Pa ge 1 Pa ge 78 American Journal of Education and Technology (AJET) Supervision of Instruction: Teachers and School Heads’ Perspective Ma. Chona S. Rizada1* Volume 3 Issue 4, Year 2024 ISSN: 2832-9481 (Online) DOI: https://doi.org/10.54536/ajet.v3i4.3862 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajet Article Information ABSTRACT Received: September 30, 2024 Accepted: November 02, 2024 Published: November 25, 2024 The research focused on discovering the tactics used by school heads and the challenges faced when overseeing teaching in selected public secondary schools in Puerto Princesa City Division. The research utilized descriptive, correlation methods. The study included 139 participants, with 124 being teachers and 15 being school heads from the 15 public secondary schools in Puerto Princesa City Division. The researcher collected data from a survey questionnaire they created, the School Improvement Plan (SIP), The data was analyzed using frequency, percentage, mean, weighted mean, ranking, Pearson-r correlation, and t-test methods. The results showed that the school heads’ supervisory strategies focused on enhancing instruction. They informed the teachers about the professional development opportunities that are available to them in certain areas. They frequently conducted their instructional supervision. The most popular functions were giving teachers feedback through performance assessment and evaluation that was constructive and accurate. The mentoring abilities of the school heads, along with the passive and uncooperative behavior of teachers, hindered their ability to supervise instruction effectively. The school heads’ instructional supervisory strategies were influenced by the frequency of instructional supervision provided to teachers, as they focused on developing, adopting, and implementing programs for instructional improvement, learning assessment, and teacher improvement. The research suggests that during mentorship sessions, school administrators should provide teachers with advice, specifically focusing on teaching techniques and the discovery and use of educational materials; Within the school improvement initiative, it is critical for school heads to establish or modify a program based on research. School administrators need to collaborate with expert teachers to evaluate and improve the curriculum in order to address the unique requirements of the community. Keywords Constraints in the Supervision of Instruction, Strategies 1 Palawan State University, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, Philippines * Corresponding author’s e-mail: machonarizada@gmail.com INTRODUCTION All institutions, such as schools, fundamentally exist to accomplish specific goals. In order to guarantee the successful realization of the stated goals, these organizations follow specific principles and mechanisms. One example of these mechanisms is monitoring. Supervision of instruction is essential in our educational institution to ensure teaching and learning processes are monitored and reviewed, meeting expectations and achieving set objectives. Supervision involves assisting, directing, recommending, and encouraging development in an employee to enhance the quality of their work. Supervision refers to any program that assists teachers in achieving both qualitative and quantitative instructional delivery. It can be concluded from the above information that supervision is a crucial factor in the teaching and learning process, as well as in achieving school and educational goals. Supervising includes overseeing the teacher’s teaching and classroom activities (Kerry & Burke, 2020). Supervision of instruction is designed to meet this developmental need in order to maintain effective education and provide sufficient resources for teachers. It is important to state that supervision of instruction can only be said to be effective if it achieves its stated objectives, which is quality instructional delivery. Anything to the contrary means the failure of the program of supervision. School heads are among those who have primary supervisory responsibilities. Being the acknowledged head of a school, the school head holds numerous duties and is answerable for the organization. Republic Act No. 9155 states that school heads are responsible for establishing the school’s mission, vision, goals, and objectives, creating a conducive learning environment, implementing the curriculum, and ensuring high learning outcomes. They must also develop education programs, offer equitable opportunities for all learners, manage resources efficiently, recommend staffing, support staff development, build school-community networks, and promote active participation from various school stakeholders. School heads who effectively supervise instruction enforce and enhance teaching