A Comparative Analysis of Principals’ Decision-Making Process in Public and Mission Secondary Schools and School Performances

A Comparative Analysis of Principals’ Decision-Making Process in Public and Mission Secondary Schools and School Performances

Njonje Joan Nalova

University of Yaounde I, Yaounde, Cameroon

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.803400S

Received: 07 November 2024; Revised: 19 November 2024; Accepted: 21 November 2024; Published: 04 December 2024

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to compare the influence the decision-making process of principals in Public and Mission secondary schools has on school performance in. Seven hundred and eleven (711) questionnaires were used to collect data on the influence of the decision making by consultation, delegation of powers, communication and motivation from 08 public and 05 Mission secondary schools. These schools had a population of 665 and 224 teachers respectively. The sample for the study was five hundred and twelve (512) teachers for public schools and one hundred and ninety-nine (199) teachers for mission schools. Ten (10) interview guides were administered to principals. A descriptive research design and a mix method of qualitative and quantitative approach was adopted for the study. Taro Yamani sampling and simple random sampling techniques were employed. The instruments were subjected to form and content validation by some teachers and principals of secondary schools in Limbe. Cronbach alpha was used to determine the reliability of the instrument which yielded a high reliability coefficient for public schools 0.797 and for mission schools the coefficient was 0 .907. The Pearson product moment correlation coefficient was used to test the hypotheses at 0.05 level of significant. Based on the findings, it was revealed that consulting of teachers, delegation of powers, effective communication and motivation of teachers during decision-making had a strong positive relationship with school performance. The coefficient was 0.753 and 0.903 for consultation, 0.620 and 0.798 for delegating powers, 0.772 and 0.951 for effective communication and for motivation, it was 0.685 and 0.895 respectively.  It was therefore recommended that principals of public schools during decision-making should always consult, delegate powers, carry out effective communication and motivate their teachers as carried out in mission secondary schools for excellent school performance. Thus, the decision making process of principals in mission secondary schools positively influence school performance more than that which is carried out in public secondary schools in Limbe Sub-Division, Fako Division.

Keywords: Decision Making Process; Public Secondary Schools; Mission Secondary Schools; Compare; School Performance.

INTRODUCTION

The school is becoming progressively very complex both in workforce and in organization wise, for the attainment of excellent performance. This necessitates having administrators in education, who are competent in their decision-making process. This decision-making is one of the most important activity in which school administrators engaged daily in the running of their institutions. Moreover, we should bear in mind that the success and the failure of a school be it Mission or Public, strongly depend on the type and procedure of decision-making that the administrator engages in the day-to-day running of his or her institution. This might explain why Musau, Wanyama and Mbae (2014) were of the opinion that principals in secondary schools need to put together a number of elements so that they can be able to make good decisions in their institutions. We have to bear in mind that decision-making is greatly link to performance.

SCHOOL PERFORMANCE

School performances are learning process promoted by the school that involves the transformation of a given state into a new one. An educational institution with excellent performance is one with no gap between the academic performance and the students’ expected performance. When performance is below the expected performance, it refers to as unsatisfactory academic performance. The problems of measuring performance in education however are considerable. Caballero, Abello, & Palacio as cited by Lamas (2015) held the view that school performance is meeting Educational goals, achievements and objectives set in the program that a student attends. These are express through grades, which are the result of an assessment that involves passing or not certain tests, subjects or courses. For an administrator to succeed, it will depend on the procedures that he will implement in the various decisions making that he is going to carry out.

DECISION MAKING

In the schools of decision-making, we have rational decision-making and irrational or intuitive decision-making. Rational decision-making follows a sequence of stages but with irrational or intuitive, is spontaneous, too rapid to allow for an orderly sequential analysis of the situation. For the Principal to daily manage the functioning of an institution he or she must use the rational and irrational decision-making. In this research though all of them undergo certain processes, we are going to focus on rational decision-making.  Every organization where the school is not left out is bound to make decisions and later implement so that, the purpose or objectives of the organization can be realized. If a school wants to survive there must be the making, implementation and evaluations of decisions. Decision-making processes differ from one situation to another and from one person to another. For any decision to be accepted and implemented, the problem leading to the decision must be well analysed based on enough information gathered through effective consultation, effective communication, delegation of powers and motivation. In carrying out all these, we should not fail to understand that the process of decision-making must follow a certain sequence of steps so that nothing is neglected in order to arrive at a rational or objective decision.

According to Ejimabo (2015) during the decision-making process, heads of organizations such as the school, need to be creative and effective in choosing from the best alternatives as well as the establishment of a healthy working environment for everyone in their organization. To Hoy and Miskel (2001) and Towler (2010) the decision-making process in administration was seen to be a sequence of events that includes the identification and diagnosis of difficulty, generating alternatives, evaluating alternatives, choosing an alternative implementing the decision and evaluating decision effectiveness. The principal as the main actor in the administration of secondary school should understand that the survival of the school heavily depends upon the decision-making procedures of managers. For this reason, the most critical task in an organization is the process of deciding a desirable course of action out of many available alternatives.

PUBLIC AND MISSION SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN CAMEROON.

In secondary education institutions in Cameroon, the public schools are own, finance and managed by the government. Principals of Public schools are liberal to make many decisions about the functioning of the secondary school while some other decisions are made under the control of their hierarchies. For mission schools or missionary schools, they are religious schools originally developed and run by Christian missionaries. They are owned, finance and manage by different branches of missionaries in Cameroon. Principals under these institutions, make decisions concerning the running of their different institutions alongside their hierarchies. Principals of Public schools are control and paid by the government. While those of the Mission schools are employed and control by a particular missionary or branch of the missionary that owns the institution but all these institutions are authorized by the government

SCHOOL PRINCIPALS AND DECISION-MAKING.

Principals are the administrative heads of secondary schools. This administrative position is highest in the hierarchy of authority in secondary schools. Principals are loaded with numerous responsibilities in the day-to-day administration of secondary schools. They work hand in glove with subordinates who may or may not have much say in their daily decision making process.

In the school, principals are in a position of responsibility and authority over all major decisions of the school. Titanji (2017) looks at the principal as an administrator who is more concerned in seeing that the school achieves its goals. That is to say, they are there to see in to the effectiveness and efficiency of the institution.

Decision-making is a continuous and dynamic process in administration and it has been observed to be the crucial aspect for the survival of every institution. It pervades all organizational activities and it is an indispensable component of the management process. Njouny and Titanji (2016) are of the opinion that for schools to achieve their desired outcomes, principals must learn to share some of their responsibilities and their decisions that influence their schools with their employees. If flawlessly done, it will go to create a positive influence on performance and productivity of their employees. In this respect, therefore, administrators in educational organizations such as the secondary school ought to have a profound knowledge on decision-making and be able to make effective decisions for the smooth running of their institutions.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The text clearly states how teachers’ incentives and other forms of motivations ought to be distributed. It has been noticed that, some public school principals fail to make good decisions to carefully manage, encourage and motivate their teachers to work hard and even incentives at their disposal are sometimes poorly managed.

Some principals prefer to send teachers indiscriminately for seminars and refresher courses.

Besides, some public school principals do not buy or replace equipment in the laboratories and in some libraries many books are outdated which do not encourage teachers to go there for research.

Occasionally, most school administrators during decision making usually fail to consult their collaborators for information and at times the decision may warrant teachers’ full participation but they may fail to involve them.

It has been noticed that, some public school principals during decision-making, even when there is a need, usually find it difficult to delegate some of their duties to their teachers to represent them in school matters and other ceremonies in and out of school. They prefer to amalgamate all their duties and responsibilities so that they should be everywhere and at any place.

The failure to communicate effectively with teachers after a pedagogic supervision, on areas that need adjustment in their teaching-learning process, will go a long way to affect the general performance of the school.

This excessive optimism coupled at times with limited awareness due to lack of information over a given situation may confidently push certain administrators, to carry out wrong decisions without their knowledge.

All these lapses may go a long way to lead to disgruntlement, tension in institutions that might influence the overall performance of the schools if care is not taking. That is why the researcher wishes to investigate why there is an inadequacy in the management of decisions making in the administration of Public and Mission secondary schools, which make it sometimes difficult for schools to attained excellent results.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of the study is to compare the decision making process in Public and Mission secondary schools and its impact on school performance.

Specifically, the study intends:

• To find out how principals of Public as compared to Mission secondary schools effectively consult their teachers in administration and the impact this has on school performance.
• To examine how principals of Public as compared to Mission secondary schools delegate powers to teachers during administration and the impact this has on school performance.
• To investigate how principals of Public as compared to those of Mission secondary schools effectively communicate with teachers during decision-making and the impact this has on school performance.
• To determine how principals of Public as compared to those of Mission secondary schools during decision making motivate teachers and the impact this has on school performance.

SPECIFIC RESEARCH QUESTIONS

• How does consultation of teachers by the principal of public secondary school compared to that of Mission schools influence school performance?
• How does the delegation of powers to teachers by the principal of public secondary school compared to that of Mission schools influence school performance?
• How does the principal’s communication with teachers of public secondary school compared to that of Mission schools influence school performance?
• How does the principal’s motivation to teachers of public secondary school compared to that of Mission schools influence school performance?

METHODOLOGY

The design used for the study was a descriptive survey design in which a group of teachers and principals considered to be a representative of the entire populations were studied, by collecting and analysing data. The results obtain was generalized to the entire population.

The methodology used in the study was a mixture of quantitative and qualitative study, which involves the use of closed ended questionnaire and interview guide for data collection. The semi-structured interview to principals was to support the quantitative data collection through questionnaires to teachers, in this study. This was to enable the researcher to collect information from teachers and from principals so that she can compare the influence the principals’ decision-making process in administering secondary schools in Public and Mission sector, had on school performance. That is, the performance of students in examinations, most especially during end of course examinations. The result arrived at are generalized on the entire population including those elements that were not studied.

THE POPULATION OF THIS STUDY

The population of this study includes all the teachers and principals of public and mission secondary schools in Limbe Sub-Division in Fako Division. The population of teachers in Public and Mission secondary schools was 665 and 224 and the sample was 499 and 199 teachers. And the principals, were 08 and 05 respectively. To have the sample, the researcher used the Taro Yamane sampling technique, Monette, Sullivan, and Dejong (2005) to determine the sampling size of the population in this study

INSTRUMENTS AND DATA COLLECTION

The questionnaires and the interview guide were constructed and administered to the sample population concerned. While in Limbe Sub-Division, to administer the instrument, the researcher went to the Divisional Delegate of Fako Division, who issued her an authorization to visit the schools.

To select the teachers of each school, the researcher met the principals of each school who gave an authorization to attend the staff meeting of each school. During the staff meeting, I use the simple random sample technique to select the teachers. Here the researcher wrote yes or no on pieces of papers. And all the teachers who picked yes were administered the questionnaires

The data from the field was analysed using frequencies and percentages that were sorted out and presented as descriptive statistics. Later, this data from the questionnaire was managed in order to prepare the data for analysis and for verifications of the hypotheses that were placed for the study. Data management procedures started with the identification and treatment of missing data, followed by dimension reduction analysis, the parametric assumptions with specific interests on the treatment of outliers and lastly the hypothesis were verified.

RELIABILITY OF INSTRUMENT

Reliability of the Interview Guide

The process of epoche which means withholding from judgement increased the study’s credibility by reducing bias. Epoche in the modern philosophy of phenomenology refers to a process of setting aside assumptions and beliefs.

Phenomenology of interest for this study was chosen in order to examine the experiences from the perspectives of secondary school principals on the decision making process in relation to the four constructs and school performance This methodology required in-depth interviews with people who had direct experience with the phenomenon of interest. The interview transcripts, field notes, and observation are used to evidence and support the emergent themes extracted by the study’s principal investigator. To verify the hypotheses, the researcher used the product moment correlation indices.

Reliability of the Questionnaires

 The test used here was the Cronbach’s Alpha which shows how reliable the questionnaire used is. This test is so important because the research carried out on the basis of a questionnaire and the reliability of that questionnaire is a very important factor to this research work.  For mission schools the reliability was .907 and .797 for public schools.

FINDINGS

This study was to compare principals’ decision-making process in Public and Mission secondary schools and their influence on school performance. Four-research questions were formulated and analysed based on the variables using descriptive and inferential statistics. The data from the field was analysed using frequencies and percentages that were sorted out and presented as descriptive statistics. Later, this data from the questionnaire was managed in order to prepare the data for analysis and for verifications of the hypotheses that were placed for the study. The discussion of the findings would be done following the four hypothesis of this study as shown below.

Research Hypothesis 1

• There is no significant relationship between effective consultation of teachers by the principal of mission secondary schools and school performance than Public secondary schools.

Table 2: Correlation between consultation and school Performance for Public schools

Table 3:  Correlation between consultation and school Performance for Mission schools.

In testing our first hypothesis which is the correlation between consultation in decision making by the principal and school performance:

rxy = .903 for mission and .753 for public

Calculated level of significant = .001 for public and .000 for mission

Research level of significant is .05 for the two

When we look at the correlation for mission schools is.903 and Public schools is .753 which shows that there is a high correlation in Mission institution than in Public schools.

Hypothesis 2

There is no significant relationship between delegation of powers by the principal of Mission Secondary Schools and school performance than public secondary schools.

Table 4: Correlation between delegation of powers and school performance for public schools

Table 5: Correlation between delegation of powers and school performance for mission schools.

In testing our second hypothesis which is the correlation between consultation in decision making by the principal and school performance:

rxy = .798 for mission and .620 for public

Calculated level of significant = .000 for public and .000 for mission .000

The research level of significance .05 for the two schools. When we look at the correlation for Mission schools is .798 and Public schools is.620, this therefore means that, there is a strong positive significant correlation between delegation of powers by the principal in decision-making and school performance in Mission institutions than in Public schools.

Hypothesis 3

There is no significant relationship between communication in decision making by principals of Mission schools and school performance than principals of Public secondary schools.

Table 6: Correlation between communication and school performance in Public schools

Table 7: Correlation between communication and performance for Mission schools.

In testing our third hypothesis which is the correlation between communication in decision making by the principal and school performance:

rxy = .981 for Mission while .772 for Public school

• Calculated level of significant = .000 for the two schools.
• Pre-determined level of significance = .05 for public and mission schools or (research level of significance)

This therefore means that there is a strong positive significant correlation between communication in decision making by the principal of Mission schools and school performance than principals of Public secondary schools.

Hypothesis 4

There is a significant relationship between principals’ decision making on motivation to teachers and school performance in mission secondary schools than in public secondary schools.

Table 8: Correlation between principals’ motivation to teachers and school performance for Public schools.

Table 9: Correlation between principals’ motivation to teachers and school performance for Mission school.

In testing our fourth hypothesis, which is the correlation between motivation by the principal and school performance:

rxy =. 895 for mission and .685 for public schools.

Calculated level of significant = .000 for public and .000 for Mission

This therefore means that, there is a strong positive significant correlation between motivations done by principals of Mission schools and school performance than that, which is carried out by principals of public schools.

Extraneous variables

Table 10: Correlation between extraneous variables and school performance in public school.

Table 11: Correlation between extraneous variables and school performance in Mission schools.

The researcher has to test the degree of relationship that the extraneous variables have on school performance.

rxy = .708 for Mission schools and .723 for Public schools

Calculated level of significant = .000 for Mission and .000 for Public.

DISCUSSIONS OF FINDINGS

Research Question 1

Consultation in Decision Making by Principals and School Performance in Public and mission secondary schools

The findings of the first hypothesis revealed that there is a lot of consultation for information and for the opinions of teachers that is carried out in mission schools before certain decisions were materialised most especially, if the decision concerns the teachers. This was not actually the case sometimes in Public schools. In situations like this, teachers turned not to cooperate with the principal by not organising catch up classes for examination classes so as to complete their syllabuses. When syllabuses that are supposed to be covered are not covered, this will lead to poor performance in external examinations, which will all go to affect the general school performance. This could be one of the reasons why the GCE results for the three years under study is low for all the public secondary schools.  This was not the case with mission secondary schools with excellent results.

In support of the above findings is the work of Olayemi and Olorunsola (2011) who are of the view that in school management, teachers need to be very involved in the decision making process. To them a failure of the school head to involve teachers may lead to conflict, a lot of rift which might go to hinder the realization of the school goals thereby affecting the success of the institution. Besides, Ayegbusi and Ogunlade (2020) who are of the opinion that, the non-involvement or a failure of teachers to participate in certain decisions making will caused them to be less committed, and become nonchalant toward their normal duties of teaching and learning which will all go to affect their output through the poor performance of students.

The study also revealed that in public secondary schools, only 35% of the respondents indicated that Principals always seek to understand their various job difficulties during and out of staff meetings. For Mission institutions, it was discovered that up to 78% of the respondents said their Principals always seek to understand their various job difficulties during and out of staff meetings. It is the duty of the principal as it is done in Mission schools, to see into the various job difficulties of teachers during staff and other meetings by allowing them to have a say in the decision-making and most especially, those areas that concern their duties. When teachers’ opinions are not considered in decision making, during staff and other meetings, they can decide to abandon the school head by not paying much attention to the students.  At the end of the day, students, who found themselves in external examinations with areas that their teachers did not come across or hurriedly covered, will end up with poor results and the school as a whole.

This study is in line with the work of Uba-Mbibi (2013) who is of the opinion that involving teachers in decision-making is very imperative as they are the life wire of teaching and learning in secondary schools. Besides, is the work of Chima and Gloria (2016) who stand on the view that, the level of productivity of teachers and others can be influenced positively or negatively following the manner in which the school head relates with his subordinates. This is also in line with the system theory which state that, for the school to function properly, the different parts of what make up the whole (school) must work in collaboration. A failure of the principal to effectively collaborate with the teachers by trying to understand their individual job difficulties and seek for some solutions, will go a long way to affect their class output and consequently the results of the students under their control.

Delegation in Decision Making by the Principal and School Performance in Public and mission secondary schools

Following the findings of the second hypothesis, it is statistically revealed that in mission secondary schools there was is a very strong significant relationship between delegation of powers in decision making and school performance, in mission schools than in Public secondary schools. From their various data analyses and the test of hypothesis we can confirm that in mission schools there is a very strong positive correlation significant than in Public schools. This is so because, when teachers feel that the principal trust and have confidence in them, they try by all possible means to do their best in their class duties. Their attitude toward work will be very acceptable and others will feel free to work with them rather than, with the principal whose physical presentation might be very fearsome. It is also understood that since teachers will be happy to work with their colleagues much will be done rather than if they were to work with the principal.

In support of the above, Griffen and Moorhead (2014) looking at the importance of delegation asserts that, by participating in decision making and problem solving, subordinates learn more about overall operations and improve their management skills thereby improving on their productivity at work.

Looking at the issue of delegation of powers, it is advisable for the principal to involve his collaborators so as to jointly put in their different effort for the academic success of the students and the school as a whole. In institutions where responsibilities to task are made to be more flexible as it was found in mission institutions, workers will turn to reduce their distancing from the working environment and the principal will have maximum cooperation from these teachers. This initiative will help principals to discover and tap on hidden skills of the instructional process and management found in some teachers that, they will exploit for the running of their different schools. This will go to improve on their output which will be seen through the performance of the students and the school as a whole.

Working on this line, Njouny and Titanji ibid (2016) are of the opinion that for schools to boost their potential and achieve the desired outcomes in the institution, the principal must learn to share some of his responsibilities and the decisions that impact schools. Thinking in the same line is the work of Jones (1997) who holds that, like Managers in the cooperate world, educators should flatten organizational structures, reduce central office directives and permit employees the opportunity to take ownership for instructional decision making.

Communication in Decision Making by Principals and school performance in Public and mission secondary schools.

