TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE OF SCHOOL HEAD AND
COLLECTIVE EFFICACY OF TEACHERS
A Research Paper
Presented to the
DIVISION RESEARCH MANAGEMENT TEAM
Division of Davao del Norte
ESTER M. BAÑEZ
Researcher
Pantaron Elementary School
2019
Research Objectives
The main purpose of the study is to determine which domain in the
transformational leadership style of public elementary school heads significantly
influences teachers’ collective efficacy. More specifically, this sought to answer the
following questions:
1. To describe the level of Principals’ Transformational Leadership in public
elementary schools in terms of:
1.1 setting directions;
1.2 developing people; and
1.3 redesigning the organization.
2. To describe the level of Teachers’ Collective Efficacy in public elementary
schools in terms of:
2.1 general competence; and
2.2 task analysis.
3. To determine the significant relationship between Principals’ Transformational
Leadership Style and Teachers’ Collective Efficacy.
4. To determine the significant influence of Principals’ Transformational
Leadership on Teachers’ Collective Efficacy in the public elementary schools.
5. To determine what new knowledge can be generated from the findings of the
study?
Hypotheses
The study will test the null hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance.
1.
There is no significant relationship between principals’ transformational
leadership and teachers’ collective efficacy;
2.
Principals’ transformational leadership do not significantly influence
teachers’ collective efficacy of public elementary schools.
Independent Variable
Transformational
Leadership of School
Heads
Dependent Variable
Collective Efficacy of
Teachers
-Setting Direction
-General Competence
-Developing People
-Task Analysis
-Establishing School Goals
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework Showing the Variable of the Study
APPROVAL SHEET
This Research Paper entitled, “TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE OF
SCHOOL HEAD AND COLLECTIVE EFFICACY OF TEACHERS”, prepared and
submitted by Ester Mella-Bańez, a Teacher III of Pantaron Elementary School, Sto.
Tomas East District, Davao del Norte Division has been examined and is hereby
recommended for oral examination, approval and acceptance.
GRACE SANTA T. DACLAN, Ed. D.
Adviser
PANEL OF EXAMINERS
APPROVED by the Panel of Examiners on Oral Examination
LOLITA P. ANDAMON, C.E, Ph. D.
Chairman
Assistant Schools Division Superintendent
EVELYN GRACE H. LABASAN
Member
Education Program Supervisor
MARLON G. EBRADO
Member
Public School District Supervisor
LIEZYL J. MOQUIA
Member
Education Program Supervisor
ACCEPTANCE
The Research Paper is hereby approved and accepted.
JOSEPHINE L. FADUL, Ed. D.
Schools Division Superintendent
June 2019
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The endeavor in making a research paper has been a personal challenge that has
led me to reflect professionally on the ways in which educators examine the process of
educating children. Additionally, the journey has compelled me to appreciate and aspire
to scholarly pursuits that have the potential of influencing educational practice and
ultimately evolving the academic chase of school children. I have long admired the
teaching profession and those who accept the challenges associated with classroom
instruction and school leadership. For me, it remains the only profession wherein one has
the rare opportunity to inspire another person each and every day.
The intricate journey through the making of this research paper has been
collectively shared by a continual support, encouragement and love from those whom I
owe a great deal of gratitude. I now understand, as I was often told, it really was not about
the destination as it was the journey. I did not know the joys and sorrows this journey
would entail, but through it all, the journey has made me a stronger, wiser and more
reflective person than I ever knew was possible. I am so grateful and would like to
acknowledge and thank the following individuals below for such reasons:
~ I must begin by thanking my Tatay…Crisostomo Alvior Mella though you are in
heaven already “Tatay” your legacy remains in the family, you had taught us the
fundamental value of a good education and modeled an unceasing work ethics that has
been instilled in me and it helps a lot for me to persuade and accomplish this study.
~ To my Nanay Letecia Cagunda Mella, you often believed in me more than
I believed in myself and for that I will always be grateful. The strong belief of you in my
ability and capacity has been one of the driving force that counts so much in making these
things possible. Thank you for your confidence, trust and unconditional love Nanay.
~ To my son Rolester Json M. Bañez and twin daughters Rester Jezzle M. Bañez
& Rester Jazzle M. Bañez – who are also educators of the 21st century learners like me,
I am so thankful for your understanding and encouragement all the way on our journey in
this life. You are the inspiration for all of these things I do. Without the three of you, this
research work would have likely remained an unfulfilled goal.
~ To my granddaughter Lovelee Narzille M. Vargas and Melody Joy D. Bañez, to
my grandsons Lester John D. Bañez, Lester Jay D. Bañez, and Rolester Json D. Bañez
Jr., all of you are the comforters: the hugs, kisses and joys you have filled my heart during
the countless hours of solitude necessary for completing conducting a research study are
very much appreciated. I deeply love you all and continue to feel that the greatest honor
of my life remains the opportunity to be your Papa and Mamitas’ mother and also a
grandmother of you.
~ I am also incredibly grateful to my superior Julie M. Famisaran Jr. and cocollegues in Pantaron Elementary School namely; Regina C. Argallon, Maria Nelly T.
Quidato, Alma S. Rafol, Victoria G. Mondragon, Charina S. Matunding, Margie A. Alsado,
Georgie R. Pacure, Jobelle S. Dela Cruz, Eldean A. Calope, Joy F. Lucero, Neilowen M.
Palces, Rosalie C. Pabillaran, Ma. Fe O. Rafols and Jocelyn B. Mulato. The enduring
words of inspiration were a source of reassurance throughout this entire process. Thank
you for the laughter and tears, joys and sorrows, and a lifetime of memories. I am forever
thankful for all the conversations and support this group provided.
~ To the subject of the research instrument, the teacher-respondents from public
elementary schools of Sto. Tomas East District of Davao del Norte Division and to the
school heads/principals of the respondents’ respective schools, whose the researcher
hereby say that, without their consent and cooperation, the study would not have been
made possible.
~ To the former District Supervisor Dr. Benny E. Batoon for allowing the researcher
to conduct the survey in his respective district.
