Mohd Norazmi bin Nordin
Mohamad Zaid Bin Mustafa Abdul Rasid Bin Abdul Razzaq ABSTRACT The task loads has long been an issue among teachers in Malaysia. These expenses increase to teachers for the Special Education Integration Program (PPKI). This high burden of duty will undermine the PPKI teachers’ job satisfaction. Although there are many studies on this issue in Malaysia and abroad, however, specific studies on the impact of the task load on the job satisfaction of special education teachers in Malaysia are still being ignored. Therefore, following the continuation of the issue, this qualitative study is aimed for exploring the elements of PPKI task load constructs that influences PPKI teacher job satisfaction in Johor, Malaysia. This study uses the full range of interview methods in collecting data. Interview sessions were administered to 11 coordinators of PPKI for each district in Johor. Thematic analysis was conducted based on the transcript of the interview that has been produced. The findings show there are five elements of PPKI teacher task loads in Johor namely time, type of assignment, working environment, teachers' readiness and resources. Therefore, the parties involved, such as teachers and administrators, should pay attention to these elements to reduce the risk of teachers' task loads and also to meet the PPKI teachers’ job satisfaction in Johor. Keywords: Task load, Teacher Job Satisfaction, Special Education, PPKI, Special Education’s Teachers
0 Comments
HEADMASTER LEADERSHIP EFFECT ON TASK LOAD OF SPECIAL EDUCATION INTEGRATION PROGRAM TEACHER8/23/2020
Headmaster Leadership Effect on Task Load of Special Education Integration Program Teacher
Mohd Norazmi bin Nordin1 Mohamad Zaid Bin Mustafa2 Abdul Rasid Bin Abdul Razzaq3 Faculty of Technical and Vocational Education Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia [email protected] ABSTRACT Purpose of the Study: The leadership of a headmaster at the school has a major influence on school management and teacher management. These influences also impact the task load of the Special Education Integration Program (SEIP) teacher. Various studies have been conducted in Malaysia and abroad on this issue. Based on previous studies and research on existing leadership theories, there are five leadership factors that impact the SEIP teacher's task load, namely leadership style, attitude, knowledge, experience and qualifications. The purpose of this study is to determine whether these factors affect the task load of the SEIP teacher. Methodology: A fully quantitative method was used in this study by distributing a set of online questionnaires to SEIP teachers across Malaysia using the google form platform. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) through AMOS software is used for data analysis purposes. Main Findings: The findings show that all of the factors mentioned in the leadership style, attitude, knowledge, experience and competency of achievement are validated as influences on the SEIP teacher's task load. There have been several studies examining the leadership factor affecting the task load of the SEIP teacher, but the application of the CFA approach using AMOS is still underdeveloped. Therefore, the findings of this study can further confirm previous findings on this issue. Application This research can be usefull for headmaster and the SEIP teachers to give their best in school management. Novelty Its is common to read about the issue for this research in the premiere school, but this research was bassed on special education field. Keywords: Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Headmaster Leadership, Task Load, Special Education, Special Education Integration Program, Structural Equation Modelling INTRODUCTION There are five factors that contribute to the issue of high SEIP teachers' task loads namely teachers, students, policies, facilities and leadership (John, 2017). However, the most important factor in influencing the high SEIP teachers' task load is that of the headmaster because the headmaster is the individual responsible for the overall operation of the school (Erica & Raymond, 2009). Some of the problems faced by the headmaster that can increase their task load are leadership styles, attitudes, knowledge, experience and qualifications (Nelson et al., 2014). Therefore, this study was conducted to determine whether all of these factors led to the burden of SEIP teachers' task load. BACKGROUND RESEARCH The burden of the SEIP teachers' task load is at a high level due to inappropriate and problematic leadership of teachers (Norizan et al., 2013). Most of the principals who work in schools with SEIP do not adopt a leadership style appropriate to the SEIP environment (Zakaria, 2016). Even some of the school principals who have SEIPs are unfair and skeptical about SEIP (Junaidah & Nik Rusila, 2013). Shawnee and Ahlgrim-Delzell (2006) on the other hand stated that headmaster who lacks the knowledge of special education would burden SEIP teachers with unnecessary assignments. In addition, the factors related to special education and teacher qualifications also influence the task load of SEIP teachers (Habib & Zaimah, 2012). In short, there are five factors of headmaster leadership that impact on the task load of SEIP teachers - leadership style, attitude, knowledge, experience and qualifications. Therefore, this study was conducted to validate factors of headmaster leadership that affect task load of special education integration teacher program. a. Research objective i. Validate factors of headmaster leadership that affect task load of special education integration program teacher. b. Research questions i. Can the factors of headmaster leadership that affect task load of special