Vol. 2 No. 1, January - March 2026 · pages 187–193
Master teachers serve as instructional leaders who support teacher development through coaching, mentoring, classroom observation, feedback, modeling, and professional guidance. This study examined the relationship between master teachers' coaching and mentoring practices and teachers' classroom performance in public elementary schools in Sta. Barbara II District, Schools Division Office, Pangasinan, during School Year 2024-2025. Specifically, it assessed coaching and mentoring practices across planning and goal-setting, observation and modeling, feedback and reflection, and support and professional development. It also assessed teachers' classroom performance in instructional delivery, classroom management, and student engagement. The study employed a descriptive-correlational research design using expert-validated Likert-scale questionnaires. Data were analyzed using weighted mean, Pearson product-moment correlation, and multiple regression at the 0.05 level of significance. Findings revealed that master teachers' coaching and mentoring practices were highly observed, with an overall mean of 3.68. Planning and goal-setting obtained the highest rating, while observation and modeling emerged as the strongest predictors of classroom performance. Teachers' classroom performance was also rated highly proficient, particularly in instructional delivery and student engagement. A very strong positive relationship was found between coaching and mentoring practices and classroom performance, with r = 0.96 and p <.001. Regression analysis further showed that coaching and mentoring practices accounted for 95.6% of the variance in overall classroom performance. The study concluded that effective coaching and mentoring significantly enhance teachers' instructional competence, classroom management, and learner engagement.
Download this article (PDF) Open the full issue
Education remains a central driver of national development because it prepares learners with the knowledge, skills, values, and competencies needed to participate productively in society. At the heart of this process are teachers, whose instructional competence, classroom management, and ability to engage learners directly shape the quality of learning outcomes. However, effective teaching is not sustained by individual effort alone. Teachers need continuous professional support, instructional guidance, and opportunities for reflective practice. Within the Philippine public school system, Master Teachers play a crucial role in this professional development process, serving not only as experienced classroom practitioners but also as instructional leaders, mentors, coaches, and models of effective teaching practice.
Coaching and mentoring are important mechanisms for improving classroom performance because they provide teachers with structured assistance in planning lessons, improving instructional delivery, managing classroom behavior, assessing learners, and responding to diverse learning needs. In the uploaded study, coaching and mentoring practices were examined through four major domains: planning and goal-setting, observation and modeling, feedback and reflection, and support and professional development. These domains represent essential elements of instructional leadership because they move professional development beyond general training and place it within the actual classroom context where teaching challenges occur.
Through these practices, Master Teachers can help classroom teachers set growth targets, observe and analyze instruction, receive constructive feedback, reflect on practice, and access relevant professional support. The need for effective mentoring is especially significant because teaching is widely recognized as a demanding profession. The early and middle years of teaching often involve challenges related to lesson planning, classroom management, learner behavior, assessment, instructional adjustment, and professional confidence. Without sufficient support, teachers may experience stress, professional isolation, and difficulty sustaining instructional effectiveness.
Mentoring and coaching address these concerns by fostering a collegial environment in which teachers are guided by more experienced instructional leaders. As discussed in the article, teachers who receive adequate coaching and mentoring are more likely to strengthen their competencies, remain committed to the profession, assume leadership roles, and contribute positively to school culture. In the Philippine context, the role of Master Teachers is supported by policy frameworks that emphasize instructional leadership and continuous professional development. Republic Act No. 9155, or the Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001, provides the basis for school-based management and instructional leadership.
DepEd Order No. 2, s. 2015 on the Results-Based Performance Management System strengthens performance monitoring and professional accountability. DepEd Order No. 35, s. 2016 institutionalizes the Learning Action Cell as a school-based continuing professional development strategy, while DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017 establishes the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers. Together, these policies highlight the importance of mentoring, reflective practice, collaboration, and continuous improvement in teacher development. Despite the recognized value of coaching and mentoring, there remains a need to examine how these practices are implemented in actual school settings and how they relate to teachers' classroom performance.
