Promoting Quality Universal Public Education Through Democratic and Strategic

Planning in Naga City

“I have given proofs as one who most wants liberties for our country and I continue wanting them. But I put as a premise the education of the people so that through education and work, they might have a personality of their own and make themselves worthy of liberties. In my writings I have recommended study and civic virtues, without which redemption is impossible. --JOSE RIZAL(Manifiesto, 15 December 1896)

Objectives

ObjectivesTo further contribute to the promotion of

quality universal public education in Naga City

To build upon Naga’s assets and initiatives in democratizing educational planning and management in the public schools

Context

The Philippine education context:

• Out of 1000 Grade Six elementary graduate students, only 6 are prepared to enter high school

• The Philippines is No. 41 in Science and No. 42 in Mathematics among 45 countries

• 1 in every 8 schools has a teacher-to-pupil ratio of 1:50 and above

• 1 in every 3 students does not have a single textbook

Situation in Naga before 2002

• Local School Board functioned merely as a local budgeting body, with minimal participation of stakeholders

• Dedicating the Special Education Fund mainly in physical facilities

• Average academic achievement level of students of 42%

Reasons for the decline in access and quality:

Not enough investment of public resources

1) Inefficient allocation of resources

2) Over centralized decision making fails to capture local knowledge and needs

Strategies implemented by the City

Lesson plans

Workbooks

Sanggawadan

Locally funded teachers

Brigada eskwelaAdopt a School

Incentive to teaching performance

Teacher training

CLICK strategy

Empowerment Fund

Construction and repair of school buildings

INSPIREQUEEN

Nutri-Dunong Surog AdalProject “Alliance for Learning”

Alternative learning System

DIVISION ACHIEVEMENT TEST RESULTS

NAGA CITY

0102030405060708090

100

cala

uag

caro

lina

conc

epci

on g

ded.

abs

ede

d. m

. abe

llade

l ros

ario

gran

view

j. riz

alj.

b. m

elito

nm

abol

om

acm

aria

nom

orad

a-ra

mos

NC

S I

NC

S II

paco

lpa

nicu

ason

r. v.

mar

amba

saba

ngsa

n is

idro

sant

a cr

uzta

buco

tinag

otri

angu

lovi

lla c

oraz

onvi

lla g

rand

e

SCHOOL

SCO

RES 2003 - 04

2004 - 052005 - 06

National Achievement Test 2005ELEMENTARY (Grade VI)Division English Science Math Total RankIriga City 71.33% 64.56% 69.41% 68.43% 1Naga City 62.15% 57.12% 61.01% 60.10% 2Catanduanes 61.35% 56.97% 61.44% 59.92% 3Camarines Norte 60.78% 55.75% 61.49% 59.34% 4Sorsogon 58.19% 53.65% 55.30% 55.71% 5Masbate 54.86% 50.08% 56.56% 53.83% 6Tabaco City 56.34% 49.58% 50.62% 52.18% 7Camarines Sur 51.80% 48.01% 51.43% 50.41% 8Sorsogon City 52.18% 47.90% 50.01% 50.03% 9Albay 51.71% 46.67% 49.66% 49.35% 10Masbate City 52.39% 46.38% 47.77% 48.85% 11Legaspi City 50.13% 45.68% 45.94% 47.25% 12Ligao City 45.10% 40.83% 40.81% 42.25% 13

SECONDARY (4th Year)Division English Science Math Total RankNaga City 60.61% 44.28% 58.79% 54.56% 1Catanduanes 55.63% 42.87% 59.70% 52.73% 2Sorsogon City 54.00% 48.31% 53.85% 52.05% 3Masbate 47.26% 34.85% 45.51% 42.54% 4Tabaco City 49.53% 32.06% 45.26% 42.28% 5Masbate City 47.82% 34.04% 43.81% 41.89% 6Sorsogon 45.12% 35.68% 44.80% 41.87% 7Camarines Norte 46.79% 33.63% 44.07% 41.50% 8Legaspi City 47.59% 34.20% 37.92% 39.90% 9Albay 44.69% 33.24% 41.50% 39.81% 10Iriga City 46.20% 31.17% 40.93% 39.43% 11Camarines Sur 42.82% 31.98% 40.11% 38.30% 12Ligao City 43.45% 29.61% 38.43% 37.16% 13

Findings

Findings: LSBOPPORTUNITIES CONSTRAINTS

Use as leverage for community involvement in education issues

Use of SEF budget only for operation and infrastructure

Participation of different stakeholders in strategic planning and implementation

Need of detailed, updated and comprehensive data base

LSB as a space for towards the improvement of the quality of education as a collective

Competing stakeholder interests fail to represent collective concerns

Provisions for EF Monitoring Committee

Weak monitoring, evaluation and feedback mechanismsNonfunctional Monitoring Committee

Findings: School ManagementOPPORTUNITIES CONSTRAINTS

Institutionalize channels for input (Annual Procurement Plan, teacher training, hiring)

Lack of input from teachers, students in allocation of funds

Training at a local level.Inclusion of teachers, principals, parents to increase participation, quality and regularity.

