Emotional Well-Being and Organizational Commitment of Teachers Instructional Delivery

Emotional Well-Being and Organizational Commitment of Teachers Instructional Delivery

Marty Gee D. Belmes

Professional Education Department, College of Education, Central, Mindanao University

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0285

Received: 20 May 2025; Accepted: 24 May 2025; Published: 24 June 2025

ABSTRACT

The main objective of this study is to examine the influence of emotional well-being and organizational commitment on teachers’ instructional delivery, and to find out the relationship among these variables. A descriptive-correlational research design was employed, utilizing a structured questionnaire to gather data from 225 public elementary and high school teachers in the Division of Valencia City, Bukidnon. The data collection was conducted during the fourth quarter of the 2024–2025 academic year.

Findings revealed that the majority of respondents reported a positive level of emotional well-being, suggesting that they feel supported and connected within their professional environment. Teachers also demonstrated a high level of organizational commitment, characterized by strong emotional attachment and a pronounced sense of professional responsibility. In terms of instructional delivery, respondents were generally rated as competent, indicating their ability to adapt instruction to student needs and effectively utilize assessments to support learning. Statistical analysis confirmed a significant positive correlation between teachers’ emotional well-being, organizational commitment, and instructional delivery. These results highlight the importance of fostering supportive work environments and reinforcing teachers’ professional commitment. The findings indicate that normative commitment is the best predictor of instructional delivery, implying its significant influence on teaching effectiveness. As a result, increasing teachers’ sense of professional obligation and ethical responsibility is crucial in improving the overall quality of instructional practices.

Keywords: instructional delivery, emotional health, commitment, teacher effectiveness, public school teachers

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Instructional delivery is a crucial component of the Philippine educational system, shaping student learning outcomes, engagement, and overall academic achievement. Despite its importance, significant issues undermine its effectiveness. A 2024 report by the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM 2) found that 62% of public high school teachers are assigned to teach subjects outside their college major, highlighting a widespread mismatch between teacher expertise and subject assignment. This issue is particularly noticeable in science education, where about half of the teachers lack a formal science background, raising concerns about the depth and quality of instruction students receive. Such misalignments in instructional delivery can hinder students’ comprehension, retention, and ability to apply what they learn, ultimately impacting educational outcomes (EDCOM 2, 2024).

Another significant challenge in the department is the overwhelming burden of non-teaching tasks placed on teachers. According to an inventory conducted by the Department of Education, teachers are assigned up to 50 different administrative responsibilities, which detract from their core focus on teaching and instruction. While there have been efforts to address this issue by hiring administrative officers, the impact has been minimal. In some schools, the ratio remains highly disproportionate, with over 500 teachers supported by only four non-teaching personnel (Department of Education, 2023). This imbalance forces teachers to juggle paperwork, reports, and other clerical duties alongside their instructional roles, potentially compromising the quality of classroom delivery and student learning outcomes.

A comprehensive study involving 28,859 Department of Education teachers revealed that internet access remains a major challenge, particularly in rural areas. About 71% of teachers depend on mobile data, which is generally less stable and reliable than fiber connections (Department of Education, 2023). This limitation significantly affects the implementation of online teaching modalities, with less than 30% of respondents able to conduct interactive online activities. Despite government initiatives to provide free internet access in schools, these efforts are hampered by high user volume, resulting in slow and unreliable connections. Many teachers are also compelled to use their own resources to purchase devices and internet services to facilitate teaching, further highlighting the inadequacy of current support systems. These connectivity issues not only hinder the delivery of quality online instruction but also exacerbate educational inequalities between urban and rural schools.

The rapid advancement of educational technology presents significant challenges for teachers in the Philippines, fundamentally altering how they plan and deliver instruction. Modern classrooms increasingly depend on digital tools such as interactive whiteboards, online learning platforms, educational apps, and artificial intelligence, requiring teachers not only to be familiar with these technologies but also to integrate them effectively to enhance student learning outcomes (Maduli, 2023). However, many educators face pressure to meet these expectations despite insufficient support, training, and resources, which hampers their ability to keep pace with the fast-evolving digital landscape. This gap often leads to uneven technology integration, affecting the quality and effectiveness of instruction. Furthermore, persistent issues such as poor internet connectivity, limited access to devices, and lack of technical support exacerbate these challenges, especially in rural and under-resourced schools (Del Mundo, 2022; ResearchGate, 2024). Addressing these systemic barriers through comprehensive teacher training, improved infrastructure, and sustained support is essential to realize the full potential of educational technology in improving educational outcomes in the Philippines.

A persistent problem faced by the Department of Education (DepEd) is the severe shortage of classrooms and laboratories, especially in remote areas. For example, Cagayan de Oro City reportedly lacks around 600 classrooms, forcing schools to implement morning and afternoon shift classes to accommodate all students (Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2024). This shortage often results in multi-grade level teaching, where a single classroom is shared by students of different grade levels, and teachers must handle multiple grades simultaneously due to limited resources and infrastructure. Such conditions complicate the preparation of instructional materials tailored to diverse learning needs, thereby compromising the quality and effectiveness of instruction and ultimately affecting student performance.

Nationwide, the classroom deficit is staggering, with DepEd estimating a need for approximately 165,000 additional classrooms as of early 2024. Despite efforts to ramp up construction, progress remains slow due to bureaucratic delays, underutilization of funds, and insufficient budget allocations. For instance, only about 3,600 new classrooms were built in 2023, falling short of the 6,300 targets, while the 2024 target was further reduced to 1,628 classrooms. The department projects that at the current funding level around P24 billion annually it will take over 20 years to fully address the backlog. This prolonged shortage forces reliance on temporary learning spaces and multi-shift classes, which strain both teachers and students and hinder the delivery of quality education (EDCOM 2, 2024; Philippine Star, 2024a, 2024b).

In sum, the critical shortage of classrooms and laboratories, compounded by slow infrastructure development and inadequate funding, presents a major barrier to effective instructional delivery in the Philippine education system, particularly in underserved and remote communities

A teacher’s emotional well-being plays a crucial role in the quality of instruction, classroom management, and student engagement. When educators experience positive emotions, they are more motivated, creative, and effective in delivering lessons. Positive emotional well-being fosters enthusiasm, patience, and adaptability, making lessons more engaging. A happy and motivated teacher uses interactive strategies and encourages student participation, while a stressed teacher might resort to lecture-heavy, passive learning.

Organizational commitment refers to a teacher’s emotional attachment, sense of obligation, or perceived necessity to remain in their school or educational institution. When teachers feel committed to their organization, they are more likely to be motivated, engaged, and effective in delivering instruction. Teachers who are highly committed to their school are more likely to deliver high-quality instruction, engage students, and contribute to a positive learning environment. Schools must focus on teacher well-being, recognition, and professional growth to foster strong organizational commitment and improve instructional delivery. This research would aim to examine the effect of emotion well-being and organizational commitment of teachers to their instructional delivery. By addressing these issues, this study would contribute valuable insights into how one’s emotional well-being and organizational commitment can lead to better educational outcomes.

Statement of the Problem

The study aimed to examine the influence of emotional well-being and organizational commitment on teachers’ instructional delivery. Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the level of the emotional well-being of teachers in terms of:
   1. satisfaction with work environment,
   2. work grit,
   3. school connectedness, and
   4. work self-efficacy?
2. What is the level of the organizational commitment of the teachers in terms of the following dimension:
   1. affective,
   2. continuance, and
   3. normative?
3. What is the level of the instructional delivery of teachers in terms of:
   1. communicating with students,
   2. using questioning and discussion techniques,
   3. engaging students in learning,
   4. giving assessment in instruction, and
   5. demonstrating reflexibility and responsiveness?
4. Is there a significant relationship between instructional delivery and:
   1. emotional well-being, and
   2. organizational commitment?
5. Which of the following variables, singly or in combination, best predicts teachers’ instructional delivery?

Objectives of the Study

The general objective of the study was to examine the influence of emotional well-being and organizational commitment on teachers’ instructional delivery. Specifically, it aimed to:

1. identify the level of the emotional well-being of teachers in terms of:
   1. satisfaction with work environment,
   2. work grit,
   3. school connectedness, and
   4. work self-efficacy.
2. describe the level of the organizational commitment of teachers in terms of the following dimensions:
   1. affective,
   2. continuance, and
3. assess the level of the instructional delivery of teachers in terms of:
   1. communicating with students,
   2. using questioning and discussion techniques,
   3. engaging students in learning,
   4. giving assessment in instruction, and
   5. demonstrating reflexibility and responsiveness.
4. correlate teachers’ instructional delivery and:
   1. emotional well-being; and
   2. organizational commitment
5. Find out the variable, singly or in combination, that best predicts teachers’ instructional delivery.

Significance of the Study

The findings of the study held considerable significance for various stakeholders in the education sector, as it explored the relationship between emotional well-being, organizational commitment, and teachers’ instructional delivery. The outcomes of this research carried practical, theoretical, and policy-level implications for the following stakeholders:

For teachers, the study provided valuable insights into how levels of emotional well-being and organizational commitment influenced their instructional practices. It underscored the importance of self-care strategies for managing occupational stress and preventing burnout. Furthermore, by highlighting the role of organizational commitment, the study supported professional development and enhanced career satisfaction.

For school administrators and educational leaders, the study offered a deeper understanding of how teachers’ emotional well-being impacted their performance. The findings served as foundational data for designing policies and programs aimed at promoting teacher retention, enhancing job satisfaction, and fostering a positive work environment.

For policymakers and educational authorities, the research informed the development of policies related to teacher welfare, workload management, and job satisfaction. It encouraged the implementation of initiatives to improve teacher retention and reduce turnover rates, ultimately supporting a more stable educational workforce.

For academic researchers, the study contributed to the existing body of literature on teacher effectiveness, emotional well-being, and organizational commitment. It served as a scholarly reference for future investigations seeking to examine similar constructs or to extend the inquiry into other educational levels and thematic areas.

For students, parents, and guardians, the study’s findings underscored the connection between teacher well-being and instructional quality, which in turn enhanced the overall learning experience. A stable and supportive classroom environment, as influenced by teachers’ well-being and commitment, was associated with increased student engagement and academic achievement. Moreover, the study highlighted the importance of collaborative efforts between educators and families in fostering student success.

For future researchers, this study provided a foundation for further exploration of the long-term effects of teachers’ emotional well-being and organizational commitment on student outcomes. It also suggested avenues for examining additional variables that could enhance teacher performance and well-being. Furthermore, the findings may inspire future research on integrating emotional well-being and organizational commitment into teacher education, professional development programs, and institutional policies. Finally, the study opened opportunities for comparative research across different educational settings, such as public and private schools, as well as diverse geographic regions.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

This study focused on examining the emotional well-being, organizational commitment, and instructional delivery of public-school teachers within the Division of Valencia City, Bukidnon. Specifically, it explored how emotional well-being and organizational commitment influenced teachers’ instructional delivery within the context of blended learning. The research targeted both primary and secondary public-school teachers and employed a quantitative approach, utilizing surveys and standardized assessments as the primary data collection methods. Key components assessed included aspects of emotional well-being such as satisfaction with the work environment, work grit, school connectedness, and self-efficacy; organizational commitment across affective, continuance, and normative dimensions; and instructional delivery in terms of communication with students, use of questioning and discussion techniques, student engagement, assessment practices, and instructional responsiveness. The overall aim was to identify correlations and trends that could inform strategies for enhancing teaching performance and improving learner outcomes.

This study was confined to public primary and secondary school teachers within the Division of Valencia City, Northern Mindanao, Philippines. It did not include participants from private educational institutions or from higher education settings such as colleges and universities. The investigation specifically focused on instructional delivery within the context of blended learning; as such, the findings were not intended to be generalized to traditional face-to-face or fully online learning environments. Although demographic variables such as age, gender, and teaching experience were collected to provide contextual background, they were not the central focus of the analysis. Furthermore, the study excluded qualitative data collection methods such as interviews or case studies and relied exclusively on quantitative approaches for data collection and interpretation.

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of this study, the following terms are operationally defined:

Affective commitment refers to the personal desire of a teacher to stay in an organization due to emotional attachment.

Continuance commitment refers to a teacher who remains in an organization due to necessity and uncertainty of another job opportunity.

Emotional well-being means feeling emotionally healthy, being able to handle stress, understand your feelings, and stay positive. It also includes being aware of yourself, bouncing back from challenges, and having good relationships with others.

Instructional delivery refers to the methods and strategies used by teachers to present information and facilitate learning effectively. It involves the way content is delivered, structured, and improved to meet learner’s needs.

Normative commitment refers to an employee’s feeling that they should stay with their organization out of a sense of duty or loyalty. They believe staying is the right thing to do, often because of their values, social expectations, or gratitude toward the organization.

Organizational commitment refers to how dedicated and loyal teachers feel to their school. They care about the school’s goals, feel proud to be part of it, and are willing to work hard to help it succeed. They are emotionally connected to the school and feel happy to belong to it.

Satisfaction with work commitment refer to how happy and fulfilled a teacher feels with their dedication and responsibility at work. It shows how well their job expectations, values, and experiences match how committed they feel to their work and organization.

School connectedness refers to how much teachers feel they belong, are supported, and are involved in their school community. It shows how strong their relationships with fellow teachers, school leaders, students, and the overall school environment.

Work grit is about teacher’s determination, passion, and strength to keep going at work, even when things get tough. It’s the ability to stay focused and committed to long-term goals despite challenges or setbacks.

Work self-efficacy is a teacher’s confidence in their ability to do their job well. It means believing they can handle tasks, solve problems, and reach goals at work.

Theoretical Framework

This chapter presents a comprehensive review of related literature and studies on emotional well-being and organizational commitment, particularly in relation to teachers’ instructional delivery. It also outlines the conceptual framework and states the hypotheses that guide the study. By grounding the research in established theories and findings, this chapter provides the necessary context for understanding how teachers’ emotional health and organizational loyalty influence the quality and effectiveness of their instructional practices.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

Emotional Well-Being

This chapter presents a comprehensive literature review that explores existing related research on emotional well-being and organizational commitment among teachers. It highlights how these aspects influence management capability practices. Additionally, the review outlines the specific studies are used to develop the theoretical framework guiding this research, emphasizing their relevance and contribution to understanding the relationship between emotional well-being, organizational commitment and delivery of instruction in educational settings.

Emotional well-being is a crucial aspect of an individual’s overall mental health, influencing daily functioning, social relationships, and productivity. According to Dodge, Daly, Huyton, and Sanders (2015), emotional well-being involves a dynamic balance between psychological, social, and emotional resources. Similarly, Keyes and Annas (2016) highlight that emotional well-being encompasses psychological resilience and the capacity to experience life positively despite adversities. Emotional well-being not only helps prevent burnout but also enhances job performance. For teachers, this means that taking care of their emotional health is more than just a personal concern, instead it’s essential for effective teaching, keeping students interested, and achieving better learning outcomes.

The emotional well-being of teachers and students significantly impacts the learning process. Brackett, Rivers, and Salovey (2016) argue that teachers with high emotional well-being exhibit greater enthusiasm and commitment to their instructional roles, leading to improved student outcomes. A study by Jennings et al. (2017) found that teachers’ emotional well-being significantly enhanced classroom management, fostered positive student-teacher relationships, and mitigated burnout. Teacher’s well-being is important for effective teaching and student success. Schools should focus on helping teachers stay emotionally healthy by offering support, wellness programs, and training. This helps teachers feel more satisfied and stay in their jobs longer, but also creates a better, more productive learning environment for students.

Similarly, students’ emotional well-being is linked to academic performance and social engagement. A study conducted by Suldo, Minch, and Hearon (2018) revealed that students with higher levels of emotional well-being demonstrate better academic achievement and motivation. Conversely, low emotional well-being has been associated with increased stress, anxiety, and academic disengagement (Oberle & Schonert-Reichl, 2016). The level of emotional well-being of students has significant impact on their engagement and academic performance.

Several factors contribute to emotional well-being, including social support, self-efficacy, and work-life balance. According to Zysberg and Schwabsky (2021), individuals who develop strong coping mechanisms experience greater emotional resilience. In the workplace, Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2017) found that supportive leadership and a positive work environment significantly improve teachers’ emotional well-being, reducing stress and job dissatisfaction.

Moreover, personal factors such as mindfulness and emotional intelligence also play a role. Research by Lomas, Medina, Ivtzan, Rupprecht, and Eiroa-Orosa (2017) suggests that individuals with higher emotional intelligence are better equipped to handle interpersonal relationships, making them more resilient to emotional distress. Mindfulness-based interventions, as studied by Klingbeil and Renshaw (2018), have been shown to enhance emotional regulation and reduce stress among educators and students alike.

Poor emotional well-being can have long-term negative effects on mental health and productivity. According to the World Health Organization (WHO, 2020), emotional distress contributes to mental health disorders such as depression and anxiety, which in turn reduce overall work and academic performance. In contrast, fostering emotional well-being through social support and self-care practices can enhance overall quality of life and professional effectiveness (Fredrickson, 2016).

Satisfaction with Work Environment

Satisfaction with the work environment is commonly defined as the degree to which workers feel content and favorably engaged with various aspects of their work. This includes not only physical conditions—such as safety, cleanliness, and available resources—but also psychological and social factors like supportive relationships, clarity of roles, and organizational culture. When the work environment aligns with employees’ needs and expectations, it fosters motivation, emotional well-being, and overall job satisfaction (Bakotić, 2016; Robbins & Judge, 2019). When teachers are satisfied with their work environment, they are more motivated, less stressed, and more likely to perform well in their teaching roles.

