Available via license: CC BY-NC 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Open Journal of Educational Development (OJED)
ISSN: 2734-2050
Article Details:
DOI: 10.52417/ojed.v5i1.779
Article Ref. No.: OJED0502007-722
Volume: 5; Issue: 2, Pages: 72-82 (2024)
Accepted Date: 30th December, 2024
© 2024 Emeruwa et al.
Open Journals Nigeria (OJN)
Open Access | Bi-annual | Peer-reviewed
www.openjournalsnigeria.org.ng
editorial@openjournalsnigeria.org.ng
RESEARCH ARTICLE
OJED0502007-722
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL PRINCIPAL’S STRATEGIES TO
ENHANCING PHYSICAL SECURITY MEASURES: A CASE STUDY OF
SECONDARY SCHOOLS SITUATED IN SOUTH EAST STATES, NIGERIA.
.
*Emeruwa, H. I., Ogbonna, R. N. O. & Afianmagbon, B. E.
LICENSE: This work by Open Journals Nigeria is licensed and published under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided this article is duly cited.
COPYRIGHT: The Author(s) completely retain the copyright of this published article.
OPEN ACCESS: The Author(s) approves that this article remains permanently online in the open access (OA) mode.
QA: This Article is published in line with “COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and PIE (Publication Integrity & Ethics)”.
ABSTRACT
The study examined Secondary School Principals’ Strategies and Physical Security Measures in South East States, Nigeria. A total of 1500
teachers were sampled in 272 secondary schools. The technique used in the selection was the disproportionate random sampling technique.
The school principal’s strategies and physical security questionnaire (SPSAPSQ) was the instrument used for data collection. It was
validated and the reliability test yielded 0.79 Cronbach Alpha coefficients. Mean statistics were used to answer the two research questions
while analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test the two hypotheses at a 0.05 level of significance. Results indicate a large concurrence
of teachers that the provision of surveillance-communication gadgets and deployment of security barriers by principals impacted positively
on enhancing security measures in schools. For enhancing school safety, planning and adequate security measures such as provision of first
aid kits, fumigating the environments, covering of gutters, ensuring the perimeter of the school is fenced, provision of ligh ting materials,
installation of CCTV to cover blind spots, liaising with community, security agencies and stakeholders for supports.
Keywords: Secondary School, Principal-ship, School Principals’ Strategies, Physical Security.
Department of Educational Administration and Planning, Abia State University Uturu.
*Corresponding Author Email: hilyke77@gmail.com
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 7 3
INTRODUCTION
Secondary education is “the second and third levels of education system in Nigeria” (Federal Republic of Nigeria.
(FRN, 2013. Basic education which is the second level comprises “kindergarten, 6 years primary school, and 3
years post-primary studies in junior secondary schools” (FRN, 2023); the third level is the 3 years post-basic
studies in senior secondary schools and technical colleges. Secondary education is “the total process of human
learning by which knowledge and faculties are trained, and different skills are developed’ (Adesemowo and
Sotonade, 2022). In Nigeria, the two broad aims of secondary education are to prepare individuals for useful
living within the society and higher education. The objectives of secondary education are “to inspire students with
a desire for self-improvement and achievement of excellence and to raise a generation of people, who can think
for themselves, respect the dignity of labour, and live as good citizens” (FRN, 2013). These objectives are
achievable in a safe, secure, and conducive environment.
Secondary schools are academic and vocational institutions that provide education to students between the ages
of 11 and 18 years, typically from grade 6 to grade 12 (International Standard Classification of Education, 2011).
Secondary school is designed to provide a learning environment and spaces for students to acquire knowledge,
skills, and values (UNESCO, 2022). Secondary school is of two types viz government schools and private entities
schools. The government controls all secondary schools through the Federal Ministry of Education (for unity
schools), Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC), State Universal Education Boards (SUBEB), and
Secondary Education Management Boards (SEMB). It is through government control of education that individuals
could be influenced to accept their roles in society and enhance national integration and unity (Anuna and Ofoeze,
2002). The schools that are being owned and administered by the government are funded through the taxpayer’s
money and the extent of funding is dependent on the competition between education and other sectors of the
economy (Mbadiwe and Nwokocha, 2018).
