EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP PRACTICES OF PRINCIPALS IN NIGERIAN SECONDARY SCHOOLS

ABSTRACT

This study focused on “Evaluation of Instructional Leadership Practices of Principals in Nigerian Secondary Schools”. The study was specifically interested in finding out the instructional leadership roles played by secondary school principals in Nigeria. In other words, the study evaluated the opinions of Teachers, Ministry of Education Officials and principals in respect of principals‟ instructional leadership practices in Nigerian secondary schools. The mass failure in examinations, non-coverage of school syllabus, wastage in human and material resources teacher incompetence, examination malpractice, absenteeism and so on were assumed or alleged to be the result of inability of principals to effectively play their instructional leadership responsibilities in their schools. The critical areas examined were curriculum implementation, instructional supervision, staff development, provision and utilization of instructional materials, motivation, maintenance of school physical facilities, institutional planning of academic programmes, delegation of authority and communication network. Nine hypotheses were formulated to find out the significant differences in the opinions of the three groups of respondents. The researcher reviewed relevant literature to establish the theoretical bases for the study. The descriptive and survey methods were adopted for investigations and data collection. Through stratified random sampling technique, twelve states in the six geo-political zones of Nigeria were selected for the study. One thousand, two hundred (1,200) respondents comprising of 960 Teachers, 96 Ministry of Education Officials and 144 Principals were selected as samples. Out of the 1,200 copies of questionnaire designed and administered by the researcher, 900 were filled and returned. The questionnaire as the basic instrument was vetted by experts in Educational Administration and Planning and statisticians and was also subjected to pilot study in Taraba State Secondary Schools. The One Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Scheffe‟s Post-Hoc test were used to test the null hypotheses. Five out of nine hypotheses were accepted while four were rejected. The four rejected hypotheses were subjected to Scheffe‟s post-hoc test to determine the extent of significant differences in the respondents‟ opinions. The major finding of the research indicated that the instructional leadership role performed by principals showed high level of instructional leadership responsibilities in curriculum implementation, instructional supervision, maintenance of school facilities, delegation of authority and communication network. Furthermore, the study also revealed that principals of secondary schools in Nigeria did not adequately give attention to staff development, provision of school instructional materials . motivation of staff and students and planning of school programmes.. The study also revealed that extra-curricular activities such as sports, clubs, debate and so on were not encouraged and promoted by secondary schools principals in Nigeria. Recommendations such as the need to get firm grip of the school curriculum in order to offer useful advice and assistance to teachers, and the need to develop various motivational techniques such as honours, praise, involving teachers in decision making, open door policy etc and the need to engage staff in several staff development programmes to constantly upgrade their knowledge and skills were offered. Finally, suggestions were also made for further research in the area of improvement in teaching and learning in secondary schools in Nigeria.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1         Background to the Study

The future of a country depends on the quality of education given to its citizens, because, education assures the future of the society and provides continuity. For this reason, educational managers responsible for educational institutions have important responsibilities in ensuring quality outputs. This is so because educational system is in continuous interaction with social, political, cultural and economic systems which surround it. The emphasis by the public nowadays according to Wayne and Miskel (2008) is on efficiency, academic achievement and employment skills which require effective leadership from the principal. Ukeje (1991) argued that Nigeria is reaching a period where teaching is fast becoming the last hope for the hopeless, that is a profession for those who have nothing else better to do. This posses a challenge for dynamic instructional leadership in Nigerian secondary schools where the head is expected to create a conducive atmosphere that will give both staff and students hope and encouragement.

Leadership has been identified by researchers as a crucial factor in instructional effectiveness. It is a major factor in determining the success and progress of an institution. It is the key to success in every organization because it can either influence the climate of the school positively or negatively. Without effective leadership, even an institution full of talented teachers will surely drift without purpose. It is therefore the key to achieving collective excellence. It is the leader who most greatly affects the organisational climate and provides direction, motivation and inspiration for the school. In other words, the success of any institution depends largely on the ability of the leader to maintain a conducive environment for the development of its members. Instructional leadership differs from that of a school administrator or manager. Principals who pride themselves as administrators are too preoccupied in dealing with strictly administrative duties compared to those who are instructional leaders (Brookover and Lezotte 1982). It is through instructional leadership that the principal can ensure that standards are not only maintained, but also improved upon to achieve expected objectives. This requires that a leader must have mission and vision to effectively utilize both human and material resources to achieve the expected goals.

