School Administrators' Leadership Styles, Attributes and Functions Towards Education-Progression Driven Era by Dr. Bernard Evangelicom v. Jamon

SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS LEADERSHIP STYLES, ATTRIBUTES AND
FUNCTIONS TOWARDS EDUCATION PROGRESSION-DRIVEN ERA
A Dissertation
Presented to
The Graduate School of
CEBU TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
Main Campus, R. Palma Street
Cebu City, Philippines
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR IN DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION
BERNARD EVANGELICOM V. JAMON
FEBRUARY 2017
ii
APPROVAL SHEET
This Dissertation entitled: SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS LEADERSHIP
STYLES, ATTRIBUTES AND FUNCTIONS TOWARDS EDUCATION
PROGRESSION-DRIVEN ERA, prepared and submitted by BERNARD
EVANGELICOM V. JAMON in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
in DOCTOR IN DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION has been examined and is
recommended for acceptance and approval for Oral Examination.
DISSERTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ROSEIN A. ANCHETA, JR., ASEAN ENGR., DM., Ph.D.

Chairperson
ADORACION A. LAWAS, Ed. D. REBECCA DC MANALASTAS, Ed. D., Ph. D.
Adviser Member
ADORA A. VILLAGANAS, Ph. D. PERLA N. TENERIFE, Ed. D., Ph. D.

Member Member
WILMA C. GIANGO, Ph. D. REYNALDO T. GABALES, Ph. D., Ed. D.

Member Member
TERESITA T. ROJAS, Ed. D.

Member
APPROVED by the committee of Oral examination with the grade of PASSED
PANEL OF EXAMINERS
ROSEIN A. ANCHETA, JR., ASEAN ENGR., DM., Ph.D.

Chairperson
ADORACION A. LAWAS, Ed. D. REBECCA DC MANALASTAS, Ed. D., Ph. D.
Adviser Member
ADORA A. VILLAGANAS, Ph. D. PERLA N. TENERIFE, Ed. D, Ph. D.

Member Member
WILMA C. GIANGO, Ph. D. REYNALDO T. GABALES, Ph. D., Ed. D.

Member Member
TERESITA T. ROJAS, Ed. D.

Member
ACCEPTED AND APPROVED in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of DOCTOR IN DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION
Comprehensive Exam: PASSED
Date of Oral Examination: FEBRUARY 17, 2017
REBECCA DC MANALASTAS, Ed. D., Ph. D.

Graduate School Dean
iii
ABSTRACT
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS LEADERSHIP STYLES, ATTRIBUTES AND

FUNCTIONS TOWARDS EDUCATION PROGRESSION-DRIVEN ERA
Bernard Evangelicom V. Jamon

jamonbernardevangelicom@gmail.com
Cebu Technological University Main Campus
Adoracion A. Lawas, Ed.D.

www.ctu.edu.ph/CoEOfficialsaspx
Cebu Technological University
This research determined the school administrators leadership styles,

attributes and functions, as well as the issues and concerns they faced as basis
for Education Progression-Driven Era Development Plan. This study utilized
descriptive method. The respondents of this study were 30 school administrators
and 150 teachers both in elementary and secondary levels in Talisay City Division.
Percentage, frequency distribution, weighted mean and Z-Test were used in this
study. The findings revealed that school administrators apply a conglomeration of
leadership styles. It was also found that the perception of school administrators
and teachers with regard to attributes, specifically to skill and attitude and to the
functions of school administrators in basic education, education governance and
regulatory and developmental have significant difference. However, there is no
significant difference to the perception of school administrators and teachers with
regard to knowledge as an attribute. It was concluded that though school
administrators apply different leadership styles, face different issues and
challenges and have polar perceptions with their teachers with regard to their
attributes and functions, they are still functioning and doing the best of their abilities
to be effective and efficient leaders of the public schools.
Key Words : School administrator; attribute, function; leadership

style; Education Progression-Driven Era Development
Plan; Talisay City, Cebu
Program : Doctor in Development Education

Research Started : November 10, 2016
Research Completed : February 20, 2017
iv
DEDICATION
The researcher humbly dedicates this work to Evelyn, Jess, James and Mary
Grace and especially to Almighty God

v
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The researcher is profoundly grateful to Almighty God for guiding him and
for giving him strength to cope-with all the challenges that life offers to him. He
also grateful to Almighty God for all the blessing He showered to him as he traverse
the journey of life.
He would like to acknowledge Dr. Adoracion A. Lawas, his adviser for her
guidance and professional advice to further enhance his work. He is also grateful
to Dr. Rosein A. Ancheta, University President; to Dr. Rebecca DC Manalastas,
the Dean of Graduate School; to Dr. Perla N. Tenerife, Dr. Adora A. Villaganas,
Dr. Wilma C. Giango, Dr. Reynaldo T. Gabales and Dr. Teresita T. Rojas for their
suggestions and advice that enriched this research.
He is also thankful to Dr. Leah P. Noveras, the Schools Division
Superintendent of Talisay City Division for her approval to his request that he may
be allowed to conduct study in her beloved division. He can also never forget the
school administrator and teacher respondents for their participation in the
gathering of data.
The researcher is very much grateful for his students, mentors, colleagues,
friends and family members for their support and encouragement that became the
inspiration of the researcher throughout his life.
Finally, he would like to extend his gratitude to his best friend, lover and
constant companion, Ms. Mary Grace M. Cabanes for her unending support and
love to the researcher. The researcher is so grateful that Ms. Cabanes was there
from the beginning up the end of all the challenges they both meet in life.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE.....i
APPROVAL SHEET........ii
ABSTRACT...iii
DEDICATION...iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTv
TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................vi
LIST OF FIGURES..x
LIST OF TABLES....xi
Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM AND ITS RESEARCH DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
Rationale of the Study.............................................1
Theoretical Background...................................................................3
THE PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem...............................................................11
Significance of the Study.......................................12
Flow of the Study....13
THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Environment.................................................15
Subjects/Respondents...................................................................17
Research Instruments....................................................................17
Research Procedures for Data Gathering......................................18

vii
Treatment of the Data18
Scoring Procedures...19
DEFINITION OF TERMS..21
Chapter 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
Related Literature..23
Chapter 3 PRESENTATION, DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Profile of Respondent Groups....32
Age and Gender32
Years of Experience.36
Leadership Styles of School Administrators.39
School Administrators Attributes...45
Knowledge.45
Skill.47
Attitude...49
School Administrators Functions..50
Basic Education51
Education Governance52
Regulatory and Developmental..54
Significant Difference...58
Attributes58
Knowledge.58
Skill.59
Attitude...60
viii
Functions..62
Basic Education...62
Education Governance...63
Regulatory and Developmental.64
School and Concerns of School Administrators.65
Issues and Concerns..65
Chapter 4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary of Findings.71
Conclusions.74
Recommendations.75
Chapter 5 Output of the Study
Education Progression-Driven Era Development Plan77
General Introduction..77
Rationale.....77
Objectives82
Scheme of Implementation...83
Education Progression-Driven Era Development Plan for
School Administrators..84
Introduction..85
Scheme of Implementation...86
Research Development Training Seminar-
Workshop for School Administrators..95

ix
BIBLIOGRAPHY...................................................................................99
APPENDICES.......................................................................................101
A. Approved Transmittal Letter Addresses Schools Division
Superintendent...102
B. Questionnaire..................................................................103
Survey Questionnaire for School Administrator....103
Survey Questionnaire for Teacher...109
C. Certificate of Similarity Using Turnitin.....113
CURRICULUM VITAE...........................................................................114
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Table Title Page
1 Conceptual Framework...10
2 Location of the Research Environment16
3 A Career Ladder: A Path from Teacher to
School Administrator...79
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Table Number Title Page
1 Number of School Administrator Respondents17
2 Number of Teacher Respondents......17
3 Age and Gender of the Respondents.32
4 Years of Experience of the Respondents..36
5 Leadership Styles of School Administrators..39
6 School Administrators Attributes in Terms of
Knowledge......45
Skill...47
Attitude.49
9 Functions of School Administrators in
Basic Education..51
Education Governance............53
xii
Regulatory and Developmental...55
12 Significant Difference between the Respondent Groups
Perception to the School Administrators Attributes
in Terms of Knowledge.58
in Terms of Skill.....59
in Terms of Attitude..60
Perception to the Compliance of School Administrators
Functions in Basic Education.62
Functions in Education Governance..63

xiii
Functions in Regulatory and Developmental.64
18 Issues and Concerns Encountered by
School Administrators65
Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS RESEARCH DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
Rationale of the Study
Leadership they say is a universal phenomenon and has been the subject
of continuous research. The definitions about leadership are complex, elusive and
somewhat contradictory. Others believe that people oriented leaders are most
effective, however, some believe that the result of every leaders action determines
his success. Relating to school leadership, the success of a school may be
equated to the quality of leadership of its school administrator. The school
administrator is a principal, a school head, or a teacher in-charge who is
designated to run a school. Though he may have different titles, he is regarded as
the school leader. He makes decisions in behalf of the school with the help of
teachers, students, parents and other stakeholders. But among all of those who
help him, he is the one in command of all the activities and carries all
responsibilities of a certain school. However, as a leader he always faces different
challenges to achieve the goals of the institution he serves. He also faces different
problems, either these problems come from the teachers, students, community or
other stakeholders.
The other term for a school head is administrator. Manager is not the
chosen term because it is businesslike than administrator. Boss is not also a good
term it is less formal than that of administrator or leader. He runs the smallest unit
of the educational organization: The School. His duty is to identify the needs of the
2
school, determine the important improvements, and have plans to address the
problems of the teachers, students and other stake holders. In addition, he is
knowledgeable of the different theories on how to handle conflicts on behavior and
leadership. He is assumed to possess skills in dealing with the diverse attitudes of
students, teachers and stakeholders. He integrates knowledge with experience to
be able to effectively deal with the problems that may arise as he leads his
respective school. Also, as school administrator he may possess some of the skills
that are necessary for effective leadership, but that is not enough. He should also
be better in what he does; he has to expand his knowledge on effective leadership.
School administration is somewhat a metamorphosis. This is due to
different programs initiated by the Department of Education such as the School
Based-Management system which empowers every school administrator to decide
on specific matters concerning the school. This requires school administrators to
possess knowledge, skills and attitude that differ them from their subordinates.
Since school administrator is a leader, the questions may arise on the
qualities/attributes that set him apart from the other teachers who may also do the
job.
This research will ascertain the leadership styles, attributes and functions
of a school administrator and how he works to attain the goals, mission, and vision
of the Department of Education, specifically of Talisay City Division.
Hopefully, this research will be able to come-up with the leadership styles
manifested, attributes possessed and functions complied by school administrators
to be effective school leaders in this progression-driven era of education.

3
Theoretical Background
This research ascertains that the success of the schools performance is
linked to the school administrators effective leadership styles, qualities/attributes
and functions across a variety of situation, thus this research is anchored on the
following theories:
The Great Man Theory suggests that the capacity to lead is inborn. This
theory can be summarized in a phrase, Great leaders are born, not made. The
notion Great Man was used for the reason that during that time, leadership was
thought primarily as a male quality, especially in terms of military leadership
(Cherry, 2016).
According to historian Thomas Carlyle (1888), History of the world is but
the biography of great men. For him, effective leaders are those gifted with divine
inspiration and have right characteristics.
In Herbert Spencers work, The Study of Sociology as cited by Cherry
(2016), he wrote, You must admit the genesis of great men depends on the long
series of complex influences which has produced the race in which he appears,
and the social state into which that race has slowly grown Before he can remake
his society, his society must make them.
Trait Theory focuses on identifying different personality traits and
characteristics traits and characteristics that are linked to successful leadership
across a variety of situations (Cherry, 2016).

4
Some beliefs of the trait theory of leadership are certain traits produce
certain patterns of behavior, these patterns are consistent across different
situations, and people are born with leadership traits.
Shriberg and Shriberg (2011) explained that the trait theory of leadership,
generally considered the first modern theory of leadership, became popular during
the second half of the twentieth century and despite scholarly criticism, has
continued to be popular. The theory states that leadership traits are innate to
leaders and potential leaders. Although the traits may vary, the most common are
intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability.
Some studies on leadership differentiated leaders from followers with the
assumption that people in leadership positions would display more leadership traits
than those of subordinates. The researchers found, however, was that there were
different few traits that could be used to distinguish between leaders and followers.
Stogdill (1974) identified the leadership traits qualities which include: age,
physique, appearance, intelligence, knowledge, responsibility, integrity, emotional
control, social skills, self-confidence, and responsibility.
In 1989, a study linked the successful leadership regardless on any situation
to task competence, physical vitality, intelligence, strong skills for dealing with
people, an ability to motivate others, decisiveness, self-confidence, assertiveness,
flexibility, need for achievement, courage, trustworthiness, and understanding the
needs of others.
5
In conclusion, this theory believes that leadership qualities are rooted in
characteristics that an individual possesses. This also claims that anybody can
emerge as leader depending on the situation.
Behavioral theory
This theory, in contrast with Great Man Theory believes that leaders are
made, rather than born. The behavioral theory believes that there are two types of
leaders, namely; The Task Oriented Leader and The People oriented Leader. The
task oriented leaders are focusing their behaviors on the organizational structure,
the operating procedure, and they like to keep control. Task oriented leaders are
still concerned with their staffs motivation. Task oriented leaders are focused on
initiating, organizing, certifying, and information gathering. In comparison, the
people oriented leaders are focused on their behaviors on ensuring that the inner
needs of the people are satisfied. Thus, they will seek to motivate their staff through
emphasizing the human relation. People oriented leaders focus the tasks and the
results; they just achieve them through different means. The people oriented
leaders encourage, observe, listen, coach, and mentor.
Robbins and Coulter (2007) as cited by Odumeru (2013) stated that a
transformational leader is a person who stimulates and inspires followers to
achieve extraordinary outcomes. The concept of transformational leadership was
introduced by James Macgregor Burns in 1978.
Transformational leadership enhances the motivation, morale, and
performance of followers through a variety of mechanisms. These include
connecting the follower's sense of identity and self to the project and the collective
6
identity of the organization; being a role model for followers that inspires them and
makes them interested; challenging followers to take greater ownership for their
work, and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of followers, so the leader
can align followers with tasks that enhance their performance (Odumeru, 2013).
Warrilow (2012) as cited by Odumeru (2013) identified four components of
transformational leadership style. The first is Charisma or idealized influence which
refers to the degree to which the leader behaves in admirable ways and displays
convictions and takes stands that cause followers to identify with the leader who
has a clear set of values and acts as a role model for the followers. The second is
Inspirational motivation which is the degree to which the leader articulates a vision
that appeals and inspires the followers with optimism about future goals, and offers
meaning for the current tasks at hand. The third is Intellectual stimulation which is
the degree to which the leader challenges assumptions, stimulates and
encourages creativity in the followers - by providing a framework for followers to
see how they connect [to the leader, the organization, each other, and the goal]
they can creatively overcome any obstacles in the way of the mission. The fourth
and the last is Personal and individual attention which is the degree to which the
leader attends to each individual follower's needs and acts as a mentor or coach
and gives respect to and appreciation of the individual's contribution to the team.
This fulfils and enhances each individual team members' need for self-fulfillment,
and self-worth - and in so doing inspires followers to further achievement and
growth.
7
Transactional Leadership, also known as managerial leadership, focuses
on the role of supervision, organization, and group performance; transactional
leadership is a style of leadership in which the leader promotes compliance of his
followers through both rewards and punishments. Unlike Transformational
leadership, leaders using the transactional approach are not looking to change the
future, they are looking to merely keep things the same. These leaders pay
attention to followers' work in order to find faults and deviations. This type of
leadership is effective in crisis and emergency situations, as well as when projects
need to be carried out in a specific fashion (Odumeru, 2013).
Within the context of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, transactional leadership
works at the basic levels of need satisfaction, where transactional leaders focus
on the lower levels of the hierarchy. Transactional leaders use an exchange model,
with rewards being given for good work or positive outcomes. Conversely, people
with this leadership style also can punish poor work or negative outcomes, until
the problem is corrected. One way that transactional leadership focuses on lower
level needs is by stressing specific task performance (Hargis et al., 2001).
Transactional leaders are effective in getting specific tasks completed by
managing each portion individually (Odumeru, 2013).
Transactional leaders are concerned with processes rather than forward-
thinking ideas. These types of leaders focus on contingent reward (also known as
contingent positive reinforcement) or contingent penalization (also known as
contingent negative reinforcement). Contingent rewards (such as praise) are given
when the set goals are accomplished on-time, ahead of time, or to keep
8
subordinates working at a good pace at different times throughout completion.
Contingent punishments (such as suspensions) are given when performance
quality or quantity falls below production standards or goals and tasks are not met
at all. Often, contingent punishments are handed down on a management-by-
exception basis, in which the exception is something going wrong. Within
management-by-exception, there are active and passive routes. Active
management-by-exception means that the leader continually looks at each
subordinate's performance and makes changes to the subordinate's work to make
corrections throughout the process. Passive management-by-exception leaders
wait for issues to come up before fixing the problems. With transactional leadership
being applied to the lower-level needs and being more managerial in style, it is a
foundation for transformational leadership which applies to higher-level needs
(Odumeru, 2013).
According to Odumeru (2013) there are various qualities of transactional
leadership. The first is that transactional leaders use reward and punishments to
gain compliance from their followers. They are extrinsic motivators that bring
minimal compliance from followers. They accept goals, structure, and the culture
of the existing organization. Transactional leaders tend to be directive and action-
oriented. The second is that transactional leaders tend to be directive and action-
oriented. The third is that transactional leaders are willing to work within existing
systems and negotiate to attain goals of the organization. They tend to think inside
the box when solving problems. The fourth is that transactional leadership is
9
primarily passive. The behaviors most associated with this type of leadership are
establishing the criteria for rewarding followers and maintaining the status quo.
In comparing transformational from transactional leadership, the
transformational leadership provides more vivid qualities of a leader than that of
the transactional leadership. Transformational leaders are usually admired by the
subordinates while transactional leader usually uses the carrot and stick
management in dealing with his subordinates. Transformational leader helps
boosts the morale of his subordinates by being the role model while the
transactional leader indirectly inculcates fear to the subordinates by punishing
them whenever a follower fails to comply with his orders.

10
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR
LEADERSHIP STYLES FUNCTIONS ATTRIBUTES

Behavioral Basic Education Knowledge
Transformational Education Skill
Transactional Governance Attitude
Regulatory and
Developmental
EDUCATION PROGRESSION-DRIVEN ERA

DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework
11
THE PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem
This research study ascertained the leadership styles, attributes, functions
as well as the issues and concerns encountered by the elementary and secondary
school administrators in the Department of Education (DepEd), Talisay City
Division, Talisay City, Cebu during School Year 2016-2017 as basis for designing
an education progression-driven era development plan.
This study specifically aimed to answer the following questions:
1. What is the profile of the respondent groups as to:
1.1. personal and
1.2. syles of leadership?
2. What attributes are possessed by the school administrators in terms of:
2.1. knowledge,
2.2. skill and
2.3. attitude?
3. As perceived by the respondent groups, do the administrators comply with the
following functions:
3.1. basic education,
3.2. education governance and
3.3. regulatory and developmental?
4. Is there a significant difference between respondent groups perception to the
administrators attributes and functions?
5. What are the issues and concerns encountered by the school administrators?
12
6. Based on the findings, what education progression-driven era development plan
can be designed?
Null Hypothesis
This study postulates the given hypothesis:
Ho1: There is no significant difference between the respondent groups
perception to the administrators attributes and functions.
Ho2: There is significant difference between the respondent groups
perception to the administrators attributes and functions.
Significance of the Study
The attributes, leadership styles and functions possessed and complied by
the school administrators in leading the progression driven era can make a
difference to others. Thus, by focusing on these variables, this study is beneficial
to the following:
Department of Education. This will help ascertain the attributes of the
present school administrators who run the schools of the Department of Education.
In addition, this research would help the Department of Education in selecting the
school administrators.
School Administrators. This research ascertains school administrators
leadership styles, attributes and functions in leading the progression driven era of
education. This will help school administrators on what attributes should they
possess in effectively fulfilling their roles/functions.

13
Teachers. This research can be beneficial to the teachers who are aspiring
to be school administrators because these research provided the yardstick of the
attributes needed by the school administrators in becoming a good school leader.
Students. This research is also beneficial to the students for they are the
center of the educative process, and their welfare must first be considered among
others, thus, a school administrator must possess the attributes that will cater the
needs of the learners.
Future Researchers. This research can be a reference by the future
researchers for further study on school leadership.
The Flow of the Study
The first stage of the study was the visualization, identification and
conceptualization of the proposed research. Then the researcher consulted the
Dissertation Agendum professor for the approval of the title and the problem. After
her approval of the title and problems, he then crafted the Chapters 1 and 2 of his
research.
After the researcher successful crafting his chapters 1 and 2, the Research
Agendum professor then assigned him to an adviser and provided him the names
of the research committee that evaluated his research.
The researcher then consulted his adviser for recommendation for the
enrichment of his research. After the completion of the chapters 1 and 2, he then
presented his research to the research to the committee for evaluation and
recommendations. Afterwards, he proceeded to revise his manuscript based on
the panels suggestions and recommendations.

14
The next step he did was that he sent a request letter to the Schools Division
Superintendent of Talisay City Division that he would be conducting a research.
After the approval of the Superintendent, he distributed the questionnaires
personally school administrators of Talisay City Division both in elementary and
secondary level and to the selected teachers of secondary and elementary level.
After distributing the questionnaires to the school administrators, he
interpreted and analyzed the data with the guidance of his adviser and his
statistician. Thereafter, he started writing his chapters 3, 4 and 5. Next, he had the
Oral Defense of his research to the research committee for evaluation and
recommendation.
The next thing he did after the Oral Defense was the finalization of his
manuscript based on the suggestion of the research committee. After the
finalization of his manuscript, he submitted his manuscript to the censor for editing.
The last thing that he did was the finalization of the manuscript for the signing of
the research committee.
After the signing of the members of the research committee, he reproduced
his manuscript for the distribution of the copies of his finalized manuscript to the
research committee, Graduate School office and library.

15
THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Environment
Talisay City was the research locale of the study. It was founded in 1684 as
an estate owned by the Augustinians. In 1849, it was converted into municipality.
In 2000 the municipality was converted into a city. The municipality is now
linked to Cebu City via South Coastal Highway from Lawaan which opened in
2004. This brought some recent investment in form of malls and subdivisions.
The Division of Talisay was founded in 2001 when Talisay City was
declared as a city. The Division composes of 18 public Secondary Schools and 25
public Elementary Schools. The Division is currently headed by Dr. Leah P.
Noveras, the Schools Division Superintendent. The officials responsible for
running the division are: Assistant School Division Superintendent, Chief
Supervisors, District Supervisors, Education Program Supervisors, Senior
Education Program Specialists, Education Program Specialists, School
Administrators (Principals, School Heads and Teachers In-Charge), Division Staff,
Teachers, and School Staff.

16
Figure 2
Research Environment
17
Respondents
Using the purposive procedures, the selected School Administrators of
both elementary and secondary public schools of Talisay City Division which could
be classified as Principals, Head Teachers, and Teachers in Charge and 5
teachers in every school were the respondents of this study.
Distribution of the Respondents
Table 1
LEVEL Number of School Administrators
ELEMENTARY 18
SECONDARY 12
TOTAL 30
Table 2
LEVEL Number of Respondents
(No. of School Administrators x 5)
ELEMENTARY 90
SECONDARY 60
TOTAL 150
Instruments
This study utilized researcher made questionnaire in gathering the
necessary data. Some parts of survey questionnaire were paralleled from the
Result Based Performance Management System (RPMS) for school heads.

18
Procedures for Data Gathering
The following procedures were followed in order to go through the data
gathering:
1. Preliminary Preparation
The researcher wrote a permission letter to the Schools Division
Superintendent before the administration and collection of the data through
questionnaire among the public school administrators and teachers of
Talisay City Division.
2. Administration of the Questionnaire
After the approval of the permission letter, the questionnaires were
personally distributed to the respondents.
3. Retrieval of the Questionnaire
The research instruments were retrieved personally by the
researcher immediately upon the accomplishment of the respondents.
Treatment of the Data
This study utilized the following statistical formula in the treatment of the data:
1. Simple Percentage. This was used to determine the percentage of the
responses of the respondents.
2. Weighted Mean. This was utilized to analyze and interpret the responses
of the respondents.
3. Mode. This was used to assess and evaluate the attributes that were
chosen most often by the respondents.

19
4. Frequency Distribution. This was used to show the number of instances
in which a variable takes each of each possible values.
5. Z-Test. This was used to find the significant difference between the mean
of the mean of the respondent groups.
Scoring Procedures
The validity of the responses of the respondents was scored using
the following:
Weight Scale Category Verbal Description
3 2.33-2.98 Well Manifested - If the leadership style is
highly perceived
2 1.67-2.32 Manifested -If the leadership style is
perceived
1 1.00-1.66 Less Manifested -If the leadership style is
less perceived
3 2.33-2.98 Well Possessed - If the attribute is well
possessed
2 1.67-2.32 Possessed -If the attribute is
possessed
1 1.00-1.66 Less Possessed -If the attribute is
less possessed
20
3 2.33-2.98 Well Complied - If the functions success is
highly complied
2 1.67-2.32 Complied -If the functions success is
complied
1 1.00-1.66 Less Complied -If the functions success is
less complied
21
DEFINITION OF TERMS
The following terms are operationally used in this research for better
understanding of the reader.
Attributes. A good quality or feature that someone or something has
Basic Education. This refers to Planning and Implementation; and, Punctuality
and Attendance of the school administrator
Education Governance. These are concerned programs, activities and projects;
Instructional Supervision; and, Resource Management implemented by the
school administrator
Effective. A producing a result that has an intended effect
Era. This refers to a period or time
Leader. A person who influences others towards the achievement of the mission,
vision and core values of the Department of Education
Leadership Style. This is the way the school administrator leads his school
Personal. The characteristics of a school administrator as a person (e.g. age, sex,
years of experience)
Progression. This refers to the process of development over a period of time
Regulatory and developmental. These are Administrative Functions,
Coordination with the private Schools in the Locality, Action Research, and
Linkages of the school administrator
Roles. A position assumed or functions
School. An educational institution, private and public, undertaking educational
operation with a specific age-group of pupils or students pursuing defined studies

22
at defined levels, receiving instruction from teachers, usually located in a building
or a group of buildings in a particular physical or cyber site (R.A. 9155)
School Administrator. A person responsible for the administrative and
instructional supervision of the school or cluster of schools
Stakeholder. This refers to any person with interest or concern in school
Student. This is any individual seeking basic literacy skills and functional life skills
or support services for the improvement of the quality of his/her life (R.A. 9155)
Teacher. This refers to all persons engaged at the elementary and secondary
levels whether on full time or part-time basis, including industrial arts or vocational
teachers and all other persons performing supervisory and/or administrative
functions in all schools in the aforesaid levels and qualified to practice teaching
under R.A. 7836 (Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers)

Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
This chapter discusses the different related literature that are similarly
connected to the study.
Related Literature
Republic Act 9155 which is also known as Governance of Basic Education
Act of 2001 defines School Head as a person responsible for the administrative
and instructional supervision of the school or cluster of schools. According to the
law (R.A. 9155), the school head shall have authority, accountability and
responsibility for the following:
(1) Setting the mission, vision, goals and objectives of the school;
(2) Creating an environment within the school that is conducive to
teaching and learning;
(3) Implementing the school curriculum and being accountable for higher
learning outcomes;
(4) Developing the school education program and school improvement
plan;
(5) Offering educational programs, projects and services which provide
equitable opportunities for all learners in the community;
(6) Introducing new and innovative modes of instruction to achieve higher
learning outcomes;
(7) Administering and managing all personnel, physical and fiscal
resources of the school;

24
(8) Recommending the staffing complement of the school based on its
needs;
(9) Encouraging staff development;
(10) Establishing school and community networks and encouraging the
active participation of teachers organizations, non-academic personnel of
public schools, and parents-teachers-community associations;
(11) Accepting donations, gifts, bequests and grants for the purpose of
upgrading teachers/learning facilitators competencies, improving and
expanding school facilities and providing instructional materials and
equipment. Such donations or grants must be reported to the appropriate
district supervisors and division superintendents; and
(12) Performing such other functions as may be assigned by proper
authorities.
Mentioning another law, the Education Act of 1982 or Batas Pambansa 232,
the school administrators have certain special rights under Section 12. These
include the following:
a. They shall be accorded sufficient administrative discretion necessary for
the efficient and effective performance of their functions.
b. School administrators be deemed persons in authority while in the
discharge of lawful duties and responsibilities, and shall therefore be
accorded due respect and protection.

25
Eric Sheninger (2011) in his blog in The Huffington Post, he discussed the
qualities of Effective Principals citing Dr. James Strong. In his blog he gave his
thoughts of what good principals do. The following are his thoughts:
Great communicator: Principals need to be able to communicate what the
school is all about. School leaders do not always do the best in terms of
epitomizing effective communication. In terms of evaluations, we cannot keep
telling teachers that they are doing good work when they are not. Being a direct
communicator is often lost during discussions on teacher performance.
Difference maker: Principals need to be able to keep the focus on
important initiatives and culture characteristics that have an impact on student
learning and achievement. They establish accountability measures to hold
teachers and students accountable for learning. Great principals see solutions, not
just problems.
Risky, but not too risky: Principals have to be willing to try new things and
have a mindset to keep trying until improvement is the end result. They need a
backstop of support that allows them to fail in these efforts. The most effective
decision makers take risks, but do not bet the farm or take quantum leaps without
knowing the end result.
Manage by walking around: Principals that consistently walk around know
the students, can better identify areas where teachers can improve, and set the
tone for practices to be emulated throughout the building. The human factor is
extremely important. Great principals establish a positive school culture by treating

26
people the way they would like to be treated. How we smile, say hello, and engage
in conversations all are important factors in setting a positive tone.
Address problems: Strong principals will do the hard, dissatisfying work
associated with addressing and removing ineffective staff. This requires
addressing problems head on with a positive attitude. When hiring new staff,
principals need to go to great efforts to hire educators that align best with the vision
of the school.
Cares about students and staff: Effective principals never give up on kids
and their support staff. They are the epitome of instructional leadership and will
show teachers how to become more effective based on evaluative data. As noted
by Dr. Strong, the elements above are important at a personal level. He then
identified the following indicators of principal quality that is supported by research.
Instructional leadership: building a vision, establishing a shared
leadership model, leading a learning community, using data, and monitoring
curriculum & instruction. The most effective teachers seamlessly use multiple
instructional strategies during a lesson and good principals can identify them.
School climate: creating a positive culture, establishing high expectations,
adhering to a practice of respect.
Human resource administration: hiring quality teachers & other staff,
inducting & supporting current staff, providing meaningful opportunities for growth,
retaining quality staff, and effectively evaluating teacher performance.
Organization management: safety, daily operations, facilities
maintenance, and securing & using resources to increase student achievement.

27
Communication and community relations: effective communicator with
all stakeholder groups.
Professionalism: ethical standards, serves as a role model, models life-
long learning.
Krasnoff (2015) citing Hull (2012) gave some Characteristics of an Effective
Principal. According to her, principals who are highly effective are more likely to
have more than three years of leadership experience overall, have at least three
years of leadership experience at that school, share leadership responsibilities,
rather than just delegate paperwork, have a clear sense of instructional goals, give
ongoing, informal feedback and support toward goals, conduct unannounced,
informal teacher evaluations or classroom visits and give feedback afterwards, and
have school boards and superintendents who exhibit a clear vision of what
constitutes a good school and create a framework that gives principals both
autonomy and support to reach those goals.
According to Hull (2012) as cited by Krasnoff (2015), schools with highly
effective principals have standardized test scores that are 5 to 10 percentile points
higher than schools led by an average principal, fewer student and teacher
absences, effective teachers who stay longer, ineffective teachers typically
replaced with more effective teachers, and principals who are more likely to stay
for at least three years.
Moreover, Krasnoff (2015) citing Hull (2012) stated that effective principals
support teachers. She noted that teachers say that principals provide instructional
support by emphasizing the value of research based strategies and applying them
28
effectively to their own school, encouraging teacher collaboration, providing more
time for teacher planning, observing teachers work, offering constructive
feedback, providing instructional guidance, and developing an atmosphere of
caring and trust.
In her conclusion in her work Leadership Qualities of Effective Principals,
Krasnoff (2015) stated that research and practice confirm that there is little chance
of creating and sustaining a high quality learning environment without a skilled and
committed instructional leader to shape teaching and learning. Research has
clearly shown that the principal is a key ingredient in the performance of the school,
especially if that school enrolls a large number of low-performing and/or poor and
minority students. Unfortunately, challenging schools are more likely to be led by
less experienced and less effective principals. And, while effective principals tend
to remain at challenging schools longer than ineffective principals, most effective
principals ultimately transfer to less challenging schools within the districtnot
because of the students, but because of the working conditions. As pressure
increases for all children in every school to succeed as learners, there is broad
acceptance that education leaders need to be more than building managers. If
principals are to be effective at turning around low-performing schools and
propelling student learning, they need the training, skills, and experience to focus
on instructional leadership and maximize teachers individual effectiveness, as well
as the schools effectiveness as a whole. State agencies and policymakers that
focus on supporting the principal as the instructional leader must collect and act
on the right information about principal effectiveness. If principals are required to

29
be instructional leaders, only ongoing assessment of their behaviors and skills will
drive continual improvement of their effectiveness.
Levine Nelson, et al. (2007) citing Levine (2005, p. 13) stated that school
administrators no longer serve as supervisors. They are being called on to lead in
redesign of their schools and systems. In the progression and accountability-driven
era, administrators have to lead their schools in rethinking goals, priorities,
finances, staffing, curriculum, pedagogies, learning resources assessment
methods, technology, and the use of time and space. They have to recruit and
retain top staff members and educate newcomers and veterans alike to understand
and become comfortable with an education system undergoing dramatic and
continuing change. Furthermore, One of the key roles for any administrator is to
transform and inspire the efforts of the teachers (Hoy and Hoy, 2003 as cited by
Nelson, et al. 2007). In addition, school administrators are responsible for schools,
and must exert leadership and accept consequences for educational outcomes.
Schools need effective leaders who can encourage learning, support and reward
good teaching, and ensure schools serve the community (Smylie and Hart, 1999;
Blas and Blas, 2001; Fullan, 2001; Creighton, 2005 as cited by Nelson, et al.
2007). Moreover, It is up to the administrators to lead schools and school
improvement. Practicing teachers gladly give their support to administrators who
assume the role of instructional leader (Fullan, 2001).
Morrison (2013) cited the studies David Woods and Chris Husbands and
Dr. Chris Brown that had conclusions shared by successful leaders. He shared
that they have consistent, high expectations and are very ambitious for the success
30
of their pupils; they constantly demonstrate that disadvantage need not be a barrier
to achievement; they focus relentlessly on improving teaching and learning with
very effective professional development of all staff; they are expert at assessment
and the tracking of pupil progress with appropriate support and intervention based
upon a detailed knowledge of individual pupils; they are highly inclusive, having
complete regard for the progress and personal development of every pupil; they
develop individual students through promoting rich opportunities for learning both
within and out of the classroom; they cultivate a range of partnerships particularly
with parents, business and the community to support pupil learning and progress;
and they are robust and rigorous in terms of self-evaluation and data analysis with
clear strategies for improvement.
In the work The School Principal as Leader: Guiding Schools to Better
teaching and Learning, Wallace Foundation suggested five key responsibilities of
a school principal; namely: shaping a vision of academic success for all students,
one based on high standards; creating a climate hospitable to education in order
that safety, a cooperative spirit and other foundations of fruitful interaction prevail;
cultivating leadership in others so that teachers and other adults assume their parts
in realizing the school vision; improving instruction to enable teachers to teach at
their best and students to learn to their utmost; and managing people, data and
processes to foster school improvement.
In the abstract of the research of Barrett and Bayer (2014) The Influence of
Effective on Teaching and Learning, they say:

31
Principals and educators are challenged with meeting the increased
demands of teaching and learning, which becomes difficult in environments
filled with negative undercurrents, such as poverty, teacher satisfaction, salary,
and instruction. Administrators must instill passion in teachers and provide
effective leadership to motivate teachers to engage and energize students. The
primary focus of this study was to determine how modeling instructional
strategies by principals influence teachers implementation of strategies that
promote greater student engagement and learning. Sustaining teachers
passion for teaching and providing educators with the motivation to engage
students in lessons through effective leadership and modeling were addressed
in this research.
As part of their conclusion, Barrett and Bayer (2014) state:

the concept of effective school leadership and the notion that
effective leadership guides teaching and learning through modeling
effective strategies, building positive collaborative relationships, and
demonstrating support for teachers as they implement new strategies in the
classrooms. Principals can lack credibility when evaluating teachers on
pedagogical practices diminishing the impact of instructional feedback.
However, in an environment where principals demonstrate efficacy in
pedagogy and lead teachers in learning and adopting effective strategies,
teachers can be both motivated and energized to implement fresh
approaches to teaching.
Chapter 3
PRESENTATION, DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
This chapter provides the data gathered by the researcher, the analysis of
those data and the interpretation of the results. The data are presented through
tables for simpler presentation so that it could be more appreciative to the reader.
PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENT GROUPS
Personal. This section presents the elementary and secondary teachers profile
and school administrators profile as to personal and styles of leadership.
Age and Gender. Age and gender play vital roles in analyzing the responses of the
respondents in terms of who and which age dominates the leadership roles in
schools and who and which age dominates the teaching world.
Table 3
Age and Gender of the Respondents
School Administrators Teachers
Male Female Male Female
Age F % F % F % F %
61-70
0 0 1 3.33 1 0.67 3 2.00
51-60
2 6.67 2 6.67 3 2.00 9 6.00
41-50
3 10.00 15 50.00 5 3.33 8 5.33
31-40
2 6.67 4 13.33 8 5.33 64 42.67
20-30
1 3.33 0 0 10 6.67 39 26.00
Total
8 26.67 22 73.33 27 18.00 123 82.00
Legend
F - Frequency
% - Percentage
33
As what is reflected in Table 3, only one (1) or only 3.33 percent of school
administrator is between ages 20-30. On the other hand, the school administrators
who age 31-40 are only six (6) or 20.00 percent of the total respondents. Most
school administrators, based on the survey are between 41-50 years old or 60.00
percent of the total respondents. The school administrators who are between 51-
60 years old are only 4, who are only 13.33 percent of the respondents. Lastly, the
school administrator who is between 61-70 years old is only one (1) or 3.33 percent
of the total respondents. On the other hand, with regard to teacher respondents
age, 32.67 percent who are 49 out of 150 respondents are between 20-30 years
old. The data also reveal that majority of the respondents who are 72 or 48.00
percent are between 31-40 years old. Teachers who are 41-50 years of age are
only 13 or 8.67 percent. The teachers who age 41-50 years old are not at par from
the teachers who age between 51-60 years old. The teachers who age 51-60 years
old are only 12 or 8.00 percent of the total teacher respondents. Lastly, the
teachers who age 61-70 years old are only four (4) or 2.67 percent among the
respondents.
In analyzing the average age of the school administrator, someone must be
at least 41-50 years old to be a school administrator. It can be deduced that if
someone already reaches those age, he already possesses experience and
knowledge about teaching, management and leadership, and wisdom to lead his
fellow teachers. However, this does not mean that someone must reach that age
to be a school administrator, just like some who became school administrators
before reaching 40. Furthermore, majority of the respondent teachers are between
34
20-40 years of age. This only proves that schools nowadays are dominated by the
young generations of teachers. The reason probably is the high demand of
teachers in the 21st century due to the robust increase of pupils and students. Two
years ago, Department of Education had a mass hiring of teachers in preparation
for the K to 12 Curriculum. This paved the way for the young teachers to be hired
to be the part of the teaching force of the Department of Education (DepEd). This
year, the new DepEd Secretary, Dr. Leonor Briones announced that the
Department of Education needs an army teachers, especially in Science and
Mathematics. Thus, it is expected that most teachers of the DepEd will be young
and full of energy due to the high demand in this profession. In fact, some
professionals just like engineers, nurses and graduates of business course are
already shifting to Teaching Profession due to unlimited opportunities in this craft.
With regard to the gender of the school administrators, eight (8) or 26.67 percent
of the respondents are male, while 22 or 73.33 percent are female. On the
teachers gender, there are 24 male teacher respondents who are 18 percent of
the total respondents, while teacher female respondents are 123 or 82.00 percent,
comprising the majority of the total respondents. The data gathered prove that
most teachers are female and the ratio among male and female teachers is almost
1:4. This means that female teachers are dominant in the teaching profession.
The data also reveal that most school administrators are female while only
few school administrators are male. The data contradict the usual clich that most
leaders are men while most subordinates are women. However, in education it is
the reverse. Female is the dominant gender in all educational systems because
35
only few men are entering the craft. The reason probably why women dominate
school leadership is that more women are in to teaching profession. If someone
notices, most teachers are women, and since most teachers are women, they have
likely more opportunities to be given a chance to lead the profession they
dominate. However, men are not discriminated in this craft; they are given equal
opportunity to grow and become leaders, it is that only few among many women
can be chosen from the group of potential teachers to be school administrators.
Using the data of the gender of the school administrators and teachers, he
surmises that since more teachers are female, they have more likely the chance
of being promoted to be school administrators than that of male teachers. Though
male and female teachers have equal opportunity in promotion and professional
growth, the female teachers have the higher chance of being promoted due to their
number.
In a nutshell, most teachers are female and their number seems to be an
advantage in the promotion- that is probably why there are more female
administrators than that of male. They are promoted, not only probably based on
competence, but based on their number compared to male.

36
Years of Experience. In determining the profile of the respondents, it is also
imperative to determine their years of experience. This Table presents the years
of experience of the respondent groups.
Table 4
Years of Experience of the Respondents
Years in Service F % F %
26-30 0 0 6 4.00
21-25 2 6.67 7 4.67
16-20 7 23.33 13 8.67
11-15 13 43.33 15 10.00
6-10 7 23.33 53 35.33
1-5 1 3.33 56 37.33
Total 30 100.00 150 100.00
In Table 4, the number of years in service of the school administrators and
teachers are presented. Their experiences of school administrators include the
years of being classroom teachers and being school administrators, whether in
private or in public institution. Based on the Table, only one (1) or 3.33 percent
school administrator has an experience between 1-5 years. Furthermore, seven
(7) who are 23.33 percent of the total school administrators. The majority of school
administrators have at least 11-15 years of experience. There are 13 of them or
43.33 percent of the total respondents. Continuing, seven (7) or 23.33 percent of
37
the school administrators have at least 16-20 years of experience, while only two
(2) or 6.67 percent have the experience between 21-25 years. On one hand, 37.33
percent of the teacher respondents have at least 1-5 years of experience. On the
other hand, 53 or 35 percent of the teachers have 6-10 years of experience while
those who have 11-15 years of experience are 15 or 10.00 percent of the total
respondents. The teachers who have 16-20 years of experience are 13 or 8.67
percent while teachers who have 21-25 years of experience are represented by
4.67 percent of the respondents. The teachers who have the most experience are
represented by six (6) or 4.00 percent of the respondents. However, no respondent
teacher has more than 31 years of experience.
The data revealed that the majority of the school administrators have
already more than 11 years of experience. This proves that the ladder to being a
school administrator is not easy. It needs experience to lead teachers who are also
intelligent and may be experienced than them. Thus, leading a school with less
experienced school administrator may be a disadvantage. However, less
experienced teachers are not deprived of becoming school administrators. Based
on the data, 26.66% of school administrators of Talisay City Division have less
than ten (10) years of experience. They may have the potentials in leading the
schools or may have the leadership attributes that made them exceptional among
their subordinates. In addition, the data are very clear that if someone wishes to
be school administrator, he must have enough years of experience to be qualified.
The data also reveal that no school administrator has more than 26 years
of experience. The researcher surmises that they have not yet reached those
38
number of years of experience due to their age as revealed on the ages of the
school administrators in table three (3) because 60.00% of the school
administrators are between 41-50 years of age in having more than 26 years of
experience may not be likely be achieved.
It can be deduced from the data that most of the teacher respondents have
ten (10) or less years of experience which if added will be totaled to 109 out of 150
respondents or 72.66 percent. This proves that many young teachers have now
been teaching at the Department of Education in Talisay City Division. This is due
to the mass hiring of teachers due to robust increase of students and pupils and to
the implementation of the K to 12 Curriculum. The increase of number of teachers
can also be credited to the governments effort in improving the education system
of the Philippines. The governments effort is now felt by many teachers because
of the massive increase of teachers in the government. However, more gaps must
be filled, such as classrooms, books and other school facilities that may improve
the teaching-learning process. Nonetheless, the increase of teaching force at the
Department of Education is already a huge leap for the government in its effort in
improving the educational system in the Philippines. President Duterte even
announced in public that he is willing to increase the salary of teachers to improve
their quality of life. The Presidents gesture really proves that the entire government
is very much willing to improve the quality of education and also improve the lives
of the teachers who are toiling to give the best education for the future leaders of
our nation.
39
Leadership Styles of School Administrators. The ways on how school
administrators deal with their subordinates can be a factor of their success as
leaders. These styles can be classified as behavioral, transformational and
transactional.
Table 5
Leadership Styles of School Administrators
X
Style Approach VD
N=30
I encourage my subordinates to participate
2.90 WM
and be involved in all activities.
Behavioral I observe my subordinates positive and
2.93 WM
negative behavior.
I listen to my subordinates concerns. 2.77 WM
I coach and mentor my subordinates in
attaining the mission, vision and core values 3.00 WM
of the Department of Education.
I have a charisma as a leader that makes my
2.70 WM
Transformational subordinates follow.
I motivate and inspire my subordinates. 3.00 WM
I challenge my subordinates intellectually. 2.63 WM
I attend to each of my subordinates needs.
2.40 WM
I use reward and punishment to make my
2.87 WM
subordinates follow.
I give specific instructions and I always want
2.30 M
things to be done immediately.
Transactional
I am willing to work for the benefit of the
2.97 WM
institution without counting the cost.
I want to preserve and maintain the culture of
2.67 WM
the Department of Education as an institution.
Legend
WM - Well-Manifested
M - Manifested
LM - Less-Manifested
X - Weighted Mean
N -Total frequency
40
As reflected in Table 5, under the behavioral style, school administrators
perceive that they well-manifested the style by encouraging subordinates to
participate and be involved in all activities, observing subordinates positive and
negative behavior and listening to their subordinates concerns. With regard to the
transformational style school administrators perceive that they well-manifested the
style by coaching and mentoring their subordinates in attaining the mission, vision
and core values of the Department of Education; having a charisma as a leader
that makes their subordinates follow; motivating and inspiring their subordinates;
challenge their subordinates intellectually; and, attending to each of their
subordinates needs. With regard to transactional leadership, school
administrators perceive that they well-manifested the style by using reward and
punishment to make my subordinates follow, having willingness to work for the
benefit of the institution without counting the cost and having the desire to preserve
and maintain the culture of the Department of Education as an institution. In
transactional leadership, only one approach in which they perceive that they
manifested and that is giving specific instructions and always wanting things to be
done immediately.
The data show that school administrators apply a conglomeration different
leadership styles. The most common styles that they all well-manifested are
coaching and mentoring their subordinates in attaining the mission, vision and core
values of the Department of Education and in motivating and inspiring their
subordinates. The styles in which they all well-manifested are not peculiar in
leadership because as school administrators, they must lead their subordinates to

