Supervision instructional programs aim to allow teachers to develop a new vision that will enrich their teaching experience (Mtetwa & Thompson, 2000), enhance their teaching skills (Sparks, 1984), and bring about improvements in their teaching and in their students' academic achievements (Blandford, 2000). Allocation of resources for supervision instructional programs can be direct or indirect. Direct allocation of resources refers to situations where the schools are entitled to select the instructors, and to obtain the resources that best fit the school needs. When indirect allocation of resources is applied, resources may not be allocated according to the school needs and preferences. Teachers' satisfaction with instructional programs, which refers to their feelings about the programs, is expected to be greater when resources are transferred to the schools via the direct channel of resource allocation than their level of satisfaction with programs offered through the LEAs.

            The exploitation of instructional programs has particular significance in school-based management (SBM) systems. While the centralized management system often ignores school-based needs and human initiatives (Cheng, 1993), the SBM enables school participants, who are closest to students and staff, to tailor decisions to the community they serve.

In a review of SBM literature, Leithwood and Menzies (1998) concluded that teachers tended to be positively affected by SBM and showed greater commitment and higher morale than in non-SBM schools. Studies they reviewed also suggested that SBM led to collaboration among teachers, a greater school-wide focus on professional development, and a greater sense of accountability, all indicators of a strong professional community.

   To date, limited research has been conducted on how teachers’ preferences regarding supervision programs and their perceptions about their work affect their level of satisfaction with instructional programs in SBM vs. non-SBM settings. This study aims to expand our understanding by determining which variables that are related to teachers' supervision instructional programs and to teachers' self-perceptions, best predict teachers' satisfaction with the programs.

   Three groups of schools were chosen for sampling purposes: 1) schools that had implemented SBM for at least 3 years and in which they were granted the instructional resources directly; 2) schools that did not implement SBM, but received the program resources directly; and 3) schools which did not implement SBM, and were granted program resources indirectly, via the local authority. The sample consisted of 841 teachers employed in 118 elementary schools divided into three groups according to the division of schools described above: Group I, 385 teachers in 52 schools; Group II, 211 teachers in 32 schools; and Group III, 245 teachers in 34 schools. Ninety-six percent were women; the mean age of the teachers was 42.5 years (sd=8.2); the average number of years of teaching in the current school was 11 years (sd=7.5), and the average number of years as teachers was 17.8 (sd=8.8). With regard to educational background, 34% of the respondents were accredited senior teachers, 43% had a Bachelor’s degree, 13% had a Master’s degree and 10% had the equivalent of a junior college diploma with teaching credentials.

 

A quantitative questionnaire, regarding different aspects of teachers’ supervision instructional programs, was administered. The respondents were asked to refer to their current school, and to answer a range of questions about their level of satisfaction with the programs, how often they attended the programs, their involvement in decisions regarding the programs, and their attitudes toward them. To this were added a number of 7-point Likert scales measuring autonomy at work (Riel & Sipple, 1996), intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction (Bhal & Ansari, 1996), personal teaching efficacy (PTE) (Gibson & Dembo, 1984), quality of interaction between principal and teachers (Bhal & Ansari, 1996), and professional development of teachers (Chui, Sharp & McCormick, 1996). The scale that measured teachers’ satisfaction with the programs was constructed specifically for the current research. It was a seven-item scale (Cronbach alpha=.87) on a 7-point scale (from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree).

Generally speaking, the teachers were satisfied with the instructional programs that they experienced (M=5.54; sd=1.1). However, teachers whose schools received resources directly reported greater satisfaction with the programs as compared to their colleagues whose schools received the resources indirectly (M=5.61, 5.36; sd=1.11, 1.22, respectively, p<.01).

A multiple regression analysis showed that six predictor variables – direct allocation of resources, feedback that is not transmitted to the principal, having the program in the school, tailoring the programs according to the teachers’ needs, the principal as the central person to make decisions about the length of the program, and finally, having the program instructor give the feedback to the teachers rather than to any other school personnel – were statistically significant predictors of teachers’ satisfaction with the instructional programs. These predictors explained 13.7% of the variance of the dependent variable [F(20,724)=5.72, p<.001].

A second multiple regression analysis showed that five predictor variables – internal satisfaction, teacher's job involvement, quality of principal-teacher relationship, the freedom to refuse to participate in the instructional program, and extrinsic satisfaction (negative value) – were statistically significant predictors of teachers’ satisfaction with the instructional programs. These predictors explained 21% of the variance of the dependent variable [F(10,829)=21.26, p<.0001].

The findings of this study demonstrate that the main factors affecting teachers’ satisfaction with the instructional programs are related to their preferences to maintain instructional processes “close to home”. That is, the variables which explained teachers’ satisfaction represented their inclination to have the programs on the school site, according to their needs, while the principal has a say about the length of the program, but the feedback itself, which is provided by the program instructor, is not transferred to him or her. These characteristics also explain the teachers’ preference for direct allocation of resources.

These findings enable us to conclude that teachers’ satisfaction with the instructional programs is closely related to their ability to design the programs in accordance with their needs.