Low budget for teacher training

Inclusion of parent, teachers as means of capacity building and accountability

Unclear rules and functions of the School Governance Board

Zoning, disseminate information on quality of smaller schools

Oversized classrooms

ELEM EN TARY SCH O O L TEACH ERSN O . O F

STU D EN TSRATIO

AVERAG E CLASS SIZE

Triangulo E.S. 11 321 1:29 29B alatas E.S. 1 32 1:32 32Jose Rizal E.S. 11 378 1:34 34San Isidro E.S. 14 483 1:35 35Concepcion G rande E.S. 35 1217 1:35 35Sabang E.S. 40 1410 1:35 35Tinago Central School 25 882 1:35 35Panicuason E.S. 11 392 1:36 36Carolina E.S. 20 719 1:36 36M abolo E.S. 23 830 1:36 36Villa Corazon E.S. 6 222 1:37 37Pacol E.S. 17 630 1:37 37D r. D . Abcede E.S. 22 838 1:38 38N aga Central School 1 74 2822 1:38 38D on M . Abella E.S. 35 1344 1:38 38Sta. Cruz E.S. 28 1096 1:39 39N aga Central School 2 56 2267 1:40 40Julian B . M eliton E.S. 46 1882 1:41 41Tabuco Central S. 39 1600 1:41 41Calauag E.S. 28 1154 1:41 41R.V. M aram ba E.S. 19 785 1:41 41D el Rosario E.S. 8 331 1:41 41M ac M ariano E.S. 23 966 1:42 42Villa G rande E.S. 6 262 1:44 44San Rafael E.S. 3 137 1:46 46M orada Ram os E.S. 2 100 1:50 50Teodora M oscoso E.S. 2 100 1:50 50G ranview E.S. 9 514 1:57 57

Average 22 847 1:39 39

TOTAL 614 23,714

TEACH ERS AN D EN RO LLM EN T

DIVISION OF CITY SCH O O LS CITY O F N AG A

SY 2006 - 2007

AVERAGE CLASS SIZECITY OF NAGA 2006 - 2007

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Triang

ulo

Balatas

Jo

se R

izal

San Is

idro

Conce

pcion

Gran

de

Saban

g

Tinago

Cen

tral

Panicu

ason

Caroli

na

Mabolo

Villa C

orazo

nPac

ol

Dr. D. A

bced

e

Naga C

entra

l

Don M

. Abe

lla

Sta. C

ruz

Naga C

entra

l 2

Julia

n B. M

eliton

Tabuc

o Cen

tral

Calaua

g

R.V. M

aramba

Del Ros

ario

Mac M

arian

o

Villa G

rande

San R

afael

Morada

Ram

os

Teodo

ra Mos

coso

Gran

view

SCHOOL

NO

. OF

STU

DEN

TS

Findings: School Management

OPPORTUNITIES CONSTRAINTSUse of communication strategies (feedback, channels, information flow)

Hierarchical interaction between levels of authority constrains participation and innovation

Inclusion of teachers, principals, parents to increase participation, quality and regularity in teacher training, e.g. CSBTP

Inequitable access and limited teacher training.

Findings: Parents & StudentsOPPORTUNITIES CONSTRAINTS

Enhance participation in school governance (School Governance Board, Evaluation Committee, Monitoring Committee and Multi-sector Hiring Committee)

Lack of experience for active engagement in school governance and management

Queen Project, Brigada Eskwela for parental involvement

Low participation of parents in school assingments (low literacy rates and/or time constraints)

Findings: Parents & Students

OPPORTUNITIES CONSTRAINTSRepresentation in LSB, in school management

Lack of student participation in LSB

Sanggawadan, Alternative Learning System, SPED, Nutri-Dunong

Out of school children and youth

Guiding Principles

Guiding Principles of Decentralized Education

PlanningDecentralization reforms have a

positive influence on the efficiency and effectiveness of education service delivery:

(a) enables the service provider (i.e. the school) to make use of information about local preferences, and

Guiding Principles…

(b) increases the opportunity for the service receiver (i.e. the community) to hold the service provider accountable,

(c) which in turn can improve teaching and learning.

School Based Management Approach

School Based Management Approach

• a proposal to decentralize and debureaucratize school control and for shared decision-making in schools

• embodies an integrative perspective for organizing change at the school level.

• a practical approach, complete with identifiable milestones and operational guidelines to help various actors at the central, division, district and school levels tackle simultaneous activities on the ground.

PARTNERSHIPfunding

SBMSchool BasedManagement

COMMUNICATIONFLOW

coordination

VOLUNTEERISMmobilization

ALTERNATIVE LEARNINGAdult literacy,

Out of school youth

SBM APPROACH: STRATEGIC PLANNING

“Increased decision making autonomy for schools can increase efficiency by taking advantage of the superior knowledge that

schools have of conditions, needs and preferences of families and students, and of their greater accountability to families.”

“The continuous process of making present entrepreneurial decisions

systematically, and with the greatest knowledge of their futurity; organizing

systematically the efforts needed to carry out those decisions; and measuring the

results of these decisions against expectations through organized systematic

feedback.”

