BIBLIOGRAPHY
FRANCISCO M. CONTERO, November 2006. Evaluation of School-Based
Management Program in Kapangan District, Benguet. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad Benguet.
Adviser: Carlos P. Luma-ang, Ph. D.
ABSTRACT
The study determined the processes, key actors, and resources involved in the
Program’s inputs, milestones, innovations or changes introduced to the school by the
Program, and the learnings gained from the Program.

The Program inputs, which include school building program, school innovation
improvement facility, curriculum instructional materials and textbooks and school-based
procurement of furniture, are provided in some selected schools. The rest of the inputs,
which include student assessment, staff development, in-service trainings and monitoring
and evaluation are provided in the rest of the schools.

The implemented milestones include the school improvement plan, annual
implementation plan, the plan implementation, managements of funds, monitoring and
evaluation and reporting to stakeholders.
The practices that have emerged during the Program’s implementation are
community consultative conference, stakeholders’ assemblies, and strong community
support. The learning derived from its implementation relates to the involvement of the

---

parents-teachers and community association. With the Program, opportunities are given
to school heads and teachers to propose their own budget.
Recommendations include urging the local government unit and the parents-
teacher community association to work harmoniously toward the improvement of
learning; providing trainings on instructional management and administrative
management; giving schools the authority over their budget, personnel and curriculum;
and creating an instructional guidance system that includes standards, curriculum
framework and assessment component.

ii

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS










Page
Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Abstract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iii
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
Background of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
Statement of the Problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
Objective of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
Importance of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
Scope and Delimitation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
REVIEW OF LITERATURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
Historical Background of SBM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
SBM Implementation Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10
School Head as Lead Implementer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14
Principal-Led School Building Program (SBP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
Student Assessment (S.A.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
Curriculum, Instruction, Materials

and Textbooks (CIMTEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
25

School-Based In-service Training (IN-SET) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
28
School Innovation Improvement

Project (SIIP/SIIF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
28

Conceptual Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29
iii

---

Paradigm of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
30
Operational Definition of Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
31
Hypothesis of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
34
METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
35
Location of Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
35
Respondent of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
38
Instrumentation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
38
Data Gathering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
40
Statistical Treatment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
40
RESULT AND DISCUSSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
42
The processes involved in the Curriculum,

Instructional Materials and Textbooks (CIMTEX) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
45

The processes involved in the School-Based

in-service trainings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
47

The processes involved in School

innovation improvement facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
50

The process involved in Student Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
52
The process involved in the

Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
55

The Process involved in the

School-based procurement of furniture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
55

School Head and Staff Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
57
Status, key actors, resources and processes involving

SBM Milestones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
58


Innovation or changes introduce to the school as a result of SBM program.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
61
iv

---

Learning’s from SBM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
62
SUMMARRY AND CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS . . . . . .
64

Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
64

Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
65

Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
66
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
68
APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
70

Questionnaires. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
70

Letter of request to distribute questionnaires. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
98

Letter granting permission to conduct similar study on SBM. . . . . . . . . .
99

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
100

v

---

1
INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study
The long-standing problems of the Philippine education relate to the
attainment of educational quality and equity in schools. They are rooted in
colonial experience, geography; social, economic and political structure;
psychological factors; and value systems. Thus the search for the solution to these
problems must go beyond educational considerations to include social, economic,
political, psychological and cultural dimensions of these problem as well
(Cortes,1993).
The Education Commission reported that universal and quality education
at the elementary level in the Philippines is in accessible to children in rural,
depressed and far-flung communities and to children from relatively poor families
throughout the country. The problems regarding unequal access to quality
education which are likewise attributable to school and non-school factors include
the following: (1) reduced instruction time partly due to teachers who, because
their permanent residence is in a community far from the school, habitually
arrived late for class on Monday mornings and left school on early Friday
afternoons. As a result class days are held only three days a week in remote
communities; (2) the practice of deploying less qualified teachers to rural and
depressed areas; (3) the lack or absence of textbooks and instructional materials;
(4) the very poor physical facilities; (5) the absence of electricity and running
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

2
water in school; and (6) the irrelevance of the content of education to the needs of
children and the resources in the community. Obviously, these problems of
access to educational opportunities are beyond the schools and power to rectify.
With the implementation of the Governance of Basic Education Act of
2001 or R.A. 9155 and with the project inception in 1998, Third Elementary
Education Project has decentralized basic education planning and implementation,
administration and fund management to the division level through the DPISU
(Division Project Implementation Unit). The second and final stage is
decentralizing these processes down to school level through School-Based
Management. The basic underlying model of the Program is a change in the
formal governance and management of the school by increasing the level of
involvement and participation of multiple stakeholders. The Philippine SBM-
model, developed under Third Elementary Education Project was based on a
careful study of existing practices and institutions on the field. It has evolved
through a model of school-community participation, led by the school heads but
involving the Parents-teachers community association, the local government unit,
teachers, parents, students, non-government and civic organizations
(http://help.yahoo.com.).
The immediate leaders in the public schools are the principals, head
teachers, and teachers-in-charge. The school leaders or administrators have daily
contacts with the schoolteachers and are responsible for the implementation and
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

3
execution of the policies. They take charge of the school buildings and other
performances of teachers. In short they oversee the strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities and threats of the educative machinery within their respective
school. Since the school heads and teachers are the ones most familiar with life,
activities and problems and their school, they are in the best position to solve their
problems. They are the partners in the achievement of educational goals. How
they run and what they do in their schools, are the determining factors in making
the educative machinery work smoothly. Their leadership counts very much.
Their performance within their jurisdictions hinges on such leadership. Their
behavior as administrators may either construct or destroy the zeal, enthusiasm
and morale of teachers. The organizational climate within the school depends on
the leadership behavior of school administrators. It cannot be gainsaid that the
existing school climate is an important factor in the working condition of the
school organizations (Dobinto, 2001).
Based on the foregoing the researcher conducted a research to evaluate the
implementation of the school-based management.

Statement of the Problem
This study aimed to determine the implementation of School Based
Management (SBM) in Kapangan District, Benguet Division. It sought to answers
the following questions:
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

4
1. What are the processes, key actors, resources involved in the
introduction of the following inputs for the School-Based Management?
2. What are the status, key actors, and processes involved in the School-
Based Management milestones?
3. What are the innovations or changes introduced in the school as a result
of the implementation School-Based Management Program?
4. What are the learnings derived from the implementation of School-
Based Management?

Objectives of the Study

This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of the school-based
management in Kapangan District, Benguet Division.

Specifically this research was conducted to:
1. Determine the processes, key actors, resources involved in the
introduction of the following inputs for the school-based management:
a. School building program (SBP)
b. Curriculum instructional materials and textbooks (CIMTEXT)
c. In-service training (INSET)
d. School improvement and innovation Facility (SIIF)
e. Student Assessment (SA)
f. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
g. School based Procurement of Furniture (SBPF)
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

5
h. School Head and Staff Development
2. Determine the status, key actors, and processes used involving the SBM
milestones.
a. Plan
b. School Based Fund
c. Plan implementation
d. Managing the SBM Fund
e. Monitoring and Evaluation
f. Reporting to Stakeholders
3. Determine the innovations or changes introduced to the school as a
result of the School-Based Management Program.
4. Determine the positive and negative learnings from the implementation
of School-Based Management.

Importance of the Study
The result of the study will provide teachers and school heads the basic
understanding of the principles inscribed in School-Based Management. Findings
will also serve as a guide for school heads in making decisions and formulating of
activities or programs for better performance in teaching-learning process. It will
also enable the administrators, teachers and stakeholders to evaluate their
strengths and weaknesses in the implementation of the SBM program.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

6
Through school-based management the principles of subsidiarity and
collegiality could be carried out. The principle of subsidiarity espouses the idea
that problem must be solved and decision made at the lowest organizational level.
Since the school heads, teachers, students, parents, local government units, and
community members are the ones most familiar with life, activities and problems
and their school, they are in the best position to solve their problems.
The principle of collegiality, on the other hand, demands that the
stakeholders work as a team in the improvement of the school. The school head
exercise collegiality at school by encouraging the participation of teachers,
parents, local leaders and students in making decision about what is best for the
school. Consequently, the school heads become truly empowered to work for their
school’s best. Ideally, higher ups should be supportive of and comfortable with
school heads increased authority and accountability as decision makers.
(.http//www.seameo-innotech.org/ic/papers/ Irene/)

Scope and Delimitation of the Study
The study was delimited to the evaluation of School-based Management
Program in Kapangan District, Benguet Division.
The main focus of the study was to determine the processes the key actors
and resources involved in the inputs of the Program, milestones the Programs,
innovation introduced and learnings gained from the implementation of the
Program.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

7
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Historical Background of School-based
Management Program
School based management Program is the institutional expression of the
decentralization of education at the grassroots level. It is based on the national
policy of the decentralization originally set by the Philippine Local Government
Code of 1991 (RA 7160) in response to the new challenges for sustainable human
development that enables local communities to become self-reliant and more
effective partners in the attainment of national goals.
Consistent with this policy, the Department of Education intended to
realize decentralization through its 10-year Master Plan (1995-2005) by giving
more decision-making powers to local school officials in terms of school repairs
and maintenance; and the procurement of textbooks, school supplies, and
equipment to improve its nationwide operation and delivery of services.
Subsequently, DECS Order No. 230 in 1999 further defined
decentralization to mean; (1) promotion of School-Based Management; (2)
transfer of authority and decision-making from central and regional offices to the
division and schools; (3) sharing education management responsibilities with
other stakeholders such as the local government units parent-teacher-community
associations, and non-governmental organizations; and (4) devolution of
education functions.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

8
With the approval of the five-year Medium Term Development Plan for
Basic Education (1999-2004), the goals of education are stated as follows:
enhancing school holding power; improving school learning outcomes and raising
quality and academic excellence; enhancing the relevance of the curriculum; and
establishing administrative and management improvement to gear the bureaucracy
for decentralization and modernization. Its mission is to decentralize educational
management so that the school becomes the focus for enhancing initiative,
creativity innovation and effectiveness. Its efforts at educational quality
improvement shall originate from the school and redound to its benefit and that of
the community.
With the enactment on August 11,2002 of Republic Act 9155 ( an act
instituting a framework of governance for basic education and for other purposes),
the legal mandate for decentralization of governance in basic education was
finally articulated. Its Declaration of Policy under Section 2 sets the direction of
basic education in the Philippines, as follows:
It is hereby declared that the policy of the state to protect and
promote the right of all citizens to quality basic education and to
make such education accessible to all by providing all Filipino
children a free and compulsory education at the elementary level and
free education at the high school level. Such education shall include
alternative learning system for out-of-school youth and adult
learners. It shall be the goal of basic education to provide them with
the skills, knowledge, and values they need to become caring, self-
reliant, productive and patriotic citizens.
The school shall be the heart of the formal education system.
It is where children learn. Schools shall have single aim of providing
best possible basic education for all the learners.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

9
Governance of basic education shall begin at the national
level. It is at the regions, divisions, school, and learning centers
herein referred to as field offices where the policy and principles for
the governance of basic education shall be translated into programs,
projects and services developed, adopted, and offered to fit local
needs.

Upon his assumption of office in 2004, Secretary of Education Florencio
Abad proposed a major policy direction through the School First Initiative, It is a
movement based on the ideas and principles of the Global Movement Education
for All. It has three components, namely, enhancement of learning; more
resources for learning; and focused organization for learning.
It is clear from this declaration of Policy that the most important change in
the government of basic education must occur at the level of the school, “the heart
of formal education system” School Based Management (SBM) is the institutional
expression of such change.
The Third Elementary Education Project (TEEP) is a nine-year public
investment program (1998-2006) of the Department of Education with external
financing from the World Bank and Japan Bank for International Cooperation.
The project supports the goal of improving the quality of elementary education
through decentralization. Specifically, it aims to (1) improve learning
achievement, completion rates and access to quality elementary education in 23 of
the poorest provinces; (2) build the institutional capacity of DepEd to manage
change through teacher effectiveness and better management at all levels; and (3)
actively involves the community and the local government in a large scale effort
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

10
to attain quality education. Moreover, TEEP is intended to be a laboratory for
reforms that involve planning by the stakeholders, social targeting,
decentralization, and school-focused and information-based decision making.

SBM Implementation Process
According to the school-based management primer (2005), The Philippine
public school system is characterized by great diversity and unevenness- whether
in terms of school size, resources, community types, administrative efficiency,
professional competencies or local support and participation. There are many
excellent and effective schools, but so many are more marginal and need
comprehensive improvement. The mentality “one size fits all” will not work on
school-based management and will be unfair to those schools, which have to start
from the lower base.
SBM is expected to enable schools to directly address the differences
especially in compensating for gaps and weaknesses.
In these diverse conditions, the definition of SBM Process is kept simple
enough to allow for maximum flexibility of school heads and other stakeholders
in designing intervention programs and strategies which met their own challenges
and which they are capable of doing.
Figure 1 shows the SBM milestones.



Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

11
*Education Quality




I
*T h i l
School Head

Implementation of School Based
Support
System
Management

Training for SBM


Plan




Fund








Implement
Manage
the Plan
the SBM
Fund


Monitor and Evaluate

Show Result


Report to stake holders

Figure 1. SBM milestones

There are only six milestones in the implementation of SBM, with
preparatory and on-going training for the school head as a prerequisite in its
implementation. This training could be made available by the divisions, regions,
central office and other institutions. Likewise, SBM requires the setting up of
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

12
support system at the cluster and division levels to assist and support the school
head and its implementation.
Figure shows the SBM milestones or indicators that demonstrate how
SBM is being practiced in the school, as well as the provisions on school head
training and SBM support system. Each milestone is explained below.
1. Plan. There is school improvement Plan (SIP), which is a three or five-
year development plan and an annual implementation plan (AIP) developed and
confirmed by all the stakeholders and approved by the schools division
superintendent. This plan contains the school vision-mission; profile of the school
and the community; problem and need assessment; objectives, standards, and
targets; implementation plan; monitoring and evaluation plan; communication and
advocacy plan; documentation and reporting to stakeholders; and signatories.
2. Fund. There is a lump sum fund coming from various sources (project
funds, regular DepEd allocation, PTCA, LGU donations) which can be allotted by
the school head, in consultation with the stakeholders, according to the priorities
set in the SIP and AIP. The schools division superintendent must duly approve the
budget.
3. Plan implementation. All stakeholders participate in the processes of
implementing the plan and managing the SBMF. The activities focus on resolving
the problems of instruction and improving the student achievement along with the
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

13
support services that the parents, local government units and community could
offer.
Management of the SBM Fund. Since the SBMF is public money, it must
be managed according to the rules set by the Department of Budget and
Management and Commission on Audit. Guidelines on allocation, utilization and
liquidation of funds are available at the division and with the school themselves.
4. Monitoring and Evaluation is the collection of data on schools actual
performance in programs and projects against the targets set in the AIP, the
identification of problems and issues based on the data, and the formulation of
possible solution and technical assistance from the district and division. In the
M&E System develop under Third Elementary Education Project, schools are
provided with SBM monitoring form on tracking non-readers and non-numerates,
mean percentage score in pre-post test of five learning areas under the basic
education curriculum, teacher effectiveness and school effectiveness. The rating
system for school head puts emphasis on pupils’ achievement as an indicator of
teacher performance. Likewise, the teacher observation checklist which is the
main basis for teacher rating puts the highest percentage on instruction and pupils
achievement.
5. Show of results. The expected outcomes of effective school-based
management are improved learning achievement of students; improved
participation and completion rates, and decreased drop-out rates.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

14
6. Report to school’s stakeholders. At the end of every school year during
a public assembly, the school head presents the school report card on the
implementation of the AIP, the management of the SBM fund and learning
outcomes of the students. This report becomes the basis of annual review and
revision of the SIP and the development of the AIP for the next school year which
immediately follows the annual reporting.

School Head as a Lead implementer
New roles, functions and competencies (Figure 2). As the lead
implementer of SBM, the school head is defined by section 7E of R.A. 9155 as
follows having the authority, accountability and responsibility to set the mission,
goals and targets of the school by developing a school improvement plan; to be
accountable for higher learning outcomes by implementing the curriculum and
develop the school educational program, creating an environment conducive to
higher learning, introduce new and innovative modes of instruction to achieve
higher learning outcomes; administer and manage personnel, physical and fiscal
resources of the school by recommending staff complement, encouraging staff
development, and accepting donations; and to establish school community
networks in support of school targets and contribute to community development.



Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

15
Roles Functions
Knowledge/
Skills/
Attitude (KSA) Required



*Visionary, Principal,
-Lead in the setting the
-Change and future
Motivator advocate and
mission, vision and goals orientation
planner
of the school
-Networking, organizing,
*Builder of net works
-Organize/expand school, social mobilization
and support system
community and local
advocacy
government networks and - development of
group who will actively
teamwork, building
participate in school
consensus, and skills in
improvement
negotiation and conflict
-Lead in developing and
resolution
implementing the school
- Participatory planning
improvement plan with
and administrative
the participation of the
management
school constituency and
Generation and use of
the community
data and information as
Lead in developing and
the basis for planning and
maintaining the school
management.
MIS

*Curriculum Developer
-Create a physical and
-Development of
and Instructional Leader
psychological climate
collective accountability
conducive to teaching
for school and student
and learning
performance
-Localize and implement -Designing of the
school curriculum
curriculum to address
-Encourage development both national and local
and use of innovative
needs and aspirations
instructional methods
-Creation of an open
focused on improvement
learning system based on
of learning outcomes,
several resource materials
increasing access to basic -Participatory and peer-
education, improving the based instructional
holding power of the
supervision
schools, and addressing
specific local problems.

Personnel Manager
-Recommend personnel
-Proper staffing:
appointment to the
identifying and
division superintendent
improving personnel
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

16
after consultation with
capacities trough a
the PTCA, from a pool of capacity building
qualified applicants
program for staff
selected for eligibility by -Leadership by example
the division

-Plan and implement a
continuing staff
development program
based on ongoing need
analysis.
*Fiscal Resource
-Administer and manage
-Fund management
Manager
all personnel, physical
-Serving as model for
and fiscal resources of
transparency and
the school
accountability especially
-Encourage and accept
in financial management.
donations, gifts, bequest
and grants for
educational purposes and
report all such donations
to appropriate offices

Figure 2. New roles, functions and competencies of school heads in SBM

The specific provisions of the above legal mandate include the new roles
and functions of school heads in their practice of SBM as well as the new
knowledge, skills and attitudes that they need to develop as the leaders in the
change process of decentralization at the school level.
Administrative Management R.A. 9155 defines the school head’s exercise
of administrative management to include setting the school mission and vision,
goals and targets; developing and implementing the school improvement pl an;
and mobilizing community participation for improvement of education
outcomes.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

17
Plan/Mobilize Program Budget





Implement







Report/
Evaluate
Monitor
Modify

Figure 3. The administrative management cycle
The first step towards effective management is to understand the
management process. This process follows the cycle of planning/mobilizing ,
programming, budgeting, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and reporting to
local stakeholders. The phases in the cycle are interrelated.
Planning or plan formulation involves the following phases: situation
analysis, goal determination, objectives and target setting, strategy /policy
formulation, and program project identification.
Programming involves the formulation and prioritization of development
and investment program designed to operationalize the SIP/AIP. The programs
specify the target clientele beneficiaries, locations, implementation schedules,
funding requirements and sources of finance.
Budgeting translate development programs into resource/financial
requirements. Financing of prioritized program and projects in the development
programs may come from the DepEd budget; The SEF (Special Education Fund)
of the LGU; and the 20 percent Social Development fund from the barangay,
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

18
school canteen operations and other school income generating projects; donations
and contributions in cash or in kind, foreign financial assistance and other
resources of funds.
Implementation is the execution of the project or delivery of services in
support of the development plan or SIP/AIP, and utilization of resources allocated
for these purposes to achieve the agreed improvements.
Monitoring is the collection of the data on the school’s actual performance
in programs and projects against the targets set in the school’s development plans
identification of problems and issues encountered by the programs and project;
and formulation of possible solutions to improve or correct program and project
implementation.
Evaluation looks at the result. It involves the identification and
measurement of the overall teaching-learning outcomes of the school’s programs
and projects against stated goals and targets on the student achievement and
participation / completion rates.
Reporting to constituencies is the end-of-year reporting of the targets
accomplished based on the AIP, the strengths and weaknesses of the school,
targets/goals for the next school year. This is done during public assembly called
for this purpose. Figure 4 shows major functions and responsibilities that the
school head must exercise as administrative manager

Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

19
Functions
Responsibilities

-Confers with teachers, parents, PTCA,

Students local leaders and other stake

holders on school planning and

development activities, reflecting the needs

of the school and community in the schools

Vision and Mission

-Facilitates systematic collection of data on

the strengths and areas for development of
PLAN/ MOBILIZE/ PROGRAM
the school, student and teachers as bases
for preparing and refining the SIP/AIP
-Mobilizes teachers, students, parents,
community, local government and NGO
for school improvement.
-Organizes expand school, community and
local government networks and groups
who will actively participate in the school
improvement through PTCA.
-Develop commitment to the SIP/AIP and
collective accountability among
stakeholders for the school and student
performance.
- Plans and implements a continuing staff
development program based on ongoing
need analysis.
- Administer and manages all personnel,
physical and fiscal resources of the school
- Collaborates with the community in the
resource generation project for the school.

-Allocates and helps to generate financial

resources according to the priorities of the

SIP/ AIP.
BUDGET/GENERATE AND MANAGE
-Accepts donations, gifts, bequests and
RESOURCES
grants for educational purposes and reports
all such donations to appropriate offices.

- Formulates school-based policies, rules

procedures and norms with teachers and

stakeholders who will facilitate SIP/AIP
IMPLEMENT
implementation.
- Involves school and community
stakeholders in the implementation of the
agreed programs.
- Introduces appropriate provisions for
learning of pupils with special needs.


Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

20

- Leads the development and the

maintenance of the school integrated

Monitoring and Evaluation System (IMES)

Uses data and information from the school
MONITOR
(IMES) to correct, assist, improve and
modify programs.
- Encourage all school constituencies to use
the school IMES

- Measures and evaluates school outputs

and outcomes against SIP/AIP standards

and targets.
EVALUATE
- Rate teachers based on their performance
and their student learning out comes.

- Documents gain successes and

weaknesses in AIP implementation.

- Report all this at a public assembly of all
REPORT OUTCOMES
stakeholders.
REVIEW/MODIFY SIP
- Uses the report to modify/ plan for the
next school year with the participation of
all stakeholders.
OVERALL ADMINISTRATIVE
- Design School-based mechanism for
MANAGEMENT:
teachers and parents in managing change
- SET MISSION GOALS AND
in:
TARGET OF THE SCHOOL
School culture to realize the school
- DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT
mission and goals
THE SCHOOL EDUCATIONAL
Curriculum in terms of time, content
PROGRAM
and strategies
- ADMINISTER AND MANAGE
Expectation in relation to opportunities
PERSONNEL, PHYSICAL AND
and targets
FISCAL RESOURCES
School -based policies and procedures

supporting school-based management
initiative.

Figure 4. Major functions and responsibilities that the school head must exercise
as administrative manager

School Building Program
According to SBP Primer (2005) in TEEP two important programs were
piloted under the school head function as administrative manager: the principal-
led school building (SBP) and the school-based procurement of furniture (SBPF).
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

21
The principal-led SBP designates school heads as the principal
implementers, they take the lead in planning and execution of construction and
repair works in their respective schools. In addition, they bear the accompanying
financial responsibilities. The school heads are directly responsible for the entire
SBP implementation process from planning execution, to turn-over/acceptance of
completed works in their school.
The role of the division offices and central project management is to
provide the necessary support, guidance and direction, including technical
assistance, funding ready to use plans, drawings tendering of documents and
support documentations

Instructional Leadership
R.A. 9155 mandates that in the exercise of instructional leadership, the
school head must create a school environment conducive to learning, and must be
accountable for learning outcomes. As instructional leaders, the SBM school
heads have the over-all responsibility of ensuring that an effective instructional
system operates in their school.
The process shown in the Figure 5 shows the main components of an
efficient and effective instructional system at the school and classroom level.



Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

22
Plan /Modify


Assess

Improve
Teach
(Formative)
Instruction











Modify
Diagnose/Set
Improve
Targets
Instruction

Report
(to
Assess

Stakeholder)
(Summative)

Figure 5. The instructional system

As instructional leaders, school heads have to develop and implement
programs that focus on student assessment, curriculum, instructional materials
and textbooks, in-service training school improvement innovation project with the
end in view of improving school performance and pupil achievement. Figure 6
shows the responsibilities of school heads.

Functions
Responsibilities
Diagnose
Collaboratively analyze the data on students and set
certain levels of expectations with the teacher’s vis-à-vis
student performance and instructional goals/targets.
Periodically assess teachers and students progress
Plan /Modify
Organize teachers into working committees to handle
Improve Instruction
specific program( e.g. reading, numeracy, science, health,
feeding)
Make use of expertise of Master teachers in school.
Demonstrate high degree of trust and confidence in
teachers’ strengths as well as concern for their
development through maximum support, in-service
training and professional/personal development
opportunities.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

23
Provide teachers with adequate information and risk taking
opportunities that will encourage them to create, produce,
innovate or modify teaching learning material, methods
and techniques to improve instruction and enrich the
curriculum.
Localize the curriculum to make it relevant to children’s
needs, community life and development.
Teach
Monitor the implementation of agreed programs/projects
and interventions
Assess
Ensure that formative assessment or continuous diagnosis
(Formative
of pupil learning is done by the teachers.
Modify Improve
Assist teachers in modifying or improving instruction
Instruction
using new strategies developed under the School
improvement and innovation Project (SIIP)
Design with the teachers school-based or cluster based
programs /projects that will assist pupils including
disadvantaged children and those with special needs.
Assess
Introduce and encourage teachers to use varied assessment
(Summative
method that will generate authentic data/information on
student achievement.
Report (to
Develop school-based mechanism that will report progress
Stakeholder)
and motivate teachers’ and pupils’ exemplary behavior and
academic performance.
Over all
Protect and support classroom instructional time ,
Instructional
encourage professional risk taking and experimentation,
Leadership
develop need based curriculum content and positive
Create a school
learning environment.
environment
Demonstrate a high degree of school participation in
conducive to
establishing and maintaining right-based child friendly
learning and be
school environment.
accountable for
Demonstrate an understanding of instructional system and
learning outcomes
process.

Accept responsibility as effective instructional leader and
accountability for school and student performance.

Figure 6. Responsibilities of school heads


Student Assessment
In the SBM context, assessment is no longer confined to just testing and
examination. Rather it now includes other methods, like classroom based
assessment, and authentic and portfolio assessment. The primary purpose of
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

24
assessment is to support the teaching and learning process at the classroom level.
Students are also assessed for other purposes: to obtain information about pupils,
teachers and school; to support teaching and learning; to serve as the basis in
modifying curriculum and teaching, to make them responsible to pupils needs and
interests; to act as selection and certification device; and to function as an
accountability mechanism.

School Wide Assessment
Under the SBM, the school needs to start of the school year assessment of
nonreaders, non-numerates, entry-level skills in the different subject areas and
student with special needs, among others; apply suitable intervention to address
different learning difficulties and corresponding formative test or authentic
portfolio assessment; set up a regular program to support teaching and learning;
have an end-of-school year evaluation; and provide of information to students,
teachers, parents, community, government and other stakeholders, regarding
student and school performance.

Assessment Driven Instruction

Test results are used to classify pupils according to their level of mastery
of the skills and competency taught, after which, appropriate adjustments are
made during instruction to improve achievement. Pupils who did not learn the
skills are given remedial instruction. Those who learned but did not master the
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

25
skills are provided with reinforcement exercises; those who achieved are given
challenging activities for their optimum development.
The guidelines on student assessment include developing continuing
school-wide assessment program where students with learning
difficulties/problems are identified through appropriate instruments; suitable
interventions are applied to improve learning achievement; a regular testing
program is in place to support teaching and learning and progress is regularly
tracked down; and information about performance of students, teachers, and
school is provided to the stakeholders. Also included are ensuring improvement of
student achievement through the implementation of the assessment driven
instruction; monitoring regularly and closely the implementation of the
assessment-driven instruction. results are reported to the teachers, and
solutions/instructions are work out to address the problems; and provide support
to the teacher through mentoring and coaching of the following: test construction
and utilization of test result, collaborative development of formative and
associated teaching activities, and use of portfolio assessment and other non-
traditional assessment techniques.

Curriculum, Instructional Materials and Textbooks

Shane and Mc Swain (1958) states that curriculum is commonly referred
to as the “ heart and soul” of the school system. It gives meaning and direction to
all educational effort. National development goals can be achieved to one potent
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

26
instrument. It is a means for developing the child’s coping abilities and values
supportive of humanism, nationhood and development. Thus it is expected that
the development of the literacy, numeracy thinking and work skills will enhance
not only learning capabilities but also values that will enable the learners to
become productive, self-reliant versatile and holistic individual.

The Parameters of Curriculum

The demand of the environment, the society and the learner defines the
parameters governing the elements of the curriculum: objectives, content,
materials, teaching learning process, and evaluation.
Objectives are expressed in terms of competencies, which are knowledge,
skills and attitudes that the learner is expected to acquire. They determine the
content and the focus of processes and skills of learning how to learn, in addition
to the substantive content or the ground coverage of facts and information.
Content is delivered using a variety of media resources. Deviating from
purely textbook-driven content, schools are encouraged to use, where available,
information and communication technology (ICT) and community resources to
widen access to knowledge and enrich learning. Content should be contextualized
and localized to be sensitive to the learner’s situation and local culture.
Materials and resources may be in the form of textbooks, printed material,
and equipment; information and communication technology; and resource person
from the community.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

27
The teaching and learning process considers the learner an active partner
rather than an object of pedagogy. The learner takes on the role of constructor of
meanings, while teacher serves as facilitator, enabler and manager of learning.
Assessment of learning involves the use of variety of instruments to
measure students’ progress. Schools are encouraged to conduct their own
assessment evaluation so that they can address their students’ learning needs
immediately and appropriately. Likewise, the result of evaluation shall determine
what adjustments might need to be made on the objectives, content, the materials
and teaching learning process in order to achieve the desired learning outcomes.
The guidelines on the curriculum implementation and instruction making
sure the intended curriculum is implemented; modifying the curriculum to address
all types of learners; providing intervention to address learning problems of the
student or setting up a special program for the development of special abilities
and interests; providing integration of local/indigenous culture across learning
areas; providing differentiated instruction to address needs, abilities and interests
of all types of all learners; encouraging teacher to use activities that actively
engage pupils. focusing on more least learned skills like the higher order thinking
skills; providing application of school learning to real life situations ensuring
effective utilization of various instructional materials for both teachers and pupils
maximizing the use of local resources; and ensuring that the instructional support
materials are developmentally appropriate.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

28
School-Based In-service Training

Anon. (2005) SBM Manual stated that in-service training is the process of
upgrading instructional and managerial competencies of a teacher and other
school personnel serving in the school. It may be done at National, Regional,
division or school/cluster level. However under SBM, school or cluster based
INSET is encouraged.

School-based In-service training is initiated by the school. The school
head and the teacher plan and implement their training program after the conduct
of training need assessment. Assessment is crucial in determining students least
learned skills. Alternatively, the school cluster composed of neighboring schools
may cooperate in developing and implementing their staff development activities.

School Improvement and Innovation Project
According to SIIF Primer (2005), school improvement innovative project
is a research-based intervention designed to address specific learning problems
whether actual or anticipated. It can be done by the school or by the individual
teacher. It is intended to compliment other interventions such as textbooks, in-
service training and other support materials.

Its main objective is to improve instruction and learning outcomes through
action research. Interventions which can be tried out include new learning
approaches or strategies in teaching, development of print and non-print
instructional materials, new ways of assessing student performance, improving
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

29
learning environment, use of new technology and equipment, curriculum
modifications, and others with the end in view of addressing the most common
learning problems and thereby improving pupils’ performance. These common
problems must be identified in the school improvement plan School improvement
plan or Annual implementation plan.

Conceptual Framework
Education plays a very essential role in responding to the present
challenges. Aquino (1988) restated one of the four national aims, saying that the
educational system must respond effectively to the challenging needs and
conditions of the nation through a system of educational planning and evaluation,
and pointing out that one vital area that can and must be improved is the area of
teacher education. The process of curriculum preparation is equally important,
and the success or failure of the curriculum lies on the hand of teachers.
Facing this challenges educators need to adapt the educational system to
the demands of changing times. To be able to come up to the standards of
relevance and quality in education there is a need for schools to evaluate their
programs and activities in all the different areas of their institutions. It is generally
accepted that quality education must have sound purposes and objectives, good
teachers, adequate instruction, well-equipped laboratories and libraries, good
physical plant, adequate student and personal services, sound orientation and
community involvement, and good organization and administration (Figure 7).
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

30
Independent Variable
Dependent Variable

Intervening Variable
Assessment of School



Based Management

Innovations or
(Kapangan District)
1. SBM In-puts

changes
-School building program

introduced to the
(SBP)
-Curriculum instructional

school as a result
materials and textbooks

of the SBM
(CIMTEXT)
-In-service training

Program
(INSET)

-School improvement and
innovation Facility (SIIF)
Status of the

-Student Assessment (SA)
implementation of SBM
-Monitoring and
Evaluation (M&E)
in Kapangan District
-School based
-Procurement of
Furniture (SBPF)
-School Head and Staff
learning’s from
Development
2. SBM Milestones
the
Plan
implementation of
School Based Fund
Plan implementation
SBM, which could
Managing the SBM Fund
be categorized
Monitoring and
Evaluation
into positive or
Reporting to Stakeholders
negative in all

aspects

Figure 7. Paradigm of the study

The independent variable for this study are the following inputs of SBM
(1) school building program; (2) curriculum instructional materials and textbooks;
(3) in-service training ; (4) School improvement and innovation facility; (5)
Student assessment; (6) Monitoring and Evaluation; (7) School-based
procurement of furniture; SBM milestones, innovations or changes introduced to
the school as a result of the SBM Program, and learnings from the
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

31
implementation of SBM. After evaluating the following independent variables
the outcome would be the status of implementation of the SBM program in
Kapangan District.

Definition of Terms

The following were defined to give the readers a better insight into the
various points of emphasis in this study:
Evaluation. As used in the study is the process in determining the extent of
implementation of the school-based management program.
School-Based Management (SBM). It is defined as decentralization of
decision-making authority from central, regional and division levels down to
individual school sites, with the intent of uniting school heads, teachers, students
as well as parents, the local government units and the community at large in
promoting effective schools.
Processes. These are actions that have taken place in the implementation
of the school-based management.
Key actors. As used in the study are the persons involved in the
implementation of the school-based management.
Resources. Are the financial resources that were utilized in the
implementation of the school-based management.
Inputs are the following programs implemented to support school-based
management: school building program, curriculum instructional materials and text
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

32
books, school innovation improvement facility, student assessment, monitoring
and evaluation, school-based procurement of furniture and school head and staff
development.
School-based in-service training (INSET). It is the process of upgrading
instructional and managerial competencies of a teacher and other school personnel
serving in the school. INSET may be done at National, Regional, division or
school/cluster level. However under SBM, school or cluster based INSET is
encouraged
School Building program SBP. It designates school heads as its principal
implementers. They take the lead in the planning and execution of construction
and repair works in their respective schools. In addition, they bear the
accompanying financial responsibilities. The school heads are directly responsible
for the entire SBP implementation process from planning execution, to turn
over/acceptance of completed works in their school.
School Innovation Improvement Facility SIIF. It is a research-based
intervention designed to address specific learning problems whether actual or
anticipated. It can be done by the school or by the individual teacher. It is
intended to compliment other intervention like textbooks, in-service training and
other support materials.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

33
Curriculum. This is the course offerings of an educational institution.
Decisions about what a school should teach are usually made by school
administrators and faculty.
Student Assessment. This includes methods, like classroom based
assessment, and authentic and portfolio assessment. The primary purpose of
assessment is to support the teaching and learning process at the classroom level.
Annual implementation plan (AIP). These are development plans
translated from the school improvement plan (SIP)
SBM Milestones. These are indicators that demonstrate SBM is being
practiced in a school.
Stakeholders. These persons or group with a direct interest, involvement,
or investment in something, for example, the employees, shareholders, and
customers of a business concern

School Improvement Plan. It is a three to five-year education development
plan that embodies the vision and mission of the school. It also contains the
profile and mission of the school and the community, problems and needs
assessments, goals, objectives standards and targets, implementation plan,
monitoring and evaluation plan communication and advocacy plan,
documentation and reporting to stakeholders and signatories.

Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

34
Hypotheses of the Study
The following the hypotheses were put forward for testing:
1. There are significant differences on the processes, key actors, resources
involved in the introduction of the following inputs for the school-based
management.
2. There are significant differences on the status, key actors, and processes
used involving the SBM milestones.
3. There are significant differences on the innovations or changes
introduced to the school as a result of the SBM Program.
4. There are significant differences on the learning’s from the
implementation of SBM, that could be categorized as positive or negative in all
aspects.

















Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

35
METHODOLOGY

Location of the Study
The study was conducted at Kapangan District Kapangan, Benguet, during
the first semester of school Year 2006 –2007.
Kapangan is located at the western portion of the province of Benguet. It
is approximately located at 16º 33min to 16º 41 min latitude and 120º 2.29 min to
120º 40 min longitude. The municipality of Kibungan bound Kapangan on the
north, of Atok on the east, La Union on the west, and the municipality of Sablan
and Tublay on the south.
Kapangan is 35 kilometers from the City of Baguio and 29 kilometers
from the Provincial Capitol of Benguet. The municipality is accessible via air and
land transportation. The common means of transportation are jeeps and buses.
The total land area of Kapangan is 17,327 hectares or 6.68 percent of the
total land area of Benguet. It has 15 barangays with each barangay having an
elementary schools .Ten barangays have complete Elementary school except for
Paykek, which has two complete elementary schools. The rest of the barangays
have barrio or multi-grade schools. There are 27 school heads, including teacher
in-charge and 124 teachers.



Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

36

Figure 8. Location of Kapangan in the map of Benguet
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

37


























Figure 9. Map of Kapangan showing the location of the study

Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

38
Some schools in Kapangan had been practicing Third Elementary
Education Project school-based management model since its inception but in
2003, all the school heads had been trained for the construction of their school
improvement plan and annual implementation plan as part of full implementation
of the school-based management program in the district.

Respondents of the Study
Table 1 shows the respondents of the study, composed of school heads
some teachers, parents-teachers community association officials and
representative from local government unit of Kapangan district. There were 27
heads of schools including teachers in-charge, 27 teachers, 27 parents-teachers
community association officials and 3 representatives from LGU.

