The Implementation of the School Improvement Plan: A Basis for a Training Program for Stakeholders

CHAPTER I
PRELIMINARIES

Abstract:
The following dissertation proposal presents the research-design based study and methods of implementing the School Improvement Plan, a five-year development plan which seeks to improve both the physical and academic aspect of a school for a more conducive learning environment for its target clientele. This dissertation will discuss some important factors in the School Improvement plan, such as the methodical approach that was use in formulating it and what are the conceptual frameworks that serve as its guidance.
The dissertation seeks to study how the said development plan was implemented by the school and what are the correlation of its purpose, goals and objectives to the stakeholders. Moreover, the intricate circumstances of how the SIP will serve as a basis for the personal development of the school’s stakeholders that will further contribute to the monumental improvement of its delivery of quality education whereas it can be effectively and efficiently delivered to its target clientele is also of primary concern for the study. This dissertation will invest in the ideological analysis that the five year development plan can serve as a tool to foster the improvement not only of the school but as well to its stakeholders, which has roles in the administration of the school. It is suffice to define the term “stakeholder” and to whom this study refers to as for there was a distinctive categorization of school stakeholders.
In its effort to reach a conclusion, the study will use qualitative and quantitative approach in a methodical manner in order to derive the optimum results. The study will apply literary analysis as its research design in order to interpret the data that will be gathered. In collecting the data that are needed for the context of the research, the proponent will observe environments that has implemented the School Improvement Plan. However, this study will not limit itself in isolated phenomena but rather broaden its network for a more concrete context for the research, in which every variable which is significant will be considered as necessary for the accomplishment of the results/findings of the study.