41
the fulfillment of the mission, vision and core values of the institution they are
serving. The mission, vision and core values are guides on where direction each
school administrator must lead. School administrators are also bound to help their
subordinates attain such mission, vision and core values because the success of
the schools depend on them. A school administrator who does not coach or mentor
subordinates is an ineffective leader because the failure of each subordinate will
also be his failure as well. As school administrator, he must also motivate and
inspire subordinates in accomplishing their respective tasks. In other words,
subordinates must be encouraged and motivated so that they will not be felt alone
or unmonitored by their superiors. In Banduras social learning theory, modeling is
a pre-requisite of motivation and inspiration. A leader who is self-motivated can
create an unending ripple to the subordinates to follow the things that he is doing.
He may also lead them without controlling because he already had become a good
role model to his subordinates. To cite an example, the researcher himself
witnessed the former Regional Director of the Department of Education pick-up the
pieces of trash; when he saw his superior doing such thing, he followed him without
a word coming from her to do the same thing. In other words, one good deed done
by a leader can create a lasting impact to his subordinates; thus inspiring and
motivating them to follow such example. Furthermore, most of the school
administrators say that they well-manifest the style of encouraging their
subordinates to participate and be involved in all activities, in observing their
subordinates positive and negative behavior, in listening to their subordinates
concerns, in having the charisma as a leader that makes their subordinates follow,
42
in challenging their subordinates intellectually, in attending to each of their
subordinates needs, in willingness to work for the benefit of the institution without
counting the cost, and in desiring to preserve and maintain the culture of the
Department of Education as an institution.
As what was discussed, school administrators need to push their teachers
to their limit because they are the direct implementers of the curriculum; thus, the
success or failure of such implementation may boomerang to the school
administrators. They may be asked by their superiors, How did you help your
teachers? or What did you do to improve your teachers performance? These
questions may be some of the relevant questions that school administrators must
address to fully become effective school leaders. In addition to be effective school
administrators, they must be observant with regard to the behavior of their
subordinates. They must be sensitive to their subordinates feelings so that they
may know how to coach them and on how to adjust with them, because whether
they like it or not, they are dealing with people who are different from each other.
They all come from different walks of life and undergo different trainings. Thus,
school administrators must be sensitive with their attitudes, whether good or bad.
They, as Howard Gardner put it, must possess interpersonal intelligence to
effectively lead their subordinates. Furthermore, charisma can also be the asset of
school administrators. Some say that charismatic leaders are leaders who are
loved by their subordinates. Charisma is a special charm that only few possess.
Though no one knows how to measure charisma or to what extent leaders should
have it, one thing is for sure, leaders who possess it have a sense of power to
43
make others follow without controlling them. Continuing further, to be effective
leaders, school administrators must attend to the needs of their subordinates. They
have different concerns and needs, whether from parents, students, or most often
times to their leaders. School administrators must be good in finding ways to help
their subordinates. In School Based Management, these are what they call
technical assistance in which the school administrators help their subordinates
solve their problems and concerns pertinent to school.
School administrators, as what other leaders must have is the ear to listen
to their subordinates concerns, whether from a teacher asking him to accept his
late report or from a student requesting that he may transfer in other school one
month before the school year ends. In other words, school administrators must be
open-minded and are willing to listen to all concerns of all their subordinates
without being judgmental or partial. If all school administrators are open-minded,
they can produce better results in their decisions because they go through strict
scrutiny and different opinions were solicited to make better decisions for the
benefit of the school, especially for the students, who are the center of the
educative process.
It is also found out that school administrators challenge their subordinates
intellectually. This must be done by them because they are not just leading people
with emotion, but people with intellect; and the fact they are leading teachers, in
which school administrators must find ways on how to stimulate them intellectually.
Teachers as we know are creative and talented, not just because they need to, but
because most of them possess such characteristics. If school administrators will

44
never utilize the creativity and talents of his subordinates, they may feel bored or
burned-out because their expectations are not met by the leaders they trust and
respect.
This research establishes that most administrators work without counting
the cost. School administrators have Herculean tasks. Their functions and roles
are not only limited for the improvement of teachers performance; they are also
concerned with students performance, improving school facilities, budgeting the
school fund, community linkages and many more. So, in order to accomplish all
those functions or roles, they must work hard to be able to be effective and efficient.
Sometimes, they are also called by the Schools Division Superintendent or
Program School Supervisors to chair or facilitate academic and non-academic
activities, thus, these are additional tasks on their hand. In spite of these, they are
still not counting the amount of their work. As good soldiers, they follow the DepEd
mandate without tallying their contributions.
School administrators also well-manifest and manifest the willingness to
preserve and maintain the culture of the Department of Education as an institution.
They, as school administrators are guardians of the institutions perennial culture.
Though the preservation and maintenance of the culture of the Department of
Education is a debatable issue, because there are still some moves to change the
older cultures that are now quite obsolete or not applicable for the modern teachers
and students, the school administrators still perceive that the old days must
remain. The preservation and maintenance of the culture probably does not
include the old teaching methodologies and conventional way of disciplining

45
students, but they are probably referring to the preservation and maintenance of
culture of respect of teachers towards them, the students views to teachers and
to them as models and paragons of virtue, and the novelty of teaching profession.
It is true that education is a dynamic institution and must abreast itself to
modern needs of the society, but part of it as what school administrators view must
be preserved and maintained for the future generations to adopt. The values tested
by time are still the core foundation of the educational system. Educational system
is not a distorted system, it is only run by distorted individual, thus, school
administrators are the guardians of the system that contributes a lot to society.
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS ATTRIBUTES
Table 6, 7 and 8 present the leadership attributes of school administrators
in terms of knowledge, skill and attitude.
Knowledge. . Knowledge is a relevant attribute needed by school administrators,
because they lead academic institutions that creativity, wit and intelligence are
highly demanded.
Table 6
Leadership Attributes in Terms of Knowledge
TEACHERS
Attributes SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
Knowledge X VD X VD
N=30 N=150
Creative 2.93 WP 1.99 P
Reader 1.97 P 1.89 P
Intelligence 2.80 WP 2.05 P
Average
2.57 WP 1.98 P
Mean
46
Legend
WP - Well-Possessed
P - Possessed
LP - Less-Possessed
X - Weighted Mean
N -Total frequency
VD - Verbal Description
As reflected in Table 6, school administrators believe that they well-
possessed creativity and intelligence while they believe that they possess the
attribute of being a reader. On the other hand, teachers perceive that their school
administrators possessed creativity, being a reader and intelligence.
Based on the data, there are quite difference with the perception of the
school administrators and teachers in terms of creativity and intelligence. However
school administrators and teachers have the same perception that school
administrators possessed the attribute of being a reader. By comparing the
average mean on the perception of the school administrators and teachers, the
school administrators responses got the average mean of 2.57 which can be
described verbally as well-possessed, while teachers responses got the average
mean of 1.98 which can be verbally described as possessed. Though there is
difference between both respondent groups perception, it can still be stated that
at least school administrators possessed knowledge as school leaders.
In leadership, intelligence plays a vital role. Intelligent leaders are most
likely be successful in terms of decision making and innovation because they have
the capacity to think critically. Intelligence may be in born or nurtured. It can be
gained from reading, education and experience. In the case of school
administrators, they most likely gained their intelligence from different mediums,
but what is more important is that they use their intelligence in righteous ways.
47
Skill. School administrators efficiency in work as well as effectiveness in leading
their subordinates can be justified to skills they possessed as school leaders.
Table 7
Leadership Attributes in Terms of Skill
SCHOOL
Attributes TEACHERS
ADMINISTRATORS
Skill X VD X VD
N=30 N=150
Time- management 2.43 WP 1.86 P
Relationship building 2.93 WP 2.01 P
Sharing vision 3.00 WP 2.16 P
Rewarding 2.93 WP 1.67 P
Fair Decisiveness 2.83 WP 1.75 P
Consistency 2.37 WP 1.99 P
Competence 3.00 WP 2.01 P
Conducts effective meeting 2.63 WP 2.01 P
Speaking skills 2.33 WP 1.91 P
Empowerment 3.0 WP 2.07 P
Ability to inspire others 2.73 WP 1.92 P
Takes responsibility 3.00 WP 2.07 P
Takes risk 3.00 WP 2.09 P
Resourceful 3.00 WP 1.81 P
Organized 2.77 WP 2.19 P
Helps others to succeed 2.97 WP 1.83 P
Coaching people 2.93 WP 1.85 P
Average Mean 2.81 WP 1.95 P
Legend
WP - Well-Possessed
P - Possessed
LP - Less-Possessed
X - Weighted Mean
N -Total frequency
VD - Verbal Description
As presented in Table 7, school administrators perceive that they all well-
possessed the different skills in leading their respective schools. On the contrary,
teachers believe that their school administrators possessed all those skills.
48
The data reveal that there are polar differences on the perception of the
respondent groups. By looking at the average mean of each groups responses,
the school administrators responses have the average mean of 2.81 which can be
verbally described as well-possessed while teachers responses average mean is
1.95 which can be verbally described as possessed.
All of the school administrators said that they well-possessed the skills of
sharing vision, competence, taking responsibility, taking risk and being
resourceful. These skills that they claimed to well-possessed are essential
attributes of school administrators. Leaders who share their vision to subordinates
motivate subordinate achieve the vision of the leaders, competence in earned
through experience, taking a responsibility is standing firm for the decisions made,
taking risk is someones courage gamble for something that he thinks is correct or
righteous, and being resourceful is finding ways to address problems. However,
teachers perception are different from the school administrators. Teachers believe
that school administrators merely possessed the skills in leadership. It is therefore
fair enough to say that the self- evaluation of school administrators on their skills
are not in parallel with their teachers perception.
Though the perceptions of the school administrators are different from the
perceptions of the teachers, it can still be deduced that school administrators
attributes in terms of skill are possessed.

49
Attitude. Walter Scott said, For success, attitude is equally important as ability.
Thus in leadership, attitude may be a key factor the success of school leaders.
Table 8
Leadership Attributes in Terms of Attitude
SCHOOL
Attributes TEACHERS
ADMINISTRATORS
Attitude X VD X VD
N=30 N=150
Self-motivated 2.43 WP 1.79 P
Optimism & Positivity 2.73 WP 1.88 P
Courage 2.90 WP 1.98 P
Humor 2.10 P 2.16 P
Integrity 3.00 WP 1.93 P
Loyal 3.00 WP 2.05 P
Humility 2.90 WP 2.01 P
Honesty and Transparency 3.00 WP 1.59 LP
Listening 2.67 WP 1.87 P
Empathy and Compassion 2.60 WP 2.07 P
Clarity 2.53 WP 2.09 P
Open-minded 2.80 WP 1.80 P
Flexible 2.93 WP 2.15 P
Independent 3.00 WP 2.00 P
Focused 2.57 WP 2.21 P
Seeks out advice 2.97 WP 2.07 P
Confidence 2.87 WP 1.85 P
Accountable 3.00 WP 1.95 P
Character 2.73 WP 2.06 P
Passion 3.00 WP 1.99 P
Respectable 3.00 WP 2.13 P
Charisma 2.17 WP 2.01 P
Discipline 2.53 WP 2.31 P
Maturity 2.77 WP 2.11 P
Reasonable 2.30 P 2.11 P
Authenticity 2.63 WP 1.84 P
Respect for others 2.57 WP 2.00 P
Commitment 3.00 WP 2.08 P
Patience 2.70 WP 1.94 P
Average Mean 2.74 WP 2.0 P
Legend
WP - Well-Possessed
P - Possessed
LP - Less-Possessed
X - Weighted Mean
N -Total frequency
VD -Verbal Description
50
As revealed in Table 8, school administrators perceive that they well-
possessed the attitude needed by the school administrators, except one; that is
being reasonable in which based on their perception, they possessed. On one
hand, teachers are believe that their school administrators possessed all the
attitudes, except honesty and transparency in which teachers perceive that their
school administrators less-possessed.
School administrators are unanimous that they well-possessed honesty and
transparency, independence, passion, being respectable and commitment which
are for the researcher are the most important attitudes that school leaders must
well-possessed. Being honest and transparent can gain the respect of
subordinates; having independence can make school administrators free from
political forces that would try to sway their decision making; having the passion
makes the job of being school administrator is not a job but a calling; being
respectable is gaining the respect of others without even asking for it; and, being
committed to the job is someones dedication to the job and willingness to take
responsibility to his actions and decisions.
The average mean of the school administrators perception is 2.74 which
falls on well-possessed, while the teacher responses have the average mean of
2.0 which can be verbally described as possessed.
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS FUNCTIONS
Table 9, 10 and 11 presents the functions of school administrators functions
in terms of Basic Education, Education Governance and Regulatory and
Developmental.
51
Basic Education. The Basic Education functions are the roles of school
administrators that primarily deal on efficiency of school administrators through
planning, punctuality and attendance.
Table 9
Functions of School Administrators in Basic Education
SCHOOL
Functions TEACHERS
ADMINISTRATORS
Basic Education X VD X VD
N=30 N=150
prepare and implement School
3.00 WC 2.01 C
Improvement Plan (SIP).
prepare Annual Improvement Plan (AIP),
Annual Procurement Plan (APP), Project
Procurement Management Plan (PPMP),
3.00 WC 1.83 C
and Monthly Maintenance and Other
Operating Expenses (MOOE) Budget
Request.
adopt and implement annual plans and
3.00 WC 2.04 C
budget.
plan and manage the performance of all
2.77 WC 2.09 C
personnel.
prepare and submit accurate reports on
2.87 WC 2.20 C
time in a year (SF 1,2,3,5,PAR,SCF48).
achieve zero (0) number of times tardy in
2.40 WC 2.24 C
a year.
complete 100% of the required attendance
both academic and non-academic 3.00 WC 1.91 C
activities in a year.
Average Mean 2.86 WC 2.05 C
Legend
WC - Well-Complied
C - Complied
LC - Less-Complied
X - Weighted Mean
N -Total frequency
Table 9 reveals that with regard to school administrators function in basic
education, school administrators perceive that they well-complied their functions.

52
On the other hand, teacher believe that school administrators complied their
respective functions.
By looking into the average mean of the respondent groups, the school
administrators responses got the average mean of 2.86 which can be verbally
described as well-complied. On the other hand, teachers responses the average
mean of 2.05 which can be interpreted as complied. The two means on the school
administrators and teachers responses establish that there are contradiction on
their perceptions.
The responses polarity establish that teachers and school administrators
have different views on the compliance of the functions.
Education Governance. Table 10 presents the school administrators and
teachers perception to the compliance of school administrators in Education
Governance. The specific tasks in Education Governance include the monitoring
of classroom environment and mortality rate of students, observation of classes,
technical assistance to teachers, proper liquidation of budget, addressing the
professional needs of the teachers and implementing Department of Education
Order on Child Protection Policy.
The Table tries to identify the school administrators and teachers
perception whether the school administrators complied with these functions.

