Content uploaded by Uduak Ekpoh
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Uduak Ekpoh on May 02, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
British Journal of Education
Vol.3, No.6, pp.31-40, June 2015
Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
31
PRINCIPALS’ SUPERVISORY TECHNIQUES AND TEACHERS' JOB
PERFORMANCE IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN IKOM EDUCATION ZONE,
CROSS RIVER STATE, NIGERIA
Ekpoh, Uduak Imo (Ph.D) and Eze, Grace Bassey
Department of Educational Administration and Planning
University of Calabar
Calabar, Nigeria.
ABSTRACT: The study investigated the relationship between principals’ supervisory
techniques and teachers' job performance in Ikom Education Zone of Cross River State,
Nigeria. Ex-post facto research design was adopted for the study. The sample was 86
principals, 344 teachers and 1,376 students drawn from a population of 86 principals, 1829
teachers and 35,359 students in public secondary schools in the study area. To achieve the
purpose of the study, two null hypotheses were formulated. Data collection was carried out
with the use of two research instruments titled “Principals’ Supervisory Technique
Questionnaire (PSTQ)” and “Teachers' Job Performance Questionnaire (TJPQ)”. The
instruments were subjected to face validity and Cronbach Alpha reliability estimate. The
reliability value obtained ranged between 0.73 and 0.78. These figures confirmed that the
instruments were reliable in achieving the objective of the study. Pearson Product Moment
Correlation Analysis (r) was used for data analysis at .05 level of significance. Results
obtained revealed that a significant relationship exist between principals’ supervisory
techniques in terms of classroom visitation, workshop techniques and teachers' job
performance. Based on the findings, it was concluded that job performances of teachers would
be enhanced when they are properly supervised by principals using the various supervisory
techniques.
KEYWORDS: Principals, supervisory techniques, teachers, job performance, secondary
schools.
INTRODUCTION
Education is the key to national development of any country, and in every educational system,
the teachers constitute a very vital component. Despite the remarkable advancement in
technology in all areas of teaching and learning process through the production of instructional
materials such as television, computer projector of various kinds, the teacher is still an
indispensably significant factor for motivating and imparting knowledge to the learners at each
level of education. The extent to which teachers achieve this important role of imparting
knowledge is contingent on their effective job performance.
Teachers' job performance involves all the activities carried out by the teacher to achieve the
desired effects on students. It involves the extent to which the teacher participates in the overall
running of the school in order to achieve the expected objective and goals of the school. In
other words, performance is the accomplishment of school goals. However, Affianmagbon
(2007) has observed professional laxity on the part of teachers. To him, many teachers are
merely staying on the job to look for better jobs outside. He complained that the constant cases
British Journal of Education
Vol.3, No.6, pp.31-40, June 2015
Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
32
of absenteeism, persistent lateness to school, irregular and unauthorized movement from duty
post and indiscipline constitute a big problem to the attainment of educational goals in
secondary schools. Accordingly, Adetula (2005: 34) has called attention to the state of affairs
in our secondary schools where in his words “a totally unwholesome and non-professional
behaviour of teachers such as absenteeism, lateness, malingering, trading and the general low
level of commitment to duty which appears to be indices of lack of supervision in school
administration”. Given this scenario in the school, it is the duty of the principal to coordinate
such activities through effective supervision, without which, effective teaching may not be
accomplished easily.
Supervision of instruction has become very necessary in recent times because of the importance
attached to education and the desire to improve the quality of education. According to
Osakwe(2010), supervision is concerned with the provision of professional assistance and
guidance to teachers and students geared towards the achievement of effective teaching and
learning in the school. The principal as a supervisor provides a professional guidance to
teachers in order to improve their competencies for effective teaching process to enhance the
learning and growth of the students. The school principal in carrying out their duties assist the
teachers to perform effectively in the areas of preparation of lesson plan and lesson notes
before lesson delivery, good use of instructional methods and teaching aids, keeping and
maintaining of school records, classroom management, among others. Through supervision the
principal can provide meaningful feedback and direction to teachers that can have profound
effect in the learning that occurs in the classroom.
Based on these, it has become vital that principals’ supervisory techniques be properly directed
for effective/efficient job performance of teachers. This can only be possible through effective
supervisory techniques. Fritz and Miller(2001) opined that, the responsibility of ensuring that
effective teaching and learning take place and the extent to which instructional supervisors
carry out their duties is by employing various techniques to enhance teachers’ job performance.
