INTRODUCTION
Over the past years the country had implemented reforms to improve the quality of education. Despite many problems facing our educational system today, our government do its best to pull out our sinking educational system. The implementation of the School Based Management based on RA 9155 known as “Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001” states that school management should be school based. The program according to (Oswald, n.d.) ensures higher quality decisions because they are made by groups instead of individuals and that it increases communication among the stakeholders, including school boards, superintendents, principal, teachers, parents, community members and students.
Teachers have at stake their understandings of their students, their professional practice and knowledge, their perceptions of themselves as teachers, and the quality of their work life and standing in the community. Their perspective on the aspect of school management, leadership, and professional development are key factors on the improvement of programs that will suit their needs and eventually improve their delivery of the school’s core services. This evaluation process involving their point of view will provide the administrators on improving their skills, practices and resource utilization to address critical needs of teachers.
This study will focus on measuring school level of practice on factors such as School management, School leadership, teacher professional development, school curriculum implementation and assessment, teaching and learning process, student learning, student development, school climate and home – school cooperation that influence school performance. Internal Stakeholders such as teachers, parents and students will be the primary respondents in the study. Their evaluation of the performance of the school will be deemed reflective of the quality of education that the school delivers. Results could lead school administrators in developing programs that would improve delivery of education to meet the needs of the school community and align its programs towards national goals in promoting quality education
Review of Related Literature and Studies
School performance evaluation plays an important role in the development of its programs and projects as it leads to increased students achievement and the quality of its services. Performance evaluation of schools have evolved to suit their varying needs and conditions. School self-evaluation using stakeholders’ point-of-view changes the way evaluation was done.
School performance can be viewed relative to the quality of education it delivers. Other stakeholders such as teachers, parents and students were not involved in the school performance evaluation. A process known as school self-evaluation in which members of staff in a school reflect on their practice and identify areas for action to stimulate improvement in the areas of pupil and professional learning (Chaman & Sammons, 2013). In some case like the one implemented by the Hongkong Education Bureau involves parents and students in the process.
Stakeholders like the students and parents are the beneficiaries of the school. Teachers on the other hand are the ones who serves as avenue to deliver reforms and programs of the school into quality education. These three primary stakeholders know best the processes and outcomes of school programs. Their views about everything of the school should be the very basis of school improvement to deliver quality education. The self-evaluation process has been described as a process for helping schools improve, which should be shaped by themselves, and integrated into their routine management systems (Chaman & Sammons, 2013). Furthermore, it is argued that this should be a collaborative practice involving stakeholders’ views and should incorporate annual updates to reflect on the impact of the school’s actions on its pupils. It makes sense that schools should regularly ask themselves questions about how they are doing and what could be done to improve current practices and programs.
Parents as one of the key stakeholders of public schools underscore the importance of considering parental satisfaction ratings in program evaluation. The study also highlights the need for considering other variables that may be associated with parental evaluation of a program (Jinnah & Walters, 2008). Parents satisfaction will be the basis of their response on the evaluation of the school’s performance and it will be reflective of their assessment of their child progress and activities at school and the programs and projects as well as their involvement in school development. Families clearly have an investment in their children’s learning, well-being, and educational future. The public invests money in education, in part as an investment in the future, and has a stake in maintaining the quality of that investment. The stewardship of the investment involves administrators and policymakers. Assessment is always value laden, and the ongoing participation of all parties involved in it is necessary in a democratic society. When any one perspective is missing, silenced, or privileged above others, the assessment picture is distorted (International Reading Association, n.d.).
Each of the stakeholders named in this standard has a stake in assessment. Students are concerned because their literacy learning, their concepts of themselves as literate people, and the quality of their subsequent lives and careers are at stake. Students or learners are one of the most important stakeholders of the school. In the study of (Dlamini, 2005)states the needs and expectations of the learners are that they should receive quality education. This is the education which will make them knowledgeable and potentially employable. It is the type of education that will also equip them with the necessary skills and competencies to do the jobs they want to do. It is also the type of education that will make them well-rounded citizens of the country. It must make them earn a decent living and contribute to the economic growth of the country. In this regard the perception of the students plays as an important factor to consider in terms of school programs and projects.
