ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP BY THE PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS IN TANQUE DISTRICT CALOOCAN CITY

Registration ID: IJNRD_323281

Published ID: IJNRD2604300

: Click Here to Get

About Hard Copy and Transparent Peer Review Report

MARIA THERESA NALO ESGUERRA

THESIS ABSTRACT Title : ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP BY THE PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS IN TANQUE DISTRICT CALOOCAN CITY Researcher : MARIA THERESA N. ESGUERRA Institution : Lyceum-Northwestern University Institute of Graduate and Professional Studies Dagupan City Degree : MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION Date of Defense : 2025 Adviser : CHRISTOPHER A. DE VERA, Ed. D. Abstract: This study aimed to determine the instructional leadership by the public elementary school administrators in Tanque District Caloocan City as basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning. Thus, the descriptive method of research is appropriate since the main purpose of this study is to describe with emphasis the instructional leadership by the public elementary school administrators. The gathered data were subjected to statistical treatment for accurate interpretation of the findings. This study was conducted in public elementary schools in Tanque District Caloocan City in order to determine instructional leadership of the school administrators as basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning. The vision of school leaders was found to inspire teachers to change their practice. In addition to a convincing vision, it is also necessary to be able to realize this change practically, by defining the activities that are required. Moreover, the researcher aims to determine the level of their competence in their exercise of instructional leadership. The formulated conclusions in this study were based on the preceding findings. The researcher therefore concluded that Majority of the school administrators were old, female, with doctorate and masteral degree holder, with minimum experience as administrators, and very satisfactory in terms of their performance. The school administrators have great level of leadership. The level of public service delivery of the school administrators is much extent. Moreover, it is shown in the table the majority of the problems mentioned are serious as rated by the school administrators. The researcher having put energy and effort into this study and formulated conclusions it was hereby recommended that, the proposed action plan should be presented to the Schools Division Superintendent for implementation. Considering the good leadership and public service delivery of the school administrators, they have to continuously strive to maintain the good leadership and public service delivery along the areas of concern. It is imperative to provide trainings to the school administrators in leadership and public service delivery. Similar study should be conducted in other divisions to determine the effectiveness of the present study. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE --------------------------------------------------------------- APPROVAL SHEET ------------------------------------------------------ CERTIFICATE OF ADMISSION TO CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE DOCTOR OF EDUCATION ------------------------ ACKNOWLEDGMENT -------------------------------------------------- DEDICATION -------------------------------------------------------------- ABSTRACT ----------------------------------------------------------------- TABLE OF CONTENTS ------------------------------------------------- LIST OF TABLES --------------------------------------------------------- LIST OF FIGURE --------------------------------------------------------- CHAPTER 1 THE PROBLEM ------------------------------------------ Rationale ------------------------------------------------------------------- Theoretical Framework -------------------------------------------------- Conceptual Framework -------------------------------------------------- Statement of the Problem ----------------------------------------------- Scope and Delimitation of the Study --------------------------------- Significance of the Study ----------------------------------------------- Definition of Terms ------------------------------------------------------ Continuation of Table of Contents Literature -------------------------------------------------------------- Studies ---------------------------------------------------------------- Contributions of the Reviewed Literature and Studies to the Present Study --------------------------------------------- CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY -------------------------------------- Research Design ----------------------------------------------------- Sources of Data ------------------------------------------------------- Instrumentation and Data Collection ----------------------------- Tools for Data Analysis ---------------------------------------------- CHAPTER 3 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA ------------------- Profile of the Public Elementary School Administrators in the Division of Caloocan City -------------------------------------- Extent of Public Elementary School Administrators on Exercise Instructional Leadership ------------------------------------------------ Problems Being Met by the Public Elementary-School Administrators in their Exercise of Instructional Leadership ----------------------------------------------- CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS -------------------------- Summary ------------------------------------------------------------- Conclusions ----------------------------------------------------------- Recommendations -------------------------------------------------- BIBLIOGRAPHY -------------------------------------------------------- APPENDICES ------------------------------------------------------------ A. Letter of Request for Permission to Conduct the Study------------------------------------------- B. Questionnaire for School Administrators in District 10 ------------------------------------------ CURRICULUM VITAE --------------------------------------------------- i ii iii iv vi vii ix xii xiii 1 1 15 19 25 26 26 28 Page 29 39 44 46 46 47 48 49 51 51 53 54 57 57 59 60 61 66 67 69 71 LIST OF TABLES Table Page Distribution of Subject-Respondents 48 Profile of the Public Elementary School Administrators in the Division of Pangasinan I 51 Extent of Public Elementary School Administrators on Exercise Instructional Leadership 53 Problems Being Met by the School Administrators 54 LIST OF FIGURE Figure Page 1 Schematic Diagram on the Conceptual Framework of the Study 24 CHAPTER 1 THE PROBLEM Rationale School leadership has become a priority in education policy agendas internationally. It plays a key role in improving school outcomes by influencing the motivations and capacities of teachers, as well as the school climate and environment. Effective school leadership is essential to improve the efficiency and equity of schooling. As countries are seeking to adapt their education systems to the needs of contemporary society, expectations for schools and school leaders are changing. Many countries have moved towards decentralization, making schools more autonomous in their decision making and holding them more accountable for results. At the same time, the requirement to improve overall student performance while serving more diverse student populations is putting schools under pressure to use more evidence-based teaching practices. In the international world, school leadership is now an education policy priority around the world. It increased school autonomy and a greater focus on schooling and school results have made it essential to reconsider the role of school leaders. Notably, there is much room for improvement to professionalize school leadership, to support current school leaders and to make school leadership an attractive career for future candidates. The ageing of current principals and the widespread shortage of qualified candidates to replace them after retirement make it imperative to take action. These developments have made school leadership a priority in education systems across the world. Policy makers need to enhance the quality of school leadership and make it sustainable (Pont, 2016). The education system in many states, has been performing instructional leadership as a major part of the effective school leaders’ behavior. One of the goals of instructional leadership implementation is to increase the learning outcomes of students. However, many of international student assessments have shown the positive effect of instructional leadership in the education system (Yunita, 2015). The school’s instructional leadership ran effectively, when, in practice, the leadership was followed and guided by a clear formulation instructional objective and good collaboration among principals, teachers, students and all stakeholders. Country practices and evidence from different sources show that school leaders need specific training to respond to broadened roles and responsibilities. Strategies need to focus on developing and strengthening skills related to improving school outcomes and provide room for contextualization. Given the increased autonomy and accountability of schools, leadership at the school level is more important than ever. Policy makers and practitioners need to ensure that the roles and responsibilities associated with improved learning outcomes are at the core of school leadership practice. Scholars have shown that school leaders can make a difference in school and student performance if they are granted autonomy to make important decisions. However autonomy alone does not automatically lead to improvements unless it is well supported. In addition, it is important that the core responsibilities of school leaders be clearly defined and delimited. School leadership responsibilities should be defined through an understanding of the practices most likely to improve teaching and learning. The increased responsibilities and accountability of school leadership are creating the need for distribution of leadership, both within schools and across schools. School boards also face many new tasks. While practitioners consider middle-management responsibilities vital for effective school leadership, these practices remain rare and often unclear; and those involved are not always recognized for their tasks. Policy makers need to broaden the concept of school leadership and adjust policy and working conditions accordingly. There is a need to reinforce the concept of leadership teams in national frameworks, to develop incentive mechanisms to reward participation and performance in these teams and to extend leadership training and development to middle-level management and potential future leaders in the school. Finally, policy makers need to reflect on modifying accountability mechanisms to match distributed leadership structures. Distribution of leadership can strengthen management and succession planning. Distributing leadership across different people and organizational structures can help to meet the challenges facing contemporary schools and improve school effectiveness. As the key intermediary between the classrooms, the individual school and the education system as a whole, effective school leadership is essential to improve the efficiency and equity of schooling. Within each individual school, leadership can contribute to improve student learning by shaping the conditions and climate in which teaching and learning occur. Beyond the school borders, school leaders can connect and adapt schools to changing external environments. And at the school-systems interface, school leadership provides a bridge between internal school improvement processes and externally initiated reform. According to Verbiest (2015), the growing interest in school leadership can be understand against the background of increasing expectations at the school in the context of a knowledge society, more autonomy for schools and school leaders but also greater accountability and the idea that school leaders can make a difference for students. But school leadership does not operate in static educational environments. As countries are seeking to adapt their education systems to the needs of contemporary society, the expectations for schools and school leaders have changed profoundly. Many countries have made schools more autonomous in their decision making while centralizing standards and accountability requirements and demanding that schools adopt new research-based approaches to teaching and learning. In line with these changes, the roles and responsibilities of school leaders have expanded and intensified. Given the increased autonomy and accountability of schools, leadership at the school level is more important than ever. Policy makers need to adapt school leadership policy to new environments by addressing the major challenges which have arisen over the past decades. There is a growing concern that the role of school principal designed for the industrial age has not changed enough to deal with the complex challenges schools are facing in the 21st century. Countries are seeking to develop new conditions for school leadership better suited to respond to current and future educational environments. As expectations of what school leaders should achieve have changed, so must the definition and distribution of tasks, as well as the levels of training, support and incentives. Ensuring future quality leadership is also vital for school improvement. In most countries, a time of high demographic turnover in school leaders, education systems need to focus on fostering future leaders and making leadership an attractive profession. The contemporary challenge of leadership, in systemic terms, is not only to improve the quality of current leaders but also to develop clear plans for future leadership and effective processes for leadership succession. The said developments and challenges have made school leadership a priority in education policy agendas and partner countries. Education ministers emphasized the key role of school leadership in helping education systems respond to the needs of rapidly changing societies. In response, the government proposed to conduct an international activity to help policy makers compare their approaches to school leadership policy, identify innovative practices and provide policy options for action. The school leader stimulates the involvement and development of teachers and work together with them to improve the instructional process. The principal is not the sole instructional leader but the leader of instructional leaders. Instructional leadership in this respect means helping teachers to make explicit their theories of