ABSTRACT
The study investigated the extent to which school mapping variables relate to teacher productivity in public secondary schools in South East, Nigeria. The need to determine the relationship of school mapping with\ teacher productivity in public Secondary Schools, in order to address the concern of parents, government, stakeholders and the general public on the recurrent poor performance of students (as manifested in the senior school certificate results) over the last ten years necessitated this study. To guide the study, seven research questions and seven null hypotheses were raised. The correlation research design was adopted for the study. The population in the study is 29835, consisting of: 1,398 principals, 27,039 teachers and 1,398 senior secondary class two (SS2) senior prefects, drawn from 1,398 public secondary schools in South East, Nigeria. The study samples were 280 principals, 2,703 teachers and 280 SS2 senior prefects, selected via multi stage and simple random sampling techniques. Five instruments were used to collect data for the study: school mapping and teacher productivity questionnaire (SMTPQ), secondary education system coverage checklist (SESCC), School Accessibility checklist (SAC), school mapping and teacher productivity checklist (SMTPC) and secondary school teachers’ characteristics checklist (SSTCC). The instruments were validated by three experts in the College of Education, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture Umudike, to ascertain their relevance in the study. One of the Validates was from Educational management, while the other two were from Measurement/Evaluation and Psychology departments. The test-retest method was used to establish the stability and internal consistency of the instrument via Cronbach alpha and the values of 0.84 and 0.82 were obtained respectively. This method was further used to determine the reliability indices of the four checklists with the following results-0.73, 0.74, 0.83 and 0.85 respectively. The research instruments were administered by the researcher and research Assistants, who were properly-briefed. They also retrieved the duly filled instruments at a return rate of 88%, while a total of 12% were either not filled or discarded by some uncooperative respondents. The data collected were analyzed, using Pearson product moment correlation, to answer the research questions, while Pearson R2 (coefficient of determination), ANOVA and multiple regressions were used to test the null hypotheses at 0.05 levels of significance. The responses were rated based on real limits of numbers. The null hypotheses of no significant relationship, with the calculated values less than the table values, at 0.05 level of significance, were not rejected, while those that were higher than the table values (only one in this study), were rejected. The findings showed that there was a high extent of correlation between teacher productivity and the following variables of school mapping: equitable location of schools in the communities, accessibility of schools to students, school community population, class size, infrastructures and teaching facilities. On the other hand, the study revealed that there is a low extent of correlation between siting of schools in the catchment areas and teacher productivity in public secondary schools in South East, Nigeria. From the findings of the study, it was concluded that School Mapping Variables relate with Teacher Productivity in Public Secondary Schools, giving the high academic performance of South East public secondary schools students in the senior secondary school certificate examinations, across the ten years under reference (2007/2008 to 2016/2017).
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover page
Title page i
Declaration ii
Certification iii
Dedication vi
Acknowledgements v
Table of contents vii
List of tables x
List of figures xii
Abstract
xiii
CHAPTER
1: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background
to the Study 1
1.2 Statement
of the Problem 13
1.3 Purpose of
the Study 13
1.4 Research
Questions 14
1.5 Hypotheses 15
1.6
Significance of the Study 16
1.7 Scope of
the Study 17
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW
OF RELATED LITERATURE 19
2.1 Conceptual Framework 19
2.1.1 Concept of school mapping 19
2.1.1.1
Components of school mapping 23
2.1.1.2 Scope
of application of school mapping 25
2.1.1.3
Objectives of school mapping 26
2.1.1.4 Uses
of school mapping 27
2.1.1.5 School
mapping process 28
2.1.2 Concept of school mapping factors 29
2.1.2.1 Global positioning system and
geographical
information
system 31
2.1.2.2 School
location and academic performance of students
33
2.1.2.3
Rationalization of the educational system 36
2.1.2.4 Educational
access to school 42
2.1.2.5
Enrollment trends in public secondary schools
45
2.1.2.6
Educational system efficiency 46
2.1.3 Concept
of teacher 48
2.1.3.1 The
Job of a teacher 52
2.1.4 Concept
of productivity 54
2.1.4.1
Measurement of productivity 56
2.1.4.2
Productivity in educational system 57
2.1.4.3 Uses
of productivity measures 58
2.1.5 Concept
of teacher productivity 58
2.1.5.1
Teacher productivity and academic performance of students 61
2.1.5.2 Class
size and teacher productivity 63
2.1.5.3 School
size and teacher productivity 65
2.1.6 Concept
of public secondary schools 66
2.2.