practices to improve student learning. It examines performance and relevant data effectively so that school heads can offer valuable feedback and guidance to students, influencing the learning in every classroom significantly (Nwaogu, 2019). The foundation of successful supervision lies in teachers engaging in caring and increasingly collaborative teaching as they continue to grow as adults. The role is essential for the progress of the organization and educational advancement of the students as the school heads is typically the primary source and motivator that maintain the well-being of the institution. As the instructional leader, the school head is responsible for Pa ge 79 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajet Am. J. Educ. Technol. 3(4) 78-85, 2024 implementing new teaching methods to actively engage students in learning. They must also create a positive learning environment, improve student performance, support and supervise teachers, ensure the curriculum is relevant, and provide effective staff development programs for teacher growth. Being an instructional leader involves dealing with complexity and multiple dimensions. If school heads think that the main objective of education is to improve students’ learning, then it is a goal worth striving for. If a principal has the necessary knowledge and skills, they will probably be successful leaders who collaborate, assist, and lead decisions regarding instructional enhancement to benefit students’ education. The school heads in the Division of Puerto Princesa City strive to create a conducive environment for education by supervising instruction effectively, aiming to improve teaching and learning results. Training school leaders on evaluation, monitoring, and quality control is essential for improving curriculum and instruction, identifying priority needs and problems, and achieving school missions and visions, including targets to enhance student learning outcomes. The resources allocated by DepEd for education programs are insufficient and frequently inconsistent. This insufficiency is made worse by the inadequate budget allocations for education. These school heads have been facing challenges with insufficient resources as they work to provide students with a robust and meaningful educational experience while also showing ongoing progress. This research aimed to provide a foundation for a potential program for school heads to improve instructional supervision, ultimately helping achieve school goals and desired learning outcomes in the study area. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study utilized the descriptive correlation approach. It also employed documentary research to identify the strategies and challenges faced by school heads when supervising the instruction in selected public secondary schools, and how these impact school outcomes. The research included 139 participants, consisting of 15 principals and 124 teachers from 15 secondary schools in the Division of Puerto Princesa City. The main source of data were the documents and the survey questionnaire designed by the researcher. RESULTS Tables with corresponding interpretations provide the answer to this question on school heads’ supervisory strategies for teacher improvement, program implementation for instructional enhancement, and learning assessment deswcriptions. Table 1: School Heads’ Instructional Supervisory Strategies Along Teacher Improvement Indicators School Heads Teachers wx¯ D wx¯ D wx¯ D A. Teacher Improvement Aspect The school head: 1. Ensures that teachers perform their assigned function effectively; 5.00 VME 4.27 ME 4.64 VME 2. Ensures that teachers are capable of carrying out their teaching responsibilities; 4.80 VME 4.44 ME 4.62 VME 3.Ensures that new teachers receive training to enable them function effectively on the job; 5.00 VME 4.34 ME 4.67 VME 4. Ensures that teachers are given assistance whenever there is need; 5.00 VME 4.29 ME 4.65 VME 5. Provides professional information to the teachers; 4.93 VME 4.05 ME 4.49 ME 6. Guides teachers to the sources of instructional materials; 4.67 VME 3.86 ME 4.27 ME 7. Provides technical assistance to the teachers especially in the areas of teaching methods and the use of instructional materials; 4.93 VME 4.14 ME 4.54 VME 8. Ensures that discipline is maintained during classroom instruction; 5.00 VME 4.23 ME 4.62 VME 9. Helps or suggests how to improve on the performance of incompetent teachers. 5.00 VME 4.08 ME 4.54 VME 10.Provides an enabling environment to discover teachers with special abilities and qualities 4.73 VME 4.19 ME 4.46 ME 11. Provide school- based INSET 4.73 VME 4.37 ME 4.55 VME 12. Uses control to affect teachers’ instructional practices 5.00 VME 4.43 ME 4.72 VME 13. Inspects teachers’ instructional practices for errors 5.00 VME 4.14 ME 4.57 VME 14. Helps teachers to find solutions to problems they encounter in their instructional practices 5.00 VME 4.09 ME 4.55 VME 15. Readily avails himself for advice and instructional support 5.00 VME 4.31 ME 4.66 VME Pa ge 80 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajet Am. J. Educ. Technol. 