education integration program teacher be determined by their consistency? LITERATURE REVIEW Among the problems faced by the headmaster that may increase the task load of SEIP teachers is their own attitude as reported by Nelson et al. (2014) show that head teachers do not provide the encouragement and support to perform large, burdensome tasks. The attitude of those who lack the proper attention to special education and the notion that special education is the only passenger in the school makes the issue of teacher task load at SEIP endless (Erica & Raymond, 2009). Concerned principals are concerned with the well-being and needs of their teachers including special education teachers such as John (2017) suggestion that those can reduce the task load of special education teachers by managing their assignments properly. This is to prevent special education teachers from doing anything outside of special education (Amalina & Azita, 2016). They also point out that headmaster often direct special education teachers to do assignments outside of special education. The second problem is the lack of knowledge of the headmaster regarding special education (Stephanie, 2017; John, 2017: Johan, 2013). Norizan et al. (2013), on the other hand, suggested that the headmaster would defer to many special education outside of special education teachers because they were less exposed to special education. Also in agreement was Adam (2014), who stated that the headmaster with little knowledge was basically unprepared and confident about the field. This will cause them to be overly concerned about special education and to burden teachers with a variety of assignments and services (Billingsley et al., 2014; Susan & Adam, 2011). According to John (2017), the problem of headmaster lack of knowledge, qualifications and experience in handling special education has led to problems with conducive working conditions, assignments and so on. This situation will cause headmaster to be less concerned with special education in general and SEIP in particular because they do not have the basic knowledge of the task load that SEIP teachers have to bear (Marek, 2016). Leadership style is another problem faced by headmaster in managing SEIPs in their schools. According to the study by Muhammad, Jamalul and Azlin (2017), autocratic teacher leadership style will affect teachers' ability to work better. Muyan and Ramli (2017) also agree that the mastery of the leadership style in the school by the headmaster can create a positive and stressful work environment for teachers. In examining these factors, two leadership theories are discussed: Kurt Lewin's Theory of Leadership and Hersey Blancard's Situation Theory. Kurt Lewin's Theory of Leadership (1939) The Style of Leadership Theory was introduced by Kurt Lewin in 1939. It explains three dimensions of leadership style: autocratic leadership style, democratic leadership style and Laissez Faire's leadership style (Lewin, 1939). These three leadership styles have been discussed and criticized by many researchers since they were introduced. All three styles have their own advantages and disadvantages (Budi, 2016). Syed Ismail and Ahmad (2010), however, explain that each dimension and style of leadership has its own scope that gives both advantages and disadvantages. The first style of leadership is the autocratic leadership style. According to Syed Ismail and Ahmad (2010), Budi (2016) and Sanghan (2007), this leadership style seems to illustrate that the leadership situation is so tight and humanitarian, that leaders give instructions and followers must obey without being given freedom to give a view. While Sanghan (2007) found that this style of leadership makes unilateral decisions and does not represent the organization it leads. However, while this style of autocratic leadership has its own positive side, as stated by Syed Ismail and Ahmad (2010) and Budi (2016), this leadership style can ensure that all tasks are properly and timely, especially when decisions are urgently needed. The second style of leadership is a more open and democratic style of democratic leadership in the interests of mutual interests (Syed Ismail & Ahmad, 2010). According to Bryan (2014), this style of leadership is based on collective decisions where leaders are receptive to their views and criticisms. Citra and Tewal (2014) point out that this style of leadership can make a stronger decision for the success of the organization than the personal success of the leader. Next is the highly open Laissez-Faire leadership style and allows full freedom of decision and action to subordinates (Syed Ismail & Ahmad, 2010). Citra and Tewal (2014) explain that this style of leadership is not about decision making, but rather about employee-leader relationships. Of the three leadership styles presented, researchers argue that each of the leadership styles introduced by Kurt Lewin in 1939, namely the autocratic leadership style, the democratic leadership style and the Laissez-Faire leadership style, had their own negative and positive sides. Nevertheless, democratic leadership styles are seen as more practical because the decisions of the majority are better than one-sided decisions (Syed Ismail & Ahmad, 2010). Hersey Blancard's Situational Leaderaship Theory (1969) Hersey and Blanchard have developed a model of leadership style that conforms to their situation in 1969. Hendryadi (2014), states that, the leadership style of this situation requires a leader to exercise his leadership in accordance with the demands and needs of the situation. In agreement with them is Dyah et al. (2015), who emphasize that situational leadership is an approach for leaders to understand their behaviors, their subordinates' attitudes, and