Correlation Between Leadership Styles and School Performance

LEADERSHIP STYLES AND SCHOOL PERFORMANCES: A CORRELATIONAL STUDY
PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education
PROPOSAL
Chapter 1 -The Problem and Literature Review

2

1.1 Background of the Study

Yale professor George Counts observed as early as the 1920’s that excessive
centralization is the major problem affecting school performances in the Philippines.
In response to this, the Department of Education (DepEd) adopted and implemented
programs emphasizes on authonomy, shared-governance and decentralization such as
School Based Management (SBM) and Result-Based Performance Management

3

System (RPMS). The RPMS is the organization-wide process of ensuring that
employees focus work efforts are towards achieving DepEd vision, mission, values,
and strategic priorities(Dizon, et. al., 2018).

The implementation of SBM and adoption of RPMS in the DepEd
confronted school administrators (Principal, Head Teacher, School In-Charge) for a
more complex, diverse, and concentrated responsibilities for perform. Thus, school
4

administrators’ role has changed subsequently as the demands of society, political
expectations, and school system have changed (Valentine and Prater, 2011; and Smith,
2016). There is greater emphasis on shared governance and participative decision
making encouraging more participation of stakeholders in the community. The
effectiveness of school administrators in performing these new roles has been a

5

matter of concern to many educationalists (Ozuruoke, et. al., 2011). The overall
management of school reflects on leadership styles of an administrator, working with
and through the teachers, parents and community stakeholders to make best use of
their capabilities in the organization and achieve the desired educational goals.
The study of Kytheoritis et. al., (2010) and Yahya (2015) revealed that leadership
styles such as Autocratic, Democratic, Laizze-faire, and Beaurocratic styles influence

6

school performance both positively and negatively. On the other hand, Smith (2016)
urged that school leadership should be dynamic and ever-changing adopting every
transformation of education organization and further proposed an integrated
leadership model that encompasses behaviors from transformational, transactional,

7

inspirational and instructional leadership styles to provide positive school
performance result.
There are hundreds of leadership styles to research. The four leadership styles that
will be focused by the researcher are found to be part of the foundation of good
leaders that can potentially be the best leadership styles a school administrator must
possess to lead positively the learner-centered, stakeholders’ inclusive, and result-

8

based school. These leadership styles are transformational, transactional, instructional,
and inspirational.
Hoy and Smith (2007) theorized that in school management the most important is
the recognition of school administrator to his leadership styles. Thus, Yagci and Uluoz
(2017) found out that school administrators do not clearly use any of leadership skills.
The sad thing is they don’t even considered their styles of leadership as determinants
9

of school performance level (Ozuruobe et al., 2011 as cited by Yahya, 2015). They
further pointed out that some of school administrators seem to find it
difficult to effectively administer their schools. Therefore, school administrators
should recognize their leadership styles and should adopt styles that would help them
obtain positive school performance.

10

Moreover, the performance of elementary schools in the Philippines is
assessed through the Result-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) rating
scale which computed from the Key Result Area (KRA), a broad category of general
outputs or outcomes. It is the mandate or function of the office and/or individual
employee. The KRA is the reason why an office and/or job exist. It is an area where
11

the office and/or individual employee are expected to focus on. Key Result Areas
(KRA’s) are found in the Office Performance Commitment and Review Form
(OPCRF) and Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF), a
performance tool of Result-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) of the
school heads or school administrators and teachers. The realization of organizational

12

vision, mission, and strategic priorities would be the utmost purpose of attaining the
Key Results Areas (Dizon, et. al., 2018).

There are five KRAs in the RPMS. First, School Leadership, Management and
Operation which encompasses on the Management/Leadership functions such as
collecting, analyzing and utilizing data to identify and plan needed interventions;
recommending localized curriculum (mother tongue based) for instruction;

13

developing standards for outstanding teacher and pupil performance; organizing
appropriate class programs, ADM, flexible learning options as stop-gap measures;
consolidating reports on learning difficulties, home visitations and peculiar incidents
used for planning and implementing appropriate interventions. Producing a school
strategic plan/SIP and AIP through the strategic planning process, conducting school
14

situational analysis, SWOT, determining strategies through prioritizing strategic
options, resource and facilities planning and formulation of PAPs based of analyses.,
Enhancing School Improvent Plan (SIP), preparing School Report Card (SRC).
Second, Instructional Leadership which tells the school head to focus on achieving
standards for performance indicators and learning outcomes of schools and centers
15

like Improved NAT performance, 0% dropout rate, 100% enrolment, acceptable GSA,
MPS and GPA, and Performing instructional supervision to achieve learning
outcomes. Third, Human Resource Management and Development that deals on
providing technical assistance to teachers on matters pertaining to enhancement of
classroom management, skills and instructional competence and to non-teaching

16

personnel for support services within the RPMS cycle. Fourth, Parents’ Involvement
and Community Partnership which suggest school head for stakeholders
partnership/mobilization plan (complete with reports and documentations of meetings,
agreements) organized programs with stakeholders, especially parents for academic
and other purposes, and obtaining resources for the school through stakeholders
17

partnership. And the fifth, is the Learning Environment which ask the school
administrators to provide safe and child friendly learning and school environment for
students/learners.
RPMS rating scale has numerical rating of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 with corresponding
final assessment adjectival description of Poor or Unsatisfactory, Satisfactory, Very
Satisfactory, and Outstanding. Locally, specifically in the ten elementary schools of

18

Numancia East District, Division of Siargao only one school got an outstanding rating
while others got very satisfactory in school year 2017-2018.

Furthermore, leadership and performance are two multidimensional concepts
which are widely studied and researched across a variety of domains in educational
world. But the concept of leadership styles and school performances under RPMS
19

implementation is something fresh for the researchers to conduct a study. A lot has
been written about leadership styles but the grouping of the four styles under study is
new. A lot has been written about factors affecting school leadership and school
performance but the five Key Result Areas (KRAs) used by RPMS are new. In other
words, there many beliefs on the linkages of the two concepts, however no previous
20

study conducted especially locally that investigate this assumption. So, what is yet to
be determined, is how these integrated leadership styles proposed by Smith (2016)
related to the school performance as measured by the KRA in the RPMS. Therefore,
the purpose of this study is to establish a relationship and thus increase the
21

understanding of leadership as it relates to school performance based on RPMS
implementation.
As such, if a relationship between leadership styles and school performances are
found to be positively correlated, it would help to build an argument for the value of
proposing a capability building for school administrators to improve their leadership
styles. Additionally, if a relationship of the variables which will be studied here is

22

established then it would help other researchers to conduct further studies whether
leadership styles or skills can be enhance through proper training or seminar.
1.2 Literature Review
Introduction
23

According to Balyer (2012) in order to cope with the rapid changing world
of task in administering one school, administrators must evolve their leadership
skills into more team-oriented, change-makers and result-based. Awad (2018)
added that leader should adopt to what should be adopted to address high urgent
24

challenges, and with the emergence and development of many theories and styles
associated with effectiveness of school administration. Thus, Smith (2016)

proposed a model of leadership styles encompasses the concepts of transforming,
rewarding, inspiring and leading instruction of learner-centered school. Integrated
leadership approach shows evidence of beneficial effects on teacher job
satisfaction, learners’ achievement and the overall performance of the school

25

(Menon, 2014). With the advent of k to 12 curriculum, School Based Management
(SBM) and Result-Based Performance Management System (RPMS)
implementation in the Department of Education (DepEd) school administrators’
performance are at risk.

