| |
Title of Thesis
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE, LEADERSHIP STYLE AND PHYSICAL FACILITIES OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN PUNJAB AND THEIR EFFECT ON SCHOOL EFFECTIVENESS |
Author(s)
Muhammad Iqbal |
Institute/University/Department Details
Institute of Education and Research/ University of the Punjab |
Session
2005 |
Subject
Education and Research |
Number of Pages
440 |
Keywords (Extracted from title, table of contents and abstract of thesis)
organizational structure, leadership style, physical facilities, school effectiveness, private schools |
Abstract This study aimed to compare the organizational structure, heads leadership style and physical facilities of public and private secondary schools. The effect of head’s leadership style was also seen on school effectiveness. It was survey study in nature. The researcher prepared and validated the following questionnaires for data collection. i Organizational Structure Measurement Questionnaire (QSMQ). ii Leadership Style Measurement Questionnaire (LSMQ). iii Physical Facilities Measurement Questionnaire(PFMQ and iv School Effectiveness Measurement Questionnaire(SEMQ) v Interview Schedules for principal, teachers, students and parents for the purpose of case studies. The sample of the study was 280 secondary schools located at 34 district headquarters of the Punjab Province split into 158 public schools and 122 private schools. The data were collected from sampled schools through mail or personally-distributed questionnaires Only 237 questionnaires could be received from 131 public schools and 106private schools. As such the response rate of questionnaire was 84.5%. Analysis of data was run through testing of 22 null hypotheses i.e. Ho 1-6 for leadership styles of heads, Ho 7-16 to find the relationship of organizational structure, leadership style and physical facilities with school effectiveness and Ho 17-22 for comparison of schools effectiveness of public and private schools by applying t-test ANOVA and linear regression. Nominal data were analyzed and presented in percentages and graphs i.e. Pie and Bar graphs, In addition to questionnaires six case studies (three from public and three from private schools) were also conducted for in-depth study of school environment and leadership behavior of school heads both. As such views of the heads, teachers, students and parents were found through interview schedules. The purpose of these case studies was to enhance generalizability of the research. Sixteen interviews were recorded from each school. The key conclusions based on statistical and descriptive evidences of this study indicated that 49% of private schools heads were task oriented and authoritative as compared to 34% public school heads which means private school heads were found to be more task oriented and authoritative. Public male and female heads had no difference of leadership style. Male heads of private schools were people-oriented and democratic as compared to their female counterparts. Female head of public and private schools had no difference of leadership style. Overall task-oriented and authoritative leadership style of public and private school heads had significant effect on school effectiveness. Private male and female school had better effectiveness as compared to public schools while public schools had more mean area and more mean number of teachers as compared to private schools. School effectiveness was measure on the basis of school internal environment, interactions and three years matriculation results.
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| S. No. |
Chapter |
Title of the Chapters |
Page |
Size (KB) |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 1 |
0 |
Contents |
|
 143.4 KB |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 2 |
1 |
Introduction |
1 |
 134.09 KB |
| |
1.1 |
Statement Of The Problem |
5 |
| |
1.2 |
Significance Of The Study |
6 |
| |
1.3 |
Objectives Of The Study |
9 |
| |
1.4 |
Null Hypotheses |
10 |
| |
1.5 |
Delimitations Of The Study |
10 |
| |
1.6 |
Definition Of Terms |
10 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 3 |
2 |
Review Of Related Literature |
13 |
 817.7 KB |
| |
2.1 |
Historical Background |
13 |
| |
2.2 |
Significant Policy Landmarks In History Of Educational Development In Pakistan |
15 |
| |
2.3 |
Education System Of Pakistan |
18 |
| |
2.4 |
Private Sector |
19 |
| |
2.5 |
Organization |
21 |
| |
2.6 |
Organizational Structure |
22 |
| |
2.7 |
Key Components Of Structure |
23 |
| |
2.8 |
Types Of Structure |
27 |
| |
2.9 |
Formal Structure In School |
39 |
| |
2.10 |
Hall’s Approach |
40 |
| |
2.11 |
Configurations Of School Structure |
52 |
| |
2.12 |
A Theory Of Loosely Coupled School Structure |
53 |
| |
2.13 |
Leadership |
57 |
| |
2.14 |
Administration |
57 |
| |
2.15 |
Administration In Education |
58 |
| |
2.16 |
Evolution Of Leadership |
60 |
| |
2.17 |
Leadership Styles |
72 |
| |
2.18 |
Physical Facilities |
76 |
| |
2.19 |
Criteria Of A Good School Site |
77 |
| |
2.20 |
Instructional Equipment |
78 |
| |
2.21 |
Physical Arrangements For Professional Growth |
79 |
| |
2.22 |
Facilities |
80 |
| |
2.23 |
Pakistan ’s Scenario In The Light Of Important Policy Landmarks |
84 |
| |
2.24 |
What Is Effectiveness? |
89 |
| |
2.25 |
Definitions Of School Effectiveness |
90 |
| |
2.26 |
Historical Evolution Of School Effectiveness And Research Studies On School Effectiveness |
91 |
| |
2.27 |
Factors Of Effectiveness |
92 |
| |
2.28 |
School Effectiveness Research Studies |
94 |
| |
2.29 |
Stages Of School Effectiveness |
96 |
| |
2.30 |
Characteristics Of Effective Schools |
100 |
| |
2.31 |
Effective Leadership |
100 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 4 |
3 |
Method And Procedure |
103 |
 257.99 KB |
| |
3.1 |
Population Of The Study |
103 |
| |
3.2 |
Sample Of The Study |
103 |
| |
3.3 |
District Wise Distribution Of Sample |
105 |
| |
3.4 |
Null Hypotheses |
107 |
| |
3.5 |
Instruments Of The Study |
109 |
| |
3.6 |
Organizational Structure Measurement Questionnaire (QSMQ) And Conceptual Framework |
109 |
| |
3.7 |
Leadership Style Measurement Questionnaire ( LSMQ ) |
110 |
| |
3.8 |
Physical Facilities Measurement Questionnaire ( PFMQ ) |
112 |
| |
3.9 |
School Effectiveness Measurement Questionnaire ( SEMQ ) |
113 |
| |
3.10 |
Validation Of Instruments |
114 |
| |
3.11 |
Collection Of Data |
117 |
| |
3.12 |
Data Analysis |
118 |
| |
3.13 |
Case Studies Of Public And Private Secondary Schools |
120 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 5 |
4 |
Analysis And Interpretation Of Data |
126 |
 2469.38 KB |
| |
4.1 |
Comparison Of Organizational Structures Of Public And Private Schools |
128 |
| |
4.2 |
Comparison Of Leadership Styles |
145 |
| |
4.3 |
Comparison Of Physical Facilities Of Public And Private Schools |
184 |
| |
4.4 |
Comparison Of School Effectiveness Of Public And Private Secondary Schools |
240 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 6 |
5 |
Summary, Findings, Conclusions And Recommendations |
317 |
 370.8 KB |
| |
5.1 |
Summary |
317 |
| |
5.2 |
Findings |
319 |
| |
5.3 |
Conclusion |
334 |
| |
5.4 |
Discussions |
342 |
| |
5.5 |
Recommendations |
351 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 7 |
6 |
Bibliography |
354 |
 608.69 KB |
| |
6.1 |
Appendix A (List Of Schools ) |
370 |
| |
6.2 |
Appendix B (Questionnaire ) |
381 |
| |
6.3 |
Appendix C (Interview Schedule ) |
392 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |