HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

TEACHERS’ PARTICIPATION IN SCHOOL DECISION MAKING: IN CASE OF

SECONDARY SCHOOLS OF HARAMAYA WOREDA

MASTER OF ART IN SCHOOL LEADERSHIP

Azeb Getahun

College: College of Education and Behavioral Sciences

School/Department: Educational Planning and Management

Program: SCHOOL LEADERSHIP

Major Advisor:
Co-Advisor:
Co-Advisor:

Junuary, 2022
Hrarmaya, Ethiopia
 2

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

MoE-Ministry of Education
OCB-: Organizational Citizenship Behavior
OREB:-Oromia Regional Education Bureaus
PDM:-Participatory Decision Making
PTA:-Parent Teacher Association
SBM:-School Based Management
SIPS:-chool Improvement Program
SPSS:-Statistical Package for Social Science
WEO:-Werada Education Offices
 3

Table of Contents
1.1. Background of the Study......................................................................................................
1.3. Research Questions...............................................................................................................
1.4. Objective of the Study..........................................................................................................
1.4.1. General Objective..........................................................................................................
1.4.2. Specific Objectives........................................................................................................
1.5. Significance of the Study....................................................................................................
1.6. Delimitation of the Study....................................................................................................
1.7. Definition of Key Terms.....................................................................................................
2.REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE..................................................................................
2.1. Concepts of Decision Making in Education.......................................................................
2.2. Models of Decision Making...............................................................................................
2.2.1. Motivational Model.....................................................................................................
2.2.2. Cognitive Model..........................................................................................................
2.3. Extent of Teachers Involvement in Decision–Making.......................................................
2.4. Rationale for Teachers’ Participation in School Decision Making....................................
2.5. Areas of Teachers’ Involvement in Decision–Making.......................................................
2.5.1. Teachers Participation in School Improvement Program............................................
2.5.1.1. Learning and teaching domain..................................................................................
2.5.1.2. Favorable learning condition and environment........................................................
2.5.1.3. School leadership and management..........................................................................
2.5.1.4. Community participation..........................................................................................
2.5.2. Participation in School Activities’ Planning....................................................................
2.5.3. School Budget and Income Generation...........................................................................
2.5.4. Students’ Affair and School Discipline...........................................................................
2.6. Factors Affecting Teachers’ Participation in Decision Making.............................................
2.6.1. Leadership Related Factors..............................................................................................
2.6.1.1 Behaviors of Leadership............................................................................................
2.6.1.2. Leadership Styles......................................................................................................
2.6.2. Delegation of Authority and Responsibility....................................................................
2.6.3. Communication................................................................................................................
 4

2.6.4. Motivation........................................................................................................................
2.6.5. Factors Related to Teachers.............................................................................................
2.7. Roles of Principals in Creating Participatory Decision Making.............................................
2.7.1. Empower Teachers to Participate in Making Decisions..................................................
2.7.2. Enhance participation in decision making.......................................................................
2.7.3. Evaluate Decision Effectiveness and Provide Feedback.................................................
3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY.....................................................................
3.1. Research Design.....................................................................................................................
3.2. Sources of Data.......................................................................................................................
3.3. Population, Sample Size and sampling techniques.................................................................
3.3.1. Target Population of the study.........................................................................................
3.3.2. Sample size and Sampling Techniques............................................................................
3.4. Instruments of Data Collection...............................................................................................
3.4.1. Questionnaire...................................................................................................................
3.4.2. Interview..........................................................................................................................
3.4.3. Document Analysis..........................................................................................................
3.5. Procedure of Data collection..................................................................................................
3.6. Reliability and Validity...........................................................................................................
3.7. Methods of Data Analysis......................................................................................................
4. WORK PLAN............................................................................................................................
5. LOGISTICS...............................................................................................................................
Reference.......................................................................................................................................
 5

1.INTRODUCTION
This research proposal contains five sections. The first section encompasses background of the
research, statement of the problem, significance of the study, scope of the study. The second
sections deals with review of literature relevant to the research. The third section discuss about
research design and methodology. The fourth and fifth section contains time schedule and budget
1.1. Background of the Study
Teacher participation in school decision-making is one of the recommendations of schoolbased
management policy. School-based management (SBM) is a proposal to decentralize and de-
bureaucratize school control and to promote teacher participation in decisionmaking within
schools (Brown, 1990). An assumption of school-based management is that if decisions are made
closer to the client, better decisions will be made and greater satisfaction and commitment will
be prevailed (Conley, 1991).
Teachers’ participation in school decision making is mandatory for the attainment of schools’
organizational objectives in democratic ways (Wadesago, 2011). This means that all stakeholders
including teachers must be given the opportunity to play their defined and legitimate roles
(Mokoena, 2011). Therefore teachers, that are important human resources in schools, must be
part of the decision making process. The present real situations in secondary schools showed
that some teachers had a greater participation while others do not want to involve. It is the
responsibility of the educational administrator to identify the capabilities and interest of
individuals and assign each staff member according to the desired level of participation (Drah,
2011).
Participatory decision making process of teachers leads to the real improvement of school and
academic achievement of students in schools Wadesago (2012). Participating teachers in the
school management system has various advantages. First, it reduces inequalities among teachers.
Second, brings change on the management, and important effects on teachers’ performance and
students learning by making teachers more accountable to their community (Wadesango and
Bayaga, 2013). Jung (2014) revised from various researches that School Based Management has
positive effects. In addition he was found that teachers’ satisfaction with their job is higher in
schools that School Based Management was implemented, and it created greater commitment to

the school among teachers. However, different researchers around the world identified
controversial results on the implementation and effect of teachers’ participation in secondary
 6

schools decision- Making processes. For instance, Mokoena (2011) conducted a research in
South African secondary schools and found that principals hinderd the proper implementation of
participatory decision making. Olorunsola and Olayemi (2011) examined teachers’ involvement
in decision-making process in secondary schools in Nigeria. In this descriptive study it was
found that secondary school teachers significantly involved in decision making processes. It was
also identified that teachers’ participation varies according to their experience and sex. Another
study from South Africa Wadesago (2012) found that the influence of insignificant teachers’
participation in critical school issues result in low staff morale. A study from neighboring
country Kenya by Kiprop and Kandie (2012) revealed that teachers’ participation in decision-
making in Kenyan secondary schools were very low; teachers did not participate in decision-
making as desired. All of the above studies recommended that teachers’ participation in decision-
making must be encouraged and creating awareness for the stakeholders found crucial.
In Ethiopia, different researches have been conducted that focus on investigating the existence of
Participatory decision making of teachers in secondary schools. The study by Workneh (2012)
examined the extent to which the involvement of different stakeholders in school impact upon
critical decision making at school level. He examined that the Ethiopian Education policy
suggested the head teachers to lead the activities of various stakeholders involved in school
decision-making should be empowered. The finding also confirmed that the attempt to
strengthen PDM and administration had made good progress.
The researcher has not come across local research conducted in Haramaya Woreda to identify
teachers’ participation in school decision making processes. The researcher observed that
teachers were working with a minimum effort in order to cope with participatory decision
making at school level. Hence, to convince this idea, this study will be examine teachers’
participation in school decision making in secondary schools of Haramaya Woreda.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Education encompasses various decision–making processes concerning different issues and
educational problems. The decision made could also be categorized as the collection of scarce
teaching and learning resources, the enrolment of students, mobilization of community,
allocation of resources, introduction of the new curriculum, student and staff discipline, staff
training and methods of improving pedagogy and educational research (Okumbe, 1998).
 7

Schools struggle with strong pressure from rapidly changing of external and internal
environments and the needs of an ever-evolving global economy. These pressures are creating
new demands on schools to produce effective students with skill to compete (Moran, 2009). To
cope with these objectives, improving the quality of school effectiveness through the
mobilization of teachers and providing them opportunities to participate in school decision–
making. In this regard, the following concepts should be taken into consideration as related
problems which hinder teachers’ participation in school decision making issues: principals’
leadership behavior and style, communication, motivation and factors related to teachers
themselves.
School Principals behavior and leadership styles is one of the factors that impede teachers’
participation in school decision making. Ethiopian Education and training policy gives authority
for principals to participate other stakeholders in decision-making (MoE,1994), however; Some
school principals were considered themselves as if they are the only people with knowledge and
authority to make decisions, As a result they govern the schools alone and hardly involved
teachers in school management. In the conclusionof the study conducted by Balcha (2012) it was
revealed that, participatory decision making was not practiced because of autocratic type of
leadership in secondary schools of Bale Zone. In addition this research intensify that teachers
were not interested in decision made by school leaders which was resulted in teachers’ low
perception in decision making and less exposed to gain leadership quality.
As communication is the lifeblood of a school organization, the school principal cannot
accomplish any tasks in the school without it (Bender, 2005). But the problem is that because of
different communication barriers occurred between principals and teachers there is deprivation
of decision making in the school. As it was shown in ( Wadesango, 2012) it is disheartening that
teachers’ role in most of secondary schools is nothing but that is passive participants concerning
their job security, productivity and for general improvement of the school. Without teachers’
participation in school decision making, achieving quality of education and school goals might
be nightmare. Olorunsola and Olayemi (2011) stated their observation as follow:
It has been observed that teachers are central in the management of schools and their
involvement in decision making process is such a sensitive issue in schools that neglect of it by
the principals could cause a lot of rift, conflict, misgiving and hindrance to the realization of the
objectives of the school goals.
 8