The presence of a mentoring program does not automatically guarantee improved teaching quality. Its effectiveness depends on the consistency, relevance, and quality of coaching practices. For example, planning and goal-setting may help teachers identify specific instructional priorities; observation and modeling may provide concrete examples of effective teaching; feedback and reflection may help teachers refine their practices; and support and professional development may sustain long-term growth. Therefore, empirical evidence is needed to determine which mentoring practices are most strongly associated with classroom performance.
Te achers ' classroom performance i n t h e study w a s examined across instructional delivery, classroom management, and student engagement. These domains are directly aligned with the daily responsibilities of classroom teachers. Instructional delivery refers to the teacher's ability to present lessons clearly, use appropriate teaching strategies, align activities with learning objectives, and differentiate instruction. Classroom management involves establishing routines, creating safe learning environments, and managing positive behavior. Student engagement involves the use of interactive activities, questioning strategies, and opportunities for learners to express their ideas.
These domains are important because they represent the visible outcomes of teacher competence inside the classroom. The uploaded study was conducted among public elementary schools in Sta. Barbara II District, Schools Division Office Pangasinan, during School Year 2024-2025. It sought to determine the relationship between Master Teachers' coaching and mentoring practices and teachers' classroom performance. The study further examined whether specific mentoring domains predicted performance in instructional delivery, classroom management, and student engagement. This focus is important because it provides district-level evidence on how Master Te achers contribute t o teacher development a n d instructional quality.
Accordingly, the study aimed to provide empirical support for strengthening structured coaching and mentoring programs in public elementary schools. By identifying the mentoring practices that significantly influence classroom performance, the study contributes to improving instructional leadership, teacher professional development, and learner-centered teaching. Ultimately, the study positions Master Teachers as key agents of school improvement whose coaching and mentoring practices can enhance teacher competence, promote reflective practice, and support improved learner outcomes. 6 Method
The study employed a descriptive-correlational research design to examine the relationship between Master Teachers' coaching and mentoring practices and teachers' classroom performance in public elementary schools in Sta. Barbara II District, Schools Division Office Pangasinan. The descriptive component was used to determine the level of coaching and mentoring practices implemented by Master Teachers across planning and goal-setting, observation and modeling, feedback and reflection, and support and professional development. It was also used to assess teachers' classroom performance in terms of instructional delivery, classroom management, and student engagement.
The correlational component was applied to determine whether a significant relationship existed between coaching and mentoring practices and classroom performance. This design was appropriate because the study sought to describe existing instructional leadership practices and determine the strength and direction of their association with teachers' classroom performance without manipulating any variables. Through this approach, the study generated empirical evidence on how Master Teachers' mentoring practices were related to teachers' instructional competence, classroom management, and learner engagement. 2.2 Participants The study was public elementary school teachers from Sta.
Barbara II District, Schools Division Office Pangasinan, during School Year 2024-2025. The study focused on the coaching and mentoring practices of Master Teachers and the classroom performance of Teacher I-III respondents. The teacher-respondents provided data on the extent to which Master Teachers implemented coaching and mentoring practices across planning and goal-setting, observation and modeling, feedback and reflection, and support and professional development. They also assessed classroom performance in terms of instructional delivery, classroom management, and student engagement. Stratified sampling was used to ensure representation among respondents from the district's public elementary schools.
This participant group was appropriate because the study required responses from teachers with direct experience with Master Teachers' mentoring practices and whose classroom performance could be examined in relation to this instructional support. Through these respondents, the study generated empirical evidence on how coaching and mentoring practices were associated with teacher competence and classroom effectiveness. 2.3 Instrumentation The study used two structured, expert-validated Likert-scale questionnaires as the primary instruments for data collection. The first questionnaire measured the extent of Master Teachers' coaching and mentoring practices across four domains: planning and goal-setting, observation and modeling, feedback and reflection, and support and professional development.
