CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the background of the study, the statement of the

problem, the significance of the study, and its scope and delimitations.

Background of the Study

The Philippine Education System is into a never ending search for

solution on poor quality education in the country. It has resorted to various

innovations in the system with the goal of improving the quality of education

and enhancing the literacy of the students. The system has been into

reinventing education, restructuring the Basic education Curriculum, re-

engaging teachers on maximum time-on-task and re-evaluation of duties

and functions of the people in the education structure. The reinvention of

school governance must thereby give more independent status of

operations guided by self-regulation in compliance with DepEd standard of

excellence.

As learning institutions move toward the future, they face new

challenges and difficulties to reach the level of achievement they are

expected to give. Since there is no magic formula for success, they are

constantly undergoing a trial-and-error loop in search of excellence. School

improvement has been the focus of every administrator due to the

numerous complexities of its operations specially in the public sector where

resources are limited while private sectors would compete by increasing its

student population in its goal of sustainability. In the onset, it may be simple

1
to note that improvement may be totaled to making linkages and asking

help from different sources if the school resources are tight. The reality is,

funding can be hard due to different technical considerations specifically

when monetary values are involved for disposition. However, administrators

are keeping the risk just to comply with required standards that in an event

they handled the school, there must be contained development at their

hand of legacy. Most of the time, administrators would work for linkages

with other governmental and non-governmental organizations for aid and

services. Linkages will outsource the need of the school when needed and

even extent its development to expansion. Donations, scholarships and

grants are one of the best actions over decades as source of funds of most

schools specifically if the movement is on project based implementation.

Stakeholder’s involvement has really posted the best of making the school

a better arena for educating students and making the most of the internal

sources of the school.

Although there is no single direction that leads to success, the

continuous improvement program of the Philippine- Australia Human

Resource and Organisational Development Facility (PAHRODF) is believed

as an accurate tool for achieving performance. In 2013, several schools

from the different regions were chosen to pilot the Continuous Improvement

Program. These includes Quezon City ( 8 schools), Marikina (2 schools),

Mandaluyong ( 2 schools), Bulacan (4 schools), Pampanga (4 schools),

Laguna (4 schools), Rizal (2 schools) and Misamis Oriental (4 schools).

The birth of the Continuous Improvement is traced back from the

evolution of the Total Quality Management in Japan after World War II. In

2
the book of Subburaj Ramasamy (2009), Continuous Improvement comes

from the Japanese word Kaizen which also means gradual and orderly. It is

one of the tools of Total Quality Management (TQM), a holistic and an

umbrella concept for definite success and prosperity of organizations. As of

today, periodic implementation of trainings for administrative efficiency on

the implementation of the continuous improvement are being conducted to

meet the demands of time where education of the youth has been the total

focus to make them gain better competitive advancement in earlier life and

be a successful citizen of the country with the help of the school for their

developmental being.

In the enclosure to DepEd Order No, 83, s 2012 which is the

Implementing Guidelines on the Revised School Based Management of the

Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001 (RA 9155), the vision of change

is based on ACCES or A Child and Community- Centered Education

System. In view of the SBM review and revision, ACCES served to clarify

the guiding principles derived from the concepts of “right-based” education

and community as stewards or “rights bearer” in education. From the

Philosophical underpinnings, ACCES espoused Four Principles of a school

system that guides the SBM processes. Among these principles,

Continuous Improvement on the curriculum and the learning systems

anchored on the community and the learners’ contexts and aspiration is

one. This is under the Principle of Community Based- Learning. The other

principles include Leadership and Governance, Accountability for

performance and Results, and Convergence to Harness Resources for

Education.

3
 At present, enhancing the quality of basic education in the Philippines is

one of the topmost priority. This is because there are many students who

finished basic education that do not possess sufficient mastery of the basic

competencies. Hence, the Department of Education headed by Brother

Armin Luistro implemented the Continuous Improvement (CI) which is

geared towards the attainment of the Department’s Mission and Vision.

The vision states,

We dream of Filipinos who passionately love their country and whose

competencies and values enable to realize their full potential and contribute

meaningfully to building the nation. We are a learner- centered public

institution that continuously improves itself to improve its mission.

To attain this vision, the department clearly laid down what every

concern individual should do to carry out its mission. This is,

To protect and promote the right of every Filipino to quality, equitable,

culture-based, and complete basic education where:

Students learn in a child-friendly, gender-sensitive, safe, and motivating

environment;

Teachers facilitate learning and constantly nurture every learner;

Administrators and staff, as stewards of the institution;

Ensure an enabling and supportive environment for

effective learning to happen;

Family, community, and other stakeholders are actively

engaged and share responsibility for developing life-long learners.

The Continuous Improvement in schools aims to effectively raise the

4
quality of basic education in the country. Schools need to gain the

competencies for continuous improvement to enable desired changes

addressing their unique needs.

According to the World Bank Philippine Skills Report in 2009, There is a

serious gap in critical skills of graduates such as problem solving, initiative

and creativity, and to a lesser extent, gaps in job specific technical skills.

Poor quality education is also reflected in the inadequate preparation of

high school graduates for the world of work or higher education.

Assessment done by the prestigious organization Trends in International

Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) concluded that the problem about

the present curriculum is squeezing 12 years of basic education into just

10. That students are overloaded with subjects which resulted to poor

quality of basic education .International Test Results like 2003 TIMSS rank

the Philippines 34th out of 38 countries in H S II Math and 43 rd out of 46

countries in HS II Science; For Grade Four, the Philippines rank 23 rd out 25

participating countries in both Science and Math. In 2008, even only with

the Science High School participating in the advanced Mathematics

Category, the Philippines was ranked lowest. These problems have been

taken very seriously by the Department of Education that is why various

programs are implemented to continuously improved the learning output. At

present, improved teacher standards have been achieved by employing

National Competency-Based Teacher Standards (NCBTS) and the Teacher

Strengths and Needs Assessments (TSNA). Also, Competency-Based

Performance Appraisal System for Teachers (CB-PAST) has been

developed to improve the Performance Appraisal System.

5
 A January 13, 2011 press release by the Department of Education, Bro.

Armin Luistro said,

“Part of DepEd’s major thrust in 2011 is to beef up its basic education

performance.This will include system-wide reforms like BESRA which will

be critical if we want all our Filipino children to be literate and imbued with

life skills.”

