Upload
donovan-dease
View
54
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Reinventing the Naga City School Board. Improving education outcomes. Outline. Our journey to improve basic education Where we are 3 years hence Getting there: 3-Year Local Education Plan Highlights Lessons Learned. Reinventing the Naga City School Board. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Reinventing the Naga City School Board
Improving education outcomes
Outline
Our journey to improve basic education
Where we are 3 years henceGetting there: 3-Year Local
Education Plan HighlightsLessons Learned
Reinventing the Naga City School Board
Conceived to make the local school board a vehicle for improving the public school system by promoting governance reforms and building stakeholdership at the local level
Guiding Principle No. 1
Education is a shared community responsibility– Impelled by reality that our nation
cannot depend on a central government agency alone to revive the basic public education system
– DepEd must partner with local communities, led by their respective local governments, to address this task
Guiding Principle No. 2
Shared responsibility must be twinned with shared accountability among public school stakeholders – Means (a) defining roles in the effort to
improve the quality of basic education, and (b) consistently reviewing performance of these roles
– Implies the need for provincial, city and municipal schools divisions and districts to be more open towards engaging with its partners
– Calls for creating mechanisms that will support more meaningful engagement and allow these partnerships to flourish
Problems facing Public Schools Deteriorating quality of basic education General lack of awareness about the current state of
public education among stakeholders Weak mechanisms for meaningful parent
participation in the education of their children Weak “soft infrastructure” support (textbooks,
reference materials, continuing professional development, etc.) to facilitate the learning process
Underperforming City School Board that has been reduced to a mere budgeting agency for local education funds
Weak local involvement and participation in the delivery of public education services
Weak planning and budgeting practices and processes that contribute to inefficient and ineffective use of local education funds, and
Lack of transparency and accountability in the administration of the public school system.
Comparative Performance2005 National Achievement Test (Bicol Region)ELEMENTARY (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
TIMSS* Results, 1999*Trends in International Math and Science Survey
43.12
61.00
71.12
43.12
60.88
75.50
TIMSS* Results, 2003*Trends in International Math and Science Survey
47.25
58.25
75.62
59.12
72.25
47.12
The Naga City School Board
JESSE M. ROBREDOCity Mayor - Chairman
NENITA L. RAMOSSuperintendent – Co-Chairman
MILA RAQUID S. ARROYOSP EdCom Chair - Member
SOLOMON SALESNACITEA President – Member
ALLEN L. REONDANGACity SKF President - Member
ABNER PARDIÑASCity PTA League President – Member
RODRIGO C. BELLEZACity Treasurer - Member
MA. FELICITAS SANTIAGONon-teaching Personnel President – Member
Legal basis: Sections 98-101, Title IV, Book I
Republic Act No. 7160 (The Local Government Code of the Philippines)
Traditional vs. Empowered School Board
TRADITIONAL EMPOWERED Functions: Budgeting Authorized SEF
disbursement Advisory, i.e. change in
name of public schools Endorse promotion of
education officials
Functions: Capacity building Performance measurement Resource mobilization and
allocation Procurement of SEF-funded
services (teachers, instructional materials)
Promoting participation Policymaking
Organization & Membership Eight-man board loaded in
favor of LGU
Organization & Membership Eight-man board (with voting
rights) Non-voting representatives
(NCPC, private schools, business chamber, media)
Naga Governance Model
Good Urban Governance
a function of leadership which local administration must provide. Seeks to build prosperity for the community at large
Progressiveperspective
enables city to tap community resources, multiplying capability and enabling it to overcome resources constraints
ensures long-term sustainability by generating broad-based stakeholdership and community ownership over local undertakings
Partnership Participation
Broad Strategies PRINCIPLE STRATEGY OUTCOME(S)
Progressive perspective
“HOME RULE” aka THE HALF-FULL GLASS
What the law does not expressly prohibits, it allows
A proactive school board that functions beyond merely providing additional budgeting support to DepEd:
Participative planning and budgeting Divisionwide achievement testing Performance-based teacher
incentives More transparent teacher
recruitment
THE BUDGET IS KEY
