The focus of this study was to investigate “principals’ administrative competence and teachers work performance” in Calabar Education zone. Four null hypotheses were tested in the course of the study. Correlational research design was adopted, while purposive sampling technique was used in selecting a sample of 800 teachers. Two instruments were used for data collection including “Principals’ Administrative Competence Questionnaire (PACQ),” and Teachers’ Work Performance Questionnaire (TWPQ).” Pearson Product Moment Correlation Analysis (r) and multiple regression (R) analysis were employed to test the hypotheses at .05 level of significance were applicable, with the aid of SPSS v21. Findings from the study revealed that; principals’ supervisory, leadership and communication competences are significantly related to teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping respectively. It was also revealed that; principals’ supervisory, leadership and communication competences have significant composite influence on teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery (p < .05; F = 26.764), attendance to classes (p < .05; F = 109.122), notes writing (p < .05; F = 228.118), and record keeping (P < .05; F = 468.793). Based on these findings, it was recommended amongst others that; such techniques as close supervision of teachers, good leadership styles, and effective communication should be jointly practiced by secondary school principals in order to improve teachers’ work performance.
Keywords: Administrative competence, Instructional delivery, Attendance to classes, Notes writing, Teachers job performance, Record keeping.
Received: 25 October 2018 / Revised: 6 December 2018 / Accepted: 9 January 2019/ Published: 27 February 2019
This paper contributes with the findings that; principals’ administrative competence in terms of supervision, leadership, and communication influence teachers work performance relatively and compositely, in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing and record keeping. It addresses the gap existing in the literature where earlier studies did.
The society places much emphasis on education because it has been identified as a tool that can transform any nation and foster rapid socio-economic development. There is a popular saying that no nation can rise above the quality of its teachers. This indicates that teachers play a pivotal role in any educational system without which, educational goals cannot be attained. It must be noted that for any curriculum to be effectively implemented, teachers are highly necessary. This further emphasizes the need for them to be effective in their day-to-day discharge of pedagogical duties. According to Gemora (2014) in today’s work-related situation, especially in an organizational system, much of human behaviors are instrumental in effecting change. In other words, the behavior of teachers is often instrumental in bringing about a desired outcome in the learners. If an outcome is reached, especially if it is a positive one, it is likely that the behavior of the participants is enhanced.
Teachers’ work performance refers to the degree at which teachers discharge their primary duty of teaching and learning, as well their general attitude towards the teaching profession and her activities (Owan, 2012). Teachers in Nigeria generally have been found by Al-Omari (2008) to be ineffective in their work performance of instructional duties which has gone further to affect students’ academic performance. The poor performance of students in standardized and norm referenced examinations is an indicator that teachers’ work performance may have contributed to this ill situation (Al-Omari, 2008).
In Calabar Education zone of Cross River State, it has also been reported that many teachers especially those in public secondary schools do not report to duty as expected. They display unfavorable attitude to punctuality and in teaching learners. Many head teachers complain of many staff not writing notes and demonstrating a high degree of absenteeism. These poor attitudes to work are indicators of poor work performance by teachers. In trying to address this ineffectiveness in the work performance of teachers, Owan (2012) identified poor motivation, non-involvement of teachers in decision making, poor leadership styles of school leaders, poor school climate, uneven distribution of task, and poor staff welfare as some variables that impede on the work performance of teachers.
However, improvements have been made in terms of staff motivation through consistent payment of secondary school teachers’ salaries; many secondary school principals have also increased the involvement of teachers in making schools’ decisions, and other such improvements have been made that were supposed to trigger a change in the work performance of secondary school teachers. Sadly, the same negative issue bordering on teachers’ work performance persists, on this note, the researchers sought to know if principals’ administrative competence has any contribution to teachers’ work performance.
Principal administrative competence refers to the ability of the school principal to plan, organize, direct, coordinate, and harness all the resources at his disposal for the purpose of achieving school goals. A school principal display competence in several ways, however, this paper’s focus is on principals’ supervisory competence, leadership competence, and communication competence.
Supervisory competence refers to the ability of the principal to monitor and control all the activities of the school ensuring that everything runs according to plans. Instructional supervision includes various roles and responsibilities that entail technical, professional and interpersonal aspects (Weller and Weller, 2002). For schools to be effective, they need to look for opportunities to increase the professional development and job performance of teachers for the betterment in managing the teaching and learning process, and this can be done through supervision (Arong and Ogbadu, 2010).
