CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.

uk
Provided by International Institute for Science, Technology and Education (IISTE): E-Journals

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org

ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

Practices and Challenges of Instructional Supervision in

Government Secodary Schools of Wolaita Zone
Teshome Terra1 Endale Berhanu2
1.Corresponding author: Wolaita Sodo
2.Co-author; Wolaita Sodo University

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to assess practices and challenges of instructional supervision in government
secondary schools of Wolaita Zone. Three research questions were formulated. They are aimed at determining the
extent to what instructional supervisors give professional support to teachers; to what extent are instructional
supervisors effective in supervisory tasks and finding out the main challenges that existed in the implementation
of instructional supervision. Descriptive survey design and mixed methods were employed. Five woredas and six
secondary schools were selected by simple random sampling technique. Five woreda education office supervision
coordinators, five assigned supervisors, 15 principals were selected by purposeful sampling technique. Eighty five
teachers were selected by simple random selection method. Instruments of data collection were developed by the
researcher and pilot-tested by using Cronbach’s Alpha. Quantitative data were gathered through questionnaire.
Qualitative data were gathered through interview. Data were analyzed in quantitative and qualitative methods.
Quantitative data were filled into SPSS version 20. Frequency, percent and mean were used to analyze quantitative
data. Qualitative data were analyzed by narration. The findings of the study indicated that instructional supervisors
didn’t give regular and adequate support to teachers in professional and curriculum development. They didn’t give
training to teachers either in pedagogical issues or in importance of instructional supervision. Instead of spending
more support time in academic tasks, they spend their time doing administrative tasks. On the other hand,
instructional supervisors faced different challenges that influenced effective implementation of supervision. These
were: problem in selecting and assigning right persons as instructional supervisor, lack of supervision manuals,
lack of adequate budget, facilities and materials, resistance of teachers to supervision due to lack of awareness for
teachers in importance of supervision, excessive workloads of principals and lack of right training for supervisors.
Based on the findings, it was recommended that supervisors need to give regular and adequate support to teachers
on professional and curriculum development and it is better to focus on academic tasks by delegating
administrative tasks to other personnel. Woreda education office is suggested to select and assign right persons as
instructional supervisors. Regional education bureau, zone education department and woreda education office are
suggested to fulfill supervision manuals for instructional supervisors.
Keywords: Instruction; Supervision; Secondary School and Zone
DOI: 10.7176/JEP/10-13-05
Publication date:May 31st 2019

1. Background of the Study

Education is an instrument to bring change in human life and a base for development. Schools are places where
formal education is implemented. For its implementation cooperation of different stakeholders is important. The
role of instructional supervisors is to support teachers who are facilitators of student learning. The goal of
supervision will be achieved when instructional supervisors and stakeholders work together.
Before the emerging of supervision, inspection was first introduced in 1941/2 in Ethiopia as it was indicated
in Ministry of Education Supervision Manual. Later, inspection was replaced by supervision in 1962/3.The
replacement of inspection by supervision was believed that it can improve the teaching-learning process [18]. But
in developed countries like United Kingdom (UK) and United States much more attention is given to inspection
than school supervision [7]. According to [4] inspectors acted as expertise and authority. They had authority to
transfer teachers to the schools they want, promote or suspend them for negligence of duties. In contrast,
supervisors are responsible to support and assist teachers and school principals in the tasks. According to [21]
instructional supervision is viewed as all activities that educational administrations may express as leadership in
the improvement of instruction like observation of teaching-learning in classrooms meeting with individual teacher
or group of teachers. This shows that instructional supervision has a role of improving teaching-learning process.
[16] explains the way of emphasizing this strategy in that all children and students can learn and many of them
need some form of support in learning and identifying barriers that hinder learning. [12] suggest the way to achieve
the goal of supervision as general advice, assistance and support of instructional supervisors.
Therefore, to make teaching- learning process effective, advice, assistance and support of supervisors is very
important. Over several decades great changes were observed in the philosophy, objective, function, technique and
in the outcomes of supervision according to [21].This shows the growth and changes made in supervision.
According to [18] in Ethiopia during socialist principle, the political system of the country changed education

37
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

management. There was strict control over education policy. Due to this, plans and programs needed to be changed
from supervision to inspection in 1980/1981. After this, when Education and Training Policy of 1994 was started
to be implemented, educational administration was decentralized. Following this, democratic supervision was
introduced. In this form of supervision all concerned stake holders can participate in decision making, planning
and setting objectives to improve teaching-learning process.
In order to improve teacher’s performance and students’ achievement, improvement of instructional
supervision plays a crucial role. Researchers such as [25] believed that instructional supervision has the potential
to improve class-room practices and contribute to student success through professional growth and improvement
of teachers.
[20] in its Education Sector Development Plan (ESDP IV) underlined the necessity of supervising and
supporting teachers as a strategy to ensure quality and improvement of teaching-learning. According to [23]
effective school supervisor gives relevant and on-going support and encouragement to teachers’ instructional
practices. Instructional supervision improves both decision-making skills and student learning out come. Therefore,
instructional supervision and support are very important to improve teaching-learning. [2] mentioned the
importance of effectiveness and commitment of stakeholders especially teachers, school leaders and management.
In (ESDP) III policy frame work, SNNPRS has given due attention to implement the current education policy. In
the same book it is underlined that educational supervision and leadership will be strengthened especially at the
wereda and school levels through intensive training for supervisors, school principals and teachers as strategy to
improve quality of education and teaching-learning.
This is to achieve education goal of GTP2 by improved teaching-learning through effective instructional
supervision. Wolaita Zone Education Department underlined the necessity of instructional supervision and
commitment of assigned/cluster supervisors to improve student achievement in the conference made in November
2017 in Wolaita Sodo. In the conference one of the challenges raised was lack of commitment of supervisors.
Another challenge raised was the tasks they do when they visit schools that are not in their job descriptions. Some
of the participants of the conference and the head of education department of Wolaita Zone said that
assigned/cluster supervisors visit the schools only to take lists of males and females and report it to woreda
education office.
[27] showed in their research that there is new approach to supervision in Addis Ababa. The city
administration Education Bureau recruits and assigns subject area supervisors/ teachers based on their qualification
and teaching experiences as permanent staff member in each school to give professional support to teachers.
Therefore, the researcher believes that effective implementation of existing instructional supervision and
finding new strategy and approach to it can promote professional competency of teachers and improve instruction.
So, this study was used to assess practices and challenges of instructional supervision in government secondary
and preparatory schools of Wolaita Zone.

