atienza r

International Peer Reviewed Journal

1

Vol. 4 January 2013Print ISSN 22438327 • Online ISSNInternational Peer Reviewed Journaldoi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7718/iamure.v4i1.571This Journal is produced by IAMURE Multidisciplinary Research, an ISO 9001:2008 certified by the AJA Registrars Inc.

The Professional Development Strategies as Correlates of Efficacy of the School Heads

MELANIE A. DEL CAMPOORCID No. [email protected] of MindanaoDavao City

EUNICE A. ATIENZARORCID No. [email protected] of MindanaoDavao City

ABSTRACT

Professional development of school heads has been described to be fragmented, incoherent, not sustained and not aligned according to state education standards and these activities have not been closely linked to instructional reforms. Programs have focused on administering schools and not on teaching and learning - the data did not diagnose students’ needs and coach or mentor teachers. School Heads need to spearhead in finding solutions to predicaments of instruction. An increase of professional development activities did not improve school performance and has not improved student learning outcomes. The poor quality of student learning is due to the deteriorating knowledge, skills and competence of school heads and their commitment to initiate reforms and programs in schools. The study explored on the significance of the relationship between professional development strategies and efficacy of school heads of Island Garden City of Samal. The study made use of

IAMURE International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research

2

the correlation survey method. An analysis was done on the data collated from 64 respondents both in Elementary and Secondary Schools through the use of mean and Pearson r. The result revealed that there was a significant relationship between professional development strategies and efficacy of school heads except for Action Research, Teaching Portfolios and Team Teaching, these against Student-Centered Leadership.

KEYWORDS

Education, professional development strategies, efficacy of the school heads, descriptive-correlational study, Davao City, Philippines

INTRODUCTION

Professional development of school heads has been described to be fragmented, incoherent, not sustained and not aligned according to state education standards and these activities have not been closely linked to instructional reforms. Programs have focused on administering schools and not on teaching and learning- one in which they develop themselves and evaluate curriculum, use data to diagnose students’ needs and coach or mentor teachers. (Darling-Hammond et al., 2009).

Across the world, the stakeholders from the lowest to the highest hierarchy of education continue to exert effort to address various institutional and instructional problems. School Heads need to stay in the forefront in finding solutions to predicaments of instruction (DiMartino & Miles, 2006). A considerable increase of professional development activities did not improve school performance (Gilley, Dixon & Gilley, 2008) and has not improved student learning outcomes (Harris, 2005; Hopkins & Jackson, 2003). There has been few studies undertaken on the relationship of school heads intercession on the teaching learning process in schools (Blasé, 2000). The poor quality of student learning is due to the deteriorating technical knowledge, skills and competence of school heads (Clarke, 2001; 2003; Adey, 2004) and their commitment to initiate reforms and programs in schools.

In the Philippines, the Department of Education (DepED) administers the schooling needs of a substantial number of students in the public schools both in elementary and secondary levels. As the agency supports the Education For All (EFA) goals, DepED through the 17 regional offices headed by directors, it has been encountering a wide range of challenges. To somehow address these, the Basic Education Assistance for Mindanao (BEAM), a DepED Philippine-Australian Project was implemented in 2002-2006, and among the programs undertaken was


3

School Management, particularly, the 4-Cycle training of school heads to enhance their efficacy in improving student learning outcomes (BEAM, 2006). Additionally, BESRA (Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda), a package of policy reforms embarked on a key reform thrust focused on school-based management which relates to the reform principle that the best people to improve the quality of schools are the stakeholders led by the school head (BESRA, 2005).

In the Island Garden City of Samal, the researchers have observed that there is a question on the efficacy of school heads as shown in the poor performance of students in the national achievement test. It is noted by teachers that the school heads’ and teachers’ sense of collective efficacy, coupled with strong, positive relationships are essential on student achievement. More importantly, the researchers have not come across studies that investigate the relationship between professional development strategies and efficacy of school heads in the Philippines. Thus, there is a challenge to the researchers to answer the identified research gap.

