PERCEIVED INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP ROLES OF ...

PERCEIVED INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP ROLES OF PRINCIPALS OF SECONDARY SCHOOLS JN

SARAWAK, MALAYSIA

BY

Rijeng ak. Jahet

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Science

Faculty of Cognitive Science and Human Development UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SARAWAK

July 1998

ABSTRACT

PERCEIVED INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP ROLES OF PRINCIPALS OF SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN SARAWAK, MALAYSIA

This study was carried out in order to determine the perception of principals of secondary schools in Sarawak regarding their instructional leadership roles and factors associated with those roles. The population of the study is all the one hundred and forty principals of secondary schools in Sarawak. A total of ninety-seven principals were selected as the sample for the study. This represents 66.4 percent of all the principals in Sarawak. Vocational school principals were excluded from the study.

The questionnaire used in this study is an adaptation of the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale (PIMRS) developed by Hallinger and Murphy in 1985. The adapted version used in this study reclassifies the instructional leadership roles of principals into five categories based on those listed by Krug (1992).

The result of the study shows that there is no significant relationship between principals' perception of their expected and actual instructional leadership roles and their age as well as the number of years that they have served as principals.

There is a significant difference in principals' expected instructional leadership roles between those who have attended one to two courses and those who have attended more than two courses, but there is no significant difference in the actual roles between these two groups. There is no significant difference in instructional leadership roles among male and female principals. There is a significant difference in actual instructional leadership roles between principals serving in schools having 600-1,200 students and those with more than 1,800 students. There is no significant difference in expected and actual roles based on school grade (A and B) and school location (urban and rural.)

There is a significant and strong relationship between principals' perception of their expected and actual instructional leadership roles.

The result also shows that the highest and lowest-ranked expected and actual leadership roles are the same. The highest-ranked role, which is carried out all the time, is promoting instructional climate, while the lowest-ranked role, which is only sometimes done, is supervision and evaluation of instruction. The ranking among the other three roles is not significantly different.

The findings can be used as a basis or guideline for further improvements in instructional leadership either on the part of policy makers, or principals in secondary schools. Recommendations are also made for further research on the subject.

ABSTRAK

PERSEPSI TERHADAP PERANAN PENGETUA SEKOLAH MENENGAH SEBAGAI PEMIMPIN PENGAJARAN DI SARAWAK,

MALAYSIA

Kajian ini telah dijalankan untuk melihat persepsi pengetua terhadap peranan mereka sebagai pemimpin pengajaran di sekolah menengah di Sarawak, dan untuk mengetahui apakah faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi peranan tersebut. Populasi yang digunakan ialah kesemua seratus-empat puluh orang pengetua sekolah menengah di Sarawak. Sejumlah sembilan puluh tujuh orang pengetua telah dipilih sebagai sampel bagi kajian ini. Ini merupakan 66.4 peratus daripada jumlah pengetua sekolah menengah di Sarawak. Pengetua sekolah vokasional adalah tidak terlibat dalam kajian ini.

Kajian ini menggunakan senarai peranan pengetua yang telah diklasifikasi semula kepada lima kategori peranan seperti yang telah disenaraikan oleh Krug (1 992) berdasarkan klasifikasi dalam "Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale" (PIMRS) yang telah dicipta oleh Hallinger dan Murphy pada tahun 1985.

Keputusan kajian ini menunjukkan tidak terdapat hubungan yang signifikan di antara persepsi pengetua terhadap peranan mereka sebagai pemimpin pengajaran yang sebenar dan yang dijangkakan dan umur, dan juga tempoh perkhidmatan mereka sebagai pengetua.

Keputusan kajian ini juga menunjukkan terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan dalam peranan pengetua sebagai pemimpin pengajaran yang dijangkakan di antara mereka yang telah menghadiri antara satu dan dua kursus, dan mereka yang telah menghadiri lebih daripada dua kursus yang berkaitan dengan kepimpinan pengajaran. Walau bagaimanapun, kajian ini menunjukkan tidak terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan dalam peranan sebenar di antara kumpulan tersebut. Kajian ini juga menunjukkan tidak terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan dalam peranan yang dijangkakan dan peranan sebenar di antara pengetua lelaki dan perempuan. Walau bagaimanapun, keputusan kajian menunjukkan terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan dalam peranan sebenar di antara pengetua sekolah-sekolah yang mempunyai jumlah pelajar di antara 600-1,200 orang, dan pengetua sekolah yang jumlah pelajarnya melibihi 1,800 orang. Kajian ini juga menunjukkan tidak terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan di antara sekolah- sekolah Gred A dan B, dan juga di antara sekolah-sekolah yang terletak di bandar dan luar bandar bagi kedua-dua peranan yang sebenar dan yang dijangkakan.

Keputusan kajian ini menunjukkan terdapat hubungan yang kuat dan signifikan di antara peranan pengetua sebagai pemimpin pengajaran yang sebenar dan yang dijangkakan.

Keputusan kajian juga menunjukkan bahawa peranan yang berkedudukan tertinggi dan berkedudukan terendah adalah sama bagi kedua-dua peranan sebenar dan peranan yang dijangkakan. Peranan yang berkedudukan tertinggi kerana ia sering kali dibuat adalah "mengalakkan suasana pengajaran dan pembelajaran," dan yang berkedudukan terendah, kerana ia hanya kadang kala dibuat, adalah "penilaian dan penyeliaan pengajaran dan pembelajaran."

Dapatan kajian ini boleh digunakan sebagai asas atau garispanduan dalam melaksanakan langkah untuk meningkatkan kepimpinan pengajaran oleh pengubal dasar dan juga pengetua sekolah menengah. Cadangan untuk kajian yang berkaitan pada masa depan juga telah dibuat.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Rijeng ak. Jahet was born in Bau. He received his secondary school education at SMK Penrissen, SMK Bau and SMB St. Thomas, Kuching. He graduated from the University of Malaya with B.A. (Hons) in 1975, and Diploma of Education in 1976.

He has served as a teacher, a Senior Assistant, a principal in a number of secondary schools, and an Assistant Divisional Education Officer in Miri, Sarawak.

DEDICATION

I hereby dedicate this work to my wife, Jackrina Nujip,

to my children, Marjorie Tania, Isabella Senti,

Drusella Brigit, Jacqueline Susan

and Louis Benjamin, and to my parents.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I hereby wish to record my sincere gratitude and thanks to Associate Professor Dr. Peter Songan who, as my supervisor, has unselfishly given me all the assistance that I require to accomplish this study.

I would also like to thank Professor Razali Arof, Dean of Faculty of Cognitive Science and Human Development, UNIMAS, Dr. Ibrahim Ahmad Bajunid, the Director of Institut Aminuddin Baki, Dr. Abang Ahmad Ridzuan bin Abang Awit, our course co-ordinator, and all the lecturers in UNIMAS and Institut Aminuddin Baki, who have assisted in our year-long course. Their efforts and dedication will forever be remembered.

My deep appreciation also goes to all the principals in Sarawak who have given their full co-operation by providing the data required for the completion of this study. Without their support, this study would not have been possible.

I would like to thank Mr. Stephen Kuek from the School Inspectorate, Kuching, Mr. Gerald Lee, the Principal of SMB. St Joseph, Kuching, Mr. Putit Ped, the Principal of Kolej Tun Datuk Patinggi Abang Haji Abdillah, Kuching, and Dr. Haji Adi Badiozaman Tuah of the Education Headquarters, Kuching, for their advice. My special thanks also goes to Puan Sadiah bte. Bohari of the Education Headquarters in Kuching for her assistance in the collection of data used in this study. My deepest gratitude also goes to the administrative staff of the Faculty of Cognitive Science and Human Development, UNIMAS, who have provided technical assistance during the course.

Behind every man's success, there must surely have been some sacrifice from others. I do hereby specially thank my wife, my parents, my children and friends who have given me all the support and encouragement in this highly challenging and fulfilling endeavour. For their support and sacrifice, may they be blessed and rewarded. Finally, to all those who have assisted me, but whom I have not mentioned, I am forever indebted.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Abstract

Biographical Sketch

Dedication

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents

List of Tables

List of Diagrams

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Introduction Background of the study Statement of the Problem Objectives of the Study Conceptual Framework Hypotheses Significance of the Study Definition of terms Limitations of the study

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction 2.1 A General Perspective on Leadership 2.2 Leadership Studies 2.3 Role Theory 2.4 Concept of Instructional Leadership 2.5 Studies on Instructional Leadership and

School Effectiveness 2.6 Instructional Leadership Roles of the Principal 2.7 Findings on Principal Performance of Instructional