Theoretical Framework
68
2.2.1 The
systems theory
68
2.2.2 The
Production theory 71
2.3. Empirical
Studies 73
2.4
Summary of Related Literature 85
CHAPTER
3: METHODOLOGY 87
3.1 Design of
the Study 87
3.2 Area of
the Study 88
3.3 Population
of the Study 90
3.4 Sampling
and Sampling Techniques 90
3.5
Instruments for Data Collection 90
3.6 Validation
of the Instruments 94
3.7
Reliability of the Instruments 95
3.8 Method of
Data Collection 96
3.9 Method of
Data Analysis 97
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 98
4.1 Results 98
4.2 Summary of
Findings 112
4.3 Discussion of Findings 115
CHAPTER 5:
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS 121
5.1 Summary 121
5.2 Conclusion 124
5.3 Educational Implications of the Study 128
5.4 Recommendations 130
5.5 Suggestions for Further Study 131
References
Appendices
LIST OF TABLES
.1: Pearson product moment
correlation
analysis of extent equitable
location of
schools in the communities relate with
teacher productivity in public secondary
schools. 98
2: Simple linear regression
analysis for
the extent of
relationship between equitable
locations of
schools and teacher
productivity
in public secondary schools. 100
3: Pearson product moment
correlation
analysis of
extent of correlation of
accessibility
of schools to students and
teacher
productivity in public secondary
schools. 101
4: Simple linear regression
analysis for the
significant relationship between accessibility
of schools to
students and teacher
productivity
in public secondary schools. 102
5: Pearson product moment
correlation
analysis of
extent of correlation between
siting of
schools in the catchment
areas and teacher productivity in
public secondary schools. 103
6: Simple linear regression
analysis for the
extent of
relationship between siting of
schools in the
catchment areas and
teacher
productivity
in public secondary schools. 104
7: Pearson product moment
correlation
analysis of
extent to which population
correlates with teacher
productivity in
public
secondary schools. 105
8: Simple linear regression
analysis for the
population and teacher productivity in
public
secondary schools. 106
9: Pearson product moment
correlation analysis of
extent of correlation between Class
Size and
teacher
productivity in public
secondary
schools. 107
10: Simple linear regression
analysis for the
extent of
relationship between class
size and
teacher productivity in
public
secondary schools. 108
11: Pearson
product moment correlation
analysis of
extent of correlation between
infrastructure and teacher
productivity. 109
12: Simple linear regression
analysis for the
extent of
relationship between infrastructure
and teacher
productivity in
public
secondary schools. 110
13: Pearson product moment
correlation
analysis of
extent of relationship between
teaching
facilities and teacher
productivity in public secondary schools. 111
14: Simple linear regression
analysis for the
extent of
relationship between teaching
facilities and teacher
productivity. 112
LIST OF FIGURES
1: Diagrammatic model of a simple system 69
2: Diagrammatic model of the production theory 72
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
One of the greatest resources for the achievement of a nation’s
developmental goals is the availability of schools with quality teachers. This
is why the Federal Republic of Nigeria, FRN (2014), emphasized that no
educational system can rise above the quality of its teachers. A teacher is one engaged in the
education industry, who guides the teaching-learning process and encourages
students to pursue knowledge on their own. Modebelu (2013) defined teachers as
a group of individuals trained specifically to impact knowledge and skills to
children, youths and adults to enable them develop healthy attitudes and live
in harmony with all other Nigerians. In
the same vein, Nwalado (2015) posited that a teacher is one who helps the
students to learn how to acquire knowledge, skills and values for personal and
societal development. They play a major role in the education system, because
they are in the position to influence the teaching-learning outcomes, either
positively or negatively. Teachers harness the other resources in the system
for efficient instructional delivery and are usually available where schools
exist. If however a community is denied the location of schools, such a community
is invariably denied the right of having teachers in its locality. The teachers
considered here are those that teach in the secondary schools.
