VARIABLES AFFECTING THE STAKEHOLDERS’

INVOLVEMENT IN SBM
PROGRAMS

Prepared by:
Angie R. Alcala
MaEd-Educational Management
 CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM

Introduction

Over the years, the educational system has been undergoing rehabilitation and

development to keep pace with the international trends and challenges in education. The

country’s educational system is constantly evolving, embracing new trends in the

educational policies and practices to ensure that the output of the system will be able to

adapt and respond to the needs of the changing times and eventually improve the quality

of life and contribute to the progress of the economy Areas like quality and excellence,

relevance and responsiveness, access, equity and efficiency and effectiveness in school

management and administration are the focus of assessment and evaluation and constant

re-examination. As such, policies and processes as well as structures of the educational

resources bring about the continuous changes of the educational systems.

Arias (2015) emphasized that education is a fundamental tool that every country

needs for every individual that needs to be developed as he or she walks through the

valley of globalization. It is also a fundamental tool that a country needs to have a

sustainable development. Magsadia (2014) stated that they have different roles as school

stakeholders. They are also mutually engaged in partnership and are one in support of the

school activities at all stages of education in a shared capacity and association.

Stakeholders become the partners of the department. And so, stakeholder involvement

means working with people and using the resources as they are and helping them to work

together to realize agreed ends and goals .

 Many might be thinking that parents, sponsoring group, community organization

and leaders are the only stakeholders. Teachers, students and school leaders are the

primary stakeholders too of the school. Marshall (2018) stressed out that stakeholder

salience is used as a framework to examine the contested nature of the engagement of

these stakeholders in education. Effective participation and involvement of stakeholders

makes a difference in improving learning and school atmosphere. In the real scenario in

the schools, as perceived by the author is that school administrator mostly gives

importance to community leaders as stakeholders while leaving others that, in the long

run should also be included.

Each of these stakeholders should be involved and accountable in implementing

programs and strategies that will close achievement gaps in the school management. In

this study, stakeholders were analyzed in terms of their level of involvement in achieving

targets written on DepEd’s mission statement and vision for learning through programs

and projects, identified school-based management performance, ascertain the significant

relationship between the extent if stakeholder’s involvement and school-based

management performance, and discuss the problems encountered by the stakeholders in

the implementation of programs and project. The developed institutional support

framework would help the school in achieving a full success on the implementation of

various school programs and projects. Aside from that, there will be possibilities of

outward development for every stakeholder in the educational process.

The school is composed of unique parts with varied functions which can be compared to

human body systems that work together to maintain homeostasis. There are changes that

happen inside and outside, just like in school settings. Things like this may be an

improvement of physical facilities, curriculum shifting and curricular activities. In

school-based management, changes are inevitable. To arrive at successful changes to

benefit the learners of schools’ district, partners of the public schools which turns to be a

vital part of school system are the stakeholders. They are the ones that play the central

role of changing the school by becoming it better, more conducive and more effective

learning. environment that caters to the present needs of the types of learners. As

observed by the researcher, the support of these stakeholders greatly affects the quality of

education being delivered to learners. As an example, the materials or equipment that

they donated to a classroom contributed to the learning factor of every student. Gradually,

they are contributing to give students a conducive learning environment. As a teacher, the

support of these people is indeed a great help in attaining higher learning outcomes

making duty fulfilled.

In Gulang-Gulang National High School-Bocohan Extension, they are trying to

maximize the results of department’s programs and project through the involvement

of stakeholders. It is truly observable that there are stakeholders extending their selfless

support to help every school in producing quality graduates that can adapt to the drastic

changes and challenges in the community. Aside from that, some physical structures

coming from stakeholders were also an additional help to the learning environment. But

then, the school finds a lot of difficulties in the sustainable and continuous progress of

specific program and project. Despite of all the odds in gathering for resources, still, the

schools find it so hard to get the desired results.

The researcher, being a faculty of a secondary school in Gulang-gulang National

High School-Bocohan Extension, noticed that there are some misconceptions and

problems in terms of how and when do the stakeholders will take their part. There are

some inconsistencies in the commitment although stakeholders are extending their help in

the development of the school. Even most parents of the students are showing less

priority towards school related matters. Due to this concern, school faces a lot of

difficulties in promoting and implementing its programs and project’s due.

 The researcher, being a faculty of a secondary school in Gulang-gulang National

High School-Bocohan Extension, noticed that there are some misconceptions and

problems in terms of how and when do the stakeholders will take their part. There are

some inconsistencies in the commitment although stakeholders are extending their help in

the development of the school. Even most parents of the students are showing less

priority towards school related matters. Due to this concern, school faces a lot of

difficulties in promoting and implementing its programs and project’s due. With this

consideration, the need to develop an institutional support framework aroused for the

stakeholders to be oriented with their functions as they continue their commitment to

support the school to produce the kind of learners that can adapt to the demands of the

community.

As a witness in the reality experienced by the researcher, she chose to conduct the

present study to help the schools in the districts to have a stable institutional support from

the stakeholders. In this context the researcher determined the extent of stakeholders’

involvement in the implementation of school’s programs and project, identified the

school- based management performance, correlated stakeholders’ involvement with

school-based management performance, and discussed the problems encountered by the

stakeholders in the implementation of school programs and project thus, the researcher

arrived to the development of an Institutional Support Framework.

 Statement of the Problem

To determine the variables affecting the stakesholders’ involvement in school programs and

projects and school performance on School Based Management in Gulang-gulang National High

School-Bocohan Extension with an end view of developing an institutional support framework.

Specifically, this study dealt to attain the following objectives:

1. What are the variables affecting the stakeholders’ involvement in school’s programs

and project as to:

1.1 Access to information

1.2 Communication process

1.3 Accountability

2. What is the School-Based Management performance of Gulang-gulang National High

School-Bocohan Extension in terms of:

2.1 Leadership and Governance

2.2 Accountability and Continuous Improvement

2.3 Curriculum and Learning

2.4 Management of Resources

3. What is the significant relationship between the extent of stakeholders’ involvement on

schools program and projects and School-Based Management Performance

4. What are the problems encountered by the stakeholders in the implementation of

programs and project as perceived by the stakeholders ?

5. Based on the findings of the study, what Institutional Support Framework can be

developed?

Hypothesis
 There is no significant relationship between the extent of stakeholders’

involvement on school’s programs and projects and School-Based Management

performance.

Conceptual Framework
Significance of the Study

Consequently, the study will serve as a guide for every school in Buenavista

Schools Districts in terms of evaluating the programs and project in which stakeholders

are involved. Also, it will serve as a guide on how they tap resources with the help of

stakeholders. A study focusing on the stakeholders alone will help the school-based

management team to have a smooth flow of support coming from the external resources

thereby adding the quality of services that we can deliver to the youth of Buenavista.

School Heads. The ones playing the key role in the education leadership. Since

they are the first person that are knowledgeable on the needs of a school, the result of the

study will guide them as they tap resources needed on the projects and programs that they

will implement.

Teachers. They are the ones directly implementing the curriculum. With the

existence of this study, they will be able to have an instrument that will determine what

will be the adjustments they will make so that the necessary service will be delivered

properly with quality to the clients of educational services. The development of the

school will not be realized with the help of internal stakeholders. They play a big part in

the success of every program or project.

Parents. Since they are in generation of globally competitive students, they can

make ways to adjust themselves with the needs of their children. Therefore, they will be

more aware of their parental responsibilities in the education of their young at present

generation.

Students. The findings and output of this study could be of great help to them

being the core of educational processes. They will benefit in the study because they are

the core consideration for every decision that the department commits. As stated in the
mission of the Department of Education, that is for the “students learn in a child-friendly,

gender- sensitive, safe and motivating environment.” To attain that mission, the school

should tie its partnership with the stakeholders.

Other stakeholders. This study could clear some misconceptions in lending

support to school by making them oriented with their responsibilities and accountabilities

to the school and community; also, it will guide them as they continue their commitment

to support the school to produce the kind of learners that can adapt to the demands of the

community.