Teachers and other staff members can be influenced by the level of motivation at work (Lin, Y.
J., 2014). Because of intrinsic and extrinsic situation, teachers move away from participatory
decision making activities (Kiprop and Kandic, 2012). Therefore, the school principals and vice
principals should not only have some knowledge of the staff but should also bear in mind factors
which can enhance or weaken motivation as it is the engine of activity implementation.
In researchers experience some teachers have knowledge, skill and attitude gap to participate in
decision making processes at school level. Due to their resistance to change, attitude to directed
and controlled and perceive themselves as if they were neglected some teachers were not ready
to accept change, prefer to remain on the sideline and show noncommitment to their work (Drah,
2011). Thus, most teachers do not put in their best to have full sense of commitment and
dedication for the implementation of school goals.
As far as the researcher’s knowledge is concerned, in the search efforts made the researcher find
two previous works done towards teachers’ participation in secondary schools decision making
processes. The related researches the researcher had come across in Oromia Reginal state were
Balcha (2012) and Desalegn (2014) who conducted research on teachers’ participation in
secondary schools of Bale zone and Jimma town respectively. These researches were explored
the current status of teachers involvement in different decision making areas such as planning,
curriculum and instruction, school policies, rules and regulations, school budget and income
generation, school building and students affaire and school discipline to reflect teachers
involvement in decision making in their zone secondary schools implementation practices.
In Oromia Regional State in Haramaya Woreda, researcher dicome across a study conducted on

teachers’ participation in school decision making in secondary schools. So, the researchers will
be used the research conducted in Bale zone by Balcha, (2012) and Jimma town by Desalegn,
(2014) as a base for his study. This studies will be revealed the importance of teachers to
participate in school decision making processes to school principals and their staff to understand
their school decision making practices and strive towards developing an exemplary and yet
inspiring practices of decision making that promotes and signifies teaching and learning through
effective school management practices. In both studies it was concluded that teachers’
participation was not to the needed requirement. The researcher in his study wants to justify that
if there is the same prevalence in research area he as a study area in relation to teachers’
participation in secondary schools decision making processes.
 9

In general, the researcher in his experience observed that school Principals’ and PTA practices in
encouraging teachers’ participation in school decision-making was ineffective. In addition, he
also observed, absence of participatory and democratic school leadership, lack of trust between
teachers and principals manifested in nagging between teachers and school leaders in secondary
schools of Harmaya Woreda. This is why the researcher inspired to look the problem more
closely and initiated to conduct this study to assess the practices of teachers participation in
secondary of Harmaya Woreda. All the above mentioned reasons initiate the researcher to
conduct this research and to forward the reasons for their reluctance on teachers’ participation in
school decision in secondary schools of Harmaya Woreda
1.3. Research Questions
Based on the above statements of the problem the researcher will be formulated the following
specific research questions.
 To what extent do teachers participate in decision making processes in Secondary schools of
Harmaya Woreda?
 In what areas of school activities do teachers participate in school decision making processes in
Harmaya Woreda?
 What are the factors that affect teachers’ participation in school decision making in secondary
schools of Harmaya Woreda?
 What strategies should be devised in order to improve teachers’ participation in school decision
making processes in Harmaya Woreda?
1.4. Objective of the Study
1.4.1. General Objective
The main objective of this study is to assess teachers’ participation in decision making process in
secondary schools of Arsi zone.
1.4.2. Specific Objectives
The specific objectives of the study are:
1) To assess the extent of teachers participation in school decision making processes in secondary
schools of Harmaya Woreda.
2) To identify areas of teachers’ participation in school decision making processes in secondary
schools of Harmaya Woreda.
 10

3) To identify factors hindering teachers’ participation in school decision making in secondary

schools of Harmaya Woreda.
4) To recommend what should be done to improve teachers’ participation in school decision
making process.
1.5. Significance of the Study
This study assumed to be very important to benefit the following bodies. It may be basis for
decision making for the target line offices by getting useful information on the extent and areas
of participation in relation to teachers’ participation in school decision makingin Haramaya
Woreda. It may also give important and timely information to principals, teachers, supervisors,
PTA and educational officers in Haramaya Woreda concerning the existing system and the
contribution of practice of teachers’ participation in school decision making processes. It may
make principals, teachers, supervisors, PTA and students of the target area and the society at
large more profitable by exposing factors affecting teachers’ participation in school decision
making processes. It may help policy makers and planners to facilitate strategies in producing
school leaders that are skillful in the implementation of participatory decision making and
seeking solution for changing of the existing system. Finally, the study may serve as a good basis
for forth coming researchers who have a strong desire to carry out a research on this or related
topics in Haramaya Woreda or elsewhere by indicating problem in the research area of the
study.
1.6. Delimitation of the Study
The study will be conducted in Haramaya Woreda of Oromia Regional State on the teachers’
participation in school decision making in secondary school. Conceptually, the coverage of the
study will be delimited to teachers’ participation in school decision making in secondary schools
of Haramaya Woreda As it is impossible to study all decision making issues, this study will be
delimited to decisions related to participation in school improvement domains, curriculum and
instruction, school activities planning, budgeting and income generation, students’ affair and
school discipline. The sampling techniques will be delimited to simple random for teachers,
availability sampling for school leaders and purposive sampling for PTA in order to make the
study manageable.
 11

1.7. Definition of Key Terms

Decision Making: s the process of identifying and choosing alternatives based on the valuesand
preferences of the decision maker, not only to identify these alternatives but to choose the one
that best fits with our goals, objectives, desires and values.
Participatory decision making: The act of sharing decision making with others to achieve
school goals (Tibebu, 2011)
School Based Management:the decentralization of authority from the central government to the
school level (Caldwell and Brain, 2005)
School leaders: Principals, unit leaders and department heads who were working in the schools
Secondary Schools: First cycle secondary school (9-10) according to the current Ethiopian
Educational Training Policy.
Teacher empowerment: the power or opportunity that teachers ought to have, sensed by
teachers themselves, and endorsed by school stakeholders (Lightfoot, 1996)
Teachers’ participation: participative process that uses the entire capacity of teachers and
design to encourage increased commitment to organization’s success (Pashiardis, 1994).
 12

2.REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This section provides a comprehensive review of the related literature on different aspect of
teachers’ participation in school decision–making. It comprises concepts, models, process, areas
and rationale for teachers’ participation in decision-making. This review considers the factors
that affect teachers’ participation in school decision-making. It also emphasizes on the role of
principals in participative decision–making.
2.1. Concepts of Decision Making in Education
Various authors define decision making differently by focusing on the process involved during
decision making, by emphasizing the steps followed during a decision making and by focusing
on the participants involved in decision making. Coleman (2005) defines decision–making as the
process of specifying the nature of particular problem and selecting among available alternatives
in order to solve the problem. This definition of decision–making indicates that a problem
precedes any decision and that there must be a number of alternative courses of action from
which an optimum course will be selected. Similarly, Law and Glover (2003) have stated as the
decision making may be view as the process by which individuals or groups select a course of
action from among alternatives to produce a desired result.
Decisions are a composite of values, facts, and assumptions. Each or all of these may be subject
to change from time to time. Decision making, therefore, is not a onetime activity but rather a
continuing activity (Okumbe, 1998). In researchers view also for different decision making
activities implementations in needed time first activities should be identified, there should be
participatory planning, participatory implementation, there should be evaluation and feedback
provision trends. Decision involve policies (the definition of objectives), resources (people,
money materials, and authority), and means of execution (integration and synthesis). In so far as
the value content of this type of decision is concerned, the school principal should identify two
major values; policy decision that seek purposive action; executing decision that seek
coordination’s of action (White, 1992).
As suggested by Coleman (2005) Decision–making is considered to be the very heart of
administration and leadership. In different functions of managerial process: planning, organizing,
staffing, directing, reporting, and budgeting are where managers make decisions. As schools are
organization principals who lead schools have to made decisions at every managerial processes
in the organization. But, in researchers view the decision making processes at every managerial
 13

functions of the schools are not practical. Coleman’s idea is also supported by (Jonse R. and
George M, 2009) since they stated as decision–making is applied in any of the organizational
activities.
To sum-up, the definition, decision making is a sequential process ending in a single decision or
series of decisions (choices) which stimulate or forced to some actions. Every successful
organization must make decisions that enable the organization to achieve its goal and which meet
the critical needs of members of the organization because decision making is cumulative and
consultative process. Decisions are made daily in school about the conduct of work, the
distribution of resources, and short term goals. Decision makings often have to decide on what is
to be done, who to do it, and when and where is to be done.
2.2. Models of Decision Making
Theories have advanced a variety of models to account for the positive effect of PDM on school
and teachers performance through which participation exercises its effects. In relation to this
there are two main types of models: motivational (affective) and cognitive (Somech. 2010).
2.2.1. Motivational Model
Participatory decision making is a motivational technique used as a means of raising job
satisfaction, which in turn fosters school outcomes (Durham et al., 1997). With respect to the
educational setting PDM promotes school and teacher outcomes through two motivational
mechanisms: organizational commitment and teacher empowerment (Somech, 2005).The
motivational factor of commitment validates motivational theories that emphasize identification
and self-control as central motivational factors (Latham and
Pinder, 2005). PDM provides teachers the opportunity to be involved in and exert influence on
decision-making processes. Teachers’ participation is believed to promote commitment to the
decisions that are made and to increase willingness to execute them in their work. Therefore,
active participation enhances involvement and commitment, because individuals tend to place
greater trust in, and accept more readily, information discovered by them (Fullan, 1997).
Participation might satisfy human growth needs of self-determination and selfactualization
through mechanisms to promote school and teacher outcomes. Evidence on the role of teacher
organizational commitment and empowerment as motivational mediators in the relationship of
PDM to school and teacher outcomes are inconsistent. For example, Wu and Short (1996) and
Somech (2005) found a positive link between PDM was significantly and positively associated
 14