A principal is described in Onye, Anugom, and Obizue (2019:282) as “an intermediary and interpreter of policy,
aims and objectives between his school and community, government, and other public and private agencies”. At
the secondary level of education, school principals are the custodians of secondary schools. As custodians, they
are responsible for school resources and materials as well as school programmes and their implementation which
cover day-to-day activities. In order words, a school principal is the chief executive officer who is responsible for
the effective management of school resources for the actualization of education's stated goals and objectives. The
principal is a school manager. He is the administrative head of a secondary school and he is also called a school
administrator. Isiozor and Ononiwu (2019) insinuate that a principal carries out administrative tasks to create a
safe, secure, and conducive learning environment for the achievement of the aims of secondary education.
Okunamiri (2010) emphasized that the principal is a key player in the achievement of school objectives because
the success of the school in implementing educational programmes and policies depends largely on him
(Okunamiri, 2010). He coordinates tasks to achieve goals (Ndom-Uchendu and Ogbonna, 2022). School
Principals’ strategies are the planned and systematic approaches employed by school administrators to achieve
specific objectives. In other words, School Principals’ strategies are the actions and measures that the school
administrators have put in place for the achievement of specific objectives such as a safe, secure, and conducive
learning environment. School principals’ strategies can also be described as management strategies in secondary
school. Karami (2022) defined management strategies as a concept that describes the specific measures being
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 7 3
executed by the administrator to achieve his responsibilities. The application of some management strategies by
the school administrators such as emergency preparedness, provision of surveillance-communication gadgets, and
deployment of security barriers are essential for the safety and protection of human, material, and financial
resources from being bullied, intimidated, assaulted, maimed, wounded, harmed, killed, defaced, vandalized,
burnt or destroyed. The concept of physical security is defined as safety, security, and protection from harm and
danger. Payne (2023) describes physical security as a concept that involves the safety and protection of human,
material, and financial resources from being bullied, intimidated, assaulted, maimed, wounded, harmed, killed,
defaced, vandalized, burnt, or destroyed. In schools, human resources are human beings and include the staff,
students, and school visitors. Material resources include facilities (such as school buildings), equipment (such as
generators), and raw materials (such as textbooks and chalk). To determine how the provision of surveillance-
communication gadgets and the deployment of security barriers of principals impacted physical security in
secondary schools in South East States, Nigeria.
The study aims to ascertain how strategies of school principals impacted physical security in Secondary Schools
situated in Southeast states, Nigeria.
SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This study assesses secondary school principals’ strategies and physical security measures in South East States,
Nigeria. The content scope is confined to how indices of utilization of security budget and School-community
collaboration employed by school principals impacted physical security effectiveness in secondary schools. The
independent variable of the study is school principals’ strategies while the dependent variable is physical security
in Secondary School. Geographically, this study is limited to Abia Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo States of
Nigeria. The population of the study embraced all the public secondary school teachers in Southeast states,
Nigeria.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
a. How much does the provision of surveillance-communication gadgets to principals impact physical security
in secondary schools in Southeast states, Nigeria?
b. To what extent have deployments of security barriers of principals influenced physical security in secondary
schools in Southeast states, Nigeria?
HYPOTHESES
a. H01:There is no significant difference between the mean scores of teachers on surveillance-communication
gadgets of principals and physical security in secondary schools in South East States, Nigeria.
b. H03:There is no significant difference between the mean scores of teachers on deployments of security
barriers of principals and physical security in secondary schools in South East States, Nigeria.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESEARCH DESIGN
This study employed a descriptive survey research design to explore the opinions of teachers in secondary schools
in South East States, Nigeria towards school principals’ strategies and physical security. This allows for efficient
collection of data using standardized questionnaires. This design enables quantification of the extent of agreement
of teachers on how strategies employed by school principals impact physical security in secondary schools.
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 7 4
AREA OF THE STUDY
Southeast Nigeria is one of the six (6) geo-political zones in Nigeria and lies between latitudes 4º20′ and
7º25′North and longitudes 6º37′ and 8º28′ East (Onyeneke et al., 2019). The geopolitical zone is bordered by
Benue and Kogi States to the north, Cross River to the east, Akwa Ibom and Rivers to the south, and Delta State
to the west. There are 27 education zones in Southeast Asia. The average population density is 450 – 520 people
per square kilometer. Christianity is the predominant religion of the people and they are predominantly Igbo by
tribe. The economy of South East Nigeria depends primarily on agriculture and commerce. They cultivate and
merchant various crop produce, most especially palm oil. The Southeast also has crude oil deposits and attracts
investments in oil and gas exploration, hydroelectric plants, gas-fired plants, education, etc. The choice of this
area was because of the prevalence of physical security threats to the educational administration of secondary
schools. The achievement of the noble goal of secondary education is bei ng threatened by increased cases of
flooding, building collapse, vandalizing of school equipment and facilities, fire incidents, banditry, terrorism,
threats by violent non-state actors, destruction of school facilities, rape, kidnapping for ransom, murder of school
teachers and students, armed robbery, violent cult, and cult-related activities, etc. The prevalence of these security
threats undermines the learning environment, fostering fear, anxiety, and distraction among staff, students, and
parents. The situation is compromising the safety and academic performance of students.
