CHAPTER ONE
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?
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?
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:
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.