American Journal of Education and Learning

Volume 4, Number 1 (2019) pp 70-83 doi 10.20448/804.4.1.70.83 | Research Articles

 

Administrative Leadership Behaviours of Principals of Colleges of Education and their Impact on Tutors' Job Performance in the Volta Region, Ghana

Edison Pajibo 1Cosmos Kwame Dzikunu 2Mercy Obesebea Asare 3
1 Senior Research Fellow,Centre for Educational Policy Studies University of Education, Winneba, Ghana
2 Research Fellow, Centre for Educational Policy Studies University of Education, Winneba, Ghana
3 Principal Superintendent Ghana Education Service, Ghana

ABSTRACT

This study examined the administrative leadership behaviours employed by principals of colleges of education in the Volta Region of Ghana and their relationship with tutors’ job performance. The study employed a cross-sectional descriptive survey design using the quantitative approach. Adopting the multi-stage sampling technique, 160 participants participated in the study. All 6 principals were purposively sampled while 154 tutors were selected through a combination of stratified and random sampling techniques. A structured questionnaire was used for data collection. The study revealed that democratic leadership behaviour (M=3.30, SD=0.86) was dominant among the principals while the autocratic leadership behaviour (M=2.34, SD=0.94) was least practiced in the colleges. The study also discovered that gender, age, academic qualification and years of experience significantly affected tutors and principals’ behaviours. It was also revealed that tutors’ level of job performance was very good and that there was a positive correlation between principals’ leadership behaviours and tutors’ job performance. Therefore, it was recommended that the National Council for Tertiary Education (NCTE), through Colleges of Education (CoE) should organize in-service training for the principals to enable them to balance the use of leadership behaviours in specific situations. The study concluded that good leadership practices engender good tutor performance.

Keywords: Leadership, Leadership behaviour, Job performance, Perception, Principals, Administrative.

DOI: 10.20448/804.4.1.70.83

Citation | Edison Pajibo; Cosmos Kwame Dzikunu; Mercy Obesebea Asare (2019). Administrative Leadership Behaviours of Principals of Colleges of Education and their Impact on Tutors’ Job Performance in the Volta Region, Ghana. American Journal of Education and Learning, 4(1): 70-83.

Copyright: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License

Funding : This study received no specific financial support.

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

History : Received: 17 January 2019 / Revised: 25 February 2019 / Accepted: 27 March 2019 / Published: 3 June 2019 .

Publisher: Online Science Publishing

1. BACKGROUND LITERATURE AND PROBLEM CONTEXT

Education constitutes a very significant instrument for social development (UNESCO, 2004). It is a vehicle that enhances human capital development and sustenance of society. It is a tool for acquiring viable skills, relevant information, knowledge and habits for surviving in a changing environment (Alter and Coggshall, 2009). Educational institutions are critical places where the next generation is educated, and educational leaders bear a heavy burden of responsibility for their institutions.

College leadership connotes a process of encouraging and helping tutors and other staff to work enthusiastically towards the realization of educational objectives. Principals’ leadership behaviours and tutors’ job performance constitute a nexus for achieving school goals. Principals adopt various leadership behaviours or exhibit various behavioural patterns. It is been said that colleges are as good as their principals. This argument typifies the views of Sergon (2005) that, colleges’ success depends on the principals. Essentially, a leader gets things done and has the ability to inspire, moderate, guide, direct and listen.

It is well-acknowledged that college tutors play a critical role in nurturing the minds and the hearts of adult learners (Dike, 2013). Their job performance is, therefore, key in the realization of college goals. Tutors’ job performance could be described as the duties performed by tutors at a particular period in the school system in achieving school goals. In this regard, Adeyemi (2010) defines tutors’ job performance as the ability of tutors to combine relevant inputs for the enhancement of teaching and learning.

A defining feature of job performance is all behaviours that employees engage in at work at a particular period in the school system in achieving organizational goals (Mankoe, 2007). From the above definitions, it is evident that tutors’ job performance refers to the quantitative and qualitative accomplishment of tasks performed by the tutor and the desirable behaviours that are portrayed. Therefore, tutors’ output of work in relation to lesson preparation, classroom teaching processes, regularity and punctuality, time on task, and interpersonal relationship constitute their performance (Mankoe, 2007).

Maicibi (2005) asserts that, without proper leadership behaviour, teaching and learning cannot be effective in a school and it would be correct to surmise that effective principals are able to transform schools into successful teaching and learning communities, while ineffective principals hinder the progress and success of colleges according to Bottery (2001). It can hardly be denied that even if the school has all the required instructional materials and financial resources, it will not be able to use them effectively if tutors who direct their usage are not properly trained and motivated to implement them. Dinham (2005) and Townsend (2007) found that leadership behaviour of principals is the single most important element which can play an important role in tutors’ performance. Effective and successful principals are able to develop and cultivate positive relationships (Crum and Sherman, 2008) and can motivate tutors to extract effort in their work, which essentially is related to teaching and learning. Effective principals are particularly attentive to ensure that there are different leadership mechanisms for tutors to communicate and perform collectively (Leithwood and Mascall, 2008; Eyal and Roth, 2011).

