Master of Arts in Education Major in School Administration
Vol. 2 No. 1, January - March 2026 · pages 166–172
School leadership plays a critical role in shaping teacher performance, instructional quality, professional motivation, and school effectiveness within accountability-driven public education systems. This study examined school heads' leadership styles as predictors of teacher performance in public schools in the First Congressional District. Specifically, it determined the level of school heads' leadership styles in terms of transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership; assessed the level of teacher performance based on RPMS ratings and IPCRF scores; examined the significant relationship between leadership styles and teacher performance; determined the extent to which leadership styles significantly predicted teacher performance; and identified which leadership style best predicted teacher performance. The study was anchored on the Full Range Leadership Theory and employed a quantitative predictive research design. Data on leadership styles were gathered from teacher respondents using a standardized leadership questionnaire adapted from the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, while teacher performance data were obtained from official Results-Based Performance Management System ratings and Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form scores. Descriptive statistics, Pearson product-moment correlation, and multiple linear regression analysis were used to analyze the data. Findings revealed that transformational leadership was practiced at a very high level, transactional leadership at a high level, and laissez-faire leadership at a low level. Teacher performance was rated very satisfactory based on RPMS and IPCRF indicators. Correlation results showed that transformational and transactional leadership were positively related to teacher performance, while laissez-faire leadership was negatively related. Regression analysis revealed that leadership styles significantly predicted teacher performance, with transformational leadership emerging as the strongest predictor. The study concluded that engaged, supportive, and vision-oriented school leadership contributes meaningfully to teacher performance in public schools.
Download this article (PDF) Open the full issue
Effective school leadership remains one of the most important institutional factors influencing teacher performance, instructional quality, school culture, and learner outcomes. School heads do not merely perform administrative duties; they establish vision, set expectations, supervise instruction, support teachers, manage school improvement processes, and create conditions that foster teaching and learning. The uploaded manuscript emphasizes that leadership shapes teacher motivation, professional development, instructional practices, and school effectiveness, making it a strategic concern in public education systems.
In contemporary education, the role of school heads has become increasingly complex because public schools operate under accountability systems that require measurable performance, evidence-based management, and continuous improvement. In the Philippine basic education system, the Department of Education institutionalized the Results-Based Performance Management System through DepEd Order No. 2, s. 2015 to align personnel performance with organizational goals and to provide guidelines for performance planning, monitoring, review, and evaluation. This policy context is important because teacher performance is not viewed only as a general perception of effectiveness but as a measurable professional output connected to standards, indicators, and documented accomplishments.
Te acher performance i n public schools i s commonly assessed through o ff icial performance management mechanisms such as the Results-Based Performance Management System and the Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form. DepEd has also released PPST-aligned RPMS tools to standardize, objectify, and make teacher performance assessment more useful for professional growth. In the present study, this accountability environment strengthens the rationale for examining leadership styles as predictors of teacher performance because school heads are directly involved in supervising, supporting, and monitoring teachers' work.
The leadership role of school heads is also supported by the Philippine Professional Standards for School Heads. DepEd Order No. 24, s. 2020 adopted the Philippine Professional Standards for School Heads were adopted, which provide a continuum of professional practice for school heads and support their role in improving teacher quality and learner achievement. This policy direction confirms that school heads are expected to exercise leadership that goes beyond school maintenance. They are expected to lead instructional improvement, support teachers' professional growth, strengthen school systems, and improve learning outcomes.
The uploaded manuscript anchors the study on the Full Range Leadership Model, which explains leadership through transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire styles. Transformational leadership is described as proactive, inspiring, supportive, and vision-oriented; transactional leadership emphasizes expectations, rewards, monitoring, and corrective feedback; while laissez-faire leadership reflects passive or minimal leader involvement. These leadership styles are important because they may influence teacher performance differently. A transformational school head may motivate teachers through shared vision and professional support.
A transactional school head may influence performance through structure, recognition, and accountability. A laissez-faire school head, however, may provide limited guidance, which could weaken teacher support and performance. Existing literature cited in the manuscript suggests that transformational leadership is often positively associated with teacher motivation, self-efficacy, job satisfaction, professional commitment, and instructional performance. Transactional leadership may also support performance when clear expectations and fair recognition are present, although its influence may depend on external rewards and compliance mechanisms.
Laissez-faire leadership, in contrast, is often associated with weaker guidance and lower organizational support. These distinctions justify the study's focus on identifying which leadership style best predicts teacher performance in public schools. Despite the established importance of leadership, the uploaded manuscript identifies a methodological and contextual gap. Many studies on leadership and teacher performance remain correlational, perception-based, or focused on broad samples, and do not clearly demonstrate the unique predictive contribution of each leadership style. This limitation is important because correlation can reveal association, but it does not clearly determine which leadership style accounts for the greatest variance in teacher performance.
A predictive approach using regression analysis can provide stronger evidence by estimating the contribution of transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles to teacher performance. The study is also significant because it is situated within public schools in the First Congressional District. The uploaded manuscript explains that congressional districts constitute politically and administratively meaningful contexts in which national education policies, local governance structures, resource allocation, and accountability expectations intersect. This context matters because leadership behavior does not operate in isolation.
