1
|
|
2
|
|
3
|
|
4
|
- Sponsor: UNESCO National
- Commission on Social and Human Sciences Committee
(UNESCO- UNACOM)
- Proponent: PNU Manila
- Key Words: makabayan
- curriculum evaluation
- basic education
- Date Accomplished: April 18, 2006
|
5
|
Conceptual Framework of the Study
|
6
|
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
9
|
|
10
|
|
11
|
|
12
|
|
13
|
- Data Sources and Instruments
- The study aimed to answer three questions, first, ‘What is the general
knowledge of the program and attitude of implementers in terms of the
following : Supervision/Administration, Curricular Requirements,
Teaching Learning Process, Instructional Materials, Evaluation/Grading
System, and Support System?’
- To gather data for the first problem the following instruments were
employed: Principal’s/Supervisor’s Attitude Test and Teacher’s Attitude
Test; Achievement Test for elementary and high school teachers; and
Classroom Observation Guide for Demonstration Teachings (Basic
Education).
- The second problem asked ‘What are the strengths and weaknesses (if
any) of the program implementation in terms of the following:
Supervision/Administration, Circular Requirements, Teaching-Learning
Process , Instructional Materials, Evaluation/Grading system, Support
System?’ To gather data for the
second problem, the following instruments were used: FGD Guide for Grade
6/4th Year Students, Interview Guide for Teachers, FGD Guide for Parents
(used meta cards/3 sets of 10 per school), FGD Guide for Teachers (used
meta cards/3 sets of 10 per school).
- The third problem asked: ‘What is the students’ achievement level in
the Makabayan program?’ The
data-gathering instruments consisted of an Achievement Test for
Elementary and Secondary Students.
|
14
|
- Sampling Procedure
- The sampling design used in this study was that of a purposive type
under non-random or judgment sampling procedure.
- Criteria in the selection of respondents included teacher respondents
to reduce bias of self-report.
Superintendent, supervisors and principals were also included for
the purpose of validating further the responses of the students.
- Pursuant to this selection scheme, a total of 209 elementary and
secondary students; 106 demo and non-demo teachers; and 8
Administrators.
|
15
|
|
16
|
|
17
|
|
18
|
|
19
|
|
20
|
|
21
|
- 5. In the case of instructional materials, congruency of texts/
workbooks, PELC, manuals and guide was not much achieved .
|
22
|
- 6. Evaluation and grading system consisted of oral recitations,
performance tests, portfolio, and others. Evaluation results indicated
satisfactory performance of pupils and evaluation items were congruent
to the objectives of the lesson.
|
23
|
|
24
|
- 8. The achievement levels of the learners was glimpsed through the
achievement test result whereby the elementary pupils had an average
test score of 45.81 (57.27%) and the high school students, 60.46
(57.58%). The MSEP was
consistently noticed to be the least subject liked as evidenced by the
fact that it was the lowest average test score of the elementary pupils
(7.03 or 8.79%) and that of the secondary students (5.37 or 5.11%).
|
25
|
- Among the learners, only those from the Wasian Elementary School (WES)
had an average total score and frequency of grouped scores that belong
to the lower 50% of the perfect score (PS). Their teachers who took the same test
they did had for the elementary level 58.21 or (72.75%) and the high
school, 57.49 (54.75%).
|
26
|
- 9. Strengths in the implementation of the program included support
through appreciation and feedback, attendance to trainings, parents’
appreciation of their children’s acquired livelihood skills.
|
27
|
- 10. Some of the weaknesses identified were difficulty in applying the
effective approaches/ strategies/ techniques like thematic, integrative,
multiple intelligences, cooperative learning, HOTS and portfolio; less
qualified Music teachers ; extra assigned works; and more subjects
taught with less time allotted.
|
28
|
|
29
|
- 2. Conduct of programs to develop implementers confidence and attitudes;
to familiarize them with new
theories of learning and teaching, and theories of new innovations in
curriculum; to augment knowledge of special types of students; to help
change in practice by changing
metaphors of teaching; and to strengthen collaboration between
teachers and outside sources.
|
30
|
- 3. For teachers to be competent, they should be provided with
appropriate materials. They would
then be able to come up with coherent lesson plans ensuring continuity
and progression within and between subjects.
|
31
|
- REFERENCES CITED
- Atweh, B. et al. 1997. Communities of Learners for Professional
Development. PROBE-EDPITAF. Australia
- Balagtas, Marilyn. 1998. Strategies in Teaching Elem. Science,
Mathematics,and EPP. CHED-DECS-EDPITAF. Quezon City
- Calderon, Jose. 2004. Curriculum and Curriculum Development. Educational
Publishing House. Manila.
- Cohen, L.and Manion, L. 1997. A Guide to Teaching Practice (4th
Edition). Clays, Ltd. London
- Dep Ed Agusan del Sur Planning & Development Office. 2005. Dep Ed
Agusan del Sur Annual Report. Dep Ed Division Office. Prosperidad,
Agusan del Sur
- Dep Ed.2002. 2002 Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) Package. Dep Ed.
Pasig City
- Gay,L.R. 1992. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and
Application. Macmillan Publishing Co., New York
- Montesclaros,Antonio V.2005. The Implementation of Grade Six Makabayan
in the District of Merida, Division of Leyte: Proposed Lesson Guides
- Punsalan, Twila G. 2006. Research Project Proposal: An Evaluation of
the Implementation of the Makabayan Program of the 2002 Revised Basic
Education Curriculum. CCEEL,PNU.
Manila.
|
32
|
|