with teacher empowerment. Accordingly, the author concluded that teacher empowerment serves
as a motivational mechanism that mediates the relation of the participative approach to school
and teacher outcomes.
2.2.2. Cognitive Model
More recently, scholars have suggested that the most consistent benefits of PDM lie in the
cognitive realm (Sagie et al., 2002). Cognitive models suggest that participatory decision making
is a viable strategy because it enhances the flow and use of important information in
organizations (Guzzo, 1996). If information flows freely among staff, strong relation will be
created in school teachers and principals that can base for more teachers participation in different
decision making issues. Theories supporting such models (Durham et al., 1997) propose that
teachers typically have more complete knowledge of their work than management; so if teachers
participate in decision making, decisions will be made with a better pool of information.
Teacher participation is thought to give administrators access to critical information closest to
the source of many problems of schooling, namely, the classroom. Increased access to and use of
this information are thought to improve the quality of curricular and instructional decisions
(Smylieet al., 1996). Cognitive models likewise suggest that if teachers participate in decision
making they will know more about implementing work procedures after decisions have been
made (Sagie et al., 2002). Accordingly, participation encourages teachers to discover new
opportunities and challenges, to learn through acquiring, sharing, and combining knowledge
(West, 2002). This process includes clarification of problems, information seeking, data sharing,
resonance of ideas, and synthesis of viewpoints (Cannon and Bowers, 1995; Sagieet al., 2002),
which in turn may promote cooperation and collaboration that foster educative exchanges among
teachers and administrators about matters of curriculum and instruction. But, teachers in schools
do not more participate in discovering new opportunities by identifying problems related to
learning and teaching for students’ achievement. In researchers view they do not react to
rigorous activities like conducting researches. They only focus to routine activities.
Participative processes may engage teachers in the types of open and collaborative interactions
most conducive to learning and change (Smylieet al., 1996). Consequently, these cognitive
mechanisms have the potential to promote school and teacher outcomes. Latham and Lynne,
(1994) and Durham et al., (1997) demonstrated that even where no motivational effect of PDM
is present, the cognitive processes help in enhancing organizational and employees’ outcomes. In
 15

sum, the motivational and the cognitive models are not mutually exclusive, but each emphasizes
a different explanatory mechanism, and all play important roles in the participative process

School Outcomes

Cognitive  Productivity
Mechanism  Innovation

 Organizational

Citizenship

PDM Behavior

O
( CB )
Motivational
Teachers Out comes
Mechanism
 Job satisfaction

 Strain

Source: Educational Administration Quarterly http://eaq.sagepub.com/

Figure 1: A Multilevel Model Participative Decision Making (PDM) for school
2.3. Extent of Teachers Involvement in Decision–Making
The perception of teachers to school management practices are linked with the extent in which
teachers involve in decision-making. Based on the extent of teachers’ Participations in school
decision–making practically vary from one school to another regarding on the issue or problems
under consideration. Chanman-Tak et al, (1997) suggest that under certain situation, there is a
zone of indifference in each individual teacher within which orders are accepted without serious
question of the authority. Otherwise, participation in decision–making may not important if the
issue appears irrelevant to teachers. Teachers may accept the outcomes or orders from the
decision without resistance or objection.
Some research findings have described areas of decision–making under which teachers take great
personal interest. Owens, R.G. (1998), for example, has also pointed out that, when dealing with
problems that fall within “staffs’ zone sensitivity”, there is a prevalence of high degree of
 16

participation in a group decision making process. On the other hand, if issue or problems are
located in teacher “zone of indifference’, participation will be less effective
(Hoy, W. and Miskel, C.G. 1991). Bridge (cited in Gortoon, 1997) bas pointed out that,
individuals or groups are usually intending to participate in the process of decision-making
wherever they feel that the degree of teachers’ participation is directly related to how well
certain pre-requisite conditions are met. Some of this involvement pre-requisite occurs in the
participants while others exist in the environment. So, the knowledge, skills, attitude of the
teachers and the school climate affect the extent of teachers’ participation in decision making
processes.
As studies suggests in many cases, the extent to which teachers’ participation can be influenced
by certain prerequisites. In this regard, Davis, K. and Newstorm, A. (1994) have identified some
major conditions that may exist in both the participants and their environment. These are: time
to participate before action is required, the potential benefits of participation should be greater
than its cost, the subject of participants must be relevant and interesting to the employees, The
participants must be able to mutually communicate, so as to exchange idea, neither party should
feel that its position is threatened by participation and participation for deciding a course of
action must be within the area of job freedom. Thus, the way an individual involves in school
decision–making process may influence the extent of participation, and the move his/her
participation is direct, the higher his power to influence the issue under consideration.
2.4. Rationale for Teachers’ Participation in School Decision Making
Teacher participation in decision–making has been advanced for a variety of reason. Most
often, participation is thought to enhance communication among teachers and
administrators and improve the quality of educational decision making. It also thought that
participation may contribute to the quality of teachers work life (Algoush, 2010). Furthermore,
because teachers have an opportunity to be involved in and to exert influence on decision –
making processes, their participation is believed to increase willingness to implement them in
class, hence to promote educational productivity (Somech, 2010).
As Wadesango (2012) stated, Participative decision–Making has been identified as an important
contributor to successful educational management. It is not only facilitating implementation of
decision but also leads teacher to feel respected and empowered. Moreover, teachers
participation in school decision making builds trust, helps teachers acquires new skills, increase
 17

school effectiveness and strengthens staff morale, commitment and team work (Lashway, 1996)
cited in (Gardian and Rathore, 2010). White,(1992) cited in Algoush (2010) found five major
benefits of impact of increased decision making authority on teacher work life: improve teacher
moral, better informed teachers, improve teacher communication within and across school,
improve student motivation and increased incentives that serve to attract and retain quality
teachers.
The participation of teachers in decision-making was perceived as forgoing links between
administrators and teachers (Sergiovani, 1992). The important decision–making in educational
organizations has been recognized as a key function required by administrators. In school where
a clear commitment in students learning is apparent, participatory decision making by the
teachers is crucial to the overall effective operation of the school (pashiardis, 1994). Mangunda
(2003) also state that participative management ensures that members in organization take
ownership of the decision, and are willing to defend decision take through collaborative means.
This means that participative management results in a great sense of commitment and ownership
of decisions. In most cases the responsibility for obtain school objectives depends on teachers.
In general, where teachers are adequately involved in decision making process, there would be
commitment and adequate support with the principal and realization of school goal will be easy,
apathy, and opposition within the school will be minimized
2.5. Areas of Teachers’ Involvement in Decision–Making
For the purpose of this sub-heading, the researcher had identified different potential decisional
areas for teachers to participate. These areas are participation in school improvement programs
which are called school domains: teaching learning, favorable learning conditions, school
leadership and community participations and other areas such as school activities’ planning,
School budget and income generation and students’ affair and school discipline
2.5.1. Teachers Participation in School Improvement Program
Teachers are the core human resources in the school for the attainment of school improvement
goals: students’ behavior and learning outcome improvement. They are the
real source to weaken or strengthen students learning and changing. So, the true school
improvement key is in the hands of teachers. School improvement guideline underline that
teachers have to participate in planning, implementation and evaluation processes. So, this part
mainly focuses on four school domains and their elements: Learning and teaching; favorable
 18

learning condition and environment; school leadership and management and community
participation by revising teachers’ participation in them.
2.5.1.1. Learning and teaching domain
This domain focus on effective efforts and initiatives of teachers; efforts of students and
curriculum by identifying them under three elements. These are act of teaching; learning and
evaluation; and curriculum. Since implementation takes place through the interaction of learner,
the role and influence of teacher in the process is indisputable. Regarding this Aggrawal (2004)
explained that a teacher can play a vital role in the socialization of the child under his change and
can exerts a great influence upon the development of the responsibility of the child. They should
not show any discrimination; they must ensure a safe and healthy social environment in which
the children may absorb desirable values of freedom, equality, integrity, honest patriotism etc.
Teachers are the main actors among the stakeholders in the improvement of schools and growing
of student outcome. Hence, they should have professional code of ethics and discharge their
responsibility accordingly (MoE, 2012).This is to say that by being model, skillful and
knowledgeable person teachers can shape students in needed way. Teachers should have the
academic knowledge required to teach their subjects efficiently and they plan and implement the
teaching task. In this case, the Ethiopian Education Sector Development program III Action Plan
emphasis not only to improve the academic qualifications but also the ethical values of the
teaching staff. As parents expect teachers to be professional role models to their children, efforts
will be exerted to have a teaching staff that is well motivated, disciplined, and endowed with
ethical values (MOE, 2005).
They are also expected to use participatory teaching methodologies and other modern approaches
in the learning – teaching process (Hume, 1990). In addition, more explicitly stated in Hume’s
teachers should give class work, homework, short tests and individual or group project works to
their students containing the three features of education (knowledge, skill and attitude); record
their result and give back their feedback. This will enable the teachers to identify, based on their
records, the weak performers and provide special assistance and discuss with the parents
concerned. In relation to this, they are expected to assess the strength and weakness of their own
capacity of teaching and make changes to their approach. In this regard, teachers should employ
an approach to encourage their students to ask questions on unclear matters; to appreciate the
 19

