This site uses cookies for learning about our traffic, we store no personal details. ACCEPT COOKIES DECLINE COOKIES What are cookies?
univerge site banner
Original Article | Open Access | Br. J. Arts Humanit., 6(2), 86-99 | doi: 10.34104/bjah.024086099

Educational Leadership Practice Theory in the School System

Leovigildo Lito D. Mallillin* Mail Img ,
Ma. Aurora T. Caday

Abstract

The paper navigates to explore the educational leadership practice theory in the school system in the area of school approach, performance of students, classroom management and learning, disruptive behavior of students, and innovation of teaching. Likewise, it identifies the extent of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents. The research employs a descriptive quantitative research design as this research enables to description of the educational phenomena and method of the study and circumstances. On the other hand, purposive sampling is utilized in the study because it is subjective based on the needs of the study which is selective and judgmental. The study comprised Forty-Five (45) respondents only. Results show that school approach theory among the respondents sustains approach and development in the school system, practices, and spectrum to allow individuals to thrive for progress and success, show that academic performance and learning process based on motivation provided by teachers as part of the school system and practices show that classroom management and learning theory are preparing students for the challenges and skills in effective practice of learning since teaching and learning process is in accordance with the mandate policy of the school, show that disruptive behavior of students theory are being guarded considering student situation as teenagers where they can discover and explore experiences, show that innovation in teaching theory demonstrates innovation in teaching that is conducive to learning characteristics of student engagement in a diverse practice classroom setting, and show that the extent level of leadership practices affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents provides evidence on self-management, guidance, management people, driving results, sustainability, and responsibility in educational leadership and practices.

INTRODUCTION

One of the perceived issues and challenges are the leadership style in the school system and organization. It pushes the researchers to provide concrete theories that can help address the problem to improve the man-agement system and practice in the school organiz-ation. It explains how effective a leader is especially in the educational setting that leads to theory practices. It emphasizes the behaviors and traits of an educational leader to boost leadership ability such as school approach, performance of students, classroom man-agement and learning, disruptive behavior of students, and innovation of teaching where a leader thinks to push through on the learning process of students as the centers of learning on the various domains in terms of cognitive, psychomotor, and effective enhancement process (Mallillin, 2020, pp. 1-11). Hence, the educa-tional leadership practice in the school system contri-butes to the professional development of a leader in terms of approach in the educational system in acquiring various theories of quality education as molders and shapers of future young generation (Mallillin & Laurel, 2022). It reviews the educational leadership practice and theory in the school system and context. It sustains educational policy makers and improves awareness of school leadership and know-ledge (Lumban Gaol, 2023, pp. 831-848).

On the other hand, a leader is very crucial in the success of boosting the team capacity without know-ledge and skills for leadership in an educational school setting. The concept applies to school settings or in any organization. Hence, without a leader the educa-tional system will not materialize and will not function to the fullest. This is based on the competency of a leader to measure the performance based on the out-come and output of the school credibility and integrity. It challenges the educational leader to innovate capacity in leadership style (Mallillin, & Mallillin, 2019). It examines the process of educational leader-ship practice theory to guide the process of the entire school system to boost the process management and mechanism which challenges characteristics of a leaders accountability, strength, weakness, and deci-sion making process. It adopts the mechanism of educational leadership theory practice in the school system (Mallillin, 2022). It contributes to the success of educational leadership and practice in the school system and setting. It deliberates leadership practice for the role of school leader (Khanal et al., 2023, pp. 200-224). In addition, the contribution of educational leadership practice theory provides framework and concept collaboration for proper management in the school system and setting. It provides smooth leader-ship, function, and flow of the entire process and operation of the school to the fullest (Mallillin, 2023, pp. 1-17). It unpacks the leadership style in the school system such as instructional leadership which leads to the process of theory though critical in the process of promoting management control in the school system. It models effective leadership in the educational organization to collaborate in the process and school system (Kilag & Sasan, 2023, pp. 63-73). 

The Cycle of Educational Leadership Practice Theory in the School System

Statement of the Problem

What is the educational leadership practice theory in the school system in the area of

school approach,

performance of students,

classroom management and learning,

disruptive behavior of students, and 

innovation of teaching?