Secondary education in Nigeria occupies a middle level in the
education pyramid. This is the education that children receive after primary
education and before the tertiary level. The secondary level receives pupils
from the primary schools and grooms them in two stages of three years duration
each (junior and senior secondary) and releases them, for the tertiary level.
Some students stop at the first stage of basic education, having acquired the
necessary skills and knowledge to make a useful living in the society.
Thereafter, the rest move further to the Universities, Polytechnics and
Colleges of Education. Within the six years of secondary education, the
students should have received such trainings that would enable them to develop
and promote Nigerian Languages, arts and culture, in the context of the world's
cultural heritage. This is designed to foster National unity with an emphasis
on the common ties that unite us in our diversity. It’s also designed to
provide technical knowledge and vocational skills necessary for agricultural,
industrial, commercial and economic development. Secondary education in Nigeria
has also been equipped to raise a generation of people who can think for
themselves, respect the views and feelings of others, respect the dignity of
labour, appreciate those values which are
specified under our broad national goals
and to live as good citizens
(FRN, 2014). These objectives and more can only be achieved in communities
where schools are equitably located, and teachers are provided in quantity and
quality in the schools.
School mapping is all about location planning in education. It is a
planning tool, which incorporates spatial and demographic dimensions into
educational planning, and this involves a dynamic process of logical and
systematic identification of the most appropriate communities and sites where
educational facilities provided for, in the education plan, are to be located
(Mendelsohn, 2006). In Nigeria, school mapping as a planning technique in
education is still relatively recent and adequate awareness is yet to be
created. The first attempt of school mapping exercise by the Federal Government
of Nigeria was in April 2008. It was scheduled to commence with the primary
school level in the Federal Capital Territory Abuja. However, no account was
given as to whether the exercise actually took off, and the extent to which it
was carried out (Eze, 2008). During the
introduction of western education by the missionaries, (before Nigerian
independence) the authorities in charge of our education industry were in the
habit of sitting learning institutions arbitrarily and without recourse to the
guidelines and principles of school mapping. The result of these anomalies
today is that Educational Planners and Managers are more often than not, faced
with the challenges of equalizing educational opportunities for all children.
Sometimes community schools are sited where there may not be need for them,
whereas they might not be found at all in places where the communities will
benefit from them. This lopsided situation
sometimes have a political undertone (Ewendu, 2016).
School mapping is the most appropriate planning tool to correct
these anomalies introduced into our educational system, deliberately or
otherwise. Hite (2011) posited that in school mapping, the location of any
learning establishment already provided for in the education plan, can easily
and accurately be located in the appropriate community or site, with the use of
Global Positioning System (GPS) and Geographical Information System (GIS).
These are vital tools which determine the exact co-ordinate values of each
school and are also used for mapping out the distribution, size and spacing of
learning establishments, as provided for in the education plan (Hite, 2011). The major question answered by school
mapping is where to locate educational facilities.
The overall benefit of school mapping is that it brings about
equity in the location of educational
facilities (Mendelson, 2006). It does this by revealing the existing
disparities in the distribution of educational facilities, and also identifies
the most appropriate locations of schools, so that more students can benefit
from the same level of investment. Another benefit of school mapping is that it
guarantees the provision of educational facilities and their equitable
distribution. The equitable distribution of public educational facilities in
the South East, Nigeria and adequate allocation to them, are of interest to
this study.
The sub variables or major components of school mapping are as
follows: Location, Access, Catchment Area, Population, Class Size,
Infrastructure, and Teaching Facilities.
1.
