Teachers' Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Relation to their Performance

Volume 2, Issue no. 11 | 66 Teachers’ Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Relation to their Performance DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17617448 Jay Marie R. Sinahon Teacher III, San Jose Elementary School, Philippines https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1250-4236 Dr. Virginia G. Mananquil Faculty, STI West Negros University, Philippines https://orcid.org/0009-0000-4812-1774 Abstract: This study explored the relationship between public school teachers’ commitment to ancillary workloads and their teaching performance. Drawing data from 120 respondents, the research examined demographic variables such as age, educational attainment, and length of service in relation to both ancillary engagement and instructional effectiveness. Findings revealed that while teachers consistently demonstrated high levels of commitment to ancillary duties—particularly in advising roles—their performance was rated as very satisfactory across all groups. Notably, longer tenure and postgraduate qualifications were associated with significantly higher performance levels, underscoring the value of experience and advanced education. A significant difference in commitment to teachingrelated duties was observed among younger teachers, suggesting generational responsiveness to evolving instructional demands. However, no significant relationship was found between overall ancillary workload commitment and teaching performance, indicating that non-instructional engagement, though essential to school operations, does not directly enhance classroom effectiveness. The study recommends strategic workload balancing to preserve pedagogical quality while sustaining institutional support. Keywords: Ancillary workloads, teacher commitment, teacher performance Introduction: Nature of the Problem The Department of Education (DepEd), through DepEd Order No. 16, s. 2009, mandates that ancillary services assigned to teachers must be distributed equitably and should not interfere with instructional time. However, in practice, many teachers continue to perform multiple roles beyond classroom instruction, raising concerns about how these added responsibilities influence their overall performance. Ancillary workloads often include teaching-related duties such as remedial classes and club advisorship, report preparations like school forms and learner profiles, subject coordinatorship involving curriculum alignment and peer mentoring, and special assignments such as event management and committee work. While these tasks support school improvement, they also consume time, energy, and focus that could otherwise be devoted to teaching. Several studies have examined teacher workload and its implications, such as the effects of multitasking on stress and instructional quality (David & Dizon, 2018) and the link between administrative duties and classroom performance (Reyes & Santos, 2021). However, limited research has directly explored teachers’ commitment to ancillary tasks and its relationship with actual performance indicators, including instructional delivery, learner outcomes, and professional behavior. This study addresses that gap by assessing the commitment level of public elementary school teachers to ancillary workloads and examining how it relates to their performance. The findings aim to inform workload management practices, strengthen policy implementation, and propose support mechanisms that enhance teacher well-being and instructional effectiveness. The researcher’s motivation stems from years of engagement in school improvement initiatives and mentoring programs, where the tension between teaching and ancillary duties often surfaces. Recognizing the dedication of Filipino educators and the complexity of their roles, this study seeks to honor their commitment while advocating for more equitable and performance-sensitive workload structures. Current State of Knowledge Teachers’ commitment to ancillary workloads has become a central concern in ensuring educational quality and teacher performance. In Indonesia, the implementation of teacher certification policies requiring a minimum of 24 teaching hours per week underscores the importance of managing workload to maintain instructional quality (Yusuf et al., 2021). However, studies such as Hendriani (2022) and Wakoli (2016) reveal that excessive teaching loads, Volume 2, Issue no. 11 | 67 multiple roles, and large class sizes often lead to stress and diminished performance, while Gul (2016) emphasizes that effective time management can help teachers cope with these demands. This growing workload issue serves as a foundation for the next discussion, which further explores how stress and burnout among teachers have intensified due to the increasing demands of both teaching and ancillary tasks. The rise in teacher stress and burnout highlights how heavy workloads and growing administrative responsibilities compromise both well-being