To what extent is the level of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents? Is there a significant relationship bet-ween the educational leadership practice theory in the school system and the extent level of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents?

Hypothesis

There is no significant relationship between the educa-tional leadership practice theory in the school system and the extent level of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents.

Theoretical Lens

The study is anchored on “Adaptive Theory Approach in Leadership: A Guide to Educational Management System and Mechanisms” as cited by Mallillin, (2022) as this theory focuses on leadership approach to provide meaningful interdisciplinary challenges on leadership in the educational system and practice. It attempts to unify the theory on bridging the discipline of leadership in education setting and leadership. It challenges the theory in terms of level and analysis. It provides component and systematic recognition of mechanism and view of educational leadership. It explains the cycle of the theory approach in leadership for educational setting and system process. It entangles with mechanism of educational leadership content and creativity innovation. It designs the boundaries of mechanisms on educational leadership. It provides philosophical heuristic and paradigm leadership app-roach style, function, creativity and innovation. It allows the concept of the educational leadership prac-tice and theory in the school system (Mallillin, 2022).

Research Design

The research employs descriptive quantitative research design as this research enables to describe the educa-tional phenomena and method of the study and circu-mstances. It quantifies and measures the educational leadership practice theory in the school system in the area of school approach, performance of students, classroom management and learning, disruptive beha-vior of students, and innovation of teaching. In addition, to the measure of the extent level of leader-ship practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents. It analyzes and quanti-fies the analysis of the population of the respondents under study. It generalizes the descriptive research design and the variables of the study (Mallillin, 2022, pp. 99-121; Fairooz et al., 2023).

Respondents of the Study

The subjects of the study are the various educational leaders from the various Higher Education Institutions for both public and private institutions. They are directors, heads, administrators, deans, and coordi-nators. They are reliable sources of information beca-use they are in the position of the management in the educational leadership function. The study comprised Forty Five (45) respondents only. 

Sampling techniques

Purposive sampling is utilized in the study because it is subjective based on the needs of the study which is subjective, selective and judgmental. It is a non-probability sampling in choosing the population as members of the respondents. The questionnaire is sent via Google Form and whoever wants to answer the questionnaire from the various Higher Education Institutions can serve as respondents. The answering of questionnaires is voluntary as written in the Google Form for purposes of gathering data exclusively. This has been sent to various leaders in the HEI until the number of respondents is met that validates the reli-ability and credibility of the instrument tools (Campbell et al., 2020, pp. 652-661).

RESULTS

On the educational leadership practice theory in the school system among the respondents

Table 1: Performance of School Administrator to Educational Leadership Practice in the Area of School Approach Theory.

Table 1 presents the weighted mean and the corres-ponding interpretation on the performance of school administrators to educational leadership practice in the area of school approach theory among the respondents. It shows in the table that rank 1 is shared by the two indicators which are “It sustains approach and deve-lopment in the school system, practice, and spectrum to allow individuals to thrive for progress and success”, and “It reforms the school system and prac-tice to focus on school pressure and accountability to improve structure and policy achievement of the academe”, with a weighted mean of 4.23 or Highly Observed which means educational leadership practice in the area of school approach theory is completely satisfied. Rank 2 is “It uplifts the success and respon-sibility of the school system for the challenge and development outcome in educational setting and practice”, with a weighted mean of 4.10 or Observed which means educational leadership practice in the area of school approach theory is very satisfied. Rank 3 is “It measures the approach to school practice and achievement for the academic performance of stud-ents”, with a weighted mean of 4.00 or Observed which means educational leadership practice in the area of school approach theory is very satisfied. The least in rank is “It views the school system and practices to prepare students in their career path as part of the educational system”, with a weighted mean of 3.39 or Moderately Observed which means educa-tional leadership practice in the area of school app-roach theory is limited. The overall average weighted mean is 3.973 (SD=0.314) or Observed which means performance of school administrators to educational leadership practices in the area of school approach theory among the respondents is very satisfied. Table 2 presents the weighted mean and the corresponding interpretation on the performance of school adminis-trators to educational leadership practice in the area of performance of students inside the classroom theory among the respondents.

Table 2: Performance of school administrator to educational leadership practices in the area of performance of students inside the classroom theory.
It shows that rank 1 is “It provides conditions in the academic performance and learning process based on motivation provided by teachers as part of the school system and practice”, with a weighted mean of 4.20 or Highly Observed  which means performance of stud-ents inside the classroom is completely satisfied. Rank 2 is shared by the two indicators which are “It pro-vides a dimension apparent to the skills and achieve-ment of students learning process”, and “It focuses on the educational system and practice in the school organization”, with a weighted mean of 4.03 or Obser-ved which means performance of students inside the 
classroom is very satisfied. Rank 3 is “Performance of students in the classroom is a part of the policy school system for the vital success of the learners”, with a weighted mean of 3.82 or Observed which means performance of students inside the classroom is very satisfied. The least in rank is “It analyzes the success of school leadership through monitoring the school system and performance of students  especially on the management of instruction and direction process ins-ide the classroom”, with a weighted mean of 3.37 or Moderately Observed which means performance of students inside the classroom is limited. The overall average weighted mean is 3.848 (SD=0.304) or Obser-ved which means performance of school administrator to educational leadership practice in the area of performance of students inside the classroom theory among the respondents is very satisfied.

Table 3: Performance of School Administrator to Educational Leadership Practice in the Area of Classroom Management and Learning Theory.
Table 3 presents the weighted mean and the corres-ponding interpretation on the performance of school administrators to educational leadership practice in the area of classroom management and learning theory among the respondents. It shows that rank 1 is “Class-room management and learning of students prepare them for the challenges, and skills in effective practice of learning since teaching and learning process is in accordance with the mandate policy of the school”, with a weighted mean of 4.21 or Highly Observed which means classroom management and learning theory practice is completely satisfied, Rank 2 is “It is a learning out base approach where the framework of the learning is being given and students are given enough time to explore the learning style and process”, with a weighted mean of 4.18 or Observed which means classroom management and learning theory practice is very satisfied. Rank 3 is shared by the two indicators which are “It prepares students in building knowledge for academic success and performance in school”, and “It emphasizes the school system and self-directed learning practices and challenges in the school setting”, with a weighted mean of 3.91 or Observed which means classroom management and learning theory practice is very satisfied. The least in rank is “It provides self-directed classroom man-agement and learning programs in school setting and discipline as part of the goals in the educational organization”, with a weighted mean of 3.34 or Mode-rately Agree which means classroom management and learning theory practice is limited. The overall average weighted mean is 3.86 (SD=0.335) or Agree which means performance of school administrator to educa-tional leadership practice in the area of classroom management and learning theory among the respon-dents is very satisfied. 

Table 4: Performance of School Administrator to Educational Leadership Practices in the Area of Disruptive Behavior of Students Theory. 
Table 4 presents the weighted mean and the corres-ponding interpretation on the performance of school administrators to educational leadership practice in the area of disruptive behavior of students theory among the respondents. It shows that rank 1 is “Behavior and attitude of students must be guarded considering their situation as teenagers where they can discover and explore experiences”, with a weighted mean of 4.22 or Highly Observed which means disruptive behavior of students theory is completely satisfied. Rank 2 is “It provides emphasis in addressing the critical behavior of students”, with a weighted mean of 4.12 or Obser-ved which means disruptive behavior of students theory is very satisfied. Rank 3 is “Students are given orientation on the school system and practice to provide rich understanding and principles inside the classroom”, with a weighted mean of 4.00 or Observed which means disruptive behavior of students theory is very satisfied. The least in rank is shared by the two indicators which are “There is policy in addressing the behavior of student in the school based on trauma, violence, and mental health”, and “It prepares students information in advanced utilization of learning appro-priately to their behavior and services”, with a weig-hted mean of 3.32 or Moderately Observed which means disruptive behavior of students theory is limited. The overall average weighted mean is 3.79 (SD=0.394) or Observed which means performance of school administrator to educational leadership practice in the area of disruptive behavior of students theory among the respondents is very satisfied. 

