ROLE OF COLLEGE PRINCIPALS IN PROMOTING QUALITY OF EDUCATION IN DISTRICT KOTLI AJ&K

Nauman Saeed¹⁺ --- Almas Ikram Kayani²

¹Department of Education Pir Mehr Ali Shah Arid Agriculture University (PMAS AAUR) Rawalpindi Pakistan

²Associate Professor, Department of Education Pir Mehr Ali Shah Arid Agriculture University (PMAS AAUR) Rawalpindi Pakistan

Keywords:Principals role Quality education Physical facilities Professional development Educational outcomes Training.

ARTICLE HISTORY: Received:26 June 2018 Revised:16 August 2018 Accepted:10 September 2018 Published:5 October 2018.

Contribution/ Originality:This study is one of the very few studies which have investigated the role of college principals in promoting quality of education. The study revealed that if college principals are willing to improve the quality of education, they should maintain positive relationships with their staff, also coordinate and cooperate with them to improve the quality of education.

1. INTRODUCTION

Education is an essential determinant of economic and social development of any nation. Quality of education of a country indicates the quality of its human resource development. Education has been considered as the back bone of a nation not only for developing countries but also for advanced countries. The principals play vital and more significant role in improving and promoting quality of education. There are highly expectations from principals to improve the quality of education, student learning, student scores, and implementation of instructional changes and also provide a vision for teachers to meet those expectations. Within the No Child Left Behind Act, there is greater focus on the principal’s role as an academic and instructional leader (Finkel, 2012 ).

It is admitted the teachers and principals play significant role in the entire educational activities. No doubt the teacher and principal bringing change in the society. Challenges of the present century can be addressed if the teachers and principals are dedicated to their professions and well equipped with the new modem teaching and administration techniques. In recent, responsibilities of principal have become more challenging and it could only be achieved through quality of education (Abbasi, 2006 ). It is true that principals of our country are neither adequately equipped nor more motivated in order to bring desirable changes in the system. The reason is lack of pre-service professional preparation of principals and also less facilities in education. Therefore, it is highly need of time to bring many reforms in education for improving the content of teaching learning process, administration process and should focus particularly on the improvement of quality of education. There is need of time that principals should perform their duties not only as administrators of colleges but also advocate and promote the quality of education. The principals revive commitment for their professions and the society should give them place honor and status for seeking required results (Ali, 2005 ).

1.1. Concept of Education

Education is a social activity on the globe along with the mankind. Education brings understanding, discipline, and economic prosperity among the people. It is the responsibility of the state to provide educational opportunities and facilities to its masses so that they can become useful citizens. That is why education is placed at the top in the social priorities of all the countries.

1.2. Quality of Education

Now a day’s education quality is the major issue to achieve the international standards. Arcaro (1997 ) suggested the forces and methods for developing the educational system for quality of education in institutions, it is necessary to participate for the process of quality management. We should prepare framework for evaluation of quality, students support services, infrastructure, curriculum and resources (Khan, 2015 ). Quality is the name of excellence, perfection, and value for money, fitness for purpose and transformation (Harvey and Green, 1993 ). Ashcroft and Foreman-Peck (2005 ) said that quality means perfection implies faultlessness for zero errors. Biggs (2003 ) remarked that quality as best use of resources to achieve the standards of living and its accountability. Kontio (2008 ) explained that the meaning of quality assurance is a process, procedure and system to implement the policies and plans in developed the products. Quality assurance is permanent and organized attention in terms of quality maintenance and quality improvement.

1.3. Defining Quality of Education

The concise meaning of quality of education to improve of the quality is normally left unexplained. It is observed in this perspective that quality of education actually may refer to inputs; like amount of teacher training, numbers of teachers and textbooks etc., processes; like extent of active learning and amount of direct instructional time, outputs; like scores of test, rates of graduation, and outcomes; like performance in consequent service. In addition, quality of education might involve basically the attainment of particular objectives and targets. There are also found further wide-ranging views and explanation of education quality might be focused on an institutions or reputation programs, the extent in which institution has partial transform in learner attitudes, attributes, ethics, behavior and knowledge, or an entire comprehensive theory or philosophy of application and acquirement of knowledge (Adams, 1993 ).

