School Heads' Efficacy On Behavior Management Authored By: Armielyn B. Advincula

International Journal of Academic and Pedagogical Research (IJAPR)
ISSN: 2643-9123
Volume 7, Issue 8 August 2023
SCHOOL HEADS’ EFFICACY ON BEHAVIOR MANAGEMENT

1Armielyn B. Advincula
1Vizal Sto.Cristo Elementary School
armielyn.bernabe001@deped.gov.ph
ABTRACT
The study is to examine the relationship between school heads’ efficacy on
their behavior management. This was conducted in North, East and West
districts in Candaba, Pampanga during the School Year 2022-2023. The
respondents of the study are all the school heads and 100 select teachers from
three districts mentioned. Using a mixed-method research design, the results of
the study revealed that school heads have high level of efficacy which denotes
that the belief in their capabilities to perform various roles is evidently observed.
Meanwhile, school heads’ behavior management in terms of human relations is
very evident while other parameters are sometimes observed such as
trust/decision making, instructional management, control and conflict were
sometimes observed. Meanwhile, there was no significant difference in the
assessment of two groups of respondents on school heads’ efficacy. There was
also no significant difference in the assessments on school heads’ behavior
management. Furthermore, there was a significant relationship between school
heads' efficacy and behavior management. Thus, null hypothesis is rejected.
Results from the qualitative part of the study showed several teachers’ insights
about the connection between school heads’ efficacy and behavior management.
Moreover, a program of activities was crafted and proposed based on the results
of the study.
Keywords: School Heads’ Efficacy, Behavior Management
ISSN: 2643-9123
INTRODUCTION
The most important leaders in our educational system are the heads of schools. They are
in-charge of implementing the school's vision and mission. School heads are essential to
the efficient operation of schools. They participate in all facets of running the school. They
are the leaders in charge of developing and carrying out all projects and programs related
to education in the school. They play a vital role in achieving the government’s aim to
provide quality basic education.
Anselmus Dami et. al (2022) cited in their study that the success and failure of a
school depend largely on how the principal performs the role in creating an idea to improve
the quality of the school. Therefore, the principal as a leader in the school has a very
substantial and strategic role and accountability in improving the quality of education in
the school. Also, being a school leader can be illustrated as one of organizational and
management responsibilities, such as responsibility for the school economy, facilities,
schedule, and personnel (Hallinger et al., 2018).
From the perspective of De Guzman (2018), school heads cannot avoid interacting
daily with different group of people including teachers, students, parents, school boards,
and other the school’s stakeholders. Each group have their own needs, difficulties, views,
expectations and demands which commonly conflict with the ideals, demands, and views
of others in the educational enterprise.
In addition, many studies focus on teacher self-efficacy wherein research evidence
shows that teacher self-efficacy is positively related to engagement and job satisfaction and
ISSN: 2643-9123
negatively related to emotional exhaustion and motivation to leave the teaching profession.
Meanwhile, little research is done related to the principal’s self-efficacy for instructional
leadership. Because of the importance and increased accountability for instructional
leadership, self-efficacy for instructional leadership has been proven to be predictive of a
principal’s emotional wellbeing and motivation.
Consequently, due to varying individual levels of self-efficacy, setbacks in
accomplishing tasks related to a particular work do happen. As an individual reflects on
his performance, his self-efficacy will be challenged by difficulties of giving his or her best
in completing a task or activity, for that matter. There is a need to understand how self-
efficacy could be integrated with the socio-cognitive and expectancy values to predict
outcomes of students at secondary schools (Domenech et al., 2017).
According to Litvinov et al., (2018), as the level of pressure continues to rise for
teachers in today’s schools the importance of the leader being sensitive to that pressure and
providing a supportive, positive workplace in order for teacher efficacy to remain high is
paramount. Generally, teachers who possess self-confidence in teaching and instruction
and are concerned with student learning have higher expectations which, in turn, produce
higher student achievement. If the school principal creates an environment that increases
and supports high teacher efficacy, student achievement will increase or remain high.
Meanwhile, Montague-Davis (2017) reported that school principals play a vital role in
fostering the development of schools as learning organizations, since principal leadership
practices determine the effectiveness of learning organizations as well as teacher
perceptions of leader effectiveness. Likewise, having a strong instructional leader that

ISSN: 2643-9123
models best practices will more likely see teachers enabling more active engagement in
students, thus increasing learners’ achievement (Quinn, 2002 as cited in Ezell, 2020).
Likewise, the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic created a radical change in
teaching-learning in schools worldwide. This occurrence challenged the self-efficacy of
both teachers and school heads in Philippine public schools, specifically on how to utilize
social media learning, which is a new modality. Thus, this research was conducted in which
the findings showed that demographic characteristics which include as sex, age,
educational background, and length of service did not have significantly link with school
performance. In contrast, the challenges linked with self-efficacy in terms of educational
management, instructional leadership, moral leadership, and application of social media
learning tools were all significantly correlated with school performance.
Self–efficacy is known to be significantly vital in teachers' commitment to their
work. With the paradigm shift of the teaching and learning process brought about by the
Philippine education system’s transformation, both teachers’ self-efficacy and
commitment have been put to the test (Guoyan et al., 2021). It appeared that self-efficacy
moves forward school execution in both teachers and school heads and is impacted by their
positive and sound states of mind. From the subjective information, the determined subjects
have suggestions with financial conditions, information, and aptitudes on the application
of innovation, exchange of information to understudies, keeping up coordination,
collaboration, and back from instructive partners, educational programs plan and adherence
with instructive guidelines, forcing disciplinary measures, and compliance with school
prerequisites. School authorities ought to consider updating approaches on work force

ISSN: 2643-9123
capability and capacity building, improving proficient improvement, and preparing them
with the application of cutting-edge educating strategies. All these concepts were
considered in a proposed suggestion to the Division of Instruction, Philippines, for
arrangement improvement. (Escobin et. al, 2022).
Undeniably, school heads have a key role in developing the learning situation in
school, which is important for teachers’ job satisfaction and students’ learning. For
instance, Butler and Shibaz (2019), in their study, found that the principals, through their
priorities and evaluations, affect the teachers’ goals and practices. However, although the
principals’ functions may be affected by their working conditions, their level of stress and
their mastery expectations, there is minimal research on school principals’ stress as well as
their self-efficacy (Darmody & Smyth 2016 as cited in Skaalvik, 2020).
Furthermore, as cited by Westberry and Hornor (2022) in their study, principals
with a strong self-efficacy are more likely to persevere through the challenges faced in
schools and positively impact teacher self-efficacy. In fact, a principal’s self-efficacy has
a positive correlation to the collective self-efficacy of a school. This collective self-efficacy
is the confidence that both the individuals (teachers, students, and principals) as well as the
collective whole will be able to carry out the behaviors of teaching and learning.
However, principals have more recently been observed to have a greater level of
frustration with the lack of independence at the school level (Weiner & Wouflin, 2017) and
increased burnout (Skaalvik, 2020). This increased frustration and burnout may have an
ISSN: 2643-9123
influence on motivation, and thereby contribute to leadership vacancies (Lemoine, et al.,
2018).
A school speaks to a complex bureaucratic administrative organization with
decentralized administrations set up by important societal laws that draw and apply impact
from both territorial and worldwide communities. Like most societal organizations, schools
are driven by school principals or pioneers. The behavior of a school vital is pivotal in
deciding the common school execution (Constantia et al., 2021) and its individuals,
learners, educating, and non-teaching staff alike. In instruction, the principals arrange
school life, keep up enactment and instruction service circulars, give official mandates, and
actualize teacher-related exercises (Edo et al., 2019).
Furthermore, Maqbool et al. (2019) investigated the effects of school heads’
behavior on the teachers’ classroom performance. From the results of the study, it was
proven that there was a strong positive correlation between principals’ leadership behaviors
and teachers’ performance. Furthermore, it was found that there was a strong positive
correlation between the subscales of school heads’ leadership behavior and teachers’
performance. It means that better the principals’ leadership behavior, the better will be the
teachers’ performance. According to (Kassim et al., 2018), leaders should involve
employees in decision making and they should be sharing knowledge and welcoming to
the employees.
As cited by Massengill (2018), an ever-increasing body of research has shown that
principal self-efficacy has a direct correlation to school effectiveness. More recently,

ISSN: 2643-9123
research is emerging that seeks to determine the impact of principal self-efficacy on
collective staff self-efficacy. Research has shown an association between school heads with
a high sense of self-efficacy and their respective staff members exhibiting a high sense of
self-efficacy. While other examples exist of studies that examine the effect of school heads’
self-efficacy on collective staff-efficacy, these studies are not as abundant as those studies
dealing with teacher efficacy or principal efficacy alone.
Besides, agreeing to Hesbol (2019), one key characteristic of high-performing
schools is how they work organizationally, empowering them to sanction changes viably
and to bargain with normal organizational uncertainty and chaos. The principal plays a
pivotal role in developing a school culture that supports high-performing schools. Thus,
her research studied the relationship between principal self-efficacy and a principal’s views
of his or her school as a learning organization. The findings indicate that principals must
possess high level of efficacy to induce others to perform at tall levels and must have a
solid conviction in instructors and the organization as a entirety to seek after the sorts of
school change endeavors and research-based organizational learning components that can
make strides understudy execution.
In addition, Republic Act 9155 moreover known as Governance of Basic Education
Act stresses out that a school must be overseen by a school head who has “the specialist,
duty and responsibility for accomplishing higher learning outcomes.” The parts of the
school head incorporate, but not restricted to, authority, administration, educator
assessment, and enforcing student discipline.

ISSN: 2643-9123
With these gaps found in related studies embarking school heads’ efficacy as
related to behavior management and due to the strong interest and relevance of the topic
nowadays which serves as the strong foundation or background of this study, the researcher
purported to determine the relationship between school heads’ efficacy and their behavior
management at public elementary schools in three districts in Candaba Pampanga such as
North, East and West.
Statement of the Problem
This study intended to assess the relationship between school heads’ efficacy and
behavior management at public elementary schools in North, East and West Districts in
Candaba, Pampanga during the School Year 2022-2023.
Specifically, this research sought answers to the following questions:
1. How may the school heads’ efficacy as assessed by themselves and teachers be
described in terms of:
1.1 developing goals;
1.2 guiding teachers;
1.3 creating a positive and safe learning environment ;
1.4 motivating teachers; and
1.5 developing a collective culture?
2. How may the behavior management of school heads as assessed by themselves
and teachers be described in terms of:

ISSN: 2643-9123
2.1 human relations;
2.2 trust/decision making;
2.3 instructional management;
2.4 control; and
2.5 conflict?
3. Is there a significant difference on the school heads’ efficacy as assessed by the
school heads and teachers?
4. Is there a significant difference on the school heads’ behavior management as
assessed by the school heads and teachers?
5. Is there a significant relationship between school heads’ efficacy and behavior
management?
6. What are the insights of teachers concerning their school heads’ efficacy and
behavior management?
7. What program of activities may be crafted from the results of the study?
Hypotheses
The following hypotheses were tested:
1. There is no significant difference in school heads’ efficacy as assessed by the school
heads and teachers.
2. There is no significant difference in school heads’ behavior management as
assessed by the school heads and teachers.

