Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies for Empowering Educators and Enhancing Teacher Development in the 21st-Century Classrooms

Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies for Empowering Educators and Enhancing Teacher Development in the 21st-Century Classrooms

Emory N. Rait, Melchor M. Amor, PhD

Mabini Colleges, Incorporated, Daet, Camarines Norte

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.909000674

Received: 12 October 2025; Accepted: 18 October 2025; Published: 25 October 2025

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to describe Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies for empowering educators and enhancing teacher development in 21st-century classrooms. Employing a quantitative method using descriptive-correlational research design, 19 school heads and 303 teachers participated through a validated and reliable researcher-made instrument, showing internal consistency among the indicators in the research instrument. Utilizing Microsoft Excel and IBM SPSS Version 20 in data analysis, various statistical tools such as weighted mean and Pearson product-moment correlation were used. Results revealed that school heads consistently implemented OBL strategies in strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability. Teachers reported very much empowered in autonomy, decision-making, and instructional innovation, with significant correlations found between OBL strategies and level of teacher empowerment. Teachers were also very much developed in collaboration, adaptation to technology, and professional growth; however, no significant relationship was observed between OBL strategies and level of teacher development. Schools reported minimal to no challenges in implementing OBL. Based on these findings, Project MERGE was proposed to strengthen the Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies of school heads.

Keywords: Outcomes-Based Leadership, school leadership, teacher empowerment, teacher development, 21st-century classrooms

INTRODUCTION

Educational leadership in the 21^st-century has shifted from rigid hierarchical models to strategies emphasizing collaboration, accountability, and empowerment. Outcomes-Based Leadership (OBL) has emerged as a practical framework that aligns institutional goals with measurable outcomes while fostering teacher autonomy and professional growth (Gutierrez, 2023; Harrison, 2024). In the Philippine context, Republic Act No. 9155 and DepEd Order No. 24, s. 2020 underscore the crucial role of school heads as instructional leaders tasked with promoting accountability, innovation, and teacher development. Despite these frameworks, many schools, particularly in resource-constrained communities, face challenges in enabling teachers to adapt to technological changes and pedagogical innovations. These gaps highlight the need for leadership strategies that not only set measurable goals but also empower teachers to actively engage in their professional growth.

This study aimed to describe Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies for empowering educators and enhancing teacher development in the 21st-century classrooms. Specifically, this study sought to answer the following: 1) What Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies are employed by school heads to empower teachers and enhance teacher development in 21st-century classrooms in terms of strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability? 2) What is the level of teacher empowerment in 21st-century classrooms along autonomy, decision-making, and instructional innovation? 3) Is there a significant relationship between Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies and level of teacher empowerment in 21st-century classrooms? 4) What is the level of teacher development in 21st-century classrooms along with peer collaboration, adaptation to educational technology, and professional growth? 5) Is there a significant relationship between Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies and level of teacher development in 21st-century classrooms? 6) What challenges are encountered by schools in the implementation of Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies? 7) What intervention may be proposed to strengthen the Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies of school heads?

METHODS

This study employed a quantitative method using descriptive-correlational research design. The respondents were 19 school heads and 303 teachers from the 19 public elementary schools in Mercedes District, Division of Camarines Norte, during SY 2024-2025. Total enumeration was used to ensure comprehensive representation.

A researcher-made questionnaire served as the primary data-gathering tool. It consisted of four parts: (1) OBL strategies (strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability), (2) level of teacher empowerment (autonomy, decision-making, and instructional innovation), (3) level of teacher development (peer collaboration, adaptation to technology, and professional growth), and (4) challenges in implementation of OBL strategies (strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability). The instrument underwent expert validation and pilot testing. Reliability analysis yielded Cronbach’s alpha values above .92 across all parts, indicating internal consistency.

Data gathering followed ethical standards, with permissions secured from the Division Office and schools. Respondents were assured of confidentiality and voluntary participation. Data were processed using IBM SPSS Version 20. Weighted mean described OBL strategies, levels of teacher empowerment and development, and challenges, while Pearson product-moment correlation tested significant relationships between leadership strategies and levels of teacher empowerment and development.

RESULTS

Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies Employed by School Heads to Empower Teachers and Enhance Teacher Development in 21st-Century Classrooms

This section explores the specific Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies implemented by school heads to promote teacher empowerment and development. It focuses on leadership strategies across strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability for empowering educators and enhancing teacher development in the 21st-century classrooms.