2. Statement of the Problem

The strength and effectiveness of instructional supervision is one of the key aspects for improvement of teaching-
learning process, teachers’ professional development and achievement of students. To achieve this goal, schools
should be supported by committed and skillful supervisors. Instruction can be successful and improved by regular
and adequate Support of instructional supervisors. But there are problems and challenges in instructional
supervision. In order to address the different problems and challenges, many countries have initiated processes of
their supervision system. Ethiopia is one of the countries that addressed the process of supervision system to
improve teaching-learning system and to assure education quality. The need to initiate system of instructional
supervision and reduce the challenges that face in the area will improve students’ learning and their achievements.
According to [28], in order to improve the teaching-learning process in general and learner’s achievement in
particular the overall education system should be supported by educational supervision.
According to [17], supervision is the process in which supervisors provide professional support for school
principals and teachers to strengthen the teaching and learning process. But there are causes of ineffectiveness in
instructional supervision. As stated in Five Years Growth and Transformation Plan and Ethiopian Renaissance
(2003 E.C) basically there is no doubt that education sector didn’t assure quality education because stakeholders
of the sector haven’t become effective in their performance meaningfully even though it differs from place to place.
[26] mentioned poor facilities in all levels of education to support instruction and weak supervisory and
administrative support for school as problem associated with quality. This indicated that there is weak supervisory
practice in the region.
It is impossible to say our country’s education has made learners to get required knowledge to develop
problem-solving skills in its objective, content, access, input, output and student achievement [10]. It is obvious
that education and training system of the country hadn’t created effective supervisory skills in instructional
supervisors. The Policy put direction for educational administration to be decentralized and hence supervision
becomes democratic which involves the participation of stakeholders who are concerned to take part in planning,

38
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

decision-making, developing objectives and teaching strategies to improve instructional process [18].
[26] reviewed and summarized from various reports that even though efforts were invested to fulfill skilled
man power at each level, the lack of qualified personnel in the region in general and at wereda and school levels
in particular was found to be the fundamental problem faced during the implementation of (ESDP) II. Different
research findings conducted on practices of instructional supervision in some primary and secondary schools of
different regions and zones of Ethiopia had showed that there is lack of awareness in utilizing various supervisory
options, lack of continuous training for different leaders and senior teachers who are supposed to carry out
supervisory activities at school level and also there is inadequate classroom observation to monitor instructional
improvement.
The research finding of [5] showed the gap of supervisors in supporting the real implementation of CPD. The
research findings of [1] showed that teachers lack awareness and orientation on the activities and significance of
school based supervision in effectiveness of practices of supervisory options matching with the individual teacher’s
development level, and inabilities of supervisors to apply the necessary process for the classroom observation
properly, lack of relevant training programs for supervisors, scarcity of experienced supervisors, lack of
supervision manuals in schools and shortage of allocated budget for supervisory activities.
A research conducted by [12] on supervisory practices of cluster supervisors in promoting teachers in teachers’
professional competences found that there was lack of adequate professional support for newly deployed teachers
in instruction and peer coaching, focus on administrative matters than on academic issues, less mutual professional
trust between principals and teachers, considering clinical supervision as fault finding, fear of newly deployed
teachers that supervisors will report their weaknesses to the other stakeholders, lack of training, need assessment
from the basis of teachers pedagogical gaps, lack of linkage of the schools with the NGOs to financial support,
challenges that face from teachers to accept comments, lack of systematic identification of teachers skill gaps and
lack of support for teachers on instructional activities.
The findings of the research conducted by [3] on Assessment of Implementation of School Clinical
Supervision in Primary Schools of Wolaita Zone showed that the school supervisors were not efficient in assisting
teachers in conducting required meetings with teachers in organized conferences and training programs at the
school level. The findings of the research conducted by [23] on Practices and Challenges of Educational
Supervision on professional Development of Teachers in Addis Ababa showed lack of trained supervisors, low
morale and commitment of supervisors and lack of attempts to identify teacher training needs.
A recent study conducted by researchers at the District Leadership Design Lab (DL2) at the University of
Washington suggested the specific work practices of principal supervisors to be associated with positive school
results.
The researchers of this study noted that principal supervisors matter to improved student learning by working
through principals and teachers, specifically, by supporting principals grow as instructional leaders [8].
The other thing that affects supervisory practice is the task supervisors do when they supervise the school’s
instructional activities. [8] mentioned some of the traditional tasks of principal supervisors. They supervise school
leaders, and the buildings they run. They also supervise compiled local policies and state regulations. They spend
their time checking these and other administrative tasks rather than academic issues. This recent research suggested
that principal supervisors can positively affect student achievement by supporting school principals grow as
instructional leaders. By giving right training and support, supervisors can assess and evaluate the current
leadership practice of principals. By doing this, they can identify professional learning opportunities which can
improve teaching-learning and student achievement. The study also added that supervisors often lack the right
training and support to help principals in capacity building as instructional leaders. As most principal supervisors
were former principals, they know the burden and complexities of the job, they are not ready to give advice and
guide school principals. Instead of leading school, these supervisors must now coach and support principals whose
work requires sets of different skills [8].
[8] in The Model Principal Supervisor Professional Standards 2015 suggests principal supervisors to shift
their supervision from focus on compliance to shaping principals’ instructional leadership capabilities. It is shown
that they were not provided with the right training and didn’t give supportive supervision to principals.
Focus on the compliance and lack of right trainings are mentioned as problems in the study mentioned. If
these problems were solved, the instructional leadership capacity of the principal with whom they work would be
improved and effective instruction and the highest level of student learning and achievement would be recorded.
Supervisor’s effectiveness in supervisory task is a key thing to improve instructional activities in the
classroom. To do this, feedback given by instructional supervisors must be timely and specific. To rate teachers’
work, supervisors should evaluate as soon as teachers perform their works. Supervisors should not wait until annual
evaluation [8].
The objective of giving feedback is to improve performance not to punish weak performance. Instructional
supervisors should offer feedback as corrective criticism. But many instructional supervisors are reluctant to give
negative/corrective feedback and hence they are not effective in their supervisory tasks. Studies showed that any

39
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

feedback (positive or negative) result in higher morale and productivity among workers than no feedback [8].
Supervisors are ineffective in their supervisory tasks of giving feedback, correction, criticism, observing
teachers’ instructions in the classrooms. Observing instruction in classroom is the task many skilled supervisors
neglect. The other issue many instructional supervisors neglect is breakdown of communication between
supervisors and teachers.
Therefore, this study focuses on investigating professional support, effectiveness and challenges of
supervisors, principals and vice principals. Hence it is guided by the following basic research questions.
1. To what extent do instructional supervisors give professional support to teachers of Wolaita Zone Secondary
Schools?
2. To what extent are instructional supervisors effective in supervisory tasks?
3. What are the main challenges that exist in the implementation of instructional supervision in Wolaita Zone
Secondary Schools?

3. Objectives of the Study

3.1 General Objective
To assess Practices and Challenges of Instructional Supervision in Wolaita Zone Secondary Schools.

3.2 Specific Objectives

The specific objectives of this study are the following:
1. To assess professional support of instructional supervisors to teachers in Wolaita Zone secondary schools
2. To investigate the effectiveness of instructional supervisors in supervisory tasks in Wolaita Zone secondary
schools
3. To find out the main challenges that exist in implementation of instructional supervision in Wolaita Zone
secondary schools

4. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This chapter contains the research design, the research method, sources of data, study site and population, sample
size, sampling technique, instruments of data collection, procedures of data collection, methods of data analysis
and ethical considerations.

4.1 Research Design

Research design is a plan for action that links philosophical assumptions to specific methods [9]. According to [14]
descriptive survey design gives a better and deeper understanding of the phenomena that helps for fact-finding. It
is adequate and accurate to analyze and interpret data. As stated by [7], it helps to gather data at a particular point
in a given period of time. This research design helps to describe the existing situation of the issue. This design was
selected to examine the current practices and challenges of instructional supervision by survey of opinions of WEO
supervision coordinators, instructional supervisors and teachers.

4.2 Research Method

In order to assess practices and challenges of instructional supervision, the quantitative and qualitative method
was used. The method explores practices and challenges that face instructional supervisors during supervisory
activities. It is one in which both quantitative and qualitative methods are used to answer research questions in a
single study [9]. Quantitative approach is considered to be appropriate because it applies survey in collecting data.
Quantitative data was collected by questionnaire and qualitative data was collected by interview [9]. According to
[9] interview facilitates to get in-depth data. In this method qualitative data is used to explain or build quantitative
results. Therefore, in this study, mixed methods which involve both quantitative and qualitative methods were
employed because the methods provide a better understanding of the research problem and questions.