ISSN: 2643-9123
3. There is no significant relationship between school heads’ efficacy and behavior
management.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual model that guided this study was cited from the study conducted by
Hallinger et al. (2018). The model identifies Principals’ Self-Efficacy as an antecedent of
school heads’ instructional leadership and collaborative teachers’ efficacy.
A primary suspicion of the self-efficacy show is that mental strategies, anything
their frame, serve as implies of making or fortifying desires of individual adequacy. Self-
efficacy may be influenced by verbal influence, vicarious involvement (seeing another
individual adapt with the errand), imaginal sanctioning (envisioning oneself doing it), or
enthusiastic excitement, but coordinate execution achievements are accepted to supply
distant the foremost persuading prove that one has the required capacities. Hence, in spite
of the fact that the self-efficacy demonstrate is based on a cognitive instrument, it
hypothesizes that alter is accomplished basically through behavior.
Research studies on self-efficacy have significantly advanced our knowledge of
human motivation. Researchers have found that a major internal motivational process
called self-efficacy influences the motivational outcomes of decisions, effort, persistence,
and performance. Self-efficacy can be influenced by personal and contextual factors. The
ISSN: 2643-9123
application of self-efficacy principles to various circumstances indicates that the basic idea
needs certain modifications. The operation of self-efficacy and assessment techniques will
be further investigated by researchers. The goal is to apply self-efficacy theory to a variety
of people and circumstances (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2021).
Meanwhile, based on Self-Efficacy Theory (SET) which is based on Social
Cognitive Theory by Bandura (1986). Albert Bandura created the Social Cognitive Theory
based on the concept that learning is influenced by cognitive, behavioral, and natural
variables (Bandura, 1991). In differentiate to the conventional mental hypotheses that
emphasized learning through coordinate involvement, Bandura set that essentially all
learning marvels can happen by watching other people’s behavior and result of it (Bandura,
1986). Too, concurring to this approach, the two key determinants of behavior are seen
self-efficacy and result hopes. The last-mentioned build alludes to the seen positive and
negative results of performing the behavior.
The SCT theory suggests that effective learning happens when an individual is in a
social context and able to engage in both dynamic and reciprocal interactions between the
person, the environment, and the behavior (LaMorte, 2016). It is the sole theoryof its kind
with this emphasison the pertinence of the social setting and the significance of upkeep
behavior in expansion to starting behavior. The hypothesis considers numerous
unmistakable, special relevant factors when anticipating or clarifying a person’s behavior,
giving it a wide extend of potential applications counting wellbeing, nearby environment,
and the neighborhood community. The extreme objective is to clarify how individuals
ISSN: 2643-9123
control their behavior through control and support to realize goal-directed behavior that
can be aced over time.
Self-efficacy is a personal judgment of an individual’s capabilities to design a
course of action to produce a desired outcome. From Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory,
where human behavior is identified as an interaction of personal factors, behavior, and the
environment, comes the cognitive construct of self-efficacy. An individual’s relationships
draw from his/her own beliefs and cognitive competencies that have been developed and
affected by the influences of their environment. Accordingly, the relationship between the
principal, their behavior, and school environment is reciprocal with each creating change
within the other. Tschannen-Moran and Gareis (2004) as cited in Dahlkamp et al. (2017),
upheld the relationship of principal self-efficacy and effective leadership capability stating
that good principals are widely acknowledged as the cornerstones of good schools.
Meanwhile, guided mastery therapy is based on the self-efficacy theory. In
differentiate to simply behavioral definitions, this hypothesis holds that cognitive forms
play a prevailing part within the procurement and maintenance of unused behavior designs.
From watching others, one shapes a conception of how unused behavior designs are
performed. From watching the impacts of one's activities, one shapes a conception of the
suitable behavior. Adequacy desires are recognized from result desires. An adequacy desire
can be characterized as a person's conviction that one can effectively execute the behavior
required to create certain results, while an result desire is the appraise that a given behavior
will lead to the results. For occurrence, a individual may abstain from acting inviting
ISSN: 2643-9123
toward others either since he/she does not accept this will lead to craved results or since
he/she does not accept he/she has the capability to act inviting (Hoffart, 2017).
Tschannen-Moran & Gareis (2004) as cited in Skaalvik (2020), defined principal
self-efficacy as a judgment of one’s own capabilities to structure a specific course of
activity in arrange to deliver wanted results within the school he or she leads. This
definition covers all obligations of the principals. Hence, in agreement with common
conceptualizations of the build, central self-efficacy is conceptualized as a
multidimensional development.
Another theory that supports individuals’ efficacy is rooted from
Self-determination Theory of Ryan and Deci (2000) as cited in Duda and
Appleton (2016) which centers on the “why” of behavior, considering the determinants and
results of more or less independent and controlled reasons for interest. A key concept inside
SDT is that of essential mental needs, specifically, the all inclusive needs of competence
(feeling one is compelling in assembly natural requests), independence (feeling true, acting
with volition, having input), and relatedness (feeling associated with and cared for by
noteworthy others within the setting at hand). SDT holds that more prominent require
fulfillment will contribute to more independent endeavoring (i.e., partaking in an
movement since one appreciates it for its possess purpose and/or by and by values the
benefits of the action) and ideal working. Lessened or effectively ruined essential needs is
connected to more controlled (i.e., locks in within the action for outward rewards or out of
sentiments of blame and weight) reasons for engagement and the compromised welfare of
those members.
ISSN: 2643-9123
In addition, Cruz (2016) said that success and failure of the school system in general
depends on the managerial skills of its school heads who are tasked to establish and
maintain a sound school atmosphere responsive to the promotion and attainment of
instructional effectiveness through a progressive and harmonious teachers’ relationship.
Also, the present study is anchored on the theory of Leader-Member Exchange
(LMX) theory of leadership, an exchange relationship between a leader and a member of
an organization, team, or organization. It is a social exchange relationship existing between
the leader like school heads and the followers. The excellent member earns extra rewards
from the leader for a job well done. Social change does mean not only the material aspect
shift but also in psychological as well. The members would be expected to show similar
behavior as a response to the apparent leader's behavior. Employee organizational
citizenship behavior is an essential constituent of the overall practice and is critical to job
performance (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995 as cited in Baluyos et al., 2019). The theory of
planned behavior has emerged as one of the most influential and popular conceptual
frameworks for the study of human action and the study of classroom management. Three
things guided a person's behavior based on the theory: beliefs of the attributes of the action,
feelings of the normative expectations of other people, and ideas about the existence of
factors that may further or hinder the performance of the behavior.
As cited in Ismail et al. (2018), school leaders play very significant role towards
the success of their schools. They carry countless responsibilities to oversee the school
organization things such as budget and timetables, students’ teach and participation, co-
curricular exercises, offices, security, enrollment and checking of instructors, appraisals,

ISSN: 2643-9123
curriculum, teaching and learning materials professional development relationships with
teachers and students and communication with parents and the surrounding community.
A transformational leader transforms the subordinates' thinking that they adopt the
idea of the organization as if that was their own. This transformation leads to idealized
influence, which indicates the degree to which a pioneer is empowering the devotee to
create believe and take after the pioneer. Inspirational motivation characterizes the amount
to which a leader presents a vision to inspire followers. Thirdly, intellectual stimulation
describes the level to which a leader encourages followers to become innovative. Finally,
individual consideration illustrates the extent to which the leaders are mindful about the
followers' individual needs (McCleskey, 2014 as cited in Baluyos et al. 2019).
Xie et al. (2022) cited in their study that one of the many important responsibilities
that school principals take in schools is to provide opportunities for teachers to develop
teachers’ professional capabilities. Teachers are regularly found to have more grounded
self-perceptions of foremost administration when they have more proficient advancement
openings organized by schools. At the same time, instructors who see higher levels of
central administration are steadier of schools’ improvement dreams and are more likely to
create higher self-efficacies.
Furthermore, teachers recognize that a strong relationship with their school heads
is vital and that needs support from the parents and people in the community. The support
they give to their principals, colleagues, students, and community members lead the
freedom to ask compelling questions focused on the needs of their communities. They seek
ISSN: 2643-9123
support in developing the skills needed in advocating the structured time to co-
create literacy projects that enhance and sustain communities. They encourage and nurture
each other to be explorers who investigate issues in their communities and acknowledge
that failure can bring out a deeper meaning for themselves and their students. Additionally,
as teachers communicate their ideas and instructional choices to community members,
these bring full support in achieving the curricular endeavor, thereby raising learners’
performance (English, 2018). Many studies have been conducted on the leadership and
behavior management of the school heads, but few have been conducted that relates to the
teachers’ efficacy.
As emphasized by Liebowitz and Porter (2019), principals are recognized to be
significant characters in moving forward educating and learning conditions in schools; be
that as it may, moderately small is known approximately the administration procedures to
which principals ought to commit their time and exertion to move forward results. From
the reviewed empirical literature, analysis revealed three central findings: (1) coordinate
prove of the relationship between foremost behaviors and understudy accomplishment was
found, educator well-being, educator directions hones, and school organizational wellbeing
(2) the significance of central behaviors past directions administration as potential
instruments to progress understudy accomplishment results was apparent and (3) the going
before discoveries are based nearly completely on observational ponders since the causal
prove base on school administration behaviors is nonexistent. It was advance contended
that discoveries recommend esteem in contributing in school authority capacities. In this
manner, it was concluded by talking about openings to progress the quality of future inquire
ISSN: 2643-9123
about looking at the relationship between vital behaviors and understudy, educator, and
school results.
Moreover, to be considered effective, a leader must be possessed of characteristics
and behaviors that aid him in his challenging role. They should be able to create the right
work environment and promote teamwork. In this context and over the years, several
management theories have been developed, many of which stem from the experience of
the management of organizations and companies.
Independent Variables Dependent Variables
Behavior Management
School Heads’ Efficacy
• developing goals • human relations
• guiding teachers • trust/decision
• creating a positive and making
safe learning • instructional
environment management
• motivating teachers • control
• developing a collective • conflict
culture
Figure 1. Paradigm of the Study
Figure 1 shows that the independent variables are the school heads’ efficacy in
terms of developing goals, guiding teachers, creating a positive and safe learning
environment, motivating teachers and developing a collective culture. These variables were
ISSN: 2643-9123
hypothesized to ha (as implied by the arrowhead) the dependent variables which is the
behavior management of school heads in terms of (human relations, trust/decision making,
instructional management, control and conflict).
Significance of the Study
The study was deemed beneficial and important in the educational arena. It would
help the educators understand the influence of school heads’ efficacy on their behavior
management, and it would ultimately benefit the following:
School Heads. The findings would serve as a guide for them to assess their personal
level of self-efficacy and to realize the need to excel in their field. In the same way, they
would be able to assess the status of their behavior management. Specifically, the results
of this study would be an eye opener for them in determining the role of their efficacy on
their behavior management and to prioritize teachers’ development programs and prepare
themselves in the delivery of lessons that are geared to the 21st-century learners who are
and prepared for the workforce of the Industrial Revolution 4.0.
Future School Heads. Specifically, the results of this study would serve as empirical
evidence about their need for technical assistance as it would further develop their
managerial and leadership skills for managing a particular school.
Teachers. Results of the study would give the teachers adequate information as
regards to the role of their school heads’ efficacy on their behavior management. Thus,
ISSN: 2643-9123
they will be aware and mindful on the different school policies and programs towards
school development and improvement.
Future Researchers. Results of the study would be very useful for future researchers
who will be undertaking studies on education specifically on educational leadership and
management. They may utilize this study as a reference for the enrichment of their future
research using other variables.
Scope and Limitation of the Study
The study focused on the school heads’ efficacy to determine its significant
relationship to their behavior management.
The school heads’ efficacy was limited only to developing goals, guiding teachers,
creating a positive and safe learning environment, motivating teachers and developing a
collective culture. Meanwhile, behavior management was assessed in terms of human
relations, trust/decision making, instructional management, control and conflict.
The respondents of this study were the 34 school heads in North, East and West
districts in Candaba, Pampanga. Likewise, the study included 100 randomly selected public
elementary school teachers from the three districts.
Location of the Study