This study can inform policy and practice, helping education authorities and school administrators have data on
how management strategies employed by principals influence physical security in secondary schools in Southeast
states. South East States, Nigeria is a significant geo-political zone, with many primary, and secondary schools,
and other higher institutions, making the findings of this study relevant to the administration of other levels of
education.
POPULATION OF THE STUDY
The study’s target population consisted of 28, 573 teachers from the 942 public secondary schools of South East
States, Nigeria.
SAMPLE AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUE
Using a disproportionate stratified random sampling technique, 1500 teachers from 272 public secondary schools
were sampled in Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo States. A population of 300 teachers from 41 public
secondary schools, 200 from 47 schools, 150 teachers from 39 schools, 450 teachers from 56 schools, and 400
teachers from 89 public secondary schools respectively were sampled.
INSTRUMENTATION
Development of the Instrument
The instrument was a researcher's self-constructed questionnaire titled “School Principals’ Strategies and Physical
Security Questionnaire (SPSAPSQ)”. It has two (2) sections. Section A obtained information on the personal data
of the respondents, while section B comprised 10 items in two (2) clusters and contained information on school
principals’ strategies and physical security in secondary schools in Southeast states, Nigeria. The instrument was
structured along a four (4) point modified Likert-type scale of strongly agreed (SA), agreed (A), disagreed (D),
and strongly disagreed (SD), weighted 4, 3, 2, and 1 points respectively.
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 7 5
Validation of the Instrument
The face and content validity were done by three (3) experts. One (1) from the Department of Educational
Administration and Planning, while the others were from the Department of Curriculum and Teacher Education
and the Measurement and Evaluation unit, all from the Faculty of Education, Abia State University, Uturu. The
reliability of the 10-item instrument yielded 0.79 Cronbach Alpha coefficients.
ADMINISTRATION OF THE INSTRUMENT
The SPSAPSQ was distributed in 1500 copies, but the researcher only managed to retrieve 1000 of them with the
assistance of 10 assistants who had received training A total of 1500 copies of the questionnaire were
administered, but only 1000 copies were retrieved by the researcher with the help of 15 assistants who were trained
on how to define words that seemed unclear and unintelligible.
METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS
To address the research questions, the collated data was analyzed using mean, and the hypothesis was tested at
0.05 level of significance using a One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).
DATA ANALYSES AND RESULTS
Although 1500 copies of the instrument were sent to the 27 education zones, only 1000 of them were properly
completed and compiled. A return rate of 66.67% is represented by this.
RESEARCH QUESTION ONE
How does the provision of surveillance-communication gadgets by principals impact physical security in
secondary schools in Southeast states, Nigeria?
Table 4: Mean Score Analysis of Principal’s Responses on Provision of Surveillance-Communication Gadgets
and Physical Security in Secondary Schools in South East States, Nigeria
S/N
Items
Provision of security-
communication
gadgets by my
principal
SA
A
D
SD
∑x
X
Decision
1
help in the reduction of
vandalism, stealing, and
damage to school
properties
ABIA
620
120
20
2
762
3.68
ANAMBRA
600
114
16
2
732
3.70
EBONYI
612
117
14
2
745
3.71
ENUGU
680
129
18
6
836
3.66
IMO
512
96
10
1
619
3.73
TOTAL
3024
576
78
13
3691
3.69
Agreed
2
help in monitoring and
recording happenings in
blind spot areas, the
video can serve as data
for management
decision on security
ABIA
608
126
22
2
758
3.66
ANAMBRA
592
120
16
2
730
3.69
EBONYI
604
123
14
2
743
3.70
ENUGU
676
132
18
6
832
3.65
IMO
504
99
12
1
616
3.71
TOTAL
2984
600
82
13
3679
3.68
Agreed
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 7 6
3
help in identifying
unauthorized access and
potential threats to lives
and properties in the
school
ABIA
616
120
20
3
759
3.67
ANAMBRA
596
117
16
2
731
3.69
EBONYI
608
120
14
2
744
3.70
ENUGU
684
129
16
6
838
3.68
IMO
508
96
10
2
616
3.71
TOTAL
3012
582
76
15
3685
3.69
Agreed
4
have boosted confidence
of teachers in the
protection of lives and
properties in the school.