Accordingly, Obi (2004) has outlined many strategies available for supervisors to help teachers
improve on the job; and also to facilitate effective instruction in schools. Some of the strategies
include self-appraisal method, micro-teaching, classroom visitation, clinical supervision,
workshop, demonstration method among others. These methods provide feedback to the
teacher on the various learning outcomes of the educational system, and also help to realize the
goals of teaching and learning. This study is carried out to examine the relationship between
principal use of workshop techniques, classroom visitation and teachers' job performance.
CONCEPT OF CLASSROOM VISITATION
Principals’ classroom visitation refers to a process by which the principal as a supervisor visits
the classroom to observe the teacher and students in action. According to Igwe (2001)
classroom visitation is a procedure by which the educational leader who possesses wisdom can
be of great assistance in aiding the teacher to improve both his instructional techniques and the
learning process of the student. The main purpose of the principals’ classroom visitation
according to the definition is for the improvement of the teaching/ learning process.
To successfully carryout the classroom visitation however, the visit has to be planned. Igwe
(2001) noted that teachers are always fearful and scared of supervision and as such do not take
it in good faith. Since supervision is inevitable, it behooves the supervisor to plan his visitation
British Journal of Education
Vol.3, No.6, pp.31-40, June 2015
Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
33
together with the teacher to dispel teachers’ fear and anxiety. To carry out a successful and
harmonious visitation, Ezeocha (1995: 65) advocated the following strategies:
i) Existence of good rapport between teachers and supervisor, so that the latter would not
be seen as an enemy.
ii) The supervisor should carefully prepare the visit and should enter the classroom as
unobtrusively as possible.
iii) A conference should precede and follow the visit.
iv) The supervisor should concentrate on the total learning situation, students – teacher
behaviour and the attitude of the students.
v) Visitation should be at the approval of the teacher.
vi) The supervisor should attempt to discover strong points in the learning situation, discuss
the past during conference and give credit where it is due.
vii) The supervisor should never openly show disapproval of what happens in the classroom,
rather, should make complimentary remarks before leaving the classroom.
Peretomode (2001) emphasized a mutual teachers – supervisor relationship during classroom
observation. The implication according to him was that before engaging him in a pre- visit
conference which might also be instrumental in dispelling teacher apprehension of the forth-
coming visit and could provide the principal with the teachers’ intentions so that both could
share a framework of meaning and understanding of the teachers’ reasoning premises, doubts
and explicit professional motives. Apart from the pre-visit conference, other facets of
classroom visitation would be real observation period and the post visit conference.Since the
supervisor observes the lesson so that he may later analyze it with the teacher, Lovell and
Kimball (2005) pointed out that it is crucially important that the data constitute a true, accurate
and complete representation of what took place. This would be so because, if the data was
seriously distorted, then the whole exercise becomes worthless.
The relationship between teachers’ and students is another important area that the supervisor
would pay attention to during classroom visitation if teachers’ job performance should be
improved upon. Besides, using classroom visitation technique for the enhancement of teachers’
job performance demand more time from principals. The principal should also consider
instruction improvement as a top priority in statutory role. It became rather unfortunate that
many principals never spend much time in visiting classes for the purpose of supervision.
CONCEPT OF PRINCIPALS’ WORKSHOP TECHNIQUE
Workshop according to Riltig (2007) is one which the individual's working group brings their
life style, their culture and their values together. Workshop as a supervisory service has been
found to be useful, resourceful and rewarding. Workshop is a techniques adopted by principals
in which teachers are brought together in an organized way to enable the principal communicate
with them on matters of school and classroom management and most especially on the
improvement of instructions. It provides opportunities for exchange of ideas on teaching
methods and other areas of teaching interest that enhance teachers’ job performance. Workshop
is a supervisory technique where people share their knowledge in group towards achieving
common goal.
Akinwumi (2002) asserted that the workshop was usually composed of a group of people
working towards a common goal and trying to find a solution to a given problem through group
British Journal of Education
Vol.3, No.6, pp.31-40, June 2015
Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
34
discussions and conferences under the supervision of resource persons or consultants. A
workshop must be flexible in nature, organized to meet a particular need at a particular time
during the year. It was therefore concluded by Schon (2000) that common results expected
from workshop were on accumulation of materials and knowledge.