ISSN: 2643-9123
This study was conducted in North, East and West Districts of Candaba, Pampanga
where 34 public elementary schools served as the participating schools.
Source: https://candabapampanga.gov.ph/municipal-profile
Figure 2. Map of Candaba, Pampang
Source: https://goo.gl/maps/EcC5JdujrSEnauyg7
Figure 2. Map of the Candaba,Pampanga

Definition of Terms
ISSN: 2643-9123
To shed light in further understanding the context of the study, the following
operational definitions are hereby presented:
Behavior Management. This refers to how school heads demonstrate behavior
while managing the school, teachers, learners and other stakeholders in terms of human
relations, trust/decision making, instructional leadership, control, and conflict domain.
Conflict. This refers to school heads’ behavior when encountering problems and
conflicts concerning their teachers.
Control. It refers to school heads’ behavior in delegating tasks and assigning duties
to their teachers.
Creating Positive and Safe Learning Environment. It refers to school heads’
capacity to guarantee ideal learning and the well-being of the learners.
Developing Collective Culture. It refers to school heads’ active engagement with
teachers to create a collective culture in which the teachers internalize common objectives
and visions.
Developing Goals. It refers to school heads’ ability to have the goals and visions
communicate the school’s mission or purpose and clarify what should be the focus of
attention.
Efficacy. In this study, this refers to school heads’ belief in his or her capabilities
as a school head to perform a specified task. It is divided into the following subscales such
as developing goals, guiding teachers, creating a positive and safe learning environment,
motivating teachers and developing a collective culture.

ISSN: 2643-9123
Guiding Teachers. It talks about the center measurement of instructional leadership
that specifically impacts the learning environment.
Human Relations. This refers to school heads’ behavior of exhibiting relations with
their subordinates who are considered to be the teachers.
Instructional Management. This refers to school heads’ behavior such as managing
the school curriculum, demonstrating knowledge on instructional strategies of teachers,
providing necessary feedback for teachers and the like.
Motivating Teachers. It refers to school heads’ ability to encourage and inspire
teachers to further improve and develop themselves.
School Head. This term refers to the designated school head who is in-charge of
managing the school.
Trust/Decision Making. This refers to how the school heads make decisions aligned
with the trust behavior.

ISSN: 2643-9123
CHAPTER II
METHODOLOGY
The information about the research and sampling procedures that was utilized by
the researcher are provided in this chapter. The research design that was employed, as the
data gathering techniques, and data analysis scheme are also discussed in this chapter.
Research Design
The researcher utilized mixed-method explanatory design in determining the
outcome of the study. Explanatory Design (also known as the Explanatory Sequential
Design) could be a two-phase blended strategies plan. This plan begins with the collection
and examination of quantitative information. This to begin with stage is taken after by the
ensuing collection and examination of subjective information. The moment, subjective
stage of the ponder is outlined so that it takes after from (or interfaces to) the comes about
of the primary quantitative stage. According to Creswell (2018), educational research for
mixed-method research can be the occasion for developing new concepts to another
concept. It can also be used to develop research based and data-driven programs and
policies for management systems.

ISSN: 2643-9123
Furthermore, to examine if school heads’ efficacy has a significant relationship
with their behavior management, correlational analysis was employed. Therefore, the
researcher determined the relationship between school head’s efficacy and their behavior
management.
Data Gathering Techniques
Prior to the conduct of the study, the researcher sought permission from the Schools
Division Superintendent of Pampanga to allow her to conduct this study at 34 public
elementary schools in North, East and West District of Candaba. Pampanga. With the
endorsement from the SDS, the researcher coordinated with the district supervisors and
school heads for the schedule of data collection. Both survey and interview were conducted
to gather the necessary data for the study.
There are two types of data that were collected for the study, the quantitative and
the qualitative data. Quantitative data were gathered through the use of closed-
ended questionnaire. On the other hand, qualitative data were gathered by means of semi-
structured interviews.
In the quantitative data gathering, the questionnaire that was utilized was composed
of two (2) parts. Part I elicited both school heads and teachers’ responses about school
heads’ efficacy scale by means of a 15-item Norwegian self-efficacy for school leaders as
lifted and adopted from the study conducted by Skaalvik (2020). It consists of five
subscales: developing goals, guiding teachers, creating a positive and safe learning
environment, motivating teachers and developing a collective culture. A five-point Likert
scale was used to collect the participant's responses on the level of principals’ efficacy. The
ISSN: 2643-9123
scale is anchored as follows: 1 =very low, 2 = low, 3 = moderate, 4 = high, and 5= very
high. Cronbach’s alpha for the total scale was .88. Computed alpha scores for the sub
variables were .90, .84, .72, .76, and .82 for goals, collective culture, motivating teachers,
observing and guiding instruction, and learning environment, respectively.
On the other hand, Part II of the questionnaire was intended to measure teachers’
perspectives as well as the school heads on their behavior management in terms of human
relations, trust/decision making, instructional management, control, and conflict. The
survey instrument was lifted and adopted from Bulach et al. (2006). A Cronbach alpha was
also used to measure the internal consistency and reliability of the total instrument. A
correlation coefficient of .95 was obtained indicating the instrument has excellent
reliability. The instrument has adequate construct validity in terms of those behaviors that
school’s head practice which teachers like or find offensive. The teachers will be asked to
respond on a Likert five-point scale ranging from “never” to “always” in terms of how
frequently their school’s head practiced each behavior. A response of “never” will be
scored as a 1.0; “seldom” will be scored as a 2.0; “sometimes” will be scored as a 3.0;
“often” will be scored as a 4.0; and “always” will be scored as a 5.0. Negative behaviors
were reversely scored.
The data gathering for both survey and interview was done online. For the online
survey on school heads’ efficacy and behavior management, Google Forms were sent to
the respondents. Meanwhile, for the qualitative interview, recorded interviews were
conducted. This online survey and interview adhere to College Memorandum No. 9 s.
2022. Furthermore, to observe the ethical standards in research, informed consent was
ISSN: 2643-9123
sought from the researchers before they proceed to answering the questionnaires as it is
mandated by Republic Act 10173 or the Data Privacy Act of 2012 titled “An Act Protecting
Individual Personal Information in Information and Communications Systems in the
Government and the Private Sector, creating for this Purpose a National Privacy
Commission, and for other Purposes.”
Sampling Procedure
To determine the recommended sample size for the study, the researcher used
Slovin’s Formula to arrive at certain sample size from a total population of 480 elementary
teachers from three districts. Therefore, a sample of 100 teachers was computed. They were
selected randomly. Meanwhile, all school heads from 34 public elementary schools are
selected to participate in the study. Furthermore, there were no inclusion and exclusion
criteria in selecting the respondents as long as they are all public elementary school teachers
within districts of North, East and West in Candaba, Pampanga, and so they are appropriate
for the conduct of this study.
The table below presents the distribution of respondents of the study.
Table 1
Distribution of Respondents of the Study
Public Elementary School Head- Teacher-Respondents

Schools in Candaba Respondents
Pampanga Population of Number of
Teachers (N) Teachers (n)
North 9 107 22
East 10 188 39
West 15 185 39
ISSN: 2643-9123
Total 34 100
Meanwhile, according to Hennink and Kaiser (2021), 9-17 participants are enough
to be included in the qualitative interview as based on the study they conducted which
focused on sample sizes for saturation in qualitative studies: a systematic review of
empirical tests. Therefore, for the qualitative part of the study, 9 teachers were selected
using random sampling to participate in the qualitative interview. They were subjected to
semi-structured interview with open-ended questions.
Data Analysis Scheme
After collecting all the questionnaires, these were organized, tallied, tabulated, and
analyzed using some statistical tools.
Descriptive statistics, specifically the mean procedure, was utilized to describe
school head’s efficacy and their behavior management as perceived by both school heads
themselves and teachers.
T-test for independent samples was employed to determine if there is significant
difference between school heads and teachers’ perspectives on school head’s efficacy and
behavior management.
Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation analysis was performed to determine if a
significant relationship exists between the independent variable (school heads’ efficacy)
and dependent variable (behavior management).

ISSN: 2643-9123
For the gathered qualitative data, discourse analysis was utilized to analyze the
gathered qualitative data. Discourse analysis is a subjective strategy of analysis, which
investigates the implications delivered by language use and communication, the settings
and forms of these implications and hones caused by these implications. Discourse analysis
points to see and categorize different meaning-making forms, systems and hones from the
information. Talk examination as an investigation hone incorporates different beginning
focuses and discipline-specific applications.
CHAPTER III
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
This chapter contains presentation, analysis and interpretation of the data collected and the
results of the statistical treatment employed in the study with the purpose of determining the
relationship between school heads’ efficacy and behavior management at public elementary
schools.
SCHOOL HEADS’ EFFICACY
One’s efficacy is a belief system that promotes goal fulfillment by believing in one's
abilities and reacting to difficulties with persistence. A school administrator’s efficacy has the
potential to contribute greatly towards his or her leadership and success. The level of school heads’
efficacy is a potential factor contributing to the effectiveness of school priorities and concerns.
ISSN: 2643-9123
Thus, the study assessed the efficacy of school heads in terms of developing goals, guiding
teachers, creating a positive and safe learning environment, motivating teachers, and developing a
collective culture, through the lens of both school heads themselves and teachers.
The assessments on the aforementioned variables are presented in Tables 2 to 6.
Developing Goals
Developing goals refer to school heads’ ability to set goals in order to achieve a greater
sense of direction. It involves identifying the desired outcomes and developing a plan for achieving
them.
The data on school heads’ efficacy in terms of developing goals as perceived/viewed by
both school heads and teachers are presented in Table 2.
Table 2
The School Heads’ Efficacy in terms of Developing Goals
Item Statement School Heads Teachers

The school head … Mean VD Mean VD
1. develops clear and achievable goals for the school. 4.74 VH 4.53 VH
2. develops spontaneous objectives and aims for both
3.68 H 3.64 H
teachers and learners
3. develops clear goals and expectations for the
4.71 VH 4.50 VH
teaching.
4. develops ambiguous goals and objectives for the
3.74 H 3.58 H
school.
5. develops a strategic plan for achieving the goals. 4.71 VH 4.55 VH
Overall Mean 4.31 VH 4.16 H
Legend: 4.21 – 5.00 Very High (VH); 3.41 – 4.20 High (H); 2.61 – 3.40 Moderate (M); 1.81 – 2.60 Low (L);1.00 – 1.80 Very Low (VL)
The school heads’ assessment of their efficacy in terms of developing goals revealed that
item statement 1 received the highest weighted mean of 4.74 for school heads with a verbal
ISSN: 2643-9123
description of “very high”, while item statement 5 got the highest weighted mean of 4.55 for
teachers with a verbal description of “very high.” On the other hand, item statement 2 obtained the
lowest weighted mean of 3.68 for school heads with verbal description of “high”, while item
statement 4 received the lowest weighted mean of 3.58 for teachers with a verbal description of
“high.” The overall mean of 4.31 for school heads with a verbal description of “very high” and
4.16 for teachers with a verbal description of “high.”
From the obtained results, it was implied that school heads have high to very high level of
creating and forming a strategic plan to achieved school’s goals. Setting goals is a crucial
component of school leadership. Principals oversee establishing longer-term strategic objectives
for tying those objectives to yearly school improvement and plans for development. They also
establish objectives for themselves and possibly take part in defining objectives for their teachers.
The results corroborate those of Meyer et al. (2019), which emphasized that self-
efficacy plays in the process of defining and achieving goals. It emphasizes the necessity to take
into account how principals' self-efficacy can be increased and maintained. Leadership
development and educational leadership implications for practice are examined.
Furthermore, as pointed out by Burhanuddin & Aspland (2016), school organizations thus
need principals who are able to employ effective leadership with a “vision” to empower their
subordinates to succeed through providing instructional and administrative services for students,
parents, and community.
During the conducted interview, teachers were asked to what extent how they attested their
school head’s efficacy on behavior management. The respondents pointed out that the behavior of
her school head towards achieving common goals for the learners are evident to him.
ISSN: 2643-9123
Guiding Teachers
Guiding teachers refers to essential aspects of instructional leadership that directly impacts
the learning conditions. School heads perform this to assist teachers carrying out their work while
motivating and helping them to develop their abilities in the teaching and learning process.
The data on school heads efficacy in terms of guiding teachers as viewed by both school
heads and teachers are exhibited in Table 3.
Table 3
School Heads’ Efficacy in terms of Guiding Teachers

1. guides teachers about educational matters. 4.56 VH 4.58 VH
2. distances himself /herself from teachers in times of
2.62 M 2.57 L
needs.
3. uses school based self-assessment to improve
4.68 VH 4.45 VH
teaching and learning.
4. refuses to offer technical assistance to teachers. 2.26 L 2.57 L
5. observes teaching and provide helpful feedback 4.62 VH 4.43 VH
Overall Mean 3.75 H 3.72 H
Legend: 4.21 – 5.00 Very High (VH); 3.41 – 4.20 High (H); 2.61 – 3.40 Moderate (M); 1.81 – 2.60 Low (L); 1.00 – 1.80 Very Low (VL)
The item statement 3 received the highest weighted mean of 4.68 for school heads with a
verbal description of “very high”, while the item statement 1 got the highest weighted mean of
4.58 for teachers with a verbal description of “very high.” On the other hand, for school heads, the
item statement 4 obtained the lowest weighted mean of 2.26 with a verbal description of “low”,
while for teachers item statements 2 and 4 are both got the lowest weighted mean of 2.57 with a
verbal description of “low.” The overall mean of 3.75 for school heads and 3.72 for teachers with
the same verbal description of “high.”

ISSN: 2643-9123
Findings suggest that the school heads observe their teachers’ teaching and provide them
with helpful feedback. It can be also deduced that school head’s coordinate supervision of
instructors is concerned with advancement of the conditions that encompass learning, pupils’
development and successful teachers’ instructing execution within the school framework.
In conformity with the findings of the present study, Encanto (2021) uncovered that those
supervisory parts of school heads in terms of classroom appearance, staff advancement, human
connection supervision, and advancement of instruction and appointment are viable. Within the
deterrents within the supervisory work as to resistance to alter, multitasking communication
demeanors and convictions towards supervision and specialized mastery were once in a while
watched.
Furthermore, Hussain et al. (2021), stated the primary aim of school is providing learning
through effective teaching. Effective teaching is possible through competent teachers, which is the
leading factor influencing students’ success. Teacher competency can be enhanced through
investing in teachers’ professional development. In this regard, school heads play a critical role in
improving teachers’ professional development. The study concluded that principals have a positive
attitude towards improvement of professional development.
In the conducted interview, when the respondents asked the importance of school head’s
efficacy on managing behavior. One of the teachers mentioned whenever they were guided by
their school head, he always expressed positive attitude in dealing with different activities in
school. Hence, that positive attitude reflected to them.
Creating a Positive and Safe Learning Environment

ISSN: 2643-9123
Making a positive and secure learning environment refers to adequacy of school heads to
guarantee that school permits both instructors and learners to put learning at the center of their
every day exercises. A secure learning environment within the classroom guarantees that
everybody has common regard for one another. Hence, learners are able to create a near bond,
back one another, and utilize conscious communication with peers and instructors, which in turn
energizes quality and all-encompassing learning.
Table 4
School Heads’ Efficacy in terms of Creating a Positive and Safe Learning Environment

1. promotes a safe school environment for students
4.76 VH 4.51 VH
which is free from bullying.
2. encourages divisiveness among learners. 2.76 M 2.93 M
3. ensures a learning environment in which learners
4.68 VH 4.58 VH
feel safe.
4. restricts establishing harmonious interaction among
2.71 M 2.88 M
learners.
5. promotes a good teacher-learner relationship. 4.53 VH 4.52 VH
Legend: 4.21 – 5.00 Very High (VH); 3.41 – 4.20 High (H); 2.61 – 3.40 Moderate (M);1.81 – 2.60 Low (L); 1.00 – 1.80 Very Low (VL)
The data on school heads' efficacy in terms of creating a positive and safe learning
environment as regarded by both school heads and teachers. As revealed that the item statement 1
received the highest weighted mean of 4.76 for school heads with a verbal description of “very
high”, while item statement 3 got the highest weighted mean of 4.58 with a verbal description of
“very high.” Meanwhile, for both school heads and teachers, the item statement 4 obtained the
lowest weighted mean scores of 2.71 for school heads and 2.88 for teachers, respectively, with a
ISSN: 2643-9123
verbal description of “moderate.” Furthermore, the overall mean of 3.89 for school heads and 3.88
for teachers. Both received a verbal description of “high.”
Results imply that school heads have a high level of creating a positive and safe learning
environment. This means that the school heads ensure that their schools are protected, have a very
friendly and welcoming environment to all the learners. Also, just as leaders need to ensure
physical safety in schools, they should also proactively work to foster an emotionally safe
environment.
The findings conform with the study of Showers (2019), Through their leadership
philosophies, models, and strategies, principals can either foster or discourage a positive school
climate. Teachers and students are more likely to want to attend class every day when the
environment is welcoming and conducive to learning. The standard of interactions, the character
of the school, environmental elements, safety concerns, the size of the school, and trust and respect
are all aspects that affect the school climate.
Motivating Teachers
Motivating teachers refer to school heads’ ability to encourage his teachers and let them
feel they were empowered. In these ways, they become more committed to teaching and endeavor
to attain school goals.
The information on school heads’ efficacy in terms of motivating teachers as perceived by
both school heads and teachers is presented in Table 5.
Table 5
School Heads’ Efficacy in terms of Motivating Teachers

ISSN: 2643-9123

1. creates enthusiasm and engagement among the
4.62 VH 4.52 VH
teachers.
2. disregards teachers’ needs in teaching and moral
2.15 L 2.10 L
support.
3. motivates the teachers for teaching and instruction. 4.53 VH 4.59 VH
4. pays no attention in terms of his/her teachers’
2.21 L 2.11 L
professional growth.
5. motivates the teachers to commit to the goals. 4.71 VH 4.59 VH
Legend: 4.21 – 5.00 Very High (VH); 3.41 – 4.20 High (H)2.61 – 3.40; Moderate (M)1.81 – 2.60 Low (L); 1.00 – 1.80 Very Low (VL)
In terms of school heads’ assessment on their efficacy, the item statement 5 received the
highest weighted mean of 4.71 for school heads with a verbal description of “very high”, while
item statements 3 and 5 both got the highest weighted mean of 4.59 for teachers with a verbal
description of “very high.” On the other hand, the lowest weighted mean of 2.15 for school heads
and 2.10 for teachers obtained in item number 2 and both received a verbal description of “low.”
The overall mean of 3.64 for school heads with a verbal description of “high” and 3.58 for teachers
with a verbal description of “high.”
The results recommend that like several other work environment, a school incredibly
benefits from the well-being of its laborers. As a result, instructors who feel backed,
acknowledged, and comfortable are bound to be contributed in their work and deliver their best to
realize an effective teaching-learning handle. When the school head takes the time to care almost
keeping up their teachers’ tall resolve, they feel commendable, and thus, they are more likely to
remain centered. It is vital to push the reality that a vital who makes the exertion to cultivate a
collaborative culture and a solid school climate will be on the correct track towards the fulfillment
of instructive objectives.
Similarly, the study's findings of Utomo (2022), revealed that it is known that principals
consistently inspire teachers to raise their professional standards. The principal constantly
ISSN: 2643-9123
encourages them to conduct in-class action research projects, establish scientific journals, build
modules or other teaching materials, and produce new works like making teaching aids and
learning media in accordance with each subject's fundamental abilities.
School heads use motivational techniques for increasing the performance of teachers in the
teaching-learning process. They encourage them to perform their duties devotedly by using
different techniques. From the results found by Chaudhry et al. (2020), data showed significant
difference among factors such as appreciation, recognition, performance appraisal, monetary
benefits and rewards and promotion. It is recommended that school heads offer awards and
incentives to teachers for improving their performance in academic related activities.
Developing a Collective Culture
Developing a collective culture refers to a commitment of school heads to valuing the needs
of teachers and learners rather than their own. Also, one of the main tasks of the school heads in
establishing a positive atmosphere is to contribute to the formation of a strong collective culture.
Table 6
School Heads’ Efficacy in terms of Developing a Collective Culture