ABIA
612
123
22
2
759
3.67
ANAMBRA
600
114
16
2
732
3.70
EBONYI
604
120
16
2
742
3.69
ENUGU
680
132
18
5
837
3.67
IMO
512
99
10
0
622
3.75
TOTAL
3008
588
82
11
3689
3.69
Agreed
5
enhanced
communication and
situational awareness in
the school.
ABIA
620
120
18
3
761
3.68
ANAMBRA
592
120
16
2
730
3.69
EBONYI
612
117
14
2
745
3.71
ENUGU
676
129
18
7
834
3.66
IMO
504
99
12
1
616
3.71
TOTAL
3004
585
78
15
3682
3.68
Agreed
Pooled Mean 3.68 (92% agreement)
Table 4 revealed that the principals from Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo States secondary schools agreed
with all the items on the table. The pooled mean of 3.68 mark which is above the criterion mean mark of 2.50
indicates stronger agreement that the provision of surveillance-communication gadgets impacted positively
physical security in secondary schools in South East States, Nigeria.
RESEARCH QUESTION TWO
How much have deployments of security barriers of principals influenced physical security in secondary schools
in Southeast states, Nigeria?
Table 5: Mean Score Analysis of Principal’s Responses on Deployment of Security Barriers and Physical Security
in Secondary Schools in South East States, Nigeria
S/N
Items
Security barriers
deployment of my
principal
SA
A
D
SD
∑x
X
Decision
6
prevent unauthorized
access into the school.
For instance, students
who were suspended
from the school or were
sent home will not have
access to enter the
school.
ABIA
560
135
30
7
732
3.54
ANAMBRA
552
126
24
6
708
3.58
EBONYI
564
129
22
6
721
3.59
ENUGU
620
144
28
11
811
3.56
IMO
480
108
16
2
606
3.65
TOTAL
2776
642
120
32
3570
3.57
Agreed
7
keep-off those who do
not have any business in
ABIA
568
129
28
8
733
3.54
ANAMBRA
560
120
22
7
709
3.58
EBONYI
572
126
20
6
724
3.60
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 7 7
the school from
accessing the school
premises (trespassing)
ENUGU
632
147
24
9
818
3.59
IMO
488
111
14
0
613
3.69
TOTAL
2820
633
108
30
3591
3.59
Agreed
8
deter arson, vandals and
school property burglars
control students’ late
coming and loitering
outside the school
premises
enter the school.
ABIA
620
114
20
4
758
3.66
ANAMBRA
612
108
18
0
738
3.73
EBONYI
624
111
16
0
751
3.74
ENUGU
692
129
18
3
842
3.69
IMO
540
93
0
0
633
3.81
TOTAL
3088
555
72
7
3722
3.72
Agreed
9
control students’ late
coming and loitering
outside the school
premises.
ABIA
632
117
18
1
768
3.71
ANAMBRA
580
111
16
8
715
3.61
EBONYI
596
114
14
7
731
3.64
ENUGU
680
132
20
4
836
3.67
IMO
512
96
12
0
620
3.73
TOTAL
3000
570
80
21
3670
3.67
Agreed
10
provide a sense of
security and safe
learning for students by
protecting the students
from distractions and the
female students from
sexual harassments.
ABIA
580
126
26
7
739
3.57
ANAMBRA
572
120
22
4
718
3.63
EBONYI
584
123
20
4
731
3.64
ENUGU
644
141
24
8
817
3.58
IMO
500
105
12
0
617
3.72
TOTAL
2880
615
104
23
3622
3.62
Agreed
Pooled Mean 3.64 (92% agreement)
Table 5 revealed that the principals from Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo States secondary schools
agreed with all the items on the table. The pooled mean of 3.64 mark which is above the criterion mean mark of
2.50 indicates very strong agreement that deployment of security barriers of principals broadly influenced physical
security in secondary schools in South East States, Nigeria.
HYPOTHESIS ONE
There is no significant difference between the mean scores of teachers on the provision of surveillance-
communication gadgets of principals and physical security in secondary schools in Southeast States, Nigeria.
