Balasandran A/L Ramiah. (2007).

Headmasters reinforcement behavior and the teachers

performance. 14th National Seminar on Educational Leadership and Management. 25-27

Jun 2007. 1-27

Balasandran, the author of this article, served as the lecturer from InstitutAminuddinBaki
(IAB), the National Institute of Education Management and Leadership, Ministry of
Education (MOE). This article was presented in the National Seminar on Educational
Leadership and Management in 2007.
Goodlad (2004) believed that it would be a mistake to identify the principal as the
main factor determining teacher satisfaction. It was believed, however, that the principal
may be one factor in determining teacher performance. Although there is no one
leadership style that fits all areas, some have been more effective than others in bringing
about changes in teachers job satisfaction and student performance on standardized
testscores. With the increased call for accountability, more research had been carried out
to measure relationship between school leaders behaviors and teachers performance.
(Kim, 2002)
In this paper, I summarize the article and offer comments about selectedaspects,
identify some relevant changes that have occurred since the article was published, and
suggest areas where additional research findings would assist in understanding the
current state of Headmasters reinforcement behavior in regard to the issues raised.

Article Summary
This study was aimed at identifying the relationship between headmasters
reinforcement behaviors and teachers performance in terms of their job satisfaction. A
correlational research methodology by using multiple regressions was used in this study
with the unit of analysis being the teachers.
There were 203 teachers from 51 primary national type schools in Penang
participated in this study. The study used a new construct called omission, which is the
non - response behavior of leaders to subordinates performance developed by
Hinkin&Schrisheim (2004). The second instrument used to measure teachers' job
satisfaction is the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ). The Minnesota
Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) is one method of evaluating job satisfaction. This
questionnaire began from the Work Adjustment Project at the University of Minnesota,
which began in 1957.His instrument has been used to measure satisfaction in numerous
occupations. The occupations range from accountants to warehousemen. Educators job
satisfaction has also been tested using this instrument (Woods &Weasmer, 2002).
Finding revealed that the headmasters in national primary school tend to utilize
more contingent reward reinforcement behavior in managing their teachers. However, to
a certain extent, other reinforcement behavior such as omission in response for good
performance, omission in response for poor performance and contingent punishment are
also used when they deal with the teachers. The study also shows that there is a
significant relationship between all dimensions of job satisfaction except between
omission in response for poor performance and intrinsic satisfaction.
This study applied correlational research study. Multiple regressions was used
to explore the pattern of relationship between one continuous variable and a number of
predictor variable. The finding of the study stated that schools leadership behavior is a
significant factor that influences teachers' job satisfaction.
It also shows that omission or non - response behavior is an important
dimension of classic operant conditioning that has been ignored in research even though
it could bring potential harm to subordinates' performance and organizational
effectiveness. This study also highlighted the relationship between teachers demographic
characteristics and their performance. Furthermore, teachers gender, educational level,
school type, and school size does influence their teachers; performance in term of
satisfaction.
Compare to national school teachers, teachers from national type teachers are
more satisfied with work. Moreover, teachers in big school were also more satisfied with
work, school and job freedom than teachers in small schools.
This study will be valuable in terms of theoretical and practical significance in
the area of Human Resource Management, particularly the performance management of
teacher with the primary focus on leadership behavior. Furthermore, the study can
provide information to country policy maker, National Institute of Educational
Management & Leadership (Institute AminuddinBaki) and create awareness.
 Comments
In the effective schools research, the principal was considered the major authority in
school reform. Because of this, many studies have been conducted on effective leadership
styles. Some of these include leadership style and teacher job satisfaction. The idea of
headmasters reinforcement corresponding to teachers performanceis supported in the
research. However, further research shall be establish a model relationship in the school
arena, starting from principal leadership style through teachers perceptions and feelings, to
teacher behavior in the class.
This study has implications for principals in that it supports teachers performance
by the reinforcement behaviors. The research stated that headmasters reinforcement
behaviors led to greater teachers performance.However, there are many extraneous
factors involved in teachers performance, and the principal of the school cannot eliminate
them in order to have satisfied teachers.
This study also showed that satisfied teachers do not assure satisfactory student
test scores. Much of the research on job satisfaction and improved outcomes has been
inbusiness and industry. As many people will testify, a school is not a business and the
outcomes of a school cannot be treated in the same manner as a business. The outcomes
for a school are its students and community. This is usually judged to be successful or not
by test scores. This study shows that making teachers happy will not guarantee a
successful school.
If this study is replicated, it is recommended that a larger population be used. A
larger population would allow for a better generalization of the data. It may also be
relevant to see if the socioeconomic status, race, or gender of the teachers of the school
would make a difference in this study. This question was not attempted by the researcher.
It is also recommended that more different types of school teachers be involved so that
the majority of the school was not overlooked.
Another recommendation would be to use more current data. More current data
would make any statistically significant relationship able to be generalized to a larger
population. It may also be of interest to see if a statistically significant relationship
existed between each category of the reinforcement behavior and the teachers
performance. This may give an indication as to what areas a principal can influence
teacher satisfaction.This research only covered the primary school in Penang. But this is a
small position of Malaysia. So when doing research in future, attention should be made to
cover large position. Hence findings of this research can be applied to all.

Conclusion
The main purpose of our study is to examine the impact of headmasters reinforcement on
teachers performance. This conclusion is based on the selected sample. That means this,
study aimed at finding the influences of headmasters reinforcement on teachers
performance in Penang. This research studied the relationship between leadership style
(reinforcement) of principals at schools and teachers job satisfaction (teachers
performance). Leadership style is one of the main factors determining job satisfaction.
Findings of this study shows that the principals should practice reinforcement behaviors
in order to increase teachers job satisfaction then only, they give their full effort in their
service.

References

Goodlad, J. I. (2004). A place called school. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co

Kim, S. (2002). Participative management and job satisfaction: Lessons for

management leadership. Public Administration Review, 62(2), 231-241.

Woods, A., &Weasmer, J. (2002). Maintaining job satisfaction: Engaging professionals

as active participant. The Clearing House, 75(4), 186-189.