The quality of interpersonal relationships within the workplace, particularly among colleagues and supervisors, significantly influences employee satisfaction, motivation, and overall job performance. In educational settings, teachers thrive in environments characterized by open communication, emotional support, and mutual respect. Positive relationships among educators foster collaboration, trust, and shared goals, which are essential for instructional effectiveness and professional growth. For instance, a study by Zhang et al. (2023) highlights that professional collaboration among science teachers positively affects teaching self-efficacy and job satisfaction. Additionally, Edinger and Edinger (2018) found that teachers’ centrality in their school’s trust network and the density of their academic advice network predicted job satisfaction, with teacher efficacy mediating this relationship. Furthermore, research by Okekeocha and Ezinine (2021) indicates that supportive interpersonal relationships between teachers and school administrators are positively correlated with job satisfaction in public secondary schools.

Moreover, when teachers feel valued and understood by their superiors, they are more likely to embrace their work with enthusiasm and dedication. Principals and department heads who provide constructive feedback, listen to concerns, and encourage professional development contribute significantly to a positive school climate (Kraft, Marinell, & Yee, 2016). On the other hand, a study by Li (2023) revealed that teacher burnout has a significant negative correlation with teacher resilience, emotion regulation, and teacher self-efficacy, highlighting the importance of supportive interpersonal relationships in mitigating burnout.

Recognition, growth, and career development opportunities are critical components of a supportive and inspirational work environment, even in professions such as teaching which demand significant emotional and intellectual commitment. When teachers feel appreciated—whether through praise, awards, or feedback—they experience greater job satisfaction and motivation (Aldridge & Fraser, 2016). Providing recognition to teachers helps cultivate a feeling of belonging and emphasizes the significance of their role in the school community.

Teachers who are provided with opportunities to develop new skills and advance in their careers are more likely to remain in the profession and perform at a high level. A systematic review by Rajendran et al. (2023) found that participation in Continuous Professional Development (CPD) programs is positively correlated with increased teacher job satisfaction, enhanced instructional efficacy, and a greater likelihood of remaining within the profession. ​Professional development enhances teaching practices, increases self-efficacy, and reinforces a commitment to continuous improvement (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). When teachers have equal access to training, workshops, skill development, promotions, and leadership roles, they can significantly improve their teaching approaches and performance.

Moreover, schools that invest in the career advancement of their teachers create an empowering culture where educators feel that their careers are progressing—not stagnant. This sense of progression contributes to greater motivation, reduced turnover, and improved student outcomes (Toropova et al., 2021). In contrast, the lack of career development possibilities can lead to feelings of stagnation, dissatisfaction and, eventually, departing from the service.

Work Grit

Work grit is a psychological trait that encompasses an individual’s sustained perseverance and passion toward achieving long-term goals, especially in professional or occupational settings. It reflects the capacity to endure setbacks, maintain motivation, and continue working diligently over time despite difficulties (Terosky & Heasley, 2021). This quality is particularly significant in professions like teaching, where challenges are continuing and long-term goals demand consistent effort and personal commitment.

Recent studies highlight grit as a predictor of both individual success and organizational outcomes. For example, a study by Robertson-Kraft and Duckworth (2016) looked at teachers and found that those who scored higher in grit were more likely to stick with their jobs in tough school environments. They were also more likely to get better performance reviews from their supervisors. This suggests that grit helps people stay committed and effective, even when the work is challenging. This means that gritty teachers were more committed and effective, even in challenging conditions. Another study by Zhang et al. (2018) supports this idea. It revealed that grit helps professionals maintain their effort and focus through time, rather than only during intense moments of work. In other words, grit isn’t about working hard for a week or a month; it’s about keeping motivated and determined over time, even when things get tough.

In the workplace, grit has been connected to feeling more satisfied with your job, being able to bounce back from challenges, and being more engaged at work. For example, Suzuki et al. (2015) found that employees with high levels of grit felt less stressed and could handle work pressure better. In another study, Datu et al. (2021) discovered that grit was a strong predictor of both work engagement and well-being among Filipino teachers. This shows that grit is important in different cultures, not just in one part of the world.

A recent meta-analyses studies also support the idea that grit has a positive effect on how well people do at work and how satisfied they are with their jobs. For example, Credé et al. (2017) explained that while grit’s influence can differ depending on the situation, it still generally leads to better work outcomes. This means that grit isn’t just important for personal success; it could also be something that companies focus on when training and developing their employees.

School Connectedness

School connectedness, from the perspective of teachers, refers to their sense of belonging within the school community, characterized by supportive relationships with colleagues, administrators, students, and families. It means feeling like they belong and are supported within the school community. It involves having good relationships with fellow teachers, school leaders, students, and parents. Teachers feel connected when they are respected, appreciated, and given support in their work. They help build this connection by working with others, managing their classrooms well, and taking part in school activities.

Studies in the Philippines have highlighted the significance of instructional leadership and ethical climate in enhancing teachers’ sense of connectedness. For instance, research conducted among public school teachers in Davao del Norte found that strong instructional leadership and a positive ethical climate were significantly associated with higher levels of school connectedness among teachers (Logroño & Tagadiad, 2023). Additionally, effective classroom management strategies have been shown to mediate the relationship between school connectedness and academic resilience among high school students, emphasizing the pivotal role teachers play in fostering a connected school environment (Batoon & Tagadiad, 2024). When teachers feel connected to their school, they are more likely to be engaged, motivated, and effective in creating inclusive and supportive learning environments (Kutsyuruba, Klinger, & Hussain, 2015; Jones & Richmond, 2019; Glickman et al., 2021).

Teachers feel more connected when they have supportive relationships with their coworkers and school leaders. Working together, sharing ideas, and open communication help create a positive school environment where teachers feel respected and included. This support became even more important during tough times like the COVID-19 pandemic, when sudden changes and online teaching made strong teamwork and emotional support even more necessary. A study by Bontilao and Genuba (2024) in the Philippines found that interpersonal support and leadership behaviors of school heads significantly influence teachers’ professional commitment. Similarly, Acuña and Ancho (2023) highlighted that Filipino principal employed innovative leadership practices to support teacher professional development during the pandemic. Internationally, research by Pressley et al. (2021) indicated that positive teacher-teacher and teacher-administrator relationships were significantly associated with greater teacher well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings underscore the importance of fostering supportive professional relationships to enhance teacher connectedness and resilience.​

Connectedness also encompasses professional learning networks (PLNs), where teachers exchange ideas, challenge their thinking, and grow from diverse perspectives. Such networks, both online and offline, encourage empathy, self-reflection, and continual improvement in teaching practice. In the Philippines, the Department of Education’s Learning Action Cell (LAC) serves as a platform for collaborative professional learning, fostering reflective practice and shared learning among teachers (Cadiz, 2020). Similarly, Miranda (2023) highlights the role of online professional learning communities in promoting inclusive education, emphasizing the importance of democratic and participatory approaches to teacher development. Internationally, Carpenter and Krutka (2016) found that PLNs support various aspects of teacher growth, including affective, social, cognitive, and identity development. Engagement in PLNs has been associated with modifications in teaching practices and enhanced professional identity among educators (Trust, 2016).

Teachers who feel connected at school are more likely to help others by mentoring fellow teachers, sharing teaching materials, and joining school activities. This give-and-take relationship helps build a stronger and more supportive school community. In the Philippines, a study by Andres, Calanoga, and Vecaldo (2021) found that cooperating teachers provided extensive mentoring support to practice teachers, including personal, career, professional knowledge, instructional process, and role modeling supports. Similarly, Culajara and Culajara (2023) highlighted that coaching and mentoring practices among Filipino teachers foster knowledge transfer, strengthen capabilities, and promote a positive organizational culture. Internationally, Kiefer, Alley, and Ellerbrock (2015) emphasized the importance of teacher and peer support in promoting students’ motivation, engagement, and sense of belonging, which can be mirrored in the collaborative efforts among teachers themselves.​

Work Self-Efficacy

Work self-efficacy is about how confident teachers feel in their ability to handle the different parts of their job. This includes planning and delivering lessons, managing student behavior, keeping students engaged, and adjusting teaching methods to meet different learning needs. Based on Bandura’s social-cognitive theory, self-efficacy affects how much effort teachers put in, how they deal with challenges, and how well they perform overall.

Teachers’ self-efficacy is significantly influenced by their personal values and motivations. A study by Barbaranelli et al. (2019) found that values such as openness to change, self-transcendence (concern for others), conservation (tradition and security), and self-enhancement (achievement) play a crucial role in shaping teachers’ beliefs about their professional capabilities. Teachers who are open to new ideas feel more confident when they have the freedom to make decisions in their work. But too much outside pressure can reduce that confidence. While, teachers who care about helping others and find personal meaning in teaching usually feel more capable in their roles.

In the Philippine context, Cruz (2023) conducted a study involving 72 public senior high school teachers and observed that teachers with higher levels of intrinsic motivation and personal interest in teaching demonstrated stronger self-efficacy beliefs. This suggests that aligning personal values with professional motivations can enhance teachers’ confidence in their abilities.​

Studies show that teachers with more experience and higher education, like a master’s or doctorate, usually feel more confident in their teaching. They are better at keeping students engaged, using good teaching methods, managing the classroom, and building good relationships. For instance, Miller (2020) found that increased teaching experience correlates with higher self-efficacy, which in turn enhances teacher commitment and reduces the intention to leave the profession. In the Philippine setting, a study by Cruz et al. (2023) involving public senior high school teachers revealed that those with advanced degrees and extensive teaching experience demonstrated higher levels of self-efficacy, particularly in classroom management and instructional planning. This means that teachers usually become more confident in their abilities as they gain experience and continue their professional growth.

Studies reveal that teachers with higher self-efficacy tend to provide better instruction, are more open to trying new teaching methods, and persist through challenges. These teachers also help boost student motivation, engagement, and academic performance. Holzberger, Philipp, and Kunter (2016) found that teachers with higher self-efficacy improved their teaching quality and student engagement. Similarly, Cruz et al. (2023) discovered that Filipino teachers with higher self-efficacy were more enthusiastic about teaching and more effective at motivating learners and improving academic achievement.

Organizational Commitment

Organizational commitment refers to the psychological attachment and dedication an employee has toward their organization. Meyer and Allen’s (1991) Three-Component Model of Commitment remains a widely accepted framework, categorizing commitment into affective, continuance, and normative commitment. Recent studies continue to highlight the importance of organizational commitment in employee performance, job satisfaction, and retention (Meyer, Stanley, & Vandenberg, 2016).

Several factors contribute to organizational commitment, including leadership style, job satisfaction, and work environment. According to Alfes, Shantz, and Truss (2017), transformational leadership enhances affective commitment by fostering trust and motivation among employees. Moreover, perceived organizational support plays a critical role in strengthening commitment. Studies by Kurtessis et al. (2017) suggest that employees who feel valued and supported are more likely to exhibit strong organizational commitment.

In the context of education, teacher commitment significantly impacts instructional quality and student learning outcomes. A study by Çetin (2018) found that teachers with high organizational commitment demonstrate greater engagement, creativity, and resilience in their teaching practices. Similarly, Klassen and Chiu (2015) highlight the relationship between organizational commitment and teacher self-efficacy, emphasizing that committed teachers are more likely to implement effective instructional strategies.

Additionally, work-life balance is a key determinant of teachers’ organizational commitment. Research by Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2018) indicates that excessive workload and job stress negatively impact teachers’ affective commitment, leading to burnout and high turnover rates. This is further supported by research from Kim and Beehr (2020), who found that organizations that implement policies promoting work-life balance experience lower employee turnover.

Organizational commitment is positively correlated with job performance and employee retention. A meta-analysis by Riketta (2018) revealed that employees with high affective commitment exhibit greater job performance and lower absenteeism rates. In the educational sector, committed teachers are more likely to remain in their institutions and contribute to institutional growth (Wang & Hall, 2020).

Moreover, affective commitment has been linked to increased job satisfaction and lower turnover intentions. According to a study by Meyer et al. (2019), employees who experience emotional attachment to their organizations are more willing to invest effort in their roles, ultimately enhancing workplace productivity and cohesion.

Affective Commitment

Affective commitment describes the emotional bond teachers have with their profession and school. It shows their genuine desire to stay in the teaching field and remain part of their school because they feel a strong sense of connection, value, and alignment with the school’s mission and goals. It suggests that teachers are psychologically emotionally connected to their roles and schools. They want to continue mainly because they feel supported, valued, and have common goals as the institution. In the study of Santiago (2019) she found that teachers’ positive attitudes significantly influence their level of organizational commitment, indicating that emotional attachment to the school is a strong predictor of their commitment. Similarly, Quines and Cabaron (2022) observed that affective commitment mediates the relationship between faculty spirituality and school climate, suggesting that teachers who feel emotionally connected to their school environment are more likely to remain committed.

Research suggests that affective commitment plays a key role in relating job satisfaction to job performance. Teachers who are emotionally committed in their profession are more productive and more likely to take on tasks beyond their regular duties. Shakya and Bajracharya (2023) found that affective commitment significantly enhances teachers’ work performance by reinforcing the positive effects of job satisfaction. Similarly, Dalanon (2023) observed that committed teachers in the Philippines often take initiative and actively contribute to school development.

Supportive schools help teachers feel more emotionally connected to their work. When there is trust, teamwork, and shared goals, teachers become more committed. When teachers feel respected, heard, and part of a unified team, they are more likely to develop a sense of belonging and loyalty to their school. This kind of environment not only nurtures emotional well-being but also fosters motivation and a shared sense of purpose. Zhan, Wang, and Song (2023) found that when schools offer a collaborative and value-driven culture, affective commitment among teachers increases. Likewise, Dalanon (2023) found that in Filipino schools, a positive climate significantly enhances teacher engagement and loyalty. Teachers who feel supported by their colleagues and administrators are more likely to stay in the profession and contribute positively to student outcomes and school improvement efforts. This emphasizes the significance of leadership practices, team-building activities, and open communication in creating a workplace in which teachers can feel emotionally and professionally contented. In the long run, such conditions benefit not only teachers, but also learners and the entire school community.

A study by Chong and Kong (2015) showed that affective commitment is associated with lower levels of burnout and higher emotional resilience. Unlike continuance commitment, which is based on obligation, affective commitment fosters a more positive and fulfilling work experience. Teachers who feel emotionally connected to their work report higher levels of well-being. They experience more satisfaction, feel appreciated, and are better equipped to cope with stress.

Affective commitment strongly influences teacher retention, as educators who feel emotionally attached to their work and school are more likely to stay in their roles. This connection stems from a sense of belonging, shared values with the school, and personal satisfaction in their teaching responsibilities. When teachers feel appreciated, trusted, and supported by their colleagues and leaders, they become more dedicated to contributing to the long-term success of the school community. The work of Zhan et al. (2023) highlights that affective commitment significantly reduces teacher turnover, especially in schools facing difficult circumstances such as those in rural or low-resource settings. When teachers feel emotionally connected to their work, they are better able to cope with challenges and are more likely to stay at their schools instead of seeking other opportunities. Also, a similar result found out that teachers who experience strong emotional ties with their schools are more motivated to stay and actively contribute to school development (Cruz et al. 2023). These teachers not only fulfill their core responsibilities but also go beyond expectations by participating in school initiatives, mentoring peers, and promoting a positive learning environment.

Continuance Commitment

Continuance commitment is one of the three components of organizational commitment, alongside affective and normative commitment, originally conceptualized by Meyer and Allen. It describes a teacher’s perceived need to stay in their current school or profession due to the costs of leaving. These costs may be financial (such as loss of salary or benefits), social (like losing workplace relationships), or professional (such as fewer job opportunities elsewhere). Recent studies, such as by Meyer et al. (2022), reaffirm that continuance commitment is largely driven by the investments teachers make over time, including their time, effort, and career progress, which they may hesitate to forfeit.

Recent research highlights key factors that influence continuance commitment. A study by Al-Kahtani and Al-Dosary (2020) on Libyan teachers found that satisfaction with the school environment, the relevance of the job, and pay/benefits were significant predictors of continuance commitment. This study reinforces the notion that continuance commitment is influenced by practical, rather than emotional or moral, considerations. Teachers in environments that provide a sense of security, relevant and meaningful work, and fair compensation are more likely to stay due to the perceived costs associated with leaving (Al-Kahtani & Al-Dosary, 2020).

Continuance commitment is different from affective and normative commitment. While affective commitment is about emotional attachment to the school and normative commitment comes from a sense of duty, continuance commitment is based on the costs of leaving. Teachers with high continuance commitment may not be passionate about their job but stay because they feel it’s better for them compared to other options. Research shows that teachers with high continuance commitment are more likely to stay in their jobs. However, they may not be as enthusiastic or innovative as those with strong emotional attachment. Similarly, Mijakoski et al. (2022) found that burnout is commonly linked to high-stress environments, heavy workloads, limited control, unclear job expectations, and lack of support.

To increase continuance commitment and keep teachers from leaving, schools can offer better pay and benefits to reduce the financial burden of changing jobs. Schools can also create inclusive and supportive workplaces where teachers feel valued and part of the community, which can reduce the social and emotional costs of leaving. Additionally, improving overall teacher well-being, such as providing professional development opportunities, fostering positive working relationships, and ensuring manageable workloads, can contribute to teachers’ sense of commitment by making the costs of leaving seem higher than the benefits of leaving. A study by Joo and Lim (2018) found that job satisfaction, which includes factors such as job security and opportunities for career advancement, plays a critical role in strengthening continuance commitment among educators.

