Instructional Leadership And Ethical Climate As Determinants Of School Connectedness

Instructional Leadership and Ethical Climate as Determinants  of School Connectedness

Cherie Mae G. Logroño¹ & Celso L. Tagadiad^2
1Department of Education, University of Mindanao Professional Schools
²UM Panabo College, Panabo City, Philippines

ABSTRACT

The study was conducted to determine the singular and combined influence of instructional leadership and ethical climate as determinants of school connectedness among 334 public school teachers in Santo Tomas, Davao del Norte, where the research used a quantitative and descriptive correlation with three sets of adopted research questionnaires answered by the respondents. The research revealed that there was a strong association between instructional leadership and school connectedness was accepted, proving that there was a relationship between the two variables. There was a considerable correlation between ethical atmosphere and school connection, as evidenced by the fact that the relationship between the two was rejected. This study can aid all learners in understanding their obligations and consequences. Additionally, parents might feel confident if they observe how the school implements and considers each learner’s emotional wellbeing, which in turn might enhance their academic success.

Keywords: instructional leadership, ethical climate, school connectedness, determinants, Philippines

INTRODUCTION

Most schools aimed to become child friendly (Loureiro, Alyssa, & Hadjar, 2020) and therefore poor school connectedness (Pikulski, Pella, Casline, Hale, Drake, & Ginsburg, 2020) which may have more risks for negative psychosocial behavior to students and play a role in the depressive symptoms among youth as well as teachers’ support (Rubach, Dicke, Lazarides, Simpkins, & Eccles, 2020). Additionally, poor academic performance and disciplinary outcomes have been attributed to poor school connectedness (Joshi & Billick, 2017).

Implementing strategies that would improve students’ connection to school may help improve having stronger teacher-student relationship (Cook, Duong, McIntosh, Fiat, Larson, Pullmann, & McGinnis, 2018; Moriña, 2019), student’s satisfaction (James & Yun, 2018) and also applying appropriate interventions to help students in academics, influence students’ self-esteem and overall wellness (Watson, 2018; Marino, Santinello, Lenzi, Santoro, Bergamin, Gaboardi, & Perkins, 2020; Song, Bang, Kim, Lee, & Jeong, 2020).

School connectedness also had influence in educational outcomes and social support to the students which is also emphasized in the teacher connectedness (Obi & Bewei, 2020). The climate of the school where the best practice of teaching-learning process and work ethics are highly observed (Yüner & Burgaz, 2019) is undoubtedly highly influential in the sense of school connectedness with the teacher-student relationship established (Knox, Gibson, Gönültas, & Mulvey, 2021). Leadership at schools also though may be indirect but contributed to the overall attainment of students’ subsequent attitudes and behavior at learning (Raad & Atan, 2019) which has been integrated to the engagement to the school activities (Knight, Atuhaire, Allen, Namy, Anton-Erxleben, Nakuti, Devries, 2020).

There were limited studies utilizing instructional leadership and ethical climate having two variables. It is therefore noteworthy to explore the level of instructional leadership along with its dimensions and as well as the school ethical climate experienced by the teachers and school connectedness as determinants, thus having three variables. Not only add up to existing knowledge but also may discover new knowledge that would help understand the status of the field of education, and in the leadership and school environment in general.

METHOD

This chapter presents and describes the method used in conducting the research which includes the research design, research locale, population and sample, research instruments as well as data collection and statistical tools applied in the study.

Research Design

The research used a quantitative non-experimental correlation to see if there was a link between instructional leadership predictors and ethical atmosphere. Because the investigation is relational in nature, quantitative methods were applied, and existing and validated instrumentation could be used. To collect real-world data and come to the results, a non-experimental design was adopted (Roberts, 2021).

Instructional Leadership, Ethical Climate, and School Connectivity are the subjects of this descriptive, non-experimental, quantitative correlational study. Correlational research was used to find out the relationship between instructional leadership practiced by the school head and the work ethical climate maintained by the teacher, that is how the level of instructional leadership influences the level of work ethical climate (Reed, 2019).

Research Locale

The study was conducted at Santo. Tomas West District, Santo. Tomas, Davao del Norte were chosen for the study after much thinking and analysis.

Figure 2. Map of the Philippines highlighting the Municipality of Sto. Tomas

Population and Sample

The respondents of this study were the 334 teachers, 55 male teachers and 279 female teachers of Santo. Tomas West District in the Division of Davao del Norte. Other than Santo. Tomas, West District, the researcher did not include any public-school teachers in Davao del Norte within or outside the region. Permanent public-school teachers who were on-leave, the school in-charge and the school heads were excluded as participants of this study.

Those teachers who refused to sign the informed consent were excluded. Even after the respondents signed the informed consent, they have the freedom to withdraw anytime as a participant if they are no longer willing to answer the questionnaires.

Research Instrument

The researchers used three (3) sets of questionnaires as a primary tool in getting the desired information needed in the study. There were areas of concerns that were made subjects of inquiry in the questionnaire under the following: instructional leadership, the first independent variable, and ethical climate, the second independent variable, and school connectedness as the dependent variable.

Expert validators examined the content validity and reliability of the three questionnaires to guarantee that the measurements were accurate. External validators with competence in social research and statistics validated the survey instruments. The surveys received an average rating of 4 from the validators. Minor adjustments were made in response to suggestions and recommendations to improve some content and assertions in the context of the instruments.

The researcher then submitted the findings to a statistician, who confirmed the content’s reliability and validity. Using Cronbach Alpha, the results from the three sets of questionnaires revealed that the independent variables, instructional leadership, and ethical climate, scored 0.982, while the dependent variable, school connectedness, scored 0.925. The survey was then administered to the teachers in Santo. Tomas, West District, in Davao del Norte, using Google form sheets.

