Abraham Final Revised Research

In this research we will discuss about leadership styles and below are the summaries point:- Leadership is defined as an influence process relationship among leaders and followers to perform in such a way to reach defined goals. Leaders use different styles in different situations with different subordinates to motivate them to perform at their utmost potential. The issue of leadership styles is a major concern for all organizations and institutions in various countries. The government of Ethiopia has made the education sector its agenda to ensure the provision of quality education for all citizens. The school principal has important roles to play in providing effective leadership in secondary schools and enhancing better job performance among teachers.To investigate the relationship between leadership styles and teacher job satisfaction in secondary schools in Ethiopia. Secondary schools: Educational institutions that provide education for students between the ages of 14 and 18. Teachers: Persons who are responsible for the education and training of students in secondary schools.

CHAPTER ONE
PROBLEM AND ITS APPROACH
This chapter deals with the background of the study, statement of the problem, objectives of the
study, significance of the study, delimitation of the study, limitation of the study, operational
definition of key terms and organization of the study.
1.1. Background of the study
Leadership is defined as an influence process relationship among leaders and followers to
perform in such a way to reach a defined goal or goals (E.g. Bennis and Nanus 1985; Burns
1978, Yukl and Vanfleet, 1992). This means that one group member (the leader) modifies or
influences the motivation or competences of others (followers) in the group so that they strive
willingly and enthusiastically towards the achievement of school goals (Ezeuwa, 2005). To do
so, leaders use a pattern of behavior called leadership styles. In otherway leadership is the
development of a clear and complete system of expectations in order to identify, evoke and use
the potentials of all resources in the organization the most important of which is people (Ololube,
2004).
According to Mosadegh (2003b) leadership style is a series of attitudes, characteristics and skills
used by a leader in different situations in accordance with individual and organizational values.
The use of a particular school leadership style by the principal affects both job satisfaction and
productivity of the teachers. Leaders use different styles in different situations with different
subordinates to motivate them to perform at their utmost potential. In the same vein, principals
adopt various leadership styles or they exhibit various behavior patterns to influence teachers.
These behavior patterns have different effects on teachers’ job satisfaction and in turn
achievement of school goals.
1

The issue of leadership styles is a major and basic concern for all organizations and institutions
in various countries. Different countries around the world have been attempting to highlight and
stress the concept of efficient leadership styles in various ways in their organizational daily
activities, programs, and performance, for example, England, Nigeria. In Ethiopia there is rapid
and increasing awareness in various sectors and fields in line with a sharp increase in the number
of teachers, including the educational institutions such as universities, colleges, schools and
others which are indirectly related to educational domain ESDP III (MoE, 2011).
The Education and Training Policy set aims and objectives, which was to: produce skilled human
resource with the necessary quality and quantity to meet the national socio-economic
development requirement, to bring up citizens who understand, respect and defend the
constitution, a citizen who respects democratic values and human rights with good work culture
and ethics (MoE, 1994).
That is why currently, the government of Ethiopia made the education sector its agenda to ensure
the provision of quality education for all citizens, which was launched as a major national wide-
reform of program to improve the quality of general education (MoE, 2010). Thus, in fostering
these aims and objectives, the school principal has important roles to play. Some of these roles
are providing effective leadership in secondary schools, and enhancing better job performance
among teachers. In supporting this issue( Crum & Sherman, 2008) stated that the principal
needed to provide highly valued, insights into their daily styles that foster an environment which
is supportive of high teachers performance.
Leadership theories have proposed several leadership styles such as: autocratic, bureaucratic,
laissez-faire, charismatic, democratic, participative, situational, transactional, and
transformational leadership. But there is consensus among researchers that a particular leadership
style will yield result in a particular situation. In other words, a single leadership style is not ideal
for every situation. And a leader may be more effective in a particular situation but may not
emerge as effective a different situation (Mosad and Yarmohammadian, 2006).
2

An organizations leadership style is considered to have a direct impact on the relations between
superiors and employees, thus affecting both the latter performance, job satisfaction and
commitment and the organizations total coherence (Wilderom, Berg and Peter, 2004). Moreover,
studies have shown that in organizations which are flexible and adopt a participative leadership
style, with emphasis in communication and employees reward, the latter are more likely to be
satisfied, resulting in the organizations success (Mckinnon, Harrison, Chow and Wu, 2003).
Furthermore, a number of scholars (Greenleaf, 1977; Podsakoff et al, 1990; Davis, 2003; Yukl
2002) pointed out that research on leadership style have generated empirical results that have
verified the impact of leadership style on employees attitude, effort and in-role performance.
Similarly, Halliger and Henk (1998) found that a school leader’s leadership style is the main
factor that generally influences school effectiveness and should be underscored. Effective
principal ship is, in general, a function of adopting appropriate leadership style contingent on the
school condition.
Failure to engage in appropriate leadership style would lead to subordinate action to be
dysfunctional rather than become productive and satisfied (Bogler, 2001). In relation to this,
Spector (1985) found that if the employees find their job fulfilling and rewarding, they tend to be
more satisfied with their jobs. School leaders are supposed to possess the ability of influencing
their staffs, parents and other stakeholders of education to make sure their schools successfully
attain its pre-intended objectives by making sure that teachers perform well in their
responsibilities and learners perform well in their academic as anticipated.
Teacher’s motivation and Job satisfaction have important effects on efficiency, productivity,
employee relations, absenteeism, turnover, and organizational performance (Koustelios, 2001). It
is a crucial factor that influences positive employee behavior, when employees are satisfied with
their job; they feel more responsible, accountable and committed to their organization
(Sihombing, Gustam, 2007).
3

They also have a tendency to remain within this organization longer.Educational institutions are
critical places where the next generation is educated and school leadership bear a heavy burden
of responsibility for their institutions. Leaders in educational institutions are the same as leaders
in other organization, and inevitably face the challenge of maintaining the goal of institution
(Northouse, 2010). School leadership is the process of encouraging and helping teachers and
learners to work enthusiastically to ward realization of school objects (educational objects).
Moreover, a school leader’s leadership style, teacher job satisfaction is another critical factors
affecting school effectiveness. Northouse (2010) believed that “a teachers’ job satisfaction may
serve to influence their moral, motivation and general willingness to maximize their teaching
potential”. Teachers who are not satisfied with their jobs may result in bad teaching or learning
process, and school effectiveness will consequently be negatively impacted. In other word,
teachers who are not satisfied with work can perform poor teaching and relationship with
students, which can have a negative impact on the school efficiency (Chieffo, 1991).In addition,
Leadership style which is employed in any organization influence two major things: job
satisfaction and organization performance. To determine the kind of leadership style that goes
with teachers’ job satisfaction in educational setting (institution) has remained a problem in
many countries the world over, including Africa; Job satisfaction in schools is important because
it contributes to organizational learning and teaching effectiveness, ultimately affects the
achievement of students themselves (Rowan et al., 2002), their social, emotional, intellectual
development and academic success (Blandford, 2000). Also, teachers who do not feel supported
in their work may be less motivated to give their best in the classroom.
Therefore, appropriate leadership style that promotes teachers job satisfaction and productivity
should be employed. In general, theoretical and empirical support for the influence of leadership
styles and job satisfaction has been reported in a number of studies undertaken in different
countries in a variety of organizational contexts, among both non-educational and educational
organizations. However, in spite of the extensive research and accumulated evidence on the
effects of leadership style on performance and job satisfaction similar stream of research has
been very limited in educational settings (Leithwood et al., 1999). The situation appears to show
that a reasonable large corps of evidence by social science standards is available but it is quite
uneven in quality and distribution across many different types of outcomes.
4

In this regard, therefore, Edwards and Gill (2012) have strongly argued that more research is
needed to understand the effects of leadership styles on teachers’ job satisfaction in school
settings. Out of the many different school settings, private primary schools are obviously
included. In Ethiopia, poor school leadership is ranked as the most de-motivating issue in the
teaching profession (Gedefaw, 2012). Studies verified that principals leadership style employed
by school directors has a profound impact on teachers job satisfaction and school effectiveness
and, therefore, on the quality of education (Bogler, 2001).
This present study; therefore, focuses on identifying the influence of leadership styles on
teachers job satisfaction in secondary and preparatory schools of Gamo Gofa Zone. The study
expects to add more knowledge and understanding of the effects of leadership styles on teachers’
motivation and their job satisfaction in school settings especially in secondary and preparatory
schools of Gamo Gofa Zone.
1.2. Statement of the Problem
Principal leadership style and teachers' job satisfaction are two very important factors for the
work of the school. A large number of researches came to a conclusion that the principal
leadership style is one of the most important factors of teachers’ motivation and their job
satisfaction (Herzberg et al. 1959; Kusum and Billingsley, 1996; Perie and Baker, 1997; Dinham
and Scott, 1998; Evans, 1998; Tillman, 2008; Sharma and Jyoti, 2006).
There is variety of styles among leaders. These consist of autocratic, democratic, laissez-faire,
transformational, transactional charismatic, participative, and bureaucratic (Rad, 2006). Styles of
all leaders do not have same effect on person and job satisfaction (Bogler, 2001). It is
significantly associated with discrimination level at work place. The more the discrimination by
supervisor, the less the job satisfaction in employees but the leaders and employees who face
more interaction with each other might have more impact on job fit and person by influencing
behaviors values and attitudes of employees (Meglino et al, 1991; Weiss, 1978). A single
leadership style may not be applied in different situations. Among these styles, leaders should
adopt a combination of some traits of these styles for effective management of personnel.
5

Therefore, the kind of leadership style that promotes teachers job satisfaction in educational
setting (institutions) has remained a problem in many countries all over the world including
Ethiopia. In this regard, the Education and Training Policy of Ethiopia emphasized the
management of teachers, and other education personnel to be democratic, professional,
coordinated, effective and efficient (TGE, 1994).
The democratic leadership style is mutually respectful style of organizing a team. Ideas travel
liberally and debate is comparatively free flowing. Along the leadership styles (democratic,
autocratic and laissez fair), people adopting democratic leadership style are the most successful
and they have a positive impact on the performance of their employees (Mgbodile, 2004).
Moreover, following the fundamental change schools undertaken during the past decade in areas
such as curriculum development, students and teachers roles, and learning strategies all of the
world including Ethiopia, school leaders are required to be transformational leaders who are
visionaries and motivate their followers towards achieving higher levels of morality and
motivation rather than creating routines, non- creative and stable environment.In one way
(MoE ,2010) argued that principals need to have the theoretical knowledge, skill and adequate
experiences in school leadership and management and/or should have a profile of possession of
various trainings on school leadership and management so as to play active and effective
leadership style in school improvement programs.
Therefore, Principals as educational leader play a pivotal role in the success of the school. In this
respect, the government of Ethiopia launched a major nationwide reform program, quality
education packages, or GEQIP (General Education Quality Improvement Program) in primary
and secondary schools, aimed to improve the quality of general education throughout the
country.
There are six components which will be applicable for the project: Curriculum, textbooks and
assessment; Teacher Development Program (TDP); School Improvement Program (SIP);
Management and Administration Program (MAP); Information Communication Technology
(ICT), and Civic and Ethical Education. At the center of strategies for accelerating the
achievement of quality education is effective leadership at all levels of the school system (ibid).
Effective school leadership is imperative for schools to function successful (Sergiovanni 1991,
Glatthorn cited in Jacobs, Kritsonis 2006).
6

Accordingly, the third domain of SIP called school leadership, explained the need for shared
leadership in which everyone has collective responsibility for student learning, the need for
effective communication about school polices, strategies, procedures and regulations and
effective implementation of decision making and administrative processes. This kind of
leadership practice maximizes the benefits obtained from democratic leadership style regarding
teachers’ job satisfaction and school quality improvement (Bogler, 2007).
Besides, none of these studies was done in the context of general secondary schools of Gamo
Gofa Zone. This promoted the researcher to undertake the study. Starting from the past 22 years
the researcher has served in Gamo Gofa Zone primary school teacher and in the past 5 years
secondary school teacher and school academic vice principal. In that period of time the
researcher heard complaints about leadership styles that the teachers are not interested in
decision made by principal, in delegation of duties and responsibilities in different activities of
the school.
Therefore, the above situation and the ordinary experience in the general secondary school of
Gamo Gofa prompt the researcher to conduct a study on effects of leadership style and
motivation on teachers’ morale and their job satisfaction. Therefore the purpose of this study was
to investigate the effects of leadership style and motivation on teachers’ job satisfaction in
secondary and preparatory schools of Gamo Gofa Zone. To address these problems the following
research questions were raised.
1. What is the relationship between leadership style and teachers job satisfaction?
2. What is the dominant leadership style exercised by principals in the study area?
3. What is the level of teachers’ motivation in the study area?
4. Which leadership style promotes high teachers job satisfaction in the study area?
1.3. Objective of the Study
This part of the paper will consists of the general and the specific objectives of the study.
1.3.1. General Objective
The general objective of this study was to identify the effects of leadership style and motivation
on teachers’ job satisfaction in secondary and preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone.
7

1.3.2. Specific Objective
1. To examine the relationship between leadership style and teachers job satisfaction in
secondary and preparatory schools ofGamo Gofa Zone.
2. To identify the dominant leadership style exercised by principals in the study area of the
secondary and preparatory schools.
3. To examine the level of teachers’ motivation in secondary and preparatory schools
4. To identify the leadership style that promotes high teachers job satisfaction in the study area of
the secondary and preparatory schools of Gamo Gofa Zone.
1.4. The Significance of the Study
The improper use of leadership styles resulted in poor teachers’ motivation and job satisfaction
in Ethiopia (Gedefaw, 2012). Especially, the result of this research has the following importance
for the school principals, school owners, human resource managers, teachers, students and
others. First, it may help the school leaders to be aware of the leadership styles against the level
of teachers’ motivation and their job satisfaction and principals to exercise effective leadership
styles so as to improve teachers’ performance. Second, the study may add more knowledge and
understanding on the effects of leadership style in school settings especially secondary schools.
Third, it may help the school principals to revisit and enrich with new knowledge, theories,
methodologies and practical behaviors. Leaders need in secondary schools and other institutions
of learning in general and secondary schools of Gamo Gofa in particular for their motivating
approach to make the teachers more effective. It will set a new paradigm for the understanding of
leadership styles and teachers job satisfaction. Fourth, the information will be helpful for higher
officials of the regional, zonal and district level regarding how the school principals apply their
leadership style to achieve educational objectives effectively. Fifth, the situations under which a
particular leadership style will yield maximum teachers job satisfaction would be understood.
Therefore, the study may bring to the attention of policy makers and planners the issues and
constraints and may help to take the necessary measures in order to remedy the inadequacies.
Lastly, it may serve as the reference and may call for further in depth researchers on the topic,
8

particularly principal leadership style and motivation on job satisfaction in the secondary schools
of Gamo Gofa Zone.
1.5. The Delimitation of the Study
The study was delimited in both content wise and geographically. The contents are delimited to
investigating the varieties of styles among leaders. These consist of autocratic, democratic,
laissez-fair, transformational, transactional, situational, charismatic, participative, and
bureaucratic (Red, 2006). Hince, among the leadership stylesproposed by scholars, this study
was delimited to transformational, transactional and laissez-fair leadership styles are
incorporated to see the existing teachers’ level of motivation and their job satisfaction. This is for
the fact that these leadership styles form a new paradigm for understanding both lower and
higher order efforts of leadership styles. This paradigm builds on earlier sets of autocratic verses
democratic or directive verses participative leadership (Avolio and Bass, 2004).
Geographically the scope of this study was delimited to 6 secondary and preparatory schools in
Gamo Gofa Zone. Therefore, the finding of this research was generalized for general secondary
and preparatory schools of Gamo Gofa Zone without considering primary one or private
secondary schools of nearby.
1.6. Limitations of the study
The results of the study should be interpreted with the following limitations in mind, namely: Since
the study was delimited to three woredas in the Zone and, the results cannot be generalized to all
secondary and preparatory schools in the Zone. Secondly, in addition to principals leadership
style, teachers job satisfaction was influenced by many factors such as: the working condition,
work itself, supervision, policy, advancement, compensation, interpersonal relationships and
empowerment.
On the otherhand the geographical delimitation of the study which was the setting of secondary
schools of this study were very far away from each other. The center of the researcher was
Chencha woreda in Gamo Gofa Zone and other five secondary schools found in far distance
about 40-45km from the center. Therefore, some problems were faced during conducting the
study was: time constraints, money, and transportation.Therefore, the study was confronted as to
9

how each dimension of transactional, transformational and laissez-faire leadership styles were
linked with job satisfaction aspects. Thus, limitations were observed in the collection, analysis and
interpretation of data.
1.7. Definition of Key terms
1. Leadership: -Leadership is defined as an influence process relationship among leaders and
followers to perform in such a way to reach a defined goal or goals (E.g. Bennis and Nanus
1985; Burns 1978, Yukl and Vanfleet, 1992).
2. Leadership Styles: Leadership style is a pattern of behavior leaders prefer to use (Marie et. al,
2011).
3. Transactional Leadership: Transactional leadership refers to the bulk of leadership models,
which focuses on the exchanges that occur between leaders and followers (Northouse, 2010).
4. Laissez-fair Leadership: Laissez-fair leadership is a passive kind of leadership style where
there are no relationship exchange between the leader and the followers. (Fatemeh, 2009)
5. Job Satisfaction: Job satisfaction is more of an attitude, an internal state. It could, for
example, be associated with a personal feeling of achievement, either quantitative or qualitative
(Mullins, 2005).
6. Leader Behavior: - The behavior of those who are leading a school or educational
organization. Usually this incorporates leading a group of people towards a common goal or
vision. It is the “nuts and bolts” of leadership.
7. Principal: The principal is the one who is the head of the school, the educational leader who
has the most opportunity to exercise leadership in a school (Drysdale, Gurr, and Mulford,
2006:371).
1.8. Organization of the study
The study constituted five chapters, organized as follows: Chapter one introduces the research
problem, the background of the study, the statement of the problem, the researcher motivation
for the study, objectives of the study, the importance/significance of the study, the
scope/delimitation of the study, limitation of the study, operational definition of key terms, and
organization of the study. Chapter two of this study comprises review of the literature relating to
the area of leadership style and motivation on teachers morale and their job satisfaction. Chapter
10

three of this study provides an overview of the research methodology used. This chapter clarifys
the research method, the research design, sources of data, population, sample and sampling
techniques, instruments, data collection procedures, and data analysis procedures. Chapter four
of this study provides an analysis of the data collected. This chapter provides presentation of
results of the data and analyzes the findings. Chapter five of this study provides summary of the
findings, conclusions and recommendations for further study.
11

CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
In this chapter, the literature related to leadership styles and motivation on teachers’ morale and
their job satisfaction will be reviewed to get a better understanding of the effect of leadership
styles and motivation on teachers’ job satisfaction. The most important reviews which rare
related for this, and which will be explained in the following sections are leadership, leadership
style, types of leadership styles, relationship between leadership style and job satisfaction,
teachers motivation, relationship between motivation and job satisfaction, the concept of morale
satisfaction, and teachers morale satisfaction in terms of job.
2.1. Leadership and Leadership styles
In this section the literature related to leadership and leadership styles will be explained in the
following sections are as follows:-
2.1.1. Leadership
Most researchers conducted in the field of leadership explained the construct as an influence
process relationship among leaders and followers to perform in such a way to reach a defined
goal or goals (e.g. Bennis and Nanus 1985; Burns 1978, Yukl and Vanfleet, 1992). Such
influence relationships according to most literatures is guided by the leader, where he/she
attempts to influence followers to achieve a common goal,(E.g. Fleshman, 1973). Developing on
the points stated earlier school leadership as studied by (Sisungo, 2002; Aghenta, 2001; Black
and Mouton) is described as the principal’s ability to influence teachers, students and other
stakeholders so that they enthusiastically and willingly make every effort towards the
achievements of school goals.
As to the pattern of interactions between school leaders (principals) and teachers, various earlier
studies have come up with an answer. Therefore, the following section of the review literature
compares the advantages and the limitations of those major studies conducted on leadership
patterns or styles in relation to teachers’ motivation and their job satisfaction in secondary
schools of Gamo Gofa Zone.
12

2.1.2. Leadership styles
Every leader in every organization performs certain roles/tasks for the smooth running of the
organization and improvement of organizational performance. As a result, Ezeuwa (2005) sees it
as the act of influencing people so that they strive willingly and enthusiastically towards the
accomplishment of goals. In the same manner, Ukeje (1999) observes that leadership means
influencing people to work willingly with zeal towards the achievement of the corporate goals. A
leader cannot work alone; he must have people to influence, direct, carry along, sensitize and
mobilize towards the achievement of the corporate goal. The manner that leader performs these
roles and directs the affairs of the organization is referred to as his/her leadership style.
Leadership style therefore is the way a leader leads. Some leaders are more interested in the
work to be done than in the people they work with while others pay more attention to their
relationship with subordinates than the job. Whether a leader emphasizes the task or human
relations is usually considered central to leadership style. (Chandan, 1987) define leadership
style is the ingredient of personality embodied in leader s that causes subordinates to follow
them. (Okumbe, 1998) on the other hand defines leadership styles is particular behaviors applied
by a leader to motivate subordinates to achieve the objectives of the organization.
The school principal is in a unique position as the manager or administrator who controls schools
resources for the purpose of achievements educational goals and can accelerate the process of
schools development or can demolish the progress of education (Oyedeji, 1998 & Adeyemi,
2004). As such, a leadership style occupies an important position in school management. Leaders
express leadership in many roles. These, among others, are: formulating aims and objectives,
establishing structures, managing and motivating personnel and providing leadership (Daresh
2002:11). However, Nathan (1996:7-8) asserts providing leadership is a very essential
component of a leaders role. The leadership style leaders choose to perform the above mentioned
roles will determine whether they will accomplish the task at hand and long-term organizational
goals or not, and whether they will be able to achieve and maintain positive relationships with
staff (Mazzarella & Smith 1989:28). Therefore, this study determines the above problems which
affect the leadership style and motivation on teachers’ job satisfaction in secondary and
preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone.
13

2.2. Types of Leadership styles
A great deal of scholars believes that leaders differ in their way of interactions with subordinates
(e.g. Hersey and Blanchard, 1993; Miller et at., 2002). This statement states that leaders may use
a wide range of behaviors or patterns to influence their followers. This is similarly true to school
principals in secondary and preparatory schools of Gamo Gofa Zone. Based on the methods and
techniques used by principals to influence teachers, researchers have discerned a number of
school leadership patterns and styles. Such as: authoritarian (autocratic), democratic, laissez-fair,
transactional, transformational, charismatic, participative, and bureaucratic (Red, 2006).
2.2.1. Autocratic Leadership styles
An autocratic leader is likely to provide clear expectations for what needs to be done, when it
should be done, and how it should be done. There is also a clear division between the leader and
the followers. Authoritarian leaders make decisions independently with little or no input from the
rest of the group. Authoritarian leadership is best applied to situations where there is little time
for group decision-making or where the leader is the most knowledgeable member of the group.
Abuse of this style is usually viewed as controlling, bossy, and dictatorial (Lewin, Lippit and
White, 1939).
Autocratic leadership refers to a system that gives full empowerment to the leader with minimal
participation from the followers. Yukl (1994) found that autocratic leaders tend to have the
following five characteristics: they do not consult members of the organization in the decision
making process, the leaders set all policies, the leader predetermines the methods of work, the
leader determines the duties of followers, and the leader specifies technical and performance
evaluation standards. Since this style of leadership usually only involves one person deciding, it
permits quick decision-making. Although the autocratic style is relatively unpopular, in certain
circumstances it can be an effective strategy, especially when the leader is short on time and
when followers are not productive. The autocratic leadership style is also known as the
authoritarian style of leadership Power and decision-making reside in the autocratic leader. The
leader directs group members on the way things should be done and does not maintain clear
channel of communication between him or her and the subordinates. He or she does not delegate
authority nor permit subordinates to participate in policy-making (Smylie and Jack, 1990; Hoy
and Miskel, 1992; John, 2002).
14