1. develops a collective culture in which everyone
4.50 VH 4.37 VH
works to achieve shared goals.
2. establishes a culture in which he/she is the only one
2.21 L 2.30 L
who decides for the goals of the schools
3. develops a culture in which teachers support each
4.59 VH 4.47 VH
other.
4. supports divisiveness among teachers. 2.68 M 2.94 M
5. promotes a shared understanding of what constitutes
4.59 VH 4.49 VH
good teaching.
ISSN: 2643-9123
Legend: 4.21 – 5.00 Very High (VH); 3.41 – 4.20 High (H); 2.61 – 3.40 Moderate (M); 1.81 – 2.60 Low (L); 1.00 – 1.80 Very Low (VL)
The data on school heads' efficacy in terms of developing a collective culture as viewed by
both school heads and teachers. When talking about school heads' evaluation on the level of their
efficacy in terms of developing a collective culture, the item statements 3 and 5 both received the
highest weighted mean of 4.59 for school heads with a verbal description of “very high”, while the
item statement 5 got the highest weighted mean of 4.49 for teachers with a verbal description of
“very high.” Meanwhile, for both school heads and teachers, the item statement 2 obtained the
lowest weighted mean of 2.21 and 2.30, respectively, with a verbal description of “low.” The
overall mean for both school heads and teachers obtained 3.71 with a verbal description of “high.”
Findings highlighted the importance to stress the fact that a principal who makes the effort
to cultivate a collaborative culture and a solid school climate will be on the proper track towards
the achievement of educational goals. Also, school heads who have a high ability in promoting
shared knowledge is what constitutes good teaching.
As cited in Langfeldt (2021), in schools where the culture is characterized as having a high
sense of collective efficacy, students achieve at higher levels. As such, it would be helpful for
school heads to identify what specific leadership behaviors positively impact collective teacher
efficacy.
Furthermore, according to Denis et al. (2012), as cited in Yada and Jappinen (2022), school
personnel and staff work more viably and inventively when they are making a difference and
benefiting others to handle common issues together. Shared authority creates settings in which
numerous people with unmistakable ability collaborate with each other for shared purposes when
they are willing to require charge of authority and obligations.
BEHAVIOR MANAGEMENT OF SCHOOL HEADS

ISSN: 2643-9123
Behavior management among school heads means running the school along the desired
educational policies. It takes into account all aspects of the school policies, material and human
resources, programs, activities, equipment and etc. and integrates them into a fruitful whole. Thus,
this study also evaluated school heads’ behavior management in terms of the following parameters:
human relations, trust/decision making, instructional management, control, and conflict.
The assessments on the abovementioned variables are presented in Tables 7 to 10.
Human Relations
Human relations refer to school heads’ way of fostering pleasant workspace, providing
support, and celebrating successes of teachers. They have the capacity to build strong relationships
to provide a foundation for teachers and students engagement, belonging and ultimately learning.
Table 7
School Heads’ Behavior Management in terms of Human Relations

1. calls teachers by name. 4.00 O 4.04 O
2. uses eye contact. 4.44 A 4.44 A
3. demonstrates a caring attitude. 4.62 A 4.37 A
4. involves me in decisions. 4.47 A 4.41 A
5. interacts with the staff. 4.56 A 4.48 A
6. models good communication skills. 4.44 A 4.40 A
7. provides positive reinforcement. 4.65 A 4.32 A
Overall Mean 4.45 A 4.35 A
Legend: 4.21 – 5.00 Always (A); 3.41 – 4.20 Often (O); 2.61 – 3.40 Sometimes (ST); 1.81 – 2.60 Seldom (S); 1.00 – 1.80 Never (N)
verbal description of “always”, while the item statement 5 got the highest mean of 4.48 for teachers
with a verbal description of “always.” However, for both school heads and teachers, the item
ISSN: 2643-9123
statement 1 obtained the lowest weighted mean of 4.00 and 4.04, respectively, with a verbal
description of “often.” Generally, the overall mean for school heads’ behavior management in
terms of human relations, as assessed by school heads themselves, is 4.45 with a verbal description
of “always.” Moreover, for teachers, the overall mean of 4.35 with a verbal description of
“always.”
The results imply that productivity and motivation can be increased by school heads
through positive social bonds in the workplace and acknowledgement of the teachers as unique
individuals. These results also suggest that strong human relations being demonstrated by school
heads can help recruit and retain quality employees and can give benefits in a streamlined way and
back their fair and equitable treatment. These functions can also enable an organization to build a
reputation as a good place to work.
Armagan et al. (2020), indicated two bases on which human relations are actualized:
sympathetic and political bases. On thoughtful premise, designs of meaning such as developing
having a place, building believe, building inspiration, availability, discussion and therapeutic
approach showed up; be that as it may, on political premise, designs of meaning as
acknowledgment, giving part adjust, surpassing the frame, specialist representation and end of
budgetary needs got to be unmistakable.
Furthermore, Awodiji et al. (2019), stated that building a strong culture of collaboration
and creative problem-solving organization demands instructional leadership qualities that possess
appropriate human relations among all staff in a school for achieving effective teaching and
learning. Their study recommended that training or capacity building programs on human relations
strategy should be organized among school heads.

ISSN: 2643-9123
Trust/Decision Making
Trust and decision making is one of school heads’ most important roles to play in which
they engage daily. The success of a school is critically linked to effective and accurate decisions.
Table 8
School Heads’ Behavior Management in terms of Trust/Decision Making

1. corrects teachers in front of others instead of
2.29 S 2.50 S
privately.
2. gossips about other teachers or administrators. 1.65 N 2.03 S
3. uses coercion to motivate teachers. 1.88 S 2.35 S
4. implements the latest fads without thorough
1.94 S 2.11 S
knowledge.
5. displays a lack of trust. 1.71 S 2.03 S
6. listens to both sides of the story before making a
4.41 A 4.26 A
decision.
7. evaluates situations carefully before taking action. 4.41 A 4.28 A
Overall Mean 2.61 ST 2.70 ST
The item statements 6 and 7 both received the highest weighted mean of 4.41 for school
heads with a verbal description of “always”, while the item statement 7 got the highest weighted
mean of 4.28 for teachers with a verbal description of “always.” On the other hand, for school
heads, the item statement 2 obtained the lowest weighted mean of 1.65 with a verbal description
of “never”, meanwhile the item statements 2 and 5 both got the lowest weighted mean of 2.03 for
teachers with a verbal description of “seldom.” The overall mean for school heads’ assessment on
their level of their behavior management in terms of trust/decision making is 2.61 for school heads
ISSN: 2643-9123
with a verbal description of “sometimes” and 2.70 for the teachers with a verbal description of
“sometimes.”
Findings imply that school heads do careful evaluation of the situations before taking
actions. When there is great trust towards school heads, they are much more likely to work together
with other school stakeholders towards achieving the same ultimate goals. Thus, decision-making
process is done effectively and efficiently.
The results coincide with the study of Siazar (2009), which revealed that there is reason to
believe that a school head, possessing the ability to do a job well, gets the respect and support of
subordinates, is well recognized and respected for one's authority, personality and ability to make
judicious and fair decision.
According to Shaked & Schechter (2018), school principals usually make a significant
number of decisions, in many cases without being able to devote their full attention to all the
relevant information needed for optimal results. Studies revealed that principals’ decision-making
often happens in 'episodic intervals' with nearly half of their time went through on activities lasting
less than 4 minutes.
Moreover, the findings of the study of Aboudahr (2018), uncovered principal rational and
intuitive decision-making styles to have moderate effect on teachers' performance while avoidance
decision making style indicated low effect on teacher performance.
Instructional Management
ISSN: 2643-9123
Instructional management refers to school heads’ behavior such as managing the school
curriculum, demonstrating knowledge on instructional strategies of teachers, providing necessary
feedback for teachers and the like.
Table 9
School Heads’ Behavior Management in terms of Instructional Management

1. frequently interrupts teachers’ teaching. 1.82 S 2.05 S
2. demonstrates a lack of vision. 1.85 S 1.97 S
3. is knowledgeable about the curriculum. 4.50 A 4.21 A
4. is knowledgeable about instructional strategies. 4.41 A 4.36 A
5. shrugs off or devalues a problem or concern. 1.91 S 2.27 S
6. fails to follow up. 2.00 S 2.04 S
7. has rules but does not always enforce them. 2.00 S 2.25 S
The data on school heads’ behavior management in terms of instructional management as
perceived by both school heads and teachers revealed that the item statement 3 received the highest
weighted mean of 4.50 for school heads with a verbal description of “always”, while the item
statement 4 garnered the highest weighted mean of 4.36 for teachers with a verbal description of
“always.” However, for school heads, the item statement 1 got the lowest weighted mean of 1.82
with a verbal description of “seldom”, for teachers, the item statement 2 got the lowest weighted
mean of 1.97 with a verbal description of “seldom.” The overall mean of 2.64 for school heads
with a verbal description of “sometimes” and 2.74 for teachers with a verbal description of
“sometimes.”
ISSN: 2643-9123
Results of the study imply that school heads are always knowledgeable about the
curriculum and the changes to it. The school heads as instructional leader effectively advances
more viable hones within the instructing and learning forms and recognizing guidelines needs
instead of by serving as a school director.
Findings of Leiva et al. (2017), emphasized that instructional management is a priority.
They reported difficulties in materializing this main concern due to lack of autonomy to hire
needed staff, teachers’ sense of professional autonomy, as well as their own lack of experience.
These findings suggested the need for induction programs to support novice principals’ fulfillment
of this strategic priority and to seek necessary support. Also, recommendations on sustainability
of quality instruction in connection to school-based management are further taken into account as
these might likewise influence the teaching and learning process to enhancing the identity of
instructional leadership (Rivera and Ibarra, 2020).
Moreover, agreeing to Brolund (2016), guidelines authority could be a show of school
authority in which a foremost works nearby instructors to grant back and direction in building up
best practices in teaching. They utilize this model of authority to associate with their staff and
together set clear objectives related to students’ accomplishment. In this model, instructors are
backed by the central. The foremost gives coaching and mentoring to those instructors who require
it, as well as proficient improvement openings that permit instructors to investigate best practices
in educating. The objective of instructional administration is for the vital to work closely with
instructors in arrange to extend students’ accomplishment.
Control
ISSN: 2643-9123
Control refers to school heads’ behavior in delegating tasks and assigning duties to their
teachers. It also refers to how the school head controls and manages the day-to-day activities
occurring within the school.
Table 10
School Heads’ Behavior Management in terms of Control

1. is able to keep a confidence. 4.47 A 4.14 O
2. is afraid to question his/her superiors. 3.85 O 3.58 O
3. “passes the buck” rather than dealing with a
1.94 S 2.13 S
situation.
4. has double standards. 1.97 S 2.26 S
5. partial to influential parents. 2.24 S 2.20 S
6. shows favoritism to some teachers. 2.00 S 2.37 S
7. supports teachers even if they are wrong. 1.88 S 1.94 S
When dealing with school heads’ assessment of their behavior management in terms of
control revealed that the item statement 1 received the highest weighted mean of 4.47 for school
heads with a verbal description of “always”, for teachers, the item statement 1 got the highest mean
of 4.14 with a verbal description of “often.” On the other hand, in the item statement 7 obtained
the lowest weighted mean of 1.88 for school heads with a verbal description of “seldom”, while
for teachers the item statement 7 got the lowest weighted mean of 1.94 with a verbal description
of “seldom.” Moreover, for school heads, the overall mean of 2.62 with a verbal interpretation of
“sometimes”, for teachers, the overall mean of 2.66 with a verbal description of “sometimes.”
From these results, it can be inferred that school heads are always able to keep confidence.
They knew how to demonstrate assurance, certainty, and sufficiency in the nature of their work,
ISSN: 2643-9123
duties and responsibilities as the leader of the school. They must take full authority and control of
the entire school to keep it organized.
School administrators, as according to Ayeni and Akinfolari (2014), are agents of change
who have a significant impact on the educational environment through their ways for
disseminating information, forging enabling social bonds, taking part in mentoring initiatives, and
encouraging advancement.
Furthermore, Sunaengsih et al. (2019), stressed out that school's scope could be optimized
for its function as an educational institution that carried out economic, humanitarian, social,
political, cultural, and educational functions, the principal who implemented effective school
management had the potential to produce a young generation of high achievers. The principal's
leadership in making decisions, communicating, guiding and developing the staff, addressing
problems, and reviewing school activities was one factor that might promote the implementation
of good school management. Results of their study revealed that one of the key elements in
establishing efficient school administration in terms of technology, school culture, information
systems, and organizations was the principal's leadership.
Conflict
Conflict refers to school heads’ behavior when encountering problems and conflicts
concerning their teachers. Conflict management by school heads is the process of identifying,
addressing, and resolving disputes or disagreements which may involve teachers, learners, parents
and other school staff.