While in describing the level of ethical climate practiced by the school head, the following was used:

In describing the level of school connectedness, the following was used:

Data Collection

The researchers secured permission to conduct a study from the Office of the Schools Division Superintendent through the Office of the School Head of Santo Tomas Central Elementary School. Thereafter, when permission was granted, the researchers personally administered the questionnaires to the respondents.  First, teachers answered the three phases of the questionnaire: Profiling, Instructional Leadership and Work Ethical Climate. The respondents were given enough time to accomplish the questionnaires. The responses were tallied and tabulated in tables for purposes of analysis and interpretation. And after, data was processed statistically in order to derive answers to this scientific inquiry.

Statistical Tool

The following statistical tools were used in processing data:

Mean. This was used to identify the level of practiced instructional leadership of the school head as observed by the teachers and the level of work ethical climate

Pearson’s r.  This tool was used to test the significant relationship between level of instructional leadership and the level of work ethical climate.

Regression analysis. This was used to determine what domains in the instructional leadership significantly influence the school ethical climate.

RESULTS

The data obtained from the respondents on the instructional leadership, ethical climate, and school connectedness were analyzed and interpreted in this section based on the research objectives previously stated. The order of discussions on the mentioned topic is as follows: level of instructional leadership; level of ethical climate; level of school connectedness in terms of; significant relationship between the instructional leadership and school connectedness; significant relationship between ethical climate and school connectedness; the singular and combined influence of instructional leadership and ethical climate on school connectedness.

Level of Instructional Leadership 

Shown in Table 1 is the level of instructional leadership has an overall mean of 4.56 with a descriptive level of Very High and is interpreted that the instructional leadership is manifested at all times. The result shows that curriculum implementation with the highest mean value of 4.69 with descriptive value of Very High. Meanwhile, professional development with a mean of 4.64; followed by maintain visible presence with 4.60; feedback on teaching learning followed with a mean of 4.59 and is followed by instructional power with a mean of 4.54; this is then followed by maximize instructional time with a mean of 4.44; and the lowest indicator is the monitoring students’ progress with a mean of 4.41 with a descriptive level of Very High. All indicators got a descriptive level of Very High. Standard deviation has an overall score of 0.66 and an overall mean of 4.55 with a descriptive level of Very High and interpreted that the instructional leadership is always manifested.

Level of School’s Ethical Climate

Shown in Table 2 is the weighted means of each criterion were computed, in which the level of school ethical climate got a mean of 4.56 with a descriptive level of Very High and interpreted that the schools’ ethical climate is always observed. The results revealed that the teacher to student with the highest mean of 4.80 which is described as Very High and is followed by environment to teacher/ learning environment with a mean value of 4.53 and described as Very High, and the Student to student with the lowest mean score of 4.37 which is described also as Very High. All indicators got a descriptive value of Very High. It also has an overall Standard Deviation of 0.57 and with an overall mean of 4.56 with a descriptive level of Very High and is interpreted as the school’s ethical climate is always observed.

Table 2. Level of  School Ethical Climate

Level of School Connectedness

Shown in Table 3 is the level of school connectedness has an overall mean of 3.97 with descriptive level of High and interpreted as the level of school connected is always manifested. The results revealed that connections with adults in school with the highest mean of 4.61 which is described as Very High and is followed by school involvement with a mean value of 4.39; followed by comfort in this school with a mean of 4.30 and with a descriptive level of Very High; emotional connections followed with a mean of 4.20 and with a descriptive level of Very High; Peer connections at school with a mean of 4.06 with a descriptive level of high; value school with a mean of 3.31 with a descriptive level of moderate and the negative connectedness with the lowest mean of 2.96 with a descriptive level of moderate. The result also showed the Standard Deviation score of 1.47 and an overall mean of 3.97 with a descriptive equivalent of High and is interpreted as the level of school connectedness is oftentimes manifested.

Table 3. Level of School Connectedness

Significance of the relationship between the Instructional Leadership and School Connectedness 

Shown in Table 4.1 is the result of the test of relationship between instructional leadership and school connectedness. Reflected in the hypothesis, the relationship was tested at 0.05, level of significance with the overall r-value of .453, or a p-value of <0.05 signified the rejection of the null hypothesis. It means that there is a significant relationship between instructional leadership and school connectedness. This shows that instructional leadership is correlated with school connectedness.

Table 4.1. Significance of the relationship between Instructional leadership (IV1) and School Connectedness (DV)

Significance of the relationship between Ethical Climate and School Connectedness
Shown in Table 4.2 is the result of the test of relationship between ethical climate and school connectedness. Reflected in the hypothesis, the relationship was tested at 0.05, level of significance, the overall r-value of .476 with a p-value of <0.05 signified the rejection of the null hypothesis. It means that there is a significant relationship between ethical climate and school connectedness. This shows that the ethical climate is correlated with school connectedness.

Table 4.2. Significance of the relationship between Ethical climate (IV-2) and School connectedness (DV)

Singular and combined influence of Instructional Leadership and Ethical Climate on School Connectedness

Shown in Table 5 is the result from the relationship between organizational environment and workforce diversity. The r-value of .041 or p is less than 0.05 or significant for the correlation of internal environment and overall workforce diversity, with r-value of .128 or p is less than 0.05 significant for the correlation between professional development and overall workforce diversity, r-value of .000 or p is less than 0.05 significant for the teamwork and overall workforce diversity, r-value of .000 or p is less than 0.05 significant for guidance and support, .000 or p is than 0.05 significant for facilitation, .407 or p is less than 0.05 significant for participation and coordination and significant for rewards and benefits with r-value of .000 p is less than 0.05 and overall workforce diversity.

When the measures of organizational environment are correlated to each indicator of workforce diversity, results showed a computed r-value of .000 or p is less than 0.05 or significant.  All sub-indicators are significant to each other. That means the p value is less than 0.05 level of significance. This signifies the null hypothesis is rejected.