Future researchers. Lastly, this study could provide them with basis in

undertaking further studies along this concern. This could also serve as a guide in

contemplating new ideas for research and relating concepts in education which will then

be useful in further exploration and innovations.

Scope and Limitations

The scope of the study attempted to determine the extent of stakeholders’

involvement in the implementation of the school programs and project in the Gulang-

Gulang National High School-Bocohan Extension as to access to information,

communication process, involvement to school programs and projects, accountability,

and evaluation. It identified the school-based management performance in terms of

leadership and governance, accountability and continuous improvement, curriculum and

learning and management of resources. It aimed to ascertain if there is a significant

relationship between the extent of stakeholders’ involvement on school programs and

projects and School-Based Management performance. This study also discussed the

problems encountered in the implementation of programs and projects as perceived by

the stakeholders. The abovementioned variables served as a basis of the researcher in the

development of institutional support framework.

 The study was limited to public secondary schools of Gulang-Gulang National

High-Bocohan Extension. The instrument in the study was given to the selected

respondents composed of the internal and external stakeholders. The internal stakeholders

were the school head and teachers while the external stakeholders were the parents,

alumni, local leaders, representatives from non- governmental organizations (NGOs) and

youth leaders who have the direct participation and involvement in the school operation.

The researcher employed purposive sampling wherein the stakeholders of participating

schools were selected based on the believe that they will contribute to the study.

A total of 257 (two hundred fifty seven) school head, teachers and external

stakeholders served as respondents. The parent- respondents were the General PTA

officers of every participating school who were most participative as recommended by

the school heads. The LGU respondents were the barangay chairman and the councilor in

charge in the committee on education where the participating school is located. Alumni

representatives were bonafide graduates of the school and still having connection due to

the services rendered or donations given. The Non-government organization was

represented by two members of NGO’s that are actively participating on school

programs.

Definition of Terms

For clarity of the study to guide and enlighten the readers, the following terms are

hereby defined both conceptually and/or operationally.

Access to Information is the ability for an individual to seek, receive and impart

information effectively (UNESCO, 2015). Operationally, this serves as the vital

component of the communication in school on how information is acquired by the

 stakeholders.

Accountability and Continuous Improvement is the process of checking the people in

power to ensure that they exercise their duty well and they do not abuse their

authority (Steer and Waltne, 2009). Operationally, it is the sense of responsibility

regarding school matters by the stakeholders.

Communication Process is a way of transmitting information and common

understanding from one person to another (Keyton, 2011). Operationally, this is

the process of delivering and exchange of information and ideas between the

school and the stakeholders through personal and/or use of different media.

Curriculum and Learning is a reconstruction of knowledge and experience

systematically developed under the auspices of the school, to enable the learner to

increase their abilities (Tanner and Tanner, 1980). Operationally, this is a

combination of learning experiences, instructional practices and methodologies,

and students’ performance assessment that are designed to bring out learner’s

skills and evaluate target learning outcomes.

Evaluation is a methodical, providing information that is credible, reliable, useful to

enable incorporation of lessons learned into decision-making process of users and

funders (OECD, 2010). Operationally, this is the way of the school measures the

success of a certain activity.

External Stakeholders refers to the persons or organizations that are extending support

to the needs of the school. Support can be in the form of financial, services, in-

kind or infrastructure that can help the school in achieving its vision-mission

(SBM Manual, 2009). Operationally, these are persons that have close attachment

to the school since they keep on supporting and becoming a part of school

programs and projects particularly members of PTA, alumni, non-government

organization and local leaders.

Internal Stakeholders are the persons that are moving inside the school that are directly

benefited by the school’s programs and projects (SBM Manual, 2009).

Operationally, they are the ones taking the initiative to implement the curriculum

for the service of the Filipino students, specifically, the school heads and teachers.

Involvement to school programs and projects means working with people and using

the resources as they are and helping them to work together to realize agreed ends

and goals (Paine and McCann, 2009). Operationally, this means engaging the

stakeholders into school programs and projects.

Institutional Support Framework is a documentation by which an organization

provides guidance for members and employees to perform their functions

correctly and reasonably efficient (AIR, 2014). Operationally, it refers to the

output of the study that spells some technique and processes in order to maximize

stakeholders’ involvement on school programs and projects.

Leadership and Governance refers to how a school is being managed, controlled or

directed where there is collective action such that it delivers an acceptable

outcome (Cabuyao, 2005). Operationally, this merely focuses on the type of

governance and its effect to the participation of stakeholders

Management of Resources is the efficient and effective development of an

organization’s resources when they are needed (Penaflor, 2016). Operationally,

this may refer to material or human resources that may be tapped by the school to

use in the educational processes.

School Head refers to the chief head of a school (Dictionary.com). Operationally, the key

leader of the school; primarily the principal. But in schools without principal,

school head may refer to head teacher, teacher-in-charge or officer-in-charge.

References

Llanes (2016). Instructional Supervision: Its Impact to Teachers’ Performance in the

South District. 2016 PCBER Souvenir Program.

Marfa, M. C. (2015). Ethical Leadership and Leader Member Exchange Quality (LMX)
Among Teachers and School Heads in Selected Secondary Schools in the First
District of Quezon. Southern Luzon State University, Lucban, Quezon

Martinez, M.(2016).Issues and Challenges of K to 12 Teachers in Selected Public

Elementary School of Lucena North Distict : Basis for an Enhanced Faculty
Development Program. Unpublished Master’s Thesis Sacred Heart College.

Orfiano, P. A. (2011). Quality Education for all Throughout Life. The Modern Teacher.
647 P. Paterno, Quiapo, Manila: In Grade School, Inc. September 2011

Pacheco (2015).School Community Organization Involvement and Schools Development

in the District of Dolores, Division of Quezon. Unpublished Master’s
Thesis.Laguna State Polytechnic University – San Pablo City Campus.

Park, S., Hironaka, S., Carver, P., & Nordstrum, L. (2013). Continuous improvement in
education. Stanford, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Retrieved from http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/sites/default/files/carnegie-
foundation_continuous-improvement_2013.05.pdf

Penaflor, Prescila P. (2016). Extent of Practices of School Administrators in Managing

Community Support for School Programs and Projects in the Division of
Marinduque: Basis for a Resource Management Program. Unpublished Master’s
Thesis Sacred Heart College
 Chapter II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

This chapter presents the review of related literature and studies. It summarizes

the literatures and studies previously undertaken and opinions of several experts, which

were analytically reviewed to provide more information and insights in the pursuit of this

study. Such related literatures and studies reviewed herein were obtained from varied

resources, may can be from printed local and foreign materials and internet. The readings

that have bearing to the study provided the researcher with insights to enrich investigation

and understanding of the study’s objective. The research framework with the

corresponding paradigm is also discussed in this chapter.

Stakeholders’ Involvement to School Programs and Projects

The education of the youth is everybody’s concern. While government is tasked to

provide free and quality education to every child and youth, the community where they

grow is an important stakeholder in their education. The community and the private

sector, which will sooner or later employ these young generation, is also an important

stakeholder in their education. The successful collaboration of all these stakeholders is

therefore pivotal in ensuring that students go to school, stay in school and learn in school.

In the realization of performance on School-Based Management specifically in the

implementation of programs and projects, studies conducted revealed that the access to

information (Kununifaa, 2015), communication process (Lunenburg, 2017),

involvement of
 14

stakeholders (Bartle, 2007), accountability (Earl, 2012) and evaluation (OECD, 2005) are

the factors to consider in involving stakeholders.

Access to Information

Penaflor (2016) recommended that school administrators should intensify the

involvement of stakeholders as partners of the school to achieve positive learning

outcomes. This can be achieved by proper information drive created by the

administration. Strengthened by Kuunifaa (2011) in his study Access to Information

Legislation as a means to Achieve Transparency in Governance, the failure to comply

and/or to use the freedom of information ultimately lead to the problem in governance

and transparency as a result of the lack of access to government or public information.

Also, for Kuunifaa (2011) regarding transparency in governance, access to information is

considered a vaccine for ensuring good governance. Everyone must gear up for this

vaccine to ensure accountability and preventing members of an organization to left

behind. To work well, everyone must know their roles and responsibilities. Information is

vital in every organization. It may spell out the success or failure of an organization. As

what Kerwin (2011) added, the most basic element of information in rulemaking is the

notice provided to the public at large when a rule is being developed and binding.

The department has a particular way of disseminating information in order for its

personnel to be well informed as well as the stakeholders. According to Part V, Chapter I

of the DECS Service Manual 2000, information from the department is disseminated to

the public through the print and non – print media. Section I discussed the information

through print media in the form of the Service Manual, handbooks, publications and

issuances.
 15

Issuances include orders, memoranda, bulletins, unnumbered memoranda, office orders

and office memoranda. Section II tackles information through electronics. In addition,

DepEd website was also created to provide information for concerns like announcements

and timely information.

As supported by the Executive Order No. 02, s. 2016 which give the Filipinos a

constitutional right to access information, official records, public records and to

documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions or decisions, as well as to

the government research data used as a foundation for policy development, the right to

information and state policies to public disclosure and transparency in the public service.

With this, the stakeholders in the school should have the right to be informed about

salient information on school status in the implementation of school programs and

projects thereby giving them the analysis of what to do next, or what might the possible

things to be done in order to achieve full success on the delivery of quality education in

our country. Also, the incorporation of this right in the Constitution is a recognition of the

fundamental role of free and open exchange of information in a democracy, meant to

enhance transparency and accountability in government official acts, transactions, or

decisions.

Since the contribution of stakeholders is acknowledged and even considered them

as part and parcel of the School Based Management, they have the constitutional right to

be well informed and receive access to information. With this, they will contribute better

ideas to the school development.

 16

Communication Process

For Lunenburg (2012) in his paper entitled Communication: The Process,

Barriers, and Improving Effectiveness, communication is important because every

administrative function and activity involves some form of direct and indirect

communication. Whether planning and organizing or leading and monitoring, school

administrators communicate with and through other people. Supported by Brun (2010),

this implies that every person’s communication skills affect both personal and

organizational effectiveness. To clarify, Keyton (2011) defined communication as

process of transmitting information and common understanding from one person to

another. The definition underscores the fact that unless a common understanding result

from the exchange of information, there is no communication. Followed up by Keyton

(2011), the elements in the communication process determine the quality of

communication. Any problem in any one of communication elements can reduce

communication effectiveness.

Effective communication is a two-way process that requires effort and skill by

both sender and receiver. Administrators will at times assume each of these roles in the

communication process. Porto (2007) mentioned that an open line communication should

be maintained at all times between the school head and stakeholders for an easy access

with one another. In addition, good communication is a key factor to better understand

the school’s situation. Proven by the study of Maranan (2010) entitled Practices and

Problems Met in the Implementation of School-Based Management in Second

Congressional District: Basis for Intervention Program, recommended based from the

results of her study that the school heads should conduct a comprehensive and effective

system of communications among teachers, students, parents and community to gain their

support.
 17

Strengthened by Lunenberg (2012), the key for being successful in the

contemporary school is the capability of the school head to work with other school

stakeholders and develop a shared sense of what the school is wanting to carry out –

vision and mission, a shared sense of commitments that people must make in order to

advance the school toward a shared vision and clarity of goals. Thus, effective

communication is needed to build a strong relationship between the stakeholders of the

school. As school administrators are able to build a shared mission, vision, values, and

goals, the school district will become more effective. Building a relationship between

school administrators and other school stakeholders truly requires effective

communication.

Hughes (2006) as mentioned by Napoles (2009) in the study entitled The Effects

of Communication Breakdown to the Work Relationship Between School Administrators

and Teachers cited that communication breakdown can occur because the purpose of the

message is unclear, the leaders or followers verbal or non – verbal behavior were

inconsistent, the message was not heard by the receiver or because someone may have

misinterpreted another’s message. Most people see themselves as effective

communicators and senders and receivers of messages often seem disposed to believe

communication breakdowns to be the other person’s fault. Communication breakdown

often leads to blaming someone else for a problem. One way to avoid the finger pointing

associated with communication breakdown is to think of communication as a process, not

as a set of discrete individual acts. In addition, proper communication flow in an

organization helps in discovering who people are, aiding in establishing meaningful

relationships, and helping change attitudes and behaviors. Not only that, Napoles (2009)

also found that communication styles have generally contributed to communication

breakdown but only

 18

to a moderate extent. She concluded that communication breakdown poses a serious

effect on the work relationship of teachers and administrators. It retards growth and

development of the school, affects productivity and teaching process, adversely affects

the performance and status of the school, causes low level motivation on the part of the

teachers and administrators and causes burnout on the administrators’ part.

Thus, stakeholders must always be ready, willing and equipped to use counter

strategies to help alleviate and or lessen the impact that are most likely to be brought by

communication failure. In like manner, administrators must know the right words to be

used when they are communicating with the persons involve in school especially the

external stakeholders. Added by Pauley (2010), a school administrator has no greater

responsibility than to develop effective communication.

Involvement to School Programs and Project

According to Gichohi (2015) in her study about Stakeholder Involvement in

Schools in 21st Century for Academic Excellence, most school embraced stakeholder

involvement; thus, school management committees were actively taking their part in the

decision-making process with respect to the school management. Indeed, the involvement

of stakeholders in the educational system has a large impact on the development of an

institution; they can contribute to the lacking resources in the department. As defined by

Bartle (2007), stakeholder involvement means working with people and using the

resources as they are and helping them to work together to realize agreed ends and goals.

A skilled manager always looks for ways in which the interests and ability of everyone

can contribute to the good of the whole.

 19

The Republic Act 9155 also known as the Governance of Basic Education Act of

2001 approved on November 29, 2002 emphasized the involvement of stakeholders. It

strongly highlighted that in the governance of basic education, the collaboration of the

stakeholders and the school should be adapted to cater the needs of our learners. As

supported by the study of Abraham (2007) on strengthening PTA, it is then stressed that

local initiatives shall always be taken into consideration for the improvement of the basic

education. Clearly, the government cannot do it all, this may mean outsourcing of the

school to fill the gaps provided by the government. Aside from that, spelled in the

Manual on School Governing Council (2009), stakeholders are the ones that get involve

in school governance. They should work in harmonizing perspectives and school

experiences, share in the mission of improving the lives of children, youth, families and

the community. They are composed of internal stakeholders such as students, parents,

teachers and non-teaching personnel while external stakeholders involve various

government agencies, non- government agencies, civic and social organizations, alumni

and retirees. These group of stakeholders may be formally represented in a governance

structure in the school system. In the School-Based Management Framework and

Standards adopted by the Department of Education, these school governance structures

are referred to as School Governing Councils.

While, the Philippine Education for All (EFA) 2015 Plan is a vision and a holistic

program of reforms that aims at improving the quality of basic education for every

Filipino by 2015. The first production task to attain EFA 2015 is expecting schools to

continuously perform better. Its key action involves every school to assess its capabilities

and performance towards attaining EFA goals. Stakeholders, school head, teachers,

parents,
 20

students, community leaders, and other groups interested in school practices shall be able

to use processes and results to determine and implement school programs to ensure

continuous improvement in school quality. Building on its task on governance, every

learning site shall create a network on community-based groups to work together as

influential champions that support the attainment of EFA goals. Schools shall continue to

harness local resources and facilitate involvement of every sector of the community in the

school improvement process.