ISSN: 2643-9123
Table 11
School Heads’ Behavior Management in terms of Conflict

1. expects work to be done “yesterday” with no notice. 1.85 S 2.11 S
2. delegates responsibility. 4.24 A 4.12 O
3. assigns duty during planning period. 4.12 O 4.15 O
4. is rigid and inflexible. 2.09 S 2.56 S
5. assigns too much paperwork. 3.12 ST 3.29 ST
6. overemphasizes control. 3.15 ST 3.14 ST
7. uses the words “I” and “My” too frequently. 3.00 ST 3.21 ST
verbal description of “always”, for teachers the item statement 3 got the highest weighted mean of
4.15 with a verbal description of “often.” On the other hand, for school heads, the item statement
1 obtained the lowest weighted mean of 1.85 with a verbal description of “seldom”, while the item
statement 1 got the lowest weighted mean of 2.11 for teachers with a verbal description of
“seldom.” Moreover, the overall mean for school heads’ behavior management in terms of conflict
as assessed by the school heads themselves, is 3.08 with a verbal description of “sometimes” and
3.23 for teachers with a verbal description of “sometimes.”
The findings have an implication that school heads must be capable of mastering and
conditions that arise in schools must be effectively controlled, with the principal serving as a
manager. The principal's abilities and skills will influence the conditions and situations of conflict
in schools, changing them from being energy-positive, which can increase the productivity of all
the components and improve the quality of education, to being energy-negative, which can affect
performance and create unsettling conditions between the students.

ISSN: 2643-9123
It conforms with results of the study of Kayanda and Tangi (2022), stressed out that the
head of school could resolve disputes by working with the school board, refraining from showing
bias, allocating resources fairly, ignoring conflict, or collaborating. Conflict in this situation is
unavoidable. However, there are ways to deal with the difficulties that arise while handling conflict
in secondary schools.
Moreover, due to each person's drive to put in the most effort and excel at school
management tasks, competition between individuals is an inevitable part of educational settings.
Competition can result in confrontations, which the principal as a figurehead in the school must
intelligently handle. Conflicts can also result from expectations in the school that are out of step
with the reality of the situation. The ability to direct and make the best decisions in resolving a
disagreement that arises in the school is an essential part of the principal's responsibility as a leader.
To improve the school, the principal must be able to comprehend and use conflict management
techniques to turn disagreement in the building into an energy (Dewi & Saputra, 2019).
Furthermore, Dantis (2012) showed that the conflict management styles of every school
head were the same. Likewise, the types of conflict encountered by all school heads were
statistically equal.
Difference between the Assessments of the Respondents on School Heads’ Efficacy
Data presented in Table 12 show the results of the t-test analysis on the respondents’
assessments on school heads’ efficacy.
Table 12
t-test Analysis on the Difference between the Assessments of the Respondents on School Heads’
Efficacy
ISSN: 2643-9123
Mean
Mean
School Heads’ Efficacy School t-value p-value
Teachers Diff.
Heads
developing goals 4.31 4.16 0.15 0.47ns 0.65
guiding teachers 3.75 3.72 0.03 0.04ns 0.97
creating a positive and safe learning
3.89 3.88 0.01 0.01ns 0.99
environment
motivating teachers 3.64 3.58 0.06 0.07ns 0.94
developing a collective culture 3.71 3.71 0.00 0.00ns 1.00
Legend: ns = not significant (p>0.05)
The results presented that there was a very small difference on the mean scores computed
in both school heads and teachers’ assessments on the efficacy of school heads such as 0.15 for
developing goals, 0.03 for guiding teachers, 0.01 for creating a positive and safe learning
environment, 0.06 for motivating teachers, and 0.00 for developing a collective culture.
Likewise, there was no significant difference on the assessments of both school heads and
teachers on the efficacy of the school heads in terms of all the indicated variables such as
developing goals, guiding teachers, creating a positive and safe learning environment, motivating
teachers and developing a collective culture since the computed t-values of 0.47, 0.04, 0.01, 0.07
and 0.00 are relatively smaller and correspond to the following p-values such as 0.65, 0.97, 0.99,
0.94 and 1.00, respectively, which are all higher than 0.05 alpha or level of significance.
Thus, the null hypothesis which stated that there is no significant difference in school
heads’ efficacy as assessed by the school heads and teachers, is accepted.
In the study of Skaalvik (2020), results stated that teachers’ motivation is adversely
correlated with principal’s self-efficacy. This relationship was mediated by both emotional
engagement and weariness. Self-efficacy for inspiring teachers was the aspect of instructional
leadership that was most closely linked to emotional tiredness and involvement. Self-efficacy for
ISSN: 2643-9123
fostering a supportive and secure learning environment for the students was the factor with the
weakest correlation to these variables.
Difference between the Assessments of the Respondents on School Heads’ Behavior
Management
The results of the t-test analysis on the respondents’ assessments on school heads’ behavior
management
Table 13
t-test Analysis on the Difference between the Assessments of the Respondents on School Heads’
Behavior Management
Mean
School Heads’ Behavior Mean
School t-value p-value
Management Teachers Diff.
Heads
human relations 4.45 4.35 0.10 1.04ns 0.32
trust/decision making 2.61 2.70 -0.09 -0.30ns 0.77
instructional management 2.64 2.74 -0.10 -0.15ns 0.88
Control 2.62 2.66 -0.04 -0.08ns 0.94
Conflict 3.08 3.23 -0.15 -0.33ns 0.75
Legend: ns = not significant (p>0.05)
The results presented in Table 13, there was a very small difference on the mean scores
computed in both school heads and teachers’ assessments as regards to school heads’ behavior
ISSN: 2643-9123
management such as 0.10 for human relations, -0.09 for trust/decision making, -0.10 for
instructional management, -0.04 for control, and -0.15 for conflict.
Meanwhile, there was no significant difference on the assessments of both school heads
and teachers on the behavior management of the school heads in terms of all the indicated variables
such as human relations, trust/decision making, instructional management, control, and conflict
since the computed t-values of 1.04, -0.30, -0.15, -0.08 and -0.33 are relatively smaller and
correspond to the following p-values such as 0.32, 0.77, 0.88, 0.94 and 0.75, respectively, which
are all higher than 0.05 alpha or level of significance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis which stated that there is no significant difference in school
heads’ behavior management as assessed by the school heads and teachers, is accepted.
In consonance to the study of Kiral and Suçiçegi (2017), the perceptions of teachers and
the instructional leadership behaviors of school principals were found to be positively and
moderately significantly correlated across all categories including behavioral management.
Teachers had a positive overall perception of the instructional leadership style displayed by school
principals; Their emotive commitment to their studies is strong, and this perception is average in
the other categories of instructional leaderships and commitment.
During the conducted interview, the researcher asked to identify the behavior management
strengths and weaknesses of school head. The respondents answered, when dealing with school
heads’ behavior management strengths, five of respondents stated that their school heads are
inspiring, role model, strategic and fair. On the other hand, it is interesting to note that the three
teacher-respondents did not mention any single weakness of their school heads. One respondent
further explained that his school head immediately turns his flaws into strengths.
ISSN: 2643-9123
Relationship between School Heads’ Efficacy and Behavior Management
The main findings of the study are presented based on the results of the correlation analysis
between school heads’ efficacy and behavior management.
Before performing the correlation analysis, reverse coding was employed to those
statements which are expressed in the negative form.
Table 14
Correlation Analysis on the Relationship between School Heads’ Efficacy and Behavior
Management
School Heads’ Behavior Management

School Heads’
human trust/decision instructional
Efficacy control conflict
relations making management
developing goals 0.338* 0.254ns 0.288ns 0.027ns 0.393*
(0.049) (0.157) (0.099) (0.880) (0.021)
guiding teachers 0.231ns 0.051ns 0.361* 0.141ns 0.107ns
(0.189) (0.772) (0.036) (0.427) (0.547)
creating a positive and
0.328* 0.165ns 0.392* 0.110ns 0.227ns
safe learning
(0.050) (0.349) (0.022) (0.535) (0.198)
environment
motivating teachers 0.326ns 0.239ns 0.392* 0.120ns 0.269ns
(0.060) (0.274) (0.022) (0.498) (0.124)
developing a collective 0.305ns 0.087ns 0.346* 0.060ns 0.303ns
culture (0.079) (0.626) (0.045) (0.738) (0.081)
Legend: * = significant (p≤0.05) Numbers in the upper entry are correlation values (r-values); ns = not significant (p>0.05) Numbers inside the
parentheses are probability values (p-values)
ISSN: 2643-9123
From the results school heads’ efficacy in terms of developing goals had a significant
relationship with their behavior management in terms human relations and conflict since the p –
values of 0.049 and 0.021, respectively, are lower than 0.05 level of significance. Also, guiding
teachers had a significant relationship with instructional management (p=0.036), creating a
positive and safe learning environment with instructional management (p=0.022), motivating
teachers with instructional management (p=0.022), and developing a collective culture with
instructional management (p=0.045).
All the computed r values are expressed in positive, therefore the relationship is in a
positive direction in which when the independent variable increases, the dependent variable also
increases. Thus, when the school heads’ efficacy increases or levels up, behavior management also
increases.
Since all the parameters of school heads’ efficacy had significant relationship with certain
parameter of their behavior management, the null hypothesis of the study which states that there
is no significant relationship between school heads’ efficacy and behavior management, is
rejected.
The results conform to those findings of Montague-Davis (2017), which reported that
school heads play a significant role in fostering the development of schools as learning
organizations, since principal leadership practices determine the effectiveness of learning
organizations as well as teacher perceptions of leader effectiveness. Therefore, the school head, as
a spearhead in the school, has a very important and strategic function and responsibility in
improving the quality of education in the school. Also, the role of the principal can be described
as one of organizational and management responsibilities, such as responsibility for the school
economy, facilities, schedule, and personnel (Hallinger et al., 2018).