3(4) 78-85, 2024 The participants clearly observe the instructional supervisory strategies implemented by school leaders. This is confirmed by (4.54). These clearly visible teaching approaches are effective in how school leaders exert influence over teachers’ teaching methods (4.72), provide helpful recommendations for enhancing teaching methods (4.70), conduct casual classroom inspections (4.70), guarantee that new teachers receive necessary training for successful job performance (4.67), and make themselves easily accessible for guidance and teaching assistance (4.65).The instructional supervisory strategies used by school heads that showed the least rank include praising teachers for specific teaching behavior, evaluating teachers’ content knowledge, directing teachers to instructional materials, observing teaching and learning formally, and sharing research findings about instruction with teachers. Based on the results, it is clear that the school administrators in the study area offer support to teachers in improving their teaching methods by giving technical guidance, conducting casual classroom observations, and being easily accessible for advice and instructional assistance, thereby impacting the teachers’ instructional techniques. Swearinger and Denbo confirm that strong supervision of instruction enables school leaders to strengthen and improve teaching methods, ultimately leading to better student learning outcomes. School administrators have a strong impact on teachers and students by closely watching teaching methods, creating a continuous supervision system, being present in classrooms, open to discussing different teaching approaches, and offering feedback for improvement. They also recognize exceptional teachers and strategies, adjust ineffective methods, and update teacher training programs based on teachers’ requirements. Table 2. School Heads’ Instructional Supervisory Strategies Along Developing, Adopting Existing Programs, Implementation of Programs for Instructional Improvement and Learning Assessment 16. Provides helpful recommendations for enhancing teaching methods 5.00 VME 4.39 ME 4.70 VME 17. Ensures that teachers have adequate teaching materials to teach 5.00 VME 4.30 ME 4.65 VME 18. Provides teachers with research findings about instruction 4.33 ME 3.51 ME 3.92 ME Evaluates teachers’ classroom instructional practices: 5.00 VME 4.10 ME 4.55 VME Assesses teachers’ content knowledge: 4.33 ME 4.40 ME 4.37 ME Ensures that teacher make good use of instructional time 5.00 VME 4.30 ME 4.65 VME Makes informal visits to classrooms 5.00 VME 4.40 ME 4.70 VME Formally observes teaching and learning 4.33 ME 4.41 ME 4.24 ME Praises teachers for specific teaching behavior 4.33 ME 4.49 ME 4.41 ME Fosters professional learning community among teachers 4.80 VME 4.39 ME 4.60 VME Total 4.85 VME 4.23 ME 4.54 VME Table 2: School Heads’ Instructional Supervisory Strategies Along Developing, Adopting Existing Programs, Implementation of Programs for Instructional Improvement and Learning Assessment Indicators School Heads Teachers wx̄ D wx̄ D wx̄ D B. Implementation of Programs for Instructional Improvement and Learning Assessment The school head: 1. Ensures proper supply of teaching materials to the schools; 5.00 VME 4.12 ME 4.56 VME 2. Ensures that quality of instruction is maintained; 5.00 VME 4.12 ME 4.56 VME 3. Provides the opportunity to assess the moral tone of the school; 5.00 VME 3.98 ME 4.49 ME 4. Provides feedback to educational planners on the need for curriculum improvement or changes. 4.66 VME 4.16 ME 4.41 ME 5. Develops a culture of functional literacy. 4.06 ME 4.27 ME 4.17 ME 6. Addresses deficiencies and sustains successes of current programs in collaboration with teachers, and learners 5.00 VME 3.78 ME 4.39 ME 7. Assists in implementing an existing, coherent and responsive school-wide curriculum. 4.66 VME 3.46 ECE 4.06 ME 8. Develops/adapts a research based school program. 4.06 ME 2.90 ECE 3.48 ECE 9. Organizes teams to champion instructional innovation programs toward curricular responsiveness. 5.00 VME 2.86 ECE 3.93 ME 10. Manages curriculum innovation and enrichment with the use of technology. 5.00 VME 3.12 ECE 4.06 ME Pa ge 81 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajet Am. J. Educ. Technol. 