practice in ways that equip them to make comparisons between existing and new practice. Moreover, school principals are expected to be prepared for this level of authority and increased responsibility in order to reach the goals of the school (Sofo et al., 2012). As a consequence, there is a greater need for the principals to expertise in teaching and learning process and to prepare actions to improve the quality of education. Therefore, the Ministry of National Education through their various principal trainings has been urging the principals to implement the instructional leadership as it has been stated to their major training module in order to improve the quality of the education. Instructional leadership is a major part of the effective school leaders’ behaviors. In ASEAN countries, education is perceived to be a panacea for all of life’s problems and an avenue to a better life. Thus, schools are under pressure to achieve an improvement in student performance. Evidence from Dean (2002) has revealed that schools need support encouragement and recognition of achievement and the said gap may be filled through effective instructional leadership. Leadership plays a critical role in creating and sustaining a school. Among other things, leadership focuses on learning. It emphasizes the essential of learning, not only for the students but also teachers and staff. There are three areas integrated into the means of leadership; first is vision, how the leaders facilitate some actions to improve the students’ outcomes and nurture commitments. Second is governance, how the leaders manage and control their staff and encourage their participation. Third is resource allocation, how the leaders place resources to support teaching and learning. (Hack, 2010) Students deserve to have access to good education so that they can develop emotionally, spiritually and physically (Peterson, 2000). Schools are judged as successful if purposeful teaching and learning occur. However, the type of environment conducive to teaching and learning is often not achieved because of the interplay of internal and external factors that tend to create a negative perception of learning amongst students rather than turning them into students who are positive about learning. School administrators are tasked with being both instructional leaders and evaluators. As instructional leaders, administrators formally observe teachers, perform walk-throughs, suggest growth opportunities, develop improvement plans, and identify effective and ineffective educators. Masitsa (2010) considers the school administrators as an instructional leader to be in a position to address problems related to the school. As they face the challenges of today’s changing and competitive world, schools and in particular, high school heads/principals have to adopt an effective instructional leadership role and perhaps a new model for effective practice to create as many win-win situations as possible which can lead to a conducive learning (Peters, 2008). According to Bush (2007), there is a general belief that the quality of leadership contributes significantly towards school and student outcomes. There are also influences at work both inside and outside the formal education system that impact on what is taught and how teaching and learning may take place. In this regard, a supportive and positive culture of teaching and learning (COTL) is needed to effect reforms that can result in school effectiveness. Swanson (2010) declare that “In a time of high educational expectations and professional accountability, today’s educational leaders need to possess a broad variety of skills that enable them to function comfortably and effectively in changing environments and other highly politicized conditions. In addition, instructional leadership should accommodate collaboration processes as well as strategies of parental mobilization and involvement and the effective management of resources. All schools and education authorities are increasingly being held more accountable to the public for the education they provide (Bowora, 2010). Therefore, they are expected to provide good value for the considerable sums of taxpayer money expended on education. Heads of high schools often find it difficult to meet the ever-changing demands and expectations regarding their instructional leadership role in creating a quality learning in their respective schools. Within the context of educational change taking place all over the world, the job or role of the high school head has changed irrevocably. The Elton Report (cited in Bowora, 2010), notes that the most effective schools seem to be those that succeed in creating a positive atmosphere for teaching and learning based on a sense of community and shared values. Nkobi (2008) argues that school heads as instructional leaders play a fundamental role to ensure the quality of education by improving teacher competencies for enhanced learner performances. The indirect effect of school effectiveness on student outcomes actually has a direct impact on instructional leadership because cultural dimensions tend to influence effective learning in the school (Mosoge, 2004). Trends of accountability on the part of high school heads seem to have a significant impact on their ability to implement a model for effective practice to create a complete teaching and learning atmosphere. Day and Sachs (2004) have observed that what students learn, how they learn, what they must attain, as the outcome of teaching and learning are the major concerns of the school principal as an instructional leader. However, Oplatka (2004) posits that instructional leadership in most developing countries is relatively rare unlike in developed nations. To address the decline in the quality of education as reported by Maringe (2000), high school heads in many Asian countries need to develop a school vision for teaching and learning as a top priority. Indeed, the poor academic performance in both the Ordinary and Advanced level examinations has raised such great concern among stakeholders that the instructional leadership of the school head is viewed as a panacea to the extremely challenging task of creating a complete learning experience that can see a redress of the situation. According to Nyatanga (2010) who advocate for greater emphasis on quality rather quantity in education system. According to Kapfunde (2010) has observed that school heads face increasingly difficult and demanding environmental pressures which include; increased local and global competition, technological changes, increased legal and pressure group demands, as well as the challenge of preparing their learners for the increasingly differentiated and demanding markets that face them upon graduating from high school. These pressures have required the implementation of an effective model of instructional leadership so that the school can compete for students with a large measure of success. Coleman (2001) recommends that school principals have to broaden their focus and place a greater emphasis on the teaching and learning process to achieve effectiveness, which is measured by the academic proficiency attained by students. In this regard, the role of instructional leadership in creating a positive culture of teaching and learning cannot be overemphasized. In the Philippines, the early part of the 21st century has been characterized by great interest in educational leadership because of the general belief that it contributes immensely to effective teaching and learning (Oplatka, 2004). The magnitude of changes to the school system in the Philippines seems to advocate for effective instructional leadership so that a positive culture of teaching and learning can be cultivated to meet local and national needs. Powers for parents or guardians in school management have also been enhanced through the establishment of school development committees in the country’s Education Act. New roles and responsibilities are continuously placed on high school heads to improve the teaching-learning. Good leadership is critical to a school’s success and achieving sustainable improvement in teaching and learning (Coles, 2005). According to Richmond (2007), school leaders are expected to supervise staff, discipline learners, interact with parents, manage facilities, lead the instructional program, assure the safety of teachers and learners, manage budgets and participate in school reform, amongst others. Today’s high school head assumes an instructional leadership role that is growing increasingly complex, as the nature of society, the economy, and schools as organizations continues to change (Andrews,2010). Shen and Williams (2004) point out that the role of the teachers in the new dispensation represents a balance between instructional leadership and management. For this reason, McEwan (2003) sees the journey of an instructional leader as an on-going journey, along a route filled with detours and potholes, as well as along freeways and straightway. To deal effectively with the many current reforms, school heads as instructional leaders, need to develop and use a range of leadership skills and behaviors to create positive teaching-learning processes. A review made by Oplatka (2008) has shown that instructional leadership functions are rare in most developing countries. Oduro (2006) also note that there is lack of formal training for school principals in developing countries which makes their instructional leadership a daunting challenge. In the present school setting, the school head according to the Department of Education mandated with the responsibility to provide instructional leadership that can enhance a positive culture of teaching and learning which can result in the provision of quality education in schools. Quality education has recently become a priority for the government because of the contribution of education to the socioeconomic and political development of the country. Indeed, the most effective schools are those that have created a positive atmosphere based on a sense of shared values (Bowora, 2000). Larner (2004) has pointed out that the principal is the single most important individual contributing to the success of any given school. The 21st century school head is viewed as all things to all people because he or she is regarded as a strategic instructional leader who is both a visionary and a change agent. The rapid social change in developing countries such has had an impact on the instructional leadership development process. Nyamuda (2004) emphasizes the need for a balanced model for effective practice, which acknowledges universal leadership principles. Members of the academe have revealed that leaders of schools are confronted with complex dilemmas and challenges regarding the task of creating a comprehensive and positive teaching –learning processes. Furthermore, a paucity of cross-cultural research on leadership in the context of the interaction between cultures has also been noted. It is therefore envisaged that a meaningful contribution to the instructional leadership role of the school head will create a meaningful learning instruction. Importantly, the school head as an instructional leader is expected to use micro-politics to negotiate between managerial, technical, and institutional arenas, and create a professional community and networks within the school. The micro–political strategies that can be used by the school head in various arenas to attain instructional objectives often arise from his/her work-related knowledge and skills. Busher (2006) suggests that the school head could firstly ensure the availability of symbolic resources such as a vision for the curriculum, which incorporates core values for teachers and students, the prioritization of actions and the manner in which school development plans are mapped to achieve a coherent set of educational and social values. Secondly, it ensures the accessibility to technical knowledge of curriculum subjects, of subject pedagogy and how to become an effective instructor. Thirdly, it ensures the availability of organizational resources, which entail the school head’s knowledge about how the school system works and how people work in organizational systems. Significantly, Kadzamira (2010) have confirmed that research on school effectiveness in developing countries has been limited. However, according to Nkobi (2008), instructional leadership seeks to improve the teachers’ quality of classroom work for the ultimate purpose of enhancing learners’ achievement and also improving their attitudes and behavior towards school work as well as their personal life. Accordingly, the core business of a school head is instructional leadership. In the status quo, keeping the school performing is a constant battle for the instructional leader because the school should continually try to overcome inertia, to gain momentum and to be productive. The battle with inertia means that there is a constant change in instruction and this is often resisted by teachers. Therefore, the instructional leader’s knowledge and experience help overcome any possible resistance to changes in the school’s teaching and learning. In fact, Abdalla (2008) maintains that the execution of leadership practice requires a sound knowledge base and leadership skills on the part of the principal to enable him or her to coach teachers. According to Tolhurst (2006), there is a continuum in the leadership approaches. On one extreme end is the leader as an expert and on the other is the leader as a coach. The foundation of leadership is built on the belief that the leader has the capacity to perform his or her role. Knowledge and skills are regarded as prerequisites for assuming a leadership role. Although general knowledge over a broad area and specific skills are prerequisites for assuming the instructional leadership role ( Pellicer, 2008) The instructional leader’s knowledge and experience about leadership is critical because of the widespread notion that the quality of leadership has an impact on school and student outcomes. The instructional leader is both as a human being and as a leader. Nevertheless, the instructional leader’s knowledge and experience of instruction will have a definite impact on attempts to improve the teaching and learning principles toward a quality education. The idea that people in positions of leadership should have the relevant knowledge and skills is an idea that goes as far back as to the days of Plato (Haydon, 2007). In the present times, the relevant knowledge can be taken to be regarded as a kind of authority. The instructional leader needs to possess the knowledge and skills needed to develop a budget, hire and assign staff, and plan and implement a curriculum. These qualities should be manifested in terms of honesty, integrity, caring, and commitment to a set of widely accepted values. For the school head to