Table 6: Analyses of significant differences between mean scores of teachers on the provision of surveillance-
communication gadgets and physical security in secondary schools in South East States, Nigeria
Source of
Variation
Sum of
Squares
Degree of
Freedom
Mean
Squares
F-Value
p-Value
Decision
Between
Groups
0.0072
4
0.0018
0.186
0.946
Fail to Reject null
hypothesis
Within
Groups
0.583
15
0.0389
Total
0.5902
19
Table 6 shows a summary of analyses of significant differences between the mean scores of teachers on the
provision of surveillance-communication gadgets and physical security. The p-value (0.946) is greater than the
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 7 8
significance level (0.05), indicating that the mean responses are not significantly different across the five states.
The F-statistic (0.186) is relatively small, indicating that the variance between groups is not significantly greater
than the variance within groups. The mean square between groups (0.0018) is much smaller than the mean square
within groups (0.1764), further supporting the conclusion that the mean responses are not significantly different.
In conclusion, based on the analyses using one-way Analyses of Variance results, the researcher fail to reject the
null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between the mean scores of teachers on the provision of
surveillance-communication gadgets and physical security in secondary schools in South East States, Nigeria. The
mean responses are not significantly different across the five states (Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo
States).
HYPOTHESIS TWO
There is no significant difference between the mean scores of teachers on deployments of security barriers of
principals and physical security in secondary schools in Southeast states, Nigeria.
Table 7: Analyses of significant difference between mean scores of teachers on the deployment of security
barriers and physical security in secondary schools in South East States, Nigeria
Source of
Variation
Sum of
Squares
Degree of
Freedom
Mean
Squares
F-Value
p-Value
Decision
Between
Groups
0.141
4
0.0353
0.0913
0.461
Fail to Reject null
hypothesis
Within
Groups
2.315
15
0.0387
Total
2.456
19
Table 7 shows a summary of analyses of the significant difference between the mean scores of teachers on the
deployment of security barriers and physical security in secondary schools in Southeast States, Nigeria. The p-
value (0.461) is greater than the significance level (0.05), indicating that the mean responses are not significantly
different across the five states. The F-statistic (0.0913) is relatively small, indicating that the variance between
groups is not significantly greater than the variance within groups. The mean square between groups (0.0353) is
smaller than the mean square within groups (0.0387), further supporting the conclusion that the mean responses
are not significantly different. In conclusion, based on the analyses using one-way Analysis of Variance results,
the researcher failed to reject the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between the mean scores
of teachers on the deployment of security and physical security in secondary schools in Southeast states, Nigeria.
The mean responses are not significantly different across the five states (Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo
States).
DISCUSSION
The findings of the first research question showed that the provision of surveillance-communication gadgets
widely impacted physical security in secondary schools. With a pooled mean score of 3.68, it implies that large
numbers of teachers agreed that the provision of surveillance-communication gadgets by school administrators
widely impacted physical security in secondary schools. This finding is in agreement with Vossekul et al. (2022)
that surveillance-communication gadgets can improve incident reports, reduce vandalism and property damage.
It also agrees with Kumar, et al. (2022) that deployment of surveillance-communication gadgets can deter
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 7 9
potential threats and enhance situational awareness in secondary schools. So, by leveraging surveillance -
communication gadgets and technologies, school principals can create safer and more secure learning
environments for students, teachers, and staff. Provision of surveillance-communication gadgets by school
administrators should help in the reduction of vandalism, stealing, and damage to school properties; help in
monitoring and recording happenings in blind spot areas, the video which can serve as data for management
decisions on security; help in identifying unauthorized access and potential threats to lives and properties in the
school; boost the confidence of teachers in the protection of lives and properties in the school; and enhance
communication and situational awareness in the school.
The findings of the second research question showed deployment of security barriers by principals influenced
physical security in secondary schools to a large extent. With a pooled mean score of 3.64, it implies that large
numbers of teachers agreed that the deployment of security barriers by school administrators influenced physical
security in secondary schools in Southeast States, Nigeria to a large extent. This finding is in agreement with the
FBI (2022) that the deployment of security barriers in schools such as perimeter fencing, access control systems,
metal detectors, secure entrance protocols, and surveillance cameras can improve physical security in secondary
schools. So, by implementing security barriers, school principals can create a safer and more secure learning
environment for students, teachers, and staff. Deployment of security barriers by principals should prevent
unauthorized access to the school. For instance, students who were suspended from the school or were sent home
will not have access to enter the school; keep off those who do not have any business in the school from accessing
the school premises (trespassing); deter arson, vandals and school property burglars; control students’ late coming
and loitering outside the school premises; and provide a sense of security and safe learning for students by
protecting the students from distractions and the female students from sexual harassments.