4.3 Sources of Data

The sources of relevant data were collected from primary and secondary sources.
4.3.1 Primary Sources of Data
The primary data sources were Woreda Education Office Supervision coordinators, assigned supervisors,
government secondary school principals, vice principals and selected teachers.
4.3.2 Secondary Sources of Data
The secondary sources of data were documents of MoE, SNNPRG Education Bureau and ETP of Ethiopia and
2017/2018 report documents of Wolaita Zone Education Department.

4.4 Study Site

This research was conducted in Wolaita Zone. Wolaita zone is located in SNNPRS, Ethiopia. The study was

40
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

conducted in five woredas. 6 government secondary and preparatory schools were selected. Its borders are Bilate
River in eastern part, Oromiya region in north-eastern part, Lake Abaya in south-east, Omo River in the west,
Hadiya zone in the north, Kambata-Tambaro zone in the north-west and Gamo Gofa zone in the south. There are
12 woredas and 3 town administrations in Wolaita zone. The capital town of Wolaita zone is Sodo. Sodo is 330
kilo meters far from Addis Ababa and 156 kilo meters far from Hawassa. The study target schools were: Hembecho,
Gurumo Koysha, Shola Kodo, Gacheno, Hobicha Bada and Edo Duguna secondary schools. They are 44, 19, 10,
31, 20 and 57 kilo meters far away from Wolaita Sodo, the capital town of Wolaita Zone respectively.

4.5 Sample, Population and Sampling Techniques

There are 68 government secondary schools in Wolaita Zone according to 2010 secondary school reports of
Wolaita Zone Education Department. 5 Woredas and 6 secondary schools were randomly selected. In a simple
random technique, every population has an equal chance of being included in the study. The names of schools
were taken from Wolaita Zone education department and the names of teachers from sampled schools.
The names of 15 woredas written in pieces of papers. Pieces of papers were folded and mixed in a small bag
and randomly picked up and selected 5 woredas. From 338 teachers 85 teachers were selected by simple random
technique. 5 WEOSC, 5 assigned supervisors, 6 principals and 9 vice principals were selected by purposeful
sampling technique. According to [22] recommended to select 10% to 30% of the total population as an adequate
sample for a study. Hence, it was taken 110(30%) from the total population that was 363.
To get reliable data for the study, the sampling techniques used were multilevel relationship sampling
techniques. They involve the use of two or more sets of sampling techniques that are extracted from different levels
of the study. These techniques involve combining probability and purposeful sampling techniques [9].
Table 1: Summary of Sample size and Sampling Technique
Sample Area Types of Sample Sampled Sampling
Woreda School Respondent Population Size Population technique
in %
Boloso Hembecho WEOSC 1 1 100% Purposeful
Sore Secondary Supervisor 1 1 100% Purposeful
School Principal 1 1 100% Purposeful
V. principals 2 2 100% Purposeful
Teachers 54 14 26% S. random

Gurumo Koysha Principal 1 1 100% Purposeful

Secondary V. Principal 1 1 100% Purposeful
School Teachers 54 14 26% S. random
Sodo Shola Kodo WEOSC 1 1 100% Purposeful
Zuriya Secondary Supervisor 1 1 100% Purposeful
School Principal 1 1 100% Purposeful
V. principals 2 2 100% Purposeful
Teachers 60 14 26% S. random
Damot Gacheno WEOSC 1 1 100% Purposeful
Gale Secondary Supervisor 1 1 100% Purposeful
School Principal 1 1 100% Purposeful
V. principal 1 1 100% Purposeful
Teachers 86 15 17% S. random
Humbo Hobicha WEOSC 1 1 100% Purposeful
Bada Supervisor 1 1 100% Purposeful
Principal 1 1 100% Purposeful
V. principal 2 2 100% Purposeful
Teachers 50 14 26% S. random
Duguna Edo WEOSC 1 1 100% Purposeful
Fango Duguna Supervisor 1 1 100% Purposeful
Principal 1 1 100% Purposeful
V. principals 1 1 100% Purposeful
Teachers 34 14 26% S. random
Total 363 110 30%

4.6 Instruments of Data Collection

In this study, questionnaires and interviews were used to collect data regarding practices and challenges of

41
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

instructional supervision in government secondary and preparatory schools of Wolaita Zone.

4.6.1 Questionnaire
Questionnaire is defined as written form that asks exact questions of all individuals in the sample group, and which
respondents can answer at their own convenience [7].The questionnaire is the most widely used type of instrument
in education. The data obtained by questionnaires can be more easily analyzed and interpreted than the data
obtained from verbal responses. Questionnaires provide greater uniformity across measurement situations than do
interviews. Each person responds to exactly the same questions because standard instructions are given to the
respondents. Questionnaire design is relatively easy [13].
Therefore, questionnaires are to be better to get large amount of data from large number of respondents in a
relatively shorter period of time with minimum cost. Based on the objectives of the study and review of related
literature, the researcher developed the questionnaire to obtain data. Open-ended and closed-ended items were
prepared for data collection. The researcher prepared questionnaires in English language and administered to 6
principals, 9 vice principals and 85 sampled teachers totally to 100 respondents with the assumption that they can
understand the language. Closed-ended type items of the questionnaires were prepared to get a greater uniformity
of responses to make it easy to be processed. In addition to this, few open- ended type of items were prepared in
order to give opportunity to the respondents to express their feelings, perception and intentions related to practices
and challenges of instructional supervision in the schools selected. In supporting the above ideas, [13]
recommended that the larger the sample size, the more structured, closed and numerical the questionnaire may
have to be, and the smaller the size of the sample, the less structured, more open and word-based the questionnaire
may be. Hence, closed-ended type of questions have five rating scales, 5=strongly agree, 4=agree, 3=undecided,
2=disagree, 1=strongly disagree.
4.6.2 Interview
The interview is a process of communication in which the interviewee gives the needed information orally in a
face-to-face contact with the interviewer. According to [6], the purpose of interviewing people is to find out what
is in their mind –what they think or how they feel about something. Semi-structured interview questions were
prepared. The questions were prepared in English language. After explaining the purpose of the interview for the
interviewees and getting their consent, the researcher interviewed 3 WEO supervision coordinators and 3 assigned
supervisors.