53
Table 10
Functions of School Administrators in Education Governance
SCHOOL
Functions TEACHERS
ADMINISTRATORS
Education Governance X VD X VD
N=30 N=150
organize and monitor different programs,
activities and projects (PAPs) to attain 2.73 WC 1.95 C
desired learning outcomes.
implement and monitor PAPs to achieve
performance indicators using goals and
targets in the following in Participation, 2.93 WC 1.95 C
Drop-outs, Cohort Survival and
Completion
observe classes among the 25% of the
total number of teachers in school every 2.77 WC 1.59 LC
quarter.
provide technical assistance to Master
Teachers and/or Department 2.73 WC 2.14 C
Heads/Subject Coordinators.
inspect and evaluate the school physical
3.00 WC 2.20 C
plant and equipment/facilities.
submit a complete school MOOE
1.33 C 1.33 LC
liquidation report every month.
post updated copies of liquidation report
and other financial resources in the 3.00 WC 2.12 C
transparency board.
conduct In-service Training of Teachers
(INSET) based on Teachers Strengths 2.60 WC 2.29 C
and Needs Assessment (TSNA).
propose teachers to attend seminars and
3.00 WC 2.09 C
trainings.
prepare and submit appropriate teaching
3.00 WC 1.35 LC
and ancillary loads of teachers.
use conflict management of school-based
3.00 WC 2.21 C
personnel efficiently and effectively.
ensure compliance with the Child
3.00 WC 1.87 C
Protection Policy of the Department.
54
Legend
WC - Well-Complied
C - Complied
LC - Less-Complied
X - Weighted Mean
N -Total frequency
With regard to the functions of school administrators in education
governance, Table 10 reveals that school administrators perceive that they well-
complied the all the functions, except in submitting a complete school MOOE
liquidation report every month in which they complied. On the other hand, teachers
perceive that school administrators complied with all their functions except in
observing classes among the 25% of the total number of teachers in school every
quarter, in submitting a complete school MOOE liquidation report every month and
in preparing and submitting appropriate teaching ancillary loads of teachers in
which teachers believe that school administrators less-complied.
By comparing the average mean of the respondent groups, school
administrators perception in all their functions education governance are well-
complied, while complied based on the teachers perceptions.
Regulatory and Developmental. Table 11 presents the school administrators
and teachers perception to the compliance of school administrators in Education
Governance. The functions in Regulatory and Developmental include requesting
of school resources, implementing orders, addressing teachers requests,
community linkages and conducting of action research.

55
Table 11
Functions of School Administrators in Regulatory and Developmental
SCHOOL
Functions TEACHERS
ADMINISTRATORS
Regulatory and Developmental X VD X VD

N=30 N=150
request additional provision of crucial
resources. (i.e. a. Teachers, b. Water and
3.00 WC 2.07 C
Sanitation, c. Seats,
d. Textbooks, e. Classrooms)
implement DepEd Memoranda and
3.00 WC 2.11 C
Orders.
assess and endorse teachers requests. 2.80 WC 1.90 C
coordinate with private schools/institutions
3.00 WC 2.49 C
within the barangay.
conduct action research based on school
2.13 WC 1.15 LC
needs and provide interventions.
prepare and implement project proposal
3.00 WC 2.23 C
for partnerships and linkages.
Legend
WC - Well-Complied
C - Complied
LC - Less-Complied
X - Weighted Mean
N -Total frequency
As shown in Table 11, school administrators perceive that they well-
complied all their functions in regulatory and developmental. On the other hand,
teachers perceive that school administrators complied with all the functions in
regulatory and developmental, except in conducting of action research based on
school needs and provide interventions.
By comparing the average mean of the respondent groups, the school
administrators perception in their regulatory and developmental function got the
average mean of 2.82 in which can be verbally described as well-complied, while

56
on the perception in the given functions, the average mean is 1.99 in which the
can be interpreted as complied.
The results in table 9, 10 and 11 establish that the most of school
administrators believe that they well-complied their functions, except in conducting
action research based on school needs in which majority believe that they observe
such function. However, teachers perceive that their school administrators
complied their functions.
Though most school administrators believe that they well-complied their
functions, teacher have quite polar view. The well-compliance of the school
administrators to their functions are quite a Herculean task because they will have
to perform different functions. The functions given to them are too many to deal
with. The Department of Education must therefore revisit the functions of school
administrators for them excellently well-complied with their functions.
Since most of the school administrators say they well-complied their
respective functions, they are leaders who are capable of redesigning their school
systems. With their knowledge of their functions or roles, the researcher would like
to borrow the words of Barrett and Beyer (2004) that principals or school
administrators can already increase the demands of teaching and learning and can
instill passion in teachers and provide effective leadership to motivate teachers to
engage and energize students. Furthermore, based on their assumption, if the
school administrators are fully aware of their functions, they lead their schools in
rethinking goals, priorities, finances, staffing, curriculum, pedagogies, learning
resource assessment, methods, technology, and the use of time and space.
57
On the teachers observation on the compliance on the functions or roles of
their school administrators, most believe that their school administrators complied
with most of the different functions or roles of school administrators. However, one
function of their school administrators is less-complied and that is the conducting
of action research based on school needs and provide interventions. With this
observation from their school administrators, it seems that their school
administrators, if they perform such function do not present or communicate to
their subordinates that they conduct such research and provide such intervention.
Communicating to their subordinates that they conduct such research and provide
interventions to the problems and needs of their respective schools is a must in
order for their subordinates to be fully aware of what their school administrators
are doing. Moreover, sharing to their subordinates that they perform such function
may be helpful on their part because the result of their research may be helpful on
their part for the teachers may help them find such intervention and help solve the
problems that may be found-out or discovered from their researches. As stated by
Krasnoff (2015), effective principals support teachers. She further said that
school administrators provide instructional support by emphasizing the value of
research based strategies and applying them effectively to their own school. With
this, the school administrators see opportunities by communicating the result of
research-based strategies to improve classroom instruction as well as schools
performance.
58
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RESPONDENT GROUPS
PERCEPTION TO THE ADMINISTRATORS ATTRIBUTES AND FUNCTIONS
In order to determine the significant difference between the perception of
the school administrators to their attributes and functions and the teachers
perception to their school administrators attributes and functions, the statistical
treatment of data was computed using the Z-Test Calculation.
Attributes. Table 12, 13 and 14 present the Significant Difference between the
respondent groups perception to the school administrators attributes in terms of
knowledge, skill and attitude.
Table 12
Significant Difference between the Respondent Groups Perception to the
School Administrators Attributes in Terms of Knowledge
Z-Test: Two Sample for Means

Sample 1 Sample 2
Mean 2.566666667 1.976666667
Known Variance 0.271233 0.006533
Observations 3 3
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
Level of Significance 0.05
z 1.93897896
z Critical two-tail
Lower Critical Value -1.959963985
Upper Critical Value 1.959963985
As reflected in the Table, the population 1 sample which are the school
administrators has a mean of 2.566666667 while the population 2 which are the
teachers has the mean of 1.976666667. The Z-Test was used to calculate the
significant difference between the perceptions of the school administrators with the
59
level of significance of 0.05 using the Two-Tail Test, in which lower critical value is
-1.959963985 and upper critical value of 1.959963985.
The test reveals that there is no significant difference between the
perceptions of the school administrators and the teachers as indicated by the Z-
Value of 1.93897896. Therefore, the null hypothesis with regard to the perception
of the school administrators and teachers to attributes relating to knowledge is
confirmed.
Findings can say that school administrators as well as the teachers believe
that the school administrators of Talisay City Division possess knowledge with
regard to intelligence, creativity and being a reader.
Table 13
School Administrators Attributes in Terms of Skill

Sample 1 Sample 2
Mean 2.814705882 1.952941176
Observations 17 17
z 12.81722634
z Critical two-tail
As reflected in the Table, the population sample 1 are the school
administrators which has the mean of 2.814705882 while the population 2 sample
60
are the teachers which has the mean 1.952941176. Using the Z-Test with critical
Two-Tail, with the lower critical of -1.959963985 and upper critical value of
1.959963985, with 0.05 level of significance the test reveals that the perception of
the school administrators and the teacher with regard to the skill of the school
administrators are significantly different as indicated by the Z-Value of
12.81722634 which is greater than the upper critical value of 1.959963985.
Therefore, the null hypothesis of no significant difference is hereby rejected.
In other words, there is a significant difference between the perception of the
school administrators and the teachers with regard to skill attribute of the school
administrators.
Table 14
School Administrators Attributes in Terms of Attitude

Sample 1 Sample 2
Mean 2.737931034 2.001034483
Observations 29 29
z 13.24359979
z Critical two-tail
Table 14 indicates that the sample 1 population are school administrators
with the weighted mean of 2.737931034 while the sample 2 population are the
61
teachers with the mean of 2.001034483. The Z Critical Two-Tail Value is used with
the lower critical value of -1.959963985 and upper critical value of 1.959963985
with 0.05 level of significance.
The Z-Test reveals through the Z-Value of 13.24359979 which is far higher
than the upper critical value of 1.959963985 that there is a significant difference
between the perception of the school administrators and teachers with regard to
school administrators attributes with regard to attitude. Therefore, the null
hypothesis is rejected. This means that there is a significant difference between
the perceptions of the respondent groups with regard to the attitude of the school
administrators.
In summarizing the Z-Test significant difference between the perception of
the school administrators and teachers with regard to the school administrators
attributes, it is found that there is no significant difference between the school
administrators attributes in terms of knowledge to the perception of the respondent
groups. However, there is a wide significant difference between the respondent
groups perception with regard to skill and attitude, thus with these the significant
difference, the null hypothesis is reject with regard to these two general attributes.
Tables 15, 16 and 17 present the Z-Test calculation of the significant
difference on the perception of the school administrators and teachers with regard
to their functions in Basic Education, Education Governance and Regulatory and
Developmental.
62
Functions. Table 15, 16 and 17 present the Significant Difference between the
respondent groups perception to the school administrators functions in Basic
Education, Education Governance and Regulatory and Developmental.
Table 15
Compliance of School Administrators Functions in Basic Education

Sample 1 Sample 2
Mean 2.862857143 2.045714286
Observations 7 7
z 8.095513218
z Critical two-tail
The Table shows that the sample 1 population are the school administrators
with the mean of 2.862857143 while the sample 2 population are the teachers with
the mean of 2.045714286. The Z-Critical two tail value with the lower critical value
of -1.959963985 and upper critical value of 1.959963985 with 0.05 level of
significance was used.
The test reveals that since the Z-Value of 8.095513218 is greater than the
upper critical value of 1.959963985, the null hypothesis is rejected. Thus, there is
a significant difference between the respondent groups perception with regard to
the compliance of the school administrators to their functions in Basic Education.

63
Table 16
Compliance of School Administrators Functions in Education Governance

Sample 1 Sample 2
Mean 2.7575 1.924166667
Observations 12 12
z 5.01172864
z Critical two-tail
Table reveals that the sample 1 population are school administrators with
the mean of 2.7575 while the sample 2 population are the teachers with the mean
of 1.924166667. The Z- Critical Two-Tail value is utilized with the lower critical
value of -1.959963985 and upper critical value of 1.959963985 with 0.05 level of
significance.
The Z-Test reveals through the Z-Value of 5.01172864 which is higher than
the upper critical value of 1.959963985 that there is a significant difference
between the respondent groups perception with regard to the functions of school
administrators in education governance.
Therefore the null hypothesis is rejected. The research hypothesis is
affirmed that there is a significant difference between the school administrators

64
and teachers perception to school administrators functions in Education
Governance.
Table 17
Compliance of School Administrators Functions in Regulatory and
Developmental

Sample 1 Sample 2
Mean 2.821666667 1.991666667
Known Variance 0.1212217 0.208417
Observations 6 6
z 3.54107089
z Critical two-tail
The Table indicates that the sample 1 population are school administrators
with the weighted mean of 2.821666667 while the sample 2 population are the
teachers with the mean of 1.991666667. The Z Critical Two-Tail Value is used with
the lower critical value of -1.959963985 and upper critical value of 1.959963985
with 0.05 level of significance.
The test reveals that since the Z-Value of 3.54107089 is higher than the
upper critical value of 1.959963985, this proves that there is a significant difference
between the respondent groups perception to the compliance of school
administrators in functions in Regulatory and Developmental. Thus, the null
hypothesis is rejected.
65
ISSUES AND CONCERNS ENCOUNTERED BY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
School administrators, as leaders also face different issues and concerns.
The sources of these problems and concerns may come people, instructional
materials, school budget or facilities. The Table presents the issues and concerns
encountered by the school administrators.
Table 18
Issues and Concerns
Issues and Concerns F %

Teachers punctuality and attendance during meetings. 30 100.00
Teachers lack of support in school activities. 30 100.00
Teachers lack of skills in technology. 30 100.00
Teachers who do not come to class to teach. 30 100.00
Teachers who escape or who go out to school during office or class
30 100.00
hours.
Teachers efficiency in submitting reports and forms. 30 100.00
Teachers attitude towards work. 30 100.00
Teachers lack of resourcefulness in addressing the needs of the
30 100.00
learners.
Teachers methodologies in teaching. 30 100.00
Lack of school facilities such as classrooms, comfort rooms,
27 90.00
computer and science laboratory, chairs, blackboards, etc.
Lack of Instructional Materials (e.g. books, curriculum guides,
30 100.00
modules, etc.)
Maintaining cleanliness and orderliness in school 30 100.00
Behavioral problems of students (e.g. bullying, teasing, stealing,
30 100.00
absenteeism, cutting classes, etc.)
Students lack of support from parents 30 100.00
Budgeting and liquidating the Maintenance and Other Operating
30 100.00
Expenses (MOOE)
Heavy load of paper works 30 100.00
Lack of monitoring from the Division office regarding my
27 90.00
performance as a school administrator.
Interruption of work due to the meetings, seminars and other
30 100.00
directives from the Division Office
Legend
F - Frequency
% - Percentage
66
In Table 18, which assesses the common problems encountered by the
school administrators, all (30 or 100.00 percent) of the school administrators
perceive that they have the problems on teachers punctuality and attendance
during meetings, on teachers lack of support in school activities, on teachers lack
of skills in technology, on teachers who do not come to class to teach, on teachers
efficiency in submitting reports and forms, on teachers attitude towards work, on
teachers lack of resourcefulness in addressing the needs of the learners, on
teachers methodologies in teaching, on the lack of Instructional Materials,
Maintaining cleanliness and orderliness in school, in budgeting and liquidating the
Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE), in heavy load of paper
works, and on interruption of work due to the meetings, seminars and other
directives from the Division Office. On one hand, 27 or 90.00 percent of the school
administrators believe that they have the problems on the lack of school facilities
such as classrooms, comfort rooms, computer and science laboratory, chairs,
blackboards, etc., and on the lack of monitoring from the Division office regarding
my performance as a school administrator.
Based on the data presented, the school administrators encounter different
problems. The source of those problems come from teachers, the lack of school
facilities, lack of instructional materials, students behavior, parental support, the
budgeting and liquidating of the MOOE, heavy load of paper works, lack of
monitoring from the Division Office and interruption of work due to meetings,
seminars and other directives from the Division Office. With regard to the school
administrators problems regarding their teachers, Hoy and Hoy (2003) as cited by
67
Nelson, et al. (2007) stated that one of the key roles of any school administrator is
to transform and inspire the efforts of the teachers. Thus, if ever some teachers do
not do not come to meetings early or some teachers do not support school
activities or teachers attitude towards work, the school administrators must find
ways to motivate teachers to be accountable and to be involved. In this way,
teachers are already part, if not the driving force of all activities. Moreover, another
problems of school administrators are teachers who do not come to class to teach,
teachers who do not go to their respective classes, teachers efficiency in
submitting reports, teachers lack of resourcefulness in addressing the needs of
the learners and their methodologies in teaching. With these problems, since
school administrators are responsible for schools, they must take the responsibility
for the success or failure of their schools. As leaders, they must encourage
subordinates, support and reward teachers who teach well, and make sure that
teachers are guided towards the attainment of the mission, vision and core values
of the Department of Education. For Fullan (2001), practicing teachers gladly give
their support to administrators who assume the roles of instructional leaders. This
means that when school administrators govern their teachers toward the
improvement of instruction, the teachers or their subordinates will most likely
support them.
Moreover, most of them find that the lack of school facilities, lack of
instructional materials and maintaining cleanliness and orderliness in school are
problems. These problems are needed to be addressed by them. These problems
are part of their responsibilities as stated in R.A. 9155. The law states that school
68
heads must develop the school education program and school improvement plan;
create an environment within the school that is conducive to teaching and learning;
improve and expand school facilities and provide instructional materials and
equipment. With these responsibilities, it is expected that school administrators
have perennial concerns with the stated problem; all they need to do is to find ways
to address those problems from time to time. They may accept donations, gifts,
bequests and grants to help them improve facilities and provide instructional
materials. The Department of Education also, as the institution that govern the
entire public basic education system finds ways to address such problems.
With regard to behavioral problems, these are common because in the
psychology of learning, students and pupils and diverse, and since they are
diverse, they have different values and attitudes that teachers and school
administrators must deal with. If the teachers may discipline learners who violate
school rules and policies, and so the school administrators, through a rigorous
process has the power to discipline students or pupils who violate school rules and
policies. For instance, for first and other offenses, which are not very serious in
nature, a suspension from school not to exceed three (3) days may be authorized
by the principal without the approval of the Division Superintendent. However,
parents must be informed by the teacher or the school principal of any misconduct
on the part of their children for which disciplinary action is necessary (Paragraph
1.1.2, Section 1, Chapter III, Part IV of the DECS Manual). This is only one case
in which the school administrator may impose sanctions to deviant students. The
school administrators may reprimand or advise students to transfer with the

