1

Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM

Rationale of the Study

The school heads, also known as school principals,

provide instructional leadership side-by-side with sound,

conscious and objective supervision by coordinating

curricula, co-curricular programmes and are responsible for

the general administration of the school. Being

instructional leaders, the principals the vantage positions

to supervise, monitor, assess, evaluate and disseminate

current information on educational issues and modern

teaching techniques to teachers in order to stimulate them

for scholarship and best practices in curriculum delivery.

With this in mind, school administration will always

entail quality assurance in education which practically

calls for efficient management, monitoring, evaluation and

reviews of the resource inputs and transformation process

(teaching and learning) to produce quality outputs

(students) that meet set standards and expectations of the

entire educational system. Robinson (2014) defines quality

assurance as the set of activities that an organization

undertakes to ensure that a product or service will satisfy

given requirements for quality. Its goals are the

 2

anticipation and avoidance of faults or mistakes by setting

attainable standards for a process, organizing work so that

they are achieved, documenting the procedures required,

communicating them to all concerned, and monitoring and

reviewing the attainment of standards.

The Department of Education (DepEd) through the

implementation of the Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda

(BESRA) is pursuing a package of policy reforms to further

improve education. One of its reforms is the K to 12

Program which has opened the way to the mandated 21st

Century Skills. One of its progress indicators is the use

of the National Competency-Based Teacher Standards (NCBTS)

for assessing teachers’ job performance through the self-

assessment tool named as Teachers Strengths and Needs

Assessment (TSNA). With the advent of 21st Century Skills

and the NCBTS, school reform has framed the impetus for

changing the roles of the school heads as instructional

leaders and the learning climate of schools. It has

significantly impacted teachers’ role as agents who seek to

establish a new culture within a school which may affect

change throughout a system.

On the other hand, the National Competency-Based

Standards for School Heads Training and Development Needs

Assessment (NCBSSH-TDNA) is a mechanism to systematically

 3

determine the training and development needs of school

heads (SHs) in order to support improved practice as

effective school leaders. The competencies assessed through

the NCBSSH-TDNA are based on the mandate for school heads

indicated in the RA 9155, its Implementing Rules and

Regulations (IRR), and on the national competency standards

for school heads contained in the DepEd Order No. 32 series

of 2010, “The National Adoption and Implementation of the

National Competency-Based Standards for School Heads.”

In view of the foregoing, instructional supervision is

an internal mechanism adopted by principals for school

self-evaluation, which geared towards helping teachers and

students to improve their teaching and learning activities

for the purpose of achieving educational objectives. The

principals ensure effective supervision by interacting

academically and socially with teachers and students at a

regular basis within and outside the classrooms. The

primary aim is to monitor the implementation of curricular

and ensure desirable increase in teachers’ capabilities,

upgrade their conceptual knowledge and teaching skills,

give them support in their work to facilitate better

performance in teachers’ pedagogical practices and

students’ learning outcomes in the school settings

(Adetula, 2015).
 4

As purported by Peters and Robert (2008),

instructional supervision provides a vehicle and structure

which allows schools, departments, as well as individuals

(teachers and students) within them, to respond effectively

to curriculum and instruction in order to achieve the

stated educational objectives. Instructional supervision,

if handled with utmost attention, has the potential to

strengthen the principals’ capacities for managing human

and materials resources. On the part of the principals,

they need to proactively mobilize all members of staff,

teaching and non-teaching, the governing board, parents and

the community towards identifying the schools’ strengths

and weaknesses and take appropriate decisions on type of

follow-up action required to improve teachers’ inputs and

students’ learning outcomes in the school.

A well-planned and adequate instructional supervision

enhances teaching and learning effectiveness in schools.

Adetula (2015) reporting on some studies carried out in

Europe, America (Canada and U.S.A.) and Australia,

identified the main goals of a school supervisor to

include: to seek insight into leadership process,

motivational forces, decision-making processes, goal-

setting processes, team work and group interaction which in

turn lead to effective and functional schools. Adetula

 5

(2015) points out that principals’ supervisory roles in the

teaching-learning process entail effective leadership

direction, motivation, goal setting, decision-making and

team work among teachers. Similarly, the various

supervision techniques highlighted by Goldhammer (2009)

would lend support to the present study which is intended

to determine the perceived effectiveness of school heads in

the supervision of teachers’ instructional tasks in

schools.