Based on this reasoning, the principal who is regarded as the instructional leader must come to grips with the proper management of all affairs related to academic activities, so as to promote teaching and learning in the school. The principal is the person responsible for managing the instructional activities of the secondary school in Nigeria with the resources available at his disposal to ensure the achievement of secondary school educational goals and objectives. He is the chief executive and responsible for all that happens in his school. This is to say that the principal is the key person responsible for creating conducive school climate and learning environment that encourage the professional development of teachers and academic performance of students. He sets clear goals, allocates resources, manages curriculum, monitors lessons, evaluates teachers, organizes and implements plans, policies and programmes meant to achieve school objective (Fagbamiye 2004). His role is both complex and demanding that, it is by his action or inaction that the educational goals have to be judged (Udoh and Akpa 1990). It is therefore, expected that the principal as the school instructional leader will engage in a variety of effective instructional leadership practices that are concerned with the elements of the instructional processes. The world of today is characterized by constant changes and the principal more than any other human being stands at the apex of these changes. His influence extends beyond the confines of the school and everyone sees him as reservoir of knowledge and skills.

However, there are complaints, accusations and reports that the present caliber of principals are deficient, inefficient and not up to the task of bringing about needed changes, because they do not respond adequately to standard based accountability, guiding and directing instructional improvement and incorporating revolutionary new information technologies in schools (Wayne and Miskel 2008). In a study Akpa (1990) found that principals deemphasized academic and instructional activities such as supervision, teaching and so on. This could be probably why Adesina and Ogunsaju (1984) argued that headship should not be for every teacher who has the requisite academic and professional qualifications, rather, it should be reserved for those who in addition to the necessary academic and professional qualifications, have the essential qualities of a good instructional leader. It is probably on this regard that Hughes (1970) also warned that it is no longer possible to believe that practical experiences alone constitute valid management training because according to him, the quality of experience can vary widely. Many reports have indicated that principals are important elements that either improve or impede academic progress of secondary schools in Nigeria.

The Nigerian secondary school education has for some time now become a source of concern to Nigerians. The concern focuses essentially on the quality of education which has been declining at an alarming and embarrassing rate (Nnoli and Sulaiman 2000). While some people attributed the causes of decline to grossly inadequate funding of the system, collapse of the educational infrastructure, poor salaries for teachers, examination malpractices, cultism, incessant strikes in the system, anti-intellectual attitudes of past regimes, others attributed it to the inability of principals to coordinate, direct and supervise instructional activities in their schools (Nnoli and Sulaiman 2000). The results of WASSCE of 2007 and 2008 (National Bureau of Statistics, 2009) are examples of the rate of decline in Nigerian secondary school education system which requires that principals should emphasise and improve their skills in instructional leadership. Out of 1,275,838 secondary school students that sat for 2007 WASSCE, only 26,606 representing 2.1% had minimum entry requirements into Nigerian tertiary institutions. Out of 1,339,171 candidates that sat for WASSCE in 2008, only 38,420 representing 2.8% students had the minimum requirements for admissions. This means that 1,249,232 representing 97.9% out of 1,275,838 would not gain any admission in 2007/2008 session while 1,330,751 representing 97.2% out of 1,369,171 candidates in 2008 did not qualify for 2008/09 admissions into tertiary levels. Who is to blame for the decline? It is clear from the results above that something is wrong with the instructional leadership role of principals since they are responsible for instructional activities of their schools. Ogunneye (2005) argued that it is not only the provision of funds, infrastructure, remuneration of staff and so on that can restore sanity and quality expected, but able and effective instructional leadership. He opined that a good, honest, hardworking and visionary principal will turn a poor school around and give it a good name image.

For an organization to be able to meet the expectations of its set role, it must be effectively and efficiently organized and managed. For the effectiveness of the organization, there are variety of functions to be performed and behaviours to be enacted by the members. The most significant of these functions in secondary schools are those performed by the principals. These functions consist of duties, obligations and formal expectations of the behaviours of the position holders. To achieve the purpose for which the role was created, the role incumbent must behave in such a way that his duties are successfully done and his obligations discharged. This requires professional training to enable one perform his duties and obligations as expected, because adequate understanding of one‟s role leads to effective performance. In addition, the characteristics of the present students and even teachers are such that call for expertise instructional leadership. However, there are accusations and reports that the Nigerian secondary school principals are not trained to handle constant changes in instructional activities in their schools. In her findings, Nosiri (1976) attributed the causes of poor instructional performance of principals to misunderstanding of their instructional roles and how to relate them. UNESCO (2000) revealed that most secondary schools principals in Nigeria have not yet been adequately trained or exposed to the tasks they perform, because many of them are inexperienced. This explains why Ozigi (1982) stated that in Nigeria, most secondary schools principals are new in the profession. The Federal Ministry of Education in a survey which analysed the problems of education sector revealed that principals require training in instructional leadership to enable them function effectively in curriculum implementation and coordination of instructional activities. This is because the organization, instruction and purpose of the school, reflect to a great extent on the personality of the head. Many programmes have been mounted to train and upgrade teachers in this country. For instance, National Teachers‟ Institute, Faculty of Education, Institutes of Education in Nigerian universities and special training programmes have been established to train and improve teachers, but no institution is specifically established to train senior teachers or principals to handle instructional leadership activities. This is confirmed in the National Policy on Education (2004) where the policy stated that all teachers in educational institutions in Nigeria shall be professionally trained. Does it mean that principals‟ performance in instructional leadership is adequate enough that requires no training or upgrading in this technological era? In Hong-Kong, America and other countries of the world, institutions were established specifically for the training of senior teachers for the position of principalship. The goal is to have lasting improvements in instructional leadership. The recipients are issued certificates and licenses to head schools as instructional leaders. There are even attempts to change the title of principalship to instructional leadership to enable the heads function effectively in school system (Brookover and Lezotte, 1982). In Nigeria, the position of principalship is based on experience and promotion. This is because the Nigerian civil service relies mostly on years of experience and promotion to elevate people from one cadre to the other, especially from the classroom to the management levels. This was criticized by Wong and Ng (2003) when they argued that an individual could be promoted from a position of competence to a position of incompetence because the individual could be insufficiently experienced and new in the new position. Because of rapid expansion in secondary schools, young graduates who have not had adequate experiences were called upon to head schools. There are also reports that principals of Nigerian secondary schools are more of administrative leaders rather than instructional leaders because according to the reports, they are mostly preoccupied with strictly administrative duties at the expense of instructional responsibilities. Oghuvbu (2005) reported that principals in Delta State were not committed to their instructional leadership role. Principals according to Brookover and Lezotte (1982) are too pre-occupied in dealing with strictly administrative duties in their offices, leaving the instructional responsibilities in the hands of teachers alone. In a study, Kitari and Westhuizen (1997), found out that principals viewed school fees and money matters as their major concerns. UNESCO (2000) in a survey in Nigerian secondary schools revealed that principals spent much time travelling between their schools and the controlling agencies or Ministry of Education, thus, losing grip of the situation in their schools. In a study in Kwara State Otu (1984) reported that principalship is becoming more and more of professional administrative position rather than professional teaching position. The principal may understand more than his staff about the mechanics of administering the school and may have superior training in instructional leadership, but unless he knows how to work with the teachers and students and how to keep educational programmes moving forward, he is not a true instructional leader. On the basis of the above exposition, this study was set to evaluate the instructional leadership practices of principals on the management of Nigerian secondary schools.