3(4) 78-85, 2024 While developing and adopting existing programs, implementing programs for instructional improvement and learning assessment, the instructional supervisory strategies of school heads are clearly visible. This is backed up by (4.10). While this shows the general opinions of the participants, there are signs that clearly demonstrate the instructional supervisory tactics of the school principals. This is especially evident when school administrators ensure the schools receive adequate teaching materials (4.56) and maintain the quality of instruction (4.56). The instructional supervisory techniques employed by school leaders include creating and managing processes for student progress communication, assessing the school’s moral tone, using various assessment methods, giving feedback for curriculum enhancements, addressing program deficiencies, working with educators and learners, and evaluating teachers’ plans and progress themselves. Ranked the lowest among the indicators of school heads’ instructional supervisory strategies listed, developing/adapting a research based school program is considered to be evident to some extent (3.48). This implies that school administrators ensure there are enough instructional materials to maintain the quality of teaching and promote student advancement. Similarly, school administrators prioritize the results of teaching and ensure that instruction is effectively improved. Glickman’s statement reinforces the research, indicating that successful monitoring of instruction reflects the teachers’ performance and student outcomes. This is achieved by offering support to teachers when necessary, directing them to educational resources, and offering technical guidance on teaching methodologies. They supply educational materials, data, and tools to promote effective learning and teaching. Enriches curricular offerings based on local needs. 4.66 VME 2.86 ECE 3.76 ME Utilizes assessment results to improve learning. 4.66 VME 3.48 ECE 4.07 ME Works with teachers in curriculum review. 4.66 VME 3.06 ECE 3.86 ME Manages the processes and procedures in monitoring student achievement 5.00 VME 3.42 ECE 4.21 ME Assesses the effectiveness of curricular/co-curricular programs and / or instructional strategies. 5.00 VME 3.59 ME 4.30 ME Ensures utilization of a range of assessment processes to assess student performance . 5.00 VME 3.82 ME 4.41 ME Manages the introduction of curriculum initiatives in line with deped. 4.66 VME 3.97 ME 4.32 ME Develops and oversees a school system to regularly communicate student progress to students and parents/guardians . 5.00 VME 4.02 ME 4.51 VME Conducts self-evaluation of teachers’ plan, work and progress; 5.00 VME 3.77 ME 4.39 ME Evaluates and coordinates the process of improving teaching and learning in schools. 4.66 VME 4.21 ME 4.44 ME Total 4.54 VME 3.65 ME 4.10 ME Table 3: Summary of School Heads’ Instructional Supervisory Strategies Indicators School Heads Teachers wx̄ D wx̄ D wx̄ D A. Teacher Improvement Aspect 4.85 VME 4.23 ME 4.54 VME B. Implementation of Programs for Instructional Improvement and Learning Assessment 4.54 VME 3.65 ME 4.10 ME Total 4.52 VME 3.94 ME 4.32 ME The instructional supervisory strategies of the school administrators are highly visible (4.32). The leading supervisory strategies are highly noticeable in terms of enhancing teachers’ performance (4.54) according to the Teacher Improvement Aspect. This indicates that the school heads’ instructional supervisory strategies are focused on enhancing instruction. They inform teachers about the professional development opportunities available in certain areas. Brookover and Lezotte’s research backs the idea that effective instructional supervisory techniques can positively influence teaching and learning environments, ultimately resulting in better student performance and academic successes. On the question relative to the teachers’ and school heads’ assessments on the frequency of instructional supervision, table 4 is presented. Pa ge 82 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajet Am. J. Educ. Technol. 3(4) 78-85, 2024 Table 4: Frequency of Instructional Supervision of the School Heads to the Teachers Indicators School Heads Teachers wx̄ D wx̄ D wx̄ D 1. Regularly checks and evaluate teachers’ lesson plans. 4.13 VO 3.73 VO 3.93 VO 2. Religious and consistent implementation of the instructional plan 4.33 VO 3.98 VO 4.16 VO 3. Regularly conduct class observations. 4.33 VO 4.35 VO 4.34 VO 4. Check teachers’ classroom practices 5.00 A 3.72 VO 4.36 VO Provide technical assistance to teachers 5.00 A 4.10 VO 4.55 A 5. Hold post conference with teachers to feedback results of class observations. 5.00 A 3.98 VO 4.49 VO 6. Regularly conduct meetings with teachers. 5.00 A 4.17 VO 4.59 A 7. Regularly follow up the agenda discussed during meetings. 5.00 A 4.13 VO 4.57 A 8. Mentor teachers about teaching methods. 4.80 A 3.97 VO 4.39 VO 9. Mentor teachers on assessing pupils’ learning. 5.00 A 3.92 VO 4.46 VO 10. Analyze classroom practices. 