~ I would like to thank so much those who spent hours consoling, reading, and
advising me at various steps throughout the process. I am particularly grateful to my
advisor who provided ongoing support and counsel during my moments of uncertainty.
Thank you so much Dr. Ver Emata, for always offering advice and commiseration when I
needed it, you knew when to push and when to listen. This research paper is a testament
to your never-ending commitment to help others realize their full potential and your
contribution to this achievement is very much appreciated.
I am also especially thankful to the following committee chair;
~ Dr. Grace Santa H. Daclan, my committee member, thank you for your attention
to the details and for insisting that I have a clear understanding of every part of my
research. I am so grateful for your persistence and patience.
~Dr. Grace Santa H. Daclan, my committee member, thank you for your neverending support, guidance and insight. Your belief in the importance of the study inspired
me to continue to push forward and to believe it can make a difference.
~Dr. Grace Santa H. Daclan, thank you for you have worked tirelessly to ensure
that I will have appropriate guidance and support to keep me on track throughout the
ever-winding road to this achievement.
~Dr. Grace Santa H. Daclan, thank you for the contributions and countless hours
examining my statistical data and challenging me to fully comprehend the ramifications
of research methodology. It has been a long journey, and I consider myself extremely
fortunate to have been led by such competent panelist.
~ Lastly, my highest praise and thanksgiving to the Heavenly Father, the ultimate
source of wisdom which this research paper can potentially impact the future of our
nation's greatest resource, the TEACHERS. Thank you for the strength and blessings for
without YOU pouring it nothing is done and accomplished.
"Go confidently in the direction of your dreams.
Live the life you have imagined."
~Henry David Thoreau
ECMB
NAME:
ESTER M. BAŇEZ
TITLE:
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE OF SCHOOL
HEAD AND COLLECTIVE EFFICACY OF TEACHERS
ABSTRACT
The concept of interest in this study were exploring four variables, the Transformational
Leadership, the first independent variable of the study described in the Leithwood’s model
as a form of principal leadership that moves individuals toward a level of commitment to
achieve school goals by setting direction, developing people and redesigning the
organization. Instructional Leadership, the second independent variable as defined in
Hallinger's Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale, with the ten dimensions
which are: framing the school goals, communicate the school goals, supervise and
evaluate instruction, coordinate the curriculum, monitor student progress, protect
instructional time, maintain high visibility, provide incentives for teachers, promote
professional development and provide incentives for learning. Servant Leadership, the
third independent variable a phrase that was first coined by Robert Greenleaf believing
that a servant leader is one, who from a leadership position, wants to serve others. The
four constructs of the instrument include agapao love, vision, empowerment, and humility.
Collective Teacher Efficacy, is the dependent variable of the study espoused by Albert
Bandura through Social Cognitive Theory through teachers’ general competence and task
analysis. The main purpose of the study was to determine the significant relationship and
significant influence of transformational, instructional and servant leadership styles of
principals on collective efficacy of public elementary school teachers in Sto. Tomas East
District. In order to understand the influence of principals’ leadership styles on teachers'
collective efficacy, research methods were employed. The first quantitative phase
involved a survey administered. Descriptive correlation method was used as research
design and four (4) sets of questionnaires administered in gathering the data; one for
teachers’ evaluation of the principal on their transformational leadership, instructional
leadership, servant leadership and another one for the collective efficacy in the different
aspect of teachers’ efficacy employing the five-point Likert Scale. Utilizing the statistical
tools such as; mean in answer to sub-problems 1 & 2, percentile in determining the
number of teacher-respondents actually responded and regression in the investigation
that answer sub-problem no. 3. There were 158 teacher-respondents selected randomly
from 14 elementary public schools in Sto. Tomas East District, Division of Davao del Norte
that participated in the study which was computed through Slovin’s Formula from the total
population of 263 public elementary school teachers regardless of their positions and
tenure of teaching S.Y. 2018-2019. In this study we tested a model hypothesizing that
principals contribute to student achievement indirectly through teachers’ collective
efficacy. Path analysis of data from 158 public elementary schools supported this
hypothesis. Schools with higher levels of transformational leadership had higher
collective teacher efficacy, greater teacher commitment to school mission,
school community, and school-community partnerships, and higher student achievement.
Increasing the transformational leadership practices in schools makes a small but
practically important contribution to overall student achievement. Principal
leadership behaviors promoting instructional and curriculum improvement were linked
to achievement.
School principals
have
a
small
to
moderate influence on student achievement ; however, this influence is largely indirect
via the behaviors, beliefs, knowledge, practices, and competencies of their teachers. A
promising
contribution
is
the
examination
of
the
indirect
relation
between instructional leadership practices
and
student achievement via
the efficacy beliefs of teachers. The reason for this optimism is the notion that
teacher efficacy beliefs
correlate
with
student achievement
and instructional leadership practices correlate with teacher efficacy beliefs. However,
only
a
handful
of
studies
have
examined
the influence of instructional leadership practices on the efficacy beliefs of teachers.
ABSTRACT
The main purpose of the study was to determine the significant relationship and significant
influence of the leadership styles (transformational leadership, instructional leadership
and servant leadership) of principals on the readiness (collective efficacy) of public
elementary school teachers in Sto. Tomas East District, Division of Davao del Norte. The
study was to test the null hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance that here was no
significant relationship between principals’ transformational leadership and teachers’
readiness (collective efficacy); principals’ instructional leadership and teachers’ readiness
(collective efficacy); and principals’ servant leadership and teachers’ readiness (collective
efficacy). Principals’ transformational leadership, instructional leadership and servant
leadership did not significantly influence readiness (collective efficacy) of public
elementary schools in Davao del Norte. Descriptive correlation method was used
employing the five-point Likert Scale. There were 158 teacher-respondents selected
randomly from fourteen (14) public schools of Sto. Tomas East District that participated
in the study which was computed through Slovin’s Formula from the total population of
263 public elementary school teachers regardless of their positions and tenure of teaching
S.Y. 2018-2019.