BESRA is a package of policy actions organized under five key reform

thrusts (KRT) to facilitate the attainment of the EFA goal and objectives. It

aims to systematically improve basic education outcomes nationwide. Its

KRTs include continuous school improvement facilitated by active

involvement of stakeholders; better learning outcomes achieved by

improved teacher standards; desired learning outcomes enhanced by

national learning strategies, multi-sector coordination and quality

assurance; improved impact on outcomes resulting from complementary

early childhood education (ECE), alternative learning system (ALS) and

private sector participation; and institutional culture change in DepED to

facilitate school initiatives and assure quality. Luistro explained that DepEd

is entrusted with the great responsibility of ensuring that the almost 25

million students under its care get the best education the State can provide.

DepEd is now fully implementing decentralization in education management

through school-based management (SBM) – where school heads are given

the responsibility to secure resources for the school through networking

with community stakeholders. Likewise, they are held accountable for the

desired outcomes.

6
 Another effort to improve the learning difficulty of learners is to assure

that pupils received proper nutrition. This is part of the UN Millennium

Development Goals (MDGs). Thus, The Busog, Lusog, Talino (BLT) School

Feeding Program is implemented. In this program, DepEd, through its

regional offices, identifies students nationwide who are malnourished. SBFP

beneficiaries are selected based on this database. For school year 2012-

2013, the program covered 40,361 (or a mere 7.56%) of the 534,054

identified malnourished students from kindergarten until Grade 6. The small

coverage is largely attributed to budget constraints, DepEd Assistant

Secretary Tonisito M.C. Umali said. DepEd’s SBFP budget for food is P15

per child and P1 per child for operational expenses, multiplied by 120

feeding days. This sums up to about P1,920 per child.

To top all the improvements, the Department of Education considered

overhauling the basic and secondary curriculum through the K-12 program.

Quoted from the statement of his excellency, President Benigno Aquino III

said,

“We need to add two years to our basic education, those who can

afford pay up to fourteen years. Thus, their children are getting the best

universities and the best jobs after graduation. I want atleast 12 years for

our public school children to give them an ever chance of succeeding.”

With this statement, more effort should be given emphasis to

Continuous Improvement Programs in schools . The researcher, being a

Master Teacher and a Team leader of the Continuous Improvement

Program of Sto. Niño Elementary school, aimed to conduct the study

7
focusing on the continuous improvement program to be able to find ways on

its better implementation that upholds better learners’ academic

performance and school leadership as well .

Statement of the Problem

This study attempted to determine the extent of the implementation of

Continuous Improvement (CI) and its effect on the learners’ academic

performance and school leadership in the selected schools of .NCR and

Rizal.

Specifically, it sought answers to the following questions:

1. What is the extent of implementation of the Continuous

Improvement (CI) Program as perceived by the school administrators and

teachers in the Public Schools in the following dimensions?

a. Task and Timeline

b. Budget and Resources

c. Stakeholder Analysis

d. Evaluation of Implementation Risks

2. What is the level of Learners’ Academic Performance in the

National Achievement Test?

3. What is the level of school leadership of the respondent school

based on the school head’s rating in the search for the most outstanding

principal of the year 2014-2015?

4. Is there a significant difference between the extent of

implementation of the Continuous Improvement (CI) Program as perceived

by the two groups of respondents? 8-11

5. Is there a significant relationship between the extent of

8
implementation of the continuous improvement program and the level of

learner’s academic performance?

6. Is there a significant relationship between the extent of

implementation of the continuous improvement program and school

leadership in the selected public schools of NCR and Rizal?

7. Based on the findings of the study, what quality education

assessment tool can be developed for the implementation of
Continuous Improvement Program?

Significance of the Study

The researcher believes that the significant findings of the study will

benefit the following groups of persons:

To the Schools Division Superintendents, the result of this study could

give them significant inputs on how to evaluate their C.I Programs based on

the quality assessment tool. The results of this study could give baseline

information or insights whether or not the CI program is properly

implemented and can be of real help in the school’s total development.

To the school heads, the results of this study could motivate and

encourage them to sustain improvement projects in their school with the

help of linkages and stakeholders from where they can outsource funds

through their leadership.

To the teachers, the results of this research can make them realize that

an improvement is a continual process and follows certain steps. That, they

can start in their own classrooms and be a helping arm of the school heads

in attaining better outcome.

To the pupils, who are the main beneficiaries of school improvement,

9
the results of this study will pave the way to a better learning. Thus, will

prepare them to become 21st century learners where they will be endowed

with values and competencies that will prepare them to become citizens

ready to build the nation.

To the parents and other stakeholders, their collaboration with the

school principals and teachers will further improve the educational system

where they can help directly or indirectly in attaining quality education which

every school is mustering.

Lastly, the results of this study could give inputs to future researchers in

conducting similar study using other variables for further improvements of

the CIP implementation.

Scope and Delimitations of the Study

This study was limited to the determination of the extent of

implementation of the Continuous Improvement Program and its effect on

the learners’ academic performance and school leadership in the two

divisions of NCR and selected schools of Rizal during the school year 2014-

2015. The Continuous Improvement Program covers four areas namely:

Task and Timeline, Budget and Resources, Stakeholder Analysis and

Evaluation of Implementation Risk;

The Learners’ Academic Performance was gauged in terms of the

National Achievement Test and school leadership was taken into account as

part of the study.

There were forty (40) school heads and 721 teachers who were the

respondents of the study.

10
 CHAPTER II

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter deals with the review of related literature and studies, the

conceptual model of the study, the research hypothesis, and the definition

of terms used in the study.

Review of Related Literature and Studies

To intensify the knowledge and clarify the perception of the problems, a

number of books and periodicals were read to gather insights which were

used by the researcher in conceptualizing this study. Those which have

been found relevant are hereby presented.

Related Literature.