According to Ray and Hyl (1990), workshops contain “less diversity and might lack divergent
thinking styles and varied expertise that helped to animate collective decision-making”. Slavin
(1990) contended that for workshops to be effective, there must be group goals and individual
accountability. For this to be done, principals as supervisors must ensure that every participant
or teacher had learned something as this could form the basis of his or her job performance. It
would be in the interest of every participant to spend time not only in answering questions on
areas that seemed unclear to him/her but also to explain to his group- mates what he had
understood for which they do not understand even though the principals as supervisor were
primarily meant for such tasks.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The ability of teachers to render co-operative effort willingly determines the extent to which
secondary schools will achieve their goals and objectives. This is so because, it is the teacher
on whose shoulder lay the actual work of pedagogy and the attainment of educational results.
However, some teachers cannot perform their jobs creditably without being effectively
supervised to ascertain whether their performance meet the required standard. Teachers in
secondary schools in Ikom Education Zone are expected to prepare lesson notes, teach
students, and evaluate students’ performance during and at the end of term. The extent to
which teachers carry-out these functions depends on how effective their principals are
performing their instructional supervisory roles. Such roles include checking on: teachers’
lesson notes, scheme of work, students’ attendance register, lesson delivery observation and
others.
It is observed in the study area that there is laxity on the part of teachers in their professional
role performance. Many teachers are merely staying on the job to look for better jobs outside.
The constant cases of absenteeism, persistent lateness to school, irregular and unauthorized
movement from duty post and other forms of indiscipline constitute a big problem to the
attainment of educational goals in secondary schools. This study was carried out to establish if
there is any relationship between principals' supervisory techniques of classroom visitation,
workshop technique and teachers' job performance.
STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES
Two null hypotheses guided the study:
1. There is no significant relationship between principals’ use of workshop technique and
teachers’ job performance.
2. There is no significant relationship between principals’ classroom visitation technique
and teachers’ job performance.
METHODOLOGY
The research design adopted for this study was the ex-post facto design. The area of study is
Ikom Education Zone of Cross River State, Nigeria. The population of this study comprised all
British Journal of Education
Vol.3, No.6, pp.31-40, June 2015
Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
35
principals, teachers and students in public secondary schools in Ikom Education Zone of Cross
River State. There are a total of 86 principals, 1829 teachers and 35,359 students in 86 public
secondary schools in the educational zone. School principals are the subjects for this study but
teachers were selected as respondents for the questionnaire, while students were used to assess
teachers’ job performance. Purposive sampling technique was employed in this study and all
the 86 principals were used for the study. Four (4) teachers from each of the 86 secondary
schools were sampled to assess their principals, giving rise to 344 teachers from a population
of 1,829 teachers. In each school, 16 senior secondary two students were sampled to assess
teachers and this amounted to a total of 1,376 students.
Two instruments were used for data collection: Principal Supervisory Technique Questionnaire
(PSTQ) and Teachers’ Job Performance Questionnaire (TJPQ). Principals' Supervisory
Technique Questionnaire (PSTQ) was divided into two sections, A and B. Section A consisted
of demographic variables. Section B of Principals’ Supervisory Technique Questionnaire
(PSTQ) consisted of 12 items based on the variables of the study. The likert-4 point scale
response option of Very Often, Often, Sometime and Never were used. Teachers’ Job
Performance Questionnaire (TJPQ) was designed to measure the sub-variables of the
dependent variable. The Likert 4 point rating scale was used. The response options were
Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Disagree, (D) and Strongly Disagree (SD). The research
instruments were subjected to face validity by experts in Test and Measurement, who ensured
that items used measured what they purport to measure. Cronbach alpha reliability estimate
was used to obtain reliability of the instruments. Reliability index for Principal Supervisory
Technique Questionnaire (PSTQ) was 0.78 while the reliability index for Teachers’ Job
Performance Questionnaire (TJPQ) was 0.81. These results indicated that the instruments were
reliable. The researchers administered the questionnaire to the respondents in all the schools
used. This was done after obtaining due consent of the school principals. Data collected were
analyzed using Pearson moment correlation coefficient
RESULTS
Hypothesis 1
There is no significant relationship between principals’ use of workshop technique and
teachers’ job performance. The independent variable in this hypothesis is principals’ workshop
technique while the dependent variable is teachers’ job performance in terms of student
assessment and evaluation, instructional ability, classroom discipline, communication
effectiveness and teaching methods and use of teaching aids. To test this hypothesis, Pearson
Product Moment Correlation Analysis (r) was utilized. The result of the analysis is presented
in Table 1.