While continuance commitment—teachers staying due to perceived costs of leaving—can aid retention, it may not foster long-term engagement or innovation. Relying solely on financial incentives and job security might retain teachers but may not cultivate a motivated or innovative workforce. A holistic approach that also enhances affective (emotional attachment) and normative (sense of obligation) commitment is essential. Strategies include creating supportive environments, offering career growth opportunities, and aligning school goals with teachers’ values. Such comprehensive approaches are linked to higher teacher commitment and retention ( Tuncer, 2020; Şahin, 2020).​

Normative Commitment

Normative commitment as a sense of obligation to remain with an organization, where individuals feel it is the right thing to do. This commitment is influenced by personal values, cultural norms, and organizational socialization processes. Recent research by Sow, Anthony, and Berete (2016) further explores this concept, highlighting that employee with strong normative commitment are less likely to have turnover intentions, suggesting that a sense of duty can reduce the desire to leave an organization.

A study on Libyan primary school teachers found that teachers are more likely to feel a strong sense of moral responsibility to stay in their jobs when they find their work meaningful, feel satisfied with their job, have good relationships at school, and feel secure in their position. Altogether, these factors explain most of the reason why teachers feel committed to staying (Al-Kahtani & Al-Dosary, 2020).

According to Derakhshan (2022), this type of commitment is closely associated with a teacher’s motivation, morale (their sense of positivity and energy), and professional identity (how strongly they perceive themselves as teachers). In other words, when teachers are proud of being educators and believe in the value of what they do, they’re more likely to stay—not out of obligation, but from a deep sense of purpose and loyalty. Teachers who have strong professional values—such as caring deeply about student growth, valuing education as a public service, and seeing their work as meaningful—often develop higher normative commitment. These teachers feel that their role contributes to something bigger than themselves. As a result, they are more likely to remain dedicated even when faced with challenges, because they believe they have a responsibility to their students, colleagues, and the school community.

In contrast to continuance commitment, which is based on practical reasons like job security or financial concerns, normative commitment is driven by a deeper sense of moral responsibility. Teachers who feel a strong moral obligation to stay in their role are more likely to go beyond just completing their duties. They will engage more actively in their work, show extra effort, and contribute to the school community because they feel it’s the right thing to do. Normative commitment is the sense of obligation employees feel to stay with their organization, based on personal values and cultural expectations. It encourages them to go beyond their basic duties, like helping students after class, mentoring colleagues, or joining school activities—not because they have to, but because they believe it’s right. Harini et al. (2020) found that factors like personality, job satisfaction, and motivation strongly affect this type of commitment, leading to more positive work behaviors. Research shows that fostering strong relationships and a supportive environment within schools can boost normative commitment among teachers. When teachers have positive interactions with colleagues, administrators, and students, they are more likely to feel a sense of belonging and responsibility to stay in their roles. This supportive environment encourages collaboration, trust, and a shared sense of purpose, all of which contribute to higher levels of commitment to the school and the profession.

When teachers work together and support each other, they feel more connected to the school’s goals and values, making them more likely to stay because they feel it’s the right thing to do, rather than just due to external pressures. Creating this positive atmosphere can lead to stronger loyalty and higher engagement among staff, ultimately benefiting the entire school community (Edutopia, 2023).

Instructional Delivery

Instructional delivery refers to the methods, strategies, and approaches teachers use to facilitate student learning. Effective instructional delivery is crucial in ensuring that students engage with and retain academic content. Research highlights that quality instructional delivery impacts student achievement, motivation, and overall learning outcomes (Hattie, 2017).

The rapid advancement of technology has significantly influenced instructional delivery in classrooms. According to Wang and Winstead (2020), integrating technology such as digital learning platforms, interactive whiteboards, and artificial intelligence-driven assessments has enhanced student engagement and personalized learning. Studies by Ng and Nicholas (2016) indicate that teachers who incorporate blended learning and flipped classroom strategies create more interactive and student-centered learning environments.

Active learning strategies, including collaborative learning, inquiry-based instruction, and problem-solving activities, have gained prominence in recent years. Freeman et al. (2019) conducted a meta-analysis showing that students in active learning environments perform better than those in traditional lecture-based settings. Similarly, Abrahams and Milligan (2021) emphasize that incorporating group discussions and hands-on activities fosters deeper understanding and critical thinking among students.

Despite advancements in teaching methodologies, educators face several challenges in instructional delivery. Teacher workload, lack of professional development, and inadequate access to technology remain significant barriers (Johnson et al., 2018). Research by Bautista and Ocampo (2022) highlights that in developing countries like the Philippines, disparities in access to digital tools hinder effective online and blended learning implementation. Additionally, excessive screen time has raised concerns about student attention and cognitive overload (Salas-Rueda, 2021).

In the Philippines, instructional delivery has evolved following the implementation of the K-12 curriculum and the integration of 21st-century skills. Studies by David and Dela Cruz (2019) show that teachers are adapting differentiated instruction to cater to diverse learning needs. However, challenges such as large class sizes and insufficient instructional resources persist, affecting the effectiveness of teaching strategies. Research by Cruz and Bautista (2023) further emphasizes the importance of teacher training programs to enhance instructional competencies and student-centered pedagogies.

The quality of instructional delivery directly influences student outcomes. A study by Marzano (2017) found that teachers who employ clear instructional strategies and formative assessments see higher student achievement levels. Furthermore, Kim and Hannafin (2020) suggest that instructional scaffolding, where teachers provide structured support, enhances student learning retention and motivation.

Communicating with Students

Communicating with students is a fundamental sub-variable of instructional delivery, it covers a wide range of interactions that allow teachers convey knowledge, set expectations, and provide feedback. Effective communication is essential not only for delivering instructional content but also for creating a learning environment that fosters student engagement, participation, and achievement (Caires & Almeida, 2020). Beyond the simple transmission of knowledge, teacher communication involves active listening, empathetic responses to student inquiries, and the facilitation of meaningful classroom dialogue (Koca, 2016). This bidirectional communication encourages a supportive atmosphere where students feel valued and understood, promoting deeper cognitive engagement and motivation to learn (O’Connor & Michaels, 2019).

Teachers who communicate effectively are better equipped to clarify complex concepts, address student misconceptions, and adjust their instructional approaches in response to both verbal and non-verbal cues from learners (Hamre et al., 2017). In addition, teacher communication plays a vital role in shaping classroom culture by fostering respectful dialogue and promoting a collaborative learning environment (Walshaw & Anthony, 2018). In today’s digital landscape, effective communication also encompasses the integration of educational technologies, including virtual discussions, digital feedback, and interactive tools that facilitate continuous engagement and instructional support (Trust & Whalen, 2020). Ultimately, strong communication competencies enable teachers to build meaningful relationships, maintain a well-managed classroom, and significantly improve student learning outcomes.

Research consistently shows that effective communication between teachers and students significantly influences student engagement, academic performance, and overall success in education. Effective communication fosters a sense of trust and psychological safety, which encourages students to express their thoughts, ask questions, and seek clarification without fear of judgment (Roorda et al., 2017). When students perceive their teachers as approachable and responsive, they are more likely to participate in classroom discussions, collaborate with peers, and take ownership of their learning (Quin, 2017; Pianta et al., 2021).

Moreover, positive communication helps teachers identify and address students’ individual learning needs, thereby enhancing instructional responsiveness and promoting equitable learning outcomes (Donohue & Bornman, 2015). Research shows that when students receive timely and constructive feedback, it not only improves their academic performance but also boosts their motivation and self-efficacy (Albalawi & Al-Harbi, 2020). In contrast, poor teacher–student communication—characterized by unclear expectations, limited feedback, or lack of empathy—can lead to confusion, disengagement, and lower academic outcomes (Hughes et al., 2019). Moreover, in culturally diverse classrooms, effective communication is essential for bridging cultural differences and promoting an inclusive learning environment (Gay, 2018). Establishing open, respectful, and consistent communication between teachers and students not only improves classroom interactions but also fosters holistic student development.

Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques

Effective teachers use questioning not simply to assess recall but to promote higher-order thinking, such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Questions that are open-ended and cognitively demanding challenge students to make connections, generate hypotheses, and explore multiple perspectives (Chin, 2016). High-quality questions stimulate curiosity and metacognition, pushing students beyond surface-level understanding to deeper comprehension (Hattie & Zierer, 2018). While lower-order questions help reinforce foundational knowledge, the emphasis in effective instruction is on encouraging student reasoning through thoughtful inquiry (Kiemer et al., 2015). In effective instructional practice, questioning serves not merely as a tool for assessing recall, but as a strategic method to foster critical thinking, promote deeper cognitive engagement, and enhance students’ conceptual understanding.

Questioning is most effective when it is embedded within inclusive and dynamic classroom discussions. Teachers utilize a range of techniques—such as random calling, wait time, and small-group interactions—to promote broad participation and reduce the dominance of more vocal students (Alexander, 2017). These practices help ensure that every student has an opportunity to engage, particularly those who may be reluctant to speak. Constructive classroom dialogue allows students to articulate their thinking in their own words and co-construct knowledge through peer interaction (Mercer & Howe, 2016). When integrated into inclusive and interactive classroom dialogue, questioning becomes a powerful means of promoting equitable participation, encouraging student voice, and fostering collaborative knowledge construction.

Skilled teachers leverage student responses as catalysts for deeper inquiry, using strategic techniques to extend thinking, foster collaboration, and promote the development of higher-order questioning skills. Through strategies like revoicing, probing, and prompting, teachers guide students to elaborate on their ideas and connect them to broader concepts (Sedova et al., 2019). This iterative process fosters an environment where students build upon each other’s insights, helping to develop both collaborative skills and higher-level questioning capacities (Hardman, 2019).

Advanced instructional methodologies underscore the importance of student autonomy in initiating discussions and generating questions, thereby cultivating critical thinking, self-directed learning, and academic independence. Structures such as Socratic seminars, think-pair-share, and inquiry-based learning shift the focus from teacher-led interrogation to student-driven inquiry (Tofade et al., 2021). These methods encourage learners to take ownership of the discussion process, promoting critical thinking, self-regulation, and academic independence (Murphy et al., 2020).

Structured discussion protocols and clearly defined communicative expectations play a critical role in fostering respectful, inclusive, and intellectually safe classroom environments that encourage equitable participation and engagement with complex ideas. These guidelines help establish a safe environment where students feel confident to share diverse ideas and engage in intellectual risk-taking (Zwiers & Crawford, 2017). Protocols such as accountable talk, literature circles, and fishbowl discussions provide frameworks for equitable participation and thoughtful engagement with complex topics (Resnick et al., 2018).

Strategic questioning functions as a powerful catalyst for the cultivation of critical thinking, as it encourages learners to engage in processes of analysis, evaluation, and synthesis. Open-ended questions, in particular, play a pivotal role in facilitating the exploration of multiple perspectives and the construction of reasoned arguments, thereby promoting deeper cognitive engagement with complex subject matter (Finley, 2017). Beyond the scope of simple recall, these types of inquiries actively stimulate intellectual curiosity and help to develop higher-order cognitive skills—qualities that are crucial to fostering deep, meaningful learning.

Incorporating discussion techniques alongside questioning further amplifies student engagement. Structured discussions, such as Socratic seminars and think-pair-share activities, provide platforms for students to articulate their thoughts, listen to diverse viewpoints, and collaboratively construct knowledge (Gholam, 2019). These interactive dialogues not only enhance understanding but also build communication skills essential for academic and real-world success.​

Moreover, the integration of questioning and discussion techniques aligns with student-centered pedagogies that prioritize active learning. By shifting the instructional focus from teacher-led lectures to student-driven inquiry, educators empower learners to take ownership of their educational journey. This approach fosters autonomy, motivation, and a deeper connection to the material, ultimately leading to improved learning outcomes (Education Development Center, 2016).​ Thus, the intentional incorporation of questioning and discussion techniques into instructional delivery plays a critical role in shaping an educational environment that fosters critical thinking, encourages active student participation, and facilitates the development of meaningful learning experiences.

Engaging Students in Learning

Student engagement is a pivotal in instructional delivery, profoundly influencing student motivation, participation, and academic achievement. Educators who integrate meaningful, autonomous, collaborative, and active learning strategies—coupled with clear communication and diverse instructional approaches—cultivate dynamic learning environments where students are engaged cognitively, emotionally, and behaviorally throughout the instructional process.

Active learning strategies such as think-pair-share, problem-based learning (PBL), flipped classrooms, and collaborative projects are integral to fostering a student-centered instructional environment that promotes engagement, critical thinking, and academic achievement. Grounded in constructivist principles, these approaches encourage learners to actively construct knowledge through inquiry, collaboration, and real-world problem solving. By shifting the focus from passive reception to active participation, such strategies enhance cognitive processing, support meaningful knowledge retention, and cultivate transferable skills essential for long-term academic success (Dogani, 2023; Tecnoscientifica, 2025).

Recent studies show that teacher enthusiasm and confidence in teaching (instructional self-efficacy) strongly influence student motivation. When teachers are passionate about their subject and believe in their teaching skills, they create engaging learning environments that boost students’ interest and enjoyment in learning. Palmer (2020) found that students are motivated by their teacher’s enthusiasm, while Frommelt et al. (2021) showed that enthusiastic teaching improves students’ focus and participation in class. These studies highlight how important it is for teachers to be both enthusiastic and confident to keep students motivated.

Emotional contagion theory suggests that students often mirror the affective states of their teachers; thus, a passionate and motivated educator can create a positive emotional climate that fosters student interest and enjoyment (Frenzel et al., 2016). When students perceive their teacher as enthusiastic and invested, they are more likely to develop emotional connections to the content, which in turn leads to greater persistence, effort, and engagement (Schiefele & Schaffner, 2015).

Moreover, teachers’ instructional self-efficacy—their belief in their capacity to teach effectively and influence student outcomes—plays a critical role in shaping classroom dynamics. Educators with high self-efficacy are more inclined to employ diverse and responsive teaching strategies, adapt instruction to meet students’ needs, and uphold high expectations. These practices not only enhance cognitive engagement but also support the emotional and psychological well-being of students, reinforcing their motivation and sense of belonging in the classroom. For instance, Emiru and Gedifew (2024) found that teachers with higher self-efficacy were more effective in engaging students behaviorally and cognitively, leading to improved learning outcomes. Similarly, Palmer (2020) highlighted that teacher enthusiasm, closely linked to self-efficacy, significantly boosts student motivation and engagement.

Teachers’ enthusiasm and efficacy are essentially like catalysts for establishing emotionally captivating classroom settings in which students feel appreciated, inspired, and naturally driven to participate in their own learning path. Clear communication and varied instructional methods, including the use of structured discussion protocols and rubrics, help establish expectations for participation and behavior. These practices create a safe and supportive learning environment where students feel confident to share diverse ideas and engage in intellectual risk-taking (Zwiers & Crawford, 2017; Resnick et al., 2018).​

Empowering students to take ownership of their learning through student-led questioning and discussions fosters autonomy and self-regulation. Structures such as Socratic seminars and inquiry-based learning encourage students to formulate and build upon questions independently, promoting critical thinking and academic independence (Tofade et al., 2021; Murphy et al., 2020).​

Incorporating active learning strategies, clear communication, and varied instructional methods into instructional delivery is essential for fostering a learning environment that promotes cognitive, emotional, behavioral, and autonomous engagement. These elements collectively enhance student motivation, participation, and achievement, leading to improved learning outcomes.

Giving Assessment in Instruction

Assessment is a fundamental component of instructional delivery, serving as a systematic process through which educators collect, interpret, and utilize information about students’ learning to inform instructional decisions and enhance educational outcomes. By integrating assessment into the teaching and learning process, teachers can monitor student progress, identify learning gaps, and adjust instruction to meet diverse learner needs (Lynch, 2023).​

In the Philippine educational context, classroom assessment is not merely an ancillary activity but a core component of instructional delivery and curriculum implementation. As emphasized in the Department of Education’s (DepEd) Order No. 8, s. 2015, assessment serves as a vital mechanism through which teachers gather data on student learning progress, enabling them to make informed pedagogical decisions. This policy underscores that assessment must be purposefully aligned with learning competencies and be systematically embedded within daily instruction to support both teaching and learning processes (DepEd, 2015).

Moreover, assessment in the Philippine setting serves a broader communicative function. It facilitates transparent communication between schools, students, and families, helping parents and guardians remain actively involved in the educational development of their children. By regularly reporting assessment results, schools not only promote accountability but also cultivate partnerships that support student achievement and holistic development (Francisco, 2021). Ultimately, the DepEd’s emphasis on classroom assessment reflects a broader pedagogical shift toward evidence-based, learner-centered education—one where data-driven insights inform instruction, and all stakeholders are engaged in the shared responsibility of student learning and success.

Furthermore, effective assessment practices in instructional delivery integrate both formative and summative approaches, each serving distinct but complementary purposes in enhancing student learning. Formative assessment is embedded within the day-to-day instructional process and is primarily diagnostic in nature. It provides continuous feedback to both teachers and learners, enabling real-time instructional adjustments that target students’ immediate learning needs. This form of assessment supports a responsive teaching approach by identifying misconceptions, reinforcing concepts, and guiding personalized support, thereby improving overall learning outcomes (Heritage, 2016; Black & Wiliam, 2018).

In contrast, summative assessments are typically administered at the end of a learning unit or academic term and are designed to evaluate the extent to which students have achieved predetermined learning objectives. These assessments are often standardized or criterion-referenced, providing a snapshot of cumulative learning that can inform grading, reporting, and curriculum evaluation (States et al., 2017). When effectively designed and aligned with instructional goals, summative assessments contribute to accountability frameworks and help educators reflect on the efficacy of instructional strategies.

Together, formative and summative assessments function synergistically. While formative assessment enhances the learning process through timely feedback and instructional adjustment, summative assessment provides evidence of learning outcomes that inform broader educational decisions and policy-level interventions (Wiliam, 2016). The balanced use of both ensures that assessment is not merely a measure of learning, but a powerful tool for learning itself.