1.4. Principals as Instructional Leaders

According to Marzano et al. (2005 ) good leaders are considered to be very important for the victorious performance of several aspects of an institution such as classroom climate, student learning, teacher practice, teacher attitude and instruction. Effective principals can make a difference in improving the learning student as well as the instruction of teacher. The job of principals is to work not only as instructional leaders but also as general managers of the institutions (Fink and Resnick, 2001 ). According to Seashore and Robinson (2012 ) the core job of a principal as Instructional leaders is to promote and facilitate instruction of teachers and main focus should be given on the improvement of classroom.

1.5. Principal’s Role in Teacher Training

According to Hallinger (2005 ) the job of leadership is to improve teaching learning and normally recognized as instructional leadership. The publication on the topic ‘‘A Nation at Risk (1983)’’ lead to a second signal of modifications that should focused on the quality work of teachers and improving teacher preparation programs and practice (Jacobson and Cypres, 2012 ). The Behind (2001 ) formed mandates for the districts and states to make available high quality of professional training and development for teachers to improve their quality of instruction and as well as achievement of students (Carlisle and Berebitsky, 2011 ). Elmore (2002 ) said that training of teachers is at the core of the practice of progress and it is the process in which we manage the development, and knowledge of teachers for their academic improvement. In improving teacher’s knowledge and quality, professional training of teachers has been broadly utilized and accepted as a main tool to improve and promote valuable research based programs.

1.6. Objectives of the Study

The following objectives were formulated for investigation.

1. To identify the indicators for enhancement of the quality of education.

2. To analyze the role of principals in promoting quality of education.

1.7. Research Questions

1. What are the indicators for enhancement of the quality of education?

2. How principals can play the role in promoting quality of education.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Population

The study is ‘Role of College Principals in Promoting Quality of Education in District Kotli AJ&K’ so; the public colleges of the district  Kotli AJK are selected for this research and in this context public college teachers and principals are involved as the population of the study. There were total 32 colleges and 446 teachers in district Kotli AJ&K.

2.2. Delimitations of the Study

Following are the delimitations of the study:

1. The study is delimited to public colleges located at district Kotli AJ&K.

2. Only the public colleges from 4 tehsils of district Kotli AJ&K were included in the study.

2.3. Sampling

A sample can be selected from the population to work as a representative of the whole group. According to Webster dictionary (1985) “A sample is a representative part of a statistical population who are under studied to seek information about the general.” Consecutive sampling technique was used. All twelve colleges from both two selected tehsils are included in final study. There are 196 teachers in both tehsils and sample was selected using L. R. Gay’s table of sampling. According to the L. R. Gay’s table if there are 196 populations then, 130 would be the sample. From population and collect data from all public colleges located in district Kotli. Whole population is selected as a sample of the study.

2.4. Research Design and Instruments

According to Gay (1987 ) the descriptive method is the best for investigating a number of educational problems and issues. The descriptive approach is used in this study while the researcher addressed the problems regarding to the role of college principals in promoting quality of education in district Kotli AJ&K. Qualitative and Quantitative are two major types of research design was used in this study. Interview and questionnaire both tools were used for collection of data in this study. First of all, the researcher planned a structured interview in order to get the responses from principals and secondly, prepared a well-structured Likert scale questionnaire to get firsthand knowledge from the worthy teachers belonging to mentioned study.

2.5. Pilot Testing

To confirm the reliability and validity of questionnaire two tehsils of district Kotli was selected to collect the data about pilot testing process and these tehsils are not include in final study. After validity results further improvements or changes are made according to the results of validity.

Table-1. Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha	N of Items
0.895	47

Source: Analysis through IBM SPSS 20

2.6. Data Collection and Data Analysis

The data was collected from structured interviews taken from the principals and through likert scale questionnaires from teachers of the selected colleges in district Kotli AJ&K. The questionnaire was administered personally by the researcher. The collected data from interviews and questionnaires were analyzed through Statistical Packages for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and AMOS software’s. Appropriate statistical techniques were used in analysis.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

3.1. Measurement Model

The measurement model is designed to investigate relationships between latent variables and what they measure. This study produces a measurement model to examine the factor for the quality of education.

3.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

3.2.1. Availability of Physical factors (AVF)

There were total of 10 items to measure the construct availability of physical factors that may have effect on quality education at college. Applying confirmatory analysis and model fit indices it only indicated five items that has statistical significant results to measure the construct. Among the five item AVF5 has the highest standardized factor loading square (R2 = 1.84) and reliability 0.23. AVF4 also has the loading factor square (R2 = 1.78) and reliability 0.24. AVF3 has the value of loading factor 1.04 and reliability of .40. AVF 1 has the regression weight of 1 and reliability value of 0.51. AVF2 has the lowest regression weight of (R2 = 0.98) while it has the reliability of 0.53.