In this study, tested a model hypothesizing that principals contribute to student
achievement indirectly through teachers’ readiness (collective efficacy). Path analysis of
data from 158 public elementary schools supported this hypothesis. Schools with higher
levels of transformational leadership had higher collective teacher efficacy, greater
teacher commitment to school mission, school community, and school -community
partnerships, and higher student achievement. This statewide study examined the
relationships between principal transformational, instructional and servant leadership and
collective teacher efficacy in public elementary schools. Differences in teachers’
collective efficacy were found when schools were grouped according to principal
leadership factors. Principal leadership behaviors promoting instructional and curriculum
improvement were linked to achievement. Within transformational leadership, the
principal’s ability to identify a vision and provide an appropriate model had the greatest
relationship to achievement. Principal Educational level also positively correlated with
each leadership factor. School principals have a small to moderate influence on student
achievement; however, this influence is largely indirect via the behaviors, beliefs,
knowledge, practices, and competencies of their teachers. Despite a growing number of
studies examining the indirect influence of school principals on student achievement there
is still much to know concerning the practices school principals use to influence student
achievement and how teachers mediate this influence. A promising contribution is the
examination of the indirect relation between instructional leadership practices and student
achievement via the efficacy beliefs of teachers. The reason for this optimism is the notion
that teacher efficacy beliefs correlate with student achievement and instructional
leadership practices correlate with teacher efficacy beliefs.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE
i
APPROVAL SHEET
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
iii
ABSTRACT
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
x
LIST OF TABLES
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
xv
DEDICATION
xvi
Chapter
1
2
Page
INTRODUCTION
Rationale
1
Research Objective
4
Hypotheses
5
Review of Related Literature
5
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
32
Significance of the Study
34
Definition of Terms
35
METHOD
37
Research Design
37
Research Locale
38
Population Sample
41
Research Instrument
45
Data Collection
46
Statistical Tools
3 RESULTS
47
48
Level of Principals’ Transformational Leadership
in terms of Setting Directions
48
Level of Principals’ Transformational Leadership
in terms of Developing People
48
Level of Principals’ Transformational Leadership
in terms of Redesigning the Organization
48
Summary on the Level of Principals’
Transformational Leadership
49
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
Terms of Framing the School Goals
50
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
Terms of Communicating the School
Goals
50
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
Terms of Supervising and Evaluating
Instruction
50
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
Terms of Coordinate the Curriculum
50
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
Terms of Monitoring Student Progress
50
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
Terms of Protecting Instructional Time
50
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership
in Terms of Maintaining High Visibility
50
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership
in Terms of Providing Incentives for
Teachers
50
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership
in Terms of Promoting Promotional
Development
50
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership
in Terms of Providing Incentives for
Learning
50
Summary on the Level of Principals’
Instructional Leadership
51
Level of Principals’ Servant Leadership
In Terms of Agapao Love
53
Level of Principals’ Servant Leadership
In Terms of Vision
55
Level of Principals’ Servant Leadership
In Terms of Empowerment
57
Level of Principals’ Servant Leadership
In Terms of Humility
57
Summary on the Level of Principals
Servant Leadership
59
Level of Teachers’ Collective Efficacy
in Terms of General Competence
62
Level of Teachers’ Collective Efficacy
in Terms of Task Analysis
64
Summary on the Level of Teachers’
Collective Efficacy
66
The Significance of the Relationship between
Principals Transformational Leadership
to Teachers’ Collective Efficacy
83
The Significance of the Relationship between
Principals’ Instructional Leadership
to Teachers’ Collective Efficacy
84
The Significance of the Relationship between
Servant Leadership of Principals
to Teachers’ Collective Efficacy
85
The Significance of the Influence of Principals’
Transformational Leadership, Instructional
Leadership and Servant Leadership
to Teachers’ Collective Efficacy
4
DISCUSSIONS
86
90
Interpretations
91
Conclusions
93
Recommendations
93
REFERENCES
96
APPENDICES
102
A.
Letter to the Validators
103
B.
Experts Validation Sheet for Research
Questionnaires
108
C.
Experts Summary Rating and Comments
113
D.
Researchers’ Letter Request to the Dean
for an Endorsement to the Regional
Director of Region XI
115
E.
F.
G.
H.
Endorsement Letter from the Regional Director
to the Schools Division Superintendents
of Region XI
117
Researchers’ Letter Requesting Permission to
the Schools Division Superintendent
of Davao del Norte
119
Researchers’ Letter Requesting Permission to
the Public School District Supervisor
of Sto. Tomas East District
121
Researchers’ Letter Requesting Permission to
the Public Elementary School Principals
of Sto. Tomas East District
125
I.
J.
K.
L.
E.
F.
G.
H.