Introduction:
In every community there lies a school which serves as the primary institution that caters productive learning and character formation to the children of that community. As such, the school being a learning epitome is mandated to perform its two-fold task: the task of providing knowledge and honing the skills of its target clientele and the task of molding the moral fiber of the children by inculcating in them the proper values. In order to carry out this obligation the school must be equipped with the necessary resources that are use in fulfilling its function. All schools want their pupils/students to succeed, however due to some circumstances; this vision is somehow bog down as the lack of resources and dilapidated physical facilities leads or contribute to the inadequate delivery of quality education, as in the case of schools located in the rural areas of the Philippines, and as a research site for the study, here in Region VIII wherein the conditions of the school is far more behind compared to that situated in the urban communities. These schools are characterized with a substandard physical facilities and minimal educational materials that is insufficient for the learning of the children.
From this point of view, the School Improvement Plan, a five-year development plan which aims to improve both the physical and academic condition of a school was conceived as an initiative solution in line with the R.A. 9155 of the Governance of Basic Act Education and the School Based Management Program thrust of the Department of Education, it is in making a difference in which of school improvement planning concept was born. (DepEd, Handbooks for the Preparation of the School Improvement Plan, 2006)
SIP seeks first to determine the strength, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the school and then from this gathered data formulate analysis that will help solve the problems of the school. The School Improvement plan was conceived since the school can only make a lasting difference when they specific goals and strategies for change. School improvement planning is a process in which the school set goals for improvement and make decisions about how and when these goals will be achieved; and the ultimate objective of the process is to improve the pupils/student level by enhancing the way curriculum is delivered, improving physical facilities and creating a positive environment with a more conducive learning. Further, it also fosters and strengthens parents involvement in their children’s learning at school and home.
The purpose of the SIP is to serve as a road map that set out the changes a school needs to make to improve the level of achievement made by the students/pupils in the academic field. School Improvement Plans are selective in the sense that they help school administrators, teachers, parents and student’s council to know what to focus and what to do in the future. It encourages the teaching staff, parents and other stakeholder’s that are known to influence the student’s success, to have an up-to-date and reliable information about the performance of the students considering that the school will be able to respond to the needs of the students if the teachers, parents and other stakeholders have knowledge over this matter. A reason for this is that SIP serves as a mechanism in which the public can hold the school accountable for student success and through which it can measure improvement.
One of the first steps in formulating the SIP - a very crucial one - is the involvement of the teachers, parent, student council and community members and work to gather analyse information about the school and its students so that what is needed for the improvement of the school will be determined. Everyone involved in or interested in the operation of schools has a role to play in the improvement planning process. District school boards and superintendents of education play important roles in setting directions and in supporting and monitoring school improvement plans. The most important work, however, takes place within the school community itself. The principal, head teacher or the teacher-in-charge, as the persons responsible for administering the school and for providing instructional leadership, is ultimately responsible for improvement planning. But the entire school community should be actively involved in all stages of the process: planning, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating progress. As the plan is implemented schools continue to gather this kind of data. By comparing the new data to the initial information on which the plan was based, the school facilitators can measure the success of the improvement strategies. (DepEd, Ibid.)
Real change takes time. It is important that all partners understand this as they enter into the school improvement planning process. Incremental improvements are significant and should be celebrated, but it does not constitute lasting change. Therefore, it is best suited to have a five-year plan for SIP. During initial deliberations, or as time goes on, schools may wish to extend the plan for additional years to ensure that it maintain the focus and reach the goals. In any case, school improvement plans should be considered working documents that schools use to monitor progress over time and to make revisions when necessary to ensure that the plans stay on course. (Education Improvement Commission, November 2000)
During initial deliberations or as time goes on, schools may wish to extend the plan for additional years to ensure that it maintain their focus and reach their goals. In any case, school improvement plans should be considered working documents that schools use to monitor their progress over time and to make revisions when necessary to ensure that the plans stay on course. In developing their school’s improvement plan, the principal, staff, school council, parents, and other community members work through a variety of activities focused on three areas of priority: curriculum delivery, school environment, and parental involvement. For each of these areas, the school improvement plan will establish a goal statement, performance targets, areas of focus, implementation strategies, timelines and persons responsible for implementing the strategies, status updates and opportunities for revision. (EIC, ibid.)
In the implementation of the SIP school-community partnership or the inter-action between the school’s stakeholders is substantial for the school, considering that when there is a collaborative effort in the school community it results to various opportunities and help ensure the success of plans and activities. School-community partnership will enable schools to continuously perform better depends mainly on the ability of the schools to tap and use effectively and efficiently. As stakeholders they will work together and share the vision and accountability for the learning outcomes of students. It helps develop interventions to improve teaching process and draw greater support from the community. The inter-action between the stakeholders help the school undertake evaluation and determine the problems and the resources needed to improve teaching-learning process in order to formulate improvement plans. Moreover, it also helps continue to reengineer systems and procedures to increase the efficiency of the schools, procurement of goods and services, financial management, management information system and teacher welfare. As such, it is important to know the possible contributions that the school’s stakeholders will impart in the program of activities that is stipulated in the plan and in a larger sense the possible impact the implementation of the SIP can bring to the development of the stakeholders. (DepEd, Primer on School-Community Partnership. 2006)
Stakeholders has an important part in school empowerment, their crucial role is to transform the school into a more conducive learning environment. The term “stakeholder” in a larger sense is broad and for the benefit of this study should be defined as it is. Stakeholders are individuals who take part in the administration and facilitation of the programs and policies of the school. The term stake holder is categorized into two distinct aspects: Internal stakeholders and external stakeholders. Internal stakeholders refer to those individuals who are directly in connection in the implementations of programs in the school and serves as internal factors such as the school head, students and student organization, teachers (Non-teaching and teaching associations), school governing councils, parents of the students and parents association, therefore this term refers to those who belongs to the school community. On the other hand the, External Stakeholders refer to those who are outside the school community and are indirectly involved in the implementation of its programs but in one way or another contributes to the development of the school by providing the needed resources. Those that fall into this category are the various government agencies, local government units, local and foreign organizations. (DepEd, Ibid.)
This dissertation seeks to determine whether the implementation of the School Improvement Plan can serve as a model for a training program for stakeholders. Looking at the above mentioned definition, it is suffice to say that it said indictment is applicable only to the internal stakeholders considering that it is impossible to train the external stakeholders since they are indirectly involve in the school and are merely external factors whose contributions to the school are through the needed resources that these individuals provide. Therefore, the research will concern the internal stakeholders and concentrate its discussion for them in order to provide context for the study and to come up with the optimum outcomes.