4.93 A 3.82 VO 4.38 VO 11. Conduct teachers’ performance assessment and evaluation. 4.80 A 4.38 VO 4.59 A 12. Provide teachers with objective, constructive and accurate feedback on teaching performance. 5.00 A 4.31 VO 4.66 A 13. Mentor teachers to use learning aids. 4.87 A 4.25 VO 4.56 A 14. Mentor teachers to effectively use instructional time. 5.00 A 4.14 VO 4.57 A 15. Offer assistance to educators with instruction 5.00 A 4.40 VO 4.70 A 16. Mentor teachers to address their professional development needs. 5.00 A 4.07 VO 4.54 A 17. Provide teachers opportunity to learn about teaching strategies for active learning. 5.00 A 3.95 VO 4.48 VO 18. Provide teachers with opportunity to learn classroom management strategies 5.00 A 4.15 VO 4.58 A 19. Mentor teachers in making decisions about the best teaching method 5.00 A 3.92 VO 4.46 VO 20. Mentor teachers to use learning aids to enhance student learning 4.80 A 4.21 VO 4.51 A 21. Engage teachers in curriculum development 4.93 A 3.99 VO 4.46 VO Foster professional learning community among teachers 5.00 A 4.15 VO 4.58 VO Total 4.86 A 4.07 VO 4.47 VO The school heads frequently provide instructional supervision to teachers in the research area. This is backed up by (4.47). Despite the common belief, there are specific signs of instructional supervision that are consistently carried out by the school administrators. School leaders play a crucial role in supporting teachers, giving them feedback, holding meetings, evaluating performance, promoting classroom management skills, and encouraging a community of professional learning among teachers. Among the indicators of instructional supervision that school heads often carry out with teachers, the least ranking include: conducting class observations regularly (4.34), consistently implementing the instructional plan (4.16), and regularly evaluating teachers’ lesson plans (3.93). Based on the results, it can be concluded that the school administrators in the study area frequently engage in instructional supervision. Conducting performance assessment and evaluation is the primary way to give helpful and precise feedback to teachers. They help teachers with their professional growth and offer instructional support as part of their mentoring role.Obi emphasizes that school leaders should prioritize their responsibilities as instructional leaders, such as visiting classrooms, observing, hosting conferences, seminars, workshops, and engaging in professional development activities, as these efforts positively influence teaching, learning environments, and ultimately student performance and academic success. Table 5 displays the responses regarding how much the perceived constraints impact the instructional supervisory tasks of school heads. Pa ge 83 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajet Am. J. Educ. Technol. 3(4) 78-85, 2024 The limitations are seen to greatly impact the school principals’ oversight of instruction. This is corroborated by (3.71). The lack of skills and knowledge among school heads in student assessment principles, alternative assessment Table 5: Perceived Constraints Affecting the School Heads’Instructional Supervisory Activities Perceived Constraints Affecting Instructional Supervision School Heads Teachers wx̄ D Rank wx̄ D wx̄ D 1. Poor principal-teacher interaction about instruction processes 2.27 LE 3.97 ME 3.12 CE 2. Less trustful in delegating some work to teachers 2.06 LE 3.86 ME 2.96 CE 3. Irregularity of class observation schedules 2.73 CE 3.91 ME 3.32 CE 4. School heads’ inability to developing coaching relationships among educators 3.73 ME 4.40 ME 4.07 ME 5. School heads’ inability to encourage teachers to visit other teachers, even in other schools, to observe teachers’ strategies. 2.73 CE 4.38 ME 3.56 ME 6. Lack of pre and post conferences to improve teaching performance 3.60 ME 4.15 ME 3.88 ME 7. School heads’ inability to develop cooperative, nonthreatening partnerships with teachers that are characterized by trust, openness, and freedom to make mistakes. 3.40 CE 4.48 ME 3.94 ME 8. Teachers’ passive attitude toward classroom observation 4.47 ME 4.30 ME 4.39 ME 9. School heads’ inability to teach/coach teachers in planning for effective instruction 4.33 ME 4.19 ME 4.26 ME 10. School heads’ inability in providing teachers with feedback on the latter’s classroom practices. 4.00 ME 4.44 ME 4.22 ME 11. School heads’ lack of competence to mentor teachers on assessing pupils’ learning. 3.06 CE 4.49 ME 3.78 ME 12. School heads’ inability to maintain trust, spur motivation, give empowerment and enhance collegiality with teachers 4.00 ME 4.26 ME 4.13 ME 13. School heads’ inability to provide teachers with opportunity to learn active strategies for active learning 3.73 ME 4.56 VME 4.15 ME 14. School heads’ lack of skills to know the theories underlying the technology-based learning environment. 