The School Board budget provides basis for activities that go beyond current laws on the LSB
2002-05 budgets were crafted with strong stakeholder participation
Budgetary provision for hiring locally-funded high school teachers paved way for teacher recruitment reforms
School board budgets authorize conduct of divisionwide pre-testing and post-testing. Results serve as basis for additional teacher incentives
Partnerships ROLE DEFINITION
Setting of rules of engagement minimizes potential conflicts
Operating principles:DepEd has mandate to provide basic education
City Hall gets involved because it is accountable for the Special Education Fund (SEF)
As taxpayers, local communities have right to demand quality basic education
RESOURCE COMPLE-MENTATION
Attains synergy: “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts”
City Hall: augmentation funding for public schools, expertise in governance
DepEd: operating funds for public schools, expertise in education
Local communities:oAdditional funding for school
and class-based projects and activities
oNGOs provide specialized services, particularly in alternative learning systems
Partnerships SPECIALIZATION Moving towards one’s core competencies
DepEd, partner academic institutions: core competency is education
City Hall: core competency is governance
Key is for City Hall to influence DepEd to embrace governance reforms in
o Transparency and accountability
o Planning and budgeting, ando Teacher recruitment
Participation GREATER STAKEHOLDER-SHIP
In all key aspect of project management
o SA – situation analysis
o PI – planning and implementation
o ME – monitoring and evaluation
More accurate needs assessment
More reliable, updated dataMore responsive budget, programs, projects and activities (PPAs)
Multi-level, multi-stakeholder performance review
o By school, at city levelo By sector (teacher, principal,
parents)
Key Accomplishments, 2002-04INVESTED MORE THAN P100 MILLION TO PROMOTE: QUALITY 1:1 textbook, workbook-student ratio in core subjects bridging
DepEd shortfall Standardization of quality instruction through printed lesson
plans. Annual localized pre-testing and post-testing. Transparent recruitment for the best teachers (close to 80 locally
funded teachers) Manageable class size (45) IT Programs (CLICK, Youth Tech
ACCESS, PCs for Public H/S, Computer Achievement Test, Teachers Training)
Significant improvements in achievement levels
ACCESS Standardization of school fees Sanggawadan extends assistance to 1,281 children and 1,281
parents to ensure stay of children in classrooms
STAKEHOLDERSHIP School Empowerment Fund PTCA – School Governance Boards
CAN IT WORK?Naga’s Academic Achievement Gains
Improvements are in line with “Low” (6%) and “High” (9%) annual target under the city’s education plan for the next 3 years
A qualified “yes” – depending on validity and reliability of testing. Cross-referencing with third-party testing. To be negotiated with DepEd
COMPARATIVE NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT TESTNaga City Schools Division, 1999-2005
Level 1999 2000 2004 2005Elementary 32.07 38.10 50.58 60.10
% Point Improvement 6.03 12.48 9.51 Secondary 37.26 47.09 48.31 54.56
% Point Improvement 9.83 1.22 6.25
Our short-term directions Quality public education as a
partnership between– Parents (individual and PTCA)– Students– School and community (incl DepEd, City Hall,
Barangay Council, other community stakeholders
One hour study time at home every day – after school hours
Homeroom PTA meetings to discuss students’ academic progress, not school contributions
“Brigada Basa” reading program Focused feeding program to address
nutrition problems of those in need
Sustaining gainsfor the long term Bring governance reforms to the
community level Deepen gains at the city level Reduce class size Optimize use of education investments,
assets and resources Pursue other measures:
– Strengthen local capability for testing– Assess teacher proficiency as basis for
continuing professional development– Establish high schools close to urban poor
communities, i.e. Pacol, Del Rosario
Community governance Anchored on proposed school
governance board that will be established in each school
The board will– Formulate 3-year school development plan– Assess resources, validate needs and
approve annual school budget– Review annual school performance– Monitor progress of school programs,
projects activities Its establishment may be legislated by
the Sangguniang Panlungsod
Composition
• Barangay captain • School head
• Faculty and Employees Association president• PTCA president • PTCA treasurer
• PTCA parent representative • Barangay committee on education chair
• Sangguniang Kabataan chair• Barangay People’s Council representative
• Student council president
Board to elect its chairman from its members
School head – chief executive officer
Potential fund sources (Per annum)
School empowerment fund
P100,000 per school
P3.5 million citywide
DepEd MOOE Around P95,000 per school
P3.3 million citywide
Barangay SK Fund
Around P163,000 per barangay
P4.4 million citywide
Barangay Development Fund
Around P327,000 per barangay
P8.8 million citywide
Deepening gains
School-level targeting anchors the proposed 3-year local education plan
City schools divided into five sub-groups according to achievement level. Annual target decreases as achievement level increases
Has four scenarios:– “Do-nothing” adopts the 2% annual percentage
point increase being targeted by the Naga schools division
– “Low” targets a 6% average increase annually– “Medium” targets a 7.5% average increase
annually– “High” targets a 9% average increase annually
A story of timelines This journey (to eventually raise average
achievement to 75%) will take a number of years
But “doing nothing” is not an acceptable option
40.00
45.00
50.00
55.00
60.00
65.00
70.00
75.00
80.00
85.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Year
Ach
ievem
en
t L
evel
Do-Nothing Low Medium High
Reduce class size Class sizes, and the corresponding cost, differ
under each scenario– Teacher requirement is based on actual sections formed– Cost of each additional teacher is assumed at
P50,000/school year (current budget for a para-teacher)– E/S enrolment is projected to increase 2% annually, H/S
by 5%
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOSE/S H/S Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total Average/Year
Do-Nothing 42 48 (9) 29 31 51 17 (0.46) 1.45 1.55 2.54 0.85
Low 40 45 44 31 32 107 36 2.18 1.57 1.62 5.37 1.79
Medium 35 40 178 36 36 250 83 8.92 1.80 1.78 12.50 4.17
High 30 35 356 40 43 439 146 17.78 2.00 2.17 21.95 7.32
Additional Teacher RequirementProposed Class Size
Cost (P000'000)
Cost (P000'000)
Cost (P000'000)
Cost (P000'000)
Resource optimization Increased budget on teacher hiring means
reducing spending in other mandated and priority areas of the school board– Instructional materials– Funding support for Palaro and similar activities– Capital outlay– Teachers’ COLA (?)
Maximize use of current textbooks, workbooks, lesson plans, etc.
Conduct A.M. and P.M. classes in congested schools to optimize current classroom capacity– There is also need for a DepEd policy statement
supporting the setting of enrolment limit based on the locally adopted target class size
Resource sharingFactor/Scenario Do-Nothing Low Medium High Additional teachers
• DepEd (7, P0.7M)
• City Schl Board (10, P0.5M)
• DepEd (10, P1M) • City Schl Board
(13, P0.65M) • Schl Gov Boards
(6, P0.3M) • Bgys (4, P0.2M) • SKs (2, P0.1M)
• DepEd (20, P2M) • City Schl Board
(32, P1.6M) • Schl Gov Boards
(16, P0.8M) • Bgys (11,
P0.55M) • SKs (5, P0.25M)
• DepEd (30, P3M) • City Schl Board
(58, P2.9M) • Schl Gov Boards
(29, P1.45M) • Bgys (19,
P0.95M) • SKs (10, P0.5M)
New Classrooms (New Elementary and High Schools)
DepEd (4) DepEd (6) DepEd (8) DepEd (10)
Repair and Maintenance
City Schl Board (P2M)
City Schl Board (P1M) Schl Gov Boards (P1M)
Capability Building on Testing
Tap local academic institutions
DepEd-NERTC Local academic institutions
Staff Development
Subject to availability of training opportunities
DepEd Local academic institutions Private training institutions
Maintenance and Operations
City School Board (P1M)
Division of City Schools (P3.3M) Schl Gov Boards (P1.1M)
Summing up We cannot improve what we do not
measure. This impels the need for – setting higher but doable targets, and – developing local testing capabilities to
accurately measure progress To increase ROI, we need to
– optimize use of existing education resources
– refocus use of available funding towards high-impact initiatives, e.g. reduction of class size
Share resources, responsibility and accountability with other stakeholders, particularly at the community level
An Emerging Paradigm Shift
The push towards decentralization
Highly centralized structure for delivery of public education
Less centralized structure for delivery of public education
Decentralized delivery of public education services
DECS DepEd “Principal empowerment” School-based management
Reinventing the Naga City
School Board
Greater community involvement
Bigger LGU role in service delivery
Lessons Learned Local education reform can be done in
the context of current legal framework LSBs are the most logical vehicle for
local education reform owing to its legal mandate under the Code
Shared responsibility goes together with shared accountability
Broad-based stakeholdership enhances outcomes by serving as entry points for greater and more meaningful stakeholder participation