ISSN: 2643-9123
Moreover, according to Kempa et al. (2017), effective principals can further improve
cooperative efforts and preserve an ideal working climate in schools.
In the conducted interview, teachers’ views were asked in terms of the extent to which they
attest the connection of their school heads’ efficacy on behavior management, interview
participants responded that they observe it in a great extent. They mentioned that their school heads
are efficient enough in performing their duties and responsibilities which make them easier to
manage the situations in school and address the needs of both teachers and learners.
Moreover, when dealing about the importance of school head’s efficacy on managing
behavior, respondents said that the school gets to be well-managed. They also become motivated
and encouraged to work well because the actions of their school heads reflect on them. It was also
noted that school heads’ efficacy affects the decision-making positively and that there is a growing
mindset of fostering camaraderie and cooperation between and among the school staff.
Program of Activities Crafted based on the Results of the Study
This program of activities was crafted based on the findings of the study on the assessments
on both school heads’ efficacy and behavior management. In terms of school heads’ efficacy, the
area that needs to be improved is “Motivating Teachers”. The classroom and teaching-learning
process are more effective when teachers are motivated. A successful classroom and better
learning outcomes depend on an engaged teacher. Motivation energizes people, helps them focus,
and helps them maintain good conduct over time. Meanwhile, in terms of school heads’ behavior
management, it was found that the area which needs to be improved is “Control”. Improving the
area of control management among school heads is indeed necessary as it speaks to how school
ISSN: 2643-9123
administrators treat their subordinates while providing them jobs and responsibilities. It also refers
to the way the principal oversees and coordinates the regular operations of the school.
The proposed intervention program focuses on fostering school heads’ motivational
leadership and control management practices that would serve as avenue towards achieving
holistic efficacy and behavior management necessary for meeting the needs and objectives of the
school.
The proposed program of activities and those underlying it such as objectives, timelines,
persons involved and expected outputs were all indicated below. Proposed programs include
Project APPLAUSE (Appreciation of Personnel’s Performance and LeAders’ UnselfiSh Efforts)
and Project ARMIE (Advanced and Responsible Management In Education).
Table 15
Proposed Program of Activities based on the Results of the Study
Proposed Objectives Timeline Persons Expected

Programs Involved Output
Project To motivate teachers August-June School Improved

APPLAUSE to perform well, School Year Heads attendance and
receiving awards and 2023-2024 active
(Applause of recognition for their Teachers participation in
Personnel’s commendable school
Performance performance. programs and
and projects
LeAders’
UnselfiSh
Efforts)
Project To develop school August-June School Improved

ARMIE heads’ self-control School Year Heads control
towards advance, 2023-2024 behavioral
(Advanced and responsible ways in Teachers management of
Responsible managing education. school heads
Management Parents that promotes
In the welfare of
Education) Learners teachers,
ISSN: 2643-9123
learners and
parents
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the summary of the major findings; the conclusions arrived at based
on the findings, and the recommendations given in accordance with the conclusions drawn.
Findings
This study was examined to determine the relationship between school heads’ efficacy and
behavior management at public elementary schools in North, East and West Districts in Candaba,
Pampanga during the School Year 2022-2023.
From the procedure stated in the preceding chapter, the answers to the problems raised in
this study were ascertained and summarized as follows: Findings revealed that school heads have
high level of efficacy as assessed by themselves and the teachers in terms of guiding teachers,
creating a positive and safe learning environment, motivating teachers, and developing a collective
culture. Meanwhile, school heads assessed themselves as very high in terms of developing goals
while high for teachers’ assessment.

ISSN: 2643-9123
In terms of respondents’ assessment on school heads’ behavior management, they always
observe school heads as managing human relations. Meanwhile, they sometimes observe school
heads’ behavior management in terms of trust/decision making, instructional management,
control, and conflict.
There was no significant difference on the assessments of both school heads and teachers
on the efficacy of the school heads in terms of all the indicated variables such as developing goals,
guiding teachers, creating a positive and safe learning environment, motivating teachers and
developing a collective culture. Likewise, there was no significant difference on the evaluation of
both school heads and teachers on the behavior management of the school heads in terms of all the
indicated variables such as human relations, trust/decision making, instructional management,
control, and conflict.
Generally, school heads’ efficacy had a significant relationship with their behavior
management.
School heads’ efficacy on their behavior management was observed in a great extent and
that they perform their duties and responsibilities well. The identified school heads’ strengths are
inspiring, role model, strategic and fair while there was no mentioned weakness. Lastly, teachers
perceived their school heads’ efficacy as essential in managing behavior.
Program of activities was crafted based on the results of the study on the assessments on
both school heads’ efficacy and behavior management. Proposed programs include Project
APPLAUSE (Appreciation of Personnel’s Performance and LeAders’ UnselfiSh Efforts) and
Project ARMIE (Advanced and Responsible Management In Education).

ISSN: 2643-9123
Conclusions
Based on the hypothesis of the study, the following conclusions were drawn: School heads’
level of efficacy are all high which denotes that the belief in their capabilities as a school head to
perform various roles is evidently observed.
Meanwhile, school heads’ behavior management in terms of human relations is very
evident while other parameters are sometimes observed.
There was no significant difference in the assessment of two groups of respondents on
school heads’ efficacy. There was also no significant difference in the assessments on school
heads’ behavior management.
There was a significant relationship between school heads' efficacy and behavior
management. Thus, null hypothesis is rejected.
Furthermore, a number of insights about the connection between school heads’ efficacy
and behavior management were uncovered.
Moreover, the need for a program of activities was realized based on the results of the study
on the assessments on both school heads’ efficacy and behavior management. Thus, a program of
activities was crafted.

ISSN: 2643-9123
Recommendations
Considering the findings and conclusions of the study, the following recommendations are
hereby offered:
1. School heads may maintain a high level of efficacy to perform their duties effectively
and efficiently.
2. School administrators may further strengthen their behavior management to achieve
the institutional goals and objectives and to foster good relationship with other school’s
stakeholders with shared vision.
3. Teachers who aspire to be school heads may venture into seminars and programs that
aim to develop leadership skills and practices.
4. School heads may consider and implement the proposed program of activities that
focused on the weak areas found in the study to promote improvement in school
leadership and management.
5. Future researchers may conduct further studies that would focus on examining
relationship with school heads’ efficacy and behavior management to contribute to
more comprehensive body of knowledge on educational leadership and management.

ISSN: 2643-9123
REFERENCES
Aboudahr, S. M. F. M. (2018). Analysis of principals’ decision-making styles on teachers’

performance in selected secondary schools of Gharbia Governorate, Egypt. In Analysis of
principals’ decision-making styles on teachers’ performance in selected secondary schools
of Gharbia Governorate, Egypt: Shorouk Mohamed Farag Mohamed Aboudahr.
Agasisti, T., Falzetti, P., & Soncin, M. (2020). School principals’ managerial behaviours and
students’ achievement: An empirical analysis of Italian middle schools. International
Journal of Educational Management, 34(5), 937–951.
Anselmus Dami, Z., Budi Wiyono, B., Imron, A., Burhanuddin, B., Supriyanto, A., & Daliman,
M. (2022). Principal self-efficacy for instructional leadership in the perspective of principal
strengthening training: work engagement, job satisfaction and motivation to leave. Cogent
Education, 9(1), 2064407.
Armagan, Y., Öz, M., & Sever, M. (2020). School Principals and Human Relations= Okul Müdürü
ve Insani Iliskiler. Educational Administration: Theory & Practice, 26(1), 1-58.
Awodiji, O. A., Etejere, P. A., Oluwalola, F. K., Eniola-arigbe, Y., Fawale, A. A., & Ololo, K. O.
(2019). Principals' human relation strategies and Teachers' Job performance in Secondary
Schools in Patigi Local Government Area of Kwara State. The African Journal of
Behavioural and Scale Development Research, 1(1).
Ayeni, A. J., & Akinfolari, C. A. (2014). Assessing Principals’ Coordinating and Controlling
Strategies for Effective Teaching and Quality Learning Outcome in Secondary Schools in
Ondo State, Nigeria. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational
Research, 7(1).
Baluyos, E., Rivera, H. & Baluyos, G. (2019). School Heads' Leadership Behavior as Predictor
of Teachers' Classroom Management Skills. Retrieved from:
https://www.ieeesem.com/researchpaper/school_heads_leadership_behavior_as_predictor
_of_teachers_classroom_management_skills.pdf
Bandura, A. (1991). Social Cognitive Theory of Self-Regulation. Organizational Behavior and

Human Decision Processes, 50, 248-287.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
ISSN: 2643-9123
Brolund, L. (2016). Student Success through Instructional Leadership. BU Journal of Graduate

Studies in education, 8(2), 42-45.
Bulach, C., Boothe, D., & Pickett, W. (2006). Analyzing the Leadership Behavior of School
Principals. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 1(1), n1.
Burhanuddin & Aspland, T. (2016). The Principal as a Team Leader with a Vision for Improving
School Effectiveness. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 6(1): 8-14.
Butler, R., & Shibaz, L. (2019). For worse more than better. School principal influences on
teachers’ achievement goals and instruction. Symposium paper presented at the EARLI
conference in Aachen in August 2019.
Chaudhry, A. Q., Munawar, S., & Sittar, K. (2020). Role of Principals' Motivational Strategies
and Performance of Elementary Schools Teachers Regarding their Academic
Qualification. Journal of Elementary Education, 29(2), 109-120.
Constantia, C., Christos, P., Glykeria, R., Anastasia, A.-R., and Aikaterini, V. (2021). The impact
of COVID-19 on the educational process: the role of the school principal. J. Educ.
2021:220574211032588. doi: 10.1177/00220574211032588
Creswell, J. W. (2018). Quality Inquiry Research Design: Choosing among five Approaches. Sage
Pblications
Cruz, G. Q. (2016). Leadership Behavior and Conflict Management of Principals on Teachers’

Performance. p1
Dahlkamp, S., Peters, M., Schumacher, G. (2017). Principal Self-Efficacy, School Climate, and
Teacher Retention: A Multi-level Analysis. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 63(4),
357-376
Dantis, R. V. (2012). Conflict Management Styles of Schools Adminidtrators on Leadership
Effectiveness. vii
De Guzman, S. (2018). Self-Efficacy Civic Responsibility, and Critical Thinking Dispositions on
Pupils’ Leadership Skills. A Master’s Thesis.
Dewi, K. F., & Saputra, B. R. (2019). Role of the Head of School in Conflict Management in the
Industrial 4.0 Revolution. In The 4th International Conference on Education and
Management (COEMA 2019) (pp. 123-126). Atlantis Press.
Domenech, F., Abellan-Rosello, L. and Gomez-Artiga, A. (2017). Self-Efficacy, Satisfaction, and
Academic Achievement: The Mediator Role of Students' Expectancy-Value Beliefs.
ISSN: 2643-9123
Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5513915/on March 27,