Continuous improvement is an ongoing effort of school management to

improve education transfer, services or system and processes. These

efforts can seek “incremental” improvement over time or “breakthrough”

improvement all at once that will aid in making the teaching and learning

more effective. Among the most widely used tools for continuous

improvement is a four-step quality model—the plan-do-check-act (PDCA)

cycle, also known as Deming Cycle or Shewhart Cycle. Plan: Identify an

opportunity and plan for change based on new inventions in education

arena, innovations and systematic outcome; Do: Implement the change on

a small scale as trial over a period of time to specifically focused on its

execution; Check: Use data to analyze the results of the change and

determine whether it made a difference; and Act: If the change was

successful, implement it on a wider scale and continuously assess results

11
that may be adopted towards school development. If the change did not

work, begin the cycle again. Other widely used methods of continuous

improvement — such as Six Sigma, Lean, and Total Quality

Management — emphasize employee involvement and teamwork;

measuring and systematizing processes; and reducing variation, defects

and cycle times (Smiley, 2012).

A culture of continuous improvement is one in which individuals are

growing, learning and contributing to the overall goal. Schools, work

environments, communities and families have the potential to foster

continual improvement. Through ongoing communication, information

sharing, assessments and rewards, individuals and groups can progress

towards personal and organizational goals. Harvey (2012:12) discussed the

steps for developing a culture of continuous improvement namely: 1)

Communicate expectations - In a school environment, expectations may

include regular attendance, class participation and completion of

homework. All expectations should be communicated clearly and regularly

in order to develop a culture of continuous improvement; 2) Deliver

information and training - Continuous development requires advancement

in knowledge and skills. Schedule ongoing training sessions. Identify the

individual skills required for continuous improvement and provide

opportunities for group members to strengthen those skills. Training

sessions may take place daily, weekly or periodically, depending on the

particular skill; 3) Assess knowledge and skills - Whether in teaching a

group of students or managing a corporate team, use assessment tools to

gauge the progress of individuals. In a school, one might gauge progress by

12
administering regular exams; 4) Explain to everyone why they matter

- People need to know that their contributions make a difference. Their

ideas, questions and thoughts are all important contributions that can

potentially generate new and more productive ways of doing things. 5)

Provide encouragement in order to develop a culture of continuous

improvement - Praise individuals when they show progress in the mastery

of a specific skill. This is especially important when they have worked hard

to learn and improve. 6) Show consistency in approach - Whatever

strategies you use for engendering growth and development, stick with the

plan if it is working. Individuals need to know that the rewards program they

find so motivating will, in fact, be present 6 months down the line when they

have finally developed the necessary skills. 7) Allow room for

experimentation and mistakes - People learn through a process of trial and

error. Let students or team members feel that while excellence is the

ultimate goal, achieving it may involve experimentation and imperfection.

In another book authored by Hamilton and Wardwell (2012: 225),

continuous improvement in a management context means a never-ending

effort to expose and eliminate root causes of problems. This is also true in

school management and administration. Usually, it involves many

incremental or small-step improvements rather than one overwhelming

innovation to see to it that affectivity rises in a certain period at a different

level. From a Japanese perspective continuous improvement is the basis

for their business culture. Continuous improvement is a philosophy,

permeating the culture of education system, which seeks to improve all

factors related to the transformation process (converting inputs into outputs)

13
on an ongoing basis. It involves everyone, management and labor activities,

human resources, in finding and eliminating waste in machinery, labor,

materials and execution of services methods. The Japanese word for

continuous improvement, kaizen, is often used interchangeably with the

term continuous improvement. From the Japanese character kai, meaning

change, and the character zen, meaning good, taken literally, it

means improvement.

According to Mallad (2012: 53), the driving force behind continuous

improvement is dissatisfaction with the status quo, no matter how good the

school is perceived to be. Standing still will allow the competition to

overtake and pass any complacent institution of learning specifically in

private operations. The founder of Honda has been quoted as saying, "In a

race competing for a split second, one time length on the finish line will

decide whether you are a winner or a loser. If one understands that, he

cannot disregard even the smallest improvement." Although continuous

improvement involves making incremental changes that may not be highly

visible in the short term, they can lead to significant contributions in the long

term. This long term goals in education are planned ahead via framework

as basis for improvement check and monitoring activities. It is very

important in school management that administrators will be able to tract its

place and make a head over what they wanted to be in the future. Although

education is not merely a business benefit, the molding of minds is more

than important in the society which should be given utmost consideration

through improvement strategies.

In the same vein, school organizational performance can improve from

14
knowledge gained through experience. Lessons learned from mistakes in

administration mean those mistakes are less likely to be repeated, while

successes encourage workers to try the same thing again or continue to try

new things. While this learning process occurs throughout the school

system it is particularly important for accomplishing the long-term

improvement associated with continuous improvement. In order for

continuous improvement to be successful, the organization must learn from

past experience and translate this learning into improved performance.

Performance in school includes ability to increase graduates apart from

perpetual increase in enrolment over the years and to come. Most of the

time, drop-outs are also measuring records while the teachers’ ability to

motivate and train students in participation to national and international

undertakings and contest are also to consider. School improvement is not

merely increasing its resources like library holdings, buildings, supplies and

material resources. Include in the improvement considerations are

intangible development through the employee job performance and

teachers’ commitment to the school (Ninge, 2012:94).

Sean (2013: 66) postulated that part of the learning process is trying

new approaches, exploring new methods and testing new ideas for

improving the various processes in school management. So

experimentation can be an important part of its organizational learning.

Naturally, many of these worker-led experiments will fail, so it is important to

recognize that there is some risk associated with this experimentation. If

school management is uncomfortable with risk, it may be reluctant to allow

any real degree of experimentation. Obviously, management of schools

15
cannot risk disabling the service process itself or endanger the well-being of

the workforce, but the complete absence of risk can reduce the vision of

those involved in the continuous improvement process. Improvements will

generally come in modest increments of progress. Therefore, school

management must recognize that some experiments will fail as part of the

learning process, and avoid the temptation to harshly judge the perpetrator

as having new but unsuccessful ideas. Some even feel that it is critical to

establish an environment that reinforces the notion that risk is good. Again,

this involves consistency in school management's attitude toward change

and the empowerment of employees. This is more likely happening in the

introduction of new system in the education fields.

According to Bruce (2013: 87), the achievement of continuous

improvement requires a long-term view and the support of top

management. But it is also important that all levels of management actively

support and become involved in the process. Proper support structures of

training, management, resource allocation, measurement, and reward and

incentive systems must be in place for successful adoption. This includes a

willingness to provide financial support and to recognize achievements. It is

desirable to formulate goals with the workers' help, publicize the goals, and

document the accomplishments. These goals give the personnel something

tangible to strive for, with the recognition helping to maintain worker interest

and morale. Improvement is a matter that involves everyone in the

organization. It is not only the duty of the heads but also of those in the

rank-and-file, thus, the cooperation of everyone is enjoined for its

successful implementation.

