This quantitative research aimed to examine the current instructional supervision practices in terms of curriculum development, instructional improvement and faculty development, supervision styles, and approaches of the Augustinian schools under the Province of Santo Nino de Cebu as bases for a proposed supervisory manual. This study used the adapted instruments from the PAASCU self-survey assessment and Galban's work. Duly validated by a jury of experts, tested for reliability, and administered to one hundred seventy-one (171) instructional supervisors and teachers respondents from different Augustinian schools. The statistical tools used were frequency count, percentage, mean, rank, standard deviation, chi-square, and Friedman's test ANOVA. The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (SPSS) and set the significance level at 0.05 alpha. Generally, the instructional supervision practices implemented for curriculum development, instructional improvement, and faculty development were "excellent" and extensively implemented. These were directed towards supporting the school's philosophy, vision, and mission; complying with the K to 12 competencies; employing a system of articulation to correlate content for broader perspectives across grade levels; monitoring the implementation of the instructional program, curricular and curricular activities; holding regular class observation; providing teachers opportunities to deepen their Christian Augustinian values and attributes, promoting better teaching efficiency and effectiveness. There were significant differences in instructional supervision practices implemented when respondents were classified according to academic qualification, administrative experience, the frequency of supervision, and the number of faculty members supervised. The supervision styles and approaches practiced by the instructional supervisors were a mix of two or more styles and approaches, and no significant difference existed in the supervision styles and approaches. Finally, based on the findings, a proposed supervisory manual was formulated for the Augustinian schools.
1. Shah, S. T. H. (2010). A constructive approach to the development of criteria for selection of contents for teaching English in secondary schools (class IX-X). Unpublished research thesis, National University of Modern Languages Islamabad
2. Shrimal, P. and Sharma, M.P. (2016). "UNESCO's Four Pillars of Education, Implications for Schools.", Education India Journal
3. Snow-Gerono, J. L. (2008). Locating supervision – A reflective framework for negotiating tensions within conceptual and procedural foci for teacher development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1502-1515.
4. Spears Harold. (2015). Improving the Supervision of Instruction. New York: Prentice Hall Inc.
5. Stoner. J.F. (2015) Introduction to Management, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.
6. Sullivan, S., & Glanz, J. (2000). Supervision that Improves Teaching. Thousand Oaks: Crowin Press. 7. Sullivan, S. & Glanz, J. (2013) Supervision that Improves Teaching: Strategies and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, C.A. Corwin Press
8. Tannenbaum, B. and D. Masarik (2007). Towards Effective Leadership, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
9. Tesema, A. (2014). The practices and challenges of school-based supervision in government secondary schools of Kamashi Zone of Benishangul Gumuz regional state. Master’s Thesis. JImma University. Retrieved from http://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/123456789/5492/
10. Tesfaw, T. A., & Hofman, R. H. (2012). Instructional supervision and its relationship with professional development: Perception of private and government secondary school teachers in Addis Ababa. Master's thesis, University of Groningen. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED534226.pdf
11. Utake, M.A. (2012). The nature and purpose of supervision for quality assurance in schools. Research in Education, 18 (1); 178 – 182.
12. USA Census Bureau Glossary. (2006)
13. USA Handbook of information (2017)
14. Vergara, M. (2004). Challenges to Augustinian educators in the Philippines. Augustinian Legacy. Vol.VI, p.3
15. Vieira, F. (2000). The role of instructional supervision in the development of language pedagogy. Mélanges CRAPEL, 25, 31–40.
16. Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teachers professional development: An international review of the literature. UNESCO: International Institute for Educational Planning, Paris
17. Wadesango, A.S. (2015) Group work: Myth or reality in school-based decision-making, Group Work, 21(1):59-82
18. Wanzare , S. & Da Costa, J. L. (2003). Supervision and staff development: Overview of the literature. NASSP Bulletin, 84(618), 47-54.Doi:10.1177/019236350008461807.
19. Wiles T. (2005). Supervision for better schools, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
20. Zepeda, S. J. (2007). Instructional supervision: Applying tools and concepts. [Online] www.eyeoneducation.com/
21. Zepeda, S. J., & Ponticell, J. A. (1998). At cross-purpose: What do teachers need, want, and get from supervision. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 14(1), 68-87. 22. Yu, E.B. (2010) Management and instructional supervisory practices of school administrators on job satisfaction and teaching performance: Basis for enhancement program. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Southern Luzon State University, Lucban, Quezon.
ISSN 1655-3535 (Print)
Philippine E-Journals
