Philippine Normal University

National Center for Teacher Education

College of Graduate Studies and Teacher Education Research
Taft Avenue, Manila

Name: Jonald I. Fabia

Program: Ph.D. in Educational Leadership and Management
Course Professor: Dr. Caridad N. Barrameda
Subject Code: EdLM 804
Course Subject: Contemporary and Emerging Theories, Models and Practices in
Educational Leadership and Management

A CRITIQUE PAPER ON TWO SELECTED LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT MODELS

vis-à-vis ACTUAL EXPERIENCES

Rationale
True enough that leadership is not one-size-fits-all concept. Leaders exercise various leadership
and management practices to meet their organizations’ set strategic vision, mission and objectives. These
practices are exhibited through their control directions towards their subordinates and staff, which are
contributory factors of both organizations’ productivity and adversity.
Any educational institution should be a child-centered institution that provides quality education
and equips its clienteles to reach their maximum capacities in meeting the demands of the global
community. Thus, the quality of leadership of school heads has greatly influenced the ways teaching and
non-teaching workforce attain excellence.
This paper intends to relate two leadership and management models in a specific school context
supported by actual experience and related studies. Specifically, it highlights these two leadership and
management models: Ambiguity – Contingency, Cultural – Moral. Moreover, this paper also highlights
a narration of personal experience of the models in education setting, which are supported by related
literatures and studies. The context, in addition, of this paper is my experiences of witnessing dominant
leadership styles of two schools in Cruz na Ligas Elementary School – Quezon City, which made a
significant impact in school processes.

Leading to Unified Diversity

Ambiguity is a prevalent feature of complex organizations such as schools and is likely to be
particularly acute during periods of rapid change (Bush, 2003): (a) ambiguity models assume that
turbulence and unpredictability are dominant features of organizations; (b) there is no clarity over the
objectives of institutions and their processes are not properly understood; (c) participation in policy
making is fluid as members opt in or out of decision opportunities.
Communicating directives and orders should be clear and specific. For a year, CNLES felt that they
are no longer productive because of unclear communication. Most teachers desire to have a specific role
to do on each program the school ventures. Though, teachers are aware of the general vision of the school
improvement and development through DepEd VMOs and mandates, there should be definite and
underlying mechanisms on how to contextualize and realize these.
Teacher-leaders, such as Master Teachers, Subject, Programs and Projects Coordinators accepted
the idea that this is the way their school head managed the school. Since they know how to carry out the
school’s goals, their creativity in implementing programs scored highly. This observation is supported by
the idea of (Weick 1976) which the schools are divided into groups which have internal coherence based
on common values and goals. Links between the groups are more tenuous and unpredictable. As long as
they work on a common goal, the organization will lead on the right track.
Yet, this management model did not really work for a long time. Teachers still need clear-cut
specifications on their roles.
Lessening ‘it depends’ situations
Best practices emerge through their dependence on the contingencies of the situations. The
contingency theory (Fiedler 1964) emphasizes the importance of both the leader's personality and the
situation in which that leader operates. Styles of leadership may be subjected to either of these motives:
task-motivated and relationship-motivated. Concepts of the situation cope with the following factors
(Northouse 2007): (a) leader-member relations, deals with the general atmosphere of the group and the
feelings such as trust, loyalty and confidence that the group has for its leader; (b) task structure, is related
to task clarity and the means to task accomplishment; and (c) the position power, relates to the amount
of reward-punishment authority the leader has over members of the group (Northouse, 2007, p.114-
115).

Identifying school’s cultural learning disability, the bridge to moral leadership

As an educational management student and, at the same time, an active practitioner and facilitator
of educative processes and experiences, identification of the culture of excellence must be given high
consideration. I anchored this thought on Peter Senge’s Seven Learning Disabilities of Schools, who
spearheaded one of the most influential leadership manuals, and he identified learning disabilities of
schools, which are indeed common sickness in our educational institutions. As it happens in the
institution, it contributes to the organization’s culture. Just a quick share, these learning disabilities really
hinder educational institutions to grow and develop. As such, the following thoughts may really
contribute to make institutions unsuccessful:
1. Unit leaders are focused on their assigned designations limiting their contributions on the scope of
their duties and responsibilities, and worst, missing the larger picture of the organization’s vision and
inter-unity among other units.
2. Whenever there are loopholes in the organization, as long as leaders did their part, they don’t manage
to participate in restructuring the process. They blame, and micromanage, if necessary, just to conceal the
weakness of the contributions they presented.
3. If there are unpleasant situations emerge in the organization, leaders should draw lines on whether
accept or disapprove suggestions and comments. However, the interpersonal intelligence of leaders and
staff members to cope with challenging situations should always yield on positive outcomes.

From the aforementioned concepts, these are considerations to ponder on in making and realizing
moral judgment in leading an organization. These are loopholes that challenge value system not only
skills and competencies. I can strongly suggest that these are compelling force to improve systems and
make stronger connections and relationships.
Reflecting is a consistent offshoot of understanding. As leaders, we should understand how our
subordinates play significant roles in the organization, how do they adapt learning opportunities offered
to them and how do they appreciate their own capacities. At the end of the day, our clients, the people
who need our assistance as leaders, are the end point of development.