4.7 Validity and Reliability

The objective of pilot-testing the question is to enable samples in completing the survey. It also helps them to
understand the questions. In addition to this, participants can provide their written comments on the survey,
According to [29], checking the validity and reliability of data collecting instruments before conducting actual
study is the core to assure the quality and reliability of data collecting instrument. According to [9], validity is the
extent to which research instruments measure what they are intended to measure. Reliability is the degree to which
a research instrument yields consistent results or measures of data when repeated on the same sampled respondents.
Based on the objective of the study and review of related literature, the researcher developed questionnaires and
made pilot- test by using Cronbach’s alpha at Areka Secondary school. For pilot-study 8 teachers were randomly
selected. 1 principal and 3 vice principals were purposively selected. Totally, 12(10.9%) of sampled population
was selected as [22] recommended 10% of total population for pilot-test. The researcher used written comments
of pilot-test respondents and the advisor and changed some questions of the instrument. The respondents of pilot
test were not included in the main study. The results of pilot-test were shown in table 3 below.
Table 2: The Results of Reliability Test
No Title of research question Cronbach’s Cronbach’s Alpha No
Alpha based on standardized Items
items
1 Professional support of instructional supervisors .952 .955 7
2 Effectiveness of instructional supervisors in doing .931 .937 9
supervision tasks
3 The main challenges instructional supervisors face .890 ..890 9
during supervision
Average .924 .927
According to [22] the reliability coefficient of 0.8 or more shows that there is a high degree of reliability of
data. The reliability of the piloted questions was Cronbach’s Alpha 0.924 and it is highly reliable. Therefore, it
was used for the study. Based on the responses and written comments given by principals and teachers who were
selected for pilot test, some poorly worded and senseless questions were discarded and some were modified. In
the questions developed to assess the professional support of instructional supervisors, 1st, 2nd, 4th and 6thitems
were modified. The 3rd item was discarded and replaced by another question. Closed-ended questions prepared
regarding the major tasks supervisors do during supervision were 9 before pilot test but after pilot test, one question

42
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

was reduced. The other questions were modified. Before pilot test, 9 closed-ended items were developed to assess
the challenges that face supervisors during supervision. But after pilot test one item was added. The 3rd item was
modified. The 7th item was excluded and replaced by another question.

4.8 Procedures of Data Collection

Data were gathered by questionnaire and interview. First, the questionnaire was developed by the researcher. Then,
it was pilot-tested. Some of the participants of pilot test provided written comments. After that, it was commented
by advisor. Based on comments given, the Questionnaires were amended. The researcher got letter of
authorization/permission from Wolaita Sodo University and gave to study sites and made consent with respondents.
Based on the consent made with sampled woredas, schools and respondents, the amended questionnaires were
administered to respondents and relevant data were gathered.

4.9 Tools of Data Analysis

Data were analyzed in quantitative and qualitative methods based on responses collected by questionnaires and
interviews. Closed-ended question responses were tallied, tabulated, filled in to SPSS (version 20) and interpreted.
The two extremes of disagreements (strongly disagree and disagree) were merged together. On the other hand, the
two extremes of agreements (strongly agree and agree) were also merged together. This was for the convenience
of data analysis and interpretation. The interpretation of data was made by using frequency, percentage, mean and
standard deviation. The percentage was used to analyze demographic profile and personal data of the respondents.
Qualitative data/open-ended questions and interview responses were analyzed using narration. The responses of
open-ended and interview questions were organized, compiled and substantiated together with related closed-
ended items. For all five point scales, the mean value of each item was interpreted based on the following mean
score results: 1-1.49 strongly disagree, 1.5-2.49 disagree, 2.5-3.49 undecided, 3.5-4.49 agree and 4.5-5 strongly
agree. Mean score results 1-2.49 were taken for disagreement; 2.5-3.49 were taken for undecided and 3.5-5 were
taken for agreement. While interviewing, to minimize the loss of information the verbal responses of interviewees
were videotaped and transcribed in a note. They were compiled together and analyzed by narration.

4.10 Ethical Considerations

To make the research ethical, clear information were given to respondents. Objective of the study were informed
in the introductory part of questionnaires and interviews guide to the respondents; and confirmed that
confidentiality of responses were protected. Respondents were informed that their participation in the study was
based on their consent. The research is not personalized any of the respondent’s response during data presentations,
analysis and interpretations. In addition to this, all the materials used for this research were acknowledged.

5. Discussions and Findings

This chapter deals with analysis and interpretation of data gathered on practices and challenges of instructional
supervision in Wolaita Zone secondary and preparatory schools. It starts with questionnaire return rate. Next to it,
demographic profiles of the respondents were presented. The other things presented in this chapter were the results
of findings based on data gathered through questionnaires and interviews from respondents.

5.1 Questionnaire Return Rate

The researcher distributed 6, 9 and 85 questionnaires to principals, vice principals and teachers respectively. The
following table shows the number of questionnaires distributed and returned.
Table 3: Questionnaire Return Rate
No Respondents Questionnaires distributed Questionnaires returned %
1 Principals 6 6 100
2 Vice principals 9 8 88.9
3 Teachers 85 74 87
Total 100 88 88
As it can be seen from table 3 above, 6 questionnaires were distributed to principals and 6(100%) were
returned. 9 questionnaires were distributed to vice principals and 8(88.9%) were returned. 85 questionnaires were
distributed to teachers and 74(87%) were returned. Totally, 100 questionnaires were distributed. From these,
88(88%) questionnaires were returned .The return rate was 88%. According to [21] 50%, 60% and above 70%
response rates are adequate, good and very good respectively. Thus, the response rate 88 % is very good and
indicated that respondents cooperated in filling and returning questionnaires. The researcher believes that the
responses can provide required information for the study.

43
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

Table 4: Demographic characteristics of Questionnaire and Interview Respondents

No Background of respondents Category Respondents
Instructional supervisors Teachers
No % No %
1 Male 20 100 53 71.6
Sex Female - - 21 28.4
Total 20 100 74 100
2 Age 21-25 - - 3 4.1
26-30 1 5 28 37.8
31-35 10 50 30 40.5
36-40 8 40 7 9.5
41 and above 1 5 6 8.1
3 Service year 1-5 5 25 18 24.3
6-10 8 40 20 27
11-15 7 35 21 28.4
16-20 - - 8 10.8
21-25 - - 3 4.1
26-30 - - 2 2.7
31-35 - - 1 1.4
36-40 - - 1 1.4
41 and above - - - -
4 Level of education Diploma - - 1 1.4
First degree 13 65 67 90.5
2nd degree 7 35 6 8.1
5 Current position WEOSC 3 15
Assigned supervisors 3 15
Principals 6 30
Vice principals 8 40
In table 4 above, 20 (100%) instructional supervisors were males. This implies that instructional supervision
of secondary schools is male dominated. 2 of interviewed WEOSC were between ages 36-40 and 1 was above 40
years. 2 of assigned supervisors were between ages of 31-35 and 1 was between ages of 36-40. 3 principals were
between ages 31-35. The rest 3 were between 36-40. 1, 5, 2 vice principals were between ages of 26-30, 31-35 and
36-40 respectively. From 74 teacher respondents, 3(4.1%), 28(37.8%), 30(40.5%), 7(9.5%), 6(8.1%) were between
ages 20-25, 26-30, 31-35, 36-40 and greater than 40 respectively. This showed that majority of teachers are
between ages 31-35 years and are more matured enough to provide data
Table 5: Responses on Professional Support of Instructional Supervisors to Teachers
No Items R No Mean DA UD A
F % F % F %
1 Supervisors give regular support to teachers to P 14 2.46 8 57.1 1 7.1 5 35.7
improve instruction T 74 2.41 47 63.5 6 8.1 21 28.4
2 Supervisors make face- to- face contact with P 14 2.43 8 57.1 1 7.1 3 21.4
teachers and observe instruction to increase T 74 2.46 47 63.5 7 9.5 20 27
professional growth of teachers
3 Supervisors encourage teachers to observe each P 14 2.14 5 35.7 2 14.3 7 50
other’s classrooms and to give feedback to each T 74 2.30 52 70.3 6 8.1 16 21.7
other
4 Supervisors create group discussion and P 14 2.48 10 71.4 - - 4 28.5
experience sharing programs to teachers T 74 2.22 50 67.6 10 13.5 14 19
5 Supervisors train teachers in pedagogical issues P 14 2.07 12 85.7 - - 2 14.3
and importance of supervision T 74 2.30 50 67.6 8 10.8 16 21.7
6 Supervisors assist teachers in determining lesson P 14 3.86 3 21.4 - - 11 78.6
objectives T 74 2.59 43 58.1 7 9.5 24 32.5
Assigned supervisors support principals to grow P 14 3.71 4 28.6 - - 10 71.4
7 as instructional leaders T 74 2.46 44 59.4 14 18.9 16 21.7
As table 5 item 1 above indicated, respondents were asked to rate their agreement levels on professional
support of instructional supervisors to teachers in their school. In the response 8(57.1%) principals with the
Mean=2.46 assured that instructional supervisors didn’t give regular professional support to teachers in their

