to school
avoidance /drop out and can accelerate the rate of antisocial and maladaptive behaviour.

15
Children with EBD are recognized as being at risk not only for poor interpersonal relationships
but also for limited school success with a school future rate of 50% (US Department of
education, (2001) Walker, Colvin, and Ramsey, (1995)

According to Carr, Taylor et al (1998) students who engage in challenging behaviour generally
receive less instruction than students who routinely comply with teachers expectations.
According to Dr. Peter B. Wood stealing was associated with multiple measures of adverse
functioning including poor grades .In his study about 15% of non kleptomania stealers reported
three or more of six problems related to kleptomania. These findings suggests that majority as
stealing is not directly accounted for by kleptomania and raises questions regarding how best to
classify and target (in prevention and treatment efforts) the majority of the adolescents , stealing
other antisocial behaviours (e.g. fighting, (carrying weapons ) were significantly associated with
a history of stealing.

2.5 Possible Interventions

Appropriate disciplinary actions are grouped into punitive, preventive and behaviour
modification (reward) methods. Punitive actions are those disciplinary methods which inflict
punishment on students with an aim of deterring the student from committing the crime.
Punishment is effective if it is commensurate with the offence perceived by the student as
punishment and delivered with support (Cotton, 2003). To be effective discipline should never
appear arbitrary for if it does, it can be a cause of much resentment and hostility (Frels, 1990).
The following are some of the frequently used punishment methods: Reprimand-this is the most
frequently resorted to. If administered calmly and without anger can be very effective;
Detention-staying after school for some hours as punishment; Enforced labour-the manual work
should be selected appropriately and should be useful to the school; Fines-carelessly damaged
school property should be compensated or replaced; Loss of privileges-a student may be
demoted from being a prefect or removed from class for hours; Suspension from school-done by
the head teacher.

Griffin (1994) says that a good school will apply a variety of punishment that are useful to the
community such as cutting long grass and cleaning ditches. He further says that press ups and

16
running round the athletic track are some of the punishments that can be administered to healthy
students. Preventive actions on the other hand are methods aimed at preventing the situation
which call for remedial measures. Such methods include development of an inclusive curriculum
that is diversified to adequately cater for all the academic and non-academic needs of students.
Such a programme should include such activities like games and societies which allow students
full participation in organizing the activities which go a long way to relieving tension that could
burst out in undesirable incidents (Ziro, 2002).

Guidance and counseling is another preventive method that can be used to minimize students‟
indiscipline in schools. Mutie (1999) asserts that guidance and counseling help the youth to
prepare for adult life. It helps them acquire the right values and attitudes that will help them
acquire self-esteem, a sense of identity, values and belief that can guide their behavior and form
their character. Teaching of religious studies invokes the fear of God and can be used to prevent
indiscipline. Worship caters for students‟ spiritual growth; it is a time when students reflect upon
their creator, God. Spiritual nourishment is quite vital for emphasizing human virtues and
harmonious co-existence (Ndakwa, 2000). Teaching of religious values can foster human moral
values which are elements of self-discipline. It helps curb indiscipline.

The behavioral modification (reward) method refers to the provision of reinforcement for
instance observing and commenting positively on good behavior (Cotton, 2003). Most modern
educationists in Europe and North America advocate a disciplinary policy focused on positive
reinforcement with praise, merit marks and house points. This plays a central role in maintaining
discipline. Duke and Canady (1991) say that in schools where the headteachers emphasize
punishments more than rewards, pupils‟ progress tends to be inhibited; the greater the number of
punishments listed, the more negative are the effects. In contrast, wherever the number of
rewards exceeded the number of punishment, the progress was greater.

Children need a safe, supervised environment, allowing them to explore and experiment. This is
particularly relevant for older children and adolescents who need adequate supervision and
monitoring in an appropriate developmental context (Sanders, 1999; Sanders, 2003b). An
environment that is interesting and stimulating helps to keep children engaged and active and

17
reduces the likelihood of misbehaviour (Sanders, et al, 2001, 2003). Triple P teaches parents how
to monitor a child’s behaviour and provide adequate supervision, knowing where the child is and
whom they are with at all times. Key adults in a child’s life play a critical role in the formation of
deviant friendships and peer groups (Miller & Zimprich, 2006), and adequate supervision and
monitoring helps to ameliorate and prevent the effects of deviant peer groups (Sanders, 1999).