2.2.2. Democratic Leadership styles.
Democratic leadership refers to a situation where there is equal work among leaders and
followers. According to Goldman (2002), democratic organizations typically have the following
six characteristics: policies are determined by a group of organizations, technical and job
performance measures are discussed so they are understood by all, leaders provide advice to
members in regards to implementing tasks, members are free to choose with whom they work,
the group determines the distribution of tasks, and leaders try to be objective in giving praise and
criticism. Goldman (2000) states that leaders using a democratic style of leadership build
consensus through participation, but these leaders also expect a higher level of excellence and
self direction. From my own experience I have observed that these leaders have time to listen
and share ideas with their followers. They also tend to be more flexible and are responsive to
ones needs. They are able to motivate teachers to participate in decision-making and are
respectful. The democratic style of leadership emphasizes group and leader participation in the
making of policies.
Decisions about organizational matters are arrived at after consultation and communication with
various people in the organization. The leader attempts as much as possible to make each
individual feel that he is an important member of the organization. Communication is
multidirectional while ideas are exchanged between employees and the leader (Heenan and
Bennis 1999). In this style of leadership, a high degree of staff morale is always enhanced (Mba,
2004). In other words, consultation, teamwork and participation are the common key
characteristics of successful schools. House and Mitchell (as reported in Oyetunyi, 2006) suggest
that a leader can behave in different ways in different situations. The following are the four kinds
of leader’s behavior:
2.2.2.1. Directive Style.
Directive leadership style is similar to the task-oriented style. The leader who uses this type of
leadership style provides teachers with specific guidelines, rules and regulations with regard to
planning, organizing and performing activities. This style is deemed to be appropriate when the
subordinates’ ability is low and or the task to be performed is complex or ambiguous. Job
satisfaction is increased when the leader gives more directives (Hoy & Miskel, 2001:408).
15

2.2.2.2. Supportive Style.
Supportive leadership style is more of a relationship-oriented style. It requires the leader to be
approachable and friendly. He/she displays concern for the well being and personal needs of the
subordinates. He/she creates an emotionally supportive climate. This style is effective when
subordinates lack self-confidence; work on dissatisfying or stressful tasks and when work does
not provide job satisfaction (Hoy & Miskel, 2001:408).
2.2.2.3. Participative Style.
The leader who employs this style consults with subordinates for ideas and takes their ideas
seriously when making decisions. This style is effective when subordinates are well motivated
and competent (Lussier & Achua, 2001:175).
2.2.2.4. Consultative Styles.
The leader has substantial but not complete confidence and trust in the employees. Although
general decisions are made by the leader, he/she seeks the opinions of the employees, but he
makes the final decision. The employees have positive attitudes toward the organization, the
manager and their work. When the employees feel that enough consultation has not taken place,
they publicly accept orders from the manager, but sometimes covertly resist the order by
insubordination, especially when the manager decides on majority rules principle (Owens
1981:207).
Communication flows from and to the hierarchy. The manager consults through relevant
channels, with subordinates. They in turn consult with him/her on matters they would like to
bring to his/her attention (Brownwell 1985:39-44). Control is mainly at the top. Middle
management usually delegates tasks to control subordinates at lower levels. This is done in terms
of appraisal, evaluation and supervision. Subordinates perceive control as a way of maintaining
the set standard (Ukeje 1992:105-106).
2.2.2.5 Achievement-Oriented Style.
In this style, the leader sets challenging but achievable goals for the subordinates. He/she pushes
work improvement sets high expectations for subordinates and rewards them when the
16

expectations are met. That is, the leader provides both high directive (structure) and high
supportive (consideration) behavior. This style works well with achievement-oriented
subordinates (Lussier & Achua, 2001).
2.2.3. Laissez-fair Leadership styles
Laissez-Faire leadership is when leaders are hands-off and allow group members to make the
decisions. With this style, freedoms are fully determined by group goals, techniques, and
working methods. Leaders rarely intervene. Laissez-faire style is described by Hackman and
Johnson (2009) as the most effective style, especially where followers are mature and highly
motivated. Laissez-faire leadership style allows complete freedom to group decision without the
leader’s participation. Thus, subordinates are free to do what they like. The role of the leader is
just to supply materials. The leader does not interfere with or participate in the course of events
determined by the group (Talbert and Milbrey, 1994).
2.2.4. Transactional Leadership styles
Review of literatures conducted on transactional leadership take up three themes: namely studies
that dwell on characteristics related to principals ability specifying the compensation and rewards
expected upon successful completion of the tasks; studies related to the role of the leader to
maintain the status quo and studies done on the dimensions of transactional leadership. The
following will explain these issues done on different literatures. Considerable work conducted to
understand the assumption of transactional leadership have verified that transactional leaders use
rewards, praises, and promises that would satisfy followers immediate needs (Northouse, 2010;
Bogler, 2001; Burns, 1978). Such relationship is considered as exchange relationship where each
of them (principal, teacher) enters the transaction because of the expectation to fulfill self-
interests (Bogler, 2001). In such cases, if a teacher in secondary and preparatory schools of
Gamo Gofa Zone does something good, he/she will be rewarded; if he/she does something
wrong, he/she will be punished. Other groups of literatures describe transactional leader as a
leader who focuses on the continuing of the works of the past and transferring them to the future.
(e.g. Tengilimoğlu , 2005). This statement emphasizes that the role of the leader in such cases is
to maintain the status quo (Bogler, 2001). In accordance with these, Nguni, Sleegers, and
17

Denessen (2006) suggest that transactional leaders prefer a policy which is about preserving the
current situation.
2.2.5. Transformational Leadership styles
To understand the assumptions underlying transformational leadership style, previous studies are
reviewed. The review of these literatures is summarized into two points, namely: studies that
describe the patterns of behavior that transformational leader’s exhibit and studies that
concentrate on the dimensions encompassing transformational leadership. Much of the literature
is devoted to describe transformational leaders as leaders that provide a vision and a sense of
mission, inspire, pride and gain respect and trust through charisma (e.g. Bass et al., 1990). Unlike
transactional leaders, transformational leaders are change agents and visionaries encouraging
individuals and having the ability to deal with complexity, ambiguity and uncertainty (Tichy and
Devanna, 1996). This is to mean that transformational principals can fit to today’s dynamic and
complex school environments specially private schools where principals are often seen as ideal
agents of change (Bogler, 2001). Furthermore, various publications on transformational
leadership verified that leaders provide every possibility to meet the needs of followers to foster
followers commitment to the organizations and inspire them to exceed their expected
performance (Bass, Avolio, Jung and Benson, 2003; Currie and Lockett, 2007; Sivanathan and
Fekken, 2002; Ali, 2006). Based on the concepts stated earlier principals in private schools of
Gamo Gofa Zone can be considered transformational if they provide inspirational guide to
teachers and staff to achieve higher level of morale and motivation at work (Burns, 1978).
A great deal of researches on dimensions of transformational leadership have identified four
dimensions in transformational leadership styles such as having consideration for the teacher,
having inspirational motivation, promoting intellectual stimulation, and making individualization
a priority (e.g. Avolio et al., 1999; Bass 1985; Bass and Steidlmeier, 1999). The following
paragraphs will discuss the reviews made on the four dimensions of transformational leadership.
Firstly, according to many researches undertaken on idealized influence dimension of
transformational leadership: Idealized influence is understood as formulation and articulation of
vision and challenging goals and motivating followers to work beyond their self-interest in order
to achieve common goals (Karip, 1998; Avolio et al., 1991; Bass and Riggio, 2006). Based on
18

the statements made earlier, private school principals can be considered as having idealized
influence when they determine institutions vision and mission by incorporating the teachers to
the process (Karip, 1998). Secondly, inspirational motivation is described in many literatures as
leaders ability to foster strong team sprit as a means of leading team members towards achieving
desired goals (Hall, Johnson, Wysocki and Kepner, 2002; Bass and Riggio, 2006; Antonakis,
Avolio and Sivasurbramaniam, 2003). According to these studies private school principals can
be considered as inspirational motivators if they expressly and characteristically emphasize to
teachers in teams the need to perform well and helps to accomplish the school goals. Thirdly,
according to many literatures intellectual stimulation is leaders ability to support the followers
for being creative and innovative (Bass, 2000, and Riggio, 2006; Nicholason, 2007). In a similar
vein, private school principals said to have such skills if they stimulate innovation and creativity
in their teachers by questioning assumptions and approaching old situations in new ways (Bass
and Riggio, 2006). For instance, if a principal allows teachers to develop their own ways of
lesson planning for better teaching learning process, he/she is said to have intellectual
stimulation skill. Fourthly, researches devoted on individualized consideration explained the
concept as a creation of a suitable and supportive environment in which individual differences
and needs are considered(e.g. Bass, 1989) and the thoughts of the followers are valued(Tourish
and Pinnington, 2002). According to the studies individual differences are recognized and
assignments are delegated to followers to provide learning opportunities (Avolio et al., 1991).
Principals in private schools are said to possess such skills if they pay special attention to each
teachers need for achievement and growth by acting as a coach and mentor.
2.3. The concept of teachers’ job satisfaction.
Every employee would wish to be satisfied with his or her job to be able to perform to the
maximum of his or her capacity. This attitude leads to an emotional orientation that has to do
with the individual’s general attitude towards the job which is either one of satisfaction or
dissatisfaction. A myriad of views have been expressed about the concept of job satisfaction.
Edwin Locke (1976) stated job satisfaction as a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting
from the appraisal of one‘s job and job experience (Locke, 1976). In other words, this is a
relationship between what a person wants from a job and what the job actually offers.
Understanding Locke‘s definition is the significance of general feelings about one‘s job, the
19

influence and acuity that the job actually provides what he or she values. Job satisfaction,
therefore, can be conceptualized as an assessment of one‘s job in terms of whether it allows the
fulfillment of one‘s important job values, which are congruent with one‘s needs (Boon, 2006).
For Nnadi (1997) job satisfaction is composed of the reaction, attitude or perception of an
individual to work. Nnadi further points out that, job satisfaction is made up of different sets of
variables, which are very complex. Such variables include economic rewards, social rewards,
company policy and its administration, interpersonal relationships, working conditions,
achievement, recognition, work itself, responsibility and advancement. Gibson, Ivancevich and
Donnely (2000) share the views of Nnadi, noting that job satisfaction is an individual‘s attitude
to his or her work. According to them, this attitude is influenced by certain factors peculiar to the
work environment, precisely the style of the supervisor, work procedures and policies, conditions
of work and fringe benefits. Bogler (2001) also defined job satisfaction from the perspectives of
two factors. The first comprises intrinsic factors, which are associated with satisfiers, such as
achievement, autonomy at work, professional prestige and development. The second is extrinsic
dimension of job satisfaction which is related to work condition, pay or benefits. Both of these
aspects are connected to issues that relate to job satisfaction. Most central to these definitions, is
the idea that job satisfaction is presumed to be a global construct encompassing a variety of
specific aspects of the job that influence a person‘s level of satisfaction. Some crucial
characteristics of job satisfaction emerge. These aspects include benefits, promotion
opportunities, working conditions, supervisor and colleagues, career prospects and pay. These
various facets are assumed to aggregate into an overall orientation termed as job satisfaction.
Generally, from the above elucidation of the concept of job satisfaction, it is evident that job
satisfaction is a function of employee‘s attitude to their work. It implies doing a job one enjoys,
doing it well, and being suitably rewarded for one's efforts. Job satisfaction is the key ingredient
that leads to recognition, income, promotion, and the achievement of other goals that lead to a
general feeling of fulfillment in secondary and preparatory scool of Gamo Gofa Zone.
20

2.3.1 Teachers’ Satisfaction in terms of Job
The education mission seems to be dependent on the way teachers feel about their work and how
satisfied they are with it. Therefore, it is not surprising that researchers suggest that “schools
must give more attention to increasing teacher job satisfaction” (Heller, Clay, & Perkins, 1993).
Most research on teacher job satisfaction is rooted in the pioneering work of Herzberg, Mausner,
and Snyder man (1959) who identified the satisfying and dissatisfying factors. Herzberg’s “two-
factor theory” associates the satisfying factors, the “motivators,” with the higher order needs and
the dissatisfying factors, the “hygiene factors,” with the lower order needs (Dinham & Scott,
1998). The higher order needs, the satisfiers, apply to the intrinsic aspects of work, such as
achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, and opportunity for advancement. The
lower order needs, the dissatisfying factors, correspond to extrinsic matters of work, such as
working conditions, supervision, work policy, salary, and interpersonal relationships.
Teacher job satisfaction is also associated with higher autonomy at work (Hall, Pearson, &
Carroll, 1992; Poulin & Walter, 1992) and with aspects related to the teaching profession.
Goodlad (1984) found that teachers who reported that they chose this occupation because of
inherent professional values expressed higher levels of satisfaction and greater commitment than
did their counterparts who went into teaching for economic reasons. Hall et al.’s (1992) study
revealed that teachers who were planning to leave the profession expressed less job satisfaction
and more negative attitudes toward teaching as a career and toward the school administration.
Teacher job satisfaction is also linked to teacher retention through aspects such as satisfaction
with principal leadership (Betancourt-Smith, Inman, & Marlow, 1994) and satisfaction in general
(Zigarelli, 1996).
Reyes and Shin (1995) found that teacher job satisfaction is a determinant of teacher
commitment and that it “must be present before the individual develops organizational
commitment”. The relationship between job satisfaction and commitment is not necessarily a
characteristic of teachers only. More general research on worker job satisfaction and
commitment has shown that conditions at work such as role conflict, autonomy, support from
peers, and adequacy of re sour them learn from their experience, in addition to using the skills
that they had acquired, were the principal sources for job satisfaction among teachers in the
21

greater area of Chicago (Plihal, 1982). Taylor and Tashakkori (1995) found that teachers use
descriptions of job satisfaction that deal with how they feel about coming to school every day
and their feeling of success, or lack of it, that they carry with regard to their performance with
students.Student achievement is identified as a very critical source of teacher satisfaction, a
finding that draws implications on teachers’ competence and efficacy (Dinham, 1995). The
importance of student achievement to teachers’ job satisfaction is found in this study, which
reveals the positive relationships between teacher satisfaction and student achievement in
secondary and preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone.
2.3.2 Teachers Job Satisfaction
The education mission seems to be dependent on the way teachers feel about their work and how
satisfied they are with it. Therefore, it is not surprising that researchers suggest that “schools
must give more attention to increasing teacher job satisfaction” (Heller, Clay, & Perkins, 1993).
Most research on teacher job satisfaction is rooted in the pioneering work of Herzberg, Mausner,
and Snyder man (1959) who identified the satisfying and dissatisfying factors. Herzberg’s “two-
factor theory” associates the satisfying factors, the “motivators,” with the higher order needs and
the dissatisfying factors, the “hygiene factors,” with the lower order needs (Dinham & Scott,
1998). The higher order needs, the satisfiers, apply to the intrinsic aspects of work, such as
achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, and opportunity for advancement. The
lower order needs, the dissatisfying factors, correspond to extrinsic matters of work, such as
working conditions, supervision, work policy, salary, and interpersonal relationships.
Teacher job satisfaction is also associated with higher autonomy at work (Hall, Pearson, &
Carroll, 1992; Poulin & Walter, 1992) and with aspects related to the teaching profession.
Goodlad (1984) found that teachers who reported that they chose this occupation because of
inherent professional values expressed higher levels of satisfaction and greater commitment than
did their counterparts who went into teaching for economic reasons. Hall et al.’s (1992) study
revealed that teachers who were planning to leave the profession expressed less job satisfaction
and more negative attitudes toward teaching as a career and toward the school administration.
Teacher job satisfaction is also linked to teacher retention through aspects such as satisfaction
with principal leadership (Betancourt-Smith, Inman, & Marlow, 1994) and satisfaction in general
22

(Zigarelli, 1996). Reyes and Shin (1995) found that teacher job satisfaction is a determinant of
teacher commitment and that it “must be present before the individual develops organizational
commitment”. The relationship between job satisfaction and commitment is not necessarily a
characteristic of teachers only. More general research on worker job satisfaction and
commitment has shown that conditions at work such as role conflict, autonomy, support from
peers, and adequacy of re sour them learn from their experience, in addition to using the skills
that they had acquired, were the principal sources for job satisfaction among teachers in the
greater area of Chicago (Plihal, 1982).
Taylor and Tashakkori (1995) found that teachers use descriptions of job satisfaction that deal
with how they feel about coming to school every day and their feeling of success, or lack of it,
that they carry with regard to their performance with students. Student achievement is identified
as a very critical source of teacher satisfaction, a finding that draws implications on teachers’
competence and efficacy (Dinham, 1995). The importance of student achievement to teachers’
job satisfaction is found in this study of Gamo Gofa Zone that reveals the positive relationships
between teacher satisfaction and student achievement.
2.4. Teachers Motivation and Job Satisfaction
Ellickson (2002) suggests that, irrespective of the approaches used to study job satisfaction, most
studies identified at least two general categories of antecedent variables associated with job
satisfaction, namely: the work environment and factors related to the work itself, and the
personal characteristics of the individual. Though the above stated factors cause job satisfaction,
the fact that they cause job dissatisfaction must be kept in mind. Therefore, the issue weather job
satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are two opposite and excludable phenomena? There is no
consensus regarding the issue among authors.
Herzberg two factor theory of motivation is probably the most often cited point of view. The
main idea is that employees in their work environment are under the influence of factor that
cause job satisfaction and factors that cause job dissatisfaction. Therefore, all factors that have
derived from a large empirical research are divided in factors that cause job satisfaction
(motivators) and factors that cause job dissatisfaction (Hygiene factors). The hygiene factors
include: company policies, supervision, interpersonal relations, work conditions, salary, and
23

status and job security. Motivators include achievement, recognition, work itself, responsibility,
advancement and growth (Herzberg, 1976). Further studies have also identified leadership styles
as an influencing factor of teachers’ job satisfaction (Bogler, 2001). Regarding what explains
employees’ job satisfaction; studies take a conflicting view point.
For instance, according to Quick (1998), each person has a different set of goals and can be
motivated if he/she believes that: there is a positive correlation between efforts and performance;
effective performance will result in a pleasing reward; the reward will satisfy an important need;
and the desire to satisfy the need is strong enough to make the effort meaningful. In support of
this view point, other studies like Vroom (1964) explained that the motivation to work depends
on the relationships between expectancy, instrumentality and valence. Expectancy is a person's
belief that working hard will result in a satisfying level of job performance. Instrumentality is an
employee’s belief that successful performance will be followed by rewards. And valence is the
value a person holds with respect to outcomes (rewards) (Vroom. 1964). However, other studies
suggest that employees form their attitude towards their jobs taking into account their feelings,
beliefs and behaviors (Robbins, 2005; Akehurst, Comeche, and Galindo, 2009). This means that
if teachers found their job fulfilling and rewarding, they tend to be more satisfied with their jobs
(Spector, 1985).
The other conflicting idea about what derives motivation and job satisfaction is evident from the
theory of Abraham Maslow; according to him employees’ needs should take a paramount
importance for job satisfaction. He arranged employees’ needs in series of levels, in the
hierarchy of importance. Based on this hierarchy, Maslow identified five needs. From the lowest
level, these are physiological needs, safety and security needs, love needs, esteem needs, and the
need for self-fulfillment at highest level (Maslow, 1954). This means that until the needs at each
level have been satisfied to some extent and until they are met, teachers working in private
primary schools of Addis Ababa city administration will find it difficult to respond to the higher
order needs (Steyn, 2002). Once the lower order need is satisfied it is no longer a motivator or
satisfier (Mullins, 2005) Considering the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational
success, a vast majority of studies believe that successful organizations normally have satisfied
24

employees while poor job satisfaction can cripple an organization (e.g. Galup, Klein and Jiang,
2008).
Literatures have also indicated that job satisfaction affects levels of job dissatisfaction,
absenteeism, grievance expression, tardiness, low morale, high turnover, quality improvement
and participation in decision making (Lee and Ahmed, 2006). These factors according to many
studies affect the overall performance of the organization (Klein Hesselink, Kooij-de Bode, and
Koppenrade, 2008; Page and Vella-Brodrick, 2008; Pitts, 2009; Riketta, 2008; Scroggins, 2008).
While others believe that organizational well-being includes employees’ physical and mental
health, sense of happiness and social well-being, which are all attributed with the term job
satisfaction (Grant, Christianson and Price, 2007). Teachers are the most important resources in a
school. They are the key figures for any changes (e.g., educational reforms) needed in schools.
The provision of a high quality education system depends on high quality teachers (Jyoti and
Sharma, 2009; Perie, Baker and The American Institute for Research, 1997). Since teachers job
satisfaction is the major issue in the present study previous studies is reviewed.
The review of the literature form three important point of focuses: the contributing factors of
teaches motivation and their job satisfaction, the importance of teacher’s job satisfaction and the
status of teachers job satisfaction in Ethiopia. One of the major factors that influence teachers’
job satisfaction is working condition (Gedefaw, 2012). According to him, working condition
refers to salary, fringe benefits, administrative support, school management and leadership style
as well as work load. Some working conditions will have a positive effect on the teachers’
contentment, whereas others will have a negative effect. Some studies, for example one by
Chang, et al. (2010:2), revealed that for the past 10 to 20 years working conditions emerged as
the major source of teacher job dissatisfaction and attrition. Ladebo (2005:365) also found that, if
working conditions are poor, these situations have a negative impact on the job satisfaction of the
teachers. Other studies confirmed that favorable teacher perceptions of their working conditions
are related to higher job satisfaction (Perie, et al., 1997: IX). Thus, working conditions, such as
salary, fringe benefits, school management and leadership, administrative support, and workload
could impact on the job satisfaction of teachers in secondary schools of Gamo Gofa Zone, either
positively or negatively. Teachers’ job satisfaction has important consequences as stated by
25