For instance, the drop-out rate which is widely used in the Philippines and in other parts of the world as performance indicator was defined and contextualized as the proportion of pupils/ students who leave school during the year as well as those who complete the grade/year level but fail to enroll in the next grade/year level the following school year to the total number of pupils/ students enrolled during the previous school year. In the study of (Russel W. Rumberger & Palardy, 2005) were school performance was measured along with test scores and dropout found out that drop out and test scores has a relationship with school processes and other school characteristics. Another study by (Glennie, Bonneau, Vandellen, & Dodge, 2013) that aims to find relationship with school performance and dropout rate found out that school level accountability on improving school performance results to decrease in dropout.
School based evaluation according to (Eligio B. Barsaga, 2002) serves to monitor the implementation of strategies of change and review their successes and it is primarily initiated by the personnel within the school and its ultimate aim is to improve the quality of educational experiences offered to students. School based evaluation encourages its teachers, parents and students to participate and be part of the school improvement. They are become aware and it stimulates them to forge cooperation to achieve the school goals.
Conceptual Framework
The study was anchored in the idea proposed in Goal-Setting theory by Locke in 1968 that the goals established by the individual or organization motivates performance. As such performance evaluation should be done by those in the grassroots to have an actual feel and understanding of the situations and present condition, in this study the internal stakeholders like parents, students and teachers will be the one to evaluate the practice of schools on a set of defined factors that could have influence on the performance of schools in the District of Sto. Domingo.
Further, Expectancy theory proposed by Vroom in 1964 states that individuals adjust their behavior in the organization based on anticipated satisfaction of valued goals. In this study, the goal is to promote quality education, but it should be satisfied by the performance of the school as it serves as the measure of the processes and activities undertaken to improve the quality of education it serves. This evaluation system provides internal stakeholders to develop sense of obligation and that it ensures inclusiveness in the school’s development. School performance as perceived by the internal stakeholders provides school administrators to reflect on their practices and enable them to identify what really matters to its internal stakeholders with respect to its services, which is education. Further result of such evaluation serves as benchmarks for the next steps for the organization.
The School performance will be determined by set of indicators such as NAT result, Drop-Out rate, Retention rate, Transition rate, Graduation rate, Participation rate and Cohort Survival rate that are all standard used by the Department of Education. All of which are indicators of school performance and are result of overall school management which covers interaction between teachers, parents and students. These School performance indicators will be used to define school performance that will be tested against the factors such as School management, School leadership, teacher professional development, school curriculum implementation and assessment, teaching and learning process, student learning, student development, school climate and home – school cooperation. The research will use questionnaire for evaluating the school level of practice on different factors that could affect the School Performance. Each factors identified will be tested against each School Performance Indicators to specifically identify its effect.
Research Questions
The study will seek to find answer and determine factors that would have an effect on the performance of schools in the district of Sto. Domingo. Specifically the study aims to answer the following:
1. How may the Performance Indicator of the Schools in the District of Sto. Domingo be described?
2. How may the practice of school be described on the following factors;
a. School Management
b. School Leadership
c. Teachers Professional Development
d. School Curriculum Implementation and Assessment
e. Teaching and Learning process as perceived by Teacher and Students?
f. Student Learning as perceived by Teacher, Student and Parents?
g. Student development as perceived by Teacher, Student and Parents?
h. School Climate as perceived by Teacher, Student and Parents?
i. Home – School Cooperation?
3. What are the factors that influences the performance of schools in the District of Sto. Domingo as perceived by the internal stakeholders?
Hypothesis
There is no relationship between the School performance and the factors such as School management, School leadership, teacher professional development, school curriculum implementation and assessment, teaching and learning process, student learning, student development, school climate and home – school cooperation.
Significance of the Study
The study will provide the schools in the District of Sto. Domingo ample background and vital information for the development and improvement of its programs, projects and learning environment to deliver quality education and to identify internal stakeholders concerns and issues regarding school performance. Further, the study will provide useful information to the following:
Students
The study will help them grasp and understand some concepts pertaining to their education and the programs of the school. This will help them become self-aware of the developmental tasks of the school and their responsibilities as well for their development.