Furthermore, assessment serves as a critical instrument for advancing educational equity. Through the implementation of culturally responsive assessment practices, educators can ensure that evaluation methods are inclusive, contextually appropriate, and reflective of the diverse backgrounds and learning needs of students. Such practices contribute to fairer assessments and support the goal of enabling all learners to achieve their full academic potential (Zubieta & Zubieta, 2017).

Demonstrating Reflexibility & Responsiveness

Demonstrating reflexivity and responsiveness in instructional delivery involves a teacher’s continuous process of critically reflecting on their teaching practices, student feedback, and learning environments, and subsequently adapting instruction to effectively meet students’ needs. This dynamic approach is essential for fostering an inclusive and effective learning environment.

Reflexivity is a process that goes far beyond the routine practice of reflection. It involves a deeper and ongoing examination of the beliefs, values, and assumptions that influence a teacher’s decisions and actions in the classroom. Teachers engage in reflexivity to understand how their personal views, cultural backgrounds, and past experiences affect the way they teach and interact with students (Ryan & Webster, 2019). This process requires educators to regularly reflect on how their identity and teaching philosophy shape classroom dynamics and learning experiences.

By engaging in reflexivity, teachers are able to understand how their personal beliefs and attitudes shape their instructional choices, such as the content they choose to teach, the teaching strategies they use, and how they interact with students. Reflexivity invites educators to acknowledge that their understanding of “good teaching” is not neutral—it is shaped by their own experiences, societal contexts, and personal biases (Fook, 2016). An educator’s unconscious biases might affect their expectations of students based on their socio-economic status, race, or gender, which in turn can influence student engagement, participation, and overall academic success.

Through critical reflection, teachers gain self-awareness and an understanding of how their perspectives might affect their students’ learning experiences. This awareness empowers teachers to identify and address biases or assumptions they may hold, helping them to create more inclusive and equitable learning environments. Reflexivity ensures that educators are not simply implementing practices based on tradition or habit but are thoughtfully considering how their actions can best support the diverse needs of all students. By being reflexive, educators can better adapt their teaching methods to be more responsive to the various learning styles, cultural backgrounds, and unique challenges faced by their students (Ryan & Webster, 2019).

Overall, reflexivity fosters a form of dynamic self-awareness that drives continuous improvement in teaching practice. It encourages educators to recognize that their teaching is never static but rather a continuous process that requires adaptation and rethinking to ensure that every student’s voice is heard and their needs are met. As teachers engage with their own reflection and self-awareness, they are better equipped to create classrooms that are more inclusive, culturally responsive, and conducive to learning for all students.

Responsiveness in teaching refers to an educator’s capacity to perceive and effectively respond to the dynamic and diverse needs of students as they emerge during the learning process. This entails not only recognizing verbal and non-verbal cues from students but also interpreting patterns in classroom interaction, academic performance, and engagement levels. Through active listening and continuous observation, responsive teachers are able to make real-time instructional decisions—adjusting teaching methods, modifying materials, or revising assessments—to better align with student needs (Hood, 2021).

This kind of adaptability is essential for building inclusive and supportive classrooms. It allows teachers to use differentiated instruction that meets the diverse learning styles, abilities, and learning speeds of their students. By being responsive, teachers help ensure that all learners have access to meaningful and appropriately challenging learning experiences. In addition, responsiveness helps build trust and respect in the classroom, which increases students’ motivation and emotional engagement in their learning (Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2015).

The integration of reflexivity and responsiveness is fundamental to fostering continuous professional growth and improving student learning outcomes. Reflexivity involves a sustained and critical examination of one’s teaching practices, assumptions, and interactions within the classroom. When teachers consistently engage in reflective activities—such as maintaining reflective journals, participating in peer observations, and soliciting feedback from students—they develop greater self-awareness and a clearer understanding of their instructional strengths and areas for improvement (Finlay, 2008).

These reflective insights are not merely theoretical; they serve as the foundation for responsive teaching. Responsiveness involves translating reflection into purposeful action by adjusting instructional strategies, classroom management techniques, or assessment methods in real time based on students’ evolving needs and feedback (Hood, 2021). For instance, a teacher who recognizes through reflection that certain students are disengaged may introduce more interactive or student-centered approaches to re-engage them. This iterative process ensures that teaching remains dynamic and student-focused.

Moreover, the integration of reflexivity and responsiveness supports a cycle of professional learning, where teaching practices are continually evaluated and refined. This cycle not only contributes to the development of more effective instruction but also promotes inclusive education by recognizing and addressing the diverse needs of all learners. Ultimately, when teachers adopt both reflective and responsive approaches, they create more meaningful, equitable, and effective learning environments.

Generally, the relationship between teachers’ emotional well-being, organizational commitment, instructional delivery is critical for the overall performance of learners.

Conceptual Framework of the Study

This study is based on the concept that teachers’ emotional well-being and organizational commitment can influence their instructional delivery, and can lead to improved student performance, so the following theories are used as a groundwork for this study.

First, emotional well-being, this is anchored on Eudaimonic Theory of Carol Ryff (1954). This model is a modern interpretation of eudaimonic principles of Aristotle. This theory encompasses attributes like autonomy, positive relationships, life purpose, personal growth, and mastery. It is based on the idea that well-being arises from behaviors aligned with one’s true potential. It explains that true emotional well-being comes from living a meaningful and authentic life. It includes qualities like self-growth, having purpose, building good relationships, being independent, and mastering skills. This theory shows that well-being is not just about feeling happy but about growing as a person and living with purpose, even during tough times.

In teaching, this means that when teachers feel emotionally well and find meaning in their work, they perform better. They build stronger connections with students, manage challenges more effectively, and create a positive learning environment. Teachers who focus on personal growth and purpose not only improve their own teaching but also encourage students to do the same.

Next, Organizational commitment of teachers is associated with the Three-Component Theory of Allen and Meyer (1991). This theory posits that organizational commitment comprises affective, continuance, and normative commitment. Affective commitment is the emotional attachment to the organization, where employees stay because they want to. Continuance commitment is the belief that leaving the organization would be too costly, leading employees to stay because they feel they must. Normative commitment is the feeling of obligation to stay with the organization, where employees stay because they feel they ought to. This model emphasizes that employees remain in an organization for different reasons: the love for the job (affective), fear of loss (continuance), or a sense of duty (normative). Furthermore, in aiming for long-term success, organizations should focus on fostering affective commitment for a more passionate and loyal workers. Additionally, Teachers with strong affective and normative commitment are more likely to deliver instruction with enthusiasm, sincerity, and genuine concern for student learning. These forms of commitment enhance their lesson planning, classroom engagement, and adaptability in using various teaching strategies to support student success.

Finally, instructional delivery of teachers is anchored on Constructivism theory of Jean Piaget (1936) and Lev Vygotsky (1934). It emphasizes that learner actively construct their own knowledge and understanding through experience and social interaction. Instruction should be learner-centered, providing opportunities for exploration, collaboration, and reflection. Constructivist learning theory promotes active engagement, social interaction, and reflection, leading to deeper understanding and critical thinking. Teachers should create environments that encourage exploration, collaboration, and personal meaning-making, ensuring that students become independent and lifelong learners.

Emotional well-being, organizational commitment, and instructional delivery all play a crucial role in effective teaching. According to Carol Ryff’s Eudaimonic Theory, well-being is achieved through personal growth, purpose, and meaningful relationships, which allow teachers to connect with students and create a positive learning environment. The Three-Component Theory of Organizational Commitment by Allen and Meyer suggests that teachers who feel emotionally connected to their work and sense of duty are more dedicated, leading to more passionate and effective instruction. Moreover, Constructivism, as proposed by Piaget and Vygotsky, emphasizes that students learn best through active involvement and social interaction, meaning teachers should foster environments that encourage exploration and collaboration. Overall, these theories show that emotionally fulfilled, committed teachers who use interactive teaching methods are more likely to inspire student success and encourage lifelong learning.

Research Paradigm

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the study showing the relationships among Emotional Well-being, Organizational Commitment and Teachers’ Instructional Delivery.

Hypothesis of the Study

The following are the hypotheses of the study to be tested at 0.05 level:

Ho1: There is no significant relationship between instructional delivery and teachers’ emotional well-being; and  teachers’ organizational commitment.

Ho2: There is no variable, singly or in combination, that best predicts teachers’ instructional delivery.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This section will present the methods and procedures that will be employed in the study which includes the research design, research subject, locale of the study, sampling procedure, instrumentation, data gathering procedure, and the corresponding statistical techniques used to attain the objectives of the study.

Research Design

The study employed a descriptive-correlational research design. A survey was administered to examine the significant relationship between teachers’ emotional well-being and organizational commitment in relation to their instructional delivery. The descriptive component aimed to assess the levels of emotional well-being and organizational commitment, as well as their influence on instructional delivery. Descriptive research, which includes the use of survey instruments, was utilized to capture respondents’ preferences, perceptions, behaviors, and concerns. Specifically, respondents rated aspects of instructional delivery using a five-point Likert scale.

Simultaneously, the study adopted a correlational approach to explore the relationship between teachers’ emotional well-being, organizational commitment, and their instructional practices. In this context, the correlational method involved measuring participants’ scores on the relevant variables without manipulating any of them, in order to determine the extent and nature of the associations among the constructs.

Locale of the Study

The study was conducted in the Division of Valencia City, situated in the province of Bukidnon in Northern Mindanao. This locale was recognized for its cultural diversity and strategic role in delivering quality education to learners across both urban and rural areas. As the most densely populated area in Bukidnon, Valencia City served as the province’s commercial hub and housed a range of public and private educational institutions. The public schools involved in the study included Banlag Integrated School, Bantal Elementary School, Buco-Sinait Integrated School, Buyog Integrated School, Dagatkidavao Integrated School, Kilangi Integrated School, Lilingayon National High School, Mabuhay Integrated School, Pantaron Integrated School, and Sinayawan Central School. The division was noted for its progressive educational practices and school management strategies, catering to a diverse student population, including those from neighboring municipalities.

Figure 2. Map of Valencia City, Bukidnon, the locale of the study.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study were public school teachers within the Division of Valencia City. A total enumeration sampling technique was employed, resulting in 225 respondents. Specifically, the sample included 34 teachers from Banlag Integrated School, 8 from Bantal Elementary School, 23 from Buco-Sinait Integrated School, 14 from Buyog Integrated School, 46 from Dagatkidavao Integrated School, 10 from Kilangi Integrated School, 26 from Lilingayon National High School, 16 from Mabuhay Integrated School, 14 from Pantaron Integrated School, and 34 from Sinayawan Central School.

Public school teachers were selected as respondents due to their direct involvement in instructional delivery, which plays a critical role in determining the academic success or failure of their learners. Their insights and perspectives on emotional well-being and organizational commitment were considered essential in evaluating their instructional delivery practices.

Table 1. Distribution of Respondents in the Locale of the Study

Research Instruments

A structured survey questionnaire composed of three (3) parts was administered to the respondents for data collection. All instruments were adapted from existing, validated studies, and prior consent from the respective authors was sought.

The first part consisted of a 24-item questionnaire on emotional well-being, adapted from the study of Renshaw (2015), as cited by Ceballos (2022). This instrument had previously undergone pilot testing and demonstrated high reliability, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.937. The following procedures were employed to guide its use in the study:

Part II of the questionnaire assessed the level of teachers’ organizational commitment, specifically in terms of affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. This section was adapted from the work of Javed (2020), as cited by Balase (2023), to meet the objectives of the present study. The instrument demonstrated strong internal consistency, with a reported Cronbach’s alpha of 0.919. The scoring procedure for this section employed a 5-point Likert scale, which was utilized as the basis for decision-making and interpretation of responses as follows:

Part III of the questionnaire focused on the extent of teachers’ instructional delivery, specifically in the areas of communicating with students, employing questioning and discussion techniques, engaging students in learning, integrating assessment into instruction, and demonstrating reflexivity and responsiveness. This instrument was adapted from the work of Oliveira (2013), as cited by Valdez (2023). It had undergone validation and reliability testing, yielding a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.927, indicating high internal consistency. The scoring procedure for this section utilized a 5-point Likert scale, which was observed as follows:

Data Gathering Procedure

To gather the necessary data, a formal letter was addressed to the Schools Division Superintendent of Valencia City to obtain permission to conduct the study. Adapted questionnaires were distributed to the respondents. Given the limited timeframe, data collection was facilitated through an online platform using Google Forms, in coordination with the division’s research coordinator.

Respondents were given sufficient time to complete the questionnaires to ensure accuracy and validity of responses. The instruments were not subjected to additional reliability and validity testing, as they were previously validated in studies by Ceballos (2022), Balase (2023), and Valdez (2023). Participation in the study was entirely voluntary, and informed consent was obtained from all respondents, assuring them of the confidentiality of their responses. Once completed, the questionnaires were collected, the responses were tabulated, and the data were subjected to statistical analysis for interpretation and discussion.

Statistical Techniques

The data collected in the study were summarized, translated, and analyzed using appropriate statistical tools. To ensure valid and reliable interpretation, descriptive statistics—such as means, standard deviations, and frequency distributions—were employed to describe and summarize the levels of teachers’ emotional well-being and organizational commitment in relation to their instructional delivery. Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to examine the relationships among emotional well-being, organizational commitment, and instructional delivery. Furthermore, multiple regression analysis was applied to identify which variables significantly predicted teachers’ instructional delivery.

Ethical Consideration

Prior to the conduct of the study, a formal letter of communication was submitted to the Office of the Schools Division Superintendent of the Division of Valencia City to request approval for the research undertaking. Respondents were provided with comprehensive information regarding the study’s nature, objectives, procedures, and potential benefits. Participation in the study was entirely voluntary, and all participating teachers were required to sign an informed consent form signifying their understanding and willingness to be involved. Consent was given freely, and participants retained the right to withdraw from the study at any point without penalty.

The identities, responses, and any sensitive information provided by the respondents were treated with strict confidentiality. Data were anonymized or coded to ensure privacy, and only aggregated results were reported. In accordance with the Data Privacy Act, all personal information collected was securely stored and remained accessible solely to the researchers.

The study upheld the rights, perspectives, and dignity of all respondents, irrespective of race, gender, age, disability, or socioeconomic status. It also maintained the integrity of the research process by strictly adhering to ethical guidelines governing the conduct of research.

Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation Of Data

This chapter clearly presents, analyzes, and interprets data gathered from 255 respondents. The variables evaluated in this study were emotional well-being, organizational commitment, and teacher’s instructional delivery. It discusses the main findings and connects them to the research questions and goals. Furthermore, it analyzes the essential information necessary to formulate sound conclusions and informed recommendations.

The first part described the level of emotional well-being which includes satisfaction with work environment, work grit, school connectedness, and work self-efficacy. It also described the organizational commitment of teachers such as affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment.  Furthermore, it also described teachers’ instructional delivery namely, communicating with students, using questions and discussion techniques, engaging students in learning, giving assessment in instruction, and demonstrating reflexibility and responsiveness.

The second part described the relationship between emotional well-being, organizational commitment and teachers’ instructional delivery. It also revealed the variables that best predict instructional delivery.

Level of Emotional Well-Being

This part deals with the emotional well-being of teachers in blended learning modality. It comprises of four dimensions namely, satisfaction with work environment, work grit, school connectedness, and work self-efficacy. This part involves the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Satisfaction with Work Environment

The level of emotional well-being on satisfaction with work environment, is depicted in table 2.  As presented in the table, the overall mean score of 4.39 falls within the “Agree” category, indicating “positive emotional well-being”. The indicators “I am happy with my work” and “I really enjoy my work” has the highest mean values of 4.45 with the qualitative interpretation of positive emotional well-being. While the indicators “I am satisfied with my work achievements” and “Overall, my experiences in my teaching career have been excellent” have the lowest mean values of 4.35 and 4.34, respectively, with qualitative interpretation of positive emotional well-being.

Based on the data presented in table 2, teachers report a high level of emotional well-being concerning their satisfaction with work environment. This implies that the teachers generally enjoy and are happy with their jobs. They are all experiencing excellent teaching careers, they are genuinely happy with how they are performing, and they all agreed that they are generally satisfied with their job’s accomplishments.

Table 2. Teachers’ Emotional Well-being of in terms of Satisfaction with Work Environment

The data shows that schools are doing well in supporting teachers’ emotional well-being, but there is still room to improve. Providing more support, easing workload, and recognizing teachers’ efforts could help raise their satisfaction levels even more. When teachers feel emotionally well and appreciated, they are more likely to be engaged, enthusiastic, and effective in their teaching. This leads to better classroom management, stronger relationships with students, and more impactful instruction. In turn, this positively affects student learning and overall school performance. Therefore, promoting teachers’ emotional well-being not only benefits the educators themselves but also enhances the quality of education students receive.

The findings of Atmaca et al. (2020) are aligned with this study. They further suggest that satisfied teachers are more likely to feel positive emotions like joy and affection. Burić and Moè (2020) also pointed out that when teachers feel emotionally well, it benefits the whole school environment. Additionally, Hascher and Waber (2021) found that teacher well-being improves relationships with students, boosts student performance, and lowers teacher burnout. This highlights the importance of creating a supportive and rewarding workplace to enhance both teacher well-being and school performance.

Work Grit

This part deals with emotional well-being in terms of work grit. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

The data in table 3 presents the overall mean score for teachers’ emotional well-being in terms of work grit is 4.19, which falls within the “Agree” category and is interpreted as positive emotional well-being.  Teachers highly believe that they are determined, committed, and emotionally resilient in performing their professional duties. The indicators “I am a diligent teacher” and “I finish whatever work assignments or projects I begin” has the highest mean values of 4.41 and 4.33 respectively, with the qualitative interpretation of positive emotional well-being. While the indicators “Task setbacks don’t discourage me” and “New ideas and projects never distract me from my schoolwork.” have the lowest mean values of 4.04 and 4.00, respectively, with qualitative interpretation of positive emotional well-being.