Statement of the Problem:
This dissertation seeks to determine the correlation of the implementation of SIP to the development of the school’s stakeholders. Variables which will provide context to the study should be determine in order to come up with the sound and justifiable results. As such, the study should know what and where to focus by trying to figure out the substantial points that should be taken into consideration. Moreover, since the topic of the research will center on the implementation of SIP and its relation to the stakeholders, it is from these two where the data gathering should be initiated. Technically, in attempt to derive with a conclusion the study will aim to answer the following questions:
1. What is the nature and ideological background that serves as the backbone
for the concept of the School Improvement Plan?
a. What is School Improvement Plan?
b. What are the difference between a School Improvement Plan and
School Development Plan? Why is it drawn up?
c. What is the purpose of the School Improvement Plan and who are
involve in its formulation?
d. What are the time frames and logistics of the SIP and what are its
key phases?
2. How can the School Improvement Plan improve the academic performance
of the students?
3. In what way can the implementation of the School Improvement Plan
correlates with the school stakeholders? How will it serve as a basis for a
training program for the stakeholder?

Hypothesis:
This study will attempt to prove the following hypothesis:
1. That it is held the implementation of the School Improvement Plan can serve as a
basis for a training program for stakeholders.
a. that the SIP can serve as a draft for the improvement of the school’s internal
stakeholders since it has already define the weaknesses of the school;
b. that the training program of the stakeholders is in turn beneficial for the
school.

Major Assumption:
The Implementation of the School Improvement Plan, a development plan which aims to enhance the academic performance of the School is also a blue-print for a training program of the school’s internal stakeholders.

Purpose of the Study:
General:
The purpose of this dissertation is to determine the components of the SIP and know the correlational interference between its implementation and the stakeholders. It wants to learn the possible outcomes when the SIP is implemented and how the stakeholders will administer it. Further, this study seeks to discover in what manner the SIP can serve as a draft for a training program intended for the school’s stakeholders and in what manner can it contribute to the development of the school. Moreover, the intricate circumstances that there is a vis-à-vis connection between the implementation of the SIP and the stakeholder’s training program and the innate probability that it will foster the improvement of the school is also of this study’s primary concern.

Specific:
a. To know the nature of SIP and its ideological framework
b. To know it relevance to school empowerment
c. To determine the possible outcomes of its implementation
d. To connect it to the development of the stakeholders





Scope and Limitation of the Study:
The scope of this study will cover the components of the School Improvement Plan and altogether its implementation, monitoring and evaluation, specifically on the method it was implemented by the school. Its discussion will also present the involvement of its stakeholders and how will the SIP becomes a draft for a training program intended for the stakeholders. To provide context for the study, the proponent will observe various sites which has formulated or implemented the SIP and to what extent has the implementation had reached, in which the response of the stakeholders will also be put into consideration. The study will limit its discussion between the implementation of the SIP and its relation to the stakeholders and will not go beyond the topic. However, the study will not limit its context by gathering data on isolated phenomena but rather broaden its network in order to derive a better outcome for the study.

Significance of the Study:
This study will be relevant for those persons who are involved in the administration of the school and wants to have a deeper understanding regarding the School Improvement Plan and how it is implemented. More likely, it will benefit the readers since it will expand their knowledge on the subject matter and helps them in their substantial decision makings. Further, these will also serve as guidance for those who will indulge in a training program for stakeholders.

Methodology:
To come up with a concrete conclusion the study will apply as its research design the literary way of analytical thinking an interpretative method of approach using qualitative and quantitative methods in order to give substantial analysis to the gathered data and therefore come up with a more logical and reasonable results for the research study.