There is also an excerpt from the Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda

(BESRA) 2006-2010 presented to guide the development of a clear and common

understanding of the constancy in policy and purpose of the state in ensuring the

attainment of national development goals through the active involvement of community

stakeholders in the different field offices of the education department. The Schools First

Initiative (SFI) is the government’s strategy for improving the basic education. It is a

popular movement featuring a wide variety of local initiatives by individual schools,

localities, school divisions, local governments, communities, civil society organizations

and other interest groups and associations. It is also a policy reform package of

institutional, structural, financial and other critical changes necessary to accelerate,

broaden, deepen, and sustain education reform. The BESRA is the national government

policy reform component of the Schools First Initiative.

Accountability

Being involved in the school atmosphere, it is an interest to look for persons that

are truly accountable in the school management. In this case, not only the school
 21

administration, but also the internal and external stakeholders are the ones that should be

accountable in things happening on school, be it negative or positive. As defined by

Britannica Encyclopedia (2010), the term “accountable” originated from the Latin word,

computare, means “to count”. To be accountable, it requires a person to produce “a

count” of either the properties or money that had been left in his care. This meaning has

gone through in all forms of accountability that are applied through financial

bookkeeping or budgetary records. But more discursive definition of being accountable,

is in the sense of “giving an account,” which also emerged early in the history of the

term. Accountability as an abstract noun, hence refers to both the capacity and obligation

on someone to produce an account. Yet, it shouldn’t be in political or legal discussions

that accountability first developed as a term of art or as a fully established and self-

standing concept.

In education, accountability may be related to having a sense of responsibility

about school related matters. Responsibility may mean different to accountability but Earl

(2012) argues that accountability necessitates reporting to other people and having a

“moral responsibility about what you are doing”. Almendrala (2014) explained that

accountability is the obligation or willingness to accept responsibility for one’s action. To

be accountable is to be answerable for his actions and be liable for their consequences.

Added to this is the study of Caponpon (2014) entitled Instructional Competence of

Teachers, School Heads’ Administrative Practices and Performance of Schools’ Inputs to

Administrators Development Program stressed that teachers should cultivate pupils’

positive interest and attitude towards studies. They should work closely with parents and

emphasize to them the importance of follow up at home in the development of their

children, which will soon contribute to a high performance of schools. Also, for Pacheco

(2015) in the study School

 22

Community Organization Involvement and Schools Development in the District of

Dolores, Division of Quezon said that since there exists an important role between the

school community-based organizations and schools towards the development of the

school operation, there must be an established policy on how those sponsoring

organizations could further engage in school programs.

Evaluation

Performance in schools is increasingly judged based on effective learning

outcomes. Information is critical to knowing whether the school system is delivering

good performance and to providing feedback for improvement in student outcomes. For

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2005), school evaluation

presents common policy challenges concerning: aligning external evaluation of schools

with internal school evaluation; providing balanced public reporting on schools and

improving data handling skills of school agents. The OECD (2005) relayed that

evaluation can play a key role in school improvement and teacher development.

Identifying strengths and weaknesses, making informed resource allocation decisions,

and motivating actors to improve performance can help achieve policy objectives such as

school improvement and school accountability.

OECD (2005) agreed that self-evaluation has the merit of being immediate,

responsive to the school’s specific needs and circumstances and its results are ‘owned’ by

the school. However, self-evaluation which serves the needs of accountability is subject

to inevitable tensions between consistency and depth on the one hand and a natural desire

not to undermine the confidence of parents and superiors on the other. As a result,

self-
 23

evaluation is more a tool for managing development than for challenging assumptions or

for arriving at conclusions which threaten key actors in the school’s hierarchy. The

involvement of externality in school evaluation, therefore, both provides that element of

distance from the internal dynamics of the school and gives the kind of perspective and

challenge to assumptions and to the interpretation of evidence. This can lead to greater

consistency in the process. Externality can be achieved in a variety of ways. Who

evaluates, what is evaluated and how, and the ways in which the results are agreed and

communicated must be explicit concerns for policy from the outset. While for Santiago

(2011), there has been a move away from school evaluation which emphasizes

compliance with central policies and procedures towards much greater stress being

placed on the need for schools to evaluate themselves as part of wider strategies of school

improvement. Partly because of this strengthened school autonomy, the role of external

evaluation has undergone significant change and achieving a much closer alignment

between self- evaluation and external evaluation has become a key policy objective.

School Based Management Performance

The implementation of the Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001 (RA

9155) provided the mandate for decentralizing the system of school management and

recognized the role of the Local Government Units and other stakeholders as partners in

education service delivery. In recognition of this, the department launched the School-

Based Management, then the Schools First Initiative (SFI), to empower the school and its

community stakeholders to effectively address access and quality issues in basic

education. Subsequently, a more comprehensive package of policy reforms known as

Basic Education
 24

Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA) was launched in 2005, to sustain and expand the gains

of SFI through School-Based Management (SBM).

Along with teacher education development, national learning strategies, quality

assurance and monitoring and evaluation, and organizational development, SBM was

identified as one of the key reform thrusts (KRTs) under BESRA which is envisioned to

effect improvements at the school level. As per DepEd Order no.83 s, 2012 is concerned,

in light of the problems encountered in the first years of implementing School-Based

Management, developments and the need to respond to the clamor of the field

implementers, the department through the SBM-Technical Working Group conducted a

series of consultation and validation activities to revise the SBM framework, assessment

process and the assessment tool that led to launch the ACCESs – A Child- and

Community – centered Education System which is the “core value” in making education

more relevant and child-centered, increasing access and quality, and strengthening

partnerships with community stakeholders which is formalized as DepEd Order no.20 s,

2013 was released. Strengthened by DO 20 s, 2013, the Philippine Accreditation

System for Basic Education (PASBE) is an accreditation process that looks into the

operations of the public and private elementary and secondary schools if they meet

the quality standards as established by stakeholders of basic education. The SBM-

PASBE continuum illustrates the transition of school system from a centralized to a

decentralized set-up characterized by a nurturing relationship between the school and

community. From those enhancement, Revised School-Based Management

Framework-Assessment, Process and Tool (SBM- APAT) highlights the four

guiding principles of ACCESs namely leadership and

 25

governance, accountability and continuous improvement, curriculum and learning and

management of resources.

The school, as an organization, defines the relationships among the key players in

its operations and expands its ability to work with the stakeholders through an effective

governance structure that comprises representatives from different groups of school

community stakeholders. Based on BESRA Matrix of SBM Dimensions by Scale of

Practice on SBM Manual (2009), to ensure that SBM works towards improved learning

outcomes, which is the ultimate goal of the school-based management, schools are

expected to evolve from Level I (standard), to Level II (progressive) and Level III

(mature). It is, therefore, imperative for the school head, teachers, students and parents, to

gain adequate and appropriate information as well as skills in engaging other groups of

community stakeholders in school improvement processes to ensure that these

improvements are sustainable. In the study of Cabardo (2016), entitled the Levels of

School Stakeholders to the Different School-Initiated Activities and the Implementation

of School- Based Management, the level of participation of the school stakeholders to the

different school-initiated activities was revealed to be significantly affected by the level

of SBM implementation. The study of Bandur (2008) believed that SBM is an effective

system for empowering local schools in decision-making by which school stakeholders

are given greater power and authority to manage a school.

Explained by Leroy (2002), SBM has been in reality of the educational system for

relatively number of years, though prevailing for several decades in the educational

systems of the other country. It has proven effective in the realization of the desired goals

and outcomes of schools in Australia, the United States, Indonesia, New Zealand,

England
 26

and Wales, Thailand and others. To Werf, Creemers & Guldemond (2001), some scholars

and researchers alike assert that parental and community participation in schools has

created more effective schools and improved student achievements. For Watson (2008),

the basic philosophy, spirit, and drive of an organization have far more to do with its

relative achievements than do technological or economic resources, organizational

structure, innovation and timing. All these things weigh heavily in success. These may

have transcended by how strongly the people in the organization believe in its basic

precepts and how faithfully they carry them out.