many literatures. It means that the teachers are happy, dedicated and committed, and it also helps
them to bring their best qualities to their schools, so that students, parents, and the society may
benefit from their services (Ofoegbu, 2004). As indicated by Jaiyeoba and Jibril (2008), satisfied
and motivated teachers are important for any educational system.
The success or failure of the education system depends mainly on satisfied teachers, but also on
satisfied school managers and administrators. Teachers, specifically, spend a great amount of
time with their students in class, and hence they have a significant impact on student
achievement (Correnti, Miller and Rowan, 2002; Jyoti and Sharma, 2009). Seco (2002) also
believes that for a number of years, teacher job satisfaction has been accepted as extremely
important for the implementation of educational reform, for the sustainment of the teacher in
life-long learning, for the quality of the teaching-learning process, and for satisfaction with life in
general. Further support for this conclusion is provided by Christodoulidis and Papaioannou
(2007), who succinctly stated as follows, “One should wonder whether education could be
improved with demoralized and unsatisfied teachers.
According to Mwamwenda (in Badenhorst, George and Louw, 2008), a lack of teacher job
satisfaction results in frequent teacher absenteeism from school, aggressive behavior towards
colleagues and learners, early exits from the profession, and psychological withdrawal from the
work. All of these negative results lead to poor quality teaching. Other studies showed that a lack
of job satisfaction is often accompanied by feelings of gloom, despair, anger, resentment and
futility (Pinder, 2008). Thus, a lack of job satisfaction has serious implications for the teacher, as
well as for the educational system in which he or she is employed.
A satisfied teaching force leads to higher commitment and productivity because of fewer
disruptions, such as absenteeism, the departure of good employees, and incidences of destructive
behavior (Robbins, in Green, 2000). The presence of satisfied teachers also translates into lower
medical and life insurance costs. According to Arnold and other researchers (in Perrachione,
Petersen and Rosser, 2008), personal satisfaction, along with professional responsibility, is an
important indicator of a person’s psychological well-being, as well as a predictor of work
performance and commitment. In a study by Hongying (2008), teacher motivation and job
26

satisfaction was found to affect teaching, the effectiveness of school administration, and the
quality of the school. Thus, motivation and job satisfaction affects the teachers work and
psychological health. Regarding the status of teachers’ job satisfaction in Ethiopia, studies have
verified that poor teachers’ job satisfaction is evident (e.g. [STURE] Report (in Centre for British
Teachers, 2008). While many factors have been identified as contributing to the poor teaches
motivation and their job satisfaction in Ethiopia, the problem has, to a great extent , have been
attributed to the low respect for and the low status of teachers living conditions, inadequate
salaries as well as failing school management and leadership (Evans, 2000; Papanastasiou and
Zembylas, 2006; VSO, 2008). Referring to leadership style as one of the factors contributing to
teachers job satisfaction much is known in other parts of the world; however, not much research
have been done on the influence of this factor on leadership style and motivation on teachers’ job
satisfaction. Specially, there exists a need to gain more information on the effects of leadership
style and motivation on teachers’ job satisfaction in secondary schools of Gamo Gofa Zone.
2.5. Relationship between Leadership styles and Job Satisfaction
Leadership style is an important determinant of employee job satisfaction. The reactions of
employees to their leaders will usually depend on the characteristics of the employees as well as
on the characteristics of the leaders (Wexley and Yukl 1984). Employee job satisfaction is
influenced by the internal organization environment, which includes organizational climate,
leadership types and personnel relationships (Seashore and Taber 1975). The quality of the
leader-employee relationship – or the lack thereof - has a great influence on the employee’s self-
esteem and job satisfaction (Chen and Spector 1991; Brockner 1988; DeCremer 2003).
Furthermore, as indicated by Lashbrook (1997) leadership style plays a vital role in influencing
employees’ job satisfactions. Some researchers discovered that different leadership styles will
engender different working environment and directly affect the job satisfaction of the employees
(Bogler, 2001, 2002; Heller, 1993; McKee, 1991; Timothy and Ronald, 2004). According to
(Yukl 1971), employees are more satisfied with leaders who are considerate or supportive than
with those who are either indifferent or critical towards subordinates. In support of this idea,
Wilkinson & Wagner (1993) argued that, it is stressful for employees to work with a leader who
has a hostile behavior and is unsupportive. If subordinates are not capable of figuring out how to
27

perform the work by themselves they will prefer a leader who will provide adequate guidance
and instructions (Wexley and Yukl, 1984).
Negative leader-employee relations reduce productivity and increase absenteeism and the
turnover to the organization can be quite high (Keashly, Trott, & MacLean 1994; Ribelin, 2003).
Similarly, the leadership style of school principals also significantly influences the job
satisfaction of the teachers (Bogler, 2001). A leadership style that involves the teachers in the
decision-making processes will give the teachers a higher level of job satisfaction than if they
were not involved (Bogler, 2001). The teachers report greater satisfaction in their work when
they perceive their principal as someone who shares information with them, who delegates
authority, and who keeps open channels of communication with them (Bogler, 2001). The
influence of leadership style on the teachers’ job satisfaction was confirmed by Sancar (2009).
He indicated that school principals who are considerate, have a significant and positive effect on
the teachers job satisfaction. School leaders, who exhibit concern for the welfare of the teachers
and other members of the school community, have satisfied teachers. The above shows that the
school principal, specifically, is very important. The teachers’ dissatisfaction with the school
head has been found as one of the frequently cited reasons by teachers to be indifferent to their
core business of teaching, and of leaving the profession.
According to Ahuja (in Jyoti & Sharma, 2006), teachers who work under incapable, inefficient,
and indifferent principals reported an increase in their job dissatisfaction. On the other hand,
principals who are democratic, generate an open, friendly and cooperative atmosphere that
enables teachers to be satisfied and happy (Jyoti and Sharma, 2006). In accordance with the
above, poor leadership decreases job satisfaction. In a survey done with 230 secondary school
teachers, Weiqi (2007) investigated the relationship between job satisfaction and its influence on
teachers’ attrition and work enthusiasm. The results of the overall job satisfaction of secondary
school teachers showed that the teachers were generally dissatisfied with school leadership and
administration, among others, and this caused them to leave the teaching profession. The quality
of school leadership serves as an important indicator of the teachers’ intent to leave their
profession (Ladebo, 2005). It was found that the probability of the teachers leaving their
profession negatively correlated with their perceived quality of leadership: if the teachers had a
28

high regard for their leadership, they were less likely to leave the profession (Ladd, 2009). In a
study of Hong Kong teachers’ commitment trends, Choi and Tang (2009) found that teachers in
late-careers left their profession due to poor leadership qualities, or to increased administrative
work. Poor leadership quality resulted in the teachers perceptions of a lack of school support,
which again resulted in a decreased commitment to the teaching profession. Thus, the quality of
school leadership significantly determines the teachers’ satisfaction and commitment, or their
intention to leave the profession.
The quality of school leadership also emerged as indicative of student achievement (Ladd, 2009).
Principals with admirable leadership qualities tend to increase the teachers job satisfaction, and
thus their commitment and motivation (Choi and Tang, 2009; Fresco, Kfir, and Nasser, 1997).
Moreover, satisfied teachers tend to be more committed to their careers; and committed teachers
influence student achievement. A good number of research works has been devoted regarding the
influence of transactional, transformational and laissez faire leadership styles on teachers’ job
satisfaction. Much of the studies indicated that school principals exhibiting transformational
leadership style cultivate high teachers’ job satisfaction than transactional and laissez faire styles
(Bass, 1998). In some cases transactional leaders were found to be effective than the other two
(Bass and Avolio, 1997). These studies verified their investigations in terms of different thematic
focuses.
The following will take up these issues along with empirical reviews. Some studies focus on the
fact that the more teachers perceive their school principal to be transformational leaders and
participative, and the less the principal exhibited transactional leadership styles, the greater were
teachers job satisfaction (Bogler, 2001). This study focus on general dimension of
transformational leadership while others like Bass (1998) indicated that transformational leaders
intrinsically foster more job satisfaction, given their ability to impart sense of mission and
intellectual stimulation. Other studies (e.g. Emery and Baker, 2007), indicated a different
dimension of transformational leadership to explain job satisfaction. According to them,
transformational leaders cultivate high teachers’ job satisfaction by motivating their followers to
take on more responsibility and autonomy. Others take employees performance appraisal as a
point of focus and verified that employees who worked for transformational leaders were more
29

satisfied than those whose leaders exhibit transactional leadership (Waldman, Bass, and Einstein,
1987). Still more other researches done by Butler, and Flick (1999) found a positive relationship
between transformational leadership and satisfaction taking supervision and trust as a primary
point of focus. Like the differences in the point of focus for analysis, empirical investigations
done on transformational leadership differ in contexts and findings. In the study conducted in
Israel, principals’ transformational leadership found to affect teachers satisfaction both directly
and indirectly through their occupation perceptions (Bogler, 2001). In accordance with this,
Bogler (2005), in a study on the satisfaction of Jewish and Arab teachers in Israel, investigated
the teachers’ perceptions of their occupations and of their principals’ leadership styles. Bogler’s
findings showed that the teachers perceptions of their occupations and of their principals
leadership styles significantly and positively correlated with their job satisfaction: their
satisfaction significantly and positively correlated with the principals transformational leadership
style (leaders and followers who inspire for a common objective), and negatively with the
principals transactional leadership style (leaders and followers have different objectives). He also
found (2005:28) that the principals’ transformational leadership styles were significant predictors
of the teachers’ job satisfaction, in addition to the teachers’ perceptions of their occupations. In a
very few literatures and empirical investigations transactional leadership is found to be effective
considering some of its dimensions. For instance, Shieh et al. (2001) noted that leaders must
understand the social environment of the school and must realize the needs of their employees.
To meet these needs, the transactional leadership style is able to set rewards for good
performance that in turn provides constructive feedback to the employee (Bass, 1999). This is to
say the exchange relationship formed between the teacher and the principals develop more
satisfaction to the teachers. Moreover, using transactional leadership, the leader can motivate
followers with higher goals instead of immediate self-interest, for achievement and self-
actualization rather than safety and security (Murray and Feitler, 1989).
Leaders give followers the capacity to develop higher levels of commitment as they relate to the
organizational goals of the school (Leithwood and Jantzi, 2000). Some others like Bass and
Avolio (1997) support the idea that transactional leadership is effective and proposed a
combination both transactional and transformational leadership. This combination according to
the studies yield greater amount of effort from followers and in turn results in higher workplace
30

effectiveness and higher teacher job satisfaction. However there is no or little empirical
investigation conducted to verify the above fact. Researchers have consistently reported that
laissez-faire leadership styles (neither transformational nor transactional) are the least satisfying
and least effective styles of leadership (Bass, 1990b). That is because these leadership behaviors
are accompanied by little sense of accomplishment, little clarity, and little sense of group unity
(Bass, 1990b).
Evidence from VSO (2008:35) and interviews with Ethiopian teachers indicates that the
authoritarian leadership style employed by school directors who have not received any leadership
training has a profound impact on teachers satisfaction and school effectiveness and, therefore,
on the quality of education. The review of the above literatures shows that there is a growing
concern on the influence of transformational, transactional and laissez faire on teachers’ job
satisfaction. However, schools, especially private primary schools in developing countries are
less explored in the literature. For instance, in Ethiopia there is little or no investigation is
conducted to examine the influence of these leadership styles on teachers’ job satisfaction in
secondary schools. In this study; therefore, the influence of the above leadership styles and
motivation on teachers’ job satisfaction of secondary school teachers in Gamo Gofa Zone will be
investigated to fill the gap.
31

CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
Introduction
This part of the study presents the methodological aspects of the research, which includes the
research design, research method, sources of data, population of the study, sample and sampling
technique, data gathering methods and instruments, data collection procedures, method of data
analysis, pilot testing and the measures to ensure the validity and reliability of the instrunments
were indicated and explained.
3.1. Research Method
In the empirical investigation, the study followed a mixed-methods approach. This implies that
both quantitative and qualitative approaches of gathering and analyzing data were used. A
quantitative approach is structured in nature, and the data are interpreted in statistical form, using
questionnaires. The quantitative research approach was employed mainly to involve as many
teachers and principals as possible and to collect standardized information from the subjects
under study, making generalizability possible. This enables the identification of the dominant
leadership style and the leadership style that promotes maximum teachers job satisfaction in the
selected secondary and preparatory schools. A quantitative approach also maximizes objectivity
by using numbers, statistics, structure and researcher control (McMillan & Schumacher,
1993:32), and it facilitates external validity.
After that, the qualitative datas were conducted by using interviews as a follow-up of the
quantitative results. The aim is to gain an in-depth understanding of the results from the questions
asked in the quantitative phase of the research. Individual interviews wereconducted with a sample
that was randomly selected from the same group of participants used in the quantitative phase.
3.2. Research Design
The quantitative analysis of data was followed by a qualitative analysis of data. The reason for
this is to gain an in-depth understanding of the quantitative results. McMillan and Schumacher
(2010:401) identified this as a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design. The primary
32

emphasis was on the quantitative paradigm (this is because there are more research questions
dealing with quantitative data), with a secondary emphasis on the qualitative paradigm to
investigate the factors influencing the job satisfaction of teachers in secondary and preparatory
schools of Gamo Gofa Zone.
3.3. Sources of Data
In order to investigate the leadership style and motivation on teachers’ moral and their job
satisfaction both primary and secondary source of data were used.
3.3.1. Primary Source of Data.
Secondary and Preparatory schools cluster supervisors, principals and teachers were chosen as
primary sources of data by expecting that, they have better exposure, experience and firsthand
information regarding the issue under the study.
3.3.2. Secondary Source of Data
In the secondary sources of data, since the information gathered from direct primary sources of
data alone were not enough for the study, and it is available in this study to use different types of
documents like, (job description to see the records of teachers, selection of teachers for
workshop, training, promotion, and rewards), anddifferent books of leadership, were helped the
researcher so as to support the information obtained in primary sources related with the topic of
the study.
3.4. Population, Sample and Sampling techniques
3.4.1. Population
To determine the population and sample schools were based on the 2015 annual statistics report.
According to this report there are 31 secondary schools and 7 preparatory schools in the Gamo
Gofa Zone, and there is total number of 1600 secondary school teachers and 31 main principals
and 23 vice principals in the Zone.Of the total population of the study the primary focus was on
three woredas and six schools (3 secondary and 3 preparatory schools). Therefore, the target
population 393 secondary and preparatory teachers and 14 principals of the study will be select
from those woredas and secondary and preparatory schools.
33

3.4.2. Sample
As the primary focus, this study was to identify the leadership style and motivation on teachers’
moral and their job satisfaction. From the focusing group of the population 79 teachers, 6 school
principals and 3 secondary school cluster supervisors were selected from six secondary and
preparatory schools and from three woredas (such as: - Dita woreda: Zada secondary and
preparatory school; Chencha woreda: Chencha secondary and preparatory school, Mesho
secondary school and Ezo secondary school; Arbaminch Kifle Ketema: Arbaminch secondary
and preparatory school and Arba Minch Prison Institution).
3.4.3. Sampling Techniques
Sampling is central to ensure that the generalizations are valid. This is because proper sampling
improves the internal and external validity of the measuring instrument (the questionnaires). A
sample is a set of target respondents selected from a larger population for the purposes of surveys
(Singh, 2007:88). It is a smaller group or subset of the total population (Cohen, Manion, and
Morrison, 2007:100). The quality of the research outcome depends, among others, on the size
and representativeness of the sample and the sampling strategy used. The samples selected for
purposes of analysis should be representative. This is because the sample represents the
properties of the whole population in question, so that the results found from the sample are
generalizable to the population (Muijs, 2004:38). Out of the various sampling designs, this
research used purposive sampling and simple random sampling techniques. According to C.R.
Kotari (2004) purposive sampling procedure can be employed in cases where the researcher
select items based on his/her interest to include items favorable to the study.
In order to get relevant and authentic information about the leadership styles and motivation on
teachers’ moral and their job satisfaction, respondents or the study population were selected by
using simple random sampling technique. As mentioned above that there were 41 both secondary
and preparatory schools in the Zone (31 secondary and 7 preparatory schools). But, to obtain
balanced result, the researcher was used only six secondary and preparatory schools from three
woredas by using purposive sampling techniques; because the researcher was expected that these
selected woredas have organized documents and materials which can support the study. After
selecting six secondary and preparatory schools, sample teachers were selected. The total
34

numbers of teachers in the sample schools were (393). To determine the sample size of teachers,
simple random sampling technique, and the formula of Paler-Colmorin were used, (William,
1977). Thus, out of (393) 79 were used as a sample in the study. To give equal distribution of
teachers between schools proportional allocation to size of teachers in each school was done. To
represent equal proportion of sample teachers in each secondary and preparatory schools formula
of Paler-Colmorin was utilized. Hence, it was done by dividing the targeted sample teachers (79)
with the total number of teachers in the sample secondary and preparatory schools (393) and
multiplied by total number of teachers in each school. Mathematically; Ps = n
N X (no of teacher
in each school) Where, Ps = Proportional allocation to size, n = Total teachers sample size (79),
and N = Total number of teacher in six selected sample school (393). After this, the researcher
employed simple random sampling technique; this is based on the assumption that it gives equal
chances for the respondents to participate in the research; therefore, especially lottery method
was employed, to select the representative teachers in each school. Therefore, secondary and
preparatory schools principals of the study was also selected through availability sampling
technique due to all the participants are few in number and easily manageable by the researchers.
Moreover, the respondents are available in the study to get relevant and real information
regarding the issue under the study. Accordingly, 79 teachers and 6 principals were used as a
sample in this study. For detail information on the list of respondents included in the study see
table 3.1
35

Table 3.1- The summary of the population, sample size and sampling technique
36
Zone
Woredas
Name of
Schools
Total No of
Respondents
Sample Size and Percentage Sampling
Techniques
Tech Prin
ci
Super
v
Teac
h.
% Prin
c.
% Sup
erv.
%
All
principals
and
supervisors
were
selected by
availability
sampling
techniques
while
Teachers
were
selected
using simple
randam
sampling
techniques
particulary
using
Lottery
Method
1
Gamo Gofa
Chencha Chencha 9-12 98 2
2
20 20 1 50
1 50Mesho 9-10 48 2 10 20 1 50
Ezo 9-10 49 2 10 20 1 50
Dita Zada 9-12 54 3 1 11 20 1 33 1 100
Arba minch Kifle Ketema
Arba minch 9-
12
128 4
2
25 20 1 25
1 50
Arbaminch
prison
Institution 9-10
16 1 3 20 1 100
2 Total
3 Woredas 6 Schools 393 14 5 79 20 6 42.
9
3 60

3.5. Instruments and Procedures of Data Collection
3.5.1. Instruments of Data Collection
In order to acquire the necessary information from participants, three types of data collecting
instruments will be used. These are;
3.5.1.1. Questionnaire
Closed ended questionnaire were employed to collect quantitative data from selected teachers.
This is because, item is convenient to conduct survey and to acquire necessary information from
large number of study subject with short period of time. Furthermore, it makes possible an
economy of time and expense and also provides a high proportion of usable response (Best &
Kahn, 2003). The questionnaire were prepared in English language and translated to Amharic,
because all of the sample teachers may not understand the concepts of the questionnaire: that
would be incorporated and to get in-depth information. The questionnaires have two parts: The
first parts of the questionnaire were describing the respondents background information includes:
sex, academic qualification, field of specialization, and experience. The second and the largest
part were incorporate the whole possible effect of independent variables of teachers job
satisfaction on dependent variables of principals leadership style and motivating teachers by
using closed ended question items. The close ended items were prepared by using likert scales.
The value of the scales were between one and five (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 =
Neutral, 4 = Agree and 5 = Strongly Agree).
37

3.5.1.2. Interview
Face to face interviews were carried out with six teachers’, six principals and three secondary school
supervisors by using Amharic language. Because interview has greatest potential to release more
in-depth information, provide opportunity to observe non-verbal behavior of respondents, gives
opportunities for clearing up misunderstandings, as well as it could be adjusted to meet many
diverse situations (MoE, 1999).
The method used interview guides to capture respondents’ views. This method is preferred due to its
flexibility and ability to provide new ideas on the subject (Kotari, 2004). Moreover, it enables to
obtain in-depth information about participants thought, beliefs, knowledge, reasoning, motivation,
and feeling about the issue under study (Johnson and Christensen, 2004).
3.5.1.3. Document Analysis
In addition to questionnaire and interview, document analysis was used to substantiate the
information gathered by the questionnaire and interview. Documents like, Minutes of meeting,
policy document, Job description records to see whether job delegated to subordinates, document
for selection of subordinates for workshop, training opportunity, promotion and rewards.
Moreover, documents like (like, General Education Quality Assurance Packages).
3.5.2. Pilot Testing
Ten secondary and preparatory school teachers and five principals from a school that were not
selected for this study were randomly selected for piloting the questionnaire. The purpose of the
pilot study was to check the clarity of the questionnaire items and instructions; eliminate
poor wording; check the readability and understanding levels of the research respondents; gain
feedback on the time required to complete the questionnaire; gain feedback from the teacher
respondents on the suitability of the questionnaire items; gain feedback regarding the
appropriate time to conduct the data collection; and identify irrelevant items. Based on the pilot
study, the following changes were made to the questionnaire items and the following decisions were
made concerning the data collection, namely vague or unclear items were deleted, items having
similar concepts or ideas were rephrased and replaced, and irrelevant items were deleted.
3.5.3. Validity and Reliability
38

3.5.3.1. Validity
The issue of validity is the most important concept that researchers are required to deal critically
with. The design of the measuring instrument must be valid so that the collected data will lead to
sound conclusions. If research is invalid (as a result of a poor instrument), then it is worthless
(Cohen et al., 2007:133).
Validity is the extent to which the measuring instrument (e.g., a questionnaire) we are using
essentially measures the characteristic or dimension we intend to measure (Leedy & Ormrod,
2001:98). This implies, if a questionnaire designed to measure teacher satisfaction measures
something else (e.g., achievement), then it is not a valid measure of teacher job satisfaction. In
this research validity is addressed with content and face validity.
Content validity, as defined by Cohen et al. (2007:137) is a form of validity that refers to the
extent to which the measuring instrument (e.g., test, questionnaire or inventory) shows that it
fairly and comprehensively covers the domain or items that it purports to cover. Thus, in the
context of the present study, content validity was concerned with the degree to which the
designed questionnaire items fairly and accurately represented the main variables (dependent and
independent). These variables include leadership styles with their respective dimensions and job
satisfaction facets. The content validity was judged by the researcher, his adviser and leadership
instructors at Educational Planning and Management department on weather peculiar behaviors
of transformational, transactional and laissez faire leadership styles and job satisfaction facets
were included in the instruments or not.
Face validity refers to the appearance of the test items. It is where, on the surface, the measuring
instrument (test) appears, at face value, to test what it is designed to test (Balnaves and Caputi,
2001; Birmingham & Wilkinson, 2003). In other words, if items are supposed to focus on the
dominant leadership, do the items appear to measure that construct? Like content validity, face
validity cannot be checked using statistical significance tests. It is based on subjective judgment.
In this study the face validity was judged by the researcher, his advisor and experts from.
3.5.3.2. Reliability
39

