TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
1.2 Statement of the Problem
1.3 Purpose of the Study
1.4 Research Questions
1.5 Research Hypotheses
1.6 Significance of the Study
1.7 Scope and Limitations of Study
1.8 Definition of Terms
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The Concept of Quality
2.3 Approaches to Managing Quality
2.4 Principalship of School Organisational Behaviour
2.5 The Concept of
Instructional Leadership
2.6 Leadership Traits of Principals
2.7 Instructional Leadership and Empowering Teachers: A Conflict
2.8 Vision, School Climate and Expectations of Principals
2.9 Academic School Climate and High Expectations of Principals
2.10 Characteristics of Effective Principals
2.11 Summary of Review
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Research Design
3.3 Population of the Study
3.4 Sample and Sampling Technique
3.5 Research Instrument
3.6 Procedure for data collection:
3.7 Procedure of Data Analysis
CHAPTER
FOUR
DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Testing of Research Hypotheses
4.3 Summary of Findings
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS,
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Summary of Findings
5.3 Discussion of Findings
5.4 Implication of the Result
5.5 Recommendation
5.6 Conclusions
5.7 Suggestions For Further Studies
Bibliography
Questionnaire
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background
to the Study
Teacher education
programme is saddled with the responsibility of nation building for the
Nigerian as development society. The quality of the products from teacher
training institutions determines the pace of the nation’s development.
Quality in the educational
sector is considered in terms of exceptionally high standards, consistency,
fitness for purpose, value for money (accountability) and transformative
effects (Atanda 2007). Onuh (2006) claims that quality in education is a multidimensional
concept which should embrace all functions
and activities, teaching and academic programmes, research and
scholarship, staffing, students, buildings, facilities, equipment, services to
the community and academic environment (UNESCO 1998).
This is why the major
concerns of Nigerian educational system is how to ensure quality and high
delivery.
According to Chambers
Twentieth Century Dictionary of current English, among other meanings, defines
quality as “grade of goodness, excellence or degrees (especially high degrees)
of goodness or worth”. The educational service delivery system needs
substantial human and material resources with adequate and sustained quality
assurance measures in order to live up to expectations. The expansion and
upgrading of facilities and equipment to enhance capacity utilization of
information communication technology (ICT) need not to be over emphasized.
There are five indicators
of quality measures in an organization or the school system.
They include Highly
trained staff ; Adequate funding;
Visionary leadership ; Service to the community/academic environment and
Research and academic activities
There are also some elements or
indicators of good service delivery in schools or organizations. They are
adequate staffing, population (enrolment of students), management of funds,
adequate management of infrastructure, accommodation and equipment, provision
of adequate information communication technology (ICT) in the library,
provision of adequate instructional materials, co-curricular activities,
uniform input and output evaluation procedures and provision of scholarship
facilities.
In schools
that are extremely good, we inevitably found an aggressive, professionally
alert, dynamic principles determined to provide the kind of educational
programmes deemed necessary no matter what (Gold Hammer, 1986).
In another
development, (Hechinger 1989) has this to say “I have never seen a good school
with a poor principal or a poor school with a good principal. I have seen
unsuccessful schools turned around into successful ones and, regrettably
outstanding schools slide rapidly into decline. In each case the rise and fall
could readily be traced to the quality of the principal.
The above
statements show that it is the leadership of the school that makes the
difference between mediocrity and excellence.
A capsule
description of the qualities and behaviours that characterize principals in
successful schools; qualities that have surfaced again and again in the
research literature, runs as follows:
(a)
Effective principals have a strong
vision of what their schools can be, and they encourage all staff to work
towards realizing that vision (Gunge 1990).
(b) They hold high expectations for both
students achievement and teacher staff performance.
(c) The observe teachers in classrooms and
provide positive constructive feedback aimed at solving problems and
improvising instruction.
(d)
They encourage excellent and efficient instruction time and
design procedures to minimize disruptions.
(e)
They use material and personal resources creatively.
(f)
They monitor the individual and collective achievement of
students and use the information to guide instructional planning (Adamson
1989).
Unfortunately, many less
effective principals define their role
as managers of the building and budget, keepers of the records, chief
disciplinarians and communicators with everyone (Davis 1989). According to
Willower (1982); many less quality or effective principals leave teaching to teachers. Research on the activities and
behaviours of principals indicate that most school principals spend very little
time on curriculum and instructional matters; while few of them have been
trained and prepared for instructional
leadership.
As Goodhead (1983) puts
it, most teachers, parents and interested others are not aware of the pivotal
role an instructionally active principal can play in creating an effective
school, a school where everyone is concerned with learning and achievement,
where expectations are high and
educational improvement is a daily concern.
The daily routine of every
school principal, although routine is hardly the correct word includes
activities which are described as
“varied, brief and disjointed”
Lee (1987), and “varied
brief and fragmented” by Martin and
Willower (1981); While Greenfield concluded that the activities of effective
school principals involve “an endless
series of brief interpersonal encounters and exchanges
with students, teachers, parents, supervisors and
others”.