School administrators have worked under highly

centralized education systems that limit their power and

autonomy in making decisions related to the core business

of school – teaching and learning. For instance, the

Ministry of Education in many countries like China,

Thailand, Singapore, Malta, Nigeria, Pakistan, solely

designs a unified national curriculum, syllabus, materials

and exams, and guides funding and staffing schools

including teacher selection, recruitment and staff

development (Hallinger, 2010). The only decision that

principals have authority to make is the allocation of

teachers to the various classes in the school. School

administrators have mainly been engaged as school managers

maintaining discipline, ordering equipment, determining

staffing needs, scheduling activities, managing school

 6

finances and resources, allocating staff, and ensuring that

teachers keep accurate records. As a result, school

administrators are more inclined to performing an

administrative function than an instruction-oriented

function.

Studies in Egypt, Indonesia, and Paraguay have found

that a principal's teaching experience and instructional

leadership training are related to higher teacher

performance and student achievement (Lunenburg, 2008).

However, only a handful of countries, such as China,

Ethiopia, Kenya, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, the

Philippines, and Thailand, have addressed the need to

improve school management, primarily by establishing

institutions to train school administrators, particularly

giving more impetus to improving supervisory practices and

approaches. Commented [U1]: What should be presented in this part

is a synthesis of the above studies and use it in support to
It is therefore along this context that the researcher the very reason why are you conducting your study.
Commented [U2]: Your Rationale of the Study is too long.
intends to undertake the development of a revitalized Shorten it. You can do so by lifting/incorporating the
highlighted paragraphs in your Chapter 2.

supervisory model in context for public school heads for

them to be able to strengthen their knowledge and

competencies particularly on school management, vis-à-vis

instructional supervision if only to contribute

significantly to improving school administration, thus

 7

gearing towards enhancing teacher performance and student

achievement. Commented [U3]: General comment: in your Rationale of

the Study, provide a brief background of “instructional
Cognizant to the foregoing, the present researcher supervision practices” and reasons why are you conducting
study on supervision practices ….

aims to address the need for improving school heads’

capacity to assume new roles and responsibilities as

instructional leaders in a decentralized system. The

present study primarily focuses on school heads’

supervisory practices in the public schools and their

capacity for providing instructional support to teachers

and students.

Classroom supervisory practices should go with teacher

effectiveness to achieve the best maximal effects. The

teacher who likes the work environment will also enjoy the

work, finds teaching challenging. Hence, good supervisory

practices demonstrated and purposively carried out by the

school head increase teaching effectiveness as it

facilitates teachers to develop competencies according to

prescribed effectiveness behavior in the classroom teaching

(Glickman, 2015). The essence of the academic supervision

at all not to assess the performance of teachers in

managing the learning process, but to help teachers develop

professional capabilities. Sergiovanni (2011) explains

that academic supervision is a series of activities to help

teachers develop the ability to manage the learning

 8

process. Related to the above description, through academic

or instructional supervision, the teacher will be able to

facilitate learning for their students.

Theoretical Framework

The increase interest in the study of school

administration has brought about systematic and logical

theories in supervision. These theories are propounded so

that school heads could be able to use them for guidance in

day-to-day school administrative system for greater

efficiency and in the function of organizations to produce

better results. Schools had become increasingly complex;

those that administer school must have both adequate

experience and proper administrative training in order to

cope with the challenging context of school.

This study is guided by the Path Goal Theory developed

by Robert House in 1971. It has its roots in expectancy

theory. This theory states that a leader's behavior is

dependent on the satisfaction, motivation and performance

of his or her subordinates. It further claims that the

leader engages in behaviors that compliment subordinates

abilities and compensate for deficiencies. This theory can

be classified both as a contingency and as a transactional

leadership theory. It was developed to describe the way the

leaders encourage and support their followers in achieving

 9

the goals they have set. According to this theory, leaders

should be clear on what they expect from the subordinates.

The theory is relevant to the present study because it

underscores that school heads will have to engage in

different supervisory practices depending on the nature and

the demands of a particular situation. It is likewise

relevant to the present study because it highlights the

fact that the school head’s job is to assist followers in

attaining goals and to provide the direction and support

needed to ensure that their goals are compatible with the

organization’s goals.

Likewise, the present study is anchored on Getzels and

Guba (2009) Theory of Organizational Behavior. This theory Commented [U4]: Getzels and Guba (year?) – indicate the
year.
is based on the assumption that task achievement of a

social system, irrespective of the nature of the task,

requires the combine effort of a number of people with

varying functions and responsibilities whose positions in

social system are usually vertically arranged as to

establish the relationship between the supervisors and the

subordinates. This basic argument of the Getzel and Guba

(2009) Theory of Organization is that organization like

schools are established for the purpose of achieving their

educational goals and fostering the survival of the school

 10

institutions through the efforts of the individual staff

that make up the school system.

Establishing relevance to the present study, this

theory purposely intends to observe behavior of an

individual in an organization, with which this study

explains understanding of the school heads’ supervisory

practices within the school dimension. It can also be used

to classify the behavior of administrators and the

behavioral pattern of workers in the institution. An

understanding that clearly exists between school heads and

teachers that could foster higher productivity and quicker

attainment of goals and objectives.

Another theory which sheds light to the present study

is the Human Relations Theory. The central idea in this

theory is that human being and their contribution to

organization is important in the achievement of

organizational goals. Thus, it is believed that workers

will achieve better if their personal welfare is taken into

consideration. According to Nankeen in Enzi (2014), the

theory related to human relation brought into

administration such concepts as democratic leadership,

delegation of authority and decentralization of

administration. The central argument of human relations

theory is that it is only when individuals are treated

 11

humanely that they can have the motivation to participate

actively in the achievement of organizational goals. With

the Human Relations Theory, the focus is on people and how

they interact.

The relevance of this theory to the school heads is

that the basic supervision can be achieved through good

relationship among the various groups of people within the

institutions. The cooperation among the workers in the

organization can bring about the attainment of goals and

objectives. In practice, this means that the school

administrators are expected to motivate and encourage

educational achievement by making instructional quality the

top priority of the school and brings that motivation to

realization.

Conceptual Framework Commented [U5]: General comment in this part: In your

Conceptual Framework, remove all the findings of studies.
The changing role of the school heads has direct and Just focus on the concepts supporting the study you’re
conducting. Your Conceptual Framework is quite too long.
Shorten it by removing some sentences and put them in
indirect links to school improvement. Being an your Chapter 2..

instructional leader where demonstrating supervisory

practices is basically embedded, they should be able to

lead the school to success by maintaining a focus on

teaching and learning. Rather than allowing the

administrative roles to conflict, school heads are

encouraged to embrace the supervisory role as the priority

 12

and simultaneously maintain the managerial functions of the

position.

Operationalizing the abovementioned theories and

providing fuller body to the concepts therein, the

researcher gives stress, in general, on investigating the

supervisory practices of school heads which eventually

could bring about school reform and restructuring movements

that change the role demands and increase the magnitude of

the school head’s instructional and managerial roles. Many

dilemmas may arise as school heads attempt to balance these

dual roles for educational leadership by blending the

managerial responsibilities and the supervisory role

practices. A strong instructional focus is called for to

meet the needs of the students and school and additionally,

accountability reform mandates (Greenfield, 2013). School

heads are expected to embrace supervisory practices focused

on teaching and learning by sharing power, acting

democratically, and encouraging collaboration and

participation; while at the same time, providing clear

leadership, guaranteeing the efficiency of school

management processes, and meeting the demands of the

academic community.

With the implementation of the Enhanced K to 12 Basic

Education Program as mandated in RA 10533, otherwise known

 13

as the “Enhanced Education Act of 2013”, it points out a

paradigm shift in the transformational and managerial roles

of school principals along instructional improvement,

curriculum development, teacher education training, school

leadership, supervision and administration.

More specifically, the NCBSSH or National Competency-

Based Standards for School Heads defines the different

dimensions of being an effective school administrator. It

clearly states that an effective school administrator is

one who can implement continuous school improvement, who

can produce better learning outcomes among its

pupils/students and who can help change institutional

culture among others. All these become even more

challenging when the school administrator manages an

integrated school.

This study, therefore, is aimed at looking into the

instructional supervision of school heads which will serve

as basis for the development of a guidebook purposely to

enhance their instructional supervisory performance.

With the supervisory role as the priority, the focus

would be on setting directions related to articulating a

shared vision, defining the school’s purpose, and promoting

an instructional climate while maintaining the managerial

aspects of monitoring student progress, supervising

 14

teaching, and managing curriculum. Redesigning the

organization includes the school’s curriculum, culture,

structures, and processes within staff, school, and

community contexts. Likewise, developing people provides

motivation through staff development, pedagogical support

and capacity building, and modeling moral and ethical

values to promote the instructional climate and the

school’s mission, teaching and learning (Leithwood and

Riehls, 2013).