Table 5: Performance of school administrator to educational leadership practices in the area of innovation in teaching Theory among the respondents.
Table 5 presents the weighted mean and the corres-ponding interpretation on the performance of school administrators to educational leadership practice in the area of innovation in teaching theory among the respondents. It shows in the table that rank 1 is “It demonstrates innovation in teaching that is conducive to learning characteristics of student engagement in a diverse practice classroom setting”, with a weighted mean of 4.23 or Highly Observed which means inno-vation in teaching theory is completely satisfied. Rank 2 is “It contains design and distinction implication of the school system and practices that emerges educa-tional organization and perspectives”, with a weighted mean of 4.01 or Observed which means innovation in teaching theory is very satisfied. Rank 3 is “Innovation of teaching increases the quality of the system and practice in school”, with a weighted mean of 3.87 or Observed which means innovation in teaching theory is very satisfied, The least in rank is “It shows domi-nant assumption in the school system practice and effectiveness of innovation in teaching”, with a weig-hted mean of 3.35 or Moderately Observed which means innovation in teaching theory is limited. The overall average weighted mean is 3.81 (SD=0.307) or Observed which means performance of school admin-istrator to educational leadership practice in the area of innovation in teaching theory among the respondents is very satisfied. 

To what extent is the level of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents?

Table 6: Extent Level of Leadership Practice Affecting the Approach to the School System Among the Respondents.
Table 6 presents the weighted mean and correspond-ding interpretation on the extent level of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents. It shows that rank 1 is “It provides evidence on self-management, guidance, management people, driving result, sustainability, and responsibility in educational leadership and practice”, with a weighted mean of 4.20 or Highly Observed which means the extent of leadership practice affect-ting the approach to the school system is completely satisfied. Rank 2 is “It advocates potential assessment of staff, teachers, and employees in educational leadership style”, with a weighted mean of 4.00 or Observed which means the extent of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system is very satisfied. Rank 3 is “It provides success in coac-hing leadership and practice in educational organiz-ation desire in improving the success and performance of the level of leadership and effect in the school system”, with a weighted mean of 3.84 or Observed which means the extent level of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system is very satisfied. The least in rank is “It aims to summarize the key performance and indicator on effective leadership and level to school system practice and attention”, with a weighted mean of 3.36 or Moderately Observed which means the extent of leadership practice affect-ting the approach to the school system is limited. The overall average weighted mean is 3.795 (SD=0.290) or Observed which means the extent of leadership prac-tice affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents is very satisfied. 
On the significant relationship between the educa-tional leadership practice theory in the school system and the extent level of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents

Table 7: Test of Significant Relationship Between the Educational Leadership Practice Theory in the School System and the Extent Level of Leadership Practice Affecting the Approach to the School System among the Respondents.
Table 7 presents the test of the significant relationship between the educational leadership practice theory in the school system and the extent level of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respondents. It shows that when two vari-ables are tested on the extent level and the educational leadership practice theory, it reveals that the computed r value of school approach is 0.038825, performance of students is 0.03945, classroom management and learning is 0.039389, disruptive behavior of students is 0.039751, and innovation of teaching is 0.039647 which is not significant and acceptance of the hypothesis, one tailed test, df of 45 at 0.05 level of significant and with critical r value of 0.287563. Therefore, it is safe to say that there is no significant relationship between the educational leadership practice theory in the school system and the extent level of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system as observed among the respondents.