Source: Peter Drucker, 1974

Deterministic rational planning:

• specialization of tasks,

• strict and explicit chain of command

• strict formal rules and procedures,

• does not suit the complexity and diversity of people and communities

Strategic Planning:

• organic management system

• respects diversity and local conditions

• based on flexibility and adaptability

• relies on participatory decision making and horizontal communication.

Interactive Strategic Planning Works for:

• Instructional objectives

• Curriculum review and development

• Teacher performance review

• Student Assessment• Quality Improvement• Equity and Equality

goals

Deterministic Standardized

Planning Works for:

• Space allocation• Physical plant

construction• Cost analysis• Enrollment forecast

SBM in TEEP…• awakened and mobilized parents,

communities, and local officials to invest time, energy and resources in the future of their children; and

• produced leaders at all levels of the organization and across functions with thecapacity to manage change, providing them a positive, nurturing and liberating environment that allowed for mistakes while innovations bloomed.

Three TEEP Divisions Made It To The Country’s “Top Ten”

TEEP

ELS

TEEP

non

-ELS

ARM

M

Akla

n+

Cag

ayan

+

Iloilo

+

Pam

pang

a+

NC

R

SY 2002-2003

SY 2004-2005

17

14

1

9

6

16

5

9

3 31

5

0

41

4

02468

1012141618

75% Mastery Level

e.g. Biliran in the top ten divisions in 2004-05: from 44% in 2002-03, it rose to 72% in 2004-05

SCHOOL BASED MANAGEMENT: EVIDENCE

FROM KENYA

Recommendations:

• Decentralization of teachers hiring and firing procedures

• Provide funds for school committees to hire locally an extra

• Training of school committee on hiring and local monitoring of local teacher

EDUCATION DECENTRALIZATION

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS: COMMUNICATION AND

SOCIALIZATION

Recommendations

• Formal Communication Budgeting Process

• Logical and Motivated Sequence

• Lateral Communication

• Information and Sensitization Session

• Train-the-Trainer Workshop

Dilemma: Hierarchical interaction between staff constrains participation and innovation

Risks and Considerations:• Development of better communication

requires specific mechanisms

• To help ensure successful communication, guidelines are needed

• Cultural and religious media can be very effective

• Formal communication processes should be complemented by informal ones

Recommendations

Recommendation 1

Adopt a school-based management approach through new roles and functions of the School Governance Boards, particularly principals, teachers and parents.

Requirements

a. freedom to develop and adopt teaching and learning strategies appropriate to their conditions;

b. targeted focus on least learned skills, literacy and numeracy in the classroom;

c. enhanced teacher effectiveness through training and regular sharing of pedagogical experiences

d. instructional supervision of school heads made accountable for the performance of their schools; and

e. strong district and division support.

Recommendation 2

Reinvigorate the roles and functions of the higher levels of authority (e.g. superintendents

and supervisors) who will promote SBM, train and

supervise SBM promoters, oversee quality of SBM conduct

in schools, etc.

Recommendation 3

Create systems of continuous profiling, database development and uptake, research, monitoring, feedback and information flows within and between public schools, and between School Governance Boards, the District Division of DepEd, and the Local School Board.

Recommendation 4

Promote and develop culture of capacity-building in strategic planning and life-long learning among teachers, principals and

superintendents, including an open culture of sharing, exchange, continuous

learning and a reading culture among students and teachers.

Recommendation 5

Diversify sources of resource mobilization using strategic planning:

Requirements

a. Tap private-public partnerships or resource mix, e.g. community schools, taxation policies, real estate contributions

b. Expand the role of local volunteers from various sectors and organizations in supporting Alternative Learning Systems, QUEEN and other City-LSB Innovations

c. Create learning-related School self-financing schemes and cost-recovery

d. Develop home-based schooling and distance education.

Recommendation 6

Reallocate the Empowerment Fund based on identification of strategic needs and consideration of diversity and equity issues. Use combined clustering and targeting of schools, as well as clustering and targeting of recipients of subsidy programs within schools, to identify the most needy and to allocate resources more efficiently.

Keys to success of CCTPs:

• Well-designed conditionality• good monitoring and evaluation

system• sound targeting methodology• satisfactory supply and quality of

schools

Recommendation 7

Combine various options/programs to address demand-side constraint among poor families, e.g. information dissemination, life skills, decision-making skills, parenting skills, monitoring, financial incentives, etc.

Recommendation 8

• Endeavour to us locally- generated funds to augment teachers’ salaries to at least above poverty level lines

• Salaries of locally funded teachers must be comparable to regular teachers

• Use SBM and strategic planning for community economic development for teachers and poor families

Risks and Mitigation Strategies of

Decentralization

Risk and Mitigation Strategies…

• Advantages– Inventiveness– Context driven

• Risks– Central government abandoning its role– Privatization of education– Market efficiency– Susceptible to capture by local elites– Resistance from higher levels of authority

Risk and Mitigation Strategies…

• Challenges– Transparency in the use of resources– Dissemination of regulations – Quality driven goals

Denying equal access to

quality education

is to deny a child’s right to his or her future…

...is to deny his or her right to be happy in the Maogmang

Lugar!

Salamat Po!

Your Questions & Comments