situations before applying their leadership style. Hersey and Blanchard (1969) divided leadership styles into four dimensions, namely, telling, selling, participating and delegating. Out of the four dimensions presented, none of the dimensions is really best in terms of their performance, because the leadership they practice needs to be in their situation (Hendryadi, 2014). The first dimension introduced in Hersey and Blanchard's leadership style was the telling style. This style is similar to the autocratic leadership style advocated by Kurt Lewin, but the details are slightly different. According to Dyah et al. (2015), this style of telling is more likely for leaders to direct their subordinates and to implement it where it is most needed when a task needs to be completed quickly, according to non-performing subordinates, and to new employees who are unfamiliar with the scope of work. The second dimension of leadership style based on this theory is called selling. According to Muchlisin (2016), this style of leadership implements two-way communication between leaders and their followers in giving and performing tasks. This style occurs when a leader assigns the task, the follower performs the task in his own way and at the same time the leader controls the execution of the assignment (Muchlisin, 2016). This style of leadership is seen as more beneficial to both parties because in carrying out the task, the leader acts in control of the action while the follower performs the task separately (Syed Ismail & Ahmad, 2010). The next style is the participating style. According to Muchlisin (2016), this style of leadership implements the support and participation of leaders and members in performing tasks, while leadership is reduced by leaders. According to Rinaldo (2016), this participating leadership style is geared towards followers who have the ability to perform tasks, but lack the willpower. Muchlisin (2016) points out that this style is best used when a large group of followers is within their reach, but has no desire to do so. The fourth leadership style presented by Hersey and Blancard was the delegating leadership style. According to Muchlisin (2016), this style of leadership refers to situations of command and little support, meaning that leaders give their followers freedom to make decisions and how to carry out their tasks. According to Lokman and Aini (2011), the leadership style of this situation is best used in schools that have different subordinate characteristics of academic background, experience, ability and ability to perform a task. In line with this study, the researchers found that the highlights of this theory and model can be elaborated because teachers in schools especially those with SEIP are of different backgrounds and different task structures. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This study uses the full quantitative method in data collection. Researchers distributed randomized sets of questionnaires to SEIP teachers using google form. There were 35 items submitted in the questionnaire. A total of 400 respondents answered the questionnaire as complete and suitable for analysis. The data were then analyzed by CFA method using AMOS 21. The tests used to determine the compatibility of the factors involved were CFA tests for each factor. The main criterion for determining this compatibility is to look at the positive factor loading value that should be ≥ 0.50 (Hair et al., 2010). For fitness index, the RMSEA value should be ≤ 0.08 (Byrne, 2001), while the GFI, CFI and TLI values (one of them) should be ≥ 0.90 (Bentler, 1990; Hatcher, 1994). Relative / Normed Chi-Square values must be approximately ≤ 5.0 (Bentler, 1990). For validity assessment, the Convergent Validity (Average Variance Extracted-AVE) and Construct Validity measurements need to be met. According to Kline (2005), the value of AVE that can determine compatibility is at least 0.50, while Fornell & Larcker (1981) suggest that the AVE value in meeting the Convergent Validity measurement requirements is ≥ 0.5. For reliability measurement, the Composite Reliability (CR) should be ≥ 0.7 (Bentler, 1990; Hatcher, 1994). FINDINGS The findings show that the CFA first analysis conducted for headmaster leadership did not meet the criteria which RMSEA = 0.107, Relative / Normed Chi-Square (5.532), while GFI, CFI and TLI values did not reach ≥0.90, as indicated in Figure 1. This is because there some items are redundant of construct measurement or did not measure the construct. Therefore, this CFA needs to be re-run for improvements through fit indices (Zainudin, 2015). Subsequent analyzes show it fit the criteria which RMSEA = 0.79, Relative / Normed Chi-Square (3.485), while GFI, CFI and TLI values reach ≥0.90, as indicated in Figure 2. Subsequent analyzes also revealed 12 overlapping items namely KP041-KP043, KP042-KP044, KP046-KP047, KP047-KP048, KP048-KP049, KP047-KP049, KP054-KP055, KP057-KP058, KP059-KP060, KP060-KP061, KP065-KP066 and KP074-KP075. All of these overlaps were looped and items with the lowest loading factor value (KP067) were discarded. This finding shows that CFA for headmaster leadership achieve the fit. It also shows that all of these factors have a direct impact on the construct. DISCUSSION Based on the findings of this study, it can be statistically validated that the headmaster leadership factors, namely leadership style, attitude, knowledge, experience and qualifications influence the task load of SEIP teachers. Leadership style is a major factor in the task load of teachers. The majority of respondents agree that democratic leadership is their choice. This democratic leadership gives teachers a chance to express their opinions and open the door for