response from students regardless of its correctness; to develop their self-confidence and protect
their feeling (MoE, 2012).
In relation to curriculum and instruction it is believed that all subjects are important though some
subjects worth more attention due to their role to be the basis for others. Hence, according to the
existing situation of the country, Mother tongue, English, Mathematics, Natural Science and,
Civics and Ethical education subjects are given special attention in the school improvement
program (MoE, 2011) .In addition other cross cutting issues such as environmental protection,
health and reproduction, gender and HIV/AIDS integrated with other subjects and special
attention have been given too (MoE, 2005).
The teaching shall focus on problem solving and will be implemented through exercises and
assignments given to students in order that they acquire knowledge and skills. It will be student-
oriented and used in a continuous system of evaluation. To sum up, if teachers participate in
decision made, students’ outcomes will be upgraded in every element of teaching and learning,
2.5.1.2. Favorable learning condition and environment
This domain mainly focus on two elements: creating conducive conditions to improve school
facilities and empowerment of students. The implementation of these issues in the school results
in creation of favorable condition and environment of students and the missing parts will be
addressed step by step whereby developing their interest for education and improving their
capacity of acceptance (MoE, 2011).
School learning environment has a physical as well as a relationship dimension (Wilson, 1996).
Physically, it refers to all material resources available in the school which a child can see, hear,
touch, smell, taste, feel and respond to. Examples are teachers, school children, school buildings,
school compound, classrooms, other workers in the school, games and sporting equipment,
facilities and fields, recreational facilities, teaching and learning materials, the arrangement of
seats and desks in the classroom, ventilation, the nature and position of the chalkboard. The
relationship dimension refers to the rapport that should be created among the school
administrators and teachers, between teachers and teachers and between teachers and students, as
well as between students and students that affects students’ affective and cognitive outcomes
based on student’s perception of classroom learning environments (Howes, 2000). These listed
resources comprise the school environment and they influence the physical, mental, social, and
emotional and personality, development of school children.
 20

Data richness in the school is an important component of effective and improving schools. It is
recently found that this factor is strongly related to improvement. However, being data rich does
not just mean the collection of large amounts of data, but also their effective use, so that data can
be turned into information as a basis for creating conducive school environment and classroom
decision-making (Potter et al.,2002). Schools should collect and consolidate a wide variety of
data, including exam results, standardized and teachermade test results, questionnaires and
qualitative data. The organization of useful data can be done by leaders and teachers of the
school.
To sum up, schools principals and vice principals should facilitate the conditions that teachers
take part in the creation of conducive learning school environment that improves students
learning and the learning outcome.
2.5.1.3. School leadership and management
The school leadership and administration play an important role in the coordinating and
managing phases due to its vitality for the improvement of student result in schools. As it was
stated in governing guide line for the implementation of the School improvement Program
(2012), the leadership and administration include the following: director and deputy Director,
School leadership committees (drawn from teachers, students, parents and the local community)
and Professionals and officials of education outside of the school. These organs are expected to
play the forefront role in bringing continuous improvement in schools. In this regard, these
organs are the primary responsible ones for the problems and weaknesses at schools and they
also play appropriate role in bringing effective practice and experience to seek solution for the
problems. In this respect, they should act jointly with the school improvement committee in the
formulation of school vision and strategic plan.
2.5.1.4. Community participation.
This school domain discusses on three elements. These are cooperation with parents; community
participation and promoting education. A number of countries have recognized the importance of
community participation as a school improvement program and decision. Also, an increasing
number have been taken, or are taking steps to both increase awareness of, and strengthen
mechanisms for community participation in school improvement program and decisions (West,
2002). Community participation is a process in which specific groups with shared needs, living
in a defined geographical area, actively pursue identification of their needs and take decisions
and establish mechanisms to meet them (Tibebu, 2011). Community should participate in school
 21

planning, in decision making; in monitoring and on-going evaluation to improve school as

community participation greatly benefit school.

Community participation can also facilitate the development of the organization of services on a
community basis. There should be a better planning of education systems, in terms of better and
more meaningful contributions in determining the need for educational facilities, their location
and size, the number and types of personnel required, recruitment procedures, employment
practices and personnel policies, the nature of financing and resource allocation. The close
relation between teachers and parents helps the school administrative committee and the school
to improve the school-community interaction (Christenson, 2004). The school cannot separate
itself from its community and it becomes increasingly more important for it to have a wholesome
relationship to its community.
Teacher-parent relationships should be a continuous process. It has a dual advantage for both the
school and the parents. On one hand, parents can understand what is going on in the school, what
the teacher is doing, what problems the school faces. On the other hand, the school can have an
opportunity to explain its overall activities. Moreover, teachers could get the chance to advise the
parents on how to handle the children outside the school. Furthermore, it promotes the
cooperative study of home and school problems that result in mutual understanding of
educational tasks to be achieved in schools. One way of enhancing community participation is to
involve parents in establishing a good relationship between the school and the home for the
benefit of the child. Educating the children is the responsibility of both parents and the school
(Awash, 2001).Hence, there is the need for frequent contact between teachers and parents as
regards the educational advancement of students. Parents may also assist with instruction of
children. Therefore, the establishment of parent-teacher associations is an important component
of community participation.
2.5.2. Participation in School Activities’ Planning
Planning is one of the four principal tasks of management focusing on identifying and selecting
appropriate goals. It is the process to decide in advance what is to be done; how and when it will
be done; and who is responsible for following up and evaluating the achievement of the pre-
planned programs in schools. It is an essential feature of every successful organization (Jones
and George, 2009). In the case of schools, planning is one of the basic school activities that
teachers should involve and be concerned with during implementation. Planning means building
 22

a mental bridge from where you are; to where you want to be when you have achieved the
objective before you (Adaire, 2010).
The participation of teachers in school activities planning promotes teachers’ commitment to the
school policies, rules and regulations and increases their motivation to implement them as well
(Jung, 2014).Concerning the importance of participative planning ( West, 2002) say,
Participation can increase the creativity, and information available for planning, and increase the
understanding, acceptance and commitment of people of final plans. Thus, teachers’ participation
in school planning aids the school administrators (principals and PTA) to direct their efforts
towards the school goal.
Preparing school plan is not the sole duties of the school administrators; rather it involves
teachers’ participation to make quality decisions. So the best method of increasing the
involvement of teachers in school decision–making is by involving teachers in the formulation of
school’s plan. Besides the school principals should facilitate the conditions that teachers take part
in the formulation of school plan, policies, rules and regulations. Teacher should participate in
planning of school finance because they are well placed in identifying what is lost or fulfilled
regarding school resources.
2.5.3. School Budget and Income Generation
Financial management in education is concerned with the cost of education sources of income to
meet the educational costs and the spending of income in order to achieve the educational
objectives Brain Kinight (1993).Mbamba (1992) cited in Balcha (2012) states school budget as”
a financial plan for producing an educational program in a school context “. Budget preparation
is not only the sole responsibility of school principals and vice principals, rather it needs teachers
and staff participation. And the above cited author states that, consulting the staff will not only
assure superintendent of securing of much needed information, but also contribute to employee
morale and status.
Internal income was one of the major sources of financing education. Secondary schools were
charging students registration fee and other contribution at the beginning of school year prior to
1994 education and Training Policy. They were also generating income from sale of services and
products such as handcraft products and school farms.
The major source for schools internal income were farmlands, parents’ contribution, school
 23

clubs activities, evening classes and rent of classrooms for different activities etc MOE (1994)
The location of schools determines the type of incomes. The income from farmland is for rural
schools while incomes from evening classes and rent of classrooms are for urban schools. The
community contribution is for all schools regardless of the location of the schools. So, teachers
need to participate in school income generation by generating idea and actively participating in
different issues that could be source of income for school. Because their genuine participation
facilitate sources of income and make implementation practical.
2.5.4. Students’ Affair and School Discipline
Students are the very reason for the establishment and existence of the school and Students’
personnel management is a crucial aspect of human resource management. The rationale why to
investigate students’ affair and school discipline is that: create an orderly and healthy school
environment; brings about total behavioral change of the student; build positive values within
students; increase students’ involvement in management ( MoE, 2004).
Most students at the secondary school were at the adolescent stage because of this they are easily
malleable. They can be affected by peers and real situation in and out of school environment. As
a result they can show some disciplinary problem. Students that exhibit problem not only hinder
themselves but negatively affect the learning of other students as well. Therefore, the behavior
must be addressed (Thomas, 2002). Same students show a disciplinary problem and that affect
the learning and teaching Conditions of the school. Therefore, disciplinary measure used should
helped to suppress, control, and redirect such misbehavior i.e. behavior that is aggressive,
immoral or disruptive ( Alemayehu, 2012)
Learning is often hampered or even prevented because of students misbehaving in the class and
school compound. In order to tackle such situations, schools have to provide different services.
Among the various student personnel services, the ones that are relevant and applicable to our
school situation may include: library services, guidance and counseling services, records and file
care services. Teachers play a major role in decreasing inappropriate behavior through the
employment of effective instructional activities (Supaporn, 2000). Students born with different
talents and have innate ideas and interests that appear in different opportunities. Co-curriculum
program is one opportunity for students to demonstrate their talent in the school. Co-curricular
activity is a program or out-of-class activity, supervised and/or financed by the school, which
provides curriculum-related learning and character building experiences that contribute for the
 24

