Qualitative case study reveals leadership enhances reading outcomes in non-reader students, suggesting effective collaboration.
This study looked at how empowering leadership might improve the efficacy of reading intervention techniques for Bansalan West District's non-reader students. The study investigated how school administrators, reading coordinators, and instructors carry out and assist reading programs meant to enhance students' literacy abilities using a qualitative case study methodology. Semi-structured interviews, focus groups, document analysis, and classroom observations were used to gather data, which was then subjected to thematic analysis.The majority of non-reader students were found to be at the frustration and instructional levels, having trouble with word identification, phonemic awareness, and reading fluency. Key empowering leadership strategies, including as shared decision-making, teacher cooperation, instructional assistance, and ongoing monitoring, were highlighted by the study. A variety of reading intervention techniques were used, including guided reading, phonics-based exercises, small-group instruction, remedial sessions, and the use of contextualized materials.The findings also demonstrated that by enhancing coordination, teacher motivation, and program sustainability, leadership significantly contributes to the efficacy of reading interventions. But there were also issues like time limits, big class numbers, uneven parental support, and a lack of educational resources.Based on the results, the study suggests an Empowering Leadership–Driven Reading Intervention Framework that incorporates community involvement, monitoring systems, capacity building, instructional methodologies, and leadership practices. The study proposes greater leadership engagement and stakeholder collaboration to support the sustainability of reading programs and indicates that empowered leadership is a significant factor in enhancing reading results among non-reader students.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arellano et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: