1.1 Background to the Study
‘Administration’ is frequently used to signify ‘to execute’ or ‘to enforce. However, an administrator’s job entails more than simply carrying out plans and choices made by others. As a result, if administrative functions are limited to execution, essential nuances are overlooked, according to Onyene (2005). Administration, according to her, is the process of accomplishing corporate goals via frenetic efforts aimed at maximizing the use of all available resources, including human, financial, material, and entrepreneurial talents. Perhaps it is because of this operational complexity that a school of thought concluded that administration is more difficult to manage than management. This is because day-to-day school administration comprises key procedures by which a person in a position of authority, such as a head teacher or administrator, fulfills his or her tasks with the help of others. Administration employs a systematic approach to guarantee that the school’s or organization’s goals and objectives are realized. Thus, a principal integrates his or her intellectual, technical, and human talents in “doing a garmot of management responsibilities such as planning, organizing, staffing, directing, regulating, instructing, communicating, supervising, and so on” (Onyene 2000). Furthermore, Onyene (2005) noted that administration is the most challenging in a private school setting because it must sometimes begin with fundamental issues in structural design, asking and answering essential questions on enrolment and patronage such as customer relations, customer values and satisfaction, learning and curriculum repackaging, and many others. This burden explains why school management is frequently in crisis. This is because, in order to break even in terms of cost-benefit, school investors choose unqualified people to lead their institutions. As a result, the head teacher or principal may lack administrative abilities that may be effectively applied to achieve corporate excellence. In order for a private school to achieve organizational success, it is necessary to define both concrete and non-physical goals. In other words, private school organizations must use the helm of affairs to accomplish deliberately stated goals and perhaps purposes in a highly personal astute manner. Once these objectives are met, basic administrative maintenance recommendations are usually used to improve internal efficiency and “break-even.”
Furthermore, administration is a process that dates back to the dawn of time. It is the art and science of arranging an organization’s resources (human, material, and financial) in a methodical and meticulous manner to fulfill its goals (Onyene, 2000). Furthermore, the industrial revolution ushered in a considerable concern about how to effectively organize people and material resources in order to maximize profits for employers. However, as a counter to the scientific management of the industrial revolution, the Human Relations Movement (HRM) focused on how to effectively encourage people to harness materials for optimum efficiency and individual worker happiness. This is an issue that was formerly exclusive to business and industry. As a result, administration theory and practice were viewed as a monopoly of business, industrial companies, and eventually the public service. This explains why phrases like “business administration” and “student administration” have become more prominent. When completely developed, Educational Administration was seen as a translation of the ideas and procedures utilized in business and governmental administration, according to Nwankwo (1982). This impression is quickly dissipating as it becomes clear that all human organizations, whether they are businesses, industries, government, religious, educational, or military, face similar and transferable factors and challenges, necessitating the use of similar theories and strategies, as well as the fact that all human problems originate in administration (Onyene, 2005).
The amount of organizational efficiency, as well as triumphs and failures, is determined by administration. Successful leadership, effective human resource recruitment and administration, and effective growth of people, programs, and activities are three critical factors of an organization’s success, according to Onyene (2005). The amount of administrative efficiency determines whether the company will develop at a steady pace, stall and decay, or bloom to new heights and expand via expansion. To achieve the purpose of education, educational administration entails the employment of essential procedures that include both administrative and operative management strategies. As a result, a school’s administrative management is always planning, coordinating, and controlling. On a daily level, operative management, like school administration, entails primarily overseeing, motivating, and communicating.
Principals are entrusted with administrative responsibilities in secondary schools (supervising, motivating and communication). As a result, principals are required to utilize their offices to organize school workers, particularly academic professionals, to do their teaching roles successfully. This study tries to investigate the extent to which administrative tasks of principals impact teachers’ performance in staff secondary schools in Lagos Mainland Local Government Area..
1.2 Statement of Problem
The purpose of this study is to see how far secondary school principals have utilized their administrative powers to impact teacher performance. It is based on the observations of Ofoegbu (2001), who stated that secondary school teachers are not given the attention they need, nor are school managers (principals) brought along as they fulfill their administrative tasks of inspiring, monitoring, and communicating. One of the key problems impacting teacher morale and work performance in Nigerian secondary schools, according to Ofoegbu, is principals’ inadequate participation of teachers in administrative operations.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study includes the following:
i. To examine the relationship between principals’ supervisory activities in schools and teachers’ work performance.
ii. To determine whether there is any relationship between principals’ motivating activities in schools and teachers’ work performance.
iii. To assess the relationship between principals’ communicating activities in schools and teachers’ work performance.
1.4 Research Questions
The questions below were raised in the study.
i. Do principals’ supervisory activities in schools influence teachers’ work performance?
ii. Is there any relationship between principals’ motivating activities in schools and teachers’ work performance?
iii. Do principals’ communicating activities have any relationship with teachers’ work performance?