Leadership and Governance

The Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA) serves as basis of the

government directions and actions towards attainment of improved basic education

competencies for all Filipinos. The implementation of the BESRA serves as the

framework of the coordinated sector-wide approach to donors’ and partners participation

of Schools First Initiative. In the first Key Reform Thrust (KRT 1) of the Basic

Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA) underscores the empowerment of key

stakeholders in school communities to enable them to actively participate in the

continuous improvement of the schools. Based on their first key indicator, an increased

number of schools with School Improvement Plan (SIP) organized and prepared through

a participatory process and with organized School Governing Council (SGC). This

indicator indicates that in the governance of basic education, the involvement of

stakeholders is really a must.

For Department of Education (2012) with SBM, several enabling policies were

formulated such as the School Governing Council (SGC); conduct of Assessment of

Level
 27

of Practice; School Improvement Planning (SIP); and reporting of accomplishments

through School Reports Cards (SRCs). These policies were supported by a budget line

item in the General Appropriations Act (GAA) for the installation of SBM in all public

elementary and secondary schools. With this, SBM had been revised to better highlight

the learner as the center of SBM practice; to encompass the diverse realities of learning

contexts defined and uniquely occurring within specific geographic, social, cultural,

economic, political, and environmental make-up of the contemporary society; to enhance

commitment of education stakeholders at all levels to their responsibilities and

accountabilities in realizing the education outcomes for children; and to improve the

school system’s capacity to be on track in achieving the Education for All/Millennium

Development Goals and sustain good performance.

A sustainable governance structure in school should produce stable and effective

leadership which underpins achievement of the school’s objectives, and which is

sensitive to guarding the vision and values of the past, whilst being responsive to the

changes in community values and the preferences of the immediate stakeholders. A

school governance is a system which runs under the principle of holistic educational

development of the learners is a shared responsibility and a shared accountability among

school’s community stakeholders. The school governance might also refer to the

authority of education stakeholders to cooperatively make decisions focused towards the

continuous improvement of learning experiences and promotion of learner’s welfare in

the school. It is interfaced among school stakeholders, the source of strategic decisions

that shape the school and its work, and ultimate accountability for the work and actions of

the whole school system.

 28

Gerona (2012) concluded that the best practices in leadership and governance are

the following: providing opportunities to teachers to exercise leadership in their roles of

specialization, conducting a general assembly at the beginning of the school year to orient

the stakeholders on school objectives at the end of the school year to appraise results and

make necessary adjustments, rendering a progress report to parents / community at least

twice a year or at the end of the semester to plan with them and accelerate progress, and

conducting aggressive recruitment and early registration in January each year giving

attention to learners with special needs and those at risk of not going to school and

providing intervention to those at risk of dropping out. Added to that is the study

conducted by Mentilla (2011) entitled Leadership Styles of Principals and Instructional

Variables of Selected Sectarian Schools in Region IV-A, revealing that principals in the

sectarian schools’ practice three (3) leadership styles as classified into authoritative,

democratic and delegative. The dominant practice is democratic leadership. The

instructional variable influences the performance of selected sectarian schools which are

teacher characteristics, classroom climate, technology and learning, motivation and

diversity and self-regulated learners. All leadership styles of the principals are

significantly correlated to the instructional variables. As the findings revealed, we may

conclude that the leadership and governance may have a direct effect on the stakeholder’s

involvement.

To Zara (2004), leadership is an important factor in the creation of good schools.

As a key official, an empowered and autonomous principal effectively leads to school

success. Supported by Directo (2000) the principal is largely responsible for all that

happen, or does not happen in the school. He receives credit or discredit as the case may

be for the school’s morale with respect to the students and staff. While the study of Marks
 29

& Printy (2007) entitled Principal Leadership and School Performance: An Integration

of Transformational and Instructional Leadership, the school leadership relations

between principals and teachers exercising potential of their active collaboration around

instructional matters to enhance the quality of teaching and student performance, found

out that when transformational and shared instructional leadership coexist in an integrated

form of leadership, the influence on school performance, measured by the quality of its

pedagogy and achievement of its student is substantial.

Another perspective is the study of Huelva (2012), Level of School Based

Management on Classroom Practices and Problems Encountered in the Implementation:

Basis for a Proposed Enhancement Program. To him, despite the differences on school

characteristics and needs of urban and barrio schools, teachers implemented the school-

based management classroom practices such as developmental lesson planning, program,

translation, “in-class activities”, collegiality, accountability, learning outcomes and

resourcing. For Antenor (2013) school leadership and governance is the process of

enlisting and guiding the talents and energies of teachers, pupils and parents toward

achieving common educational aim. In fact, in her study Administrator’s Level of

Practices on School Improvement Plan in the Secondary Schools in the City of Lucena

and Tayabas: Basis for Enhancing School Performance, the respondents perceived in

terms of leadership, school are just practicing the delivery of instruction, stakeholder’s

participation and best practices without excellence. But then, respondents have positive

perception on the influence of SIP to school performance in terms of National

Achievement Test (NAT), school awards and even on student awards. Therefore, it

concluded that there is significant relationship between the school improvement practices

and the school performance.

 30

Accountability and Continuous Improvement

Stressed in the purpose of School-Based Management on the school context,

success in school is rooted on the continuous improvement efforts as greatly defined by

the quality of the shared commitment of all school stakeholders – shared commitment

that is founded on the spirit of shared school ownership. School leaders should facilitate

the development of shared organizational values, trust and a systems perspective which

serves as a strong foundation on which school-based shared decision making is built.

When school leaders help stakeholders move sources of power, motivation, self-esteem

and well-being, those within the school community develop a broader and deeper sense

of responsibility to the work they share and strong commitment to seeing the school

succeed. Side by side by shared commitment is shared accountability. This means taking

one’s fair share of responsibility for outcomes. Being accountable means, one answers for

his/her actions as well as the results of his/her actions. Accountability is not only taking

credit, but also accepting the blame. Shared accountability in schools should be regarded

as a process of continuous collective engagement of all stakeholders that is mechanizes

towards various activities and actions to be taken towards improved performance results

in school, with an ultimate goal of improving student learning outcomes.

The passage of RA 9155 or Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001, provides

the overall framework for school head empowerment by strengthening their leadership

roles and school-based management within the context of transparency. Anderson (2005)

suggested that there are three types of accountability in School Based Management which

are accountable for adhering the rules and accountable to the education authorities,

accountable for adhering to standards and accountable to the peers and accountable for
 31

student learning and to the general public. SBM programs both strengthen and simplify

these types of accountability by empowering those at the school level to make decisions

collectively. Thus, increasing the transparency in the process as one of the objectives of

introducing SBM. Lacerna and Meer (2016) in their study The Scouters Rock

Implementation at Public Secondary Schhols: A TEA Governance Experience in Sto.

Tomas revealed that the management practices at Sto. Tomas District is highly evident to

be anchored to TEA Governance – Scouters Rock. It may be considered as the best

practices in school management. Cayadong (2015) cited by Lacerna and Meer (2016) in

his study entitled The Implementation of No Collection Policy in the Division of Misamis

Oriental School Year 2015 – 2016 and its Effects to the Learners: A Basis for an Action

Plan showed that schools generally displayed favorable attitudes towards their operations

and positive image. It further revealed that these had a positive response on the

motivational factors such as clientele satisfaction, relationship of parents and teachers,

instructional guidance and school community relationship. He recommended that

intensified information dissemination on the program should be done.

It is also important to understand the stakeholders’ needs and expectations, as

well as their perception of whether the process or system is capable of addressing these.

The term “continuous improvement” as defined by American Society for Quality (2010)

is used across industries to describe a process or approach to problem solving that

represents an ongoing effort to improve outcomes. For Park et.al (2013), in education,

continuous improvement can refer to a school, district, or other organization’s ongoing

commitment to quality improvement efforts that are evidence-based, integrated into the

daily work of individuals and contextualized within a system. In schools or

district, continuous
 32

improvement may refer to ongoing efforts to improve operational practices and processes

related to efficiency, effectiveness, and student outcomes.