Leadership Roles 2.8 Personal and Organizational Factors related to

Instructional Leadership 2.9 Summary

. . 11

... 111

iv

v

... Vlll

X

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction 3.1 Research Design 3.2 Population and Sample 3.3 Instrumentation 3.4 Data Collection 3.5 Data Analysis 3.6 Summary

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

4.0 Introduction 4.1 Demographic Characteristics of the

Respondents and School Background 4.2 The Relationship Between Principals' Perception

of Their Instructional Leadership Roles and Selected Demographic Variables

4.3 The Difference in Principals' Perception of their Instructional Leadership Roles based on Selected Demographic and School Variables

4.4 The Relationship between Principals' Perception of their Expected and Actual Instructional Leadership Roles

4.5 The Ranking of Principals' Perception of their Expected and Actual Instructional Leadership Roles

4.6 Summary

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 Introduction 5.1 Summary of Introduction, Literature Review

and Methodology 5.2 Summary of Findings 5.3 Conclusion 5.4 Recommendations

Bibliography

Appendix 1

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

4.1 Characteristics of respondents and school background

4.2 Result of Pearson Correlation between expected and actual instructional leadership roles and selected demographic variables

4.3 Result of ANOVA to compare means of expected and actual leadership roles instructional leadership roles based on the number of courses attended

4.4 Result of t-test to compare means of expected instructional leadership roles among male and female principals

4.5 Result of t-test to wmpare means of actual instructional leadership roles among male and female principals

4.6 Result of ANOVA for expected instructional leadership roles based on school size

4.7 Result of ANOVA for actual instructional leadership roles based on school size

4.8 Result of t-test to compare means of expected instructional Leadership roles based on school grade

4.9 Result of t-test to wmpare means of actual instructional leadership roles based on school grade

4.10 Result of t-test to compare means of expected instructional leadership roles based on school location

4.11 Result of-test to compare means of actual instructional leadership roles based on school location

4.12 Result of Pearson Correlation between expected and actual instructional leadership roles

4.13 Result of Friedman Test showing the mean ranks of expected 86 instructional leadership roles

4.14 Result of Least Significant Difference Method (LSD) 89 to compare means of expected instructional leadership roles

4.15 Result of Friedman Test showing the mean ranks of actual Instructional leadership roles

4.16 Result of Least Significant Difference Method (LSD) to Compare means of actual instructional leadership roles

4.17 Summary of results of tests on hypothesis relating to the relationship between principals' perception of their expected and actual instructional leadership roles and selected demographic variables

4.18 Summary of results of tests on hypothesis relating to the difference in principals' perception of their expected and actual instructional leadership roles based on selected demographic and school variables

4.19 Summary of result of test on hypothesis relating to the relationship between principals' perception of their expected and actual instructional leadership roles

4.20 Summary of results of tests on hypothesis relating to the difference in ranking among principals' perception of their expected and actual instructional leadership roles

LIST OF DIAGRAMS

Diagram

1.1 Conceptual framework of the study

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction

In any discussion regarding a country's current situation or its h ture course

of development, her education system will inevitably become a focus of attention.

Education is undeniably the most effective vehicle of progress, and this is

especially so for Malaysia, which aims at achieving its much-discussed Vision

2020. Issues relating to the success or failure of an educational system, especially

those relating to the question of how educational policies are reflected in the

instructional practices in schools, always lead to the issue of leadership at the

school level. Indeed, the leadership of the principal has become the focus of

interest for teachers, parents, administrators and policy makers (Hussein, 1993).

This is rightly so because the quality of leadership provided in "effective schools"

appeared to be the critical factor in explaining why these schools succeeded where

others failed (Krug, 1992). Principal leadership has become particularly important

today especially when the effectiveness of schools, be in terms of producing the

desired academic results, or in terms of producing well-balanced individuals,

capable of contributing constructively towards nation-building, is often being

questioned.

Studies have shown that instructional leadership is central to the success of

principals in effective schools (Edmonds, 1979; Rutter, Mau~han, Mortimore,

Ouston and Smith,1979). However, these studies and other studies did not always

look at instructional leadership in terms of the same activities.

According to Krug (1992), efforts that have been directed towards

identifying commonalities of instructional leadership activities in effective schools

have been made difficult by the differences in school settings. Moreover, the range

of ways in which leadership can be exercised is virtually limitless. In this

connection, among the earliest attempts towards identifying such commonalities

were the works by Hallinger and Murphy (1985). Their studies led to the

conclusion that instructional leadership could be conceptualised in terms of 10

categories.