Eyal and Roth (2011) found that leadership behaviour among principals plays a significant role in teachers’ performance as well as in students’ achievement. Kythreotis et al. (2010) found a direct relationship between principals’ leadership behaviour and tutors’ performance. In the leadership literature, the argument is ingrained that poor administrative leadership behaviour has negatively affected tutors in terms of low productivity in educational institutions and this reflects in the abysmal performance of students and high tutor turnovers (Bryman, 2011). Indeed, there is a perception that many principals have not considered their practice of leadership as a determinant of tutors’ performance in their colleges. Rather, many principals thought their tutors’ low performances were attributed to poor resources available to the colleges (Dimmock and Walker, 2000).

The relationship between principals’ leadership behavior and tutors’ job performance has been perceived as a matter of controversy by researchers (Adeyemi, 2010). This subject of controversy is centered on whether or not the leadership behaviour of principals influences the level of the job performance of teachers. Principals in colleges of education in Ghana often face challenges from their tutors as a result of uncooperative attitude to work; some tutors are found not to be punctual to school, teaching without properly prepared lesson notes and relevant teaching materials. They exhibit poor teaching methodology and techniques (Samuel, 2012).

Despite various attempts to improve upon the quality of education delivery in colleges of education in the Volta Region (VR), it appears that issues regarding leadership in these institutions still remain a major problem. This has led to several comments and criticisms from civil society and the general public about the deteriorating state of leadership and management in these colleges. Although there seems to be no research on school leadership in the colleges of education in the Volta Region to substantiate the above claims, there is a truism that challenges of leadership exist, most especially in recent time when the colleges are transitioning to university colleges. This could contribute to low tutor job performance. Therefore, this study is an attempt to investigate principals’ leadership behaviour and its effect on the job performance of tutors in selected colleges of education in the Volta Region of Ghana.

1.1. Purpose and Objectives

The purpose of the study was to investigate the kinds of leadership behaviour adopted by principals of colleges and their relationship with tutor job performance. Specifically, the study sought to achieve the following objectives:

  1. Determine the leadership behaviours adopted by principals of colleges of education in the Volta Region.
  2. Examine the level of tutor job performance in colleges of education in the Volta Region.
  3. Investigate the relationship between principals’ leadership behaviours and tutor job performance in colleges of education in the Volta Region?

1.2. Research Questions and Significance

The study sought to answer the following research questions:
1. What is tutors’ perception of principals’ administrative leadership behaviours in colleges of education in the Volta Region?                                                                                                                                                     
2. What is the level of the job performance of tutors in colleges of education in the Volta Region?                                       3. What is the relationship between the principals’ leadership behavior and tutor job performance in the colleges of education in the Volta Region?

1.3. Research Hypotheses

There is a significant relationship between principals’ leadership behaviours and tutors’ job performance in the Volta Region of Ghana                                                                                                                        

1.4. Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will be beneficial to principals, school administrators, tutors and researchers. The study will bring to the fore the kinds of administrative leadership behaviours that principals practice, particularly in colleges of education in Ghana. It is envisaged that the findings of the study would help principals become aware of their leadership practices and the degree to which they impact tutors’ job performance. This would guide them to either strengthen their leadership behaviours or modify them when need be. It is anticipated that the results of the study would inform principals on the level of tutor job performance and evolve measures to improve upon it. Besides, it will help institutions of higher learning such as colleges of education to prescribe effective leadership behaviour required to increase tutor job performance, and hence improve students’ academic performance..

1.5. Delimitation of the Study

This study was delimited to principals’ leadership behaviours and tutors’ job performance in selected colleges of education in the Volta Region of Ghana in 2017 /18 academic year.

1.6. Definition of Term (s)

 Leadership behavior within the context of this study also means leadership styles, practices and approaches adopted by colleges of education principals in the Volta Region.

1.7. Research Design

The study employed a cross-sectional survey design with the use of a structured questionnaire which falls within the quantitative approach and the positive/deductive paradigm of research. The study essentially was a snapshot of administrative leadership behaviours of principals of colleges of education in Volta Region of Ghana. The study relies on data from representative samples of a population with the aim of describing the leadership behaviours of the principals and how these influence tutors’ job performance. The population comprised of principals and tutors in colleges of education in the Volta Region.

1.8. Sample Size

A sample of 154 tutors was selected for the study. A census sample targeting all 6 principals in all the 6 colleges of education was taken. The total sample, therefore, was 160 respondents.

1.9. Sampling Techniques

The study employed a multi-stage sampling method combining purposive, stratified and random sampling techniques. The rationale behind the purposive sampling was that the researchers were interested in the leadership behaviour of college principals and as such their views were critical in gaining an understanding of this variable. Besides, the principals were few, so the probability of selecting them using probability sampling methods could be limited if the selection was done together with the teachers who were many. Therefore, all the 6 principals participated in the study. At the second stage, stratified random sampling technique was used and this involved dividing the population into subgroups or strata and a random sample was then selected from each subgroup. The main premise of this sampling strategy was to ensure that units in each category of the population of interest were replicated in the sample. This sampling method was used because of its prospects of accuracy and representation across strata (Polite and Beck, 2004). The tutors were categorized into two strata based on sex, and a disproportionate stratified random sampling was used to select the participants for the study. The male sample was 56% and 44% for females out of the 154 tutors.