Principals must deal with
competing values and expectations along with shortages in space, staff, funds,
equipment and materials and miss communications are common (Barnett et al,
(1984) The work of the principal is largely
verbal.
Principals dispense
information about procedures and politics to veteran teachers, new teachers, substitute teachers, special
education teachers, reading specialties, counsellors, school psychologists,
maintenance staff, students, parents and others in the community. Well-trained
and experienced school principals answer questions about the availability of
aids, space, materials and other
resources and details about forth coming events in the schools where they are
found (Bloomberg 1987).
According to Morris et al
(1992), the principals’ activities are
classified into monitoring school activities, serving as school spokesperson,
disseminating information to school staff, handling resources.
Statement of the Problem
The school principal is
the arrow head of the school system. This means that the school principal
determines the pace at which things or events move in the school. In this
regard therefore, the quality of the school principal to a large extent,
determines the services he/she renders to the school.
According to Goodhead
(1983), many less effective principals
view the role they play in the school as managers of the school building and
budget keepers of the school records and communicators with every one. They
unfortunately, leave the teaching of the classroom teachers. Most principals spend little time on curriculum and
instructional matters. Most principals in the school system today are poor
school leaders, inefficient administrators, who lack the required capacity and
academic process to keep the school moving ahead. They lack experience and
qualification with which high and qualitative services are rendered in the
administration of the school. (Ola, 2004)
This study examined
linking quality to service delivery, a focus on administrators of senior
secondary schools in Lagos State.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The main purpose of this
study is to examine the linkage between quality and service delivery among
school principals in Lagos State, senior secondary schools.
The specific objectives of
this study include:
To examine the effects of
leadership quality on service delivery of principals in Lagos State secondary
school administration.
To link efficiency with
quality service delivery among principals.
To identify the factors
militating against service delivery in schools administration.
To profer solutions to the
problems of poor service delivery among principals in our secondary schools.
Differentiate between the
service delivery of trained/experienced principals and the untrained/
inexperienced ones.
Examine the service
delivery of male and female principals.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The following research
questions were raised in this study.
1. Does experience affect principal’s services delivery in schools?
2.
How can teacher’s number of years in service be linked to
their service delivery?
3.
What are the constraints that militate against service
delivery among school principals?
4.
Is there any difference between the service delivery pattern
as exhibited by male and female principals?
5.
What are the possible solutions to the problems of poor
service delivery among principals in our secondary schools?
6. To what extent can service delivery of trained principals differ from those rendered by the
untrained ones?
Research Hypotheses
These research hypotheses
were formulated in this study:
1. There will be no significant effect of experience on service delivery among school principals in Lagos
state.
2. There will be no significant gender difference in the service delivery of principals in schools.
3. There will be no significant difference
service delivery patterns of trained principals and their untrained
counterparts.
Significance of the Study
This study will be
beneficial to the following:
This study will help
school principals have better insight on the importance of service delivery in
the school. With the recommendations and findings of this study, school
principals would be more aware of the importance of quality in service
delivery.
This will enable them to
imbibe the culture of being exposed
to training and retraining in the school in order to achieve maximum quality
for effective service delivery in
the day to day management and administration.
The findings of this study enables teachers in the school
system, who practice teaching on
daily basis, the opportunity of knowing
that the quality of a teacher to a large extent affect the way at which he/she delivers service in the
teaching profession. With this
study, practising teachers would be able to imbibe the culture of updating
their academics periodically as that will help them to perform their duties
creditably well. It also helps teachers to know that it pays to deliver quality
services in one’s profession.
This study would help the
school authority to be able to provide conducive environment towards the
production of personnel who will be able, available, ready and efficient in
service delivery in the school system. With this study, the school authority
will be able to make policies
that would enable staff to be trained
and groomed for better performance and higher productivity
in the school. The study would serve as
a good and important reference material to the public and the upcoming
researchers and students in general.
Scope and Limitations of Study
This study will cover the
linking of quality to service delivery among secondary schools in Lagos State.
Definition of Terms
The following terms were
defined in this study:
Quality: Quality is defined
as grade of goodness, excellence or degrees (especially high degrees) of
goodness of work.
Service Delivery: The control and effective management and utilization of school population,
funds, infrastructures, accommodations, equipment, information communication technology and so on for growth and development of the school system.
Quality Assurance: This refers to the fitness of an
organization in accomplishing the goals for which it is set up, and also
maintaining comparable standards.
v
Quality Service
Delivery: This is a situation in which services
or functions are at the apex level. This means the highest services delivered
by those expected to deliver them in an organisation or institution.
v
School Administrators: This refer to those or
personnel who manage the schools as institutions of learning. The headmasters,
headmistresses, principals, vice principals are regarded as school
administrators.
Login To Comment