and performance (Banal & Dela Cruz, 2022). Despite policies like the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers (RA 4670), teachers continue to face extended working hours, inadequate compensation, and limited institutional support, weakening their resilience (Jomuad et al., 2021; Talastas, 2021). While resilience helps teachers adapt to challenges, excessive ancillary work—such as meetings, reports, and coordination duties—often leads to emotional exhaustion and reduced job satisfaction (Magalong, 2021). This situation reflects a wider regional concern, linking directly to the findings from across Asia that demonstrate how unregulated workloads negatively affect teacher well-being and classroom efficiency. Across Asia, studies have consistently shown that unbalanced workloads hinder teacher effectiveness and compromise educational outcomes. For instance, Yusuf et al. (2022) and Hendriani (2022) reveal that teachers in Indonesia work extended hours and face exhaustion due to overlapping responsibilities at school and home. Similarly, Werang (2018) and Dorji and Wangchuk (2022) emphasize that poor workload regulation and limited staffing lead to emotional exhaustion and reduced lesson preparation time. Parallel studies in India and Bhutan echo these results, underscoring the global relevance of workload issues (Wakoli, 2016; Gul, 2021). These findings connect to the next discussion on how resilience and institutional support can moderate the negative effects of workload on teacher productivity and satisfaction. Several studies underscore that resilience and supportive institutional mechanisms are crucial in maintaining teacher effectiveness amid growing workloads. Banal and Dela Cruz (2022) found that low resilience levels during the COVID19 pandemic reduced teachers’ performance, while Sales and Belgira (2021) and Talastas (2021) showed that workload balance and professional development opportunities improve productivity and satisfaction. These studies transition toward a broader understanding of performance as a multidimensional construct—one that not only includes classroom teaching but also the management of ancillary roles and organizational responsibilities. Indeed, teacher performance is now recognized globally as encompassing both instructional delivery and engagement in school-based responsibilities. Fernández and Martínez (2022) and Goldhaber and Anthony (2021) argue that while these additional roles foster leadership and collaboration, they can also lead to burnout if not managed effectively. Similarly, Campbell and Osmond (2020) and Tan and Gopinathan (2021) emphasize the importance of maintaining equilibrium between instructional and non-instructional duties to ensure sustained performance and professional growth. This multidimensional perspective aligns with policy analyses that frame teacher workload as a systemic issue requiring structural reforms. The EDCOM II Policy Brief (2024), Tarraya (2022), and Dichos (2023) collectively identify teacher workload as a systemic concern, highlighting how excessive ancillary tasks exceed recommended limits and erode instructional focus. These studies emphasize that sustainable performance requires institutional support, rationalized workload policies, and clear guidelines for non-teaching assignments. This aligns with international findings that also advocate workload rationalization as a means of preserving teacher well-being and performance. Across global contexts, including Pakistan, Indonesia, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom, studies (Kanwal et al., 2023; Rakim, 2025; Pan et al., 2023; Brady, 2020) reveal similar patterns of stress, fatigue, and performance decline resulting from ancillary workloads. While some research, such as Rakim (2025), notes the potential benefits of ancillary roles for community involvement, time constraints and overcommitment remain key barriers to effectiveness. These findings parallel those from Philippine studies, which consistently highlight the same issues within local contexts, demonstrating the universality of the workload-performance dilemma. In the Philippines, studies by Dichos (2023), Tarraya (2022), and Dela Cruz and Manalo (2021) confirm that excessive ancillary duties diminish instructional quality, weaken morale, and heighten stress levels. The EDCOM II Policy Brief (2024) further emphasizes that many teachers exceed the two-hour daily limit on non-teaching tasks, recommending the hiring of support staff and stricter policy enforcement. Reyes and Bautista (2020) similarly advocate differentiated task assignments to preserve teaching time. Collectively, these studies tie back to the overarching theme that teachers’ commitment to ancillary workloads must be balanced with instructional priorities and supported by institutional and policy reforms to sustain educational quality and teacher performance. Theoretical Underpinnings This study is anchored on the Theory of Organizational Commitment by Meyer and Allen (1991) and the Theory of Performance (ToP) by Don Elger (2013). The Theory of Organizational Commitment explains that an individual’s commitment to an organization is a psychological state composed of three components: affective commitment Volume 2, Issue no. 11 | 68 (emotional attachment and identification with the organization), continuance commitment (awareness of the costs associated with leaving), and normative commitment (a sense of moral obligation to remain). This framework helps explain why teachers remain dedicated to their work despite challenges, as their sense of belonging, loyalty, or responsibility influences their job satisfaction and engagement. When teachers experience fulfillment and alignment with institutional goals, they develop a deeper affective commitment, contributing positively to their performance and organizational stability. Complementing this is Elger’s Theory of Performance (ToP), which defines performance as the act of producing valued results through the interaction of six components: context, knowledge, skills, identity, personal factors, and fixed factors. This theory highlights that improving performance is a continuous process of growth influenced by both internal and external conditions. It is particularly relevant in the teaching profession, where educators’ performance evolves as they enhance their competencies and adapt to institutional demands. Together, these theories provide a comprehensive foundation for the present study, illustrating how teachers’ organizational commitment drives their motivation and how performance improvement can be achieved through consistent professional development and contextual support. Objectives This study aimed to determine the level of teachers’ commitment to ancillary workloads in relation to their performance in a district of a large-sized division in Central Philippines for the School Year 2024-2025. Specifically, this study sought to answer the following questions: 1) the level of teachers’ commitment to ancillary workloads in the area of teaching related duties, advising duties, report preparations, subject coordinatorship, special assignments; 2) the significant difference in the level of teachers’ commitment to ancillary workloads when grouped and compared according to the aforementioned variables; 3) the significant difference in the level of teachers’ performance when grouped and compared according to the aforementioned variables; and 4) the significant relationship between teachers’ commitment to ancillary workloads and their level of performance. Methodology: This section presents the discussion of the research methodology used, the subjects and respondents of the study, the research instruments used, the validity and reliability of the instruments, the procedure for data gathering, and the statistical tools and procedure for data analysis. Research Design The study employed the descriptive research design to determine the teachers’ level of commitment to ancillary workloads in relation to their performance in one of the districts of a large-sized division in a large-sized province, in Central Philippines for the School Year 2024-2025. According to Calmorin (2016), a descriptive research design method focuses on the present situation, and the purpose is to find the new truth. The truth may have different forms, such as an increased quantity of knowledge, a further generalization, or new "law," an improved insight into a factor. Descriptive design is appropriate for this study because it aimed to find out what prevails in the present condition or relationships, held opinions and beliefs, processes and effects, and developing trends. The design is a scientific method which involves observing and describing the behavior of a subject without influencing it in any way. Study Respondents The respondents of the study consist of 120 public elementary school teachers from one district of a large-sized division in Central Philippines. Given the relatively large population of 174 teachers, the researcher employed the Cochran formula to determine an appropriate sample size for manageability and representativeness. The respondents are distributed across the 14 participating schools, with sample sizes proportionally drawn from each institution. The sample allocation ranged from 6 to 15 teachers per school, representing 5.17% to 12.64% of the total, ensuring fair representation across all schools in the district. Instruments To determine the level of teachers’ commitment to ancillary workload in relation to their performance, the researcher used a self-made survey questionnaire composed of two parts: Part I gathered respondents’ profile data (age, educational attainment, and length of service), while Part II contained 40 items across eight areas measuring teachers’ commitment to ancillary tasks using a five-point Likert scale from 1 (“Almost Never”) to 5 (“Always”). The instrument underwent validity and reliability testing to ensure accuracy. Three expert validators—a Principal I, a Principal II, and a Teacher-In-Charge—assessed the content using