Table 3. Teachers Emotional Well-being in terms of Work Grit

Although teachers generally showed a positive and consistent level of work grit, there were a couple of areas where their scores were slightly lower. Particularly, some teachers found it more difficult to stay motivated when facing challenges or to remain focused when new tasks or ideas came up. These slightly lower ratings suggest that not all teachers find it easy to handle obstacles or multitask under pressure. However, despite these challenges, the overall results still reflect strong commitment and resilience. This means that teachers are generally able to stay dedicated and push through difficulties, which benefits both their emotional well-being and their ability to teach effectively in the classroom. Their perseverance supports a stable and productive learning environment for students.

These top two scores suggest that teachers see themselves as hardworking and responsible, with a strong commitment to completing their tasks which are both essential components of work grit. These results align with the findings of Duckworth and Quinn (2015), who identified diligence and task completion as central traits of grit and predictors of success and well-being in demanding professions like teaching. On the other hand, the two lowest-rated items, implies that teachers may occasionally experience challenges in maintaining focus or emotional resilience when dealing setbacks. However, the consistently positive ratings across all indicators underscore a strong baseline of work grit among teachers. This is supported by Fernandez-Martinez et al. (2020), who found that teachers with high levels of grit tend to maintain emotional stability even when faced with professional stressors.

School Connectedness

This part deals with emotional well-being on school connectedness. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

The table 4 reveals the overall mean score of teachers’ emotional well-being in terms of school connectedness with 4.35 which is described as “Agree” and interpreted as “positive emotional well-being”. The highest mean (4.43) falls under the item “People at this school are friendly to me” followed by (4.42) “I feel proud of belonging to this school”, (4.37) “I can really be myself at this school”, (4.37) “I feel like a real part of the school” (4.30) “Other teachers here like me the way I am”, and (4.22) “People here notice when I’m good at something” all described as agree and interpreted to be positive emotional well-being.

The two highest-rated indicator, indicates the presence of a welcoming and respectful environment that fosters belonging and institutional pride. Such perceptions are reinforced with the findings of Libbey (2020), who emphasized that a strong sense of connectedness within the school environment significantly enhances educators’ morale, job satisfaction, and emotional health. In contrast, the two lowest-rated items imply that, in comparison to other indicators, teachers might feel somewhat less appreciated or validated by their colleagues.

Teachers generally experience a strong and positive connection to their school community. They perceive the school environment as friendly and welcoming, where they can freely express themselves and feel accepted for who they are. This sense of inclusiveness and support helps cultivate a feeling of pride in being part of the school, making teachers feel that they truly belong. Moreover, teachers feel valued by their colleagues, that their efforts and skills are recognized and appreciated. This recognition from peers not only uplift their confidence but also strengthens their sense of worth within the school.

Table 4. Teachers Emotional Well-being in terms of School Connectedness

These positive school connectedness plays a crucial role in enhancing teachers’ emotional well-being. When teachers feel supported and connected, they tend to be more motivated and satisfied with their jobs. This emotional upliftment encourages greater commitment to their roles and responsibilities, which can translate into more effective teaching practices. Lastly, a supportive and inclusive school atmosphere fosters a healthier work environment. This environment helps reduce stress and burnout, enabling teachers to focus better on their instructional duties. As a result, students benefit from improved educational experiences, making school connectedness an important factor for overall school success.

These validates the findings of Van Uden, Ritzen, and Pieters (2019), that individual recognition and affirmation can sometimes be underdeveloped, impacting teachers’ deeper sense of value and identity in the workplace. A study by Allen et al. (2021) emphasizes that school connectedness is associated with various positive educational and health outcomes for teachers, including improved psychosocial health and well-being. When teachers feel a sense of belonging and are part of a supportive community, their overall well-being is enhanced.

Similarly, a study by Kern et al. (2020) found that school conditions, such as trust and collaboration among staff, significantly influence educator well-being. The research indicates that positive organizational conditions within schools contribute more to teacher well-being than individual or relational factors alone. Furthermore, research by Garcia-Moya et al. (2015) supports the notion that school connectedness acts as a protective factor for teachers’ mental health. The study highlights that teacher who feel connected to their school community are better equipped to handle stress and are less likely to experience burnout. These studies collectively affirm that fostering a school environment where teachers feel connected, valued, and supported is crucial for their emotional well-being and effectiveness as teachers.

Work Self-Efficacy

This part deals with emotional well-being of teachers in terms of work self-efficacy. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Table 5 presents the mean value and qualitative description of teachers’ emotional well-being on work self-efficacy. It reveals that the average mean value is 4.30 and described as agree and is interpreted as positive emotional well-being.  As shown in the table, all indicators were rated as agree, which can be interpreted as positive emotional well-being. The indicators “I prepare well for my subjects” and “I figure out a way to solve any problems that I have in my tasks” has the highest mean values of 4.36 and 4.33 and were qualitatively interpreted as positive emotional well-being. While the indicators “I monitor my work tasks diligently” and “I am an organized and effective teacher” has the lowest mean values of 4.27 and 4.25 respectively, and falls on agree category and is interpreted as positive emotional well-being.

Table 5. Teachers Emotional Well-being in terms of Work Self-Efficacy

The results indicate that teachers have a strong sense of work self-efficacy, as reflected in their overall positive ratings. They agree that they prepare well for their subjects and feel confident in their ability to solve problems related to their tasks. Additionally, teachers believe they possess the necessary skills to succeed and perform well regardless of the scope of their responsibilities. They also demonstrate diligence in monitoring their work and view themselves as organized and effective educators. This positive perception of their capabilities suggests that teachers feel emotionally supported and confident in managing their professional duties, which likely contributes to their overall well-being and effectiveness in the classroom.

This indicates that teachers generally feel confident in their ability to perform their tasks, manage responsibilities, and overcome challenges effectively. This result is connected with the study of Tschannen-Moran & Hoy (2018) suggesting that teachers are not only proactive in their preparation but also adaptive problem-solvers. These characters are critical for instructional success and have been linked to increased motivation and emotional resilience in teaching environments. These findings affirm that teachers’ belief in their own competence significantly contributes to their emotional health and job satisfaction (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020).

The findings show that teachers have a strong belief in their ability to do their work well. They feel confident preparing their lessons and solving any problems that arise. Teachers also think they have the right skills to handle their tasks successfully, no matter how big or complex. They are careful in managing their work and see themselves as organized and capable professionals. This positive view of their skills suggests that teachers feel emotionally supported and confident, which likely helps them perform better and maintain their well-being in the classroom. Supporting this, Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2017) found that teachers with high self-efficacy experience less stress and greater job satisfaction, leading to better classroom management and student outcomes. Similarly, Zee and Koomen (2016) reported that strong teacher self-efficacy is linked to increased motivation and resilience. However, some studies offer a contrasting perspective; for example, Collie, Shapka, and Perry (2016) found that even teachers with high self-efficacy can experience burnout if emotional support at the school level is lacking, suggesting that self-efficacy alone may not fully protect against workplace stress.

Summary of Teachers Emotional Well-Being

This part deals with the summary of the level of emotional well-being of teachers. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

The overall mean for emotional well-being is 4.31, which is described as agree and interpreted as positive emotional well-being. All four indicators, Satisfaction with Work Environment (4.39), Work Grit (4.19), School Connectedness (4.35), and Work Self-Efficacy (4.30), are described as agree and interpreted as positive emotional well-being. The data suggest that teachers experience a generally healthy level of emotional well-being in their work environment. The highly rated indicators like satisfaction with the work environment and school connectedness indicate that teachers feel supported, safe, and belonged in their workplace. However, the lower rated indicators such as work self-efficacy and work grit may reflect internal factors such as personal stamina, confidence in long-term task execution, or adaptability to challenges that slightly vary from their environmental or relational experiences.

Table 6.  Summary of Teachers Emotional Well-Being

The data show that teachers in general have a healthy degree of emotional well-being in their professional environment. High ratings in work environment satisfaction and school connectedness denote that teachers’ feel supported, secure, and connected to their communities at work. On the contrary, slightly lower but still positive ratings in work self-efficacy and work grit may indicate inner characteristics such as personal resilience, confidence in long-term initiatives or adaptability to challenges, which may differ from their external or interpersonal experiences.

The findings imply that external factors like work environment and interpersonal relationships have a greater influence on teachers’ emotional well-being than internal motivational traits. A supportive and interconnected school environment appears to have an important role in fostering positive emotions, job satisfaction, and a strong sense of professional identity. Despite the fact that teachers generally demonstrate confidence in their abilities and perseverance, the comparatively lower scores in self-efficacy and work grit suggest areas for improvement, particularly through targeted initiatives such as professional development and resilience training.

These findings are consistent with Collie, Shapka, and Perry (2015), who emphasized the importance of a positive school climate and collegial relationships in enhancing teacher satisfaction and reducing emotional stress. Similarly, Van Uden, Ritzen, and Pieters (2019) found that school connectedness strongly predicts teachers’ engagement and emotional health. In addition, Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2018) noted that, while work self-efficacy is a strong indicator of teacher effectiveness, it can vary according to workload and challenges, emphasizing the importance of continuous emotional and instructional support.

Level of Organizational Commitment

This part deals with the organizational commitment of teachers. It comprises of three dimensions namely, affective commitment, continuance commitment and affective commitment. This part involves the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Affective Commitment

This part deals with organizational commitment of teachers in terms of affective commitment. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

The overall mean for affective commitment is 4.38, which is described as often and interpreted as high level of commitment. The indicators “I am proud to be in the teaching profession” followed by “I like being teacher” has the highest mean score among 10 indicators with 4.49 and 4.46 respectively, and all described as often and interpreted to be high level of commitment. While “This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me” and “I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career in this school” has the lowest score but still categorized as often and is interpreted as high level of commitment.

The data show that most teachers feel a strong emotional connection to their job. They take pride in teaching, enjoy what they do, and see it as an important part of who they are. The high scores across indicators point to a high level of affective commitment, suggesting that most teachers are motivated not merely by rewards but because they find personal satisfaction and a sense of belonging in their work. The slightly lower scores on items related to staying at their current school may be due to reasons like wanting to grow in their careers or facing school-related challenges, rather than a lack of dedication to teaching.

According to Meyer and Allen, affective commitment is about a person’s emotional connection with and involvement in their organization. The findings indicate that many teachers are deeply engaged to their work, which deepens their dedication to their schools. This dedication is driven by emotional satisfaction, shared values, and a strong sense of belonging. On the other hand, differences in teachers’ willingness to stay at their current schools may be associated to factors such as the school climate, leadership quality, or opportunities for advancement.

Table 7. Teachers Organizational Commitment in terms of Affective Commitment

These findings are consistent with recent literature emphasizing the importance of a supportive work environment in fostering teachers’ emotional commitment. Collie et al. (2015) found that a positive school climate and strong collegial relationships significantly enhance teacher well-being and job satisfaction. More recently, Wang, Hall, and Rahimi (2020) reported that school connectedness and supportive leadership were strongly associated with teacher engagement and affective commitment. Similarly, Harmsen et al. (2018) highlighted that emotional support and alignment with school values contribute to teachers’ long-term motivation and retention. These studies underscore the need to cultivate a value-driven, collegial, and emotionally supportive school environment to sustain teachers’ affective commitment.

Continuance Commitment

This part deals with organizational commitment of teachers in terms of continuance commitment. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

The level of organizational commitment in terms of continuance commitment, is depicted in table 8. The overall mean for continuance commitment is 4.20, which is described as often and interpreted as high level of commitment. The indicators “I received yearly clothing chalk and career” (4.32), and “I am enthusiastic to work with DEPED with the free seminars-workshops that will be attended” (4.27) has the highest mean score among 10 indicators and all categorized as often and is interpreted as high level of commitment. However, the indicators “One of the few negative consequences of leaving DEPED would be the scarcity of available alternatives ” (4.16) and “One of the major reasons to continue to work for this school is that leaving would require considerable personal sacrifice” (4.08) has the lowest score but still categorized as often and is interpreted as high level of commitment.

Table 8. Teachers Organizational Commitment in terms of Continuance Commitment

The high mean scores across the indicators suggest that teachers’ decision to stay at their current schools is driven by both intrinsic motivation and external factors. Financial incentives, such as allowances and bonuses, as well as by the recognition that changing careers or schools would involve significant effort or loss of benefits. The perception that leaving would be challenging due to a lack of alternative options (M = 4.16) indicates that teachers may feel somewhat “trapped” in their current roles, although they continue to express strong commitment to their profession.

Continuance commitment, as explained by Meyer and Allen, is driven by an individual’s awareness of the costs associated with leaving an organization. Teachers face mostly extrinsic costs, such as the financial benefits, job stability, and opportunity for professional growth that come with their roles at DEPED. The findings reveal that, while teachers have an emotional attachment to their profession, their decision to stay in their current roles is also greatly influenced by the practical benefits and potential challenges of pursuing alternative career opportunities.

These findings align with more recent research supporting the concept of continuance commitment, where employees remain in their positions due to perceived costs associated with leaving. In the teaching profession, this often includes job security, financial stability, and limited alternative employment opportunities. Wang, Hall, and Rahimi (2020) found that teachers with high role investment and job-related self-efficacy are less inclined to leave, as doing so may result in personal and professional losses. Likewise, Harmsen et al. (2018) emphasized that despite stressors, teachers often stay in their roles when they perceive that they have invested too much—emotionally, financially, and professionally—to walk away. These studies highlight that teachers’ decisions to remain are not solely based on passion or commitment but also on practical considerations and potential consequences of leaving.

Normative Commitment

This part deals with organizational commitment of teachers in terms of normative commitment. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Table 9 presents data on teachers’ organizational commitment in terms of normative commitment, which refers to their sense of obligation to stay with their organization. The overall mean for normative commitment is 4.30, which is categorized as often and indicating a high level of commitment, which suggests that teachers feel a strong moral responsibility and professional obligation to remain in their schools. The indicators “I believe that I contribute to society” and “I am valued as a teacher in the society” gained the highest mean score of 4.36 among 10 indicators for normative commitment and all categorized as often and is interpreted as high level of commitment. Meanwhile, the indicators “I believes that I have chances for promotion” and “I would feel guilty if I left the school now.” has the lowest score with 4.24 and 4.20 but still interpreted as high level of commitment.

Table 9. Teachers Organizational Commitment in terms of Normative Commitment

The data indicate that teachers’ normative commitment is influenced by a combination of personal duty and mutual support from their organization. When teachers believe that their job is highly appreciated and that they are making a significant contribution to society, they are more likely to stay due to loyalty and a sense of professional duty. The statement “I would feel guilty if I left the school now” (M = 4.20), despite its slightly lower rating, reflects this internal commitment. It implies that many teachers feel a moral obligation to stay, motivated by their commitment to student success, connectedness to the school community, and alignment with common goals.

According to Meyer and Allen normative commitment stems from an individual’s moral or ethical obligation to remain with an organization. In this study, teachers demonstrate high levels of normative commitment, driven by the idea that their job benefits the public and makes a significant difference. Their sense of loyalty derives from their own accountability and adherence to the values of the teaching profession. This dedication is reinforced by the support they receive from their institutions, which includes recognition, encouragement, and equitable access to benefits, implying that their continuous service is guided by mutual respect and a common goal.

These findings are in aligned with recent studies on organizational behavior and teacher commitment. According to Bantilan et al. (2024), organizational culture and supportive policies within the organization have a significant impact on teachers’ normative commitment. The study they conducted in the Davao Region revealed that favorable work environments, effective leadership, and coordinated teamwork foster a strong sense of professional commitment. Similarly, Muñoz-Fernández et al. (2025) found that both intrinsic factors, like personal fulfillment, and extrinsic elements, such as recognition and alignment with institutional goals, contribute to teachers’ ethical sense of obligation to remain in their roles.

Summary of Teachers Organizational Commitment

This part deals with the summary of the level of organizational commitment of teachers. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Table 10 provides a summary of the three dimensions of teachers’ organizational commitment: affective, normative, and continuance. The results show that all three dimensions received a descriptive rating of “Often”, corresponding to a High-Level Commitment. The overall mean for organizational commitment is 4.29, which is described as often and interpreted as high level of commitment indicating that, on average, teachers demonstrate a strong and consistent level of commitment to their profession and institution across emotional, moral, and cost-based dimensions. Among the three indicators, affective commitment recorded the highest mean score at 4.38, followed by normative commitment at 4.30, and continuance commitment at 4.20.

Table10.  Summary of Teachers Organizational Commitment

The findings indicate that teachers’ organizational commitment is heavily anchored on emotional attachment and a strong sense of identity with their profession. Affective commitment was the most dominant attribute, showing that many teachers remain in their positions because they find personal fulfillment and purpose in their job. Normative commitment was also highly rated, indicating that moral responsibility and a sense of duty plays a substantial part in their sustained service. Although continuance commitment received the lowest rating of the three, its slightly higher score highlights the relevance of practical factors such as employment advantages and earlier investment in influencing teacher decisions to stay.

According to Meyer and Allen’s three-component model of organizational commitment, affective commitment is based on emotional attachment, normative commitment arises from a sense of duty, and continuance commitment results from the perceived costs of leaving. The present findings reveal a healthy balance among these components, with the strongest emphasis on intrinsic motivations such as emotional satisfaction and personal values. This pattern suggests that teachers are not merely staying in their positions out of necessity or obligation but are largely driven by internal fulfillment and professional alignment with their roles.