Strategic Actions. This section presents the Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies employed by school heads to empower teachers and enhance teacher development in 21st-century classrooms along strategic actions. It focuses on setting goals, promoting collaboration, fostering innovation, and ensuring inclusive and transparent planning processes.

Table 1 shows that the overall weighted mean for strategic actions is 3.83, interpreted as “Always,” indicating that school heads consistently implement these strategies. The highest-rated indicator is facilitating regular meetings to discuss progress toward achieving strategic objectives, with a weighted mean of 3.85, interpreted as “Always.” The lowest-rated indicator is actively involving teachers in decision-making processes for strategic planning, with a weighted mean of 3.81, also interpreted as “Always.”

Table 1 Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies Employed by School Heads to Empower Teachers and Enhance Teacher Development in 21st-Century Classrooms along Strategic Actions

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Always (A); 2.50-3.24 – Often (O); 1.75-2.49 – Sometimes (S); 1.00-1.74 – Never (N)

The data suggest that school heads consistently engage in strategic actions that foster a structured and goal-oriented school environment. The highest-rated indicator highlights the importance of ongoing discussions to monitor progress and ensure alignment with objectives. Meanwhile, the relatively lower rating for teacher involvement in strategic planning may indicate areas where participation in decision-making could be further enhanced to strengthen teacher empowerment.

Continuous Improvement. This section presents the Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies employed by school heads to empower teachers and enhance teacher development in 21st-century classrooms along continuous improvement. It focuses on fostering professional growth, promoting data-driven practices, and creating a supportive environment for learning and development.

Table 2 shows that the overall weighted mean for continuous improvement is 3.85, interpreted as “Always,” indicating that school heads consistently foster an environment focused on ongoing enhancement. The highest-rated indicator is establishing a mentoring system for new or less experienced teachers, with a weighted mean of 3.89, interpreted as “Always.” The lowest-rated indicators are regularly evaluating and updating school policies to address emerging challenges and providing platforms for teachers to share best practices and success stories, both with a weighted mean of 3.82, still interpreted as “Always.”

Table 2 Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies Employed by School Heads to Empower Teachers and Enhance Teacher Development in 21st-Century Classrooms along Continuous Improvement

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Always (A); 2.50-3.24 – Often (O); 1.75-2.49 – Sometimes (S); 1.00-1.74 – Never (N)

The data indicate that school heads prioritize continuous improvement efforts by promoting a supportive, feedback-rich environment and encouraging professional growth. The highest rating for mentoring systems reflects the value placed on nurturing new teachers, ensuring they receive guidance and support for their development. Meanwhile, the slightly lower ratings for policy updates and sharing best practices may suggest that, while these strategies are consistently applied, they may require more emphasis or innovation to maximize their effectiveness.

Accountability. This section presents the Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies employed by school heads to empower teachers and enhance teacher development in 21st-century classrooms along accountability. It focuses on setting performance expectations, monitoring progress, ensuring fair evaluations, and promoting a culture of responsibility and transparency.

Table 3 Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies Employed by School Heads to Empower Teachers and Enhance Teacher Development in  21st-Century Classrooms along Accountability

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Always (A); 2.50-3.24 – Often (O); 1.75-2.49 – Sometimes (S); 1.00-1.74 – Never (N)

Table 3 shows that the overall weighted mean for accountability is 3.86, interpreted as “Always,” indicating that school heads consistently implement strategies that promote responsibility and transparency. The highest-rated indicators are addressing underperformance constructively by providing coaching or intervention plans and providing regular updates on school performance to all stakeholders, both with a weighted mean of 3.89, interpreted as “Always.” The lowest-rated indicator is tracking the alignment of teacher performance with student learning outcomes, with a weighted mean of 3.83, also interpreted as “Always.”

The data suggest that school heads prioritize accountability by focusing on constructive interventions and ensuring stakeholders remain informed about school performance. The highest ratings reflect a proactive approach to addressing underperformance and fostering transparency. The slightly lower rating for tracking the alignment of teacher performance with student outcomes may suggest that while this practice is implemented, it could benefit from more refined or systematic approaches to enhance its impact.

Level of Teacher Empowerment in 21st-Century Classrooms

This section evaluates the extent of teacher empowerment in schools where Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies are implemented. It focuses in the areas of autonomy, decision-making, and instructional innovation, reflecting their ability to exercise professional judgment and adapt to diverse classroom needs.

Autonomy. This section presents the level of teacher empowerment in 21st-century classrooms along autonomy. It highlights the extent to which teachers exercise independence in selecting instructional methods, modifying curriculum content, designing assessments, managing classrooms, planning activities, and implementing creative teaching strategies to support student learning.

Table 4 Level of Teacher Empowerment in 21st-Century Classrooms along Autonomy

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Very Much Empowered (VME); 2.50-3.24 – Much Empowered (ME); 1.75-2.49 – Moderately Empowered (MoE); 1.00-1.74 – Not Empowered (NE)

Table 4 shows that the overall weighted mean for teacher empowerment along autonomy is 3.84, interpreted as “Very Much Empowered,” indicating that teachers experience a high degree of freedom in managing their instructional practices. The highest-rated indicator is the ability to shape the instructional setting to support student learning, with a weighted mean of 3.87, interpreted as “Very Much Empowered.” The lowest-rated indicator is the freedom to select instructional methods suited to student needs, with a weighted mean of 3.77, still interpreted as “Very Much Empowered.”

The data suggest that teachers feel significantly empowered to make instructional decisions that best support student learning. The highest rating on shaping the instructional setting reflects a strong sense of control over creating an environment conducive to learning. The slightly lower rating on selecting instructional methods may indicate that while teachers generally feel empowered, some constraints for standardized approaches might still influence this area.

Decision-Making. This section presents the level of teacher empowerment in 21st-century classrooms along decision-making. It highlights the extent of teachers’ involvement in planning, policy development, budgeting, curriculum design, professional development, school evaluations, and school improvement initiatives.

Table 5 shows that the overall weighted mean for teacher empowerment in decision-making is 3.87, interpreted as “Very Much Empowered,” indicating that teachers are highly involved in key decisions affecting their work and the school. The highest-rated indicator is contributing to setting school priorities and objectives, with a weighted mean of 3.90, interpreted as “Very Much Empowered.” The lowest-rated indicators are engagement in budget decisions impacting instructional resources and inclusion in planning school events and activities, both with a weighted mean of 3.85, still interpreted as “Very Much Empowered.”

Table 5 Level of Teacher Empowerment in 21st-Century Classrooms along Decision-Making

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Very Much Empowered (VME); 2.50-3.24 – Much Empowered (ME); 1.75-2.49 – Moderately Empowered (MoE); 1.00-1.74 – Not Empowered (NE)

The data suggest that teachers feel significantly empowered to participate in critical decisions shaping their teaching environment and school direction. The highest rating on contributing to setting school priorities reflects a strong recognition of teachers’ insights in guiding the school’s strategic direction. The slightly lower ratings for budget involvement and event planning may indicate that while teachers are included, these areas may still be more leadership-driven or less accessible to teachers’ influence.

Instructional Innovation. This section presents the level of teacher empowerment in 21st-century classrooms along instructional innovation. It highlights how teachers are encouraged to explore new teaching methodologies, integrate technology, design creative learning experiences, collaborate with peers, and apply flexible assessment methods to enhance student learning.

Table 6 shows that the overall weighted mean for instructional innovation is 3.93, interpreted as “Very Much Empowered,” indicating that teachers feel highly empowered to innovate in their instructional practices. The highest-rated indicator is encouragement to nurture creative problem-solving skills in students, with a weighted mean of 3.96, interpreted as “Very Much Empowered.” The lowest-rated indicator is freedom to explore and apply new teaching methodologies, with a weighted mean of 3.88, still interpreted as “Very Much Empowered.”

Table 6 Level of Teacher Empowerment in 21st-Century Classrooms along Instructional Innovation

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Very Much Empowered (VME); 2.50-3.24 – Much Empowered (ME); 1.75-2.49 – Moderately Empowered (MoE); 1.00-1.74 – Not Empowered (NE)

The data suggest that teachers experience substantial empowerment in creating and implementing innovative instructional strategies. The highest rating on promoting creative problem-solving skills highlights a strong emphasis on fostering critical thinking and adaptability among students. The slightly lower rating on exploring new teaching methodologies, while still high, may suggest that teachers occasionally encounter limitations in experimenting with unfamiliar or unconventional methods.

Relationship Between Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies and Level of Teacher Empowerment in 21st-Century Classrooms

The test for significant relationship that may exist between the Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies along strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability and the level of teacher empowerment in terms of autonomy, decision-making, and instructional innovation was determined using the Pearson Product Moment Correlation (r).