44
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

school. 47(63.5%) teachers with the Mean=2.41 showed that they were not supported by instructional supervisors
on professional development. On the other hand 5(35.7% principals and 21(28.4%) teachers agreed on the issue.
This showed that majority of respondents disagreed in regular support of instructional supervisors to teachers.
From this, it can be concluded that teachers were not properly supported by instructional supervisors in the schools
they work. In supporting the above idea, research findings of [12] on supervisory practices of cluster supervisors
in promoting teachers in teachers’ professional competences found that there was lack of adequate professional
support for newly deployed teachers in instruction.
In table 5 item 2 above, principals and teachers were asked whether supervisors make face to face contact
with teachers and observe instruction to increase professional growth of teachers or not. 10(71.4%) principals with
Mean=2.43 showed disagreement on the issue. 47(63.5%) teachers also assured that they didn’t observe teachers
in classrooms. 3(21.4%) principals and 20(27%) teachers showed agreement. Thus, it can be concluded that
instructional supervisors do not make face to face contact with teachers to observe instruction and assist
professional growth of teachers. In supporting this idea, [1] found in his research that supervisors are unable to
apply the necessary process for the classroom observation properly. But according to [13], the purpose of
supervision is promoting face-to-face interaction and building relationship between the teacher and the supervisor.
As the findings indicated, supervisors in the study area didn’t do face-to-face interaction and classroom observation.
As it can be seen from table 5 item 3, principals and teachers asked whether supervisors encourage teachers
to observe each other’s classrooms to give feedback to each other. 7(50%) principals showed agreement but
5(35.7%) of them disagreed on the encouragement of supervisors to teachers to observe each other’s classrooms.
52(70.3%) teachers disagreed on supervisors encouragement. 16(21.7%) teachers agreed. This showed that
majority, 57(64.8%) of respondents assured that instructional supervisors do not encourage teachers. Therefore, it
can be concluded that supervisors’ encouragement to teachers to observe and give feedback to each other in
classrooms was unsatisfactory.
As table 5 item 4 above indicated, principals and teachers asked to rate their agreement level on supervisors’
support in creating group discussion and experience sharing opportunity to teachers. 10(71.4%) principals and
50(67.6%) teachers totally, 60(68.2%) respondents confirmed that instructional supervisors do not create group
discussion and experience-sharing opportunities for teachers. 18(20.5%) respondents agreed and 10(11.4%)
respondents undecided. From the responses given it can be concluded that supervisors didn’t create group
discussion and experience sharing programs to teachers. But according to [13], developing the skills of working
with groups to solve instructional problems is a very important task of supervision. Therefore, it is the
responsibility of the supervisor to set for instructional problem-solving meetings and experience sharing programs
among teachers to improve instruction.
Principals and teachers were asked to respond in rating their agreement for the question whether or not
supervisors train teachers in pedagogical issues and in the importance of instructional supervision in table 5 item5
above. 12(85.7%) principals with Mean=2.07 and 50(67.6%) teachers with Mean=2.30 confirmed that
instructional supervisors didn’t train teachers in pedagogical issues and in the importance of instructional
supervision. 18(20.4%) from the two groups of respondents responded that supervisors train teachers on mentioned
points. From this result it is possible to conclude that supervisors didn’t train teachers in pedagogical issues and in
the importance of instructional supervision. In supporting this finding, [3] revealed that school supervisors were
not efficient in assisting teachers in conducting required meetings with teachers in organized conferences and
training programs at the school level.
In table 5 items 6 above, principals and teachers responded to the question asked to know whether or not
supervisors assist teachers in determining appropriate objectives of the lesson. In the response, 11(78.6%)
principals with Mean=3.86 and 24(32.5%) teachers confirmed that supervisors assist teachers in determining
appropriate objectives of the lesson. But 43(58.1%) teachers and 3(21.4%) principals disagreed on the issue. From
the total 88 respondents, 46(52%) disagreed. From this it is possible to conclude that the implementation of
assisting teachers in preparing lesson and determining its objectives by instructional supervisors were not
satisfactory.
In the same table item 7, principals and teachers responded to the question asked to know whether or not
assigned supervisors support principals to grow as instructional leaders. 10(71.4%) principals agreed but 4(28.6%)
principals disagreed. 44(59.4%) teachers disagreed but 16(21.7%) teachers agreed. From the total respondents that
were 88, 48(54%) respondents disagreed on the issue. This shows that assigned supervisors do not support
principals to grow as instructional leader.

45
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

Table 6: Responses on to what extent Instructional Supervisors are effective in their tasks
No Items R No Mean DA UD A
F % F % F %
1 Supervisors spend time by supporting teachers P 14 2.21 10 71.4 - - 4 28.5
for their professional growth T 74 2.15 55 74 7 10 12 16
2 Supervisors organize and facilitate instructional P 14 2.31 9 64.3 1 7.1 4 28.5
process to give direct assistance to teachers T 74 2.42 43 58 10 14 21 28
3 Supervisors discuss with teachers and P 14 2.36 10 72 1 7.1 3 21
encourages them to help each other to develop T 74 2.44 48 64 10 14 17 22
curriculum
4 Assigned supervisor spends time by discussing P 14 4.71 - - - - 14 100
with principals in administrative issues T 74 4.12 10 13.5 2 2.7 62 83.8
5 Assigned supervisor spends time by supervising P 14 2.79 6 42.8 2 14.3 6 42.9
principals and school buildings T 74 4.08 6 8 6 8 62 84
6 Assigned supervisor spends time by taking lists P 14 3.51 6 43 - - 8 57
of males and females and writing reports T 74 4.07 7 9 5 7 62 84
7 Assigned supervisor writes comment and leaves P 14 4.07 2 14 - - 12 86
it in principal’s office T 74 3.82 55 74 4 5.4 15 20
8 Supervisors support teachers in conducting P 14 1.93 11 79 2 14 1 7.1
action research T 74 2.18 55 74 4 6 15 20
As it was indicated in table 6 item 1, principals and teachers responded to a question they were asked whether
supervisors spend their time of supervision by supporting teachers for their professional growth. 10(71.4%)
principals and 55(74%) teachers disagreed on the point raised. 4(28.5%) principals and 12(16.2%) teachers agreed
on the issue. From the total of 88 respondents, 65(73.9%) respondents assured that instructional supervisors do not
spend their time of supervision in supporting teachers. Based on this result, it is possible to say that the time of
supervisors was not used for professional development of teachers as their major tasks. But according to [15],
professional development of teachers is the major function of school supervision and school supervisor. It is
promoting effective teaching practices, providing for continuous personal and professional growth as well as
changing the character of the school and teaching.
Table 6 item 2 shows the response of principals and teachers for the question asked whether supervisors
organize and facilitate instructional process to give direct assistance to teacher. 9(64.3%) principals with the mean
2.31 and 43(58.1%) teachers with the mean 2.42 asserted that supervisors didn’t organize and facilitate
instructional process. 4(28.5%) principals and 21(28.4%) teachers agreed that instructional supervisors organize
and facilitate instructional process. 11(20.6%) respondents undecided to respond.
As it was shown in table 6 item 3, 10(71.5 principals and 48(64%) teachers showed their disagreement.
20(22%) respondents agreed on the issue. But the result showed that majority of the respondents disagreed on the
issue. From this it is possible to conclude that assigned supervisors didn’t provide opportunity for curriculum
development with teachers. But as stated by [13] curriculum development involves the supervisor providing
opportunities for changes in curriculum and materials to improve teaching-learning process.
As it was indicated in table 6 item 4, principals and teachers were asked whether or not assigned supervisor
spends time by discussing with principals in administrative issues. 14(100%) principals with Mean 4.71 and
62(83.8%) teachers with Mean=4.12 agreed and asserted that assigned supervisor spends the time of school visit
by discussing with principals in administrative issues. This indicated the agreement of majority of the respondents.
10(13.5%) teachers disagreed and the rest 2(2.7%) teachers undecided. From this one can easily notice that when
assigned supervisors visit schools, they spend their time by discussing with principals in administrative issues.
[8] mentioned supporting idea to the above finding. They supervise school leaders, and the buildings they run.
They also supervise compiled local policies and state regulations. They spend their time checking these and other
administrative tasks rather than academic issues. In contrasting this result, [14] research findings in Bangladesh
indicated that supervisor’s job needs more academic orientation and greater attention to the teaching- learning
process but supervisors focus on administrative tasks that are less crucial and more urgent.
According to table 6 item 5, the responses of principals and teachers for the question asked to answer whether
or not assigned supervisor spends time by supervising principals and school building. 6(42.9%) principals and
62(83.8%) teachers with Mean value 4.08 agreed on the point raised. Totally, 68(77.3%) respondents agreed.
Table 6 item 6 above indicated that 8(57.1%) principal and 62(83.8%) teacher respondents agreed that
assigned supervisors spend most of their time of supervision by taking lists of males and females and writing
reports. In supporting this, [8] mentioned some of the traditional tasks of principal supervisors. They spend their
time supervising compiled local policies, state regulations and other administrative tasks rather than academic
issues.

