RESEARCH DESIGN

   The study put through content analysis on the features of School Heads Development Program (SHDP) project outputs. Content analysis as “a research technique for making replicable and valid inferences from texts (or other meaningful matter) to the contexts of their use” (Krippendorff, 2004). It is also more than counting process as the goal is to link the results to their context or to the environment in which they were produced: a systematic and objective means to make valid inferences from verbal, visual, or written data in order to describe and quantify specific phenomena (Downe‐Wamboldt, 1992). To carryout, the researcher objectively analyzed the written data of the school heads from the categorized project outputs for instructional leadership. In addition, survey questionnaire and interview were utilized to determine the beliefs and practices of school heads. Spearman was computed using the SPSS (Version 27) software program to determine the correlation between the school heads management and beliefs.

PARTICIPANTS

   The target group of this study are the 35 schools’ districts of Department of Education Division of Sorsogon Province for SY 2020 – 2021. The study engaged 70 samples, school heads (35), and teachers (35). Every district represents one school head and teacher as respondent. They were chosen for a purposive-convenience sampling.

TOOL

   The researcher utilized survey questionnaires, the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale (PIMRS) which an adapted instrument designed by Dr. Philip Hallinger (Hallinger & Murphy, 1985). The instrument was scored in Likert-type scale. The instrument was scored in Likert-type scale. The instrument was categorized along the management beliefs with school heads respondents and management practices with teacher as respondents.

FEATURES OF SCHOOL HEADS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM ANCHORED ON THE TWO-DIMENSIONAL CONSTRUCTS

The features of School Heads Development Program on instructional leadership function along frame the school goals, communicating the school goals, developing high academic standards and expectations, and developing incentives for teachers and students have been done in a collegial manner. While, supervising and evaluating instructions was empirically done, coordinate the curriculum was standard-based, monitor students’ progress was done in consistent and rigorous manner, and promoting professional development of teachers was done by support in mutual and shared manner. As to instructional leadership processes of school heads project outputs along communication was generative, decision-making and conflict management was collegially done through avoiding and compromising way, group process through consideration, change process was done through systematic approach, and environmental interaction through conciseness and carefulness.

MANAGEMENT BELIEFS OF SCHOOL HEADS ON INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP ALONG WITH THE TWO-DIMENSIONAL CONSTRUCTS

Table 1 shows the management beliefs of the school heads on instructional leadership functions. The computed grand weighted means on the management beliefs of the school heads on instructional leadership functions along frame the school goals, communicate the school goals, supervise and evaluate instruction, coordinate the curriculum, monitor student progress, protect instructional time, maintain high visibility, provide incentives for teachers, promote professional development and provide incentives for learning are 4.85, 4.83, 4.73, 4.75, 4.81, 4.63, 4.49, 4.58, 4.79, and 4.74 with a grand mean of 4.72which described as strongly agree

Table 2 shows the instructional leadership processes along communication, decision-making, conflict management, group, change, and environmental interaction are 4.65, 4.46, 4.24, 4.38, 4.23, and 3.39 with a grand mean of 3.39 which described as agree.

MANAGEMENT PRACTICES OF SCHOOL HEADS ON INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP ALONG WITH THE TWO-DIMENSIONAL CONSTRUCTS

Table 3 below shows that the computed grand weighted means on the management practices of the school heads as purely perceived by the teachers on instructional leadership functions along frame the school goals, communicate the school goals, supervise and evaluate instruction, coordinate the curriculum, monitor student progress, protect instructional time, maintain high visibility, provide incentives for teachers, promote professional development and provide incentives for learning are 4.45, 4.31, 4.15, 4.19, 4.29, 4.03, 3.98, 4.01, 4.50, and 4.34 with a grand mean of 4.23 which described as frequently.

Table 4 shows the instructional leadership processes along communication, decision-making, conflict management, group, change, and environmental interaction are 4.14, 4.11, 3.90, 3.95, 4.05, and 4.11 with a grand mean of 4.04 which described as frequently.