Table 7 shows that there is a significant relationship between Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies and the level of teacher empowerment. This indicates that as the level of Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies increases, the level of teacher empowerment also increases. Autonomy is correlated with all leadership strategies suggesting that the Outcomes-Based Leadership influences teachers’ ability along the variables of teacher empowerment. The highest correlation for autonomy was with accountability (r = .311), implying that when leaders hold teachers accountable, it may also allow them to exercise more independence in their teaching approaches.

Table 7 Test for Significant Relationship between Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies and Level of Teacher Empowerment in 21st-Century Classrooms

**Correlation is significant @ 0.01 level.

Moreover, decision-making has the highest correlation across the leadership strategies, particularly along continuous improvement (r = .379). This suggests that when leadership emphasizes ongoing growth or improvement, teachers are more likely to involve in making decisions. Finally, instructional innovation also obtained significant relationships along strategic action, continuous improvement and accountability. Accountability got the highest coefficient among the three variables with r = .247. This suggests that when leaders implement accountability strategies, teachers gain greater empowerment in innovating their instructional practices.

Overall, these findings underscores that Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies directly contribute to teacher empowerment, with accountability strongly linked to autonomy, continuous improvement to decision-making, and accountability to instructional innovation. Thus, the null hypothesis is rejected.

Level of Teacher Development in 21st-Century Classrooms

This section presents the extent of teacher development in schools where Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies are implemented. It focuses in the areas of peer collaboration, adaptation to educational technology, and professional growth which are key components in shaping resilient education.

Peer Collaboration. This section presents the level of teacher development in 21st-century classrooms along peer collaboration. It highlights how teachers engage in collaborative activities such as co-planning lessons, sharing resources, providing feedback, and participating in professional learning communities to enhance their instructional practices.

Table 8 shows that the overall weighted mean for peer collaboration is 3.79, interpreted as “Very Much Developed,” indicating that teachers are highly engaged in collaborative practices. The highest-rated indicator is openness to discussing instructional challenges with peers, with a weighted mean of 3.99, interpreted as “Very Much Developed.” The lowest-rated indicators are frequency of sharing instructional resources with colleagues and openness to observing and learning from peers’ teaching practices, both with a weighted mean of 3.72, still interpreted as “Very Much Developed.”

Table 8 Level of Teacher Development in 21st-Century Classrooms along Peer Collaboration

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Very Much Developed (VMD); 2.50-3.24 – Much Developed (MD); 1.75-2.49 – Moderately Developed (MoD); 1.00-1.74 – Not Developed (ND)

The data suggest that teachers demonstrate a strong commitment to collaboration, particularly in discussing instructional challenges with peers highlighting a supportive professional culture where teachers seek solutions collectively. The slightly lower ratings on sharing resources and observing peers may indicate that while teachers value collaboration, practical barriers like time constraints or established teaching routines might limit these activities.

Adaptation to Educational Technology. This section presents the level of teacher development in 21st-century classrooms along adaptation to educational technology. It covers teachers’ proficiency, confidence, and willingness to integrate technology into instruction to enhance student learning and classroom management.

Table 9 shows that the overall weighted mean for adaptation to educational technology is 3.81, interpreted as “Very Much Developed,” indicating a high level of competence among teachers in using technology. The highest-rated indicators are willingness to learn new digital skills and skill in personalizing learning through technology, both with a weighted mean of 3.85, interpreted as “Very Much Developed.” The lowest-rated indicators are proficiency in using digital tools in the classroom and comfort with educational software to enhance teaching, both with a weighted mean of 3.78, still interpreted as “Very Much Developed.”

The data suggest that teachers demonstrate strong adaptability to educational technology, particularly in their openness to acquiring new digital skills and customizing learning experiences to meet student needs. The slightly lower ratings for proficiency with digital tools and comfort with educational software underscore that while teachers are eager to learn and innovate, differences in confidence and proficiency remain, often depending on access to training and prior exposure.

Table 9 Level of Teacher Development in 21st-Century Classrooms along Adaptation to Educational Technology

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Very Much Developed (VMD); 2.50-3.24 – Much Developed (MD); 1.75-2.49 – Moderately Developed (MoD); 1.00-1.74 – Not Developed (ND)

Professional Growth. This section presents the level of teacher development in 21st-century classrooms along professional growth. It highlights the extent to which teachers engage in activities such as lifelong learning, self-assessment, and networking to continually improve their professional capabilities.