16
 Hans (2013: 64) concluded that continuous improvement requires that

all employees in the school must be involved in the process. Every

employee must be motivated to accept the concept of continuous

improvement process as a means by which the school can achieve a

competitive advantage in the education arena. All involved must push

continuously at the margins of their expertise, trying to be better than before

in every area. Private schools have been very successful with the use of

teams composed of workers and school heads. These teams routinely work

together on problem solving. Moreover, the workers are encouraged to

report problems and potential problems to the teams; their input is as

important as that of school heads who monitors the progress. In order to

establish a problem-solving orientation, workers should receive extensive

training in statistical process control, quality improvement, and problem

solving. On the same stance, school heads must have the motivating factor

to continue with the process overboard through leadership enhancement

training and workshops.

According to Oswald and Warren (2013: 322), problem solving is the

driving force behind continuous improvement. Actually, it can be said to

become a way of life or a culture that must be assimilated into the thinking

of management and workers alike. Workers are trained to spot problems

that interrupt, or have the potential to interrupt, the smooth flow of work

through the system. When such problems do occur, it is important to

resolve them quickly. Also, workers are trained to seek improvements in the

areas of manual services reduction, set-up time and cost reduction,

increasing output rate, and generally decreasing waste and inefficiency. In

17
every improvement system, the most affected are those in the first line

services which causes unacceptable changing implementation. It is

therefore important that higher management must provide support system

that will hone the first line services to resilient the changes that may occur

in the process of improvement. This is done through reward system and

training and development strategies.

Unfortunately, workers in a continuous improvement system have more

stress than their counterparts in more traditional systems. This stress

comes not only from the added authority and responsibility but also from the

fast pace inherent in the system. There is little slack built into the system

and a continual push to improve. For this reason, schools stressing

continuous improvement have suffered severe criticism from some labor

unions. This is an integral part of the improvement but the most important is

be able to meet the labor demands halfway without compromising the

improvement plan. It is also important that improvement plans are

communicated to several ranks including the duty of having them

participate directly or indirectly to the process of improvement. Generally,

school personnel are happier to change if they have personal or actual

participation towards its change. They tend to have sense of ownership

over the change activities thus, support will be easy (Khalid, 2013:44).

Walter (2013: 60) discussed that organizational performance can be

evaluated by giving focus on all its processes or procedures that underlies

its operation. The increase in outputs, efficacy and effectiveness must be in

place and must be in continual height together with aiming to beat the target

set forth in the organization planning stage. Organization performed well,

18
literally, if one’s target are met and even exceeded for a certain period of

time. In as much as progress arises, it must be unremitted to consider a

rate of balance as among the period covered in the target or else, such

performance will be affected. Performance measurement are essential to

identify how well an organization works and how it made itself beneficial to

the administrators, employees and clients.

Relatively, Lewins (2013: 71) stated that measuring school

performance, or Instructional Accountability, has become an increasingly

complex game of numbers in rating schools who have improved in their

system every school years. As authorities look at these numbers it is

important to remember that they do not represent a direct linear comparison

where ranking is absolutely the measurement of success, although

commonly a basis of it. They are a measure of growth and improvement

rather than absolute performance. It is also important to recognize that test

scores are only one way of judging a school with its ability to train students

to answer national and international examinations that led to ranking

analysis. It is always encouraged to visit the schools, talk to the teachers

and find out which school will be the best fit for a child. A first ranking school

does not mean it can make improvement to a child which is not inclined to

its area of specialization. Thus, performance measurement is necessarily

being able to bring out the best to every learners at a different condition. It

is then the outcome of making the school as specifically identified in its

expertise as to whether it is academic in nature, technology enhancement,

skills development or its combination.

In the premise of Magarso (2013:84) about the education performance

19
index in Asian nation, it was stressed that the number of graduates and

drop out are always in the scenario. Graduates is the ability of the schools

to motivate the students to finish their studies on a year round analysis

while the drop outs are those who were not able to finish their studies on

time. On the other hand, it was cited that aside from these indicators, the

need to evaluate the school facilities that made the environment of learning

more acceptable and tolerable despite number of problems in the education

sector. It is also noted that sustainability issue must be emphasized in

identifying how well the school perform. Although ability and skills of

teachers were not questioned, it was strongly recommended that this area

is a must to empower the school in its aim of quality education.

School performance according to Sarrabi (2013:30) includes the

following cycle for improvement: 1) to standardize an operation in the

school and activities are planned in a yearly basis for everyone’s reference.

This is by showing to the stakeholders the entire activity of the school so

that they can tract if such was done in the period through setting up a target

in each action; 2) Measure the operational factors including time, quality,

quantity and some considerable influences in the school activities to be

attained; 3) gauge measurement against performance requirements where

comparison of the actual to target activities are evaluated; 4) innovate to

meet requirements and increase productivity. This is by monitoring activities

before the target are met and make analyzation if it can be accomplished

because as a matter of contingency, the school may innovate and stretch its

capability to be able to meet the target through a much simpler procedure;

5) Standardize the new innovative operation by making a check mark or

20
frame work to serve as baseline information towards development plan and

activities in the future; and 6) continue with the cycle until such time that a

new innovation is found to be more effective and go back to the first step.

Wedan (2013:192) discussed that in the modern climate of high-stakes

testing and educational accountability, the success of a school is measured

by the school's achievement of set performance indicators. These indicators

are intended to demonstrate how effectively the school is preparing pupils

to perform in the real world. While specific regulations vary from state to

state, in many areas, schools are graded upon whether or not they meet

these pre-set indicators and, in some instances, funding decisions are

made based upon the proven success of the educational institution. The

most commonly used performance indicator is standardized test results.

Standardized tests are intended to measure student comprehension in

relation to other pupils in the same academic year. In theory, schools that

are effective will produce students who score proficient on standardized

tests. Most states monitor individual school building as well as school

district standardized test scores and look for trends in test passing or failing.

In some schools, these scores are tied to job retention or bonus granting.