Location: The location of educational facilities in any community depends on
the norms that are prevalent in that very community, which help to determine
the most appropriate sites for schools or their alternatives, so that a greater
number of children in the community can benefit from the same level of
investment. School location is the principal element considered in educational planning (Owoeye and Yara,
2010).
2.
Access: This refers to the way or
means of gaining admission into the available
schools. Various schools have conditions that every student must satisfy
before he or she can be given access to study in a particular school. Family
demand is also an important factor that influences access. The existence of
educational facilities in any geographical area does not necessarily mean that
every household in that area will desire access to the school. Some households
might prefer a school that is further away, rather than a nearby one, for
reasons best known to them. Access also considers the route that students pass
to and from school every day. Some students encounter obstacles like valleys,
streams, swampy road, mountains, et cetera, while others might simply walk on
smooth routes to school (Humphrey and Crawfurd, 2014).
3.
Catchment Area: This is the maximum area
from which the children to be enrolled in the school will come from. Enrolment
projections are important to decide on the opening of new schools, up-grading
of existing ones and for estimation of the number of teachers required. The
catchment area of a school is the geographical area served by the school and
represents the maximum distance that the child can trek from home to school and
back every day (Orlu, 2013). He maintained that knowledge of the catchment
areas of an environment is necessary in order to determine where to site
schools in the communities.
4.
Population: Every proposed school must have a population from where students
will be drawn to the school. The density of the population determines the size
of the population. Where a population has a high density, the size of the
population will be small, and the students will trek short distances to get to
the school and back. However, where the density of the population is low, the
size of the population will be large, and students will trek long distances to
and from school every day (Olamiju Olujimi, 2011).
- Distance from home to school: This is the maximum distance that a student is permitted to trek to
and from school every day. The distance must be such that the student
should not be worn out before getting to school. A maximum distance of
about two kilometers to and from school is recommended. This distance is
recommended so that the student will not be worn out on getting to school,
and also that he will be early enough to take part in the morning
assembly. The recommended distance will also enable the student to get
home early enough in other to do his assignments and get ready for the
following day’s school. (Hoxby,
2008).
- Security: The school route from home to school should be safe and secured for
the students. The road should be free from all sorts of danger and treat
to life. Where they are supposed to cross any busy/major road (example,
expressway) adequate steps should be taken to provide road signs, to
inform motorists and other road users that the place is school area, hence
they should be more careful in passing through the area. (Kayode, 2011).
7.
Teaching Facilities: Teaching facilities are extensively used by
teachers to demonstrate their teaching. Allade (2014) posited that teaching
facilities make teaching easier and help teachers to drive home their teaching.
Some teaching facilities are provided in the schools by the government, while many are locally provided
by the school authorities or the resourceful teacher himself Fabunmi, 2012).
Sometimes students are asked to bring certain materials from the school
environment to facilitate teaching in the classroom. Students in the rural
areas find it easier to procure such materials from their rural environments
than those in the urban areas. Urban
environments are often devoid of some
agricultural and biological materials students might require for practical lessons, and even where such
materials are found, they would be in short supply due to large numbers of
urban students. Before the introduction of the Universal Basic Education (UBE),
students’ enrolments in the schools were moderate and teaching facilities were
then more readily available in their environment. This rise in enrolment
however affected the ease with which students procure local teaching facilities
for their practical lessons.
The increased enrolment rates in the country due to the Free and Compulsory
Universal Basic Education (UBE), has however created challenges in ensuring
quality and satisfactory learning achievements, as resources remain inadequate,
and spread across growing number of secondary schools. This situation
invariably tends to have a negative effect on teacher productivity, since the outputs of
this educational system are observed to be performing below expectation.