Instrumentation
The researcher used a survey questionnaire used by the Development
Academy of the Philippines in evaluating the SBM in all TEEP- covered
provinces. The questionnaire is composed of the following: introduction of the
inputs for the school-based management, the status key actors and processes used
involving SBM milestones, the innovations or changes introduced to the school as
a result of the SBM program.
The questionnaire was reliable and valid because it was already used by
the Development Academy of the Philippines.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

39
Table 1. Respondent of the study
NAME OF SCHOOLS IN
SCHOOL
TEACHER PTCA TOTAL
KAPANGAN DISTRICT
HEAD
1.Ampongot Bo. School
1
1
1
3
2.Balakbak Elementary School
1
1
1
3
3. Baguionas Bo. School
1
1
1
3
4. Beling-Belis Bo. School
1
1
1
3
5. Boklaoan Elementary School
1
1
1
3
6. Catiaoan Bo. School
1
1
1
3
7. Cayapes Bo. School
1
1
1
3
8. Central Elementary School
1
1
1
3
9. Cuba Bo. School
1
1
1
3
10. Datakan Elementary School
1
1
1
3
11. Gadang Elementary School
1
1
1
3
12 Gaswiling Bo. School
1
1
1
3
13. Kaliwaga Bo. School
1
1
1
3
14. Laoangan Bo. School
1
1
1
3
15. Liblibeng Bo. School
1
1
1
3
16. Lomon Elementary School
1
1
1
3
17. Longboy Elementary School
1
1
1
3
18. Pakawan Bo. School
1
1
1
3
19. Paykek Elementary School
1
1
1
3
20. Pongayan Bo. School
1
1
1
3
21. Pudong Elementary School
1
1
1
3
22. Sagubo Elementary School
1
1
1
3
23. Taba-ao Elementary School
1
1
1
3
24. Tadayan Bo. School
1
1
1
3
25. Tawang Bo. School
1
1
1
3
26. Toplac Bo. School
1
1
1
3
27 Ubod Bo. School
1
1
1
3
28 Local Government Unit
3 representatives
3
Grand Total



84


Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

40
Data Gathering
The data were gathered through the use of a survey questionnaire. The
researcher asked permission from the Division Office through the District
supervisor to float it. The endorsement of the District Supervisor was given to
every school head concerned. To ensure high percentage return of answered
questionnaires, the researcher personally distributed the survey questionnaire to
the school heads, teachers, local officials and (Parents Teachers and Community
Association) PTCA officials. The researcher made them understand its contents
to ensure that reliable data would be gathered. The researcher collected the survey
questionnaires just after the respondents answered them.

Statistical Treatment

The gathered data were organized, tabulated and illustrated in a series of
tables. The descriptive statistics used to address the problems and objectives were
frequency count, percentage and ranking. The frequency count operation reported
the mean, median, standard deviation, and sample size in the results log and then
allowed users to specify the binning parameters 'from minimum', 'to maximum',
and 'step size'. The frequency count then binned the selected data and reported bin
centers, frequency counts, bin end points, and cumulative frequency counts.
The inferential statistics used to test the hypotheses was the Friedman
analysis of variance. The Friedman ANOVA was used to compare three or more
groups. It is to determine if true differences exist among the groups or not. The
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

41
research hypotheses is accepted if true differences exist among the groups but
rejected if the differences are too small and considered negligible.
Formula for Friedman ANOVA:
X2r = 12 ∑ ∑ Rj 2 – 3N∑ c+1
N c c+1
Where:
– X2r Symbol for fried man ANOVA
12,3,1- are constants
c –column
N- rows/ number of cases












Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

42
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The Processes, Key Actors and Resources
Involved in the School Building Program

Table 2 presents the processes, key actors and resources involved in the
school building program as one of the inputs of the school-based management.
Representing the school are the school heads, teachers, and (Parents
Teachers and Community Association) PTCA, the local government unit and the
whole district.
Out of the 27 schools of Kapangan District, only three have buildings each
of which have been constructed under the LGU-led school building program, and
eight schools have their buildings repaired under the program. In the process of
school building, the school heads are the principal implementers. The local
government unit allocated some funds for the construction of buildings as their
share in the Program. The (Parents Teachers and Community Association) PTCA
officials of the assist school heads in looking for contractors.

One problem encountered by one school is the non-fulfillment of the
requirements in the Program.

On the other hand, the factors that facilitated the Program are supervision
during construction and timely submission of work accomplished and progress
billing by contractors.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

43
Table 2. The processes, key actors, and resources involved in the school building
program.

PROCESSES KEYACTORS AND
SCHOOL TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
RESOURCES
HEAD
A. Processes












a. Building constructed






under SBP
3
3
3
3
12
14
b. Building repaired under
8 8
8
3
27
32
SBP
c. Role in the SBP






1.Principal implementer
10


3
3
4
2. Contributed some funds






for the construction of





the building

3

3
4
3. Assisted school heads






in looking for


3

3
4
contractors.
d. Problems encountered in






the construction or repair of
school building under the SBP
1. Fulfillment of the






requirements
1
1
1
1
4
5
e. Factors which facilitated in the






construction or repair under the
SBP.
1.Supervision during






Construction
10
10
10
3
33
39
2.Timely submission of






work accomplished and






progress billing by
10
10
10
3
33
39
contractors
B. Key actors






Persons involved in the decision






making on the side of SBP.




1. School head


10
3
13
15
C. Resources






Source of SBP funding






1. Local Government Unit
10
10
10
3
33
39
2. TEEP
10
10
10
3
33
39
X2r = 3.63

X2 0.05 =7.815
*Not Significant


Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

44
The school heads were identified as the key actors involved in the
decision-making on the side of (School Building Program) SBP. This was the
result from questions asked from the (Parents Teachers and Community
Association) PTCA and (Local Government Unit) LGU representatives.

The resources from the School Building Program have come from the
(Third Elementary Education Program) TEEP fund and a part counter from the
local government unit.

During the first years of the (Third Elementary Education Program) TEEP
(School Based Management) SBM Model Kapangan MLGU did not participate in
the counterpart or equity of the first principal-led (School Building Program)
SBP. In the latter part after the part counter was decreased from 25 percent to 10
percent the MLGU participated and had eight buildings repaired and three
classrooms constructed under the (Local Government Unit) LGU-led (School
Building Program) SBP.

There was no significant difference on the process key actors and
resources on the implementation of SBP. Thus, the research hypothesis was not
accepted. The respondents do their parts in their respective roles in the
implementation of SBP. This was a plus factor for the successful implementation
of the program in Kapangan district.



Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

45
Table 3. Processes involved in the curriculum, instructional materials and
textbooks

PROCESS
SCHOOL TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
HEAD
a. Instructional Materials






designed or produce to meet




specific requirements of




teachers and students
17
17
34
40
b. Locally produced






instructional materials
1. Printed materials
15
15


30
36
2.Computer aided
2 2

4
5
instructions
c. Introduced modifications or






changes in the curriculum to





address type of learners
5
5
5
15
18
X2r = 7.20

X2 0.05 =7.815
*Not Significant


The Processes Involved in the CIMTEX

Seventeen schools have designed or produced instructional materials to
meet the specific requirements of teachers and students and they have used
printed materials and computer-aided instruction.
Klorh and Frymier (1963) stated that the learners’ needs, the culture the
society, and the teachers are other factors to be considered in the curriculum
planning. Curriculum planning should be made by those most directly involved in
the carrying out of the learning activities for pupils: teachers, school
administrators, boards of education and parents. These participants in curriculum
planning should acquaint themselves with the great body of literature available
and with the views of national and international educators and leaders who have
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

46
established themselves as insightful and scholarly authorities in education. They
should study researches, evaluate experiments, judge innovations, read reports of
organization, listen to comments and criticism, examine projects sponsored by the
government or foundations, and any other feasible ways to become highly
knowledgeable of educational matters, but those directly involved in the operation
of the s school in the country should make the decisions necessary for the
education of the learners.
There is no significant difference in the processes involved in the
CIMTEXT. The research hypothesis is not accepted since the respondents who
are involved in the processes in CIMTEXT do their respective roles. For instance,
the school head and teachers provide instructional materials to meet the specific
requirements of the learners.

The Processes Involved in the School-
based In-service Training

Table 4 shows the processes involved in the school-based (In-Service
Training) IN-SET Eleven out of 27 schools have a system/mechanism to
determine the teachers who go to training as perceived by the school heads.
Having the authority vested upon them by the implementation of Republic Act
9155 the school heads as perceived by the teachers and school heads themselves
has the final decision on matters involving school-based (In-service training) In-
set.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

47
Table 4. Process involved in the school–based in-set






%
PROCESS
SCHOOL
TEACHERS
PTCA
LGU
TOTAL
HEAD
a. No. of schools






having a system/



mechanism to determine the



teachers who will go to what
11
11
13
type of training
b.
Makes the final decision on






matters involving the INSET
1. School head
27
27


54
64
2. Teachers
20



20

3. Division Office
27
27


54
64
c. Personnel who attended any






INSET
27
27
54
64
d. Mode of selection






1. Personal application

4


4
5
2. Went trough selection






process
6
6
7
3.Did not apply but was nominate/
17


17
20
selected by principal, district
or division
e. Manner of knowing about the In-set






1. By official communication/






invitation
27
27
32
f. Bases on choosing the kind of






training attended
1. Result of the TNA

20


20
24
2. Based on new assignment

7


7
8
X2r = 10.56

X2 0.05 =7.815
* Significant

According to Gregorio (1961), the success of any in-service training
program in school is dependent largely upon the principal. Morale enthusiasm and
desire of the personnel to grow most likely stem from the inspiration and
stimulation by the principal. The principal, who promotes growths among his
teachers, recognizes first the need of his profession and accepts the responsibility
for his self-improvement.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

48
Given the role of technical support and assistance, teachers and school
head perceived that the division office has some final say in the school based In-
set, and due to the fact that the teachers are concerned and to undergo the training
they are also included to make decisions on the matter involving school-based In-
service training.
Franco (1991) defined training as learning to change performance of
people doing the job. It is important then that one must know the required
behavior and means to measure the behavioral change. The only valid result of
training is a measurable increase or improvement in an individual’s contribution
to the goals of an organization. Thus, trained behavior must not only be
observable and measurable but must be transferred to the job. The end is an
improvement in the organization is ability to meet its goals. The basic purpose of
training is to shape or reshape the behavior pattern of an individual. The desired
behavior is brought about through learning particularly through in-service
training.

On the mode of selection, four teacher respondents claim that they have
been selected due to their application or desire to attend the training conducted:
six claim that they have gone through the selection process; and 17 that they have
been nominated or selected by the principal.
On the manner of knowing about the in-service training all the
respondents are informed through official communications and in choosing the
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

49
kind of training to attend is based on training assessment needs and teacher’s new
assignment.
The result of the Friedman’s test indicates that significantly difference in
the process they employ sending to attend as shown by the computed value of
10.56 being higher which exceed the tabular value of 7.815. Hence the acceptance
of the hypothesis indicates that the parents-teachers community association and
the local government unit don not have participations in the process of selecting
school-based In-set and that the teachers and administrators determine the type of
In-service training that are to be conducted and implemented.

The Processes Involved in School
Improvement Innovative Facility

Table 5 shows the process involved in school improvement innovative
facility in Kapangan, eight schools have availed of the school improvement
innovative facility program.

The main task of the school head are that of being the principal
implementer, monitor, evaluator and community mobilizer. The teachers help in
monitoring, evaluating and mobilizing the community, and the parents-teachers
community association acts a as participant in the project.


Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

50
Table 5. Process involved in the school improvement innovative facility

PROCESS
SCHOOL TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
HEAD







a. Have project under SIIF
8
8
8
3
27
32
b. Role in the implementation of






SIIF
1. Project implementer
8



8
10
2. Monitor/Evaluator
8
8


16
19
3. Community mobilizer
8
8


16
19
4. Participants


8

8
10
c. Improvements in school that have






been introduce under the School
Improvement and Innovation
Facility
1.New learning approach or






strategies in teaching
5
3
8
10
2.Developmentofprintandnon-






print instructional materials
2
3
5
6
3. New ways of assessing






student performance
5
3
8
10
4. Improving learning

1
3
4
5
environment
X2r = 0.24

X2 0.05 =7.815
*Not Significant

The parents-teachers community association and local government unit
claim that the improvements in the school introduced under the school
improvement innovative facility are the new learning approaches or strategies in
teaching, development of print and non-print instructional materials, new ways of
assessing student performance, and improving learning environment.

They do not significantly differ as indicated by the computed value of
0.24, which is lower than the tabular value of 7.815. Thus the rejection of the
hypothesis, it may be inferred that all schools who have school improvement
innovative facility project involve their parents-teachers community association
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

51
its, teachers, administrators and local government unit in the processes involve in
the said project.

Process Involved in Student Assessment
Table 6 shows the process involved in student assessment. All of the
schools administer student assessment. The tools used to assess the learners are
formative test, national sample-based assessment, national achievement test, and
division achievement test. Formative test, national achievement test, and division
achievement test are the tools being used since they are always administered in
every school. One school had uses national sample-based assessment since, it has
been selected to represent the whole district being the lead school of the district.
The school heads give assistance to teachers who need coaching and
mentoring to further improve their teaching abilities used the result of the student
assessment.
Namuhe (2006) said that Php 776,596 was the total obligated amount in
the student assessment component. This was spent mostly for workshops on test
item formulation, analysis and interpretation; portfolio assessment; and rubric
preparation. School managers, district supervisors, and teachers participated in the
said workshops. Samples of rubrics and model test questions were provided by
Third Elementary Project. As a result, each school formulates its own rubrics.
Likewise, achievement test and school-based test are refined.

Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

52
Table 6. Processes involved in student assessment
PROCESS SCHOOL
TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
HEAD
a. Student Assessment






administered in your
27
27
27
3
84
100
school
b. Tools used to assess the






students in your
class/school
1. Formative Tests
27
27
27

81
96
2. National sample-






Based Assessment
1
1
1

3
4
(NSBA)
3. National Achievement






Test ( NAT)
27
27
27
81
96
4. Division Achievement






Test (DAT)
27
27
27
81
96
c. Use the result of SA to






help teacher improve
27
27
27
81
96
instruction
d. Technical assistance do






you receive from the
27
27
54
64
principal
1. Coaching
27
27


54
64
2. Mentoring
27
27


54
64
X2r = 12.90

X2 0.05 =7.815
*Significant


The computed indicates that the processes involved in the student
assessment significantly differ. Thus, with the acceptance of the hypothesis, it
may be inferred that only the teachers and school heads have implemented the
assessment; though the parents-teachers association and local government unit
know that assessment is being done in the school, they have no direct
participation in it.


Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

53
Table 7. Process involved in the monitoring and evaluation
PROCESS SCHOOL
TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
HEAD
a. No of schools who






conducted monitoring
27
27
54
64
and evaluation
b. Monitor the following






indicators to ensure that
the desired school and
student performance are
achieved.
1. Zero Non-reader and






Non-numerates
27
27
54
64
2. Mean Percentage
27 27

54
64
Score
3. Teacher Effectiveness

10


10
12
4. School Head
11


11
13
Effectiveness
c. Tools/instrument/






schemes/mechanism do
you use to monitor the
indicators stated above.
1. Using the IMES
17
17


34
40
2. Using the SIP
10



10
12
3. Using AIP
10



10
12
4. Using Key






Performance
27
27
54
64
Indicator (KPIs)
d. Frequency of






monitoring
1. Monthly

27


27

2. Quarterly
27
27


54
64
e. Activities done after






finding out the result.
1. Discuss with teachers
27
27


54
64
X2r = 17.67

X2 0.05 =7.815
*Significant

Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

54
Process Involved in the Monitoring
and Evaluation

Table 7 shows that 27 schools conduct in the monitoring and evaluation.
They use the following indicators to ensure that the desired school and student
performance are achieved: zero non-reader and non-numerate, mean percentage
score as the main indicator used. Ten respondents use teachers effectiveness and
eleven prefer for the school heads effectiveness.
The indicators are also measured by all schools using the key performance
indicator. Most use the integrated monitoring and evaluation system and ten
schools use the AIP/SIP in monitoring the indicators. Monitoring is done monthly
and quarterly.

The computed value indicates that the processes involved in monitoring
and evaluation significantly differ. Thus, with the acceptance of the hypothesis it
may be inferred that only the teachers and school heads are directly involved in
the implementation of monitoring and evaluation.

The Process Involved in the School-
Based Procurement of Furniture

Eleven schools are given the opportunity to procure furniture for their
school and all of them procure desk wood. The process involved in the
procurement is simple canvass since it allows administrators to contact local
carpenters and let them do all the tasks involving the construction of the furniture
Fianza, (2006).
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

55
Table 8. Process involved in the school-based procurement of furniture
PROCESS SCHOOL
TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
HEAD
a. No. of schools who had
11 11
11
3
36
43
SBPF
b. Kinds of Furniture






procured
1. Desk wood
11
11
11
3
36
43
c. Process of furniture






procurement
1. Simple canvass
11
11
11
3
36
43
X2r = 5.40

X2 0.05 =7.815
*Not Significant

Comparing the value computed 5.4 to 7.815 showed that there is no
significant difference in the process involved in the SBPF. The research
hypotheses was not accepted. The respondents of the eleven schools who were
involved in the processes in the SBPF did their respective roles. The teachers,
school heads, PTCA and LGU had help one another in the procurement of the
furniture.
According to Luis (2005), the parents-teachers community association
initiated the canvassing of who would make the furniture and the local
government unit had helped them in the hauling of the furniture from place of
where it was constructed. This furniture was delivered to the respective schools.

School Heads and Staff Development
Table 9 shows that all school heads and teachers have attended SBM
trainings on preparation of school improvement plan and annual implementation
plan.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

56
Table 9. Process involving school head in staff development
PROCESS SCHOOL
TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
HEAD
a. No of personnel who






attended SBM Training
27
27
54
64
b. SBM Training Attended





1. Preparation of School





Improvement Plan
27
27
54
64
and Annual
Implementation Plan
2. Total Quality
11 11
22
26
management
c. Areas where additional






training is needed by
school heads to manage
the school
1. Leadership


10
3
13
15
2. Personnel
10
3
13
15
Management
3. Curriculum and
11
3
14
17
instructional
development
4. Fiscal resource
12
3
15
18
management
5. Project management


12
3
15
18
X2r = 7.20

X2 0.05 =7.815
*Not Significant

Moreover, 11 school heads have attended seminar on total quality
management.
The parents-teachers community association and local government unit
perceived additional training is needed for the TIC who are assigned to head a
barrio school on the following areas: leadership, personnel management,
curriculum and instructional development, fiscal resource management and
project management.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

57
The computed value indicates that the roles in the processes by the school
heads in the staff development do not significantly differ. Thus, the hypothesis is
not accepted. That is to say, the respondents did their respective roles in the staff
development.

Status, Key Actors, Resources and Processes
Involving SBM Milestones

Table 10 shows that all the schools of Kapangan district have their
AIP/SIP The roles of persons involved in the SIPAIP preparations relate to being
idea contributors, convenor facilitators, and documentators. Most of the problems
met are financial constraint, identification of school problems and prioritization
of school problem. The activities involve in the preparation of school
improvement plan and annual implementation plan which are done by most of the
schools, are identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats;
providing solutions to the problems and threats as identified and prioritized;
enhancing strengths and opportunities; managing the school-based management
fund; and monitoring and evaluating and reporting to stakeholders the result.
Under the factors that facilitate the preparation of the plan participation of
the school head, staff and participation of division staff is perceived to be a great
influence on the plan execution followed by the participation of local government
unit, barangay official and parents-teachers community association.

Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

58
Table 10. Status key actors and processes involving SBM milestones
STATUS, KEY ACTORS,
SCHOOL TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
AND PROCESSES
HEAD
A. Status






Schools having SIP/AIP
27
27
27
3
84
100
B. Processes






a. No. of schools involved






in the SIP/AIP
27
27
27
3
84
100
preparation
b. Role in the SIP/AIP






preparation
1. Idea contributor
27
27
24
3
84
100
2. Convenor
21
21


42
50
3. Facilitator
21
21


42
50
4. Documentator
27
27
27
3
84
100
c. Problems or difficulties in






the preparation of the AIP
1. Financial constraints






(sources of funds)
21
21
21
63
75
2. Identification of school
12 12
12

36
43
problems
3. Prioritization of school
10 10
10

30
36
problems
d. Factors that facilitated the






preparation of the plan.
1. Participation of School






Head and Staff
27
27
27
3
84
100
2. Participation of PTCA
20
20
20
3
63
75
3. Participation of LGUs
20 20
20
3
63
75
and Barangay Official
4. Participation of
27 27
27
3
84
100
Division Staff
e. Activities done in the






preparation of SIP
1. Identify the strengths






weaknesses,
27
27
27
81
96
opportunities and
threats
2. Provide solution to






the problems and
27
27
27
81
96
threats as identified
and prioritized while
strengths and
opportunities are
enhanced
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

59
Table 10. Continued . . .
STATUS, KEY ACTORS, SCHOOL TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
AND PROCESSES
HEAD
3. Manage the SBM Fund
27
27
27

81
96
4. Monitor and evaluate
27
27
27

81
96
5. Report to stakeholders
27 27
27

81
96
the result
f. Tools/instrument/device






used to monitor
plan implementation
1. Report/forms
27
27


54
64
2. Key Performance
27 27

54
64
Indicators (KPIs)
g. Frequency of monitoring






1. Quarterly
27
27


54
64
2. Annually
27
27


54
64
h. No. of schools who holds






a public assembly at the





end of the school year to





report the status of plan





implementation and fund
22
22
22
66
79
utilization to the different
stakeholders
C. Key actors






Persons involved in the






preparation of SIP/AIP
1. School Head and Staff
27
27
27
3
84
100
2. PTCA President and






representative
27
27
27
3
84
100
3. LGUs and Barangay
27 27
27
3
84
100
Official
D. Resources






Sources of SMF






1. TEEP/ Projects Funds 10
10 10 3 33 39
2. Regular DepEd
27 27
27
3
84
100
allocation
3. PTCA
27
27
27
3
84
100
4. LGU
27
27
27
3
84
100
X2r = 46.06

X2 0.05 =7.815
*Significant.


Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

60
The tools/instruments/devices used to monitor plan implementation are
reports/forms and key performance indicators. Monitoring is done quarterly and
monthly.
The key actors involved in the preparation of SIP/AIP are school heads
and staff, PTCA president and representative, local government units and
barangay officials. The sources of funds are from TEEP/ projects funds, regular
DepEd allocation, a parents-teachers community association and local
government unit.
The computed value indicates that the processes, key actors and resources
involved in the school-based management milestones significantly differ. Thus
with the acceptance of the hypothesis, it may be inferred that only the teachers,
school heads and parents-teachers association are involved in the implementation
of the school improvement plan and annual implementation plan. The school
head, teachers and PTCA were involved in the preparation up to the
implementation of the school improvement plan and annual implementation plan.
The local government unit has no roles in the preparation of the school
improvement plan and annual implementation plan but they were involved in the
financial resources.






Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

61
Innovations or Changes Introduced to
the School as a Result of SBM Program

The innovations and changes, as stated by the respondents, are the
following: having community consultative conference; conducting stakeholders
assemblies-these are opportunities for project implementation review with the
stakeholders; enjoining community support –barangay special education fund is
given to schools to augment school-based management fund; and establishing
support system. The teachers in-charge are assisted by coordinating principals to
process school-based management in order not to disrupt classes.

Table 11. Innovation or changes introduce to the school because of SBM program

INNOVATIONS/CHANGES
SCHOOL TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
HEAD
1. Community consultative






conference
11
11
11
3
36
43
2. Stake holders assemblies,






these were opportunities for




project implementation




review with stake holder
11
3
14
17
3. Strong Community support,






barangay Special education






fund was given to school to






augment SBMF
27
27
27
3
84
100
4. Established support system,






TICs were assisted by



coordinating principal to



process SBM in order not to



disrupt classes
11
11
13
X2r = 0.075

X2 0.05 =7.815
*Not Significant


Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

62
The computed value indicates that the perceptions of the respondents on
the innovations or changes introduce, because of school based management
program do not significantly differ. Thus, the hypothesis is not accepted. It may
be inferred that all the respondents have observe the innovations and changes
introduced by the implementation of school-based management program.

Learning’s From SBM
Table 12 are the learnings derived from the school-based management
implementation: the parents-teachers community association involvement in
monitoring and maintenance of school building; school-based management fund
gives opportunities to school heads and teachers to propose their own budget;
procurement program gives an opportunity for the school to purchase furniture
suited for the pupils; using the school-based management fund delegated by some
school managers; the teachers can purchase their own needed instructional
supplies and materials.
The computed value indicates that the learnings derived from the
implementation of the school-based management significantly differ. Thus, with
the acceptance of the hypothesis it may be inferred that only the teachers and
school heads perceived that learnings are gained from the school-based
management implementation.


Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

63
Table 12. Learning’s from school-based management
LEARNING SCHOOL
TEACHERS PTCA LGU TOTAL %
HEAD
1. PTCA involvement in






monitoring and




maintenance of school
11
14
25
30
building
2. SBMF gave opportunities






to school head and teachers




to proposed their own
12
12
24
29
budget.
3. Procurement program gave






opportunity for the school




to purchase furniture suited




for the pupils
27
27
54
64
4. Using the SBMF delegated






by some school managers,




teachers purchased their




own needed instructional




supplies and materials.
11
11
22
26
X2r = 9.68

X2 0.05 =7.815
*Significant











Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

64
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECCOMENDATIONS

Summary
This research was conducted to evaluate and determine the processes, key
actors and resources in the inputs of school-based management, the SBM
milestones, the innovation/changes as a result of school-based management
program, and the learnings gained from the implementation of school-based
management in Kapangan District, Benguet Division.
The questionnaire used by the Development Academy of the Philippines
to evaluate TEEP SBM Model covered provinces was adapted to ensure that all
inputs and the milestone of the SBM program would be fully evaluated.
The salient findings of the study are as follows:
1. The processes involved are those related to the roles indicated in the
implementation of school-based management inputs and milestones. The key
actors are the school heads, teachers, parents-teachers community association and
the local government unit. The resources involved are the funds utilized to
augment the expenses of the Program.
2. The milestones include all schools in Kapangan district implementing
school improvement plan and annual implementation with the active participation
of parents and other members of the community; managing the funds by the
schools; monitoring, evaluating; and reporting result to stakeholders during
community assemblies the status of the program.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

65
3. The practices involved in the school-based management
implementations are as follows: having community consultative conference,
conducting stakeholders assemblies, enjoining strong community support,
establishing support system.
4. The leading learnings derived from the SBM implementation are
involving the parents-teachers community association involvement in monitoring
and maintaining school buildings, giving opportunities for school head and
teachers to propose their own budget, and giving the powers to school heads to
procure their own needed instructional supplies and materials.

Conclusions

Based on the findings the following conclusions are drawn.
1. The following inputs in the SBM have been implemented well in all the
schools of Kapangan District: the school-based in-service training, student
assessment, and monitoring and evaluation.
2. The SBM milestones are fully implemented and observed in all the
school of Kapangan because that the training on the implementation of the
milestones have been introduced before the school-based management
implementation.
3. The innovations brought about by the SBM program, such as
stakeholders assemblies, strong community support, have established support
system
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

66
4. The positive learnings gained from the SBM implementation, such as
parents-teachers involvement in monitoring in the school building, school-based
management fund gives opportunities to school heads and teachers to propose
their own budget, procurement program gives opportunity for the school to
purchase their own furniture suited for pupils.