46
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

As it can be seen from table 6 item 7, principals and teachers were asked to rate their agreement level
concerning assigned supervisor’s comment writing during school visit. The question was to know whether or not
assigned supervisor discusses about the comment he/she wrote with concerned bodies or leaves it in principal’s
office. 12(85.7%) principals with the Mean=4.07 and 55(74.3%) teachers with Mean=3.82 agreed on the point
raised. Thus, one can conclude that assigned supervisors simply write comment and put it in principal’s office
without discussing about it with concerned bodies.
Item 8 of table 6 indicated the result of responses given for the question asked to know whether supervisors
support teachers in conducting action research or not. 11(76.8%) principals with the Mean=1.93 and 55(74.3%)
teachers with Mean value 2.18 disagreed on the issue raised. This showed that majority of the respondents 66(75%)
disagreed. Based on the result obtained, it can be said that supervisors didn’t support teacher in conducting action
research. But according to [15], action research allows teachers to evaluate their own thinking and teaching that
results in improvements in instruction.
Item 9 of questionnaire in part three is open-ended question which was given to get the opinions of the
respondents. It asks the respondents to mention other tasks that supervisors spend their time doing in school.
From 14 principals and 74 teachers returned the questionnaire, 3(21.4%) principal and 27(36.3%) teachers
responded to this open-ended question. From total 88 respondents, 30(34.1%) responded to open-ended questions.
Thus, it can be said that majority of the respondents did not want to write and respond to open-ended questions.
Principals’ and teachers’ responses of this open-ended question supported the idea of the responses in closed-
ended questions in table 6 items 2, and 3. They said that assigned supervisors did not give attention to teaching-
learning process. Instead, they discuss with principals, PTA and KETB in administrative issues. In contrast to the
responses of table 7 item 8, majority of them said that assigned supervisors find faults in the school, magnify and
complicate it and report it to WEO. From responded teachers, majority asserted that instead of supporting teachers
to grow professionally and develop curriculum to improve instruction, supervisors do administrative tasks such as:
discussing with principals, PTA, KETB; checking attendance sheets; asking students some information of teachers’
work; visiting students in the classrooms and taking lists of males and females; looking at mark lists. The above
responses support closed-ended responses of table 6 items 4 and 6. A few teacher respondents said that assigned
supervisors do other task in woreda education office rather than supporting teachers in schools. Some other
respondents told that supervisors are unable to assess teachers’ need. In contrasting the responses of closed- ended
responses in table 6 items 1, 2 and 3, the rest few respondents asserted that supervisors visit teachers in classrooms,
motivate and support them for their professional development. They also added that supervisors discuss with
students to improve achievement. Therefore, from the responses of majority, it is possible to conclude that the task
supervisors do is administrative. The findings of open-ended question responses supported the finding of closed-
ended responses.
Table 7 : Responses on the Main Challenges that face supervisors during supervision
No Items R No Mean DA UD A
F % F % F %
1 Supervisors lack good communication skills P 14 1.93 5 36 7 50 2 14
T 74 2.86 34 45 11 15 29 40
2 There is problem in selecting and assigning P 14 3.59 4 29 3 21 7 50
supervisors so that they are incompetent T 74 3.80 16 30 3 4 55 66
3 There is lack of supervision manual in the school P 14 4.43 - - - - 14 100
T 74 3.56 23 31 5 7 46 62
4 Supervisors do not properly use their time of school P 14 1.76 9 64 2 14 3 22
visit T 74 3.57 26 35 8 11 40 55
5 There is lack of budget, facilities and materials for P 14 4.57 - - - - 14 100
supervision T 74 3.59 20 27 5 7 49 66
6 Teachers resist supervision because they lack P 14 4.43 - - 1 7 13 93
awareness T 74 3.64 24 32 7 10 43 58
7 Principals have excessive workloads to do P 14 4.64 - - - - 14 100
supervision T 74 3.54 26 35 10 14 38 51
8 Supervisors are fault finders P 14 2.29 11 79 - - 3 21
T 74 3.60 27 36 5 7 42 57
9 There is lack of right training for supervisors P 14 4.36 - - - - 14 100
T 74 3.61 18 24 6 8 50 68
10 Principals do not create conducive environment for P 14 1.43 14 100 - - - -
supervision T 74 2.97 34 46 8 11 32 43
As it was shown in table7 item 1, 5(36%) principals with Mean=1.93 and 34(45%) teachers showed
disagreement for the question given to rate their agreement level whether supervisors lack good communication