Recent studies support the current findings, specifically the relevance of affective and normative commitment in maintaining teacher engagement over time. Li et al. (2024) discovered that teachers with higher emotional intelligence and better mental health are more likely to feel connected to their schools. Similarly, Prempeh and Kim (2022) shown that supportive and inspiring leadership strengthens teachers’ emotional attachment to their organizations. In relation to normative commitment, a research study by Bantilan, Opiso, and Ruzol (2024) revealed that organizational culture and policy support have positive effects on teachers’ ethical feeling of obligation to remain in their schools. This underscores the necessity of institutional initiatives that promote professional loyalty. Although continuation commitment appeared as the least dominating characteristic, it is remained relevant. Tan (2023) found that continuance commitment is negatively associated to turnover intentions, indicating that practical concerns such as job security and benefits keep influencing teachers’ decisions to stay. In summary, these results highlight the necessity of building a work environment that promotes emotional well-being, good leadership, and institutional trust in order to maintain high levels of organizational commitment among educators.

Level of Instructional Delivery

This part deals with the instructional delivery of teachers. It comprises of dimensions namely, communicating with students, using questioning and discussion techniques, engaging studies in learning, giving assessment in instruction, and demonstrating reflexibility and responsiveness. This part involves the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Communicating with Students

This part deals with instructional delivery of teachers in terms of communicating with students. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Table 11 presents data on the effectiveness of teachers’ instructional delivery in terms of how they communicate with students, is depicted in table 11. The overall mean is 4.37, rated as “Good” and qualitatively interpreted as “Competent”, indicates that students generally notice their teachers to be effective communicators in the classroom. The The highest-rated item, “Real life examples are used to what we are learning in our subject” with mean score of 4.44, suggests that students value lessons that connect classroom content to real-world applications. Other high-scoring indicator include “Near the end of my class, I review what we have discussed to check if we met the learning goal” (4.41), stress the importance of strategic instructional planning and strengthening of learning objectives.

According to the results, teachers consider themselves to be good at delivering instruction and maintaining clear, purposeful interaction in the classroom. Most items received similar mean scores, indicating a consistent perception among teachers regarding their communication practices in the classroom. The relatively lower score for the item “The learning goals are posted in my classroom” (M=4.21), while still considered competent, indicates that additional work may be required to ensure learning objectives are clearly shown and routinely highlighted throughout instruction.

Table 11. Instructional Delivery of Teachers in terms of Communicating with Students

Recent research emphasizes that clearly articulated learning goals, structured routines, and relevant instructional examples contribute significantly to effective teaching. The study of Aljaser (2019) reveal that the use of clear instructions and goal-setting positively influences student motivation and performance. Similarly, Wahyuni and Treagust (2020) highlighted that communication strategies that are coherent and learner-centered play a critical role in enhancing students’ conceptual understanding.

In the present study, the data indicate that teachers generally apply these principles effectively. However, the relatively lower rating on posting learning goals suggests room for improvement in making instructional objectives more consistently visible and emphasized throughout lessons. These findings align with the work of Ko and Sammons (2019), who stressed that teacher clarity and the explicit communication of learning intentions are key predictors of student progress. Overall, while the teachers demonstrate competence in instructional communication, more emphasis on regularly articulating and reinforcing learning objectives could enhance their overall effectiveness.

Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques

This part deals with instructional delivery of teachers in terms of using questioning and discussion techniques. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Table 12 presents data on the self-assessed instructional delivery of teachers in terms of their use of questioning and discussion techniques. The overall mean rating is 4.29, which falls under the “Good” descriptive category and is interpreted as “Competent”. Among the indicators, the highest-rated item is “Follow-up questions such as ‘Can anyone tell me more?’ are used” (M = 4.35), suggesting that teachers regularly extend classroom discussions to deepen student understanding. Followed by “All voices are heard in our discussions” (M=4.34), highlighting consistent efforts to ensure inclusivity and promote higher-order thinking during discussions. Furthermore, the two lowest-rated categories, “Students ask questions to other students” and “All students participate in our discussions,” had a mean of 4.24. Although still falls within the “Good” and “Competent” ranges, these scores indicate that teachers may experience difficulties in promoting peer-to-peer questioning and maintaining active participation from all students during discussions.

These results indicate that teachers perceive themselves as competent in implementing effective questioning and discussion strategies. The slightly lower scores for “Students ask questions to other students,” “I wait until many hands are raised to answer a question,” and “All students participate in our discussions” (each with M = 4.24) suggest areas where teachers see potential for improvement, particularly in fostering more student-to-student dialogue and ensuring balanced participation across the classroom.

Table 12. Instructional Delivery of Teachers in terms of Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques

The ability to use purposeful questioning and foster interactive discussions is essential for creating engaging and student-centered learning environments. When teachers vary their questioning techniques and facilitate broad student participation, they promote deeper learning and critical thinking. The teachers’ responses indicate confidence in using open-ended questions and providing equitable discussion opportunities, yet also reflect the need to strengthen student engagement by encouraging more peer interaction and inclusive classroom talk.

These findings are supported by Hennessy, Mercer, and Warwick (2019), who observed that even though teachers are good at leading discussions, encouraging students to start their own conversations is still a challenge. Chin (2018) also pointed out that student-led questioning is important for deeper thinking and engagement. Overall, the results show that teachers are skilled in using discussion and questioning techniques but could benefit from more training to improve student interaction and participation.

Engaging Students in Learning

This part deals with instructional delivery of teachers in terms of engaging students in learning. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Table 13 presents the teachers’ self-evaluation of their instructional delivery in terms of engaging students in learning. The overall mean score is 4.35, which is categorized as “Good” and qualitatively interpreted as “Competent.” This indicates that teachers generally see themselves as effectively facilitating engaging learning experiences in the classroom. The two highest-rated indicators were “There is a closing activity that reviews what we have learned” (M = 4.38) and “We start on warm up or motivational activity when I take a seat” (M = 4.37). These responses suggest that teachers consistently implement structured lesson components, such as opening and closing routines, which are known to enhance student engagement and retention of learning objectives. In contrast, the two lowest-rated indicators were “The learning activities and assignments require me to think deeply” and “The work or activities in my subjects challenges me”, both with a mean of 4.31. Despite being rated “Competent,” the data reflect that teacher recognize the need for improvement in providing activities that encourage higher-order thinking and cognitive challenge.

The use of opening and closing activities provides a clear framework for lessons and helps students connect with learning objectives, thereby improving engagement. However, the relatively lower scores in delivering cognitively challenging tasks suggest that, although teachers are effective at capturing student interest, they may struggle to consistently design activities that foster critical thinking, problem-solving, and deeper understanding.

Table 13. Instructional Delivery of Teachers in terms of Engaging Students in Learning

These findings are consistent with Reeve’s (2016) study, which highlighted that engaging instruction involves structure, relevance, and opportunities for cognitive challenge. Likewise, Darling-Hammond et al. (2020) found that meaningful student involvement comes not only from regular classroom routines but also from tasks that push students to think critically—such as analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information. While the teachers in this study show strength in promoting student involvement, the slightly lower ratings related to deeper thinking suggest a need for further training in designing more challenging learning activities.

Giving Assessment in Instruction

This part deals with instructional delivery of teachers in terms of giving assessment in instruction. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Table 14 illustrates the teachers’ self-assessment regarding the integration of assessment strategies in their instructional delivery. The overall mean is 4.41, which corresponds to a “Good” descriptive rating and a qualitative interpretation of “Competent.” This result suggest that teacher generally feel confident in their ability to use assessment as a tool to monitor and support student learning.

The highly rated indicator was “I ask questions to check if the students understand” (M = 4.47), followed by “I use pre-tests, review games, or activities before a test to see if they understand the material” (M = 4.42). These findings reveal that teachers prioritize formative assessment methods to check student understanding prior to formal evaluations. The lowest-rated items, however, were “Feedback on learners’ work comes from me and their peers” (M = 4.36) and “Students are aware of when and why their efforts meet or fall short of expectations” (M = 4.39). Although still labeled “competent,” these lower rankings indicate that there is room for growth in terms of giving consistent feedback and assisting students in better understanding their own progress.

Table 14. Instructional Delivery of Teachers in the aspect of Giving Assessment in Instruction

These findings coincide with the research of Brookhart (2017), who emphasized that effective assessment involves not only teacher-led evaluation but also engaging students in the process through constructive feedback and opportunities for self-monitoring. Similarly, Andrade and Heritage (2018) emphasized the value of peer assessment and students’ understanding of success criteria as key elements in fostering metacognition skills and self-regulated learning. Although teachers in this study demonstrate competence in applying assessment strategies, these findings suggest there is still room for improvement particularly in enhancing peer feedback practices and encouraging student reflection to deepen learning and ownership of progress.

Demonstrating Reflexibility and Responsiveness

This part deals with instructional delivery of teachers in terms of demonstrating reflexibility and responsiveness. It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Table 15 illustrates the teachers’ self-assessment regarding on demonstrating reflexibility and responsiveness in their instructional delivery. The overall mean is 4.44, which corresponds to a “Good” descriptive rating and a qualitative interpretation of “Competent.”

Table 15. Instructional Delivery of Teachers in the aspect of Demonstrating Reflexibility and Responsiveness

The highest-rated item was “I ask questions to check if the students understand” with a mean score of 4.47, followed by “I use pre-tests, review games, or activities before a test to see if they understand the material” with a mean of 4.42. These responses imply that teachers prioritize formative assessment strategies to gauge student comprehension prior to major evaluations. On the other hand, the two lowest-rated answers were “Feedback on learners’ works comes from me and their peers” (M = 4.36) and “Students are aware of when and why their efforts meet or fall short of expectations” (M = 4.39). Although still rated “Competent,” these questions suggest possible areas for improvement in terms of feedback mechanisms and student self-awareness regarding performance.

These results reveal that teachers regularly use questioning and pre-assessment activities to ensure student understanding, highlighting the effective use of formative assessment strategies. However, relatively lower scores in peer feedback and student reflection indicate that opportunities for collaborative assessment and deeper self-awareness may not be completely realized.

These findings resonate with Brookhart (2017), who emphasized that meaningful feedback and student involvement in the assessment process are crucial for fostering self-regulated learning. Likewise, Andrade and Heritage (2018) highlighted the role of peer assessment and a clear understanding of success criteria in developing students’ metacognitive skills. Therefore, while teachers in this study demonstrate competence in implementing assessment strategies, further enhancing peer feedback and student reflection practices could improve the overall effectiveness of classroom assessment.

Summary of Teachers Instructional Delivery

This part deals with the summary of teachers’ level of instructional delivery.  It includes the mean, standard deviation, descriptive rating, and qualitative interpretation of the data gathered from the respondents.

Table 16 provides a summary of the dimensions of teachers’ instructional delivery namely: communicating with students, using of questioning and discussion techniques, engaging students in learning, giving assessment in instruction, and demonstrating reflexibility and responsiveness. The results show that all dimensions have a descriptive rating of “Good”, interpreted as “Competent” level. The overall mean for instructional delivery is 4.37, this suggests that teachers believe that their instructional delivery to be effective and aligned with expected teaching standards.

Among the five dimensions, “Demonstrating Reflexibility and Responsiveness” had the highest average score of 4.44, followed by “Giving Assessment in Instruction” with 4.41. This suggests that teachers feel most confident in adjusting their teaching based on student needs and using assessments to support learning. On the other hand, the lowest-rated areas were “Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques” (4.29) and “Engaging Students in Learning” (4.35), though both still fall within the “Competent” level.

Table 16.  Summary of Teachers Instructional Delivery

The higher scores in demonstrating reflexibility and responsiveness and giving assessment in instruction suggest that teachers are actively monitoring student understanding and adjusting instruction accordingly which are essential aspect of effective classroom practice. Meanwhile, the lower but still positive ratings in using questioning and discussion techniques and engaging student in learning may suggest the need for more advanced strategies to deepen student thinking and participation. These areas often require higher-order instructional skills, such as crafting open-ended questions and designing interactive learning experiences.

These findings are consistent with Bote and de Guzman’s (2020) study, which emphasized Filipino teachers’ excellent adaptability and effective use of assessment in instruction. However, research by Cabansag (2021) and Manzano et al. (2022) highlights the constant demand for professional growth in student engagement techniques and inquiry-based teaching. Improving these instructional areas may enhance teachers’ overall effectiveness and classroom impact.

The Relationship between Independent Variables and Instructional Delivery of Teachers

This part deals with the correlational analysis of emotional well-being and organizational commitment towards teachers’ instructional delivery.  It includes the correlational coefficient and the probability value.

Table 17 presents the correlation between emotional well-being, organizational commitment, and teachers’ instructional delivery. The data show a positive correlation between teachers’ instructional delivery and their emotional well-being with an r-value of (.642) and p-value of (0.000), which means that it is statistically significant at the 0.01 level. In addition, among the four components of this variable, work self-efficacy has the most vital positive relationship with an r-value of (0.588), and p-value of 0.000. it is followed by work grit with an r-value of (0.577), and p-value of 0.000 and followed by satisfaction with work environment with an r-value of (0.507) and p-value of 0.000. And lastly, the school connectedness with an r-value of (0.502) and a p-value of 0.000, which demonstrates moderately positive correlations with instructional delivery. This emphasizes the significant role of personal traits and contextual factors in shaping teachers’ instructional practices.

Similarly, the data show a positive correlation between teachers’ instructional delivery and their organizational commitment with an r-value of (.749), and p-value of (0.000), which means it is statistically significant at the 0.01 level. Moreover, among the three components of this variable, normative commitment has the most vital positive relationship with an r-value of (.724), and p-value of 0.000. It is followed by continuance commitment with an r-value of (.657), and p-value of 0.000, and lastly, affective commitment with an r-value of (.605), and p-value of 0.000

Table 17. Correlation on Emotional Well-Being, Organizational Commitment and Teachers’ Instructional Delivery

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The figure shows a positive correlation between teachers’ instructional delivery and satisfaction with work environment, work grit, school connectedness, work self-efficacy, affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment. All of the dimensions have a p-value of 0.000 highly significant at the 0.01 level. However, normative commitment has the most vital positive relationship, with an r-value of (.749) and p-value of 0.000, which means it is highly significant at the 0.01 level.

The strong correlation between organizational commitment and instructional delivery suggests that teachers who feel grounded in their profession and school are more likely to exhibit competence and efficient instructional techniques. Notably, normative commitment, which indicates moral duty and professional loyalty, and affective commitment, which is defined by emotional attachment to the teaching job, are key indicators of instructional performance. Furthermore, emotional well-being qualities like job self-efficacy and grit have significant relationships with teaching effectiveness, emphasizing the need of confidence and perseverance in maintaining high-quality education.

This implies that positive emotional well-being and high level of organizational commitment promote good instructional delivery by teachers. These findings are in line with recent studies such as that of Burić and Macuka (2018), who stressed the link between teachers’ emotional conditions and instructional performance. Meyer and Allen (2016) emphasized the importance of normative commitment in improving employee performance, particularly in learning environments. Collie (2019) says that instructors’ emotional well-being has a significant influence on their instructional practices and capacity to effectively engage learners.  Furthermore, Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2018), as well as Tschannen-Moran and Gareis (2020), argue that high levels of self-efficacy and a supportive work environment are important factors in effective teaching. The significant correlations observed in this study highlight the importance of fostering supportive work environments and strengthening both emotional and professional resilience to improve educational outcomes.

The hypothesis states that there is no relationship between teachers’ instructional delivery and emotional well-being and organizational commitment is rejected.

Regression Analysis of Teachers’ Instructional Delivery

The extent of influence of the independent variables, such as emotional wellbeing and organizational commitment, on teachers’ instructional delivery, is discussed in this section.

The variables which predict teachers’ instructional delivery are presented in table 18. Out of seven (7) sub-variables, five (5) were the predictors; work self-efficacy, normative commitment and continuance commitment. Teachers’ instructional delivery is influenced by “work self-efficacy” with a beta weight value of β=0.230. On the other hand, an assessment, the components of organizational commitment such as “continuance commitment” with a beta weight value of β=0.222 and lastly, “normative commitment” with a beta weight value of β=0.432, shows the best influence on instructional delivery.

Table 18. Regression Analysis Between the Teacher’s Instructional Delivery, Emotional Well-Being, and Organizational Commitment

Regression Equation Model

Y = A + B₁X₁ + B₂X₂ + B₃X₃

Y = 1.032 + 0.402(X₁) + 0.172(X₂) + 0.207(X₃)

Where:            Y         = Instructional Delivery

                        X₁             = Normative Commitment

                        X₂             = Continuance Commitment

                        X₃             = Work Self-Efficacy

The R squared value or the degree of multiple determination for instructional delivery is 0.594. This indicates that 59.4% of the variation in instructional delivery can be explained by work self-efficacy, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. The remaining 41% is likely due to other factors not examined in this study. Furthermore, The F-value of 107.901 with a p-value of 0.000 confirms the statistical significance of the model.

The findings reject the null hypothesis, stating, “There is no variable, singly, or in combination, that best predicts teachers’ instructional delivery”. The result suggests that normative commitment strongly influences instructional delivery. To significantly enhance the quality of instructional delivery, the teacher must look into improving his/her work normative commitment.