1.2         Statement of the Problem

Secondary education occupies an important place in the Nigerian education system, and also serves as the link between the primary and higher levels. As the leader of secondary school, the principal is regarded as the chief executive and responsible for all that happens in the school (Oyediji and Fasasi 2006). In specific terms Lunebury and Ornstein (2008) viewed the functions of the principal as setting instructional directions, sensitive, result-oriented, team work, judgement, organizational ability, effective communication, development of others and developing self. He is well respected because people see him as reservoir of knowledge and skills.

However, it has been observed that academic and instructional activities including curriculum development, teaching and instructional supervision are treated with less vigour by principals (Akpa 1990). This observation was further corroborated by Mulkeen, Chapman, Dejaeghere and Leu (2007) who also observed that most school leaders in African countries do not have regard for instructional leadership and thus viewed it as not part of their duties. This is why Togneri (2003) observed that principals focused more on the administrative parts of their roles.

Over the years, leaders of secondary schools in Nigeria have been accused of various lapses (Hale 2009). They are said to be inexperienced and accused of failing to provide direction and adequate leadership for their schools. Ukeje and Ethiametalor (1998) stated that most of our educational leaders display non-collegial system which breeds informal groups, conflicts, cleavages and ultimately crises.

People nowadays no longer agree that secondary school graduates are in any way comparable to primary school graduates of yesteryears. Above all, there have been several agitations especially from parents that the missionary bodies should take over their schools so as to improve instructional leadership and better performance in examinations. Governments are also worried that inspite of huge sums invested on education, things are not getting better with the sector. The question one asks here is that what is wrong with the present instructional leadership practices of principals? In other words, are the principals not adequately performing their instructional roles as expected?

There are complaints and reports that many principals do not devote much time and attention in planning, supervising, coordinating, directing and influencing academic activities in their schools (Ndu 1991). There are also complaints that teachers are no longer efficient and productive because they do not make optimal use of the available time to see that the students acquire necessary skills, knowledge and attitudes as specified in the schools‟ curricular activities because of poor instructional leadership practices displayed by principals (Nnabuo 1997). Although some reports indicate that there are a lot of factors (commitment, professional growth, school environment, prevailing culture, teachers‟ innovativeness etc) associated with teachers‟ performance, several studies seem to relate organizational leadership to teacher productivity (Fagbamiye 2004) In other words, teachers‟ performance in instructional activities has direct or indirect connection with the principals‟ instructional leadership responsibility. The principal is expected to provide the appropriate instructional leadership which will assist teachers to contribute maximally to quality education.

The inaction of the principals towards instructional leadership activities results in problems such as loss of sense of direction, mass failure in examinations, examination malpractice, class absenteeism by both teachers and students, non-coverage of syllabus, wastage in human and material resources, teacher incompetence, role conflicts, high rate of dropout, and so on as evident in many secondary schools in Nigeria (Ezeocha 1985).

Several studies have revealed that principals generally performed effectively in administrative leadership responsibilities and are less effective in instructional leadership practices. Studies by Olachukwu (2008), Out (1984), Akpa (1990) and so on revealed that principals administrative leadership took more of their time than instructional leadership. By implication, it can be stated that teaching and learning is not their priority. This means that principals in Nigerian secondary schools are not instructionally oriented in academic and instructional activities such as curriculum development, instructional supervision, organization of staff development, provision and utilization of instructional materials, maintenance of school physical facilities, planning of institutional academic programme non-involvement in teaching and so on. In view of these issues, it is worthwhile to evaluate the principals‟ instructional leadership practices in Nigerian secondary schools

1.3         Objectives of the Study

The following are the objectives that guided the study.