Table 10 shows that the overall weighted mean for professional growth is 3.88, interpreted as “Very Much Developed,” indicating a high level of commitment among teachers to their ongoing development. The highest-rated indicator is attendance at educational conferences or professional gatherings, with a weighted mean of 3.92, interpreted as “Very Much Developed.” The lowest-rated indicator is consistent attendance at training sessions or workshops, with a weighted mean of 3.82, still interpreted as “Very Much Developed.”

The data suggest that teachers are deeply committed to expanding their professional knowledge and refining their teaching practices. The high ratings for self-assessment, receptiveness to feedback, and lifelong learning reflect a culture of continuous improvement. The slightly lower score for attending training sessions may indicate barriers such as scheduling conflicts or limited access to relevant workshops, despite the strong overall dedication to growth.

Table 10 Level of Teacher Development in 21st-Century Classrooms along Professional Growth

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Very Much Developed (VMD); 2.50-3.24 – Much Developed (MD); 1.75-2.49 – Moderately Developed (MoD); 1.00-1.74 – Not Developed (ND)

Relationship Between Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies and Level of Teacher Development in 21st-Century Classrooms

To investigate the potential relationship between Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies along strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability and the level of teacher development in terms of peer collaboration, adaptation to educational technology, and professional growth, Pearson Product Moment Correlation (r) was employed.

The table shows that there is no significant correlation between leadership strategies and the level of teacher development. This suggests that school heads’ Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies do not influence the level of teacher development. Hence, the null hypothesis will not be rejected.

The results suggest that Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies employed by school heads may not have a direct influence on teacher development. The absence of a significant correlation indicates that while leadership strategies provide a structured environment, teacher development may be more influenced by other factors.

Table 11 Test for Significant Relationship between Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies and Level of Teacher Development in 21st-Century Classrooms

Challenges Experienced by Schools in the Implementation of Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies

This section identifies the challenges schools face in the implementation of Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies. It focuses on the challenges across strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability, providing insight into areas needing targeted support and intervention.

Strategic Actions. This section presents the challenges encountered by schools in implementing Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies along strategic actions. It focuses on issues related to goal setting, teacher involvement, collaboration, innovation, and stakeholder engagement.

Table 12 Challenges Experienced by Schools in the Implementation of Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies along Strategic Actions

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Always (A); 2.50-3.24 – Often (O); 1.75-2.49 – Sometimes (S); 1.00-1.74 – Never (N)

Table 12 shows that the overall weighted mean for challenges in strategic actions is 1.51, interpreted as “Never,” indicating that these challenges are generally not experienced by schools. The highest-rated challenge is limited teacher involvement in decision-making and strategic planning, with a weighted mean of 1.57, still interpreted as “Never.” The lowest-rated challenge is weak stakeholder engagement and partnership-building efforts, with a weighted mean of 1.45, also interpreted as “Never.”

The data suggest that schools effectively manage strategic actions, ensuring clear goals, teacher involvement, and support for innovative practices. It reflects a well-structured leadership approach where collaboration, stakeholder engagement, and innovation are prioritized. However, the slightly higher rating for limited teacher involvement signals an area worth monitoring to maintain high engagement levels.

Continuous Improvement. This section identifies the challenges schools face in the implementation of Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies along continuous improvement. It focuses on issues related to feedback mechanisms, professional development opportunities, data-driven decision-making, mentoring programs, and teacher recognition.

Table 13 shows that the overall weighted mean for this dimension is 1.49, interpreted as “Never,” indicating that these challenges are generally not encountered by schools. The highest-rated challenges are limited opportunities for professional development and training tailored to teachers’ needs and lack of recognition and incentives for teachers’ contributions to school improvement initiatives, both with a weighted mean of 1.51, still interpreted as “Never.”. The lowest-rated challenge is inadequate feedback mechanisms for teaching and learning improvements, with a mean of 1.47, also interpreted as “Never.”

Table 13 Challenges Experienced by Schools in the Implementation of Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies along Continuous Improvement

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Always (A); 2.50-3.24 – Often (O); 1.75-2.49 – Sometimes (S); 1.00-1.74 – Never (N)

The data indicate that schools are proficient in implementing continuous improvement strategies, ensuring that teachers receive sufficient feedback, professional development, and mentoring support. The consistently low ratings suggest that schools have effective systems in place to avoid these challenges. However, the slightly higher ratings on professional development opportunities and teacher recognition imply potential areas for continuous monitoring and enhancement to sustain teacher motivation and growth.