In a synthesis of research on instructional leadership, De Bevoise stated

that instructional leadership encompasses "those actions that a principal takes, or

delegates to others, to promote growth in student learning" (1984, p. 15). Effective

instructional leadership is based on the assumption that the principal can and is

capable of changing the teaching-learning situation to achieve the school's

academic goals (Ramaiah, 1 992).

The importance of the principal as an instructional leader in the school

context has been mentioned by many writers. Bossert, Dmyer, Rowan and Lee

mentioned that "recent work on successful schools underscores the importance of

instructional leadership, especially the role of the principal in co-ordinating and

controlling the instructional programme" (1982, p. 34). Concurring on the matter,

3

Newton (1993) said that principals in effective schools are assertive leaders who

are willing to act independently in the interest of the school, are committed to

improvements, emphasize instructional leadership and communicate their wishes

to their staff and stress academic standards. Expressing similar views on the role of

principals, Heck, Larsen and Marcoulides commented thus:

principals may.. . ..impact teaching and classroom practices through such

school decisions as formulating school goals, setting and communicating

high achievement expectations, organizing classrooms for instruction,

allocating necessary resources, supervising teachers' performance,

monitoring student progress, and promoting a positive, orderly environment

for learning (1990, p. 95).

As the foregoing comments on instructional leadership suggest, among the

roles or finctions of the principal as an instructional leader are: formulating the

instructional goals, managing and co-ordinating the curricular processes, leading

the teachers who are involved in carrying out the instructional programmes, and

developing a teaching and learning environment that motivates the students and

teachers to achieve the school's academic goals (Kimbrough and Burkett, 1990).

Further, Kimbrough and Burkett (1990) mentioned that most research findings in

literature strongly imply that the principal is the most important person in

providing leadership for improved instruction and better curricula.

In Malaysia, the importance of the principal as an instructional leader is

reflected in the emnhasis that is being placed on principals' roles by the Ministry

4

of Education. This is seen from the clear stand made by the committee which was

set up by the Ministry of Education to study the status of education in schools in

1982, that principals should be instructional leaders (Hussein, 1993). When the

Integrated Secondary School Curriculum (KBSM) was implemented, principals

were required to provide curriculum leadership, which essentially refers to

instructional leadership (Hussein, 1993).

The role of principals is particularly important because they are not only

accountable for the school's academic performance, but ultimately also for the

realization of the country's educational vision. If principals fail to carry out their

roles effectively, they will not be able to motivate the teachers or exploit their

knowledge and experiences, and neither will they be able to motivate the students

to excel in their academic pursuits. In short, they will have failed to carry out their

roles as instructional leaders, and schools will have failed to achieve their goals.

Instructional leadership is clearly the central role that principals must play,

and all other leadership roles are meant to support to it. An understanding of these

roles will be beneficial not only to the principals themselves, but also to policy

makers who are definitely interested in knowing what principals do and how their

performance vary according to principals' personal characteristics and the school

context.

1.1 Background of the study

In the context of Sarawak, secondary school principals serve in

environments which are very similar to those in other parts of Malaysia. It is

common knowledge that schools in Sarawak vary in terms of student enrolment,

location, and the category to which they belong (grade A or B.) Principals

themselves also differ in terms of gender, age, years of experience as principals,

years of service as ordinary teachers, and in the type and amount of managerial and

curriculum leadership training they might have received. Moreover, some

principals have had other experiences as they might have served as administrators

or as supervisors either at the Divisional Education Offices or at the Education

Headquarters. Some may have served at the teachers' colleges as lecturers while

others may have served as Senior Assistants prior to their appointment as

principals.

Differences either in terms of personal characteristics, professional

experiences, or the school context, may affect the way they perform their roles as

instructional leaders. Bossert et al. (1982) mentioned that a principal's personal

characteristics, such as his gender, has the potential to influence his instructional

management behaviour. In illustration, he mentioned that a number of studies have

found that women perform better than men as principals. For instance, women

principals tend to score higher on standardized tests and have more experience in

education than male principals. Bossert et al. (1982) also said that women work

more hours, are more inclined to be innovative, are more likely to be democratic

6

leaders, and are more preferred by teachers and superiors than men. This is also

supported by Hallinger, Bickman and Davis (1 996) who found, through their study

of school principals' effects on reading achievement in a sample of 87 U.S.

primary schools, that female elementary school principals exercise more active

leadership in areas of curriculum and instruction than do their male peers.