Researchers’ Certificate of Appearance Signed
by Public Elementary School Principals
of Sto. Tomas East District
129
Pictorials on the Conduct and Administration
of the Research Instruments
137
Questionnaire on Principal’s Transformational Leadership
(Teachers Evaluation of the Principal)
141
Questionnaire on Principal’s Instructional Leadership
(Teachers Evaluation of the Principal)
141
Questionnaire on Principals Servant Leadership
(Teachers Evaluation of the Principal)
145
Questionnaire on Teacher’s Collective Efficacy
(Evaluation of the Teachers on Self Efficacy)
147
Reliability Test Result for Principals’ Transformational
Leadership, Instructional Leadership and
Principals Servant Leadership and
Teachers’ Collective Efficacy
153
Editors’ Certification
160
CURRICULUM VITAE
162
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1
Frequency Distribution of Respondents by Schools
40
2
Level of Principals’ Transformational Leadership
in terms of Setting Directions
50
Level of Principals’ Transformational Leadership
in terms of Developing People
52
Level of Principals’ Transformational Leadership
in terms of Redesigning Organizations
54
Summary on the Level of Principals’
Transformational Leadership
56
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
terms of Framing the School Goals
58
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
terms of Communicating the School
Goals
61
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
terms of Supervising and Evaluating
School Goals
63
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
terms of Coordinating the Curriculum
64
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
terms of Monitoring Students Progress
66
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
terms of Protecting Instructional Time
66
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
terms of Maintaining High Visibility
67
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
terms of Providing Incentives for
Teachers
68
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
terms of Promoting Professional
Development
69
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in
terms of Promoting Professional
Development
70
Level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership
in terms of Providing Incentives
for Learning
71
Summary on the Level of Principals’ Instructional
Leadership
72
Level of Principals’ Servant Leadership in
terms of Agapao Love
73
Level of Principals’ Servant Leadership in
terms of Vision
74
Level of Principals’ Servant Leadership in
terms of Empowerment
75
Level of Principals’ Servant Leadership in
terms of Humility
76
Summary on the Level of Principals’ Servant
Leadership
77
23
Level of Teachers’ Collective Efficacy
77
24
Summary on the Level of Teachers’ Collective
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Efficacy
25
26
27
28
80
Significance of the Relationship between Principals’
Transformational Leadership on Teachers’
Collective Efficacy
81
Significance of the Relationship between Principals’
Instructional Leadership on Teachers’
Collective Efficacy
86
Significance of the Relationship between Principals’
Servant Leadership on Teachers’ Collective
Efficacy
87
Significance of the Influence of Principals’
Transformational, Instructional Leadership and
Servant Leadership on Teachers’ Collective
Efficacy
88
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1
2
3
4
5
Page
A Model Showing Direct Causal Relationship
of Transformational Leadership, Instructional
Leadership and Servant Leadership on
Collective Teacher’s Efficacy
32
A Model Showing Direct Causal Relationship
of Transformational Leadership and Servant
Leadership and the Indirect Effect of Servant
Leadership through mediating influence of
Instructional Leadership and on Collective
Teacher’s Efficacy
33
A Model Showing the Correlation between
Transformational Leadership and Servant
Leadership and its Direct Causal Relationship
to Collective Teacher’s Efficacy
34
A Model Showing Causal Relationship of
Servant Leadership to Collective Teachers’
Efficacy
35
A Model Showing Causal Relationship of
Transformational Leadership to Collective
Teacher’s Efficacy
36
DEDICATION
It is my honor to dedicate this study,
to all Educators
who believe on the impact of school principal leadership styles
as an effective contributory
factors on collective teachers’ efficacy in the field
of teaching the 21st century education.
To my affirmative son who followed my footstep as an educator,
Rolester Json M. Bańez
Altruistic twin daughters,
Rester Jezzle M. Bańez & Rester Jazzle M. Bańez
To my lovely granddaughter
Lovelee Narzelle,
And sweet grandsons
Lester John, Lester Jay and Rolester Json Jr.,
To my loving
Nanay Letty, brothers and sisters, nieces and nephews…
All of you, are my greatest joy and inspiration in doing this.
Having you all in my life exceedingly surpasses all other events.
Your love has made all the difference in my educational journey.
Lastly, to the Almighty God, my Creator and Savior,
giver of an unconditional love, divine protection,
over flowing blessings and guidance
where I am truly blessed as an individual.
Father GOD, for YOU be the glory to all of th
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Rationale
Commitment in the organization leads to a more fruitful undertaking for teachers
put their hearts in setting and realizing their goals. It is a virtue which drives the teachers
to engage into more meaningful tasks that would transform the organization into a better
home to live on. However, there are instances that employees cannot even render
overtime, loaf around and are tardy in reporting and submitting reports which affect the
flow of the functions of the organization. These are manifestations of the low level of
commitment among employees (Hanges, 2011; Harris, , & Hopkins, 2006; Christensen,
2010).
In California, there is a crisis in leadership in recent years, the school districts are
struggling to attract and retain an adequate supply of highly qualified candidates for
leadership role. One study in America found that majority of the principals was rated as
ineffective by their teachers. This reflects that there is a big discrepancy between what
the principals are and how they perceived by the teachers (Hunter- Boykin and Evans,
1995; Davis et al., 2005;)
In the Philippines, school heads’ leadership is facing numerous barriers. Slowly it
is losing its impact and effectiveness and administrators are getting less respect due to
lack of leadership styles, which is one of the factors needed as the key to the success of
the school. One of the identified problem is the lack of effective leadership among school
principals like clarifying the task, providing guidance and coaching, providing moral
support, and giving compliment to a job well done were less. As a result, coordination,
camaraderie and relationship between them and their teachers are affected. She added
that school heads as a leader in a school must be aware of communication dimension. In
the same way, communication flow and processes would also affect the development of
the institution. Communication must in line with the quality of information to be shared. (
Forbes, 2012)
The
researcher_____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________,
thus, the need to conduct this study.
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Rationale
Today, the success of every school organization can often hinge upon the ability
to create teams that effectively work interdependently to accomplish tasks. One key
predictor of effective group performance is how people perceive their capability to achieve
goals. The collective confidence in their capability, their collective efficacy belief,
influences group motivation and resilience. In this aspect, teachers and principal are at
the foundation of every successful school organization. Successful schools can be
defined as having vision, leadership, high academic standards, standards of the heart,
family, school, and community partnerships, professional development, and evidence of
success (Thomas, 2015; Malally, 2016).
In New York, some researchers drew attention to the dearth of collective teacher
efficacy, noting that although there are some findings from collective teacher efficacy
studies have been compelling, the research conducted was limited. To that end,
commentators have looked for an increase in studies examining how teachers’ collective
efficacy beliefs influence student and teacher outcomes. Researchers labeled teachers’
collective efficacy as a “neglected construct” in educational research a reason to called
for further research examining the links between teachers’ collective efficacy and schools
achievement stated in Curry, (2015).
In public schools nationally, studies in leadership styles have been found in
schools of management and education. A review of literature regarding general
leadership theory indicated that there were many different philosophies and viewpoints
concerning what qualifications were needed to determine leadership skills. Much of the
literature for this research focused on the notion that traditional managers of organizations
have been lacking in terms of long term sustainable organizational success. Studies have
showed the importance of a principal’s role in school reform and staff development
programs. Leadership development programs has gained the attention of many educators
and researchers. Establishing a positive relationship between principals and their
teachers is a very important strategy in educational leadership Elzahiri, (2010).