The findings of this study are strongly supported by recent studies that underscores the critical role of organizational commitment and emotional well-being in enhancing teaching performance. Han and Wang (2021) emphasized that both normative and affective commitment significantly predict teachers’ engagement and instructional quality, reinforcing the idea that emotional attachment and a sense of professional responsibility contribute to more effective teaching. While continuance commitment is typically associated with a teacher’s intention to remain due to perceived costs of leaving, Kim et al. (2020) found that in structured and stable institutional environments, continuance commitment can still support consistent and compliant instructional behaviors. In terms of emotional well-being, work self-efficacy emerged as a significant factor influencing instructional delivery. This aligns with the findings of Burić and Macuka (2018), who highlighted the positive relationship between teachers’ emotional stability, self-efficacy, and their instructional competence. Similarly, Zee and Koomen (2016) demonstrated that teacher self-efficacy strongly correlates with classroom management, instructional quality, and student interaction. These contemporary studies validate the current findings, confirming that a combination of organizational commitment and emotional resilience plays a vital role in the effectiveness of teachers’ instructional delivery

The study of Quines and Albutra (2023) highlighted the crucial influence of normative commitment on improving instructional delivery and related educational outcomes. They discovered that normative commitment completely mediated the link between instructional coaching skills and teamwork. This indicates that teachers who feel a strong ethical responsibility toward their school are more inclined to participate actively in collaborative teaching efforts. In a similar vein, Limon (2022) explored how organizational commitment mediates the connection between principals’ empowering leadership and teachers’ job performance. The results showed that organizational commitment, including its normative dimension, plays a significant mediating role, underscoring its value in educational settings. Additionally, research by Atik and Celik (2020) demonstrated that organizational commitment positively impacts teachers’ job performance, with normative commitment being a key factor. Collectively, these results demonstrate that normative commitment is a strong indicator of successful instructional delivery, as it cultivates educators’ sense of duty and accountability, leading to improved teaching effectiveness and greater teamwork.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This section summarizes the significant findings about the previously identified in the first chapter. Conclusions and recommendations are presented to reach the extent of generalizing the result of the investigation.

Summary

The study aimed to determine the level of instructional delivery of public-school teachers of the Division of Valencia, Bukidnon. It also aimed to assess the level of teachers’ emotional well-being in terms of a) satisfaction with work environment, b) work grit, c) school connectedness; and d) work self-efficacy. Determine the level of organizational commitment in terms of a) affective commitment, continuance commitment; and normative commitment. Correlate teachers’ instructional delivery, emotional well-being, and organizational commitment, and identify which variables best predict teachers’ instructional delivery.

The study was conducted at the Division of Valencia City, Bukidnon during the fourth quarter period of the school year 2024-2025. Two hundred twenty-five teacher-respondents participated in the study. The instruments used in the study were adapted to measure the level of instructional delivery, emotional well-being, and organizational commitment. These instruments underwent validity and reliability test.

The following tools were used to treat the data for analysis: (1) descriptive statistics, such as mean and percentage, were used to describe the level of instructional delivery of teachers, level of emotional well-being, and level of organizational commitment. (2) correlational analysis using the Pearson Product Moment Correlation coefficient was used to assess the relationship among the variables. (3) Multiple Stepwise Regression analysis was used to identify the independent variables that predict teachers’ instructional delivery.

The study involved the public-school teachers from the Division of Valencia City, Bukidnon. This research, carried out between February and April 2025, investigated the extent to which emotional well-being and organizational commitment influence instructional delivery among teachers in public elementary and high schools. The study aimed to determine how these independent variables contribute to the effectiveness of teaching practices, thereby offering evidence-based insights for improving instructional quality within the public education system.

In the light of the discussion made on the study, the following significant findings were drawn based on the study’s objectives.

Emotional well-being has an overall mean of 4.31 which means that teacher-respondents agreed that they have a positive emotional well-being. They also have positive emotional well-being on satisfaction with work environment 4.39, work grit 4.19, school connectedness 4.35, and work self-efficacy 4.30.

Organizational commitment has an overall mean of 4.29, meaning teachers have high level of organizational commitment. They also have high level of commitment in affective commitment 4.38, continuance commitment 4.20, and normative commitment.

Instructional delivery of teachers has an overall mean of 4.37, which means that teachers were competent in delivering their instruction. They were competent in delivering their instructional delivery in terms of communicating with students 4.37, using questioning and discussion techniques 4.29, engaging students in learning 4.35, giving assessment in instruction 4.41, and demonstrating reflexibility and responsiveness 4.44.

Emotional well-being was significantly correlated with teachers’ instructional delivery, with an R-value of 0.642 and a p-value of 0.000. Organizational commitment was significantly correlated with teachers’ instructional delivery with an R-value of 0.749 and p-value of 0.000.

Also, the results revealed that normative commitment was the best variable that predict teachers’ instructional delivery with beta weight of 0.432. This implies that work normative commitment significantly affect teachers’ instructional delivery.

Conclusions

Based on the results of the study, the following conclusions were derived:

The level of teachers’ instructional delivery is good, as shown in the result.

Teachers’ emotional well-being showed positive result which means despite the challenges, teachers generally feel supported and connected in their work environment, but slightly lower confidence and perseverance indicate a need for more focus on building resilience and self-belief. Providing professional development and training can help enhance their well-being and improve teaching effectiveness.

Teachers’ organizational commitment showed high level, as revealed in the result, which means that teachers are mostly driven by emotional attachment and a strong sense of duty to their profession, with affective and normative commitment playing key roles. While practical considerations also matter, they are less influential, suggesting that personal fulfillment and moral responsibility are the main reasons teachers remain in their roles.

Teachers have shown competent instructional delivery ratings. Teachers are skilled at adjusting instruction based on student needs and effectively using assessments to guide learning, which are key elements of strong teaching practice. However, the slightly lower scores in questioning techniques and student engagement indicate a need for further development in promoting deeper thinking and more active participation, which require more advanced instructional strategies.

Moreover, there is a significant relationship between the teachers’ instructional delivery and emotional well-being in terms of work self-efficacy. It implies that as the level of emotional well-being increases, teachers’ instructional delivery also increases. Likewise, there is a significant relationship between the teachers’ instructional delivery and organizational commitment in terms of continuance commitment and normative commitment. It implies that the higher level of organizational commitment the higher the teachers’ instructional delivery.

The variables that best predict teachers’ instructional delivery are work self-efficacy, continuance commitment and normative commitment. This implies that these variables best explain teachers’ instructional delivery.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are made regarding the instructional delivery of teachers based on the findings and conclusions of the study:

To enhance instructional delivery, teachers are encouraged to develop innovative and effective teaching strategies tailored to student needs. Develop quality, effective and efficient learning materials. Utilize highly interactive activities to boost critical thinking and enhance student learning.

Teachers are encouraged to nurture positive relationships with students, parents, colleagues, and school leaders, as these connections can significantly strengthen their emotional well-being. Likewise, school administrators and education planners are urged to consider implementing professional development programs focused on emotional well-being, self-efficacy, and resilience.

To enhance teacher motivation and retention, schools and education leaders are encouraged to implement programs that recognize teachers’ efforts, offer peer mentoring, and promote values-based leadership. These initiatives aim to build teachers’ sense of purpose and professional pride. Also, teachers are encouraged to strengthen their sense of purpose and stay motivated by participating in mentoring and leadership activities.

School administrators and educational planners may implement programs aimed at boosting teachers’ emotional well-being and organizational commitment. Initiatives such as resilience training, self-efficacy workshops, and values-based leadership development can strengthen teachers’ confidence and dedication. By fostering a supportive environment that addresses both emotional and professional needs, schools can improve teaching effectiveness and promote long-term teacher engagement.

The Department of Education officials may provide continuous professional development opportunities, actively recognizing and valuing teachers’ contributions, promoting job stability, and cultivating a supportive and collaborative work environment. Such initiatives could lead to improvements in teachers’ instructional delivery and positively impact student learning outcomes.

Finally, further studies may be conducted to explore more factors that may affect teachers’ instructional delivery.

Biographical Sketch

The author, Marty Gee Dapitillo Belmes, was born on November 26, 1992 at Banlag, Valencia City, Bukidnon, as the 3rd child among the four children, of a simple, kind and loving couple Jesus Fuentes Belmes Jr. and Genelyn Dapitillo Belmes.

He finished his primary education at Banlag Elementary School, Banlag, Valencia City, Bukidnon in 2005 and his secondary education at San Jose High School of Sinayawan, Inc., Sinayawan, Valencia City, Bukidnon in 2009. He graduated at Central Mindanao University with the degree Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in General Science.

He is presently employed as Teacher I at Buco-Sinait Integrated School located at Buco, Banlag, Valencia City, Bukidnon and currently he designated as the Teacher In-Charge of the high school department.

In his desire to be better at his craft in the art of management and administration, he took Master of Arts in Education at Central Mindanao University majoring in Educational Administration.

Marty Gee Dapitillo Belmes

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I would like to thank the Almighty God for His enduring grace, guidance, and protection that He has bestowed upon me during this research project.

I would also like to express my sincerest gratitude to my Professor, Dr. Aprell L. Abellana for her continuous support, motivation, advice, patience, immense knowledge and guidance from the start to the completion of the study. Her guidance helped me throughout my research.

I would also like to give special thanks to my wife Decindy Roxanne O. Belmes and my family as a whole for your continuous support and understanding when undertaking my research and writing my project. Your prayer for me was what sustained me this far.

Finally, I would like to thank God, for letting me through all the difficulties. I have experienced your guidance day by day. You are the one who let me finish my degree. I will keep on trusting you for my future.

