Blog Archives

Students’ Performance in English: Effects of Teachers’ Leadership Behavior and Students’ Motivation

A research paper published in a Scopus-indexed journal

Massuline Antonio D. Ligaya and Marie Charmaine P. Igwe
Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), Vol. 19, No. 1, February 2025, pp. 91–102
DOI: 10.11591/edulearn.v19i1.21680

Research Summary

Teachers do more than deliver instruction; they also exercise leadership in guiding, motivating, and managing students throughout the learning process. In foreign-language education, this leadership role may be particularly important because successful language learning requires active student participation and sustained motivation. This study investigated how English teachers’ leadership behavior relates to students’ performance in English and examined whether students’ instrumental and integrative motivation mediate that relationship.

Teacher leadership was examined through two dimensions derived from the Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ): initiating structure, which emphasizes task organization and goal attainment, and consideration, which emphasizes interpersonal relationships, respect, trust, and concern for students. Motivation toward learning English was examined through instrumental motivation, in which the language is learned for practical or external benefits, and integrative motivation, associated with interest in communicating with and understanding people from other linguistic and cultural backgrounds.

The study employed a descriptive survey design involving 911 university students in South Korea who were enrolled in mandatory English courses across different academic departments. Students evaluated their teachers’ leadership behavior and their own motivation toward learning English. Leadership items were drawn from the LBDQ, while motivation measures were adapted from Gardner’s Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB). Students’ English performance was assessed using a 25-item grammar proficiency test covering vocabulary, correct grammatical form, answering questions, combining sentences, and word sequencing. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation and regression analyses, and parallel mediation analysis using Hayes’ PROCESS procedure.

Students perceived their English teachers as demonstrating high levels of both leadership behaviors, although consideration was more strongly manifested than initiating structure. The mean for initiating structure was 4.06, while the pattern of responses for consideration showed that nearly 88% of students rated their teachers high or very high on this dimension. Students also reported high levels of both forms of motivation, with integrative motivation (M = 3.96) exceeding instrumental motivation (M = 3.55).

Performance on the English test was generally satisfactory. Of the 911 students, 542 obtained scores of 12 or higher, while 369 scored 11 or below. Analysis of specific areas showed that students were proficient in vocabulary, correct grammatical form, and answering questions but only moderately proficient in combining sentences and word sequencing.

Correlation analyses showed that both initiating structure and consideration were positively related to students’ instrumental and integrative motivation and to English performance. Integrative motivation was also positively and significantly correlated with English performance, whereas instrumental motivation was not significantly correlated with performance at the bivariate level.

The regression and mediation analyses revealed a more differentiated pattern. When the two leadership dimensions were considered simultaneously, consideration—but not initiating structure—significantly predicted students’ English performance. Consideration also significantly predicted both instrumental and integrative motivation. When leadership behavior and both forms of motivation were entered together, consideration and integrative motivation had positive significant coefficients, whereas instrumental motivation had a significant negative coefficient.

Most importantly, the mediation analysis showed that neither instrumental nor integrative motivation significantly mediated the relationship between initiating structure and English performance. In contrast, both forms of motivation significantly mediated the relationship between consideration and students’ English performance. The direct effect of consideration remained significant after the mediators were included, indicating partial rather than complete mediation.

Overall, the findings emphasize the potential importance of the relational dimension of teacher leadership in language learning. Students may benefit when English teachers combine pedagogical competence with leadership behaviors characterized by rapport, respect, accessibility, and concern for students. The findings further suggest that students’ reasons for learning English form part of the pathway through which this people-oriented leadership behavior relates to their academic performance.

Research Contribution

The study contributes to research on teacher leadership and second/foreign-language learning by integrating teacher leadership behavior, student motivation, and measured English performance within a mediation framework. Rather than examining teacher and learner variables independently, it investigates a possible mechanism linking them: teacher leadership → student motivation → English performance. Its finding that consideration, rather than initiating structure, was associated with performance through both instrumental and integrative motivational pathways highlights the potential importance of relationship-oriented teacher leadership in the foreign-language classroom. The study also provides a foundation for further research examining how teacher behavior and different forms of learner motivation jointly contribute to English-language achievement.

Keywords: teacher leadership, consideration, initiating structure, instrumental motivation, integrative motivation, English performance, mediation, South Korea

Full Text

The full text of this publication is available upon request. Researchers, educators, students, and other interested readers who wish to obtain a copy may contact the author through this website or by email at madligaya@gmail.com.

Teachers’ Commitment and Leadership Behavior as Correlates of Academic Performance

Teachers’ Commitment and Leadership Behavior as Correlates of Academic Performance
Massuline Antonio D. Ligaya, Joung-Hyun Ham, and Nanje Bakoma Daniel
Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), Vol. 18, No. 2, May 2024, pp. 598–608
DOI: 10.11591/edulearn.v18i2.21083

Research Summary

Students’ academic performance is influenced by factors operating at different levels of the educational environment. Teachers directly shape classroom learning, while school administrators create organizational conditions that may influence how teachers perform their work. Guided by social exchange theory, this study examined the relationships among three elements of this educational chain: teachers’ commitment, the leadership behavior of school administrators, and students’ academic performance.

Teacher commitment was examined through two dimensions: commitment to job (CTJ) and commitment to organization (CTO). School administrators’ leadership behavior was assessed using the two dimensions of the Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ): initiating structure, representing task-oriented leadership, and consideration, representing people-oriented leadership. Student achievement was measured through performance in Mathematics, Science, and English.

The study employed a descriptive-correlational survey design and involved 81 teachers, 11 school heads, and 470 students from 11 schools. All Mathematics, Science, and English teachers and all school heads in the participating schools were included, while ten students were randomly selected from each of 47 graduating classes. Teachers assessed their commitment to their jobs and organizations and described their school heads’ leadership behavior. Students’ academic performance was measured using achievement-test results. Data were analyzed using frequency, mean, standard deviation, and correlation coefficients.

Teachers reported being committed both to their jobs and their organizations, although commitment to job (M = 4.05) was slightly higher than commitment to organization (M = 3.99). School administrators scored above average on both leadership dimensions. Their mean score for initiating structure (4.23) was higher than that for consideration (3.89), indicating that although the administrators demonstrated characteristics of both task- and people-oriented leadership, they were perceived as somewhat more task-oriented. Using the LBDQ framework, their combined characteristics generally placed them within the dynamic-leader category.

The correlation analysis revealed a strong positive relationship between commitment to job and commitment to organization. Initiating structure was positively correlated with both forms of teacher commitment, whereas consideration was negatively correlated with them. These findings indicate that, within the schools studied, teachers tended to report greater commitment where administrators demonstrated stronger task-oriented leadership.

A different pattern emerged when teacher commitment was related to student achievement. Both commitment to job (r = −.126, p < .01) and commitment to organization (r = −.189, p < .01) were negatively correlated with students’ Mathematics performance, although the relationships were small. Neither form of commitment was significantly related to performance in Science or English.

Leadership behavior showed another noteworthy pattern. Initiating structure was negatively correlated with student performance in all three subjects—Mathematics (r = −.209, p < .01), Science (r = −.094, p < .05), and English (r = −.126, p < .01). These relationships were small or negligible in magnitude. Consideration, meanwhile, showed no significant relationship with students’ performance in any of the three subject areas.

Taken together, the findings reveal a potentially important tension. Stronger task-oriented leadership was associated with greater teacher commitment, yet at the same time it was associated with slightly lower student achievement. The study proposed possible explanations—including academic pressure, highly structured expectations, and reduced attention to non-academic activities—but these interpretations require further investigation. The results therefore point toward the need for school leaders to consider how organizational structure, expectations, teacher commitment, and student well-being may interact rather than assuming that practices associated with greater employee commitment will necessarily translate directly into higher student achievement.

Research Contribution

The study contributes to educational leadership research by examining school leadership, teacher commitment, and student achievement within a single relational framework. Rather than assuming that stronger teacher commitment or more structured leadership automatically improves academic performance, the findings reveal more complex and, in some instances, counterintuitive relationships. Particularly noteworthy is the contrasting association of initiating-structure leadership with higher teacher commitment but lower student performance. This finding provides a useful basis for further research into whether leadership practices that strengthen organizational performance among teachers may have different consequences for students and highlights the importance of balancing task-oriented leadership, teacher commitment, student well-being, and academic expectations.

Keywords: academic performance, teacher commitment, commitment to job, commitment to organization, leadership behavior, initiating structure, consideration, school leadership

Full Text

The full text of this publication is available upon request. Researchers, educators, students, and other interested readers who wish to obtain a copy may contact the author through this website or by email at madligaya@gmail.com.