CHAPTER 3

Research Design and Methodology

This chapter presents, describes, and analyzes the research

design, sampling technique, respondents of the study, study

procedures, research instrument, and statistical tools.

Research Design

This study used the descriptive-evaluative- inferential-

correlational method with documentary analysis. Descriptive

method of research will be use because it has a purposive process

of gathering, analyzing, classifying, and tabulating data about

the prevailing conditions, practices, beliefs, processes, and

trends, which will lead in making adequate and accurate

interpretation about the data gathered with the aid of the

statistical methods.

Sevilla, et al (1980) pointed out that descriptive-

correlation type of research gives or describes the nature of a

situation as it exist at the time of the study and to explore the

causes of particular phenomena. They further discussed that

descriptive-correlation research is a collection of the data in

order to test hypotheses or to answer questions concerning the

current status of the subject of the study.

The Population and the Sampling Technique

The population of the study was composed of twenty (20)

school heads and two hundred twenty-seven (227) public elementary

school teachers with a total of two hundred forty-seven (247)

school heads and teachers assigned in twenty (20) different

schools which are grouped into three (3) Clusters in San Narciso

District. With these, 165 were the total respondents in three (3)

Clusters and was determined through the use of the Slovin

Formula.

N
n= 2
1+ N e

Where:

n= the desired sample

N= the total number of respondents

e= the margin of error

1= constant

The Respondents

Purposive sampling was used in choosing San Narciso District

as the venue of the study. The respondents of this study were

composed of public elementary school heads and teachers. There

were three (3) Clusters in San Narciso District with a total of

one hundred sixty-five (165) respondents.

 From the set of respondents it is obviously shown in Table 1

that comprises the respondents in every Cluster in San Narciso

District.

Table 1

Distribution of the Respondents

Respondents Percentage (%)

School School
Cluster Heads Teachers Heads Teachers

Central 1 31 5 22

Roadside 12 57 60 39

Seaside 7 57 35 39

Total 20 145 100 100

One hundred forty-five (145) teachers and a total enumeration for

twenty (20) school heads. The respondents of this study

represented every Cluster of the District.

All the respondents were requested to participate in the

study. Public Elementary teachers of San Narciso District are

warranted to investigate the leadership behavior and

organizational climate of public elementary schools in San

Narciso District.
The Research Instrument

The instrument used in this study was the questionnaire. It

consisted of two parts namely: the leadership behavior and

organizational climate exercised by the school heads and

teachers. In the validation of the researcher made instrument,

the following steps have been followed:

Step 1: Content Validation

The researcher was conducted intensive readings of books and

other related references on leadership behavior and

organizational climate that particularly focuses on school heads.

The researcher developed a table of specifications.

Table 2 indicates the table of specification on the

instrument that was uses in this study.

Table 2

Table of Specification

Contents No. of Item Percentage

Items Placement (%)
I. The Leadership
28 1-28 42.42
Behavior
10 1-10
A. Authority
 10 11-20
B. Responsibility
8 21-28
C. Accountability
II. The Perceived School Heads
and Teachers Organizational 38 29-66 57.58
Climate
A. Job Satisfaction
10 29-38
B. Management Behavior
8 39-46
C. Human Relation
10 47-56
D. Physical Condition
10 57-66
Total 66 100

The questions were shop from the ideas of other researchers,

which was taken from theses and dissertations that was used to

supplement, to validate and enrich the discussion, presentation,

and interpretation of the data in Chapter 4.

A five-point rating scale was used in all the parts of the

questionnaire. For the leadership behavior and organizational

climate of the school heads and teachers the following rating

scale was followed:

For Leadership Behavior

Scale Weights Assigned Description

5 4.50-5.00 Very Much Evident (VME)

4 3.50-4.49 Much Evident (ME)

2 2.50-3.49 Evident (E)

 2 1.50-2.49 Moderately Evident (MoE)

1 1.00-1.49 Not Evident (NE)

For Organizational Climate

Scale Weights Assigned Description

5 4.50-5.00 Very Much Efficient (VME)

4 3.50-4.49 Much Efficient (ME)

2 2.50-3.49 Efficient (E)

2 1.50-2.49 Moderately Efficient (MoE)

1 1.00-1.49 Not Efficient (NE)

Step 2: Face Validation

The items are inspected to determine if the test is valid to

the extent that it serves its purpose of the efficiency with

which it measures what it intends to measure (Oriondo, et al

1998).

Item Inspection-a group of test constructor and evaluators

inspected the initial draft of the instrument. The group

consisted of instructors on test construction, basic statistics

and the research adviser. They were given criteria where they

based their judgment.

The dry-run will be administered in nearby District

including 50 percent of the respondents. The researcher explained

further the purpose of the study and refreshed some salient

points on leadership behavior and organizational climate. The dry

run identified different problems such as: vagueness of language,

confusing directions, and duplication of ideas in some items.

Step 4: Dry Run

The questionnaires were immediately retrieved and evaluated.

The respondents comprehended and are able to answer all the items

in the research instrument. There must be 100% retrieval of the

questionnaire. All the respondents must be cooperative.

