Predictive Influence of Supervisory Behavior Orientations on the Instructional Performance of Teachers in Large-Type High Schools

This study examined the predictive influence of supervisory behavior orientations on the instructional performance of teachers in a large-type public high school. Specifically, it investigated how directive, collaborative, transformational, and nondirective supervisory orientations relate to teachers’ Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF) ratings. The study employed a descriptive–correlational research design and involved 45 teachers from the Science, Mathematics, and STEM departments of Eastern Samar National Comprehensive High School (ESNCHS) during the School Year 2025–2026. Data were collected using the Supervisory Behavior Orientation Questionnaire (SBOQ), a researcher-developed Likert-type instrument, complemented by the teachers’ actual IPCRF ratings representing their instructional performance.
Results revealed that all four supervisory behavior orientations were practiced by school heads to a great extent. Among these, directive and transformational orientations exhibited the strongest positive correlations with instructional performance, indicating that clear guidance, feedback, and motivational leadership contribute significantly to effective teaching. Regression analysis further showed that supervisory behavior orientations collectively serve as significant predictors of teachers’ IPCRF ratings. Thus, the null hypotheses stating no significant relationship and no significant predictive influence were rejected.
The findings underscore the importance of balancing directive and transformational supervisory practices to foster both accountability and professional growth among teachers. School administrators are encouraged to adopt supervisory approaches that inspire, guide, and support teachers toward sustained instructional excellence.

supervisory behavior orientations, instructional performance

1. REFERENCES [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Aguinaldo, R. M., & De Guzman, A. B. (2020). Instructional supervision practices and teachers’ performance in secondary schools: Basis for enhancement program. Philippine Journal of Education Studies, 95(2), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/pjes.v95i2.2020 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Arrieta, L., & Domingo, J. (2023). Teacher collaboration and supervisory support as predictors of instructional improvement in secondary schools. Philippine Journal of Educational Leadership, 19(2), 45–59. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. Free Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Batugal, M. A. (2019). Supervisory behavior and teacher performance in public secondary schools in Region VIII. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences, 6(3), 50–57. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Castro, E., & Reyes, M. (2022). Collaborative supervision and teacher confidence in public high schools. International Journal of Education and Development, 8(4), 65–78. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. De Guzman, F., & David, L. (2024). Instructional supervision and teacher performance in Philippine secondary schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Research, 15(1), 33–47. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Department of Education. (2017). National adoption and implementation of the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers (DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017). Department of Education. https://www.deped.gov.ph [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Department of Education. (2020). Results-based performance management system (RPMS) manual for teachers and school heads. Department of Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Flores, G., & Asuncion, M. (2023). Transformational leadership and teacher effectiveness: Evidence from Philippine basic education. Journal of Teacher Education Studies, 31(2), 89–102. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2018). SuperVision and instructional leadership: A developmental approach (10th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1985). Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals. The Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 217–247. https://doi.org/10.1086/461445 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. World Publishing Company. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Hoque, K. E., Banu Bt Kenayathulla, H., Vili D/O Subramaniam, M., & Islam, R. (2020). Relationships between supervision and teachers’ performance and attitude in secondary schools in Malaysia. SAGE Open, 10(2), 2158244020925501. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020925501 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Huang, X., Liu, J., & Tan, S. (2024). Leadership styles and teacher performance: A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach. Educational Management Review, 42(1), 12–27. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Lahoylahoy, J. C., Lahoylahoy, M. A. R., & Cajurao, I. P. (2024). Enhancing educational leadership: An assessment of supervisory practices in Mobo South District, Masbate, Philippines. Journal of Management and Development Research, 1(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.69739/jmdr.v1i2.83 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Landawe, S. A., Cayabas, M. D., & Landawe, B. K. K. A. (2024). Supervisory competence and managerial behavior of school heads and teachers’ performance in Southern Philippines. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research (IJFMR), 6(3). https://www.ijfmr.com/papers/2024/3/19308.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Lee, H., Park, C., & Kim, Y. (2024). The influence of directive leadership on teacher accountability in large institutions. Frontiers in Psychology, 15(3), 115–128. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22(140), 1–55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Manalili, M. C., & Ocampo, R. (2021). Predictors of teachers’ instructional competence in large secondary schools. International Journal of Educational Management, 35(4), 512–528. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/ijem.2021 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Pineda, S. J. V., Habagat, J. B. A., Lucido, J. B., & Obediente, A. E. (2024). Leveraging Classroom Observation Tools (COT) for an enhanced instructional supervisory practice. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 13(6), 27–44. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrse.2024.24040 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Quilala, R. L., & Tantiado, R. C. (2025). Instructional supervision and teachers’ efficacy. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis (IJMRA), 8(3). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v8-i03-13 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Rahman, A., & Khalid, S. (2024). Transformational leadership and teacher motivation: A post-pandemic analysis. International Review of Educational Research, 28(1), 21–39. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Ramos, J., & Pineda, E. (2023). Transformational strategies and teacher engagement in Philippine high schools. Philippine Educational Leadership Journal, 14(3), 55–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (2007). Supervision: A redefinition (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Serrano, K. (2024). Directive supervision and teacher performance during transitional learning environments. Journal of Instructional Management, 29(2), 101–118. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Talisayon, S. D. (2019). Instructional leadership and supervision in Philippine public schools: A case study. Philippine Educational Research Journal, 14(1), 23–39. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Villegas, K. L., & Castillo, J. R. (2022). The role of instructional supervision in improving teaching performance: Evidence from Philippine secondary schools. Journal of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, 6(1), 88–104. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Villanueva, D. (2021). Nondirective supervision and professional growth among secondary teachers. Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 7(4), 112–125. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Wiley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study