Comments, Suggestions and Recommendations

1. Grammar issues, formatting and layout concerns

The entire manuscript needs a major revamp in terms of presentation. There are a lot of
noticeable grammar lapses across all chapters that needs to be reviewed and corrected.
Some of which are as follows:
a. Page 2 – Consistency with the use of uppercase and lowercase letters (Leadership,
Governance….)
b. Page 3 – “trendas…”
c. Page 3 – “forced to used gadgets…”
d. Page 5 – “SBM dimensions are realized Them implementation of SBM…”
e. Page 6 – Introduction and Background of the Study both discusses the same
thoughts. Requires thorough review and revisions.
f. Page 7 – “During the pandemicthe…”
g. Page 7 – the discussion on the conceptual framework is the same as the
introduction”
h. Page 8 – “Its features is…”
i. Page 10 – figure number is missing. The figure itself is not readable and
incomprehensible.
j. Page 10 – image/figure presented was not cited.
k. Page 11 – Arrange and fix the figure. Arrow heads, data labels, typographical
error on “length of service”, figure labeling, “measured” rather than “improved”
should be used on the last box.
l. Page 11 – the formatting of the discussion on the research framework should be
fixed.
m. Page 12 – the formatting of the figure 2
n. Page 13 – “the study aim to determine…”
o. Page 13 – make sure to be consistent with the use of the title of the research
p. Page 77-81 – figures are not clearly readable and are not properly labelled. Make
sure that every single illustration presented in manuscript has a a corresponding
reference in the discussion
q. Page 115 – missing table number
r. Page 120 – missing table number
s. Page 126 – the figures are not properly presented and requires rework.
t. Page 131- avoid using indecisive statements like “maybe…”
u. Table and Figure numberings should be fixed in the entire manuscript. There are
two Table 10 labels.
v. The references are not properly arranged.

2. Uncited statements, claims, and citation concerns

a. Page 2 – claims on the last two paragraphs should be cited. Sources should be
relevant and valid
b. Page 3 – 1986 work was cited and may no longer be relevant or a more updated
version of the work may be available.
3. Literature Review
a. All studies and literatures presented are not properly discussed and not coherently
narrated based on its relevant to the research topic.
b. The discussion on relevance of the studies presented are not substantial enough to
support the premise of the existence of a research gap.

4. Research Methodology
a. The sampling method of using Slovin’s formula is not clearly appropriate.
Consider other sampling calculation like Cochran’s, etc.
b. The table presented in page 119 is not consistent with the actual verbal
interpretations used in the manuscript.

5. Results and Discussion

a. Make sure that all presented tables, showing the results are properly cited and
discussed in the manuscript.
b. Page 123 – consistency in the school year used as presented in table 10. It is not
the same with the school years discussed in chapter 1.
6. Summary and Findings / Conclusion
a. Page 206 – there should be no longer a discussion on statistical tools and research
instrument in this chapter. The scales which appeared on page 206 should be
discussed on chapter 3.
b. The summary of findings should be aligned with the presented problems,
objectives and the entire discussion in the manuscript.
c. Page 207 – the summary of findings based on covered research locale timeline
should be consistent across in the entire manuscript. (e.g 2018-2019, 2019-2020
and 2020-2021 should be used across all discussions)
d. The discussions in the summary of findings are almost similar to the discussions
on the results and analysis. Should be more straightforward in terms presenting
the data and findings.
e. The recommendations should be data driven and supported by the results of the
study.