Empirically, Nzabonimpa (2011) examined the influence of secondary school head teachers’ general and instructional supervisory practices on teachers’ work performance. The study findings revealed that to some teacher participants, supervision is non-existent in secondary schools due the fact that some of them have been teaching for more than a decade, but they have never been supervised by the head teacher in the classroom. The research findings likewise indicate a moderate correlation between secondary school head teacher’s supervisory practices and teacher’s work performance. The relationship existed at the 0.001 level (2-tailed) with Pearson Correlation Coefficient of 0.636. And the coefficient of determination was 0.4044 or 40% indicating a moderate relationship between supervision and teacher performance. Challenges related to teacher supervision were reported by study participants, mainly, head teachers. Private secondary school head teachers reported more challenges than their counterparts in government schools.
Leadership competence is the style of leadership adopted by school principals which can make or mar them from relating well with their staff and students. Managerial leadership of a school principal is important and necessary to manage education in schools effectively and efficiently to achieve quality education expected by all parties. The school principal is the actual organization manager who decides the strategies to follow in order to achieve educational goals. As a manager, the principal must have the ability to perform managerial functions concerning management activities such as planning, organizing, and controlling actuating (Tobin, 2014). Some empirical studies related to leadership competence and teachers’ work performance were reviewed as shown below.
Ghasemizad et al. (2012) investigated the relationship between principals’ leadership, quality of work life, job satisfaction and productivity of teachers in Kerman high schools. Findings from the study showed that there was a significant relationship between principals’ leadership and job satisfaction (R=.40). There was a significant relationship between principals’ leadership and productivity (R=.32). There was a significant relationship between principals’ leadership and quality of work life (R=.41). There was a significant relationship between job satisfaction and productivity (R=.34). A significant relationship was observed between job satisfaction and quality of work life with (R=.54). A significant relationship was observed between quality of work life and productivity (R=.68). All these relationships were significant at the level of p < 0.01.
Communication competence refers to the ability of the school administrator to use diverse communication channels and media to pass information across to all concerned and ensuring to receive feedback where necessary (Arop et al., 2018). Communication is an important process inside schools and the most frequently used tool by organizational leaders. Leadership exists only through communication. Leaders are increasingly important as creators of culture, decision makers, and change agents. These roles require the use of communication to develop shared meanings, search and use information effectively, and create and communicate visions to enhance an organization’s future and guide it through eras of change (Arlestig, 2008).
In an empirical study, Fashiku (2016) investigated the influence leaders’ communication pattern and lecturers’ job performance in Kwara State Colleges of Education, Nigeria. The results of the investigation revealed that: a significant relationship existed between leaders’ democratic communication pattern and lecturers’ performance; leaders’ Autocratic pattern did not significantly relate to lecturers’ performance; leaders’ laissez faire pattern not significantly related to lecturers’ performance and that leaders’ communication pattern significantly related to lecturers’ performance. The study concluded that leaders’ pattern of communication significantly enhanced lecturers’ performance in Kwara State Colleges of Education and recommended that leaders should as much as possible engage in democratic communication pattern in order to facilitate the attainment of the stated aims and objectives of the institutions.
Having explored several literatures, it was deduced that limited studies have been conducted which examined principals’ administrative competence as it relates to teachers’ work performance especially in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping, and at the secondary school level. Many studies cited herein, were not conducted in Nigeria and the few studies in Nigeria were conducted outside Cross River State. This is a gap which must be filled with reason being that the results obtained from a foreign study might not be the same as that of a study carried out locally. There is a need for a study to be conducted locally that will yield results that may be applicable to the immediate environment. It was based on this background that the conduct of this study was considered germane.
Secondary schools were established for the society as a means of producing quality students who can be self-reliant, and who can serve as good inputs to the tertiary education level. It was expected that everybody within the secondary schools including the principals, teachers, non-teaching staff and even students, play active roles in modifying the behavior of secondary school students through teaching, learning and guidance.
Sadly, many secondary school teachers in Calabar Education Zone of Cross River State, have been observed to be ineffective in their work performance as manifested in their poor record keeping attitudes, lateness to school, poor attendance to classes, lack of self-discipline, nonchalant attitude towards writing notes of lesson and marking attendance register, and several other unacceptable behaviors which cannot contribute to attainment of secondary education goals.