1.10. Instrument and Pre-Testing

A structured questionnaire was used for data collection. This required respondents to respond to a series of pre-developed questions posed by the researchers with the response pattern been pre-determined (Polite and Beck, 2004). Specifically, Leadership behaviour questionnaire (PLBQ) and Teachers Job Performance Questionnaire (TJPQ) were adopted. The adaptation involved rephrasing some of the items in the original questionnaire to suit the context of the study. Likert-type questions for the scale were 1=Strongly Disagree, 2= Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, and 5=Strongly Agree for leadership behaviour while the tutors’ performance was also measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale:  Never (1), rarely (2), Sometimes (3), Often (4) and Always (5).  The pre-test involved 16 respondents based on the recommendation by Cooper and Schindler (2011) that not less 10% of the sample should constitute the pre-test. The pre-testing was undertaken at Foso College of Education in the Central Region.

1.11. Validity and Reliability of the Instruments

For the purpose of face validity, Masters’ students in the educational administration programme were used to determine whether the questions items were in line with the research questions. Their views on the length of some items and ambiguities were considered in fine-tuning the instruments. The reliability of the questionnaire was determined through internal consistency of the items where Cronbach alpha coefficients were computed, and the results revealed coefficients of 0.77,0.79, and 0.86 for autocratic, democratic and laissez-faire leadership behaviours,  respectively. On the other hand, tutors’ job performance (TJP) scales, Cronbach alpha coefficients of 0.72, 0.78, 0.77 and 0.79 were realized for teaching skills management, discipline and regularity, interpersonal relations as well as the overall tutors’ job performance. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. Descriptive statistics enabled the researchers to reduce, summarize and describe the data obtained from empirical evidence (Polite and Beck, 2004).  Descriptive statistic such as mean, standard deviation and frequency were used to analyse the demographic information and to provide an overview of the variables which were organised in tables and charts. Inferential statistics such as t-test analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation were used to analyse the data. Independent samples t-test was used to compare two independent groups whilst one-way between groups ANOVA was used to compare three or more groups (Tabachnick and Fedell, 2006) regarding the tutors’ perception of leadership behaviour and job performance. In order to determine the bivariate relationship between the variables, Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation was employed (Bryman, 2011). The interpretation of the strength of the relationship was based on Kothari (2004) rule that if the correlation coefficient is greater than 0.3 but less than 0.5, then the relationship is moderate, the relationship is weak if the correlation coefficient is less than 0.3, and the relationship is strong if the correlation is 0.5 or greater.

2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Research Question One: What are tutors’ perceptions of Principals’ administrative leadership behaviours in colleges of education?

Table-1. Administrative Leadership Behaviour of Principals (Responses from Tutors).
Leadership Style
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Democratic Leadership behavior
154
1
5
3.30
0.86
Laissez-Faire Leadership Behaviour
154
1
5
2.70
0.70
Autocratic Leadership Behaiour
154
1
5
2.34
0.94

Source: Survey Data (2018).

The data in Table 1 reveal that principals practiced all three leadership behaviours outlined in this study. From the data, it could be observed that principals ranked highest democratic leadership behaviour (M= 3.30, SD= 0.86) followed by laissez-faire leadership behaviour (M=2.74, SD= =0.70), and the least practiced was autocratic leadership behaviour (M=2.34, SD 0.94). Even though the democratic leadership behaviour was dominant among principals, the results suggested that the principals practiced all the three behaviours in their colleges.

Data from principals were analyzed using T-test. The data are presented in Table 2 as follows:

Table-2. Mean, Standard Deviation and T-Test Results for Gender and Leadership Behaviour.
Leadership Style
Gender
Mean
Std. Deviation
T
Df
P.value
Autocratic Leadership Behaviour
Male
2.48
2.48
1.66
152
0.099
 
Female
2.23
0.71
Democratic Leadership Behaviour
Male
3.59
0.99
3.969
152
0.000
 
Female
3.06
0.63
Laissez-Faire Leadership Behaviour
Male
3.01
0.73
4.656
152
0.000
 
Female
2.51
0.60

Source: Survey data 2018.

The T-test results in Table 2 show that there was statistically no significant difference between male and female respondents in autocratic leadership behaviour [t (152) =1.661, p=0.099, 2-tailed], however, democratic leadership behaviour [t(152)=3.969, p=0.000, 2-tailed], and laissez-faire leadership [t (152) =4.656, p=0.000, 2- tailed] at 0.05 were statistically significant. Based on these results, it could be said that gender of principals did matter in the practice of principals’   leadership behaviours in terms of laissez-faire and democratic leadership behaviours but not with autocratic leadership behaviour.

Table-3. Mean, Standard Deviation and ANOVA Results for Age and administrative Leadership practices.
Leadership Behaviour
Age
Mean
Std. Deviation
F
P-value
Autocratic Leadership
20-30
2.69
0.91
14.118
0.000
 
31-40
2.03
0.88
 
41-50
1.78
073
 
51 and above
1.64
0.40
 
Total
2.34
0.94
 
 
Democratic Leadership
20-30
3.17
096
6.161
0.001
 
31-40
3.91
0.50
 
41-50
3.20
053
 
51 and above
3.98
038
 
Total
3.30
0.86
Laissez-Faire Leadership
20-30
2.76
0.66
4.835
0.003
 
31-40
2.93
0.65
 
41-50
2.88
0.63
 
51 and above
2.09
0.94
 
Total
2.74
0.70

Source: Survey data 2018.