 In looking at the relationship which communication in decision making by the principals has on school performance using the Pearson correlation index, it was discovered that, there was a positive strong relationship between communication and school performance for mission secondary schools .951 than public schools which was .772.

When we look at the issue of gathering of sufficient facts over a situation before taken a decision, it was realized in public schools that almost half of the respondents were of the view that the principal always gather enough facts over a situation before taken a decision, the rest indicated sometimes and never. In mission institutions, statistics showed that almost all respondents were of the view that principals always gather sufficient evidence over a situation before taken a decision. For a good decision to be taken, the principals are called upon to gather enough facts over the situation before taken the decision, so as to avoid criticism.

As concerns the findings on the prompt and punitive transfer of stubborn teachers, in public schools, it was revealed that, only 16% of the sample were for the fact that stubborn teachers are always giving a prompt and punitive transfer while for mission schools, 91% of the sample were for always. It is always necessary as seen in mission institution, to immediately transfer or dismiss any teacher who is very heady to the principal and may not want to adjust. When an action like this is promptly carried out, it will prevent any other teacher who wanted to copy such behaviour to immediately adjust. It should be understood that, actions like this if immediately handled, will help the academic standards of the students and the school not to fall. This is in line with the work of Ezeugbor and Okoye (2018) who hold that the teaching process can only be achieved through effective staff personnel administration which is attached on the principals’ skills and competencies to ensure that staff especially the teachers work with commitment and devotion.

From our results on the perception of respondents on the rate at which principals share ideas with teachers after pedagogic supervision. It was found that, 42% of the respondents of public schools were of the opinion that sometimes principals share ideas after pedagogic supervision while 71% of respondents in mission institutions indicated that their principals always do so. Principals should be cognisance of the fact that teachers will love to know their strength and weakness after a pedagogic exercise so that they work on them to better enhance their students’ achievement. Since supervision is very important, principal or the head of the institution should be timely for any feedback to teachers after the exercise. This is supported by Udoh-Awah (2015) who on his part said that supervision reports must be made available to teachers timely and the head has to follow up to see that the necessary advice that were given during inspection have been implemented. When this is well followed up it will go to adjust certain short coming thereby leading to good results for the students and the school at large.

It should be noted that, for an institution to function successfully, it is always advisable for the school head to communicate with other subordinates most especially the teachers on matters relating to the functioning of the institution since they are the life wire of the school. This view is highly supported by the system theory which says that the whole is more important than the parts. That is to say for principals to succeed in running their institutions, information sharing should be looked upon from a holistic point of view.

In line with the users’ perception is the work of Farrant (1986) who holds that, opportunity for discussion in an institution enables everyone to understand various viewpoints, policies and programmes in the school as well as government policies on particular matters. Also, Akinfolarin (2017), was of the view that, there must be a good communication mechanism among teachers’, students’ and school managers’ within and outside the school for goals achievement at all levels. The presence of good information and communication system in school management will help teachers and students to achieve school aims and objectives which will be seen through the good performance of the students most especially in external examinations.

Principals decision making on Motivation and school performance in Mission and public schools.

The findings of the fourth hypothesis revealed that there is a strong positive impact between principals’ decision making on motivation and school performance for mission schools than for public schools. This relationship is seen as the correlation coefficient is .685 for public schools and .895 for mission schools. From our findings on whether teachers go for seminars and refresher courses without discriminations. It was discovered that, 48% of the respondents in public schools were for always while 96% from mission institutions were for always. When one looks at the interview analyses of most of the principals they tried to make us realised that all teachers are treated same without any discrimination. Understanding the importance of seminars to teachers, it is advisable for principals to organize internal seminars and to make sure that the school sends out teachers to attend external seminars and refresher courses routinely, without discrimination. It should be understood that, if this issue is not well organised, it might cause some teachers to work with a lot of frustration and this might lead to inefficiency in some areas of the institution that might in the long run, affect the institution through poor performance. This might also be one of the reason why the end of course examination results for public institutions under the three years of studies were very poor.