Recommendations


Based on the conclusions the following are recommended:
1. The inclusion of LGU and PTCA is a great achievement in the SBM
program. Full commitment of parties should also include working harmoniously
and attaining the objectives to improve the quality of educating learners.
2. The teacher in-charge of small schools should undergo trainings on
instructional management and administrative management since they are given
the roles to manage a school.
3. The schools must have the real authority over the budget, personnel and
curriculum. That is; the school heads leading the other stakeholders can practice
all the milestones of the school-based management. This authority must be used
in introducing changes in school functions that actually have impact on teaching
and learning outcomes.
4. The new power of school heads or school-clustered leaders must lead to
innovative strategies to enhance decentralization.
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

67
5. There should be directions for curriculum and instructional reform
through the creation of an instructional guidance system that includes standards,
curriculum framework and assessment component within which schools may
determine how to deliver the curriculum.
6. To further researches, it is recommended that evaluation of school-
based management should be conducted.















Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

68
LITERATURE CITED

ANON. 2004 Aide Memoire Philippines, Third Elementary Education Project,
World Bank Supervision Mission: January21-February 5 2004 The World
Bank Group, Washington DC, USA February 17 2004

ANON. 2005 A Primer on School-Based Management and its Support System,
Revised June 2005

AQUINO G. Principle of Teaching and Educational Technology. Manila
Bookstore INC. 1998 p 3

An Ac Instituting framework of Governance for Basic Education and for Other
Purposes (R.A. 9155)

CORTES, J 1993. Exploration in the theory and Practice of Philippine Education:
University of the Philippine Press. Quezon City p 187

DECS order No. 230 s. 1999

DOBINTO A.M 2001 An Analysis of the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities
and Threats of Baguionas Barrio School Kapangan District Unpublished
MS Thesis Benguet State University p.3

ERNESTO, E. F. 1991. Training Quezon City, Philippines Kalayaan Press
Marketing Enterprise Inc. p 3

Field Research Manual on Evaluation of SBM, Development academy of the
Philippines. 2006

Governance Act of Education 2001( An act instituting a framework of
Governance for basic Education and for Other Purposes) R.A. 9155

FIANZA, R. 2006 Interview
FRANCISCO, F.Y.1989, Curriculum Development in the Philippine Setting.
Manila: National Bookstore

HERMAN, G. C. 1961.. School Administration and Supervision R.P Garcia
Publishing Company 311 Quezon Boulevard p 392-393

Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

69
KLORH, P.R. AND J.R. FRYMIER, 1963. Curriculum Development: Dynamic
Change, Review of Educational Reserarch. P 318

LUIS, N. 2006 Interview

NAMUHE, M.B, 2005. Project Completion Report School Year 2005. p.10

Philippine Local Government Code of 1991 (R.A. 7160)
Presidential Commission to Study Philippine Education (1970) PCSPE report
Manila

ROBLES, I. 2005. Managerial Leadership. http//www.seameo-
innotech.org/ic/papers/ Irene/

SHANE, H.C. and E.T. Mc Swain 1958. Evaluation and the Elementary
Curriculum. New York Henry Holt and Company

School based Management and its Support System: Handbook and Operation
Manual for School Heads, Third Elementary Education Project,
Department of Education Pasig City Philippines, March 2004


















Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

70
Appendix A

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE SCHOOL HEAD
Name of School head: ______________________________
Name of School: __________________________________
Type of School: ( ) Mono grade ( ) Multi grade
Length of Stay in school________
Please go to the questionnaire and answer each item carefully.
Use a check mark (⁄) for answering question items with pre printed
responses. You may check as many responses as applicable. If your
answer is not on the choices, write it on the space marked “others”.

School Building Program (SBP)
1. Do you have building constructed under the SBP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
2. Do you have building repaired under the SBP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
3. What was your role in the SBP?
( ) Principal implementer?
( ) Technical project Adviser
( ) Fund Manager
( ) Project Manger
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
4. What was the source of the SBP funding?
( ) National Government
( ) Local Government Units
( ) Loans
( ) Donations
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
5. Did you encounter problems in the construction or repair of school building
under the SBP?
( ) Yes
( ) No, Proceed to Question No. 7
6. What are these problems?
( ) Fulfillment of the requirements
( ) Selection of contracting of contractions( bidding process)
( ) Construction phase
( ) Turn over
( ) Closing
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

71
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
7. What factors facilitated the construction or repair under the SBP?
( ) Supervision during construction
( ) Timely submission of work accomplished and progress billing by contractors
( ) Substantial completion of works ( by 98%)
( ) conduct o joint inspection
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION, MATERIALS AND TEXTBOOKS
8. Do you design or produce instructional materials to meet specific requirements
of teachers and students in your school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
9. What are these locally produced instructional materials?
( ) Text books
( ) Printed Materials
( ) Computer aided instructions
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
10. Did curriculum experts evaluate these instructional materials?
( ) Yes
( ) No
11. Did you introduce modification or changes in the curriculum in your school to
address all types of learners?
( ) Yes
( ) No
12. With Multi grade schools,
12.1 Did you initiate to have learning resources (e.g. Advanced weekly
lesson plans)
( ) Yes
( ) No
12.2 Did you receive specialized training and staff development on
handling MG classes?
( ) Yes
( ) No
12.3 Did you receive other inputs and assistance? (e.g. parents as para-
teachers)
13. In Indigenous community,
13.1 Did you initiate to have learning resources ( e.g. Compilation of
indigenous materials)
( ) Yes
( ) No
13.2 Did you receive specialized training and staff development on
handling indigenous people?
( ) Yes
( ) No
13.3 Did you receive other inputs and assistance?
( ) Yes
( ) No
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

72
14. Do you encounter problems regarding books?
( ) Yes
( ) No
15. What is the ratio of textbook to student in your school?
( ) 1:1
( ) 1:2
( ) 1:3
( ) 1:4
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
SCHOOL BASED INSERVICE TRAINING (INSET)
16. Do you have a system/mechanism to determine the teachers who will go to
what type of training?
( ) Yes
( ) No
17. Who makes the final decision on matters involving the INSET?
( ) School head
( ) Teachers
( ) Regional office
( ) Division Office
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
18. Have you attended any INSET?
( ) Yes
( ) No
19. Did the training meet your training needs?
( ) Yes
( ) No
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION FACILITY (SIIF)
20. Do you have project under SIIF?
( ) Yes
( ) No
21. Do you have a role in the implementation of the SIIF-funded projects?
( ) Yes
( ) No
22. What was your role in the implementation of the SIIF-funded project?
( ) Project implementer,
( ) Fund manager
( ) Monitor/Evaluator
( ) Community mobilizer
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
23. Are there individual, groups or sectors involved in the implementation of the
SIIF funded Project?
STUDENT ASSESSMENT (SA)
24. Is S A administered in your school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
25. What are the testing tools used to assess the students in your class/school?
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

73
( ) Formative Tests
( ) National sample-Based Assessment (NSBA)
( ) National Achievement Test ( NAT)
( ) Division Achievement Test (DAT)
( ) Regional Achievement Test (RAT)
26. Do you use the result of SA to help your teacher improve instruction?
( ) Yes
( ) No
27. What are the ways by which you help the teachers?
( ) coaching
( ) mentoring
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
MONITORING AND EVALUATION M&E
28. Do you conduct monitoring and evaluation of school and student
performance?
( ) Yes
( ) No
29. What do you monitor to ensure that the desired school and student
performance are achieved?
( ) Zero Non-reader and Non-numerates
( ) Mean Percentage Score
( ) Teacher Effectiveness
( ) School Head Effectiveness
( ) SBM Implementation
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
30. What tools/instrument/schemes/ mechanism do you use to monitor these?
( ) Using the IMES
( ) Using the SIP
( ) Using AIP
( ) Using the report/Form Coding System
( ) Using Report card
( ) Using Key Performance Indicator (KPIs)
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
31. How frequent do you monitor?
( ) Weekly
( ) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Semi- annually
( ) Annually
32. What do you do with the results?
( ) discuss with teachers
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

74
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
SCHOOL-BASED PROCUREMENT OF FURNITURE
33. Do you procure furniture for the school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
34. What are these furniture?
( ) Graders Table
( ) Graders chair
( ) Blackboard
( ) Desk wood/steel s
( ) Teachers Chair Flip charts
( ) Teachers Table
35. Do you have a procurement process pertinent to furniture procurement in your
school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
36. What is the process in procuring furniture to your school?
( ) Simple Canvass
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
SCHOOL HEAD AND STAFF DEVELOPMENT
37. Did you attend SBM training?
( ) Yes
( ) No
38. What other SBM Training did you attend?
( ) Effective Instructional Leadership and Educational Resource Management
Training ( E-FILERMAT)
( ) Preparation of School Improvement Plan and Annual Implementation Plan.
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
SBM MILESTONES
39. Do you have school improvement plan (SIP)? An Annual Implementation
Plan (AIP) in your school?
SIP





AIP
(

)
Yes
(

)
Yes

(

)
None

(

)
None

40. What is the latest SIP do you have?______________ School Year
41. What is the latest AIP do you have?______________ School Year
42. Are you involved in SIP/AIP preparation?
( ) Yes
( ) No
43. What is your role in the SIP preparation?
( ) Idea contributor
( ) Convenor
( ) Facilatator
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

75
( ) Documentator
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
44. What is your role in the AIP preparation?
( ) Idea contributor
( ) Convenor
( ) Facilitator
( ) Documentator
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
45. Do you experience problems or difficulties in the preparation of the AIP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
46. What are these problems?
( ) Participation of selected participants
( ) Financial constraints (sources of funds)
( ) Identification of school problems
( ) Prioritization of school problems
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
47. What factors facilitated the preparation of the plan?
( ) Participation of School Head and Staff
( ) Participation of Pupils
( ) Participation of PTCA
( ) Participation of LGUs and Barangay Official
( ) Participation of Division Staff
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
48. Who are the persons involved in the preparation of the SIP/AIP?
SIP




AIP
( ) School Head and Staff


( )School Head and Staff
( ) Pupils( ) Pupils
( ) PTCA President and representative
( ) PTCA President and
representative
( ) LGUs and Barangay Official

( ) LGUs and Barangay Official
( ) Division Staff



( ) Division Staff
( ) Others, Please Specify______

( ) Others, Please Specify______
49. what activities do you do in the preparation and implementation of the SIP
and AIP?
Preparation of
SIP AIP
( ) Identify the strengths weaknesses,
( ) Identify the strengths weaknesses,
opportunities and threats
opportunities and threats
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

76
( ) Provide solution to the problems
( ) Provide solution to the problems
and threats as identified and prioritized and threats as identified and prioritized
while strengths and opportunities are
while strengths and opportunities are
enhanced
enhanced
( ) Manage the SBM Fund
( ) Manage the SBM Fund
( ) Monitor and evaluate
( ) Monitor and evaluate
( ) Report to stakeholders the result
( ) Report to stakeholders the result
( ) Others, Please Specify______
( ) Others, Please Specify______
50. Is the plan supported by the SBM-fund?
( ) Yes
( ) No
51.What are the sources of SBM Fund?
( ) TEEP/ Projects Funds
( ) Regular DepEd allocation
( ) PTCA
( ) LGU
( ) Donations
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
52. Is the fund Adequate?
( ) Yes
( ) No, specify possible resources
53. Who manages the fund?
( ) School head
( ) Teacher
( ) Division office
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
54. Do you monitor the implementation of the AIP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
55. What tools/instrument/device used to monitor plan implementation?
( ) Report/forms
( ) Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
56. How often do you Monitor?
( ) Weekly
( ) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Semi- annually
( ) Annually
57. Do you hold a public assembly at the end of the school year to report the
status of plan implementation and fund utilization to the different stakeholders?
( ) Yes
( ) No
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

77
58. Are the target set in the AIP met?
( ) Yes
( ) No
SUPPORT, SUPERVISION &TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
59. Do you receive technical support from the division, regional or central office?
( ) Yes
( ) No
60. What are these technical supports? Please enumerate
( ) Provide school with a lump sum budget
( ) Offer directions for curriculum and instructional reform through creation of
instructional guidance system
( ) Encourage professional development and training
( ) Guiding schools to innovate instructional practices
( ) Helping design new instructional model
( ) Others, Please Specify______
POLICIES/SYSTEM
61. Are there new practices, policies and support system put in place to support
SBM?
( ) Yes
( ) No
62. What are these practices, policies and support systems?
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
63. What are the learning’s from the implementation of the SBM which could be
categorized in to positive or negative in all aspects?
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________
Thank you





















Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

78
Appendix B

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS
Name of Teacher: ______________________________
Name of School: __________________________________
Type of School: ( ) Mono grade ( ) Multi grade
Length of Stay in school________

Please go to the questionnaire and answer each item carefully.
Use a check mark (⁄) for answering question items with pre printed
responses. You may check as many responses as applicable. If your
answer is not on the choices, write it on the space marked “others”.