These indicators captured how Master Teachers assisted teachers in setting professional growth goals, conducting classroom observations, modeling teaching strategies, providing constructive feedback, encouraging self-reflection, recommending professional development activities, and monitoring instructional progress. The second questionnaire assessed teachers' classroom performance in terms of instructional delivery, classroom management, and student engagement. The classroom performance indicators were aligned with the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers and focused on lesson clarity, instructional strategies, alignment of objectives with activities and assessment, differentiated instruction, classroom routines, positive behavior management, safe learning environment, interactive activities, learner participation, and questioning strategies that promote critical thinking.
The use of Likert-scale items allowed the responses to be quantified and interpreted using weighted means. Prior to administration, the instruments were validated by experts to ensure relevance, clarity, and alignment with the study's objectives. Using these instruments, the study generated measurable data to determine the levels of coaching and mentoring practices, teachers' classroom performance, and the relationship between the two variables. 2.4 Data Analysis The data gathered from the questionnaires were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical procedures aligned with the study's objectives. A weighted mean was used to determine the level of Master Teachers' coaching and mentoring practices in planning and goal-setting, observation and modeling, feedback and reflection, and support and professional development.
The same procedure was used to assess teachers' classroom performance in terms of instructional delivery, classroom management, and student engagement. Pearson product-moment correlation was employed to determine the strength and direction of the relationship between coaching and mentoring practices and teachers' classroom performance. To further determine the extent to which specific mentoring domains predicted classroom performance, a multiple regression analysis was conducted, with the coaching and mentoring dimensions as predictors and the classroom performance domains as outcomes. The hypotheses were tested at the 0.05 level of significance.
Through these statistical procedures, the study identified the overall relationship between Master Teachers' coaching and mentoring practices and teachers' classroom performance, as well as the specific mentoring practices that most strongly influenced instructional delivery, classroom management, and student engagement.
The results showed that Master Teachers' coaching and mentoring practices were highly observed by the teacher-respondents. The overall weighted mean was 3.68, interpreted as Highly Observed. Among the four mentoring domains, planning and goal-setting obtained the highest rating, particularly in the collaboration between Master Teachers and teachers in setting professional growth goals, which received a mean of 3.89. Other highly rated practices included planning coaching sessions aligned with teachers' needs, providing constructive feedback, monitoring teacher progress, and recommending continuing professional development programs.
These findings indicate that Master Teachers actively supported teachers through structured, goal-oriented, and developmental mentoring practices. In terms of specific domains, feedback and reflection, support and professional development, and planning and goal-setting were strongly evident in the mentoring process. Master Teachers were perceived as helping teachers identify strategies to address classroom challenges, encourage self-reflection, monitor instructional progress, and provide professional guidance. However, observation and modeling, while still interpreted as Highly Observed, received lower ratings than the other domains.
Indicators related to classroom modeling, demonstration of teaching strategies, and the use of observation data for mentoring discussions received comparatively lower mean scores. This suggests that although Master Teachers provided instructional support, demonstration-based mentoring may still need further strengthening. The results also revealed that teachers' classroom performance was rated Highly Proficient, with an overall weighted mean of 3.68. Among the classroom performance domains, instructional delivery emerged as one of the strongest areas. Teachers reported high proficiency in differentiating instruction, aligning learning objectives with activities and assessments, and presenting lessons clearly and logically based on the curriculum guide.
Student engagement was also highly rated, particularly in the use of interactive activities, questioning strategies that promote critical thinking, and opportunities for learners to express their ideas. These findings suggest that teachers demonstrated effective instructional competence and learner-centered classroom practices. Classroom management was likewise rated positively, especially in maintaining a safe and conducive learning environment and managing learner behavior through positive and proactive strategies. However, the indicator on establishing routines and procedures to promote order and efficiency received a comparatively lower rating, although it remained within the Proficient level.
This finding indicates that while teachers generally managed classrooms effectively, there is still a need to strengthen consistency in routines, classroom procedures, and time management practices. These areas may be addressed through more focused mentoring, modeling, and follow-through support from Master Teachers. The relationship analysis showed a very strong positive relationship between Master Te achers ' coaching a n d mentoring practices a n d teachers ' classroom performance, with a correlation coefficient of r = 0.96. This indicates that higher levels of coaching and mentoring were closely associated with higher classroom performance in instructional delivery, classroom management, and student engagement.
