|Home Instructors Journals ContactUs|
TEACHERS INVOLVEMENT IN DECISION-MAKING AS A CORRELATE OF SCHOOL GOAL ACHIEVEMENT
‘Kayode Olu. Ijaduola
Department of Educational Management,Tai Solarin University of Education, Ijagun, Nigeria
Keywords: Decision-making administrator, leadership, goal achievement, rational model
Who makes what decision, when and how decisions are made is a major problem faced by all formal organizations (Ajetunmobi, 2000, Brenner, 2000, Sule, 2002, Yailagh, Lloyd Walsah, 2005, Ijaduola, 2007a). This is because decision making is very crucial to the survival of any organization and the outcome of these organizations is a function of the type of importance attached to decisions made. In the words of Dion, (2006).
…. The salient process of adaptation in
organization is decision; where upon the
biological, personal, physical and social
factors of the situation are selected for specific
combination by volitional action.
In a simpler term, according to Brookfield (2006), Kanuka and Anderson (2008), decision-making implies the process of choosing one alternative among set of alternatives that is, it is the act of choosing one way of doing things or solving problems among many other alternative ways.
various ways and approaches that can lead to the performance of distinct tasks. In essence, almost all the activities in the school system require decision. For instance, the teaching/learning activities cannot exist without a handful of decision-making. This is because the classroom teacher is responsible to take decision on what topic to teach, at what time and also decide which method to use while imparting the knowledge.
In the same vein, the school principal, according to Adekeye (2005) is also expected to decide job or vocation among teachers and plan a favourable work schedule. All these are demanding and require decision-making. Consequently, the principal devices various strategies on the best method to adopt to reach a logical decision-making stage. Having known the capacity of his teaching force, then he knows whom to call at a particular decision-making level. He is concerned with his strategy for dealing with conflicts that may occur because of differences in cultural values, role expectations or vested interest of individuals or groups. Nevertheless there is no greater test of leadership on the part of school principal than his positive influence on the professional growth of his teachers. If he is accepted by his teachers merely as a leader,
JORIND (7) 1 June, 2009. ISSN 1596 – 8308. www.transcampus.org., www.ajol.info/jorind
he cannot be regarded as a successful principal. He is responsible for contributing definitely to the professional improvement of his teachers and he will probably not succeed unless he becomes a stimulating professional leader (Wentzel, 1999; Umar, 2001; Okam, 2002, Simmt, 2005; Slavin, 2005; Tahir, 2006; Ijaduola, 2008a).
According to Bernard (2000), Weston and Cranton (2003) and Ijaduola (2007b) administrators should know that teachers are reliable instruments in implementing their administrative policies, and principals remember that teachers are no more robots but the classroom maestros that they used to be. This is because teachers are interested in participating in decision-making as a result of increased teachers’ varying dispositions, professionalism, school increasing complexity, increased democratic ideas in school and pursuit for job satisfaction and self actualization because all the decisions made in schools often deal with human beings and not ordinary files and objectives. They are no more ‘yes men’ rather they are part of the framework of the school system. This is the reason why it is necessary for teachers to be fully integrated in decision-making process of the school.
Conversely, an organization whether educational or otherwise is viable only when it accomplishes the goals for which it is established (Enoch, 2002; O’ Bannon, 2002; Manyanga, 2005; Kizlik, 2006). As opined by Ijaduola (2008b), school goal achievement can be judged by the congruence between expected managerial behaviour of a school head in relation to this task performance. As a result the inability of the principal to perform his administrative tasks in such a way that the educational goals and objectives are achieved will be regarded as ineffectiveness of decision making on the part of principal as the school administrator. In a nutshell, school administration can be regarded as an effective one if it has achieved the accepted objectives and goals of the organization using the resources at its disposal. Some indicators of school goal achievement are as shown in table 1.
Table 1: Indices of School Goal Achievement
Indices Appraisal guide
School facilities Are there enough classrooms and enough furniture? What about recreational facilities? Does the need arise too f frequently for the school to borrow laboratory equipment?
Academic How well do students perform in both the internal and external
performance examinations? Do their results compare with others in the zone? Were results often withheld because of examination malpractice?
Teachers’ attitude Are teachers regular and punctual? Do they attend meetings and contribute meaningfully to the school progress? Do they show happiness when in school?
Managerial behaviour Are the vice-principals very cooperative? Do teachers follow the line organization in solving problems? Are there cases of financial embarrassment to the school?
Perception by Do they perceive the school as a good one or bad one?
parents/community Are they always ready to assist the school? Are they proud of the school?
Tone of discipline Are there numerous cases of students becoming unruly? Are students made to teachers or visitors to the school? Is there large-scale
irregularity in students’ attendance e.g. truancy, lateness to class etc.