Definition of Keyterms:
In this dissertation some words were used by the proponent that are necessary for the study, however for the better understanding of the readers the definition are provided as follows:
SIP - (School Improvement Plan) A programme of action that a school
undertakes in order to effect improvement, especially in areas of
particular need but also of the school as a whole.
School Community Partnership - any relationship and collaboration between and
among educators, students, families and
community at large to work together in bringing
about better and improved school performance.
SBM - (School Based Management Program)
the decentralization of the decision making authority to school heads
wherein at school level school heads, teachers, students, parents and
community work together to improve the school’s performance.
DepEd - Primary legal agency that handles the education system in Primary and
Intermediate level.
Stakeholders - as defined in the study, these refers to the individuals who work or
participate in the programs of the school. It is categorized into two:
Internal Stakeholder - individuals who directly participate in the
programs of the school they are:
- School Head
- Teachers
- Students
- Parents

External Stakeholder - individuals who indirectly involve in the
programs of the school but plays an important
role, in which they mobilize the resources
needed for the school.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

In a study it has been found out that despite the clear commitment of governments and international agencies to the education sector, efficient and equitable access to education is still proving to be elusive for many people around the world. Girls, indigenous peoples, and other poor and marginalized groups often have only limited access to education. These access issues are being addressed with great commitment in international initiatives, such as Education for All, in which resources are being channeled to low-income countries to help them to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for education. However, even where children do have access to educational facilities, the quality of education that is provided is often very poor. This has become increasingly apparent in international learning tests such as Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), and Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), in which most of the students from developing countries fail to excel. There is evidence that merely increasing resource allocations will not increase the equity or improve the quality of education in the absence of institutional reforms. (Hanushek and Woessmann, 2007).
Governments around the world are introducing a range of strategies aimed at improving the financing and delivery of education services, with a more recent emphasis on improving quality as well as increasing quantity (enrollments) in education. One such strategy is to decentralize education decision-making by increasing parental and community involvement in schools—which is popularly known as school-based management (SBM). The argument in favor of SBM is that decentralizing decision- making authority to parents and communities fosters demand and ensures that schools provide the social and economic benefits that best reflect the priorities and values of those local communities (Lewis, 2006; and Leithwood and Menzies, 1998).
Education reforms in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries tend to share some common characteristics of this kind, including increased school autonomy, greater responsiveness to local needs, and the overall objective of improving students’ academic performance. Most countries whose students perform well in international student achievement tests give local authorities and schools substantial autonomy to decide the content of their curriculum and the allocation and management of their resources. (World Bank, “What is School-Based Management;” Novemeber 2007)
An increasing number of developing countries are introducing SBM reforms aimed at empowering principals and teachers or at strengthening their professional motivation, thereby enhancing their sense of ownership of the school. Many of these reforms have also strengthened parental involvement in the schools, sometimes by means of school councils. Almost 11 percent of all projects in the World Bank’s education portfolio for fiscal years 2000–06 supported school-based management, a total of 17 among about 157 projects. This represents $1.74 billion or 23 percent of the World Bank’s total education financing. The majority of SBM projects in the World Bank’s current portfolio are in Latin American and South Asian countries, including Argentina, Bangladesh, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Mexico, and Sri Lanka. In addition, a number of current and upcoming projects in the Africa region have a component focused on strengthening school-level committees and SBM. There are also two World Bank-supported SBM projects in Europe and Central Asia (in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and in Serbia and Montenegro) and one each in East Asia and the Pacific (the Philippines), and in the Middle East and North Africa (Lebanon). (World Bank, Ibid.)
The few well-documented cases of SBM implementation that have been subject to rigorous impact evaluations have already been reviewed elsewhere. The definition of SBM broadly to include community-based management and parental participation schemes but do not explicitly include stand-alone, or one-off, school grants programs that are not meant to be permanent alterations in school management.