This is in line with the works of Titanji (2017) who is of the view that teachers need to be provided opportunities to attend workshops, seminars and conferences, granting of study leave to them when necessary, encouraging them to attend refresher courses and organizing orientation programs and conference for them among others. If the principal carefully implements the above with a lot of considerations, it will positively influence the duties of teachers in the classroom and at the end of course examinations as it is seen with the mission institutions that were involve in the study.

In this study, 34% of the respondents of public schools affirmed that the principal distribute all school incentives and other forms of motivations meant for teachers while in mission schools 88% of respondents were for always. From the interview analyses, one will see that most of the principals claimed to be giving motivation and school incentives to teachers as required. Teachers incentives and other forms of motivations has been clearly stated by the text on how they should be distributed. Principals are therefore advised to respect the text and to motivate teachers as stipulated. If the text is well implemented, these will lead to satisfaction and high job performance as it was found in the mission schools. It should be noted that, when heads of institutions do not distribute all school incentives and other forms of motivations meant for teachers, it will lead to demotivation and frustration on the part of teachers and this will indirectly influence the students’ performance thus the great disparity in performance between the mission and public schools. This research is in line with the work of Devis and Newstrom, (1985) in the performance – satisfaction – effort loop diagram which they explain that, the reward an individual gets after a performance is seen as his perception. When workers discovered that when it comes to rewards at work, there is justice there is satisfaction and this satisfaction will lead to a greater commitment and fairness at the job side. And when there is no equity or justice in reward there is no performance hence no satisfaction and this consequently will lead to workers less commitment and no fairness to their work. Also in line is the work of Wadesango and Bayaga (2013) who are of the opinion that when the principal motivates teachers be it directly or indirectly, the teachers will feel that inward push to carry out their individual tasks. This will encourage teachers to work hard by even organizing extra classes so that the students will not be left behind in the completion of their syllabuses.

Additionally, school incentives and other forms of motivation are very important to teachers because they go to encourage teachers to work harder in their various classes if and only if they are available and are distributed to teachers. When we look at the responses of mission schools, we discovered that majorities of the teachers were motivated based on their hard work which is felt in the results of their students. Reason why during school occasions as seen in the interview analyses, principals say the best teachers are always rewarded in the presence of the parents’ body. One can see that, actions like this are indirect ways to encourage and motivate other teachers to work harder and improve on the performance of their students in both internal and external examinations. This research is in line with the work of Mbua (2003) who observed that the standard of education is falling in the secondary schools may be because the principals usually fail to implement effective motivational practices to teachers who are committed to pedagogical delivery and display of moral uprightness as well as academic excellence in the teaching profession so that they could put in more effort.

The Effects of the Extraneous Variable on School Performance

In investigating the effect, the extraneous variable has on school performance using the Pearson correlation index, it was found that the correlation value for public schools was .708 while that for mission schools was .723 which shows that, the two variables move in the same direction. We should therefore bear in mind that, the extraneous variables to some extent influences school performance. Following our inference, we can therefore conclude that, there is a significant relationship between extraneous variable and school performance in both mission and public schools.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of this study, it is concluded that the principal’s decision-making process in mission secondary schools, through consultation with teachers, delegation of powers to teachers, effective communication with teachers and effective distribution of the motivation meant for teachers, influence school performance more than that which is carried out in public secondary schools in Limbe Sub-Division.

RECOMMENDATIONS

From the above findings, the researcher made the following recommendations to schools on:

Consultation:

• It is often necessary for public school’s principals to consult their staff during decision making, most especially, during the definition of certain problems and also consider the opinions of teachers especially in areas that concerns them as it is mostly done in mission schools.

Delegation

• Principals of public schools should always find it a reason to delegate some of their responsibilities to teachers instead of wanting to be everywhere that they are called upon. Also, through delegations they might be able to discover and exploit the expatriate skills of some of their staffs in the running of their institutions.

Communication 

• For principals to succeed at all levels, they must institute an efficient communication network between the administration and staff as it is well instituted in mission schools. Besides, Principals should understand the importance of pedagogic supervision in improving the teaching-learning process. As a result, principals are advised with the assistance of expert to regularly observe teachers’ classroom instructional delivery and provide professional guidance and assistance where necessary.