the Carter V. Good and Douglas E. Scates criteria, Volume 2, Issue no. 11 | 69 yielding a validation score of 4.93 (“Excellent”), confirming the tool’s validity. A pilot test involving 30 non-respondent teachers established the instrument’s reliability, producing a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.938 (“Excellent”), indicating that the questionnaire was both valid and reliable for data collection. Data Gathering Procedure In conducting the study, the researcher followed a systematic data-gathering process beginning with the submission of a formal letter to the Public Schools District Supervisor to seek permission, followed by the endorsement of the approved letter to the School Heads. Upon approval, hard copy questionnaires were distributed to the selected respondents, who were given three days to accomplish and return them. The collected data were then encoded and tallied using a pre-formatted Excel file to facilitate tabulation. Finally, computations and analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), and the resulting statistical tables were prepared in accordance with the study’s objectives. Data Analysis and Statistical Treatment Objective No. 1 also used descriptive analytical scheme and mean to determine the level of teachers’ commitment to ancillary workload in the area of Teaching Related Duties, Report Preparations, Subject Coordinatorship and Special Assignments. Objective No. 2 used comparative analytical scheme and Mann Whitney U test to determine the significant difference in the teachers’ level of commitment to ancillary workloads when grouped and compared according to the aforementioned variables. Objective No. 3 also used comparative analytical scheme and Mann Whitney U test to determine the significant difference in the level of teachers’ performance when grouped and compared according to the aforementioned variables. Objective No. 4 relational analytical scheme and Spearman rho to determine the significant relationship between the level of teachers’ commitment to ancillary workload and their work performance. Ethical Consideration In conducting this study, ethical considerations were strictly observed to protect all participants, including school heads and teachers. Informed consent was obtained prior to data collection, with participants fully briefed on the study’s purpose, procedures, and their right to withdraw at any time without consequence. Confidentiality and anonymity were ensured by excluding identifiable information and securely storing all data for academic use only. Responses were analyzed in aggregate form to prevent attribution to individuals, safeguarding honesty and professionalism. The researcher also adhered to academic integrity and institutional protocols, securing approval from the appropriate division office or ethics board and committing to objective, transparent reporting of results. These measures ensured that the study upheld participants’ rights, dignity, and trust while contributing responsibly to educational research. Results and Discussion: This section deals with the presentation, analysis and interpretation of data gathered to carry out the objectives of this study. All these were made possible by following certain appropriate procedures so as to give the exact data and solution to each specific problem. Table 1 Teachers’ Level of Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Teaching Related Duties Area A. Teaching Related Studies Mean Interpretation As a teacher, I … 1. prepare DLL/DLP for all assigned subjects. 4.61 Very High Level 2. demonstrate competence in preparing lesson contents. 4.46 High Level 3. consider learners’ MELCs. 4.53 Very High Level 4. am always ready for content knowledge preparation. 4.24 High Level 5. can easily cope with all extra teaching loads. 4.19 High Level 6. design and localize my own visual aide. 4.28 High Level 7. integrate ICT-based learning. 4.28 High Level 8. provide advance learning guide to all learners. 4.09 High Level Overall Mean 4.34 High Level Volume 2, Issue no. 11 | 70 Table 1 shows that the level of commitment of teachers to ancillary workloads in teaching-related duties yielded an overall mean score of 4.34, interpreted as a “High Level.” Item No. 1, which states “I prepare DLL/DLP for all assigned subjects,” got the highest mean score of 4.61, interpreted as “Very High Level.” On the other hand, Item No. 8, “I provide advance learning guide to all learners,” received the lowest mean score of 4.09, still interpreted as “High Level.” While teachers remain committed to supporting learners beyond the classroom, the relatively lower score may reflect challenges in time management, resource availability, or differentiated instruction. Magante et al. (2023) noted that while teachers value proactive learning support, systemic constraints such as large class sizes and limited instructional materials often hinder consistent implementation of advance learning strategies. In summary, the data confirms that teachers maintain a commendable level of commitment to teaching-related ancillary duties, with particular strength in lesson planning and curriculum preparation. These findings align with DepEd’s emphasis on instructional quality and teacher accountability, as outlined in the PPST and recent reforms aimed at improving classroom delivery and learner outcomes. Table 2 Teachers’ Level of Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Advising Duties Area B. Advising Studies Mean Interpretation As a teacher, I … 1. have my own advisory class to handle. 