DISCUSSION

The educational leadership practice theory provides framework and concept in collaborating proper man-agement in the school system and setting. It provides smooth leadership, function, and flow of the entire process and operation of the school to the fullest. Hence, in the area of school approach theory among the respondents shows a sustained approach and deve-lopment in the school practice and spectrum to allow individuals to thrive for progress and success. It also shows how to reform the school system and practice to focus on school pressure and accountability to imp-rove structure and policy achievement of the academe. It is a dimension educational leadership analysis for the provision of the regulation and structure in the organization. It is believed to produce improved quality and increased innovation in educational leader-ship practices (Bellei & Munoz, 2023, pp. 49-76). Accordingly, it uplifts the success and responsibility of the school system for the challenges and development outcome in educational setting and practice. It ackno-wledges the increased policy makers and challenges arising at school level. It delegates responsibility expectation in the school system approach to leader-ship success and practice (Brauckmann et al., 2023, pp. 4-15). Furthermore, it measures approaches to school practice achievement for the academic perfor-mance of students especially on the various domains of learning approach to teaching strategy. It reveals the ability of the structural functions and responsibility of the lesson in the academic performance of students (Mallillin et al., 2021). Hence, it views the school system and practices to prepare students career path as part of the educational system. It provides pedagogical intervention transition of competency based approach in the educational leadership practice system. It enhances students competency in the school system and leadership transition (van der Baan et al., 2022, pp. 398-415). Furthermore, the performance of school administrators in educational leadership practice in the area of performance of students inside the classroom theory among the respondents show to provide condi-tions in the academic performance and learning process based on motivation provided by teachers as part of the school system and practice. It mediates distribution models of educational leadership among teacher professionals. It proposes trust of the educa-tional leaders and motivation on the professional system and process (Bektaş et al., 2022, pp. 602-624). Moreover, it provides a dimension apparent to the skills and achievement of students learning process.  It focuses on the educational system and practice in the school organization. It develops skills in responsible educational leadership and demand in the school system. It is imperative to improve the quality of education and equity to promote learning opportunities for students. It includes core educational innovation practice to address needs of students as the centers of learning (González-Pérez & Ramírez-Montoya, 2022). Also, it shows that performance of students in the classroom is a part of the school systems vital success of the learners. It implements the readiness of the learners. It explores academic competency on pedago-gical design development of learning advance enhan-cement. It identifies the access of advanced technology in educational leadership practice (Mallillin et al., 2020). Yet, it analyzes the success of school leadership through monitoring school systems and performance of students, especially on the management of instructi-on and direction process inside the classroom. It exp-lores educational leadership and teacher perception commitment to the academic success of students. It is a collective efficacy and organizational trust structural equation transformational leadership in the school system. It is directly related to teachers behavior and transactional leadership. It highlights contingency approach and exploration in understanding leadership school contexts (Freeman, & Fields, 2023, pp. 318-338). Moreover, the performance of school adminis-trators in educational leadership practice in the area of class-room management and learning theory among the respondents show that classroom management and learning of students prepares them for the challenges and skills in effective practice of learning since teaching and learning process is in accordance with the mandate policy of the school. It influences readiness in teaching and learning according to the procedures of the school and professional knowledge of the lecturers to focus on student learning enhancement (Mallillin et al., 2020). Further, it shows that the learning out base approach framework of the learning is being given and students are given enough time to explore the learning style and process. It explores effective classroom pedagogy through the contribution of instructional design that leads to better teaching and learning for students as centers of learning. This involves forma-tion of knowledge, critical thiking, knowledge of lesson and analyzing inferences (Mallillin et al., 2023, pp. 41-52). Meanwhile, it prepares students in building knowledge for academic success and performance in school to emphasize the school system and self-directed learning practice and challenges. It provides changes on advanced technology in the globe toward self-directed teaching and learning. It is needed in the key competency educational leadership practice. It provides evidence and support on positive imple-mentation and guidelines to foster self-guided learning (Chen et al., 2022, pp. 409-426). Lastly, it provides a self-directed classroom management and learning program in school setting and discipline as part of the goal in the educational organization. It is a continuous process of learning and acquiring knowledge. It focu-ses on the practical teaching for educational leadership theory. It provides better experience and opportunity for students in the school system and resources (Chukwuere, 2023, pp. 232-249). Indeed, the perfor-mance of school administrators in educational leader-ship practice in the area of disruptive behavior of students theory among the respondents show that students are guarded considering their situation as teenagers where they can discover and explore experi-ences. It explores the paradigm of learning on the behavior, attitude, knowledge of students, learning based implementation and acquisition success beha-vior of students (Valero Haro et al., 2022, pp. 123-145). In addition, it shows emphasis in addressing the critical behavior of students. It explores various perceptions and activities of students related to critical thinking and problem solving skills that can lead to control behavior and attitude of students for better learning process. It analyzes the behavior of students to have a better smooth flow of teaching and learning. It is a friendly environment that can address students behavior towards teaching and learning (Topsakal et al., 2022, pp. 136-145). In view hereof, it shows that students are given orientation on the school system and practice to provide rich understanding and principles inside the classroom. This can better pro-vide positive leadership inside the classroom when proper management of the classroom is established prior to teaching and learning. It provides a positive learning experience where teachers show their leader-ship skills as innovators in teaching and learning. It illuminates the positive role of perspective practice of leadership such as wide benefit learning, outcome learning, leadership affection, positive leadership skills, leader-member leadership style, principles, and ethics (Kouhsari et al., 2022, pp. 1-21). 