Regression analysis further revealed that coaching and mentoring practices accounted for 95.6% of the variance in overall classroom performance. Among the mentoring domains, observation and modeling emerged as the strongest predictor, with B = 0.71 and p <.001. Feedback and reflection, planning and goal-setting, and support and professional development also contributed significantly. Overall, the findings confirm that effective coaching and mentoring practices, particularly observation and modeling, substantially influence teachers' classroom performance.
The study's findings confirm that Master Teachers' coaching and mentoring practices were highly observed by Teacher I-III respondents, indicating that instructional support was actively implemented in Sta. Barbara II District. The high overall mean of 3.68 suggests that teachers perceived Master Teachers as consistently providing guidance in planning and goal-setting, feedback and reflection, observation and modeling, and support and professional development. This finding supports the instructional leadership role of Master Teachers within the Philippine basic education system, where mentoring and professional guidance are essential in strengthening teacher competence.
It is also aligned with DepEd Order No. 35, s. 2016, which institutionalizes the Learning Action Cell as a school-based continuing professional development strategy that promotes collaborative learning, reflective practice, and improvement of teaching and learning. The strong rating for planning and goal-setting indicates that Master Teachers were effective in helping teachers identify professional growth priorities and align coaching activities with instructional needs. This result supports the idea that mentoring becomes more meaningful when it is structured, intentional, and connected to teachers' actual classroom challenges.
Goal-oriented mentoring enables teachers to focus on specific areas for improvement, such as lesson planning, assessment alignment, differentiated instruction, and learner engagement. This is consistent with the principles of the Results-Based Performance Management System under DepEd Order No. 2, s. 2015, which emphasizes performance improvement, professional accountability, and evidence-based development planning. Thus, the high rating in planning and goal-setting reflects a mentoring practice that is not merely informal assistance but a systematic process of professional growth. The study also found that teachers' classroom performance was rated highly proficient, particularly in instructional delivery and student engagement.
This suggests that teachers demonstrated competence in presenting lessons clearly, aligning objectives with activities and assessments, differentiating instruction, using participatory strategies, and encouraging learners to express ideas. These findings are consistent with the Philippine Professional Standards for Te achers under DepEd Order N o. 4 2, s. 2 0 1 7, which emphasizes content knowledge and pedagogy, learning environment, diversity of learners, curriculum and planning, assessment and reporting, and professional growth. The high classroom performance ratings suggest that mentoring practices may have helped teachers strengthen their instructional delivery, classroom management, and learner-centered teaching.
The very strong positive relationship between coaching and mentoring practices and classroom performance (r = 0.96, p <.001) provides strong empirical support for the importance of Master Teachers as instructional leaders. This means that higher levels of coaching and mentoring were closely associated with stronger classroom performance among teachers. Regression analysis further showed that coaching and mentoring accounted for 95.6% of the variance in overall classroom performance, indicating substantial predictive value. These findings support the view that teacher development is most effective when professional support is embedded in classroom practice through observation, feedback, modeling, reflection, and follow-through guidance.
Among the mentoring domains, observation and modeling emerged as the strongest predictor of classroom performance, with B = 0.71 and p <.001. This finding is especially important because it shows that teachers benefit greatly from seeing effective teaching practices demonstrated in real or simulated classroom contexts. Observation and modeling allow teachers to connect theory with practice, observe classroom management techniques, examine instructional strategies, and apply demonstrated approaches in their own teaching. Although this domain received relatively lower implementation ratings than planning and feedback, it had the strongest predictive influence, suggesting that schools should strengthen demonstration teaching, peer observation, classroom walkthroughs, and post-observation conferences.
Overall, the study supports the institutionalization of structured coaching and mentoring programs that prioritize modeling, reflective feedback, collaborative planning, and continuous professional development to improve teacher competence and learner outcomes.
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.