School heads work within policy mandates, division supervision, community expectations, resource realities, and performance systems. Therefore, examining leadership styles within a defined public school district provides more context-specific evidence than studies that combine schools from broad or unrelated settings. Another important feature of the study is its focus on system-recognized teacher performance indicators. The manuscript notes that many previous studies rely on indirect measures such as teacher satisfaction, commitment, or self-efficacy, which may be related to performance but are not equivalent to official performance ratings.
By focusing on RPMS ratings and IPCRF scores, the study strengthens the connection between leadership styles and formal teacher performance outcomes within the DepEd accountability structure. Accordingly, this study examined school heads' leadership styles as predictors of teacher performance in public schools in the First Congressional District. Specifically, it sought to determine the level of transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles; assess teacher performance using RPMS and IPCRF indicators; determine the relationship between leadership styles and teacher performance; and identify which leadership style significantly predicts teacher performance.
Using a quantitative predictive design, the study aimed to generate district-level evidence to guide leadership development, school head training, instructional supervision, teacher support, and performance improvement initiatives in public schools. 4 Method
The study employed a quantitative predictive research design to examine the extent to which school heads' leadership styles predicted teacher performance in public schools in the First Congressional District. This design was appropriate because the study did not merely describe leadership styles or determine simple relationships among variables; rather, it sought to establish the predictive contribution of transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles to measurable teacher performance outcomes. The quantitative component enabled the researcher to collect numerical data on leadership styles using a standardized leadership questionnaire and on teacher performance using official RPMS ratings and IPCRF scores.
The predictive component was assessed using multiple regression to determine which leadership style significantly predicted teacher performance and which leadership style had the strongest predictive influence. This design was suitable because the study aimed to move beyond correlational analysis by estimating the explanatory power of leadership styles for teacher performance. Through this approach, the study generated empirical evidence useful for leadership development, instructional supervision, teacher support, and performance improvement in public schools within the First Congressional District. 2.2 Participants The study consisted of heads and teachers employed in public elementary and/or secondary schools within the First Congressional District during the academic year in which the study was conducted.
The participating schools were under the supervision of the Department of Education Division Office and implemented standardized teacher performance evaluation systems, particularly the Results-Based Performance Management System and the Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form. School heads were included because they represented the leadership structure of the participating schools, specifically regarding transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles. Teachers served as the primary respondents in assessing their school heads' leadership styles because they directly experienced and observed the leadership behaviors being measured.
Teacher performance data were based on official RPMS ratings and IPCRF scores, which provided system-recognized indicators of professional performance. A sampling procedure was employed to obtain a representative subset of teachers from the total population, ensuring that the data reflected the leadership-performance relationship within the public school context of the First Congressional District. These participants were appropriate because the study aimed to determine how school heads' leadership styles predicted measurable teacher performance in an accountability-driven public education system. 2.3 Instrumentation The study utilized two main sources of data to measure school heads' leadership styles and teacher performance.
To assess leadership styles, a structured survey questionnaire adapted from the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire was used. The instrument was grounded in Bass and Avolio's Full Range Leadership Theory and measured three leadership styles: transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire. Teacher-respondents rated their school heads' leadership behaviors based on observed practices in their respective schools. To measure teacher performance, the study used official Results-Based Performance Management System ratings and Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form scores. These records served as system-recognized, performance-based indicators of teacher effectiveness under the Department of Education's accountability framework.
The use of both survey and official performance data strengthened the study because leadership styles were measured through teacher observations, while teacher performance was based on formal evaluation records rather than perception alone. Using these instruments, the study generated quantitative data to determine leadership style levels, assess teacher performance, examine relationships among variables, and test the predictive influence of transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership on teacher performance in public schools in the First Congressional District. 2.4 Data Analysis The data gathered in the study were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical procedures aligned with the objectives of the quantitative predictive research design.
Descriptive statistics, particularly mean and standard deviation, were used to determine the level of school heads' leadership styles in terms of transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership, as well as the level of teacher performance based on official RPMS ratings and IPCRF scores. The Pearson product-moment correlation was used to assess the significance, strength, and direction of the relationship between school heads' leadership styles and teacher performance. To determine t h e extent t o which leadership styles predict teacher performance, a multiple linear regression analysis was conducted, with transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles as independent predictors and teacher performance as the dependent variable.
The regression analysis estimated the predictive contribution of each leadership style using standardized coefficients, significance values, and explained variance. This procedure was appropriate because the study sought to move beyond simple correlation and identify which leadership style best predicted teacher performance in public schools within the First Congressional District. Through these analyses, the study generated empirical evidence on the leadership behaviors most strongly associated with measurable teacher performance outcomes.
The results showed that school heads in public schools within the First Congressional District demonstrated active and performance-oriented leadership practices. Among the three leadership styles examined, transformational leadership was practiced at a very high level, indicating that school heads were generally perceived as vision-oriented, motivating, supportive, and capable of encouraging professional growth among teachers. Transactional leadership was practiced at a high level, showing that school heads also used structured expectations, monitoring, feedback, and recognition to guide teacher performance. Meanwhile, laissez-faire leadership was rated low, suggesting that passive, non-interventionist, or minimally involved leadership behaviors were not commonly exhibited by school heads.
The level of teacher performance in public schools in the First Congressional District was found to be very satisfactory based on official Results-Based Performance Management System ratings and Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form scores. This indicates that teachers generally met established professional and instructional standards under the public school accountability system. The use of RPMS and IPCRF data strengthened the findings by measuring teacher performance through official indicators rather than perceptions alone. Correlation analysis revealed that leadership styles were significantly related to teacher performance.
Transformational and transactional leadership were both positively and significantly associated with teacher performance, indicating that teachers performed better when school heads demonstrated active, supportive, motivating, structured, and performance-oriented leadership behaviors. In contrast, laissez-faire leadership was negatively and significantly associated with teacher performance, suggesting that limited guidance, weak supervision, or passive leadership may be associated with lower teacher performance. Multiple regression analysis further showed that school heads' leadership styles significantly predicted teacher performance.
Collectively, transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles explained a substantial proportion of the variance in teacher performance outcomes. This means that leadership style was not only related to teacher performance but also contributed meaningfully to explaining differences in performance among teachers. The findings support the view that leadership behaviors are important predictors of teacher effectiveness in public schools within an accountability-driven education system. Among the leadership styles, transformational leadership emerged as the strongest and most significant predictor of teacher performance.
This suggests that school heads who inspire teachers, communicate a clear vision, provide individualized support, encourage innovation, and promote professional growth are more likely to positively influence teacher performance. Transactional leadership also contributed to teacher performance by reinforcing expectations, accountability, and feedback, while laissez-faire leadership showed a negative predictive effect. Overall, the findings indicate that engaged, supportive, and transformational leadership is most beneficial in strengthening teacher performance in public schools in the First Congressional District.
The study's findings confirm that school heads' leadership styles are important predictors of teacher performance in public schools in the First Congressional District. The results showed that transformational leadership was practiced at a very high level, transactional leadership at a high level, and laissez-faire leadership at a low level. These findings indicate that school heads were generally perceived as active, supportive, and performance-oriented leaders rather than passive administrators. This is important in the context of public education because school heads are expected to guide teacher performance, supervise instruction, and support professional growth under the Department of Education's Results-Based Performance Management System.
DepEd Order No. 2, s. 2015 established the RPMS in DepEd to align individual performance with organizational goals and provide a structure for performance planning, monitoring, review, and evaluation. The finding that teacher performance was rated very satisfactory based on RPMS and IPCRF indicators suggests that teachers generally met official performance expectations. This strengthens the study because teacher performance was not measured solely through perceptions but also through system-recognized performance indicators. The use of official RPMS and IPCRF records provides a stronger basis for examining leadership as a predictor of teacher performance.
This aligns with the Philippine Professional Standards for School Heads, which position school heads as instructional leaders responsible for improving teacher quality, professional practice, and learner outcomes. DepEd Order No. 24, s. 2020 states that the PPSSH provides a continuum of professional practice that supports school heads in pursuing career-long professional growth. The positive relationship between transformational leadership and teacher performance supports the claim that teachers perform better when school heads provide vision, motivation, individualized support, professional encouragement, and opportunities for growth.
Transformational leadership may influence performance by building teacher commitment, strengthening school culture, encouraging innovation, and promoting shared responsibility for school goals. This finding is consistent with the study's theoretical foundation, the Full Range Leadership Theory, which views transformational leadership as a proactive, developmental leadership style. In the present study, transformational leadership emerged as the strongest predictor, suggesting that teachers benefit most from leaders who inspire, mentor, communicate clearly, and support professional development. The positive relationship between transactional leadership and teacher performance also indicates that structured leadership remains useful in public schools.
Transactional leadership supports performance by clarifying expectations, monitoring work, providing feedback, recognizing accomplishments, and reinforcing accountability. In a DepEd setting where teachers are evaluated through formal performance management systems, transactional leadership can help ensure that teachers understand performance standards and submit expected outputs. However, the results suggest that transactional leadership is less effective than transformational leadership at predicting teacher performance. This implies that while structure and accountability are necessary, they are more effective when combined with inspiration, professional support, and teacher empowerment.
The negative relationship between laissez-faire leadership and teacher performance shows that passive or non-interventionist leadership may weaken teacher support and professional outcomes. When school heads provide limited guidance, avoid decision-making, delay feedback, or fail to monitor instructional needs, teachers may receive less support in improving classroom practice and meeting performance expectations. This result strengthens the argument that school leadership should be active, responsive, and development-oriented. Overall, the findings support the conclusion that engaged school leadership, particularly transformational leadership, contributes meaningfully to teacher performance.
The study therefore recommends strengthening leadership development programs that train school heads in vision-setting, instructional supervision, coaching, mentoring, feedback-giving, professional support, and data-informed performance management.
The text above was read out of the issue PDF. Paragraph breaks were placed at sentence ends because the PDF carries none; no wording was changed. Tables and figures are not reproduced — the PDF is the authoritative copy.