69
corresponding recommendation from the teacher or guidance
coordinator/counselor.
Another problem that school administrators encounter is the lack of support
from parents. They play the vital role in rearing the future leaders of our country
but sometimes that vital role is ignored by them. Since the school administrators
run the educational institution, part of their concern is to be in cooperation with
parents, but sometimes parents do not cooperate. Even the researcher, as
classroom teacher experiences the same. Some parents during Homeroom
Meetings do not attend and also in General Parents-Teachers Assembly. Some
parents also do not or never monitor their children in school. These concerns are
also concerns of school administrators. As leaders of schools, the problems of the
teachers are their problems, and part of the problems is the lack of support from
parents.
Additional problems that they face is the Budgeting and Liquidating the
Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) and heavy load of paper
works. The MOOE is given monthly in every school, but before they get the MOOE
for the next month, they first must liquidate the MOOE for the previous month.
However, liquidating and budgeting MOOE can be strenuous because the school
administrators are the only persons who have the control of the money and the
money cannot just be spent in anything, because the expected expenses in every
school year are already reflected in the Annual Procurement Plan (AIP) and there
are rules and regulations on how to spend such budget per school. For all
administrators, this is a problem because they already have a lot functions to

70
attend to, and liquidating and budgeting MOOE is another burden on their part.
However, they may delegate the purchase, canvass and liquidation to their
teachers or staff, but the responsibility and liability lie in their hands for the MOOE
are under their names. Thus, MOOE is another burden for them in addition to
heavy load of paper works.
In addition to the problems aforementioned, school administrators have
also problems on the lack of monitoring from the Division Office regarding their
performance as school administrator. The reason probably why they consider it a
problem is because they perceive that their superiors often visit their schools for
monitoring. As teacher, the researcher notices that supervisors only visit the school
at least once in a year, thus, it is not enough for school administrators also need
to be coached and to be monitored. As leaders, they are also imperfect, and their
performances need to be assessed and evaluated by their superiors from time to
time.
One last problem that school administrators encounter is interruption of
work due to meetings, seminars and other directives from the Division Office. They
consider it problem because when they are outside the school, they leave their
respective schools that they manage. Though, they are good soldiers who follow
the directives from the Division Office, the Division Office must also minimize the
calling of the school administrators for they need to run their schools smoothly
without so many interruptions. The major concerns of the school administrators
are within their respective schools, thus, meetings, seminars and other directives
have little meaning to them because their main function is running a school.
Chapter 4
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary of Findings
It was established that most school administrators are between 41-50 years
of age. With regard to their gender, majority of them are female who consisted of
73.33 percent of the total respondents. On their experiences, the data showed that
most of school administrators have at least 11 years of experience.
On the teacher respondents age, it was revealed that majority of the
teachers in both elementary and secondary levels are between 20-40 years of age.
On their gender, the majority gender was female. The data showed that the ratio
between male and female teachers was almost 1:4. With regard to their
experiences, 72.66 percent or 109 of total teacher respondents had ten (10) or
less years of experience.
On the leadership styles of the school administrators, through the analysis
to the weighted mean of the school administrators responses, it was found that
school administrators well-manifested almost all behavioral, transformational and
transactional leadership styles. Only one approach under transactional leadership
according to them is manifested, and that is giving specific instructions and always
desiring to make things done immediately.
Moreover, to the attributes of school administrators, school administrators
through the average mean of 2.57 believe that they well-possessed the attributes
under knowledge. However, teachers through the average mean of 1.98 perceive
that their school administrators possessed knowledge. With regard to skill as an

72
attribute, school administrators with the average mean of 2.81 perceived that they
well-possessed the attributes. On one hand, teachers perceive through the
average mean of 1.95 that their school administrators possessed the attributes
under skill. Furthermore, it was also found that school administrators through the
average mean of 2.74 perceive that they well-possessed attitude, while teachers
were consistent through the average mean of 2.0 believe that school
administrators possessed the attribute.
On the functions of school administrators in basic education, education
governance and regulatory and developmental, school administrators said that
they well-complied their functions under basic education, however, teachers
believe their school administrators complied with basic education functions.
Furthermore, in education governance, school administrators believe that they
well-complied their functions, while teachers perceive that school administrators
complied such function. Lastly, in regulatory and developmental, school
administrators believe that they well-complied this function, while teachers believe
that their school administrators complied with this function.
In the test of the significant difference using Z-Test with the upper critical
value of 1.95963985 and lower critical value of -1.95963985 with 0.05 level of
significant difference, that in knowledge as attribute of school administrators, the
null hypothesis is confirmed. In other words, both school administrators and
teacher agreed that school administrators possessed the knowledge as school
leaders. On the attributes of skill and attitude, the null hypothesis is rejected.
73
Therefore, there is a significant difference between the respondent groups
perception on the possession of school administrators of those attributes.
In testing the significant difference using Z-Test with the upper critical value
of 1.95963985 and lower critical value of -1.95963985 with 0.05 level of significant
difference on to the respondent groups perceptions to the functions of school
administrators in basic education, education governance and regulatory and
developmental, it was found that there is a significant difference between the
school administrators perception to their functions and the teachers perception to
the functions of school administrators. Therefore, the null is rejected. It means that
there is a significant difference between the school administrators and teachers
perception with regard to the function of school administrators.
On the issues and concerns encountered by the school administrators, it is
found that they have the problems on teachers punctuality and attendance during
meetings, on teachers lack of support in school activities, on teachers lack of skills
in technology, on teachers who do not come to class to teach, on teachers
efficiency in submitting reports and forms, on teachers attitude towards work, on
teachers lack of resourcefulness in addressing the needs of the learners, on
teachers methodologies in teaching, on the lack of Instructional Materials,
maintaining cleanliness and orderliness in school, in budgeting and liquidating the
Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE), in heavy load of paper
works, and on interruption of work due to the meetings, seminars and other
directives from the Division Office. On one hand, 27 or 90.00 percent of the school
administrators believed that they had the problems on the lack of school facilities
74
such as classrooms, comfort rooms, computer and science laboratory, chairs,
blackboards, etc., and on the lack of monitoring from the Division office regarding
my performance as a school administrator.
Conclusions
Based on the findings, it can be concluded that before someone becomes
a school administrator, he must have at least 11 years of experience before he
becomes fully qualified for the job, however, years of experience does not preclude
someone for aspiring to be a school administrator for some school administrators
have less than 11 years of experience. Moreover, most of the school
administrators are female, because in the teaching profession, female gender is
the dominant gender. On the leadership styles of school administrators, it was
established that school administrators do not follow specific leadership style,
instead they use behavioral, transformational and transactional leadership styles
respectively. With regard to functions, the perception of school administrators is
that they well-complied their functions in basic education, education governance
and developmental and regulatory. On the contrary, the teacher perceive that their
school administrators merely complied with those functions. Using the Z-Test to
find the significant difference, the null hypothesis with regard to school
administrators attribute in terms of knowledge is affirmed. However, there is a
significant difference between the respondent groups perception to the attributes
of school administrators in terms of skill and attitude, thus rejecting the null
hypothesis to that extent was the decision. Moreover, on the test of significant
difference between respondent groups perception to the compliance to the

75
functions of school administrators in basic education and, education governance
and developmental and regulatory, there is a significant difference between their
perceptions, thus the hypothesis must be rejected.
In addition to the conclusion, school administrators face a lot of problems
with regard to teachers, students, school facilities, instructional materials, parents,
and superiors that affect their functions or roles as school leaders.
In a nutshell, school administrators need enough experience to lead their
respective schools effectively and efficiently. They also apply different leadership
styles; they have different attributes; they have different functions or roles; and,
they encounter different issues and concerns that may affect their performance as
leaders, but what is most important is that they survive from all the challenges that
they may encounter along the way as leaders of the schools of the Department of
Education.
Recommendations
The following recommendations are offered for related studies on the
leadership styles, attributes, functions and issues and concerns encountered
school administrators.
1. Potential school administrators must have proper training on the functions
or roles of school administrators before taking the position of school administrators;
2. The Division and Central Office must find ways to minimize or if not
narrow the functions of school administrators as instructional leaders and school
managers;
76
3. Teachers must also be also be aware of the functions of school
administrators to fully understand and appreciate the tasks and achievements of
their leaders.
4. School leadership empowerment must be given more focus by the
Department of Education for it serves as the core foundation of more productive
schools;
5. Given that this study focuses on the attributes of school administrators,
the Department of Education must define the attributes that it finds to its school
administrators; and,
6. Provide opportunities for school administrators to pursue their
professional growth through scholarship program and human resource
development, and encourage them to undergo further graduate study.

Chapter 5
OUTPUT
Education Progression-Driven Era Development Plan
This output presents the Education Progression-Driven Era Development
Plan for School Administrators as basis for their personal, leadership, research
and functional improvement as leaders of the schools.
Rationale of Education Progression-Driven Era Development Plan for School
Administrators
The career ladder to being a school administrator is laborious and steep for
only few are chosen to occupy such position. Just for instance, of approximately
1,200 strong teachers of Talisay City Division only 38 are privileged to be
designated as school administrators. Thus, a school administrator must be well-
equipped with necessary experience and leadership skills to be able to run
effectively the school.
The first step to the career ladder is to hold a Bachelors Degree in Education.
This does not matter whether in elementary and secondary education. After
earning the Bachelors Degree in Education, someone must pass the Licensure
Examination Test for Teachers and be hired at the Department of Education as
Regular Permanent Teacher. The second step is be a successful teacher who has
a vast teaching experience and demonstrate leadership skills. Someone must
show his potential to lead his fellow teachers and must have wide array of
leadership skills to be qualified for the job. The next step is apply as school
administrator position when there are vacancies and/or be recognized by the

78
Schools Division Superintendent to deemed qualified for the position. In some
cases, the Schools Division Superintendent designates teachers to be school
administrators during vacancies. This due to his wide latitude of discretion of
choosing which he thinks the best person for the job. When someone is considered
qualified for being a school administrator, he must be designated or appointed by
the Schools Division Superintendent. Designation and appointment are two
different terms. Designation is temporary occupation of the position. In other
words, if someone if designated as school administrator, he can be replaced
anytime and serves for the pleasure of the Schools Division Superintendent. On
the other hand, appointment is being given a regular permanent position as
principal or head teacher. Receiving an appointment means that he has to occupy
the position until retirement, resignation or death, except for being promoted to
higher position or dismissed from service. The last step for the school career ladder
is assuming the position as school administrator. But before assuming the position,
the designated or appointed school administrator must be given an assignment
order or appointment duly signed by the Schools Division Superintendent. Then,
the designated or appointed school administrator must be installed in the school
that he will be serving. On that moment, he already assumes the position as school
administrator.
79
The figure below shows the Career Ladder for School Administrator.
Assume the position of School

Administrator.
Be designated as Teacher In-

charge or be appointed as Head
Teacher of Full-fledged
Principal.
Apply for the position of being a
school administrator or be
recognized by superior(s) as the
future school administrator.
Become successful teacher who
has a vast teaching experience
and demonstrate leadership
skills.
Earn Bachelors Degree in
Education and pass the
Licensure Examination
Teachers.
A Career Ladder: A Path from Teacher to School Administrator
Figure 3
80
The assumption of the office carries with it the responsibilities of school
administrator. Just like a metamorphoses, he also follows certain stages as he
functions as school leader.
The researcher proposes four stages for school administrators. The first stage
is the Novice School Administrator Stage in which the school administrator has no
more than two (2) years of administrative experience, has less than or more than
40 hours of relevant leadership training or has completed at least the Academic
Requirements for any relevant Masters Degree. The possible roles and
responsibilities of the Novice School Administrator includes the handling of school
with less than 20 teachers, leading the basic education, education governance,
regulatory and developmental and performing other functions that may be
indicated in the IPCRF for School Administrators. The second stage is the Model
School Administrator in which the school administrator has more than two years
but less than five (5) years of administrative experience, has less than or more
than 80 hours relevant leadership training or has at least completed any relevant
Masters Degree. The Model School Administrators possible roles and
responsibilities may include the handling of school with more than 20 teachers,
leading the Basic education, education governance, regulatory and developmental
and other functions that may be indicated in the IPCRF for School Administrators
and chairing or facilitating different Division activities as may be required by the
Division Office and sitting as a member of the selection committee in hiring
teachers, head teachers or any other positions. The third stage is the Experienced
School Administrator in which the school administrator has more than five (5) years
81
but less than 10 years of administrative experience, has less than or more than
120 hours relevant leadership training and has at least completed any relevant
Masters Degree or has completed the Academic Requirements to any relevant
Doctorate Degree (Ed.D, Ph.D, DPA, DA). The possible roles and responsibilities
of the Experienced School Administrator includes the handling of school with more
than 20 teachers, leading the Basic education, education governance, regulatory
and developmental and other functions that may be indicated in the IPCRF for
School Administrators, chairing or facilitating different Division activities as may be
required by the Division Office and sitting as a member of the selection committee
in hiring teachers, head teachers or any other positions. The fourth and last stage
of the school administrators career is being a Master School Administrator in
which the school administrator has already accumulated at least ten years of
administrative experience, participated less than or more than 160 hours relevant
leadership training or has at least completed any relevant Masters Degree or has
any relevant Doctorate Degree (Ed.D, Ph.D, DPA, DA). The Master School
Administrators possible roles and responsibilities may include the handling of
school with more than 20 teachers, leading the Basic education, education
governance, regulatory and developmental and other functions that may be
indicated in the IPCRF for School Administrators, chairing or facilitating different
Division activities as may be required by the Division Office or functioning as
District head or coordinator.
Though all stages may not be reached by school administrators, they may
likely accomplish at least two of the stages in their school leadership experience.
82
With the stages given, school administrators must continually grow personally and
professionally. They must continually be immersed to different leadership
trainings, seminars and workshops to be more effective and efficient leaders of our
schools. Thus, they may be able to cope-with the challenges that they may face
along the way.
School administrators, whether novice school administrators, model school
administrators, experienced school administrators or master school administrators
must continually be immersed to different meaningful trainings, seminars and
workshops to be able to improve their performances as school leaders.
Objectives of Education Progression-Driven Era Development Plan for
School Administrators
The Education Progression-Driven Era Development Plan designed by the
researcher aims to improve school administrators performance by engaging them
in different meaningful activities.
Progression-Driven Era Development Plan is a path to greater responsibility
and different types of roles for School Administrators.
The Progression-Driven Era Development Plan for School Administrators
aims to:
provide personal, leadership, functional and research plan for school
administrators;
immerse school administrators to different seminars and workshops that will
enhance their personal, research and leadership skills; and,

83
improve school administrators performance by engaging them in
meaningful trainings, seminars and workshop.
Scheme of Implementation
For the fulfillment of the Education Progression-Driven Era Development
Plan for school administrators, the scheme of implementation is provided.
This will serve as the guide for the improvement of school administrators
relationship with others, leadership styles, and functions. This will also try to
educate school administrators as to what is action research, how to do action
research and why do action research.