Despite all the efforts made by the government and other relevant stakeholders to improve the quality of teachers’ work performance, the poor issue is still prevailing. This perhaps, may have further contributed to the poor academic performance of secondary school students recorded in internal and external examinations. Since all efforts made have yielded no results, the researchers wonder whether principals’ administrative competence have any link to secondary school teachers’ work performance. Thus, the problem of this study put in question form is; how does principals’ administrative competence relates to teachers work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping in Calabar Education zone? It is an attempt to answer this question that makes conducting a study of this magnitude, highly relevant.
The main purpose of this study was to investigate “principals’ administrative competence and teachers work performance” in Calabar Education zone. Specifically, this study investigated the:
The following null hypotheses were formulated to direct the study.
The research design adopted for this study was correlational research design. Correlational research design was considered appropriate for this study, because the study was purported to examine independent variables such as principals’ supervisory, leadership, and communication competence, and how these relate to teachers’ work performance respectively.
The population of this study comprised all the public secondary school teachers in Calabar Education zone of Cross River State who are still active in service up to 2018/2019 academic session. Purposive sampling technique was employed in selecting a sample of 800 teachers from the population.
Two instruments were used for data collection including “Principals’ Administrative Competence Questionnaire (PACQ),” and Teachers’ Work Performance Questionnaire (TWPQ).” The former was divided into two parts. Part A was used to elicit respondents’ demographic data; while part B comprised of 20 items organized on a four-point Likert scale, and was used to elicit information on principals’ administrative competence. The sub-variables of the independent variable were measured thus: principals’ supervisory competence (item 1 – 10 of the PACQ); principals’ leadership competence (item 11 – 20 of the PACQ); and principals’ communication competence (item 21 – 30 of the PACQ); While the latter, teachers’ work performance Questionnaire was used to assess the dependent variable of the study. The dependent variable teachers’ work performance was measured using (item 1 – 10 of the TWPQ).
The instruments were administered to the respondents in their respective schools by the researchers. To ease the process of data preparation, the data collected were prepared on a person-by-item matrix. In analyzing the data for the study, each hypothesis used for the study was re-stated, both the independent and dependent variables were identified. Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient Analysis (r) and multiple regression (R) analysis were employed to test the hypothesis at .05 level of significance were applicable, with the aid of SPSS version 21.
Hypothesis One
Principals’ supervisory competence has no significant relationship with teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping. The results from the analysis of data using Pearson correlation is presented in Table 1.
Table-1. Summary of Pearson Correlation results showing the relationship between principals’ supervisory competence and teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping (n = 800).
Variables |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Cal. r |
Sig. |
Principals’ supervisory competence |
24.81 |
8.847 |
1 |
|
Instructional delivery |
24.71 |
8.921 |
.188** |
0 |
Attendance to classes |
25.02 |
9.129 |
.469** |
0 |
Notes writing |
25.12 |
9.005 |
.584** |
0 |
Record keeping |
25.29 |
8.965 |
.692** |
0 |
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
The results presented in Table 1 above shows that the p-values respectively for instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing and record keeping, are all less than the alpha level of .05. With these results, the null hypothesis was rejected implying that; principals’ supervisory competence has significant relationship with teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping.
The results further indicate that there was weak positive relationship between principals’ supervisory competence and instructional delivery (r=.188) and attendance to classes (r=.469). The results disclosed that there was a moderate relationship between principals’ supervisory competence and notes writing (r = .584) and record keeping (r = .692).
Hypothesis Two
There is no significant relationship between principals’ leadership competence and teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping. The results from the analysis of data using Pearson correlation is presented in Table 2.
The results presented in Table 2 shows that the sig. values .000, .000, .000, and .000 for instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing and record keeping, are all less than .05 level of significance. Given these results, the null hypothesis was rejected while the alternate hypothesis is upheld. The implication of this result is that; there is significant relationship between principals’ leadership competence and teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping.
Table-2. Summary of Pearson Correlation results showing the relationship between principals’ leadership competence and teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping (n = 800).