be effective in guiding change, Mehan (2002) propose that he or she should have the knowledge and skills to create and maintain a sense of trust in the school. Importantly, the school head as an instructional leader as an expert takes pride in knowing about almost everything occurring in the school. Teachers see such an instructional leader as having all the solutions to problems concerning teaching and learning. Thus, when problems arise, the instructional leader takes a solution-focused approach. The instructional leader who relies on expertise as a source of power likes to maintain tight control over the delivery of instruction. Usually teachers prefer such a leader because he/she can concentrate on the teaching and learning process more than attending to administrative responsibilities. Instructional leadership that includes coaching maintains an overview of what takes place in the different parts of the school and its departments. Coaching refers to the methodology for shifting a culture of ‘power over’ people to one in which the ‘power within’ is unleashed (Lyons, 2010). In addition, Tolhurst (2006) maintains that coaching is a way of working alongside someone, giving him/her an opportunity to set goals and the support needed to achieve them. Therefore, the researcher, as a member of the academe, aims to determine the exercise of Instructional Leadership of Instructional leadership by the Public Elementary School Administrators in the Division of Caloocan City as Basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning. Theoretical Framework Instructional leaders are mandated to establish a standard of excellence in teaching, define benchmarks of instructional effectiveness and help teachers meet the required standards and attain the benchmarks. The expectations are not merely fluff that a leader uses to help followers to maintain a positive outlook on their work, but the expectations that the leader holds provide the framework into which followers fit their realities. The following theories support the current study: The Theory of Action provides the ways that professional standards can guide educational leadership practice and promote its outcomes. This theory-of-action also indicates how these professional standards can be effectively used. Standards have direct influence on members of the profession by creating expectations and setting directions for the practice of educational leaders. They have indirect influence on educational leadership by helping to shape the actions and support provided to members of the profession by professional associations and the system of supporting institutions involved in educational leader preparation and development. They also have indirect influence on educational leadership by serving as a foundation for policy and regulations regarding the profession and its practice, including those related to educational leader preparation, certification, professional development, and evaluation. Moreover, standards shape public expectations for the profession, for policy, and for supporting institutions which also affect practice. In addition, Transformational Leadership Theory is defined as a leadership approach that causes change in individuals and social systems. In its ideal form, it creates valuable and positive change in the followers with the end goal of developing followers into leaders. Enacted in its authentic form, 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 mission and the collective identity of the organization; being a role model for followers that inspires them; 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 optimize their performance. Furthermore, Stimulus Response Theories emphasize the importance of association or connection between the stimulus and the response. These theories analyse learning situations, divide learning phenomena in to small element and investigate the simplest possible stimulus-response relationship in order to understand better and more complex total phenomena of learning. These theories emphasize drill and practice in learning. It supports a systematic, carefully pre-planned, expository approach to teaching. It agrees in principle that the function of a teacher is to help students learn and the role of the teacher as a classroom manager or director of the learning process. Here, the student’s interests, needs, goals and problems are taken into account at individualizing the instructional programs. Teacher decides which particular kinds of changes are to be brought about in his students, what they will learn, and kinds of responses they will eventually come to make. Then he proceeds to plan, organize and direct the work of the class in such a way that the desired responses will be made. Thus teachers should be flexible in selecting and adapting what they regard as the better features of each system. They must accept the better point, specific applications and implication of each theory for classroom learning rather than waste their time in applying all the conflicting views of all the theories. As stated by Van Niekerk (2009), the Contingency Theory of Leadership indicates that the leadership approach adopted by a leader should be matched with the existing situation and this also includes the followers’ level of maturity. Justifying the importance of followers’ readiness for responsibility, the authors argue further that the success or failure of change in education is determined at the educator’s level where it is implemented. Holbeche (2006) maintains that an individual’s level of motivation is influenced by his or her willingness to carry out a given task. Thus, school heads who consider the readiness of staff to introduce changes in the instructional program are more likely to raise the level of motivation to excel. As emphasized in the Situational Leadership Theory, it was revealed in the interviews conducted with the various participants that school heads, as instructional leaders, took the prevailing circumstances in the school’s internal and external environment into account. The high school head at school also pointed out that she exercised emotional awareness, resilience, and persistence in the course of their instructional leadership to succeed in creating a teaching-learning process. In essence, evidence gathered from observations of the high school head’s instructional leadership behavior, document analysis of minutes of staff meetings held and interviews conducted indicated that most school heads manifested an understanding and empathic personality. The situational leadership theory maintains that effective leadership behavior is dependent on the situation in which the leader functions. This means that the leader must be cognizant of variables such as the nature of the task to be performed, the maturity of the group and operative time constraints. To realize optimal results, the contingency theorists emphasized the need for leaders to change their approaches in accordance with the circumstances. Thus, Trait Theory of Leadership, which subscribes to the notion that leaders are born, suggests that successful leaders’ behaviors can be attributed to a set of unique personality traits such as forcefulness, intelligence and the need for achievement. However, in the 20th century the work of Frederick Taylor gave rise to another school of thinkers in the field of leadership studies based on behavioral theory. Behavioral theorists such as McGregor (cited in Pellicer, 2008) believed that what leaders do is far more significant than any set of traits they might possess. Behavioral theorists were cognizant of the fact that people within rigid organizations have needs that must be satisfied first so that the organization can be successful in its endeavors. The study of behaviorists on the leader’s personality paved the way for a series of leadership models, assessment tools, and motivational theories that have had a significant influence on the study and practice of leadership in the present day (Gwete, 2005). Conceptual Framework Effective instructional leadership is associated with trustworthiness, caring and respectfulness, emotional literacy and cultural awareness. According to Goldsmith (2000), leaders are viewed as dependable, sincere and non-deceptive promise keepers. Therefore, the instructional leader should also possess important traits such as integrity and moral fabric. To succeed in creating a positive learning, the instructional leader should demonstrate a high regard for the dignity, worth, wellbeing, and autonomy of all the members of the school community as well as for himself or herself. The instructional leader must be prepared to learn from other cultures so that he/she may have a broader perspective of his or her role. Emotional awareness, resilience, and persistence on the part of the instructional leader are also important in learning process. Under stressful and difficult situations these assist the instructional leader to sense, understand, and respond effectively. The trust he or she inspires in teachers for instance serves as an impetus to the attainment of quality education. The 1987 Philippine Constitution clearly mandates that the government to provide quality education to its citizens. “The State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels, and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all” ( Sec.1, Article XIV) Furthermore, the State shall establish, maintain, and support a complete, adequate, and integrated system of education relevant to the needs of the people and society. In addition, the government shall maintain, a system of free public education in the elementary and high school levels. Without limiting the natural rights of parents to rear their children, elementary education is compulsory for all children of school age. Moreover, the school shall inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love of humanity, respect for human rights, appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical development of the country, teach the rights and duties of citizenship, strengthen ethical and spiritual values, develop moral character and personal discipline, encourage critical and creative thinking, broaden scientific and technological knowledge, and promote vocational efficiency. In addition, Republic Act No. 9155 or an act instituting a framework of governance for basic education, establishing authority and accountability, renaming the department of education, culture and sports as the department of education, and for other purposes. It is hereby declared the policy of the State to protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality basic education and to make such education accessible to all by providing all Filipino children a free and compulsory education in the elementary level and free education in the high school level. Such education shall also include alternative learning systems for out-of-school youth and adult learners.It shall be the goal of basic education to provide them with the skills, knowledge and values they need to become caring, self- reliant, productive and patriotic citizens. Batas Pambansa Blg. 232 (the education act of 1982). This was an act providing for the establishment and maintenance of an integrated system of education. In accordance with Section 2, this act shall apply to and govern formal and non- formal system in public and private schools in all levels of the entire educational system. As provided by this Act, the national development goals are as follows: To achieve and maintain an accelerating rate of economic development and social progress; To assure the maximum participation of all the people in the attainment and enjoyment of the benefits of such growth; and To achieve and strengthen national unity and consciousness and preserve, develop and promote desirable cultural, moral and spiritual values in changing world. Pursuant to Section 3 of the Basic Education as per Republic Act No. 10533, states that basic education is intended to meet basic learning needs which provide the foundation on which subsequent learning can be based. It encompasses kindergarten, elementary, and secondary education as well as alternative learning systems for out-of-school learners and those with special needs under Section 8 of this IRR. Moreover, to ensure that the enhanced basic education program meets the demand for quality teachers and school leaders, the DepEd, CHED, and TESDA shall conduct teacher education and training programs, in collaboration with relevant partners in government, academe, industry, and non-governmental organizations. Such professional development programs shall be initiated, conducted and evaluated regularly throughout the year to ensure constant upgrading of teacher skills. Republic Act No. 10533, an act enhancing the Philippine basic education system by strengthening its curriculum and increasing the number of years for basic education, appropriating funds therefor and for other purposes. The State shall establish, maintain and support a complete, adequate, and integrated system of education relevant to the needs of the people, the country and society-at-large. Likewise, it is hereby declared the policy of the State that every graduate of basic education shall be an empowered individual who has learned, through a program that is rooted on sound educational principles and geared towards excellence, the foundations for learning throughout life, the competence to engage in work and be productive, the ability to coexist in fruitful harmony with local and global communities, the capability to engage in autonomous, creative, and critical thinking, and the capacity and willingness to transform others and one’s self. Republic Act No. 4670 or the “Magna Carta for Public School Teachers” was approved to promote and improve the social and economic status of public school teachers, their living and working conditions, their employment and career prospects. The researcher utilized the Input- Process- Output (IPO) model of research. The input variables are the preferred profile of the public elementary school administrators in Caloocan City. The extent of the public elementary school administrators exercises their instructional leadership. Lastly, the problems being met by the public elementary school administrators in their exercise of instructional leadership. The process variables are the descriptive data analysis and design the proposed action plan and the output variable is the proposed action plan to address the problems being met by the public elementary school administrators in their exercise of instructional leadership. Figure 1 is the Schematic Diagram of the conceptual framework of the study presented on the next page. Figure 1 Paradigm of the Study Statement of the Problem This study aimed to determine the instructional leadership by the public elementary school administrators in Caloocan City as basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning. Specifically, it sought to answer the following sub-problems: 1. What is the preferred profile of the Public Elementary School Administrators in the Division of Caloocan City in terms of the following variables: a. present position; b. no. of years of service as school administrators; c. highest educational attainment; and d. performance for the last three years ? 2. In what extent do the public elementary school administrators exercise instructional leadership in terms of the following to promote effective teaching-learning in terms of the following variables: a. setting goals; b. allocating resources for instruction; c. managing the curriculum; d. evaluating teachers; and e. establishing healthy and viable home-school relations? 3. What are the problems being met by the public elementary-school administrators in their exercise of instructional leadership. 4. What action plan can be propose to address the problems being met by the public elementary school administrators in their exercise of instructional leadership? Scope and Delimitation This study was conducted in public elementary schools in Caloocan City in order to determine instructional leadership of the school administrators as basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning. The vision of school leaders was found to inspire teachers to change their practice. In addition to a convincing vision, it is also necessary to be able to realize this change practically, by defining the activities that are required. Moreover, the researcher aims to determine the level of their competence in their exercise of instructional leadership. Significance of the Study Leaders need to manage and organize appropriate, in-depth learning opportunities for teachers. Their role, among many, is to demonstrate ‘personal passion and enthusiasm’ while also being ‘sensitive to the fears of some teachers’ in trying new things. The positive and symbiotic relationship between practice development and wider educational policy is of great importance in the educational system. The schools benefitted from linking practice outcomes to overall education strategy. The Department of Education Officials the findings of the study will help the government leaders to enact laws and guidelines on the instructional leadership program. The government shall conduct regular trainings and seminars on instructional leadership among the teachers and students in order to develop teaching-learning process. The Administrators that the findings of the study will help the local representatives and heads in designing programs that will provide instructional leadership in school, and community that will benefit the parents, students, and other stakeholders. The Administrative Assistants the findings of the study will help the school officers and teachers to spearhead the activities and programs that will enhance and mold the leadership skills and character of the teachers in order to become an effective instructional leader in the school campus. Furthermore, it will develop the teaching and learning process of the teachers and the students which will uplift the educational status in the country. The Learners the findings of the study will provide quality learning to the students. Moreover, it will establish a fiduciary relationship among the teachers and the students towards achieving a common goal. The Researcher the findings of the study will help the researcher to present scholarly works that dwells on the topic of instructional leadership of the school heads. In addition, it will provide important aspects of leadership that will enhance the teachers’ skills and knowledge as leaders which will positively affect the learning process of the students. Other Researchers that the result of this study will encourage the latter to conduct studies on the instructional leadership in order to strengthen the leadership skills of the stakeholders that will uplift the teaching and learning relation in the school environment. Definition of Terms The following words and phrases used are constructively defined herein in order to provide the true meaning and intent of the researcher to further avoid cloud of doubts in this study. Action plan in this study, it refers to a plan created to organize a school and district improvement effort. A school and district improvement goals such as targets for improved student test performance and promotion of effective teaching-learning. The specific actions or strategies a school will undertake to achieve its goals Instructional leadership in this study, it refers to an important principle for the dynamic establishment of broader school leadership. This concept is deter-mined by understanding the educational leaders who highly contribute on im-proving the students’ learning outcomes. Pangasinan in this study, it refers to the third biggest province in the whole Philippine Archipelago. The province is located on the western area of the island of Luzon. According to the 2010 Census of Population and Housing (CPH), the province of Pangasinan has 44 towns, four cities and 1,364 barangays. Public Elementary School in this study, it refers to a school fully funded and supported by the government through the Department of Education. This is an institution with a duty to educate the children. Teaching in this study, it refers to a noble duty or profession of teachers with a responsibility of educating the learners by providing or transferring knowledge to the children. LITERATURE A strong instructional leader is important for a school to be successful. There have been a lot of new various development programs and trainings for principals and teachers in order to bring success to the schools. The development trainings and programs are designed to build the characters of instructional leadership as a strategy to increase students’ performances (Halingger, 2016). Leadership is the most fundamental building block and the primary factor in creating the conditions for innovations in teaching. It is conventional wisdom among scholars that teachers are the most important school factors influencing student learning, since they are at the heart of teaching and learning activities in schools. Teachers’ individual competencies on pedagogical and content knowledge and their ability to teach are the key elements for their success. It is, therefore, obvious that teachers’ success depends strongly on their ability to improve their knowledge and capacity, but they cannot achieve this without working collaboratively to enrich their instructional practice (Bulut, 2016). Effective leadership has a key role in motivating teachers towards individual and shared learning, a factor which is considered to be quite important for school effectiveness to be achieved. Consequently, it becomes clear that leadership is the mediator which has the authority to develop and empower teachers in the quest of school effectiveness. The idea of organizing schools as learning organizations where the practices allow for continuous learning is rapidly and steadily considered as the mediator for achieving school improvement. According to Sillins (2016), the school is gradually transformed into a learning organization which needs to refresh the processes involving its current and future needs. Leadership practices have positive effects on teacher’s lifelong professional development in the school context because they have the potential to empower teachers towards a commitment to change and enhance their learning in school organization. Leadership, in whichever model it embraces, has as central goal to ensure and maintain the school improvement which has to do with the quality of teaching; the most influential factor of students’ achievement. It is obvious though that the quality and the effectiveness of leadership is understood and evaluated in correspondence with regards to teachers’ motivation and effectiveness. According to Masuku (2015), one of the main leadership practices has to do with the teacher’s empowerment which is strongly related to the central goal of the school; students’ learning. The improvement of the employees’ performance is a significantly important aim which the leader tries to achieve through several actions taking into consideration individuals’ beliefs, values, motivations and skills (Fullan, 2015). Structuring a specific vision and giving directions, they provide teachers with a strong motivation to improve their performance. In particular, setting a shared purpose that clarifies the roles, the objectives and the desired expectations from the teachers’ performance they enhance teachers’ effectiveness in the classroom. According to Jantzi (2015) who cited that over the past years there are several different theoretical models concerning the educational leadership. The idea of the educational instructional leadership which was introduced during the early 1980s describes a teacher who wants to manage, supervise and develop curriculum and instruction in the school context. Moreover, it is the teacher’s responsibility to build a kind of work that condition on productive and creative relationships between the teachers and the whole community, enforcing in this way the professional development of the teaching staff. Also, the leader can provide opportunities for teachers’ learning by organizing and managing several programs concerning their professional development or by offering individual mentoring to them. Such leadership practices produce supportive working conditions to motivate and influence the teaching staff. Effective leadership has been a major area of concern in many educational reforms as can be seen from reports by Mourshed (2013). Scholars state that countries’ education systems were considered in terms of their academic performance. One major finding in those reports was that educational institutions had improved their pupil’s educational achievement owing to strong school leadership by their school administrators. Furthermore, going through recent evidence it could be stated that leaders are also able to determine teachers’ emotions which are considered to be influential to their motivation and effectiveness, such as: sense of efficacy, job satisfaction and anxiety. The spotlight of educational leadership is on instructional leadership. As pressure for improving student performance in the current standards based accountability environment swells and test results are increasingly scrutinized, school principals are being urged to focus their efforts on the core business of schooling—teaching and learning. Instructional leaders usually aim to school improvement having a strong goal orientation but at the same time they construct an academic pressure because of indicating high expectations from the teachers. According to Hallinger (2013), an instructional leader specifies the school’s aims, organizes the instructional program in order to achieve these goals and tries to promote learning by constructing the appropriate climate. Several additional practices are also applied by the principal in the school setting. The communication between the leader and the teaching staff seems to be quite important for the specific educational and learning goals to be extensively known and supported by the total school community. Instructional leadership, supported by the proper tools and resources, can counteract these tendencies toward fragmentation and incoherence. From extensive conversations with a group of principals identified as instructional leaders, three themes emerged as crucial elements of instructional leadership. Additionally, the teacher should manage the instruction procedure on the whole and supervise the student’s progress. An instructional teacher tries also to create a positive learning environment by supporting the professional development, sharing his vision and providing strong motivations and inspirations for learning to the teaching staff. A teacher to be motivated should be helped to evaluate and recognize the need to change his/her perceptions towards a specific direction-action. Motivation could be considered as the interaction between individual aims and the goal-orientation of the school. For this reason, a leader should adopt strategies in order to motivate teachers and coordinate their personal aims with the school ones. The sense of capacity is usually a strong motivating feeling which increases the amount of effort paid, aiming to achieve the common goal (Brown,2013). Moreover, Ford (2012) emphasized that some of the leadership strategies which could increase the teachers’ capacity and as a consequence their motivation is the positive and supporting feedback, the experience shared with the teaching staff and the communication in order to explain in details the aims and the actions that should be applied. Positive emotions also, in correspondence with the achievement of a personal goal, seem to have motivational value which could be empowered if the principal expresses his confidence concerning the success attained through positive feedback. Leadership seems to be able to affect the organizational citizenship behavior of teachers either indirectly, through its influence on job satisfaction, or directly, through leader’s behavior and personal relationship with the teaching staff. That activity contributes to the school evolvement and helps teachers to obtain not only a better sense of their role in the organization but also a vision about their future as members in this organization (Nguni et al, 2012). Teachers are usually overburdened administratively, have no time for more educational tasks and take little part in decision-making. The main difficulty encountered in consolidating effective school leadership is related to the increase in and concomitant higher complexity of, principals’ tasks and activities in the 2000s. Owing to external demands, moreover, the function has become fragmented in many cases. In regard to that growth in complexity, Elmore (2012) has pointed out that principals’ main function should be to drive organizational learning in schools. Day et al (2012) drew the same conclusion when they wrote that organizational learning is the means of ensuring effective leadership and quality learning in schools. Learning-centered leadership requires a major change in research and policies since it implies switching from the approach centered on management capacity devised centered on ability to influence learning. According to Louis (2011), the connection between leadership and the improvements in learning achievement and quality education is critical. The principal’s leadership can have a direct effect by improving teaching by creating conditions conducive to good learning achievement. There is broad consensus in literature that leadership in education is what a teacher, team and community and achieve good learning outcomes for all pupils. Effective