total development of learners (Rehel, 2012). Cocurricular activities are voluntary are recognized
as a source of enrichment and vitalization of the school curriculum, these are mainly through the
nurturing of hobbies, interests, and growing talents etc.
Teachers can establish and maintain good student’s behavior in the schools by incorporating
and providing support through guidance and counseling services and involving students in
cocurricular activities. In addition to this, they can devise strategy to establish good discipline by
effective classroom management. In relation to this, Michael Shader (2005) cited in (Alemayehu,
2012) puts, “with good class room management, the curriculum flows smoothly with few
problem, student enjoy the class, the teacher feels successful and rewarded”.
Therefore, one of the primary functions of teachers is developing and maintaining good
discipline in the school. To realize this, school principals should involve teachers and other none-
teaching staff in any decision making of school affair and discipline
2.6. Factors Affecting Teachers’ Participation in Decision Making
Under this sub-topic the researcher will see definition of leadership and major factors that may
influence teachers’ participation in school decision making. These factors include behavior and
styles of leadership, delegation of authority and responsibility, communication, motivation and
teachers related factors.
2.6.1. Leadership Related Factors
To encourage teachers to the decision making process, the success or failure in managing the
school is highly depends upon the efforts of the principal .This is because; it is believed that, he
is well equipped in exercising the right authorities and principles of leadership within the school
environment. Hence, leadership factor is one factor that may either encourage or discourage
teachers’ participation in school decision making affairs.
These leadership factors are behaviors of leadership and styles of leadership that should be
considered by the school leaders (Northouse, P. G. 2010).
2.6.1.1 Behaviors of Leadership
Studies those have been conducted on behaviors of leadership show there are many dimensions
of leadership behaviors. Despite the fact that there could potentially be numerous leadership
behaviors, Farris (1998) identified two specific kinds of leadership behaviors: task-oriented
behaviors and relations-oriented behaviors. Task-oriented leaders are primarily concerned with
reaching goals. They help their employees accomplish their goals by defining roles, establishing
 25

goals and methods of evaluations, giving directions, setting time lines, and showing how the
goals are to be achieved. As a rule, task-oriented leaders use a one-way communication method
to clarify what needs to be done, which is responsible for doing it, and how it needs to be done.
Task-oriented leaders coordinate, plan, and schedule work-related activities. They provide their
employees with the necessary motivation, equipment, supplies, and technical assistance for
completing the task (Northouse, 2010).
Relations-oriented leaders, on the other hand, are more concerned with developing close,
interpersonal relationships. They involve a two-way communication method to show social and
emotional support while helping their employees feel comfortable about themselves, their co-
workers, and their situations (Northouse, 2010). According to Yukl (2006), they provide their
employees with enough information to do the job, they allow individual autonomy in work, and
they show appreciation.
Good leader in order to inspire and serve his staff members, he must possess a high quality of
leadership skills that they come from the knowledge, experience and understanding of people
and human relationships (Armstrong, 1990). The results of many research noted that school
principals can highly influence their teachers if they focused on the following management
strategies: staff development, communication about school norms, power sharing and
manipulation of symbols to foster cooperative relationships with teachers (Blasé, 1993).
Moreover, Johnson in Blasé (1993) point out that equitable distribution of resources, assignment
of administrative responsibility, expertise, personal example, and expressed personal interest are
some of the actions and behaviors of principals’ that have favorable impacts on teachers. Thus, it
is assumed that in school decisions, teachers’ participation can be influenced by the behavior of

principals and vice principals. This is because they may encourage or discourage their teachers.

2.6.1.2. Leadership Styles

Leadership at school level depends on a number of factors. Some of the most important factors
influencing the choice of particular type of leadership style depend on the following factors: the
leadership personality, the nature of the task, the type of people involved in the task, the
expectation of the group, the relationship between the leader and the other members of the group,

the nature and culture of the organization (MoE, 2004). Leadership styles are classified into
democratic, autocratic and laissez-faire styles (Mbamba, 1992). From the researcher’s point of
 26

view, democratic style of leadership is more preferred to autocratic and laissez-faire styles of
leadership. This is due to democratic leadership style give high consideration or subordinates
(teachers) in solving school problems together with school leaders. The autocratic leadership
style, however; most of the time focuses on that school leaders are the most dominant one in
determining and making decision for solving school problems. Laissez-faire leadership style is
also not recommended in solving school problems. This is because of the rules and regulations
which do not allow teachers in solving school problems.
In general, as many people agreed, from these three categories of leadership styles, a democratic
style of leadership is better than the other two styles. This is due to the fact that democratic
leadership styles allow subordinates to participate in any decisions of the organization.
Therefore, school principals and vice principals have to know which style of leadership is more
suitable to their school environment. Moreover, they also need to have necessary knowledge and
skills about leadership styles more participating teachers in school decision making issues.
2.6.2. Delegation of Authority and Responsibility
Delegation is the process by which school managers such as principals and vice principals
transfer part of their authority to subordinates (teachers) for the performance of certain tasks and
responsibilities of their schools. The role of the secondary school principal is very crucial in
meeting the objectives of the education in the school. However, the role of the principal has
become more complex that the principal needs to share the responsibilities with others in the
school through delegation. While delegation involved empowerment of employees as stated
above, certain factors should be taken into consideration such as defining the delegated task,
capacity, and interest of the person to be delegated the task. Sutherland and Canwell (2004)
asserted further that delegation usually began with the identification of an individual suitable to
perform a particular task. The person needed to be prepared, and above all, given the authority in
order to carry out the job properly. Further, delegation required the leader to support and monitor
progress, and once the tasks were completed, to acknowledge that the job was completed
successfully.
Delegation of responsibility to teachers and other staff in the school relieves the principal from
many pressures of work. According to Eyre and Pettinger (1999), if delegation of responsibility
was not effective it could lead to work overload, delayed or inaccurate decisions, stress, mistrust,
resentment, and low morale among the staff. It was also apparent that, without effective
 27

delegation by school administrators, cases of inefficiency, disharmony, and a poor working

environment could result (Missik, 2004). Despite the importance of delegation of responsibility
in schools, there were still barriers that affected the effectiveness of delegation. There was,
therefore, need to establish whether principals were not willing to delegate certain
responsibilities, and find out constraints to delegation of responsibility.
According to the above idea, delegation enables schools to take full advantages of staff members
for their goal achievement. In other words, if staff members are well delegated, they will develop
the intention of full participation in school affairs. In connection to this Wodasengo (2012) states
that delegation builds morale, develops and uncovers potential, and hence increases the quality
of the work tone. Hence, school principals must properly delegate and they have to delegate
wisely so that staff members develop a positive attitude towards their professional and willingly
participate in school decision.
2.6.3. Communication
Communication is the sharing of information between two or more individuals or groups to reach
a common understanding. Good communication is essential for increasing efficiency, quality,

responsiveness, and innovation (Jonse R. and George M, 2009). Communication occurs in

various forms ranging from face to face conversation to written messages to the more subtle
forms involving facial expression and body movements (Rue and Byars, (1990). They further
define communication as, the process by which information is transferred from one source to
another source and is made meaningful to the involved sources (Bender, 2005). In organization,
there should be effective communication in keeping effective participation of staff members.
This can be achieved through creating good coordination and cooperation between managers and
staff members by building their moral (Caldwell and Brian, 2005).
Therefore, to make decision there must be a good communication, cooperation,
coordination between school principals, vice principals and teachers. If this is so, there is trust
and respect among them. Otherwise the reverse will be true, supporting this, (Cheng, 2008) point
out that, unless the staff members feel secure in communicating certain information and feel that
what they are communicating will be taken seriously, they are not like to increase their
communication. So, without effective communication among principals and teachers
participatory decision making is ineffective (Pashiardis, 1994).
 28

2.6.4. Motivation
Motivation is psychological forces that determine the directions of a person’s behavior in an

organization, a person’s level of effort, and a person’s level of persistence (Jonse and George,
2009). (Emily, 2011) suggested in the research conclusion that motivation refers to reasons that
underlie behavior that is characterized by willingness and volition. Intrinsic motivation is
animated by personal enjoyment, interest, or pleasure, whereas extrinsic motivation is governed

by reinforcement contingencies. Motivation involves a constellation of closely related beliefs,

perceptions, values, interests, and actions. The use of rewards may either encourage or diminish
motivation, depending on the type of rewards and the context in which they are given.
Accordingly, Mokoena’s (2011) study concludes that where teachers are given an opportunity to

participate in decision making, indications are that they experience high morale. Many factors

influence teachers and other staff members’ level of motivation at work. These include school
climate, lack of recognition, head teachers skill in handling decisions, communication, how the
past decisions have been handled, nature of task, fear, alienation, teacher expertise and
victimization (kipropand Kandic, 2012).Therefore, the school principals and vice principals
should not only have some knowledge of the staff but should also bear in mind all factors which

can enhance or weaken motivation as it is the engine of activity implementation. A reason for

teachers’ participation in decision making is meaningful for teachers’ empowerment (Anderson,

2002). As it was recommended in research conducted by Muhammad (2011) Factors positively
affecting motivation of teachers are: income status, importance in the society, incentives and
rewards on showing good results. In general, as it increases the morale of individuals motivation
is important for both organization and individual. Therefore, school administrators must consider
the importance of motivation in the school environment in order to motivate teachers towards the
achievement of predetermined goal.
2.6.5. Factors Related to Teachers
There are two barriers to teachers’ decision making at school level. At the outset, the first barrier
was teachers’ capacity for their involvement. According to Lichtenstein, and et al.,(1991),
organization theory of high-participative management, teachers needed to be empowered by four
basic elements comprised of power, knowledge, information, and reward (Johnse and George,
 29