School Building Program (SBP)
1. Do you have building constructed under the SBP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
2. Do you have building repaired under the SBP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
3. What was your role in the SBP?
( ) Principal implementer?
( ) Technical project Adviser
( ) Fund Manager
( ) Project Manger
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
4. What was the source of the SBP funding?
( ) National Government
( ) Local Government Units
( ) Loans
( ) Donations
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
5. Did you encounter problems in the construction or repair of school building
under the SBP?
( ) Yes
( ) No, Proceed to Question No. 7
6. What are these problems?
( ) Fulfillment of the requirements
( ) Selection of contracting of contractions( bidding process)
( ) Construction phase
( ) Turn over
( ) Closing
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

79
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
7. What factors facilitated the construction or repair under the SBP?
( ) Supervision during construction
( ) Timely submission of work accomplished and progress billing by contractors
( ) Substantial completion of works ( by 98%)
( ) conduct o joint inspection
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION, MATERIALS AND TEXTBOOKS
8. Do you design and develop additional instructional materials?
( ) Yes
( ) No
9. What are these instructional materials?
( ) Text books
( ) Printed Materials
( ) Computer aided instructions
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
10. Do you encounter problems regarding books?
( ) Yes
( ) No
11. Did you introduce modification or changes in the curriculum in your school to
address all types of learners?
( ) Yes
( ) No
12. What is the ratio of textbook to student in your school?
( ) 1:1
( ) 1:2
( ) 1:3
( ) 1:4
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
13. Is the principal or head teacher involved in matters involving
curriculum,instructional materials and textbooks?
( ) Yes
( ) No
SCHOOL BASED INSERVICE TRAINING (INSET)
14. Have you attended any in-set?
( ) Yes
( ) No Proceed to question number
15. How were you selected?
( ) Personal application
( ) Went trough selection process
( ) Did not apply but was nominate/selected by principal, district or division
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

80
16. How did you know about the In-set?
( ) by official communication/invitation
( ) by colleagues
( ) by publication/bulletin boards/website
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
17. What were the basis in choosing the kind of training you attended?
( ) result of the TNA
( ) based on performance
( ) based on new assignment
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
18. Did the training meet your training needs?
( ) Yes
( ) No
19. Was the duration of training sufficient?
( ) Yes
( ) No, Why
not?____________________________________________________________
20 What needs are addressed by this training?
( ) Instructional skills
( ) Subject matter content
( ) Commitment to teaching
( ) All of the above
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION FACILITY (SIIF)
21. Do you have project under SIIF?
( ) Yes
( ) No
22. Do you have a role in the implementation of the SIIF-funded projects?
( ) Yes
( ) No
23. What was your role in the implementation of the SIIF-funded project?
( ) Project implementer,
( ) Fund manager
( ) Monitor/Evaluator
( ) Community mobilizer
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
24. Are there individual, groups or sectors involved in the implementation of the
SIIF funded Project?
STUDENT ASSESSMENT (SA)
25. Is S A administered in your school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
26. What are the testing tools used to assess the students in your class/school?
( ) Formative Tests
( ) National sample-Based Assessment (NSBA)
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

81
( ) National Achievement Test ( NAT)
( ) Division Achievement Test (DAT)
( ) Regional Achievement Test (RAT)
27. Do you use the result of SA to help your teacher improve instruction?
( ) Yes
( ) No
28. What technical assistance do you receive from the principal?
( ) coaching
( ) mentoring
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
MONITORING AND EVALUATION M&E
29. Do you conduct monitoring and evaluation of school and student
performance?
( ) Yes
( ) No
30. What do you monitor to ensure that the desired school and student
performance are achieved?
( ) Zero Non-reader and Non-numerates
( ) Mean Percentage Score
( ) Teacher Effectiveness
( ) School Head Effectiveness
( ) SBM Implementation
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
31. What tools/instrument/schemes/ mechanism do you use to monitor these?
( ) Using the IMES
( ) Using the SIP
( ) Using AIP
( ) Using the report/Form Coding System
( ) Using Report card
( ) Using Key Performance Indicator (KPIs)
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
32. How frequent do you monitor?
( ) Weekly
( ) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Semi- annually
( ) Annually
33. What remedial measures do you take given the monitoring result?
( ) discuss with teachers
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

82
SCHOOL-BASED PROCUREMENT OF FURNITURE
34. Do you participate in procurement planning?
( ) Yes
( ) No
35. What kind of furniture is procured for your class?
( ) Graders Table
( ) Graders chair
( ) Blackboard
( ) Desk wood/steel s
( ) Teachers Chair Flip charts
( ) Teachers Table
SCHOOL HEAD AND STAFF DEVELOPMENT
36. Did you attend SBM training?
( ) Yes
( ) No
37. What other SBM Training did you attend?
( ) Effective Instructional Leadership and Educational Resource Management
Training ( E-FILERMAT)
( ) Preparation of School Improvement Plan and Annual Implementation Plan.
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
SBM MILESTONES
38. Do you have school improvement plan (SIP)? An Annual Implementation
Plan (AIP) in your school?
SIP





AIP
(

)
Yes
(

)
Yes

(

)
None

(

)
None

39. What is the latest SIP do you have?______________ School Year
40. What is the latest AIP do you have?______________ School Year
41. Are you involved in SIP/AIP preparation?
( ) Yes
( ) No
42. What is your role in the SIP preparation?
( ) Idea contributor
( ) Convenor
( ) Facilatator
( ) Documentator
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
43. What is your role in the AIP preparation?
( ) Idea contributor
( ) Convenor
( ) Facilitator
( ) Documentator
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

83
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
44. Do you experience problems or difficulties in the preparation of the AIP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
45. What are these problems?
( ) Participation of selected participants
( ) Financial constraints (sources of funds)
( ) Identification of school problems
( ) Prioritization of school problems
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
46. What factors facilitated the preparation of the plan?
( ) Participation of School Head and Staff
( ) Participation of Pupils
( ) Participation of PTCA
( ) Participation of LGUs and Barangay Official
( ) Participation of Division Staff
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
47. Who are the persons involved in the preparation of the SIP/AIP?
SIP




AIP
( ) School Head and Staff


( )School Head and Staff
( ) Pupils




( ) Pupils
( ) PTCA President and representative
( ) PTCA President and
representative
( ) LGUs and Barangay Official

( ) LGUs and Barangay Official
( ) Division Staff



( ) Division Staff
( ) Others, Please Specify______

( ) Others, Please Specify______
48. what activities do you do in the preparation and implementation of the SIP
and AIP?
Preparation of
SIP AIP
( ) Identify the strengths weaknesses,
( ) Identify the strengths weaknesses,
opportunities and threats
opportunities and threats
( ) Provide solution to the problems
( ) Provide solution to the problems
and threats as identified and prioritized and threats as identified and prioritized
while strengths and opportunities are
while strengths and opportunities are
enhanced
enhanced
( ) Manage the SBM Fund
( ) Manage the SBM Fund
( ) Monitor and evaluate
( ) Monitor and evaluate
( ) Report to stakeholders the result
( ) Report to stakeholders the result
( ) Others, Please Specify______
( ) Others, Please Specify______
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

84
49. Is the plan supported by the SBM-fund?
( ) Yes
( ) No
50.What are the sources of SBM Fund?
( ) TEEP/ Projects Funds
( ) Regular DepEd allocation
( ) PTCA
( ) LGU
( ) Donations
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
51. Is the fund Adequate?
( ) Yes
( ) No, specify possible resources
52. Who manages the fund?
( ) School head
( ) Teacher
( ) Division office
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
53. Do you monitor the implementation of the AIP?
( ) Yes
( ) No, Proceed to Question No. 83
54. What tools/instrument/device used to monitor plan implementation?
( ) Report/forms
( ) Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
55. How often do you Monitor?
( ) Weekly
( ) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Semi- annually
( ) Annually
56. Do you hold a public assembly at the end of the school year to report the
status of plan implementation and fund utilization to the different stakeholders?
( ) Yes
( ) No
57. Are the target set in the AIP met?
( ) Yes
( ) No
SUPPORT, SUPERVISION &TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
58. Do you receive technical support from the division, regional or central office?
( ) Yes
( ) No
59. What are these technical supports? Please enumerate
( ) Provide school with a lump sum budget
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

85
( ) Offer directions for curriculum and instructional reform through creation of
instructional guidance system
( ) Encourage professional development and training
( ) Guiding schools to innovate instructional practices
( ) Helping design new instructional model
( ) Others, Please Specify______
POLICIES/SYSTEM
60. Are there new practices, policies and support system put in place to support
SBM?
( ) Yes
( ) No, end.
61. What are these practices, policies and support systems?
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
62. What are the learning’s from the implementation of the SBM which could be
categorized in to positive or negative in all aspects?
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________
Thank you





















Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

86
Appendix C
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PTCA OFFICIALS
Name of PTCA Official __________________________
Name of School: __________________________________

Please go to the questionnaire and answer each item carefully.
Use a check mark (⁄) for answering question items with pre printed
responses. You may check as many responses as applicable. If your
answer is not on the choices, write it on the space marked “others”.

School Building Program (SBP)
1. Do you Participate in the School building Program?
( ) Yes
( ) No
2. What role did you play in the school building program in the SBP?
( ) Served as a witness
( ) Contributed some funds for the construction of the building
( ) Assisted school heads in looking for contractors
( ) attended the meetings to discuss the plan of SBP
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
3. Who was making decision on the side of the school regarding the school
building program.
( ) School HEAD
( ) Division accountant
( ) Technical division advisor
( ) Donations
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
4. In your observation did the school encounter problems in the construction or
repair of school building under the SBP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
5. What are these problems?
( ) Fulfillment of the requirements
( ) Selection of contracting of contractions( bidding process)
( ) Construction phase
( ) Turn over
( ) Closing
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
6. What factors facilitated the construction or repair under the SBP?
( ) Supervision during construction
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

87
( ) Timely submission of work accomplished and progress billing by contractors
( ) Substantial completion of works ( by 98%)
( ) conduct o joint inspection
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION, MATERIALS AND TEXTBOOKS
8. Do you have a role in curriculum enrichment in your school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
9. What role do you play in curriculum enrichment in school?
__________________________________________________________________
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION FACILITY (SIIF)
10. Do you participate in identifying possible impovement and innovation in your
school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
12. What improvement in school have been introduce under the school
improvement and innovation Facility?
( ) New learning approach or strategies in teaching
( ) Development of print and non-print instructional mayterials
( ) New ways of assessing student performance

( ) Improving learning environment
( ) New technology and equipment
( ) Curriculum modification
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
13. What was your role in the implementation of the SIIF-funded project?
( ) As coordinator,
( ) As participant
( ) As assessor of student performance
( ) As curriculum developer
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
STUDENT ASSESSMENT (SA)
14. Do you have a role in the conduct of student assessment?
( ) Yes
( ) No
15. What role do you play in student assessment?
( ) Process observer
( ) Assessor/evaluator
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
MONITORING AND EVALUATION M&E
16. Do you participate in monitoring the performance of teachers, students, and
the school?
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

88
( ) Yes
( ) No
SCHOOL-BASED PROCUREMENT OF FURNITURE
17. What furniture are being procured at the school?
( ) Graders Table
( ) Graders chair
( ) Blackboard
( ) Desk wood/steel s
( ) Teachers Chair Flip charts
( ) Teachers Table
18. Are you aware of the process of furniture procurement in your school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
SCHOOL HEAD AND STAFF DEVELOPMENT
19. Do you think school heads needs additional training to manage the school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
20. In What areas do you think school heads needs additional training to manage
the school?
( ) Leadership
( ) Personnel Management.
( ) Curriculum and instructional development
( ) Fiscal resource management
( ) Project management
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
SBM MILESTONES
21. Do you have school improvement plan (SIP)? An Annual Implementation
Plan (AIP) in your school?
SIP





AIP
(

)
Yes
(

)
Yes

(

)
None

(

)
None

22. What is the latest SIP do you have?______________ School Year
23. What is the latest AIP do you have?______________ School Year
24. Are you involved in SIP/AIP preparation?
( ) Yes
( ) No
25. What is your role in the SIP preparation?
( ) Idea contributor
( ) Convenor
( ) Facilatator
( ) Documentator
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
26. What is your role in the AIP preparation?
( ) Idea contributor
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

89
( ) Convenor
( ) Facilitator
( ) Documentator
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
27. Do you experience problems or difficulties in the preparation of the AIP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
28. What are these problems?
( ) Participation of selected participants
( ) Financial constraints (sources of funds)
( ) Identification of school problems
( ) Prioritization of school problems
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
29. What factors facilitated the preparation of the plan?
( ) Participation of School Head and Staff
( ) Participation of Pupils
( ) Participation of PTCA
( ) Participation of LGUs and Barangay Official
( ) Participation of Division Staff
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
30. Who are the persons involved in the preparation of the SIP/AIP?
SIP




AIP
( ) School Head and Staff


( )School Head and Staff
( ) Pupils( ) Pupils
( ) PTCA President and representative
( ) PTCA President and
representative
( ) LGUs and Barangay Official

( ) LGUs and Barangay Official
( ) Division Staff



( ) Division Staff
( ) Others, Please Specify______

( ) Others, Please Specify______
31. what activities do you do in the preparation and implementation of the SIP
and AIP?
Preparation of
SIP AIP
( ) Identify the strengths weaknesses,
( ) Identify the strengths weaknesses,
opportunities and threats
opportunities and threats
( ) Provide solution to the problems
( ) Provide solution to the problems
and threats as identified and prioritized and threats as identified and prioritized
while strengths and opportunities are
while strengths and opportunities are
enhanced
enhanced
( ) Manage the SBM Fund
( ) Manage the SBM Fund
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