Reliability, as defined by Cohen, et al. (2007:146), is the consistency, dependability and
reliability of the measuring instrument over time, and with the same respondents. It is the extent
to which the measuring instrument yields consistent and accurate results when the characteristic
being measured remains constant (Leedy & Ormrod, 2001:99). In order to determine the
reliability of the questionnaire in the study, Cronbach alpha was computed for each of the three
main independent variables with their dimensions, and for the job satisfaction obtained from
each of three leadership styles. This is a measure of the internal consistency of the questionnaire.
The reliabilities (Cronbach alphas) were as follows:
(a) Transactional leadership :- contingent reward= 0.78, Management by
exception(active) = 0.85 and management by exception(passive) = 0.74
(b) Transformational leadership :- Idealized influence = 0.75 , Inspirational motivation =
0.72, Intellectual stimulation= 0.78, and Individualized consideration=0.76
(c) Laissez- fair leadership = 0.90
(d) ) Job satisfaction questioners with all the three leadership styles: Transactional leadership
style and job satisfaction facets = 0.64 , transformational leadership style and job
facets = 0.76 and laissez-fair leadership style and job facets = 0.87
According to McMillan and Schumacher (2010:184), a good rule of thumb is that the reliability
needs to be 0.7 or higher. This means that in this research all the variables (except one), have
reliability values greater than 0.7. However, it is worthwhile to include variables of which the
reliability values are less than 0.7. As suggested by McMillan and Schumacher (2010:182),
reliability values are highly dependent on the number of items, so alpha value of 0.64 is
acceptable for thefact that nine items were included in transactional leadership style and job
satisfaction facets. Psychology department on how the instrument appears or designed to
measure what it intended to measure.
3.5.4. Procedures of Data Collection
After pilot, validity and reliability tests of the instruments were made, the researcher obtained
permission for the research from principals of the sampled schools. At each of the sampled
40

schools issues regarding the purpose of the study and data collection by means of the
questionnaires and interviews were discussed with the principals. On the agreed dates, the
researcher personally administered the questionnaire and interviews to all the teachers at the
schools, on condition that they are willing to participate. Upon completion, the researcher
collected all the questionnaires, so that a 100 % response rate was secured.
3.5.5. Methods of Data Analysis
Information obtained from the questionnaires were regularly coded and updated on a coding
framework. The collected data were analyzed by means of descriptive and inferential statistics
that included frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations (descriptive statistics) as
well as t-tests (inferential statistics). The t-test enabled the testing of significant difference
among the responses of teachers and principals. The data was analyzed by using the statistical
package for Social Science (SPSS-20). SPSS-20 was used as a data analysis tool because it is
latest version. For the information obtained through interviews, the analysis was conducted using
Guba and Lincoln’s constant comparative method of analysis (in Leech and Onwuegbuzie,
2007:565).
This was done as follows:
(i) Categorizing and comparing units: The researcher prepared a transcript of the interviews with
the participants. Then he carefully read and reread the entire set of data (the transcript). This
enabled him to chunk the data into smaller meaningful parts. Following this, the researcher
labeled each similar chunk with a code (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2007:565). In this way,
categories were identified and documented.
(ii) Integrating categories and their properties: After completing the formation of categories and
units, comparisons were made with each code so that similar chunks were clearly labeled with
the same code. This process enabled the researcher to see whether the chunks were clearly
labeled, to integrate the categories, and to reduce their number.
(iii) External coder: An external coder checked the analysis of interview transcripts. This
enhanced the trustworthiness of the findings.
41

CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1. Introduction
In this research study, the specific objectives were to assess the dominant leadership style in
practice by principals in secondary and preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone and the
leadership style that promotes high teachers job satisfaction in secondary and preparatory school
of Gamo Gofa Zone. This chapter therefore, presents the results and discussion of the results in
order to answer the above-mentioned questions. The results were based on the data that were
collected using quantitative and qualitative measures (questionnaires and interviews). Firstly the
biographical data of the sampled teachers and principals were provided. Nextly, the results from
the quantitative and qualitative datas were analysed.
4.2. Analysis of the General Information.
Table 4.1 and 4.2 illustrates the respondents’ biographical information as determined by
questions in part I of the questionnaire. The total number of teachers,principals’ and supervisors’
respondents is 79, 6 and 3 respectively.
Table 4.1Biographical data of teachers, principals and Supervisors: sex and age
Variable Teachers Principals Supervisors
Frequency(f) Percent (%) Frequency(f) Percent (%) Frequency(f) Percent (%)
42

Sex
Male 53 67.1 5 83.3 3 100
Female 26 32.9 1 16.7 - -
Total 79 100 6 100 3 100
Age
20-30 60 75.9 - - - -
31-40 16 20.3 4 66.7 3 100
41-50 - - 2 33.3 - -
Above 50 3 3.8 - - - -
Total 79 100 6 100 3 100
Table 4.2 Biographical data of teachers, principals and Supervisors: qualification and work
experience
Variable Teachers Principals Supervisors
Frequency(f) Percent
(%)
Frequency(f) Percent
(%)
Frequency(f) Percent
(%)
Qualification
Certeficate - - - - - -
Diploma 13 16.5 - - - -
Degree 60 75.9 4 66.7 - -
Mastes 6 7.6 2 33.3 3 100
PhD - - - - - -
Total 79 100 6 100 3 100
Work
Experience
1-10 13 16.5 - - - -
11-20 45 57.0 2 33.3 2 66.7
21-30 16 20.3 4 66.7 1 33.3
Above 31 5 6.3 - - - -
Total 79 100 6 100 3 100
43

Table 4.1 illustrates the following: of the total of 79 teachers, 6 principals and 3 supervisors; the
males were the majority (N=53, 67.1%),(N=5, 83.3) and (N=3, 100%) respectively. It is evident
that the population is mainly composed of male respondents. The frequency distribution of
teacher respondents by age showed that most of them (N=60, 75.9%) were in the age category 20
to 30 years. However, majority (N=4, 66.7%) of principal respondents and (N=3, 100%) of
supervisors were in the age group 31-40. In addition the respondents who belonged to the age
group 41-50 and above 50 constituted the second largest group of respondents equally (N=6,
18.8%).
Table 4.2 above shows that the highest academic qualification of teachers respondents was a
bachelor’s degree (N=60, 75.9%). Diploma holders constitute the second larger group of
respondents (N=13, 16.5%). Only 6(7.6%) of the respondents hold masters’ degrees. This result
shows that, on average, the teachers in the selected secondary schools have a first degree. This is
beyond the expectation of the Ethiopian secondary and preparatory education training system
that requires teachers who teach in secondary and preparatory schools to have a minimum
qualification of at least degree. Similarly majority (4, 66.7%) of the principals’ respondents were
degree holders followed by master’s degree holders (N=2, 33.3%). However, the academic
qualification of all supervisor respondents were a masters degree (N=3, 100%).
Table 4.2 also indicates that the largest group (N=45, 57.0%) of teachers respondents had 11-20
years of experience as a teacher. The rest 16(20.3%), 13(16.5) and 5(6.3) of teachers respondent
population experienced teaching for (21-30), (1-10) and (above 31) years respectively. Similarly,
majority (N=4, 66.7%) of principal respondents and (N=2, 66.7) of supervisor respondents were
between the work experience of (21-30) and (11-20) years respectively.Only 2(33.3%) of
principal respondents and 1(33.3) experienced their job for a range of (11-20) and (21-30) years
respectively.
4.3. Results of the Qualitative and Quantitative data
To facilitate clarity of interpretation, the aggregate mean for each of the three leadership styles,
the average mean of teachers and principals’ responses and t-test were calculated. Moreover,
frequencies and percentages were also used to identify the leadership style in practice by
44

principals and the leadership style that promotes high teachers’ job satisfaction in secondary and
preparatory schools of Gamo Gofa Zone.
4.3.1. Leadership Style
It was indicated that transactional leadership has three sub variables namely contingent reward,
management by exception (active), management by exception (passive). Similarly
transformational leadership constituted four sub variables namely idealized influence,
inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration. Therefore, to
obtain a great understanding of the influence of each of variables each were identified and
discussed.
Analysis of each of transactional leadership sub variables, transformational leadership sub
variables and laissez faire leadership styles follows:
Table 4.3 Mean ratings on transactional leadership dimensions
Transactional
leadership
Respondents Average
mean
t-obtained
Teachers N=79 Principals N=6
Leadership
dimensions
Mean S.D Mean S.D
Contingent reward 3.91 0.928 4.10 0.967 4.00 1.059
Management by
exception (Active)
4.36 0.744 4.26 1.014 4.31 0.543
Management by
exception (Passive)
3.41 1.312 3.28 1.206 3.34 0.309
Key: Mean Value ≥ 4.5 = very high, (3.51-4.51) = high, (2.51-3.5) = moderate, (1.51-2.5) =low
and <1.5 =very low at p < 0.05, tcr = 1.960, df = 326 (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2007:565).
A principal with contingent reward behavior clarifies the work that must be achieved and provide
a reward. In addition to clarifying the work to be achieved, he/she also provides a reward when
teachers do the activities excepted of them and teachers also know that their efforts lead them to
a reward. As a result, table 4.3 above depicts respondents view on the status of contingent
reward. In relation to this, the mean scores of both principals (4.10) and teachers (3.91) lie in the
range (3.51-4.51). Moreover, the average mean score was 4.00.
45

Furthermore, interviews were made with some teachers, principals and supervisors concerning
contingent reward issues. Accordingly, majority of the teachers in the study area replied that
their principal usually provides them with a reward when they met standards. According to the
teachers, rewards are given in the form of certificates or praises. For instance, a teacher from
school A replied that:
The principal and the school management usually provides us with a certificate, whenever
we properly set out our lesson plan, perform in department and club activities and perform
all the school activities according to the standard set.
In general, contingent reward transactional leadership dimension is the act of providing a reward
in exchange for a work well done; therefore, as indicated in table 4.3 and the responses of the
interviews made, one can infer that principals in the study area exhibit high contingent reward
behaviors following the best achievement of school activities. In order to observe weather there
is significant difference between the two independent means, t-test at P<0.05 significant level
and 326 degrees of freedom is used. Thus, it was found that the t-test value calculated (1.059)
was less than the table value (1.960) indicates there is no significant difference between the
means of the two groups.
Transactional leadership can also be expressed in terms of management by exception (active)
dimension. Management by exception (active) is a key transactional leadership dimension that
dwells on the activity of a principal to actively monitor the work of teachers and constantly
acquainting teachers what they need to achieve. It provides a room for immediate remedial
actions. Based on the above general idea, questions referring to management by exception
(active) ask whether there is continuous evaluation to check whether standards are met or not and
the presence of regular information for the activities to be performed.
With regard to the above idea, Table 4.3 presents respondents view on management by exception
(active) dimension. Accordingly, the average mean score was 4.31 which is in between 3.51and
4.51. Furthermore interviews conducted to assess respondents’ evaluation on management by
exception (active) dimension indicated that principals actively monitor the work of teachers. For
instance a teacher form school C said that:
46

We are always in a continuous follow up by the principal. He usually walks by
our class. He concentrates on dos and don’ts. He checks our notebooks, lesson
plans and overall day to day activities. He usually tells us the record of our day to
day activity leads us to promotions and salary increment. The feedbacks we get
from the monitoring and evaluation help us to immediately fill our gaps.
The responses of the interviews show that principals are in a continuous process of monitoring
teachers. In general, the overall analyses of the responses of the respondents show that the status
of transactional leadership in relation to management by exception (active) dimension is
relatively high. This indicates that principals actively monitor the work of teachers and give
remedial actions for available gaps. It was also observed that the active and continuous
monitoring of teachers’ activity in the study area leads to promotions and praises. Furthermore,
the calculated t- value (0.543) was less than the table value of 1.960 at P< 0.05 and 326 degrees
of freedom. This verified that there is no significant difference between the responses of teachers
and principals.
Management by exception (passive) is a dimension of transactional leadership. Management by
exception (passive) refers to principals who intervene in the teaching learning process only when
a problem arises. Therefore, some questions were raised to understand respondents view on this
dimension of transactional leadership. In light of this, table 4.3 presents respondents view on
management by exception (passive) dimension in secondary and preparatory school of Gamo
Gofa Zone.
In this regard, Table 4.3 illustrates the mean value of both teachers (3.41) and principals (3.28).
This value is between 2.51 and 3.51. Similarly the average weighted mean (3.34) of the scores
was in the same range (2.51-3.51). Moreover, interviews conducted on the same issue verified
that majority of the principals in the secondary and preparatory scools of Gamo Gofa Zone are
rarely passive. Moreover, according to them principals are more of proactive than reactive.
In general, from the mean scores and the responses of the interviews one can deduce that
management by expectation (passive) is moderate. From this it is possible to infer that principals
do not prefer to use passive management in comparison with contingent reward and management
by exception (active) dimensions of transactional leadership. Furthermore, the calculated t-value
47

(0.309) is found to be less than the table t value (1.960) at P<0.05 and 326 degree of freedom
indicating no significant differences between teachers’ and principals’ responses.
Table 4.4 Mean ratings on transformational leadership dimensions
Trasformational
leadership
Respondents Average
mean
t-
obtainedTeachers N=79 Principals N=6
Leadership dimensions Mean S.D Mean S.D
Idealized Influence 4.19 0.843 4.45 0.796 4.32 1.756
Inspirational motivation 3.9 0.940 4.49 0.583 4.19 5.077
Intellectual stimulation 3.81 0.935 4.36 0.752 4.08 3.901
Individualized consideration 4.03 0.99 4.52 0.671 4.27 3.721
Unlike simple exchange and agreement in transactional leadership, transformational leaders
provide a vision and a sense of mission, inspire, pride and gain respect and trust through
charisma. Transformational leadership has four dimensions like idealized influence, inspirational
motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration. Based on the above general
idea, Table 4.4 presents the mean scores of the respondents view on each of the dimensions of
transformational leadership.
Idealized influence is a leader who is trusted and respected. A leader who maintains high moral
standards and teachers seek to emulate him/her. In relation to this, questions regarding the sense
of happiness while working with the principal, inspiration and motivation when goals are
achieved and articulation of the schools’ strategic vision to stake holders are raised. In this
regard, respondents’ views with the mean scores are presented in Table 4.4. Accordingly, the
48

results in table 4.4 illustrates that the mean scores of idealized influence for both teachers (4.19)
and principals (4.45) is found between 3.51 and 4.51. In addition to the mean scores interviews
were conducted. The results of the interviews will follow:
Majority of principal respondents consider themselves as someone highly trusted and respected.
According to them they inspire and motivate teachers towards the vision of the school. They
repeatedly mentioned their ability to arose teachers and bring them to follow their mission and
vision. However, majority of teacher respondents disagree with above point of view. They
critically mentioned that principals are very hard to work with. For instance a teacher from
school D said that:
I have been working in this school for the last four years. The principal is not someone
easy going. He doesn’t feel good while working with teachers. He usually concentrates
on the task to be performed. During my stay in the school, I haven’t seen the principal
creating a vision and mission. He always dwells on the activities on his table. On the
school meetings, the schools future direction, objectives and vision are not
communicated.
In general, idealized influence behavior is the art of influencing others towards the success of
school goals and vision. Though the mean scores are high, the responses from teachers’
interviews indicated that principals are not good enough with idealized influence behavior. From
this it is possible to infer that teachers are poorly satisfied with principals’ attitude towards
idealized influence. The calculated t- value (1.756) for idealized influence is slightly below the
table t- value (1.960) at P<0.05 and 326 degrees of freedom. This is an indicator for statically no
difference between the responses of the two groups.
Individualized consideration is principal’s ability to pay special attention to teachers. Principals
with this skill treat teachers as individuals but all are treated equally. Individual needs are
recognized and assignments are delegated to teachers to provide learning opportunities. In
relation to this, three questions particularly on the help to develop oneself, the value given for the
thought of each teacher and understanding of individual differences existent in each teacher were
raised in order to assess the status of each in the area under the study. As a result, Table 4.4
above indicates respondents view on the status of individualized consideration. Accordingly, the
49

mean scores of teachers (4.03) and the average weighted mean (4.27) are between 3.51and 4.51.
The mean score for principals is 4.52. This value is greater than 4.50.
Interviews were also made with some teachers’ principals and supervisors in the study area. A
conflicting point of view is observed from the interviews made. Almost all of the principals and
supervisors respondents revealed that they give due attention to each teachers’ need. According
to the principals, their understanding of individual differences creates conducive environment for
teachers’ development. However, majority of the teachers’ respondents consider principals and
supervisors as someone who does not care about teachers’ development and individual need.
They repeatedly mentioned that principals and supervisors don’t understand the skill difference
among each teacher. This view is reflected by the following response by principals:
Teachers in our school are different in their willingness as well their skills. Some of them
are so willing that they involve in every activity. They are also eager to learn. Some of
them are so talented where little help is required to develop them. Some of our staff
members hate feedbacks. The principal does not understand these differences. He usually
does things by the book.
In a nut shell, individualized consideration is principals’ ability to understand individual
differences existent in each teacher. With regard to this, principal mean scores and responses
from principals and supervisors interviews indicated that principals individualized consideration
skill is very high. However, teachers’ interviews on similar issues indicated that principals’ don’t
treat teachers equitably and don’t create a ground for development. From this one can deduce
that the way principals’ carry out individualized consideration skill is poorly exercised and its
effects are not noticeable. Furthermore, the independent sample t- test conducted to test whether
there is significant difference between the responses of teachers and principals support the idea
that there is difference between the scores. This is evident from the fact that the calculated t-
value (3.721) is way beyond the table t-value (1.196) at P<0.05 and 326 df.
Inspirational motivation is principals’ ability to emphasize teachers the need to perform well and
helps to accomplish the organizational goals. Based on the above idea, three questions were
raised regarding issues like expression of what should be done in few words, creating an
appealing image about the activities to be done and developing a meaning in the profession of
50

teaching. The mean results of the responses of the above issues of inspirational motivation
(Table 4.4) and interviews conducted were presented below. The mean score for inspirational
motivation for teachers and principals is 3.9 and 4.49 respectively. These values are in between
3.51 and 4.51. Similarly, the average mean is 4.19.
Moreover, principals’ and supervisors interviews concerning inspirational motivation issues
revealed that majority of the respondents in the study area exercise inspirational motivation.
Principals believed that they have the ability to strengthen teachers’ responses and explain
important ideas in simple ways. According to the principals, teachers perform well due to the
appealing image created about what should be done. However, teachers frequently expressed
their discontent about principals’ inspirational motivation skills. Majority of teacher interview
respondents expressed principals’ ability to inspire is poor. The following is a typical comment
form a teacher in school C:
As to me, to inspire means to create a sense great motivation about the activities we
perform in the school compound. An inspired teacher is energetic, work with
determination and commitment to attain school goals and objectives. An inspired teacher
is one who loves teaching profession. However teachers in our school including me are
not inspired. We usually work in this school to make a living out of it. I believe the
principal should be the real actor to inspire us towards the success of the school
objectives and goals. Moreover, he should be the one who initiates us to make a meaning
in the profession of teaching. However, he lacks motivation skills.
In general, the ability to inspire is perceived as a unique and energetic expression of the need to
perform as a best teacher. In light of this, all the results of the mean scores in Table 4.4 indicate
that principals’ inspirational motivation skill is relatively high. In addition to the mean scores,
principals’and supervisors’interviews also proves the presence inspirational motivation skill in
the study area. However, teachers’ interview indicates that there is a perceived difference
between the results and responses of the interviews made. This shows that principals’ ability to
inspire teachers is not dominantly practiced and the effect is not remarkably convincing. Hence
this could affect teachers’ job satisfaction. Moreover, the calculated t-value (5.077) is above the
table t-value (1.196) at P< 0.05 and 326 degrees of freedom indicating the significant differences
between the responses of the two groups.
51

Principals’ transformational leadership style can also be measured in terms of intellectual
stimulation. A principal with this skill stimulate teachers’ understanding of the problems and an
identification of their own beliefs and standards. To assess this skill, some questions in form of
questionnaires and interviews were raised. The questions focus on weather changing
environments are seen as opportunities, the availability of a room to change old situations with
new ones and on encouragement to rethink ideas that one have never questioned before. As a
result, Table 4.4 above depicts respondents view on the status of intellectual stimulation in the
study area. In relation to this, the mean scores of both teachers (3.81) and principals (4.36) are
found in the range between 3.51 and 4.51.
Furthermore, interviews from supervisors’ were also made with some teachers and principals
concerning intellectual stimulation issues. Accordingly, supervisors’ in the study area mentioned
their strong ability to initiate teachers to create new ways of doing things. According to the
principals, due the ground created to try new things, teachers constantly developed their own
ways of developing a lesson plan and notes. However, teachers expressed their feeling of
dissatisfaction on the way the principal stimulate them intellectually. According to teachers they
are not encouraged to create new things; they were usually discouraged while they brought best
teaching and planning methods. They frequently described their principal as someone who likes
to do things as they are. They said that the principal tend to maintain the status quo.
Therefore, from the mean scores in Table 4.3 and principal interviews one can deduce that
intellectual stimulation skill is high in the study area. However, teacher interviews surprisingly
show that principals’ ability to encourage followers to try new approaches or methods is
relatively low. This indicates that principals’ intellectual stimulation ability in the study area is
poorly practiced. Moreover, the independent t- test conducted to check whether there is
significant difference between teachers’ and principals’ responses or not indicated significant
difference between the two means. This was seen from greater difference between calculated t-
value (3.901) and table t-value (1.196) at P<0.05 and 326 df.
Table 4.5 Mean ratings on Laissez-faire leadership style
Laissez fair leadership Respondents Average
mean
t-obtained
Teachers N=79 Principals N=6
52

Leadership dimensions Mean S.D Mean S.D
Laissez fair leadership items 2.46 1.199 2.21 1.442 2.34 0.947
Laissez-faire leadership is a passive kind of leadership style. There is no relationship between the
leader and the followers. It represents a non-transactional kind of leadership style in which
necessary decisions are not made. In light with the above statement three questions were raised
in the questionnaire to assess their status in the area under study. In relation to this, the responses
are presented in Table 4.5. Accordingly, the mean scores of both teachers (2.46) and principals
(2.21) are found in range between 1.51 and 2.51.
In addition to the mean scores, interviews conducted in the study area indicate the disagreement
with the points raised. According to the respondents, they do not prefer to work in a stable
environment. They repeatedly mentioned the need for rules and regulations in the school. Most
importantly the principal is the key figure in the school actions and decisions as stated by the
respondents. From this it is possible to deduce that laissez-faire leadership style is the least
preferred and practiced leadership style in the area under study. Moreover, the calculated t-value
(0.947) is less than the table t-value (1.196) at P<0.05 and 326 degrees freedom. This indicates
that there is no significant difference between the responses of teachers and principals.
4.3.2. Leadership style and job satisfaction
The second purpose of the study was to identify the leadership style (transactional,
transformational and laissez-fair) that maximizes high teachers’ job satisfaction. To do so, the
nine job satisfaction domains like pay, promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, recognition,
operating procedure, co-worker, nature of the work and communication (Locke 1976; Smith et
al.) are combined with peculiar behaviors of the three leadership styles resulting nine questions.
The aggregate mean value, frequencies and percentages results were displayed in the tables given
below.
53

Table 4.6 Teachers’ mean ratings on job satisfaction statements of transactional leadership
Transactional leadership mean Std.
Statements
I feel happy if pay correlates with performance 4.43 0.824
I feel pleased if benefits matches with commitment 4.61 0.559
I feel satisfied if opportunities for promotion is given in exchange for
performance
4.45 0.630
I feel pleased if the principal actively supervise my work 4.25 0.855
I feel satisfied if the principal gives me a recognition for my best
achievements
4.56 0.524
Active monitoring and continuous rewards makes teaching pleasing 4.32 0.689
The principal‟s attitude for reward and recognition disturbs my
professional relationship with colleagues
2.83 1.467
Teaching will be pleasing if best performances are rewarded and
recognized
4.42 0.737
I feel happy if the principal clarify the work to be achieved 4.40 0.644
Variable total 4.26 0.769
Key: S.A= Strongly Agree, A= agree, D=Disagree, U=Undecided, S.D= Strongly Disagree, f
(%) = frequency and percentage, X= mean and Std= standard deviation
54