In some point of view in the local setting, in order for school districts to achieve
higher levels of success required by school boards and their constituents, leaders must
be selected to be more than managers. The principal’s role is of paramount importance
in influencing teachers to excel but this issue has not been extensively explored instead
it has been said that school leaders often ignore the emotional aspects of school climates,
such as the passionate commitment and motivation necessary for effective teaching and
learning.
In today’s climate of accountability and standards, the prevailing educational
policies have aligned teacher motivation with teacher performance while neglecting the
negative consequences of poor working conditions on teacher efficacy. Teacher burnout
and attrition have been attributed to inadequate organizational support factors and
teacher efficacy. In addition, results of the previously mentioned Teaching and Learning
Survey indicated dichotomous perceptions of adequate working conditions between
teachers and administrators. Thus, a reasonable expectation of organizational inputs may
not align effectively with teacher-outcome accountability requirements (Breen, 2013;
Evans, 2016; Kinsler, 2017).
Meanwhile, the school administrators can exert an influence over school collective
efficacy however, leadership mechanisms to improve school collective efficacy remain
unclear. The current research study is an investigation of the potential influence of
perceived school administrator leadership styles in support to the organization for
collective teacher efficacy (Fancera, 2009; Breen 2013).
The schools are social organizations whereby participants’ well-being and
accomplishments are influenced by group interactions described as collective efficacy,
“an emergent organizational property” that reflects the capability judgments of a collective
system. But unfortunately, most research internationally has focused on teachers’ selfefficacy, few studies have explored the collective teacher efficacy as an intervention for
closing achievement gaps in schools (Breen, 2013; Malally, 2016).
The need for further research was a recommendation for in some literature, it can
be read that a stronger an organization’s collective efficacy beliefs, the more likely its
members are to exert the sustained effort and persistence required to attain desired
goals. High levels of perceived collective efficacy are associated with a robust sense of
purpose that helps groups see setbacks as temporary obstacles to be overcome rather
than evidence confirming their inefficacy. Numerous studies discovered, collective
teacher efficacy as an important factor in predicting higher academic achievement, it is
also associated with increased rates of parent involvement, increased school
organization, teacher innovation, teacher collaboration, reduced suspensions and
dropout rates across elementary and secondary schools. “Schools in which staff
members collectively judge themselves capable of promoting academic success imbue
their schools with a positive atmosphere for development that promotes academic
attainments
regardless
of
whether
they serve
predominantly advantaged
or
disadvantaged students’” quoted in Malally, (2016).
Recognizing the important of collective teachers’ efficacy, the researcher made a
thorough review of related literature and found out in a numerous studies conducted by
Demir (2008) that the school principals’ leadership styles are able to predict 35% of the
collective efficacy of the teachers in accordance with teachers’ perceptions. Furthermore,
it was concluded that school principals’ leadership styles had the power to explain the
collective efficacy of the teachers at a positive and medium level. In this study, Kurt (2009)
found that school administrators’ transformational, instructional and servant leadership
styles significantly predicted the collective efficacy of the teachers. Thus principal’s
leadership is needed for the teachers to feel that they belong to the school and for their
work environment to be at a desirable level.
Previous research has found that leadership contributes to teacher collective
capacity, there are also some studies related to features of principals in schools.
However, no previous study has examined the mechanisms through which this influence
occurs. According to a study done by Evangelista (N.D.) the importance of teacher
efficacy in the academic setting cannot be discounted. Thus, the influence of leadership
on teacher’s self-efficacy in an organization has strengthened previous studies on
teachers’ self-efficacy and leadership but on her recommendation she added that it would
be best to include the collective teacher efficacy to test its effectiveness in an organization
and the leadership skills of school managers. The above mentioned problem, the
researcher has found it necessary to conduct a study investigating the leadership
potentials of school heads and readiness of teachers on collective efficacy. The
researcher recognized the need to examine the existing potential leadership skills of
school heads in relation to effectiveness of collaborative efforts of teachers in pursuit to
organizational and academic success. Since there are studies about teacher efficacy but
only limited researches on their collective efficacy.
LEADERSHIP STYLE OF SCHOOL HEAD AND READINESS OF TEACHERS IN
STO. TOMAS EAST DISTRICT
Research Objectives
The main purpose of the study is to determine which domain in the leadership style
of public elementary school heads significantly influences the readiness of teachers. More
specifically, this sought to answer the following questions:
6. To describe the level of Principals’ Transformational Leadership in public
elementary schools in terms of:
6.1 setting directions;
6.2 developing people; and
6.3 redesigning the organization.
7. To evaluate the level of Principals’ Instructional Leadership in public
elementary schools in terms of:
7.1 framing the school goals;
7.2 communicate the school goals;
7.3 supervise and evaluate instruction;
7.4 coordinate the curriculum;
7.5 monitor student progress;
7.6 protect instructional time;
7.7 maintain high visibility;
7.8 provide incentives for teachers;
7.9 promote professional development; and
7.10 provide incentives for learning.
8. To assess the level of Principals Servant Leadership in public elementary
schools in terms of:
3. 1 agapao love;
3.2 vision;
3.3 empowerment; and
3.4 humility.
9. To ascertain the Collective Teachers’ Efficacy in public elementary schools in
terms of:
9.1 general competence; and
9.2 task analysis.
10. To determine the significant relationship between:
10.1
principals’ transformational leadership and teachers’ collective
efficacy;
10.2
principals’ instructional leadership and teachers’ collective efficacy;
and
10.3
servant leadership and teacher’ collective efficacy.
11. To determine the significance of the combined and singular influence of
Principals’ Transformational Leadership, Instructional Leadership and Servant
Leadership on Teachers’ Collective Efficacy in the public elementary schools.
Hypotheses
The study will test the null hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance.
1.
There is no significant relationship between:
1.1 principals’ transformational leadership and teachers’ collective efficacy;
1.2 principals’ instructional leadership and teachers’ collective efficacy; and
1.3 principals’ servant leadership and teachers’ collective efficacy.
2.