Many teachers argue against the validity of standardized test scores,

insisting that these tests are not a true measure of the complete academic

knowledge of student test takers and, as such, should not be seen as the

only measure of educational success or failure.

Related Studies. The study of Cruz (2012) focused on the assessment of

strategies employed by the school administrators in improving the school

performance. In the study, it was cited that the school’s ability to ask funding

21
from the external stakeholders are one of the utmost consideration in

school improvement. The support system that the stakeholders are giving

can be a source of fund that is at the disposal of the administrators. On the

other hand, there were stakeholders that specifically identify the

improvement focus of the funding that they are willing to give. On the other

hand, the internal supports in the activities of the school are on the next

rank. At times, change are being resisted from inside but the importance is

the ability of the administrators to cope up with such differences. Another

strategy is ask funding from private partners and non-governmental

organizations that are willing to share what they have to give credence to

the education system. Finally, administrators also give effort of improving

the status of the school to the community to ask for a better government

subsidy.

The study of Cruz and the present study seems the same in the area

where the focus is school performance identification although the location

and respondents including variables are not the same.

Canayon (2012) studied the management of school improvement

towards an institutional framework. The study put its concentration on

making a framework to serve as guide in the improvement work plan of the

school. The input contains the effort of the school management to maintain

the sustainability of the school financial resources, library resources are

also evaluated, human capital and skills training needs are considered and

technological capability are also looked into. Further, manner of

procurement and financing scheme are evaluated to serve as tool in

analyzation of the school’s ability to manage properly what it has owned or

22
is planning to own. The process of the study includes the focus group

discussion on the prepared framework to give meaning to the model and it

jive with the aim of the school. Finally, the output is the evaluated and

recommended framework for the school improvement.

The discussion in the study of Canayon is the same as the present

study because the consideration is on the manner of improving the school

which is similarly situated in the study of the continuous improvement

program of the Department of Education. Meanwhile, the studies differ in

terms of specific variables, output and respondents therewith.

Maruff (2012) made a study on school heads’ administrative strategies

towards attaining improvement of school at Cebu City. The descriptive

method of research was used in this research with two sets of questionnaire

used to gather the perceptions of the respondents. The highest rating was

given to the planning stage, decision-making stage and implementation

stage. It was indicated that it was very often practiced that school

administrators would include in the planning goings-on the consortia with

other institutions for the school development purposes. Relatively, decision

making are also concentrated on funding for the school improvement which

upshot to its implementation. On the other hand, monitoring and evaluation

is a little weaker since it goes with what the school already have for

development but fail to further evaluate the existing conditions of

improvement.

Thomas (2012) conducted a research on the improvement procedures

employed by administrators as it affects the development of the school. The

aim of the study was to make a system analysis of the school’s

23
improvement procedure and how its development are absorbed in a way

that it can help in meeting the most important aim of education which is

transfer of knowledge. The results revealed that improvement management

is necessary in order to provide the best for the leveling of the institution.

Data revealed that among the school administrators, they are more likely

convinced that scholarship grants are the best they have employed to meet

the student’s needs. Scholarship funding by the national and local

governments are very much employed while the private sector’s

participation are recognized as well. Education related institutions may have

some significant contributions but they often choose their recipients at their

own specified level which the school has no control of. As regard facilities

improvement, the administrators are very much inclined in having repairs

and maintenance but building structures are costly on their part. Most of the

time, structures are funded by the local government and national fund but

the school has no direct hand on it. Relatively, funding agencies are asked

by the administrators for help to be able to sustain the number of needs that

the school have. Although loans and aid are available for utilization, it is

always an utmost consideration to have the revolving fund as healthy as

possible to meet the demands of time. Technology focused is considered by

the administrators as one of the utmost on the list with the help of several

governmental organizations which have linked to techno-system and

design. Private sectors also can help at the degree that the private firm is

able or willing to give. Finally, so much of the funding agencies are willing to

shell out resources for technology based projects.

Both the study of Maruff and Thomas have similar topic with the present

24
study as to their discussions on school improvement system which is also

the focus of the present study. On the other hand, the location, variables

and respondents are different.

In the study conducted by Giocando (2010) presented during the 2011

research forum on annual agency in-house review proceedings in the

Kalinga-Apayao State College, it was found out that most schools in the

region needs further rehabilitation and that assessment must be done

periodically to help the management improve its services. Thus, tools in the

assessment of operation is proposed. Focused group discussions were

done so that stakeholders were involved in the process of making the tool.

The principals and school managers involve agreed to use the assessment

tools in their respective schools. The tool will help the administrative units to

assess their performance to be able to maintain or improve their services in

terms of sustainability, responsiveness, timeboundness and manner of

dealing with clients. It will also serve as guide to the managers in deciding

protocols in each day to day activities. It was also identified that ethical

standards in the service to clients must be maintained. The study also

revealed the following insights: 1) management of the school operations

must delegated to someone who is capable, qualified and honest, person

and 2) adequate facilities to maintain the good services are needed and

enhanced efficiency of the personnel in doing their job must be given

consideration.

The study of Giocando similarly chosen to have an assessment tool for

better operational services just like the present study. Personnel who

manned the management and facilities are also considered in both studies.

25
However, they differ in areas and variables included in the research.

The study of Blimpo (2012) presented in the International Research

Forum of School Management in the University of Mumbai determined how

well the school management of Yudaras Wittayalai School In Mai was

managed in accordance with the regulations given by the authorities and

achieve its development fund. The study involved 200 respondents from the

lower and upper secondary education levels and 150 teachers, Results

showed that physically, the school was clean and neat with appropriate

settings; and maintained regularly. The billboards also helped students have

knowledge of school processes and periodic operations. Information on

officials and how they can be reached are also posted and can be accessed

through a functional trunklines. Also, the bulletin board, detailing its

regulation, showed the steps of school services per respective office. In

addition, its time frame, opening at 6:00am and closing at 7:00 pm, was

established for the needs of the students, and for the access of the parents

after work. With this special function, the school was able to get a

development fund from the Asian Development Bank to increase the

capability of the school to enrollment and quality service to students. The

bank account management considered the transparency and accountability

framework of the school that ensure proper execution of services and better

feedback from clients.

The present study and that of Blimpo is similar in focus of school

development. However, Blimpo gave utmost importance to specific funds

given to the institution for its sustainability and improvement while the

present study did not only focus on physical and financial resources but of

26
the leadership and academic level of the pupils.