discussion. The second factor is the attitude of the headmaster towards special education. Respondents agree that the attitude of careless and sceptical headmasters towards special education students, SEIP teachers and SEIP itself creates a burden on the SEIP teachers. The third factor is the knowledge of the headmaster regarding special education. The majority of respondents felt that headmaster with special education-related knowledge could distribute their assignments to SEIP teachers fairly and appropriately. Likewise, the fourth factor is the experience of the headmaster in relation to special education, special needs students and SEIPs that influence the task load of SEIP teachers. The fifth factor is a major qualification factor for special education. The majority of respondents felt that head teachers with academic qualifications or special education-related expertise would better understand SEIP. This would have prevented them from imposing SEIP teachers on childlike and inappropriate assignments. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION The findings of this study show that headmasters play an important role in school management in general and SEIP management in particular. Principals' leadership style, attitude, knowledge, experience and qualifications influence their ability to manage SEIP especially the teachers. This task load issue is still ongoing and requires the support of multiple parties to address it. Research on these five factors can be done by the headmaster to facilitate SEIP management in their schools. As a suggestion, a study of the factors affecting the leadership of the headmaster to the task load of the teacher could be extended to other constructs and factors. In addition, it is proposed that this study be conducted qualitatively to obtain more research data. CLOSING The issue of the burden of the SEIP teachers' task load continues to this day. School administrators especially principals need to pay attention to this issue, so that it can be addressed effectively. This should be done to prevent the productivity of SEIP teachers being affected. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank Ministry of Education Malaysia for supporting this research under Fundamental Research Grant Scheme Vot No. K207, FGRS/1/2019/SS109/UTHM/02/1 and partially sponsored by Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. REFERENCE
Factors for the Task Load of Special Education Integration Program (PPKI) Teachers in Johor8/23/2020
Factors for the Task Load of Special Education Integration Program (PPKI) Teachers in Johor Mohd Norazmi bin Nordin Abstract: Teachers’ task load has become a chronic issue. This issue involves teachers in various fields, including special education teachers in the Special Education Integration Program (PPKI). They are burdened with a variety of tasks whether they involve special education or normal students. As we know, the real focus for teachers at PPKI is for students with special needs (MBK) who are full of challenges as MBK is came up of various categories. When their focus is directed to tasks other than those involving MBK, their work will increase and stress them. These full qualitative study was conducted to identify factors affecting the task load of teachers in PPKI. After interviews with the 11 PPKI coordinators of each district in Johor, interview transcripts were constructed and analyzed. Through thematic analysis, the findings indicate that there is three factors contributing to the task load of PPKI teachers' namely students, facilities and leadership. This finding can serve as a guide for headmasters to manage PPKI in schools. Special Education Unique Leadership Theory
In maintaining the success of the special education program, the welfare of teachers and SNS needs to be taken into account (Norazmi, 2020). Therefore, the basis for this theory of leadership is based on leadership those focuses on: i. The Welfare of Special Education Teachers ii. Achievement of Special Education Students To achieve this, leadership needs to control the task load of teachers and inculcate teachers' job satisfaction, so that SNS achievement can be enhanced. As a result, school administrators need to have five uniqueness in their leadership: i. First Unique: Unique Leadership Style In leading a school organization or program involving special education, a school leader must have uniqueness in their leadership. This means that the style of leadership practiced should be consistent with the guidelines for the implementation of the work and scope of the special education teacher's duties. In addition, their leadership must also be special in considering the needs of the SNS. In other words, the practice of leadership needs to be consistent with the acceptance of special education teachers and students. In order to make the leadership relevant, it is sometimes necessary to emphasize things that involve teacher work performance and student achievement. This unique leadership style is at the center of the autocratic and democratic leadership styles. ii. Second Unique: Unique Knowledge Knowledge of leadership is very important in managing special education. The uniqueness of this knowledge is that their knowledge must be meticulously as bottom up process. School leaders need to have knowledge of basic education fundamentals such as policies, scope rules and so on. Then, knowledge also needs to be satisfied regarding each of the features of SNS and their capabilities. This knowledge of SNS is important to prevent school leaders from setting goals beyond their SNS capabilities. After that, the knowledge of special education teachers should be taken into consideration. Their basic background, their service, their way of working, their