3.2.2. Teachers Views about Administration (TVA):

There were nine statements to measure the teachers view about administration which helps in improvement of quality in education. Confirmatory factor analysis recommended only four statements which have high factor loading value and also fits in the model run in AMOS. TVA3 has the highest factor loading value (R2 = 1.27) and reliability value of 0.11. TVA 1 has the lowest value of (R2 = 1) with reliability value of 0.48. TVA2 and TVA4 statements have the regression weight more than 1.

3.2.3. Teachers Satisfaction towards their Job (TSJ)

In Confirmatory factor analysis only four statements were extracted which high factor loading values. TSJ4 has the highest regression weight of R2 = 1.48 among the four statements and its reliability is 0.32. TSJ3 has the regression value for 1.26 and TSJ2 of R2 = 1.12. TSJ1 has the lowest value of 1. The four items are good predictor of teacher satisfaction towards their job.

3.2.4. Teachers Trainings (TT):

There are three items which have the highest factor loading values extracted in confirmatory factor analysis.  TT3 has the regression weight score of (R2 = 1.20) with reliability 0.25. TT2 and TT1 items has the factor loading value of (R2 = 1.12) and (R2 = 1) respectively.

3.2.5. Teacher Role in Quality of Teaching (RQT):

Confirmatory factor analysis extracted three statements which best fits in the model. RQT2 second statement has the regression weight of 1.02. RQT1 has the regression weight of 1 while RQT3 has the lowest regression weight of 0.48. 

3.2.6. Quality of Curriculum (QC):

Curriculum quality very much matters in the improvement of educational quality. Quality of curriculum has five dimensions that were extracted in factor analysis. QC3 and QC4 has the highest loading value of 1.18. QC2 and QC5 has the regression weights of R2 = 1.02. QC1 has the value of 1.

3.2.7. Quality of Education Improvement (QEI)

Quality of education improvement construct has the three dimensions to measure. QEI3 has the Regression weight of 1.37 highest among the others. QEI1 has the regression weight of 1 while QEI2 has the lowest loading factor value of 0.87.

3.2.8. Qualitative Analysis

Q.1      Which strategies do you apply in order to improve the Quality of Education?

Table-2.Strategies to improve the Quality of Education

S.No	Items	Frequency	Percentage
1	Enforce the law and order	11	83
2	Check the teaching staff	9	75
3	Connectivity with the co-curricular activities	8	66
4	Proper test system and teaching schedule	8	66
5	Cooperative with staff	10	83
6	Democratic leadership strategies	8	66
7	Regular classes	12	100
8	Provision of A.V aids	11	91
9	Improve attendance and discipline	10	83
10	Motivate all the staff	7	53

Source: Analysis through IBM SPSS 20

Analysis: Table no. 2 shows that majority of respondents 83% answered that to improve quality education they maintain law and order and 75% answered that they monitor the teaching staff in their institutions. 66% respondents said that they link co-curricular activities with curricular activities and they have proper test system and teaching schedule to ensure quality education.  Most of the principals 83% answered that to improve quality education they keep cooperative behavior and 66% said that they keep democratic leadership with staff. All principals100% said that they make sure to conduct classes on regular basis and 91% answered that they provide a.v aids to enhance learning. 83% replied they improve attendance and discipline among students while 53% respondents said that they also motivate their staff member on doing good work to improve the quality of education in their institutions. The above results show that all respondents used above mentioned strategies to improve the Quality of Education in their institutions.

The above data suggests that a principal can adopted above mentioned strategies to improve the quality of education. Research questions two and four are addressed here.

Q.2 Do you possess adequate knowledge to fulfill your role as a leader and can carry on your responsibilities?

Table-3. Principals’ Knowledge and Their Responsibilities

S. No.	Items	Frequency	Percentage
1	Perform tasks with responsibilities	11	91
2	Enough knowledge regarding the post	9	75
3	Assistance to others	10	83
4	Possess adequate knowledge	12	100

Source: Analysis through IBM SPSS 20

Analysis: Table no.3 indicates that most of respondent 91% agreed that they perform their duties with responsibilities and 75% think that they have enough knowledge regarding to their post. 83% principals said that principal should provide assistance to others. All 100% principals responded that they have adequate managerial knowledge to fulfill his/her role as a leader and carry on responsibilities that asked to them. The above table results show that all principals said that they possess adequate knowledge to fulfill their role as a leader and can carry on their responsibilities.