Lastly, it shows that there is policy in addressing behavior of students in school based on trauma, violence, and mental health. It also shows that it prepares students information for advanced utilization of learning appropriately to their behavior and ser-vices. It determines the intention of the learning management of students based on their interest, behavior, and attitude in teaching. It manages the utilization of resources and teaching to meet students behavior and attitude in learning (Al-Mamary, 2022).

Notably, the performance of school administrator to educational leadership practice in the area of inno-vation in teaching theory among the respondents show to demonstrate innovation in teaching that is conducive to learning characteristics of student engag-ement in a diverse practice classroom setting. It cultivates learning to the fullest. It designs attention in the educational system such as cooperation ability for teaching, learning, critical thinking, and creative thinking. It is a competency in developing teaching and learning to demonstrate better teaching pedagogy and innovation. It stimulates creation of imagination in teaching and learning (Xin et al., 2022). Hence, it also shows to design  distinction implication of the school system and practice to emerge educational organiza-tion and perspective context. This includes innovation in the educational system process as to the culture of learning ideas and society to achieve better learning among students. It identifies the core competency in learning as part of innovation theory such as concept of development and specific discipline of learning. It is a critical thinking framework learning out-based for students as centers of learning (Mallillin et al., 2022). Nonetheless, it shows that innovation of teaching increases the quality of the system and practice in school to evaluate necessity quality innovation of teaching and learning in the educational system. It analyzes innovation of education based curriculum set-up in the school system (Zhou & Zhou, 2022, pp. 605-612). Similarly, it shows dominant assumptions in the school system practice and effectiveness of innovation in teaching to establish a systematic and scientific educational system in the traditional classroom setting. It inspires wisdom in teaching innovation for the learners. It improves the quality of teaching and learning (Xin et al., 2022).

In addition, the extent of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respon-dents shows evidence on self-management, guidance, management of people, driving result, sustainability, and responsibility in educational leadership and practice in the educational setting. It faces various challenges as to the teaching and learning atmosphere. It indicates challenges on the real consequences of teaching and learning to the real world. It examines the efficacy of education leadership practice in the 21st century (Gardner-McTaggart, 2022, pp. 647-663). Nevertheless, it shows to advocate potential assess-ment of staff, teachers, and employees in educational leadership style. It examines the moderate institutional role theory that focuses on the participative different outcome of leadership association. It demonstrates institutional theory on the level of complexity, participative leadership style and theory performance of teaching and learning circumstances (Khassawneh, & Elrehail, 2022). Certainly, it shows success in coaching leadership and practice in educational organ-ization desire in improving the success and perfor-mance level of leadership and effect in the school system. It fosters the best equity and offers the possibility for students inclusive goals in school for better outcome in the learning process. It implements individualized planning in educational leadership. It is connected with leadership style in teaching and learning innovation (Lambrecht et al., 2022, pp. 943-957). Lastly, it summarizes the key performance and indicators on effective leadership and level to school system practice and attention. It changes the process of the workplace from good, better, and best. It challen-ges the advanced leadership ability in the school organization. It determines and analyzes the leadership elements needed in the school system and organization (Khaw et al., 2022, pp. 514-534).

CONCLUSION

It shows that school approach theory among the respondents sustains approach and development in the school system, practice, and spectrum to allow indivi-duals to thrive for progress and success. It includes reform of the school system and practice to focus on school pressure and accountability to improve struc-ture and policy achievement of the academe. It shows that performance of students inside the classroom theory among the respondents provides conditions in the academic performance and learning process based on motivation provided by teachers as part of the school system and practice. It shows that classroom management and learning theory among the respon-dents are being prepared for students challenges and skills in effective practice of learning since teaching and learning process is in accordance with the mandate policy of the school. It shows that disruptive behavior of students theory among the respondents are being guarded considering student situations as teenagers where they can discover and explore experiences. It shows that innovation in teaching theory among the respondents demonstrates innovation in teaching that is conducive to learning characteristics of student engagement in a diverse practice classroom setting. It shows that the extent of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system among the respon-dents provides evidence on self-management, guid-ance, management people, driving result, sustain-ability, and responsibility in educational leadership and practice. It shows that there is no significant rela-tionship between the educational leadership practice theory in the school system and the extent level of leadership practice affecting the approach to the school system as observed among the respondents.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The researchers would like to acknowledge the people behind the success of this research. To our respon-dents, and the different educational institutions who allowed the researchers to float questionnaire in the gathering of instrument to make this research possible. Thank you for your cooperation. 