2.93 CE 4.49 ME 3.71 ME 15. School heads’ lack of skills and knowledge about the principles of student assessment, assessment procedures with emphasis on alternative assessment methods and assessment 4.40 ME 4.56 VME 4.48 ME 16. Inadequate facilities for supervision 2.93 CE 2.43 LE 2.68 CE 23 17. Lack of incentives and motivation 1.53 LE 3.85 ME 2.69 CE 22 18. Lack of training and experience in educational supervision; 2.87 CE 4.33 ME 3.60 ME 17 19. Lack of in-service opportunity for training and retraining of school heads 3.00 CE 4.38 ME 3.69 ME 15 20. Lack of time for inspection due to non supervisory administrative burden; 3.33 CE 4.25 ME 3.79 ME 12 21. Lack of executive power to ensure implementation of recommendations; 1.46 NAA 3.61 ME 2.54 CE 24 22. Lack of commitment by school heads; 3.93 ME 4.44 ME 4.19 ME 6 23. Uncooperative attitude of teachers; 4.44 ME 4.04 ME 4.24 ME 4 24. School head’s autocratic supervisory style; 3.00 CE 4.34 ME 3.67 ME 16 awx¯ 3.25 CE 4.17 ME 3.71 ME Pa ge 84 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajet Am. J. Educ. Technol. 3(4) 78-85, 2024 There is a strong correlation between the frequency of instructional supervision given to teachers and the supervisory strategies used in developing, adopting, and implementing programs for instructional improvement and assessment (r=0.710). Additionally, there is a significant correlation between instructional supervision frequency and strategies related to teacher improvement (r=0.634). The significant correlations between variables include frequency of instructional supervision given to teachers and development, adoption, and implementation of instructional improvement programs and learning assessment (t=6.534 > 2.021, df=42), as well as frequency of instructional supervision given to teachers and teacher improvement (t=5.621 > 2.010, df=47), leading to rejection of the null hypothesis at the 0.05 significance level due to higher computed t-values compared to critical t-values.This implies that the frequency of instructional supervision provided to teachers influences the instructional supervisory strategies of school administrators in the development, adoption, and implementation of programs for instructional improvement, as well as in assessing learning and improving teacher performance. Table 8: Correlation Between School Heads’ Instructional Supervisory Strategies and Perceived Impediments/ Constraints Affecting Supervision of Instruction Instructional Supervisory Strategies Perceived Impediments/Constraints Affecting Supervision of Instruction r-value Computed t-value Df Critical t-value (0.05) Decision Teacher Improvement Aspect 0.811 9.504 47 2.010 Ho: Reject Along Developing, Adopting Existing Programs, Implementation of Programs for Instructional Improvement and Learning Assessment 0.412 2.930 42 2.021 Ho: Reject The amount of instructional supervision provided to teachers is closely related to the supervisory methods used in creating, accepting, and executing programs for instructional enhancement and evaluation (r=0.710). Furthermore, a strong relationship exists between how often instructional supervision is conducted and the approaches employed for enhancing teacher skills (r=0.634). The strong connections between variables are the frequency of instructional supervision provided to teachers and the growth, adoption, and execution of instructional enhancement programs and learning evaluation (t=6.534 > 2.021, df=42), as well as the frequency of instructional supervision provided to teachers and teacher enhancement (t=5.621 > 2.010, df=47), resulting in the null hypothesis being turned down at the significance level of 0.05 because of greater calculated t-values in comparison to critical t-values. This means that how often teachers receive instructional supervision affects the supervisory techniques used by school administrators in creating, adopting, and carrying out programs to improve instruction, as well as in evaluating learning and enhancing teacher performance. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn: • The school heads supervisory strategies focus on enhancing instruction. They inform teachers about the professional development opportunities that are available to them in certain areas. • The school heads frequently carry out instructional supervision. One of the main functions is to give helpful and precise feedback to teachers through performance assessment and evaluation. • School heads support teachers in their professional growth and offer instructional assistance as part of their mentoring responsibilities. • Their mentoring abilities, along with teachers’ lack of engagement and uncooperative behavior, impact their oversight of instruction. • The frequency of supervising teachers in instruction impacts school principals’ supervisory strategies in developing, adopting, and implementing programs for instructional improvement, as well as assessing learning and teacher development. • Perceived obstacles or limitations on supervising Table 7: Instructional Supervisory Strategies Frequency of Instructional Supervision Extended to Teachers r-value Computed t-value Df Critical t-value (0.05) Decision Teacher Improvement Aspect 0.634 5.621 47 2.010 Ho: Reject Along Developing, Adopting Existing Programs, Implementation of Programs for Instructional Improvement and Learning Assessment 0.710 6.534 42 2.021 Ho: Reject Pa ge 85 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajet Am. J. Educ. Technol. 