Parents
This will help them to understand their relationship with the school for them to help their child improve and cooperate with the school regarding their child progress and development. Further, the study will give them an in-depth understanding of the importance of shared vision and responsibility for them to help educational institutions deliver quality and responsive education.
Teachers
The study will help them understand the totality of the systems of education and the processes that involves them for the improvement of the educational system thus improving the quality. The result would make them identify practices that affect students’ performance and teachers as well from different perspectives. This study could be used as a guide for the improvement of delivery and modes of teaching and learning for a more appropriate ways that will suit different conditions.
Administrators
The result could lead administrators and school managers to develop programs and create initiatives for their faculty development. Stakeholders views will able them to pinpoint the ups and downs of the school and provide remediation to help the entire school community adjust to its needs and deliver quality education.
Scope and Limitations
The study will be limited to identify school performance based on the following indicators namely: NAT result, Drop-Out rate, Retention rate, Transition rate, Graduation rate, Participation rate and Cohort Survival rate. Level of practice on factors such as School management, School leadership, teacher professional development, school curriculum implementation and assessment, teaching and learning process, student learning, student development, school climate and home – school cooperation will be determined thru a questionnaire which will be answered by the internal stakeholders. The study will be conducted in the district of Sto Domingo and data will be gathered to teachers, parents and students as internal stakeholders of all schools in the public elementary in the District of Sto. Domingo for S.Y. 2017-2018
The study will be limited to school based analysis and is not a substitute for national, regional and division level practices in the evaluation of school performance. This will focus only on schools’ self-evaluation and improvement that widen its perspective thru the inclusion of internal stakeholders in the process. Since the study features factors that could have influence school performance, its result will be vital for school heads to focus on specific areas of concern that needs immediate action.
METHOD
Type of Research
The study will use descriptive – correlational research design to interpret data and discuss results pertaining to the evaluation of stakeholders on school of practice on factors that could have influence on school performance in the District of Sto. Domingo. The factors such as School management, School leadership, teacher professional development, school curriculum implementation and assessment, teaching and learning process, student learning, student development, school climate and home – school cooperation will be analyzed and interpret to find out if it has any relationship with school performance as indicated by NAT result, Drop-Out rate, Retention rate, Transition rate, Graduation rate, Participation rate and Cohort Survival rate.
Respondents
The respondents will be the Teachers, Grade 6 Students and Parents. Parents and students respondent should be not related or parent respondent should not be the student respondents’ parent or vice versa. Teacher respondents will be any teachers from different grade levels from all selected schools. School Heads will provide the updated data on school performance indicator of the school.
List of Schools School Head Teachers Parents Students
(Grade 6)
Baloc 1 3 3 3
Buasao 1 3 3 3
Burgos 1 3 3 3
Cabugao 1 3 3 3
Comitang 1 3 3 3
Concepcion 1 3 3 3
Dagat-dagatan 1 3 3 3
DMSC 1 3 3 3
Dolores 1 3 3 3
Felix T. Pascual 1 3 3 3
Gen. Luna 1 3 3 3
Ilog Baliwag 1 3 3 3
Kabulihan 1 3 3 3
Mabini 1 3 3 3
Malaya 1 3 3 3
Malayantoc 1 3 3 3
Pelmoka – Lina 1 3 3 3
Pulong Buli 1 3 3 3
Rogelio – Valdezotto 1 3 3 3
San Fabian 1 3 3 3
San Francisco 1 3 3 3
San Pascual 1 3 3 3
Sto.Domingo Central 1 3 3 3
Sta. Rita 1 3 3 3
Sto. Rosario 1 3 3 3
Villa Juan 1 3 3 3
Violago – Gatdula 1 3 3 3
Total 27 81 81 81
Table 1 Respondents Distribution
Sampling Method
The study used purposive random sampling in selecting the respondent. Each School will have an equal number of respondents from the teacher, parents and students while school performance indicator will be per school. Equal number of respondent per school was ideal since School performance indicators are same for all respondent in a particular school hence larger number of respondent with higher/lower performance will affect the data range. Number of samples per school is shown in Table 1 Respondents Distribution.