Transactional leadership is a kind of leadership where the principal communicates with teachers
to explain how task must be done and let them know that there were rewards for a job well done.
This is an exchange relationship between teachers and principals. Based on the above general
idea, nine questions regarding the combined effects of transactional leadership dimensions and
job satisfaction aspects were raised. As a result, Table 4.6 illustrates respondents view on the
status transactional leadership and job satisfaction aspects.
In relation to this, majority of teacher respondents agreed with all of the nine statements.
Particularly, from the mean value (mean= 4.61) teachers’ job satisfaction is related to benefits
obtained in exchange for best performances. In support of the above quantitative data, interviews
conducted concerning teachers’ job satisfaction and work aspect issues indicated that in the
majority of the schools, benefits and salaries are relatively unsatisfactory in comparison with the
work done. This mismatch between salary and work load creates poor job satisfaction.
According to teachers, for high job satisfaction it is wise to exchange salaries with job
performances. For instance a teacher from school A commented:
Teachers do not perform equally in the school. Some of us do better where as others
perform poorly. For instance, I usually submit my lesson plans, note books in time; I
usually submit tests and final examination on time. I am usually punctual. I do the
teaching properly. However there are some teachers who are so careless and unwilling.
Therefore, I fell greatly satisfied if the school management or principal considers our
activities for salary increment schemes.
In general, the overall analysis of the responses of the respondents shows that the level of job
satisfaction in relation to the exchange of benefits and salaries for the job well done is relatively
high. This shows that performance oriented salary or benefit increment schemes have a serious
implication on teachers’ job satisfaction. Such kind of relationship is evident from contingent
reward dimension of transactional leadership.
The other job satisfaction aspect is recognition. In educational institutions, students and teachers
are the most important resources. The impact of teachers on student achievements, quality
education and educational reforms should be recognized by school administrators, and also by
other teachers. Based on the above general idea, the fifth item in Table 4.6 asks the status of
55

teachers’ job satisfaction for recognitions provided. Accordingly, the mean and the percentage
responses was 4.56 and 96.3% respectively. Furthermore, interviews made with some teachers
support the idea that teachers need the appreciation, approval and respect of school
administrators, and of others. According to them, they feel valuable, functional and important if
their best performances were recognized. As repeatedly mentioned by teachers a recognized and
appreciated teacher tended to be happy with his/her profession.
In general, the results and responses of the interview show that recognitions considered for the
exchange of best performances brought about high teachers’ job satisfaction. This shows that
transactional leadership has an influence on teachers’ job satisfaction as far as contingent reward
dimension is concerned. In this case the contingent reward exchanged for best performance is
recognition by either the principal or school administrators.
In the teaching profession promotion can be realized when teachers receive the opportunity of
being appointed as school principals, department heads, supervisors, district officers, or to the
next level, by achieving additional educational qualifications. Considering opportunities for
promotion as a contingent reward, questions regarding teachers’ job satisfaction were raised.
Accordingly, Table 4.6 illustrates views on the status of teachers’ job satisfaction for
opportunities given. In relation to this, respondents expressed their agreement for the statement
given in Table 4.5.
Moreover, interviews support the idea that opportunities for promotion given in exchange for
best performances promote high teachers’ job satisfaction. Teachers repeatedly mentioned the
need for promotion in accordance with their advancement in performance and educational
background. In general, the overall analysis of the responses for this item shows that
teachers’view on promotion aspect of job satisfaction is high. In light of this, it is possible to
infer that promotions have a paramount importance for teachers’ job satisfaction especially
exchanged for outstanding performances.
The only discontent regarding transactional leadership and job satisfaction aspect is also
observed in Table 4.6. This is related to weather principal attitude for reward and recognition
disturbs teachers’ professional relationship with colleagues. Regarding this factor teachers’,
mean= 2.83) expressed their disagreement with this statement. In relation to this, some interview
56

questions were raised to teacher respondents. Accordingly, majority of the respondents
frequently mentioned that so long as rewards are given for best performances, it had not disturb
their relationship with colleagues. According to them felling of poor association with colleagues
prevails particularly when poor performances are rewarded. The results and responses of the
interview show that respondents view for the last item in Table 4.6 is relatively low. Form this it
is possible to deduce that relationship with colleagues as an aspect teachers’ job satisfaction
would not be disturbed with the exchange relationship evident from transactional leadership
style.
Furthermore, Table 4.6 illustrates that teachers’ job satisfaction in terms of the exchange
between pay and performance (mean=4.43), the active supervision carried out by the principal
(mean=4.25), the active monitoring and continuous rewards (mean=4.32) and the clarification of
work to be achieved (mean=4.40) are found to be high from the mean results obtained. In
addition to the results, the responses from interviews strengthen the fact that transaction between
the above mentioned transactional leadership dimensions and job satisfaction facets leads to high
teachers’ job satisfaction. In support of the above idea, the aggregate mean value (4.26) found in
the range (3.51-4.51) also shows high teachers’ job satisfaction with transactional leadership and
work aspects. This implies that transactional leadership can be a core element of teachers’ job
satisfaction if excellent executions of important job aspects are followed by rewards,
recognitions, promotions and incentive increments.
Table 4.7 Mean ratings on job satisfaction statements of transformational leadership
Transformational leadership mea
n
Std.
Statements
I feel happy if the school‟s strategic vision and future improvements brought better pay 4.41 0.592
I feel pleased if benefits are evident from the success of school goals through inspiration
and motivation
4.48 0.582
I am happy if my promotion rely on innovations and creativity to solve old problems 4.22 0.869
I feel pleased if the principal encourages new approaches/methods of teaching during
supervision
4.58 0.565
I feel satisfied if we are recognized as a team 4.31 0.814
57

Formulation of clear goals, innovation and inspirations by the principal makes teaching
pleasing
4.36 0.733
The principal‟s attitude to pay special attention to each teacher‟s need for achievement
magnifies my relationship with colleagues
4.15 0.824
Teaching will be pleasing if there is strong team spirit and creative work environment 4.60 0.625
I feel satisfied if the principal motivate and inspire teachers to commit to their job and
vision of the school
4.61 0.644
Variable total 4.41 0.677
Table 4.7 presents teachers’ views on the nine statements constituting transformational
leadership job satisfaction variables. This table depicts that most of the teacher respondents were
satisfied with each of the nine statements. In rank order, out of the nine statements most of the
teachers (mean=4.61) were satisfied with the transformational leadership dimension that deals
with inspiration and motivation of teachers to the vision of the school.
Furthermore, interviews made with teachers concerning similar issues indicate that teachers fell
pleased to work with a principal who can create an appealing image about the job. According to
them an inspired teacher is energetic to accomplish the vision of the school. From the results and
responses of the interview made, one can infer that the use of inspirational motivation dimension
of transformational leadership brought about high teachers’ job satisfaction in the area under
study.
Intellectual stimulation as a dimension of transformational leadership has a role to stimulate
innovation and creativity in the work environment. With regard to this, some points related to
teaching profession were raised in Table 4.7 in order to assess the level job satisfaction. As a
result, Table 4.7 above depicts respondents view on the status job satisfaction from intellectual
stimulation and work aspect. In relation to this, the mean value 4.60 expresses teachers’ feeling
of job satisfaction. In support of the qualitative data, teachers frequently expressed their opinion
on the fact that changing and innovative teaching environment is pleasing. Teachers believed that
principals’ ability to try new methods or approaches strengthen their level job satisfaction. Form
the frequency, means and the responses of the interview it is possible to deduce that intellectual
58

stimulation linked with some aspects of teaching promotes high level of job satisfaction next to
inspirational motivation.
Supervision is one of the aspects of job satisfaction. Though the continuous process of
supervision teachers can be supported and developed. In relation to this, the item in Table 4.7
provides the extent of job satisfaction if principals encourage new ways of teaching
methodologies during supervision. Accordingly majority (mean= 4.58) of teachers expressed
their feeling of happiness if principals work with teachers to solve the gap observed during
supervision. In this respect, the responses of the interview with teachers strengthen the point.
According to the respondents, they like to work with a school principal who regularly supervise
their work and provides them with constructive feedbacks. Teachers believed that discussions
after supervision promote innovations and creativity in teaching.In general the results and the
responses of the interview indicate that high job satisfaction is evident from intellectual
stimulation and supervision work aspect.
Development of school’s strategic vision, future improvements and promotion of innovation and
creativity are important elements of transformational leadership. In light of this, the 1st, 2nd , 3rd
,5th and 6th items in Table 4.7 asks whether the success of the above mentioned elements
promotes teachers’ job satisfaction or not. Accordingly, the job satisfaction for better pay
resulting from success of school goals and improvements (mean= 4.41), teachers’ job satisfaction
form benefits earned from success of school goals , (mean = 4.48), teachers’ job satisfaction
evident from promotions as a result of innovation and creativity to solve old problems and
feeling of satisfaction as a result of recognition as a team (mean= 4.31) and teachers’ job
satisfaction as a result of formulation of clear goals ( mean= 4.36) were high from the results
obtained. Moreover, majority of the respondents involved in the interview believed that school’s
future direction and principals’ ability to encourage innovation and creativity magnifies teachers’
job satisfaction. In general, from the results and responses of the interview one can infer that
better pay, benefits and promotions earned from the success of school goals maximizes teachers’
job satisfaction. In addition to this, one can deduce that strong team spirit, innovation and
creativity are important factors that influence teachers’ job satisfaction.
Individualized consideration is a dimension of transformational leadership where leaders
recognize the needs and desires of each teacher in the school compound. In this respect, teachers
59

were asked whether principal attitude to pay special attention to each teacher’s need disturbs
their relationship with colleagues or not. Accordingly, the results in Table 4.7 illustrated the
highest mean value (mean =4.15) that expressed relationship with colleagues would be
magnified if principals give due attention to each teachers’ need. Moreover, interviews made
with teachers concerning similar issues revealed that the main issue in collegial relationship is
the concern one had for each teacher’s need. From this one can deduce that the more one
understands the differences existent in each teacher’s need in a group, the higher the relationship
with colleagues would be. This in turn leads to high teachers’ job satisfaction. Furthermore, the
aggregate mean 4.41, a value between 3.51and 4.51 also confirms high teachers’ job satisfaction
from transformational leadership and work aspects.
Table 4.8 Mean ratings on job satisfaction statements of laissez-fair leadership style
Laissez-fair leadership mean Std.
Statements
I feel satisfied if pay do not correlate with performance or evaluation 1.96 1.221
I feel pleased if benefits do not relate to criteria and evaluation 1.82 0.991
I feel happy if promotions should not rely on the principal’s evaluation and
follow up
1.99 1.005
I feel satisfied if the principal does not involve in the process of supervision 1.82 1.013
I feel pleased if I am recognized by my colleagues rather than the principal 2.43 1.159
Teaching will be pleasing if there are no rules and regulations set for teachers 1.63 0.937
The principal’s attitude to shy away from decisions strengths my relationship
with colleagues
2.35 1.220
Teaching will be interesting if the principal does not involve in teachers’
work and decisions
1.98 1.195
I feel satisfied if the principal does not communicate about the school’s
actions and decisions
1.55 0.784
Variable total 1.95 1.058
Laissez-fair leadership style is a kind of leadership style where leadership responsibilities are
ignored, and authority unused. A leader displaying this form of non-leadership is perceived as
60

not caring at about other issues. In light of this, some elements of laissez-faire leadership style
and job satisfaction aspects were raised in order to assess the strength of teachers’ job
satisfaction in the area under study. Accordingly, Table 4.8 above and interviews made depicts
respondents’ views on the status of job satisfaction in relation to laissez-fair leadership style. In
relation to this, the highest area of discontent is observed from poor communications about
school actions and decisions followed by the absence of school rules and regulations. The third
area of poor job satisfaction is seen from the item that indicates poor principals‟ involvement in
supervision. The fourth area of discontent is summarized as non-transaction between pay,
benefits and promotions with performance and evaluation. The fifth area of poor satisfaction is
related to principal’s attitude not to involve in decisions.
Communication is the life blood of an organization and it has a paramount importance on
teachers’ job satisfaction. With regard to this, the item in table 4.8 provides the extent to which
job satisfaction is affected by poor communication. Accordingly, teacher respondents expressed
their disagreement to the point (mean= 1.55). Similarly, interview respondents replied that poor
communication about school actions and decisions lowers teachers’ job satisfaction. Moreover
according to teachers communication is an important factor for teachers’ job satisfaction. The
more school principals involve teachers in decisions, the highest the level of job satisfaction. In
general from the results and the responses of the interview made it is possible to deduce that poor
communication resulting from laissez-fair leadership style significantly reduces teachers’ job
satisfaction.
The other characteristic of laissez-fair leadership style is the absence of rules and regulations in a
school. In this respect, the 6th item in Table 4.8 asks the status of teachers’ job satisfaction in a
school environment where there are no rules and regulations. In light of this, Table 4.8 presents
respondents view on the issue. Accordingly of teacher respondents (mean= 1.63) expressed their
level disagreement to the idea raised. Furthermore, interviews were also made with some
teachers to assess the idea that absence of rules and regulations reduces teachers’ job satisfaction.
Accordingly, some teachers replied that they feel extremely disturbed to work in a school where
there are tight rules and regulations. Moreover, according to them there will be high teachers’
turnover and absenteeism in such schools. For instance a teacher from school B replied that:
61

In our school the rules and regulations are extremely tight. Teachers are controlled in
every aspect of their job. This includes personality, punctuality, hand writing, classroom
management, etc. There are serious reprimands for those who don’t comply with the
rules. Sometimes the transport allowance is deducted for very minor mistakes. Due to
this, teachers hate to work in our school. There is high teachers’ turnover that lasts from
the beginning of the year to the end. To this end I can say that very tight rules and
regulations result in very low level of teachers’ job satisfaction. This will be followed by
turnover.
While others said that they prefer to work in an environment where there are very serious rules
and regulations. According to them if a teacher is left free without rules, he/she does not teach
properly. Furthermore, according to the respondents it is preferable and pleasing to work in
schools where there are some sets of rules that abide all the community of the school. In general,
from the results and interviews made one can possibly infer that the absence of rules and
regulations in a school has a serious influence on teachers’ job satisfaction.
Laissez fair leadership style can also be explained in terms principals’ attitude not to involve in
supervision. Based on the above general idea the 4th item in Table 4.8 asks the extent of
teachers’ job satisfaction for a principal who does not involve in supervision. Accordingly, Table
4.8 presents teachers’ views for the idea mentioned above. As a result, Table 4.8 depicts
respondents view on the status of teachers’ job satisfaction in relation to poor supervision. The
percentage of disagreement is shown with a mean value of 1.82. Moreover, interviews conducted
on similar issues proved that teachers don’t prefer to work with a principal who is too lenient in
the process of supervision. According to them, teachers need to develop and grow professionally
through continuous monitoring and evaluation aided by a system of feedback. In general, from
the results and interviews made it is possible to deduce that poor supervision results in low
teachers’ job satisfaction. This indicates that supervision has a serious implication on teachers’
job satisfaction.
Laissez- faire leadership style involves non-transaction between aspects of job satisfaction like
pay, benefit and promotion with performance. With regard to this, teachers were asked weather
such kind of non-transaction brought about job satisfaction or not. Accordingly, from the results
of Table 4.8, majority of the respondents expressed their feeling of dissatisfaction and
62

disagreement with non-transaction of pay with performance (mean= 1.96), non-transaction of
benefit with performance (mean=1.82) and non-transaction of promotions with performance
(mean=1.99). Furthermore, interview respondents replied that job satisfaction is a function of
exchange relationship between some aspects job like pay, benefit and promotions and
performance. In general, from the results and interviews made one can infer that non-transaction
between such factors like pay, benefit and promotion with performance reduces teachers’
productivity and the turnover to the school will be quite high.
Decision making is considered as litmus paper test for managerial effectiveness. However, a
principal with laissez-fair leadership style does not involve in decision making thus his/her
efficiency is at stake. With this respect, teachers were asked whether such attitude not to involve
in decisions stimulate teachers’ job satisfaction or not (Table 4.8). Accordingly, majority of the
respondents from the quantitative data (mean=1.98) and interviews indicated their disagreement
and feeling poor satisfaction with the points raised. Therefore, from the results and responses of
the interview it is possible to deduce that teachers’ job satisfaction would negatively be
influenced with a passive leadership style where authority is unused, decisions were not made
and actions were delayed. In a nut shell, the grand total variable mean of 1.95, a value between
1.51 and 2.5 also confirms poor teachers’ job satisfaction from laissez-fair leadership style.
63

CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMANDATIONS
Introduction
The objective of the study was to examine the leadership style in practice by principals of
secondary and preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone and to identify the leadership style that
promotes high teachers’ job satisfaction in secondary and preparatory school of Gamo Gofa
Zone. In the empirical investigation, a mixed method sequential explanatory design was used.
Data was collected from a total of 393 respondents constituting 79 teachers 6 principals and 3
supervisors drawn from 6 sample schools in 3 randomly selected woredas.The Data was
collected by a means of questionnaire and interviews. The data from the quantitative method was
analyzed using SPSS and the data from the qualitative method was analyzed using comparative
method. In this chapter therefore, summary of the major findings along with objectives of the
study, conclusions drawn from analysis and interpretation of data and recommendations for
enhancement of secondary and preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone were made.
5.1. Summary of the Major Findings
5.1.1. The Dominant Leadership Style
64

The leadership styles under study were transactional, transformational and laissez-fair.
Transactional leadership style has three sub variables namely contingent reward, management by
exception (active) and management by exception (passive). Transformational leadership style
has four sub-variables namely idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual
stimulation and individualized consideration.
Out of the three sub variables of transactional leadership, two dimensions namely contingent
reward (mean=4.00) and management by exception (active) (mean=4.31) had the highest
dominance mean rating (Table 4.3).This was also supported by the qualitative data. However, the
data from both the interview and questionnaire revealed that management by exception (passive)
dimension was moderately practiced (mean=3.34).
The other major finding reported mainly by principals is the existent of transformational
leadership style in secondary and preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone (Table 4.3). This
finding was seen from the highest mean obtained from all of the dimensions of transformational
leadership. However, this finding was not well supported by teachers as indicated by the value of
t-test conducted to check whether there exists significant difference between the means of the
two groups (Table 4.3). Furthermore, the qualitative data obtained during teachers’ interviews
indicated that the practice of transformational leadership and its dimensions were poor in the area
under study.
The third major finding with regard to leadership style was seen from laissez-fair leadership
style. The results from both quantitative and qualitative data indicated that laissez-fair leadership
style was the least preferred and practiced (mean=2.34) leadership style in secondary and
preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone (Table 4.4).
5.1.2. Leadership Styles and Teachers’ Job satisfaction
The second objective of the study was to identify the leadership style that maximizes high
teachers’ job satisfaction. Nine job satisfaction facets like pay, benefit, recognition, promotions,
relations with colleagues, supervision, operating procedures, nature of work and communication
were combined with peculiar behaviors of transactional, transformational and laissez-faire
leadership styles. The major findings of the study were summarized in the following paragraphs.
65

Regarding transactional leadership, mean value of the respondents (mean=4.61) expressed
exchanges between benefits and performance were highly satisfying. This was also supported by
qualitative data. The results and responses of the interview revealed that the mean value (mean=
4.56) of the respondents agreed on recognitions considered for best performances brought about
high teachers’ job satisfaction. Considering opportunities for promotion, the mean score (mean=
4.45) of respondents repeatedly mentioned their need for promotion in accordance with their
performance and educational background. Moreover, teachers’ job satisfaction in terms of the
exchange between pay and performance (mean=4.43) was high. Furthermore, the aggregate
mean value (4.26) obtained from transactional leadership dimensions confirms high teachers’ job
satisfaction (Table 4.6).
The results of this study with regard to transformational leadership and work aspects showed that
inspirational motivation dimension of transformational leadership yield high teachers’ job
satisfaction with a mean value of 4.61. The mean score (mean=4.60) of the teachers surveyed on
job satisfaction expressed their feeling of satisfaction with intellectual stimulation of
transformational leadership. In addition, from the results and responses of the interview better
pay, benefits and promotions earned from the success of school goals found to maximize
teachers’ job satisfaction. Individualized consideration as a dimension of transformational
leadership found to upgrade collegial relationship which in turn leads to teachers’ job satisfaction
(Table 4.7). Furthermore, the aggregate mean value (4.41) also confirms high teachers’ job
satisfaction as a result of transformational leadership.
The mean score of (mean= 1.55) teachers surveyed on job satisfaction were not satisfied with
laissez-fair leadership style. Results and responses of the interview expressed poor
communication resulting from laissez-faire leadership style significantly reduce teachers’ job
satisfaction. The mean value (mean= 1.63) result and responses of the interview indicate that
absence of rules and regulations in a school significantly reduces teachers’ job satisfaction.
Similarly, the quantitative data and responses of the interview proved teachers’ dissatisfaction on
supervision practices. In addition, non- transaction between factors like pay, promotion and
benefit with performance reduces teachers’ job satisfaction. Furthermore, the variable mean, 1.95
also confirms poor teachers’ job satisfaction form laissez-fair leadership style.
5.2. Conclusions
66

The main conclusion of this study was presented in the next sections:
5.2.1. Leadership Style
Out of the three dimensions of transactional leadership, two dimensions namely contingent
reward and management by exception (active) had the highest mean rating and frequency
expression from both the qualitative and quantitative data. Regarding transformational leadership
a contradictory view point was seen from teachers and principals responses. This was observed
from the value of t-test conducted to check significant differences among the two groups and the
analysis of the interviews made. The average mean value of Laissez-fair leadership style was
rated low. This was also supported by the qualitative data. The results indicated that transactional
leadership style was the most dominant and frequently practiced leadership style,
transformational leadership style was the less frequently used and laissez-fair leadership style
was the least dominant and practiced leadership style in secondary and preparatory school of
Gamo Gofa Zone.
This finding is consistent with As-Sadeq and Khoury (2006) who showed that transactional
leadership style was the more frequent than transformational leadership and laissez-fair
leadership style was considered as least commonly occurring leadership style and more frequent
among leaders with low educational background, and low previous experience. This showed that
principals in the study area actively supervise the work of teachers in the school compound and
provide them a reward in the form of praises, promotions, recognition, benefits and pay
increments in exchange for their best performances. Both the principal and the teacher enter to
the transaction because of the expectation to fulfill self- interests and it is the role of the principal
to maintain the status quo by satisfying the needs of teachers (Bogler, 2001). The problem to this
approach(transactional leadership) was the absence of bond between principals and teachers in
any enduring way; therefore, this results in a routinized, non-creative but stable environment as
compared to the responsive and innovative environment that transformational leadership brings
about (Silins, 1994).
5.2.2. Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction
Teachers’ job satisfaction from transactional leadership style was the result of exchanges
between job aspects like pay, benefits, recognitions and promotions with best performances.
67