commitment to the school and so on. On the top level, knowledge about leadership is needed in deciding what kind of leadership needs to be implemented. iii. Third Unique: Unique Attitude In addition to leadership styles and knowledge, school leaders also needs to have a unique attitude toward leading special education. Attitudes are concerned, empathy, love and more are at the discretion of deciding something for teachers and SNS. iv. Fourth Unique: Unique Experience The experience of managing special education is a unique and meaningful journey. In order to succeed in effective leadership, a leader leading a special education program needs to have direct experience with special education. This means that the leader must be in the special education program, in the special education teacher condition and in the SNS abilities. Keep in touch with them, hear them, experience the learning process with special education teachers and SNS. Gain experience by engaging in activities with a special education community at school or outside of school. v. Fifth Unique: Unique Qualification In order to become a leader who is qualified to lead a special education progran, one must place themselves at the ready with the hustle and bustle of special education. Not only academic requirements, but management qualifications, community engagement, always wanting to find special education related knowledge, ready to serve special education and always bear the responsibility of special education. The theory introduced is in support of existing leadership theories and adapted to the situation in special education. In line with the findings of this study and previous studies, this theory is an attempt to make special education more consistently through competitive and responsible leadership. It is hoped that this theory will help the school leadership to implement leadership focused on special education.
Effect Size for Model of the Influence of Headmasters Leadership on Teacher Task Load and Teacher Job Satisfaction of Special Education Integration Program
Mohd Norazmi bin Nordin 1Faculty of Technical and Vocational Education, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia ABSTRACT The leadership of school administrators led by the headmaster plays a very important role in determining the success of a school. Their leadership style, attitude, knowledge, experience and qualifications are elements that influence the task load and job satisfaction of teachers. This situation also applies to the Special Education Integration Program (SEIP). Leadership effectiveness ensures better achievement of special needs students (SNS). This study was conducted to test the effect size of headmaster leadership on the factor mediator of teacher task load and job satisfaction. This study uses quantitative approaches in the process of data collection and analysis. The questionnaire was distributed to 400 respondents consisting of special education teachers across Malaysia is randomly using Google Form. The data obtained were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) using AMOS 21 software. Based on the structural model, effect size was tested by looking at Standardized Regression Weight when the construct was acting as a single predictor. The findings show that the effect size of the construct of the task load of teachers on the leadership of the headmaster and the job satisfaction of the teachers is within the range. At the end of the study, a leadership theory was proposed to help school leaders lead SEIP-based schools. Keywords: Teachers Job Satisfaction, special needs students, special education leadership, structural equation modelling
Relationship between Headmasters’ Leadership, Task Load on Special Education Integration Programme Teachers’ Job Satisfaction
Mohd Norazmi bin Nordin1 , Mohamad Zaid Bin Mustafa2 and Abdul Rasid Bin Abdul Razzaq3 1Faculty of Technical and Vocational EducationUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia 2Faculty of Technical and Vocational EducationUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia 3Faculty of Technical and Vocational EducationUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia Abstract The leadership of the headmaster at the school exerted a powerful influence on the overall management of the school. For schools with the Special Education Integration Program (SEIP), the leadership of the headmasters is effecting the task load of teachers and their productivity. The subsequent state of affairs also has an impact on job satisfaction. There have been numerous studies both domestically and abroad that have shown that headmaster leadership has a significant impact on SEIP teacher duties. This study was conducted to identify the relationship between headmaster leadership, task load and SEIP teacher job satisfaction. Data were collected quantitatively by distributing a set of questionnaires to 400 respondents comprising SEIP teachers throughout Malaysia using google form. Using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and AMOS software, all three constructs were tested to identify relationships with each other. The analysis showed that there was a significant positive relationship between headmaster leadership, task load and SEIP teacher job satisfaction. There are many studies on these constructs, but the use of SEM analysis for related constructs is still poorly conducted. The findings of this study can serve as a reference to school administrators, especially principals to re-evaluate their leadership so as not to burden teachers and to provide job satisfaction to SEIP teachers. Keywords: Structural Equation Modelling, Headmaster Leadership, Task Load, Teacher Job Satisfaction, Special Education Integration Program.