Sources of Data
Data will be gathered thru a questionnaire to be answered of supplied with information by the respondents. This includes data for factors; School management, School leadership, teacher professional development, school curriculum implementation and assessment, teaching and learning process, student learning, student development, school climate and home – school cooperation.
School performance indicators are from secondary data obtained in the District file or to be Supplied with by the school head during the data gathering process. Secondary data gathered are shown below in Table 2 School Performance in the District of Sto. Domingo.
LIST OF SCHOOLS NAT DROP – OUT RETENTION RATE TRANSITION RATE GRADUATION RATE PARTICIPATION RATE COHORT SURVIVAL RATE
Baloc 89.13 .9 82.16 94.90 98.48 98.09 92.25
Buasao 81.55 1.50 91.96 94.74 100 91.87 89.47
Burgos 88.35 0 96.73 96.29 100 95.79 93.55
Cabugao 87.87 0 100 100 100 99.98 100
Comitang 83.04 1.06 97.00 100 100 98.00 94.00
Concepcion 86.32 1.98 94.42 100 100 98.06 95.12
Dagat-dagatan 86.82 0 92.75 100 100 100 –
DMSC 86.22 0 99.99 96.47 100 98.60 95.70
Dolores 90.00 0 98.00 102 100 97.73 102
Felix T. Pascual 89.85 0 104 96.00 100 98.03 63.00
Gen. Luna 92.04 0 100 100 100 100 100
Ilog Baliwag 85.47 .67 89.00 80.00 100 97.00 –
Kabulihan 83.50 0 100 100 100 100 –
Mabini 85.47 1.40 96.69 94.44 100 100 76.19
Malaya 87.71 0 95.52 97.15 100 98.44 100
Malayantoc 90.94 .59 99.16 94.12 100 100 100
Pelmoka – Lina 88.38 0 97.89 100 100 96.92 100
Pulong Buli 94.26 .015 100 95.23 100 100 100
Rogelio – Valdezotto 85.23 0 99.23 70.37 100 94.69 78.95
San Fabian 87.98 .22 99.37 98.39 96.61 100 91.94
San Francisco 94.36 0 109.9 104.7 100 100 123.5
San Pascual 85.99 1.17 98.93 98.57 98.55 98.39 94.44
Sto.Domingo Central 85.74 .0016 100 97.67 100 100 100
Sta. Rita 90.38 0 98.13 100 100 100 86.67
Sto. Rosario 83.4 0 94.57 99.59 100 100 80.47
Villa Juan 91.05 .80 95.08 95.00 100 100 92.68
Violago – Gatdula 88.60 0 100.9 94.44 100 100 126.5
Table 2 School Performance in the District of Sto. Domingo
Instruments
The research instrument for teachers, parents, and students will be developed based from the questionnaire by the Bureau of Education in Hongkong on School Self Assessment. The research questionnaire will be used to determine the schools level of practice using set of indicators of factors such as School management, School leadership, teacher professional development, school curriculum implementation and assessment, teaching and learning process, student learning, student development, school climate and home – school cooperation
The research questionnaire for Teachers, Parents and Students will be answered using a four point Likert scale as to how they perceive the school level of practice on the above mentioned factors
The Scale will be interpreted as follows 4 – Highly Observed, 3 – Observed, 2 – Rarely Observed, 1 – Not Observed.
Reliability and Validity Testing of the Instrument
The research instrument will be pre-tested to 10 respondent from the group of teachers, parents and students which data will be excluded from the statistical analysis of this study. The result will be analyzed using the Cronbach’s correlation coefficient (Cronbach Alpha)
The respondents were asked to answer a questionnaire which serves as the data gathering instrument. The researcher will guide the respondents in answering the questionnaire.
Data Collection Procedure
The study will also utilize secondary data for school performance indicators such NAT result, Drop-Out rate, Retention rate, Transition rate, Graduation rate Participation rate and Cohort Survival rate this S.Y. 2015-2016.
The study will use a survey questionnaire for data gathering. The respondents were asked to answer the questionnaire accordingly. The instrument will identify the respondent’s perception on school level of practice on the following factors School management, School leadership, teacher professional development, school curriculum implementation and assessment, teaching and learning process, student learning, student development, school climate and home – school cooperation
Teachers will answer the questionnaire without guidance from the researcher for it is assumed that they can comprehend the questions and statements on the instrument.