school leadership is therefore one of the factors with a significant impact on education quality. Instructional leadership refers to a series of behaviors designed to affect classroom instruction. Such behaviors include principals informing teachers about new educational strategies and tools for effective instruction, and assisting them in critiquing them to determine their applicability in the classroom (Sindhvad, 2016). Andrews (2016) describes the effective instructional leader as a resource provider, instructional resource, communicator, and visibly present in the school. There is an emerging consensus among scholars that providing instructional leadership (IL) in a school is the basic and essential role of school administrators. Instructional leadership ensures that teachers are supervised and that students are supported, guided and that their work is monitored. It can boost stakeholder engagement and if used properly, can help in establishing professional learning communities. School leadership has now become an international priority on the education policy agenda, so the question arises as to which policies would achieve successful school leadership. In that respect, in the report by Pont et al. (2015) it is stated that the position of a teacher remains an essential feature of schools, but it is facing a number of challenges. As the expectations of what schools should achieve have changed dramatically over recent years, countries need to develop new forms of school leadership better suited to respond to current and future educational environments. Hallinger and Heck (2015) state that the most theoretically and empirically robust models used to study school leadership effects show that principals can influence student achievement when efforts are aimed toward influencing internal school processes. These internal processes range from school policies and norms (e.g. academic expectations, school mission, student opportunity to learn, instructional organization, academic learning time) to the practices of teachers. A number of materials reveal school goals (sustaining a school wide purpose focusing on student learning) as a significant factor of school principalship. Garcia (2015) cited that as schools have taken on a variety of new tasks, educators have come to understand much more about how children learn. And as knowledge of child development, curriculum, and instruction has burgeoned, the profession has become Balkanized. Many of today's teachers have their own areas of expertise and their own professional language. It is simply not realistic to expect an administrator to serve as an intellectual resource or catalyst for all these (and countless other) efforts. As Roland Barth (2015) cited, the obstacles to the job are the job. But while administrators can identify the constraints and the roadblocks that keep us from exercising instructional leadership, we cannot let those obstacles stop us. Our task is to find ways to remove or go around them. Retraining and training of school teachers and leaders is very important since they are the people who apply education policies in schools, so if they are poorly trained and supported, no policy, be it national or regional or local, can be effective. Nevertheless, despite the trends noted, there is great heterogeneity among regions and countries. Effective school management practices depend on the features and characteristics of education systems as well as on teachers’ status and work. School leadership has now become an international priority on the education policy agenda, so the question arises as to which policies would achieve successful school leadership. In that respect, in the report by Sofo et al. (2014) it is stated that the position of principal remains an essential feature of schools, but it is facing a number of challenges. As the expectations of what schools should achieve have changed dramatically over recent years, countries need to develop new forms of school leadership better suited to respond to current and future educational environments. Leadership and management are both essential and deserve equal elevation within the school. The challenges posed by schools today need a person with a round character, someone who will firstly have fundamental knowledge of management and lastly have extensive knowledge of IL. Teachers first need to have relevant management skills before thinking of being instructional leaders (Bush, 2013). This argument does not infer that management roles of school administrators are not important. Arguably they are important, but management responsibilities are not the leading reasons for which teachers are appointed. In the country, there is an emerging need to improve the quality and culture of teaching and learning. Research has indicated a strong relationship between school improvement and instructional leadership. Instructional leadership advocates for the distribution of decision making powers to the local and school levels. The mechanism to carry this idea forward is school based management. In a study of school administrators’ roles, Rooyen (2013) found that the majority of school administrators spend more time on administrative and financial tasks and performed their role as “administrators” rather than as instructional leaders. This kind of management saw school administrators directly involved and participating in the teaching culture of the school, establishing working relations with students and classroom teachers, looking after school finances, managing buildings, playgrounds, disciplining students and other related matters. School administrators saw themselves deeply involved in issues that did not have a direct bearing on teaching and learning. Traditionally, school leadership has been a largely managerial job. Educational Larry Cuban (2012) highlighted that the life of a school principal thus can be seen largely as a tug of war among managerial, political, and instructional responsibilities. Typically, managerial duties overwhelm the other two roles and school administrators construct their roles largely as managers of their schools. Given these forces, the job of the instructional leader becomes an on-going struggle to preserve a substantial proportion of time and energy for instructional supervision and to make their managerial and political responsibilities subservient to their instructional ones. Ponce (2010) argued that Instructional leadership is not a substitute for management. Instructional leaders did not ignore the managerial aspects of their jobs, which all eight principals agreed were vital, but as instructional improvement became the primary emphasis of the organization. Management is still an important dimension of school administration. However, the instructional dimension is the key to total school reform. However, if high-quality teaching is to occur in the building, the principal has to lead this effort. Instructional improvement became the organizing emphasis in the lives of these leaders, from which their decisions and priorities flowed. Furthermore, Andaya (2012) explained that powerful instructional leadership involves more than just a generic focus on instruction, although that is a start. School administrators that increase their schools’ focus on instruction will certainly improve their students’ performance, for more instruction is surely better than less. But exponential value of instructional leadership comes from the marriage of an intense organizational focus on instructional improvement with a clear vision of instructional quality. A concrete vision of instructional quality provides a tangible representation of what effective instructional planning and delivery looks like, provides teachers with an instructional portrait they can work toward, and provides a picture that administrators can measure implementation against. The literature also suggests that principals of effective schools show a higher quality of human relations. They recognize the needs of teachers and help them achieve their own performance goals. They also encourage and acknowledge teachers’ good work. According to Jacob (2011),highly effective principals have a positive impact on teacher morale leading toward increased teacher effort to which has a positive impact on student performance. The literatures show that strong district involvement in curriculum and instruction that supports principals’ instructional goals is another aspect of an effective school. RELATED STUDIES Foreign The instructional leader gives the top priority to improving instruction and making efforts to realize the vision (Ahmad, 2016). The term ‘instructional leadership’ is associated with measures that a principal takes, or delegates to others, to enhance students’ learning. Instructional leadership is acknowledged to be a critical skill in educational administration, few principals and superintendents have had in-depth training for that role, especially in a standards-based environment. Current definitions of instructional leadership include much deeper involvement in the core technology of teaching and learning, carry more sophisticated views of professional development, and emphasize the use of data to make decisions in school. Leadership is also distributed across the school community, with principals, superintendents, teachers, and policymakers having complementary responsibilities. Leadership preparation programs include cohort programs, case studies, problem-based learning, and internships. School districts can build instructional leadership by expecting all employees to be both teachers and learners (Eugene, 2016). Teacher leadership studies have identified attributes of teachers who assume leadership roles. Teacher leadership reflects teacher agency; that is, teachers’ school-wide work is supported through establishing relationships, breaking down barriers, and marshalling resources throughout the organization in an effort to improve students’ educational experiences and outcomes. Principals who sustained diverse responsibilities for many aspects of school management, did not focus on the core business of schooling, teaching and learning, were urged to pay more serious attention to the matters of instruction (Greenfield, 2016). One out of the three dimensions of the instructional leadership construct is managing the Instructional Program. Managing the Instructional Program is associated with the principal’s role in working with teachers in areas specifically related to educational technology, curriculum, and instruction. School principals play the most important role in managing the instructional program, the second dimension of instructional leadership. Unfortunately, instructional leadership is not very popular yet, particularly in developing countries. Katzenmeyer (2015) defined teacher leadership in terms of influence, while Shelton (2015) discussed the construct by describing teacher behavior. The changing education system and new curriculum imply a change in the roles and expectations for teachers or school administrators as school leaders. In accordance with this view, Steyn (2015) regards improved leadership and management as a way to provide better quality education. Effective leadership is widely accepted as being a key constituent in achieving school improvement. The evidence from both local and international literature demonstrates that effective leaders exercise an indirect but powerful influence on the effectiveness of the school and on the achievement of students. Whilst the quality of teaching strongly influences levels of pupil motivation and achievement, it has been consistently argued that the quality of leadership matters in determining the motivation of teachers and the quality of teaching in the classroom. A preliminary glance at the leadership research literature however reveals that it is largely premised upon individual impetus rather than collective action and offers a singular view of leadership predominantly bound up with headship (Murphy, 2015). Riehl (2014) argues that accountability regarding the performance of learners has put pressure on actors at all levels, from learners themselves to teachers, principals and superintendents. Principals are no longer regarded only as managers, but as leaders of schools as learning organizations, with a duty to exercise effective school leadership to ensure education reform and improvement in the performance of learners. The implication of Riehl‘s contention is that school administrators have to be prepared effectively in order to create good schools. They have to be able to transform human energy in schools into desired learner academic and social growth, to serve all learners well, and to react to the increasingly complex environment of the 21st century. McNulty (2014) stated that it will no doubt require a capable school leadership corps to effectively implement and manage the realization of the ideals and values referred to in the preamble to the constitution. The leadership literature has consistently questioned the extent of a school‘s impact on learner performance, whether the level of performance can be attributed to the leadership displayed in a school, and also the importance of leadership in an organization. The conclusion in all cases has consistently been that school leadership (particularly instructional leadership) substantially boosts learner performance and that leadership is considered to be a vital precondition for an organization‘s success. In the US, the study of Lashway (2014) stated that significant educational ideas endure, but they also evolve over time. The instructional leadership became the dominant paradigm for school leaders after researchers noticed that effective schools usually had principals who kept a high focus on curriculum and instruction. Attention to instructional leadership seemed to waver, displaced by discussions of school-based management and facilitative leadership. But recently instruction has surged back to the top of the leadership agenda, driven by the relentless growth of standards-based accountability systems. Explicit standards of learning, coupled with heavy pressure to provide tangible evidence of success, have reaffirmed the importance of instructional leadership. Nevertheless, despite general agreement that instructional leadership is a critical skill, few principals and superintendents have had in depth training for that role, especially in a standards-based environment. Moreover, Litz (2014) in his study highlighted that The National Association of Elementary School Administrators frames instructional leadership in terms of leading learning communities. In NAESA’s view, instructional leaders have six roles: making student and adult learning the priority; setting high expectations for performance; gearing content and instruction to standards; creating a culture of continuous learning for adults; using multiple sources of data