Accountability. This section identifies the challenges schools face in the implementation of Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies along accountability. It focuses on issues related to performance expectations, monitoring and evaluation systems, transparency in assessments, support for underperforming teachers, and fostering a culture of accountability.

Table 14 shows that the overall weighted mean for this area is 1.58, interpreted as “Never,” indicating that these challenges are generally not experienced by schools. The highest-rated challenge is weak culture of accountability due to inconsistent communication and follow-through on leadership commitments, with a weighted mean of 1.63, still interpreted as “Never.” The lowest-rated challenge is inconsistent performance expectations, leading to unclear teacher responsibilities and objectives, with a mean of 1.51, also interpreted as “Never.”

Table 14 Challenges Experienced by Schools in the Implementation of Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies along Accountability

Rating Scale: 3.25-4.00 – Always (A); 2.50-3.24 – Often (O); 1.75-2.49 – Sometimes (S); 1.00-1.74 – Never (N)

The data suggest that schools maintain effective accountability systems, ensuring that performance expectations are clear, evaluations are transparent, and underperforming teachers receive adequate support. The low ratings imply that these issues are not prevalent, reflecting a structured and well-managed approach to accountability. However, the relatively higher rating on fostering a culture of accountability suggests that while communication and follow-through are generally maintained, slight inconsistencies may still occur, warranting attention.

Proposed Intervention to Strengthen Outcomes-Based Leadership Strategies of School Heads

Based on the results of this study, the researcher developed and proposed Project MERGE or Mercedes Engagement and Responsive Growth in Education: A Quarterly Leadership and Teacher Development Sessions (see Appendix H). It aims to strengthen the Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies of school heads by addressing the indicators and challenges revealed in the study. The intervention focuses on enhancing teacher involvement in planning and decision-making, which emerged as the lowest-rated practice under strategic actions, despite being consistently implemented. Through its first session on Collaborative Planning and Strategic Goal Setting, teachers will be empowered to actively participate in co-creating school improvement plans, thereby fostering ownership and alignment with the school’s vision and mission.

The session on Personalized Professional Development and Growth Pathways directly addresses the finding that while teachers are highly developed in autonomy and instructional innovation, continuous growth requires structured and tailored opportunities. By guiding teachers in crafting individual professional development plans based on classroom realities and self-assessment results, this intervention ensures that teacher growth is purposeful and aligned with school goals.

Furthermore, the Strengthening Accountability and Performance Monitoring session responds to the slightly lower ratings in tracking teacher performance alignment with student outcomes under accountability. By building a culture of professional responsibility through peer review and feedback tools, teachers and school heads can ensure consistency in instructional practices and improved learning outcomes.

Finally, the Sharing Best Practices and Institutionalizing Teacher Leadership Initiatives session fosters a culture of continuous improvement by celebrating successful strategies and encouraging teacher-led innovations. This directly supports the finding that while challenges in continuous improvement and accountability are minimal, sustaining high performance requires regular reflection and showcasing of effective practices.

Implementing Project MERGE may further enhance Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies by deepening teacher engagement in strategic planning, reinforcing accountability systems, and promoting continuous professional growth. This intervention may ultimately build a stronger culture of shared leadership, collaboration, and instructional excellence within the school.

DISCUSSION

The results revealed that school heads consistently implemented OBL strategies in strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability, with overall weighted means of 3.83, 3.85, and 3.86, respectively, all interpreted as Always. This indicates that school leaders strongly adhered to leadership practices that provide direction, foster growth, and ensure accountability. The highest-rated indicators such as facilitating regular meetings, establishing mentoring systems, and addressing underperformance constructively demonstrate the value of proactive leadership in maintaining alignment and continuous development.

These findings are consistent with Ampo (2024), who emphasized that shared leadership fosters empowerment by encouraging participation and accountability among teachers. Similarly, Perez and Banayo (2023) highlighted that consistent monitoring, mentoring, and transparency are hallmarks of effective school leadership. However, relatively lower ratings for teacher participation in strategic planning and policy updates suggest that inclusivity in decision-making processes can still be improved. This implies that while OBL provides a strong foundation for direction and accountability, more participatory approaches are needed to fully engage teachers as partners in leadership.

In addition, teachers reported high levels of empowerment across autonomy, decision-making, and instructional innovation, with overall weighted means of 3.84, 3.87, and 3.93, respectively, interpreted as Very Much Empowered. This suggests that teachers felt confident exercising independence, participating in school decisions, and adopting innovative instructional practices.