FRAMEWORK

This study anchors on the argument that to be an efficient school leader, a school head must give primary attention to the professional development activities of teachers (Clarke, 2003). In addition, school heads play a vital role in sustaining teachers’ dispositions toward quality instruction.

Cordingley et al., (2005) supports the aforementioned argument, who posited that professional development effort of the school is equally important than any other change initiative. Harris, et al., (2004) stated that teachers have to expose themselves to diverse trainings and workshops about teaching knowledge, skills, and attitudes.On the other hand, Irvin & White, (2004) argued that the function of school heads is to look into the teachers’ quality of instruction, and student learning outcomes (Cunningham & Sanzo, 2002). School heads at the onset are educators who should be competent, not just in management and supervision but also in the classroom and whole school pedagogy (Gilley et al., 2008).

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

This is a descriptive-correlational study on the professional development strategies and efficacy of school heads. The objectives are the following: 1) to determine the level of professional development strategies among public school heads in the division of Island Garden City of Samal in terms of Peer Coaching, Study Groups, Action Research, Mentoring, Teaching Portfolios, In-Service Training, and Team


4

Teaching; 2) to determine the level of efficacy of school heads in IGACOS with reference to: Student-Centered Leadership, Academic and Social Development of Students, Content and Instruction, Culture of Continuous Learning, Identification and Application of Instructional Improvement, and Community Engagement; and 3) to determine if there is a significant relationship between professional development strategies and efficacy of school heads.

METHODOLOGY

This is a descriptive-correlational study on the professional development strategies and efficacy of school heads. The descriptive method is used to describe or explain the status of a particular variable and its correlation to another variable (Cresswell, 2002). It was descriptive because the data described the assessment of professional development strategies and school heads efficacy. Likewise, it was also correlational because the study determined whether the first variable will affect the second variable and vice versa.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1 reflects the summary on the level of professional development strategies of the School Heads in the Division of Island Garden City of Samal. As shown in the table, the overall professional development strategies of the research respondents has a mean score of 4.32 with descriptive equivalent of high, reflected as frequently manifested by the school heads.

Peer-Coaching and Study Groups got the highest mean score of 4.48 with descriptive equivalent of high, which means frequently manifested by the school heads while Portfolios got a mean score of 4.46 with a descriptive equivalent of high, which means always manifested by the school heads.

The school heads got a mean score of 4.22 in Action Research with a descriptive equivalent of high, reflected as manifested by the school heads. However, in Mentoring and In-service Training, they got a mean score of 4.20 with descriptive equivalent of high, reflected as frequently manifested while in Team-Teaching, they got a mean score of 3.95 with a descriptive equivalent of high, reflected as frequently manifested by the school heads but needs to be given an enhancement training.

The result is indicating that the school heads in the Island Garden City of Samal possess professional development strategies, but they need further training on Mentoring and Team Teaching.


5

Table 1. Summary on the level of professional developmentstrategies among public school heads

Item SD Mean Descriptive LevelPeer-Coaching 0.41 4.48 HighStudy Groups 0.46 4.48 HighAction Research 0.58 4.22 HighMentoring 0.64 4.20 HighTeaching Portfolios 0.49 4.46 HighIn-Service Training 0.54 4.20 HighTeam Teaching 0.75 3.95 High

Overall 0.49 4.32 High

Shown in Table 2 is the summary on the level of efficacy of school heads with the indicators having an overall mean score of 4.49 with descriptive equivalent of high, reflected as frequently manifested by the school heads. Student –Centered leadership has the highest mean score of 4.60 with a descriptive equivalent of very high, reflected as always while in Community Engagement, the school heads got a mean score of 4.54 with a descriptive equivalent of high, reflected as always. Academic and social development of students and culture of continuous learning follows, with mean scores of 4.45, with a descriptive equivalent of high, reflected as frequently manifested by the school heads.