CONCLUSION
The findings of the study showed that school teachers in South East States, Nigeria largely agreed that application
of management strategies of school principals influenced physical security in secondary schools to a large extent.
The study therefore noted that for effective secondary school administration, school administrators should
intensify the application of some management strategies including the provision and deployment of surveillance -
communication gadgets, the deployment of security barriers, ensuring effective utilization of the security budget
of the school, and ensuring school-community collaborations. The study improves the understanding of school
principals’ strategies and physical security in secondary schools in South East, Nigeria.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations are made;
1. School principals in South East States, in Nigeria should be committed to identifying and mobilizing
resources such as personnel, equipment, supplies, and facilities needed to ensure physical security.
2. School principals in the South East States, of Nigeria should be committed to the deployment of security
barriers and monitor the school perimeter and entrance/exit routes regularly. Potential security weaknesses
and vulnerabilities should be identified and enforcement of security protocols and barriers should be ensured
at all times.
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 8 0
REFERENCES
Adesemowo, P.O. & Sotonade, O.A.T. (2022). The meaning and scope of education. In P.O. Adesemowo (ed).,
Basic of education (pp 1 – 9). Retrieved from https://www.Research gate.net/publication/3618 13544
Anuna, M.C. & Ofoeze, H.G. (2002). State management and control of education in Nigeria: A political analysis
(1970 – 1993). In T.N. Ekpo, M.C. Anuna, & G.L. Okoli (eds.), Contemporary issues and problems in the
Nigerian education system. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishing Co. Ltd (pp 25 – 40).
International Standard Classification of Education. (2011). Operational manual: Guidelines for classifying
educational programmes and qualifications. UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
Isiozor, G.N. &Ononiwu, J.C. (2019).Principals level of effectiveness in managing teachers indiscipline in
secondary schools in Owerri education Zones of Imo State, Nigeria. Journal of Educational
Administration, Management and Planning Abia State University, Uturu, 1(1): 39 – 49.
Karami, M. (2022). Strategic planning and organizational performance. Journal of Business Research, 147: 342-
353.
Kumar, P., Sharma, S., & Singh, R. (2022). Emergency Preparedness and Response in Schools. Journal of
Emergency Management, 17(2): 147-155.
Lopez, D. (2020). Surveillance technology and society. Routledge.
Marx, G. T. (2022). The Public Eye: Surveillance and the Exposure of the Self. Journal of Social
Issues, 78(3): 537–554.
Mbadiwe, H.C., & Nwokocha, L.K. (2018). Cost and financing of education in Nigerian universities. In B.E.
Afianmagbon & L.K. Nwokocha (eds.), Economics of education: A book of reading in honour of
Professor Philip Onuigbo Okunamiri. Leach-Ugorji Publishers (pp 333 – 372).
Federal Bureau of Investigation (2022). Active shooter incident report. The USA FBI.
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2013). National Policy on Education. Abuja. NERDC.
Ndom-Uchendu, M.N. & Ogbonna, R.N.O. (2022). Constraints to functional vocational and technical education
management in the period of insecurity in Abia State. Journal of Educational Administration and
Planning Abia State University, Uturu 2(1): 55 – 65.
Okunamiri, P.O. (2010). Educational Planning and Policy Analysis. Owerri: Novelty Industries Enterprises
Ltd.
Onye, C.O., Anugom, F. &Obizue, M.N. (2017). Principals’ time management skills for effective secondary
school administration in owerri zones, Imo State. Journal of Educational Studies and Research,
7(1): 281-290.
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 8 1
Onyeneke, R., Nwajiuba, C.A., Munaonye, J., Igberi, C., Aligbe, J.O. & Amadi, M. (2019).
Migration and agricultural investment in Southeast, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural
Extension 23(4): 130 - 143.
Payne, Y. (2023, August 12). Understanding risk management mheories. IIENSTITU Blog Retrieved
from https://www.iienstitu.Com/en/blog/un derstanding-risk-management-theories
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2022). Disaster risk reduction in schools: A
guide for school administrators. Paris. UNESCO Publishing.
Vossekuil, B., Fein, R.A., & Bergman, M. (2022). The Final Report and Findings of the Safe School Initiative.
Washinton, D.C., US Secret Service.
Zhang, Y., Li, X., & Wang, J. (2021). Access control systems: A survey. Journal of Network and Computer
Applications, 182: 103034.
Emeruwa et al., 2024 OJED 5(2) | 8 2