Table 5.  Domain of instructional leadership and ethical climate in their singular and combined capacities significantly influence school connectedness

Multiple Regression Analysis of the 

            Influence of Ethical Climate and Instructional Leadership

Shown in Table 6, when regression is established, the researcher aims to see if there are any possible direct and indirect correlations. When such ethical climate and instructional leadership were regressed on the school connectedness of instructors, it produced an R² of .266, as shown in Table 6. The ANOVA value of this regression is 53.826 significantly influences the school connectedness. The R² .266 indicates that 26.6 % of the variance in school connectedness is attributed to ethical climate and instructional leadership. This means that 73.4% other factors not explored in this study account for a significant portion of the variance in school connectedness. Examining further, the table reveals that ethical climate and instructional leadership have the biggest impact among the variables (Beta =0.559, p- value= 0.000) and the lowest is, the ethical climate with (Beta = .138, p-value=0.343).

Table 6 Multiple Regression Analysis of the Influence of Ethical Climate and Instructional Leadership

DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the discussion of the data on instructional leadership, ethical climate, and school connectedness.

Level of Instructional Leadership

The first indicator, instructional power, with a descriptive equivalence of Very High as the results revealed. Encouraging the teachers to use instructional materials freely came with the highest. Second to highest is organizing and delivering the instructional materials to teachers. Third, providing teachers sufficient access to instructional material. Fourth, recommends resources in areas in which teachers need. Fifth, provides students with sufficient access to the instructional material. Sixth, guides teachers in using instructional resources. The seventh and final, takes feedback on availability of the instructional resources.

The second indicator, maintaining the visible presence, with a descriptive value of Very High as the results revealed. First came is visibly present in school for teachers and students. Second, conducts meetings to discuss instructional matters. This is then followed and comes third by personally attending co-curricular activities of the school. Fourth is discussing with teachers the matters related to the instructions. Then followed and came fifth is physically available for instructional issues. The sixth and final is to visit classes regularly to observe teaching and learning.

While the third indicator, professional development, with descriptive equivalence of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest is planning faculty meetings for professional development. Second, it encourages teachers to improve their classroom practices. Two came on third are available for teachers’ professional development and arranges teachers to take steps to solve instructional issues. Fourth, plan professional development according to needs. Fifth, two questions on the same, develop follow up plans for assessing professional development and encourage teachers to take steps to solve instructional issues.

The fourth indicator maximizes instructional time with a descriptive equivalence of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, encourages all teachers to come to class well-prepared and on time. Second, it ensures that all students are present in the class during class time This is then followed and comes third which protects classroom instructional time from outside interruptions. Fourth, solves issues related to discipline to maximize instructional time. Fifth, make sure that students are not allowed to go to the office during class. All of which have a descriptive equivalence of Very High. The sixth and final, uses class time of teachers for regular meetings, the only one with a descriptive equivalence of High.

Then the fifth indicator, monitoring students’ progress, with a descriptive equivalence of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, asks the teachers to send the students’ progress reports to parents. Second, discuss the students’ result teachers for curricular strengths. This is then followed and comes third, meets teachers individually to discuss student progress issues. The fourth and final is to review students’ work when evaluating classroom instructions.

Then the sixth indicator, feedback on teaching-learning, with a descriptive equivalence of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, praises outstanding students on their achievement publicly. Second, provide public praise to those teachers who perform well. This is then followed and comes third, communicates students’ performance in parent-teacher meetings. Fourth, reinforces the teachers in staff meetings/newsletters/ memos. The fifth and final is to provide verbal and written feedback to my teachers.

Then the seventh and final indicator, curriculum implementation, with a descriptive equivalence of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, ensures that teachers teach the required curriculum. Second, came two on the same spot: encouraging a lesson plan for making curriculum effective and encouraging my teachers to engage their students in activities. Followed and came, meeting teachers to get reports about curriculum implementation. The fourth and final, students’ marks provide curriculum implementation.

This backs up Hassan’s (2019) claim that what the teacher does in the classroom with the curriculum has an impact on whether the specified goals are accomplished, and that the teacher is the major curriculum implementer. As a result, how well the curriculum is executed is influenced by the instructor’s knowledge, professional training, competence, initiative, enthusiasm, and motivation. Moreover, Madondo (2021), the teachers’ ideas on effective classroom instruction were implicit in their comments of how the program was implemented. Such viewpoints provide a lot of light on the difficulties rural schools face when implementing their curricula. The study’s findings, which were supported by a theoretical framework based on teacher agency, showed that schools lack the human, financial, and material resources necessary for effective curriculum implementation and that teachers need assistance regarding adequate infrastructural facilities.

                       On the other note, monitoring students progress, according to Tereza Aidonopoulou‐Read (2021), several assessment issues in this setting relate to consistency and transferability, the absence of official acknowledgement of non-academic development, familiarity with the learners, observation skills and training, workload and time, and the subjectivity of professional judgment.Additionally, Jenlyn, & Loftus-Rattan (2022) added that when implementing Individualized Education Programs for students with learning difficulties and more generally in a multi-tiered system of supports framework, academic progress monitoring is crucial. While progress monitoring is a common practice in schools today, many of these pupils are not actively participating in it. According to research, actively involving students in tracking their progress through goal-setting and performance evaluation can boost their academic performance and motivation. In addition to the standard academic progress-monitoring procedures, this column offers a performance feedback and goal-setting method for progress monitoring.

Level of Ethical Climate

Teacher to student, its first indicator, with a descriptive equivalence of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, praising students for excellent work and treating all students with respect came in the same spot. Second, making students feel safe. Followed and came third, respecting the differences of all students. Fourth, grade assignments fairly. Fifth, available to help students. Sixth, allow students to express their ideas.