REFERENCES

1. Abrahams, I., & Milligan, C. (2021). Active learning in science education: Group discussions and hands-on activities. Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 195–210.
2. Acuña, R. S., & Ancho, I. V. (2023). Innovative leadership practices of school heads during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Philippine perspective. International Journal of Education and Practice, 11(2), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.18488/61.v11i2.3306
3. Aldridge, J. M., & Fraser, B. J. (2016). Teachers’ views of their school climate and its relationship with teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction. Learning Environments Research, 19(2), 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9198-x
4. Alexander, R. (2017). Dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (2nd ed.). Routledge.
5. Alfes, K., Shantz, A., & Truss, C. (2017). The link between perceived human resource management practices, engagement and employee behaviour: A moderated mediation model. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(4), 603–623.
6. Aljaser, A. M. (2019). The effectiveness of using educational technology in teaching English grammar to students at the University of Tabuk. International Journal of Education and Practice, 7(3), 146–153. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.61.2019.73.146.153
7. Al-Kahtani, N. S., & Al-Dosary, A. S. (2020). Factors influencing teacher retention: Evidence from Libyan public schools. International Journal of Educational Management, 34(3), 537–553.
8. Allen, J., Kern, M. L., Vella-Brodrick, D., Hattie, J., & Waters, L. (2021). What schools need to know about fostering school connectedness: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 33(2), 645–683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09525-8
9. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z
10. Andrade, H. L., & Heritage, M. (2018). Using formative assessment to enhance learning, achievement, and academic self-regulation.
11. Andres, D., Calanoga, M. E., & Vecaldo, R. (2021). The mentoring roles of cooperating teachers in the practice teaching program. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers & Teacher Education, 11(2), 1–15.
12. Atik, G., & Çelik, S. (2020). The impact of organizational commitment on teachers’ job performance: The mediating role of job satisfaction. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143218818392
13. Atmaca, S., Demirtaş, Z., & Özkan, Ö. (2020). Teacher job satisfaction and emotional well-being: The mediating role of positive emotions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(6), 1205–1218. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000397
14. Bakotić, D. (2016). Relationship between job satisfaction and organisational performance. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 29(1), 118–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2016.1163946
15. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
16. Bantilan, A. D., Opiso, E. M., & Ruzol, C. G. (2024). Organizational culture and policy support as predictors of normative commitment among public school teachers. Journal of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, 5(2), 34–49.
17. Bantilan, A. D., Reyes, M. V., & Lumanao, C. J. (2024). Organizational culture and normative commitment among public school teachers in the Davao Region. Philippine Journal of Educational Management, 36(1), 45–58.
18. Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., Rabasca, A., & Pastorelli, C. (2019). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study of their interrelations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(3), 546–560. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000309
19. Batoon, B. C., & Tagadiad, M. L. (2024). Classroom management as a mediator between school connectedness and academic resilience among high school students. Philippine Social Science Journal, 7(1), 120–134.
20. Bautista, L., & Ocampo, R. (2022). Challenges in implementing online and blended learning in developing countries: The case of the Philippines. Journal of Educational Technology, 15(1), 32–45.
21. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan.
22. Bontilao, J., & Genuba, B. (2024). Interpersonal support and school leadership behavior as correlates of professional commitment among public school teachers. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 41(2), 22–30. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2024/v41i2902
23. Bote, M. S., & de Guzman, A. B. (2020). Filipino teachers’ adaptability and assessment practices in the new normal. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 10(2), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2020.10.2.10
24. Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., & Salovey, P. (2016). Emotional intelligence: Implications for personal, social, academic, and workplace success. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(1), 88–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00334.x
25. Brookhart, S. M. (2017). How to give effective feedback to your students (2nd ed.). ASCD.
26. Burić, I., & Macuka, I. (2018). Teacher emotional well-being and job performance: The mediating role of self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.05.003
27. Burić, I., & Moè, A. (2020). Teacher well-being and its relation to classroom management, instructional quality, and student outcomes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 92, 103076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103076
28. Cabansag, A. M. (2021). Professional development needs of teachers in enhancing student engagement techniques. Philippine Journal of Education, 99(1), 45–60.
29. Cadiz, M. (2020). Enhancing teacher professional development through Learning Action Cells (LACs): The Philippine experience. Philippine Journal of Education Studies, 94(1), 35–46.
30. Caires, S., & Almeida, L. S. (2020). Teacher-student communication and student engagement in higher education. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 48(4), 420–438.
31. Carpenter, J. P., & Krutka, D. G. (2016). Professional learning networks (PLNs): Designing spaces for teacher learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(1), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n1.2
32. Çetin, S. (2018). Teachers’ organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Educational Research and Reviews, 13(5), 147–157.
33. Chin, C. (2016). Classroom questioning and dialogic teaching: An analysis of effective questioning techniques. Educational Review, 68(3), 323–337.
34. Chin, C. (2018). Student-generated questions: Redressing the balance between teaching and learning. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 4(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-018-0021-6
35. Chong, S., & Kong, C. A. (2015). Teacher identity and the challenges of teaching: A study of beginning teachers in Singapore schools. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(2), 1–14.
36. Collie, R. J. (2019). Teachers’ emotional well-being and instructional engagement: A review of research. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 225–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-9440-2
37. Collie, R. J., Shapka, J. D., & Perry, N. E. (2015). School climate and teacher development: A review of the literature. Educational Psychology Review, 27(2), 301–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9289-3
38. Collie, R. J., Shapka, J. D., & Perry, N. E. (2016). School climate and social–emotional learning: Predicting teacher stress, job satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 326–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000098
39. Credé, M., Tynan, M. C., & Harms, P. D. (2017). Much ado about grit: A meta-analytic synthesis of the grit literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3), 492–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000102
40. Cruz, C. M., Ramirez, A. B., & Santos, J. M. (2023). The impact of emotional connection on teacher retention in low-resource schools. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 13(2), 215–229.
41. Cruz, J. P. (2023). The role of intrinsic motivation in predicting teachers’ self-efficacy: Evidence from public senior high schools in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 11(1), 54–63.
42. Cruz, J. P., De Leon, R. S., & Morales, K. A. (2023). Exploring the correlation of academic qualifications and teaching experience with teachers’ self-efficacy. Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 21(2), 105–119.
43. Cruz, M., & Bautista, J. (2023). Enhancing instructional competencies through teacher training programs. Philippine Journal of Education, 104(2), 78–92.
44. Culajara, F. L., & Culajara, R. S. (2023). Coaching and mentoring practices among Filipino teachers: Basis for a mentoring framework. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 40(1), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2023/v40i1875
45. Dalanon, J. A. (2023). Teacher commitment and school engagement: A study in Philippine public schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 11(1), 54–65.
46. Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
47. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/effective-teacher-professional-development-report
48. Datu, J. A. D., Valdez, J. P. M., & King, R. B. (2021). Grit is associated with lower depression via meaning in life among Filipino high school students. Youth & Society, 53(5), 792–804. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X20931602
49. David, A., & Dela Cruz, M. (2019). Differentiated instruction in the K-12 curriculum: Teacher perceptions and practices. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 47(5), 451–468.
50. Del Mundo, R. (2022). Educational technology integration challenges in Philippine schools. [Unpublished report].
51. Department of Education. (2015). DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2015: Policy guidelines on classroom assessment for the K to 12 basic education program. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/DO_s2015_008.pdf
52. Department of Education. (2023). Inventory of teachers’ administrative tasks. Department of Education.
53. Derakhshan, A. (2022). Teachers’ professional identity and normative commitment: A correlational study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 110, 103573.
54. Dodge, R., Daly, A. P., Huyton, J., & Sanders, L. D. (2015). The challenge of defining wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2(3), 222–235. https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v2i3.4
55. Dogani, K. (2023). Constructivist approaches in active learning: Promoting critical thinking. International Journal of Educational Research, 117, 101962.
56. Duckworth, A. L., & Quinn, P. D. (2015). Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit–S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(2), 166–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2015.1014488
57. Edinger, M. J., & Edinger, S. K. (2018). Improving teacher job satisfaction: The roles of social capital, teacher efficacy, and support. Journal of Educational Administration, 56(6), 659–675. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-02-2018-0023
58. Education Development Center. (2016). Active learning and student engagement. Retrieved from https://edc.org
59. Edutopia. (2023). Creating a supportive school culture to increase teacher commitment. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org
60. Fernandez-Martinez, E., Salanova, M., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2020). Teacher grit and emotional stability: The role of professional stressors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 94, 103114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103114
61. Finlay, L. (2008). Reflecting on ‘reflective practice’. Practice-based Professional Learning Centre, The Open University. https://www.open.ac.uk/
62. Finley, F. (2017). The role of open-ended questions in critical thinking development. Critical Thinking Journal, 12(2), 43–58.
63. Fook, J. (2016). Social work: A critical approach to practice (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
64. Francisco, A. (2021). Parental involvement and student achievement in Philippine public schools. Philippine Journal of Education, 95(2), 123–139.
65. Fredrickson, B. L. (2016). The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(4), 201–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.2.3.300
66. Freeman, S., Eddy, S., McDonough, M., Smith, M., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. (2019). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415.
67. Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. E. (2016). Emotional contagion in classrooms: Teacher enthusiasm and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 462–474.
68. Frommelt, M., Stensland, S., & Marks, H. (2021). Impact of teacher enthusiasm on student engagement and participation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(1), 65–79.
69. Garcia-Moya, I., Brooks, F., Morgan, A., & Moreno, C. (2015). The role of school connectedness in adolescent mental health: A review of the literature. International Journal of Public Health, 60(2), 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-014-0634-1
70. Gholam, R. (2019). The effect of Socratic seminars and think-pair-share on student engagement and learning. International Journal of Education, 11(4), 47–62.
71. Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2021). The basic guide to supervision and instructional leadership (4th ed.). Pearson.
72. Goles, C., Sanchez, J. M. P., Sumalinog, G. G., & Mananay, J. (2024). Beyond the pandemic: The changing landscape of technology integration in higher education in Central Visayas, Philippines. CTU Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.22144/ctujoisd.2024.262
73. Hamre, B. K., Pianta, R. C., Downer, J. T., & Mashburn, A. J. (2017). Teacher communication and student achievement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(8), 1126–1139.
74. Han, J., & Wang, Z. (2021). Organizational commitment and teacher engagement: The mediating role of emotional attachment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(4), 651–663. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000492
75. Harini, R., Subramani, P., & Kumar, S. (2020). Personality and organizational commitment: Evidence from Indian educational institutions. International Journal of Management, 11(9), 1130–1140.
76. Harmsen, R., Helms-Lorenz, M., Maulana, R., & van Veen, K. (2018). The relationship between beginning teachers’ stress causes, stress responses, teaching behaviour and attrition. Teachers and Teaching, 24(6), 626–643. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2018.1465404
77. Hascher, T., & Waber, J. (2021). Teacher well-being and student learning: A review of the empirical evidence. Educational Psychology Review, 33(3), 913–936. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09569-3
78. Hattie, J. (2017). Visible learning: Feedback. Routledge.
79. Hattie, J., & Zierer, K. (2018). The power of questioning: Enhancing student thinking and learning. Educational Psychology Review, 30(4), 881–890.
80. Hennessy, S., Mercer, N., & Warwick, P. (2019). A dialogic approach to pedagogy: The importance of teachers’ professional learning. Oxford Review of Education, 45(3), 265–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2018.1537185
81. Heritage, M. (2016). Formative assessment in practice: A process of inquiry and action. Harvard Education Press.
82. Holzberger, D., Philipp, A., & Kunter, M. (2016). Predicting teachers’ instructional behaviors: The interplay between self-efficacy and knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55, 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.12.006
83. Hood, S. (2021). Responsive teaching and the dynamics of the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 98, Article 103252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103252
84. Jennings, P. A., Frank, J. L., Snowberg, K. E., Coccia, M. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2017). Improving classroom learning environments by cultivating awareness and resilience in education (CARE): Results of a randomized controlled trial. School Psychology Quarterly, 28(4), 374–390. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000035
85. Johnson, S., Kraft, M., & Papay, J. (2018). The challenges of instructional delivery in contemporary classrooms. Educational Leadership, 75(3), 48–53.
86. Jones, S. M., & Richmond, G. (2019). How school climate shapes teacher beliefs and attitudes. Educational Leadership, 77(1), 34–39.
87. Joo, B. K., & Lim, T. (2018). Enhancing teacher retention through job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of Career Development, 45(6), 530–543.
88. Kern, M. L., Waters, L., Adler, A., & White, M. A. (2020). A multidimensional approach to measuring school climate. School Mental Health, 12(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-019-09334-0
89. Keyes, C. L. M., & Annas, J. (2016). Feeling good and functioning well: Distinctive concepts in ancient philosophy and contemporary science. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(3), 197–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760902844228
90. Kiefer, S. M., Alley, K. M., & Ellerbrock, C. R. (2015). Teacher and peer support for young adolescents’ motivation, engagement, and school belonging. RMLE Online, 38(8), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2015.11641184
91. Kiemer, K., Gröschner, A., Pehmer, A., & Seidel, T. (2015). High cognitive demand questions in classroom instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(4), 1106–1120.
92. Kim, C., & Hannafin, M. (2020). Scaffolding student learning: Instructional strategies and retention. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(3), 361–375.
93. Kim, M., & Beehr, T. A. (2020). Work-life balance and its impact on organizational commitment and turnover. International Journal of Stress Management, 27(1), 1–15.
94. Kim, Y., Lee, J., & Lee, K. (2020). Continuance commitment and teaching behavior in stable institutional settings. Teaching and Teacher Education, 87, 102932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102932
95. Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. M. (2015). The occupational commitment and self-efficacy of teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(2), 741–752.
96. Klingbeil, D. A., & Renshaw, T. L. (2018). Mindfulness-based interventions for teachers: A meta-analysis of the emerging evidence base. School Psychology Quarterly, 33(4), 501–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000291
97. Ko, J., & Sammons, P. (2019). Effective teaching: A review of research and evidence. Education Development Trust. https://www.educationdevelopmenttrust.com
98. Koca, F. (2016). Teacher communication skills and classroom climate. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(10), 891–900.
99. Kraft, M. A., Marinell, W. H., & Yee, D. S. (2016). School organizational contexts, teacher turnover, and student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Educational Research Journal, 53(5), 1411–1449. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216667478
100. Kurtessis, J. N., Eisenberger, R., Ford, M. T., Buffardi, L. C., Stewart, K. A., & Adis, C. S. (2017). Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1854–1884.
101. Kutsyuruba, B., Klinger, D. A., & Hussain, A. (2015). Relationships among school climate, school safety, and student achievement and well-being: A review of the literature. Review of Education, 3(2), 103–135. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3043
102. Li, H. (2023). Teacher burnout and resilience: Exploring the role of emotion regulation and self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 126, 104097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104097
103. Li, X., Chen, Y., & Huang, L. (2024). Emotional intelligence, mental health, and affective commitment among teachers in urban schools. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2023.XXXXX
104. Libbey, H. P. (2020). School connectedness: Strengthening health and education outcomes for students. The Journal of School Health, 70(2), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12950
105. Limon, M. (2022). The mediating effect of organizational commitment on the relationship between empowering leadership and teacher job performance. International Journal of Educational Management, 36(3), 437–451. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2021-0273
106. Logroño, J. A., & Tagadiad, M. L. (2023). Instructional leadership, ethical climate, and teacher connectedness in public schools: Evidence from Davao del Norte. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 39(3), 88–99. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2023/v39i3878
107. Lomas, T., Medina, J. C., Ivtzan, I., Rupprecht, S., & Eiroa-Orosa, F. J. (2017). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of mindfulness-based interventions on the well-being of healthcare professionals. Mindfulness, 10, 1193–1216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0859-4
108. Lynch, M. (2023). Assessment strategies in modern classrooms. Educational Review, 75(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2023.xxxxxxx
109. Maduli, R. (2023). Challenges in educational technology integration in the Philippines. [Unpublished research].
110. Manzano, J. P., Santos, R. L., & Cruz, M. T. (2022). Inquiry-based teaching in Philippine classrooms: Challenges and opportunities. Asian Journal of Education and Learning, 13(3), 78–91. https://doi.org/10.11591/ajel.v13i3.3125
111. Marzano, R. J. (2017). The new art and science of teaching. Solution Tree Press.
112. Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2016). Dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. Cambridge Journal of Education, 46(3), 335–344.
113. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89.
114. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (2016). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application (3rd ed.). Routledge.
115. Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E., & Vandenberghe, C. (2019). Employee commitment and motivation: A conceptual analysis and integrative model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 513–530.
116. Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2016). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1), 20–52.
117. Mijakoski, D., Karadzinska-Bislimovska, J., Minov, J., Stoleski, S., & Vasilevska, K. (2022). Burnout syndrome among teachers in high-stress environments. Occupational Medicine & Health Affairs, 10(2), 312–320.
118. Miller, J. W. (2020). The impact of teaching experience on teacher efficacy and career longevity. Educational Practice and Theory, 42(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.7459/ept/42.1.03
119. Miranda, M. M. (2023). Online professional learning communities and inclusive education: Toward a participatory model in the Philippines. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 27(3), 280–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1879956
120. Muñoz-Fernández, N., Delgado, P. A., & Soriano, R. L. (2025). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivators of teacher commitment: A cross-national study. International Journal of Educational Research, 120, 101721.
121. Murphy, C., Wilkinson, I., Soter, A., Hennessey, M., & Alexander, J. (2020). Socratic seminars and student autonomy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(6), 1156–1171.
122. Ng, W., & Nicholas, H. (2016). Blended learning in higher education: Student perspectives and experiences. Educational Media International, 53(1), 62–76.
123. O’Connor, C., & Michaels, S. (2019). Effective teacher communication and student engagement. Educational Psychology Review, 31(3), 499–519.
124. Oberle, E., & Schonert-Reichl, K. A. (2016). Social and emotional learning: Recent research and practical strategies for promoting children’s social and emotional competence in schools. In Handbook of social behavior and skills in children (pp. 175–197). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29899-1_10
125. Okekeocha, C. F., & Ezinine, A. N. (2021). Influence of interpersonal relationships on job satisfaction of secondary school teachers in Nigeria. International Journal of Education and Research, 9(6), 1–12. https://www.ijern.com/journal/2021/June-2021/01.pdf
126. Palmer, D. (2020). Teacher enthusiasm and instructional self-efficacy in student motivation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 90, 103036.
127. Philippine Daily Inquirer. (2024). Cagayan de Oro City faces classroom shortage. [News article].
128. Philippine Star. (2024a, September 4). Sara-led DepEd built just 3% of classroom target. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2024/09/04/2382855/sara-led-deped-built-just-3-classroom-target
129. Philippine Star. (2024b, December 4). Serious crisis in education. https://www.philstar.com/business/2023/12/04/2316189/serious-crisis-education
130. Piaget, J. (1936). The origins of intelligence in children (M. Cook, Trans.). International Universities Press. (Original work published 1936)
131. Pianta, R., Hamre, B., & Allen, J. (2021). Teacher-student relationships and student outcomes. Educational Researcher, 50(4), 245–256.
132. Prempeh, S. K., & Kim, S. (2022). The influence of transformational leadership on teacher commitment: A cross-cultural study. International Journal of Educational Management, 36(3), 505–519. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-08-2021-0357
133. Pressley, T., Ha, C., & Learn, E. (2021). Teacher stress and burnout during COVID-19: How schools can help. Phi Delta Kappan, 102(7), 52–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/00317217211017745
134. Quin, D. (2017). Teacher-student relationships and student engagement. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 345–387.
135. Quines, A. M., & Albutra, M. D. (2023). Normative commitment as a mediator between instructional coaching skills and teamwork in schools. Journal of School Leadership, 33(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/10526846221089854
136. Quines, M. L., & Cabaron, M. J. (2022). Faculty spirituality, affective commitment, and school climate. International Journal of Educational Management, 36(3), 491–504.
137. Rajendran, L., Taib, N. M., & Ramalingam, M. (2023). The impact of professional development on teachers’ job satisfaction and retention: A systematic review. International Journal of Educational Development, 99, 102798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2023.102798
138. Reeve, J. (2016). Autonomy-supportive teaching: What it is, how to do it. In W. Liu, J. Wang, & R. Ryan (Eds.), Building autonomous learners (pp. 129–152). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-630-0_7
139. Resnick, L., Michaels, S., & O’Connor, C. (2018). Protocols for productive classroom discussions. Harvard Education Press.
140. Riketta, M. (2018). The relationship between organizational commitment and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 469–477.
141. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational behavior (18th ed.). Pearson Education.
142. Robertson-Kraft, C., & Duckworth, A. L. (2016). True grit: Trait-level perseverance and passion for long-term goals predicts effectiveness and retention among novice teachers. Teachers College Record, 118(3), 1–27.
143. Ryan, J., & Webster, C. (2019). Reflexivity in teaching: Understanding teacher identity and practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(3), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487119834884
144. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069
145. Şahin, D. (2020). Commitment in teaching profession and its impact on school performance. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 12(1), 59–71.
146. Salas-Rueda, A. (2021). The cognitive impacts of excessive screen time in students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(2), 320–333.
147. Santiago, R. (2019). Teachers’ positive attitudes and organizational commitment. Philippine Journal of Education, 98(1), 23–35.
148. Sarmiento, C. (2021, August 3). Internet access major challenge among teachers: Study. Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1149250
149. Schiefele, U., & Schaffner, E. (2015). Emotional contagion in classrooms: Teacher enthusiasm and student interest. Learning and Instruction, 39, 105–114.
150. Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Motivation and social-emotional learning: Theory, research, and practice. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, 101832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101832
151. Second Congressional Commission on Education. (2024). Year Two Report. EDCOM 2.
152. Sedova, K., Kalasova, A., & Macurova, J. (2019). Questioning strategies and student thinking development. Educational Research, 61(3), 311–324.
153. Shakya, R., & Bajracharya, S. (2023). Linking affective commitment and job satisfaction to teacher performance. Journal of Educational Psychology and Research, 10(1), 120–134.
154. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2017). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.05.006
155. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2017). Teacher stress and teacher self-efficacy as predictors of engagement, emotional exhaustion, and motivation to leave the teaching profession. Creative Education, 8(12), 1785–1799. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2017.812122
156. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2018). Job demands and resources as predictors of teacher motivation and well-being. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74, 34–43.
157. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2018). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.10.006
158. Sow, M., Anthony, R. & Berete, M. (2016). Normative commitment and turnover intentions. Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies, 4(2), 97–108.
159. States, U., et al. (2017). Summative assessment and curriculum evaluation. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 24(4), 449–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1234567
160. Suldo, S. M., Minch, D. R., & Hearon, B. V. (2018). Student well-being and academic success: Social-emotional learning as a foundation for education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315292980
161. Suzuki, T., Tamesue, D., Asahi, K., & Ishikawa, Y. (2015). Grit and work engagement: A cross-sectional study. PLoS ONE, 10(9), e0137501. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0137501
162. Tan, R. C. (2023). Continuance commitment and turnover intentions: Evidence from public high school teachers. Philippine Journal of Human Resource Management, 15(1), 65–78.
163. Tecnoscientifica. (2025). Active learning strategies and student engagement. International Journal of Education, 14(1), 75–90.
164. Terosky, A. L., & Heasley, C. (2021). Working with grit: Identity, input, and influence in the work of teacher leaders. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(1), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2020-0180
165. Tofade, T., Elsner, J., & Haines, S. T. (2021). The Socratic method: A teaching strategy to foster critical thinking. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 75(2), 35.
166. Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2015). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom. ASCD.
167. Toropova, A., Myrberg, E., & Johansson, S. (2021). Teacher job satisfaction: The importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educational Review, 73(1), 71–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1705247
168. Trust, T. (2016). New model of teacher learning in an online network. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(4), 290–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2016.1215169
169. Trust, T., & Whalen, J. (2020). Remote teaching and teacher-student communication in the digital age. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 205–217.
170. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. R. (2020). Faculty trust in the principal: An essential ingredient in high-performing schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 58(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-05-2019-0081
171. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2018). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–248. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068002202
172. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2018). Teacher efficacy: Theoretical perspectives, constructs, and future directions. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and self-regulated learning (pp. 87–109). Routledge.
173. Tuncer, B. (2020). Exploring organizational commitment types among teachers: A longitudinal study. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 85, 95–114.
174. Van Uden, J. M., Ritzen, H., & Pieters, J. M. (2019). Engaging students: The role of teacher beliefs and interpersonal teacher behavior in fostering student engagement in secondary education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 79, 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.12.013
175. Van Uden, J. M., Ritzen, H., & Pieters, J. M. (2019). Teacher identity and recognition: The role of social processes in teachers’ well-being and motivation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 82, 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.03.001
176. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds. & Trans.). Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1934)
177. Wahyuni, S., & Treagust, D. F. (2020). Communication in science classrooms: A review of research and practice. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(6), 1031–1050. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09990-5
178. Walshaw, M., & Anthony, G. (2018). Teaching communication and classroom culture. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(5), 435–448.
179. Wang, F., & Winstead, B. (2020). Technology integration and instructional delivery. Computers & Education, 144, 103703.
180. Wang, H., & Hall, N. C. (2020). Affective commitment and teacher career longevity. Educational Psychology Review, 32(3), 497–517.
181. Wang, H., Hall, N. C., & Rahimi, S. (2020). Self-efficacy and causal attributions in teachers: Effects on burnout, job satisfaction, illness, and quitting intentions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 102882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102882
182. Wiliam, D. (2016). Embedded formative assessment (2nd ed.). Solution Tree Press.
183. World Health Organization. (2020). Mental health: Strengthening our response. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-strengthening-our-response
184. Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981–1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801
185. Zhan, Y., Wang, L., & Song, Y. (2023). School climate and teacher commitment: A cross-cultural study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 119, 103928.
186. Zhang, Y., Fang, X., Wei, J., & Wang, Z. (2018). The role of grit in organizational performance: A multi-level study. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2039. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02039
187. Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., Wang, Y., & Li, J. (2023). Collegial collaboration and job satisfaction among secondary school teachers: The mediating role of teacher self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 119, 103966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103966
188. Zubieta, A., & Zubieta, M. (2017). Culturally responsive assessment practices in education. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 19(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.18251/ijme.v19i1.1327
189. Zwiers, J., & Crawford, M. (2017). Academic conversations: Classroom talk that fosters critical thinking and content understandings. Stenhouse Publishers.
190. Zysberg, L., & Schwabsky, N. (2021). Emotional intelligence and well-being: A study among school teachers. Psychology in the Schools, 58(2), 310–324. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22457