SBM programs lie along a continuum in terms of the degree to which decision-making is devolved to the local level. Some devolve only a single area of autonomy, whereas others go further and devolve the power to hire and fire teachers and authority over substantial resources, while at the far end of the spectrum there are those that encourage the private and community management of schools as well as allow parents to create schools. Thus, there are both strong and weak versions of SBM based on how much decision-making power has been transferred to the school. The World Bank’s World Development Report 2004 (WDR 2004) presented a conceptual framework for SBM. The WDR argues that school autonomy and accountability can help to solve some fundamental problems in education. While increasing resource flows and support to the education sector is one aspect of increasing the access of the poor to better quality education, it is by no means sufficient. The SBM approach aims to improve service delivery to the poor by increasing their choice and participation in service delivery, by giving citizens a voice in school management by making information widely available, and by strengthening the incentives for schools to deliver effective services to the poor and by penalizing those who fail to deliver. (World Bank, Ibid.)
SBM is the decentralization of authority from the central government to the school level. School-based management can be viewed conceptually as a formal alteration of governance structures, as a form of decentralization that identifi es the individual school as the primary unit of improvement and relies on the redistribution of decision-making authority as the primary means through which improvement might be stimulated and sustained. (DepEd, “Primer on School-Based Management Program;” 2006)
Thus, in SBM, responsibility for, and decision-making authority over, school operations is transferred to principals, teachers, and parents, and sometimes to students and other school community members. However, these school-level actors have to conform to or operate within a set of policies determined by the central government. SBM programs exist in many different forms, both in terms of who has the power to make decisions and in terms of the degree of decision-making that is devolved to the school level. While some programs transfer authority only to principals or teachers, others encourage or mandate parental and community participation, often as members of school committees (or school councils or school management committees). In general, SBM programs transfer authority over one or more of the following activities: budget allocation, the hiring and firing of teachers and other school staff, curriculum development, the procurement of textbooks and other educational material, infrastructure improvements, and the monitoring and evaluation of teacher performance and student learning outcomes. (DepEd, Ibid.)
The theory behind School Based Management is the fostering of school empowerment that it might lead to quality education. Good education is not only about physical inputs, such as classrooms, teachers, and textbooks, but also about incentives that lead to better instruction and learning. Education systems are extremely demanding of the managerial, technical, and financial capacity of governments, and, thus, as a service, education is too complex to be efficiently produced and distributed in a centralized fashion. The idea behind choice and competition is that parents who are interested in maximizing their children’s learning outcomes are able to choose to send their children to the most productive (in terms of academic results) school that they can find. This demand-side pressure on schools will thus improve the performance of all schools if they want to compete for students. Similarly, local decision-making and fiscal decentralization can have positive effects on school outcomes such as test scores or graduation rates by holding the schools accountable for the “outputs” that it produced.
In the context of developed countries, the core idea behind SBM is that those who work in a school building should have greater control of the management of what goes on in the building. In developing countries, the idea behind SBM is less ambitious, in that it focuses mainly on involving community and parents in the school decision-making process rather than putting them entirely in control. However, in both cases, the central government always plays some role in education, and the precise definition of this role affects how SBM activities are conceived and implemented.
SBM in almost all of its manifestations involves community members in school decision-making. Because these community members are usually parents of children enrolled in the school, they have an incentive to improve their children’s education. As a result, SBM can be expected to improve student achievement and other outcomes as these local people demand closer monitoring of school personnel, better student evaluations, a closer match between the school’s needs and its policies, and a more efficient use of resources. (DepEd. Ibid.)
SBM has several other benefits. Under these arrangements, schools are managed more transparently, thus reducing opportunities for corruption. Also, SBM often gives parents and stakeholders opportunities to increase their skills. In some cases, training in shared decision-making, interpersonal skills, and management skills is offered to school council members so that they can become more capable participants in the SBM process and at the same time benefit the community as a whole. (Briggs and Wohlstetter, 1999)
One of the activities of the School Based Management Program thrust that has been imposed by the Department of Education is the formulation and implementation of the School Improvement Plan, which is a three to five years program of action which embodies the school’s mission and vision, and undertaken by the school in order to effect improvement, especially in areas of particular need but also in the school as a whole. It is drawn up in response to findings and recommendations made in its self-evaluation and in the external evaluation. A SIP serves to inform and guide the school towards improvement, address the areas of development, enable the school to be more effective learning institution, enhance the accountability of the school to take responsibility and ownership in addressing problem areas and foster collective and cooperative responsibility in regarding educational initiatives. (EIC, School Improvement Planning: Handbook, 2000)