Under the same indicator, the same seventh in the same place, with positive role models for students and gives students the chance to practice what they learn. Eighth, help students improve their student habits. Then followed and came ninth, encouraging cooperation among students. Tenth, encourages students to ask appropriate questions. Came eleventh, helping students with special needs. Then followed by twelfth on the same spot: well prepared and provides adequate assistance for the students. Thirteenth came with two questions as well which asks the students who have questions about assignment to feel free and help students when they have a problem Fourteenth, sets high expectations for good behavior. The final and the lowest, returns assignments in a reasonable amount of time.

The second indicator is students to teacher or learning environment, with a descriptive equivalence of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, enjoy learning from their teachers. Second, treat their teachers fairly. Third came, respectful to teachers. Fourth, perform their personal best in their schoolwork. Fifth, cooperate with their teachers. Followed by actively participating in class activities in sixth. Seventh, trusted by their teachers. Eighth, respect things that belong to their classmates. Ninth, follow directions. Tenth, pay attention during class, and last and with the lowest, learn from their mistakes.

The third and final indicator is student to student with a descriptive equivalence of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, are accepted by their classmates. Second, treat their classmates with respect. Third came, when working in a group with their classmates, to do their fair share. Fourth, encourage their classmates to do their best. Fifth, will get help if they see others in a fight. Followed by helping their classmates even if it means more work for themselves in sixth. Seventh, came two questions in the same spot which are also the last, stick up for classmates who are being picked on by others, and feel free to stand up for what they believe even if it is not popular.

The result supports Carbonneau (2020) that teachers’ perspectives on student-teacher conflict were examined to see if they influenced their assessments of students’ mathematical reasoning. Teachers’ assessments of students’ mathematical reasoning were found to be a major predictor of their standardized scores. According to the data, teachers’ views of student-teacher conflict bring accord out of action as an intermediary in the relationship. There is a stronger correlation when there is a discrepancy between teachers’ judgments and pupils’ standardized test scores.

Level of School Connectedness

The negative connectedness, as first indicator, with a descriptive equivalence of Moderate as the results revealed. The first and the highest, feel that teachers focus more on punishing students instead of helping them. Second, they do not want to cheer for their school. Third, wishing to transfer to another school. Fourth, keep on having arguments with their teachers and feel that their classmates are dumb came of the same spot. Fifth, bullying is prevalent and the people they cherish say discouraging words about our school also came at the same spot.

Under the same indicator, negative connectedness, feel that teachers are illogical in sixth. Seventh, don’t see the value of things they learned from school. Eighth, feeling that teachers do not treat them fairly. Ninth, they usually lose their interest in class. Tenth, do not want to engage themselves with their classmates. This is then followed by sometimes refusing to attend their class in the eleventh.  Then twelfth, feeling that the only reason why they go to school is because ‘they have to’. Thirteenth, commit some mistakes to get their teacher’s attention. All of which have a descriptive equivalence of Moderate. The last, prefer to isolate themselves from everyone, even from their teacher, with a descriptive equivalence of Low.

The second indicator, connections with adults in school, with a descriptive value of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, care for their students. Second, assist students whenever they need help. Third, students are happy. Fourth, treat students warmly. Fifth, they can be trusted at school, whenever they have a problem. This is then followed by consulting students as to how they are doing and cherishing their students. The last, immerse themselves in the students’ performance.

The third indicator, peer connections at school, with a descriptive value of High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, enjoy spending time with their classmates. Second, they feel like they belong with their classmates and peers. Third came, thinking that their classmates would accept them. Fourth, are comfortable with other students’ company, and like interacting with other students.

Under the same indicator, peer connections at school, the fifth, have someone whom they eat lunch with. All of which have a descriptive equivalence of Very High. The sixth, feel like they can rely on most of their classmates whenever they are struggling. This is then followed by feeling their classmates disregard their presence, in seventh, and with a descriptive equivalence of Moderate. The eighth and lowest, feel alone.

The fourth indicator, school involvement, with a descriptive value of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, are doing everything in order to support our school. Second, like attending school events, like sports events and dances. Third came, encouraging their peers to participate in our school’s activities. The fourth, participate in activities within our school, such as clubs or teams.

The fifth indicator, Emotional connections, with a descriptive value of Very High as the results revealed. First, try doing things that can make their teachers happy. Second, share how they are feeling with their friends at school, both, with a descriptive equivalence of Very High. Third came, asking their friends at school for help whenever they have a problem. This is then followed by offering help to their friends at school when they are having some problem, fourth. Lastly, care about how their classmates think of me.

The fifth indicator, emotional connections, with a descriptive value of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, try doing things that can make their teachers happy. Second, share how they are feeling with their friends at school, both, with a descriptive equivalence of Very High. Third came, asking their friends at school for help whenever they have a problem. This is then followed by offering help to their friends at school when they are having some problem, fourth. Lastly, care about how their classmates think of me.

The sixth indicator, value school, with a descriptive value of Moderate as the results revealed. First, thinking that going to school is essential. Second, care about how their teachers’ perception about them, both, with a descriptive equivalence of High. Third came, getting into a fight with their classmates with a descriptive equivalence of Moderate. The last, sometimes talk back to their teachers, with a descriptive equivalence of Low.

The seventh and final indicator, comfort in this school, with a descriptive value of Very High as the results revealed. The first and the highest, feel safe in our school. Second, feel like school is where they truly belong. Third came, always trying to give their utmost best at school – all of which have a descriptive equivalence of Very High. Lastly, do not feel good whenever people criticize our school, with a descriptive equivalence of High.

The result supports Wyman, Pickering, Pisani, Rulison, SchmeelkCone, Hartley, and Valente (2019), the connection with adults in school, as well as network interventions addressing these processes, such as increasing the influence of adolescents with healthy coping skills and boosting youth–adult interactions across the school, could lead to more protective schools (Wyman, Pickering, Pisani, Rulison, SchmeelkCone, Hartley, Valente, Bal and Perzigian (2013), cited by Cedeo (2021), proposed that school social workers become aware of the needs of unaccompanied minors and develop interventions to address their specific difficulties because schools are often the first social and institutional venues where immigrant adolescents engage in cultural adaptation.

Moreover, Bandolpho (2020) added that teachers who are strong role models and listeners are essential for students. Students require teachers who are coaches and facilitators who create lessons that excite and include students in the practice that leads to learning. These teachers should plan lessons from intended objectives for both learning and classroom culture. Relationship development and valuable, challenging academic experiences are not incompatible. Instead, they can be intentionally incorporated into the classroom culture and lesson design to foster both strong relationships and a sense of belonging.Encourage pupils to stick with challenging coursework.

Significance of the relationship between the Instructional Leadership and School Connectedness

            The test of relationship between instructional leadership and school connectedness revealed a positive and significant relationship between the indicators of instructional leadership to school connectedness which means that instructional leadership influenced school connectedness.  Feedback on teaching and learning came the highest. Second, maintain a visible presence. Third, professional development; Fourth, instructional power; Fifth, monitoring students’ progress; Sixth, maximizing instructional time, and curriculum implementation.

Significance of the relationship between the Ethical Climate and School Connectedness

The test of relationship between ethical climate and school connectedness revealed a positive and significant relationship between the indicators of ethical climate to school connectedness which means that ethical climate influence school connectedness. Student to student came the highest. Second, teacher to student. Third, student to teacher/learning environment.

On singular and combined influence of Instructional Leadership and Ethical Climate on School Connectedness

One of the important purposes of this study is the multiple regression analysis determining which indicators of school connectedness best predicts the instructional leadership and ethical climate.  The study states that there are no domains or there is no domain of instructional leadership and ethical climate significantly influenced school connectedness.  However, it was found that their ethical climate and school connectedness revealed a positive and significant relationship between the indicators of ethical climate to school connectedness. Additionally, school connectedness is a reversible predictor of academic achievement (Lemkin et al., 2018) connections between schools (supportive interactions with adults at school and participation in school groups).

CONCLUSION

Conclusions are formed in this part, as may be seen from the study’s findings. The following are the conclusions based on the results.

The level of instructional leadership is very High with a descriptive level of Very High.  The indicator that got the highest mean is the curriculum implementation with a descriptive level of Very High. On the other note, the indicator that got the lowest is monitoring students’ progress with a descriptive level of Very High. While the level of school ethical climate with a descriptive level of Very High. The indicator that got the highest is the teacher to student and descriptive level of Very High. On the other hand, the indicator that got the lowest is the student to student with a descriptive level of Very High.

On the other hand, the level of school connectedness with a descriptive level of high. The indicator that got the highest is connections with adults at school with a descriptive level of Very High. On the other note, the indicator that got the lowest is the negative connectedness with a descriptive level of Moderate.

Furthermore, on the relationship between instructional leadership and school connectedness, which was rejected which means there was a significant relationship between instructional leadership and school connectedness. While on the relationship between ethical climate and school connectedness, which was rejected which means there was a significant relationship between ethical climate and school connectedness.

Recommendation

Based on the foregoing findings and conclusions, a number of recommendations are offered.

The overall level of instructional leadership, monitoring students’ progress should be given attention as it appears that this indicator had the lowest mean score. Regular monitoring of the students’ progress can be of great help. Regular means every activity, to monitor each students’ strengths and even weaknesses. On the ethical climate, student to student got the lowest mean among indicators. As a facilitator, it can be improved by encouraging and building stronger relationships in class through activities in building camaraderie. While on the school connectedness, negative connectedness has the lowest mean which means that learners feel moderate. This can be eradicated by helping learners feel comfortable outside and inside the classroom where there is no animosity.

In this context, the school administrators craft policies that would protect the well-being of every learner inside and even outside the campus. One of these is the existing anti-bullying. This can help every learner be aware of the responsibilities and effects of such. Also, parents could also feel secure seeing the school implements and take into considerations the emotional well-being of each learner, which in return could improve their academic performance.

Additional research into other elements that affect the individual and combined influence of instructional leadership and ethical atmosphere on school connectedness may be done as part of the study. Furthermore, replication of this work is encouraged to test and validate results in different settings.