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

There is no conflict of interest in this research. This research is not funded. The research is only for disse-mination and information that can contribute to the educational system in the world.

Article References:

  1. Al-Mamary, Y. H. S. (2022). Why do students adopt and use learning management systems? Insights from Saudi Arabia. Inter J. of Infor-mation Management Data Insights, 2(2), 100088. https://www.academia.edu/90131510/Why 
  2. 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.
  3. Bellei, C., & Munoz, G. (2023). Models of regulation, education policies, and changes in the education system: a long-term analysis of the Chilean case. J. of Educational Change, 24(1), 49-76.
  4. Brauckmann, S., Pashiardis, P., & Ärlestig, H. (2023). Bringing context and educational leader-ship together: Fostering the professional deve-lopment of school principals. Professional deve-lopment in education, 49(1), 4-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1747105 
  5. Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., & Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples. J. of research in Nursing, 25(8), 652-661.
  6. Chen, C. H., Chen, K. Z., & Tsai, H. F. (2022). Did self-directed learning curriculum guidelines change Taiwanese high-school students self-directed learning readiness? The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31(4), 409-426.
  7. Chukwuere, J. E. (2023). Exploring the appli-cation of self-directed and cooperative learning in information systems education: a critical analysis. J. of Science and Education (JSE), 3(3), 232-249. https://jse.rezkimedia.org/index.php/jse/article/view/216 
  8. Fairooz F, Karim SS, and Uddin MA. (2023). Role of Bangladesh national museum in public education: a study on contributions, opportuni-ties and challenges, Int. J. Manag. Account. 5(6), 114-131. https://doi.org/10.34104/ijma.023.001140131 
  9. Freeman, G. T., & Fields, D. (2023). School leadership in an urban context: Complicating notions of effective principal leadership, organiz-ational setting, and teacher commitment to students. Inter J. of Leadership in Education, 26(2), 318-338.
  10. Gardner-McTaggart, A. C. (2022). Educational leadership and global crises; reimagining plane-tary futures through social practice. Inter J. of Leadership in Education, 25(4), 647-663.
  11. González-Pérez, L. I., & Ramírez-Montoya, M. S. (2022). Components of Education 4.0 in 21st century skills frameworks: systematic review. Sustainability, 14(3), 1493.
  12. Khanal, J., Rana, K., & Ghimire, S. (2023). Context-specific leadership practices: An exam-ination of evidence of successful community school headteachers in Nepal. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 22(1), 200-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2021.1921223 
  13. Khassawneh, O., & Elrehail, H. (2022). The effect of participative leadership style on emp-loyees performance: The contingent role of institutional theory. Administrative Sciences, 12(4), 195.
  14. Khaw, T. Y., Teoh, A. P., & Letchmunan, S. (2022). The impact of digital leadership on sustainable performance: A systematic literature review. J. of Management Development, 41 (9/10), 514-534. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmd-03-2022-0070 
  15. Kilag, O. K. T., & Sasan, J. M. (2023). Unpac-king the Role of Instructional Leadership in Teacher Professional Development. Advanced Qualitative Research, 1(1), 63-73.
  16. Kouhsari, M., Navehebrahim, A., & Abbasian, H. (2022). Exploring positive school leadership practices in Iranian primary schools. Inter J. of Leadership in Education, 1-21.
  17. Lambrecht, J., Lenkeit, J., & Spörer, N. (2022). The effect of school leadership on implementing inclusive education: How transformational and instructional leadership practices affect indivi-dualised education planning. Inter J. of Inclusive Education, 26(9), 943-957.
  18. Liu, H., Sheng, J., & Zhao, L. (2022). Innovation of teaching tools during robot programming learning to promote middle school students critical thinking. Sustainability, 14(11), 6625.