to assess learning; and activating the community’s support for school success. These sweeping goals reflect a “best-practices” perspective distilled from an analysis of the current demands being placed on schools. The leader’s day is built around dozens of concrete “micro tasks,” many of which have no overt connection with instruction. On the other hand, Blase (2011) provided a partial answer by asking teachers to describe the behavior of school administrators who had a positive influence on student learning. Two broad themes emerged: talking with teachers and promoting professional development. These were expressed in specific behavior such as making suggestions, giving feedback, modelling effective instruction, soliciting opinions, supporting collaboration, providing professional development opportunities, and giving praise for effective teaching. All these actions were carried out in a way that respected teacher knowledge and autonomy. Instructional leadership was teacher-centered, often accompanied by images of heroic leaders single-handedly keeping the school on track. Many recent policy documents continue to put school administrators’ front and center. O’Neill (2011) characterizes the school administrator as the “chief learning officer” who bears “ultimate responsibility for success or failure of the enterprise.” However, a growing number of researchers say that instructional leadership is distributed across the school community, with principals, superintendents, teachers, and policymakers having complementary responsibilities. Policy makers need to adapt school leadership policy to new environments. Thus, Instructional leadership is a change from conventional management practice of the schools, in which principals were seen as general managers of the schools, to a principal as instructional leader. Contributions of the Reviewed Literature and Studies to the Present Study The above developments and challenges have made instructional leadership a priority in education policy agendas of many countries. The education ministers emphasized the key role of school leadership in helping education systems respond to the needs of rapidly changing societies. In response, scholars proposed to conduct an international activity to help policy makers compare their approaches to school leadership policy, identify innovative practices and provide policy options for action. CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY In this chapter, the research methodology structure of the study is presented. It discusses the research design, sources of data, instrumentation and collection of data and statistical treatment of the data to quantify and analyze the instructional leadership by the public elementary school administrators in Caloocan City as basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning. Research Design To describe and analyze the instructional leadership by the public elementary school administrators in Caloocan City as basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning, the researcher used descriptive method of research. According to Fischer (2020), descriptive research is used to describe characteristics of a population or phenomenon being studied. It does not answer questions about how/when/why the characteristics occurred. Rather it addresses the "what" question (what are the characteristics of the population or situation being studied. The characteristics used to describe the situation or population is usually some kind of categorical scheme also known as descriptive categories. Descriptive research generally precedes explanatory research. The description is used for frequencies, averages and other statistical calculations. Often the best approach, prior to writing descriptive research, is to conduct a survey investigation. Qualitative research often has the aim of description and the researcher may follow-up with examinations of why the observations exist and what the implications of the findings are. Thus, the descriptive method of research is appropriate since the main purpose of this study is to describe with emphasis the instructional leadership by the public elementary school administrators. The gathered data were subjected to statistical treatment for accurate interpretation of the findings. Sources of Data In this study, the study was conducted from the public elementary schools in Caloocan City in order to determine the instructional leadership by the public elementary school administrators in Caloocan City as basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning. Table I Distribution of Public Elementary Schools in Caloocan City N= 7 Public Elementary Schools Number of School Heads 1. Baesa Elementary School 1 2. Bagong Barrio ES 1 3. BES—Libis Baesa Annex 1 4. East Bagong Barrio Elementary School 1 5. Morning Breeze Elementary School 1 6. Sta. Quiteria Elementary School 1 7. Talipapa Elementary School 1 Total 7 Instrumentation and Data Collection The researcher used questionnaire to gather data. Information gathered was on the analysis of the instructional leadership by the public elementary school administrators in Caloocan City as basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning. Since the questionnaire was used, the researcher tests the validity and reliability of the instrument. To determine the validity of the questionnaires, the researcher sought the advice of her research adviser. Furthermore, a dry run of the questionnaires and pretesting was done. Hence, this is done to determine early on the potential problems that may arise in the actual conduct of the study, Comments and concerns of the research adviser were noted for further improvement prior to the distribution of the questionnaires. All these were done to assure content validity of the instrument. Hence, the researcher secured permission from her adviser and from the Dean of the Graduate School in the conduct of the study. Then, the researcher sought the permission of the Office of the Schools Division Superintendent for the use of documents and records. Once permission was granted, the researcher also sought the permission of the principals to allow her to conduct the study in the school. The target respondents have been identified prior to the administration of the instrument to facilitate a more efficient conduct of the survey. Retrieval of the answered questionnaires was immediately made. And data were kept confidential. Tools for Data Analysis The following statistical measures and methods were used to come up with valid and credible interpretation of data. For sub- problem no.1 pertaining to the preferred profile of the public elementary school administrators in Caloocan City, the frequency counts with their frequency, percentage and mean were used. The formula is as follows: F % = -------- X 100 N Where: % -percentage N- number of respondents F- frequencies 100- constant For sub- problem no. 2 pertaining to what extent do the public elementary schools administrators exercise instructional leadership to promote effective teaching-learning contributing to the improvement of the quality of life, a five point likert scale was used as shown to interpret the computed average weighted mean. Point Values Point Ranges Descriptive Equivalent 5 4.21 - 5.00 Very Much Extent 4 3.41 - 4.20 Much Extent 3 2.61- 3.40 Extent 2 1.81 - 2.60 Slightly Extent 1 1:00 - 1.80 Not At All For sub- problem no. 3 pertaining to the problems being met by the public elementary-school administrators in their exercise of instructional leadership, the frequency counts with their frequency, percentage and mean were used. For sub- problem no. 4 the researcher proposed an action plan to address the problems being met by the public elementary school administrators in their exercise of instructional leadership. CHAPTER 3 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA This chapter presents the data gathered together with the corresponding statistical analysis done, interpretation, and corroboration to meet the set objectives of the study. Moreover, the researcher employed the widely acceptable tools in field of research in order to gather information and preserve the integrity of the data and findings of the study. Profile of the Public Elementary School Administrators in the Division of Caloocan City This section presents the profile of the Public Elementary School Administrators in the Division of Caloocan City in terms of the present position, no. of years of service as school administrators, highest educational attainment; and performance for the last three years. Table II Profile of the Public Elementary School Administrators in the Caloocan City Professional Profile NUMBER (f) PERCENTAGE (%) A. Present Position 1 1 1 2 1 1 14% 14% 14% 28.57% 14% 14% Head Teacher I Head Teacher II Head Teacher III Principal I Principal II Principal III Total 7 100% B. LENGTH OF SERVICE 2 1 2 2 28.57 14 28.57 28.57 1-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years 16 years & above Total 7 100% C. HIGHEST EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT Ph. D/Ed.D. With Ph. D/Ed.D. units MAED/MED Grad. With MAED/MED units 1 1 3 2 14 14 42. 86 28.57 Total 7 100% D. PERFORMANCE RATING Outstanding 4 57.14 Very Satisfactory 3 42.86 Total 7 100% As regards to their present position 1 of them were Head Teacher III representing 14 %, 1 of them were Principal II representing 14 %; 1 of them were Principal II and 1 of them as Head Teacher II; 1 of them as Principal III and 1 as Head Teacher I. Relative to the length of their services, bracket 1-5 years had 3 school administrators representing 10%, bracket 6-10 years had 7 school administrators representing 25%, bracket 11-15 years had 9 school administrators representing 31%, bracket 16 years & above had 16 school administrators representing 34%. Out of the 29 school administrators, there are 4 or 14 % had doctorate degree; 6 of them had PH. D./Ed. D. units; there were 14 who were Master of Arts in Education graduates (MAED) representing 48%; 5 of them had units in MAED representing 17%. Relative to their performance rating, 6 school administrators were outstanding representing 21% and the rest school administrators were very satisfactory representing 79%. Extent of Public Elementary School Administrators on Exercise Instructional Leadership This section dealt with the extent do the public elementary school administrators exercise instructional leadership in terms of the following to promote effective teaching-learning in terms of the setting goals, allocating resources for instruction, managing the curriculum, evaluating teachers; and establishing healthy and viable home-school relations. Table III Extent of Public Elementary School Administrators on Exercise Instructional Leadership Exercise Instructional Leadership 1 NA 2 SE 3 E 4 ME 5 VME 1. setting goals ⁄ 2. allocating resources for instruction ⁄ 3. managing the curriculum ⁄ 4. evaluating teachers ⁄ 5. establishing healthy and viable home-school relations / On the exercise of Instructional Leadership to promote effective teaching-learning composed of 1. Setting goals which had verbal rating of Very Much Extent (VME), 2. allocating resources for instruction which received verbal rating of Much Extent (ME), 3. managing the curriculum which received verbal rating of Much Extent (ME), 4. evaluating teachers received verbal rating of Very Much Extent (VME) and 5. establishing healthy and viable home-school relations which received verbal rating of Much Extent (ME). Problems Being Met by the Public Elementary-School Administrators in their Exercise of Instructional Leadership This section presents the problems being met by the public elementary-school administrators in their exercise of instructional leadership. Table IV Problems Being Met by the School Administrators N=29 Indicators WM Descriptive Equivalent 1. Some teachers are against with my policies. 4.72 VS 2. Lack of support from the PTA. 4.04 S 3. Lack of skills in implementing different rules and regulations. 4.41 S 4. Lack of time to attend leadership training. 4.23 S 5. Lack of budget to attend leadership training. 4.26 S 6. Indifferent attitudes of teachers to innovation/change in school. 4.42 S 7. Doing other functions not related to management. 4.16 S OAWM 4.32 S The problems being met by the school administrators are serious as reflected in the overall average weighted mean of 4.32. The number 1 problem of the school administrators is some teachers are against with their policies with 4.72 which is very serious. This is being followed indifferent attitudes of teachers to innovation/change in school with 4.42 which is serious. The lowest mean rating was given to lack of support from the PTA with 4.04 but it is still serious. Moreover, it is shown in the table the majority of the problems mentioned are serious as rated by the school administrators. Propose Action Plan This section presents the action plan that can be propose to address the problems being met by the public elementary school administrators in their exercise of instructional leadership. Table V Propose Action Plan Objectives Performance Indicator/Target Activity/ Strategy Key Person Involved Time-Frame 1.To invite resource person/speaker 100% participation rate of the participants Meeting/ conference Resource Speaker DepEd Officials School Administrators bi-monthly 2.To call a school based meeting by the administrator 100% participation rate of the teachers Planning & execution of instructional leadership School Administrator & Teachers Monthly 3.To re-echo the results of the previously done regarding on the exercise of instructional leadership 100% participation rate of the school administrators Assigning of a school administrators School administrators Quarterly 4. To demonstrate exercise of instructional leadership with new trends application 100% participation rate of the school administrators Assigning of a school administrators School administrators Semi-Annually CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter presents the summary of findings, the conclusions arrived at, and the recommendations made based on the conclusions. Summary This study aimed to determine the instructional leadership by the public elementary school administrators in Caloocan City as basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning. Thus, the descriptive method of research is appropriate since the main purpose of this study is to describe with emphasis the instructional leadership by the public elementary school administrators. The gathered data were subjected to statistical treatment for accurate interpretation of the findings. This study was conducted in public elementary schools in Caloocan City in order to determine instructional leadership of the school administrators as basis for an action plan for the promotion of effective teaching-learning. The vision of school leaders was found to inspire teachers to change their practice. In addition to a convincing vision, it is also necessary to be able to realize this change practically, by defining the activities that are required. Moreover, the researcher aims to determine the level of their competence in their exercise of instructional leadership. Findings Findings were derived from the responses to the sub-problems of this study. 