For Continuous Improvement Project Learning Guide (2016), the stakeholder may

also be a source of improvement ideas or suggestions. But then, different types of

stakeholders have different needs that they wanted to satisfy-- enrolling their child or

even supporting a school. It is important to understand the stakeholder segments in order

to satisfy their different needs. In line with understanding the needs of stakeholders, it is

critical to have the stakeholders themselves help in identifying their needs. The voice of a

stakeholder is a qualitative statement or phrase that describes the stakeholders’ needs and

is worded in the stakeholder’s language. The use of the stakeholders’ own language is

important because we may be able to pick up new ideas on what they need.

The study of Formento et. al (2013) entitled The Key Factors For A Continuous

Improvement Process, each organization must develop its own continuous improvement

strategy, a working plan oriented to increase the success possibilities. On the basis of the

findings, it is proven that companies with continuous improvement program gained

effective results. This means that they have developed high standards and are thus

benchmarks for other companies, even though they still need to develop further

themselves. This is supported by Grayson (2013) when he claimed that continuous

improvement is one promising approach that public education can use on its path to

improved outcomes. Research has shown that such an approach has already proven

successful in fields such as healthcare, manufacturing, and technology. In these sectors,

continuous improvement has been used to achieve significant advances, ranging from

improved technologies to reductions in patient mortality.

 33

Best and Dunlap (2014), in their study Continuous Improvement in Schools and

Districts: Policy Considerations revealed that continuous improvement has proven useful

and effective in various industries, and schools and districts incorporating continuous

improvement into their work have shown promising results. Schools and districts that use

continuous improvement can achieve impressive results. Indeed, Flumerfelt & Green,

(2013), proven that educational organizations that have pursued such a path have

achieved a range of performance goals, including decreased failure rates, increased

homework completion rates, increased Advanced Placement exam participation,

increased kindergarten readiness, increased college enrollments, and more efficient use of

funds.

Curriculum and Learning

Ensuring that every child grows up with a strong education is a deeply rooted

Filipino value. Over time, however, the basic preparation that students need to succeed in

the world has changed. Now, with a competitive global economy and the importance of

technology in the fields of health, energy, and engineering, the government must improve

its education system to give all students, regardless of ethnic or economic background,

the skills to face these challenges and seize the opportunities available to them. This give

rise to more comprehensive type of education we receive today through the Republic Act

10533, an act enhancing the Philippine Basic Education System by strengthening its

curriculum and increasing the number of years for basic education.

With the implementation of K to 12 curricula strengthened by RA 10533, it set

standards and principles in developing the enhanced basic education curriculum. It is

stated that the State shall establish, maintain and support an adequate, complete, and

integrated
 34

system of education relevant to the needs of the people, the country and society-at-large.

The curricula are based on the fundamental aims of education set forth in the Article XIV

Section 2 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the Education Act of 1982 and Deped

Vision and Mission. Looking into the Part III Chapter I Section 2 of the DECS Service

Manual 2000, curricular programs, the matter of policy are suggestive patterns and

models for the guidance of the field officials and teachers. The development and

organization of the curricular programs must focus on the learner’s total development.

Also, as stated in Paragraph 2, Section 6.2, Rule VI from Rules and Regulations

of RA 9155 as mentioned in DepEd Order No.1, s. 2003, the school head shall have

accountability and responsibility for creating an environment in the school that is

conducive to teaching and learning. Thus, working together of the internal and external

stakeholders is one of the keys to effective schools. Whitehouse (2011) stated that good

educational systems ensure that opportunities for both approaches to professional

development programs are available and accessible to teachers. It is therefore incumbent

upon the DepEd to ensure teachers’ continuing professional development (CPD) within

the framework of School Based Management (SBM) and embodied in the School

Improvement Plans (SIPs). As such, this policy highlights the fact that the focus of

learner development is at the school welfare where deliberate measures must be taken to

improve student learning outcomes. In relation, Gerona (2012) concluded that the best

practices in curriculum implementation are: employing best teaching practices to develop

critical and creative thinking, actively involving learners in planning, implementing and

evaluating instruction, making the curriculum flexible so that it can readily respond to

emergent needs, challenges and opportunities and adapt local cultural conditions,

providing varied
 35

and meaningful activities for interaction, cooperative, group - based as well as

individualized self - directed learning and utilizing both formal and non – formal

alternative learning modalities to enhance achievement for all learners.

Villaflor (2010) explained that school - based training for teachers is needed to

update their knowledge and technical know – how about effective teaching. Likewise,

Deped Order No 35, s. 2016 - The Learning Action Cell as a K to 12 Basic Education

Program School – based Continuing Professional Development Strategy for the

Improvement of Teaching and Learning discussed that in line with implementation of RA

10533 or the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 was implemented. Through this

policy, the DepEd fully supports the continuing professional development of the teaching

personnel based on the principle of lifelong learning and DepEd’s commitment of

teachers’ potential aimed towards their success. This can be done through the school -

based LAC which primarily functions as a professional learning community for teachers

that will help them improve practice and learner achievement.

Llanes (2016) pointed out that instructional supervision has positive effect on

teachers’ effectiveness therefore, there should be constant workshops and seminars for

both the school principal and teachers separately to make them knowledgeable on the

expectations of the instructional supervision in schools. It is also important to establish

good rapport between school head and teachers for a positive learning environment.

Immediate response for the obstacles encountered should be done by the school head to

avoid conflict and to achieve the common goal which is high quality learning outcomes

of the pupils. While the study of Balbon (2016) entitled School Heads Administrative

Skill Affecting Teachers Participation in the Implementation of the K to 12 Curriculum:

Basis
 36

for District Human Resources Development Plan, revealed that the administrators

practiced the combination of both negative and positive administrative styles in

implementing K to 12 curriculum. The extent of teachers’ participation in the planning,

implementing, monitoring and evaluating school program and activities obtained a

weighted mean of 2.83 interpreted as “High Participation” which means that the

combination of administrative skills resulted to the teachers’ high participation.

Quitans (2006) in the study entitled Management Practices of Public Elementary

School Principals of Los Banos Laguna found that civil status is significantly related to

the principal’s management practices specifically in terms of curriculum development.

However, he recommended that teachers may support the program of activities of the

principals to improve and develop schools. Furthermore, she pointed out that efficient

and effective leader could be measured by performance and not by rewards. Martinez

(2016) in the study entitled Issues and Challenges of K to 12 Teachers in Selected Public

Elementary School of Lucena North District: Basis for an Enhanced Faculty

Development Program explained that both personal and environmental factors are

effective. According to her, it can be illustrated by teachers by bringing their past

experiences into classroom settings so their beliefs regarding how children learn and

develop affect the quality of the curriculum implementation. Furthermore, if teachers

existing belief structures were not consistent with the philosophy of the curriculum, then

they affect the success of curriculum implementation. He recommended that school heads

and administrators should engage in dialogues with the K to 12 teachers to address the

issues and challenges of the K to 12 teachers.

 37

Considering reality that not all students are financially capable of sending

themselves in the regular schooling, the Department of Education has an Alternative

Deliver Mode in the form of Open High School Program. The OHSP gave an opportunity

to pursue studies in the secondary school in a non-traditional way. Spelled in the OHSP

Handbook (2008), it caters to learners who are unable to attend the regular class program

due to the physical impairment, work, financial difficulties, distance of home to school

and other justifiable and legitimate reasons. As revealed by the study Implementation of

OHSP Program as Alternative Delivery Mode for Drop-out Reduction in Selected

Schools in Region IV-A by Nagares (2014), it is well implemented in the respective

schools though there were some problem encountered in some aspects this program

should be sustained to continually help students with special needs or care. More

importantly, a downtrend was seen in the drop-out rate of the schools under study, hence,

implementation of OHSP helped in reducing drop-out rate in the respective school. In

Buenavista District 1, there is one secondary school that offers the same program and

according to its graduates, they were given an opportunity to get a diploma and have a

comfortable life ahead of them.