According to Bossert et al. (1982), other factors that are important to

principals' work are training and experience, although research fails to bear out

this common sense notion. The importance of training is also mentioned in studies

by Goldhammer (1971) who noted that principals reported their lack of training to

deal with human relations problems in their schools, and would like more courses

in communication skills.

Differences either in terms of gender, length of service as principals, the

number of courses they have attended, or school context, may also mean that

principals place different priories in as far as their instructional leadership tasks are

concerned.

1.2 Statement of the problem

In the context of Sarawak, the roles of principals as instructional leaders

have not been specifically studied. There is no research finding which shows the

nature of, and the extent to which principals perform their roles as instructional

leaders. Neither is there much information available as to what extent the

7

performance of these roles differ or van. according to different school contexts, or

how they are affected by principals' personal characteristics or experiences.

Although generally principals are aware of what is expected of them

through guidelines that have been provided by the Ministry of Education, it is

uncertain as to the extent to which principals are actually performing their roles as

instructional leaders. This is clearly a matter which deserves the attention of

educational authorities such as the State Education Department and the Ministry of

Education.

At the same time, the authorities which monitor instructional practices in

schools as well as the role of the principal in managing these practices, need to

have a credible basis for the expectation that they might have about the status of

instructional leadership performance in the state. In this manner, their follow up

actions or suggestions will be a lot more beneficial to the principals.

Although this study does not aim to compare the performance of successfU1

or effective principals with that of less successful or effective ones, it is of

relevance to note that the work of successful high school principals corresponds

more closely to what principals themselves say that they should emphasize,

compared to the work of a mixed group of high school principals (Sergiovanni,

1987). What would the pattern be in the case of principals in Sarawak? Would the

actual and the expected roles differ greatly, or would they be quite similar?

8

This study therefore aims to study the relationship between principals'

expected and actual instructional leadership roles, and whether these roles are

affected by selected demographic factors and differences in school contexts.

1.3 Objectives of study

1.3.1 General objective

The general objective of this study is to determine what are the personal

factors and the school factors which influence principals' performance of their

instructional leadership roles and whether principals are actually performing the

roles that they feel they should perform as instructional leaders in their schools.

1.3.2 Specific objectives

The specific objectives of the study are:

a) to determine the demographic characteristics of the principals and their school

characteristics;

b) to determine the relative ranking of principals expected and actual

instructional leadership roles;

c) to determine whether there is any relationship between principals' perception

of their expected and actual instructional leadership roles and selected

demographic variables;

9

d) to determine whether there are differences in principals' perception of their

expected and actual instructional leadership roles based on selected school

characteristics and principals' personal characteristics; and

e) to determine whether there is any relationship between principals' perception

of their expected and actual instructional leadership roles.

1.4 Conceptual framework

This study proposes that personal as well as school context factors have a

potential influence on principals' perception of their expected and actual

performance of instructional leadership roles. These factors are shown in the

conceptual framework as follows:

Diagram 1.1. Conceptual framework of the stu&

Dependent variables

1 Expected Roles 1 1 . Defining mission

2. Managing curriculum and

instruction

1 3. Supervising and I Independent variables

evaluating instruction I I 1 4 Monitoring student progress I I Age

5. Promoting instructional Years of experience

climate Number of courses attended

Actual Roles

1. Defining mission

2. Managing curriculum and

Gender

School size

School grade

School location

instruction

3. Supervising and

evaluating instruction

4. Monitoring student

progress

5 . Promoting instructional

climate

1.5 Hypotheses

This study tests the following hypotheses:

There is no significant relationship between principals' perception of their

expected instructional leadership roles and their age.

There is no significant relationship between principals' perception of their

actual instructional leadership roles and their age.

There is no significant relationship between principals' perception of their

expected instructional leadership roles and the number of years they have

served as principals.

There is no significant relationship between principals' perception of their

actual instructional leadership roles and the number of years they have served

as principals.

There is no significant difference in principals' perception of their expected

instructional leadership roles based on the number of courses they have

attended.

There is no significant difference in principals' perception of their actual

instructional leadership roles based on the number of courses they have

attended.

There is no significant difference in principals' perception of their expected

instructional leadership roles based on their gender.

There is no significant difference in principals' perception of their actual

instructional leadership roles based on their gender.