1994). It was necessary for a teacher to have all of the four critical elements as participating in
decision making concerning school management. Teachers empowered needed to understand
both the knowledge with regard to decentralized school governance and the information about
the operation and outcome of school policies (Johnson and Boles, 1994). This revealed the need

for teachers’ training about their participation in school budget, curriculum, and staffing
decisions (White, 1992).
Second, as empowered with authority of decision making, teachers had to change their beliefs
and attitudes toward their roles outside the classroom and learnt how to think in new ways
regarding what was possible (Kirby and Peggy, 2001). Sometimes it was not easy for teachers to
adapt themselves to the new or strange circumstance which they were not familiar with at all.
Some may felt that they did not prepare well for the acceptance of the new roles to join in the
groups of making decisions. Others might complain that schools would increase their workload
by means of their involvement in decision making instead of incorporating it into their work
(Howes, 2000). These two misunderstandings reflected the lack of the appropriate belief and
attitude toward involvement in teachers’ mind, which needed the retraining and in-service
activities for teachers to construct new attitudes and roles fundamental to the new style of
decision-making (Jung, 2014)
Indeed there were still other limitations to teachers’ decision making, such as the school political
pressure, the lack of time, the vagueness of shared decision making models, the discord between
teachers and administrators (Howes, 2000). Nevertheless, the two barriers mentioned above
represented the very readiness of teachers as the authority of decision making was transferred to
them. With the capacity to deal with decisions, teachers had to be informed enough by means of
the offer of professional knowledge and information. As for the self-efficacy regarding decision
making, it was essential for teachers to have confidence in performing the new roles well.
2.7. Roles of Principals in Creating Participatory Decision Making
School principals have roles to be performed by them in relation to participatory decision making
at school level. The major ones are: empower teachers to participate in making decisions,
enhance participation in decision making and follow implementation and provide feedback.
2.7.1. Empower Teachers to Participate in Making Decisions
The rationale for teachers’ participation in school decision making is to facilitate better
decisions, because those closest to the students know best how to improve their schools and are
 30

in the best position to make and carryout decisions (Cheng, 2008). The decision making of
school staffing, curriculum, or resource allocation etc had been conventionally made by school
principals or members of administrative managerial teams. As it was stated in Jung (2014)
teachers were usually excluded by school administrators in the process of decision making and
not endowed with the obligation to implement school policies. Merely informed of the results of
decisions made, teachers might not clearly understand why or how those decisions were made.
As they seldom had opportunities to be involved in these crucial matters, their isolation within
classroom might bring about the alienation or misunderstanding between them and school.
Over the last two decades, studies indicate that if teachers are not empowered and supported as
professionals, schools would not be able to sustain significant change (Wynne, 2007 ).With the
advent of teacher empowerment, teachers will be expected to be given authority to be the ones
having access to decision making about school significant matters. If Teachers empowered by
principals through different means, there will be increment of teachers’ commitment to schools

(Caldwell and Brain, 2005). School principals would encourage teachers to participate in school
activities outside the classroom, such as textbook selection, curriculum development, learning

assessment, student placement, personnel staffing, or professional development Teacher

empowerment could include extrinsic power and intrinsic power (Kiprop and Kandic, 2012). The
extrinsic power concerned with the phenomenon that teachers had the status of affirmation, the
knowledge they need, and the process of participatory decision making. The intrinsic power was
involved with teachers’ attitude and confidence in displaying their capacity of mastering their
own work, and the representation of intrinsic power counts on teachers’ own self-determination
and sense of self-efficacy a lot. In this regard, the role of a teacher should transform into an
active participant from a passive practitioner by the practice of teacher empowerment.
2.7.2. Enhance participation in decision making
School administration at all levels along the hierarchy, makes decision. The decision may
ultimately negatively or positively influence the schools members. For any group of stakeholders
to participate in decision-making processes they need a facilitator, who will enable them to
meaningfully participate and also help to motivate them to be part of the decision making
process (Latham and Pinder, 2005). As a result, the school principals should facilitate the process
of decision making and the communication of those decisions to the members of the organization
to attain the school goal and to enlarge the moral of teachers and other staffs. It can therefore be
 31

argued that, school principals who make decision on important school issue without adequate
information do not facilitate to the attainment of organizational goals and frequently lower the
morale of members of the organization (Wadasengo, 2011). (Tibebu, 2011), recommended
effective leadership select the appropriate decisions set and permit the optimal participation for
followers. This is to say that instead of making decisions without sufficient and tangible
information, it is not necessary for school principals to facilitate environment which is conducive
and enhance participation of teachers through consultation, stimulation, and affection. Decision –
making is an important managerial process in which many decisions made by member of the
groups.
2.7.3. Evaluate Decision Effectiveness and Provide Feedback
The school principals are the first line personnel who are in charge of the decision needing
educational activities of the school (Desta, 2010).Principals of the school are the major actors to
follow and provide timely and constructive feedback on what is going on in relation to decision
passed in the school. He/she has to identify what going in the school during decision making, its
implementation and its evaluation trend to provide feedback. Principals should give constant
feedback to the teachers. If teachers participation in decision making supervised and feedback is
provided; they feel valued, makes them visible and noticed and helps improve their teaching
skills.
 32

3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This section provides a comprehensive research design and methodology of this research. It
comprises research design, sources of data, population, sample size and sampling techniques,
instrument of data collection, procedure of data collection and methods of data analysis.
3.1. Research Design
Descriptive survey design will be employed to carry out the study. This is because the researcher
believed that this method will help him to find or gather relevant data in detail and to make
detailed analysis. It is also a mixed-methods study as one containing both a quantitative and a
qualitative portion. A mixed-approach design was also employed in this study (Frankel and
Wallen, 2004). The reason is that the researcher has used a mixed method approach to broaden
understanding by incorporating both qualitative and quantitative approaches to use one approach
to better explain or build on the results from the other approach. In addition this approach is
useful in the development of data gathering instruments and tools like questionnaire, interview
and document. Hence, the research design will mixed approach.
3.2. Sources of Data
The sources of data for this study are primary and secondary and secondary sources of data. The
primary sources of data are school leaders (principals, vice principals, department heads, unit
leaders), teachers, secondary schools supervisors, Parent-Teachers association chairpersons of
the sample schools. While The secondary sources of data are various school documents such as
minutes of staff meeting, supervision records which were given in form of feedback in relation to
decision making, and reports related to teachers’ participation in decision making in 2021
academic year.
3.3. Population, Sample Size and sampling techniques
3.3.1. Target Population of the study
According to data obtained from the HWEO (2021), there are 4 government secondary schools
in the woreda. The statistical population of this study will be teachers, principals, vice principals,
and 4 PTA chairperson in 4 secondary schools. Hence, teachers, principals, vice principals,
supervisors and PTA will be the population (sample frame) of the study and from this the target
 33

population (samples) are drawn. Accordingly, the population for the study are 195 teachers, 4
principals, 7 vice principals, 2 supervisors and 4 PTA chairperson found in these two secondary
schools of Haramaya Woreda.

3.3.2. Sample size and Sampling Techniques

To make the research manageable and to achieve the desired result, the researcher used
different sampling techniques for various groups of study participants. According to data
obtained from the HWEO (2021), there are 4 government secondary schools in the woreda. so,
the researcher will select all school as sample using availability sampling method.. Similarly,
2(100%) supervisors, 4 (100%) secondary school’s principals, 7(100%) vice-principals and
4(100%) PTA char parson will be selected through availability sampling according to their role
and responsibility to provide supervision activities for teachers. Because as Singh, (2006)
states, the availability sampling is applied to those samples that are taken because the researcher
is unable to employ more acceptable sampling methods. Regarding the selection of the sample
teachers, out of 198 (100%) teachers working in 4 sample secondary schools of Haramaya
Woreda, 101 (50%) teachers will be selected by employing simple random sampling method
through lottery system based on Cohen et al., (2007) table for determining sample size from a
given population.
Table 1: Summary of population, sample and sampling techniques of the sample teachers
No Secondary Population Samples Sampling technique
schools sample teachers teachers
(N)
n %
1 Ugaaz 21 11 50 Simple random sampling
Baate 39 20 50 to select teachers from one
Haramaya 89 45 50 school & proportional
2 Addele 49 25 50 sampling from each school
Totals 198 101 50

Table 2: Summary of Sample Respondents and Techniques.