REFERENCES

1. Aas, M., & Paulsen, J. M. (2019). National strategy for supporting school principal’s instructional leadership: A scandinavian approach. Journal of Educational Administration, 57(5), 540-553. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2018-0168
2. Akram, M., Kiran, S., & İlğan, A. (2017). Development and validation of instructional leadership questionnaire. International Journal of Organizational Leadership, 6(1), 73-88. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.19236/IJOL.2017.01.06
3. Alternative ways of cooling a passive school building in order to maintain thermal comfort in summer. (2021). Energies, 14(1), 70. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en14010070
4. Abimbola, O. O., PhD., & Ugbede, O. T. (2018). Gender differences in risky behaviour, learned helplessness and school connectedness among undergraduates in osun state. Gender & Behaviour, 16(1), 11073-11084. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/gender-differences-risky-behaviour-learned/docview/2109234890/se-2?accountid=31259
5. Amri-Dardari, A., Mkaouer, B., Nassib, S. H., Amara, S., Amri, R., & Salah, F. Z. B. (2020). THE EFFECTS OF VIDEO MODELING AND SIMULATION ON TEACHING / LEARNING BASIC VAULTING JUMP ON THE VAULT TABLE. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 12(3), 325-344,437. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/effects-video-modeling-simulation-on-teaching/docview/2458773445/se-2?accountid=31259
6. Andreja Brajša‐Žganec, Merkaš, M., & Velić, M. Š. (2019). The relations of parental supervision, parental school involvement, and child’s social competence with school achievement in primary school. Psychology in the Schools, 56(8), 1246-1258. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pits.22273
7. Aqeel, M., & Rehna, T. (2020). Association among school refusal behavior, self-esteem, parental school involvement and aggression in punctual and truant school-going adolescents: A multilevel analysis. International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare, 13(5), 385-404. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJHRH-06-2020-0041
8. Ayub, A., Siddiqui, J. A., & Lodhi, M. S. (2017). To investigate the quality of science text book (biology) at secondary level: A content analysis. New Horizons, 11(1), 59-76. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/investigate-quality-science-text-book-biology-at/docview/1881103067/se-2?accountid=31259
9. Baeten, M., Dochy, F., Struyven, K., Parmentier, E., & Vanderbruggen, A. (2016). Student-centred learning environments: An investigation into student teachers’ instructional preferences and approaches to learning. Learning Environments Research, 19(1), 43-62. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9190-5
10. Bandolpho, B. (2020). I’m Listening: How Teacher-Student Relationships Improve Reading, Writing, Speaking, and Listening (Drive Student Engagement and Empower Learners Through Teacher-Student Relationships). Solution Tree, Solution Tree.
11. Bauml, M., Mary, M. P., & Rhea, D. (2020). A qualitative study of teachers’ perceptions of increased recess time on teaching, learning, and behavior: JRCE. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 34(4), 506-520. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2020.1718808
12. Bernaldez, E. & Gempes, G. (2016). The Mediating effect of Conflict Management styles of School Heads on the relationship between Ethical Climate and Organizational Commitment among Public Elementary Schools in region XI. International Journal of Management Excellence Volume 7 No.1. 743-750. ISSN:2292-1648
13. Bickle, M. C., & Rucker, R. (2018). STUDENT-TO-STUDENT INTERACTION: Humanizing the online classroom using technology and group assignments. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 19(1), 1-11,56. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/2100350081?accountid=31259
14. Bronkema, R., & Bowman, N. A. (2018). GENDER, CAMPUS FRIENDSHIPS, AND EMOTIONAL CONNECTION. College Student Affairs Journal, 36(1), 50. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/gender-campus-friendships-emotional-connection/docview/2160308994/se-2?accountid=31259
15. Buckler, A. (2015). An exploratory study of student and teacher perceptions on student motivation and the teacher-student relationship (Order No. 3708723). Available from ProQuest Central. (1698505522). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1698505522?accountid=31259
16. Carbonneau, K. J. (2020). Teacher judgments of student mathematics achievement: The moderating role of student-teacher conflict. Educational Psychology, 40(10), 1211-1229. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2020.1768223
17. Cardenas, H.J. & Cerado, E. (2016). School Climate, Teachers’ Efficiency and Learning Outcomes in Koronadal City Schools Division, Philippines. Journal of Modern Education Review, Volume 6, No. 1, pp. 19–25 Doi: 10.15341/jmer(2155-7993)/01.06.2016/003. ISSN 2155-7993.
18. Cedeño, S.,M. (2021). Conexiones: Brokering connections with unaccompanied immigrant adolescents in secondary schools. School Social Work Journal, 45(2), 1-20. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/conexiones-brokering-connections-with/docview/2549949720/se-2?accountid=31259
19. Che Nidzam, C. A., Shaharim, S. A., & Mohd Faizal Nizam, L. A. (2017). Teacher-student interactions, learning commitment, learning environment and their relationship with student learning comfort. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 14(1) Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1919521212?accountid=31259
20. Cheser, K., Cox, J. L., & Detwiler, J. (2015). A triptych study of the impact of teacher dispositions on teacher hiring and student outcomes, teacher and student growth mindsets, and student perceptions of teacher-student relationships (Order No. 3707247). Available from ProQuest Central. (1695818108). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1695818108?accountid=31259
21. Cook, C. R., Duong, M. T., McIntosh, K., Fiat, A. E., Larson, M., Pullmann, M. D., & McGinnis, J. (2018). Addressing discipline disparities for black male students: Linking malleable root causes to feasible and effective practices. School Psychology Review, 47(2), 135-152. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.17105/SPR-2017-0026.V47-2
22. Daubney, K. (2021). “Employability is not inimical to good learning” *: Rearticulating school academic curricula to surface their employability value. Journal of Work-Applied Management, 13(1), 103-116. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-08-2020-0041
23. Enwereuzor, I. K., Onyishi, I. E., Albi-Oparaocha, F., & Amaeshi, K. (2020). Perceived leader integrity as a mediator between ethical leadership and ethical climate in a teaching context. BMC Psychology, 8, 1-11. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40359-020-00420-6
24. Gebhardt, M., DeVries, J. M., Jungjohann, J., Casale, G., Gegenfurtner, A., & Jörg-Tobias Kuhn. (2019). Measurement invariance of a direct behavior rating multi item scale across occasions. Social Sciences, 8(2) doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/socsci8020046