These results align with Shiwakoti (2022), who found that empowered teachers are more likely to engage in innovation and shared responsibility. The high ratings for instructional innovation reflect the growing emphasis on creativity in the classroom, consistent with global trends in 21st-century teaching. Nonetheless, slightly lower scores for teacher involvement in policy-making and curriculum material adoption indicate that empowerment is still more operational than structural. This suggests a gap between classroom-level autonomy and system-level participation, which could be bridged by leadership practices that include teachers in higher-level governance.

Correlation analysis revealed significant positive relationships between OBL strategies and teacher empowerment, with the strongest association found between continuous improvement and decision-making (r=.379). This finding suggests that when school heads prioritize growth-oriented leadership, teachers feel more engaged in school decision-making processes.

This aligns with Ampo (2024), who highlighted that leadership promoting collaboration and growth fosters empowerment and participation. The strong correlation between continuous improvement and empowerment further emphasizes the importance of structured professional development and feedback in building confidence among teachers. These results imply that OBL strategies not only provide accountability but also directly contribute to strengthening teacher autonomy, decision-making, and innovation.

Moreso, the study found that teachers were very much developed in peer collaboration (3.79), adaptation to technology (3.81), and professional growth (3.88). Teachers actively engaged in resource sharing, integration of digital tools, and participation in professional seminars and self-directed learning. These results reflect that teachers are continuously advancing their skills and adapting to the changing educational landscape.

However, slightly lower ratings for co-teaching, designing technology-based assessments, and pursuing graduate studies highlight areas where teacher development could be enhanced. This reflects the results of Perez and Banayo (2023) that while teachers are committed to growth, structural barriers such as workload, access to advanced education, and resource availability limit professional development opportunities. These findings imply that while teachers demonstrate strong individual motivation, institutional support is essential for deeper growth.

Moreover, the correlation analysis revealed no significant relationship between OBL strategies and teacher development across all domains. This finding suggests that teacher development may be shaped by factors other than leadership strategies, such as external training opportunities, peer-driven learning, and personal initiative.

This result aligns with Shiwakoti (2022) who emphasized that innovation often emerges from teacher collaboration and self-directed growth rather than leadership directives. The implication is that while OBL strengthens empowerment, additional interventions are required to translate empowerment into measurable professional development.

Furthermore, findings showed that schools encountered minimal challenges in implementing OBL strategies, with overall means of 1.51 for strategic actions, 1.49 for continuous improvement, and 1.58 for accountability, all interpreted as Never Encountered. Minor concerns included occasional resistance to goal-setting, limited access to professional development, and inconsistency in performance evaluation.

These results reflect a generally supportive environment for OBL, which is consistent with Harrison (2024), who argued that OBL is most effective in contexts where leadership systems are already collaborative and transparent. The minimal challenges indicate that the district is well-prepared to sustain OBL practices. However, the findings also point to opportunities for refining evaluation systems, expanding access to professional development, and promoting inclusivity in decision-making.

In response to the findings, the study proposed Project MERGE (Mercedes Engagement and Responsive Growth in Education). The program addresses areas requiring reinforcement by institutionalizing teacher involvement in planning, crafting individualized professional development, strengthening accountability mechanisms, and fostering continuous improvement through mentoring and recognition.

CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions drawn from the study’s findings were as follows:

1) School heads consistently employ Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies along strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability to empower teachers and enhance their development in 21st-century classrooms, but there remains a need to strengthen teacher involvement in decision-making, promote dynamic policy updates and sharing of best practices, and enhance systems that align teacher performance with student outcomes.

2) Teachers are very much empowered in terms of autonomy, decision-making, and instructional innovation, implying that they experience significant independence, involvement, and creativity in their professional practices within 21st-century classrooms.

3) There is a significant relationship between Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies and teacher empowerment in 21st-century classrooms, implying that strong leadership strategies contribute to greater teacher autonomy, participation in decision-making, and instructional innovation.

4) Teachers are very much developed in peer collaboration, adaptation to educational technology, and professional growth, implying that they are highly committed to collaborative practices, technological integration, and continuous learning in the 21st-century classroom.

5) There is no significant relationship between Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies and teacher development, implying that teacher growth may depend more on other factors such as personal motivation, professional learning communities, and external support systems.