4.70 Very High Level 2. keep in touch with parents and guardians. 4.63 Very High Level 3. relay assessment results to parents. 4.43 High Level 4. provide assistance to learners and parents. 4.40 High Level 5. assist learners with special needs. 4.31 High Level 6. talk to parents about learners’ behavior. 4.61 Very High Level 7. update parents with learners’ academic performance. 4.58 Very High Level 8. identify the subject where learners’ performance is least. 4.48 High Level Overall Mean 4.52 Very High Level Table 2 presents the level of commitment of teachers to ancillary advising duties, yielding an overall mean score of 4.52, interpreted as “Very High Level.” Item No. 1, “I have my own advisory class to handle,” received the highest mean score of 4.70, interpreted as “Very High Level.” On the other hand, Item No. 5, “I assist learners with special needs,” recorded the lowest mean score of 4.31, though still interpreted as “High Level.” This may point to challenges in inclusive education practices, such as limited training, lack of specialized resources, or insufficient collaboration with support personnel. As highlighted by the PPST’s Domain 3 on Diversity of Learners, teachers are expected to respond to varied learner needs, but implementation often depends on institutional capacity and access to professional development. Magante et al. (2023) also noted that while teachers express willingness to support learners with special needs, systemic constraints can hinder consistent and effective delivery of inclusive strategies. In summary, the data confirms that teachers exhibit a very high level of commitment to advisory duties, particularly in maintaining communication with parents and managing advisory classes. These findings reinforce the importance of strengthening advisory systems and providing targeted support for inclusive education, as recommended by recent studies and national standards. Table 3 Teachers’ Level of Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Report Preparations Area C. Report Preparations Mean Interpretation As a teacher, I … 1. submit all required reports on time. 4.28 High Level 2. help in the preparation of some school reports. 4.29 High Level 3. have a timeline for all deliverables. 4.25 High Level 4. assist newbies in preparing for their reports. 4.22 High Level 5. prepare a checklist of monthly/quarterly deliverables. 4.14 High Level 6. prioritize learners’ report card prior to its releasing. 4.34 High Level 7. take ample time to prepare and submit my IPCRF. 4.37 High Level 8. comply with all prescribed format for all reports. 4.38 High Level Volume 2, Issue no. 11 | 71 Overall Mean 4.28 High Level Table 3 shows that the level of commitment of teachers to ancillary workloads in report preparations yielded an overall mean score of 4.28, interpreted as “High Level.” Item No. 8, “I comply with all prescribed format for all reports,” garnered the highest mean score of 4.38, interpreted as “High Level.” On the other hand, Item No. 5, “I prepare a checklist of monthly/quarterly deliverables,” recorded the lowest mean score of 4.14, though still interpreted as “High Level.” This may suggest that while teachers are committed to submitting reports, proactive tracking and checklist preparation may be less consistently practiced. Factors such as workload saturation, overlapping deadlines, and limited administrative support may contribute to this gap. As noted by Kotze and Nel (2020), teachers’ organizational habits are often shaped by institutional culture and time constraints, and without structured systems, checklist-based planning may be deprioritized. In summary, the findings confirm that teachers maintain a high level of commitment to report preparations, with particular strength in formatting compliance and IPCRF submission. These results underscore the importance of streamlining reporting systems and providing time management support to sustain teacher efficiency and reduce administrative fatigue. Table 4 Teachers’ Level of Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Subject Coordinatorship Area D. Subject Coordinatorship Mean Interpretation As a teacher, I … 1. instill discipline in each class across all subjects. 4.58 Very High Level 2. manifest competence in any subject assigned to me as coordinator. 4.39 High Level 3. cordially works with school head and other subject teachers. 4.45 High Level 4. facilitate conducive learning across all subjects. 4.39 High Level 5. create school year action plan for the assigned coordinatorship. 