The evolution of dominant models of leadership has started in the middle
of 1970’s from researchers emphasizing traits, behavior, situations and context

26

that influenced a leader’s leadership, to the more dynamic leadership models
present today (Amoroso, 2002; Bass and Riggs, 2006; Creighton, 2005, Marzano,
Waters, & McDulty 2005; Dale Jr., 2012). Prominent leadership styles such as
authoritarian, democratic, laissez-faire, beaurocratic, servant, and more recently
transformational, transactional, instructional and inspirational have been the target

27

of many research studies (Dale Jr., 2012; Mohammed & Wang, 2018; Smith,
2016).
In this study, the researcher will try to present the concept of
transformational leadership, transactional leadership, inspirational leadership, and
instructional leadership as new theories, styles, and leadership models with their
28

core goals in achieving the endeavors of school administrators in uplifting overall
school performance.
So first, the researcher is going to review the leadership theories and styles
in order to provide a common understanding on the development of leadership and
how these styles show significant effects on school performance, what makes
them important in today’s implementations of various programs? And finally,

29

review related studies on the use of leadership models and their effectiveness to
school performance.
Leadership theories and Styles

Leadership literature reveals that theories have been refined and modified
as the demands of society changes and they are all relevant (Khan et al., 2016).
30

Because of the direct and indirect effect of leadership to school performance is the
result of the evolutions of new and more promising leadership theories.
Great Man Theory (the 1840’s)

The explorations of why organizations need heroes to define their common
culture over centuries. Thomas Carlyle (1847) claimed in his “Great Man Theory”
31

that men are endowed with heroic potentials to become a leader, thus leaders are
born not made. Leaders with this theory were regarded as those individuals as a
result of “fortunate inheritance or social adventure” (McGuire, 2004 as cited by
Awad, 2018).
With the belief that history of the world is a biography of great leaders and
someone within the bloodlines is destined by nature to be in their role as leader

32

influencing followers. Arkitson Jr. (2013) added that the capacity for leadership is
inherent which means that great are born, not made.
Trait Theory (1930’s-1940’s)

A certain physical traits and personality characteristics of born leaders
distinguished them from non-leaders. Trait theories focus on human features and
33

traits. Thus, ignoring the issue on whether the leadership traits were inborn or
acquired.
According to McArthur, et. al., (2011) it is a theory based on
identifications of number of behavioral characteristics being shared by a number
of leaders. However, it subsequently criticized as it views each personality
variable as something that acts independently to determine leadership.

34

Behavioral Theories (1940’s-1950’s)

It is the theory that believes on the theory that effective leaders are made
not born. The behavioral achievements and successes of a leader define his
leadership (Awad, 2018). Hence, the actions related to his accomplishments are
35

the factors affecting the description of his leadership and not his personal
characteristics (McArthur et al., 2011).

Situational or Contingency Theories (the 1960’s)
According to Thai (2014) contingency theories evaluates the behaviors of
the leader such as task-oriented behavior, relations-oriented behavior,
participation, and contingent reward behaviour on the effectiveness of leadership

36

under various conditions. It supports the concept that leadership is all about
perfecting the right balance on the usage of behaviours, needs and context.
Transformational Leadership Theories (the 1970’s)
Avolio, Bass & Sung (1999) as cited by Awad (2018) refers
transformational leadership theory to three specific leadership behaviours:
idealized influence, individualized consideration, and perceptive stimulation. This

37

theory measures the impact of specific leadership behaviours on performance
(Gundersen, 2012).
Bass (1985, as cited by Awad, 2019) believed that transformational
leadership theory is best for uncertain and mysterious circumstances and
situations. Thus, it found to be positively correlated to middle manager
effectiveness, CEO Success, cross cultural leadership, virtual teams, personality/

38

military leadership, emotional intelligence, teacher job satisfaction, and a variety
of other topics (McClerky, 2014).

Transformational Leadership
Burns (1978) as cited by Dale, Jr. (2012) defined transformational
leadership as a process where leaders and followers engage in a mutual process of

39

empowering one another through values, self-awareness, charismatic actions, and
motivation. Giving high level of value placed on the perceived needs of the staff
instead of the leader based more on trust and commitment than reward and
punishment, transformational leadership emphasizes organizational change through
new vision for the future (Horn-Turpin, 2009; and Bucic, et. al., 2010).
40

According to Kurtland et al., (2010), transformational leadership style begun to
appear in educational literature in the 1980s in the reason of improving school
systems and performances on academic and many other factors. This encompasses the
idea that this style of leadership helps to assess individual motives, satisfy
organizational members’ need, and value them. The current emphasis on school
41

change means that successful educational leaders need to develop a deeper
understanding of working within a school environment (Whitaker, 2003 as cited in the
work of Allen, 2010). This knowledge is essential because effective leaders are
considered critical to the quality of teachers’ work and student learning.

42

According to Avolio, (2007) as cited by Dale Jr., (2012) transformational leaders
lead their colleagues towards innovative and creative questioning of assumptions,
reframing problems, and approaching old situations with new methods and insights.
So, it might be appropriate to say that higher levels of transformational leadership will
be associated with higher levels of group effectiveness.

43

Transactional Theory (the 1970’s-1980’s)

According to Nawas and Khan (2016) transactional theory is activated
divergence from the specific perspectives of the leader, leadership context and the
follower and toward practices that concentrated further on the exchanges between
followers and leaders. Bargaining, trading and compromising among leaders and
followers are the relationships and do not go beyond this.

44

Transactional theory is based on the concept that the leader either rewards
or punishes the employee for the task accomplished. A leader in this theory
continuously monitors performance and attempts to intervene proactively (Avolio
& Bass, 1997 as cited by Awad, 2018)

Transactional Leadership
45

Wany and Swamy (2014) defines transactional leadership as trades
between the leader and follower by which followers are compensated for meeting
specific goals or performances criteria. The transactional leader will first validate
the relationship between performance and reward and then exchange it for an
appropriate response that encourages subordinates to improve performance.

46

Bass Bernard et al (1997)as cited by Allen, (2010) explained that
transactional leadership depends on contingent reinforcement, either positive
contingent reward or the more negative active or passive forms of management-
by-exception. They do this by giving reward or punishing based on performance

47

or proficiencies. Followers are praised or punished in order to meet the
organizational goals set out by the leader.