The school heads got a mean score of 4.43 in the application of instructional improvement with a descriptive equivalent of high, reflected as frequently manifested by the school heads while in content and instruction they got the lowest mean score of 4.41 with a descriptive equivalent of high, reflected as frequently manifested by the school heads. The result is indicative that school heads in Island Garden City of Samal need instructional leadership training and instructional improvement.

Table 2. Summary on the level of efficacy of school heads

Item SD Mean Descriptive LevelStudent-Centered Leadership 0.38 4.60 Very HighAcademic and Social Development of Students 0.67 4.45 HighContent and Instruction 0.39 4.41 HighCulture of Continuous Learning 0.43 4.45 HighApplication of Instructional Improvement 0.42 4.43 HighCommunity Engagement 0.63 4.54 High

Overall 0.31 4.49 High


6

Significance on the Relationship between Professional Development Strategies and Efficacy of School Heads

One of the objectives of the study is to determine the correlation between professional development strategies and efficacy of school heads of the division of Island Garden City of Samal. Table 3 shows the detail of the significance of the relationship between Professional Development Strategies and Efficacy of School Heads. As shown in The Table, the overall relationship between the two variables are indicated by an r-value of .67 with significant at 0.05 hence the rejection of the null hypothesis. It can be stated therefore that there is a significant relationship between the two variables.

Examining the relationships of the indicators of the two variables, it shows that all indicators of professional development strategies significantly correlate with the indicators of the efficacy school heads with r- values ranging from .258 to .757 except for Action Research with Student-Centered Leadership, Teaching Portfolios with Student-Centered Leadership, and Team-Teaching with Student-Centered Leadership. Furthermore, the overall result validates the theory of (Hismanoglu, 2010) which states that there is a significant relationship of Professional Development Strategies and Efficacy of School Heads.

Table 3. Significance of the relationship between professional developmentstrategies and efficacy of school heads

Professional Development

Strategies

School Head Efficacy

Student-Centered Leader-

ship

Academic Social De-velopment of Students

Content and

Instruc-tion

Culture of Con-tinuous

Learning

Identifica-tion and Applica-

tion of In-structional Leadership

Com-munity Engage-

ment

Overall

Peer C .339* .427* .535* .544* .465* .640* .757*

Study Groups .258* .240 .374* .387* .300* .319* .399*

Action Re-search .176 .419* .425* .481* .540* .462* .536*

Mentoring .284* .418* .572* .452* .363* .462* .539*

Teaching Portfolios .164 .414* .425* .519* .458* .427* .515*


7

In-Service Training .285* .378* .584* .556* .561* .464* .604*

Team Teach-ing .197 .296* .307* .333* .279* .374* .382*

Overall .334* .475* .605* .613* .543* .577* .670*

· Significant @ .05 · Decision on Ho = REJECT

CONCLUSIONS

In the light of the statistical evidences presented and evaluation conducted, the following conclusions are made. The level of Professional Development Strategies of School heads is high; Efficacy of School Heads is high. The overall result shows that there is a significant relationship between Professional Development Strategies and Efficacy of School Heads except for Action Research and against Student-Centered Leadership, Teaching Portfolios and Student-Centered Leadership, Team-Teaching and Student-Centered Leadership. This is supported by Cotton (2003) that some school heads personalize school experience by leading their staff in implementing effective teaching and schooling practices, regardless of background or economic status to continually increase achievement levels. These are the key areas indicating efficacy of school heads.

LITERATURE CITED

BESRA (Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda)2008 Retrieved on March 13, 2012 from www.slideshare.net/guevarra_2000/

basic-education-sector-reform-agenda-besra

Blasé, J. 2000 “Effective instructional leadership: Teachers’ perspectives on how principals

promote teaching and learning in schools”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 38 Iss: 2, pp. 130 – 141. Retrieved on September 12, 2012 from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=839169&show=abstract


8

Cresswell, J. W. 2002 Educational Research Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative

and Qualitative Research. University of Netvaska: Merrill Prentice Hall. Retrieved on February 02, 2012 from http://www.scis.nova.edu/~nasutif/MCTE690-syllabus-summer2003.pdf

Cunningham, W.G., & Sanzo, T.D. 2002 Is High-Stakes Testing Harming Lower Socioeconomic Status Schools?