Variables |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Cal. r |
Sig. |
Principals’ leadership competence |
25.13 |
8.992 |
1 |
|
Instructional delivery |
24.71 |
8.921 |
.261** |
0 |
Attendance to classes |
25.02 |
9.129 |
.501** |
0 |
Notes writing |
25.12 |
9.005 |
.646** |
0 |
Record keeping |
25.29 |
8.965 |
.768** |
0 |
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
The results also indicate a weak positive relationship (r = .261) between principals’ leadership competence and instructional delivery; while a moderate positive relationship exist between principals’ leadership competence and attendance to classes (r=.501), notes writing (r= .646), and record keeping (r= .768).
Hypothesis Three
Principals’ communication competence has no significant relationship with teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping. The results from the analysis of data using Pearson correlation is presented in Table 3.
Table-3. Summary of Pearson Correlation results showing the relationship between principals’ communication competence and teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping (n = 800).
Variables |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Cal. r |
Sig. |
Principals’ communication competence |
24.71 |
9.089 |
1 |
|
Instructional delivery |
24.71 |
8.921 |
.216** |
0 |
Attendance to classes |
25.02 |
9.129 |
.253** |
0 |
Notes writing |
25.12 |
9.005 |
.283** |
0 |
Record keeping |
25.29 |
8.965 |
.270** |
0 |
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
From Table 3, it was discovered that the p-values of .000, .000, .000, and .000 for instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing and record keeping, are all less than .05 level of significance. Given these results, the null hypothesis was rejected while the alternate hypothesis is upheld. The implication of this result is that; there is significant relationship between principals’ communication competence and teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping.
The results also indicate a weak positive relationship (r = .261) between principals’ leadership competence and instructional delivery; while a moderate positive relationship exist between principals’ leadership competence and attendance to classes (r=.501), notes writing (r= .646), and record keeping (r= .768).
Hypothesis Four
Principals’ supervisory competence, leadership competence, and communication competence have no composite relationship with teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping. The results from the analysis of data using multiple regression are presented on Table 4.
Table-4. Multiple regression results summary of the composite relationship between principals’ supervisory competence, leadership competence, and communication competence with teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping.
Teachers’ work performance |
R |
R2 |
Adj. R2 |
F |
Sig |
Instructional delivery |
.303a |
0.092 |
0.088 |
26.764 |
.000a |
Attendance to classes |
.540a |
0.291 |
0.289 |
109.122 |
.000a |
Notes writing |
.680a |
0.462 |
0.46 |
228.118 |
.000a |
Record keeping |
.799a |
0.639 |
0.637 |
468.793 |
.000a |
a. Predictors: (Constant), Principal supervisory, leadership and communication competence.
The results presented in table indicates that there is a joint multiple correlation of principal supervisory, leadership, and communication competences with instructional delivery (R = .303), attendance to classes (R = .540), notes writing (R = .680), and record keeping (R = .799). The three variables jointly accounted for 8.8%, 28.9%, 46%, and 63.7% of the total variance in teachers’ instructional delivery (Adj. R2 = .088), attendance to classes (Adj. R2 = .289), notes writing (Adj. R2 = .460), and record keeping (Adj. R2 = .639) respectively, as indices of teachers’ job performance. With the remaining 91.2%, 71.1%, 54% and 36.3% respectively, due to other variables not included in this study.
The results further disclosed that p-values .000, .000, .000, and .000 obtained for instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping all less than .05 level of significance. With this result, the null hypothesis was rejected while the alternate hypothesis was upheld. The conclusion is that; principals’ supervisory competence, leadership competence, and communication competence have composite influence on teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery (p < .05; F = 26.764), attendance to classes (p < .05; F = 109.122), notes writing (p < .05; F = 228.118), and record keeping (P < .05; F = 468.793). Therefore, the R values of .303, .540, .680, and .799 respectively for the various indices of teachers’ work performance, were not due to chance.
First, it was established through the findings of this study that; principals’ supervisory competence has significant relationship with teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping in Calabar Education Zone of Cross River State. This result implies that in schools where principals exhibited good supervisory competence, teachers work performance will also increase and vice versa, in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping. However, this result does not imply that supervisory competence of secondary school administrators is the cause for teachers’ work performance increasing or decreasing. This finding corroborates the finding in a study by Nzabonimpa (2011) which examined the influence of secondary school head teachers’ general and instructional supervisory practices on teachers’ work performance. Pearson Correlation Coefficient was used to establish the extent of relationship between head teachers’ supervisory practices and teacher’ work performance. The findings revealed among others, a moderate correlation between secondary school head teacher’s supervisory practices and teacher’s work performance. The relationship existed at the 0.001 level (2-tailed) with Pearson Correlation Coefficient of 0.636. And the coefficient of determination was 0.4044 or 40% indicating a moderate relationship between supervision and teacher performance.