Structural Equation Modelling Using AMOS: Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Taskload of Special Education Integration Program Teachers
Mohamad Zaid Bin Mustafa1 Mohd Norazmi Bin Nordin2 Abdul Rasid Bin Abdul Razzaq3 Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia [email protected] Received October 22, ABSTRACT This study explores the factors leading to the onset of task load among teachers of Special Education Integration Program. As we know, task load is an important issue among special education teachers in general and teachers of Special Education Integration Program in particular. This issue has been going on for a long time. Some studies have found that there is a number of factors that influence the task load of teachers of Special Education Integration Program, including leadership issues at school, working conditions, work intensity and also resources or facilities. In this study, a fully quantitative approach is used to determine factors in the task load of teachers of Special Education Integration Program. The questionnaire was distributed online using the google form platform to randomly collect data from 400 respondents across Malaysia. The data obtained were then analysed using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) using AMOS 21 application. Confirmatory Factor Analysis was performed to obtain factor loading for each element obtained namely work type, work environment and time. The analysis results show that the two factors reflect the appropriate fit and meet all the criteria for validation. While the work type factor does not show compatibility. There have been several domestic and overseas studies examining the factors of special education teacher loading, but the application of the SEM analysis approach using AMOS is still underdeveloped. Therefore, the findings of this study can further confirm previous findings on this issue. Keywords: Structural Equation Modelling, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Task load, Special Education, Special Education Integration Program.
The Practice of Headmasters’ Leadership and Its Effect on Job Satisfaction of Special Education Integration Program (PPKI) Teachers in Johor, Malaysia
Mohd Norazmi bin Nordin1 Mohamad Zaid Bin Mustafa2 Abdul Rasid Bin Abdul Razzaq3 Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia *Corresponding Author: [email protected], [email protected] Copyright©2019 by authors, all rights reserved. Authors agree that this article remains permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License Abstract Teachers in the special integration education program (PPKI) in Johor do not feel satisfaction in working, especially in the teaching and learning process for pupils with special needs. This problem exists due to various factors, such as the high burden of duties, the special circumstances of students who are unable to manage themselves, the readiness of the teachers themselves and the leadership of the headmasters. From all the factors mentioned, the headmasters’ leadership factor has a very significant influence in determining job satisfaction for teachers in PPKI. Therefore, this study was conducted to explore the elements of the headmasters’ leadership construct that influences teachers’ job satisfaction in the Special Education Integration Program (PPKI) in Johor, Malaysia. This study involved 11 respondents consisting of PPKI coordinators from each district in Johor, Malaysia. This study used the full qualitative approach by interview data collection. The result of the thematic analysis showed that there are five main leadership elements that have become the factors to job satisfaction among PPKI teachers in Johor namely leadership style, attitudes, knowledge, experience and also qualification. These five elements are recommended to the headmaster to be given attention in ensuring the satisfaction of PPKI teachers. Keywords Headmaster Leadership, Special Education, PPKI, Teacher Job Satisfaction
Regression between Headmaster Leadership, Task Load and Job Satisfaction of Special Education Integration Program Teacher
Mohd Norazmi bin Nordin1 Mohamad Zaid Bin Mustafa2 Abdul Rasid Bin Abdul Razzaq3 Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia [email protected] ABSTRACT Managing school is a daunting task for a headmaster. This responsibility is exacerbated when it involves the Special Education Integration Program (SEIP). This situation requires appropriate and effective leadership in addressing some of the issues that are currently taking place at SEIP such as task load and job satisfaction. This study aimed to identify the influence of headmaster leadership on task load and teacher job satisfaction at SEIP. This quantitative study was conducted by distributing 400 sets of randomized questionnaires to SEIP teachers across Malaysia through google form. The data obtained were then analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and AMOS software. The results show that there is a significant positive effect on the leadership of the headmaster and the task load of the teacher. Likewise, the construct of task load and teacher job satisfaction has a significant positive effect. However, for the construct of headmaster leadership and teacher job satisfaction, there was no significant positive relationship. This finding is very important as a reference to the school administration re-evaluating their leadership so as not to burden SEIP teachers and to give them job satisfaction. In addition, the findings of this study can also serve as a guide for SEIP teachers to increase awareness of the importance of managing their tasks. This study also focused on education leadership in general and more specifically on special education leadership. Keywords: Headmaster Leadership, Task Load, Teacher Job Satisfaction, Special Education Integration Program. |
AuthorIjazah Sarjana Muda Perguruan (Pendidikan Khas Masalah Pendengaran)- IPG Kampus Ilmu Khas ArchivesCategories |