CHAPTER III
DATA AND METHODS

Conceptual Framework of the Study:
The formulation of the School Improvement Plan started with the dream to make a difference in the delivery of education. The efforts of the Department of Education can be summed up with the new directions and policies that it undertakes to foster school empowerment and to enable schools to move forward optimistically into the path of monumental development. This dramatic shift was spurred by the enactment of the R.A. 9155 or otherwise known as “the Governance of Basic Education Act” which offers a clear indictment of general support for basic education through processes that empowers the schools. It’s on this premised that the view on the implementation of the School Improvement Plan was conceived, accordingly it was pointed out that empowered schools can become better and more effective learning organizations when given freedom to make decisions on what they think is best for the learnes. (DepEd, Handbook on the Preparation of School Improvement Plan, 2006)
The process of school improvement planning is a shared responsibility; it needs school-community partnership in order to realize its objectives. One basic indicator of a high performing and empowered school is the willingness of various stakeholders to work collaboratively for the development of the school. It is for the main reason that an empowered school takes full advantage of the diversity resources and the energies of the stakeholders for the development purposes of the school.
SIP is the main vehicle through which schools will walk to the path of improvement. It is carefully structured to focus on key goals and strategies which will lead to greater student learning and a more effective school organization. A SIP is a development plan which embodies the school and the community’s vision of the future as well as the strategies and activities that the school wants to undertake to attain its objectives and able school to negotiate development initiatives.

It is a comprehensive overview of major principles to which school stakeholders will be dedicated to at least five years. The SIP will describes areas which are needed to be prioritize and for which the school will commit its resources. Activities outlined in an improvement plan will take the school beyond the maintenance of present strengths towards a more conducive learning. Involved in the formulation of the SIP are the various stakeholders which comprise of all individuals that participates in the improvement of the school, the school administrators, teachers, students, parents, local government units and NGO’s, etc. With the involvement of the school and community, the school improvement process will be put in place of systematic method of upgrading the delivery of educational resources at school level. It involves the analysis of the schools priority improvement areas and setting appropriate areas. (DepEd, Ibid.)
The SIP has its legal basis. It was ground on the principles of the Local Government Code of the Philippines or R.A. 7160 which enables communities to be more effective partners in the attainment of national goals. Second is the Multi-term Philippine Development Plan that requires localized educational management that would enable schools to focus on enhancing initiative, creativity, innovation and effectiveness. Then the earlier mentioned Governance of Basic Education Act or R.A. 9155 that emphasizes decentralization of school governance. Another legal basis for SIP is the internationally supported School Based Management Program (SBM). Moreover, it is also supported by the Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda that provides package of policy reforms focused on Key Reform Thrusts that deals on the continuous school improvement through the involvement of the stakeholders. It is anchored on the principle that those who are directly involved in and affected by the school’s operations are in the best position to plan, manage and improve the school. Lastly, is the Schools First Initiative of 2004 which empowers educational leaders and stakeholders to focus on school improvement. (DepEd, Ibid.)
In formulating the SIP it is best to determine the areas that should be considered for improvement. The over-all objective of school improvement planning is an enhanced level of student academic performance, to effect real change the process needs to be focus on specific priorities. Student performance improves when teachers use curriculum-delivery strategies that specifically address the needs of the students, when the school environment is positive and when parents are involved in their children’s education. In planning improvements, therefore, schools should establish one priority in each of these three areas—curriculum delivery, school environment, and parental involvement. (DepEd, Handbook on the Preparation of the School Improvement. 2006)
Curriculum is the foundation of the education system. The Department of Education has published curriculum policy documents that set out expectations for student learning in each grade and subject area. These expectations describe the knowledge and skills that students are expected to develop and to demonstrate in their class work, on tests, and in various other activities on which their achievement is assessed. The policy documents also contain achievement charts (“rubrics”) that help teachers assess the level of each student’s achievement in relation to the expectations. The achievement levels are brief descriptions of four possible levels of student achievement. These descriptions, which are used along with more traditional indicators like letter grades and percentage marks, are among a number of tools that teachers use to assess students’ learning. To set a goal for improving the way curriculum is delivered, principals, teachers, school councils, parents, and other community members participating in the improvement planning process must understand the academic expectations set out by the DepEd and how well the students in their school are achieving those expectations.
Effective schools share a set of characteristics that add up to an environment that fosters student achievement. By setting goals to improve a school’s environment, principals, teachers, school councils, parents, and other community members can make their schools more effective places in which to learn. Highly effective schools are; possessed with a clear and focused vision, a safe and orderly environment, a climate of high expectations for the student’s success, a focus on high levels of student achievement that emphasizes activities related to learning, a school head who provides instructional leadership, frequent monitoring of student progress, strong home-school relations.
Research tells us that parental involvement is one of the most significant factors contributing to a child’s success in school. When parents are involved in their children’s education, the level of student achievement increases. Students attend school more regularly, complete more homework in a consistent manner, and demonstrate more positive attitudes towards school. These students also are more likely to complete school. Parental involvement helps a child succeed in school and later in life. To ensure parents are informed about and involved in their children’s education, schools must foster partnerships with parents. Because parental involvement is one of the most significant factors in a child’s success, it is crucial that all schools set a goal in their improvement plans for increasing it. With a better understanding of the three priority areas of the school, it can also give way to the creation of a program that will provide the stakeholders expanded knowledge that they may be able to understand more deeply the management of the school.