90
( ) Monitor and evaluate
( ) Monitor and evaluate
( ) Report to stakeholders the result
( ) Report to stakeholders the result
( ) Others, Please Specify______
( ) Others, Please Specify______
32. Is the plan supported by the SBM-fund?
( ) Yes
( ) No
33 .What are the sources of SBM Fund?
( ) TEEP/ Projects Funds
( ) Regular DepEd allocation
( ) PTCA
( ) LGU
( ) Donations
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
34. Is the fund Adequate?
( ) Yes
( ) No, specify possible resources
35. Do you know how SBM Fund is used fund?
( ) Yes
( ) No
36. Who is responsible for this?
( ) School head
( ) Teacher
( ) Division office
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
37. Are you aware who is res[ponsible in approving the use of fund for school
needs?
( ) Yes
( ) No
38. Do you have a role in the generation of SBMF?
( ) Yes
( ) No
39. Do you have a role in the utilization of SBMF?
( ) Yes
( ) No
40. What is your role?________________________________________________
41. Are you involve in monitoring the implementation of the AIP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
42. How often is the monitoring conducted?
( ) Weekly
( ) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Semi- annually
( ) Annually
43. Do you have a public assembly at the end of the school year where the status
of plan implementation and fund utilizations reported to the different
stakeholders?
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

91
( ) Yes
( ) No
44. Do You attend this assembly
( ) Yes
( ) No
SUPPORT, SUPERVISION &TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
45. In your knowledge does the school get support from the division, regional or
central office?
( ) Yes
( ) No
46. What are these technical supports
( ) Provide school with a lump sum budget
( ) Offer directions for curriculum and instructional reform through creation of
instructional guidance system
( ) Encourage professional development and training
( ) Guiding schools to innovate instructional practices
( ) Helping design new instructional model
( ) Others, Please Specify______

47. What are the learning’s from the implementation of the SBM which could be
categorized in to positive or negative in all aspects?
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________
Thank you




















Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

92

Appendix E
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT
Name ___________________________________
Position: _________________________________

Please go to the questionnaire and answer each item carefully.
Use a check mark (⁄) for answering question items with pre printed
responses. You may check as many responses as applicable. If your
answer is not on the choices, write it on the space marked “others”.

School Building Program (SBP)
1. Do you Participate in the School building Program?
( ) Yes
( ) No
2. Did LGU Participate in the School building Program?
( ) Yes
( ) No
3. What role did you play in the school building program in the SBP?
( ) Served as a witness
( ) Contributed some funds for the construction of the building
( ) Assisted school heads in looking for contractors
( ) attended the meetings to discuss the plan of SBP
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
4. Who was making decision on the side of the school regarding the school
building program.
( ) School HEAD
( ) Division accountant
( ) Technical division advisor
( ) Donations
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
5. Did you encounter problems in the construction or repair of school building
under the SBP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
6. What are these problems?
( ) Fulfillment of the requirements
( ) Selection of contracting of contractions( bidding process)
( ) Construction phase
( ) Turn over
( ) Closing( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
7. What factors facilitated the construction or repair under the SBP?
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

93
( ) Supervision during construction
( ) Timely submission of work accomplished and progress billing by contractors
( ) Substantial completion of works ( by 98%)
( ) conduct o joint inspection
( ) Others,
Specify__________________________________________________________
CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION, MATERIALS AND TEXTBOOKS
8. Do you have a role in procuring textbooks in school under your administrative
jurisdiction?
( ) Yes
( ) No
9. What role do you play in procuring textbooks in schools in your locality?
__________________________________________________________________
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION FACILITY (SIIF)
10. What improvement in school have been introduce under the school
improvement and innovation Facility?
( ) New learning approach or strategies in teaching
( ) Development of print and non-print instructional mayterials
( ) New ways of assessing student performance

( ) Improving learning environment
( ) New technology and equipment
( ) Curriculum modification
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
11. What was your role in the implementation of the SIIF-funded project?
( ) As coordinator,
( ) As participant
( ) As assessor of student performance
( ) As curriculum developer
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
STUDENT ASSESSMENT (SA)
12. Do you have a role in the conduct of student assessment?
( ) Yes
( ) No
13. What role do you play in student assessment?
( ) Process observer
( ) Assessor/evaluator
( ) Others,
Specify___________________________________________________________
Monitoring and Evaluation M&E
14. Do you participate in monitoring the performance of teachers, students, and
the school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

94
15. What is your participation in the monitoring and evaluation of student and
school
performance?_______________________________________________________
SCHOOL-BASED PROCUREMENT OF FURNITURE
16. What furniture are being procured at the school?
( ) Graders Table
( ) Graders chair
( ) Blackboard
( ) Desk wood/steel s
( ) Teachers Chair Flip charts
( ) Teachers Table

17. Are you aware of the process of furniture procurement in your school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
SCHOOL HEAD AND STAFF DEVELOPMENT
18. Do you think school heads needs additional training to manage the school?
( ) Yes
( ) No
19. In What areas do you think school heads needs additional training to manage
the school?
( ) Leadership
( ) Personnel Management.
( ) Curriculum and instructional development
( ) Fiscal resource management
( ) Project management
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
SBM MILESTONES
20. Do you have school improvement plan (SIP)? An Annual Implementation
Plan (AIP) in your school?
SIP





AIP
(

)
Yes
(

)
Yes

(

)
None

(

)
None

21. What is the latest SIP do you have?______________ School Year
22. What is the latest AIP do you have?______________ School Year
23. Are you involved in SIP/AIP preparation?
( ) Yes
( ) No
24. What is your role in the SIP preparation?
( ) Idea contributor
( ) Convenor
( ) Facilatator
( ) Documentator
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

95
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
25. What is your role in the AIP preparation?
( ) Idea contributor
( ) Convenor
( ) Facilitator
( ) Documentator
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
26. Do you experience problems or difficulties in the preparation of the AIP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
27. What are these problems?
( ) Participation of selected participants
( ) Financial constraints (sources of funds)
( ) Identification of school problems
( ) Prioritization of school problems
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
28. What factors facilitated the preparation of the plan?
( ) Participation of School Head and Staff
( ) Participation of Pupils
( ) Participation of PTCA
( ) Participation of LGUs and Barangay Official
( ) Participation of Division Staff
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
29. Who are the persons involved in the preparation of the SIP/AIP?
SIP




AIP
( ) School Head and Staff


( )School Head and Staff
( ) Pupils( ) Pupils
( ) PTCA President and representative
( ) PTCA President and
representative
( ) LGUs and Barangay Official

( ) LGUs and Barangay Official
( ) Division Staff



( ) Division Staff
( ) Others, Please Specify______

( ) Others, Please Specify______
30. what activities do you do in the preparation and implementation of the SIP
and AIP?
Preparation of
SIP AIP
( ) Identify the strengths weaknesses,
( ) Identify the strengths weaknesses,
opportunities and threats
opportunities and threats
( ) Provide solution to the problems
( ) Provide solution to the problems
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

96
and threats as identified and prioritized and threats as identified and prioritized
while strengths and opportunities are
while strengths and opportunities are
enhanced
enhanced
( ) Manage the SBM Fund
( ) Manage the SBM Fund
( ) Monitor and evaluate
( ) Monitor and evaluate
( ) Report to stakeholders the result
( ) Report to stakeholders the result
( ) Others, Please Specify______
( ) Others, Please Specify______
31. Is the plan supported by the SBM-fund?
( ) Yes
( ) No
32 .What are the sources of SBM Fund?
( ) TEEP/ Projects Funds
( ) Regular DepEd allocation
( ) PTCA
( ) LGU
( ) Donations
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
33. Is the fund Adequate?
( ) Yes
( ) No, specify possible resources
34. Do you know how SBM Fund is used fund?
( ) Yes
( ) No
35. Who is responsible for this?
( ) School head
( ) Teacher
( ) Division office
( ) Others,
PleaseSpecify______________________________________________________
36. Are you aware who is respossible in approving the use of fund for school
needs?
( ) Yes
( ) No
37. Do you have a role in the generation of SBMF?
( ) Yes
( ) No
38. Do you have a role in the utilization of SBMF?
( ) Yes
( ) No
39. What is your role?________________________________________________
40. Are you involve in monitoring the implementation of the AIP?
( ) Yes
( ) No
41. How often is the monitoring conducted?
( ) Weekly
( ) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Semi- annually
Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

97
( ) Annually
42. Do you have a public assembly at the end of the school year where the status
of plan implementation and fund utilizations reported to the different
stakeholders?
( ) Yes
( ) No
43. Do You attend this assembly
( ) Yes
( ) No
SUPPORT, SUPERVISION &TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
44. In your knowledge does the school get support from the division, regional or
central office?
( ) Yes
( ) No
45. What are these technical supports
( ) Provide school with a lump sum budget
( ) Offer directions for curriculum and instructional reform through creation of
instructional guidance system
( ) Encourage professional development and training
( ) Guiding schools to innovate instructional practices
( ) Helping design new instructional model
( ) Others, Please Specify______

46. What are the learning’s from the implementation of the SBM which could be
categorized in to positive or negative in all aspects?
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________
Thank you










Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

98


Appendix E

Communication


Department of Education
Cordillera Administrative Region
Benguet Division
Kapangan District

September 29, 2006

The Schools Division superintendent
Benguet Division
La Trinidad Benguet

Madam:

I have the honor to request permission to float questionnaire of research
entitled “Evaluation of School-based management Program of Kapangan District,
Benguet” in partial requirement for the degree of master of Arts in education
Your kind consideration and favorable action on this matter will be highly
appreciated.

Very truly yours,

(SGD)FRANCISCO M. CONTERO


Approved:

(SGD) JIMMY C. WANKEY
Public Schools District Supervisor



Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

99
Appendix F

Communication

LETTER GRANTING PERMISSION TO CONDUCT SIMILAR STUDY
ON SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT
"Grace Gatarin" <ggatarin@dap.edu.ph> Add to Address
From:
Book
To:
kenshed_1@yahoo.com
Subject: SBM Evaluation Study
Date:
Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:03:34 +0800








Dear Mr. Contero,

This is to inform you that we are allowing you to use
the FGD and KII materials that we developed for your
study.

Thank you very much and good luck in your study.


Grace R. Gatarin




Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

100
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

The author was born on March 10, 1976 in Baguio City. He was the
second child from the three children of Mr. Delfin Contero of Nawal, Bokod and
Victoria Montes Contero of Datakan, Kapangan, Benguet. The author finished his
elementary education at Datakan Elementary School, Datakan, Kapangan,
Benguet. In 1993 he graduated from Saint Theresita’s High School Labueg,
Kapangan, Benguet. He pursued his college through the help and assistance of his
parents. He completed his bachelor of Elementary Education (BEED) at Benguet
State University (BSU), La Trinidad, Benguet.
In 1996, he passed the Licensure Examination for Teachers , and later was
hired as substitute teacher at Central Elementary School, Central, Kapangan,
Benguet from January to March 1996. On November 14, 1996 he was given a
permanent item and was sent to Catiaoan Bario School, Gaswiling, Kapangan
Benguet and stayed there for a year and a half. He was transferred to Sagubo
Elementary School Sagubo, Kapangan, Benguet on June 1999. In November 2002
he requested for transfer at Longboy Elementary school to be near his family and
it was granted.
He is happily married to Benia Gaspar of Poblacion Tuba. They are
blessed with two children Kenedy Keith and Shedrick Glen.

Evaluation of School-Based Management Program
in Kapangan District, Benguet / Francisco M. Contero. 2006

---

Document Outline

• Evaluation of School-Based Management Program in Kapangan District, Benguet
  • BIBLIOGRAPHY
  • ABSTRACT
  • TABLE OF CONTENTS
  • INTRODUCTION
    • Background of the Study
    • Statement of the Problem
    • Objectives of the Study
    • Importance of the Study
    • Scope and Delimitation of the Study
  • REVIEW OF LITERATURE
    • Historical Background of School-basedManagement Program
    • SBM Implementation Process
    • School Head as a Lead implementer
    • School Building Program
    • Instructional Leadership
    • Student Assessment
    • School Wide Assessment
    • Assessment Driven Instruction
    • Curriculum, Instructional Materials and Textbooks
    • The Parameters of Curriculum
    • School-Based In-service Training
    • School Improvement and Innovation Project
    • Conceptual Framework
    • Paradigm of the study
    • Definition of Terms
    • Hypotheses of the Study
  • METHODOLOGY
    • Location of the Study
    • Respondents of the Study
    • Instrumentation
    • Data Gathering
    • Statistical Treatment
  • RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
    • The Processes, Key Actors and ResourcesInvolved in the School Building Program
    • The Processes Involved in the CIMTEX
    • The Processes Involved in the SchoolbasedIn-service Training
    • The Processes Involved in SchoolImprovement Innovative Facility
    • Process Involved in Student Assessment
    • Process Involved in the Monitoringand Evaluation
    • The Process Involved in the School-Based Procurement of Furniture
    • School Heads and Staff Development
    • Status, Key Actors, Resources and ProcessesInvolving SBM Milestones
    • Innovations or Changes Introduced tothe School as a Result of SBM Program
    • Learning�s From SBM
  • SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECCOMENDATIONS
    • Summary
    • Conclusions
    • Recommendations
  • LITERATURE CITED
  • APPENDICES
  • BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

---