Behaviour management. When parents use assertive discipline, children learn to accept
responsibility for their actions and to develop self-control. Children are less likely to develop
behaviour problems such as stealing when parents are consistent (Sanders, et al., 2001). Triple P
specifically teaches parents positive child management skills as an alternative to coercive
parenting practices, such as discussing ground rules with children; giving clear calm instructions;
logical consequences; time out; and planned ignoring (Sanders, 1999; Sanders, 2003b). By
focusing on children’s positive behaviour, further desirable behaviour is promoted.

2.6 Summary and Conclusion

Stealing, larceny and shoplifting are the common names used to significantly mean taking other
people’s property without their permission and without the intension to return it. There are the
common symptoms signaling that the child will likely steal in future. With that in mind there has
not been clear ways to measure and assess stealing without the fear of labeling, however reasons
for stealing have been identified as cultural peer and individually based. Implications of stealing
are identified as social psychological and even physical in nature and therefore the roles of
parents and teachers are very important and should be adequately scored.
The success of past interventions for stealing has been limited, largely due to the inability of the
parents of stealers to adequately monitor their children’s behaviour Interventions for stealing
have focussed on parents’ suspicions about stealing and have trained parents to condemn
stealing publicly and to punish children on suspicion of stealing. Such interventions often fail to
generalize a reduction in stealing across all settings.

18
CHAPTER THREE : METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction
This section highlights the research design and locale, population of the study, sampling
techniques and sample size, research instruments, data collection procedures and data analysis.

3.1 Research Design

The researcher will use the descriptive research design, because it can be used to increase the
understating and knowledge about the behavior and thought process of people.
It is the most appropriate design for this study because it is concerned with the factual
registration with giving explanation as to why and it is objective in nature.
This design can be used to formulate significant principles of knowledge and solution to
significant problems. In this case low academic achievement.
Descriptive survey design can be used to collect information by interviewing or administering a
questionnaire to a sample of individuals (Orodho, 2003)
It can be used when collecting information about people’s attitudes, opinions or any of the
variety of education or social issues Delno and Kisilu (2006) Stealing behaviour disorder is a
habit and an educational issue as it’s a problem experienced in the schools.

3.2 Location of the Study

This study will be carried out in Kibwezi zone in Kibwezi sub-county, Makueni county Kenya.
The area residents come from different ethnic backgrounds but the Akamba people dominate.
The area was chosen because it is easily accessible and there are has many public primary
schools and therefore will be sufficient for our study.

3.3 Target population

The target population of the study shall be pupils of all the 16 public primary schools, upper
primary pupils in Kibwezi zone with 2406 boys and 2438 girls total number of pupils is 4844
and 123 upper primary school teachers. Kibwezi zone is where the researcher works and
therefore most appropriate for the study.

19
3.4 Sample Size and Sampling Procedures
Sampling is the process of selecting a number of individuals for a study. The individuals or
subjects selected represents the larger group form which they are selected (Mulusa, 1988). The
researcher will use simple random sampling technique to select pupils from the public primary
schools in kibewezi zone. Simple random sampling is a procedure that is used to reduce chance
variation between a sample and the population it represents (Grinnell, 1996 and Gall et all,
1996). It is also considered as a fair way of selecting a sample from a given population since
every member is given equal opportunities of being selected. Simple random sampling is its
representativeness of the population. Theoretically, the only thing that can compromise its
representativeness is luck. If the sample is not representative of the population, the random
variation is carried out. The study will use a sample size of 30% to give each school an equal
presentation which is in line with gay (1996) recommendations.

3.5 Research instruments

These are the tools for collecting data .The researcher chose to use two;-

3.5.1 Questionnaires
Questionnaires will be prepared and distributed to the pupils and teachers by the researcher.
They will be given to them and collected immediately they are filled in. This would minimize
chances of some failing to be returned. The pupils will be issued with the questionnaires and
some explanation given to guide the exercise.

3.6 Piloting
The researcher will carry out a pilot study to test the worth of the tools and test validity and
reliability of the tools; this will be repeated after a fortnight

3.7 Validity
This is the extent to which an instrument measures what it’s supposed to. Very important is the
content of the tool which should be in line with the knowledge and skills of respondents. It is
guided by the objectives of the study, and the collected data will confirm this. Validity of an
instrument is improved through expert judgment (Gall & Meredith, 2003). As such, the

20
researcher will seek assistance of research experts, experienced graduates, lecturers and
experienced supervisors in order to help improve content validity of the instruments.