84
EDUCATION PROGRESSION-
DRIVEN ERA DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS

85
INTRODUCTION
The Education Progression-Driven Era Development Plan for School
Administrators aims to enhance school administrators performance as school
leaders as they lead their respective schools. The researcher designed different
programs for school administrators to undergo. He included personal, leadership
styles, leadership attributes, issues and concerns they encounter, functions,
selection process and research development to fully equip school administrators
with all the necessary skills they need to run effectively and efficiently their
respective schools. The scheme of implementation is divided in different sections
in which each section is incorporated with different trainings and workshops that
school administrators must take.
He personally believes that with this Education Progression-Driven Era
Development Plan, school administrators will have a full grasp and understanding
of their roles and functions as leaders.

86
SCHEME OF IMPLEMENTATION
Areas of Objectives Strategies Persons Budget Source of Time Expected Actual Remarks
Concern Involved Budget Frame Outcome Accom-
plish-
ment
This section School 1. Schools Venue: Division Through
specifically aims Administrator Division 30,000.00 (MOOE) School
to: s will undergo Superintende Speakers: Maintenan Administ-
develop three (3) Day nt 15,000.00 ce and rators,
school Seminar on 2. Assistant Meals: Other the
administrat Relationship Schools 50,000.00 Operating relations-
ors building with a Division Training Expenses hip them,
personal title: School Superintende kits: and/or teachers,
relationship Administrator nt 10,000.00 (SEF) students,
with s: The Bridge 3. Chief Transporta- Special parents,
teachers, Towards Education tion Education school
students, Unity in Supervisors Allowance Fund personne
Personal parents, School 4. for every 3 days l,
superiors Supervisors participant: superiors
and other 5. Education 10,000.00 and other
stakeholde Supervisors Decoration stakehold
rs 6. DepEd and other -ers are
educate personnel miscellaneo develope
school 7. School us d.
administrat Administrator expenses:
or on s 10,000.00
Human Total
Relations Budget:
and how it 125,000.00
functions;
and,
87
Provide
opportunity
to solve
gaps
encountere
d in school.
plish-
ment
This section School 1. Schools Venue: Division The
specifically aims Administrator Division 30,000.00 (MOOE) School
to: s will be Superintende Speakers: Maintenan Administr
Educate participating a nt 15,000.00 -ce and ators
school training 2. Assistant Meals: Other view on
administrat workshop for Schools 50,000.00 Operating types of
or on the school Division Training Expenses school
different administrators Superintende kits: and/or leadershi
leadership with a title: nt 10,000.00 (SEF) 3 p will be
Types of styles, Leadership 3. Chief Transporta- Special Days broadene
Leadershi theories Styles: Its Education tion Education d and
p and Impact to the Supervisors Allowance Fund honed
practices; Success of 4. for every and they
Promote Every Leader Supervisors participant: may
modern 5. Education 10,000.00 apply the
paradigm Supervisors Decoration leadershi
of 6. DepEd and other p style
leadership; personnel miscellaneo appropri-
us ate in
88
Abreast 7. School expenses: every

school Administrator 10,000.00 situation.
administrat s Total
or with the Budget:
influence of 125,000.00
leadership
style to
their
success as
school
leaders.
plish-
ment
This section The school 1. Schools Venue: Division The
specifically aims administrators Division 30,000.00 (MOOE) school
to: will be Superintende Speakers: Maintenan administr
Make participating a nt 15,000.00 -ce and -ators will
school leadership 2. Assistant Meals: Other be able
administrat seminar Schools 50,000.00 Operating to reflect,
ors reflect workshop that Division Training Expenses if not
on their focuses on Superintende kits: and/or emulate
Leadershi attributes Leadership nt 10,000.00 (SEF) 3 the
p as leaders; Attributes. 3. Chief Transporta- Special Days leadershi
Attributes The title of the Education tion Education p
training Supervisors Allowance Fund attributes
89
Discuss workshop is: 4. for every that

the The Role of Supervisors participant: leaders
attributes Leadership 5. Education 10,000.00 must
that must Attributes to Supervisors Decoration possess.
be the Success 6. DepEd and other They are
possessed of School personnel miscellaneo also
by good Leaders. 7. School us expected
leaders; Administrator expenses: share the
and, s 10,000.00 unique
Adapt the Total attributes
good Budget: they
qualities/ 125,000.00 possess
attributes that
of leaders. deem
necessar
y for
other
school
leaders.
90
plish-
ment
This section School 1. Schools Venue: Division School
specifically aims administrators Division 30,000.00 (MOOE) Administr
to: , whether Superintende Speakers: Maintenan a-tors are
Orient newly nt 15,000.00 -ce and expected
school installed or 2. Assistant Meals: Other to learn
administrat veteran will Schools 50,000.00 Operating and re-
-ors be required to Division Training Expenses learn
regarding participate in Superintende kits: and/or their
their the seminar. nt 10,000.00 (SEF) different
Functions functions The title of the 3. Chief Transporta- Special functions
of School or roles; seminar will Education tion Education 3 or roles
Administr Discuss be School Supervisors Allowance Fund Days as school
at-ors the Administrator 4. for every leaders.
challenges s Functions Supervisors participant: They are
and issues in the 21st 5. Education 10,000.00 also
that school Century Supervisors Decoration expected
administrat Education. 6. DepEd and other to be
-ors may personnel miscellaneo more
face as 7. School us respons-
they Administrator expenses: ible to
perform s 10,000.00 the roles
their Total that the
functions Budget: Depar-
or roles; 125,000.00 ment of
and, Educatio
Promote n gave
leadership them.
91
response-
bility
among
school
administ-
rators.
plish-
ment
This section School 1. Schools Venue: Division After the
specifically aims Administrator Division 30,000.00 (MOOE) seminar,
to: s will be Superintende Speakers: Maintenan school
Discuss asked to nt 15,000.00 -ce and adminis-
the participate a 2. Assistant Meals: Other tratorss
different seminar Schools 50,000.00 Operating knowle-
Legal entitled, The Division Training Expenses dge of
Basis of Legal Basis of Superintende kits: and/or law is
Issues Education; Education: Its nt 10,000.00 (SEF) expected
and Promote Impact to 3. Chief Transporta- Special 3 to widen.
Concerns awareness School Education tion Education Days They are
that on the Leadership. Supervisors Allowance Fund also
school different 4. for every expected
adminis- legal The Division Supervisors participant: to be
trators actions that Office shall 5. Education 10,000.00 more
encounter may be commission Supervisors Decoration cautious
taken when lawyers have 6. DepEd and other on the
critical the personnel miscellaneo legal
problems experience 7. School us expense: implicatio
arise that and Administrator 10,000.00 n of their
need legal knowledge on s action.
92
remedy; Educational Total

and, Laws. Budget:
Educate 125,000.00
School
Administ-
rators on
their rights,
obligations
and
privileges.
plish-
ment
This section - The Schools 1. Schools Meals: Division 30 There will
specifically aims Division Division 5,000.00 (MOOE) work- be a
to: Superintende Superintende Transport- Maintenan ing clear
Provide nt will nt ation -ce and days qualifica-
guidelines compose a 2. Assistant 1,000.00 Other upon tion
in choosing team of Schools Other Operating the require-
qualified school Division Miscellan- Expenses issu- ment for
School school administrators Superintende eous and/or ance the
Administr- administer- , supervisors, nt expenses (SEF) of the school
ator ators; parents and 3. Chief 2,000.00 Special memo administr
Applicants Enhance other Education Total Education randu -ator
Selection School stakeholders Supervisors Budget: Fund m aplicants.
Process Administr- to provide 4. 8,000.00 There will
ator guidelines in Supervisors also be a
screening and specific
93
selection selecting 5. Education procedur

process; school Supervisors e in
and, administrator 6. DepEd choosing
Implement applicants. personnel school
new school - The 7. School leaders.
administer- Superintende Administrator
ator nt must s
selection ensure that 8. Parents
plan during the guidelines
the are in
selection consonance
process. with DepEd
orders and
memorandum
.
plish-
ment
This section - The school 1. Schools Venue: Division The
specifically aims administrators Division 50,000.00 (MOOE) school
to: will be Superintende Speakers: Maintenan administr
Educate required to nt 25,000.00 -ce and -ators will
School participate a 2. Assistant Meals: Other can be
Administr- seminar- Schools 80,000.00 Operating able to
ators on workshop Division Training Expenses develop
the entitled: Superintende kits: and/or Action
Research process of Action nt 10,000.00 (SEF) 5 Research
Develop- conducting Research: A 3. Chief Transporta- Special Days in their
ment for Action Basis in Education tion Education respectiv
School Research; Improving Supervisors Allowance Fund e school.
94
Administr- Inculcate School 4. for every Through

ators the performance. Supervisors participant: this they
importance 5. Education 20,000.00 can make
of Action Supervisors Decoration some
Research -The Schools 6. DepEd and other intervene
for the Division personnel miscellaneo -
improve- Superintende 7. School us expense: ventions
ment of nt will be Administrator 15,000.00 needed
school; inviting s Total to
and, resource Budget: improve
Determine speakers who 190,000.00 their
school wide array of respectiv
issues and knowledge e
concerns and schools.
that can experience in
the basis research.
for Action
Research.
95
RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT TRAINING SEMINAR-WORKSHOP FOR
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
Registration: 6:30-7:30 AM
Venue: Golden Valley Hotel, Cebu City
Time: 8:00 AM -5:00 PM
Inclusive Dates: May 8-12, 2017
Speakers: Dr. Helen B. Boholano
Professor V
Cebu Normal University
Dr. Genario Virador Japos
International Association of Multidisciplinary Research
Dr. Glenn Andrin
University of Bohol
Seminar-Workshop Objectives:
The research development training seminar-workshop for school
administrators aims to:
educate School Administrators on the process of conducting Action
Research;
inculcate the importance of Action Research for the improvement of
school; and,
determine school issues and concerns that can the basis for Action
Research.
96
Persons In-Charge
Overall Chairman : Dr. Leah P. Noveras
Decoration : Mr. Ditto Chiu
Invitation : Mr. Alfonso Abasolo, Jr.
Documentation : Dr. Mariano R. Montebon
Venue : Ms. Rosario Dioko
Food and Snacks : Mrs. Nanette A. Nacor
PROGRAM
Day 1
Morning
I. Invocation... Mrs. Josephine Rabaya
II. Philippine National Anthem Mr. Mayonito A. Abaquita
III. Welcome Address.. Dr. Cartesa Perico
IV. Opening Remarks.. Dr. Leah P. Noveras
V. Ice Breaker Mayonito A. Abaquia
V. Rationale... Mr. Jeffrey Seblero
V. Preliminary Activities Dr. Cecilia Lastimosa
Afternoon
I. Introduction of 1st Speaker.. Mr. Jeorge Manguilimotan
II. Quantitative Research Dr. Helen B. Boholano

97
Day 2
Morning
I. Invocation... Mr. Erwin Caparida
II. Philippine National Anthem Mr. Jonas Villaver
III. Recapitulation. Mrs. Lorena Panilagao
IV. Qualitative Research. Dr. Helen B. Boholano
Afternoon
I. Activity Dr. Helen B. Boholano
II. Presentation. Participants
Day 3
Morning
I. Invocation... Mr. Maximo Carin
II. Philippine National Anthem Mrs. Vilma B. Mantua
III. Recapitulation. Ms. Junet Abapo
IV. Introduction of 2nd Speaker.. Mrs. Haraliza Ofredo
V. Improving Schools Through Research Dr. Genario Japos
Afternoon
I. Identifying Relevant School Problems.. Dr. Genario Japos
II. Activity... Dr. Genario Japos
III. Presentation of Outputs. Participants

98
Day 4
Morning
I. Invocation... Mrs. Imelda Valde
II. Philippine National Anthem Mrs. Josephine Rabaya
III. Recapitulation. Mrs. Maria Lourdes Ipong
IV. Introduction of 3rd Speaker.. Mrs. Editha Sasan
V. Action Research. Dr. Glenn Andrin
Afternoon
I. Action Research as Basis for Improving School. Dr. Glenn Andrin
II. Activity... Dr. Glenn Andrin
Day 5
Morning
I. Invocation... Mrs. Lorena Panilagao
II. Philippine National Anthem Mrs. Jonabel Bendebel
III. Recapitulation. Mr. Romeo Dumasis
IV. Presentation of Output.. Participants
Afternoon
I. Closing Remarks.. Dr. Leah P. Noveras
II. Distribution of Certificates.. Dr. Cartesa Perico

99
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Adair, John (2004). Adair on Creativity and Innovation. London: Thorogood

Publishing Ltd.
Bauzon, Prisciliano (2012). Handbook in Legal Bases of Education. Mandaluyong,

Philippines: National Bookstore.
Bilbao, Purita P., et al. (2015). The Teaching Profession. Quezon City, Philippines:
LORIMAR PUBLISHING, INC.
Burns, James Macgregor (1978). Leadership. New York USA: Harper and Row,
Publishers.
Corpuz, Brenda B. and Salandanan, Gloria G. (2013) Principles of Teaching 1.

Quezon City, Philippines: LORIMAR PUBLISHING, INC.
Nelson, Jack, et al. (2007). Critical Issues in Education- Dialogues and Dialectics.
New York USA: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Sizer, Theodore (1992). Horaces Compromise- the Dilemma of the American High
School. United States of America: Theodore Sizer.
Republic Act 9155 also known as Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001.
Electronic Sources
Barrette, Catherine and Breyer, Robert (2014). The Influence of Effective
Leadership on Teaching and Learning.Accessed from http://digitalcommons
.uncfsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1028&context=jri
Cherry, Kendra (2016). The Great Man Theory of Leadership. Accessed from
https://www.verywell.com/the-great-man-theory-of-leadership-2795311
Cherry, Kendra (2016). The Major Leadership Theories. Accessed from

https://www.verywell.com/leadership-theories-2795323
Krasnoff, Basha (2015). Leadership Qualities of Effective Principal. Accessed from
http://nwcc.educationnorthwest.org/filesnwrcc/research-brief-leadership-qualities-
effective-principals.pdf
100
Lai, Andrea (2011). Transformational-Transactional Leadership Theory. Accessed

from http://digitalcommons.olin.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context
=ahs_capstone_2011
Odumeru, James A. (2013). Transformational Vs. Transactional Leadership

Theories: Evidence in Literature. Accessed from
https://www.irmbrjournal.com/papers/1371451049.pdf
Sheninger, Eric (2011). Effective Leadership in the Age of Reform. Accessed

from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-sheninger/effective-leadership-in-
t_b_898111.html.
Wallace Foundation (2013). The School Principal as Leader: Guiding Schools to

Better Teaching and Learning. Accessed from
http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledgecenter/Documents/The-School-
Principal-as-Leader-Guiding-Schools-to-Better-Teaching-and-Learning-2nd-
Ed.pdf
101
APPENDICES
102
Appendix A
APPROVED TRANSMITTAL LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE SCHOOLS

DIVISION SUPERINTENDENT
Dr. Leah P. Noveras

Schools Division Superintendent
Talisay City Division
Talisay City, Cebu
Madam:
I have the honor to inform your good office that I, the undersigned is working on
the dissertation study entitled: SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS ATTRIBUTES
TOWARDS EDUCATION PROGRESSION-DRIVEN ERA as partial fulfilment of
the requirement leading to the degree of Doctor in Education Major in Development
Education at Cebu Technological University.
In view of the foregoing, I would like to humbly request permission to

conduct a research survey to the school administrators in the public schools both
in elementary and secondary level.
I will be glad if this request will be given favorable consideration. Thank you
very much and God bless!
Very truly yours,

RESEARCHER
Noted:
ADORACION A. LAWAS, Ed. D.