JORIND (7) 1 June, 2009. ISSN 1596 – 8308. www.transcampus.org., www.ajol.info/jorind
Source: Adapted from Jaiyeoba, A. O. (2003). Perspectives in Secondary School Administration. In Babalola, J.B. and Adedeji,S.O. (Eds). Contemporary Issues in Educational Management: A Book of Honour. Ibadan: Department of Educational Management. University of Ibadan.
Decision making entails identifying and choosing alternative solutions that lead to a desired state of affairs. The process begins with a problem and ends when a solution has been chosen. To gain an understanding of how teachers can make better decisions, this study focuses on the rational model.
The rational model proposes that managers use a rational four step sequence for making decision. The four steps include: identifying the problem, generating alternative solutions, selecting a solution; and implementing and evaluating the solution. According to this model, managers are completely objective and possess complete information to make a decision.
The rational model is based on the premise that managers optimize when they make decisions. Optimizing involves solving problems by producing the best possible solutions. This assumes that managers have knowledge of all possible alternatives; have complete knowledge about the consequences that follow each alternative, and have the computational ability to compare consequences and to determine which one is prepared.
It has been suggested (Dotse, 1989; Sesan, 2002; Zakari, 2002, John, Wick, Sue and Juani, 2003, Tom and Adrian 2006; and Ijaduola, 2007c) that if a school principal is to adopt this model, the teachers should be involved at least to identify the problems and generate alternative solutions to the problems identified. This is essential because the principal alone may not possess a complete knowledge of ideas or problems and their consequences. This was why Swierenga (2007), another theorist, described the rational model as a model which is at best an instruction tool. Thus, if teachers are involved in decision making, the four step sequence for making decision will be a huge success.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to:
1. Ascertain whether any correlation exists between teacher involvement in decision making and school goal achievement as opined by school principals.
2. Establish the relationship between private and public school teachers’ involvement in decision making and school goal achievement as perceived by the teachers.
3. To know some of the factors school principals see in their teachers before involving the latter in decision making.
4. To find out if teachers should be involved in all decisions made within the school.
5. To elicit level of decision-making participation in the school that can engender teachers optimal output in the school organization.
i. What factors do principals consider in teachers before involving them in school decision-making?
ii. Should teachers be involved in all decision made within the school?
iii What do the teachers’ perceive as the appropriate level of participation that can ensure their maximum output in the school organization?
The following two hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance:
1. There will be no significant correlation between teacher involvement in decision- making and school goal achievement as perceived by school principals.
2. There will be no significant correlation between private and public school teachers’ involvement in decision making and school goal achievement as perceived by the teachers.
The survey research design was used for this study in order to ascertain the extent to which teacher participation in decision-making predicts school goal achievement. 50 (fifty) secondary schools (25 public and 25 private) stratifiedly selected from five local government areas in Ogun State, Nigeria were used in the study. The local governments include: Abeokuta South, Imeko-Afon, Ijebu-Ode, Remo North and Ogun Waterside. 50 (fifty) school principals (25 public and 25 private) and 500 (five hundred) classroom teachers (250 private and 250 public) constituted the respondents in the study. Selection of the teachers was done randomly at 10 (ten) teachers per private and public schools’ respectively.
A questionnaire called: Decision Making and School Goal Achievement Questionnaire (DMSGAQ) developed by Olalere (2002) was used to collect data. The questionnaire has been used in similar studies by Jones (2004), Akorede (2006) and Fatunsi (2007) hence its relevance and suitability for the present study. However, the questionnaire was subjected to construct validation by four other research experts in educational management while a reliability coefficient of 0.93 was obtained as a result of a test-retest treatment using Kudder Richandson’s correlation KR2 formular. The three research questions asked in the study were answered via frequency counts, percentages and mean scores, while the two null hypotheses developed were subjected to the Pearson product moment correlation statistical analysis at 0.05 level of significance. The researcher personally administered the questionnaire to the respondents.
Ho1: There will be no significant correlation between teachers’ involvement in decision making and school goal achievement as perceived by school principals.
Table 2: Analysis of correlation between teachers’ involvement in decision-making and school goal achievement as perceived by school principals (n=50)
Variable X SD r
Teachers’ involvement 63.01 7.03 0.254*
School goal achievement 59.77 6.92
*Significant @ P <0.05; df = 48; critical r = 195.
As shown in table 2, the calculated r-value of 0.254 is greater than the critical r-value of .195 required for significance at 0.05 level with 48 degrees of freedom. This implies that there is a significant correlation between teachers’ involvement in decision making and school goals achievement as perceived by school principals. Hence, the null hypothesis stated earlier was rejected.
Ho2: There will be significant correlation between private and public school teachers involvement in decision making and school goal achievement as perceived by the
Table 3: Analysis of correlation between private and public school teachers involvement in decision making and school goal achievement as perceived by the teachers (n=500).
Variable X SD r
Private school teachers 71.44 33.81