1

CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED BY SCHOOL HEADS IN THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PHILIPPINE PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS FOR
SCHOOL HEADS (PPSSH) DOMAINS

Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM

Rationale

The Philippine Professional Standards for School Heads (PPSSH) provide

the professional conduct and behavior that are required of competent school

heads, respectively. This standard shared vocabulary for high-impact leadership

among school heads throughout the country. This PPSSH provides the school

heads a clear image of what is expected of them along the well-defined career

phases of the professional development continuum, knowledge, skills, and

values that they must steadily and meaningfully implant in their practice.

Along with its guidance are the challenges that school heads had to face

in its implementation. There were five (5) domains that reflect school heads'

leadership practices. These are the following: Domain 1: Leading Strategically;

Domain 2: Managing School Operations and Resources; Domain 3: Focusing on

Teaching and Learning; Domain 4: Developing Self and Others; and Domain 5:

Building Connections.

The DepEd acknowledges the significance of professional standards in

the progress of school heads and their continued professional development

based on the concepts of lifelong learning. The DepEd maintains that high-quality

student learning depends on high-quality teachers, who are assisted by high-

 2

quality school administrators. The PPSSH goals include specific requirements for

school heads along with clearly defined career stages of professional growth

from entry-level work through exceptional practice; b. Encourage school leaders

to actively support ongoing efforts to achieve high levels of competence. Support

professional learning and development. Assist in identifying areas that need

improvement (deped.gov.ph).

As stewards of their institutions, school leaders are essential in fostering a

climate that is conducive to successful teaching and learning. The Department of

Education (DepEd) can produce great instructors and "holistic learners who are

immersed in values, endowed with 21st-century skills, and able to drive the

country to growth and advancement" through their effective leadership and

administration (DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017). This is in line with the DepEd's

mission to create "Filipinos who passionately love their country and whose values

and competencies enable them to fulfill their full potential and to constructively

contribute to the construction of the nation" (DO No. 36, s. 2013).

The Philippine Professional Standards for School Heads (PPSSH)

introduces a continuum of professional practice that supports school heads to

pursue career progression amid various national and international reforms such

as the K to 12 Basic Education Program and the Philippine Professional

Standards for Teachers, as well as ASEAN integration, globalization, and the

changing character of the 21st century learners (deped.gov.ph).

International research evidence shows unequivocally that teacher quality

is vital in raising learner achievement. However, teachers alone cannot bring

 3

about substantive changes without effective leadership. “The quality of an

education system depends on the quality of its teachers; but the quality of

teachers cannot exceed the quality of the policies that shape their work

environment in school and that guide their selection, recruitment and

development” (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,

2018).

It is on this desire that the researcher wants to study the challenges faced

by school heads to determine how they overcome such difficulties for the

achievement of better performances and established certain leadership practices

using PPSSH as a guide.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
This study will be anchored on the Distributed Leadership Theory of Solly

(2018) and the Transformational Leadership of Burkus (2010).

Distributed Leadership Theory

“Great leaders do not create followers, they create more leaders.” Tom
Peters
It embodies everything that a school leader should strive for. School

administrators face a variety of challenges in education, so they demand greater

leaders who are prepared to not only develop themselves and their careers, but

also to help create the next generation of leaders.

The impact of a leader's leadership on those around them is the acid test

for any leader. In a school setting, leaders have a moral obligation to ensure the
 4

best possible educational outcomes for the students in their charge. This entails

students achieving excellent and A-level results while maturing into decent,

responsible young adults with strong morals and the ability to think for

themselves. As a result, leading a school is one of the most difficult roles in the

world of education, but it is also one of the most rewarding. It takes skill,

knowledge, empathy, bravery, and a lot of patience. It also cannot be

accomplished on its own.

In a distributed leadership approach, leaders within a school need to be

given the autonomy to make key decisions in their areas of responsibility. This

autonomy is central to achieving the aforementioned objective of empowering

leaders and giving them ownership of their work. They should not be

micromanaged, and for new heads, this can be a hard thing to do. Affording

members of your senior or middle leadership team this level of autonomy

requires a huge amount of trust and this is often outside the comfort zone for

many head teachers.

However, this trust must be earned because it is risky to give ineffective

leaders complete autonomy; thus, the term "earned autonomy" is commonly

used. Accountability comes with earned autonomy. How can they hold someone

accountable for delivering impact if they lack the authority to lead the strategy?

These two concepts are inextricably linked, but there is one critical caveat that

leaders, particularly head teachers, must be aware of: as the head teacher, they

bear ultimate responsibility for standards across the school, and if you truly
 5

believe in distributed leadership, you must accept a degree of shared

accountability.

The majority of the key improvement strategies implemented throughout

the school are not carried out by the head teacher. It is the responsibility of the

leader to ensure that others are well led and that they have an impact. When you

empower others to lead and invest in your employees by developing them as

leaders, there is an inherent risk that things will go wrong or stop working. In

schools, these resources include time, resources, and coaching. If we overload

our leaders with too many lessons to teach, they will be unable to keep their

heads above water to deliver school improvement strategies.