Schools in the urban cities tend to face very high enrolment rates, and this is
due to high populations of urban dwellers, as against the rural areas (Opateye,
2013). This is due to the prevailing rural-urban migration of the rural
population, in search of greener pastures and better life in the cities. The
teacher–student ratio in most cities is quite high, and in some cases, above
the Federal Government benchmark of 1:40 (FRN, 2014). Consequently, any class
that has more than 40 students is said to be a large class. It has been
observed that more often than not, because of populations of urban dwellers,
schools in the urban towns have very large classes as against those in the
rural areas. (Ayodele, 2011) In most cases teachers find it difficult to cope
with large classes because they can neither establish the much-needed eye
contact with students nor pay individual attention to them. On their own part,
the students cannot pay attention to the teacher to learn effectively due to
overcrowding and distractions. This could be one of the reasons why students
perform very poorly in the senior school certificate examinations (Ayodele, 2011).
The West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE)
results over the years have revealed unimpressive performances of the graduate
students (WAEC, 2017). This anomaly invariably queries the productivity of
teachers, which is largely measured in terms of the students' performance.
Qualitative tools, such as standardized test scores of students' academic
performance are used to determine teachers' productivity. Poor students'
academic performance as well as poor graduate output from
the school system imply teachers’ low productivity in
the system (Akinsolu, 2010). There is therefore the need to carry out an investigation
of the secondary education system across South-East, Nigeria, to determine the
extent to which the sub-variables of school mapping correlate with teacher productivity
in the public secondary schools.
From the point of view of educational management, there are quite a
number of factors that are known to influence teacher productivity in the public secondary
schools in South- East, Nigeria. Some of these factors include the following: teachers’
qualifications, teachers’ training, teachers’ experience, leadership styles of
school heads, roles of supervisory bodies, teachers’ motivation and welfare
programmes (Yusuf & Adigun, 2010). Teacher productivity in public secondary
schools is measured by the students’ performance in standardized achievement
tests. However, teacher productivity cannot amount to anything, where students
trek long distances to and from school every day. In such situations, it should
be expected that their academic performance cannot be wonderful. This is
because they are worn out before arriving at school, and possibly they miss the
first and second lessons every day. In the same vein, by the time they return
from school, they are so tired and cannot do their home works, on daily basis.
On the contrary, where teachers are supplied in quantity and quality and are
evenly distributed, and where schools are located as provided in the plan and
students trek reasonable distances to and from school, the effect of teacher
performance will surely be evident in the students’ achievements, and teacher
productivity will invariably be high.
The level of productivity of teachers is a major concern to educational
planners. Productivity is concerned with the overall effectiveness and
efficiency of performing prescribed tasks. The effectiveness of the educational
system is dependent to a large extent on the quality of its teachers. This is
why Okeke (2004) cited in Osagie (2011) maintained that no nation can rise above
the quality of its teachers. The national development of any nation depends on the extent to which
the teaching force in that nation is productive (Okeke, 2004). A productive
teacher is one who is able to improve on the students study skills, via the use
of active learning strategies (Osagie, 2011). In the same vein, Nwangwu (1998)
opined that unless the child learns, the teacher has not thought. Teachers
however disputed this opinion, and argued that what a student is able to learn
from the instruction of the teacher is a function of many complex variables, which are beyond the
control of the teacher. Some of these, according to Ajayi and Afolabi (2012)
include: the intellectual capacities of the child, the nature of the subject matter
taught, the child’s learning habit, his environment, his interest in the
subject matter being taught, among other factors. Teachers now refuse to accept
that they are totally responsible for a child’s failure to learn. The studies
of Ajayi and Afolabi (2012) however showed that teacher productivity is low in
the Nigerian educational system at all levels. Researchers like Oduwaiye (2004)
and Nwagwu (1998) attributed the low level of teacher productivity to certain
factors which work against their productivity, and thereby hinder the
performance of their students in external examinations. Some of these factors
according to Oduwaiye (2004) include: poor workplace environment, inadequate
motivation, poor reward system, inadequate incentives and obsolete facilities.
Nwagwu (2008) however still maintained that after all said and done, there is
no other way of estimating teacher productivity in the school system other than
judging the academic performance of their students in external examinations.