3.8 Reliability
Reliability is the dependability or trustworthiness and in the context of a measuring
instrument ,it is the degree to which an instrument consistently measures what it is measuring
Martin E. Amin(2005). The researchers wishes to use the test retest reliability as it provides
evidence that the scores obtained on a test at one time (test)are the same or close to the same
when the test is re-administered some other time(retest).
3.9 Data Collection procedure
The researcher will use both primary and secondary methods of data collection. Primary data is
by use of researcher administered questionnaires consisting of both open-ended questions and
closed-ended questions. The open-ended questions will allow the respondents to express their
own thoughts, feelings, emotions and attitudes concerning the issue in the best way they know
how. Primary data will also be obtained from the interview schedule.
Data for this study will also be collected from secondary sources. These sources include: books,
articles, journals and the internet. Secondary data collection methods are used since they involve
less time, cost and effort.

3.10 Data analysis techniques

Raw data obtained from the questionnaires will be analyzed qualitatively using descriptive
statistics which involves means frequencies and percentages. It will then be edited, coded and
tabulated using statistical packages for social sciences – (SPSS). The means frequencies and the
percentages will be used to summarized and describe the stated variables such as government
financial support for academics programmes, parents/community socio-economic status, their
level of education and how they affect the progress and success of early childhood programmers.

3.11 Ethical considerations

All participants will be briefed on the importance of the study and were requested to participate
voluntarily. The researcher will assure participants that all the information given will be treated
with strict confidentiality and confidence and will only be used for the purpose of the study. The
respondents will be reminded not to write the names or names of the school anywhere in the

21
questionnaire to ensure anonymity. A code will be used to identify each school.

22
Reference
Alltucker, K.W., Bullis, M., Close, D. & Yovanoff, P. (2006). Different Pathways to Juvenile
Delinquency: Characteristics of Early and Late Starters in a Sample of Previously
Incarcerated Youth. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 15(4), 479-492.

Blanco C, Grant JE, Petry NM, et al prevalence and correlated of shoplifting in theunitedstate: J
Psychiatry 165 905- 13, 2008.

Born, M., Chevalier, V., & Humblet, I. (1997). Resilience, desistance and delinquent career of
adolescent offenders. Journal of Adolescence, 20, 679-694.

Caputo, Gail, (2003) What is in the Bag? A shoplifting treatment and education program,
Lanham MD:

Carr, E, Taylor, J.M $ Robinson, S, (1991) The effects of severe behaviour problems in children

Cullinan, D (2002) students with emotional and behavioral disorders: An introduction for
teachers and other helping professional .Upper saddle River, NJ: Merrill / prentice
Hall.

Dr Peter B. Wood et al. (2014) Motivation for violent crime among incinerated Adults

Gail Caputo (2003) A shoplifting Treatment and education program Lanham, MD: American
correctional Association.

Gerber, John J. Linda M. (2010) Sociology (7 th Canadian ed.).Toronto; Pearson Canada.p.97

ISBN978-0-13-700161-3

Harper Collins (1998) Your Child American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

Hirschfield, Alex (2008) The multifated Nature of crime Build Environment: crime in the city.

Kreek MJ, Nelson DA, Bulelmau ER, et al. 2005 Genetic influences on impulsively risk taking,
stress responsivity and vulnerability to drug abuse and addiction. Nat Neurosci.

Leonard A.G (1968) The lower Niger and its Tribes Frank class London.

23
Loeber, R., & Farrington, D.P. (Eds.). (2001).Child Delinquents, Development, Intervention and
Service Needs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Martin E. Amin (2005) social Science Research: Conception Methodology And

Analysis,Makerere University Uganda.

Merline A, Jager J, Schulenberg JE (2008) Adolescent risk factors for adult alcohol use and
abuse: Stability and change of predictive value across early and middle adulthood.

Miller, G,E., & Klungness,L. (1989). Childhood Theft: A Comprehensive Review of Assessment
and Treatment. School Psychology Review, 18(1), 82-97.

Miller, G.E., & Zimprich, E. (2006). Stealing. In G.G. Bear, & K.M. Minke, (Eds.), Children’s
needs III : development, prevention, and intervention (pp. 171-180). Bethesda, Md:
National Association of School Psychologists.

Moncher FJ, Miller GE: Nondeliquent youths stealing behaviour and their perceptions of
parents, school and peers, adolescent: 34:57 – 91, 1999.J37:347-58, 2001.

Moore, K.J., & Patterson, G.R. (2003). Parent Training. In W. O’Donohoue, J.E. Fisher, & S.C.
Hayes (Eds.),. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy: Applying Empirically Supported
Techniques in Your Practice (pp. 280-287). Hubuker, New York: Wiley & Sons Inc.

Mutua, J.N. (2004) Investigation into the Alternative Strategies of Discipline in the Absence of
Corporal Punishment in Public Secondary Schools, Unpublished M.ED thesis, University
of Nairobi. Nairobi

Nalhan E.Org,MA (2009) Challenging behaviour Analysis and Consultation ltd. Marine view,
Cobble HICL , BC, Canada.

Ndakwa, D.A. (2000). A simplified Guide on: The Making of a Good Student. Nairobi. Pavement
Publishers.

Ngaroga J. M. (1996) Revision Education for Primary Teacher Education. East African
Education Publishers Ltd. Nairobi.

24
Odlaung BL, Grant JE (20100 Impulse- control disorders in a college sample: results from the
self administered Minnesota impulse Disorder interview (MIDI) Prim care comp J clin
Psychiatry

on the teaching behaviour of adults. Journal of Applied behavioral Analysis.

Onyechi, K. C., Okere, A. U. & Trivellor (2007) Deviant Behavior as Correlate of Academic
Achievement Among Secondary School Adolescents: Implication of Service Delivery in
the Education Sector, Issues and Strategies, B.G Mworugu Ed

Reid JB and Patterson G.R 1976 The modification of aggression and stealing behaviour of boys
in the home setting in E-Ribes inesta &Bandura (Eds)Analysis of delinquency and
aggression New York: Wiley & sons ltd

Roman M.Y Murillo,F. Javier (2011)Latin America ;School bulling and academic achievement
Cepal Review,104,pp.37-54.

Sanders, M.R. (2004). Every Parent: A positive approach to children’s behaviour. Victoria:
Penguin group.

Sanders, M.R., & McFarland, M. (2000). Treatment of depressed mothers with disruptive
children: A controlled evaluation of cognitive behavioral family intervention. Behavior
Therapy, 31(1), 89-112.

Stavrou A. (2002) Crime in Nairobi, Aki Stavrou

Tylor ER, Kelly J, ValescuS, et al. / Stealing and a gateway crime? Community Mental health
Segrave, Kerry. Shoplifting, A social History Jefferson, Nc: McFarland & co 2001

Walker, H, Colvin, G and Ramsey, E (1995) Antisocial behaviour in public school: Strategies
and best practices. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks / Cole.

Widom, C.S., & Toch, H. (1993). The Contribution of Psychology to Criminal Justice Education.
Journal of Criminal Justice Education 4(2), 251-272

25
APPENDIX 1: PUPILS’ QUESTIONNAIRES

Section A: Demographic Information

1. Sex: Male [ ] Female [ ]

2. Please indicate whether you are : Day scholar[ ] Border [ ]

3. School Responsibility held: Assistant Prefect [ ] Prefect [ ] Other [specify]

Relationship between stealing behavior and student performance

4. Does your school have incidences of stealing behaviour

Yes ( ) (b) No ( )
5. How do you rate the incidences of stealing in your school?
Increasing ( ) Decreasing ( ) Not certain ( )

6. The table below has statements on stealing behavior. Indicate whether you Strongly Agree
(SA), Agree (A) are Undecided (U) Disagree (D) or Strongly Disagree (SD) with the statement
below by putting a tick (√) once for each statement.

QUESTION SA A U D SD
There are cases of theft in the school and in
the class.
Theft cases occur every week in the
classes/school.
Some pupils steal because their friends steal
Pupils steal because they feel good when they
are not caught by the owner.
Pupils steal because they are in need.
Most of the pupils who steal have expensive
items/things

26
 Those pupils who steal also lie or cheat.
Many pupils who steal absent themselves
from school.
Some of the things that happen at school
encourage stealing among pupils

Causes of stealing behavior

7. What are the main causes of stealing behavior in the schools.

Lack of discipline

Poor parental guidance

Poverty

Peer pressure
8. The table below has statements on causes stealing behavior. Indicate whether you Strongly
Agree (SA), Agree (A) are Undecided (U) Disagree (D) or Strongly Disagree (SD) with the
statement below by putting a tick (√) once for each statement.

QUESTION SA A U D SD

Children who are rejected by their peers are at

significant risk for chronic antisocial
behaviour
Poor parenting competence including
inadequate supervision of the child, poorly
defined rules, and harsh and inconsistent
27
 discipline
students who engage in challenging behaviour
generally receive less instruction than students
who routinely comply with teachers
expectations
Peer groups then provide a training ground for
both covert and overt delinquent behaviour

9. What are the effects of student‟s bad behaviour to learning in this school?
______________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

11. What kind of characteristics does those student with stealing behavior have ?d
______________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

10. What do you think administrators should do to minimize incidences of stealing among
students?

11. (a) Does your school have a set of school rules and regulations?
(a) Yes ( )

(b) No ( )
(b) Where are they displayed? ____________________________________

(c) Are all the consequences of undesirable behaviour known to students?

28