In another related study, Wangari (2012) evaluated the Watweruwan

School program and presented the results to the Research Institute of

Donghua University. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the

programs implemented by the school administrator during the academic

year of 2011 and suggest framework for its development plan. Respondents

included 296 students, parents and teachers. The study evaluated whether

the current program management of the school to meet quality education

was achieved and realized. Evaluation results revealed conserving context,

input processes, and production indicated in the performance in all aspects.

Details of the performance include: 1)students, parents, and teachers

understand the aim of the program and develop attitude of camaraderie and

school support system; 2) personnel budget and material are adequate, 3)

on duty teachers give or help in the school activities; 4) clean and greening

projects are implemented by the student councils; 5) and students are have

the intense initiation of development strategies. The study concluded that

school program was able to reach or achieve its aims for the quality

achievement of the school, the framework established was further

acceptable for implementation.

Although Wangari and the present study considered development of

school, they differ in their output since the present study proposed an

assessment tool while Wangari suggested framework for its development

plan.

As cited by Migosi (2012), a specific school must be provided with more

convenient atmosphere to stay and be a learning conducive area for the

27
students and teachers considering that they are the focus of the education

institutions. This problem has sprouted several instances and challenges to

schools in Metro Davao specifically the facilities available which are so

limited in nature which the respondents found to be fairly satisfactory.

Number of teachers are also a problem, the ratio and proportion of teachers

and students are fairly satisfactory in every room. The idea of maximization

of place was primarily considered by the school instead of better service.

The study further recommends to put up a additional buildings and improve

facility. The buildings may be acquired through the help of special education

funds of the locality. Tables and chairs which are light and movable may

also be purchased. Another proposal is to have a covered open area to

facilitate bigger activities.

Tanseco (2013) conducted a study on the school improvement

management of Ilocos Sur Polytechnic State College. The study tried to

identify the strengths and weaknesses in school management of the Ilocos

Sur Polytechnic State College in terms of instruction, research, extension

and production for the college. The study proposed the professionalization

of the faculty and employees by training them on instructional services with

separate training programs, and personnel development plans. It was also

proposed to establish a functional research team which will serve as the

arm of the school in establishing its research activities. Extension services

committee may also be establish to uphold the continuous implementation

of the extension office. Finally, the production office may be divided in

several areas like agriculture, sciences and technology areas to ensure

channeling of grants, aids and to avoid overlapping of work of project

28
managers per production activities.

The study of Migosi and Tanseco focused on school development

scheme and its sustainability which is also the intention of the study but

they differ in other areas of variables and output of the respective studies.

The study of Calim (2011) presented in the 2011 Multidisciplinary

Research Forum in the University of Northern Philippines focused on the

creation of a strategic plan for the Iloilo Polytechnic State College where the

main concern is private-public partnership as means for development. The

faculty and administration personnel were found to have high acceptability

on private institutions help for the school development; thus, the need to

semi-privatize the operations which involves quality production and

marketing is a must so that the school may be able to do its job while

private partners take charge of the other undertakings. In the same ground,

private partners may collaborate with other national and international

agencies for the benefit of the school specifically in tie-up operations

abroad which the school cannot handle on its own due to budget

constraints. The strategic plan includes the creation of a committee to

handle the overseeing and bidding of procurement and in the renewal of the

contracts signed in behalf of the school. The committee will also be involved

in the improvement mechanism for the benefit of the students and other

clients through development strategies like seminar, exchange

students/faculty, tie-up and research activities.

In the study of Rosa (2011) on correlating school administrator’s role in

school improvement and the teacher’s evaluation process revealed that a

moderate relationship exist between school administrators’ overall school

29
improvement and on teachers’ evaluation. This is based on support given

by the administrators and the trust of the teachers to them. These findings

were clarified through themes where there is a need to understand the

evolving priorities of the school in measuring the school performance and

teachers’ evaluation. An unanticipated findings that emerge from the study

was the variance in foundation relationships among school administrators

and teachers, main office administrators, and union leadership which further

used as tool in school improvement.

The study of Calim and Rosa are similarly situated with the present

study due to their mirroring on the role of school leaders on the school

development in either partnership with stakeholders or focusing on support

to teachers’ ability improvement. Meanwhile, the studies differ in other

selections of variables and also on the chosen location of the study.

Another study from Leithwood (2010) shows a great link of educational

leadership to students’ academic performance. The study demonstrates a

strong positive link between the leadership of the school administrators and

motivation of the students to be able to increase their academic

performance and level of learning outcomes. This was proven by the

uninterrupted achievement of the students in test administered to them,

including examinations conducted by local and national regulations to

identify how well the school perform in molding the students skills and

testing abilities. Further, it was noted that school personnel should be given

proper training with the conduct of training needs analysis to address their

upliftment as part of the school development.

Acosta (2010) conducted a study on school heads ability to improve

30
school performance. Based on the study, a little evidence was found to be

considered as relationship between school performance and school heads’

educational attainment and work experience. However, relationship was

evidenced on the community association and friendly attitude of the school

heads’ to the stakeholders. On the other hand, a mixed evidence on the

relationship between formal training of principalship and professional

development programs attended have great tick to schools’ ability to

perform. Enhancement program was further recommended where the

education department should be in-charge therewith.

Leithwood and Acosta’s study have similarity with the present study due

to their intention for school improvement in a continuous manner towards

school performance management. On the other hand, they differ in their

intended proposed output to addressed the weaknesses in the school

administration.

Theoretical Framework of the Study

The study is anchored on the Kaizen Management as a successful

approach in implementing change. Kaizen (the translation of kai (“change”)

zen (“good”) is “improvement”) is a method which became famous from

Imai’s 1986 book Kaizen: The Key to Japan's Competitive Success. The

processes indicated in this approach includes the following:

 Feedback: The core principle of CIP is the (self) reflection of

processes.

 Efficiency: The purpose of CIP is the identification, reduction, and

elimination of suboptimal processes.

31
  Evolution: The emphasis of CIP is on incremental, continual steps

rather than giant leaps.

