Studying Academic Departments

The study was on the level of administrative effectiveness of Heads of Academic Departments in Nigeria universities and the considerable difference (if any) in administrative effectiveness of male ad female Heads of Academic Departments. 1 study question and 1 hypothesis were raised/formulated to direct the investigation. Out of 1520 Heads of Academic Departments in all 36 public universities in Nigeria, 1326 academic staff in nine universities were selected from 362 Departments in nine universities for the study. The results of investigation revealed that the administrative effectiveness of Heads of Departments in Nigerian universities was high. Because there was no considerable distinction in the area of sex, it was recommended among other people that gender really should not be a hindrance in the appointment of Heads of Department of Heads of Departments.

INTRODUCTION

The state of administration in higher education has been a source of concern to the stakeholders. The universities had firm control of the activities of staff and students. This was to the extent of the existence of normal academic calendar of nine months. Stakeholders specially parents and employers of labor had assurance as to the precise year of graduation and caliber of graduates from universities in Nigeria. The mandate of the university as specified in section 8 of the National policy on Education (FRN, 2004 edition) is to teach, conduct research development and offer community service. These organizational goals of the university seen no longer realizable due to obstacle that incorporate alleged poor performance of Heads of Departments who are no longer performing their functions effectively. Lucas (1994) describes administrative functions of the Head of Department to include: preparing teaching schedules, ensuring teaching effectiveness of staff, managing graduate assistants, and other department staff, performing personnel decision-generating, revising the curriculum, and managing the spending budget. The success or failure of the department is for that reason his responsibility. The mandate of the university can only be achieved by means of the successful efficiency, by the Heads of Departments of their functions. The National Universities Commission (UNC) in its 2002 report on the state of education in Nigeria alleged that universities in Nigeria perform below expectation (Okebukola, 2002). Some stakeholders especially parents and employers of labour also alleged poor efficiency of graduates from universities in Nigeria. Aghenta (2001) equally observed that not much more than 30 percent of the typical period of teaching is employed for actual teaching. Lecturers do not submit examination questions early neither do the mark the scripts and submit results on times. Could these be due to the fact the Heads of Departments are uncaring, self-serving and exhibits dictatorial management? There are circumstances where, for instance, students so not even register their courses prior to examinations. Considering that the department is the simple unit of the university system, could it be that the Heads of Departments are not performing their administrative or supervisory roles effectively? How powerful are the Heads of Departments in the administration of academic departments? Could it also be that female Head of Departments are not effective in the efficiency of administrative duties? It was as a result imperative to ascertain the administrative effectiveness of Head of Departments who are given duties to perform and figure out if female Heads of Departments are not successful in the performance of ,administrative duties?

Technique OF STUDY

This is descriptive research based on the ex-post-factor style. The population of the study comprised all the academic staff in the 1520 Academic Departments in all the 36 public universities in a range of varieties of (federal, state, conventional, specialized, older, newer) universities. Via a multistage and stratified approaches and finally by way of purposive sampling technique 1,326 academic staff had been selected to rate the 362 Heads of Departments in nine universities taken from the 36 public universities in Nigeria. The primary instruction that was used in information collection was the questionnaire title &lsquoHeads of Departments Administrative Effectiveness questionnaire (HODAEQ: The purpose of the rate the efficiency of the Heads of Departments in Nigerian universities in order to establish their administrative effectiveness. The questionnaire was made up of two main section. The very first section sought background data (ownership, age and curriculum of university and sex of the Head of Department. The second section contained 30 administrative duties of the Head of Department on which academic staff had been asked to rate the performance of their Heads of Departments on a five point likert kind scale. The items had been grouped into seven functional areas that included Heads of Departments administration of instructional programmes, administration of staff, administration of students, administration of facilities, administration of finance, administration of external relations and administration of workplace. 5 of these groups had 4 items per group whose Reponses were to determine the administrative effectiveness of the Heads of Departments. The other two group had five items each and every. To make certain the achievement of the face and content material validity the instrument Head s of Departments Administrative Effectiveness Questionnaire (HODAEQ) was created to reflect