Management of Resources

Usman (2016) pointed out in his study Educational Resources: An Integral

Component for Effective School Administration that education as an investment

constitutes the largest enterprise in community. It is the principal instrument for academic

progress, social mobilization, political survival and effective national development of any

country. Investment in education is a necessary condition for promotion of economic

growth and national development. Educational institutions including schools are

established and
 38

managed essentially to achieve certain stated goals and objectives. Usman (2016) further

concluded that accessibility of education resources has always been regarded as an

essential and integral part of school administration and basically geared towards the

improvement of all other factors in teaching and learning process thus ensuring

qualitative service delivery by the school to the society. The success of the schools

depends among others on effective school administration with good leadership, proper

time management in the school system, allocation of ample financial resources to

schools, regular training and re-training of human resources in the school, perfect

interrelationship with the community and ingenious utilization of the available resources

in the school system.

School Based Management Primer (2006) explained that finances are the

lifeblood of an organization. Thus, without funds, an established organization will not

function. In line with this, government funds require strict compliance to rules. This calls

for regular monitoring and the submission of the required reports to show how and where

the government funds have been disbursed. Supported by Penaflor (2016) in the study

entitled Extent of Practices of School Administrators in Managing Community Support

for School Programs and Projects in the Division of Marinduque: Basis for a Resource

Management Program, he explained that the fund coming from MOOE and other Deped

sources like Special Education Fund from the Local School Board, allocations from 20%

barangay Social Development Fund and from Sangguniang Kabataan, Parent – Teachers

Association contribution, donation from alumni and other sources and school generating

project is a collaborative undertaking of the school administrators, teachers and

community stakeholders to achieve transparency, effectiveness and efficiency. She also

recommended that administrators should regularly involve stakeholders in school

programs and projects

 39

and create partnership with the government, NGOs and PTA the present programs and

projects worth supporting. The teachers should also support the school administrators to

institute resource management program that will help the schools in achieving success in

the implementation of community support programs and projects.

The school administrator takes the lead in fund management which is a three part

process that includes preparation of the Annual Implementation Plan (AIP) which is

translated to the School Operating Budget (SOB), implementation of the SOB and fund

accountability (Monitoring and Reporting). The effectiveness and efficiency of the

management of resources greatly depend on the practices of the school administrator in

managing the support of the community for the school programs and projects. Gerona

(2014) concluded that the best practices in the management of resources are: putting in

place a system of helping teachers identify and respond appropriately to their

performance need and challenges, observing accounting and auditing rules and

regulations in managing school resources, providing training and development programs

on competencies that advance the school vision and purpose in support of the school

improvement plan and orienting new staff (teaching and non – teaching) to school

policies standards and programs. School heads and other community stakeholders should

also pay attention to resource management to maximize school and community resources

to significantly improve student achievement, enrolment, retention and participation.

Villaflor (2010) recommended in his study that measures should be adopted to manage

the physical resources. In addition, every school should adapt the improvement of

physical resources through the implementation of the School Based Management (SBM).
 40

Tapar et al. (2016) in the study entitled Analysis on Utilization of Canteen Fund

as Part of TEA Governance found out that the school administration cannot follow the

required percentages of the required disbursement of funds due to the schools’ rise of

needs. He further recommended that DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2007 should be revised.

Seminars on proper utilization and budgeting may be done by the proper authority.

Prioritizing of needs and proper utilization of canteen fund would be of great help and

continuity on analyzing the data should be done and employed quarterly. As stressed by

Cranston (2001), schools should always be ready to link with the community stakeholders

in order to facilitate whatever deficiencies in schools’ plant facilities and resources.

Supported by Allawan (2012), it is accepted by majority that schools cannot exist alone in

the community and in order that schools will be progressive and its goals will be realized,

community linkages should be strengthened The study of Bandur (2008); San Antonio &

Gamage (2007); Anderson (2006); and Cranston (2001) believed that SBM is an effective

system for empowering local schools in decision-making by which school stakeholders

are given greater power and authority to manage a school.

Problems Encountered in the Implementation of Programs and Projects in the

School-Based Management

White (2010) reminded that in any undertakings, there are obstacles and

limitations – no problems, no business. Yet there are better ways to solve all common

problems by being focused, do some analysis and always start work right and positive.

He emphasizes some common problems encountered in the implementation of a process

which are as follows: lack of employer commitment, lack of employee enthusiasm and

poor leadership. In particular, Gamage (2004) asserts that any comprehensive

examination of SBM is
 41

incomplete unless underlying tensions associated with decentralization and centralization

which has occurred roughly at the same time is considered together. This can lead to the

perception that ultimate aim of decentralization in educational policy issues was to

develop an effective teaching and learning environment. Further, the School

Development Global Horizon in Indonesia claimed that SBM community participation is

generally limited to raising financial-related concerns for the school and the community

and not involved in school management and does not support directly the teaching and

learning.

Indeed, the cited literature and studies related to the involvement of stakeholders

in the implementation of programs and projects based on the above premises, should not

be ignored considering that there is a significant relationship among the presented

variables in the study. This may become the key in upgrading our level of practice in

the School-

Based Management. The local, foreign literature and studies discussed in this chapter

have a relevant connections or similarity pertinent to the conceptual and theoretical

framework of this study. It also served as reference to preparation of a proposed

institutional support framework in the involvement of stakeholders in the implementation

of school programs and project thereby increasing the level of practice in the school

based management performance in schools of Gulang-gulang National High School-

Bocohan Annex.

Compliance of those variables in the implementation of programs and projects

might result to a rising performance on the school-based management- assessment

process and tool (SBM-APAT) ACCESS principles. With this, the school can ensure the

delivery of quality education and acquisition of lifelong skills to its learners making them

globally competitive. This strengthens the drive of the researcher to pursue the study that
 42
may somehow contribute to the existing problem of the school with regards to the

diminishing commitment of the stakeholders in the educational process.

 43

Institutional Support Framework

The Institutional Support Framework is a guide in stakeholders’ involvement on

programs and project, developed based on the result of this study. It is designed to the

school-based management team and school stakeholders in brainstorming and

implementing effective ways to engage stakeholders—including teachers, school heads,

students, parents, alumni, local school board, non-government organization and

community organizations in developing and implementing developmental plans to ensure

maximum involvement and support that can be given by the stakeholders. This guide is

intended to give options and guidance without being prescriptive, given each school’s

unique context.

There are many benefits in tapping the resources, ability and experience of

various partners in developing plans for conducive learning environment that eventually

lead to effective teaching and learning process. By collaboratively reviewing data and

identifying the root causes behind existing problems, there is remarkable potential to

build and strengthen partnerships while at the same time developing a strategic and

innovative plan that may sustain and even grow support coming from the stakeholders.

Effectively engaging and asking for input from stakeholders has never been more

important. As supported by AIR (2014), it is particularly valuable to effectively involve

stakeholders because it will lead in garnering public support and political will to

implement the plans with success; stakeholder ownership and buy-in are needed to

overcome the considerable financial and political challenges that may be associated with

challenges that require widespread support and advocacy; and will bring together leaders

from the school, district, and government as well as the involvement of parents, civil

groups, health and welfare, legal, and other institutions—each of whom will likely be

involved in implementing the strategies developed.

 44
Gathering people of good will from across many sectors to seek common ground

on acquiring quality education is valuable. This process would take time and careful

planning, but the result has enormous potential. Building a partnerships and relationships

on this issue will serve the school and broader community well on future initiatives. More

than any other education policy issue, ensuring that all students have access to consistent,

high quality instruction requires the input and support of all stakeholders. To lead the way
 45

on access to effective teaching and learning process in schools, sparking discussions with

all key stakeholders must be at the center of planning. This guide provides step-bystep

considerations to help you in planning and conducting those crucial conversations.