Teacher productivity measurement is very important because the
effectiveness of the educational system depends to a large extent on the
quality of the teachers. Okeke (2004) maintained that no nation can rise above
the quality of its teachers. Therefore to achieve success in any national
educational programme, the teaching workforce in that nation’s educational
system should be productive (Okeke, 2004). In Nigeria, the students’
performance in external examinations is the yardstick for measuring their
academic performance and invariably the teacher productivity. The productivity of teachers however depends to a large extent on the
teachers’ level of education. No teacher can teach what he or she has not learnt.
Nzabihimana (2010) asserted that the teachers’ level of education has a
positive correlation with the students’ academic achievement. Nzabihimana
(2010) posited that for teachers to be productive, they must be qualified by possessing
the minimum standard, which in Nigeria, is the Nigerian Certificate in
Education (NCE). This is the minimum qualification for teachers to teach in the
basic education level (primary and junior secondary), while the Bachelor degree
in education and various subject areas, is the minimum qualification to teach
in the senior secondary schools (FRN,2014).
The wealth of experience of teachers has tremendous influence on
the academic performance of their students (Ewetan & Ewetan, 2015). It has
been proved over the years that experience impacts positively on the teachers’
teaching skills. Teachers who have taught the same subjects
continuously for many years tend to perfect their skills. Commeyas (2003)
posited that students learn better and faster when they are taught by teachers
who have acquired experience over the years, in their various areas of
specializations. Gender has been found to have no effect on teacher
productivity. The performances of male and female teachers in the secondary
schools are not different because they passed through the same educational
attainment. In a study by Ajayi and Afolabi (2012), they discovered that gender
has no influence on the productivity of secondary school teachers. They however
opined that there could be a little drop in productivity of the female teachers
at the child-bearing age because of divided attention during periods of
baby-nursing. This is taken care of when the child-bearing age is over and
generally speaking, gender has no influence on productivity of teachers
(Kimani, Kara & Njagi, 2013).
From the point of view of educational management, there are quite a
number of factors that are known to influence teacher productivity in the
public secondary schools in South-East, Nigeria. Some of these factors include
the following: teachers’ qualifications, teachers’ training and experience, leadership
styles of school heads, roles of supervisory bodies, teachers’ motivation and
welfare programmes (Yusuf & Adigun, 2010). Lots of researches
have been carried out in these areas, to determine the productivity of
teachers, as manifested in the students' performances. Ewendu (2016) investigated teacher
productivity in Imo state, Nigeria, using school mapping strategies. From the
empirical studies reviewed however, none studied school mapping as factor for teacher
productivity in public secondary schools in South-East, Nigeria. This is the
gap the study intended to fill.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
School mapping involves a dynamic process of logical and systematic
identification of the most appropriate communities and sites where educational
facilities already provided in the plan are to be located. It takes into
account the already existing institutional network of educational facilities. It
tries to evaluate the extent to which such facilities are utilized. It assesses
how well a demand for school by a
community matches the needs of the students. It identifies the demand gap and
provides means of bridging them in order to benefit the masses. In the South-East,
Nigeria there are lots of disparities in the mapping of
secondary schools. The result is that public secondary schools are
arbitrarily-located, without reference or regard to the guidelines or principles
of school mapping. This deviation from
the laid-down principles of school mapping could result to low teacher
productivity. The problem of this study in question form is therefore, “To what
extent does school mapping variables relate with teacher productivity in the
public secondary schools in South East, Nigeria?”
1.3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The study investigated the extent to which school mapping variables
relate with teacher productivity in public secondary schools in South East,
Nigeria.
Specifically, the study sought to:
1 ascertain the extent to
which equitable location of schools in communities relates with teacher
productivity in public secondary schools.
2
ascertain the extent to which accessibility of schools to students
relates with teacher productivity in public secondary schools.
3
find out the extent to which siting of schools in catchment areas relates with teacher
productivity in public secondary schools.
4
determine the extent to which population relates with teacher
productivity in public Secondary
Schools.
5
Find out the extent to which distance from home to school relate
with teacher productivity in public secondary schools.
6
determine the extent to which security relates with teacher
productivity in public secondary schools.
7 ascertain the extent of relationship between
teaching facilities and teacher productivity
in public secondary schools.