Motivation

• Principals should bear in mind that, motivations and other forms of incentives in school, should be satisfactorily distributed to those who actually merit them as it is practiced in mission institutions. Also, principals should encourage all teachers to attend seminars and refresher courses. Decisions like this, if well implemented, will act as a form of motivation and will keep teachers abreast with innovative strategies in the performance of their instructional duties.

School Performance

• Looking at the poor results of schools, in public examinations most especially in the public schools for the three years that were studied, public schools’ principals are called upon to encourage their teachers to work hard and improve on the academic performance of their institutions like what is happening in mission institutions who had outstanding results.

REFERENCES

1. Akinfolarin, A. V. (2017). Analysis of principals’ managerial competencies for effective \ management of school resources in secondary schools in Anambra State, Nigeria. International Journal of Social Sciences, Humanities and Education, 1(4), 1-10.
2. Ayegbusi, E. T. & Ogunlade, L. A. (2020). Teachers’ decisional participation and job Calabrese, R.L. & Zepeda S.J. (1999). Decision making assessment: Improving principal performance. International Journal of Educational Management, 13(1), 6-13.
3. Chima, R. I. & Gloria, N.I. (2016). Factors militating against effective administration of secondary schools in Anambra State. World Journal of Educational Research, 3 (1), 213-226.
4. Devis, K. & Newstrom, W.I. (1985). Human behavior at work: Organizational behavior.  New York:  McGraw – Hill Book Company.
5. Ejimabo, N.O., (2015). The influence of decision making in organizational leadership and management activities. Journal of Entrepreneur Organization Management, 4(2), 1-13.
6. Ezeugbor, C. O. & Okoye, O. F. O. (2018). Staff personnel administrative practices adopted by principals’ for promoting teacher-job performance in secondary schools in Awka education zone, Anambra State, Nigeria. International Journal of Advanced Research and Publications, 2(1), 20-27.
7. Farrant, J.S. (1986). Principles and Practice of Education. London: Morrison and Gibb. Ltd.
8. Griffen, R. W. & Moorhead, G. (2014) Oganizational behavior: Managing people and organizations (11^th ed.). Australia: Prentice Hall Inc.
9. Hoy, C. R., and Miskel, G.C. (2001). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice. (6^th ed.).  New York: McGraw-Hill.
10. Jones, R. F., (1997). Teacher Participation in Decision – Making – Its Relationship to Staff Moral and Student Achievement. Journal of Education, 1997.  America Questa Media America; Inc
11. Lamas, H. (2015). School performance: Propositas y repreentaciones, 3(1), 313-386.
12. Njouny, E.M. & Titanji P.F. (2016). A study of teachers’ perceptions of involvement in decision making within secondary schools in Cameroon. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 6(2), 165-175.
13. Mbua, F. N. (2003). Educational administrator: Theory and practice: The management of organisationist and individuals. Limbe: Design House. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(5), 81-87
14. Monette, D. R., Sullivan, T. J. and Dejong, C. R., (2005). Applied social research: A tool for the human service (6^th ed.). Toronto: Thomson Learning.
15. Musau, N.M., Wanyama, I.K. & Mbae, J. (2014). Decision making as a factor in management efficiency among principals of secondary schools in Kenya. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(2), 81-87.
16. Olorunsola, E.O. & Olayemi, A.O. (2011). Teachers participation in decision making process in secondary schools in Ekiti State, Nigeria. International Journal of Education Administration and Policy Studies, 3(6), 78-84.
17. Titanji. P.F. (2017). Understanding educational organisations and leadership. Calabar: University of Calabar Press.
18. Towler, M. (2010). Rational decision making: An introduction. New York, NY: Wiley.
19. Uba-Mbibi, F. O. (2013). Decision making and job satisfaction as correlates of teachers’ job performance in junior schools in Abia State, Nigeria.  Mediterranian Journal Scocial Sciences, 4(8), 107- 113.
20. Wadesango, N. & Bayaga, A. (2013). Management of schools: Teachers’ involvement in decision making processes. African Journal of Business Management, 7(17), 1689-1694