The relationship with the line manager, in particular, can make or break a

distributed leadership model. If the line manager removes or compromises one of

the key principles of autonomy, accountability, or capacity, we are only putting on

a show. Coaching is essential for this approach to be genuine and to have the

best chance of success. Every school has an organizational hierarchy with an

"appraisal tree," but if leaders coach those who report to them, we can start to

create an environment where authentic leadership capacity can grow.

Coaching is widely acknowledged to have a high impact on the

development of others' leadership, and if schools are serious about implementing

a distributed leadership model, they must invest time and resources in

developing high-quality coaching across the school. Finally, implementing a true

distributed leadership approach necessitates patience, trust, and a genuine belief

 6

that your school can become more effective by investing time, effort, and

resources in developing your staff's professional capital.

Leithwood et al. (2006) discovered that when leadership is widely

distributed, it has a greater influence on schools and students. Their evidence

suggests that the combined leadership of a team of leaders is far more influential

than any single individual's efforts. They went on to say that leadership must be

coordinated as well as distributed, and that clarity about roles and good

communication structures are essential.

Distributed leadership can also be used across schools and organizations

that collaborate, allowing senior leaders and other staff to take responsibility for

leading various aspects of work across the partnership. It may also provide more

opportunities for employees to learn from one another by sharing effective

practices, as Leithwood et al. suggest (2006).

According to Hargreaves and Fink (2006), distributed leadership is not an

end in itself, and the manner in which leadership is distributed, as well as the

rationale for such distribution, will determine the practice's success. They

describe a distributed leadership continuum and outline the benefits and

drawbacks of each category (see the diagram 'A continuum of distributed

leadership' below). According to the authors, depending on the school context,

each pattern of distribution has strengths and weaknesses. This theory relates to

the study by determining the capabilities of school administrators as how they

were able to provide more opportunities in terms of the challenges they

encountered in times of pandemic.

 7

Transformational Leadership Theory

Transformational leadership is a relatively new approach to leadership that

focuses on how leaders can create valuable and positive change in their

followers. James MacGregor Burns first introduced the concepts of

transformational leadership when studying political leaders, but this term is now

used when studying organizations as well. Burns described two leadership

styles: transactional and transformational as cited by Burkus (2010).

Transactional leaders focus on gaining compliance by giving and

withholding rewards and benefits. Transformational leaders focus on

“transforming” others to support each other and the organization as a whole.

Followers of a transformational leader respond by feeling trust, admiration,

loyalty, and respect for the leader and are more willing to work harder than

originally expected. Another researcher, Bernard M. Bass, added to the work of

Burns by explaining the psychological mechanisms that underlie transformational

and transactional leadership. Bass’ work established that transformational

leaders demonstrate four factors: individual consideration, intellectual stimulation,

inspirational motivation (charismatic leadership), and idealized influence as

stipulated by Burkus (2010).

Transformational leadership theory is supported by nearly 30 years of

research correlating transformational leadership to positive performance

outcomes including individual, group, and organizational level variables. It also

solidified the need to study followers in leadership research. Transformational

leadership was the first developed and validated theory to emphasize morals and
 8

values in leadership. However, research on the theory is primarily based on the

multifactor leadership questionnaire, which has produced inconsistent results.

Research has also focused heavily on senior-level leaders. Transformational

leadership also has the potential to be used negatively by leaders “faking it.”

Regardless, transformational leadership theory is a valuable and widely used

approach to studying and teaching leadership as mentioned by Burkus (2010).

This relates to the study for it determines how school leaders can create

valuable and positive change in times of pandemic. This will also recount on the

resiliency of the school administrators as to the challenges they face in times of

pandemic.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The conceptual framework of this study illustrates and defines the relevant

variables and maps out how they might relate to each other. It is represented in a

visual format in Figure 1 - the schematic paradigm of the study. As shown in this

figure, there are two variables - the independent and dependent variables. The

independent variable includes the Performance of the school administrators

amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. On the other hand, the dependent variable

includes the challenges encountered. The expected output of the study will be a

development plan where they can improve their leadership skills in trying times.
 9

Independent Variable Dependent Variable Output

CHALLENGES SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS’ DEVELOPMENTAL
ECCOUNTERED PLAN
PERFORMANCE

Figure 1. Schematic Paradigm of the Study

 10

Statement of the problem

This study aims to determine the challenges encountered by the school

administrators in the new learning landscape which will eventually lead to a result

of crafting a developmental plan among the school administrators of Baloi East

District of the Division of Lanao del Norte for the school year 2021-2022.

Specifically, it seeks to answer the following questions:

1. What are the challenges encountered by the school administrators in terms of:

1.1 Giving technical assistance,

1.2 distance from home to school,

1.3 mobilization, and

1.4 transitioning from a normal learning structure to the new normal

learning structure?

2. What is the level of performance of the administrators as they transitioned to a

new learning landscape?

3. Is there a significant relationship between challenges encountered by the

school administrators and their level of performance in the new learning

landscape?
 11

4. What developmental plan can be derived from the result of the study?

Null Hypothesis

The null hypothesis below will be tested at a 0.05 level of significance.

HO: There is no significant relationship between challenges encountered by the

school administrators and their level of performance in the new learning

landscape.