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The following research questions asked, guided the study:
1. To what extent does equitable location of schools in their
communities relate with teacher productivity in public secondary schools?
2. To what extent does accessibility of schools to students relate
with teacher productivity in public secondary schools?
3. To what extent does siting of schools in their catchment areas
relate with teacher productivity in public secondary schools?
4. What is the extent to which population relates with teacher
productivity in public Secondary
Schools?
5. What is the extent of relationship between distance from home to
school and teacher productivity in public secondary schools?
6. To what extent does security relate with teacher productivity in public secondary
schools?
7. What is the extent of relationship between teaching facilities and
teacher productivity in public secondary schools?
1.5 HYPOTHESES
The following null hypotheses formulated guided the study and were
tested at 0.05 level of significance:
H01:
There is no significant relationship between equitable locations of schools and
teacher productivity in public secondary schools.
H02:
Accessibility of schools to students does not significantly relate with teacher
productivity in public secondary schools.
H03:
Siting of schools in their catchment areas does not significantly relate with
teacher productivity in public secondary schools.
H04:
There is no significant relationship between population and teacher
productivity in public secondary schools.
H05:
There is no significant relationship between distance from home to school and
teacher productivity in public secondary schools.
H06:
Security has no significant relationship with teacher productivity in public secondary
schools.
H07:
Teaching facilities do not significantly relate with teacher productivity in
public secondary schools.
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The findings of the study will be useful to
educational planners, teachers, students, parents and future researchers.
The findings will enable Educational Planners
to be aware of the relationship of school mapping and teacher productivity. The
findings will further equip them with
the knowledge and benefits
of systematic school mapping
techniques. They will understand that equity in
locations of educational establishments
correlates positively with teacher productivity, hence they will at all
times endeavour to avoid lopsided
locations of schools. Above all, the knowledge of existing lapses will
equip Educational Planners in future school mapping exercises.
The findings of this study will equip teachers
with the knowledge and information they need to know about the relationship of
school mapping and teacher productivity. They will then be in a better position
to know and understand that school mapping inadequacies could be one of the
reasons for their low productivity in their chosen profession over the years.
They will then determine how to conduct
themselves to grapple with the negative effects of school mapping in order to
achieve high productivity.
Students are the direct beneficiaries of the
findings of this study, because any improvement in the teachers’ productivity
arising from this study, is in the interest of the students. They will
then be in a position to pass their standardized tests (BECE, NECO and SSCE) in
one attempt and emerge as quality products.
The
findings of this study will enable parents to have first-hand information about
high performing schools in the neighbouring communities, where they could send
their children or wards for better outcomes. Such information will also enable
parents to avoid much stress in securing access for their children.
The findings will provide researchers in Abia,
Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu and Imo states with accurate statistical data on the
diagnosis of public secondary schools in South East, Nigeria. The findings and benefits of this study will
definitely stimulate the desire for similar studies in other zones of Nigeria.
Above all, the findings will add to available knowledge on the demand and
provision of public secondary schools in south East, Nigeria.
1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The scope of the study is school
mapping variables and teacher productivity in public secondary schools in South
East, Nigeria. The study is delimited to all principals, teachers and students
in all the 1,398 public secondary schools in the five states in South East,
Nigeria, from 2007/2008 to 2016/2017 academic session. The study focused on determining
the extent to which school mapping relate with
teacher productivity in public
secondary schools in South East, Nigeria. School mapping is the independent
variable in this study delimited to seven sub variables: location,
accessibility, catchment area, population, distance from home to school,
security and teaching facilities.
The dependent variable in the study
is teacher productivity and has the following sub variables: teacher
qualification, teacher experience and teacher length of service. In this study
therefore, the productivity of teachers in the public secondary schools in
South-East, Nigeria, will be delimited to students' academic performance in the
Senior School Certificate Examinations (SSCE), with reference to the past ten
years (2007/2008--2016/2017).
Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects
FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!
+(234) 0814 780 1594
Login To Comment