Abstract :

This study is grounded on the premise that instructional leadership and supervision influence the quality of teaching and student learning. It employed Ivankova’s multistrand Mixed Methods Action Research (MMAR) framework to strengthen the supervisory competence of instructional leaders in secondary science through the Project RESET (Reflect, Empower, Supervise, Engage, Transform) initiative. 31 purposefully selected participants, who function as instructional leaders in the school, participated in the study. The study was implemented following the MMAR iterative processes: diagnosis, reconnaissance, planning, acting, evaluating, and monitoring. Quantitative findings and qualitative insights revealed that Project RESET resulted in a statistically significant improvement in supervisory competence from competent to highly competent, and participants’ reflections on improved supervisory approaches, including structured practices, clarity in the use of tools, and more relational/emphatic supervision, supported this. The study concluded that Project RESET strengthened the supervisory competence and practices of secondary science instructional leaders, bridging gaps in instructional supervision, providing a replicable, needs-based model for professional development.

---

Keywords :

mixed methods action research, supervisory competence, secondary science, instructional leader

---

References :

1. Glanz, J. (2021). Personal reflections on supervision as instructional leadership: From whence it came and to where shall it go? Journal of Educational Supervision, 4(3), 66 – 81. https://doi.org/10.31045/jes.4.3.5
2. Kinyua, B. K., Obura, E. A., & Masinde, J. M. (2025). Teachers’ perceptions towards principals’ instructional supervisory role in selected secondary schools. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 14(5), 3891-3903. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v14i5.34063
3. Lisene, L. N., Jita, L. C., & Mapulanga, T. (2026). Examining the self-reported instructional leadership practices of science heads of departments in Lesotho secondary schools. Education Sciences, 16(2), Article 347. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci16020347
4. Sumapal, M. L., & Haramain, J. T. (2023). Descriptive study on the instructional supervision practices of Bangsamoro school heads: Evaluating their impact on educational improvement. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 18(3), 1518–1532. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2023.18.3.1251
5. Mangadlao, J., & Oropa, J. (2025). Enhancing supervisory programs through instructional practices of school heads. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 3(3), 398-406. https://doi.org/10.69569/jip.2025.052
6. (2016). Incheon declaration and framework for action for the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4. Paris. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245656
7. (2018). Activating policy levers for Education 2030: The untapped potential of governance, school leadership, and monitoring and evaluation policies. Paris. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000265951
8. Richardson, L. (2024). The role of educational leadership in enhancing student engagement and learning outcomes. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 28(S2), 1-2. https://www.abacademies.org/articles/the-role-of-educational-leadership-in-enhancing-student-engagement-and-learning-outcomes.pdf
9. Bradley University. (2024, July 18). Educational leadership principles: Key concepts for success. Bradley University. https://info.online.bradley.edu/doctor-of-education/blog/educational-leadership-principles
10. Global Education Monitoring Report. (2024). Leadership in education: Lead for learning. GEM Report UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54676/eflh5184
11. Hallinger, P. (2011), Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125–142, https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231111116699
12. Department Memorandum No. 089, s. 2025. (2025). Guidelines on the Multi-Year Performance Management and Evaluation System (PMES) for teachers from School Years 2025–2026 to 2027–2028. https://www.deped.gov.ph/2025/10/01/october-1-2025-dm-089-s-2025-guidelines-on-the-multi-year-performance-management-and-evaluation-system-for-teachers-from-school-years-2025-2026-to-2027-2028/
13. Caratiquit, K., & Pablo, R. (2021). Exploring the practices of secondary school teachers in preparing for classroom observation amidst the new normal of education. Journal of Social, Humanity, and Education, 1(4), 281-296. https://doi.org/10.35912/jshe.v1i4.721
14. Department of Education. (2017, August 11). DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017: National adoption and implementation of the Philippine professional standards for teachers. https://www.deped.gov.ph/2017/08/11/do-42-s-2017
15. Buban, L. M., & Digo, G. S. (2021). Management beliefs and practices of elementary school heads on instructional leadership. International Journal of Research – GRANTHAALAYAH, 9(7), 170-178. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v9.i7.2021.4088
16. Egloso, R.A., & Benavides, N.G. (2024). Profile and instructional leadership performance of the elementary school heads. United International Journal for Research & Technology, 5(7), 105-118. https://uijrt.com/articles/v5/i7/UIJRTV5I70009.pdf
17. Balona, J. B., & Digo, G. S. (2024). Navigating the leadership challenges and support system for assistant school principals in senior high school. International Journal of Social Science and Education Research Studies, 4(6), 514–530. https://doi.org/10.55677/ijssers/V04I6Y2024-07
18. Second Congressional Commission on Education. (2026). Turning point: A decade of necessary reform (2026-2035), EDCOM II Final Report. https://edcom2.gov.ph/publications/the-edcom-2-final-report/
19. Ivankova, N. (2015).  Mixed methods applications in action research. SAGE Publications, Inc., https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071909843
20. Department of Education (2015). Handbook on Instructional Supervision: Standards, Procedures, and Tools. https://docplayer.net/57204970-Instructional-supervision-standards-procedures-and-tools.html
21. DeBell, A. (2020, January 6). What is the ADDIE model of instructional design? Waterbear Learning. https://waterbearlearning.com/addie-model-instructional-design/
22. Fetters, M. D., & Tajima, C. (2022). Joint displays of integrated data collection in mixed methods research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221104564
23. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
24. Schoonenboom, J. (2022). Developing the meta-inference in mixed methods research through successive integration of claims. In The Routledge Handbook for Advancing Integration in Mixed Methods Research (pp. 55-70). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-edit/10.4324/9780429432828-6/developing-meta-inference-mixed-methods-research-successive-integration-claims-judith-schoonenboom
25. Younas, A., Fàbregues, S., & Creswell, J. W. (2023). Generating metainferences in mixed methods research: A worked example in convergent mixed methods designs. Methodological Innovations, 16(3), 276-291. https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991231188121
26. Sonia, N. R. (2022). Supervisi pengembangan mutu pendidikan: Tinjauan konsep developmental supervision Glickman. Southeast Asian Journal of Islamic Education Management, 3(1), 103–122. https://doi.org/10.21154/sajiem.v3i1.97
27. Apellido, L., & Ventura, C. V. (2025). School heads’ 21st-century instructional leadership and teachers’ performance management in Lambayong 3 District. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 36(7), 745-768. https://doi.org/10.70838/pemj.360702
28. Prestoza, M.-J., & Naldoza, N. (2025). Challenges and practices of instructional leadership: A qualitative inquiry of principals’ and teachers’. The Normal Lights, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.56278/tnl.v19i1.3112
29. Zepeda, S. J. (2025). Instructional supervision: Applying tools and concepts (5th ed.). Routledge.
30. Maisyaroh, B., Budi, W.B., Hardika, Valdez, A.V., Mangorsi, S.B., & Canapi, S.P.T. (2021). The implementation of instructional supervision in Indonesia and the Philippines and its effect on the variation of teacher learning models and materials. Cogent Education, 8(1), Article 1962232. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1962232
31. Davys, A., & Beddoe, L. (2020). Best practice in professional supervision: A guide for the helping professions. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
32. Ha, C., Pressley, T., & Marshall, D. T. (2025). Teacher voices matter: The role of teacher autonomy in enhancing job satisfaction and mitigating burnout. PLoS One, 20(1), Article e0317471. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0317471
33. Papa, M. S. (2022). The use of RPMS – classroom observation tool (COT), the educational management, and the level of teachers’ proficiency in the province of Laguna. International Journal of Research Publications, 104(1), 26-43. https://doi.org/10.47119/ijrp1001041720223500
34. Arifin, S., Sutama, S., Aryani, S. A., Prayitno, H. J., & Waston, W. (2023). Improving the professional teacher competence through clinical supervision based on multicultural values in a pesantren. Nazhruna: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 6(3), 386-402. https://doi.org/10.31538/nzh.v6i3.4037
35. Haley, A., Holmqvist, M., & Johansson, K. (2024). Supervisors’ competences from doctoral students’ perspectives – a systematic review. Educational Review, 77(6), 1971–1990. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2024.2306938
36. Basilio, M. B., & Bueno, D. C. (2021). Instructional supervision and assessment in the 21st-century and beyond. Institutional Multidisciplinary Research and Development Journal, 4, 1–20.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1179/1/012065
37. Gordon, S. P. (2023). Supervision, teaching, and learning in successful schools: A hall of mirrors. Journal of Educational Supervision, 6(3), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.31045/jes.6.3.1
38. Quilala, R. L., & Tantiado, R. C. (2025). Instructional supervision and teachers’ efficacy. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis, 8(03), 1004-1011. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v8-i03-13
39. Torres, M. V., Zerrudo, A. P., Labad, V. S., & Gabales, B. G. (2024). Teachers’ views on the conduct of class observation: The Philippine DepEd setting. International Journal of Instruction, 17(3), 453–474. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2024.17325a
40. 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
41. Mesfin, S. (2025). Practices and challenges of school-based supervision. Current Trends in Business Management, 3(1), 01-06. https://doi.org/10.33140/ctbm.03.01.04
42. Tarraya, H. O. (2024). Teachers’ workload policy: Its impact on Philippine public school teachers. Puissant, 5, 1614–1629. https://puissant.stepacademic.net/puissant/article/view/246
43. Andal, L. M. (2024). Challenges in instructional supervision: A phenomenological study of master teachers in Cabuyao.