British Journal of Education
Vol.3, No.6, pp.31-40, June 2015
Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
36
Table 1
Pearson Product Moment Correlation Analysis of Relationship between Principals’ Workshop
Technique and Teachers’ Job Performance. n=344
Variables
X
SD
rxy
Principal’s supervisory workshop technique (x)
Teachers’ Job Performance
a. Student’s assessment and evaluation (y1)
b. Instructional ability (y2)
c. Classroom discipline (y3)
d. Communication effectiveness (y4)
e. Teaching methods and use of teaching
aids (y5)
15.03
18.77
19.08
17.51
18.60
17.80
2.18
2.17
2.59
3.69
3.45
2.55
-.099
.19*
.25*
.18*
.20*
*Significant at .05, Critical r =0.11, df=342
The result presented in Table 1 shows that a significant relationship exists between principal’s
use of workshop technique and teachers’ job performance in terms of instructional
ability,(r=0.19;p<.05), classroom discipline (r=0.25;p<.05),communication effectiveness
(r=0.18;p<.05), teaching methods and use of teaching aids (r=0.20;p<.05). But an insignificant
negative relationship between principals' supervisory workshop technique and teachers' job
performance in terms of students' assessment and evaluation(r=-.099;p>.05)
The null hypothesis was rejected for four cases because the calculated r-values of 0.19; 0.25;
0.18; 0.20 were found to be greater than the critical r-value of 0.11 while that of student
assessment and evaluation was lower than the critical r of .11 given .05 level of significance
and 342 degrees of freedom. This finding implies that principals' supervisory technique of
workshop has a significant positive relationship with teachers' job performance in terms of
instructional ability, classroom discipline, communication effectiveness, teaching methods and
use of teaching aids. The positive r implies that the higher the principal's use of supervisory
technique of workshop the higher the teacher’s job performance in terms of instructional
ability, classroom discipline, communication effectiveness, teaching methods, and use of
teaching aids tends to be. Conversely, the lower the principal's use of the supervisory technique
of workshop the lesser the teachers' job performance in terms of instructional ability, classroom
discipline, communication effectiveness, teaching methods and use of teaching aids tends to
be.
HYPOTHESIS 2
There is no significant relationship between principals' supervisory classroom visitation
technique and teachers’ job performance. The independent variable is principals' classroom
visitation technique while teachers’ job performance in terms of student assessment and
evaluation, instructional ability, classroom discipline, communication effectiveness, teaching
methods and use of teaching aids is the dependent variable. To test this hypothesis, Pearson
Product Moment Correlation Analysis (r) was utilized, and the result of the analysis is
presented in Table 2.
British Journal of Education
Vol.3, No.6, pp.31-40, June 2015
Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
37
Table 2
Pearson Product Moment Correlation Analysis of Relationship between Principals’ Classroom
Observation Technique and Teachers’ Job Performance. n=344
Variables
X
SD
rxy
Principal’s supervisory classroom Visitation
technique (x)
Teachers’ Job Performance
a. Student’s assessment and evaluation (y1)
b. Instructional ability (y2)
c. Classroom discipline (y3)
d. Communication effectiveness (y4)
e. Teaching method and use of teaching aid
(y5)
15.69
18.77
19.08
17.51
18.60
17.80
2.26
2.17
2.59
3.69
3.45
2.55
.10
.32*
.14*
.18*
.12*
*Significant at .05, Critical r =0.11, df=342
The result of the analysis presented in Table 2 shows that there is a significant positive
relationship between principals' supervisory classroom visitation technique and teachers' job
performance in terms of instructional ability (r=0.32;p<.05), classroom discipline
(r=0.14;p<.05), communication effectiveness (r=0.18;p<.05), teaching methods and use of
instructional aids (r=0.12;p<.05) and an insignificant relationship between principals'
classroom visitation technique and teachers' job performance in terms of students’ assessment
and evaluation (r=0.10;p<.05).