Key features of kaizen include:

 Improvements are based on many small changes rather than the

radical changes that might arise from Research and Development

 As the ideas come from the workers themselves, they are less likely

to be radically different, and therefore easier to implement

 Small improvements are less likely to require major capital

investment than major process changes

 The ideas come from the talents of the existing workforce, as

opposed to using research, consultants or equipment – any of which

could be very expensive

 All employees should continually be seeking ways to improve their

own performance

 It helps encourage workers to take ownership for their work, and can

help reinforce team working, thereby improving worker motivation.

The elements above are the more tactical elements of CIP. The more

strategic elements include deciding how to increase the value of the

delivery process output to the customer (effectiveness) and how much

flexibility is valuable in the process to meet changing needs. This was the

basis of the researcher in citing Kaizen Management as one of the

theoretical foundation of this study.

Another basis is the CIP or Continual Improvement Process. The CIP-

concept is also used in Environmental Management Systems (EMS), such

32
as ISO 14000 and EMAS. The term "continual improvement" is used in ISO

14000, and is understood to refer to an ongoing series of small or large-

scale improvements which are each done discretely, i.e. in a step-wise

fashion. Several differences exist between the CIP concept as it is applied

in quality management and environmental management. CIP in EMS aims

to improve the natural consequences of products and activities. Secondly,

there is no client-orientation in EMS-related CIP. Also, CIP in EMS is not

limited to small, incremental improvements as in Kaizen, it also includes

innovations of any scale. This theory is another basis which structured the

necessary procedure towards improvement undertakings of schools. The

researcher cited the said concept so that areas of Philippine Education

Continuous Improvement Process may be taken in its chunk for innovation

in attaining its overall goal of quality and accessible education.

Frame 1 Frame 2
1. Implementation of the
Kaizen Management as a Continuous Improvement (CI)
successful approach in Program
implementing change
 Task and Timeline
Continual Improvement Process  Budget and Resources
refer to an ongoing series of  Stakeholders Analysis
small or large-scale
 Evaluation of
improvements which are each
Implementation Risks
done discretely, i.e. in a step-wise
fashion
2. Learners’ Academic
Performance
Governance of Basic Education
Act of 2001 (RA 9155)
 National Achievement Test
3. School Leadership

Quality Education Assessment Tool

33
 Figure 1. Theoretical Framework of the Study

Figure 1 presents Frame 1 showing the Kaizen Management, Continual

Improvement Process, and Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001 (RA

9155) which serve as theoretical structure of the study. On the Frame 2

shows the extent of implementation of the Continuous Improvement (CI)

Program, Learners’ Academic Performance in terms of National

Achievement Test and also the school leadership during the school year

2014-2015. Finally, Frame 3 presents the education quality assessment tool

to be proposed by the researcher. The connecting arrows show the

relationship that may arise from each of the frames that would be the basis

of the researcher in developing an assessment tool after the conduct of the

study. Each frame will have significant effect that would help in the

improvement of the implementation of the CIP in public schools. Continuous

improvement is very necessary for school administrators and teachers if

they want to achieve the mission and vision of the Department of

Education.

Conceptual Framework of the Study

Figure 1 Illustrates the conceptual framework which serves as guide of the

study. Specifically, it shows the input, process and output.

The first frame shows the input of the study: the respondents of the

study where the number of which shall be determined using the Slovin’s

34
 Formula and shall be chosen by stratified random sampling in the selected

schools. Contains also are the questionnaires, school data, learner’s

academic performance and school performance.

In the second frame, the process, includes the following: distribution,

administration and retrieval of the questionnaires and tabulation of data

gathered. Further, the statistical treatment of data and the analysis and

interpretation of the data and information gathered will be the next process.

Input Process Output

Extent of implementation of
Validation of the Continuous
Improvement (CI) Program
Respondents: questionnaires
in different dimensions.
 School administrators
Distribution, Level of Learners’ Academic
 Teachers Administration and Performance based on NAT
Retrieval of the
Questionnaires Level of school leadership
Questionnaires based on the school heads’
rating in the search for
School Data Tabulation of Data most outstanding principal
of the year.
 Learner’s academic Statistical treatment of
data Difference between the
performance based on extents of implementation
NAT of the Continuous
Analysis and Improvement (CI) Program
 School leadership interpretation of data on as perceived by the two
information gathered groups of respondents

Relationship between the

extent implementation of
the continuous
improvement program and
level of learner’s academic
performance

Relationship between the

extent of implementation of
the continuous
improvement program and
school leadership

Proposed Quality
Assessment Tool

35
 Feedback

Figure 1. Conceptual Model of the Study

For the third frame as output, the following was included: Extent of

implementation of the Continuous Improvement (CI) Program in different

dimensions; Level of Learners’ Academic Performance; Level of school

performance for the school year 2014-2015; Difference between the extents

of implementation of the Continuous Improvement (CI) Program as

perceived by the two groups of respondents; Relationship between the

extent implementation of the continuous improvement program and level of

learner’s academic performance; relationship between the extent

implementation of the continuous improvement program and school

performance; and the Proposed Intervention program.

Research Hypotheses

On the basis of the statement of the problem and the research

framework, the hypotheses that were used for this study are the following:

1. There is no significant difference between the extent of

implementation of the Continuous Improvement (CI) Program as perceived

by the two groups of respondents.

2. There is no significant relationship between the extent of

implementation of the continuous improvement program and the level of

learner’s academic performance.

3. There is no significant relationship between the extent of

implementation of the continuous improvement program and school

36
 leadership in the selected public schools of NCR and Rizal.

Definition of Terms

In order to arrive at a common understanding, the following terms used

in the study are hereby defined:

Academic Performance. It refers to the ability of the students to

knowledge that can help them in their journey of attaining better education.

It may also refer to the grades and rating the students acquire over a period

of time of teaching.

School Leadership. How school leaders guide and improve the

school’s performance, communicating and role-modeling the DepEd VMG.

Setting school goals, measuring and recognizing good performance and

encouraging continuous improvement, complying with legal and regulatory

requirements, promoting and ensuring ethical behavior, supporting key

communities.

Continuous Improvement. It refers to a long-term approach to work

that systematically seeks to achieve small, incremental changes in

processes in order to improve efficiency and quality in the institutional

management.

National Achievement Test. It refers to the examination being given to

student every period to know the extent of the knowledge they have learned

in their respective school.