For Krick et al. (2005), leading companies have started to develop an appreciation

that stakeholder engagement can contribute to learning and innovation in products and

processes, and enhance the sustainability of strategic decisions within and outside of the

company. The stakeholder engagement enables companies to align social, environmental

and economic performance with core strategy. Such stakeholder engagement processes

involve a pooling of resources (e.g. know-how, financial, human or operational

resources) that can help all parties involved to gain insights, solve problems, and reach

goals that none of them could reach alone. The benefits of stakeholder engagement can

lead to more equitable and sustainable social development by giving those who have a

right to be heard the opportunity to be considered in decision-making processes; enable

better management of risk and reputation; allow for the pooling of resources (knowledge,

people, money and technology) to solve problems and reach objectives that cannot be

reached by single organizations; enable understanding of the complex business

environment, including market developments and identification of new strategic

opportunities; enable corporations to learn from stakeholders, resulting in product and

process improvements; inform, educate and influence stakeholders and the business

environment to improve their

decision-making and actions that impact on the company and on society; and build trust

between a company and its stakeholders.

Despite the obvious challenges of stakeholder involvement, the outcomes of best

possible practice in stakeholder involvement to school programs and projects clearly justify
 46

the necessary efforts. Successful stakeholder involvement not only helps schools to

secure leadership in an increasingly complex and ever-changing education environment,

but will also help to bring about systemic change towards sustainable development.

Research Paradigm

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE

Stakeholders’ Involvement
on Programs and Projects

 Access to Information
 Communication
Process
 Involvement of
Stakeholders to
Program and
Project
 Accountability Problems Encountered in
 Evaluation the Program and Project
Implementation
Performance of SBM-APAT
 Leadership and
Governance
 Accountability and
Continuous
Improvement
 Curriculum and
Learning
 Management of
Resources

Institutional Support Framework

Figure I: Paradigm of the Stakeholders Involvement on Programs and Projects,

School-Based Management Performance and Problems Encountered in Program
and Project Implementation and the Output
 47

The second frame encloses the dependent variable which is the problems

encountered by the stakeholders during the implementation of school programs and

projects.

Thus, the researcher develops an institutional support framework based on the

result of the study.

 Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter displays the detailed discussion of the methods of research used. It

also includes the locale of the study, research design, respondent, instrument to be used,

data collection procedures, and statistical treatment of data.

Research Locale

This study was conducted in Gulang-gulang National High School- Bocohan

Annex. The locale was chosen firstly, due to the strong drive of the researcher in helping

the district where she belongs in determining the variables affecting support coming from

the stakeholders; secondly, to clear some misconceptions of stakeholders in supporting

school programs and projects thereby making all their efforts valuable towards the

wholistic development of the young; thirdly, to have a clearer understanding about the

problems exists in stakeholder’s involvement.

 49

Research Design

This study used the descriptive-correlational method of research. Descriptive

method as defined by Calmorin (2011) is a purposive process of gathering, analyzing,

classifying and tabulating data about prevailing conditions, practices, beliefs, processes,

trends, cause and effect relationship and making adequate and accurate interpretation

about such data with or without the aid of statistical methods. Thus, descriptive method is

deemed necessary since this study described, analyzed and interpreted the extent of

stakeholders’ involvement and school programs and project.

Aside from that, this study determined the variables of stakeholders’ involvement

and schools’ program and projects as viewed by the respondents. Towards its end, it

described a recommended support framework that will surely help the school heads in

providing outstanding services in the wholistic development of the whole institution.

Respondents

The respondents of the study were composed of thirteen (13) internal

stakeholders, and two hundred forty five (245) external stakeholders with a total of two

hundred fifty seven (257). They were selected from the Gulang-gulang National High

School-Bocohan Annex school year 2022-2023.

 50

Research Instrumentation

In the preparation of the research instrument, the questionnaire served as the main

tool of the study. It was composed of three parts. Part I dealt with the extent of

stakeholders’ involvement, Part II for School-Based Management performance and Part

III for the problems encountered by the stakeholders in the implementation of programs

and projects. The part I and III of the questionnaires were constructed by the researcher

based on the literature and studies she presented on chapter II, while part II was adopted

from the existing SBM-APAT for school performance such as leadership and

governance, accountability and continuous improvement, curriculum and learning, and

management of resources. The constructed survey questionnaire underwent face

validation that took note of some suggestions for proper construction of the statements.
 51

After which, she asked for the help of three educational leaders outside the district to

validate the content of the questionnaire. After those validation, the questionnaire was

administered to 257 respondents for pilot testing. Revisions were made based on the

result of pilot test. Lastly, the questionnaire was confirmed by an English and Filipino

teacher for grammar and paragraph construction. All suggestions and recommendations

of the researcher adviser and validators were considered in the revision of research

instrument to arrive in the final form of research instrument before administering it to the

respondents.

Data Gathering Procedure

A pilot testing for 257 respondents was made before final copies of the

questionnaires was produced and distributed to the schools in the Gulang-gulang National

High School- Bocohan Annex. The questionnaires were distributed personally by the

researcher to make sure that it will reach the proper respondents. For LGU’s, she asked

some help to the Association of Barangay Captains (ABC) and Barangay Councilors

League to reach the community leaders during their regular sessions. Also, she handed

the survey questionnaire to the School Governing Council in which case is the Municipal

Mayor and to the Councilor-in-charge for the committee in education personally. The

respondents were given ample time to answer the instrument. The retrieval of all survey

questionnaires distributed in the school-respondents was done by the researcher. After

retrieval, the researcher proceeded to the statistical treatment of the gathered data.

Constant follow up with her research adviser was evident so she would be guided

accordingly as she continued on with her study.

 52

Statistical Treatment

In the analysis of data, the researcher used the following statistical tools: average

weighted mean and Pearson R product of correlation. Weighted mean was used to

describe the extent of stakeholders’ involvement on programs and project, school-based

management performance and problems encountered by the stakeholders in the

implementation of programs and project observed by the respondents.

5𝑓 + 4𝑓 + 3𝑓 + 2𝑓 + 1𝑓
𝑊𝑀 =
𝑁

Where:

f = frequency

N = total number of respondents

WM = Weighted Mean

To determine the significant relationship of involvement of stakeholders in school

programs and projects with SBM performance, the Pearson Product Moment Correlation

Coefficient was used.

n ∑ 𝑥𝑦 − ∑ 𝑥 ∑ 𝑦
r=
√[𝑛 ∑ 𝑥 2 − (∑ 𝑥 )2] [𝑛 ∑ 𝑦 2 − (∑ 𝑦 )2]

Where:

r = Pearson Product Moment Coefficient of Correlation

n = sample size
∑ 𝑥𝑦 = the sum of the product of level of stakeholders’ involvement and school
programs and projects
∑ 𝑥 ∑ 𝑦 = the product of the sum of ∑ 𝑥 and the sum of ∑ 𝑦
∑𝑥 2 = sum of square of x
∑𝑦 2 = sum of square of y
 53

For the interpretation and analysis of data gathered, the scale, weight assigned, and

description below were used:

a. For the variables affecting involvement of stakeholders as perceived by

themselves, the following scale was followed:

Scale Range Descriptive Rating

4 3.26 - 4.00 Involvement to a Great Extent (IGE)
3 2.51 - 3.25 Involvement to a Moderate Extent (IME)
2 1.76 - 2.50 Involvement to a Low Extent (ILE)
1 1.0 - 1.75 No Involvement (NE)

b. For the implementation of school programs and projects, the following scale

was followed:

Scale Range Descriptive Rating

4 3.26 - 4.00 Excellently implemented (EI)
3 2.51 - 3.25 Satisfactory implemented (SI)
2 1.76 - 2.50 Moderately implemented (MI)
1 1.0 - 1.75 Poorly implemented (PI)

c. For the problems encountered by the stakeholders on School-Based Management,

the following scale was followed:

Scale Range Descriptive Rating

4 3.26 - 4.00 Always Encountered (AE)
3 2.51 - 3.25 Sometimes Encountered (SE)
2 1.76 - 2.50 Rarely Encountered (RE)
1 1.0 - 1.75 Not Encountered (NE)
54

49
55
56