Significance of the Study

This study is deemed significant for the following:

With the crafted developmental plan, learners will be benefited from this

study through the enhanced leadership skill of their teachers. This study will also

be helpful for teachers. They can form a holistic approach to giving meaningful

learning experiences among their learners. Moreover, the study's findings may

help school administrators shape a vision of academic success for all learners by

cultivating leadership in others, creating a climate conducive to education, and

improving instruction. Hence, other researchers will find this study as an avenue

for other future related studies. They may consider other variables not identified

in the study.

Scope and Limitation

This study will be limited to the thirty-five (35) school administrators of

Balo-i East District, Baloi West District, and Pantao Ragat District of the Division
 12

of Lanao del Norte, for the School year 2021-2022. Other limitations of the study

may include the distance between schools, which may make the distribution and

retrieval of survey questionnaires difficult.

Definition of Terms

For common understanding, the following key terms which will be

recurrent in this study are defined conceptually and operationally:

Challenges. This term refers to challenging periods of certain events or

occurrences.

Challenges Encountered. This term refers to challenges or difficulties

encountered by school administrators in the new learning landscapes.

Developmental Plan. As used in this study, a developmental plan refers

to a plan that will enhance the vision of academic success for all learners by

cultivating leadership in others, creating a climate conducive to education, and

improving instruction for the benefit of the delivery of instruction among teachers

and learners.

New Learning Landscape. As used in the study, this refers to the new

normal structure of education faced by institutions brought by this COVID-19

pandemic.

School Administrators. As used in this study, school administrators refer

to persons administratively responsible for the school.

 13

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This study presents the different readings made by the researcher which

are important and related to the present study.

Related Literature

School principals are at the heart of the educational system, bridging the

gap between educational authorities, teachers, students, and communities.

When the heart fails, the entire system fails, just as it does in their bodies. School

administrators have been under tremendous pressure to put together an

emergency response to schooling amid a pandemic. In times of crisis, they

require more time and energy than ever before to focus on the immediate

challenges. This could be accomplished through measures such as temporarily

adjusting administrative workloads for school heads or compensating them for

the increased volume of work. During difficult times, it is critical that school

leaders are encouraged, supported, and their efforts are recognized, as they play

a critical role in ensuring that learning continues, even when it is at a distance as

stipulated by Whang (2021).

 14

Good leadership in schools fosters nurturing learning environments that

help children grow and develop. To cultivate such an environment, school heads

must navigate and promote collaboration across the often complex network of

stakeholders: education authorities, teachers, students, parents, and local

communities. In a sense, school heads are the glue that holds everyone together

as stated by Whang (2021).

Resilience, Reorientation, and Reinvention: School Leadership During the

Early Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic

As the COVID-19 pandemic spread rapidly across the globe, many

schools struggled to react both quickly and adequately. Schools were one of the

most important societal institutions to be affected by the pandemic. However,

most school leaders have little to no training in crisis leadership, nor have they

dealt with a crisis of this scale and this scope for this long. This article presents

our findings from interviews of 43 school organizations around the globe about

their responses during the early months of the pandemic. Primary themes from

the interviews included an emphasis on vision and values; communication and

family community engagement; staff care, instructional leadership, and

organizational capacity-building; equity-oriented leadership practices; and

recognition of potential future opportunities. These findings resonate with the

larger research literature on crisis leadership and have important implications for

school leaders’ future mindsets, behaviors, and support structures during crisis

incidents (McLeod & Dulsky, 2021).

 15

The literature base on crisis leadership has been broadly consistent for

decades. Often drawn from the government, military, business, or health sectors,

several key themes and leadership behaviors regularly emerge from scholarly

research. In the sections below, we briefly describe what we seem to know about

leadership during crises, both in education and across other societal sectors.

What Is Crisis Leadership?

Since crises occur regularly in the lives of organizations, several

researchers have attempted to create conceptual models and sense-making

frameworks to help leaders and institutions think about effective leadership

during crisis events. Boin & Renaud (2013) created one of the most

comprehensive crisis leadership frameworks. Noting that crisis episodes bring

out instant “winners” and “losers” when it comes to leadership, they articulated

ten key executive tasks that accompany successful crisis management. Initial

tasks include early recognition of the crisis, sense-making in conditions of

uncertainty, and making critical decisions. Other tasks include vertical and

horizontal coordination within the organization and across organizations, as well

as coupling and decoupling systems as necessary. Other critical tasks include

robust communication, helping others engage in meaning-making for others, and,

finally, reflecting on and learning from the crisis and rendering accountability

regarding what worked and what did not.

The authors noted that the overall goal of a leader should be to increase

organizational resilience before, during, and after a crisis. Each of these

executive tasks has been unpacked in further detail in the scholarly literature and
 16

most of the elements in the framework from Boin, Kuipers, and Overdijk occur

frequently in others’ conceptual models (Smith and Riley, 2012; Dückers et al.,

2017).

As noted by Boin & Renaud (2013), one of the most consistent elements

of crisis leadership appears to be sensemaking in conditions of uncertainty.

