Teachers’ Perceptions of School Heads’ Transformational Leadership Practices and Perceived Organizational Performance in Public Elementary Schools: An Explanatory Sequential Mixed-Methods Study in District I, Schools Division of Kidapawan City
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/wjsam.V1.I2.21Keywords:
Distributed Leadership, Kidapawan City, Mixed Methods, Organizational Performance, Public Elementary Schools, Transformational LeadershipAbstract
This study examined the relationship between school heads’ transformational leadership and perceived organizational performance in public elementary schools in District I, Schools Division of Kidapawan City. An explanatory sequential mixed-methods design combined surveys of 150 teachers across five schools with semi-structured interviews involving 18 purposively selected participants. Researcher-developed questionnaires assessed seven leadership behaviors and four organizational performance domains. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, linear mixed modeling, and thematic analysis guided data interpretation. Teachers rated transformational leadership (M = 4.618) and organizational performance (M = 4.635) very highly. A strong positive relationship emerged (r = .841, p < .001), with leadership remaining significantly associated with perceived performance after adjusting for teacher tenure and school clustering (B = 0.774, p < .001). Teacher tenure was not statistically significant (p = .851). Qualitative findings emphasized shared direction, empowerment, professional trust, coordinated responsibilities, and institutional capacity, while participants identified staffing shortages, workload pressures, and infrastructure constraints as conditions associated with contrasting experiences. The findings demonstrated a significant association between transformational leadership and perceived organizational performance, influenced by organizational conditions. School heads should strengthen participatory leadership, distributed responsibilities, and institutional support systems. The cross-sectional design, self-reported measures, and unequal school sample sizes limited causal interpretation and generalizability. By integrating statistical findings with teachers’ experiences, the study provides context-specific evidence for strengthening educational leadership, institutional coordination, and sustainable school improvement.
References
Adams, C., & Adigun, O. B. (2024). The structure of principal–teacher conversation: Why it matters for school leadership. International Journal of Educational Management, 38(3), 622–638. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-09-2023-0432 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-09-2023-0432
Bektaş, F., Kılınç, A. Ç., & Gümüş, S. (2022). The effects of distributed leadership on teacher professional learning: Mediating roles of teacher trust in principal and teacher motivation. Educational Studies, 48(5), 602–624. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1793301 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1793301
Berkovich, I., & Bogler, R. (2021). Conceptualising the mediating paths linking effective school leadership to teachers’ organisational commitment. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(3), 410–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220907321 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220907321
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
British Educational Research Association. (2024). Ethical guidelines for educational research (5th ed.). https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-fifth-edition-2024-online
Carless, S. A., Wearing, A. J., & Mann, L. (2000). A short measure of transformational leadership. Journal of Business and Psychology, 14(3), 389–405. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022991115523 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022991115523
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://www.sagepub.com/shop/buy-a-book/research-design-6-270550
Dacpano, E. B. (2022). The influence of school heads’ transformational leadership on schools’ performance: The case of City Schools Division of San Fernando, La Union. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 3(9), 1717–1736. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber03.09.12 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber03.09.12
de Jong, W. A., de Kleijn, R. A. M., Lockhorst, D., Brouwer, J., Noordegraaf, M., & van Tartwijk, J. W. F. (2023). Collaborative spirit: Understanding distributed leadership practices in and around teacher teams. Teaching and Teacher Education, 123, Article 103977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103977 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103977
DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2022). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://www.sagepub.com/shop/buy-a-book/scale-development-5-269114
Haynes-Brown, T. K. (2025). The role of sampling in an explanatory sequential mixed methods study: General applications of the transformative paradigm. Methods in Psychology, 12, Article 100176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2025.100176 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2025.100176
Jackson-Gordon, R., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2024). Using a joint display for building integration in a sequential study: Informing data collection for a participatory second phase. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 18(2), 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898231179848 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898231179848
James, T. G., DeJonckheere, M., & Guetterman, T. C. (2024). Integrating transformative considerations and quantitative results through a participant selection joint display in explanatory sequential mixed methods studies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 18(1), 14–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221149470 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221149470