The research paradigm employs the Input-Process-Output

approach to elucidate the flow of the study.

The first box (Input) encapsulates the professional

profile of public school principals in the Division Office Commented [U6]: Instead of using the term “public
school”, use the term “public school”. In other words,
I Pangasinan in terms of highest educational attainment, remove the word “elementary”..

length of experience as school head, highest level of

relevant capability building trainings attended, number of

teachers supervised, school type and length of supervisory

experience prior to installation as school principal.

It likewise includes the extent of instructional

supervision of public school principals based on the

National Competency-Based Standards for School Heads

(NCBSSH) along the competency strands (a) Assessment for

Learning; (b) Developing Programs and/or Adapting Existing

Programs; (c) Implementing Programs for Instructional

 15

Improvement; and (d) Instructional Supervision, under the

domain instructional leadership.

The second box (Process) underpins the descriptive

data analyses of professional profile of public school

principals, the extent of their instructional supervision

in terms of the identified competency strands as assessed

by themselves and their teachers. It also includes the

development of a guidebook to enhance the instructional

supervisory performance of the school principals.

The third box pertains to the output of the study for

use of public school principals in the Division Office I

Pangasinan.
 16

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

Professional profile of
public school
principals in terms of:
a. highest
educational
attainment
b. length of
experience as
school principal
c. highest level of Descriptive Data
relevant capability
Analyses of
building trainings
attended Professional
d. number of Profile of Public
teachers School
supervised Principals
e. school type Guidebook for
f. length of Extent of
supervisory enhancing the
experience prior
Instructional
Supervision of instructional
to installation as
school principal the supervisory
Respondents in performance of
terms of the
school principals
Extent if instructional Identified
supervision of the Competency
respondents along Strands
the instructional
leadership Preparation and
competency strands:
Development of
a. Assessment for
Learning the Guidebook
b. Developing
Programs and/or
Adapting Existing
Programs
c. Implementing
Programs for
Instructional
Improvement
d. Instructional
Supervision

Figure 1. Research Paradigm

 17

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to assess the extent of instructional

supervision of the public school principals in the Division

Office I Pangasinan, during the academic year 2018-2019

which will serve as basis in the development of a guidebook

for enhancing the instructional supervisory performance of

school principals.

Specifically, it seeks to answer the following sub-

problems:

1. What is the professional profile of the respondents

in terms of:

a. highest educational attainment;

b. length of experience as school head;

c. highest level of relevant capability building

trainings attended;

d. number of teachers supervised;

e. school type; and

f. length of supervisory experience prior to

installation as school principal?

2. What is the extent of instructional supervision of

the public school principals as assessed by

themselves and their teachers along the following

instructional leadership competency strands:

a. Assessment for Learning;

 18

b. Developing Programs and/or Adapting Existing

Programs;

c. Implementing Programs for Instructional

Improvement;

d. Instructional Supervision?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the

professional profile of public school principals and

the extent of their instructional supervision along

the identified competency strands?

4. What guidebook can be developed to enhance the

instructional supervisory performance of school

principals?

Hypotheses

The following hypothesis will be tested in this study

at 0.05 level of significance:

There is a significant relationship between the

professional profile of public school principals and the

extent of their instructional supervision along the

identified competency strands.

Basic Assumptions

As the present study intends to investigate the

instructional supervision of public school principals along

the identified competency strands, the study revolves around

the following basic assumptions:

 19

1. Instructional supervision of public school principals

is an important component in the discharge of their

functions along the domain instructional leadership.

2. Competency strands assessment for learning,

developing programs and/or adapting existing

programs, implementing programs for instructional

improvement, and instructional supervision under the

domain instructional leadership are relevant in

determining the extent of instructional supervision

of public school principals.

3. Professional variables of school heads correlate with

their extent of instructional supervision along the

identified competency strands.

4. A guidebook to be developed can be used to enhance the

instructional supervisory performance of public school

principals.

Scope and Delimitation

This study will cover the instructional supervision of

the public school principals in the Division Office I

Pangasinan, during the academic year 2018-2019, in terms of

highest educational attainment, length of experience as

school head, highest level of relevant capability building

trainings attended, number of teachers supervised, school

 20

type and length of supervisory experience prior to

installation as school principal It will likewise look into

the respondents extent of instructional supervision based on

the National Competency-Based Standards for School Heads

(NCBSSH) along the competency strands under the domain

instructional leadership.

The present study will be delimited to determining the

significant relationship between the professional profile

of public school principals and the extent of their

instructional supervision along the identified competency

strands.

Significance of the Study

With the intent of looking into the instructional

supervision of the public school principals in the

performance of their instructional leadership which will

serve as basis for the development of a guidebook to

enhance their instructional supervisory performance, this

study would be beneficial to the following:

Public School Principals. The result of this study will

provide valuable information to school principals who are

faced with the challenges of administering innovations and

changes for their schools. The study will serve as a help

to supervisors on how to consciously incorporate

 21

supervisory model to improve teacher’s instruction and for

well-being of the entire school system.

Teachers. The findings could serve as basis for further

faculty development and an eye opener for them to get

involved in the educational landscape of the school to

yield more positive work outcomes among faculty members.

Teachers who will become administrators later on could have

an idea on how they could become not only school heads but

effective instructional managers as well.

Learners. Being the recipients of the educational

system, they will be benefited since they will be provided

with better education through competent, effective and

efficient school leaders and managers who supervise and

ascertain the development and effectiveness of the

teachers.

Future Researchers. Since education is a continuous

process, future researchers may find this useful and

relevant to their study to be conducted.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are defined lexically and

operationally to enlighten the readers on the findings,

conclusions, and recommendations and on the whole research

in particular.
 22

Assessment for Learning. A competency strand under

the domain instructional leadership which indicates the

processes and procedures in monitoring and assessing

student achievement and performance, effectiveness of

curricular/co-curricular programs and/or instructional

strategies, and communication of student progress to

students and parents/guardians.

Developing Programs and/or Adapting Existing Programs.

A competency strand under the domain instructional

leadership which includes use of research, expertise,

and/or other vehicles in the development and implementation

of a coherent and responsive school-wide curriculum; ways

in addressing deficiencies sustaining successes of current

programs; and development of a culture of functional

literacy.

Guidebook. This refers to a practical reference

framework on supervision for public school principals which

illustrates typical scenario and how each scenario is dealt

with, specifically to keep them abreast with the current

school management through application of appropriate

approaches, and develop a common understanding of where and

how to take action based on the domain instructional

leadership.
 23

Highest Educational Attainment. This professional

profile describes whether the public school principal is a

holder of Doctor of Education degree, has earned Doctor of

Education or Doctor of Philosophy units, a holder of Master

of Arts or Master of Science degree, or has earned Master

of Arts or Master of Science units

Highest Level of Relevant Capability Building

Trainings Attended. This includes trainings, seminars and

conferences attended by the public school principals

whether in the division, provincial, regional, national or

international level.

Implementing Programs for Instructional Improvement.

A competency strand under the domain instructional

leadership which includes management of the introduction of

DepEd aligned curriculum initiatives; curriculum review;

curricular offering enrichment; and curriculum and

instructional innovation with the use of technology.

Instructional Leadership Domain. This domain covers

those actions in instructional leadership (e.g. assessment

for learning, development and implementation, instructional

supervision and technical assistance that school heads

take or delegate to others to promote good teaching and

high level learning among pupils/students.

 24

Instructional Supervision. A competency strand under

the domain instructional leadership which includes

preparation of instructional supervisory plan;

instructional supervision using appropriate strategy;

evaluation of lesson plans and classroom management;

providing feedback regarding teacher performance; and

technical assistance or expertise and instructional support

to teachers.

Professional Profile. Profile variables of public

school principals in terms of highest educational

attainment, length of experience as school head, highest

level of relevant capability building trainings attended,

number of teachers supervised, school type and length of

supervisory experience prior to installation as school

principal.

School Principals. Referring to school administrators

who occupy a strategic position in the educational system,

which includes supervision and instructional leadership, a

position whose importance revolves around the fact that it

is concerned with the total functioning of the school.

School Type. This refers to the categorization of the

school as central, non-central or integrated.

Supervision Practices. School management tasks

exhibited by school heads that relate to approaches and

 25

activities in the promotion of a conducive and productive

work environment and development of teachers and students.

In context, this means that the school head encourages

educational achievement by making instructional quality the

top priority of the school and brings that vision to

realization.