ATTENTION:
BEFORE
YOU READ THE CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE
INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!
INFORMATION:
YOU CAN
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000
ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE
BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420
PRINCIPALS
LEADERSHIP PRACTICE AND INSTRUCTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS OF JUNIOR SECONDARY SCHOOLS
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background
of the Study
Globally,
educating a nation remains the most vital strategy for the development of the
society throughout the developing world (Aikaman & Unterhalter, 2005). When
people are educated, their standards of living are likely to improve, since
they are empowered to access productive ventures, which will ultimately lead to
an improvement in their livelihoods (Nsubuga, 2008). As a result, much is
expected from the education sector of every nation to meet up the growing
educational needs of its people (Nkata, 2005) and this has prompted UNESCO to
suggest 23% of every nation’s budget to be allocated for education (UNESCO
2003).
Education in
Nigeria is an instrument for effecting national development. The country’s
educational goals have been set out in the National Policy on Education in
terms of their relevance to the needs of the individual and the society (FGN,
2004). Towards this end, the National Policy on Education set up certain aims
and objectives which were to facilitate educational development in the country.
These aims and objectives are to prepare the individual for useful living
within the society, and higher education guides educational activities in all
the 36 States and Capitals in Nigeria of which Lagos State is not an
exception. In fostering these aims and
objectives, the school principal has important roles to play (Adeyemi, 2010).
Among these roles include, providing effective leadership in secondary schools,
thereby enhancing better instructional effectiveness. How effective the
principal is, in performing these roles has been a matter of concern to many
educationists (Aghenta, 2000; Ige, 2001).
The Minister
of Education, Professor Ruqayyatu Ahmed Rufa’i, decried the poor quality of
outcome in the country’s education system. However, the minister explained that
there was a marginal improvement in performance in public examination in 2012,
with WAEC recording 39 percent of those that made five credits and above
including English and Mathematics over the previous year while NECO had 31.58
per cent as opposed to 8.06 per cent in 2011(www.gtbank.com). The Minister
specifically asked state governments to do more in addressing such problem of
poor performance of students, saying that states have greater role to play in
turning round the massive failure in our examinations, especially when viewed
from the fact that basic and secondary education are controlled by the states.
According to statistics made available to journalists at the event, students
from the Northern states of the country performed more poorly in public
examinations. For instance, out of a total of 16, 633 that sat for WAEC in
2012, only 251 of them were able to obtain five credits and above, including
English and Mathematics. In Gombe State, only 906 out of 21,233 had five
credits and above, Adamawa State, only 1,706 made it out of 32,410 in 2012 WAEC
(www.gtbank.com).
In Lagos
State, the state government is concerned about the not-too-encouraging
performance of students recorded in examinations in recent times, especially
external ones like WAEC and NECO.
However, machinery set in motion by the State Government in the last two
years {2010-2012} seems to have yielded results as expressed by Chief Fatai
Olukoga the Special Adviser to the governor on Education, who expressed
satisfaction with the performance of its students in the 2012 May/June WAEC
examinations. He stressed that the state
recorded a significant improvement in the students’ performance in the
examinations. The state scored 38 per cent outstanding performance in core
subjects in the results released by WAEC. It is the best in the country and the
main reason for the improvement is the government policy which ensures that
pupils are only promoted on merit in our primary and secondary schools (Daily
Times Nigeria, December 29, 2012).
The rapid
growth of educational institutions in Nigeria and worldwide and the
ever-increasing enrollment will require improved management; therefore,
educational practitioners have recognized leadership as vitally important for
education institutions, since it is the engine of survival for the institutions
(Nsubuga, 2008). This recognition has come at a time when the challenges of
education development in Nigeria and worldwide are more demanding than ever
before (Nkata, 2005). Building a sense of educational development in school
structures leads to the realization that a shared vision focusing on the
relationship between school leadership and performance of schools is the only
prerequisite for effective standards (Oyetunyi, 2006).
Blazing the
trail and dominating the field in this direction, scholars and researchers like
Mullins (2002), Steyn (2005) and Maicibi (2005) note that the study of school
leadership is necessary to make school activities effective. This argument is
further augmented by Sashkin and Sashkin (2003) who contend that leadership
matters, because leaders help reduce ambiguity and uncertainty in
organizations. In support of this statement Abari and Mohammed (2006) said that
organization facilitates effective administration and in every organization of
human composition, it is the end that justifies the means. Thus, school
leadership can be situated within the larger framework of institutional
leadership where leadership skills are necessary for effective management and
performance. Linda (1999) in Oyetunyi (2006) indicated that there is a positive
relationship between teacher morale, job satisfaction and motivation on the
type of leadership in schools, indeed, head teachers have the capacity to make
teachers’ working lives so unpleasant, unfulfilling, problematic and
frustrating that they become the overriding reason why some teachers do not
perform as expected and some have to exit the profession.