25. Gilliland, Sarah J, PT, DPT,PhD., C.S.C.S., & Wainwright, Susan Flannery,P.T., PhD. (2017). Physical therapist students’ conceptualizations of clinical practice. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 31(3), 54-63. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/physical-therapist-students-conceptualizations/docview/2066610964/se-2?accountid=31259
26. Goldring, E., Grissom, J., Neumerski, C. M., Blissett, R., Murphy, J., & Porter, A. (2020). Increasing principals’ time on instructional leadership: Exploring the SAM® process. Journal of Educational Administration, 58(1), 19-37. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JEA-07-2018-0131
27. Goyal, S., Kumar, N., Badyal, D., Kainth, A., & Singh, T. (2017). Feedback of students to aligned teaching -learning and assessment. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 59(4) doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/psychiatry.IndianJPsychiatry_12_17
28. Hallinger, P. & Murphy, J. (1985), “Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals”, The Elementary School Journal,
29. Haryono, S., & Arafat, Y. (2017). Effects of organizational culture and work motivation on job performance among the private universities’ full-time faculties in south sumatera province. International Information Institute (Tokyo).Information, 20(8), 5563-5575. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/effects-organizational-culture-work-motivation-on/docview/2020736510/se-2?accountid=31259
30. Hassan, B. G., MED. (2019). Extend of implementation of biology curriculum in public senior secondary schools in maiduguri metropolis, borno state, nigeria. Researchers World, 10(1), 60-66. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.18843/rwjasc/v10i1/06
31. James, M., & Yun, D. (2018). Exploring student satisfaction and future employment intentions: A case study examination: Is there a link between satisfaction and getting a job? Higher Education, Skills and Work – Based Learning, 8(2), 117-133. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-03-2017-0019
32. Jenlyn, F., & Loftus-Rattan, S. (2022). Actively Involving Students With Learning Disabilities in Progress Monitoring Practices. Intervention in School and Clinic, 57(5), 329-337. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512211032618
33. Joshi, K., & Billick, S. B. (2017). Biopsychosocial causes of suicide and suicide prevention outcome studies in juvenile detention facilities: A review. Psychiatric Quarterly, 88(1), 141-153. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11126-016-9434-2
34. Knight, L., Atuhaire, L., Allen, E., Namy, S., Anton-Erxleben, K., Nakuti, J., . . . Devries, K. (2020). Long-term outcomes of the good school toolkit primary school violence prevention intervention among adolescents: Protocol for a nonrandomized quasi-experimental study. JMIR Research Protocols, 9(12) doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/20940
35. Knox, J., Gibson, S., Gönültas, S., & Mulvey, K. L. (2021). School connectedness and bystander intervention: The moderating role of perceived exclusion and privilege among african american students. School Psychology Review, 50(2), 316-329. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2020.1846459
36. Lassandro, P., & Zonno, M. (2018). A work-related learning project for energy efficiency evaluation and indoor comfort of school buildings. Ingenierie Des Systemes d’Information, 23(5), 7-27. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3166/isi.23.5.7-27
37. Lemkin, A., Kistin, C. J., Cabral, H. J., Aschengrau, A., & Bair-Merritt, M. (2018). School connectedness and high school graduation among maltreated youth. Child Abuse & Neglect, 75, 130. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/school-connectedness-high-graduation-among/docview/2019059925/se-2
38. Limpert, S. M. (2017). A qualitative study of learning spaces at a midwest elementary school and its relationship to student attitudes about reading (Order No. 10680861). Available from ProQuest Central. (1969256221). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1969256221?accountid=31259
39. Loureiro, K. S., Alyssa, G., de, M. F., & Hadjar, A. (2020). Analyzing drawings to explore children’s concepts of an ideal school: Implications for the improvement of children’s well-being at school. Child Indicators Research, 13(4), 1387-1411. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12187-019-09705-8
40. Madland, C., & Richards, G. (2016). Enhancing student-student online interaction: Exploring the study buddy peer review activity. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3) Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1792746037?accountid=31259
41. Madondo, F. (2021). Perceptions on Curriculum Implementation: A Case for Rural Zimbabwean Early Childhood Development Teachers as Agents of Change: JRCE. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 35(3), 399-416. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2020.1731024
42. Marino, C., Santinello, M., Lenzi, M., Santoro, P., Bergamin, M., Gaboardi, M., & Antonio Calcagnì Gianmarco Altoè Douglas D. Perkins. (2020). Can mentoring promote self-esteem and school connectedness? an evaluation of the mentor-UP project. Intervención Psicosocial, 29(1), 1-8. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5093/pi2019a13
43. McFarland, L., Murray, E., & Phillipson, S. (2016). Student-teacher relationships and student self-concept: Relations with teacher and student gender. Australian Journal of Education, 60(1), 5-25. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0004944115626426
44. Mishra, B., & Tikoria, J. (2021). Impact of ethical leadership on organizational climate and its subsequent influence on job commitment: A study in hospital context. The Journal of Management Development, 40(5), 438-452. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMD-08-2020-0245
45. Monteagudo, M. (2016). Organizational Ethical Climate within the University of Nueva Caceres College of Computer Studies. 1-5. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305768759_Organizational_Ethical_Climate_within_the_University_of_Nueva_Caceres_College_of_Computer_Studies
46. Moriña, A. (2019). The keys to learning for university students with disabilities: Motivation, emotion and faculty-student relationships. PLoS One, 14(5) doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.021524
47. Myriam, H., Davis, S. N., & Els, C. (2021). The power of peers? early adolescent gender typicality, peer relations, and gender role attitudes in belgium. Gender Issues, 38(2), 210-237. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12147-020-09262-3 New York: Routledge.
48. Nkata, A. S., & Dida, M. A. (2019). Centralized education management information system for tracking Student’s academic progress in tanzanian secondary schools. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 11(10), 25. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5815/ijmecs.2019.10.03
49. Obi, S. N., (PhD.), & Bewei, E. C. (2020). Mindfulness, school connectedness, perceived social support and psychological well-being of university students in ibadan, nigeria. Ife Psychologia, 28(1), 9-22. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/mindfulness-school-connectedness-perceived-social/docview/2409675603/se-2?accountid=31259