4.38 High Level 6. always ask for the consensus of the team. 4.44 High Level 7. decide on how to effectively implement the curriculum based on shared best practices. 4.34 High Level 8. represent as subject teacher in all undertakings. 4.38 High Level Overall Mean 4.42 High Level Table 4 presents the level of commitment of teachers to subject coordinatorship duties, yielding an overall mean score of 4.42, interpreted as “High Level.” Item No. 1, “I instill discipline in each class across all subjects,” garnered the highest mean score of 4.58, interpreted as “Very High Level.” Meanwhile, Item No. 7, “I decide on how to effectively implement the curriculum based on shared best practices,” recorded the lowest mean score of 4.34, though still interpreted as “High Level.” This may reflect the complexity of curriculum decision-making, which often requires consensus-building, resource alignment, and contextual adaptation. As noted by Merdegia et al. (2024), teachers in coordinatorship roles face challenges in translating shared practices into actionable curriculum strategies due to time constraints, overlapping responsibilities, and limited access to professional development. The relatively lower score suggests that while teachers value collaborative curriculum planning, institutional support and structured frameworks are needed to optimize implementation. In summary, the data confirms that teachers exhibit a high level of commitment to subject coordinatorship, with particular strength in maintaining discipline and fostering collaboration. These findings highlight the need for sustained support systems, mentorship programs, and workload management strategies to empower coordinators and enhance their impact on school improvement. Table 5 Teachers’ Level of Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Special Assignments Area E. Special Assignments Mean Interpretation As a teacher, I … 1. participate in seminar/workshops outside of the school. 4.44 High Level 2. lead student organizations within the school. 4.09 High Level 3. volunteer as adviser to school organizations. 3.78 High Level Volume 2, Issue no. 11 | 72 4. join community extension services. 3.73 High Level 5. accept and perform the role of any assigned task given by the school head. 3.51 High Level 6. take non-specialized subject teaching if required to do so. 3.84 High Level 7. represent the school in some forums. 3.72 High Level 8. provide feedback to the school head or provide echo seminar after attending an external training. 4.03 High Level Overall Mean 3.89 High Level Table 5 presents the level of commitment of teachers to ancillary workloads involving special assignments, with an overall mean score of 3.89, interpreted as “High Level.” Item No. 1, “I participate in seminar/workshops outside of the school,” garnered the highest mean score of 4.44, interpreted as “High Level.” On one hand, Item No. 5, “I accept and perform the role of any assigned task given by the school head,” recorded the lowest mean score of 3.51, though still interpreted as “High Level.” This may suggest that while teachers are generally cooperative, the acceptance of additional roles may be influenced by workload saturation, unclear task boundaries, or lack of consultation. As emphasized in DepEd Division Order No. 01, s. 2020, public school heads are advised to distribute special assignments equitably and avoid overburdening individual teachers. The policy underscores that no teacher should hold more than one special assignment unless all others have been assigned and the teacher consents without reservation—highlighting the importance of protecting teacher welfare while maintaining institutional functionality. In summary, the findings confirm that teachers demonstrate a commendable level of commitment to special assignments, particularly in professional development and student engagement. However, the relatively lower score in task acceptance suggests the need for clearer guidelines, equitable distribution, and supportive leadership to sustain teacher motivation and well-being. Table 6 Difference in the Teachers’ Level of Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Teaching Related Duties when grouped and compared according to the aforementioned variables Variable Category N Mean Rank Mann Whitney U-Test p-value Sig. level Interpretation Age Younger 70 65.81 1378.000 0.047 0.05 Significant Older 50 53.06 Highest Educational Attainment Lower 72 62.97 1550.000 0.338 Not Significant Higher 48 56.79 Length of Service Shorter 70 63.81 1518.500 0.216 Not Significant Longer 50 55.87 Table 6 presents the results of the Mann-Whitney U-Test to determine whether significant differences exist in teachers’ level of commitment to teaching-related ancillary duties when grouped according to age, highest educational attainment, and length of service. Among the three variables, only age yielded a statistically significant difference, with a p-value of 0.047, which is below the 0.05 threshold. This indicates that younger teachers (Mean Rank = 65.81) exhibit significantly higher commitment to teaching-related duties compared to older teachers (Mean Rank = 53.06). The result suggests that younger educators may be more responsive to instructional demands, possibly due to recent exposure to updated pedagogical frameworks, digital integration, and performance-based systems. Cervañez and Francisco (2024) observed similar trends in Negros Occidental, noting that younger teachers often demonstrate higher energy and adaptability in instructional planning and curriculum alignment, especially in public school contexts where innovation is encouraged. On the other hand, no significant differences were found when teachers were grouped according to highest educational attainment and length of service. For educational attainment, the p-value of 0.338 indicates that teachers with postgraduate degrees (Mean Rank = 56.79) and those with bachelor’s degrees (Mean Rank = 62.97) show comparable levels of commitment to teaching-related duties. This finding aligns with the study by Lee (2024), which concluded that while higher education enhances pedagogical knowledge, it does not necessarily translate into measurable differences in day-to-day instructional commitment. Similarly, the length of service variable yielded a pvalue of 0.216, suggesting that teachers with shorter service (Mean Rank = 63.81) and those with longer tenure (Mean Rank = 55.87) are equally committed to teaching-related tasks. This supports the assertion that professional dedication is shaped more by institutional culture and role expectations than by tenure alone. Volume 2, Issue no. 11 | 73 Overall, the results affirm that while age may influence teachers’ commitment to teaching-related ancillary duties, educational attainment and length of service do not produce statistically significant differences. These findings highlight the importance of supporting younger teachers’ enthusiasm while ensuring that experienced educators remain engaged through targeted professional development and collaborative planning. They also reinforce the idea that commitment is a multidimensional construct influenced by both individual disposition and contextual factors. Table 7 Difference in the Teachers’ Level of Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Advising Duties when grouped and compared according to the aforementioned variables Variable Category N Mean Rank Mann Whitney U-Test p-value Sig. level Interpretation Age Younger 70 55.51 1401.000 0.061 0.05 Not Significant Older 50 67.48 Highest Educational Attainment Lower 72 57.24 1493.500 0.205 Not Significant Higher 48 65.39 Length of Service Shorter 70 56.87 1496.000 0.173 Not Significant Longer 50 65.58 Table 7 presents the results of the Mann-Whitney U-Test to determine whether significant differences exist in teachers’ level of commitment to advising-related ancillary duties when grouped according to age, highest educational attainment, and length of service. The statistical analysis reveals that none of the three variables yielded significant differences, as all p-values exceeded the 0.05 threshold. This suggests that teachers, regardless of demographic grouping, demonstrate comparable levels of commitment to advising responsibilities such as managing advisory classes, communicating with parents, and supporting learners with behavioral or academic concerns. When grouped by age, younger teachers (Mean Rank = 55.51) and older teachers (Mean Rank = 67.48) showed no statistically significant difference in their commitment to advising duties, with a p-value of 0.061. Although older teachers had a slightly higher mean rank, the difference was not sufficient to establish statistical significance. This finding aligns with the study by Cervañez and Francisco (2024), which found that while veteran educators often exhibit deeper relational ties with families and broader experience in advisory roles, younger teachers bring enthusiasm and responsiveness that balance out performance outcomes. The shared commitment across age groups reflects a strong institutional culture of learner support and parent engagement. Similarly, when grouped by highest educational attainment, teachers with postgraduate degrees (Mean Rank = 65.39) and those with bachelor’s degrees (Mean Rank = 57.24) did not differ significantly in their advising commitment, as indicated by a p-value of 0.205. This supports the assertion that while advanced academic preparation may enhance pedagogical knowledge, it does not necessarily translate into higher advisory engagement. Lee (2024) emphasized that advisory effectiveness is more closely tied to interpersonal skills, empathy, and schoolbased collaboration than to academic credentials alone. Lastly, the comparison based on length of service yielded a p-value of 0.173, indicating no significant difference between teachers with shorter service (Mean Rank = 56.87) and those with longer tenure (Mean Rank = 65.58). Although longer-serving teachers scored slightly higher, the difference was not statistically meaningful. This finding reinforces