Principals’ transformational leadership, instructional leadership and servant
leadership of school principals do not significantly influence teachers’
collective efficacy of public elementary schools in Sto. Tomas East District.
Conceptual Framework
Figure 1 shows the schematic diagram of the study. The independent and
dependent variables of the study. There are three independent variables and one
dependent variable. The first independent variable which is the transformational
leadership has the following indicators: setting directions, developing people and
redesigning
the
organization.
___________________ (
The
above
indicators
were
taken
from
). The second independent variable is that of
__________________ (
) the instructional leadership of school heads which has the
following indicators: frame the school goals, communicate the school goals, supervise
and evaluate Instruction, coordinate the curriculum, monitor student progress, protect
instructional time, maintain high visibility, provide incentives for teachers, promote
professional development, and provide incentives for learning. And the third independent
variable were taken from Sashkin & Rosenbach (2013) which is the servant leadership
that has the following indicators: agapao love, vision, coordinated teamwork, customer
orientation and cultural strength.
The dependent variable is the teachers’ collective efficacy. (Ross and Gray (2000)
postulated that leadership would contribute to teacher commitment to organization values
exclusively through collective teacher efficacy thus forming the following two indicators:
analysis of the teaching task and assessment of teaching competence.
Independent Variable
Dependent Variable
Leadership Style of
School Heads
Readiness of Teachers
Transformational
Collective Efficacy
Leadership
Instructional Leadership
Servant Leadership
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework Showing the Variable of the Study
Significance of the Study
The result of this study provides references for DepEd officials to lay bundles of
memorandums and programs in educational planning and evaluation concerning the
leadership styles of the school heads. The results of the study provide references of the
school administrators concerning the style of school heads and readiness of teachers that
would assist them to have reasonable decision in clarifying objectives and learning
activities in school; defining role of persons working in schools and guiding the selection
of learning strategies and tactics in the school climate. The findings of the study enable
the teachers to identify their primary role as teacher and the data gathered in this study
may serve as basis in engaging in any school’s initiatives to improve the teaching
practices in the school.
Furthermore, the results of the study may eventually benefit the students since this
study is conducted to evaluate the importance of path-goal leadership style of school
heads and readiness of teachers in making instructional decision in favor to the
progressive development of the learners.
The findings of the study may help the
researcher in his/her endeavor to become a school head and in managing one’s
leadership style that is essential in the realization of effective school
Definition of Terms
In a desire to have a clear understanding on the terms used in the study the
following terms are defined conceptually and operationally:
Leadership style of School Heads. The term refers to the school heads’ adopting
a particular style of behavior to match the needs to the subordinate and the situation in
which the subordinate is working (Martin, 2012). In the study, the term refers to the
leadership style that a leader should perform that can affect the performance, satisfaction,
and motivation of a group with indicators such as supportive leadership; directive
leadership; participative leadership; and achievement-oriented leadership.
Readiness of Teachers. This refers to the deep concern of the teachers in the
organization that they are in which are measured in terms of affective commitment,
continuance commitment and normative commitment.
Chapter 2
METHOD
Included in this chapter are the research design, research locale, population and
sample, research Instrument, data collection, and statistical tools following the
assessment of communication dimension and path goal leadership of school heads in
Sto. Tomas East District.
Presented in this chapter will be the discuss method and procedures that will be
use by the researcher in the conduct of the study: the research design where the plan or
strategy used in investigating the research objectives, the research respondents or
subjects that gives information whom, how many and where the research study was
specifically conducted, the research instruments that describes the justification of the
instruments being used and the information of its reliability and validity, the data gathering
procedure which describes the step-by-step implementation of the study design and how
it was conducted and executed and the data analysis tools or statistical tools used in
analyzing the data gathered.
Research Design
In this study the researcher will utilize the non-experimental quantitative research
design employing the correlational and regression technique in order to determine the
level of transformational, instructional and servant leadership of school principals and
collective teacher efficacy of public elementary schools in Division of Davao del Norte
and to find out which among the indicators of transformational, instructional and servant
leadership of school principals affect collective teachers’ efficacy. In this study, the
variables will not in any way be manipulated. The data will simply be observed, and from
the data, relationships of independent and dependent variables will be checked and
interpreted to see if there will be emerging trends and patterns. Furthermore, the
correlation technique will be used to describe the statistical association between two or
more variables. Hence the researcher examined the interrelationship between the four
variables.
The researcher needs to consider possible alternative explanations, to jointly
analyze several variables, and to present conclusions without making definitive causal
statements. This includes published studies that will be incorporated into the discussion
to facilitate understanding (Belli, 2008).
In addition, by using this method the researcher cannot control or manipulate the
variables either because the variables already occurred or because it is not possible for
it to be influenced. Non experimental research design includes descriptive, comparative,
correlation and causal-comparative research (McMillan, 2004).
Non-experimental quantitative research is an important area of research for
educators because there are so many important but non manipulable independent
variables needing further study in the field of education, (Johnson, 2001). This is
appropriate for the present study for it deals with the communication dimension and path
goal leadership of school heads in Sto. Tomas East District in Division of Davao del Norte.
Its purpose is to describe existing characteristics such as achievement, attitudes,
behavior, and relationships.
Research Locale
Slovens Formula .
Stratefied random sampling was employed in the selection of sample (n) of the
study. Inclusion of fourteen (14) public elementary schools in whole Sto. Tomas East
District of Davao del Norte Division with a population (N) Two hundred seventy nine (279)
where three (3) are deployed school heads and eleven (11) are designated principals and
a total number of two hundred sixty three (263) 21st century teachers of today. Among
these numbers of teaching force in Sto. Tomas East District of Davao del Norte Division,
two hundred sixty three (263) were chosen as samples to answer the research
instruments for the leadership styles of principals which are bases of this study on the
collective teacher efficacy of elementary teachers of Sto. Tomas East District.
Sto. Tomas East District is located in Davao del Norte, Philippines specifically in
the Island of Mindanao Region XI wherein Tagum City is the nearest city of the location.