Research Design:
The study is compose of a discussion regarding the implementation of the School Improvement Plan and its possible correlation to the development of the stakeholders, which is a specific manifestation that the said study is an experimental one considering that the results are yet to be discovered. In order to derive with a justifiable conclusion, the proponent decides to have as its research design the literary analytical way of thinking using both qualitative and quantitative method of approach for a more sound experimental results. The qualitative part of the study will give interpretations to the data gathered while the quantitative part will serve as a medium that will prove the statistical problem of the study, in which variance analysis can give credit to an optimum finding. The “onion skin” research approach which has a multi-layered method of observation and analysis is best equipped for the study since it will help provide substantial evidence for its findings and its interpretation will be systematically treated, in which every layer will of discussion will be scrutinized under a microscopic eye.
Since qualitative research is a situated activity that imposes to the researcher to take part in the environment of the study in order to feel the fluctuating situations, the study will consists of a set of interpretive, material practices that will make the context more visible since these practices will transform every gathered data into a sound analysis for an optimum outcome. It’s for the reason that it turn the experimental sites into a series of representations, including field notes, interviews, conversations, photographs, recordings, and memos to the self. At this level, qualitative research involves an interpretive, naturalistic approach to the study. This means that qualitative research method prefers to study things in their natural settings and attempts to interpret any given variables that are significant to the study which proves that this approach implies a realistic view. Most importantly, since the researcher personally studies the environment, it gives opportunity to gain a better understanding through personal interaction and explore the directions that the research participants and their experiences may take that contributes to the reason why certain situation fluctuates.
The design of this study seeks to answer the issue by means of accomplishing the following characteristics that are essential for a concrete study as outlined is Garman (1994):
• verity (intellectual authenticity)
• integrity (structural soundness)
• rigor (depth of intellect)
• utility (professional usefulness)
• vitality (meaningfulness)
• aesthetics (enrichment)
• ethics (consideration of dignity and privacy of participants)
• verisimilitude (sufficient detail to warrant transferability)
By using the “onion skin method” gathered data will be screened in step-by-step and layer-by-layer, scrutinizing each element making a maintained steady progress as it will turn these variables into a substantial fact and at the end of the day will help the traps of tangents, irrelevance, data mismanagement or disorganization, shallow interpretation, bias, and weak analysis. On the other hand, the quantitative approach will give verifiable statistical indicators for the study and therefore provide a more logical reasoning as it proves what the study seeks to prove.