the idea that advisory commitment is a shared professional responsibility, shaped by institutional expectations and individual disposition rather than years of experience. Espiritu and Espiritu (2024) concluded that advisory effectiveness depends on relational trust, communication practices, and contextual support—factors that transcend tenure. In summary, the results affirm that teachers across age, educational attainment, and length of service demonstrate consistent levels of commitment to advising duties. The absence of significant differences suggests that advisory responsibilities are deeply embedded in the professional identity of teachers, regardless of demographic background. These findings support the continued emphasis on inclusive advisory training, collaborative practices, and schoolwide support systems to sustain high levels of engagement in learner and parent support. Table 8 Difference in the Teachers’ Level of Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Report Preparations when grouped and compared according to the aforementioned variables Volume 2, Issue no. 11 | 74 Variable Category N Mean Rank Mann Whitney U-Test p-value Sig. level Interpretation Age Younger 70 58.67 1622.000 0.493 0.05 Not Significant Older 50 63.06 Highest Educational Attainment Lower 72 57.60 1519.500 0.262 Not Significant Higher 48 64.84 Length of Service Shorter 70 61.96 1648.000 0.585 Not Significant Longer 50 58.46 Table 8 presents the results of the Mann-Whitney U-Test to determine whether significant differences exist in teachers’ level of commitment to report-related ancillary duties when grouped according to age, highest educational attainment, and length of service. The analysis reveals that none of the three variables yielded statistically significant differences, as all p-values exceeded the 0.05 threshold. This suggests that teachers, regardless of demographic grouping, demonstrate comparable levels of commitment to tasks such as submitting reports, preparing school forms, and complying with institutional documentation protocols. When grouped by age, younger teachers (Mean Rank = 58.67) and older teachers (Mean Rank = 63.06) showed no significant difference in their commitment to report preparations, with a p-value of 0.493. Although older teachers had a slightly higher mean rank, the difference was not statistically meaningful. This finding aligns with the study by Biñas et al. (2023), which concluded that age does not significantly influence teachers’ commitment to administrative tasks, especially in contexts where reporting is standardized and monitored through institutional systems. The shared commitment across age groups reflects a culture of procedural compliance and professional accountability. When grouped by highest educational attainment, teachers with postgraduate degrees (Mean Rank = 64.84) and those with bachelor’s degrees (Mean Rank = 57.60) did not differ significantly in their reporting commitment, as indicated by a p-value of 0.262. This supports the assertion that while advanced academic preparation may enhance pedagogical depth, it does not necessarily translate into higher engagement in administrative documentation. Lee (2024) emphasized that commitment to reporting tasks is more closely tied to institutional expectations and workload management than to academic credentials. Lastly, the comparison based on length of service yielded a p-value of 0.585, indicating no significant difference between teachers with shorter service (Mean Rank = 61.96) and those with longer tenure (Mean Rank = 58.46). This result reinforces the idea that reporting commitment is a shared professional responsibility, shaped by school culture and administrative routines rather than years of experience. The Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers (PPST) outline documentation and reporting as core competencies expected of all teachers, regardless of tenure, thereby promoting uniformity in performance expectations. Overall, the findings confirm that teachers across age, educational attainment, and length of service maintain consistent levels of commitment to report preparations. The absence of significant differences suggests that institutional systems, rather than demographic factors, play a more decisive role in shaping teachers’ engagement with reporting tasks. These results support the continued emphasis on standardized reporting protocols, collaborative planning, and time management training to sustain efficiency and accountability in school documentation practices. Table 9 Difference in the Teachers’ Level of Commitment to Ancillary Workloads in Subject Coordinatorship when grouped and compared according to the aforementioned variables. Variable Category N Mean Rank Mann Whitney U-Test p-value Sig. level Interpretation Age Younger 70 59.48 1678.500 0.702 0.05 Not Significant Older 50 61.93 Highest Educational Attainment Lower 72 57.81 1534.000 0.295 Not Significant Higher 48 64.54 Length of Service Shorter 70 60.14 1725.000 0.893 Not Significant Longer 50 61.00