Q.3. Which sort of leadership qualities are required for a principal to be a perfect leader in order to improve the quality of education?

Table-4. Perfect Leader and Quality of Education Improvement

S. No.	Items	Frequency	Percentage
1	Cooperative Behavior	4	33
2	Committed	10	83
3	Hard Work	7	58
4	Responsible	9	75
5	Decision Maker	8	66
6	Problem Solver	9	75
7	Supportive	6	50
8	Solution Oriented	5	41
9	Punctual	11	91

Source: Analysis through IBM SPSS 20

Analysis: 33% principals said that principal must have cooperative behavior with teachers and other staff members. 83% principals revealed that principal should be committed to his/her duties while 58% think that principal should be hard worker. Majority of respondent 75% replied that they should be responsible and 66% answered that they should be decision maker. 75% principals said that principal should be problem solver while 50% replied that he/she must have supportive to his/her teachers and other staff members. 41% principals were in the favor of that they should be solution oriented and 91% think that he/she should be punctual.

4. FINDINGS

The analyzed data shows the following indicators are necessary for enhancement of the quality of education

1. The analyzed data shows that the teacher’s participants of this research study displayed positive attitude towards need and importance of physical facilities. Necessary physical facilities should be provided to the institutions to improve the quality of education. 
2. The result shows that the administration also effects on quality of education. If principal has good attitude, decision making ability and takes decisions at right time, provide enough budgets to meet the institutional requirements, coordination and cooperate with staff, create an atmosphere of collaboration and trust among students and teachers, establish priorities and make short and long term achievable plans then quality of education can be improved.
3. Teacher’s satisfaction towards their job also effects on quality of education because if teachers have enough salary, provide accommodation and principal’s attitude is good with them so, they are more willing to perform better and education quality can be improved.
4. The findings show if teachers are provided pre-service and in-service training and they are trained according to the need of the time and enhances teachers, productivity to solve their own academic and professional problems to improve quality of education.
5. Analyzed date also points out that Teacher Role and his Teaching also effects on quality of education.
6. Curriculum quality very much matters in the improvement of educational quality. The findings show if curriculum is aim oriented, based on futurology and updated according to the needs of student’s quality of education should be improved.

The findings of interview show that principals play the role in promoting quality of education.

1. The results show that all principals are highly qualified and well experienced.
2. All principals reported that they all possessed adequate knowledge and experience in order to accomplished their duties. They had enough knowledge and experience. They are performing their responsibilities smoothly and honestly.
3. All the principals remarked that they use various strategies to improve quality of education and these strategies are required for a principal to be a perfect leader to improve quality of education.

5. DISCUSSION

According to Asiyai (2012 ) School facilities are essential for improving quality of education. According to our findings enough availability of physical resources can be useful for improving quality of education. According to Oluremi (2013 ) a successful administration enables the discipline in the school so as to develop teaching learning and improve performance of the schools. Findings of this research show that the administration also affects the quality of education. Zembylas and Papanastasiou (2005 ) remarked that quality of education is largely related to teacher job satisfaction. This study shows that teacher’s satisfaction towards their job also effects on quality of education because if teachers have enough salary packages, provide accommodation and other necessary facilities they should be more willing to perform better and satisfied towards their jobs.

The findings show teacher role and his/her teaching also effects on quality of education if teachers are provided required training according to their needs it can improve quality of education. Analyzed date also points out that curriculum quality very much matter in the improvement of educational quality. The findings show if curriculum is aim oriented, based on futurology and updated according to the needs of student’s quality of education should be improved. According to Anderson and Togneri (2003 ) principals accountable for their role as leaders this includes supporting teachers with their instructional needs. The findings of the study revealed that if college principals are willing to improve quality of education, they should maintain positive relationships with their staff members, try to provide in service training to them to improve their teaching skills.

Now the role of the principals has been become more crucial and these changes demands that school leaders produce good results (Blome and James, 1985 ). The findings of this research also explore that principals must be professionally trained and have enough experience to perform their role as a leader. They also must have adequate knowledge, skills and experience in order to accomplish their duties and they must perform their responsibilities smoothly.