The manner
in which the leader performs roles and directs the affairs of the organization
is referred to as his/her leadership practice (Oyetunyi, 2006). According to
Oyetunyi (2006), leadership practice therefore is the way a leader leads. Some
leaders are more interested in the work to be done than in the people they work
with, whilst others pay more attention to their relationship with subordinates
than the job. The leader’s emphasis on either the task or human relations approach
is usually considered central to leadership practice. In lieu of this issue of
leadership Oyetunyi (2006) opined that the ways in which leaders behave, and
the specific acts by which they play out their leadership roles are based on
certain assumptions about human nature. Consciously or unconsciously, he
emphasized that leaders operate on the basis of some personal theory of human
behavior; a view of what their subordinates are like as people. One of the
assumptions is that some heads of schools employ the task-oriented philosophy
of management whereby they confer it upon themselves that teachers and students
are naturally lazy in achievement; they need to be punished in order to stir up
their enthusiasm, commitment and support; the task-oriented style explores
styles such as the autocratic and the bureaucratic leadership styles; the
autocratic head teacher is concerned with despotic principles of management
which concentrate leadership on the top rather than from the bottom, whilst the
bureaucratic head teacher, on the other hand, is concerned with the rules of
the game, procedures, and regulations as a way of transforming productivity.
Another assumption is that of employee-oriented philosophy of management which
focuses upon putting the subordinate at the centre of progress, with a view to
tying the organization’s success on the shoulders of the subordinates; hence,
the subordinate is treated with compassion, care, trust and consideration that
place him in the realm of school governance; consequently, subordinates’ inputs
in school functions are often high as a result of high morale and motivation
(Oyetunyi, 2006). Others include behavioral-leader philosophy of management
which explores styles such as the democratic, participative and laissez faire leadership
styles.
According to
Muyingo (2004), the democratic style of management regards people as the main
decision makers. The subordinates have a greater say in decision-making, the
determination of academic policy, the implementation of systems and procedures
of handling teaching, which leads to school discipline and hence academic
excellence and overall school performance in the fields of sport and cultural
affairs. Aside these categories, there are other existing associated terms
which conforms with the foundational functions of the autocratic, democratic
and laissez faire type of leadership practice (The Wallace Foundation, 2011;
Abari and Mohammed, 2006; Sola – Aina, 2011; Bradley, Paul, Michael and Lauren,
2003). The principal as a leader in a school
system will be an effective principal in function by shaping a vision of
academic success for all students; creating a climate hospitable to education,
cultivating leadership in others; improving instruction; and managing people,
data and processes to foster school improvement (The Wallace Foundation, 2011).
Though defining educational performance is difficult and yet also essential.
With this regard Genck in Oyetunyi (2006) opined that it is not just academic
achievement, but the social and emotional dimensions of the child’s overall
development and the role of the school in the community considering performance
in terms of all three domains of education (affective, cognitive and the
psychomotor domains). Similarly, Elliot (in Luyten, Visscher & Witziers,
2004) concludes that learning is an unpredictable process. According to him,
school performance should not only rely on academic results, but on the
teaching and learning process. In addition, Scheerens (in Luyten et al., 2004)
contends that the school’s financial resources and the professional experience
of its teachers are the two categories of school inputs that significantly
contribute to its performance. Further, he claims the nature of school
leadership, teacher cooperation within the school and the school level
characteristics also affect the student’s achievement directly or indirectly
(e.g. the quality of instructions).
In reference
to principals’ leadership style and its relationship with instructional
effectiveness DeCenzo and Robbins in Oyetunyi (2006) examine performance in
relation to effectiveness and efficiency. According to them, effectiveness
refers to goal accomplishment while efficiency evaluates the ratio of inputs
consumed to the output achieved and that greater the output for a given input,
the more efficient you are. So in this case performance has been examined in
terms of productivity (DeCenzo & Robbins, 1998). In addition, productivity,
as measured in terms of efficiency and effectiveness, can also be used to
describe an employee who not only performs well in terms of productivity but
also minimizes problems for the organization by being at work on time, by not
missing days and minimizing loss.
The nature
of academic performance can be based on two models, that is, the holistic and
the integrative models. Armstrong’s (2001) holistic approach to academic
performance is helpful in exploring a comprehensive view of the constituents of
academic performance. The holistic theory focuses on what people do (work), how
they do it (behavior), and what is achieved (results). In the context of
leadership, an effective leader dedicates himself to knowing the academic task,
how to accomplish it, and the results expected. Hence, he directs his effort
and legitimate power towards addressing these elements for effective academic
performance according to the holistic theory. While, the integrative model on
the other hand examines how academic performance is integrated into the way the
school is managed, and should link with other key processes such as the
business strategy, employee development, and total quality management processes
in institutional development. In this regard, Armstrong (2001) opines that
academic performance can be linked to school inputs like the availability of
funds, quality of teachers, students’ entry scores, the education policy and
strategy in relation to the process involved in achieving academic performance
in terms of parents and other stakeholders’ participation.