1. As regards to their present position 15 of them were Head Teacher III representing 52 %, 8 of them were Principal II representing 28 %; 2 of them were Principal II and 2 of them as Head Teacher II; 1 of them as Principal III and 1 as Head Teacher I. Relative to the length of their services, bracket 1-5 years had 3 school administrators representing 10%, bracket 6-10 years had 7 school administrators representing 25%, bracket 11-15 years had 9 school administrators representing 31%, bracket 16 years & above had 16 school administrators representing 34%. Out of the 29 school administrators, there are 4 or 14 % had doctorate degree; 6 of them had PH. D./Ed. D. units; there were 14 who were Master of Arts in Education graduates (MAED) representing 48%; 5 of them had units in MAED representing 17%. Relative to their performance rating, 6 school administrators were outstanding representing 21% and the rest school administrators were very satisfactory representing 79%. 2. On the exercise of Instructional Leadership to promote effective teaching-learning composed of 1. Setting goals which had verbal rating of Very Much Extent (VME), 2. allocating resources for instruction which received verbal rating of Much Extent (ME), 3. managing the curriculum which received verbal rating of Much Extent (ME), 4. evaluating teachers received verbal rating of Very Much Extent (VME) and 5. establishing healthy and viable home-school relations which received verbal rating of Much Extent (ME). 3. The problems being met by the school administrators are serious as reflected in the overall average weighted mean of 4.32. The number 1 problem of the school administrators is some teachers are against with their policies with 4.72 which is very serious. This is being followed indifferent attitudes of teachers to innovation/change in school with 4.42 which is serious. 4. A proposed action plan to address the problems being met by the public elementary school administrators in their exercise of instructional leadership. CONCLUSIONS The formulated conclusions in this study were based on the preceding findings. The researcher therefore concluded that: 1. Majority of the school administrators were old, female, with doctorate and masteral degree holder, with minimum experience as administrators, and very satisfactory in terms of their performance. 2. The school administrators have great level of leadership. 3. The level of public service delivery of the school administrators is much extent. 4. Moreover, it is shown in the table the majority of the problems mentioned are serious as rated by the school administrators. RECOMMENDATIONS The researcher having put energy and effort into this study and formulated conclusions it was hereby recommended that: 1. The proposed action plan should be presented to the Schools Division Superintendent for implementation. 2. Considering the good leadership and public service delivery of the school administrators, they have to continuously strive to maintain the good leadership and public service delivery along the areas of concern. 3. It is imperative to provide trainings to the school administrators in leadership and public service delivery. 4. Similar study should be conducted in other divisions to determine the effectiveness of the present study. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS A. Bass, B. M. Leadership: Good, better, best. Organizational Dynamics, 1985. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. Transformational Leadership: A response to critiques. In M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and directions. New York: Academic Press, 1993. Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. Personality and Transformational and Transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2004. Burns, J. M. G. Leadership: Harper & Row.1979. Fullan, M. Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001. Lewis, P. S., Goodman, S. H. & Fandt, P. M. Management challenges in the 21st century. Cincinnati: Thomson, 1998. B. PUBLISHED MATERIALS Bass, B. M.. Does the transactional–transformational leadership paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 1997. Bass, B. Transformational leadership: industry, military, and educational impact, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates, 1998. Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. Transformational Leadership: L. Erlbaum Associates. 2006. Bensimon, E.M., Neumann, A. & Birnbaum, R. Higher education and leadership theory In: M. Christopher Brown. Organization governance in higher education. (5th edition). (pp.241-231). Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2000. Billingsley, B. S. Cultivating and keeping committed special education teachers: What principals and district leaders can do. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2005. Castanheira, P. & Costa, J. A. In search of transformational leadership: A (Meta) analysis focused on the Portuguese reality. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2011. Dubinsky, A., Yammarino, F., & Jolson, M. An examination of linkages between personal characteristics and dimensions of transformational leadership. Journal of Business and Psychology, 1995 Evers, C. W. & Lakomski, G. Exploring educational administration: coherentist applications and critical debates. NY: Elsevier Science, 1996. Hallinger, P. Leading educational change: reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 2003. Kahn, W. A. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 1990. Heck, R. H. & Hallinger, P. Next generation methods for the study of leadership and school improvement. In J. Murphy & L. Seashore (Eds.). Handbook of Research on Educational Administration. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999. Larsson, M., & Lundholm, S. E. (2010). Leadership as work-embedded influence: A microdiscursive analysis of an everyday interaction in a bank. Leadership, 2010. Leithwood, K., Steinbach, R. & Jantzi, D. (2000). School leadership and teachers’ motivation to implement accountability policies. Education Administration Quarterly, 2000. Littrell, P.C., Billingsley, B. & Cross, L. The effects of principal support on special an general educators’ stress, job satisfaction, school commitment, health, and intent to stay in teaching. Remedial and Special Education, 1994. Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A., School Leadership that works: From Research to Results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 2005 Masi, R. J., & Cooke, R. A. Effects of transformational leadership on subordinate motivation, empowering norms, and organizational productivity. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 2000. McFarlin, D. B. & Sweeney, P. D. International management: trends, challenges and opportunities, Ohio: South-Western College Publishing, 1998. Moolenaar, N. M., Daly, A. J. & Sleegers, P. J. C. (2010). Occupying the principal position: examining relationships between transformational leadership, social network position, and schools’ innovative climate. Educational Administration Quarterly, 2010. Northouse, P. G. Leadership theory and practice. Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 2001. OCCD- Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments: First Results from TALIS – ISBN 978-92-64-05605-3, 2009. Omar. 2005. Leadership styles and styles adaptability of deans and department chairs at three research universities. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Washignton State University, 2005. Oyetunyi. C.O. The relationship between leadership style and school climate: Botswana secondary schools. Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of South Africa, 2006. Owens. R.G 1998.Organisational behaviour in education.6th edition .Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1998. Saks, A. M. Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2006. Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S. K., & Peng, A. Cognition-based and affect-based trust as mediators of leader behavior influences on team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2011. Sergiovanni, T. J. The life of leadership: Creating culture, community and personal meaning in our schools. San Francisco: Jossy-Bass.2000. Sonnentag, S. (2003). Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior: A new look at the interface between nonwork and work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003. Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Xanthopoulou, D. Do transformational leaders enhance their followers' daily work engagement? The Leadership Quarterly, 2011. Wang, G., Oh, I., Courtright, S. H., & Colbert, A. E. Transformational leadership and performance across criteria and levels: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of research. Group & Organization Management, 2011. Weber, M., Henderson, A. M., & Parsons, T. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization: being Part I of Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: W. Hodge. C. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS Abalos, Aurora. “The Leadership Behavior of Administrators. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Baguio Central University, 2006. Del Rio, Lucy. “The Perceived Influence of Management Competencies of the Grade School Principal on Teachers’ and Pupils’ Performance” Unpublished Disseration, Philippine Normal University”, 2004 Samonte, Luis P. “Managerial Leadership Effectiveness of the School Principals of the Cordillera Administrative Region” Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Saint Loius University, Baguio City, 2004. Sante, Teofilo. “Total Quality Leadership of Public Elementary School Administrators in Relation to Quality of Instruction and Community Involvement” Unpublished Dissertation, Pangasinan State University, Urdaneta City, 2005. APPENDICES Appendix A Permit to Conduct the Study CECILLE G. CARANDANG, EDD Schools Division Superintendent Division of Caloocan City Caloocan City Madam: The undersigned is conducting a research study entitled “ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP BY THE PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS IN CALOOCAN CITY” in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Education at the Lyceum-Northwestern University, Dagupan City. In view of this, may I have the honor to request permission from your good office to administer my questionnaire to the School Administrators in Caloocan City. Anticipating your favorable approval regarding this matter. Thank you very much! Very truly yours, (Sgd.) MARIA THERESA N. ESGUERRA Researcher Noted: (Sgd.) CHRISTOPHER A. DE VERA, Ed. D. Adviser APPROVED CECILLE G. CARANDANG, EDD, CESO V School Division Superintendent Appendix B Letter to the Respondents Dear Respondents, The undersigned is conducting a research study entitled “ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP BY THE PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS IN CALOOCAN CITY” in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in Education at the Lyceum Northwestern University, Dagupan City. In this connection, I am seeking for your help and cooperation by answering the questionnaire. Rest assured that all your answers will be kept confidential. Anticipating your favorable approval regarding this matter. Thank you very much! Very truly yours, (Sgd.) MARIA THERESA N. ESGUERRA Researcher Noted: (Sgd.) CHRISTOPHER A. DE VERA, Ed. D. Adviser APPROVED (Sgd.) LEONARDO C. CANLAS, EDD School Division Superintendent Appendix C Questionnaire Name: ___________________________________ (Optional) School: __________________________________ Direction: Please check (/) the option which corresponds to your answer or write the information called for on the space provided. I. Profile of the Public Elementary School Administrators in the Division of Caloocan City A. PRESENT POSITION ____Head Teacher I ____Head Teacher II ____Head Teacher III ____Principal I ____Principal II ____Principal III B. LENGTH OF SERVICE ____1-5 years ____6-10 years ____11-15 years ____16 years & above C. HIGHEST EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT ____Ph. D/Ed.D. ____With Ph. D/Ed.D. units ____MAED/MED Grad. ____With MAED/MED units D. PERFORMANCE RATING _____Outstanding _____Very Satisfactory _____Satisfactory II. Extent of Public Elementary School Administrators on Exercise Instructional Leadership Exercise Instructional Leadership 1 NA 2 SE 3 E 4 ME 5 VME 1. setting goals 2. allocating resources for instruction 3. managing the curriculum 4. evaluating teachers 5. establishing healthy and viable home-school relations III. Problems being met Indicators VS (5) S (4) MS (3) SS (2) NP (1) 1. Some teachers are against with my policies. 2. Lack of support from the PTA. 3. Lack of skills in implementing different rules and regulations. 4. Lack of time to attend leadership training. 5. Lack of budget to attend leadership training. 6. Indifferent attitudes of teachers to innovation/change in school. 7. Doing other functions not related to management. 8. Others (please specify) CURRICULUM VITAE CURRICULUM VITAE MARIA THERESA NALO ESGUERRA B2 L4 Fir St. Bulacan Meadows, Caypombo, Santa Maria, Bulacan Email Address: mariatheresa.esguerra@deped.gov.ph Mobile number: 09322766470 Educational Qualification Master of Educational Management December 2024 - Present Complete Academic requirements Lyceum Northwestern University Tapuac, Dagupan City April 2015- June 2020 Governor Andres Pascual College 1045 Naval St., Navotas , Philippines Licensure Examination for Teachers Passer Licensed Teacher Registration number: 0021379 PRC Manila Philippines Tertiary Bachelor of Elementary Education June 1992- March 1996 Philippine Normal University Taft Avenue, Manila Secondary June 1988 – March 1992 Sacred Heart Academy Poblacion Santa Maria, Bulacan Elementary June 1982 – March 1988 Lourdes College of Bulacan Angat, Bulacan Work Experiences School Principal I August 1, 2022 up to present East Bagong Barrio Elementary School East Bagong Barrio Caloocan August 7, 2023- Present Antonio Luna Elementary School Bagumbong, Caloocan December 21, 2021 - August 6, 2023 Teacher III June 11, 1998 - December 20, 2021 Bagbaguin Elementary School Gen. Luis St, Brgy 165, Bagbaguin , Caloocan City Philippines 1421 Contractual Teacher June 1996-- March 1998 Sacred Heart Academy Poblacion Santa Maria, Bulacan Personal Information Birthdate: March 18,1975 Age: 50 yrs. Old Civil Status: Married Citizenship: Filipino Height: 5’ feet Weight: 60 kg