3(4) 78-85, 2024 instruction impact school administrators’ strategies for instructional supervision, which includes teacher development, program adoption, program implementation for instructional improvement, and learning assessment Recommendations To the School Heads • In mentoring sessions, school heads should offer guidance to teachers, particularly on teaching methods and how to find and utilize instructional materials. • In the school development program, it is essential for school heads to create or adjust a school program that is based on research. • School heads should work with expert teachers to review and enhance the curriculum to meet the specific needs of the community. • School heads need to give teachers impartial, helpful, and precise feedback about their teaching. • It is important for school heads to consistently review and assess teachers’ lesson plans and classroom methods. • School heads should provide guidance to teachers in deciding on the most effective teaching approach and support them in utilizing educational tools to improve student learning. • Regular pre and post conferences should be held consistently to enhance teaching performance. • School heads should strive to improve their instructional supervision by constantly training and upgrading themselves, in order to support the use of effective, research-based instructional methods, decisions, and programs for a more effective teaching and learning experience. • They need to be devout and dependable in executing the instructional plan. • School heads build strong relationships with teachers through forming a professional learning community and fostering a community of learners among teachers. They should evaluate teachers’ needs and interests, acknowledge their potential, and offer opportunities for professional growth. • School heads need to create a clear plan for observing classes throughout the year, as well as holding pre and post conferences to provide feedback on teacher performance. • School heads need to improve their understanding of student assessment principles and procedures, and focus on alternative assessment methods, as well as attend professional training sessions to enhance their skills. • Survey and compare the enrollment, retention, and graduation rate strategies of other schools to identify best practices and adopt them to enhance their own schools’ low performance indicators. To the Teachers • In order to enhance skill, educators need to be open and welcoming to new teaching methods, tactics, and instructional advancements to reduce, if not eliminate, their concerns. • Teachers need to have a positive outlook towards curriculum changes and view them as chances for growth and skills development in their teaching practice. • In order to improve student achievement, teachers must strive to be more original and inventive in their teaching methods. REFERENCES Brookover, M., & Lezotte, R. (2019). Exploring the transformational nature of instructional leadership. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 42(4), 1-12. Hallinger, P. (2019). Developing instructional leadership terms in secondary schools: A framework. NASSP Bulletin, 73(517), 35-47. Harris, M. (2019). Principals as agents? Investigating accountability in the compensation and performance of school principals. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 61(3), 45-62. Heck, A. (2019). Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 12-29. Lashway, J. (2019). Empowering principal behavior. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 123-145. Leithwood, S. (2019, November 2). Learning communities for administrators. Educational Leadership. http:// www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/ learning-communities-for-administrators Sergiovanni, T. J. (2019). Rethinking leadership: A collection of articles. Corwin Press. Sergiovanni, T. J. (2019). School leadership that works: From research to results. Sage Publications. Stronge, J. M. (2018). Theory and practice of supervision. Dodd, Mead and Co. Swearinger, M. E. (2019). Supervision of instruction: Foundations and dimensions. Allyn & Bacon.