6) Challenges in the implementation of Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies are never encountered, implying that schools effectively manage strategic actions, continuous improvement, and accountability, with slight areas for monitoring such as teacher involvement, professional development opportunities, and fostering a strong culture of accountability.

7) The proposed Project MERGE may strengthen Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies by promoting teacher participation in planning, enhancing accountability systems, and fostering continuous professional growth, implying that structured and targeted interventions can support leadership effectiveness and teacher empowerment.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the conclusions, the following recommendations were proposed:

1) School heads may adopt more inclusive and participatory leadership approaches by involving teachers in strategic planning, creating structured platforms for sharing best practices, updating policies responsively, and strengthening systems that track teacher performance in relation to student learning outcomes to sustain empowerment and professional growth.

2) School heads may further provide professional development opportunities and flexible support systems to sustain high levels of empowerment and to encourage teachers to explore diverse instructional strategies and actively participate in wider school decisions.

3) School heads may continue to strengthen Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies by fostering trust, accountability, and continuous improvement to further empower teachers in their professional practices.

4) School heads may provide structured opportunities for resource-sharing and peer observation, targeted training on digital tools, and more accessible professional development programs to sustain and enhance teacher development.

5) Schools may explore additional interventions beyond leadership strategies, such as mentorship programs, targeted training, and collaborative professional learning communities, to enhance teacher development in the 21st-century classroom.

6) Schools may continue to strengthen teacher involvement in planning, enhance professional development and recognition programs, and maintain clear communication to further sustain effective implementation of Outcomes-Based Leadership strategies.

7) Schools may implement Project MERGE to deepen teacher engagement, reinforce accountability, and promote shared leadership and professional development towards instructional excellence.

8) Future researchers may expand the study to a wider scope or include other variables such as school climate, teacher well-being, or student outcomes. They may also use qualitative approaches to gain deeper insights into teacher experiences and the effectiveness of leadership interventions.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The researcher extends his heartfelt gratitude to all those who have contributed to completing this research. This research would not have been possible without the collective efforts and generosity extended to him, and for that, the researcher offers his sincerest appreciation.

The researcher expresses deep gratitude to the thesis advisory committee, Anicia S. Madarang, EdD, Daryl I. Quinito, PhD, and Jennifer S. Rubio, PhD, for their invaluable guidance and support, as well as to the faculty and staff of the Graduate School, classmates, and friends for their encouragement. Special thanks are extended to the researcher’s family for their unconditional love and prayers, and above all, to Almighty God for His grace and strength that sustained the completion of this study.

The researcher extends gratitude to Almighty God for the wisdom and strength to complete this study, to his adviser Melchor M. Amor, PhD, for his guidance, and to Sonia S. Carbonel, PhD, Dean of the Graduate School, for her support. Thanks are also given to the thesis committee, Anicia S. Madarang, EdD, Daryl I. Quinito, PhD, and Jennifer S. Rubio, PhD, for their invaluable guidance and support, the panel secretary, Jamila M. Macapundag, MAED, MLL, faculty of the Graduate School, classmates, friends, and most especially to his family for their love, prayers, and encouragement throughout this academic journey.

REFERENCES

1. Gutierrez, K. (2023). How To Implement An Outcomes-Based Approach to Managing Your Team. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-imple ment-outcomes-based-approach-managing-your-team-gutierrez
2. Harrison, D. (2024). Shifting Gears: Embracing Outcome-Based Leadership for Strategic Success. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/shifting-gears-embracing-outcome-based-leadership-success-harrison-8rmme
3. Republic Act No. 9155. (2001). Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2001/08/11/republic-act-no-9155/
4. DepEd Order No. 24, s. 2020 “National Adoption and Implementation of the Philippine Professional Standards for School Heads.” (2020). Department of Education. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ DO_ s2020_024-.pdf
5. Ampo, A. B. (2024). Shared Leadership of School Heads and Teacher Empowerment in Public Elementary Schools in Davao Del Norte Division. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 5(5), 9175–9181. https://doi.org/10.55248/gengpi.5.0524.1353
6. Perez, D. B., and Banayo, A. F. (2023). Leadership Practices and Management behavior of School Heads Towards Quality Service and Performance of Teacher. International Journal of Research Publications, 127(1), 528–536. https://doi.org/10.47119/ijrp1001271620235061
7. Shiwakoti, K. P. (2022). Leading Schools for Innovation and Change: A Case Study of Successful Schools. Journal of TESON, 3(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/ 10.3126/jteson.v3i1.51765