47
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

skills or not. 2(14%) principals and 29(40%) teachers agreed on the issue. 7(50%) principals and 11(15%) teachers
undecided. From this it can be concluded that supervisors have good communication skills.
Table7 item 2 indicated the responses of principals and teachers on the question which asks to rate their
agreement level if there is problem in selecting and assigning supervisors. 7(50%) principals and 55(66%) teachers
agreed on the issue with the Mean=3.21 and 3.80 respectively. 4(29%) principals and 16(30%) teachers disagreed
and 6(6.8%) respondents undecided in the responses. Totally 62(70.5%) respondents agreed that there is problem
in selecting and assigning right persons as supervisors so that they are incompetent. This implies that there is
problem in selecting and assigning right persons as supervisors. So that, they are incompetent. Opposing this, [12]
found that supervisors are alert, competent professionals who are confident in intervening when less experienced
workers behave inappropriately.
As it was depicted in table 7 item 3, 14(100%) principals and 46(62%) teachers agreed on their response to
the question asked to respond if there is lack of supervision manual in the school. 23(31%) teachers disagreed on
the issue. The result of the responses assured that there is lack of supervision manuals in the study area. Therefore,
one can conclude from this that there is lack of supervision manuals for supervisors to use as guideline. There can
be no effective supervision of instruction without adequate instructional materials [11]. Modules like supervision
guides and manuals are reference materials for supervision. As it is indicated in [28], these materials are very
helpful for supervisors and the schools. These materials are guides that can change inspectional visits into a more
objective support. The materials also show the target task and focus areas of supervision.
In table 7 item 4, principals and teachers rated their agreement level for the statement, “Supervisors do not
properly use their time of school visit.” 40(54%) teachers and 3(22%) principals agreed on the point raised. 9(64%)
principals and 26(35%) teachers disagreed on the point. 10(11.3%) respondents undecided. Totally 43(48.9%)
respondents agreed on the issue. This showed that supervisors didn’t properly use their time of school visit.
As it can be seen from table 7 item5, 14(100%) principals with Mean=4.57, and 49(66%) teachers with
Mean=3.59 agreed that there is lack of budget, facilities and materials to run supervision. From this finding it is
possible to conclude that budget, facilities and materials which are very important were not available to run
supervisory activities. There can be no effective supervision of instruction without adequate instructional materials
[11]. Modules like supervision guides and manuals are reference materials for supervision. As it was indicated in
[28], these materials are very helpful for supervisors and the schools. These materials are guides that can change
inspectional visits into a more objective support. The materials also show the target task and focus areas of
supervision. In addition to this, lack of budget is taken as a challenge to run supervisory activity effectively. Lack
of enough budget results the incapability to run supervisory activities effectively such as in-service training
programs for teachers and visiting other schools for experience sharing [28].
In table 7 item 6, principals and teachers were asked to respond if teachers resist supervision and if their
resistance is due to lack of awareness about supervision or not. 13(93%) principals with mean value 4.57 and
43(58%) teachers with mean value 3.64 agreed that teachers resist supervision. 24(32%) teachers disagreed on the
issue raised. Only 1(7%) principal couldn’t decide. The result indicated that majority of the respondents 56(63.6%)
respondents agreed on the point. From this finding it is possible to conclude that teachers resist supervision due to
lack of knowledge and awareness about supervision. In supporting the above finding, the research findings of [1]
showed that teachers lack awareness and orientation on the activities and significance of school based supervision
In table 7 item 7, 14(100%) principals with mean value 4.64 and 38(51%) teachers with Mean 3.54 confirmed
their agreement that principals have excessive workloads which hinder supervision in classrooms. 26(35%)
teachers disagreed on the issue. Therefore, one can conclude from this finding that because of excessive workloads
of principals in the office, they couldn’t support teachers in classrooms. In supporting the above idea, [14]showed
that secondary school principals are so weighed down by routine administrative burden that they hardly find time
to visit classrooms and observe how the teachers are teaching.
In table 7 item 8, 42(57%) teachers with Mean=3.60 confirmed that supervisors are fault finders. 3(21%)
principals also agreed. 11(79%) principals and 27(36%) teachers disagreed on the issue. 5(7%) teachers couldn’t
decide. But majority of the respondents 45(51%) agreed that supervisors are fault finders. From this finding it is
possible to conclude that supervisors of study area were fault finders.
As it can be seen from table 7 item 9, principals and teachers responded to the question which was asked to
rate their agreement level. They were asked whether or not there is lack of right training for supervisors. 14(100%)
principals with the mean value 4.36 and 50(68%) teachers agreed that there is lack of right training for supervisors.
Based on the result, it is possible to say that supervisors didn’t get right training. In supporting the above idea,
[22] revealed that lack of training for supervisors affects the supervisory practice in the school. In addition to this,
[21] pointed out lack of continuous training system for supervisors to up-date their educational knowledge and
skills as challenge of instructional supervision.
Item 10 of table 7 indicated the responses of principals and teachers. The respondents were asked to rate their
agreement level for the statement, “Principals do not create conducive environment for supervision.” 14(100%)
principals with mean value 1.43 and 34(46%) teachers disagreed on the issue raised. But 32(43%) teachers agreed.

48
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

From the two groups responded, 48(54%) disagreed on the issue. Therefore, it can be concluded that principals
cooperate by creating conducive environment for supervision. In contrast to this, [22] in his study showed that lack
of cooperation from principals negatively affect the practice of supervision.
Item 11 in part four of the questionnaire was open-ended question. The question was provided to respondents
to mention other challenges that face assigned supervisors in the schools. Regarding the challenges that face
supervisors during supervision, majority of open-ended question respondent principals and teachers in supporting
closed-ended responses in table 7 items 3, 5 and 9 revealed that lack of training; lack of budget; lack of knowledge
of supervisors on their profession; lack of awareness of teachers on supervision; lack of materials and lack of
logistics were the main challenges. In supporting the response of table 7 item 6, the same respondents agreed that
teachers were not cooperating to run supervision and they were not willing to be supervised.
The reason they gave for this was teachers have not been supervised for long time. Supporting this, the
research findings of [1] showed that teachers lack awareness on the activities and significance of school based
supervision in effectiveness of supervisory options matching with the individual teacher’s development level, and
inabilities of supervisors to apply the necessary process for the classroom observation properly, lack of relevant
training for supervisors, scarcity of experienced supervisors, lack of supervision manuals and shortage of allocated
budget for supervisory activities. Therefore, the challenges that were identified in open-ended question responses
supported the findings in table 7 items 3, 5 and 9 of closed-ended question responses.
The responses of the interview held with WEOSC and assigned supervisors were to support responses of
quantitative data analyzed in tables 5, 6 and 7. The responses given by majority of an interview session supported
the responses of questionnaire in table 5 item 2. Majority of respondents told that they make face-to-face contact
with principals. They revealed that they support principals and principals support teachers. In supporting the idea
of questionnaire respondents in table 5 items 5 and table 7 items 9, majority of the interview session participants
reported that due to lack of budget, training was not given to teachers and instructional supervisors. The responses
the researcher got from closed and open-ended questionnaires in table 6, items 4,5,6 and 7 regarding the
effectiveness of instructional supervisors in the tasks they do during their supervision was similar to the majority
of interview session respondents. They told that it was more administrative than academic. This showed that
instructional supervisors were ineffective in academic tasks. The task they do during supervision was not directly
related to their task mentioned in their job description. Questionnaire respondents asserted that principals create
conducive environment for supervision but majority of interview respondents said that principals challenge and
resist supervision. The main challenges of supervision revealed by majority of questionnaire respondents in table
7, items 3, 5, and 9 were: lack of supervision manuals, lack of budget, lack of materials, teachers’ resistance to
supervision and lack of training for instructional supervisors. All interview session respondents supported the
responses given by questionnaire respondents.

