Table 7.3 summarises the changes in participation of external stakeholders in the four school sites and based on respondents’ accounts indicates areas where stakeholders were frequently and consistently engaged:
Areas of Participation
School Sites
Details of Activities Occurrence Frequency of Engagement
US1 US2 RS1 RS2 9155 Pre 9155 Post
Resource Mobilisation
(Financial)
For school-wide projects (fund raising activities e.g. popularity contests, etc.) Recurring Brigada Eskwela – education stakeholders provide financial assistance to procure materials e.g. paint
Recurring
For homeroom projects (fund-raising and procurement of learning equipment and materials Recurring Barangay assistance (e.g. faucets, mowing equipment, generator, etc.)
Recurring
Covering payment of school utilities (e.g. water, electricity) Recurring Resource Mobilisation (Human) Stakeholders provide manpower to prepare the school for the school opening (refurbishing school buildings, gardening, etc. Recurring City government assigned two police officers class days
Recurring Barangay designated POSO/CVO to maintain school safety Recurring Payment of salary of
non-teaching staff (e.g. cleaners, utility, security guards, etc) Recurring Attendance at School Activities
Information dissemination Recurring Participation in school programs (e.g. graduation) Recurring Attended parent- teacher meetings/card day Recurring
Attended PTA meetings
to discuss school issues Recurring
School Physical Improvement
The Supreme Student/Pupil Government implemented school improvement projects (e.g. waste segregation, hand washing area, parks, school letter blocks, identifying school policies e.g. public display of affection, etc.) Recurring Parents/Community funded construction of school facilities (e.g. drinking fountains, gym, water tanks, etc.)
Areas of Participation
School Sites
Details of Activities Occurrence Frequency of Engagement
US1 US2 RS1 RS2 9155 Pre 9155 Post
Teaching and Learning
Professionals from the community were tapped as resource persons to deliver topics linked to the curriculum e.g. blood typing, dengue awareness, etc.)
Occasional
Parents were tapped as story tellers in a reading comprehension project funded and implemented by a local company in the community Occasional Through a Memorandum of Agreement, community business establishments agree as work
placements for senior high school students
Recurring
Participation as Parent of the Day to assist in maintaining classroom discipline
Too early to determine
School Improvement Planning
Consultation Recurring
Problem Identification Recurring Solutions Identification Recurring Identification of priority
improvement areas Recurring Providing feedback of
perceived school issues to management
Recurring
Networking and Linkaging
Parents were asked to discuss concerns with other parents regarding their children’s
performance/ behaviour in school programs
Occasional
Linkaging with other government agencies (e.g. PAGCOR), business sector and the alumni
Occasional
Parents were asked to enforce school policies e.g. traffic
management, no loitering in school ground during school hours
Occasional
Hiring and Firing of
Personnel
Parents were involved in terminating the services of the project engineer contracted to oversee the construction of the rain walk Occasional Conflict Resolution The barangay
mediated and resolved a conflict between a teacher and learners.
Areas of Participation
School Sites
Details of Activities Occurrence Frequency of Engagement
US1 US2 RS1 RS2 9155 Pre 9155 Post
Advocacy
Assisted in disseminating information about the K to 12 program to parents and community
Occasional
School Project Implementatio n & Monitoring
Participation in Bidding process Occasional Monitoring project implementation Occasional Project adjustments (e.g. termination of project engineer); Occasional Student Progress Monitoring Involvement by signing the form and student-
at-risk interventions Recurring
Policy Formulation &
Implementation
Involvement with the implement of the Child Protection Policy in the school in addressing issues like bullying
Occasional
Formulation of school policies e.g. No smoking
policy, bullying, etc. Occasional
Table 7.3 Changes in the Patterns of Participation with Frequency of Engagement in the Research Sites
From Table 7.3, it is evident that, in all four school sites, the areas for frequent external stakeholders engagement were resource mobilisation (financial and human), attendance to school programs/activities, and in school physical improvement. Engagement in these areas of school management had occurred prior to and have persisted after the introduction of RA9155.
Thus, external stakeholders’ involvement in the schools is consistent with internal stakeholders’ perceptions of the reasons underpinning community participation in school based management which is premised on a resource-deficient state model.
However, school improvement planning was another area of recurring external stakeholder engagement across both urban schools. It is worth examining, therefore, with greater detail the extent and level of external stakeholder engagement in the preparation of the school improvement plan.
The Department advocated a participatory planning process through the introduction of a multi-stakeholder School Planning Team tasked to oversee the various stages of the preparation of the School Improvement Plan. Based on respondents’ accounts, although external stakeholders were involved in vision and mission setting in US1, stakeholders’ participation in both the urban school sites were generally confined to involvement in planning-related consultation workshops. Based on internal stakeholder’s accounts about the SIP process it was the teachers who exercised substantial influence in driving SIP preparation. Hence, although community involvement in the planning process had considerably changed from mere compliance, external stakeholders are still unable to participate in decision-making processes and exercise substantial influence over the school’s strategic direction.
While external stakeholders’ involvement in the area of planning does not determine with certainty that internal stakeholders’ are motivated by their resource-deficient state perspective of community participation this was made apparent during the review of the school improvement plans of the two urban respondent schools. Furthermore, the estimated financial requirement to support the implementation of the current SIP for both urban schools is Php 6,185,825 (AUD 162,784.86) and approximately Php 2,413,000 (AUD 63,500.00) of this is expected to be provided by external stakeholders (parents, local government units, etc.). Given this, it seems that the involvement of external stakeholders in the planning process was in part intended to raise stakeholders’ awareness of the extent of the financial shortfall affecting the ability of the school to meet its goals with the view of facilitating and generating support from stakeholders to implement planned interventions and attain planned objectives.
In the rural school sites, participation of external stakeholders in the planning process was practically non-existent. Based on internal respondents’ accounts, they updated their plans without the involvement of the parents and the community due to the tight
submission timelines. They also shared that previous attempts at SIP preparation were, at times, a ‘copy and paste’ exercise where they borrowed another school’s SIP and they ‘copied’ it with minor modifications. Similar to their urban counterparts, teachers were heavily engaged in plan preparation and that consultation sessions were also held to advise external stakeholders of the issues, programs and projects of the school.