  19. Lumban Gaol, N. T. (2023). School leadership in Indonesia: A systematic literature review. Edu-cational Management Administration & Leader-ship, 51(4), 831-848. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1381405 
  20. Mallillin, L. L. D. (2022). Adaptive Theory Approach in Leadership: A Guide to Educational Management System and Mechanisms. Euro-pean J. of Education Studies, 9(7).
  21. Mallillin, L. L. D. (2023). Educational system theory, concept, and framework. Asian J. Soc. Sci. Leg. Stud, 5(1), 1-17.
  22. Mallillin, L. L. D. (2020). Different Domains in Learning and the Academic Performance of the Students. J. of Educational System, 4(1), 1-11.
  23. Mallillin, L. L. D. (2022). Teaching and learning intervention in the educational setting: adapting the teacher theory model. Inter J. of Educational Innovation and Research, 1(2), 99-121.
  24. Mallillin, L. L. D., Cabaluna, J. C., & Mallillin, J. B. (2021). Structural domain of learning and teaching strategies in the academic performance of students. European J. of Education Studies, 8(9).
  25. Mallillin, L. L. D., Carag, E. A., & Laurel, R. D. (2020). Integration of knowledge through online classes in the learning enhancement of students. European J. of Open Education and E-learning Studies, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.46827/EJOE.V5I1.3117 
  26. Mallillin, L. L. D., & Laurel, R. D. (2022). Professional Development System Theory for Quality Education. European J. of Education Studies, 9(8).
  27. Mallillin, L. L. D., & Mallillin, J. B. (2019). Competency skills and performance level of faculties in the higher education institution (HEI). European J. of Education Studies.
  28. Mallillin, L. L. D., Mallillin, J. B., & Burabo, J. Z. (2023). Instructional design for effective classroom Pedagogy of teaching. Eureka: J. of Educational Research, 1(2), 41-52.
  29. Mallillin, L. L. D., Mendoza, L. C., & Lipayon, I. C. (2020). Implementation and readiness of online learning pedagogy: a transition to COVID -19 pandemic. European J. of Open Education and E-learning Studies, 5(2).
  30. Mallillin, L. L. D., Sy-Luna, G., & Atendido, G. C. L. (2022). Culture, Society, Ideas, and Inno-vation of General Education Subject of Students in the now Normal: a Concept and Development in Teaching. Culture, 2(5). https://doi.org/10.59079/isagoge.v2i5.117 
  31. Topsakal, İ., Yalçın, S. A., & Çakır, Z. (2022). The effect of problem-based stem education on the students critical thinking tendencies and their perceptions for problem solving skills, Science Education International, 33(2), 136-145.
  32. Valero Haro, A., Noroozi, O., & Mulder, M. (2022). Argumentation Competence: Students argumentation knowledge, behavior and attitude and their relationships with domain-specific knowledge acquisition. J. of Constructivist Psy-chology, 35(1), 123-145. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720537.2020.1734995 
  33. van der Baan, N., Gast, I., & Beausaert, S. (2022). Coaching to prepare students for their school-to-work transition: conceptualizing core coaching competences. Education+ Training, 64(3), 398-415.
  34. Xin, X., Shu-Jiang, Y., & Dan, L. (2022). Review on A big data-based innovative know-ledge teaching evaluation system in universities. J. of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(3), 100197.
  35. Zhou, Y., & Zhou, H. (2022). Research on the quality evaluation of innovation and entre-preneurship education of college students based on extenics. Procedia computer science, 199, 605-612.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.01.074 

Article Info:

Academic Editor

Dr. Sonjoy Bishwas, Executive, Universe Publishing Group (UniversePG), California, USA.

Received

November 9, 2024

Accepted

December 13, 2024

Published

December 22, 2024

Article DOI: 10.34104/bjah.024086099

Corresponding author

Leovigildo Lito D. Mallillin*
Faculty of Languages and Literature, Philippine Normal University, Taft Ave., Manila, Philippines.

Cite this article

Mallillin LLD., and Caday MAT. (2024). Educational leadership practice theory in the school system, Br. J. Arts Humanit., 6(2), 86-99. https://doi.org/10.34104/bjah.024086099 

Views
173
Download
109
Citations
Badge Img
Share