50. Oghubvu, E.P. & Okpilike, F.E.M. (2017). Common Ethical Issues in Delta State
51. on Employee Attitudes: Bosnian Case. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/8684583/The_Effects_of_Ethical_Climate_and_Ethical_Leadership_on_Employee_Attitudes_Bosnian_Case on October 30, 2019.
52. Peurach, D. J., Cohen, D. K., & Spillane, J. P. (2019). Governments, markets, and instruction: Considerations for cross-national research. Journal of Educational Administration, 57(4), 393-410. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2018-0172
53. Pikulski, P. J., Pella, J. E., Casline, E. P., Hale, A. E., Drake, K., & Ginsburg, G. S. (2020). School connectedness and child anxiety. Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools, 30(1), 13-24. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/jgc.2020.3
54. Poulou, M. S. (2017). Social and emotional learning and teacher-student relationships: Preschool teachers’ and students’ perceptions. Early Childhood Education Journal, 45(3), 427-435. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10643-016-0800-3
55. Prewett, S. L., Bergin, D. A., & Huang, F. L. (2019). Student and teacher perceptions on student-teacher relationship quality: A middle school perspective. School Psychology International, 40(1), 66. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0143034318807743
56. Raad, A. S., & Atan, T. (2019). The influence of ethical leadership on academic employees’ organizational citizenship behavior and turnover intention: Mediating role of intrinsic motivation. Management Decision, 57(3), 583-605. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2017-0721
57. Rubach, C., Dicke, A., Lazarides, R., Simpkins, S., & Eccles, J. S. (2020). Addressing adolescents’ depressive symptoms and risky behavior: The role of perceived parents’ and teachers’ social support. Journal of Organizational Psychology, 20(4), 70-101. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/addressing-adolescents-depressive-symptoms-risky/docview/2468395167/se-2?accountid=31259
58. Sampasa-Kanyinga, H., Chaput, J., & Hamilton, H. A. (2019). Social media use, school connectedness, and academic performance among adolescents. Journal of Primary Prevention, 40(2), 189-211. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10935-019-00543-6
59. Schools: An Empirical Analysis. Retrieved from
60. Shaked, H. (2020). Social justice leadership, instructional leadership, and the goals of schooling. The International Journal of Educational Management, 34(1), 81-95. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-01-2019-0018
61. Shih, W., Lin, T., Tan, N., & Liu, M. (2017). Long-term perceptions of outdoor thermal environments in an elementary school in a hot-humid climate. International Journal of Biometeorology, 61(9), 1657-1666. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00484-017-1345-x
62. Shrivastava, S., & Shrivastava, P. (2018). Comparative study of stress between male and female school going adolescents. Indian Journal of Health and Wellbeing, 9(6), 857-860. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/comparative-study-stress-between-male-female/docview/2157821607/se-2?accountid=31259
63. Song, M. K., Bang, K., Kim, S., Lee, G., & Jeong, Y. (2020). Effects of an urban forest-based health promotion program on children living in group homes. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing & Mental Health Services, 58(6), 18-29. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3928/02793695-20200406-01
64. Souza, J., Nogueira, B. L., Lima, A. V. P., & Leder, S. (2020). Thermal comfort analysis in both naturally ventilated and air-conditioned classrooms in a warm and humid climate. IOP Conference Series.Earth and Environmental Science, 503(1) doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/503/1/012044
65. Stosich, E. L. (2020). Central office leadership for instructional improvement: Developing collaborative leadership among principals and instructional leadership team members. Teachers College Record, 122(9), 1. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/central-office-leadership-instructional/docview/2507950482/se-2?accountid=31259
66. Tereza Aidonopoulou‐Read. (2021). Can the Engagement Model act as a replacement for the P‐scale assessment system?: Issues in monitoring the progress of students with autism and severe learning difficulties. Support for Learning, 36(2), 258-277. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.1235
67. Vanessa, K., & Archambault, I. (2018). Student–Teacher relationships and student anxiety: Moderating effects of sex and academic achievement. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 33(3), 212-226. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0829573517707906
68. Watson, J. C. (2018). Examining the relationship between self-esteem, mattering, SchoolConnectedness, and wellness among middle school students. Professional School Counseling, 21(1) doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5330/1096-2409-21.1.108
69. Wang, W., Yin, H., Lu, G., & Zhang, Q. (2017). Environment matters: Exploring the relationships between the classroom environment and college students’ affect in mathematics learning in china. Asia Pacific Education Review, 18(3), 321-333. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12564-017-9478-5
70. Whitaker, B. (1997). Instructional Leadership and Principal Visibility, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 70:3, 155-156, DOI: 10.1080/00098655.1997.10543916
71. Wyman, P. A., Pickering, T. A., Pisani, A. R., Rulison, K., Karen Schmeelk‐Cone, Hartley, C., . . . Valente, T. W. (2019). Peer‐adult network structure and suicide attempts in 38 high schools: Implications for network‐informed suicide prevention. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 60(10), 1065-1075. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13102
72. Yavrutürk, A. R., İlhan, T., & Baytemir, K. (2020). Social support and school climate as predictors of school connectedness in high school students. Bartin Üniversitesi Egitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(2), 334-351. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.14686/buefad.653345
73. Yunas, M., & Iqbal, M. (2013). Dimensions of instructional leadership role of principal. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(10), 629–637.
74. Yüner, B., & Burgaz, B. (2019). Evaluation of the relationship between school governance and school climate. Egitim Ve Bilim, 44(199) Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/evaluation-relationship-between-school-governance/docview/2276731505/se-2?accountid=31259
75. Zhu, L. (2018). A multi-level analysis on school connectedness, family support, and adolescent depression: Evidence from the national longitudinal study of adolescent health, 1995-1996. Social Sciences, 7(5), 72. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/socsci7050072
76. Zhu, W., May, D. R., &Avolio, B. J. (2004). The impact of ethical leadership behavior on employee outcomes: The roles of psychological empowerment and authenticity. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies (Baker College), 11, 16-26.