The Role of Transformational Leadership in Shaping Teachers Performance: A Sequential Explanatory Analysis

Declining teaching performance is distressing. The impact of educational leadership on teachers as followers and the analysis of the convergence and divergence between quantitative and qualitative findings on this impact were examined. Sequential method was employed. A total of 377 samples and 9 study participants were surveyed and interviewed respectively and analyzed using multiple linear regression, and thematic approach. Results showed that transformational leadership has weak (20.4%) but significantly positive influence on teacher performance. School heads use transformational leadership practices shaping the performance of teachers as followers through structural, motivational, relational, and professional growth dimensions. The convergence explains that there are indicators of leadership not substantiated by the emerging sub-themes. School leaders may implement programs that strengthen transformational leadership to improve teaching performance, while future research may replicate the quantitative study using only the converged indicators and further explore the convergence through qualitative methods to strengthen transformational leadership theory.

Transformational leadership, shaping teachers’ performance, sequential explanatory analysis

1. Acharya, A. S., Prakash, A., Saxena, P., & Nigam, A. (2013). Sampling: Why and how of it? Indian Journal of Medical Specialities, 4(2), 330–333. https://doi.org/10.7713/ijms.2013.0032. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ahmad, M., & Wilkins, S. (2025). Purposive sampling in qualitative research: A framework for the entire journey. Quality & Quantity, 59(4), 1461–1479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-024-01789-3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bacus, R. C., Picardal, M. T., Perez, N. B., & Balo, V. T. M. (2024). Predictors of beginning teachers’ teaching performance. Frontiers in Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1375726. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bhandari, P. (2023). Data collection: Definition, methods & examples. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/data-collection/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Burns, J. M. (2003). Leadership (original work published 1978). HarperCollins Publishers. https://www.simplypsychology.org/what-is-transformational-leadership.html. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Cazorla, I. M., Utsumi, M. C., & Magina, S. M. (2023). The conceptual field of measures of central tendency: A first approximation. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 18(4), em0748. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/13571. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M., & Hanson, W. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook on mixed methods in the behavioral and social sciences (pp. 209–240). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Espinosa, M. P., Reomero, J. I., Deguito, P. O., & Lugatiman, R. (2023). Performance appraisal of teachers in public secondary schools: A systematic review. International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, 10(11), 356–367. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Hallinger, P., & Wang, W. C. (2020). Assessing instructional leadership with the PIMRS: A meta-analysis of reliability and validity. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 2–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1623310. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Haynes Brown, T. K. (2025). The role of sampling in an explanatory sequential mixed methods study: General applications of the transformative paradigm. Methods in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2025.1001765. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. https://guides.library.georgetown.edu/data-analysis. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Individual Performance Commitment and Review form (IPCRF) for Regular Teachers in the Proficiency Stage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Jerrim, J., Prieto-Latorre, C., Marcenaro-Gutierrez, O. D., & Shure, N. (2024). Teacher self-efficacy, instructional practice, and student outcomes: Evidence from the TALIS video study. American Educational Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312241300265. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2006). Transformational school leadership for large-scale reform: Effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(2), 201–227. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Mangrulkar, R. S., & Chavan, P. V. (2025). Multiple Linear Regression. In Predictive Analytics with SAS and R: Core Concepts, Tools, and Implementation (pp. 57-85). Berkeley, CA: Apress. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2026). Enhancing trustworthiness in qualitative research: Audit trails and transparency in practice. Qualitative Research Journal, 26(1), 45–59. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Núñez-Naranjo, A. F., Castillo-Bustos, M., Parra-Real, S., & Yépez-Moreno, A. (2024). Teaching leadership and pedagogical performance of the teaching staff. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 14(5), 306. https://doi.org/10.36941/jesr-2024-0140. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Pan, S., Liu, Z., Han, Y., Zhang, D., Zhao, X., Li, J., & Wang, K. (2024). Using the Pearson's correlation coefficient as the sole metric to measure the accuracy of quantitative trait prediction: Is it sufficient? Frontiers in Plant Science, 15, 1480463. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2024.1480463. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Rajapakse, C., Ariyarathna, W., & Selvakan, S. (2024). A self-efficacy theory-based study on teachers’ readiness to teach artificial intelligence in public schools in Sri Lanka. arXiv. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Rutledge, J., & Hogg, M. (2023). Qualitative interviewing in education research: Principles and practices. Educational Research Review, 38, 100512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100512. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Saunders, M., & Lewis, P. (2026). Research methods for business students (9th ed.). Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Showcat, M., & Perveen, S. (2017). In-depth interview: A qualitative research technique. International Journal of Applied Research, 3(7), 38–41. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Talavera-Mendoza, F., Cayani Caceres, K. S., Urdanivia Alarcon, D. A., Gutiérrez Miranda, S. A., & Rucano Paucar, F. H. (2024). Teacher performance level to guide students in inquiry-based scientific learning. Education Sciences, 14(8), 805. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080805. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). Mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed.). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Transformational Leadership Survey – nwlink.com, Oct 7, 2021 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Winslow, C. (2025). Data collection techniques: Pros and cons. The NMC. https://thenmc.org/data-collection-techniques-pros-and-cons/. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Indirect Effect of Liquidity and Activity on Company Value with Profitability as an Intervening Variable
• Effect of Financial Skills, Knowledge, and Attitude on The Financial Behaviour of Clergy
• A Decade of Review: Trends in Budget Execution and Financial Performance of Development Projects in Tanzania (2014/15-2023/24)
• The Influence of Pre-Project Planning on the Budget Absorption Rate of Public Funded Infrastructure Projects in Kenya a Comparative Case Study of Narok, Migori, and Kisii County Government Projects
• Assessment of Factors Influencing Digital Transformation in Hotels’ Facility Management in Abuja Metropolis, Nigeria