Moreover, results from job satisfaction aspects related to transactional leadership dimensions
indicated that active supervision carried out by the principal promotes high teachers’ job
satisfaction. The findings also indicated that active monitoring followed by continuous rewards
and the clarification of the job to be achieved promotes teachers’ job satisfaction. Furthermore,
the aggregate mean value also confirms the overall success of transactional leadership
dimensions in terms of teachers’ job satisfaction.
The practice of transformational leadership results in teachers’ job satisfaction in the study area
with excellent developments of school’s strategic vision with strong inspirational motivation
skill. Benefit, pay and promotions earned from the success of school goals brought about high
teachers’ job satisfaction. Moreover, the results and the interviews made indicated that
transformational leadership dimensions like inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and
individualized consideration promotes teachers’ job satisfaction.
With respect to laissez-fair leadership style, majority of the respondents agreed on the negative
relationship between laissez-faire leadership style and teachers’ job satisfaction factors
particularly on poor communication about school actions and decisions. This means that teachers
need to work with a leader who communicates teachers about school actions and decisions.
Moreover, teachers’ job satisfaction was promoted with a principal who delegates authority and
involves teachers in decision making.
The data on job satisfaction domains above indicated that principals’ leadership style and
motivation influence teachers’ job satisfaction in the study area. Both transactional and
transformational leadership styles were positively influencing teachers’ job satisfaction in the
study area. Laissez-fair leadership style brought about poor teachers’ job satisfaction in
secondary and preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone. This implies that a mix of
transformational and transactional leadership styles is deemed suitable for leading secondary and
preparatory scool in the study area. This may be possible with a proper dose of transformational
and transactional leadership abilities, such as inspirational motivation and intellectual
stimulation, individualized consideration and other ingredients such as active monitoring and
evaluation followed by rewards.
5.3. Recommendations
68

Based on the conclusions, the following recommendations were made:
1. The dominant leadership style practiced in the area under study was transactional leadership
style. Findings of the study revealed that the success of transactional leadership style was seen
from management by exception (active) and contingent reward dimensions. Therefore, principals
need to predominantly design and adopt an active monitoring and evaluation technique followed
by a system of reward mechanism.
2. For secondary and preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone succeeds in today’s fast changing
educational environment, it is recommended that they adopt a mix of transformational leadership
and transactional leadership styles to maximize teachers’ job satisfaction in the area under study.
Therefore, continuous trainings and awareness creating mechanisms were required to acquaint
principals and school owners on the area of transformational and transactional leaderships.
3. What is most important for improving teaching and learning in schools is the leadership styles
and qualities that the school principals display in their schools. Addressing the factors that
negatively affect the job satisfaction and motivation of teachers should be a primary concern of
the school principals. The school principals should have quality and participatory school policies
in place, and make fair decisions, and they should promote open discussions and the sharing of
good experiences between themselves and the teachers.
4. Transactional leadership promotes high teachers job satisfaction when school benefits, pay,
promotions and recognitions were exchanged with teachers’ performance in the area under study.
Therefore, principals, school owners and strategic planners involved in secondary and
preparatory school of Gamo Gofa Zone were recommended to design performance related
motivation schemes.
5. School principals were recommended to encourage teachers to perform special tasks that
would develop their talent and creativity. This would embolden teachers to see the problems
within the school from different angles and make them more confident and eager to perform the
tasks at hand effectively.
6. School principals need to communicate unambiguously with teachers about their work and
responsibilities and make clear what their expectations were in terms of performance and reward,
69

encouragement, recognition, promotion and salary increment which the teachers would receive
for performing satisfactorily.
7. The school principals should be given continuous in-service training regarding leadership. It is
the responsibility of the education leaders to design training programs for school principals on
how to lead others. The education stakeholder leaders can design feedback systems as a means to
oversee the leadership systems prevailing in the schools. The teachers could be given the
opportunity to anonymously reflect on the type of leadership practices being implemented in
their schools. These reflections should then be used to design training for school principals.
Moreover, the private school owners should monitor and regularly evaluate whether the learning
from the training is being implemented in the schools.
70

REFERENCES
Abdo,& HA, (2000), Teacher incentives in the Middle East and North Africa region: the
shortcomings. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Studies, 6(1):107-122.
Avolio B., Waldman D., & Einstein W, (1988), Transformational Leadership in a Management
Game Simulation: Impacting the Bottom Line. Group & Organization Management, 13(1),
59-80.
Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999), reexamining the components of transformational
and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 441-462
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (1991), the full-range of leadership development, Binghamton, NY:
State University of New York, Center for Leadership Studies.
Avolio, B., & Bass, B. (2004), Multifactor leadership questionnaire (third edition manual and
sampler set), Mind Garden, Inc.
Bass, B. M. (2000), the Future of Leadership in Learning Organizations. Journal of Leadership
& Organizational Studies, 7 (3), 18-40.
Bass, B.M. (1981). Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research (rev.ed.)
New York: Free Press.
Bass B., M., Avolio, B. J., & Suny. (1993), Transformational Leadership and Organizational
Culture, Public Administration Quarterly, 113-121
Bass, B. (1998). From transactional to transformational Leadership: Learning to share the
vision. 19- 31.
Bass, B. (1999). Two Decades of Research and Development in Transformational Leadership.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8 (1), 9–32.
71

Bass, B.M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and
applications (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. (2003), Predicting Unit Performance by
Assessing Transformational and Transactional Leadership. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 88(2), 207
Betancourt-Smith, M., Inman, D., & Marlow, L. (1994, November), Professional attrition:
Anexamination of minority and nonminority teachers at-risk. Paper presented at the
annualMeeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Nashville, TN
Best, J. W. & Kanh, J. V. (2003), Research in education. (9th ed.). USA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Bennis W. & Nanus, B. (1985), Leaders: the Strategies for Taking Charge. New York: Harper
Row.
Bolger, R. (2001), the influence of leadership style on teacher job satisfaction. Educational
Administrative Quarterly, 37, 662 – 683.
Boon, O. K., Arumugam, N., Vellapan, Y., & Wei, H. (2006),a quantitative analysis of the link
between organizational culture and job satisfaction: Evidence from some
Malaysiahealthcare organizations. Malaysian Management Review, 41(1), 68-90.
Centre for British Teachers and Voluntary Services Overseas [CfBT & VSO]. (2008). managing
teachers: the centrality of teacher management to quality education. Lessons from
developing countries, London, UK:
CfBT Education Trust, Centre for British Teachers [CfBT]. (2008). Study into teacher
utilization in the regions of Ethiopia (STURE). Addis Ababa: UNDP.
Correnti, R., Miller, RJ. & Rowan, B. (2002) what large-scale survey research tells us about
teacher effects on student achievement: insights from the prospects study of elementary
schools. Teachers College Record, 104(8):1525-67.
Chandan, J. S. (1987), Management theory and practice. New York; Vikas Publishing House
Christodoulidis, T. & Papaioannou, A. (2007), a measure of teachers' achievement goals,
Educational Psychology, 27(3):349-361.
Chen, P.Y., & Spector, P.E. (1991), negatively affectivity as the underlying cause of correlations
between stressors and strains, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.76, pp.398-407
Choi PL. Tang, &SYF. (2009). Teacher commitment trends: cases of Hong Kong teachers from
1997 to 2007. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(5):767-777.
72

Crum, K. S. & Sherman, W. H. (2008), Facilitating High Achievement: High School Principals‟
Reflections on their Successful Leadership Practices. Journal of Educational
Administration, 46(5), 562-580
Daresh, J. C. (2002). What it means to be a Principal: your guide to leadership. California:
Corwin Press Inc. Dinham, S. (1995), Time to focus on teacher satisfaction. Unicorn,
21(3), 64-75.
Dinham, S.,&Scott, C. (1998).A three domain model of teacher and school executive career
Satisfaction,Journal of Educational Administration, 36(4), 362-378.
Drysdale, L., Gurr, D. & Mulford, B. (2006), Models of successful principal leadership. School
Leadership and Management, 26(4):371-359.
Edwards G. & Gill.R (2012), “Transformational leadership across hierarchical levels in UK
manufacturing organizations”, Leadership Organ Dev. J. 33(1):25-50
Ellickson, MC. (2002), Determinants of job satisfaction of municipal government employees.
Personnel Management, 31(3):343-358.
Emery, C., College, E., Barker, K., & Fredonia,S. (2007). The effect of transactional and
transformational leadership styles on the organizational commitment and job
satisfaction of customer contact personnel. Journal of Organizational Culture,
Communications and Conflict, 11(1), 77-90.
Ezeuwa, L. (2005), Issues in Educational Management. Enugu-Hipuks Additional Press
Fleishman, E.A. (1973). Twenty years of consideration and structure. In E.A. Fleishman & J.G.
Hunt (Eds.) Current developments in the study of leadership (pp. 1-37) Carbondale:
Southern Illinois University Press.
Hersey, P. (1984), the situational leader. Escondido, CA: Center for Leadership Studies.
Gibson, J.L., Ivancevich, J.H. and Donnely, J. (2000) Organizations: Behavior, Structure,
andProcesses, McGraw-Hill
Greenleaf RK (1977). Servant leadership: a journey into the nature of legitimate power
andgreatness. New York, NY: Paulist Press
Galup, S. D., Klein, G., & Jiang, J. J. (2008), the impact of job characteristics on is employee
satisfaction: A comparison between permanent and temporary employees. Journal of
Computer Information Systems, Vol. 48, No. 4, pp. 58-68.
Goldman, E. (2002). The significance of leadership style, Educational Leadership, 55(7), 20-22
Goodlad, J. I. (1984).Aplace called school. Prospects for the future, NewYork: McGraw-Hill.
73

Grant, A.M., Christianson, M.K., & Price R.H. (2007), Happiness, Health, or Relationships?
Managerial Practices and Employee Well-Being Tradeoffs, Academy of management
perspectives, 21, 51-63
Hackman, M.Z. & Johnson, C.E. (2009), Leadership: A communication perspective, (5th Ed.).
Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
Hall, B. W., Pearson L. C., & Carroll, D. (1992), Teachers’ long-range teaching plans:
Adiscriminant analysis. Journal of Educational Research, 85(4), 221-225.
Hall, R. H. (2005). Organizations: structures, processes, and outcomes (9th Ed.).Upper Saddle
River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hallinger, P., Heck, R. H. (1998), “Exploring the principals’ contribution to school
effectiveness”, School effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol., No 2, 157-191.
Heenan DA, Bennis, W. (1999), Co-leaders. The Power of Great Partnership, John Wiley and
Sons, New York, pp. 38-54.
Heller, H.W., Clay, R., & Perkins, C. (1993), the relationship between teacher job
satisfactionsand principal leadership style, Journal of School Leadership, 3(1), 74-86.
Heller, H.W., Rex, J. C., &Cline, M. P. (1992), Factors related to teacher job satisfaction and
dissatisfaction, ERS Spectrum, p, 20-24.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Snyderman, & B. (1959), the motivation to work, New York:
JohnWiley, Hipp, & K.A
Herzberg, H. F. (1976). Motivation-Hygiene Profiles, p. 20
Hongying, S. (2008), Literature review of teacher job satisfaction, Chinese Education and
Society, 40(5):11-16.
Hoy NK, Miskel, C.G. (1992). Educational Administration: Theory, Research and Practice. 2nd
Edition, Randam House, New York pp. 22-24
Hoy, W.K & Miskel, C.G. (2001). Educational administration: Theory, research and practice,
New Jesey: McGraw-Hill Inc.
Heller, H.W, Clay, R., Perkins, & C. (1993), the relationship between teacher job satisfaction
and principal leadership style, Journal of School Leadership, 3(1), 74-86.
Jaiyeoba, AO. & Jibril, A. (2008), a study of job satisfaction of secondary school administrators
in Kano state, Nigeria. AnInternational Multi-Disciplinary Journal, 2(2): 94-107. 66
74

Klein Hesselink, J., Kooij-de Bode, H. & Koppenrade, V. (2008), Wie zijn de overage
flexwerkers en hoe gaan zijn Om met hetrisico van ziekte. Hoofddorp: TNO Work and
Employment.
Keashly, L., Trott, V., & MacLean, L.M. (1994), Abusive behavior in the workplace: A
preliminary investigation. Violence and Victims, Vol.9, No.4, pp.341-357
Leithwood K, Jantzi D, Steinbach R (1999), Changing leadership for changing times.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Lewin, K., Lippit, R., & White, R.K. (1939), Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally
created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology, p, 271-301.
Kumar, R. (2005). Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners. (2nd ed.).
England: Sage publication Ltd.
Ladebo, OJ. (2005). Effects of work-related attitudes on the intention to leave the profession: an
examination of school teachers in Nigeria. Educational Management Administration
and Leadership, 33(3):355-369.
Ladd, H. (2009). Teachers’ perceptions of their working conditions: how predictive of
policyrelevant outcomes? National center for analysis of longitudinal data in education
research working paper, Washington, DC: CALDER.
Lee. H. Y., & Ahmad, K. Z. (2009), the moderating effects of organizational culture on the
relationships between leadership behaviour and organizational commitment and
between organizational commitment and job satisfaction and performance. Leadership
& Organization Development Journal, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 53 – 86.
Leithwood K, Jantzi D, Steinbach R (1999), Changing leadership for changing times.
Buckingham: Open University Press
Lussier, R. N. & Achua, C. F. (2001), Leadership: Theory, application and skill development.
USA: South- West College Publishing.
Maslow, AH (1954), Motivation and personality, New York, NY: Harper and Row Publishers,
Inc.
Mazzarella, J. A. Smith, & S. C. (1989), Leadership Styles in School Leadership: Handbook for
Excellence, edited by Stuart C., Smith & Philip. Piele USA: ERIC Clearing House on
Education Management: 28-51.
Mba J. (2004), Strategic Management Centre. Punch Lagos: Punch News paper, pp. 11-24.
75

McKinnon, L.J., Harrison, L.G, Chow, W.C., & Wu, A. (2003), Organizational culture:
association with commitment, job satisfaction, propensity to remain and information
sharing in Taiwan. International Journal of Business Studies, 11(1), 25-44.
McQueen, R. A. & Knussen, C. (2002), Research methods for social science: A practical
introduction. England: Pearson Education Limited.
Mosadeghrad, A.M. (2003b), Principles of Health Care Administration. Dibagran Tehran,
Tehran.
Mosadeghrad, A.M., Yarmohammadian and M. H. (2006), A study of relationship between
managers' leadership style and employees' job satisfaction. Leadership in Health
Services, 19(2), 11 – 28.
MoE (2010), General Education Quality Assurance package Addis Ababa MoE (1994), the
education and training policy of Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: EMPDA.
MoE (2006), decentralized management of education in Ethiopia: A reference manual. Addis
Ababa, Moore, Cheng & Dainty, (2002), Competence and Competences:
Performance Assessment in Organisations. Work study (5.1), 314-319.
Ministry of Education [MOE] 1994, Ethiopian education and training policy, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia: MOE.
Mwamwenda, T. S. (1997), Occupational stress among secretarial personnel at the University of
Transkei, Psychological Reports, p48
Mullins, LJ. (2005), Management and organisational behavior, (7th ed.). London: Prentice Hall.
Murray, F, Feitler, & F. (1989), an investigation of transformational leadership and
organizational effectiveness in small college settings, Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA
Nathan, M. (1996), The Headteacher’s Survival Guide. London: Kogan Page Limited.
Nnadi, P.O. (1997), Job satisfaction and Motivation. Lagos, Nigeria: Macmillan Nigerian
Publishers Ltd.
Northouse, P. G. (2010),Leadership, theory and practice (5th ed.), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Nzuve, S.N.M (1999), Elements of Organizational Behaviour, Nairobi University Press
Ofoegbu, FI. (2004). Teacher motivation: a factor for classroom effectiveness and school
improvement in Nigeria. College Student Journal, 38(1):81-89. 69
Okumbe, J.A.(1998),Educational management theory, a comparative evolution to general
theory. Nairobi: Nairobi University Printery.
76

Ololube, N. P. (2004). Professionalism: An Institutional Approach to Teachers’ Job
Effectiveness in Nigerian Schools. Paper Presented at the Seventh International LL in
EConference, September 23-25, 2004.
Ostroff, C. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance:
AnOrganizational analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 963-974
Owens, R. G. (1987), Organisational Behaviour in Education. (3rd. ed). Englewood.
Owens, R. G. (1981), Organizational Behavior in Education, 2nd edition, Englewood Cliffs:
Oyedeji NB (1998). Management in education principle and practice; Lagos ARAS Publishers,
pp. 54-72
Pinder, CC. (2008). Work motivation in organizational behaviour. (2nd ed.). New York:
Psychology Press.
Quick, &T.L. (1998), Expectancy theory in five simple stepsTraining and Development Journal,
Vol.52, No.9, pp.30-32
Rad, A. M. M., Yarmohammadian, M.& H. (2006), a study of relationship between manager’s
leadership style and employees’ job satisfaction,Leadership in Health Services, 19(2),
xixxviii.
Robbins, S, Mary Coulter, and M, (2000), Management (7th Edition), Prentice-Hall
International, Inc
Sancar, M. (2009), Leadership behaviour of school principals in relation to teacher job
satisfaction in North Cyprus. Social and Behavioural Sciences, 1:2855-2864.
Sergiovanni, T. (1967), Factors which affect satisfaction and dissatisfaction of teachers.
Journal of Educational Administration, 5(1), 66-81.
Seyoum& Ayalew, (1989),Fundamental in Educational Research for students and Beginning
researchers, Addis Ababa: AAU printing press.
Smylie MA, Jack W.D. (1990), Teachers Leadership Tension and Ambiguities in Organizational
Perspective Educ. Admin, pp. 26-59.
Spector, P. E. (1997). Job Satisfaction: Application, assessment, cause, and consequences.
Thousand Oaks, CA Sage Publications, Inc.
Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development of the Job
Satisfaction Survey. American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol.13, No.6, pp.
693-713.
77

Sisungo, Z. W. M. (2002), the Influence of Headteachers’ Management Skills on School Climate.
Unpublished Doctoral Thesis presented to Egerton University.
Seco, GMS. (2002). Teacher satisfaction: some practical implications for teacher professional
development models. Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational
Research, University
Steyn, GM. (2002), a theoretical analysis of educator motivation and morale. Available at:
http://uir.unisa.ac.za/dspace/bitstream/10500/237/1/ar.steyn theoreticalanalysis.pdf.
Shieh, H., Mills, M., & Waltz, C. (2001). Academic leadership style predictors for nursing
faculty job satisfaction in Taiwan, the Journal of nursing education, 40(5), 203
Talbert JE, Milbrey W.M. (1994).Teacher Professionalism in Local School Contexts’ Am. J.
Educ., pp. 123-153.
Tengilimoğlu, Dilaver ve Yiğit, Arzu, (2005), “Hastanelerde Liderlik Davranışlarının Personel İş
Doyumuna Etkisini Belirlemeye Yönelik Bir Alan Çalışması”, Hacettepe
Sağlıkİdaresi Dergisi, 8, (3): 374-400.
Tichy, N. Devanna, & M, (1996), the Transformational Leader, New York: John Wiley and
Sons.
Timothy, A. J., & Ronald, F. P. (2004), Transformational and transactional leadership: A
metaanalytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89,
No. 5, pp. 755– 768
Ukeje, B. (1998), Educational Administration. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishing Co. Ltds.
Ukeje, B.O. (1999), the Education of Teachers for a New Social Order. The Nigeria Teacher
Vroom, VH, (1964), Work and motivation, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Wilderom C.P.M., Berg D.V., & Peter T. (2004), Defining, Measuring, and Comparing
Organizational Cultures. Internal Association for Applied Psychology, 53(4), 570-582.
Wilkinson, A. (1999). Empowerment: Issues and Debates’ QWL News and Abstracts, ACAS,
11: 28-33
William, G.C. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). Canada: Jhon Willey & Sons Inc.
Wexley K. N. & Yukl, G.A. (1984), Organizational Behavior, People and Processes in
Management. Richard D. Iwin, Homewood, Illinois
Weiqi, C. (2007), the structure of secondary school teacher job satisfaction and its relationship
with attrition and work enthusiasm. Chinese Education and Society, 40(5): 17-31.
78

Yukl G. (2002). Leadership in organizations (5 ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Zigarelli, M. (1996), an empirical test of conclusions from effective schools research, Journal of
Educational Research, 90(2), 103-109
APPENDIX A, QUESTIONNAIRES FOR RESPONDENTS
A. QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS
HAWASSA UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
Questionnaire for Teachers
The purpose of this questionnaire is to examine the effect of leadership style and
motivation on teachers’ moral and their job satisfaction in secondary and preparatory
schools of Gamo Gofa Zone.
This questionnaire will be used to collect the data for a partial fulfillment to get MA
degree in educational leadership and Management.
First of all, the researcher would like to thank for your willingness to respond this
questionnaire form for the study of leadership style and motivation on teachers’ morale
and their job satisfaction.
I. Dear respondent you are not required to write your name to give you freedom, to
respond confidently and to keep your secret safely.
II. Please put √ mark in the place provided for close-ended questions, while write your view
for open-ended questions on the provided blank space.
Part I: General information
1. Name of the school________________________
2. Sex: Male Female
3. Age: A, 20-30 B, 31-40 C 40-50
D, 50 and above
4. Qualification: A, certificate B, diploma
79

C, Degree D, Masters E, PhD
5. Work experience: A, 1-10 B, 11-20
C, 20-30 D, 30 and above
Part II: basic questions
1. Are you interested in your profession? Yes No
2. Did you use profession effectively for yourself or professional satisfaction? Yes
No
3. What are the major constraints that affect the moral for teachers’ job satisfaction?
a. ---------------------------------------
b. ---------------------------------------
c. ---------------------------------------
d. Others specify --------------------------------
4. Do you apply any kind of open discussion with your leader? Yes No
4.1. If your answer for Q. 4 is yes, what methods do you use?
a. -----------------------------------------
b. -----------------------------------------
c. -----------------------------------------
5. Do any of your staff members make discussion about teachers’ job satisfaction?
a. Yes b. No
6. What do you feel about teaching learning process look like in your life?
a. ____________________ b. ____________________
7. Is your family satisfied in your job? Yes No
8. If no, why? -----------------------------, -------------------------------, ----------------------
9. Your principal gives any motivation to your job? Yes No
10. Do you face moral constraint in your profession? Yes No
11. How do you see the current salary which paid to your work?
a. Satisfied b. Sufficient c. not satisfied
12. Have you got any promotion in the last 3 years?
a. Yes b. No
13. If the answer to Q 12 No, why? ____________________________________
14. If the answer to Q 18 is not what is the reason?
Part III: Questionnaire for teachers: - The dominant leadership style in your school
1. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements that reflect the
extent your principal exercises what type of leadership style? Indicate your answer by
indicating a √ for the response of your choice on the number in the box on the right. The
numbers will have the following meaning: 1= strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 =
undecided, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree.
80