The null hypothesis was rejected for four cases because the calculated r-values of 0.32; 0.14;
0.18; 0.12 were found to be higher than the critical r-value of 0.11 while that of student
assessment and evaluation was lower than the critical r of .11 given .05 level of significance
and 342 degrees of freedom. This finding implies that principal’s use of supervisory technique
of classroom visitation has a significant positive relationship with teachers' job performance in
terms of instructional ability, classroom discipline, communication effectiveness, teaching
methods, and use of teaching aids. The positive r implies that the higher the principal's use of
supervisory technique of classroom visitation, the higher the teachers' job performance in terms
of instructional ability, classroom discipline, communication effectiveness, teaching methods,
and use of teaching aids tends to be. On the other hand, the lower the principals’ use of the of
supervisory technique of classroom visitation the lesser the teachers job performance in terms
of instructional ability, classroom discipline, communication effectiveness, teaching methods
and use of teaching aids tends to be.
DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
The result of hypothesis one was significant. This necessitated the rejection of the null
hypothesis and retaining of the alternate hypothesis. This result suggests that principals’
workshop technique plays a significant role in the job performance of teachers in terms of
instructional ability, classroom discipline, communication effectiveness, teaching method and
use of teaching aids. This supports the fact that the quality of principals’ workshop technique
is also a function of teachers’ job performance in participating in the workshop. Principals’
workshop that is rich in practical ideas, new techniques and current information about students’
assessment and evaluation, instructional ability, classroom discipline, communication
British Journal of Education
Vol.3, No.6, pp.31-40, June 2015
Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
38
effectiveness, teaching method and use of teaching aids is likely to create awareness to teachers
with regards to techniques, skills, methods and competence to carry out their responsibilities
effectively.
The result of this finding confirms the findings of Aniah (2005) who found that teachers were
capable of performing at higher intellectual levels when asked to work in collaborative active
situations than when asked to work individually. He added that group work, such as workshop
diversified in terms of knowledge and experience contributed positively to job performance. In
an earlier study, Akinwumi (2002) also asserted that workshop was usually composed of a
group of working people working towards a common goal and trying to find a solution to a
given problem through group discussions and conferences under the supervision of resource
persons or consultants. Similarly, this finding support the view of Schon (2005) that a workshop
must be flexible in nature, organized to meet a particular need at a particular time during the
year.
The result of this finding supports the view of Welberg and Govora (1992) that there were
tendencies for teachers attending multiple school workshop to perceive less classroom and
other impact of the workshop than teachers who attended single school workshop. They further
explained that workshops that had met for longer number of hours were rated as having a
greater impact on teachers. Effective principal’s workshop technique provides opportunities
for exchange of ideas among teachers. The accumulation of ideas by the teachers through
workshop technique of the principal improves the teachers’ job performance.
The result of the second hypothesis was also significant. That means, the job performance of
teachers in terms of instructional ability, classroom discipline, communication effectiveness,
teaching method and use of teaching aids is influenced by the quality of principals’ classroom
visitation. This therefore led to the rejection of the null hypothesis and the retention of the
alternate hypothesis. The result suggests that principals’ classroom visitation plays a significant
role on the job performance of teachers in terms of instructional ability, classroom discipline,
communication effectiveness, teaching method and use of teaching aids. Whereas on students’
assessment and evaluation, it showed not significant.
The result of this finding is in consonance with the findings of Nakpodia (2010) who was of
the view that most teachers felt confident while being observed and reported that observations
were not usually disruptive to classes and that teachers were even confident while being
observed. However, about 44% of the teachers found that classroom observations were not
usually helpful. These findings also support the result of Saka (2000) study on the quality of
observation, that the principal was the primary source of observations. Osika (2002), in an
earlier study also found that teachers tend to be committed to their duties if principals visit
classroom regularly. His findings also revealed that a principal who never visits classrooms to
observe teachers encourage laziness among teachers.
The findings from this study showed that the higher the principals' use of supervisory technique
of classroom visitation, the higher the teachers’ job performance in terms of instructional
ability, classroom discipline, communication effectiveness, teaching methods and use of
teaching aids. This means that a principal’s supervisory technique of visiting classrooms on
regular basis to observe, not only how teachers teach, but also the total learning situation and
teachers-students relationship, enhances teachers’ job performance.