During a crisis, challenges arise quickly and both information and known

solutions may be scarce. During the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic,

some of the key challenges for school leaders were the unique nature of the

crisis (i.e., most school organizations have not experienced a pandemic), the

rapid timeline, and the accompanying uncertainty that hindered effective

responses. Leaders’ experience mattered little when the COVID crisis had few

“knowable components” (Kahneman and Klein, 2009). Boin and Renaud (2013)

articulated that joint sensemaking is “particularly important to effective crisis

management: if decision-makers do not have a shared and accurate picture of

the situation, they cannot make informed decisions and communicate effectively

with partners, politicians, and the public”. Unfortunately for many school leaders

during the first months of the pandemic, policymakers–and often the

administrators above those leaders in the organizational hierarchy–often lacked

an accurate picture of what was occurring, nor did they share what they knew

with others in ways that enabled effective leadership responses and

partnerships. Anecdotal stories abound of front-line educators and administrators

struggling to get information and guidance during the pandemic’s first few months
 17

from those above them in the school system or their local, state, and federal

politicians.

Another consistent element of crisis leadership is effective communication,

and numerous scholars have emphasized the leader’s role in communicating

with both internal and external audiences. Marsen (2020) noted that crisis

communication must deal with both issue management during the crisis and

reputation management after the crisis. In their handbook on crisis

communication, Heath and O’Hair (2020) emphasized that good communication

is critically important because of the social nature of a leader’s work and because

crisis management is inherently a collective activity. Effective communication

builds trust and helps to create shared understandings and commitments across

stakeholders (Lucero et al., 2009). During times of crisis, effective leaders

engage in holding, which means that they are containing and interpreting what is

happening during a time of uncertainty.

Containing refers to the ability to soothe distress and interpreting to the

ability to help others make sense of a confusing predicament they think, offer

reassurance, orient people, and help them stick together, that work is as

important as inspiring others. It is a precondition for doing so.

Another important finding regarding crisis leadership is that what

constitutes effective leadership often changes over the period of the crisis

(Hannah et al., 2009). As conditions shift and new needs emerge, leaders must

be flexible and adaptive (Smith and Riley, 2012). During the first few months of

the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, most school leaders progressed through
 18

several key response phases (McLeod, 2020). Phase 1 represented a focus on

basic needs and included feeding children and families, ensuring student access

to computing devices and the Internet, and checking in on families’ wellbeing.

During Phase 2, administrators reoriented their schools to deliver instruction

remotely. This work included training teachers in new pedagogies and

technologies, as well as establishing instructional routines and digital platforms to

facilitate online learning. Once schools began to settle into new routines, leaders

then could begin paying attention to richer, deeper learning opportunities for

students (Phase 3) and look ahead to future opportunities, and help their

organizations be better prepared for future dislocations of schooling (Phase 4).

This latter phase is what many scholars have identified as a reconstruction or

adaptive Prewitt et al., (2011) stage of crisis leadership (Smith and Riley, 2012).

Finally, some researchers have noted the importance of leaders’ attention

to social and emotional concerns during a crisis (Meisler et al., 2013). After

finding that “the psychosocial dimension of crises has received little attention in

crisis management literature”, Dückers et al. (2017) created a conceptual model

of psychosocial crisis management that emphasized such leadership and

organizational tasks as “providing information and basic aid” and “promoting a

sense of safety, calming, self- and community efficacy, connectedness to others,

and hope”. The authors noted that effective crisis leadership involves more than

effective communication and response coordination and also must attend to the

general wellbeing and health of employees and other stakeholders.

Crisis Leadership in Schools

 19

The literature cited here from other contexts also applies to school

systems. During a crisis, school leaders–like their counterparts in other

institutions–must engage in effective communication, facilitate sense-making in

conditions of uncertainty, be flexible and adaptive, and pay attention to the

emotional wellbeing and health of employees. The executive tasks described by

Boin et al. (2013) are relevant for school organizations and their leaders, just as

they are in other societal sectors. In addition to the more generalized research

base, some crisis leadership research has been conducted on school settings

specifically. For instance, Smith and Riley (2012) recognized that school

administrators’ crisis leadership is very different from that necessary to be

successful in a more “normal” school environment. They also noted that critical

attributes of effective crisis leadership in schools include:

The ability to cope with–and thrive on–ambiguity; a strong capacity to think

laterally; a willingness to question events in new and insightful ways; a

preparedness to respond flexibly and quickly, and to change direction rapidly if

required; an ability to work with and through people to achieve critical outcomes;

the tenacity to persevere when all seems to be lost; and a willingness to take

necessary risks and to “break the rules” when necessary.

Related Studies

In a study of school principals’ actions after the 2011 earthquake in

Christchurch, New Zealand, Mutch (2015) articulated a three-factor conceptual

model of school crisis leadership. The first factor was dispositional and included
 20

school leaders’ values, belief systems, personality traits, skills, and areas of

expertise. The second factor was relational and included leaders’ visioning work

as well as fostering collaboration, building trust, enabling empowerment, and

building a sense of community. The final factor was situational, which included

understanding both the past and immediate contexts, adapting to changing

needs, thinking creatively, and providing direction for the organization. In her

case studies of four elementary schools, Mutch identified specific leadership

actions that fell under each of these factors. In a separate article that same year

he noted that schools with an inclusive culture and with strong relationships

beforehand are better situated to manage crises that may occur.

