Innovative educational management and institutional improvement in Upper Basic Education: correlational study in Vinces, Ecuador
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70577/hfpzrp31Keywords:
educational management; educational innovation; quality of education; secondary education; educational administration.Abstract
To establish the relationship between innovative educational management and institutional improvement at the Upper Elementary level of a public school in the Vinces Canton, Ecuador, during the 2025–2026 school year. This quantitative study employed a basic, non-experimental, cross-sectional design with a descriptive-correlational scope. The study included 38 participants—8 principals and 30 teachers—using a census sample. Data were collected using two structured questionnaires based on a Likert scale; the instruments underwent expert validation, and their reliability was satisfactory, as measured by Cronbach’s alpha: α = 0.847 for innovative educational management and α = 0.821 for institutional improvement. Descriptive results: Innovative educational management received a favorable rating from the participants, with higher scores observed in the dimensions of organizational climate and resource optimization; institutional improvement received moderate overall scores, with its weakest dimensions being classroom support, institutional self-evaluation, and community participation. Inferential results: The study showed that there is a direct, strong, and statistically significant relationship between the two variables (ρ = 0.785; p < 0.05). Innovative educational management is significantly related to institutional improvement provided that it integrates pedagogical leadership, teacher participation, and the multidimensional incorporation of collaborative work among teachers and within the institution, along with self-evaluation and inquiry aimed at continuous improvement related to educational quality.
Downloads
References
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.
Babbie, E. R. (2021). The practice of social research (15th ed.). Cengage.
Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Harvard Education Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
Field, A. (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (6th ed.). SAGE.
Galdames-Calderón, M. (2023). Distributed leadership: School principals’ practices to promote teachers’ professional development for school improvement. Education Sciences, 13(7), 715. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070715
Gningue, S. M., Peach, R., Jarrah, A. M., & Wardat, Y. (2022). The relationship between teacher leadership and school climate: Findings from a teacher-leadership project. Education Sciences, 12(11), 749. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12110749
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2020). COVID-19: School leadership in disruptive times. School Leadership & Management, 40(4), 243-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2020.1811479
Hernández-Sampieri, R., & Mendoza, C. (2018). Metodología de la investigación: Las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta. McGraw-Hill Education.
Instituto Nacional de Evaluación Educativa. (2025). Resultados de Ser Estudiante 2023-2024 y recomendaciones para la acción pública. Ineval. https://www.evaluacion.gob.ec/
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077
Liu, J., Qiang, F., & Kang, H. (2023). Distributed leadership, self-efficacy and wellbeing in schools: A study of relations among teachers in Shanghai. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10, Article 248. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01696-w
Meyer, A., Hartung-Beck, V., Gronostaj, A., Krüger, S., & Richter, D. (2023). How can principal leadership practices promote teacher collaboration and organizational change? A longitudinal multiple case study of three school improvement initiatives. Journal of Educational Change, 24, 425-455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-022-09451-9
Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador. (2012). Estándares de calidad educativa: Aprendizaje, gestión escolar, desempeño profesional e infraestructura. Ministerio de Educación.
Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador. (2023). Modelo educativo nacional. Ministerio de Educación. https://recursos.educacion.gob.ec/red/modelo-educativo-nacional/
Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador. (s. f.). Guía metodológica para la construcción participativa del Proyecto Educativo Institucional. Ministerio de Educación. https://recursos.educarecuador.gob.ec/phocadownload/bt/gi/Gesti%C3%B3n/GI_15_Elaboracion_del_PEI.pdf
OECD. (2019). TALIS 2018 results (Volume I): Teachers and school leaders as lifelong learners. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education.
OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
OECD. (2024). Education at a glance 2024: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en
Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika, 52(3/4), 591-611. https://doi.org/10.2307/2333709
Spearman, C. (1904). The proof and measurement of association between two things. The American Journal of Psychology, 15(1), 72-101. https://doi.org/10.2307/1412159
Stosich, E. L. (2024). Working toward transformation: Educational leaders’ use of continuous improvement to advance equity. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1430976. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1430976
UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education: A tool on whose terms? UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2024). Global education monitoring report 2024/5: Leadership in education: Lead for learning. UNESCO.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations.
Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2015). Teacher collaboration: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 15, 17-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.04.002
World Bank, UNESCO, UNICEF, FCDO, USAID, & Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2022). The state of global learning poverty: 2022 update. World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/publication/state-of-global-learning-poverty
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Lorena Aracely Zárate Quintana1, Egidio Yobanny Salgado Chévez (Autor/a)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Eres libre de:
- Compartir : copiar y redistribuir el material en cualquier medio o formato
- Adaptar : remezclar, transformar y desarrollar el material
- El licenciante no puede revocar estas libertades siempre y cuando usted cumpla con los términos de la licencia.
En los siguientes términos:
-
- Atribución : Debe otorgar el crédito correspondiente , proporcionar un enlace a la licencia e indicar si se realizaron cambios . Puede hacerlo de cualquier manera razonable, pero no de ninguna manera que sugiera que el licenciante lo respalda a usted o a su uso.
- No comercial : no puede utilizar el material con fines comerciales .
- CompartirIgual — Si remezcla, transforma o construye sobre el material, debe distribuir sus contribuciones bajo la misma licencia que el original.
- Sin restricciones adicionales : no puede aplicar términos legales ni medidas tecnológicas que restrinjan legalmente a otros hacer algo que la licencia permite.