Instrument to be administered to Parents and Grade 6 pupils will be explained and guided by the researcher for the respondents to answer appropriately what was asked in the questionnaire to ensure that the responses or answers were correct and most likely to be accurate.
Ethical Considerations
Data gathered will be used only for the conduct of the study and will not be shared to other schools however its result that will possibly help them to improve their practice will likely be shared and discussed to serve as basis for self improvement.
Data gathered and results will not be used to or shall not inflict on the performance of the school head and teachers alike and shall not be a basis of their rating.
Materials, instruments which were from open source will be used in the research are properly acknowledge and that does not become a property of the researcher.
Hence, the study shall not serve as an alternative to national, regional, division and district processes on performance evaluation of schools but rather as a tool to school self-evaluation only.
Data Analysis
The study will use quantitative descriptive statistics such as mean, percentage, and frequency counts to describe and determine the level of practice of school on set of given factors that could have influence on schools’ performance in the District of Sto. Domingo. Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient or Pearson r will be used to test if there are significant relationship between the factors namely; School management, School leadership, teacher professional development, school curriculum implementation and assessment, teaching and learning process, student learning, student development, school climate and home – school cooperation and the school performance indicators namely; NAT result, Drop-Out rate, Retention rate, Transition rate, Graduation rate, Participation rate and Cohort Survival.
To determine the degree to which the following factors influence school performance, regression analysis will be conducted. This analysis will specifically identify how much is the attributes of a given or set of factors to school performance or thus there are other factors that may have influence on School performance which are not included in this study.
The data gathered will be interpreted using the IBM SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) Statistics 22.
Timetable/Gantt Chart
The study will be conducted and its result will be disseminated on the following timetables per activity:
ACTIVITIES MONTH
JAN. FEB. MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT NOV. DEC.
1. Identification of Research Area
2. Review of related literature
3. Development or research questionnaire(data Gathering Instrument)
4. Formulate research design, strategy and methods.
5. Writing the research proposal
6. Secure approval/revision and refinement of the research proposal
7. Data Collection
8. Data analysis
9. Writing the final research output.
10. Refinement and approval
11. Information dissemination and implementation
12. Implementation feedback and impact assessment.
Cost Estimates
The following estimates of expenditures which will be incurred through the process from the conceptualization up to the final and implementation of the research. The following are as follows based on its processes:
ACTIVITY ESTIMATED COST
A. Writing of Research Proposal
1. Materials and Supplies 2,000.00
2. Printing and reproduction(revisions up to its approval) 2,500.00
3. Transportation Cost 500.00
B. Data Gathering/Collection
1. Reproduction of Research instrument 3,000.00
2. Transportation Cost 2,500.00
C. Writing the final research output
1. Printing and reproduction(including revisions 3,500.00
and final manuscript)
2. Transportation Cost 2,500.00
D. Information dissemination, implementation and
Assessment. 3,500.00
_______________________________________________________________
TOTAL 20,000.00
Plan for Dissemination and Advocacy
ACTIVITY STRATEGIES TIME FRAME PERSONS INVOLVED EXPECTED OUTCOME
Research Output Orientation Meetings or Conference/ Open Forum Oct. 2017 School Heads and school research coordinator. Understanding of the research objective and process.
School Wide implementation Data gathering
Analysis of data
Interpretation of Result Oct. – Nov. 2017 School Head, Teachers, Parents, and students(G6) Identified school performance based on internal stakeholders perspective.
Comparative analysis of the school level results with the district result Analysis/Brainstorming on the result of school level assessment and the district level result Dec. 2017 School Head, Teachers, Parents, and students(G6) Identified areas of concern and good practices based on the research questionnaire and result.
Implementation feedback and impact assessment(School and District Based)
- Open Forum/Conferences/ meetings
- Feedback of experiences, behavior, response and participation on the implementation
- Assessment of impact on internal stakeholdersDec. 2017 PSDS, School Head, Teachers, Parents, and students
- Experiences in the implementation at school level.
- Acceptance School Administrators and participation of internal stakeholders in the school performance evaluation process.