NASSP Bulletin, 86. 62–75. Retrieved on May 12, 2012 from http://bul.sagepub.com/content/86/631/62.short

Clarke, D.M. 2001 Understanding, assessing and developing young children’s mathematical

thinking: Research as powerful tool for professional growth. In J. Bobis, B. Perry, & M. Mitchelmore (Eds.), Numeracy and beyond (Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Vol. 1, pp. 9-26). Sydney: MERGA. Retrieved on May 22, 2012 from Numeracy and beyond, 2001 - merga.net.au

Clarke, D. M. 2003 Effective professional development: What does research say? (ACU/CEO

Research Monograph Series). Melbourne, Australia: Mathematics Teaching and Learning Centre, Australian Catholic University. Retrieved on July 13, 2012 stwww.weizmann.ac.il/g.../clarke_doug_amp_barbara_icmi15_prop.doc

Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Thomason, S., & Firth, A. 2005 The impact of collaborative continuing professional development (CPD)

on classroom teaching and learning. Review: how do collaborative and sustained CPD and sustained but not collaborative CPD affect teaching and learning?. Research evidence in education library, EPPI Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, London. Retrieved on May 23, 2012 from http://www.eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid=136

Cotton, K.2003 Principal preparation programs for effective school leaders, Association for


9

Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved February 12, 2012 from sdsu-dspace.calstate.edu

Darling-Hammond, L., Meyerson, D., LaPointe, M., & Orr, M.T.2010 Preparing Principals for changing world. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,

published by Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Retrieved on May 12, 2012 from http://www.google.com.ph/books?hl=en&lr=&id=wj_z9UdZgNQC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=Preparing+Principals+for++changing+world&ots=a2KeeVn-pk&sig=kvZOMm7BRxRC6cxWhxVfRWC6Qg4&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Preparing%20Principals%20for%20%20changing%20world&f=false

Gilley, A., Dixon, P., & Gilley, J. W. 2008 Characteristics of leadership effectiveness: Implementing change and driving

innovation in organizations. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 19., 153–169. Retrieved on July 13, 2012 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hrdq.1232/abstract

Harris, A. 2005 Leading or misleading? Distributed leadership and school improvement.

Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37. 255–265. Retrieved on May 23, 2012 from www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00220270500038602

Harris, J., Martin, B., & Agnew, W. 2004 The characteristics, behaviours and training of effective educational/

leadership chairs. In Thompson, D. and Crampton, F. (eds) The Changing Face(s) of Educational Leadership: UCEA at the Crossroads. Kansas City, MO. Retrieved on August 20, 2012 from http://scholar.google.com.ph/scholar?q=The+characteristics%2C+behaviours+and+training+of+effective+educational%2Fleadership+chairs&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5

Hismanoglu, M.2010 Effective professional development strategies of English language teachers.

Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 990-995. Retrieved on August 20, 2012 from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042810001795


10

Irvin, L. E., & White, D. 2004 Keys to effective leadership. Principal Leadership 4, 20-24. Retrieved January

9, 2012 from http://scholar.google.com.ph/scholar?q=Keys+to+effective+leadership&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5

Knobl, S.J. Jr. as cited by DiMartino, J., & Miles, S. 2010 Perceptions of the Roles, Professional Development, Challenges, and

Frustrations of High School Principals. Retrieved on July 27, 2012 from http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.

Pursuant to the international character of our publications, IAMURE journals are indexed by the following agencies: (1) Thomson Reuters Journal Masterlist Zoological Record, (2) Public Knowledge Project, a consortium of Simon Fraser University Library, the School of Education of Stanford University, and the British Columbia University, Canada; (3) Philip-pine E-Journals; (4) Google Scholar; (5) Scholastica; (6) Index Copernicus; (7) Proquest; (8) Researchgate.

atienza r

Documents