Authors : Myra E. Maraño; Manuel V. Estera

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 1 - January

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/399xbwzk

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/2a77akdw

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jan437

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This study examined the literacy-focused leadership competencies of school heads, the implementation of literacy policies, their influence on reading performance, the challenges encountered, and a proposed Learning and Development (L&D) program to strengthen leadership capacity. Findings revealed consistently high levels of literacy-focused leadership competencies, with overall mean ratings ranging from 4.18 to 4.37, all interpreted as high. School leaders demonstrated strong competencies in setting clear literacy goals, supervising instruction, embedding literacy in the School Improvement Plan, and supporting teachers through assessment-driven strategies. The highest ratings were recorded in school-based practices, particularly in supporting reading interventions, highlighting their commitment to creating literacy-rich environments. School leaders employed various strategies in implementing literacy policies, such as structured remediation schedules, the pull-out system, differentiated instruction, and one-on-one reading sessions. These practices reflect learner- centered, data-informed approaches consistent with national and international best practices in literacy intervention. Their use of tools like Phil-IRI and comprehension checks strengthened targeted interventions and enabled efficient resource allocation. School-wide literacy culture-building practices—such as DEAR, literacy celebrations, and maintaining print-rich environments—further enhanced learners’ motivation and engagement. Despite the high competence levels, school leaders faced several systemic challenges. The most significant were limited funding, insufficient monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, heavy administrative workload, weak parental engagement, and inadequate literacy materials. Gaps in teacher training also posed difficulties, limiting the effectiveness of intervention programs. To address these issues, a three-day L&D program was proposed focusing on: (1) literacy policy implementation and instructional leadership, (2) data-driven decision- making and teacher capacity building, and (3) community engagement, resource mobilization, and innovation. This program aims to strengthen key leadership domains, enhance collaboration, and support contextualized literacy improvement initiatives. Finally, the study concludes that effective literacy-focused leadership significantly influences school reading performance. Strengthening leaders’ competencies ensures systematic, equitable, and sustainable literacy development in schools.

Keywords : Literacy-Focused Leadership, Instructional Supervision, Reading Performance, Community Engagement, Transformational Leadership.

References :

1. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2010a). Collaborative leadership and school improvement: Understanding the impact on school capacity and student learning. School Leadership & Management, 30(2), 95–110.
2. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2010b). Leadership for learning: Does collaborative leadership make a difference in school improvement? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(6), 654–678.
3. Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (2013). Running on empty? Finding the time and capacity to lead learning. NASSP Bulletin, 97(1), 5–21.
4. Harris, A. (2009). Distributed leadership: What we know. In A. Harris (Ed.), Distributed leadership: Different perspectives (pp. 11–21). Springer.
5. Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. Routledge.
6. International Literacy Association. (2017). Leadership for literacy: Research-based practices to support reading and writing. Author.
7. International Literacy Association. (2018). Standards for the preparation of literacy professionals. Retrieved from https://literacyworldwide.org
8. Jeynes, W. H. (2012). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of different types of parental involvement programs for urban students. Urban Education, 47(4), 706–742.
9. Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership. National College for School Leadership.
10. Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22.
11. Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. Wallace Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.wallacefoundation.org
12. Mandinach, E. B., & Gummer, E. S. (2016). What does it mean for teachers to be data literate? Laying out the skills, knowledge, and dispositions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 366–376.
13. Marsh, J. A., Pane, J. F., & Hamilton, L. S. (2006). Making sense of data-driven decision making in education. RAND Corporation.
14. OECD. (2016). School leadership for learning: Insights from TALIS 2013. OECD Publishing.
15. Piper, B., Zuilkowski, S. S., & Mugenda, A. (2018). Improving literacy instruction in Kenya through teacher professional development and text message support: A cluster randomized trial. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 11(4), 551–577.
16. Republic Act No. 9155. (2001). Governance of basic education act of 2001. Retrieved from https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph
17. Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674. doi:10.1177/0013161X08321509
18. Sheldon, S. B., & Jung, S. B. (2015). Parent involvement and student achievement: Longitudinal findings from research and practice. The Elementary School Journal, 116(1), 31–56.
19. Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Davis, S., & Madden, N. A. (2011). Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Educational Research Review, 6(1), 1–26. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.002
20. Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.
21. UNESCO. (2017). A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in education. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org
22. Vaughn, S., & Fletcher, J. M. (2012). Response to intervention with secondary school students with reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(3), 244–256. doi:10.1177/0022219412442157
23. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.