Research Methodology:
The research will use both qualitative and quantitative analytical approach in order to prove the assumptions of the study which concerns the correlational interference between the implementation of the SIP and stakeholders or in a more specific manner how will it serve as a blue print for a training program. since this dissertation aims to provide a deeper understanding of the said issue, by applying qualitative research, observations will be utilized by the proponent in order to determine the variables that are needed in order to come up with an absolute result. Since this is an experimental study, to justify the interpretative findings statistical operations and variance method of analysis should be applied, since it is significant to use quantitative analysis. It is also needed for the research to be back-up with a qualitative case study since it will provide additional context for the study. The qualitative case study will be grounded in an outline that:
1) investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident;
2) Copes with the technically distinctive situation in which there will be many more variables of interest than data points: and as one result relies on multiple sources of evidence, with data needing to converge in a triangulating fashion; and as another result, benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions to guide data collection and analysis.
The case study for this dissertation is bounded by several contexts, the students/pupils, the teachers themselves and their experiences in the delivery of values education program and the response of the students/pupils to it involve in the formulation and implementation of the School Improvement Plan. The study is situated within these interlocking contexts. The findings will be discovered through qualitative research techniques, in which the relationships and resulting interactions between the school and stakeholders will be considered. This analysis will provide the concept that the School Improvement Plan can become guidance for a training intended for developing the school’s stakeholders.




Data Analysis:
Qualitative case study research amasses huge amounts of raw data; therefore, it is essential to maintain the data in an organized and timely fashion. More importantly, preliminary data analysis must be conducted immediately post-collection or better yet, the right way to analyze data in a qualitative study is to do it simultaneously with data collection.
More specifically, an outline for a detailed procedure of data gathering and analysis - will aid the simultaneous nature of the work.
• coding (organizing and theming data)
• policing (detecting bias and preventing tangents)
• dictating field notes (as opposed to verbatim recordings)
• connoisseurship (researcher knowledge of issues and context of the site)
• progressive focusing and funneling (winnowing data and investigative technique
as study progresses)
• interim site summaries (narrative reviews of research progress)
• memoing (formal noting and sharing of emerging issues), and,
• outlining (standardized writing formats)
While these procedures were used in a large, multi-site study, research for thisdissertation will utilize a similar format, making a few changes to accomplish a similar task for a smaller study with a single researcher. This particular data collection / analysis will substitute transcribed interviews and written field notes for the dictated field notes; and it will combine the elements of summaries, memos, and outlines into a reflective research journal kept by the researcher. These procedures will attempt to organize the data as it is collected; such procedures mark a fine line between data collection and analysis, thus easing the task of simultaneous collection and analysis. After reviewing all the data sources, the materials will be manually coded and preliminary meaning generated from the interviews, observation field notes, and participant artifacts. The data analysis will proceed from noting patterns and themes to arriving at comparisons and contrasts to determining conceptual explanations of the case study.

Data Collection:
Data collection will be done in selected learning institutions in Region VIII. All gathered data from participant resources will be collected with explicit permission from the participants and in full compliance with review board. In accordance with qualitative research tradition multiple data sources will be collected. Data used in this dissertation is organized into four sets: the primary set is made up of interview data, which will comprise approximately three one-hour audio semi-structured interviews. This interview data will be triangulated by the following:
1) participant artifacts (lesson plans, classroom materials, personal reflection papers, and student/pupil participation or work), observations, and field notes (a minimum of five, one-hour field-based observations);
2) Teacher interviews
3) other resources including copies of district and state lesson design
guidelines for values education.
The use of interviews and observations are commonplace in qualitative case study research, it serves as one manner of obtaining an insider or perspective regarding the issues being studied.
The interaction between researcher and participant through the interview is, the establishment of human-to-human relation with the respondent and the desire to understand rather than to explain. Interviews with the participants will be semi-structured; this provides for consistent investigation of particular topics with the participant and basic introductory questions, but also affords flexibility to engage in natural conversation that provides deeper insight for the study.

Research Site & Participants:
The participants for this study are the teachers, administrators and students of the selected schools within the area of Region VIII that has implemented the DepEd thrust the formulation of the School Improvement Plan, and will serve as observation sites for the proponent and will provide data and context to the study, and being the variables will determine the result for this research.