Bass and Riggio (2006) as cited in the work of Smith (2016) provided two
dimensions of transactional leadership and explained as follows; the first
dimension is based on contingent reward which the primary aim is to achieve
organizational objectives. The leader gives various rewards to improve the

48

performance and motivations of followers, who can get the award while fulfilling
the mandate. The second dimension is defined as management-by-exception. This
dimension can be applied in two ways, active or passive. In the case of active
leaders, they will correct the mistakes of followers by tracking their performance.
However, if the leader follows a more passive approach, they will wait for the
49

emergence of errors before making corrections. Transactional leaders will follow
performance and problems arise, take actions to correct the problems.
Accomplishing work in exchange for rewards is what motivates the followers of
transactional leader.
Instructional Leadership Theory (1980’s-1990’s)
50

With the concept that school administrators are responsible in all aspects
of school performances, including learner’s academic achievement. Thus, the
major problem of school administrators facing is the truth that they cannot be in
every classroom every day in order to personally affect student performance
(Gentilucci & Muto, 2007). Though school administrators cannot be in the

51

classroom every day, teachers are directly teaching and influencing students in the
classroom on a daily basis (Dale Sr., 2012).
With the belief that the school administrator has greatly influences the job
satisfaction of the teachers (Nguni et al., 2006; Grayson & Alvarez, 2008; Hulpia
52

et al., 2009), Instructional Leadership Theory has emerged and designed to help
teachers refine classroom behaviors and support teaching skills in the classroom.
Instructional Leadership
According to the study in TALIS countries, School Administrators with
instructional leadership frequently work with teachers to improve weaknesses and
address pedagogical problems, and also to solve problems with teachers when there
53

are challenges to learning in a particular classroom. Also, they often inform teachers
about possibilities to update their curricular knowledge and instructional skills.
Furthermore, these principals are being vigilant about descriptive student behavior in
classrooms. In general, principals with instructional leadership style spend significant
amounts of their managerial time in attempting to improve classroom instruction.

54

Constructivist teachers as instructional leaders is anchored with school vision
concentrated on learner-centered which requires direct involvement with teachers in
improving teaching and learning process (Robinson, 2011).

Inspirational Leadership Theory (1990’s-2000’s)
In the literature that talks about inspirational leadership theory and style,
the term “influence in a non-forced manner” is the best description. With the
55

advent of rapid and various program implementations in the Department of
Education (DepEd), school administrators’ needs not only to direct their teachers
but to motivate to move towards achieving goals. Inspiring followers always have
a noble effect to followers to move voluntarily into noble goal (Indrawati, 2014)
Inspirational Leadership
56

Inspirational Leadership is described as an influence relationship between leaders
and followers in achieving the common goals. The interaction between the two parties
is one of the main principles of this type of leadership. Inspirational Leadership
focuses on inspiring and energizing followers to give sense of direction and
momentum for change. It is about touching individuals to strive towards a compelling

57

vision of the future by embracing and embodying the values of the organization. It
emphasizes on giving clear goals and objectives to ensure that leaders and followers
work collaboratively towards a shared purpose.

Followers are encouraged to grow and given empowerment and accountability to
accept responsibility for their own success through motivational support.

58

Employees desire leaders who truly care and are committed to their well-being.
Kouzes and Posner (2007) as cited by Smith (2016) stated that leaders who recognize
and celebrate significant accomplishments who encourage, inspire, and stimulate
positive energy which increases their constituents understanding of the commitment
to the vision and values. Employees crave to know if management cares, if they have
59

a secure job, how they can achieve greater meaning and fulfillment from their work,
if they are being told the truth, if their contribution matters(Secretan, 1999 as cited by
Smith, 2016). Inspirational leaders are able to answer these questions by simply
inspiring followers, one soul at a time.

Sounds amazing but the good news is that inspirational leadership can be
learned. In fact, all of us may posses the qualities of an inspiring leaders. The secret is
60

to empower leaders build their strenghts they currently have and shore up any
qualities that may compromise their ability to inspire (Awad, 2018).
Development of leadership model and its effect to school performance

The use of leadership model has been proposed by many researchers
which is anchored on the idea that there is no single style that fits in all. In order to
61

justify that leadership models, which means an integration or combination of two or
more styles to secure success were already proposed by a number of researchers in the
field, the researcher will provide and discuss briefly few of the proposed models
where leadership styles used are anchored.

Hersey Blanchard Situational Leadership Model
62

According to Hersey and Blanchard (1970) tasks are different and each type of
task requires a different style. It draws major views from contingency concept and as a
model it came from the name itself which implies that situation is the bases of
leadership, and no leadership style is considered to be the best.

This model used Telling, Selling, Participating, and Delegating as leadership styles and
paired up with maturity levels abbreviated as M1, M2, M3, and M4.
63

Vroom-Yetton Decision Model
The Vroom-Yetton Decision Model or Vroom-Yetton Contingency Model is a
situational leadership theory. It was developed by Victor Vroom in collaboration with
Philip Yetton in 1973. Later, in the year 1988 Arthur Jago joined their study. Thus, they
64

called the theory as Vroom-Yetton-Jago Normative Decision Model. This model
proposes five different styles ranging form authocratic to consultative to group-based

65

decisions making on the situation and level of involvement. Indeed, the Vroom-Yetton-
Jago Normative Decision Model believes that the best leadership style is contingent to
the situation (Dale Jr., 2012)
Full Range Leadership Model

66

Bass (1985) created this model to better understand behaviors related to
leadership. Thus, identifies three styles of leadership behavior including laissez-faire
leadership, transactional leadership, and transformational leadership style. Laissez-faire
leadership is essentially considered non-leadership because the leader provides feedback
to followers only when problems used to be corrected and the leader avoid to make
67

decision (Avolio and Bass, 1995; Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999). Out of the three styles,
transformational leadership is considered as the most effective while laissez-faire is least
effective in relation to follower’s effort, commitment, performance and satisfaction (Bass,
1995; and Avolio 1999 cited by Dale Jr., 2012).

Transformational-Transactional Leadership Model
68

According to Mac Gregor (2003) the application of both styles reveal
positive effect on school performance, thus the application varies from situation to
situation and context to context. Transactional leadership is the most preferable style to
use to situations such as high degree of precision, technical expertise, time-constraints
and detailed technological paper works. While in situations like human intensive
69

environment where motivation, respect, and inspiration are the focus to influence
followers to move towards organizational goals, transformational leadership is the best
style to use.
Transformational-Transactional-Instructional Leadership Model

Due to the fact that learner achievement is not directly affected by school
administrators for the reason that they are not present in the classroom every day but they
70

need to influence learner’s achievement (Orr & Orphanos, 2007; Perry & Mankin, 2007;
Wahlstron & Louis, 2008). Studies such as the one conducted by Valentine and Prater
(2011) as cited by Yahya (2016) have indicated a correlation between school
administrators who use instructional leadership to train and develop teaching skills in
teachers to an influence on learner’s academic achievement.

71

In order to have greater success in terms of learner’s performances, school
administrators must acquire leadership styles that promotes teachers with job satisfaction.
Horu-Turpin (2009) reported that administrative support correlated to higher levels of
teacher satisfaction and higher commitment to their jobs. The success of learners
performance relies on the strength of its administrative leadership given off by school
72

administrators cultivating teacher job satisfaction, providing discipline to learners,
maintaining school budget, and working with parents and stakeholders (Sarros & Sarros,
2007; Nguni, et al.; 2006; Stroh, 2007; Rowland, 2008). So, instructional leadership has
added to transformational and transactional leadership because when teachers are not
satisfied with their job, it becomes more difficult to exert the effort needed to consistently
73

motivate learners to learn, However, when teachers feel their school administrator
supports them, commitment to learners and teacher morale is enhanced (Mackenzie,
2007; and Yahya, 2016).
Integrated Leadership Model

74

Smith (2016) proposed a new model of leadership suited for school based
administration that encompasses behaviors from transformational, transactional,
instructional, and inspirational. By Researcher showed evidence that an integrated
leadership approach has significant effects on teacher job satisfaction, learners’ success,
and overall school performance (Meson, 2014).

75

Inspirational leadership completed the four core leadership styles in the
model. As being new evolved leadership styles, it gains major interest from many
researchers (Awad, 2018). As outlined in the Canadian Model and British Model of
inspirational leadership, it is an especial way of monitoring for which behaviors of

76

followers are monitored by leaders towards inspiring direction (Horwitch & Whipple,
2014) say that the ability of a person to inspire is not inborn and can be learned.
As today’s description of school becomes wide enough to include school
as a learning hub of multicultural races and where community and stakeholders are
encouraged to participate in school administration, inspirational leadership is a must to
include a bucket list of school administrators leadership.

77

Synthesis
It is based on above mentioned in research findings (affects on relationship
between the leaderships’ styles and school performances), and the belief that the school
heads leadership styles are connected to school performance (however, no previous study
78

specially locally that investigate this assumption). From above, indicates a must for more
studies that examine the possible relationship between school leadership styles and school
performance based on the KRA of the school administrators on their OPCRF as
performance tool used by RPMS that somehow established the impact of school heads’
79

leadership style on the school performance in the Philippines, more specifically in the
Numancia East District Division of Siargao.
1.3 Conceptual Framework
This study will anchor on the Integrated Leadership Model of Bradley Smith
(2016) on his study on the Role of Leadership Style in Creating a Great School where
he proposed four leadership styles which are found to have relatively positive
80

influence to school performance. The four leadership styles comprises from

transformational leadership style, transactional leadership style, instructional
leadership style and inspirational leadership style.
Perceptions of these leadership styles will somehow help school administrators

addressed some problems brought about by a rapid changes and implementations of
school and curriculum programs. With all the phases of changes encountered by
81

school system, the teachers are always placed as the front-liner of implementation.
Hence, motivation of teachers has a significant effect on the success or failure of the
implementation (Haley, 2009; Eval & Roth, 2011). According to Jacobsen (2010)
school leaders should give attention on praising teachers in order to create more
favorable conditions for learning.
82

Having known with four leadership styles in the school is not all an
advantages of the school administrators because usually leaders have inherently
possessed a single leadership style. Likewise, school is generally having filled every
day of the things need to be done which leaders must perceive priority at a time.
Now, the question is which leadership style is the most effective in a particular
situation? However, school administrators need to understand that it is not
83

necessary to master each of the style, rather find the traits in each that fit for each
individual (Smith, 2016).
On the other hand, performance of the school administrators (Principal, Head
Teacher, School In Charge) reflected as the performance of the school. Result-Based

84

Performance Management System (RPMS) adopted by Department of Education
(DepEd) as performance tool measuring performance of school employee both
teaching and non-teaching staff. RPMS as performance management tool of the
DepEd employees covers all aspect of the school performances provided as the Key
Result Areas (KRA’s) which referred as the reasons why the job or the organization
85

existed. Key Result Areas (KRA’s) of the DepEd as define in the RPMS which
encompasses from School Leadership, Management and Operation; Instructional
Leadership; Human Resource Management and Development; Parents’ Involvement
and Community Partnership; and Learning Environment.

86

Presented in figure 1 is the research paradigm of the study. The first column of four
boxes on the left side is the identified leadership styles part of integrated leadership
model of Smith (2016). Transformational Leadership Style, Transactional Leadership
Style, Instructional Leadership Style, and Inspirational Leadership Style.

Another column of boxes are the Key Result Areas (KRA’s) of the DepEd used by
RPMS as measuring areas for level of performances. The five KRAs are School
87

Leadership, Management and Operation; Instructional Leadership; Human
Resource Management and Development; Parents’ Involvement and
CommunityPartnership; and Learning Environment The bottom box of the second
column is the final ratings generated through summing the scores get from the different
KRA’s.
88

The variables above will be under the investigation of the researcher in linking
each style to each KRA and further correlate which leadership style influence greatly to
school performance as RPMS tool is concerned.
Figure 1.Conceptual Paradigm of the Study

89

90

1.3 Research Problems and Hypothesis
1. What are the leadership styles practiced by school administrators in Numancia East
District, Siargao Division?
2. What is the school performance based on the KRA in the RPMS?
3. Which among the leadership styles influence school performance?

91

4. What capability building for school administrators can be designed?
Premised on the problem number 3, this study will pursue testing of errors the
single null hypothesis in hand.
Ho: Is there no significant influence between a single styles of leadership to the school
performance?
92

1.4 Scope and Limitation
This study will be limited along the following aspects:

93

Content. This study will focus on the integrated leadership model of Bradley Smith
(2016) which encompasses the transformational leadership style, transactional
leadership style, instructional leadership style, and inspirational leadership style. And the
areas of school performances stipulated under the Key Result Areas (KRA’s) in the OPCR
of the school head.
94

Respondents. The respondents of the study will be the Elementary School Administrators
of Numancia East District of Siargao Division, Surigao del Norte. For the purpose of
measuring the leadership style of each administrator, all teachers have one year contact
to administrator of elementary schools of Numancia East District of Siargao Division, but
limited.
95

Place and Time. This research will be conducted at Numancia East District alone, this
school year 2018-2019.
1.5 Definition of Terms

96

To facilitate understanding of the terms and/or acronyms to be used in this study,

the following are defined operationally:
Capability Building. A term refers to the possible program designed to provide the
necessary supports to assist administrators in building up a level of comfort that allows
them to truly understand and implement each of the four leadership styles that make up
under this study.
97

Human Resource Management and Development as KRA. It is an area of school

performance where technical assistance to teachers on matters pertaining to
enhancement of classroom management, skills and instructional competence and to
non-teaching personnel for support services within the RPMS cycle.
Inspirational Leadership Style. A leadership style focuses on energizing and creating

a sense of direction and purpose for employees and excitement and momentum for
98

change. It involves energizing individuals to strive towards a compelling vision of the

future.
Instructional Leadership as KRA. It is an area of school performance where

accounted for performance indicators and learning outcomes of schools. School
administrator is expected to perform instructional supervision to achieve learning
areas.
99

Instructional Leadership Style. A leadership style that influences teachers through the
design of curriculum and instruction (Hart, 2006). Instructional leadership includes the
school administrator concentrating on supervision, coordinating, controlling, and
developing curriculum and instruction (Hallinger, 2003).
100

Key Result Area (KRA). It is a category of general outputs or outcomes which school
administrators are expected to focus on and serves as the area of school performance
measured by the survey questionnaire.
Learning Environment as KRA. It is an area where school administrator’s focus on

providing safe and child friendly learning and school environment for learners.
101

Office Performance Commitment and Review Form (OPCRF). It is the form that
shall reflect the office commitments and performance, which shall be accomplished by
the head of office.
Parents’ Involvement and Community Partnership as KRA. The goal of school

administrator in this area is to establish school and family and community partnership
for school performance.
102

School Administrator. Refers to the head of office or school (Principal, Head Teacher,
School In Charge) and whose performance rating in OPCRF serves as the performance
of the school in the study.
School Administrator Leadership Style. The behavior patterns that a school

administrator uses to influence, coordinate and support the work of teachers, parents
103

and community stakeholders in an effort to achieve the KRA goals as measured by the
self-assessment and rater survey questionnaire.
School Leadership, Management and Operations as KRA. It is an area where school

administrator is expected to perform school leadership, management and operations
functions. SIP and AIP are the expected outputs of this area.
104

Transactional Leadership Style. A leadership style which focuses on the traditional

form of leader-follower relationship through the exchange of rewards based on the
fulfillment of contractual obligations and punishments for followers do not perform as

expected. Transactional leadership style has two components which include : (a)
contingent reward, and (b) management by exception (active and passive).
105

Transformational Leadership Style. A leadership style with the goal of transforming

followers into leaders themselves (Bass & Avolio, 2004). The transformational leader
gained trust and respect from his/her followers by providing a vision and sense of
pride (Bass, 1998). The core of transformational leadership is strengthening the
commitment of the staff and helping them to grow by elevating their goals (Mulford,
2008).
106

Chapter 2 –Methods
2.1 Research Design

107

The study will employ the descriptive-correlational survey research designs. This
will appropriate to use because the study will determine the leadership styles used by
school administrators, school performance based on the KRA of the RPMS, and it will
ascertain the significant relationship between the styles and the RPMS. Also, the study
will further investigate which style influences most in the school performance.
108

2.2 Sampling and Participants
The participants of the study will be the school administrators, 57 teachers and 1
district supervisor. Purposive sampling will be employed in choosing the participants.
Table 1 shows the distribution of the participants.
109

Distribution of Respondents
School No. of School No. of teachers District Supervisor

Administrators
Antipolo ES 1 7
Bitoon ES 1 7
110

Cabugao ES 1 4
Esperanza ES 1 7
Lobogon ES 1 7
Mahayahay ES 1 4
Sayak ES 1 7
San Fernando ES 2
Toburan ES 1 7
Quezon PS 3
Total 8 57 1
111

2.3 Instruments
This study will use registration method in order to gather the Office Performance
Commitment and Review Form (OPCRF) of the elementary schools administrators of
Numancia East District, Siargao Division. The final rating of the school administrators
found in the OPCRF will be accessed with due permission.
112

The overall rating/assessment for the accomplishments shall fall within the
adjectival ratings of RPMS and shall be in three decimal points as described based on the
rating system of the RPMS which is shown below.
RANGE ADJECTIVAL RATING
4.500 – 5.000 OUTSTANDING
3.500 – 4.499 VERY SATISFACTORY

113

2.500 – 3.500 SATISFACTORY
1.500 – 2.500 UNSATISFACTORY
Below 1.499 POOR
On the other hand, there will be two data gathering instruments to be used to
obtain the necessary data and information in order to find out what leadership style the
114

elementary school administrators of Numancia East District are practicing: (1) self-
assessment survey, and (2) rater-assessment survey. Self-assessment survey will be used
by school administrators to rate themselves and the rater-assessment survey will be used
by teachers to rate their school administrators.
In both versions, there are five sections representing the five Key Result Areas (KRA’S).
(A) School Leadership, Management and Operation; (B) Instructional Leadership; (c)
115

Human Resource Management and Development; (D) Parent’s Involvement and

Community Partnership; (E) Learning Environment which define in the OPCRF of the
school heads. Each KRA’s has 12 items by which composed of 3 items (transformational
Leadership), 3 items (Transactional Leadership), 3 items (Instructional Leadership), and 3
items (Inspirational Leadership) with 5-point rating scales.
116

Self-assessment survey is found at appendix 1, rater-assessment survey is found

at appendix 2, and the manual guide and rubrics of the two survey questionnaires is
found at appendix 3.
To ensure the validity of the researcher made survey questioners develop from
the concepts of Leadership questionnaires available in the internet like the Multi-factor
Leadership Questionnaire of Bernard Bass and many more, the corrections of the thesis
117

adviser and panel will be incorporated in the final copy of the questionnaire including
the comments and remarks from a number of experts that will improve the face value of
the items in the questionnaire, thus leading to its validity.
The reliability of the instrument will be ascertained by conducting a dry run to

non-respondents, they will be asked to answer the questionnaire to ensure suggestions.
Measure of internal consistency will determine using Cronbach’s alpha method.
118

2. 4 Data Gathering Procedure
If instrument found to be valid and reliable, the writer will ask permission and
approval from the SDS where the subject is to employ. After seeking permit, the
researcher will administer the research instrument to the targeted respondents. The data
of the survey questionnaire will retrieve during due and convenient time of the
respondents to ensure higher percentage of retrieval.
119

2.5 Data Analysis
With the hypothesis being advanced, the following statistical tools will used to
analyze the data of the study.
Frequency Count and Percent. These tools will be used to determine the
leadership styles as stated in problem 1.
Mean and standard Deviation. These will be used to answer the school
performance being asked in problem 2.
120

Pear Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient. This tool will be

employed to ascertain the significant relationship between the leadership style used by
school administrators in Numancia East District and the school performances based on
RPMS.
2.6 Potential Ethical Issues

121

Prior to the collecting data, the participants will be given written instructions and
notified of their voluntary participation in the study and right of refusal. Each
participant will receive general instructions, study description and intent, approval
notification, and an informal consent form. The researcher will guarantee the
participants that all data and writing their names is optional to protect each identity. All
data to be collected will be used for this research only and issues of confidentiality will
122

be addressed at the time of data collection. Participants will be given ample time to
answer and perform and will be given chance to modify their answer.
References
123

124

125

126

127

Appendices (A)
SELF - ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

128

INSTRUCTIONS: This questionnaire will provide a description of your leadership style

as an school administrator. Sixty descriptive statements are listed below. Please indicate
how frequently each statement fits you.
Encircle the number that best describe you in each row using the following rating
scale:
1 - to almost no extent
2 - to a slight extent
3 - to a moderate extent
4 - to a great extent
5 - to a very great extent
129

To what extent do you:
A. SCHOOL LEADERSHIP, MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION RATING SCALE

1. Make teachers feel good to be around you in coordination 1 2 3 4 5
with stakeholders on resource mobilization.
2. Not interfere to problems such as strategic planning 1 2 3 4 5
processes of school stakeholders until problems become
serious.
130

3. Ensure that the objectives in SIP Strategic Planning are 1 2 3 4 5

aligned with those of the classroom.
4. Facilitate open and honest dialogue with teachers to develop 1 2 3 4 5
standards for outstanding teacher and pupil performance.
5. Consider every teacher as a person having different needs, 1 2 3 4 5
abilities and aspirations from others to identify and plan
needed interventions.
6. Focus attention on irregularities, mistakes, exceptions, and 1 2 3 4 5
deviations against school standards to ensure quality
standards for facilities given to the school.
131

7. Review student work products when evaluation classroom 1 2 3 4 5

instruction to be the basis for strategic planning.
8. Plan needed interventions to promote understanding of what 1 2 3 4 5
needed for change.
9. Go beyond self-interest for the inclusion of all school 1 2 3 4 5
stakeholders in the strategic planning process of the school.
10. Provide recognition/reward to teachers having 1 2 3 4 5
accomplishments of school targets with evidence contained in
school report card.
11. Consolidate reports on learning difficulties, home visitations 1 2 3 4 5
132

and peculiar incidents used for planning and implementing

appropriate interventions.
12. Generate teachers’ excitement, enthusiasm and commitment 1 2 3 4 5
in school goals by translating the school vision, mission and
values into terms that are relevant for planning and
implementing interventions.

B. INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP RATING SCALE
1. Inspire teachers to do their best to maintain 100% 1 2 3 4 5
133

attendance in school.
2. Display a sense of power and confidence in achieving zero 1 2 3 4 5
dropout rate in school.
3. Take no action, as long as school enrolment has no problem or 1 2 3 4 5
not decreasing.
4. Visit classrooms to discuss school issues such as teacher to 1 2 3 4 5
pupil ratio, pupil to classroom, chair, textbook and toilet
ratios.
5. Motivate teachers to commit themselves for the progress of 1 2 3 4 5
academic performance of pupils.
134

6. Specify to teachers the importance of having a strong sense of 1 2 3 4 5

purpose in maintaining 100% enrolment.
7. Tell teachers to be accounted for performance indicators and 1 2 3 4 5
learning outcomes of school if they want to have higher PBB
incentives.
8. Perform instructional supervision to achieve learning 1 2 3 4 5
outcomes.
9. Promote teachers’ understanding of their roles in maintaining 1 2 3 4 5
zero percent dropouts.
10. Let teachers know how you think they are doing in achieving 1 2 3 4 5
135

standards for school performances.

11. Not try to change anything, if things are still working like the 1 2 3 4 5
school maintains 0% dropout and 100% enrolment.
12. Discuss the item analysis of tests with the faculty to identify 1 2 3 4 5
strengths and weaknesses in the instructional program.

C. HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RATING SCALE
1. Conduct classroom observations and provide technical 1 2 3 4 5
assistance to teachers to enhance their classroom
136

management.
2. Provide technical assistance with innovative teaching 1 2 3 4 5
strategies to teachers to effectively manage resistance or
negative reaction to change.
3. Talk to teachers about your most important values and beliefs 1 2 3 4 5
in providing them with technical assistance pertaining to the
completion of RPMS portfolio.
4. Praise special efforts of teachers on classroom management 1 2 3 4 5
during your classroom observation.
5. Believe that instructional supervision is an effective way to 1 2 3 4 5
137

monitor pupils’ progress.

6. Help teachers gain their confidence in accomplishing their 1 2 3 4 5
RPMS Portfolio.
7. Act in ways that build respects with teachers pertaining to 1 2 3 4 5
enhancement of classroom management.
8. Keep track of all mistakes so that you can provide effective 1 2 3 4 5
technical assistance to teachers.
9. Provide technical assistance to teachers on matters pertaining 1 2 3 4 5
to enhancement of their instructional and classroom
management.
138

10. Keep on inspiring teachers to extent over innovative teaching 1 2 3 4 5

strategies on their class.
11. Help teachers develop their strengths in 1 2 3 4 5
performing/accomplishing RPMS processes.
12. Provide 100% technical assistance to teachers in exchange for 1 2 3 4 5
their effort.

D. PARENT’S INVOLVEMENT AND COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP RATING SCALE
1. Not take any changes, if the establishments of school and 1 2 3 4 5
139

family and community partnership for performance seem

fine.
2. Discuss pupils’ achievements with parents and stakeholders. 1 2 3 4 5
3. Lead and inspire parents and community stakeholders to 1 2 3 4 5
participate and create something truly innovating and
distinguishing school programs to achieve better school
performance.
4. Do your best to organize programs with stakeholders and 1 2 3 4 5
make them proud to be associated with you.
5. Provide recognition to stakeholders for the obtained 1 2 3 4 5
140

resources.
6. Inform parents and stakeholders about the school 1 2 3 4 5
performances.
7. Make sure to instill in the hearts of parents and community 1 2 3 4 5
stakeholders the passion of helping the school projects and
programs.
8. Treat teachers and stakeholders as an individual rather than 1 2 3 4 5
just a member of the group.
9. Express satisfaction with stakeholders for every successful 1 2 3 4 5
program organized with them.
141

10. Encourage parents to participate in instructional planning of 1 2 3 4 5

the school like reading programs.
11. Involve parents and stakeholders in planning for innovative 1 2 3 4 5
projects and programs for school.
12. Let parents and stakeholders feel that you instill pride for 1 2 3 4 5
being associated by them.

E. LEARNING ENVIRONMENT RATING SCALE
1. Encourage teachers to think old problems in new ways such 1 2 3 4 5
142

as ICT integration as learning support system.

2. Wait for things to go wrong before you take actions like 1 2 3 4 5
having clear DRRM mobilization plans.
3. Make sure that classroom instructions adhere with child- 1 2 3 4 5
friendly environment standards and programs.
4. Institutionalized child protection policy in school with 1 2 3 4 5
effective teachers, parents and stakeholders convergence.
5. Give personal attention to pupils who seem rejected through 1 2 3 4 5
adhering Child-Friendly environment standards and
programs.
143

6. Express praising words to teachers who take initiatives in 1 2 3 4 5

providing safe and child friendly learning and school
environment for pupils.
7. Encourage teachers to prepare lessons with DRRM inclusion. 1 2 3 4 5
8. Implement school policy that somehow provides a safe 1 2 3 4 5
learning environment for pupils to strive even harder.
9. Make sure pupils have trust and faith in school officials 1 2 3 4 5
through institutionalizing child protection mechanism and
processes (per DepEd Order 40, s. 2012).
10. Make clear what one can expect to receive when school has a 1 2 3 4 5
144

living school environment.

11. Inform teachers the new trends of classroom instruction with 1 2 3 4 5
ICT aid as learning support system.
12. Encourage teachers to make use of facilities to inspire their 1 2 3 4 5
pupils to learn.
145

Appendices (B)
RATER- ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE
INSTRUCTIONS: This questionnaire will provide a description of the leadership style of your
administrator. Sixty descriptive statements are listed below. Please indicate how frequently
each statement fits him/her.
146

Encircle the number that best describe him in each row using the following rating
scale:
1 - to almost no extent
2 - to a slight extent
3 - to a moderate extent
4 - to a great extent
5 - to a very great extent
To what extent do your administrator:

147

A. SCHOOL LEADERSHIP, MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION RATING SCALE

1. Makes teachers feel good to be around him/her in 1 2 3 4 5
coordination with stakeholders on resource mobilization.
2. Not interfere to problems such as strategic planning 1 2 3 4 5
processes of school stakeholders until problems become
serious.
3. Ensures that the objectives in SIP Strategic Planning are 1 2 3 4 5
aligned with those of the classroom.
4. Facilitates open and honest dialogue with teachers to develop 1 2 3 4 5
148

standards for outstanding teacher and pupil performance.

5. Considers every teacher as a person having different needs, 1 2 3 4 5
abilities and aspirations from others to identify and plan
needed interventions.
6. Focuses his/her attention on irregularities, mistakes, 1 2 3 4 5
exceptions, and deviations against school standards to ensure
quality standards for facilities given to the school.
7. Reviews student work products when evaluation classroom 1 2 3 4 5
instruction to be the basis for strategic planning.
8. Plans needed interventions to promote understanding of 1 2 3 4 5
149

what needed for change.

9. Goes beyond self-interest for the inclusion of all school 1 2 3 4 5
stakeholders in the strategic planning process of the school.
10. Provides recognition/reward to teachers having 1 2 3 4 5
accomplishments of school targets with evidence contained in
school report card.
11. Consolidates reports on learning difficulties, home visitations 1 2 3 4 5
and peculiar incidents used for planning and implementing
appropriate interventions.
12. Generates teachers’ excitement, enthusiasm and commitment 1 2 3 4 5
150

in school goals by translating the school vision, mission and

values into terms that are relevant for planning and
implementing interventions.

B. INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP RATING SCALE
1. Inspires teachers to do their best to maintain 100% 1 2 3 4 5
attendance in school.
2. Displays a sense of power and confidence in achieving zero 1 2 3 4 5
dropout rate in school.
151

3. Takes no action, as long as school enrolment has no problem 1 2 3 4 5

or not decreasing.
4. Visits classrooms to discuss school issues such as teacher to 1 2 3 4 5
pupil ratio, pupil to classroom, chair, textbook and toilet
ratios.
5. Motivates teachers to commit themselves for the progress of 1 2 3 4 5
academic performance of pupils.
6. Specifies to teachers the importance of having a strong sense 1 2 3 4 5
of purpose in maintaining 100% enrolment.
7. Tells teachers to be accounted for performance indicators and 1 2 3 4 5
152

learning outcomes of school if they want to have higher PBB

incentives.
8. Performs instructional supervision to achieve learning 1 2 3 4 5
outcomes.
9. Promotes teachers’ understanding of their roles in 1 2 3 4 5
maintaining zero percent dropout.
10. Let teachers know how I think they are doing in achieving 1 2 3 4 5
standards for school performances.
11. Not try to change anything, as long as things are working like 1 2 3 4 5
the school maintains 0% dropout and 100% enrolment.
153

12. Discuss the item analysis of tests with the faculty to identify 1 2 3 4 5
strengths and weaknesses in the instructional program.

C. HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RATING SCALE
1. Conducts classroom observations and provide technical 1 2 3 4 5
assistance to teachers to enhance their classroom
management.
2. Provides technical assistance with innovative teaching 1 2 3 4 5
strategies to teachers to effectively manage resistance or
154

negative reaction to change.

3. Talks to teachers about his/her most important values and 1 2 3 4 5
beliefs in providing you with technical assistance pertaining
to the completion of RPMS portfolio.
4. Praises special efforts of teachers on classroom management 1 2 3 4 5
during my classroom observation.
5. Believes that instructional supervision is an effective way to 1 2 3 4 5
monitor pupils’ progress.
6. Helps teachers gain their confidence in accomplishing their 1 2 3 4 5
RPMS Portfolio.
155

7. Acts in ways that build respects with teachers pertaining to 1 2 3 4 5

enhancement of classroom management.
8. Keeps track of all mistakes so that I can provide effective 1 2 3 4 5
technical assistance to teachers.
9. Provides technical assistance to teachers on matters 1 2 3 4 5
pertaining to enhancement of their instructional and
classroom management.
10. Keeps on inspiring teachers to extent over innovative teaching 1 2 3 4 5
strategies on their class.
11. Helps teachers develop their strengths in 1 2 3 4 5
156

performing/accomplishing RPMS processes.

12. Provides 100% technical assistance to teachers in exchange 1 2 3 4 5
for their effort.

157

D. PARENT’S INVOLVEMENT AND COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP RATING SCALE

1. Not takes any changes, If the establishments of school and 1 2 3 4 5
family and community partnership for performance seem
fine.
2. Discusses pupils’ achievements with parents and 1 2 3 4 5
stakeholders.
3. Leads and inspires parents and community stakeholders to 1 2 3 4 5
participate and create something truly innovating and
distinguishing school programs to achieve better school
performance.
158

4. Does his/her best to organize programs with stakeholders 1 2 3 4 5

and make them proud to be associated with me.
5. Provides recognition to stakeholders for the obtained 1 2 3 4 5
resources.
6. Informs parents and stakeholders about the school 1 2 3 4 5
performances.
7. Makes sure to instill in the hearts of parents and community 1 2 3 4 5
stakeholders the passion of helping the school projects and
programs.
8. Treats teachers and stakeholders as an individual rather than 1 2 3 4 5
159

just a member of the group.

9. Expresses satisfaction with stakeholders for every successful 1 2 3 4 5
program organized with them.
10. Encourages parents to participate in instructional planning of 1 2 3 4 5
the school like reading programs.
11. Involves parents and stakeholders in planning for innovative 1 2 3 4 5
projects and programs for school.
12. Let parents and stakeholders feel that he/she instills pride for 1 2 3 4 5
being associated by them.
160


E. LEARNING ENVIRONMENT RATING SCALE
1. Encourages teachers to think old problems in new ways such 1 2 3 4 5
as ICT integration as learning support system.
2. Waits for things to go wrong before he/she takes actions like 1 2 3 4 5
having clear DRRM mobilization plans.
3. Makes sure that classroom instructions adhere with child- 1 2 3 4 5
friendly environment standards and programs.
4. Institutionalizes child protection policy in school with 1 2 3 4 5
effective teachers, parents and stakeholders convergence.
161

5. Gives personal attention to pupils who seem rejected through 1 2 3 4 5

adhering Child-Friendly environment standards and
programs.
6. Expresses praising words to teachers who take initiatives in 1 2 3 4 5
providing safe and child friendly learning and school
environment for pupils.
7. Encourages teachers to prepare lessons with DRRM inclusion. 1 2 3 4 5
8. Implements school policy that somehow provides a safe 1 2 3 4 5
learning environment for pupils to strive even harder.
162

9. Makes sure pupils have trust and faith in school officials 1 2 3 4 5

through institutionalizing child protection mechanism and
processes (per DepEd Order 40, s. 2012).
10. Makes clear what one can expect to receive when school has a 1 2 3 4 5
living school environment.
11. Informs teachers the new trends of classroom instruction 1 2 3 4 5
with ICT aid as learning support system.
12. Encourages teachers to make use of facilities to inspire their 1 2 3 4 5
pupils to learn.
163

Appendices (C)
MANUAL GUIDE AND RUBRICS OF THE SURVEY QUESTIONERS

164

This manual will be used to both Self-assessment and Rater-Assessment Questionnaires.