Types of Totals Sample Sampling Techniques
Respondents population size
(N)
n %
Teachers 198 101 50 Simple random sampling method through
lottery method considering their proportion
 34

Principals 4 4 100 Availability sampling

Vice-principals 7 7 100 Availability sampling
PTA Chair person 4 4 100 availability sampling.
Totals 213 116 54

3.4. Instruments of Data Collection

Using different types of tools for gathering data help to get adequate and sufficient data for the
problem on the study. Therefore, the researcher will be use three different types of data gathering
instruments in this study. These are questionnaire, interview, and documents.
3.4.1. Questionnaire
The main reason to use questionnaire is for obtaining factual information, opinions and attitudes
from large number of subjects with-in a short period of time. The same questionnaires are
prepared for teachers and school leaders. Questionnaires include both types of items, that is,
closed and open ended. Both closed and open ended items will be use to collect data from the
above respondent assessing the decision making extents, areas and factors affecting teachers’
participation in school decision making processes and the possible mechanisms that could
improve decision making in school.
The questionnaire has five parts. The first is about demographic situation of respondents to
analyze if there is any link between this factors and decision making. Part two and three of the
questionnaire consists of 39 items and it thought to elicit the extent and areas of teachers’
participation in school decision–making. Respondent will be requested to indicate teachers rate
of participation ranging 1 to 5 where 1 = very low, 2 =low; 3 = medium; 4=high; 5= very high).
In order to get relevant information for the purpose of this study, those decision statements
prepared by Malike, Joseph (cited in Assefa Abahumna, 1995) will be adopted and modified to
suit this research. Part four of the questionnaire contained 19 questions focus on factors affecting
teachers’ participation in decision–making. Respondents will be asked to indicate their degree of
agreement using a five point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5 (where 1 =strongly disagree; 2
=disagree; 3 =undecided; 4 =agree; 5 = strongly agree). In addition, the fifth part of the
questionnaire contain three open ended questions in which respondent will write their additional
idea in relation to extent and areas; and on strategies to improve teachers’ participation in school
decision makings.
 35

3.4.2. Interview
Interview will be used to collect primary data about teachers’ participation in school decision
making in secondary schools of Haramaya Woreda The type of interview will be used semi-
structured and it contained similar idea with the contents of the questionnaire. For this purpose,
interview guideline will be prepared for 4 secondary schools supervisors and 4 PTA
chairpersons. Questions for interview will be prepared in English but translated in to Afan
Oromo before the interview to obtain the necessary in depth information and avoid
communication barriers. On the other hand, informal conversational interview will be also
employed to get more additional information that supports the study.
3.4.3. Document Analysis
Documents will be checked to see different recorded/written documents such as minutes of
meeting of management committee, teachers’, PTA, departments and clubs involvement in
different decisions passed and another related documents were analyzed in order to check the
teachers’ current practicing in school decision making.
3.5. Procedure of Data collection
Data those valid this research will be collected through questionnaire, interview and document
review. The questionnaire will be tested and made necessary correction to avoid ambiguity and
confusion before conducting the final data collection. This will be followed by the preparation of
the final draft of the questionnaire. Then, the questionnaire will be administered with the help of
principals and unit leaders of the schools after provision of necessary orientation by the
researcher. The researchers will be distributed 101 questionnaires to teachers and 11
questionnaires for school leaders (principals, vice-principals and supervisors) respondents and
collected them after a week. The interview will be conducted with PTA to obtain data.
Moreover; the data available in document forms related to teachers’ participation in school
decision making in secondary schools of HWEO will be gathered from written materials, in the
sample schools and HWEO.
3.6. Reliability and Validity
Checking the validity and reliability of data collecting instruments before providing to the actual
study subject will be the core to assure the quality of the data (Yalew, 2006). Pilot study will be
conducted in Awaday secondary School for 20 teachers and 3 school leaders to check the
reliability of items prior to the final administration of the questionnaires to all respondents. The
 36

pilot test will be conducted to secure the validity and reliability of the instruments with the
objective of checking whether or not the items include in the instrument can enable the
researcher to gather relevant information. Besides, the purpose of pilot testing will be made
necessary amendment so as to correct confusing and ambiguous questions. The result of the pilot
testing is statistically computed by the SPSS computer program. The Cronbach’s Alpha model
will be used for analysis. Based on the pilot test, the reliability coefficient of the instrument will
be found to be statistically calculated.

3.7. Methods of Data Analysis

The data will be analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively based on the responses which
obtained through questionnaires, interview and document analysis. The data collected through
closed ended questions will be tallied, tabulated and filled in to SPSS version 20 by consulting
statistician and interpretation is done using percentage, mean, standard deviation and
independent sample t-test. Depending on the nature of the basic questions, gathered data will be
analyzed using different statistical tools. Accordingly, the respondents report and the nature of
the basic questions required the following statistical techniques: Frequency and percentage
distribution will be used to analyze various characteristics of the respondents such as sex, year of
service, education qualification and field of study while mean score, and standard deviation will
be computed for quantitative variables against each item score to identify the extent of practice
and challenges of instructional supervision; independent sample t-test will be employed to test
statistically significant difference between the mean scores of the respondents as such as teachers
and school leaders. The existing response differences will be tested at p=0.05 level of
significance.
 37

4. WORK PLAN
Table 4. Research Activities.

Task Anticipated Person Required

Submission of research title decepmer1-30/2022 Researcher

First draft proposal Writing January 1-31/2022 Researcher

Literature Review Preparing Instrument February 1-31/2022 Researcher

Write up of methodology March 1- 31/2022 Researcher

Data Collection April 1-14 /2022 Researcher and Assistant

Data Analysis and Interpretation write up April15- 28/2022 Researcher and Statistician
and submission of first draft

Incorporate comments and write up of the May 1-30/2022 Researcher

second draft thesis.

Submission of thesis for examination. June 8 /2022 Researcher

Presentation June 14-20/2022 Researcher

5. LOGISTICS
Table 5. Cost of Stationary Materials and Others

No. Item Unit Quantity Unit price Total price

1 printing paper Ream 3 120.00 360.00
2 Pen Pieces 10 5.00 50.00
3 Pencils Pieces 4 3.00 12.00
4 Compact disk Pieces 2 40.00 50
 38

5 Note book Pieces 1 15.00 15.00

6 Toner Pieces 1 1300.00 1300.00
7 Flash disk Pieces 1(8GB) 180.0 180.0
8 Eraser Piece 1 5.00 2.00.00
9 Printing and bending - - 500.00
10 Questioner duplicate 1500.00
11 Type writing 500.00
12 Transport & communication 5200.00
13 Personal cost 6000.00
Totals 15624.00

Reference
Adams, D. 1993. Defining Educational Quality. Improving Educational quality
project.Publication.No-1.Biennial report
Aggarwal, R.D. 1993. Organization and Management. McGraw: Hill Publishes Company
Limited, New Delhi, India.
Aggrwal, J. C. 2004. Teachers and Education in a developing Society .4th Edition, VIKAS
Publishing House, PVT, Ltd. Delhi, India.
Alemayehu Tegenu. 2012. Assessment of Students Misbehavior and Coping Strategies In
case of shashemene Secondary School. M.A. Thesis. Addis Ababa University, Addis
Ababa.
Algoush, K.S. 2010.Assessment of the Relationship between Involvements Decision Making
Process and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction. Open University, Malaysia.
Anderson, K .2002.Why teachers participate in decision making and the third continuum,
Canadian. Journal of educational administration and Policy, 23(4):134-136.
Andre, B.1996.Teachers and job satisfaction: A study Employing the Experience
Sampling Method. 3:147-154.
Armstrong , M. 1990. A hand book of Human Resource Management. Kagan page Ltd.
London, England.
Awash Gebru, 2001.A study of Community Participation in Education with Particular
emphasis on Community Financing of Primary Schools in selected Region ofEthiopia.
Problems and policy implementation. M.A Thesis. Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa.
 39

Balcha Diriba. 2012. An investigation of Teachers’ Participation in School Decision

making process:The case of selected Secondary schools of Bale Zone,Oromia
Regional State. M.A Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya.
Bender, Y.2005.The FactfulTeacher.Effective Communication with parents, collegues
and Adiminstrators, Normad Press. United States of America
Blasé, J. 1993. The Micro politics of effective School Based leadership:Teachers
perspectives.Educational Administration Quarterly. 29(2):142-163.
Bogdan, R.C. and Biklen, S. K. 1998. Qualitative research for Education. An introduction to
theory and methods: Mifflin co., Boston, USA.
Brain, R. and Kinight, J. 1993.Financial Management for School: The thinking Manger’s
guide. Athenaeum Press Ltd.
Brown, B. 1992. Curriculum and Instruction: An introduction to Methods of
teaching.:McMillan publisher Ltd. London, England.
Brown, D. J. 1990. Decentralization and school-based management. The Falmer,
London, England.
Caldwell and Brian J. 2005.School-Based Management.Education Policy Series.
UNESCO/International Institute for Educational Planning and International
Academy of Education, Paris, France
Cannon, G. and Bowers, J. 1995. Defining team competencies and establishing team training
requirements. Their training and performance.Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Challenging
circumstances. London, DfES.
Carron G. and Grauwe A.1997. Supervision and support services in Asia. A comparative
analysis.Paris UNESCO.
Chan, M., Ching, Y. and Cheng, V.1997.Teacher Participation in Decision Making. The case
of SMI schools in Hong Kong. Educational Journal. 25(2):17-42.
Chanman-Tak, Yue-Chor, Ching and Yin-Cheong 1997. Teachers‟ Participation in Decision–
Making: The case of SMI Schools in Hong Kong: Educational Journal, 25, (2).
http;//sunzi.libhku.hk/view/
Cheng, C. K. 2008. The effect of shared decision making on the improvement in teachers’ job
development.New Horizons in Education. 56(3):3-5.
 40

Christenson, S. L. 2004. The Family–School Partnership: An Opportunity to Promote the