Published Paper   E-Certificate

MARIA THERESA NALO ESGUERRA (April-2026). ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP BY THE PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS IN TANQUE DISTRICT CALOOCAN CITY. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NOVEL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, 11(4), c875-c905. https://ijnrd.org/papers/IJNRD2604300.pdf

Volume 11 Issue 4, April-2026

Pages : c875-c905

Paper Reg. ID: IJNRD_323281

Published Paper Id: IJNRD2604300

Research Area: Other area not in list

Author Type: Foreign Author

Country: STA. MARIA, Bulacan, Philippines

Published Paper PDF: https://ijnrd.org/papers/IJNRD2604300.pdf

Published Paper URL: https://ijnrd.org/viewpaperforall?paper=IJNRD2604300

Journal Name: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NOVEL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT(IJNRD)

UGC CARE JOURNAL PUBLICATION | ISSN: 2456-4184 | IMPACT FACTOR: 8.76 Calculated By Google Scholar | ESTD YEAR: 2016

An International UGC CARE JOURNAL PUBLICATION, Low Cost, Scholarly Open Access, Peer-Reviewed, Refereed Journal Impact Factor 8.76 Calculate by Google Scholar and Semantic Scholar | AI-Powered Research Tool, Multidisciplinary, Monthly, Multilanguage Journal Indexing in All Major Database & Metadata, Citation Generator

Publisher: IJNRD (IJ Publication) Janvi Wave | IJNRD.ORG | IJNRD.COM | IJPUB.ORG

© 2026 - Authors hold the copyright of this article. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. and The Open Definition. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). 🛡️ Disclaimer: The content, data, and findings in this article are based on the authors’ research and have been peer-reviewed for academic purposes only. Readers are advised to verify all information before practical or commercial use. The journal and its editorial board are not liable for any errors, losses, or consequences arising from its use.

Call For Paper - Volume 11 | Issue 4 | April 2026

IJNRD is a Scholarly Open Access, Peer-Reviewed, Refereed, and UGC CARE Journal Publication with a High Impact Factor of 8.76 (calculated by Google Scholar & Semantic Scholar | AI-Powered Research Tool). It is a Multidisciplinary, Monthly, Low-Cost, and Transparent Peer Review Journal Publication that adheres to the New UGC CARE Transparent Peer-Reviewed Journal Policy and aligns with Scopus Journal Publication standards to ensure the highest level of research quality and credibility.

IJNRD offers comprehensive Journal Publication Services including indexing in all major databases and metadata repositories, Digital Object Identifier (Crossref DOI) assignment for each published article with additional fees, citation generation tools, and full Open Access visibility to enhance global research reach and citation impact.

The INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NOVEL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (IJNRD) aims to advance applied, theoretical, and experimental research across diverse academic and professional fields. The journal promotes global knowledge exchange among researchers, developers, academicians, engineers, and practitioners, serving as a trusted platform for innovative, peer-reviewed journal publication and scientific collaboration.

Indexing Coverage: Google Scholar, SSRN, ResearcherID-Publons, Semantic Scholar (AI-Powered Research Tool), Microsoft Academic, Academia.edu, arXiv.org, ResearchGate, CiteSeerX, ResearcherID (Thomson Reuters), Mendeley, DocStoc, ISSUU, Scribd, and many other recognized academic repositories.

Transparent Peer Review Journal Publication: IJNRD operates a strict double-blind peer review system managed by 3000+ expert reviewers, ensuring ethical, unbiased, and high-quality review for every research paper.

For Indian Authors : Get a transparent peer review report from Scholar9.com for just ₹1000. View Sample Report

For Foreign Authors : A detailed peer review report is available through Scholar9.com for $20 USD. View Sample Report

Transparent Peer Review Journal Publication

⭐ Transparent Peer Review | 🕵️‍♂️ Double-Blind | 👨‍🏫 3000+ Expert Reviewers | 🇮🇳 Report for India Author ₹1000 | 🌐 Report for Foreign Author $20 | 📄 Sample Reports on Scholar9.com | 🌍 High Credibility | ⚖️ Ethical & Unbiased Evaluation

How to submit the paper?

By Our website

Click Here to Submit Paper Online

By Mail

Send your paper to editor@ijnrd.org

Recently, the UGC discontinued the UGC-CARE Journal List and introduced new parameters that allow publication in Transparent Peer-Reviewed (Refereed) Journals. IJNRD is Transparent Peer Review Journal Valid As per New UGC Notification.

You can now publish your research paper in IJNRD.ORG. IJNRD is a Transparent Peer-Reviewed Open Access (Refereed Journal), UGC and UGC CARE Approved, Crossref DOI, Multidisciplinary, Impact Factor calculate by Google Scholar. As an International, open-access, and online journal, Publishing with us ensures wider reach, academic credibility, and enhanced recognition for your work.

For more details, refer to the official notice: UGC Public Notice

⭐ Low Cost ₹1570 | 📚 UGC CARE Approved | 🔍 Peer-Reviewed | 🌐 Open Access | 🔗 Crossref DOI & Global Indexing | 📊 Google Scholar Impact Factor | 🧪 Multidisciplinary

Submit Paper Online  Call for Paper  About IJNRD UGC CARE Approval

Important Dates for Current issue

Paper Submission Open For: April 2026

Current Issue: Volume 11 | Issue 4 | April 2026

Impact Factor: 8.76

Last Date for Paper Submission: Till 30-Apr-2026

Notification of Review Result: Transparent peer review process - your paper is evaluated by experts, and you receive acceptance or rejection updates via email and SMS.

Publication of Paper: Once all documents are submitted, your paper is published without delay, and you can instantly download your certificate and confirmation letter online.

Frequency: Monthly (12 issue Annually).

Journal Type: IJNRD is an international open-access journal offering Low Cost Journal Publication, transparent Peer Review Journal Publication, Crossref DOI, and multidisciplinary research visibility under UGC CARE Approved Journal Publication.

Subject Category: Research Area

Approval, Licenses and Indexing: More Details

Call For Paper - Volume 11 | Issue 4 | April 2026

IJNRD.org offers low-cost journal publication starting at ₹1570 with UGC CARE Approved, refereed, peer-reviewed, open-access publishing. This multidisciplinary monthly journal, available in both online and print formats, features a strong Google Scholar-based impact factor of 8.76, Transparent Peer Review, CrossRef DOI, global indexing, fast publication, and complete metadata for maximum research visibility and citation impact across multidisciplinary domains.

Volume 11 | Issue 4 | April 2026 | IJNRD Transparent Peer Review Certificate | Submit Paper Online till 30-Apr-2026

⭐ UGC CARE Approved Refereed Journal | 🔍 Transparent Peer Review | 🌐 Open Access Publishing | 💰 Low-Cost ₹1570 | 🔗 CrossRef DOI & Global Indexing | 📊 Google Scholar Impact Factor 8.76 | 🧪 Multidisciplinary | Online & Print

Submit Paper Online