Karakose, T., Ozdogru, M., & Malkoc, N. (2024). Leading sustainable school improvement: A meta-synthesis of qualitative research on problems and challenges faced by school leaders. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1449174. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1449174 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1449174
Kılınç, A. Ç., Polatcan, M., Savaş, G., & Er, E. (2024). How transformational leadership influences teachers’ commitment and innovative practices: Understanding the moderating role of trust in principal. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 52(2), 455–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221082803 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221082803
Li, Y., & Karanxha, Z. (2024). Literature review of transformational school leadership: Models and effects on student achievement (2006–2019). Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 52(1), 52–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221077157 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221077157
Liu, Y., Bellibaş, M. Ş., & Gümüş, S. (2021). The effect of instructional leadership and distributed leadership on teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Mediating roles of supportive school culture and teacher collaboration. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(3), 430–453. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220910438 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220910438
Maligsay, M. B., & Quines, L. A. (2023). The mediating effect of affective commitment on the relationship between transformational leadership of school heads and organizational change among public elementary schools. European Journal of Education Studies, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v10i2.4789 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v10i5.4771
Manglallan, N. B., & Tagadiad, C. L. (2024). Transformational leadership of school heads, team building effectiveness, and stress management competency: A structural equation model on attitude to organizational change of teachers. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 8(9), 1393–1410. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8090114 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8090114
Ninković, S., & Knežević Florić, O. (2024). School leadership and teaching practice: A systematic review of studies of the indirect effects. Journal of Educational Administration, 62(4), 357–372. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-08-2023-0190 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-08-2023-0190
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2026). The value of school principals in TALIS 2024. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a2cdb777-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/a2cdb777-en
Quinn, R. E., & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science, 29(3), 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.29.3.363 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.29.3.363
Republic Act No. 10173. (2012). Data Privacy Act of 2012. https://officialgazette.gov.ph/2012/15/republic-act-no-10173
Santos, O. R., Caparas, L. A. R., Medina, A. B., & Cabrera, W. C. (2024). An assessment of transformational leadership of school heads and its relationship to the school climate. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 5(12), 5218–5227. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.05.12.22 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.05.12.22
Stefana, A., Damiani, S., Granziol, U., Provenzani, U., Solmi, M., Youngstrom, E. A., & Fusar-Poli, P. (2025). Psychological, psychiatric, and behavioral sciences measurement scales: Best practice guidelines for their development and validation. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1494261. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1494261 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1494261
Turan, C., Demirtaş, Z., & Alanoğlu, M. (2024). The adaptation and psychometric analysis of the Global Transformational Leadership (GTL) Scale for Turkish educational institutions. Research in Educational Administration & Leadership, 9(4), 620–659. https://doi.org/10.30828/real.1518967 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30828/real.1518967
UNESCO. (2024). Global education monitoring report 2024/5: Leadership in education—Lead for learning. https://doi.org/10.54676/EFLH5184 DOI: https://doi.org/10.54676/EFLH5184
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2025). The sustainable development goals report 2025. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2025/
Younas, A., & Durante, A. (2023). Decision tree for identifying pertinent integration procedures and joint displays in mixed methods research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 79(7), 2754–2769. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15536 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15536
Zhang, Y., & Lai, M. H. C. (2024). Evaluating two small-sample corrections for fixed-effects standard errors and inferences in multilevel models with heteroscedastic, unbalanced, clustered data. Behavior Research Methods, 56, 5930–5946. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02325-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02325-9
Zhou, Y., & Wu, M. L. (2022). Reported methodological challenges in empirical mixed methods articles: A review on JMMR and IJMRA. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 16(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689820980212 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689820980212
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Aileen H. Siawan, Dr. Life Gabriel F. Osumo, LPT, Dr. Eduardo M. Tejeros III, LPT, Stephanie B. Mesa, Marissa A. Diaz, Maricyl D. Lapiz, Marycris G. Calawen, Analea S. Roflo, Leny C. Bose, Dr. Jaymie A. Rellon, LPT (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