In order to score the questionnaire, you have to group the responses into four categories in
the grid below.
Step One
Look at the grid below. It is divided into four sections (Transformational, Transactional,
Instructional, and Inspirational). Each section contains letters (A,B,C,D,E) which
165

represents the KRAs (A-School Leadership, Management and Operation, B- Instructional

Leadership, C- Human Resource Management and Development, D- Parent’s
Involvement and Community Partnership, E- Learning Environment) with list numbers of
items from the questionnaire fall in the section or leadership style.
Step Two
For each statement number in the questioner, transfer the number rating into the grid.
166

For example if number 1 of letter A is rated 4, put 4 in the blank next to the statement
number.
Step Three
To identify the leadership style of an administrator, add all fifteen items individual scores
for each section together and divided by 15 (the total number of items).
167

The following scoring guide and interpretation will be used to determine the leadership
styles:
Weighted Mean Verbal Interpretation
4.20 – 500 To a Very Great Extent
3.40 – 4.19 To a Great Extent

168

2.60 – 3.39 To a Little Extent
1.80 – 2.59 To a Very Little Extent
00 – 1.79 No Extent at All
And to link which leadership style correlates best to the specific Key Result Area (KRA),
the three items with five rating scales will be added and divided by 3(the total number of
items). The following scoring guide will be used to analyze:
169

Weighted Mean Verbal Interpretation
4.20 – 5.00 Highly Evident
3.40 – 4.19 Evident
2.60 – 3.39 Moderately Evident
1.80 – 2.59 Slightly Evident

170

00 – 1.79 Not Evident
Transformational Instructional
A A
1 ___ 5 ___ 9 ___ 3 ___ 7 ___ 11 ___

171

B B
2 ___ 6 ___ 10 ___ 4 ___ 8 ___ 12 ___
C C
3 ___ 7 ___ 11 ___ 1 ___ 5 ___ 9 ___

172

D D
4 ___ 8 ___ 12 ___ 2 ___ 6 ___ 10 ___
E E
1 ___ 5 ___ 9 ___ 3 ___ 7 ___ 11 ___
Transactional Inspirational
173

A A
2 ___ 6 ___ 10 ___ 4 ___ 8 ___ 12 ___
B B
3 ___ 7 ___ 11 ___ 1 ___ 5 ___ 9 ___
C C
174

4 ___ 8 ___ 12 ___ 2 ___ 6 ___ 10 ___
D D
1 ___ 5 ___ 9 ___ 3 ___ 7 ___ 11 ___
E E
2 ___ 6 ___ 10 ___ 4 ___ 8 ___ 10 ___

175

176

CURRIULUM VITAE
177

NAME : Donald C. Dapar
ADDRESS : Poruk 3, Brgy. Mahayahay, Del Carmen, SDN
DATE OF BIRTH : August 05, 1989
PLACE OF BIRTH : Del Carmen, SDN
CITIZENSHIP : Filipino
178

MARITAL STATUS : Married
SPOUSE NAME : Riva M. Dapar
PARENTS : Mr. Ludy M. Dapar
: Mrs. Nelia L. Cordita
EDUCATION
179

Master of Arts in Education major in Educational Management

Philippine Normal University (PNU) Mindanao
Prosperidad, Agusan del Sur
Bachelor of Elementary Education (BEED)

Bucas Grande Foundation College
Socorro, Surigao del Norte
180

EMPLOYMENT HISTORY
Esperanza Elementary School

August 27, 2016 to Present
Jaboy Elementary School

August 23, 2013 to August 2016

Correlation Between Leadership Styles and School Performance

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Correlation Between Leadership Styles and School Performance

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LEADERSHIP STYLES AND SCHOOL PERFORMANCES: A CORRELATIONAL STUDY

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

Chapter 1 -The Problem and Literature Review

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

1.1 Background of the Study

centralization is the major problem affecting school performances in the Philippines.

In response to this, the Department of Education (DepEd) adopted and implemented

programs emphasizes on authonomy, shared-governance and decentralization such as

School Based Management (SBM) and Result-Based Performance Management

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

System (RPMS). The RPMS is the organization-wide process of ensuring that

and strategic priorities(Dizon, et. al., 2018).

confronted school administrators (Principal, Head Teacher, School In-Charge) for a

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

administrators’ role has changed subsequently as the demands of society, political

2016). There is greater emphasis on shared governance and participative decision

making encouraging more participation of stakeholders in the community. The

effectiveness of school administrators in performing these new roles has been a

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

management of school reflects on leadership styles of an administrator, working with

styles such as Autocratic, Democratic, Laizze-faire, and Beaurocratic styles influence

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

transformation of education organization and further proposed an integrated

leadership model that encompasses behaviors from transformational, transactional,

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

inspirational and instructional leadership styles to provide positive school

possess to lead positively the learner-centered, stakeholders’ inclusive, and result-

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

based school. These leadership styles are transformational, transactional, instructional,

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

further pointed out that some of school administrators seem to find it

difficult to effectively administer their schools. Therefore, school administrators

obtain positive school performance.

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

Moreover, the performance of elementary schools in the Philippines is

assessed through the Result-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) rating

outputs or outcomes. It is the mandate or function of the office and/or individual

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

(OPCRF) and Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF), a

performance tool of Result-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) of the

school heads or school administrators and teachers. The realization of organizational

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

Key Results Areas (Dizon, et. al., 2018).

Operation which encompasses on the Management/Leadership functions such as

recommending localized curriculum (mother tongue based) for instruction;

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

developing standards for outstanding teacher and pupil performance; organizing

appropriate class programs, ADM, flexible learning options as stop-gap measures;

consolidating reports on learning difficulties, home visitations and peculiar incidents

used for planning and implementing appropriate interventions. Producing a school

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

situational analysis, SWOT, determining strategies through prioritizing strategic

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

MPS and GPA, and Performing instructional supervision to achieve learning

outcomes. Third, Human Resource Management and Development that deals on

providing technical assistance to teachers on matters pertaining to enhancement of

classroom management, skills and instructional competence and to non-teaching

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

and Community Partnership which suggest school head for stakeholders

partnership/mobilization plan (complete with reports and documentations of meetings,

agreements) organized programs with stakeholders, especially parents for academic

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

final assessment adjectival description of Poor or Unsatisfactory, Satisfactory, Very