Statement of
the Problem
The
relationship between principals’ leadership practice and instructional
effectiveness has been a subject of controversy by researchers (Nwadian, 1998;
Adeyemi, 2006). The controversy was centered on whether or not the leadership
practice of principals influences the level of instructional effectiveness.
Common observation in the school system shows that the leadership practice of a
principal could perhaps have serious impact on instructional effectiveness
(Adeyemi, 2010; Ijaiya, 2000; Evan, 1998; Oluwatoyin, 2003). Hence, the problem
of the study therefore was to determine what relationship exists between
principals’ leadership practice and instructional effectiveness in Junior
Secondary Schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun Local Government Areas (L.G.A) of Lagos
State, Nigeria.
Research
Questions
In
addressing this problem, the following research questions were raised:
1. Which leadership style is most commonly
used by school principals of junior secondary schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun local
government area of Lagos State, Nigeria?
2. What is the level of instructional
effectiveness among teachers of junior secondary schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun
local government area of Lagos State, Nigeria?
3. Is there any significant difference in
principals’ leadership practice and instructional effectiveness of junior
secondary schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun
local government of Lagos State, Nigeria?
4. Is there any significant difference in
principals’ leadership practice and instructional effectiveness on the basis of
monitoring students’ work in junior secondary schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun local
government of Lagos State, Nigeria?
5. Is there any significant difference in
principals’ leadership practice and instructional effectiveness on the basis of
evaluation of teaching in junior secondary schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun local
government of Lagos State, Nigeria?
Research
Hypotheses
The
hypotheses of this research include the following:
1. There is no significant difference in
principals’ leadership practice and instructional effectiveness of junior
secondary schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun local government of Lagos State, Nigeria.
2. There is no significant difference in
principals’ leadership practice and instructional effectiveness on the basis of
monitoring students’ work in junior secondary schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun local
government of Lagos State, Nigeria.
3. There is no significant difference in
principals’ leadership practice and instructional effectiveness on the basis of
evaluation of teaching in junior secondary schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun local
government of Lagos State, Nigeria.
Significance
of the study
The findings
of this research will be useful to the education policy makers and implementers
in the various fields of education. The study will shed light on the
relationship between principals’ leadership practice and instructional
effectiveness. This will be useful to authorities who appoint and deploy school
principals as well as those who monitor the effectiveness of instructional
materials in schools. The findings will also be used by those involved in
support supervision and monitoring of schools, where special emphasis will be
placed on the factors which influence instructional effectiveness in secondary
schools.
Stakeholders
in the ministry of education may also benefit from the study, because the
findings will guide them in prioritizing the allocation of resources. By
focusing on the specific leadership factors which influence instructional
effectiveness, the study might motivate future researchers to identify others
factors with a view to establishing the role each factor plays in the overall
instructional effectiveness in the school. In terms of the system of
performance appraisal of school managers, the findings of the study will also
indicate the strength of leadership practices, and their contribution to instructional
effectiveness secondary schools in Lagos state. For those responsible for
organizing induction courses for newly appointed school managers, the study
would provide some lessons to draw on. The study will also shed light on the
view of leadership as involving more than the leader’s personality and focusing
on leaders as dominated by headship.
Operational
Definitions of Terms
Leadership
Leadership
is a process of inspiring individuals to give off their best in the pursuit of
desired results. Leadership focuses on getting people to move in the right
direction, gaining their commitment and motivating them to achieve their goals.
Leadership
Practices
The manner
in which the leader performs roles and directs the affairs of the organization
is referred to as his/her leadership practice. Leadership practice therefore is
the way a leader leads.
Instructional
Effectiveness
Instructional
effectiveness encompasses the full range of instructional activities that would
characterize the objectivity of the set of instructions in the curriculum as
being successful.
Secondary
Schools
In this
content, the focus is on junior secondary schools whose class of students range
from basic 7 to 9.
HOW TO GET THE FULL PROJECT WORK
PLEASE, print the following
instructions and information if you will like to order/buy our complete written
material(s).
HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)
After paying the appropriate amount
(#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to
08068231953 or 08168759420
(1) Your project
topics
(2) Email
Address
(3) Payment
Name
(4) Teller Number
We will send your material(s) after
we receive bank alert
BANK ACCOUNTS
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 0046579864
Bank: GTBank.
OR
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 2023350498
Bank: UBA.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:
08068231953 or 08168759420
AFFILIATE
Comments
Post a Comment