Research Adviser
Recommending Approval:
REBECCA DC. MANALASTAS, Ph.D.

Dean, Graduate School
Approved:
LEAH P. NOVERAS, ED.D., CESO VI

SUPERINTENDENT
103
Appendix B
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
FOR SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR
Name (optional):________________________________________________
Age: 20-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70
Sex: Male Female
Number of Years in Service: 1-5 6-10 11-15
16-20 21-25 26-30
31-35 36-40 41-45
I. Classify whether you manifest each given leadership style as school
administrator. Use the given scales in rating your answers. Put a check mark on
the box that corresponds to your answer.
3- Well manifested
2- Manifested
1- Less manifested
Style 3 2 1
I encourage my subordinates to participate and be involved in all
activities.
I observe my subordinates positive and negative behavior.
I listen to my subordinates concerns.
I coach and mentor my subordinates in attaining the mission,
vision and core values of the Department of Education.
I have a charisma as a leader that makes my subordinates follow.
I motivate and inspire my subordinates.
I challenge my subordinates intellectually.
I attend to each of my subordinates needs.
I use reward and punishment to make my subordinates follow.
I give specific instructions and I always want things to be done
immediately.
I am willing to work for the benefit of the institution without
counting the cost.
I want to preserve and maintain the culture of the Department of
Education as an institution.
104
II. Classify whether you possess each given attribute of a good leader. Use the
given scales in rating your answers. Put a check mark on the box that corresponds
to your answer.
3- Well possessed
2- Possessed
1- Less possessed
Attribute 3 2 1 Attribute 3 2 1
Self-motivated Confidence
Optimism & Accountable
Positivity
Courage Character
Humor Passion
Integrity Respectable
Loyal Charisma
Humility Discipline
Time- Maturity
management
Relationship Speaking skills

building
Honesty and Reasonable
Transparency
Listening Authenticity
Empathy and Empowerment

Compassion
Clarity Ability to inspire
others
105
Sharing vision Takes responsibility
Rewarding Respect for others
Fair Decisiveness Commitment
Consistency Takes risk
Open-minded Resourceful
Flexible Organized
Creative Reader
Competence Helps others to

succeed
Independent Patience
Focused Intelligence
Seeks out advice Coaching people
Conducts Integrity
effective meeting
III. Classify whether the success of your functions/roles as a school administrator
is complied. Use the given scales in rating your answers. Put a check mark on the
box that corresponds to your answer.
3- Well-Complied
2- Complied
1- Less-Complied
106
Functions/Roles 3 2 1
I prepare and implement School Improvement

Plan (SIP).
I prepare Annual Improvement Plan (AIP),
Procurement Management Plan (PPMP), and
Monthly Maintenance and Other Operating
Expenses (MOOE) Budget Request.
I adopt and implement annual plans and budget.
I plan and manage the performance of all
personnel.
I prepare and submit accurate reports on time in
a year (SF 1,2,3,5,PAR,SCF48).
I achieve zero (0) number of times tardy in a
year.
I complete 100% of the required attendance both
academic and non-academic activities in a year.
I organize and monitor different programs,
activities and projects (PAPs) to attain desired
learning outcomes.
I implement and monitor PAPs to achieve
performance indicators using goals and targets
in the following:
a. Participation
b. Drop-outs
c. Cohort Survival
d. Completion
I observe classes among the 25% of the total
number of teachers in school every quarter.
I provide technical assistance to Master
Teachers and/or Department Heads/Subject
Coordinators.
I inspect and evaluate the school physical plant
and equipment/facilities.
I submit a complete school MOOE liquidation
report every month.
I post updated copies of liquidation report and
other financial resources in the transparency
board.
I conduct In-service Training of Teachers
(INSET) based on Teachers Strengths and
Needs Assessment (TSNA).
I propose teachers to attend seminars and
trainings.
107
I prepare and submit appropriate teaching and

ancillary loads of teachers.
I use conflict management of school-based
I ensure compliance with the Child Protection
Policy of the Department.
I request additional provision of crucial
resources, i.e.
a. Teachers
b. Water and Sanitation
c. Seats
d. Textbooks
e. Classrooms.
I implement DepEd Memoranda and Orders.
I assess and endorse teachers requests.
I coordinate with private schools/institutions
I conduct action research based on school
needs and provide interventions.
I prepare and implement project proposal for
partnerships and linkages.
IV. Put check mark on the box if you consider the given statement or phrase a
concern/problem of a school administrator and leave the box blank if you do not
consider the given statement or phrase a concern/problem of a school
administrator. There is no correct or wrong response in your answers.
Teachers punctuality and attendance during meetings.
Teachers lack of support in school activities.
Teachers lack of skills in technology.
Teachers who do not come to class to teach.
Teachers who escape or who go out to school during office or class hours.
Teachers efficiency in submitting reports and forms.

108
Teachers attitude towards work.
Teachers lack of resourcefulness in addressing the needs of the learners.
Teachers methodologies in teaching.
Lack of school facilities such as classrooms, comfort rooms, computer
and science laboratory, chairs, blackboards, etc.
Lack of Instructional Materials (e.g. books, curriculum guides, modules,
etc.)
Maintaining cleanliness and orderliness in school
Behavioral problems of students (e.g. bullying, teasing, stealing,
absenteeism, cutting classes, etc.)
Students lack of support from parents
Budgeting and liquidating the Maintenance and Other Operating
Expenses (MOOE)
Heavy load of paper works
Lack of monitoring from the Division office regarding my performance as
a school administrator.
Interruption of work due to the meetings, seminars and other directives
from the Division Office

109
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
FOR TEACHER
Name (optional):________________________________________________
Age: 20-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70
Sex: Male Female
Number of Years in Service: 1-5 6-10 11-15
16-20 21-25 26-30
31-35 36-40 41-45
Classify whether your school administrator possesses each given attribute of a
good leader. Use the given scales in rating your answers. Put a check mark on the
3- Well possessed
2- Possessed
1- Less possessed
Attribute 3 2 1 Attribute 3 2 1
Self-motivated Confidence
Optimism & Accountable
Positivity
Courage Character
Humor Passion
Integrity Respectable
Loyal Charisma
Humility Discipline
110
Time- Maturity
management
Relationship Speaking skills

building
Honesty and Reasonable
Transparency
Listening Authenticity
Empathy and Empowerment

Compassion
Clarity Ability to inspire
others
Sharing vision Takes responsibility
Rewarding Respect for others
Fair Decisiveness Commitment
Consistency Takes risk
Open-minded Resourceful
Flexible Organized
Creative Reader
Competence Helps others to

succeed
Independent Patience
Focused Intelligence
Seeks out advice Coaching people
Conducts Integrity
effective meeting
111
II. Classify whether the success of the functions/roles of your school administrator
is complied. Use the given scales in rating your answers. Put a check mark on the
3- Well-Complied
2- Complied
1- Less-Complied
Functions/Roles 3 2 1
My School Administrator
prepares and implements School Improvement

Plan (SIP).
prepares Annual Improvement Plan (AIP),
Procurement Management Plan (PPMP), and
Monthly Maintenance and Other Operating
Expenses (MOOE) Budget Request.
adopts and implements annual plans and
budget.
plans and manages the performance of all
personnel.
prepares and submits accurate reports on time
in a year (SF 1,2,3,5,PAR,SCF48).
achieves zero (0) number of times tardy in a
year.
completes 100% of the required attendance both
academic and non-academic activities in a year.
organizes and monitors different programs,
activities and projects (PAPs) to attain desired
learning outcomes.
implements and monitors PAPs to achieve
performance indicators using goals and targets
in the following:
a. Participation
b. Drop-outs
c. Cohort Survival
d. Completion
112
observes classes among the 25% of the total

number of teachers in school every quarter.
provides technical assistance to Master
Teachers and/or Department Heads/Subject
Coordinators.
inspects and evaluates the school physical plant
and equipment/facilities.
submits a complete school MOOE liquidation
report every month.
posts updated copies of liquidation report and
other financial resources in the transparency
board.
conducts In-service Training of Teachers
(INSET) based on Teachers Strengths and
Needs Assessment (TSNA).
proposes teachers to attend seminars and
trainings.
prepares and submits appropriate teaching and
ancillary loads of teachers.
uses conflict management of school-based
ensures compliance with the Child Protection
Policy of the Department.
requests additional provision of crucial
resources, i.e.
a. Teachers
b. Water and Sanitation
c. Seats
d. Textbooks
e. Classrooms.
implements DepEd Memoranda and Orders.
assesses and endorse teachers requests.
coordinates with private schools/institutions
conducts action research based on school needs
and provide interventions.
prepares and implements project proposal for
partnerships and linkages.
113
114
CURRICULUM VITAE

________________________________________________________________
A. Personal Data
Home Address : Fairview Village, Talisay City, Cebu

Contact No. : 0923-117-5704
E-mail Address : jamonbernardevangelicom@gmail.com
Date of Birth : February 21, 1992
Place of Birth : Valenzuela, Metro Manila
Citizenship : Filipino
Gender : Male
Status : Single
B. Educational Background
Graduate Studies : Cebu Technological University CY 2017

Doctor in Development Education
March 2017
Talisay City College in Consortium with

Cebu Technological University CY 2015
MASTER IN EDUCATION
Major in School Administration and Supervision
March 2015
Tertiary : St. Cecilias College, Cebu, Inc. CY 2012

Course : Bachelor of Secondary Education
Major in English
October 2012
115
Secondary : Accelerated through Alternative Learning

System (ALS) 2008
Primary : Accelerated through Alternative Learning

System (ALS) 2008
C. WORK EXPERIENCE
LAWAAN III NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Lawaan III, Talisay City, Cebu
Teacher 1
2014 to Present
TALISAY CITY COLLEGE

Poblacion, Talisay City, Cebu
Instructor
2014 to Present
GeenEd CTRC
Ormoc, Leyte
Review Lecturer
2014 to Present
CEBU TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

R. Palma St., Cebu City
Instructor
2nd Semester 2015-2016
LAWAAN III NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Lawaan III, Talisay City, Cebu
Teacher Aid Volunteer
December to May 2014
TABUNOK NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Tabunok, Talisay City, Cebu
Teacher Aid Volunteer
June to December 2013
D. Recent Training / Seminars Attended:

Research Writing Through Talisay City College Feb. 13, 2017
Literary Criticism
Outcomes-Based Education Talisay City College Dec. 27-28, 2016

Syllabus Writing Workshop
116
School Partnership Division of Talisay City Dec. 9, 2016

Capability Building
The Division In-Service Division of Talisay City Oct. 24-28, 2016

Training
Teacher Induction Program Division of Talisay City June 27-31, 2016
Regional Journalism Training The Freeman July 9-11, 2016
Personality Development Talisay City College Sept. 20, 2014

and Enhancement Seminar
Hope Worldwide Philippines Hope Foundation August 7-9, 2013

Child Protection Seminar
HiEd UbD and St. Cecilias College Oct. 22-23, 2012

Pedagogical Skills
Training Workshop
Understanding St. Cecilias College Sept. 26-28, 2012

by Design
Thesis Writing Seminar St. Cecilias College Oct. 14-16, 2012
Adapting to the Dynamics St. Cecilias College March 7, 2012

and Change in the Basic
Education
K to 12 Curriculum and St. Theresas College March 1, 2012

MTB-MLE: Its Trends,
Issues and Challenges
Classroom Test Center for Educational Nov. 12, 2011

Construction Measurement

School Administrators' Leadership Styles, Attributes and Functions Towards Education-Progression Driven Era by Dr. Bernard Evangelicom v. Jamon

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

School Administrators' Leadership Styles, Attributes and Functions Towards Education-Progression Driven Era by Dr. Bernard Evangelicom v. Jamon

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS LEADERSHIP STYLES, ATTRIBUTES AND

FUNCTIONS TOWARDS EDUCATION PROGRESSION-DRIVEN ERA

BERNARD EVANGELICOM V. JAMON

DISSERTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE

ROSEIN A. ANCHETA, JR., ASEAN ENGR., DM., Ph.D.

ADORA A. VILLAGANAS, Ph. D. PERLA N. TENERIFE, Ed. D., Ph. D.

WILMA C. GIANGO, Ph. D. REYNALDO T. GABALES, Ph. D., Ed. D.

TERESITA T. ROJAS, Ed. D.

ROSEIN A. ANCHETA, JR., ASEAN ENGR., DM., Ph.D.

ADORA A. VILLAGANAS, Ph. D. PERLA N. TENERIFE, Ed. D, Ph. D.

WILMA C. GIANGO, Ph. D. REYNALDO T. GABALES, Ph. D., Ed. D.

TERESITA T. ROJAS, Ed. D.

REBECCA DC MANALASTAS, Ed. D., Ph. D.

SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS LEADERSHIP STYLES, ATTRIBUTES AND

Bernard Evangelicom V. Jamon

Adoracion A. Lawas, Ed.D.

This research determined the school administrators leadership styles,

Key Words : School administrator; attribute, function; leadership

Program : Doctor in Development Education

Grace and especially to Almighty God

the journey of life.

to Dr. Rosein A. Ancheta, University President; to Dr. Rebecca DC Manalastas,

suggestions and advice that enriched this research.

He is also thankful to Dr. Leah P. Noveras, the Schools Division

school administrator and teacher respondents for their participation in the

inspiration of the researcher throughout his life.

Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM AND ITS RESEARCH DESIGN

Rationale of the Study.............................................1

Statement of the Problem...............................................................11

Significance of the Study.......................................12

Flow of the Study....13

THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Procedures for Data Gathering......................................18

Treatment of the Data18

Chapter 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

Chapter 3 PRESENTATION, DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Profile of Respondent Groups....32

Age and Gender32

Leadership Styles of School Administrators.39

School Administrators Attributes...45

School Administrators Functions..50

Regulatory and Developmental..54

Regulatory and Developmental.64

School and Concerns of School Administrators.65

Issues and Concerns..65

Chapter 4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND

Chapter 5 Output of the Study

Education Progression-Driven Era Development Plan77

Education Progression-Driven Era Development Plan for

Research Development Training Seminar-

Workshop for School Administrators..95

A. Approved Transmittal Letter Addresses Schools Division

Survey Questionnaire for School Administrator....103

Survey Questionnaire for Teacher...109

C. Certificate of Similarity Using Turnitin.....113

Table Title Page

2 Location of the Research Environment16

3 A Career Ladder: A Path from Teacher to

Table Number Title Page

1 Number of School Administrator Respondents17

2 Number of Teacher Respondents......17

3 Age and Gender of the Respondents.32

4 Years of Experience of the Respondents..36