No Description/item 1 2 3 4 5
1 Transactional leadership
contingent reward
1.1.1 The principal clarify the work that must be achieved and provide me a reward.
1.1.2 When I do activities expected of me, the principal provides me a recognition or
reward.
1.1.3 I know that I get a reward for what I accomplish.
Management by exception (Active)
1.2.1the principal actively monitor what I do and check weather I met standards or not.
1.2.2 The principal get satisfied when I met agreed upon standards.
1.2.3 The principal tells me the activities I need to achieve.
Management by exception (Passive)
1.3.1 The principal intervene in my teaching learning process or work when I made a
mistake.
1.3.2 As long as I do things right, the principal does not question my work.
1.3.3 Problems become worse before the principal take action.
2. Transformational leadership style
Idealized Influence
2.1.1 I feel good and proud while working with the principal
2.1.2 The principal inspire/motivate me so that I can achieve school goals.
2.1.3 I know our school’s strategic vision, objectives, and future direction.
Inspirational motivation
2.2.1 The principal tells me what I should and could do in few words.
2.2.2 The principal provides an appealing image about what I can do in life/teaching.
2.2.3 The principal helps me to find a meaning in the profession of teaching.
Intellectual situation
2.3.1 When changes arise, the principal tells me to see the situation as an opportunity.
2.3.2 The principal gives me an opportunity to change old situations with new ones.
2.3.3 The principal helps me to rethink ideas that I had never questioned before.
Individualized consideration
2.4.1 The principal helps me to develop myself.
2.4.2 The principal understands the individual differences in the staff and help us
81

accordingly.
2.4.3 The principal value my thoughts/opinions.
3 Laissez-fair leadership style
3.1 The principal let me continue working in the same way.
3.2 There are no rules and regulations set for teachers and whatever I do is ok with the
principal.
3.3 The principal does not involve on my work and decision except it is absolutely
essential.
Teachers’ job satisfaction
To what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements that reflect the extent your
satisfaction with your job as a teacher? Indicate your answer by indicating a √ for the response of
your choice on the number in the box on the right. The numbers had the following meaning: 1=
strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = undecided, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree.
No Descriptions/items 1 2 3 4 5
1 Transactional leadership style
1.1 I feel happy if pay correlates with performance
1.2 I feel pleased if benefits matches with commitment
1.3 I feel satisfied if an opportunity for promotion is given in exchange for performance.
1.4 I feel pleased if the principal actively supervise my work.
1.5 I feel satisfied if the principal gives me recognition for my best achievements.
1.6 active monitoring and continuous rewards makes teaching pleasing.
1.7 The principal’s attitude for reward and recognition disturbs my professional relationship with
colleagues.
1.8 Teaching will be pleasing if best performances are rewarded and recognized.
1.9 I feel happy if the principal clarify the work to be achieved.
2. Transformational leadership style
2.1 I feel happy if the school’s strategic vision and future improvements brought better pay.
2.2 I feel pleased if benefits are evident from the success of school goals through inspiration and
motivation.
2.3 I am happy if my promotion relies on innovations and creativity to solve old problems.
2.4 I feel pleased if the principal encourages new approaches/methods of teaching during supervision.
2.5 I feel satisfied if we are recognized as a team.
2.6 Formulations of clear goals, innovation and inspirations by the principal make teaching pleasing.
2.7 The principal’s attitude to pay special attention to each teacher’s need for achievements magnifies
my relationship with colleagues.
2.8 teaching will be pleasing if there is strong team spirit and creative work environment.
2.9 I feel satisfied if the principal motivate and inspire teachers to commit to their job and vision of
the school.
3 Laissez-fair leadership style
3.1 I feel satisfied if pay do not correlate with performance or evaluation.
82

3.2 I feel pleased if benefits do not relate to criteria and evaluation.
3.3 I feel happy if promotions should not rely on the principal’s evaluation and follow up.
3.4 I feel satisfied if the principals does not involve in the process of supervision.
3.5 I feel pleased if I am recognized by my colleagues rather than the principal.
3.6 teaching will be pleasing if there are no rules and regulations set for teachers
3.7 The principal’s attitude to shy away from decisions strengths my relationship with colleagues.
3.8 teaching will be interesting if the principal does not involve in teachers work and decisions
3.9 I feel satisfied if the principal does not communicate about the school’s actions and decisions.
B. INTERVIEW FOR TEACHERS
Part 1: general information
1. School ---------------------------------------------------
2. Qualification --------------------------------------------
3. Age ---------
4. Duration of time as teacher (in years) -------------
5. Number of teachers in the school --------------------
Part 2: basic interviews
1. Is there a system of reward mechanism in your school? If yes,
1.1. What are the usual ways of rewards in your school?
1.2. What is the basis for principals’ reward mechanism?
1.3. How do you rate your level of job satisfaction if there is continuous
reward mechanism in exchange for best performance?
2. Are you satisfied with the salary and benefit you earn from your school?
2.1. Describe your level of job satisfaction if salary and benefit increments are
given to you as a reward for your best accomplishments?
3. How often the principal recognize your best achievements/
3.1. Briefly explain the level of job satisfaction one may earn for considering
recognition as a reward?
4. How often do you receive opportunities for promotion from the school?
4.1. How do you evaluate your level of job satisfaction if opportunities for
promotions are rewarded for outstanding achievements?
5. How do you evaluate the relationship with your colleagues?
5.1. What will be the status of your relation with your colleagues if rewards
and recognitions are given to your friends?
6. How often the principal evaluate and monitor your work?
83

6.1. Explain the relationship between frequent supervision and job satisfaction
7. Briefly explain the principal’s ability to communicate about school’s strategic vision
and goals?
7.1. How do you evaluate the status of trust between you and the principal?
7.2. Discus how principals inspirational skill influences your job satisfaction?
8. Does your school develop with its strategic vision over years?
8.1. Explain your feeling of job satisfaction if school improvement and success
of school goals brought you better pay, benefit and promotions?
9. Describe what team spirit means to you?
9.1. Evaluate your level of job satisfaction for strong team sprit?
10. How do teachers perceive about the profession of teaching?
10.1. Evaluate the principal’s ability to create an appealing image about
teaching?
10.2. Explain your level of job satisfaction if principals strongly inspire teachers
towards the profession of teaching?
11. Does the principal understand individual differences existent in the school?
11.1. Is there a ground created to develop, support and treat teachers equitably?
11.2. Explain weather such conditions promotes teachers job satisfaction or not?
11.3. Discuss the status of your relationship with colleagues in a staff where
teachers are valued and considered?
12. How often principals encourage teachers to try their own ways of doing things?
12.1. How do principals regard teachers with creativity and innovation?
12.2. How do principals regard teachers with new ways of teaching
methodology?
12.3. Briefly explain weather innovative and changing school environment
promotes teachers job satisfaction or not?
12.4. What is the importance of supervision in innovation and creativity in
teaching?
13. How often principals involved in setting rules and regulations?
13.1. As a teacher, how often do you involve in the school actions and
decisions?
13.2. What will be your job satisfaction in cases where the principal does not set
rules, the principal does not involve in decisions and supervision?
14. How do you evaluate your level of job satisfaction?
84

C. QUESTIONNAIRE FOR LEADERS (PRINCIPALS AND V/PRINCIPALS)
HAWASSA UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
Questionnaire for Leaders
The purpose of this questionnaire is to examine the effect of leadership style and
motivation on teachers’ moral and their job satisfaction in secondary and preparatory
schools of Gamo Gofa Zone.
This questionnaire will be used to collect the data for a partial fulfillment to get MA
degree in educational leadership and Management.
First of all, the researcher would like to thank for your willingness to respond this
questionnaire form for the study of leadership style and motivation on teachers’ morale
and their job satisfaction.
2. Dear respondent you are not required to write your name to give you freedom, to respond
confidently and to keep your secret safely.
3. Please put √ mark in the place provided for close-ended questions, while write your view
for open-ended questions on the provided blank space.
Part I: General information
1. Name of the school_________________________
2. Sex: Male Female
3. Age: A, 20-30 B, 31-40 C, 40-50 D, 50 and above
4. Qualification: A, certificate B, diploma
C, Degree D, Masters E PhD
85

5. Work experience: A, 1-10 B, 11-20
C, 20-30 D, 30 and above
Part II: basic questions
1. Do you give moral satisfaction to your teachers? Yes No
2. Do you think that the teachers in your staff are satisfied being in your leading? Yes
No
3. If you answer for question 2 is no why?
a. ----------------------------------------------
b. ----------------------------------------------
c. ----------------------------------------------
4. . How do you encourage your teachers to be morally satisfied in their job? By
a. ------------------------------------------------
b. -------------------------------------------------
c. -------------------------------------------------
5. Do you think that reinforcements /motivation have significant effect on the teachers’
achievements in teaching learning activity? Yes No
Part III: Questionnaire for school principals
A. The dominant leadership style in the school
1. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements that reflect the
extent you exercise your leadership style? Indicate your answer by indicating a √ for the
response of your choice on the number in the box on the right. The numbers will have the
following meaning: 1= strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 =
strongly agree.
86

No Descriptions/item 1 2 3 4 5
1. Transactional leadership style
1.1 contingent reward
1.1.1 I clarify the work that must be achieved to teachers if they want to be rewarded.
1.1.2 I provide recognition/rewards when teachers do the activities expected of them.
1.1.3 I tell teachers what they will get for what they accomplish.
1.2 Management by exception (Active)
1.2.1 I actively monitor the work of teachers to check weather standards are met or
not.
1.2.2 I am satisfied when teachers meet agreed up on standards
1.2.3 I tell teachers the activities they need to achieve.
1.3 Management by exception (Passive)
1.3.1 I intervene in the teaching learning process or in other works of teachers when a
problem arises.
1.3.2 As long as things are working right in the school, I do not try to change
anything.
1.3.3 Problems become worse before I know it and take action.
2 Transformational leadership style
2.1 Idealized influence
2.1.1 I make teachers feel good and proud while working with me.
2.1.2 I inspire and motivate teachers so that they can achieve goals.
2.1.3 I clearly articulate our schools strategic vision, objectives and future directions
to teachers and other stakeholders.
2.2 Inspirational motivation
2.2.1 I express what we could and should do in few words.
2.2.2 I provide an appealing image to teachers about what we can do.
2.2.3 I help teachers find a meaning in the work of teaching.
2.3 Intellectual stimulation
2.3.1I encourage teachers to see changing environments as situations full of
87

opportunities
2.3.2 I give room for teachers so that they change old situations in new ways.
2.3.3 I get teachers to get rethink ideas that they had never questioned before.
2.4 Individualized consideration
2.4.1 I help teachers to develop themselves.
2.4.2 I value the thought of each teacher in the school compound.
2.4.3 I understand individual differences existent in each teacher and create a
supportive environment where each of them can be considered.
3. Laissez-fair leadership style
3.1 I am content to let teachers continue working in the same way.
3.2 I do not set rules and a regulation to teachers whatever they want to do is ok with
me.
3.3 I don’t involve on teachers work and decision except it is absolutely essential.
Teachers’ job satisfaction
To what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements that reflect the extent of
teachers’ job satisfaction in accordance with the leadership style you exercise in the school?
Indicate your answer by indicating a √ for the response of your choice on the number in the box
on the right. The numbers will have the following meaning: 1= strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3
= neutral, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree.
No Descriptions/item 1 2 3 4 5
1. Transactional leadership style
1.1 Teachers feel happy if pay correlates with performance.
1.2 Teachers feel pleased if benefit matches with commitment.
1.3 Teachers feel satisfied if an opportunity for promotion is given in exchange for performance.
1.4 Teachers feel pleased if I actively supervise their work.
1.5 Teachers feel satisfied if recognition is given for best achievement.
1.6 Active monitoring and continues rewards makes teaching pleasing.
1.7 My attitude for reward and recognition disturbs teachers’ professional relationship with
colleagues.
1.8 Teaching will be pleasing if best performances are rewarded and recognized.
1.9 Teachers feel happy if I clarify the work to be achieved.
2. Transformational leadership style
2.1 Teachers feel happy if the school’s strategic vision and future improvements brought better
pay.
2.2 teachers feel pleased if benefits are evident from the success of school goals through inspiration
and motivation.
2.3 Teachers feel happy if promotion relies on innovations and creatively to solve old problems.
2.4 Teachers feel pleased if I encourage new approaches/methods of teaching during supervision.
2.5 Teachers feel satisfied if they are recognized as a team.
2.6 Formulations of clear goals, innovation and inspirations by the principal make teaching
88

pleasing.
2.7 My attitude to pay special attention to each teacher’s need for achievement magnifies teachers’
relationship with colleagues.
2.8 Teaching will be pleasing if there is strong team spirit and creative work environment.
2.9 Teachers feel satisfied if I motivate and inspire teachers to commit to their job and vision of the
school.
3 Laissez-fair leadership style
3.1 Teachers feel satisfied if pay does not correlate with performance or evaluation.
3.2 Teachers feel pleased if benefits do not relate to criteria and evaluation.
3.3 Teachers feel happy if promotions should not rely on my evaluation and follow up.
3.4 Teachers feel satisfied if I do not involve in the process of supervision.
3.5 Teachers feel pleased if they are recognized by their colleagues rather than the principal.
3.6 Teaching will be pleasing if there are no rules and regulations set for teachers.
3.7 My attitude not to involve in decisions strengths teachers’ relationship with colleagues.
3.8 Teachers will be interested if I do not involve in teachers work and decisions.
3.9 Teachers feel satisfied if I do not communicate about the school’s actions and decisions.
D. INTERVIEW FOR PRINCIPALS AND SUPERVISORS
HAWASSA UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
Part 1: general information
1. School ---------------------------------------------------
2. Qualification --------------------------------------------
3. Age ---------
4. Duration of time as principal (in years) -------------
5. Number of teachers in the school ---------- M ---------- F ----------
Part 2: basic interviews
1. What do you understand about rewards and praises given to teachers in your school?
Do you give rewards for teachers? If yes,
A. what is the basis for your reward mechanism? ---
B. What are your usual ways of rewarding teachers? ---
2. Is there a system of monitoring and evaluation in your school? If yes,
A. how often do you evaluate teachers work? ----
B. what is the basis for your evaluation? ----
C. how do you evaluate the system of feedbacks? ----
3. How do you evaluate the status of trust and respect between you and teachers? -----
89

4. How do you explain the diversity existing among teachers? -----
a. How do you understand teachers’ differences in terms of skills, needs
and desires? ------------------------
b. Explain the basic importance of understanding teachers’ need and
desires in the school? -------------
5. How teachers in the school perceive about teaching? ----------------------
a. What are your ways of motivating teachers towards the profession of
teaching? -------------------------------
b. How often do you perform it? --------------------------
6. How do you tackle problems teachers demotivation? ---------------------------------
a. Do you try to give solution before the problem arise or after the
problem arise? -----------------
7. How do you perceive about communication? -------------------------
a. How often do you communicate about the schools’ strategic vision
and goals? -----------------------------------------
8. What is the importance of involving teachers in school decisions? -----------------
a. How do you involve teachers in decision making? -----------------
b. How often do you involve in changing the working procedure,
strategy and system of the school? --------------------------------------
9. How do you know whether teachers in your staff are satisfied in their job or not?
10. What is the contribution of leaders for teachers moral and job satisfaction?
11. What are the driving forces for the teachers’ low satisfaction in their job?
12. What do you think the major changes that are the result of teachers’ activity from
your school?
13. What changes have you observed with respect to teaching learning activity to
moral satisfaction?
14. What changes have occurred with respect to school achievement?
15. How do you evaluate the impact of teachers’ low moral satisfaction on economic
development of teaching learning activity of the area?
90

APENDIX B
የተሳታፊዎችመጠይቅበአማርኛቋንቋ
ሀዋሳዩኒቨርሲቲ
የድህረ-ምረቃጥናታዊትምህርት
የትምህርትዕቅድናሥራአመራርትምህርትክፍል
ሀ/ የመምህራንመጠይቅ
የዚህመጠይቅዋናዓላማበጋሞጎፋዞንበ 2 ኛ/ደ/መ/ት/
ቤቶችየአመራርሥልቶችናየሥራማበረታቻበመምህራንሞራልናበሥራእርካታቸውላይየሚያስከትለውንውጤትመር
ምሮለማወቅየሚረዳናየመጠይቁመረጃዎችየሚሰበሰቡትበትምህርትዕቅድናሥራአመራር
2 ኛድግሪለማግኘትእንደማሙያይጠቅማል፡፡
ከሁሉምበማስቀደም፣ይህንንየት/
ቤትአመራርስልቶችናየሥራማበረታቻበመምህራንሞራልናበሥራእርካታቸውላይየተዘጋጀውንጥናታዊመጠይቅፎር
ምበታማኝነትናበፍቃደኝነትስለምትሞሉማመስገንእወዳለሁ፡፡
፩. ውድተሳታፊዎችየራሳችሁንስምሳትጽፉበነጻነትበሚስጢርበሚነበብመልኩፃፉ፡፡
፪. ለምርጫጥያቄዎችከፊትለፊትባለውሳጥን (√)
ምልክትበማድረግናገለፃለሚያስፈልጋቸውደግሞትክክልየሚሆነውንየየራሳችውንሀሳብበመግለፅይሞሉ፡፡
ክፍል 1፡ስለመረጃውሰጭውአጠቃላይመረጃ
1. የት/ቤቱሥም …………………………………………………
2. ፆታሀ/ ወንድ ለ/ሴት
91

3. ዕድሜሀ/ 20-30 ለ/ 31-40 ሐ/41-50 መ/51 ናከዛበላይ
4. የት/ትደረጃ ሀ/ምስክርወረቀት ለ/ድፕሎማ ሐ/ድግሪ መ/ማስትሬት
ሠ/ዶክተሬት
5. የስራልምድ ሀ/ 1-10 ለ/11-20 ሐ/21-30 መ/31 ናበላይ
ክፍል 2፡መሠረታዊመጠይቆች
1. የመምህራንንሞራልናየሥራእርካታንምንእንደምጎዳያውቃሉ?
2. ሙያዎትንለራሶዎናለስራእርካታይጠቀማሉ? ሀ/አዎ ለ/አይደለም
3. ሙያዎንይወዳሉ? ሀ/አዎ ለ/አይደለም
4. ከር/መ/ሩጋርምንምዓይነትግልፅውይይትያደርጋሉ? ሀ/አዎ ለ/አይደለም
4.1. መልሶዎአዎከሆነምንአይነትመንገድነውየምትጠቀሙት?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
5. የስታፍአባላትበመምህራንሥራእርካታላይይወያያሉወይ? ሀ/አዎ ለ/አይደለም
6. በሕይዎትህበመማርናማስተማርሕደቶችምንእንደምሰማህግለጽ
---------------------------------------------------
7. ቤተሰቦችህበስራህ/በሙያህይደሰታሉ? ሀ/አዎ ለ/አይደለም
7.1. አይደለምከሆነለምን? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. ር/መ/ሩምንምአይነትማበረታቻይሰጣል? ሀ/አዎ ለ/አይደለም
9. በሙያዎየሞራልጉዳትደርሶያውቃል? ሀ/አዎ ለ/አይደለም
10. ባሁኑሰዓትየሚከፈልህንደሞዝእንዴትታያለህ? ሀ/ያስደስታል ለ/በቂነው ሐ/አያስደስትም
11. ባለፉት 3 ዓመታትምንምዓይነትየደረጃዕድገትአግኝተዋል? ሀ/አዎ ለ/አይደለም
12. ለጥያቄቁጥር 11 መልሶዎአይደለምከሆነለምን?
-----------------------------------------------------------
ክፍል 3፡- ሀ/ የመ/ራንመጠይቅበት/ቤታችሁባለውበአመራርስልት
ቀጥሎ የቀረቡ አረፍተነገሮች የር/መ/ር ተግባርን የሚያንጸባሪቁ ስሆን በዬትኛው አመራር ስልት
እንደምትስማሙና እንደማትስማሙ ለምርጫችሁ መልስ (√) ምልክት በማድረግ ከፊትለፈት ባለው ሰንጠሬዥ
መልሱ፡፡ ለቁጥሮቹ የሚቀጥለው ትርጉም ተሰጥተዋቸዋል፡- 1.በፍጹምአልስማማም 2.አልስማማም
3.አልወስንም 4.እስማማለሁ 5.በጣምእስማማለሁ
ተ.ቁ የአመራርስልቶችናገለጻዎች 1 2 3 4 5
1. Transactional Leadership Style
1.1 Contingent reward(የአጋጣሚማበረታቻዎችናሽልማቶች)
1.1.1 ር/መ/ሩመሠራትያለባቸውንሥራዎችግልጽበማድረግማበረታቻዎችንያዘጋጃል
1.1.2 ከእኔየሚጠበቅብኝንከሠራውር/መ/ሩማጠናከሪያናማበረታቻያዘጋጃል
1.1.3 የሚጠበቅብኝንከሠራውእንደምሸለምአውቃለው
1.2 Management by exception(Active)
1.2.1 በመመሪያናደምብመሠረትእንደምሰራናእንደማልሰራር/መ/ሩበንቃትይቆጣጠረኛል
1.2.2 በመመሪያዎችተስማምቼሲሠራረ/መ/ሩይደሰታል
92

1.2.3 መሠራትያለባቸውንሥራዎችንለመሥራትር/መ/ሩይነግረኛል
1.3 Management by exception(Passive)
1.3.1 ር/መ/ሩበመማርማስተማርሥራሂደትላይእናጥፋትሲሠራጣልቃይገባል
1.3.2 ሥራዎችንበትክክልከሠራውር/መ/ሩሥራዬንአይጠይቅም
1.3.3 ር/መ/ሩካልተንቀሳቀሰችግሮችይባባሳሉ
2. Transformational Leadership Style
2.1 Idealized Influence
2.1.1 ከር/መ/ሩጋርሲሰራጥሩስሜትናኩራትይሰማኛል
2.1.2 ር/መ/ሩስለሚያበረታታኝየት/ቤቱንዓላማማሳካትእችላለው
2.1.3 የት/ቤቱንስትራቴጂክራዕይ፣ዓላማናየወደፊትአቅጣጫዎችንአውቃለው
2.2 Inspirational Motivation
2.2.1 ምንመሥራትእንዳለብኝናምንመሥራትእንደምችልር/መ/ሩበተረጋጋመንፈስይነግረኛል
2.2.2 በሕይዎቴበሚሰራውሥራር/መ/ሩይረዳኛል
2.2.3 የመ/ርነትሙያዬንፈልገናወድጄእንድሠራር/መ/ሩይረዳኛል
2.3 Intelectual Situation
2.3.1 ለውጦችበሚኖሩበትጊዜሁኔታዎችንእንደሁኔታቸውእንዲረዳር/መ/ሩይነግረኛል
2.3.2 የቆውንሁኔታበአዲሱእንድቀይር/እንድለውጥር/መ/ሩእድልይሰጠናል
2.3.3 ቀደምሲልያልጤኩትንበድጋሚአስቤእንድጠይቅር/መ/ሩያግዘኛል
2.4 Individualized Consideration
2.4.1 ራሴንእድገነባር/መ/ሩይረዳኛል
2.4.2.ር/መ/ሩበስታፋችንያሉመ/
ራንንእያንዳንዳቸውንልዩነትበመረዳትለእያንዳንዱአስፈላጊውንእርዳታያደርጋቸዋል
2.4.3 ለሀሳቤናለንግግሬር/መ/ሩዋጋይሰጣል
3. Laissez-fair Leadership Style
3.1 ር/መ/ሩቀደምሲልእደምሰራውአይነትሥራዬንእንዲቀጥልያደርገኛል
3.2 ር/መ/ሩምንምአይነትሥራቢሠራጥሩሆኖለት/ቤቱግንምንምአይነትሕግናደምብየለም
3.3 ር/መ/ሩበጣምአስፈላጊናወሳኝካልሆነበስተቀርበሥራዬጣልቃአይገባም
ለ/ የመ/ራንመጠይቅየመ/ራንንሥራእረካታበተመለከተ/Teachers Job Satisfaction/
ቀጥሎ የቀረቡ አረፍተነገሮች የር/መ/ር ተግባርን የሚያንጸባሪቁ ስሆን በዬትኛው አመራር ስልት
እንደምትስማሙና እንደማትስማሙ ለምርጫችሁ መልስ (√) ምልክት በማድረግ ከፊትለፈት ባለው ሰንጠሬዥ
መልሱ፡፡ ለቁጥሮቹ የሚቀጥለው ትርጉም ተሰጥተዋቸዋል፡- 1.በፍጹምአልስማማም 2.አልስማማም
3.አልወስንም 4.እስማማለሁ 5.በጣምእስማማለሁ
ተ.ቁ የአመራርስልቶችናገለጻዎች 1 2 3 4 5
1. Transactional Leadership Style
1.1 ከሥራዬጋርየተመጣጠነክፊያሲፈጸምደስይለኛል
1.2 ጥቅማጥቅሞችካለውኃላፊነትጋርየተጣጣመስሆንደስይለኛል
1.3 የእድገትዕድልለሥራዬውጤትስሰጥደስይለኛል
1.4 ር/መ/ሩሥራዬንበንቃትስከታተልደስይለኛል
1.5 ላስመዘገብኩትውጤትር/መ/ሩስያበረታታኝይረካኛል
93