2022. Google Scholar
Duda, J. L., & Appleton, P. R. (2016). Empowering and disempowering coaching climates:
Conceptualization, measurement considerations, and intervention implications. In Sport
and exercise psychology research (pp. 373-388). Academic Press.
Edo, B., Nwosu, I., and Uba, N. (2019). Principals' Application of Education Law in the
Management of Secondary Schools in Rivers State. Int. J. Innov. Legal Polit. Stud. 7, 28–
34. Available online at: http://seahipaj.org/journals-ci/mar-2019/IJILPS/full/IJILPS-M-3-
2019.pdf
Encanto, C. M. (2021). Supervisory Functions of School Heads and Barriers in Developing
Teachers’ Performance. International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 3(4): 65-72.
DOI: 10.54476/iimrj206.
English, C. (2018). The language of leadership. English Journal, 107(4), 33-38. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2018571280?accountid = 149218.
Escobin, M. R., Yazon, A. D., Tan, C. S., Bandoy, M. M., & Buenvinida, L. P. (2022). A Mixed
Study on the School Head’s and Teacher’s Self-Efficacy and School Performance: An Input
for Policy Enhancement for Social Media Learning in the Philippines during the New
Normal. International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary
School Education, 4(2), 177–201. https://doi.org/10.31098/ijtaese.v4i2.1088
Ezell, R. K. (2020). A Comparison Study of Teacher Efficacy and Principal Leadership Behaviors
at the Elementary and Middle School Levels. Gardner-Webb University.
Guoyan, S., Khaskheli, A., Raza, S. A., Khan, K. A., & Hakim, F. (2021). Teachers’ self-efficacy,
mental well-being and continuance commitment of using learning management system
during COVID-19 pandemic: a comparative study of Pakistan and Malaysia. Interactive
Learning Environments, 1-23.
Hallinger, P. & Liu, S. (2018). Principal Instructional Leadership, Teacher Self-Efficacy, and
Teacher Professional Learning in China: Testing a Mediated-Effects Model. Educational
Administration Quarterly 54 (4), 501-528
Hennink, M., & Kaiser, B. N. (2021). Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A
systematic review of empirical tests. Social Science & Medicine, 114523.
Hoffart, A. (2017). Reference Module in Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Psychology. Retrieved
from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/self-efficacy-theory.
Hesbol, K. A. (2019). Principal Self-Efficacy and Learning Organizations: Influencing School
Improvement. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, v14 n1, p33-51
Hussain, L., Atta, M. A., Khan, Z., Bakhsh, K., & Sibtain, M. (2021). Role of the Principal in
Improving Teachers Professional Development (TPD). Elementary Education Online,
20(5), 7860-7860.
ISSN: 2643-9123
Ismail, S. N., Don, Y., Husin, F., & Khalid, R. (2018). Instructional Leadership and Teachers'
Functional Competency across the 21st Century Learning. International Journal of
Instruction, 11(3), 135-152.
Kassim, N. A., Baharuddin, K., & Khalib, L. H. (2018). Organizational Culture and Leadership
as Factors of Organizational Learning Capabilities. International Journal of Academic
Research in Progressive Education and Development, 7(3), 268–277.
Kayanda, K., & Tangi, F. (2022). Methods used by Head of Schools in Managing Conflict in
Improving Teachers Morale in Public Secondary Schools in Chato District in Tanzania.
International Journal of Humanities and Education Development (IJHED), 4(6), 1-7.
Kempa, R., Ulorlo, M., & Wenno, I. H. (2017). Effectiveness Leadership of Principal.
International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 6(4), 306-311.
Kiral, E., & Suçiçegi, A. (2017). The Relationship between Teachers' Perception of School
Principals' Instructional Leadership and Organizational Commitment Level. International
Journal of Psycho-Educational Sciences, 6(1), 95-109.
LaMorte, W. W. (2016). The social cognitive theory. Boston University School of Public Health.
Retrieved from http://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/MPH-
Modules/SB/BehavioralChangeTheories/BehavioralChangeTheories5.html
Langfeldt, J. (2021). Principals' Empowering Leadership Behaviors and Collective Teacher
Efficacy, What's the Relationship. University of Nebraska at Omaha ProQuest
Dissertations Publishing.
Leiva, M. V., Montecinos, C., Ahumada, L., Campos, F., & Guerra, S. (2017). Novice principals’
instructional management practices in high poverty, low performing schools in Chile.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 237, 3-9.
Lemoine, P. A., McCormack, T. J., & Richardson, M. D. (2018). Planning strategies to fill
principal vacancies: The issues and some choices. Educational Planning, 25(1), 17-28.
Liebowitz, D. D., & Porter, L. (2019). The effect of principal behaviors on student, teacher, and
school outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review
of Educational Research, 89(5), 785-827.
Litvinov, A., Alvarez, B., Long, C., & Walker, T. (2018). 10 Challenges facing public education
today. NEA Today. http://neatoday.org/2018/08/03/10-challengesfacing-public-education-
today/
Lovell, C. W. (2009). Principal efficacy: An investigation of school principals' sense of efficacy
and indicators of school effectiveness.
Maqbool, S., Ismail, S. A. M. B. M., Maqbool, S., & Zubair, M. (2019). Principals’ Behaviour
and Teachers’ Performance at Secondary Schools in Rural Area of Pakistan. International
Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 9(1).
ISSN: 2643-9123
Montague-Davis, C. (2017). Elementary Principals and Teachers: Prerception Alignment of

Leadership Behaviors. Gardner-Webb University ProQuest Dissertation Publishng,
1082011.
Massengill Jr, D. R. (2018). An Analysis of the Relationship Between Principal Self-Efficacy and
Collective Staff Efficacy in a Rural North Carolina School System. Gardner-Webb
University.
Meyer, F., Sinnema, C., & Patuawa, J. (2019). Novice principals setting goals for school
improvement in New Zealand. School Leadership & Management, 39(2), 198-221.
Rivera, P. A. P., & Ibarra, F. P. (2020). The Extent of Principals’ Empowerment and Their
Functions towards Management of Public Elementary Schools. Indonesian Research
Journal in Education| IRJE|, 188-203.
Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2021). Self-efficacy and human motivation. In Advances in
motivation science (Vol. 8, pp. 153-179). Elsevier.
Shaked, H., & Schechter, C. (2018). Exploring Systems Thinking in School Principals’ Decision
Making. International Journal of Leadership in Education.
Showers, S. C. (2019). Building a Positive School Climate: What Principals have Done to Effect
Change, an Ethnographic Case Study. The University of Nebraska-Lincoln ProQuest
Dissertations, 1389863
Siazar, L. P. (2009). Managerial and Supervisory Skills of School Administrators in Technical
Vocational Schools in Bulacan, Impact to Teachers Instructional Effectiveness. (3)
Skaalvik, C. (2020). School principal self-efficacy for instructional leadership: relations with
engagement, emotional exhaustion and motivation to quit. Social Psychology of Education,
23(2), 479-498.
Sunaengsih, C., Anggarani, M., Amalia, M., Nurfatmala, S., & Naelin, S. D. (2019, April).
Principal Leadership in the Implementation of Effective School Management. In
Elementary School Forum (Mimbar Sekolah Dasar) (Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 79-91). Indonesia
University of Education. Jl. Mayor Abdurachman No. 211, Sumedang, Jawa Barat, 45322,
Indonesia. Web site: https://ejournal. upi. edu/index. php/mimbar/index.
Tschanne-Moran, M. & Gareis, C. R. (2004). Principals’ Sense of Efficacy: Assessing a Promising
Construct. Journal of Educational Administration 42 (5), 573-585
Utomo, S. (2022). Leadership Role of School Principles to Motivate Teachers Promotion at Public
Junior High School 4 Kudus in 2021. ANP Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 3,
30-39.
Westberry, L. A. & Hornor, T. (2022). A Comparison of Principal and School Counselor Self-
Efficacy During the Pandemic: Lessons to Be Learned. Journal of Educational Leadership
in Action: Vol. 8: Iss. 2, Article 6, 6
ISSN: 2643-9123
Weiner, J.M. and Holder, S. (2018). Why lead? Using narrative to explore the motivations of those
aspiring to be principals in high needs schools. International Journal of Leadership in
Education, 22 (5), 555-572.
Xie, Z., Wu, R., Liu, H., & Liu, J. (2022). How does teacher-perceived principal leadership affect
teacher self-efficacy between different teaching experiences through collaboration in
China? A multilevel structural equation model analysis based on threshold. Frontiers in
Psychology, 5159.
Yada, T., & Jappinen, A. K. (2022). Principals’ Perceptions about Collective Competences in
Shared Leadership Contexts. Teaching and Teacher Education: Leadership and
Professional Development, 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tatelp.2022.100012.

School Heads' Efficacy On Behavior Management Authored By: Armielyn B. Advincula

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

School Heads' Efficacy On Behavior Management Authored By: Armielyn B. Advincula

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Academic and Pedagogical Research (IJAPR)

SCHOOL HEADS’ EFFICACY ON BEHAVIOR MANAGEMENT

provide quality basic education.

management responsibilities, such as responsibility for the school economy, facilities,

schedule, and personnel (Hallinger et al., 2018).

of others in the educational enterprise.

In addition, many studies focus on teacher self-efficacy wherein research evidence

leadership. Because of the importance and increased accountability for instructional

leadership, self-efficacy for instructional leadership has been proven to be predictive of a

principal’s emotional wellbeing and motivation.

Consequently, due to varying individual levels of self-efficacy, setbacks in

accomplishing tasks related to a particular work do happen. As an individual reflects on

outcomes of students at secondary schools (Domenech et al., 2017).

paramount. Generally, teachers who possess self-confidence in teaching and instruction

fostering the development of schools as learning organizations, since principal leadership

practices determine the effectiveness of learning organizations as well as teacher

perceptions of leader effectiveness. Likewise, having a strong instructional leader that

Likewise, the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic created a radical change in

teaching-learning in schools worldwide. This occurrence challenged the self-efficacy of

performance. In contrast, the challenges linked with self-efficacy in terms of educational

management, instructional leadership, moral leadership, and application of social media

learning tools were all significantly correlated with school performance.

Self–efficacy is known to be significantly vital in teachers' commitment to their

Philippine education system’s transformation, both teachers’ self-efficacy and

of innovation, exchange of information to understudies, keeping up coordination,

prerequisites. School authorities ought to consider updating approaches on work force

considered in a proposed suggestion to the Division of Instruction, Philippines, for

arrangement improvement. (Escobin et. al, 2022).

their self-efficacy (Darmody & Smyth 2016 as cited in Skaalvik, 2020).

Furthermore, as cited by Westberry and Hornor (2022) in their study, principals

a positive correlation to the collective self-efficacy of a school. This collective self-efficacy

influence on motivation, and thereby contribute to leadership vacancies (Lemoine, et al.,

A school speaks to a complex bureaucratic administrative organization with

actualize teacher-related exercises (Edo et al., 2019).

Furthermore, Maqbool et al. (2019) investigated the effects of school heads’

teachers’ performance. According to (Kassim et al., 2018), leaders should involve

As cited by Massengill (2018), an ever-increasing body of research has shown that

principal self-efficacy has a direct correlation to school effectiveness. More recently,

research is emerging that seeks to determine the impact of principal self-efficacy on

dealing with teacher efficacy or principal efficacy alone.

Besides, agreeing to Hesbol (2019), one key characteristic of high-performing

make strides understudy execution.

In addition, Republic Act 9155 moreover known as Governance of Basic Education

assessment, and enforcing student discipline.

management at public elementary schools in three districts in Candaba Pampanga such as

North, East and West.

Statement of the Problem

Candaba, Pampanga during the School Year 2022-2023.

Specifically, this research sought answers to the following questions:

described in terms of:

1.1 developing goals;

1.2 guiding teachers;

1.3 creating a positive and safe learning environment ;

1.4 motivating teachers; and

1.5 developing a collective culture?

2. How may the behavior management of school heads as assessed by themselves

and teachers be described in terms of:

2.1 human relations;

2.2 trust/decision making;

2.3 instructional management;

2.4 control; and

3. Is there a significant difference on the school heads’ efficacy as assessed by the

school heads and teachers?