Step 5: Reliability and Validity of the Instrument

To measure the internal consistency of the instrument,

Kuder-Richardson Formula 21 will be use. After the retrieval of

the questionnaires, the reliability will be computed using the

formula: (Deidreich, 1976).

M ( N−M )
r = 1−
N (s 2)

where:

r = reliability coefficient

M = mean

N = number of items

S = standard deviation

The significance of the reliability coefficient was tested

using the formula (Siegel, 1988):

 t = r
√ N −2
1−r 2

where: r = the reliability coefficient

n = number of items

The reliability of the test yielded to be 0.3759 and the

test for correlation analysis arrived at 0.05 levels with degree

of freedom which is 1.645, the computed value highly exceeded the

tabular t value at 0.05 level of significance. With this, the

researcher was confident that the instrument is highly reliable.

Standard Deviation was determined by the following formula:

(Hopkins and Stanley, (1981).

S = Sum of the high sixth-Sum of the low sixth

Half the number of cases

Step 6: Finalization of the Research Instrument

After the dry-run, final copies of the questionnaires will

be distributed to three (3) Clusters of San Narciso District.

The questionnaires will personally distributed by the researcher

to be sure that the instrument will be given to the target

respondents. Teacher-respondents are given four (4) days to

answer the questions in the research-made instrument without

disrupting their classes.

Step 7: Retrieval of the Questionnaires

 After couple of days waiting for the questionnaires to

be accomplished by the respondents, these will be retrieved from

the school heads teachers of the three (3) Clusters in San

Narciso District.

Research Procedure. In order that the conduct of the study

becomes systematic, the researcher designed a time schedule.

This will be shown in Figure 4.

1. Formulated the title

2. Prepared Chapter I

3. Gathered Related Literature and Studies

4. Prepared Chapter III

5. Title Proposal Defense

6. Reviewed Chapter I – III

School Year 2016-2017

ACTIVITIES Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar

1. Formulated
the title
2. Prepared Chapter I

3. Gathered Review of
Related Literature
and Studies
4. Prepared Chapter III

5. Title Proposal
Defense
6. Reviewed Chapter I-
III
7. Gathered Data

8. Retrieved Data
 9. Tabulated and
Interpreted Data
10. Pre-Oral Defense

11. Revised Manuscript

12. Final Oral Defense

13. Reviewed Manuscript

14. Submitted the Final

Draft
15. Submitted Manuscript
to CHED for SO
16. Disseminated the
Findings
17. Published

Figure 4

Gantt Chart of the Research Procedure

7. Gathered Data

8. Retrieved Data

9. Tabulated and Interpretation of Data

10. Pre-Oral Defense

11. Revised Manuscript

12. Final Oral Defense

13. Reviewed Manuscript

14. Submitted the Final Draft

15. Submitted the Manuscript to CHED

16. Disseminated the Findings

17. Published
Statistical Treatment of the Data

To determine the result of the study, it was tallied and

tabulated.

After the instruments had been retrieved from the

respondents, the data gathered were treated using the appropriate

statistical tools.

Weighted mean was used to determine the leadership behavior

and organizational climate of Public Elementary School heads and

teachers in San Narciso District for School Year 2016-2017.

Upon computing the weighted mean, the researcher made the

corresponding interpretation of the given option range.

The Kendall’s Coefficient of Concordance W was used to

determine the significant agreement on the rank orders of the

leadership behavior and organizational climate of school heads

and teachers.

S
W=
1
( K ¿¿ 2)(N 3−N )¿
12

Where:

S = the summation of the deviation from the

mean difference

K = number of group of respondents

N = number of cases
 1
= constant
12

The Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney U-Test was used to determine

the significance of difference between the leadership behavior

and organizational climate.

Wx+0.5−m(N + 1)/2
z =
√ mn(N + 1)/12
where:

Wx = the summation of ranks of the smaller

group

m = number of cases of non-teaching

n = number of cases of teaching

N = total number of cases

Spearman Rank-Order Correlation Coefficient rs was used to

determine the significant relationship between the leadership

behavior and organizational climate. (Siegel, 1988)

6∑ D
2
r s=1− 2
N ( N −1)

Where: N = the number of pairs

rs = the rank –order correlation coefficient

 r s √ n−2
t=
√1−¿ ¿ ¿

The level of significance was set at 0.05.

Education Secretary Leonor Magtolis Briones (2016) laid out the

10-Point Agenda of the Department of Education which introduced

greater leadership supervision on finances, targeted construction

of school buildings, established Integrated Financial Management

System, implemented the comprehensive drug testing, initiated

massive feeding programs, suggested excellent education

credentials for teachers, emphasized the importance of

Philippines’ rich historical experiences, expanded the welfare of

academic and non-academic employee, spearheaded an active,

transparent, consultative, collaborative, and corruption-free

department, maintained partnership with the private sector.

The Schools First Initiative (SFI) of 2004 is an effort

to improve basic education outcomes through a broadly

participated, popular movement featuring a wide variety of

initiatives undertaken by individual schools and communities as

well as networks of schools at localities involving school

districts and divisions, local governments, civil

society organizations and other stakeholder, groups and

associations.