1.6 ተከታታይማበረታቻናሽልማትሲሰጥለማስተማርደስይለኛል
1.7 ር/መ/ራንለማበረታቻናለሽልማትያላቸውግምትበሙያዬናከስራባልደሬቦቼጋርያለውንግኑኝነትይረብሻል
1.8 መልካምአፈፃፀምያላቸውንሥራዎችንማበረታቻናሽልማትከተደረገላቸውማስተማርያስደስታል
1.9 ር/መ/ሩመሰራትያለባቸውንሥራዎችግልጽስያደርግደስይላል
2. Transformational Leadership Style
2.1 የት/ቤቱስትራቴጂክራዕይናየወደፊትመሻሻልጥሩዋጋስሰጠውደስይላል
2.2 ጥቅማጥቅሞችናማነቃቀያዎችከት/ቤቱዓላማናስኬቶችላይባለውመረጃስሆንደስይላል
2.3 ደረጃእድገቴበአዳዲስናበፈጠራስራየቀድሞውኝችግርየፈታስሆንደስይላል
2.4 አዳዲስየማስተማሪያአቀረባቦችንናዘደዎችንር/መ/ሩየሚያበረታታከሆነደስይላል
2.5 በቡድንሆነንስንሰራደስይላል
2.6 ግልፅበሆኑመመሪያዎችማነቃቀያዎችናማበረታቻዎችንረ/መ/ሩሰርቶየሚመራከሆነለማስተማርደስይላል
2.7
በር/መ/ሩበኩልለእያንዳንዱመ/ርያለውአመለካከትለተፈለገውውጤትናከስራባልደሬቦችጋርያለውንግኑኝነትያሰ
ፋል
2.8 ጠንካራየቡድንመንፈስናየስራፈጠራአከባቢስሆንማስተማርያስደስታል
2.9. ር/መ/ሩ መ/ራንን በማነቃቃትና በማበረታታት መ/ራንን በስራቸው እንዲበረቱና ለት/ቤቱ ራዕም
ጠንክረው እንድሰሩ ስያደርግ ያስደስታል
3. Laissez-fair Leadership Style
3.1 የሚከፈለውክፊያከስራውጋርያልተመጣጠነናየማይመዝንስሆንያስደስታል
3.2 ጥቅማጥቅሞችበተቀመጠውመመሪያናምዘናደምብጋርያልተገናኙስሆንያስደስታል
3.3 ደረጃእድገትበር/መ.ሩክትትልናምዘናመስፈርትመሰረትያላደረገስሆናያስደስታል
3.4 በክፍልምልከታላይር/መ/ራንካለተሳተፉያስደስታል
3.5 ከር/መ/ሩይልቅየሥራባልደሬቦቼሲያበረታቱኝያስደስታል
3.6 ማስተማርየሚያስደስተውመ/ራንንየሚቆጣጠርሕግናደምብሳይኖርስቀርነው
3.7 የር/መ/ራንአመለካከትከውሳነዎችለየትያለከሆነከሥራባልደሬቦቼጋርያለውንግኑኝነትያጠነክራል
3.8 ር/መ/ራንበመ/ራንሥራዎችናውሳነዎችጣልቃየማይገቡከሆነማስተማርያስደስታል
3.9 ር/መ/ሩበት/ቤቱእንቅስቃሰናውሳነዎችየማይነጋገርስሆንያስደስታል
ሀዋሳዩኒቨርሲቲ
የድህረ-ምረቃጥናታዊትምህርት
የትምህርትዕቅድናሥራአመራርትምህርትክፍል
ለ/የመምህራንቃለ-መጠይቅ
የዚህቃለ-መጠይቅ ዋና ዓላማ በጋሞጎፋ ዞን በ 2 ኛ/ደ/መ/ት/ቤቶች የአመራር ሥልቶችና የሥራ ማበረታቻ በመምህራን
ሞራልና በሥራ እርካታቸው ላይ የሚያስከትለውን ውጤት መርምሮ ለማወቅ የሚረዳና የመጠይቁ መረጃዎች
የሚሰበሰቡት በትምህርት ዕቅድና ሥራ አመራር 2 ኛ ድግሪ ለማግኘት እንደ ማሙያ ይጠቅማል፡፡
ክፍል 1 ፡አጠቃላይመረጃ
94

1. የት/ቤቱስም -------------------------------------------------
2. የት/ትደረጃ --------------------------------------------------
3. ዕድሜ ----------------
4. በመምህርነትየቆዩበትጊዜ (በዓመት) ----------------
ክፍል 2 ፡መሰረታዊናዋናመጠይቆች
1. በት/ቤታችሁየሽልማትዘዴአለ?አዎከሆነ፡-
ሀ/ በምንአይነትመንገድነውየምትሸለሙት?
ለ/ የሽልማቱመሠረትምንድነው?
ሐ/ ስለመልካምስራአፈፃፀምቀጣይነትያለውየሽልማትሥነ-ሥርዓትካለውየስራእርካታንእንዴትታያለህ?
2. ከት/ቤቱከምታገኘውጥቅማጥቅምናከሚታገኘውደሞዝአንፃርትደሰታለህ?
ሀ/ ለመልካምአፈፃፀምስለምሰጠውጥቅማጥቅምናደሞዝአንፃርየሥራእርካታምንእንደምመስልግለጽ --------
3. መልካምሥራህንር/መ/ሩእንዴትያያል?
ሀ/ ማበረታቻሀሳብንእንደሽልማትአስበህከወሰድክየስራእርካታደረጃህንበደምብግለጽ ……………
4. ከት/ቤትህየደረጃዕድገትዕድልንእንዴትታገኛለህ?
ሀ/ ለደረጃእድገትእንደሞደልሠራተኛተሸላሚየሚትሆንበትእድልብታገኝምንይሰማሀል?
5. ከሥራባልደሬቦችጋርያለውንእንዴትትመዝናለህ?
ሀ/ ለጏደኞችህሽልማትናማበረታቻብሰጣቸውከሥራባልደሬቦችህጋርያለውየግኑኝነትአቋምእነዴትነው?
6. ር/መ/ሩሥራህንየሚቆጣጠረውናየሚመዝነውእንዴትነው?
ሀ/ በሥራእርካታናበተደጋጋሚምልከታያለውንግኑኝነትግለጽ
7. ር/መ/ራንየት/ቤቱንስትራቴጂክራዕይናዓላማንለማራመድያላቸውአመለካከትእንዴትእንደሆነበደምብግለጽ
ሀ/ በር/መ/ሩናበርሶመካከልያለውንጣማኝነትአንዴትታያለህ?
ለ/ ር/መ/ራንበሥራተነሳሽነትናፈጠራላይያላቸውክህሎትበእናንተበስራእርካታላይምንአይነትተፅዕኖያመጣል?
8. በየዓመቱት/ቤቱከስትራቴጂክራዕይዎችናዓላማዎችጋርይለወጣል?
ሀ/ት/ቤቱምንዓይነትመሻሻልይታይበታል?
9. በቡድንመንፈስያለውየስራሁኔታምንይመስላል?
5. የመምህርነትንሙያእንዴትተቀብለዋል?
6. ር/መ/ራንመ/ራንንወደመምህርነትሙያቸውየሚያገፋፉከሆነምንይሰማሀል?
7. ረ/መ/ሩበት/ቤትያለውንየእያንዳንዱንልዩነትበሚገባይረዳል?
8. ር/መ/ራንመመሪያዎችናደንቦችንስሰሩመ/ራንንያሳትፋሉ?
9. የራስህንየሥራእርካታንእንዴት
ሀዋሳዩኒቨርሲቲ
የድህረ-ምረቃጥናታዊትምህርት
የትምህርትዕቅድናሥራአመራርትምህርትክፍል
ሐ/ የር/መ/ራንናሱፐርቫይዘሮችመጠይቅ
የዚህ መጠይቅ ዋና ዓላማ በጋሞጎፋ ዞን በ 2 ኛ/ደ/መ/ት/ቤቶች የአመራር ሥልቶችና የሥራማ በረታቻ
በመምህራን ሞራልና በሥራ እርካታቸው ላይ የሚያስከትለውን ውጤት መርምሮ ለማወቅ የሚረዳና የመጠይቁ
መረጃዎች የሚሰበሰቡት በትምህርት ዕቅድና ሥራ አመራር 2 ኛ ድግሪ ለማግኘት እንደ ማሙያ ይጠቅማል፡፡
95

ከሁሉምበማስቀደም፣ይህንንየት/
ቤትአመራርስልቶችናየሥራማበረታቻበመምህራንሞራልናበሥራእርካታቸውላይየተዘጋጀውንጥናታዊመጠይቅፎር
ምበታማኝነትናበፍቃደኝነትስለምትሞሉማመስገንእወዳለሁ፡፡
፩. ውድተሳታፊዎችየራሳችሁንስምሳትጽፉበነጻነትበሚስጢርበሚነበብመልኩፃፉ፡፡
፪. ለምርጫ ጥያቄዎች ከፊትለፊት ባለው ሳጥን (√) ምልክት በማድረግና ገለፃ ለሚያስፈልጋቸው
ደግሞ ትክክል የሚሆነውን የየራሳችውን ሀሳብ በመግለፅ ይሞሉ፡፡
ክፍል 1፡ስለመረጃውሰጭውአጠቃላይመረጃ
a. የት/ቤቱሥም …………………………………………………
b. ፆታ ሀ/ ወንድ ለ/ሴት
c. ዕድሜ ሀ/ 20-30 ለ/ 31-40 ሐ/41-50 መ/51 ናከዛበላይ
d. የት/ትደረጃ ሀ/ምስክርወረቀት ለ/ድፕሎማ ሐ/ድግሪ መ/ማስትሬት
ሠ/ዶክተሬት
e. የሥራኃላፊነት ሀ/ ር/መ/ር ለ/ ሱፐርቫይዘር
f. የስራልምድ ሀ/ 1-10 ለ/11-20 ሐ/21-30 መ/31 ናበላይ
ክፍል 2፡መሠረታዊመጠይቆች
1. ለመ/ራንሞራልእርካታሰተውያውቃሉ? ሀ/ አዎ ለ/ አይደለም
2. ለመ/ራንየሥራሞራላቸውንበምንታበረታታለህ?
3. መ/ራንንማበረታታትናመሸለምበመማርናማስተማርሥራእንቅስቃሰላይጥሩውጠየትያስከትላልብለውያስባሉ?
4. ለጥያቀቁጥርመልሶዎአዎከሆነእንዴት?………………………….. አይደለምከሆነለምን?
………………….
5. ት/ቤቱንበመምራትህመ/ራንበርሶበኩልይደሰታሉ? ሀ/ አዎ ለ/ አይደለም
6. ለጥያቄቁጥር 5 መልሶዎአይደለምከሆነለምን? …………………
ክፍል 3፡ሀ/ የር/መ/ራንናሱፐርቫይዘሮችመጠይቅበት/ቤቱእየተመራባለውበአመራርስልትላይ
ቀጥሎየቀረቡአረፍተነገሮችየር/መ/
ርተግባርንየሚያንጸባሪቁስሆንበዬትኛውአመራርስልትእንደምትስማሙናእንደማትስማሙለምርጫችሁመልስ (√)
ምልክትበማድረግከፊትለፈትባለውሰንጠሬዥመልሱ፡፡ለቁጥሮቹየሚቀጥለውትርጉምተሰጥተዋቸዋል፡-
1.በፍጹምአልስማማም 2.አልስማማም 3.አልወስንም 4.እስማማለሁ 5.በጣምእስማማለሁ
ተ. የአመራርስልቶችናገለጻዎች 1 2 3 4 5
96

ቁ
1. Transactional Leadership Style
1.1 Contingent Reward
1.1.1. ለመሸለምከፈለጉመሥራትያለባቸውንሥራዎችለመ/ራንግልፅአደርጋለው
1.1.2. ከመ/ራንየሚጠበቀውንከሠሩሽልማትናማበረታቻአዘጋጅላቸዋለው
1.1.3. ምንሠርተውምንማግኘትእንዳለባቸውለመ/ራንበግልፅእነግራቸዋለው
1.2 Management by exception(Active)
1.2.1. የመ/ራንሥራበመመሪያናበደምብመሠረትመሆኑናአለመሆኑንበንቃትእቆጣጠራለው
1.2.2. መ/ራንመመሪያውንየሚቀበሉናበመመሪያውየሚስማሙከሆነያስደስታል
1.2.3. መደረግናመሠራትያለበትንሥራለመ/ራንአገልፃለው
1.3 Management by exception(Passive)
1.3.1. ችግሮችስነሱበመማርናማስተማርሕደቶችናበሌሎችመ/ራንሥራዎችላይጣልቃእገባለው
1.3.2. ነገሮችበትክክልስከናወኑምንምአይነትነገርለመቀየርአልሞክርም
1.3.3. ችግሮችከመጀመሪያውሲባባሱአውቄአንድውሳኔአወስዳለው
2. Transformational Leadership Style
2.1 Idealized Influence
2.1.1. መ/ራንንማስደሰትናከእነሱጋርሲሰራእኮራለው
2.1.2. አላማቸውንእዲያሳኩመ/ራንንአበረታታቸዋለው
2.1.3.ለመ/ራንና ለሌሎች ባለድረሻ አካላት የት/ቤቱን ስትራቴጂክ ራዕይ፣ ዓላማና የወደፊት
አቅጣጫውን በግልፅ አወጣለው
2.2 Inspirational Motivation
2.2.1. ምንመሥራትናማድረግእንዳለባቸውባጭርቃልእገልፃለው
2.2.2. መ/ራንምንመሥራትእንዳለባቸውጥሩእይታእፈጥራለው
2.2.3. በመ/ርነትሥራትርጉምእንዲያገኙመ/ራንንእረዳቸዋለው
2.3 Intellectual Stimulatio
2.3.1. ሁሉምመ/ራንሙሉእድልበማግኘትየአከባቢለውጥእንዲያደርጉእደግፋቸዋለው
2.3.2. የለፈውንሁኔታበአዲሱእንዲቀይሩለመ/ራንቦታእሰጣቸዋለው
2.3.3. መረዳትናማወቅያለባቸውንአስበውእንድጠይቁእረዳቸዋለው
2.4 Individualized Considerations
2.4.1. መ/ራንራሳቸውንእንድገነቡአግዛቸዋለው
2.4.2. በት/ቤትግቢየእያንዳንዱንመ/ርአስተሳሰብእገመግማለው
2.4.3. የእያንዳንዱንመ/ርልዩነትበመረዳትእያንዳንዱመ/ርእንድረዳምቹአከባቢእፈጥራለው
3. Laissez-fair Leadership Style
3.1 እየሰሩባሉትመንገድእንዲሰሩአደርጋቸዋለው
3.2 ከእኔጋርየሚሰሩትትክክለኛስሆንምንምአይነትመመሪያናደምብለመ/ራንአላመጣም
3.3 በጣምአስፈላጊካልሆነበስተቀርበመ/ራንሥራናውሳኔጣልቃአልገባም
ለ/ የር/መ/ራንናሱፐርቫይዘሮችመጠይቅበመ/ራንሥራእርካታ
ቀጥሎየቀረቡአረፍተነገሮችየር/መ/
ርተግባርንየሚያንጸባሪቁስሆንበዬትኛውአመራርስልትእንደምትስማሙናእንደማትስማሙለምርጫችሁመልስ (√)
97

ምልክትበማድረግከፊትለፈትባለውሰንጠሬዥመልሱ፡፡ ለቁጥሮቹየሚቀጥለውትርጉምተሰጥተዋቸዋል፡-
1.በፍጹምአልስማማም 2.አልስማማም 3.አልወስንም 4.እስማማለሁ 5.በጣምእስማማለሁ
ተ.
ቁ
የአመራርስልቶችናገለጻዎች 1 2 3 4 5
1. Transactional Leadership Style
1.1 ከሥራዬጋርየተመጣጠነክፊያሲፈጸምደስይለኛል
1.2 ጥቅማጥቅሞችካለውኃላፊነትጋርየተጣጣመስሆንደስይለኛል
1.3 የእድገትዕድልለሥራዬውጤትስሰጥደስይለኛል
1.4 ር/መ/ሩሥራዬንበንቃትስከታተልደስይለኛል
1.5 ላስመዘገብኩትውጤትር/መ/ሩስያበረታታኝይረካኛል
1.6 ተከታታይማበረታቻናሽልማትሲሰጥለማስተማርደስይለኛል
1.7
ር/መ/ራንለማበረታቻናለሽልማትያላቸውግምትበሙያዬናከስራባልደሬቦቼጋርያለውንግኑኝነትይረብ
ሻል
1.8 መልካምአፈፃፀምያላቸውንሥራዎችንማበረታቻናሽልማትከተደረገላቸውማስተማርያስደስታል
1.9 ር/መ/ሩመሰራትያለባቸውንሥራዎችግልጽስያደርግደስይላል
2. Transformational Leadership Style
2.1 የት/ቤቱስትራቴጂክራዕይናየወደፊትመሻሻልጥሩዋጋስሰጠውደስይላል
2.2 ጥቅማጥቅሞችናማነቃቀያዎችከት/ቤቱዓላማናስኬቶችላይባለውመረጃስሆንደስይላል
2.3 ደረጃእድገቴበአዳዲስናበፈጠራስራየቀድሞውኝችግርየፈታስሆንደስይላል
2.4 አዳዲስየማስተማሪያአቀረባቦችንናዘደዎችንር/መ/ሩየሚያበረታታከሆነደስይላል
2.5 በቡድንሆነንስንሰራደስይላል
2.6
ግልፅበሆኑመመሪያዎችማነቃቀያዎችናማበረታቻዎችንረ/መ/ሩሰርቶየሚመራከሆነለማስተማርደስ
ይላል
2.7 በር/መ/ሩ በኩል ለእያንዳንዱ መ/ር ያለው አመለካከት ለተፈለገው ውጤትና ከስራ
ባልደሬቦች ጋር ያለውን ግኑኝነት ያሰፋል
2.8 ጠንካራየቡድንመንፈስናየስራፈጠራአከባቢስሆንማስተማርያስደስታል
2.9 ር/መ/ሩ መ/ራንን በማነቃቃትና በማበረታታት መ/ራንን በስራቸው እንዲበረቱና ለት/ቤቱ
ራዕም ጠንክረው እንድሰሩ ስያደርግ ያስደስታል
3. Laissez-fair Leadership Style
3.1 የሚከፈለውክፊያከስራውጋርያልተመጣጠነናየማይመዝንስሆንያስደስታል
3.2 ጥቅማጥቅሞችበተቀመጠውመመሪያናምዘናደምብጋርያልተገናኙስሆንያስደስታል
3.3 ደረጃእድገትበር/መ.ሩክትትልናምዘናመስፈርትመሰረትያላደረገስሆናያስደስታል
3.4 በክፍልምልከታላይር/መ/ራንካለተሳተፉያስደስታል
3.5 ከር/መ/ሩይልቅየሥራባልደሬቦቼሲያበረታቱኝያስደስታል
3.6 ማስተማርየሚያስደስተውመ/ራንንየሚቆጣጠርሕግናደምብሳይኖርስቀርነው
3.7
የር/መ/ራንአመለካከትከውሳነዎችለየትያለከሆነከሥራባልደሬቦቼጋርያለውንግኑኝነትያጠነክራል
98

3.8 ር/መ/ራንበመ/ራንሥራዎችናውሳነዎችጣልቃየማይገቡከሆነማስተማርያስደስታል
3.9 ር/መ/ሩበት/ቤቱእንቅስቃሰናውሳነዎችየማይነጋገርስሆንያስደስታል
ሀዋሳዩኒቨርሲቲ
የድህረ-ምረቃጥናታዊትምህርት
የትምህርትዕቅድናሥራአመራርትምህርትክፍል
መ/ የርዕሳነመምህራንናሱፐርቫይዘሮችቃለ-መጠይቅ
የዚህቃለ-መጠይቅ ዋና ዓላማ በጋሞጎፋ ዞን በ 2 ኛ/ደ/መ/ት/ቤቶች የአመራር ሥልቶችና የሥራ ማበረታቻ
በመምህራን ሞራልና በሥራ እርካታቸው ላይ የሚያስከትለውን ውጤት መርምሮ ለማወቅ የሚረዳና የመጠይቁ
መረጃዎች የሚሰበሰቡት በትምህርት ዕቅድና ሥራ አመራር 2 ኛ ድግሪ ለማግኘት እንደ ማሙያ ይጠቅማል፡፡
ክፍል 1 ፡አጠቃላይመረጃ
10. የት/ቤቱስም -------------------------------------------------
11. የት/ትደረጃ --------------------------------------------------
12. ዕድሜ ----------------
13. በርዕሳነመምህርነትየቆዩበትጊዜ (በዓመት) ----------------
14. የመምህራንብዛት ----------. ወንድ -----------. እናሴት ------------
ክፍል 2 ፡መሰረታዊናዋናመጠይቆች
1. በት/
ቤትህዉስጥለመምህራንከሚሰጠውሽልማትናማበረታቻዬትኛውንታውቃለህሽልማትናማበረታቻለመምህ
ራንትሰጣላችሁ? አዎከሆነ:-
A. በምንመነሻነውየምትሰጡት?
B. በምንመንገድነውየምትሸልሙት?
2. በት/ቤትህየመገምገሚያናየመቆጣጠሪያሲስቴምአለ? አዎከሆነ:-
A. የመ/ራንንስራእንዴትትመዝናላችሁ?
B. የመመዘኛውመስፈርትምንድነው?
C. የመ/ራንንውጤትእንዴትትመዝናላችሁ?
3. በእርሶናበመ/ራንመካከልተቀባይነትናአከብሮትእንዳለእንዴትታውቃለህ?
4. የመ/ራንንልዩነትበት/ቤትህእንዴትትገልፃለህ?
A. ከመ/ራንመካከልየክህሎትናየፍላጎትልዩነትእንዴትትረዳለህ?
B. የመ/ራንክህሎትናፍላጎትማወቅምንእንደምጠቅምግለፅ?
5. መ/ራንበት/ቤትህየመማርናማስተማርሁኔታንእንዴትያያሉ/ተቀብለዋል?
A. መ/ራንንበምንአይነትመንገድታነሳሳለህበማስተማርሙያቸውእንድሰሩ?
B. ምንያክልጊዜነውይህንንየሚታደርጉት?
6. ችግሮቹንእንዴትነውየምትከላከሉት?
A. ችግሩከመነሳትናችግሩከተነሳቦኃላችግሩንለመቅረፍመፍትሔፈልገውያውቃሉ?
99