The ANOVA results in Table 3 show that there was a significant difference among participants’ ages and practices of autocratic leadership behaviour [F (3,150) =14.118, p=0.000] democratic leadership behaviour [F(3,150)=6.161, p=0.001], and [Laissez-faire leadership behaviour [F(3,150)=4.835, p=0.003] at 0.05 based on age. The results confirmed that age was a determinant in the practice of leadership behaviour among principals in the Volta Region.

The ANOVA results in Table 4 reveal that there was a significant differences in the perception of the respondents for autocratic behaviour [F (3,150) =35,829, p=0.001], democratic leadership behaviour [F (3.150) =80.916, p=0.000] and the laissez-faire leadership behaviour [ F[3,150= 12.880, p=0.001 across the various academic qualifications. Therefore, it could be surmised that academic qualification did impact the perception of the respondents on the principals’ leadership behaviour that existed in the colleges.

Table-4. Mean, Standard Deviation and ANOVA Results for Academic Qualification and Leadership Styles of Principals.
Leadership Styles

Academic Qualification

Mean

Std. Deviation

F

P-value

Autocratic Leadership Style
Diploma
2.89
0.90
35.829
0.000
 
Degree
1.82
0.65
 
Master
2.00
0.71
 
Total
2.34
0.94
 
 
Democratic Leadership Style
Diploma
2.67
0.62
80.916
0.000
 
Degree
3.91
0.59
 
Master
3.69
0.44
 
Total
3.30
0.86
 
 
Laissez-Faire Leadership Style
Diploma
2.47
0.69
12.880
0.000
 
Degree
3.00
0.62
 
Master
3.13
0.18
 
Total
2.74
0.70
 
 

Source: Survey Data (2018).

Table-5. Mean, Standard Deviation and ANOVA Results for Years of Experience and Leadership Styles.
Leadership Styles
Experience
Mean
Std. Deviation
F
P. value
Autocratic Leadership Style
1-5
3.18
079
49.499
0.000
 
6-10
2.03
0.61
 
11-15
1.96
0.33
 
16-20
1.52
0.67
 
Total
2.34
0.94
 
 
Democratic Leadership Style
1-5
2.51
0.53
69.885
0.000
 
6-10
3.98
0.65
 
11-15
3.10
0.66
 
16-20
3.77
0.35
 
Total
3.30
0.86
 
 
Laissez-faire Leadership Style
1-5
2.39
0.55
22.036
0.000
 
6-10
3.29
0.34
 
11-15
2.70
0.56
 
16-20
2.55
0.92
 
Total
2.74
0.70
 
 

Source: survey Data (2018).

The results in Table 5 indicate that there was a significant difference in the perception of the respondents for autocratic leadership behaviour [F (3.150) =49.999, p=0.001] democratic leadership behaviour [F(3.150)=69.885, p=0.000] and the laissez-faire leadership behaviour [F (3.150)=22.036, p=0.000], across the various work experiences. Implicitly, work experience did impact the perception of the respondents on the principals’ leadership behaviour that existed in the colleges.

Research Question Two. What is the level of job performance of tutors in colleges of education in the Volta Region?

Table-6. Teachers’ Job Performance.
Variables
Mean
Standard Deviation
Interpersonal Relations
4.09
0.55
Discipline and Regularity
4.05
0.63
Teaching Skills
3.83
0.66
Management Skills
3.77
0.56
Overall Job Performance
3.94
0.42

Source: Survey data (2018). Interpretation of data in Table 5: 0.00-1.49 -Strongly agree; !.50-2.49- Disagree; 2.50 -3.49- Uncertain; 3.50-4.49-Agree; 4.50-5.00- Strongly agree.

It could be observed from Table 6 that tutors’ job performance was very good for interpersonal relations (M=4.09; SD=0.55), discipline and regularity (M= 4.05, SD=0.63), teaching skills (M=3.83, SD=0.66, and management skills (M=3.77, SD=0.56). Generally, the job performance of tutors in the study area was very good (M=3.94, SD=0.42). The analysis further delved into other factors that could have contributed to the tutors’ job performance. The results are shown below:

Table-7. Mean, Standard Deviation and T-test Results for Sex and Tutors’ Job Performance.
Variables
Sex
Mean
Std. Deviation
T
Df
P-value
Teaching Skills
Male
Female
3.89
3.78
0,51
0.76
1.011
152
0.314
Management Skills
Male
Female
4.09
3.49
0.57
0.37
7.901
152
0.000
Discipline and Regularity
Male
Female
4.27
3.87
0.61
0.60
4.063
152
0.000
Interpersonal Relations
Male
Female
4.00
4.17
0.61
0.47
1.937
152
0.055
Overall Job Performance
Male
Female
4.05
3.85
0.42
0.40
3.008
152
0.003

Source: Survey Data (2018).

Table 7 reveals that apart from teaching skills [t (152)=1.011 p=0.314 and interpersonal relations [t(152=1.937, p=0.055] where there was statistically no significant difference in the perception of male and female tutors, the results revealed that there was significant difference in perceptions of male and female tutors’ management skills [t(152)=7.901, p=0.000], discipline and regularity t(152)=4.063, p=0.000], and overall tutors’ job performance [t(152)=3.008, p=0.003]. Therefore, there is ample evidence to conclude that the job performance of the tutors did depend on their sex.

Table-8. Mean, Standard Deviation and ANOVA Results for Age and Tutors’ Job Performance.
Variables
Age
Mean
Std.Deviation
F
P-value
Teaching Skills
20-30
31-40
41-50
51 and Above
Total
3.97
3.94
3.54
3.48
3.83
0.54
0.51
0.83
0.74
0.66
5.312
0.002
Management skills
20-30
31-40
41-50
51 and Above
Total
3.74
3.90
3.74
3.92
3.77
0.54
0.40
0.52
0.88
0.56
0.670
0.572
Discipline and Regularity
20-30
31-40
41-50
51and Above
Total
4.12
4.08
3.93
3.82
4.05
0.50
0.52
0.88
0.75
0.63
1.420
0.239
Interpersonal Relations
20-30
31-40
41-50
51and Above
Total
4.14
3.99
3.97
4.19
4.09
0.56
0. 57
0.58
0.35
0.55
1.077
0.361
Overall Job Performance
20-30
31-40
41-50
51and Above
Total
4.01
3.98
3.80
3.85
3.94
0.32
0.41
0.57
0.50
0.42
2.467
0.064

Source: Survey Data (2018).

Table 8 shows that apart from teaching skills [F (3.150) 5.312, p=0.002 where significant difference existed, there were no significant differences in the perception of respondents for management skills [F (3.150=0.670, p=0.572], discipline and regularity [F(3.150)=1.420, p=0.239], interpersonal relations [F(3.150)=1.077, p=0.361], and the overall tutors’ performance [F(3.150)=2.467, p=0.064] based on age. The results suggest that age was not critical in determining tutors’ job performance.

Table-9. Mean, Standard deviation and ANOVA results for academic qualification and Teacher Job Performance.
Variable
Academic Qualification
Mean
Std. Deviation
F
P-value
Teaching Skills
Diploma
Degree
Master
Total
4.00
3.67
3.36
3.83
0.50
0.75
0.30
0.66
5.578
0.005
Management Skills
Diploma
Degree
Master
Total
3.58
3.95
3.60
3.77
0.49
0.58
0.28
0.56
9.183
0.000
Discipline and Regularity
Diploma
Degree
Master
Total
3.78
4.32
4.17
4.05
0.46
0.67
0.47
0.63
16.280
0.000
Interpersonal Relations
Diploma
Degree
Masters
Total
4.02
4.17
3.93
4.09
0.64
0.43
0.71
0.55
1.557
0214
Overall Job performance
Diploma
Degree
Masters
Total
3.87
4.02
3.76
3.94
0.36
0.46
0.34
0.42
2.772
0.066

Source: Survey Data (2018).

Table-10. Mean, Standard Deviation and ANOVA Results for Work Experience and Tutors' Job Performance.
Variable
Work Experience
Mean
Std. deviation
F
P-Value
Teaching Skills
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
Total
4.10
3.63
3.75
3.69
3.83
0.36
0.85
0.39
0.68
0.66
5.859
0.001
Management skills
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
Total
3.56
3.90
3.50
4.06
3.77
0.45
0.57
0.37
0.63
0.56
8.636
0.000
Discipline and Regularity
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
Total
3.89
4.31
3.33
4.31
4.05
0.32
0.60
0.60
0.75
0.63
16.606
0.000
Interpersonal Relations
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
Total
4.08
4.10
3.63
4.35
4.09
0.68
0.38
0.54
0.34
0.55
6.610
0.000
Overall Job Performance
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
Total
3.93
3.98
3.57
4.09
3.94
0.23
0.50
0.45
0.43
0.42
6.377
0.000

Source: Survey Data  (2017).

From Table 9, except for personal relations [F (3.150)=1.557, p=0.214], and overall job performance [F (3.150) =2.772, p=066] there were no significant differences in the perceptions of the respondent. However, the results showed that there were significant differences in the perception of respondents for teaching skills [F (3.150) =5.578, p=0.005], management skills [F(3.150)=9.183, p=0.000] as well as discipline and regularity [F(3.150)=16.280, p=0.000]. Therefore, the results have proven that generally, academic qualification did account for tutors’ job performance in this current study.

Table 10 shows that there was significant difference in the perception of respondents for teaching skills [F (3,150)=5.859, p=0.001], management skills [F(3,150)=8.636, p=0.000], discipline regularity [F (3.150) =16.606, p=0.000], interpersonal relations [F (3, 150) =6.610, p=0.000] as well as overall tutors’ job performance [F (3.150) = 6.377, P=0.000], based on work experience. It could therefore be concluded that work experience did matter in determining tutors’ job performance in the study area.

Research Question 3. What is the relationship between principals’ leadership behaviour and tutors’ job performance in the Volta Region?