DON OMOIKE AND PHILIP O.A IDOGHO

The difficulty and the hypothesis of the study. Two study consultants in educational administration certified the instrument prior to it was administered. The test-retest approach was utilised to test the reliability of he instrument. The data obtained was statistically analyzed to obtain the reliability coefficient. The result of the correlation of the scores by means of Pearson &lsquor’ was .83. The questionnaire was administered on a total of 1,448 academic staff in the 362 departments out of which 1,326 was retrieved for analysis. The information collected to answer the analysis question raised for the study were analyzed with the use of indicates and percentages. The hypothesis that was formulated was tested utilizing the z-test statistics. Sixty percent (or transformed mean of 3.00) was adopted as the base line for administrative. Effectiveness. Research Question: What is the level of administrative effectiveness of Heads of Departments? Percentage. The outcomes are presented in table 1. As revealed in table 1, there were a total of 1,326 respondents who rated the 362 Heads of Department in he nine selected universities. With a mean of 15.two, a transformed mean of three.55 and 71 percent rating on administrative effectiveness rating. HYPOTHESIS: There is no substantial distinction in administrative effectiveness in between male and female Head of Departments of universities in Nigeria.

Table 1:

Administrative effectiveness rating of heads of departments

1,326 141,335 15.two three.55 71 Efficient

Table 2:

z-test in administrative effectiveness in between male and female heads of department in Nigerian

Gender N X sd df z-value Remarks

Administrative Male 1,150 71.8 6.9 1.324 ±1.96 Not significant

Effectiveness   Female 176 70.2 7.6 P>0.05

The hypothesis was tested by applying the z-test . The result of analysis is presented in table two. The z-test of significance of difference as shown in the table two had a calculated z-test value of 1.54. This indicates that no substantial distinction exists in administrative effectiveness of male and female Heads of Departments in Nigerian Universities. Therefore, the hypothesis that states that there is no considerable distinction in administrative effectiveness between male and female heads of departments retained.

DISCUSSION

1 of the findings of this study was that heads of department had been generally quite effective ( 71%) in their administration of academic departments. The finding confirms that of Hamlin ( 2002) that found a degree of congruence in all the criteria of managerial effectiveness of leaders in higher education. he has identified academic leaders as successful. Another important discovering was that females had been under represented in department headship in Nigerian universities. The discovering of futrell (2002) is confirmed that girls represent a little proportion of educational leaders and administrators. 1 would tend to agree with Forsyth (1999), that men are likely to emerge as leaders simply because females are &lsquoreluctant’ to assume leadership roles. This result is a confirmation of Forsyth’s earlier confirmation that there is a substantial distinction in leadership emergence by gender, which he translated to mean that leadership efficiency is titled towards the male than female leaders. With a mean score of 70,two, female Heads of Departments had been identified to be successful in their administration of academic departments. This is further strengthened by the result of z-test that showed no considerable distinction in heads of departments administrative effectiveness between male and females. The earlier impressions has been on exclusive gender differences that negatively have an effect on the appointment and performance or effectiveness of female Heads of Departments (Korabik, 2002) .out of the 362 Heads of Departments sampled, only thirteen percent had been females. It could be a result of their relative non-availability as could be identified in the male-female ratio of academic staff in universities. From the results, for that reason , the sex of a leader can’t be equated with ability, efficiency and effectiveness. The findings do not agree with Hawkin’s (1995) observation that there are mutually exclusive gender differences that have an effect on the emergence and performance of a leader. The obtaining of no important difference in administrative effectiveness between male and female Heads of Departments confirm Osho’s (1998) earlier obtaining of no important distinct in administrative effectiveness between male and female principals. There is therefore no differential performance in leadership by men and woman as observed by Korabik (2002). She had concluded that females are given individual oriented leadership abilities even though men really should be given job-oriented skills to guarantee their powerful leadership efficiency.

CONCLUSION

The study has provide evidence of high level of administrative effectiveness of Heads of Departments in Universities in Nigeria. It would appear that the difficulty that emanate and normally lead to crisis within the universities in Nigeria may possibly not be traced to the administration of departments by Heads of Departments. The appointment of Heads of Department seems to be proper as virtually all Head of Departments were efficient in the performance of administrative duties in the departments. The locating of no important distinction in administrative effectiveness of Heads of Departments between males and females has implication for gender problems in university administration. There is the existing global focus on female education that demands boost not only in females education but also in female involvement in educational administration in general and university governance in specific. This seems to be the focus of &lsquowomen in academics movement RECOMMENDATION Head o Departments should continuously perform their administrative functions as best they can. They only require to be encouraged to do greater so as to enhance the percentage rating on the effectiveness scale. Gender of an academic staff need to not be a factor in contemplating whom to appoint as Heads of criteria for appointments such as expertise, they need to be appointed as Heads of Department their administrative effectiveness is not in doubt. Conscious and direct plans need to be put in place to redirect focus on bringing women into academia.  Please read more about Tramadol side effects and Ambien side effects.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *