EDAD 222: Educational Leadership

Professor: Jerome T. Buenviaje, Ph.D.

CLASS LOG NO. 06

Date Submitted: 10-12-2016

Nothing produces such anxiety in the workplace as hearing that "change is coming" Lane, 2007

Two of the four models in school improvement pointed out that transformation and turnaround
are vital to change process that led to principal and teachers replacement. The term turnaround is
often equated to rapid and dramatic improvement not just in students test scores but also in
culture, attitude, and student aspirations. Therefore, to initiate drastic change there is a need for
teachers and principal replacement when applying the model from the leastperforming school,
identified by the state. But from my perspective, replacing teachers and principal will neither
guarantee the increase in students scholastic or achievements rates nor improve school
performance. It might likely deteriorate both teachers and principals morale. Indeed, most of
the research focused on discovering the direct relationship or influence of principal and teachers
leadership on students outcomes but failed in addressing other factors affecting students
outcomes like poverty, calamities, migration or change of residence, malnutrition and distance
between the school and students, systemic funding disparities (Trujillo and Renee, 2013).
The low-performing school can turnaround and transform without replacing the principal and
teachers, however, changing them can sometimes be the better action. Replacement is far
different from change. Replacement means a removal of an individual in a current position and
replaces with someone else who is better fit to a position. On the contrary, change is more on the
aspects of the behavior, traits, style of someone else to make something different. A healthy
atmosphere of turnaround or transformation in a low- performing school can happen - firstly,
when teachers change the way they teach; secondly, when a principal changes to become an
instructional leader who will focus not only improving teaching but also student performance
and lastly, when both teachers and principal share the same vision of good teaching and better
student outcomes (Elmore,2000; Fullan, 2006). Ongoing professional leadership and
development, training, seminars, CPE for both teachers and principal will be of great help to
change and strengthen the curriculum, change the school schedule if necessary, improve
instructional practices, and address staffing issues. The collective effort may lead to improved
student outcomes and a new culture for teaching and learning. Nevertheless, change is inevitable
and change begins with people. Stakeholders cannot ask teachers, principal to change without
giving them the tools to change. The support must be real, obvious, and should be given freely.
The low performance of public schools in the Philippines desperately requires solutions.
Replacement is not the answer but change should be a ready option because a significant fraction
of public schools in the Philippines currently do not have enough qualified professionals who can
replace a principal or a head teacher. This clearly needs to be addressed first before turnaround
or transformation of school improvement model is initiated.
References
Lane, I. F. (2007). Change in higher education: Understanding and responding to individual and organizational
resistance. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 34(2),
85-92.
Amoroso, V. and Bajo A (2015) Phldropouts rates rising since 2007. Retrieved from
http://www.libguides.gwemc.edu
School Turnaround Policies Ineffective, Report States. (2012). District Administration, =48(11), 16.

Laluna, Jennifer J.
2014- 89438

EDAD 222: Educational Leadership

Professor: Jerome T. Buenviaje, Ph.D.

Laluna, Jennifer J.
2014- 89438

CLASS LOG NO. 06

Date Submitted: 10-12-2016