Secondly, the finding emanating from this study disclosed that; there is significant relationship between principals’ leadership competence and teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping. This finding agrees with the findings of Ghasemizad et al. (2012) which also showed that there was a significant relationship between principals’ leadership and job satisfaction (R=.40). There was a significant relationship between principals’ leadership and productivity (R=.32). There was a significant relationship between principals’ leadership and quality of work life (R=.41).
Thirdly, it was established through the finding from this study that; there is significant relationship between principals’ leadership competence and teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing, and record keeping. This relationship implies that an improvement in principals’ communication competence will to an increase in the work performance of teachers and vice versa. The finding supports the finding of Fashiku (2016) which revealed that; leaders’ communication pattern is significantly related to lecturers’ performance.
Lastly, this study established that; principals’ supervisory competence, leadership competence, and communication competence have significant composite influence on teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery (p < .05; F = 26.764), attendance to classes (p < .05; F = 109.122), notes writing (p < .05; F = 228.118), and record keeping (p < .05; F = 468.793). This implies that when principals exhibit supervisory, leadership and communication competences jointly, teachers’ performance will also be improved in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing and record keeping. By implication, teachers will be closely monitored, they will also understand their roles expectations, and will be motivated to work as a result of principals’ improved supervision, communication and leadership patterns.
It was concluded generally that principals’ administrative competence is significantly related to teachers’ work performance. Principals’ supervisory, leadership, and communication competences influence teachers’ work performance in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing and record keeping. Competent principals who supervise, lead, and communicate effectively with their teachers will witness improved performance from teachers in terms of instructional delivery, attendance to classes, notes writing and record keeping, then incompetent principals. Principals who are competent will be able to closely monitor teachers; they will be able to communicate objectives and roles expectations to teachers and will be able to motivate teachers through their leadership.
The following recommendations were stated following the outcome of the findings;
| Funding: This study received no specific financial support. |
| Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. |
| Contributors/Acknowledgement: Both authors contributed equally to the conception and design of the study. |
Al-Omari, A., 2008. The relationship between leadership styles of Hashemite university department chairs and job satisfaction as reported by department faculty members. University of Sharjah Journal for Humanities & Social Sciences, 5(2): 101-124.
Arlestig, H., 2008. Communication between principals and teachers in successful schools. A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Education, Umeå University.
Arong, F. and M. Ogbadu, 2010. Major causes of declining quality of education in Nigeria from administrative perspective: A case study of Dekina local government area. Canadian Social Science, 6(3): 183-198.
Arop, F.O., V.J. Owan and M.A. Ekpang, 2018. Effective communication management and the performance of tertiary institutions in Cross River State, Nigeria. International Journal of Current Research, 10(7): 72019–72023.
Fashiku, C.O., 2016. Leaders’ communication pattern: A predictor of lecturers’ job performance in Nigeria. International Journal of Educational Leadership and Management, 4(2): 103-126.Available at: https://doi.org/10.17583/ijelm.2016.1848.
Gemora, R.B., 2014. Influence of interpersonal relationship on the administrative and teaching performance among faculty administrators. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences, 1(3): 35–39.
Ghasemizad, A., M. Amirian Zadeh and S. Bagheri, 2012. A study of the relationship between teachers and principals’ spiritual leadership, quality of work life, job satisfaction and productivity. American Journal of Scientific Research, 4(9): 11-20.
Nzabonimpa, B.J., 2011. Influence of head teachers’ general and instructional supervisory practices on teachers’ work performance in secondary schools in Entebbe municipality, Wakiso District, Uganda. A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies, Bugema University.
Owan, V.J., 2012. Some causes of poor performance of pupils in primary school mathematics. A case study in. Akamkpa Local Government Area of Cross River State, Nigeria. NCE Project Submitted to School of Education, Cross River State College of Education, Akamkpa. Available from https://goo.gl/NTTxqc.
Tobin, J., 2014. Management and leadership issues for school building leaders. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 9(1): 1-14.
Weller, L.D. and S.J. Weller, 2002. The assistant principal: Essentials for effective school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press
| Views and opinions expressed in this article are the views and opinions of the author(s), Humanities and Social Sciences Letters shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. |