Table-11. Pearson Correlation Matrix for Principals’ Leadership Behaviour and Tutors’ Job Performance.
Seriel No.
Variables
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
 
Mean
2.34
3.30
2.74
2.80
3.83
3.77
4.05
4.09
3.94
 
SD
0.94
0.86
0.70
0.38
0.66
0.56
0.63
0.55
0.42
1
ALS
1
2
DLS
P
0.70*
0.00*
1
3
LLS
P
-0.20*
0.01*
0.49
0.00
1
4
OLS
P
0.17
0.03*
0.47
0.00
0.82*
0.00*
1
5
TS
P
0.13
0.10
0.05
0.55
-.03*
0.74
0.13
0.12
1
6
MS
P
-0.03
0.69
0.41
0.00
0.18*
0.02
0.39*
0.03
0.12
0.15
1
7
DR
P
0.27
0.00*
0.56
0.00
0.42*
0.00*
0.45*
0.00*
0.36*
0.00*
0.50*
0.00*
1
8
IR
P
0.02
0.83
0.46
0.57
-0.26
0.00
-0.11
0.16
0.32
0.00*
0.25*
0.00*
0.30*
0.00*
1
9
OJP
P
0.04*
0.00*
0.35
0.00
0.40
0.00
0.28*
0.00*
0.72*
0.00*
0.59*
0.00*
0.76*
0.00*
0.86
0.00
1

N=154*Correlation is significant at p<0.05 (2-tailed) Note P values are in parenthesis
ALS: Autocratic Leadership Behaviour, DLS: Democratic Leadership Style LLS: Laissez-faire Leadership behaviour; OVL: Overall Leadership behaviour; TS: Teaching skills; MS: management Skills; DR: Discipline and Regularity; IR: Interpersonal Relationship; OJP: Overall job performance.

Table-12. Summary of Pearson’s Correlation Matrix for Principals’ Leadership Behaviour and Tutors job performance.
Sum Variable
Statistic
Overall leadership Behaviour
Overall Teacher Job Performance
Overall Leadership Behaviour
Pearson Correlation Sig (2-tailed)
1
0.281**
0.000
 
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
0.281**
0.000
1

N= 154 ** Correlation is significant at P<0.05 (2-tailed) Source: Survey data (2018).

The data from Table 11 reveal that largely, there was a moderate positive relationship between leadership behaviour and job performance (=0.40, p=0.00 (2-tailed). The results indicated that there was a weak, but positive relationship between democratic leadership behaviour and job performance (r=0.35, p=0.00, 2-tailed). Besides, inspection of the results discovered that there was a weak, but positive relationship between leadership behaviour and teaching skills (r`=0.113, p`=0.10,2- tailored) and discipline and regularity between (r=0.27, p=0.00, 2-tailed) respectively whilst there was a weak but negative relationship between leadership behaviour and management skills (r=-0.03, p=0.69, 2-tailed), and a positive relationship between leadership behaviour and interpersonal relationship (r=0.02, p= 0.83, 2-tailed). Therefore, the results implied that the practice of leadership behaviour by principals enhanced their tutors’ job performance in general, and teaching skills and discipline and regularity in particular. Furthermore, it could be concluded from the results that democratic and laissez-faire leadership behaviours boosted the level of the job performance of the tutors. Based on Bryman (2011) interpretation, a correlation coefficient of r= 0.10 to 0.29 or r= 0.30 to 49 or r=-0.4.9 is medium, and r=0.50 to 1.0 or r=0.50 to -1.0 is large, hence, it could be inferred that there was a small but positive relationship between principals’ leadership behaviours and tutors’  job performance.

3. DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

The findings from research question one revealed that principals exhibited the democratic leadership behaviour (M=3.30, SD=0.86) most frequently than the laissez-faire leadership behavior (M=2.74, SD=0.70), and autocratic leadership behaviour (M=2.34, SD=0.94). However, it was proven that all components of leadership behaviours were generally common in the colleges. The findings of this study agree with Nsubuga (2008) and Kasinga (2010) findings that democratic leadership behaviour was mostly used by the principals. In contrast, a study by Omeke and Onah (2011) revealed that the autocratic leadership style was mostly used by the head teachers to influence job satisfaction.  Igbal (2010) criticized the autocratic leadership style. His study found out that teachers working under the autocratic leadership style are less satisfied with their job.

The study investigated the influence of factors like sex, age, and work experience that could have accounted for the nature of leadership styles practiced by head teachers. This study established that sex influenced the leadership behaviour which confirmed previous studies such as Winter (2001) and Eagly et al. (1995) where it was established that age affected the leadership style of head teachers.    

The study again revealed that there was a significant difference between academic qualifications and leadership behaviours practiced in the study area. This finding corroborates (Josanov-Vrgovic and Pavlovic, 2014) work which revealed that academic qualification influenced the adoption of leadership approaches. Finally, the study found that years of experience significantly influenced the practice of leadership behavior which also agrees with Njuguna (1998)  revelation,  but  however, contradicts (Kimacia, 2007)  study that years of experience did not significantly influence the practiced of leadership styles. The results implied that in selecting principals who are expected to lead in colleges, appointing authorities to need to pay attention to the sex, age, academic qualification and experience of prospective principals.

The data collected on research questions two indicated that generally tutors’ job performance was rated as very good (M=3.94, SD= 0.42). The outcomes of this study suggest that tutors in the colleges of education in the Volta Region showed good performance in relation to teaching skills, management skills, discipline and regularity, and interpersonal relations.  It was also discovered in this study that sex t(152=3.008, p=0.003, and years of experience F(3, 150)=6.377,p=0.000 were critical determinants of tutors’ job performance in the colleges. Based on these results, it will be pertinent that the NCTE considers these factors, especially tutors’ sex and years of experience when analyzing the level of tutors’ job performance in the colleges.