British Journal of Education
Vol.3, No.6, pp.31-40, June 2015
Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
39
CONCLUSION
Based on the findings, it was concluded that principals’ supervisory techniques in terms of
workshop and classroom visitation had a significant relationship with teachers’ job
performance. The job performances of teachers would be enhanced when they are adequately
supervised by principals using the various supervisory techniques. From these therefore, it is
very necessary for secondary school principals to ensure the utilization of the various
supervisory techniques for teachers to improve their teaching capabilities and overall work
performance in the school. Hence, teachers’ job performance depend significantly on these
techniques which have been found as basis for improvement in the quality of teachers job
performance that will result in improved students’ academic achievement.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the result of this study, it was recommended that School principals should ensure
effective supervision of teachers’ classroom instruction as this will go a long way to enhance
teaching and learning in schools.
REFERENCES
Adetula, L. O. (2005). Improving the supervisory skills and competencies of inspectors of
mathematics education in schools. International Journal of the Teacher’s Registration
council of Nigeria, 1(1), 33-40.
Affianmagbon, B. E. (2007). Educational Supervision. Owerri: International University press
Ltd.
Akinwumi, F. G. (2002). The supervisory practices of secondary school principals in Egbado
South Local Government Area of Ogun State. Unpublished M.Ed Thesis, University of
Ibadan, Ibadan.
Aniah, S. A. (2005). Supervision and teachers productivity in public secondary schools in Cross
River state, Nigeria. Unpublished M.Ed Thesis, University of Calabar, Calabar.
Ezeocha, P. A. (1995). Modern school supervision (supervision of instruction and issues).
Owerri: International University press.
Fritz, C. & Miller, G. (2001). Escalation model for instructional supervisors in Agricultural
education. Proceedings of the 28th Annual National Agriculture Education Research
Conference, New Orleans. LA, 28, 320-332.
Igwe, S. O. (2001). Supervision, evaluation and quality control in education. In N.A. Nigeria,
E.J. Ehiametalor, M.A. Ogunu and M. Nwadiani (Eds) Current Issue in educational
management in Nigeria. Benin City: Nigeria Association for Educational
Administration and Planning, 3(9), 33-39.
Lovell, J. T. & Kimball, W. (2005). Supervision for better schools. New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Inc.
Nakpodia, E. D. (2010). The dependent outcome of teacher performance in secondary schools
in Delta State: an empirical assessment of principal’s supervisory Capacity. African
Journal of Education and Technology, 1(1), 15-24.
Obi, E. (2004). Law and Education management. Enugu: Empathy International.
British Journal of Education
Vol.3, No.6, pp.31-40, June 2015
Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
40
Osakwe, N. R. (2010). Relationship between principals’ supervisory strategies and teachers’
instructional performance in Delta North senatorial District, Nigeria. Pakistan Journal
of Social Sciences,7(6),437-440.
Osika, E. O. (2002). Principals’ instructional supervision and Job performance of secondary
schools in Southern Senatorial District of Cross River State. Unpublished M.Ed thesis,
University of Calabar, Calabar.
Peretomode, V. F. (2001). Introduction to Educational Administration, Planning and
Supervision. Ikeja: Joja research and publishers ltd.
Ramaprasad, A. (1996). On the definition of feedback. Behavioural Science, 28(1), 4-13.
Ray, S. & Hyl, N. (1990). Emerging pattern of supervision: Human perspectives, New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Riltig, P. R. (2007). Leslie’s lament: how can I make teachers’ supervision meaningful?
Educational Horizons, 79(1), 33-37
Saka, A. A. (2000). The relationship between supervisory climate and teacher/student
performance in secondary schools in Oyo State, Nigeria. Unpublished Ph.D
Dissertation, University of Ibadan, Ibadan.
Schon, D. A. (2000). Educating the reflective practitioner. Toward a new design for teaching
and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Slavin, P. J. (1990). Supervisory behaviour in education Eaglewood cliffs. New Jersey: Prentice
Hall Incorporate.
Welberg, H. & Gevora, J. (1992). Staff, school and workshop influence on knowledge use in
educational improvement. Journal Education Research, 76(4), 69-80.