Many researchers have noted the importance of maintaining trust during a

crisis (Dückers et al., 2017). They examined leadership behaviors in light of a

school crisis caused by the accidental deaths of two students on a service-

learning trip. Utilizing Tschannen-Moran and Hoy’s (2000) model of trust in

schools, Sutherland found that closely held, non-consultative decision-making by

top executives eroded the school’s ability to communicate effectively and thus

hindered trust in the larger school community. He also found that subsequent

implementation of new communication structures fostered better collaboration

and rebuilt trust with educators and families. Sutherland’s findings are relevant

for school leaders who have struggled to balance often-conflicting parent and

educator expectations during the pandemic and thus have seen community trust

erode as a result.
 21

Mahfouz et al. (2019) studied Lebanese principals and schools as they

responded to the international Syrian refugee crisis. They noted that “instead of

focusing on leadership and academic performance, principals [faced with a large

influx of Syrian refugee families spent] most of their time “putting out fires,”

resolving urgent issues, and attending to basic needs that typically are taken for

granted in other schools”. Those challenges resemble the lived experiences of

many principals and superintendents during the first months of the COVID-19

pandemic.

Crisis Leadership in Schools During the Pandemic

Some very recent publications have attempted to apply principles of crisis

led to the COVID-19 pandemic in non-educational sectors. For instance, Pearce

et al. (2021) employed leadership concepts from the military to the global

pandemic, identifying some “key components of mission command” as the unity

of effort, freedom of action, trust, and rapid decision making. These leadership

concepts are similar to a list identified for public health officials several years

ago, which also emphasized trust, decisiveness with flexibility, and the ability to

coordinate diverse stakeholders (Deitchman, 2013).

Contemporary research on leadership in schools during the COVID-19

pandemic is starting to emerge as well. Although it is still relatively early to make

sense of schools’ responses to the pandemic, scholars are beginning to try to

understand the early phases of the crisis. However, much of this work has been

theoretical or conceptual, rather than empirical. For instance, Bagwell (2020)

noted that the pandemic “is rapidly redefining schooling and leadership” and
 22

advocated for leaders to lead adaptively, build organizational and individual

resilience, and create distributed leadership structures for an optimal institutional

response. Likewise, Netolicky (2020) noted many of the tensions that school

leaders are facing during the pandemic. These tensions range from the need to

lead both fast and slow, to balancing equity with excellence and accountability, to

considering both human needs and organizational outcomes.

During the pandemic, Fernandez and Shaw (2020) recommended that

academic leaders focus on best practices, try to see opportunities in the crisis,

communicate, connect with others, and distribute leadership within the

organization. They offered seven propositions for consideration and potential

research attention, including the ideas that “most school leadership preparation

and training programs… are likely to be out of step with the challenges facing

school leaders today” and that “self-care and consideration must be the main

priority and prime concerns for all school leaders”. They also recognized that

“crisis and change management are now essential skills of a school leader that

require more than routine problem solving or occasional firefighting”.

In one of the few empirical studies to emerge so far on pandemic-era

school leadership, Rigby et al. (2020) identified three promising practices for P-

12 school systems: treating families as equal partners in learning, continuing to

provide high-quality learning opportunities for students, and decision-making that

is coordinated, coherent, and inclusive. Through their interviews of thirteen

central office leaders in the Puget Sound area of Washington, they also made

three recommendations, which were for school districts to focus on “building on”
 23

not “learning loss,” to prioritize relationships and to create anti-racist, systemic

coherence. Regarding their first recommendation, they noted that “this is an

opportunity to design systems to understand and build on what children learned

(and continue to learn) at home”.

As the pandemic progresses, there is a clear need for more empirical

research on the effects of COVID-19 on schools and other institutions.

Educational scholars and school leaders need evidence from the field to inform

the theoretical and conceptual approaches that have dominated during the first

months of the global crisis.

Insights

Principals are at the center of the educational system and are under

immense pressure to put together an emergency response to schooling. Sense-

making in uncertain situations appears to be one of the most constant

characteristics of crisis leadership. Leaders must be flexible and adaptable as

situations change and new requirements develop. Most school leaders, for

example, went through many crucial reaction phases during the first several

months of the COVID-19 outbreak. Many experts have labeled this stage of crisis

leadership as the rebuilding or adaptive stage.

Collaborative decision-making by school leaders during a crisis erodes

trust in the larger community, according to research by sociologist David

Sutherland. School leaders must communicate effectively and promote decision-

making in unclear situations, be flexible and adaptable, and pay attention to

 24

employees' emotional well-being, authors argue. There is a clear need for more

empirical research on the effects of COVID-19 on schools and other institutions.

Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODS

This chapter will present the research design, research environment,

participants of the study and sampling procedures, research instrument to be

used, scoring procedure, research protocol, data gathering procedure, and

statistical tools to be used.

Research Design

This study will employ the descriptive-correlational quantitative research

design, to describe the variables and relationships that may occur naturally

between and among them. In this study, the variables include the challenges

encountered by the school administrators and their level of performance in the

new learning landscape.

 25

The triangulation approach (Denzin, 2012) will also be used to reinforce

the findings. The convergence of information from many sources will be utilized

to assess the effectiveness of triangulation. Triangulation in this study will be

accomplished by interviews and observations.