Attached below is the Davao del Norte Map in bigger size and the one in smaller size
inserted is the map of Municipality of Sto. Tomas composing two districts, the Sto. Tomas
West and Sto Tomas East respectively which the focus of the study conducted.
Population and Sample
These research studies were intended to public elementary teachers of Sto.
Tomas East District, Division of Davao del Norte. These teacher-respondents were
coming from the fourteen (14) public elementary schools of Apitong ES, Balisong ES,
Casig-ang ES, Esperanza ES, Jesus Lumain ES, Kimamon ES, Kinamayan ES, La
Libertad ES, Lunga-og ES, Nafco Central ES, Pantaron ES, Salvacion ES, San Miguel
ES, and Talomo ES year 2018-2019.
In the selection of such respondents, the researcher opted to use the Stratified
Random Sampling method in which the sample proportions are made to be the same as
the population proportions on the stratification variable (Johson and Christensen, 2008).
Specifically, proportional stratified sampling using simple random sampling and ______
_____________________ is the stratification variable chosen. Using this kind of sampling
technique follows steps wherein after defining the population (N) and choosing the
relevant stratification (___________________) there is a need to divide the number of
the stratum by its population to get its percentage. Secondly, to get the exact number of
sample (n) needed in the study, is the identifying of the desired sample size and out of it
multiply the result percentage in every stratum (________________). Lastly, the exact
number of sample among the __________________ population have to be randomly
picked.
The respondents for transformational, instructional and servant leadership
influence of principals in making a difference and the teachers’ collective efficacy were
randomly selected from Sto. Tomas East District of Davao del Norte Division with fourteen
(14) public elementary schools managed by three (3) school heads/teacher in-charge and
eleven (11) designated principals with a teaching force of two hundred sixty three (263)
nationally paid elementary teachers.
The questionnaire was administered to find the level of leadership styles of public
elementary school principals and teachers’ collective efficacy in the said district,
purposely to gather the important data pertinent to the study.
The table 1 below shows the distribution of respondents using proportionate
stratified sampling. The total population composed of two hundred sixty three (263)
teachers. Out of two hundred sixty three (263) teachers in the total population, 263 were
randomly picked as the sample proportionate to the population that responds and gave
the information needed.
Table 1
Frequency Distribution of Respondents by Schools
Name
Population (N)
Of
of
Number
Percentage
Elementary Schools
Public
of Respondents
in
Elementary
(n)
Sto. Tomas
Teachers
Surveyed
1. Apitong ES
8
5
2. Balisong ES
8
5
3. Casig-ang ES
15
9
4. Esperanza ES
13
8
5. Jesus Lumain ES
11
7
6. Kimamon ES
34
20
7. Kinamayan ES
27
16
8. La Libertad ES
21
13
9. Lunga-og ES
28
17
10. Nafco ES
32
19
11. Pantaron ES
15
9
12. Salvacion ES
24
14
13. San Miguel ES
14
9
14. Talomo ES
13
8
263
158
East District
Total:
Research Instruments
The instrument used in this study has four parts, the first part deals with the
transformational leadership of principals with indicators such as:1) setting directions, 2)
developing people, 3) redesigning organization which were patterned from the source,
Leithwood, Jantzi & Steinbach, (1999).
The second part of the instrument deals with the instructional leadership of
principals with indicators such as:1) framing the school, 2) communicate the school goals,
3) supervise and evaluate instruction, 4) coordinate the curriculum, 5) monitor student
progress, 6) protect instructional time, 7) maintain high visibility, 8) provide incentives for
teachers, 9) promote professional development, 10) provide incentives for learning.
These were developed by Hallinger, (1982).
The third part is on the servant leadership style with indicators such as: 1) agapao
love; 2) vision; 3) empowerment; and 4) humility. These were adapted from the source,
Dennis (2004).
The fourth part of the instrument deals with the collective efficacy of teachers with
indicators such as:1) general competence and b) task analysis. These were adopted and
was modified from Goddard and Hoy (2003).
Thus, four sets of questionnaires were used in gathering the data from the
teachers-respondents. The first instrument is a questionnaire for the first part the
principals’ transformational leadership which is constructed in a single set as teachers’
evaluation of the principals. Another set of questionnaire is on the principals’ instructional
leadership of the principals which is constructed in another single set as teachers’
evaluation of the principals’ leadership. The third part of the instrument deals with the
servant leadership style and the fourth part is on the collective efficacy of teachers.
The construction and development of these questionnaires was made involving
the following proceedings: 1) scrutiny of various materials namely, books, journals,
magazines and mostly on related literatures from which the researcher based the items;
2) making of first and second drafts of the desired questionnaires; 3) query for
improvement, diligent checking and approval of the division researcher’s management
team; 4) submission and validation of experts of the constructed and submitted sets of
questionnaires with validation sheet attached and corresponding criteria where they
indicated their comments and suggestions; 5) undergoing constant revisions based on
given comments and suggestions coming from the experts of the above-mentioned areas
which were consequently integrated and incorporated in the refinement of said
instruments;
The five-point Likert Scale is likely to produce a highly reliable scale and was used
as the basis in describing the level of principals’ leadership styles and collective efficacy
of teachers. According to Santos (2007) quoted in Javilles (2011) this scale requires
individuals to tick on the box/circle in response to large number of items concerning an
attitude, object and stimulus. Individual responses obtained were normally treated as
measurements by calculating the averages or generally by using any arithmetic
operations he further stated.
To determine the level of principals’ transformational leadership in schools, the
researcher adopted to use the following five orderable gradations with their respective
range of means and descriptions:
Four sets of questionnaires will be utilized for this study. The first set of the survey
questionnaire will be use on Transformational Leadership of school principals in Division
of Davao del Norte developed by Leithwood, Jantzi & Steinbach, (1999). It will be adapted
and modified to contextualize in the school setting with the following indicators: setting
directions; developing people; and redesigning organization. In evaluating the
transformational leadership, the researcher used the following scales.
Range of Means
4.20 – 5.00
Descriptive Equivalent
Very High
Description
This
indicates
describing
that
the
the
measure
transformational
leadership styles is always manifested.
3.40 – 4.19
High
This
indicates
describing
that
the
the
measure
transformational
leadership styles is often manifested.
2.60 – 3.39
Moderate
This
indicates
that
describing
the
leadership
styles
the
measure
transformational
is
sometimes
manifested.
1.80 – 2.59
Low
This
indicates
describing
that
the
the
measure
transformational
leadership styles is seldom manifested.
1.00 – 1.79
Very Low
This
indicates
describing
the
that
the
measure
transformational
leadership styles is never manifested at
all.
For the second questionnaire, the researcher adopted and modified the
instructional leadership of school principals developed by Hallinger, (1982) with ten (10)
indicators; framing the school, communicate the school goals, supervise and evaluate
instruction, coordinate the curriculum, monitor student progress, protect instructional
time, maintain high visibility, provide incentives for teachers, promote professional
development and provide incentives for learning. It is consisted of items which required
scaled responses. The following scales will be used in evaluating the instructional
leadership of school principals.
Range of Means
Descriptive Equivalent Description
4.20 – 5.00
Very High
This means that the measure describing
the instructional leadership styles is
always manifested.
3.40 – 4.19
High
This means that the measure describing
the instructional leadership styles is often
manifested.
2.60 – 3.39
Moderate
This means that the measure describing
the instructional leadership styles is
sometimes manifested.
1.80 – 2.59
Low
This means that the measure describing
the instructional leadership styles is
seldom manifested.
1.00 – 1.79
Very Low
This means that the measure describing
the instructional leadership styles is
never manifested at all.
The third instrument will be adapted from Dennis (2004) but modified to
contextualize to the local setting to measure the servant leadership of different public
school principals with the indicators; agapao love, vision, empowerment and humility of
school principals, the following parameter limits were used:
Range of Means
4.20 – 5.00
Descriptive Equivalent
Very High
Description
This means that servant leadership of
principals is always manifested.
3.40 – 4.19
High
This means that servant leadership of
principals is oftentimes manifested.
2.60 – 3.39
Moderate
This means that servant leadership of
principals is sometimes manifested.
1.80 – 2.59
Low
This means that servant leadership of
principals is seldom manifested.
1.00 – 1.79
Very Low
This means that servant leadership of
principals is never manifested.
The fourth instrument deals with the collective efficacy of teachers with the
following components: general competence and task analysis. This is adopted and was
modified from Goddard and Hoy (2003).
Range of Means
4.20 – 5.00
Descriptive Equivalent
Very High
Description
This indicates that the provision relating
to collective efficacy embodied in the
item is always manifested.
3.40 – 4.19
High
This indicates that the provision relating
to collective efficacy embodied in the
item is often manifested.
2.60 – 3.39
Moderate
This indicates that the provision relating
to collective efficacy embodied in the
item is sometimes manifested.
1.80 – 2.59
Low
This indicates that the provision relating
to collective efficacy embodied in the
item is seldom manifested.
1.00 – 1.79
Very Low
This indicates that the provision relating
to collective efficacy embodied in the
item is never manifested at all.
Data Collection
The researcher underwent these research data gathering procedure of the study
which consists of the following steps:
Seeking permission to conduct the study. A formal communication letter sent
to the Schools Division Superintendent of Davao del Norte to ask permission to conduct
the study on principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ collective efficacy to the public
elementary school teachers of the Division of Davao del Norte. After the approval of the
SDS, another communication was sent to the Schools District Supervisors and to the
Principals/School Heads with an intention of requesting permission to allow the
distribution of the questionnaires to the teacher-respondents of the study.
Surveying the total number of respondents’ population (N). The researcher
was personally gone to the Division Office of DepEd in Davao del Norte, getting the
number of public elementary schools managed by principals/school heads and the exact
and official population of teachers in Sto. Tomas East District that became the teacherrespondents of principals’ transformational, instructional and servant leadership and the
teachers’ collective efficacy. The survey was especially done relevant in determining the
exact sample size (n) for the final reproduction of the questionnaires.
Administration of Research Instrument. With the permission of the Division
Superintendent, Public Schools District Supervisor and School Principals/Heads, the
researcher conducted and administered personally the distribution of the questionnaires
to the respondents.
Tabulation of Data Gathered. The researcher after gathering the important data,
made the tally and tabulation based on the sub-problems and then enthusiastically used
the appropriate statistical tools in analyzing the result after which interpretation of the
findings was made.
Moreover, the results of the computation with the corresponding interpretations are
presented in the tables.
Statistical Tools
The data gathered through the questionnaires were tallied, tabulated, analyzed
and interpreted based on the purpose of the study. The following were the statistical
treatments used:
Mean. Since the questionnaires on this study used the Likert Scale, the weighted
mean was employed to determine and describe the level of transformational, instructional
and servant leadership of public elementary school principals and teachers’ collective
efficacy in schools in answer to sub-problems 1, 2, 3 & 4.
Percentile. This was used to determine the number of teacher-respondents who
was actually responded and the number of prospective teacher-respondents of the public
elementary schools.
Pearson-r. To determine the significance of the combined and singular influence
of Principals’ Transformational Leadership, Instructional Leadership and Servant
Leadership on Teachers’ Collective Efficacy in the public elementary schools.
Regression. This statistical tool was used in the investigation of the relationship
between the level of principals’ transformational leadership and teachers’ collective
efficacy in answer to sub-problem 5.1 and the relationship between the level of principals’
instructional leadership and teachers’ collective efficacy in answer to sub-problem 5.2.
and the relationship between the level of principals’ servant leadership and teachers’
collective efficacy in answer to sub-problem 5.3. The researcher assembles data on the
underlying variables of interest and employs this type of analysis to estimate the
quantitative effect of the causal variables “transformational leadership of principals”,
“instructional leadership of principals” and “servant leadership of principals” upon the
variables that it influences “teachers’ collective efficacy”. The researcher also typically
assessed the “statistical significance” of the estimated relationships, that is, the degree
of confidence that the true relationship is close to the estimated relationship.
Moreover, this was done for the decision rule in accepting or rejecting the null
hypothesis in which alpha is set at 0.05 level of significant.