6. CONCLUSION

The findings show that enough availability of physical resources can be useful for improving quality of education. The study revealed that that the administration also affects the quality of education. Teacher’s satisfaction towards their job also affects on quality of education and his/her teaching also effect on provision of quality of education. The curriculum quality very much matter in the improvement of educational quality. The study explore that principals can play their vital role in improving quality of education. If college principals are willing to improve quality of education, they should maintain positive relationships with their staff members. They should also coordinate and cooperate with the staff members and also engage them in every discussion and decision making process to create positive environment of college to improve quality of education.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

The major recommendations are: All basic and needed educational facilities such as furniture, buildings, science laboratories, libraries, A.V aids and required well trained teaching staff should be provided. All principals and teachers should be provided needed and required facilities such as enough salary packages, accommodation and transport facilities. College’s principals should take necessary steps to improve college standard. Principals should cooperate with staff. Both pre-service and in service training is provided to the teachers. Managerial and administrative training should be provided to the principals.

Funding: This study received no specific financial support.

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Contributors/Acknowledgement: All authors contributed equally to the conception and design of the study.

REFERENCES

Abbasi, A.R.K., 2006. A comparison of M. Ed programmes offered by AIOU with M. Ed programmes offered by AJKU. Doctoral Dissertation, AIOU.

Adams, D., 1993. Defining educational quality. Educational Planning, 9(3): 3-18.

Ali, A., 2005. Evaluation of effectiveness of in-service training programme. Islamabad: AllamaIqbal Open University. pp: 1.

Anderson, S.E. and W. Togneri, 2003. Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools. A Project of the Learning First Alliance [and] A Leadership Brief.

Arcaro, J.S., 1997. Quality in education. USA: St. Lucie Press. pp: 1-2. 56-67.

Ashcroft, K. and L. Foreman-Peck, 2005. The lecturer's guide to quality and standards in colleges and universities. Routledge.

Asiyai, R.I., 2012. Assessing school facilities in public secondary schools in Delta State, Nigeria. African Research Review, 6(2): 192-205.Available at: https://doi.org/10.4314/afrrev.v6i2.17.

Behind, N.C.L., 2001. Elementary and secondary education act. Pub. L. No. 107-110.

Biggs, J., 2003. Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. 2nd Edn., Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

Blome, A.C. and M.E. James, 1985. The principal as instructional leader: An evolving role. NASSP Bulletin, 69(481): 48-54. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/019263658506948107.

Carlisle, J.F. and D. Berebitsky, 2011. Literacy coaching as a component of professional development. Reading and Writing, 24(7): 773-800.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9224-4.

Elmore, R.F., 2002. Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for professional development in education. Secondary Lenses on Learning Participant Book: Team Leadership for Mathematics in Middle and High Schools: 313-344.

Fink, E. and L.B. Resnick, 2001. Developing principals as instructional leaders. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(8): 598-610.

Finkel, E., 2012. Principals as instructional leaders. District Administration, 48(6): 50.

Gay, L.R., 1987. Educational research. Columbus Ohio: Charles E. Merill.

Hallinger, P., 2005. Instructional leadership and the school principal: A passing fancy that refuses to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3): 221-239.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760500244793.

Harvey, L. and D. Green, 1993. Defining quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1): 9-34.

Jacobson, S.L. and A. Cypres, 2012. Important shifts in curriculum of educational leadership preparation. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 7(2): 217-236.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775112455117.

Khan, K.B., 2015. Determinants of cognitive development. Paper Presented in 6th International Conference of Cognitive Science, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.

Kontio, J., 2008. Quality assurance at higher education institutes: The role of educational initiatives. In International Conference on Engineering Education. pp: 27-31.

Marzano, R.J., T. Waters and B.A. McNulty, 2005. School leadership that works: From research to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Oluremi, O.F., 2013. Principals organizational management and students academic achievement in secondary schools in Ekitistate Nigeria. Singaporean Journal of Business, Economics and Management Studies, 2(2): 76-84.Available at: https://doi.org/10.12816/0003853.

Seashore, L.K. and V.M. Robinson, 2012. External mandates and instructional leadership: School leaders as mediating agents. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(5): 629-665.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231211249853.

Zembylas, M. and E.C. Papanastasiou, 2005. Modeling teacher empowerment: The role of job satisfaction. Educational Research and Evaluation, 11(5): 433-459.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610500146152.