Research Environment

The present study will be conducted in the Balo-i East District, Balo-

West District, and Pantao Ragat District in the Division of Lanao del Norte. The

distict is located in the municipality of Balo-i, Lanao del Norte and in the

municipality of Pantao Ragat. There are eleven (11) schools in the district,

Fourteen (14) schools in Balooi West District, and Ten (10) schools in Pantao

Ragat District.

The municipality of Balo-i is a 3 rd class municipality. According to the

2020 census, it has a population of 58,383 people. It is a landlocked municipality

with a land area of 90.98 square kilometers or 35.13 square miles. It is

composed of 21 barangays. In addition, Pantao Ragat is a landlocked

municipality in Lanao del Norte's coastal province. It is a fourth-class municipality

in the Philippine province of Lanao del Norte. It has a population of 30,247

people, according to the 2020 census.

Respondents
 26

The participants of the study are the school administrators of Baloi East

District of the Division of Lanao del Norte, The participants are selected using the

purposive sampling procedure.

Below is the table showing the distribution of respondents:

Table 1: Distribution of Respondent

Number of
Respondents
Name of Schools School
Administrator
s
1. Baloi East District 11
2. Baloi West District 14

3. Panatao Ragat District 10

35

Research Instrument and Its Validity

This study will make use of adapted standardized survey questionnaires

published electronically by Parveen (2021).

The questionnaire has two (2) Parts. Part – I on the demographic profile

of the school administrators; and Part II - on challenges encountered by school

administrators in terms of their giving technical assistance, distance from home

to school, mobilization, and transitioning from a normal learning structure to the

new normal learning structure.

Scoring Procedure

The study will use a 4-point Likert Scale.

Table 2: Scoring Procedur

 27

Scale Range Descriptive Rating

1 1.00-1.80 Strongly Disagree
2 1.81-2.60 Moderately Disagree
3 Neither disagree nor
2.61-3.40
agree
4 3.41-4.20 Moderately Agree
5 4.21-5.00 Strongly Agree

Data Gathering Procedure

To be able to facilitate the gathering of data, permission to conduct will be

sent to the Schools Division Superintendent of the Division of Lanao del Norte,

the District Supervisor of Baloi Districts and Pantao Ragat District, and

Principals/ School Heads of the corresponding schools of the three districts All

communications will be signed and approved by the concerned personalities

including the administrative personnel of the identified districts.

Since there had been a strict prohibition of face-to-face interaction or

actual gatherings, data will be gathered through online platforms for the school

administrators. A virtual meeting will be set to explain how they are going to

answer the survey questionnaire. However, for the targeted learners, home

visitation will be employed to get their responses.

A virtual meeting will also be set for an interview to have a deeper

understanding of how they will be able to cope with the challenges they

encountered in the new learning landscape.

Statistical Treatment

The following statistical tools to be used in the study are as follows:

 28

Frequency distribution. This tool will be used to summarize categorical

variables.

Weighted Mean. In this study, the weighted mean will be used

considering some data values to be more important that the other values and so

we want them to contribute more to the final average.

Pearson Product-Moment Correlation. This will be used to measure the

strength and direction of association that exist between 2 variables.

REFERENCES

Bagwell, J. (2020). Leading through a pandemic: adaptive leadership and

purposeful action. J. School Adm. Res. Dev. 5, 30–34. doi:
10.32674/jsard.v5iS1.2781.

Boin, A., Kuipers, S. and Overdijk, W. (2013). Leadership in times of crisis: a

framework for assessment. International Review of Public Administration,
vol. 18(1), pp.79- 91.

Boin, A. and Renaud, C. (2013). Orchestrating joint sense making across

government levels: challenges and requirements for crisis leadership.
Journal of Leadership Studies, vol. 7(3), pp.41–46.

Burkus, D. (2010). Transformational Leadership Theory. Retrieved from

https://davidburkus.com/2010/03/transformational-leadership-theory.

Clarke, S., & Wildy, H. (2004). Context counts: Viewing small school leadership
from the inside out. Journal of Educational Administration, 42, 555-572.
doi:10.1108/09578230410554061

Deitchman, S. (2013). Enhancing crisis leadership in public health

 29

emergencies. Disaster Med. Public Health Prep. 7, 534–540. doi:

10.1017/dmp.2013.81.

Denzin, N. K. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6,

80–88. doi:10.1177/1558689812437186

Dückers, M. L., Yzermans, C. J., Jong, W., and Boin, A. (2017). Psychosocial
crisis management: the unexplored intersection of crisis leadership and
psychosocial support. Risk Hazards Crisis Public Policy 8, 94–112. doi:
10.1002/rhc3.12113

Fernandez, A. A., and Shaw, G. P. (2020). Academic leadership in a time of

crisis: the coronavirus and COVID-19. J. Leadersh. Stud. 14, 1–7. doi:
10.1002/jls.21684.

Hannah, S. T., Uhl-Bien, M., Avolio, B. J., and Cavarretta, F. L. (2009). A

framework for examining leadership in extreme contexts. Leadership.
Q. 20, 897–919. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.09.006.

Hargreaves, A. and Fink D. (2006), Sustainable Leadership. San Francisco: Jos
ey Bass.