1. To assess the principals‟ instructional leadership practices in Nigerian secondary schools in respect of curriculum implementation.
2. To examine the instructional leadership practices of secondary schools principals in Nigeria in respect of instructional supervision.
3. To assess the instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in organizing staff development.
4. To investigate the instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in the provision and utilization of instructional materials.
5. To find out the instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in respect of maintenance of school physical facilities
6. To find out the instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in providing motivation to teachers and students.
7. To investigate the instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in respect of institutional planning of academic activities.
8. To investigate the instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in delegating authority to staff and students.
9. To examine the instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in communication network

1.4         Research Questions

The study attempted to find answers to the following questions:

1. What are the principals‟ instructional leadership practices in Nigerian secondary schools in curriculum implementation?
2. What are the principals‟ instructional leadership practices in Nigerian secondary schools in instructional supervision?

6. What are the instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in providing motivation to staff and students?
7. What are the instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in respect of institutional planning of school programmes?

9. What are the instructional leadership practices of principals in secondary schools in Nigeria in respect of communication network?

1.5         Research Hypotheses

This study was guided by the following hypotheses.

1. There is no significant difference in the opinions of principals, teachers and ministry of education officials in respect of instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in     curriculum implementation.

2. There is  no significant  difference  in the opinions of  principals,  teachers and

ministry of education officials in respect of instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in instructional supervision.

3. There is no significant difference in the opinions of principals, teachers and ministry of education officials in respect of instructional leadership practices of principals in secondary schools in Nigeria in the organization of staff development.
4. There is no significant difference in the opinion of principals, teachers and ministry of education officials with regard to instructional leadership practice principals in Nigerian secondary schools in the provision and utilization of instructional materials.

5. There is no significant difference in the opinions of principals, teachers and ministry of education officials in respect of instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in the maintenance of school physical facilities.
6. There is no significant difference in the opinions of principals, teachers and ministry of education officials in respect of instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in staff and students‟ motivation.
7. There is no significant difference in the opinions of principals, teachers and ministry of education officials in respect of instructional leadership practices of principals in secondary schools in Nigeria in planning of institutional academic programmes.
8. There is no significant difference in the opinion of principals, teachers and ministry of education officials in respect of instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in delegation of authority to staff and students.
9. There is no significant difference in the opinions of principals, teachers and ministry of education officials in respect of instructional leadership practices of principals in Nigerian secondary schools in communication network.

1.6         Basic Assumptions

In this study, it is assumed that:-

1. principals are instructional leaders in their schools.
2. effective educational leadership makes a significant difference in improving teaching and learning.
3. principals are academically qualified and experienced to perform their instructional duties
4. instructional leadership skills help principals to accomplish goals in an effective fashion.
5. lack of effective and able instructional leadership is responsible for students‟ poor performance in examinations.

1.7         Significance of the Study

The study would help principals to become more skillful, competent and effective in the performance of their responsibility as instructional heads of their institutions.

The study would also help policy makers in the ministries of education to formulate policies that will improve the leadership position of the principals of secondary schools system.

Furthermore, it study would help teachers especially those that would be promoted to principalship position in the future so as to understand the instructional role principals are expected to play in the discharge of their duties in schools.

It would also help Ministry of Education and School Board officials in charge of promotion and posting of teachers to understand the instructional role of principals. It would assist the governments and proprietors of schools who are employers of teachers to understand the instructional role expected of principals of secondary schools.

The study, like other studies, would add to the existing pool of knowledge in education, particularly in educational Administration and planning. The results would provide vital and important information to researchers and educators.

1.8         The Scope of the Study

This study examined the instructional leadership practices of principals of secondary schools in Nigeria. The choice of the entire country was to give a fair representation of all the groups in Nigeria. The study covered secondary schools in the entire country which comprises of six geo-political zone namely, North East, North Central, North West, South East, South West and South-South. This means that only secondary schools were the focus of this study. The tertiary and primary schools do not form part of this study.

In addition, the study focuses mainly on instructional leadership practices of principals of secondary schools in Nigeria as assessed by the principals, ministry officials and teachers of these institutions.

The study also examines areas in instructional leadership practices such as curriculum implementation, instructional supervision, staff development, provision and utilization of instructional materials, motivation, maintenance of school physical facilities, planning of institutional academic programmes, delegation of authority and communication network.

Related Project Topics :