6. Accordingly, the following findings were obtained.

1. Concerning professional support of supervisors, the study assured that 55(62.5%) respondents revealed that
instructional supervisors didn’t give regular and adequate support to teachers on professional and curriculum
development areas. Another thing the study revealed was 62(70.5%) respondents revealed that supervisors didn’t
train teachers in either pedagogical issues or in the importance of instructional supervision.
2. Regarding effectiveness of supervisors in their supervisory tasks during school supervision, 65(73.9%)
respondents revealed that supervisors didn’t spend their time by supporting teachers. 76(86.4%) respondents
agreed that assigned supervisors spend their time by discussing with principals about routine administrative tasks.
This showed that instructional supervisors were ineffective in implementing supervisory tasks.
3. The main challenges of instructional supervision revealed were: Problem in selecting and assigning right
persons as supervisors. 62(70.5%) respondents agreed to this idea. 60 (68.2%) respondents asserted that there is
lack of supervision manuals in schools to refer. 63(71.6%) respondents agreed that there is lack of budget, facilities
and materials. In addition to this, 56(63.6%) respondents agreed that teachers’ resistance to supervision was a
challenge for supervision. This was due to lack of awareness of teachers in benefits and importance of supervision.
52(59.1%) respondents agreed that principals were overloaded by routine administrative tasks that made
supervisory tasks ineffective. 64(72.7%) respondents asserted that there was lack of right training for instructional
supervisors

7. Conclusions
The general objective of this study was to assess practices and challenges of instructional supervision in Wolaita
Zone secondary schools. Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:
1. Instruction can be improved by giving regular and adequate support to teachers in training them in pedagogical
and professional issues and in creating their awareness in benefit and importance of supervision. From this, it can
be concluded that instructional supervisors didn’t give regular and adequate professional support for teachers.
2. Instructional supervisors are responsible to carryout effective supervisory tasks which are more academic and

49
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

that can improve professional development of teachers and student achievement. This can be achieved if
supervisors focus on academic tasks which are directly related to their job descriptions. But, from this finding it
can be concluded that supervisors spend their time by doing less important routine administrative tasks. Thus, they
are ineffective in implementing supervisory tasks.
3. The findings revealed the challenges of instructional supervision which hinder effective implementation of
supervisory tasks. These were: problem in selecting and assigning right persons as supervisor, lack of supervision
manuals, lack of budget, facilities and materials, resistance from teachers against supervision due to lack of
awareness about it, excessive workloads of principals and lack of right training for supervisors.

8. Recommendations
Based on the objectives, findings and conclusions drawn the following recommendations forwarded to improve
practices of supervision in secondary schools.
1. As instructional supervisors are assigned to provide professional support to teachers and improve instruction,
they need to give regular and adequate support to teachers.
2. As revealed in the study, instructional supervisors were ineffective in implementing supervisory tasks. It is
better for instructional supervisors to be effective in supervisory tasks such as spending their time of supervision
in supporting teachers, organizing and facilitating instructional process and engaging teachers in professional
dialogue.
3. The study identified challenges of instructional supervision. There is problem in selecting and assigning right
persons as supervisors. Therefore, it is advisable for woreda education office to select and assign right persons as
supervisors. It is better for regional education bureau, zone education department and woreda education office to
fulfill supervision manuals in schools; and they are suggested to allocate adequate budget to train instructional
supervisors and involve them in different professional seminars, workshops and meetings. It is advisable for
principals to reduce administrative workloads by delegating other personnel.

References
[1] Abebe Tessema. (2004). The Practices and Challenges of School-Based Supervision in Government Secondary
Schools of Kamashi Zone of Benshangul Gumuz Regional State. Department of Educational Planning and
Management. M.A. Thesis, Jimma University.
[2] Aggarwl. (1985).Theory and Principles of Education: Philosophical and Sociological Base of Education. New
Delhi: Vikas publishing House pvt. Ltd
[3] Alemayehu Adelo. (2016). Assessment of Implementation of School Clinical Supervision in Primary Schools
of Wolaita Zone. MA Thesis .Wolaita Sodo University
[4] Ali, Mehrunnisa.Ahmad(1998).Supervision for teacher development: a proposal for Pakistan: IIEP
publications. Delacroix, Paris, France.
[5] Ashebir Mekonnen. (2014). Practices and Challenges of School Based Continuous Professional Development
in Secondary Schools of Kemashi Zone. MA Thesis in Educational Leadership. Jimma University.
[6] Best, W. J., & Kahn, V.J. ed. 1993. Research in Education. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall, India pvt. Ltd, pp. 312-
395.
[7] Cohen, L. (1994). Research Methods in Education (4th ed.). New York: Rutledge.
[8] Council of Chief State School Officers. (2015). Model Principal Supervisor Professional Standards.
Washington, DC: CCSSO.
[9] Creswell, J. ( 2007). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative
research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
[10] Education and Training Policy. (1994). Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Addis Ababa.
[11] Enaigbe, A.P. (2009).Strategies for Improving Supervisory Skills for Effective Primary Education in Nigeria.
Edo Journal of Counseling, 2(2), 236-241.
[12] Gashaw, D. (2008) .Supervisory Practices of Cluster Primary School Supervisors in Promoting Teachers
Professional Competences: Addis Ababa University
[13] Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2004).Supervision and Instructional Leadership. A
developmental approach. USA: Pearson Education, Inc.
[14] Govinda, R. and Tapan, Shahjahan .(1999).Quality education through School-based Supervision and support:
the case of GSS Primary Schools in Bangladesh: International Institute for Educational Planning/UNESCO
7-9 rue Eugene-Delacroix 75116, Paris.
[15] Jose, F., & Gonzales, C. (1993. Methods of Research and Thesis Writing. Paris National Boore, Acept Marulas.
Merga, Feyisa. (2007). Approaches to Educational Training Manuscript, Oromia REB: Finfine. Unpublished.
[16] MoE. (2006).Decentralized Management of Education in Ethiopia: A reference Manual. Addis Ababa: Ged
Printing and Packaging Plant.
[17] MoE. (2002).Educational Leadership and Administration Community Participation and Financial Directive.

50
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) DOI: 10.7176/JEP
Vol.10, No.13, 2019

Addis Ababa: EMPDA.

[18] MoE. (1994). Educational Supervision Manual. Addis Ababa: EMPDA.
[19] MoE. (2006). School Improvement Program. Addis Ababa: EMPDA.
[20] MoE .(2006).Special Needs Education Program Strategy Emphasizing Inclusive Education Program to Meet
the UPEC and EFA Goals. Addis Ababa.
[21] Mugenda, O. L., and M, A, G.(1999). Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Nairobi:
African Center for Technology Students.
[22] Mugenda, O. and M, A. (2003). Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Nairobi:
African Center for Technology Students
[23] Netsanet Kassahun. (2014). Practices and Challenges of Educational Supervision on Professional
Development of Teacher in government Preparatory Schools of Addis Ababa. MA Thesis. Addis Ababa
University.
[24] Sergiovanni, T. J. (1995). The Principal ship: Boston: Allyn and Beacon
[25] Sergiovanni, T. J., &Starratt, R. J. (2002).Supervision: (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill
[26] SNNPRS Education Bureau. (2005/06-2009/10). Education Sector Development Program (ESDP) III.
Awassa: Regional Education Bureau.
[27] Tesfaw T.A., and Hofman, R.H. (2012). Instructional Supervision and its Relationship with Professional
Development; Perception of private and government secondary Schools. Addis Ababa. Master’s thesis:
University of Groningen.
[28] UNESCO.(2007). Teachers and Educational Quality: Monitoring Global Needs for 2015. Montereal:
Succursale Center-Ville.
[29] Yalew Endaweke. (1998). Fundamental Principles of Research and its Implementation. Bahir Dar: Alpha
Printing Enterprise. .

51