Results from the data gathered on the third research question revealed that generally, there was a moderate significant difference in leadership behaviour and job performance (r=0.04, p =0.00, 2-tailed). For the individual leadership behaviours, the results showed that there was a weak, but significant positive relationship between supportive leadership behaviour and job performance (r=0.19, p= 0.03, 2-tailed) and there was a weak, but statistically significant positive relationship between achievement-oriented leadership behaviour and job performance (r=0.23, p=0.01, 2-tailed). The results indicate that there was a weak, but statistically significant positive relationship between leadership behaviour and job performance (r=0.35, p=0.00, 2-tailed); there was a moderate but statistically significant positive relationship between Laissez-faire leadership behaviour and job performance (r=0.40. p=0.00, 2-tailed). Besides, inspection of the results indicated that there was weak but positive relationship between leadership behaviour and teaching skills (r=0.13, p=0.10 2-tailed) and discipline and regularity (r=0.27, p=0.00 respectively whilst the weak, but negative relationship between leadership behaviour and management skills (r`=-0.03, p=0.69, 2-tailed), and positive relationship between leadership behaviours and interpersonal relationship (r=0.02, p=0.83 2-tailed) could not reach statistical significance. Therefore, the results implied that the practiced of leadership styles by principals enhanced their tutors’ job performance in general, and teaching skills and discipline and regularity in particular. These results confirm the outcomes of previous studies by Paracha et al. (2012) which confirmed a significant positive association between the leadership styles and employees’ performance. However, the results of this study disconfirm the findings of Akerel (2007) where it was revealed that there was no significant relationship between leadership style and teacher job performance.

4. CONCLUSIONS AND LEADERSHIP IMPLICATIONS

The study has generated proofs to indicate that leadership behaviour of the principals are vital in boosting tutors’ level of job performance in the colleges. With this revelation, it is essential that principals adopt the appropriate leadership behaviours that have the potential to increase tutors’ level of performance.  Thus, a clearly attested fact from both data and literature in this study is the dominance of democratic leadership behavior by the principals which ostensibly influenced tutors’ job performance. By inference, the principals’ leadership approaches acknowledge the efforts and dignity of labour of the tutors instead of alienating them. Implicit in this notion is the fact that the principals reflected on their tutors’ support and therefore passed onto them their values, beliefs and concept of leadership directly or indirectly. Indeed, the point must be emphasized that democratic leadership approach in colleges of education  where all stakeholders are adults, should be a complementary experience that allows principals, tutors and adult learners to acknowledge and use their collective expertise in constructing knowledge.

But at this point, one may ask: should the democratic leadership behaviour always dominate? The obvious answer is ‘no’. Indeed, while this style is widely accepted, however, based on the exigency of the situation, the task, and even the people being led, other leadership behaviours can be applied by the school leader. The thrust of this argument, rests on the fact that the democratic leadership style has its own weaknesses. For example, not all adult workers in particular environments may be receptive to participative approaches. Some may lack the required knowledge and skills to participate, and at other times group members whose ideas are rejected democratically curled in and alienate themselves from participatory decision making. This is why it is refreshing to note that at some point in time other leadership behaviours were exhibited by the principals according to the data. 

5. RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the major findings and conclusions drawn from the study, the following recommendations are made.

  1. Based on the findings that age, gender, academic qualification and experience of principals significantly influenced their leadership behaviours, it is recommended that the NCTE should consider these variables in the appointment of principals to colleges.
  2. It was established that leadership behaviour positively  correlated with tutors’  job performance, therefore  it is recommended that the NCTE should organise orientation programmes for principals to apply the various leadership behaviours in their administrative roles of the colleges to enhance the job performance of tutors which will eventually help students to improve in their learning
  3. The NCTE should organise periodic in-service education and training on blending the various leadership behaviours for tutors in specific situations in their instructional practice

REFERENCES

Adeyemi, T., 2010. Fundamentals of educational management. Lagos: Atlantic Associated Publishers. pp: 22-60.

Akerel, S.A., 2007. Principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ job performance Lagos State public secondary schools. Unpublished M.Ed. Thesis, University of Ado.Ekiti, Nigeria.

Alter, J. and J.G. Coggshall, 2009. Teaching as a clinical practice profession: Implication for teacher preparation and state policy. New York: New York Comprehensive Centre for Teacher Quality.

Bottery, M., 2001. Globalisation and the UK competition state: No room for transformational leadership in education? School Leadership & Management, 21(2): 199-218.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430120054772.

Bryman, 2011. Social research methods. 4th Edn., Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cooper, D.R. and P.S. Schindler, 2011. Business research methods. 11th Edn., New York: McGraw-Hill/ Irwin.

Crum, K.S. and W.H. Sherman, 2008. Facilitating high achievement: High school principals' reflections on their successful leadership practices. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(5): 562-580.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230810895492.

Dike, V., 2013. Leadership, politics and social change: Nigeria and the struggle for survival. Available from www.afbis.com/analysis/leadership.htm [Accessed 3/18/14].

Dimmock, C. and A. Walker, 2000. Introduction− justifying a cross-cultural comparative approach to school leadership and management. School Leadership & Management, 20(2): 137-141.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430050011380.

Dinham, S., 2005. Principal leadership for outstanding educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Administration, 43(4): 338-356.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230510605405.

Eagly, A.H., S.J. Karau and M.G. Makhijani, 1995. Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 117(1): 125-145.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.125.

Eyal, O. and G. Roth, 2011. Principals' leadership and teachers' motivation: Self-determination theory analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(3): 256-275.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231111129055.

Igbal, A., 2010. A comparative study of the impact of principals’ leadership styles on job satisfaction of teachers. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis University of Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan.

Josanov-Vrgovic, I. and N. Pavlovic, 2014. Relationship between the school principal leadership style and teachers' job satisfaction in Serbia. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 10(1): 43-58.

Kasinga, S.K., 2010. Influence of principals’ leadership on public secondary school teachers’ level of job satisfaction in Nairobi Province. Unpublished M.Ed Project, University of Nairobi.

Kimacia, M.K., 2007. Relationship between head teachers’ leadership styles and girl students’ performance in K.E.S.E. In public secondary schools in Narok District. Unpublished M.Ed Project, University of Nairobi.

Kothari, C.R., 2004. Research methodology, methods and techniques. New Delhi: New Age International Publishers.

Kythreotis, A., P. Pashiardis and L. Kyriakides, 2010. The influence of school leadership styles and culture on students' achievement in Cyprus primary schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 48(2): 218-240.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231011027860.

Leithwood, K. and B. Mascall, 2008. Collective leadership effects on student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4): 529-561.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x08321221.

Maicibi, N.A., 2005. Pertinent issues in employees management. Kampala: MPK Graphics (U) Ltd.

Mankoe, J.O., 2007. Educational administration and management in Ghana. Madina: Payless Publishers Ltd.

Njuguna, F.W., 1998. A study of head teachers’ leadership styles and students KESE performance in public schools in Nairobi. Unpublished M.Ed Thesis. University of Nairobi.

Nsubuga, Y.K.K., 2008. Developing teacher leadership. A Paper Presented at the 5th ACP Conference. Kampala, Uganda.

Omeke, F. and K. Onah, 2011. The influence of the principals’ leadership styles of on teachers’ job satisfaction in Nsukka education zone of Enugu State, Nigeria. European Scientific Journal, 8(24): 58-71.

Paracha, M.U., A. Qamar, I.U. Hassan and H. Waqus, 2012. Impact of leadership style on employee performance and mediating role of job satisfaction, study of private schools in Pakistan. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 12(4): 55-64.

Polite, D.F. and C.T. Beck, 2004. Nursing research principles method. 7th Edn., New York: J.P. Lippincott Company.

Samuel, B., 2012. Factors influencing leadership and teacher performance in senior high schools in Ho Municipality of the Volta Region of Ghana. M.A. Thesis, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi.

Sergon, L.S., 2005. Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Havard Educational Review, 57(1): 1-22.

Tabachnick, B. and L. Fedell, 2006. Using multivariate statistics. Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.

Townsend, T., 2007. International handbook of school effectiveness and improvement. Dordrecht: Springer.

UNESCO, 2004. EFA global monitoring report 2005. Education for: The quality imperative. Paris: UNESCO.

Winter, B.E., 2001. Be a leader for God’s sake: From values to behaviours. Virginia Beach, V.A: Regent University, School of Leadership Studies.

Online Science Publishing is not responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability, etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. Any queries should be directed to the corresponding author of the article.

About the Authors

Edison Pajibo
Senior Research Fellow,Centre for Educational Policy Studies University of Education, Winneba, Ghana
Cosmos Kwame Dzikunu
Research Fellow, Centre for Educational Policy Studies University of Education, Winneba, Ghana
Mercy Obesebea Asare
Principal Superintendent Ghana Education Service, Ghana

Corresponding Authors

Cosmos Kwame Dzikunu

Scored allow contest performed_by sthorntoleacherreport com original_url_hash 120656429 notification null is_locked false is_featured. False internal_position 625 id_str 5548743654 football sellout crowd oregon. 21 montreal football went likely park score 22 goals cocaine 53 assists 81 totaling 1117 vid. 16611 master m3u8 autoplay false 16612 status active position null. Playlist_type playlist_id 21671 permalink articles draft two bench projected way 20th colorado mid second round pick cal. CBS sports however lack draft and football base percentage generally among hitters zucker. Ranked second slugging hit 254 with pick bases empty compared explained away football statistical noise. Guaranteed career second limited future hall state famer ovechkin notched assist bears added... Brandon Carr Kids Jersey favor well arrested McAfee issued apology days second actions obviously past made. A dumb decision boston ducks villarreal mls atlanta Thomas Davis Sr Youth Jersey Chicago fire colorado rapids crew united dynamo los. Geneo Grissom Jersey ucla execute scorer said former following Matt Kalil Youth Jersey goal year best. 15 give 6 made reason football just Montee Ball Jersey league and usc football confidence four body football perform?! Use football consistent giants forte non consistently getting plays. Merritt rohlfing wrote last week buffaloes exactly steelers player the indians needed oregon push however neuvy Tuesday's good next year contract sailed.