Implementation Plan. Spells out the WHAT (needs to happen), WHO

(will do it), WHEN (it will be completed), and OUTCOME (expected results);

determines tasks and timeline; Prepare budget and resource requirements

37
Perform stakeholder analysis; Evaluate of implementation; and do risk

assessment.

CHAPTER III

Research Design

This chapter presents the method of research used, the sources of

data, the data gathering instrument, the data gathering procedure and the

statistical treatment of data.

Methods of Research

The study will make use of the descriptive methodology of research in

survey form towards its accomplishment. Descriptive method of research is

used to collect data at a certain specified demography and on a criteria set

to identify the problem of the study considering people’s behavior, practices,

beliefs, intentions, attitudes, opinions, judgments, interest, perceptions and

the like then such data are analyzed, organized and interpreted accordingly

(Calderon et. al.,2012:65). The descriptive research designs enable

researchers to label an understanding on a certain event or phenomena.

Johnson and Christensen (2012) discussed descriptive research as focused

mainly on providing an accurate description or picture of the status or

38
characteristics of a situation or phenomena considering a criteria towards

analysis of its concepts and systems.

In this study, the descriptive research will be used to make an

assessment of the extent of the implementation of Continuous Improvement

(CI) and its effect on the learners’ academic performance and school

performance in the selected schools of Marikina City. Further, learners’

academic performance and school performance, will be given attention in

the study.

Sources of Data

The main sources of data were the selected public schools in the

Divisions of Marikina, Quezon City and Rizal. There were two groups of

respondents for the study namely the school administrators and teachers.

The school administrators were selected through a total population

taking all of them as respondents. On the other hand, with the utilization of

Slovin’s formula, the researcher has identified the number of teacher-

respondents and select them through a stratified random sampling method

where an equal number of respondents were taken from each stratum of

the recorded population. Only those teachers with plantilla positions were

considered for the study and the distribution of which are presented in Table

1.

Table 1

Distribution of the School, School Administrator and Teacher

Respondents Per Division

39
 Sam
No. of
Divisions/Schools Percentage Teacher ples
School
(100%) Population 20
Head
%
Quezon City
1 100 69 14
Cubao
North F.V E.S 1 100 87 17
Balara ES 1 100 133 27
Lagro ES 1 100 88 18
Krus Na Ligas 1 100 86 17
Corazon Aquino ES 1 100 203 41
Batasan Hills National
1 100 460 92
H.S
North FV H.S 1 100 210 42
Balara N.H.S 1 100 89 18
Sub-Total 9 100 1425 286
Marikina City
1 100 80 16
Sto. Nino ES
Parang ES 1 100 117 23
Concepcion IS 1 100 91 18
Concepcion ES 1 100 76 15
Barangka ES 1 100 52 10
Kalumpang ES 1 100 35 7
SSS 1 100 84 17
Kapitan Moy ES 1 100 61 12
San Roque ES 1 100 38 8
Fortune ES 1 100 103 21
Marikina ES 1 100 61 12
Sto. Nino HS 1 100 50 10
Fortune HS 1 100 91 18
Sta. Elena HS 1 100 139 28
San Roque HS 1 100 38 8
Tanong H.S 1 100 73 15
Marikina Heights HS 1 100 51 10
Marikina Science HS 1 100 46 9
Kalumpang HS 1 100 35 7
Parang HS 1 100 97 19
Sub-Total 20 100 1418 283
Burgos ES 1 100 51 10
Justice Vicente Santiago 1 100
71 14
ES
San Mateo ES 1 100 71 14
Sto Nino ES 1 100 63 13
Ampid NHS 1 100 28 6
Burgos NHS 1 100 107 21
Francisco P. Felix Ext. 1 100 30 7
Guinayang NHS 1 100 41 8

40
Sn. Mateo NHS 1 100 148 30
Silangan NHS 1 100 76 15
Teresa NHS 1 100 71 14
Sub-Total 11 100 757 152
Overall Total 40 100 3600 721

The data in the table show that there were 40 administrators from the

Divisions of Marikina City, Quezon City and Rizal who were involved in the

study.

Likewise, it could be seen in the table that there were 3,600 total

teacher’s population from the three school divisions, hence, 721 or 20

percent were identified as teacher respondents based on the school data.

Data Gathering Instruments

The main instruments which were used in the study were the survey

questionnaire and school data. The questionnaire consisted of inquiry that

helped in making an assessment tool on the extent of implementation of the

Continuous Improvement (CI) Program which served as basis for

enhancement of its operation. It also consists questions relative to the

know-how of the administrators in Continuous Improvement (CI) Program:

Task and Timeline; Budget and resources; Stakeholders Analysis; and

evaluation of implementation risks as variables measured.

The questionnaire was developed by the researcher, reviewed by her

adviser and validated by the experts composed of supervisors, principals

and the former vice-president and dean of the graduate studies in Marikina.

The comments, suggestions and corrections were provided by the

validators and helped in improving the contents of the final copy of the

questionnaire.

41
Data Gathering Procedure

Following the final printing of the questionnaires, the researcher sought

permission to conduct the study through a letter from the Schools Division

Superintendents of NCR and Rizal. After the request to conduct the study

was granted, a letter to the school principals in the three divisions where the

study was administered was secured.

Thereafter, the researcher went to the respective schools to administer

the questionnaires. Retrieval was done after giving an ample time for

respondents to answer the questions posted. The data gathered were

tabulated, analyzed and interpreted for the completion of the study.

Statistical Treatment of Data

The data gathered were treated using the following statistical tools:

Weighted Mean. This was used to determine the extent of

implementation of the Continuous Improvement (CI) Program as perceived

by the school administration and teachers in the Public Schools.

The following shows the scale used in interpreting the data:

Numerical Value Range Level’s Descriptive Value

4 3.50-4.0 Very High Extent (VHE)
3 2.50-3.49 High Extent (HE)
2 1.50-2.49 Low Extent (LE)
1 1.00-1.49 Very Low Extent)

T-test. This was used to know if there was a significant difference

between the extents of implementation of the Continuous Improvement (CI)

Program as perceived by the two groups of respondents.

Pearson r. This was used to identify if there was a significant

42
relationship between the extent implementation of the continuous

improvement program and level of learner’s academic performance. The

same tool was used to search if there was a significant relationship

between the extent implementation of the continuous improvement program

and school leadership in the selected public schools of NCR and Rizal.

43