Learning Competence of All Students. School Psychology Review. 33(1): 83-104.
Coleman, M. 2005. Theories and Practice of Leadership: And introduction in Leadership and
management in Education: Cultures, Change and context. Oxford university
press.Delta Kappan.
Davis, K. and Newstorm A. 1994. Human Behavior at Work: Organizational Behavior (8th
ed.). New York: Mcgraw-Book Company.
Desalegn Gemechu. 2014. The practice of teachers’ involvement in decision making in
government secondary schools of Jimma town .M.A.Thesis ,Jimma university,
Ethiopia.
Desta Kaweti. 2010. Practice and problems of principals, leadership and teachers
performances of secondary schools in West Arsi Zone M.A thesis Addis Ababa
University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Drah, S. T. 2011. Teachers participation in decision making process in senior high and
technical Schools in the Kwaebibirem district in the eastern region of Ghana. M.A.
Thesis, University of Cape Coast.
Durham, C., Knight, D., and Locke, E. A. 1997.Effects of leader role, team-set goal difficulty,
efficacy, and tactics on team effectiveness.Organizational Behaviorand Human
Decision Processes.
Emily R. Lai .2011.Motivation: A literature Review, Research report.
Endale Ajebew, 2011.Practice and Problems of Financial Management in Government
Primary schools: The case of Shashemene Town, Oromia Regional state, Ethiopia.
MA. Thesis. Haramaya University.
Evans, L. 1998.The Effects of Senior Management teams on teachers’ morale and job
satisfaction. Nairobi, Kenya; Nairobi University Press.
Ewton R 2007. Sustaining Employee Morale. From < http://www.associatedcontent.com>
Eyre, E. C. Pettinger, R. 1999. Mastering Basic Management, 3rd Edition. Houndmills:
Macmillan Press Ltd.
Farris, G. F. 1998. Technical leadership: Much discussed but little understood. Research
Technology Management, 31(2), 12-16.
 41

Felipe Barrera-Osorio, 2008. Decentralized Decision-Making in Schools. The world

Bank,Washinton D.C. USA.
Frankel, J. and Wallen,N. 2003. How to design and evaluate research in education, New York.
Fullan, M. G. 1997. Change forces. Falmer. London.
Gardian, A. and Rathore, H. C. 2010. Teacher Participation in Decision –Making Process:
Reality and Repercussions in India Higher Education, Kamacha, Varansi, India.
Gorton, R. A. 1997. School Leadership and Administration: Important Concepts, Case
Studies and Situation (3rd ed.). Iowa: Mc Brown Publisher.
Guzzo, R. A. 1996. Fundamental considerations about work groups. M. A. Handbook of
work group psychology.Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Howes, C. 2000.Social Emotional Classroom Climate in children: Child Teacher
Relationship. Retrieved from www.mendeley.com/research/socialemot.
Hoy, W. and Miskel, C.G. 1991. Educational Administration: Theory, Research and Practice.
(4th ed). New York: McGraw–Hill, Inc.
Hume, C. 1990. Grievance and Discipline in Schools. Harlow: Longman Group.
Jonse R. and George M, 2009.Contemporary management.McGraw Hill. New Delhi, India.
Joyce, B., Calhoun, E. and Hopkins, D. 1999. The new structure of school improvement
Buckingham, Open University Press.
Jung, Lin Y.2014.Teachers Involvement in school Decision Making. Journal of Study in
Education. 4(3):12-15.
Kiprop, C. J. and Kandic, S.J. 2012.An investigation into Teachers Participation in
Decision-Making in public Secondary Schools in Kenya and case of baringo
district.Elixir Education.
Kirby and Peggy, C. 2001. “Shared Decision making: Moving from concern about
Restrooms to concern about classrooms “.Journal of school leadership. 4(6): 10-15.
Latham, G. P. and Pinder, C. C. 2005. Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of
the 21st century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485-516.
Law, S. and Glover, D. 2003. Educational Leadership and Learning: Practice, Policy and
Research. London: Biddles Ltd.
 42

Leiberman, A., and Lynne, M., 1994. Restoring schools: What matters and what works.
Lightfoot, S. L., 1996. On goodness in schools: Themes of empowerment. Peabody
Journal,12(4): 56-71.
Lin, Y. J., 2014. Teachers Involvement In school Decision making of secondary schools of
Hong Kong. Chaina, Microthink Journal of Education. Administration and policy
study, 4(3): 52-53
Luneberg, F. C., 2010.The Decision making Processes. National Forum of educational
Administration and supervision journal. Sam Houston State University. 27(4): 5-9.
Mbumba, A. M. 1992. Book of reading in Educational Management. Maxongororo paper
converters Pvt.Ltd., Harare, Zimbabwe.
Millet T 2010. 6 Reasons Why Staff Morale is Important. From < http://EzineArticles.com.
Missik, J. 2004. Barriers to Effective Delegation in Secondary School Administration in
Kobujoi and Kaptumo Divisions, Nandi South District.Unpublished M.ed
Thesis.University of Eastern Africa, Baraton.
MoE, 1994.Educational Planning, Community Participation, and Finance guide.
Working Manual- Amharic Version. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
MoE, 2004.Woreda Capacity Building program course Workbook:AED,USAID/BESO
II project. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
MoE. 1994. Education and Training Policy. Ministry of Education. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
MoE. 2005. Education Sector Development Program III. The Federal Democratic of
Ethiopia.Program Action Plan. Addis Ababa. Ethiopia.
MOE. 2005.Recurrent and capital Budget for education sector. Abstract. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
MOE. 2007. General Education Quality Assurance package. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
MoE. 2010. Education Sector Development Program IV. Program Action Plan.Federal
Ministry of Education. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
MoE. 2011. Governing Guide line for the Implementation of the School Improvement
Program: Revised. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
 43

MoE. 2012. Professional Standards for Ethiopian School Teachers. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
Mokoena S. 2011. Participative Decision-Making perception of School Stakeholders
in South Africa.University of South Africa.
Moran, T.M. 2009. Fostering Teachers Professional in School: The Role of Leadership
Orientation and Trust. Education Administration Quarterly, Journal of educational
administration Vol. 45 2(217-247).
Mualuko,2009. Improving decision making in schools through teacher
participation.Educational Research and Review.4(8).MasindeMuliro University of
science and technology, Kenya.
Muhammad, T.A. 2011.Factors Affecting Teachers Motivation.International journal of
Business and social Science, 2(3):57-59.
Ngambi H.C. 2011. The Relationship Between Leadershipand Employee Morale In Higher
Education. African Journal Of Business Management, 5(6): 90.
Northouse, P. G. 2010. Leadership: Theory and practice, 5 th Edition. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
Okumbe, J.A. 1998. Educational management: Theory and Practice . Nairobi University
Press, Nairobi, Kenya.
OLorunsola and Olayemi, 2011.Teachers Participation in Decision-Making process in
Secondary School in Ekiti State, Nigeria. International Journal of Education.
Administration and policy Studies, 3(6):78-84.
Owens, R.G. 1998 . Organization behavior in education. Boston: Ally and Bacon, Inc.
Pashiardis, P. 1994. Teachers’ Participation in Decision-Making.International Journal of
Educational Management. 12(4): 56-71.
Paul.C.C. 2001.Methods in Behavioral Research, 7th Edition.McGraw-Hill Companies.
Potter, D., Reynolds, D. and Chapman, C. 2002. School improvement for schools facing
challenging circumstances: a review of research and practice, School Leadership
and Management.
 44

Rehel G/tsadik, 2012. Practice of Co- curricular Activities and How They Develop
Students’ Talent inPreparatory Schools in Addis Ababa. M.A.thesis. Addis
University, Ethiopia.
Rue, L. W. and Byars, L. L. 1990. Supervision key Link to Productivity. Richard D. Irwin,
Inc., Boston, USA.
Sagie, A., Zaidman, N., Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Te’eni, D., and Schwartz, D. G.
(2002). An empirical assessment of the loose-tight leadership model: Quantitative
and qualitative analyses. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(6): 234-250.
Schoenfeld, A. H. 2011. How we think: A theory of goal-oriented decision making and its
educational applications. NY: Routledge, New York, USA.
Sergiovanni, T. J. 1992. Moral Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publisher.
Smylie, M. A., Lazarus, V. and Brownlee-Conyers, J. 1996. Instrumental outcomes of
school-based participative decision making. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis,
Somech, A. 2005. Directive versus participative leadership: Two complementary approaches
to managing school effectiveness. Educational Leadership Quarterly, 56(5): 41-53.
Somech, A. 2010. Participative decision making in Schools: A mediation moderating
Analytical framework for understanding school and teachers outcomes. Educational
Administration Quarterly,12: 78-96.
Supaporn, S. 2000. High school students’ perspectives about misbehavior. Physical Educator.
Sutherland, J. Canwell, D. 2004. Key Concepts in Strategic Management. Palgrave,
Macmillan, New York, USA.
Thomas, B., 2002. School Discipline.htt://www.helium.com/items/1245730.ChangingProblem.
Tibebu Legesse. 2011. The Role of Principals in participative decision making Practice:
The case of Government Secondary schools of Hawassa town in SNNPR. M.A.
Thesis. Haramaya University, Ethiopia.
Wadesango, N and Bayaga, A .2013.Management of school: teachers’ involvement in
decision making process. African Journal of Business management, Full length
Paper.
 45

Wadesango, N. 2011. Strategies of teacher participation in decision making in schools.

Journal of Social Science. 27(2):85-91.
Wadesango, N. 2012. The Influence of Teachers Participation in Decision-Making on
their Occupational Morale. Waltersisulu University. East London, Republic of
South Africa.
West, M. A. 2002. Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity
and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology, An International
Review.
White, P. A. 1992. Teacher empowerment under "ideal" school-site autonomy. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis.
Wilson, R.E. 1996. Educational Administration, Kent State University.
Workneh Abebe. 2012. School Management and Decision-Making in Ethiopia Government
Schools.WWW.Yornglives ,org,UK.
Wu, V., and Short, P. M. 1996.The relationship of empowerment to teacher job
commitment and job satisfaction. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 7: 45-70.
Wynne, B. 2007. Leading the turn around. The Journal of Research and Development in
Education, 6(1):90-111.
Yukl, G. 2006. Leadership in organizations, 6th Edition. Upper Saddle, NJ: Pearson
Prentice Hal