RELATIONSHIP THAT EXISTS BETWEEN THE SCHOOL HEAD’S MANAGEMENT BELIEFS AND PRACTICES

Table 5 shows that the computed statistical test values using the Spearman to determine the relationship between management beliefs and practices of the respondents in terms of Frame the School Goals, Communicate School Goals, Supervise and Evaluate Instruction, Coordinate the Curriculum, Monitor Student Progress, Protect instructional Time, Provide Incentives for Teacher, Promote professional Development, Provide Incentives for Learning are 0.043, 0.270, 0.120, -0.016, 0.115, -0.202, 0.141, -0.047, 0.007 and is less than/does not exceed critical value of 0.345 at 0.05 level of significance.

Table 6 shows that the computed statistical test values using the Spearman to determine the relationship between management beliefs and practices of the respondents in terms of communication, decision-making, conflict management, group process, change process, and environmental interaction are -0.177, 0.106, 0.211, 0.131, -0.179, and is less than/does not exceed critical value of 0.335 at 0.05 level of significance.

In this study, there are five purposes established to explain the management beliefs and practices of school heads on instructional leadership. The first purpose established was to determine the features of School Heads Development Program (SHDP) project outputs of school heads anchored to the two-dimensional constructs of Hallinger and Murphy (Hallinger et al., 1985). The features of school heads’ accomplishment reports were analyzed through contextual analysis by textual presentation. It showed that the project outputs for leadership functions have been done in a collegial manner, standard based, consistent and rigorous manner. While, on leadership processes it was also done collegially, generative, and systematically.

The second purpose was to determine the management beliefs of school heads on instructional leadership along with the two-dimensional constructs perceived by themselves. The grand weighted mean for leadership function was obtained an equivalent to 4.72, which described as “Strongly Agree”. While, on leadership processes the grand mean obtained 4.39, which has a description of “Agree”. Based on the result, it means that school heads make good use of their position to process their duties and responsibilities as instructional leaders to improve the quality of education. One of the respondents stated that:

“Considering also the participation, collaboration and involvement of parents and stakeholders will help to the success of school since they are the partners in the educational process.”

What people think, believe, and feel about themselves can affect their behavior in social settings (Bandura, 1997) (Rashtchi, 2021).

The third purpose was to determine the management practices of school heads on instructional leadership on two dimensional constructs as perceived by the teachers. The grand mean on leadership functions obtained 4.23 which described as “frequently”. While, leadership processes garnered a grand mean of 4.04 described as “frequently”. When asked, the respondent answered this way:

“School heads have lot of reports to be accomplished and other functions might be seldom neglected.”

Likewise, other respondent gave thoughts in this way:

   “Our school head rarely visit them for class observation due to other related activities but finds time to pay visits for formal class observation.”

   Leadership in an organization that is not appropriate will make employees unable to understand the direction of the leadership and management properly and will affect the results of the work shown by each of them (Aisyah & Si, 2021). However, one of the respondents commented this way:

   “School head see to it that he’s present as much as possible for important activities e.g., giving award to pupils’ achievement.”

   Leadership is defined as a person's ability to be able to influence others, through communication, either directly or indirectly, with the intention of moving these people so that with understanding, awareness and pleasure, they are willing to follow the wills of the leader (Anoraga, 2003), (Salain, Rismawan, Rihayana, Adhika, & Manek, 2021).

The fourth objective was to determine the relationship that exists between the school heads management beliefs and practices along with the identified variables. Based on the result, the computed statistical test values using the Spearman to determine the relationship between management beliefs and practices of the respondents along instructional leadership functions is less than/does not exceed critical value of 0.345 at 0.05 level of significance with 33 degrees of freedom. This means that the management practices on instructional leadership of school heads does not affect their management beliefs on instructional leadership but they have strong impact or strongly influence each other. Since school heads are government employees; government employees are governed by Civil Service Commission Law, they are still entrenched by the belief and practice as stated by its rules and regulations. Whatever their beliefs in regards with their action is not affected by the practices in terms of school management because of the stated rules and regulations.

 The fifth and last purpose was the intervention that could be proposed. Based from the result of the study, a Professional Development Plan for Elementary school heads in the Division of Sorsogon was hereby proposed.