Heath, R. L., and O’Hair, H. D. (eds) (2020). Handbook of Risk and Crisis

\Communication. New York, NY: Routledge. doi:
10.4324/9781003070726.

Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. (2009). Conditions for Intuitive Expertise: A Failure to
Disagree. American Psychologist, 64, 515-526.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016755

Leithwood, K & Jantzi, D, 2006, Linking leadership to student learning: The

contribution of leader efficacy, Educational Administration Quarterly.

Lucero, M., Tan, A. T. K., and Pang, A. (2009). Crisis leadership: when should
the CEO step up? Corp. Commun. Int. J. 14, 234–248. doi:
10.1108/13563280910980032.

Mahfouz, J., El-Mehtar, N., Osman, E., and Kotok, S. (2019). Challenges and
agency: principals responding to the Syrian refugee crisis in Lebanese
public schools. Int. J. Leadersh. Educ. 23, 24–40. doi:
10.1080/13603124.2019.1613570.

Marsen, S. (2020). Navigating crisis: the role of communication in organizational

 30

crisis. Int. J. Bus. Commun. 57, 163–175. doi:

10.1177/2329488419882981

McCallum, F., Price, D., Graham, A., & Morrison, A. (2017). Teacher wellbeing:
A review of the literature. Sydney, NSW AIS.

McLeod, S. and Dulsky, S. (2021). Resilience, reorientation, and reinvention:

school leadership during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 6, 637075

McLeod, S. (2020). Rising to the challenge and looking ahead: school leadership
during the pandemic. UCEA Rev. 61, 17–19.

Meisler, G., Vigoda-Gadot, E., and Drory, A. (2013). “Leadership beyond

rationality: Emotional leadership in times of organizational crisis,”
in Handbook of Research on Crisis Leadership in Organizations, ed. A. J.
DuBrin (United Kingdom: Edward Elgar), 110–126. doi:
10.4337/9781781006405.00014.

Mutch, C. (2015). Leadership in times of crisis: dispositional, relational, and

contextual factors influencing school principals’ actions. Int. J. Disaster
Risk Reduct. 14, 186–194. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.06.005.

Netolicky, D. M. (2020). School leadership during a pandemic: navigating

tensions. J. Prof. Capacity Commun. 5, 391–395. doi: 10.1108/JPCC-05-
2020-0017.

Pearce, A. P., Naumann, D. N., and O’Reilly, D. (2021). Mission command:

applying principles of military leadership to the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19)
crisis. BMJ Mil. Health 167, 3–4.

Prewitt et.al. (2011). Crisis leadership: an organizational opportunity. Aust. J.

Bus. Manage. Res. 1, 60–74.

Rigby, J., Forman, S., Foster, L., Kazemi, E., and Clancey, S. (2020). Promising
District Leadership Practices for Transformative Change in the Context of
COVID-19. Washington: University of Washington.

Smith, L. and Riley, D. (2012). School leadership in times of crisis. School

Leadership & Management, vol. 32(1), doi:
10.1080/13632434.2011.614941.

Solly, B. (2018). Distributed Leadership Defined. Retrieved at https://www.sec

ed.co.uk/best-practice/distributed-leadership-explained/.
 31

Tschannen-Moran, M., and Hoy, W. K. (2000). A multidisciplinary analysis of the

nature, meaning, and measurement of trust. Rev. Educ. Res. 70, 547–
593. doi: 10.3102/00346543070004547.

Whang, C. (2021). The role of school heads and why they matter during the
COVID pandemic. Retrieved at https://oecdedutoday.com/role-school-
principals-heads-covid/.

APPENDIX A

RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE

Instruction: Kindly put a check mark or fill out the space provided before that
corresponds to your answer. Please answer the entire question for the
completion of the study.
Part I. Respondents profile

Name (Optional) : ___________________________

Subject Taught: ________________________

Position:

Faculty ( ) Staff ( )

Age:

25 below ( ) 43 – 48 ( )
 32

25 - 30 ( ) 49-54 ( )

31 - 36 ( ) 55 above ( )

37 - 42 ( )

Sex: Male ( ) Female ( )

Length of Service: ___________________

Part II. Challenges Encountered by School Heads

Neithe
Moder
r Moder Strong
Strongly ately
CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED BY SCHOOL disagr ately ly
disagree disagr
HEADS ee nor agree agree
d (1) eed (2)
agree (4) (5)
(3)
1. Technical connection problems had been
recurrent during the pandemic.
2. Different application used by schools makes it
hard to have a access and the same output.
3. No distance education support for inclusive
and disabled students who need special
needs.
4. Family concerns and inadequate parental
support.
5. Having financial difficulties in providing for
gadgets and buy loads for the internet
connection.
6. Decreasing motivation of teachers and their
reluctance to make weekly schedules and to
teach in live lessons, lack of communication
 33

between teachers.
7. Decreasing motivation of students.
8. Being not ready for the distance education
process.
9. The need to improve crisis management
skills.
10. Maintenance of hygiene and daily life in
school.
11. Establishing a financial balance during
heights of pandemic.
12. Bringing digital and technology leadership to
the forefront.

DIRECTION: Kindly put a check mark or fill out the space provided before that
corresponds to your answer. Please answer the entire question for the
completion of the study.
Legends:
Strongly disagreed (1)
Moderately disagreed (2)
Neither disagree nor agree (3)
Moderately agree (4)
Strongly agree (5)
13. The strains of continually raising test scores
and the pressures of accountability among
teachers.
14. Continuous delivery of "out-of-the box"
education in a climate of narrowing curriculum
and options.
15. Continue to meet the needs of a diverse
student population in the midst of Pandemic.
16. Balancing the expectations of the office
(discipline, attendance issues, parent issues,
classroom/staffing coverage) with the
expectations of being an instructional leader
throughout the building (teacher
observations/evaluations, grade level
collaborations, designing and coordinating
professional development opportunities).
17. Absence of sustaining good practices.
18. School heads have been under enormous
pressure to put together the emergency
response to schooling amidst a pandemic.
19. Providing regular opportunities for
stakeholders to share their opinions and
 34

reflections of the progress of their school

leaders
20. Support the wellbeing of their school
community (while maintaining their own
health and wellbeing).
21. Leverage expertise and experience from
multiple stakeholders to facilitate transition
from a crisis
22. Large-scale shortfalls in classrooms,
teachers, and other tools to sustain sound
learning also make up a big issue.
23. While there is a great deal of concern for how
educational needs would be met over
distance learning, there was also another
prominent worry for many in teaching and
principal roles: how will students’ mental and
social needs be met.
24. Constantly communicating in a variety of
venues with parents, with staff and with
students had been so hard at times when
pressing some point to parents.
25. Principal have to deal with a public that can
be hostile to mask mandates and mandatory
vaccines when it was implemented.

APPENDIX B

(Letter to the Schools Division Superintendent)

ST. PETER’S COLLEGE

Sabayle St., Iligan City
Graduate School Department

EDILBERTO L. OPLENARIA, CESO V

Schools Division Superintendent
Division of Lanao del Norte

Sir,

Greetings of Peace and Prosperity!

The undersigned is asking permission from your good office to conduct a descriptive-
correlational quantitative research among the school heads of Baloi East District, Baloi West
District and Pantao Ragat District, Division of Lanao del Norte, entitled CHALLENGES
ENCOUNTERED BY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS IN THE LEARNING LANDSCAPE: A
 35

BASIS FOR A DEVELOPMENT PLAN” in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the
degree, Master of Arts in Education major in Educational Management.

In view of this, your favorable response regarding this matter is highly appreciated. Rest
assured that all their answers would be kept confidential by the "Ethics of Research."

Hoping for your kind Approval. Thank you and God bless!

Respectfully yours,

(SGD) NASHIBA M, USMAN

Researcher

Noted by:

(SGD) OMAR Q. HUSSIEN, PhD

Research Adviser

(SGD) EMMAH B. MAGRACIA, PhD

Dean, Graduate Studies

Approved by:

(SGD) EDILBERTO L. OPLENARIA, CESO V

Schools Division Superintendent
APPENDIX C

(Letter to the Elementary School Principal)

ST. PETER’S COLLEGE

Sabayle St., Iligan City
Graduate School Department

NORHATTAH C. DAUD
Public Schools District Supervisor
Baloi Districts and Pantao Ragat District

Ma’am/Sir,

Greetings of Peace and Prosperity!

The undersigned is asking permission from your good office to conduct descriptive-
correlational quantitative research among the school heads of Baloi East District, Baloi West
District, and Pantao Ragat District, Division of Lanao del Norte, entitled CHALLENGES
ENCOUNTERED BY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS IN THE LEARNING LANDSCAPE: A
 36

BASIS FOR A DEVELOPMENT PLAN” in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree, Master of Arts in Education major in Educational Management.

Given this, your favorable response regarding this matter is highly appreciated. Rest
assured that all their answers would be kept confidential by the "Ethics of Research."

Hoping for your kind Approval. Thank you and God bless!

Respectfully yours,

(SGD) NASHIBA M. USMAN

Researcher

Noted by:

(SGD) OMAR Q. HUSSIEN, PhD

Research Adviser

(SGD) EMMAH B. MAGRACIA, PhD

Dean, Graduate Studies

APPENDIX D

(Letter to the Respondents)

ST. PETER’S COLLEGE

Sabayle St., Iligan City
Graduate School Department

RESPONDENTS

Dear Respondents,

Greetings of Peace and Prosperity!

The undersigned is going to conduct descriptive-correlational quantitative research among

the school heads of Baloi East District, Baloi West District, and Pantao Ragat District,
Division of Lanao del Norte, entitled CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED BY SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS IN THE LEARNING LANDSCAPE: A BASIS FOR A DEVELOPMENT
PLAN” in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Master of Arts in Education
major in Educational Management.
 37

Given this, your favorable response regarding this matter is highly appreciated. Rest
assured that all their answers would be kept confidential by the "Ethics of Research."

Hoping for your kind Approval. Thank you and God bless!

Respectfully yours,

(SGD) NASHIBA M. USMAN

Researcher

Noted by:

(SGD) OMAR Q. HUSSIEN, PhD

Research Adviser

(SGD) EMMAH B. MAGRACIA, PhD

Dean, Graduate Studies