(PDF) Principals’ Leadership Practice and Instructional Effectiveness of Junior Secondary Schools in Ajeromi-ifelodun Local Government of Lagos State, Nigeria

Content Structure of Principals’ Leadership Practice and Instructional Effectiveness of Junior Secondary Schools in Ajeromi-ifelodun Local Government of Lagos State, Nigeria

The abstract contains the research problem, the objectives, methodology, results, and recommendations
Chapter one of this thesis or project materials contains the background to the study, the research problem, the research questions, research objectives, research hypotheses, significance of the study, the scope of the study, organization of the study, and the operational definition of terms.
Chapter two contains relevant literature on the issue under investigation. The chapter is divided into five parts which are the conceptual review, theoretical review, empirical review, conceptual framework, and gaps in research
Chapter three contains the research design, study area, population, sample size and sampling technique, validity, reliability, source of data, operationalization of variables, research models, and data analysis method
Chapter four contains the data analysis and the discussion of the findings
Chapter five contains the summary of findings, conclusions, recommendations, contributions to knowledge, and recommendations for further studies.
References: The references are in APA
Questionnaire.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Chapter One of Principals’ Leadership Practice and Instructional Effectiveness of Junior Secondary Schools in Ajeromi-ifelodun Local Government of Lagos State, Nigeria

INTRODUCTION

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:

Which leadership style is most commonly used by school principals of junior secondary schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun local government area of Lagos State, Nigeria?

What is the level of instructional effectiveness among teachers of junior secondary schools in Ajeromi-Ifelodun local government area of Lagos State, Nigeria?

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?

Research Hypotheses

The hypotheses of this research include the following:

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.
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.
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.

Download Chapters 1 to 5 PDF