RESEARCH COMPETENCY, WORK PRODUCTIVITY AND SCHOOL BASED

ACTION RESEARCH (SBAR) OUTPUTS ON DIFFERENT THEMES

IN COTABATO DIVISION

A Dissertation Title Proposal

Presented to the
Faculty of Graduate School of
COTABATO FOUNDATION OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Kidapawan City Campus

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirement for the Degree of
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
(Educational Management)

JOHN CLYDE A. CAGAANAN

July 2019
 CHAPTER I

The Problem and Its Setting

Research competency can be described as the combination of training, skills,

experience and knowledge that a person has and their ability to apply them to perform a

task (Viloria, 2015). However, US study conducted by Buckley (2010) revealed that the

difference between undergraduate research experiences across teachers found that

Education Program incorporated less research than any other discipline. In this

connection The American Association of Law Libraries (2016) revealed that researchers’

lack of fundamental research skills is complicated, involving many aspects of quality and

efficiency of research.

In 2013, Savaskan, in his study found out that experience with action research

showed that teachers were able to do research successfully and can achieve when given

opportunities and support. Research encourages teachers critically to identify the problem

and solved it. There is a need for an action research as part of teachers’ development

which focuses on their own real problems encountered within the learning or teaching

environment (International Journal of Innovative Interdisciplinary Research V2 12, 2013).

In the research conducted by Ado (2013), he claimed that in order to prepare

teachers for action research, teacher educators’ need to address research practice and

research time management skills during the period. For a teacher to work productively he

must develop the following individual goals, time management, taking breaks, eliminate

distractions, research productivity and instructional productivity (Gosadan, 2017).

 Burns (2011) stated that many teachers have put off research and the theories

about teaching did not match the reality. According to Atay (2012) it has been observed

that teachers do not have sufficient time and training in the conduct of research. Borg

(2012) emphasized that there was a need for awareness rising work involving research

because teachers may have inappropriate or unrealistic notions of inquiry in research.

DepEd Memorandum no.114 s. 2014 mandated the teachers to conduct action

researches or assessment within their realm. Basic Education Research Agenda (BERA)

suggested the following research themes: Teaching and Learning Child Protection,

Human Resource Development and Governance cum Cross-cutting Themes. Moreover,

D.M. No. 144, s. 2017 otherwise known as Supplementary Research Guides and Tools

aim to provide guidance for those who intend to conduct research.

In Cotabato Division Research Records indicated that there were only 1100

research outputs out of 8,300 teachers or 7.54 % who complied and passed School

Based Action Research (SBAR) submitted and approved by the School’s Division

Superintendent.

It is in the above premise that the researcher would like to pursue this study, in

order to determine the teachers’ research competency, work productivity and School

Based Action Research (SBAR) on different themes of the elementary school teachers in

the Division of Cotabato.

 Statement of the Problem

The study will be conducted to determine the research competency, work

productivity and School Based Action Research (SBAR) on different themes of the

elementary school teachers in the Division of Cotabato.

Specifically the study would like to:

1. Describe the profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1 age;

1.2 sex;

1.3 highest educational attainment;

1.4 length of service; and

1.5 number of research trainings attended;

2. Find out the level of research competency among the elementary school

teachers in terms of:

2.1. framing of research questions and capability of developing instrument;

2.2. critical review of the literature and comprehensive theoretical

knowledge;

2.3. data collection related competencies, and;

2.4. data analysis related competencies;

3. Determine the work productivity of teachers in terms of the following: individual

goals, time management, taking breaks, eliminate distractions, research
productivity and instructional productivity;
4. Determine the School Based Action Research (SBAR) outputs on different themes
as follows:
a. Teaching and Learning
b. Child Protection
 c. Human Resource Development
d. Governance cum Cross-cutting Themes

5. Determine whether teachers’ profile significantly influence School Based Action

Research (SBAR) outputs on different themes.
6. Determine whether research competency significantly influence School Based
Action Research (SBAR) outputs on different themes.
7. Determine whether work productivity significantly influence School Based Action
Research (SBAR) outputs on different themes.
8. Identify the problems encountered by the respondents on conducting research.

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored on following theories: Corey’s Theory on Curriculum

Development and Research, Lewin’s Theory on Research in Social Change, The

Pragmatism of Dewey and The Theory of the Dynamics Research Culture.

Corey’s Theory on Curriculum Development and Research tells that teachers

urged to do research in their own practice in order to improve skills in doing research.

Prior to that the only researches were expert outsiders who objectively researched social

situations. But Corey wanted teachers to research their own practices scientifically so that

they could evaluate their decisions and actions (Corey, 1953).

Action research according of Corey’s Theory is a process in which participants

examine their own educational practice systematically and carefully, using the techniques

of research. It is based on the following assumptions: Teachers and principals work best

on problems they have identified for themselves; Teachers and principals become more

effective when encouraged to examine and assess their own work and then consider
ways of working differently; Teachers and principals help each other by working

collaboratively and; Working with colleagues helps teachers and principals in their

professional development (Watts, 1985, p. 118).

Stephen Corey at Teachers College at Columbia University was among the first to

use action research in the field of education. Corey’s Theory believed that the scientific

method in education would bring about change because educators would be involved in

both the research and the application of information. Corey summed up much of the

thought behind this fledgling branch of inquiry. We are convinced that the disposition to

study the consequences of our own teaching is more likely to change and improve our

practices than is reading about what someone else has discovered of his teaching

(Ferrance, 2000).

Corey developed a collective form of action research, in which teachers and school

principals worked together on curriculum development with external researches. The

purpose of this collaboration, according to Noffle (1997) was the increased commitment

of teachers to change, an increased probability that the actions proposed to teaches

would be possible, greater range and variety of talent, a reduction of individual risk and

the prevention of feeling manipulation (Elsevier Inc., 2011).

Corey (1953) wanted teachers to research their own practices scientifically so that

they could evaluate their decisions and actions, modify and reformulate their plans. Corey

insisted on teachers' research being a cooperative activity which would support

democratic values.
 Corey believed that the value of action research is in the change that occurs in

everyday practice rather than the generalization to a broader audience. He saw the need

for teachers and researchers to work together. However, in the

mid 1950s, action research was attacked as unscientific, little more than common sense,

and the work of amateurs (McFarland & Stansell, 1993, p. 15). Interest in action research

waned over the next few years as experiments with research designs and quantitative

data collection became the norm.

Corey succinctly states that anyone who tries to get better evidence of the success

or failure of his/her teaching or administrative or supervisory activities and what he/she

does in the light of this evidence is conducting a type of action research (K.H. Smith,

2010).

The practice of action research by Corey’s Theory is again visible and seen to

hold great value. It is now often seen as a tool for professional development, bringing a

greater focus on the teacher than before (Noffke & Stevenson, 1995).

Another theory by Kurt Lewin (1947) on Lewin’s theory on research in social

change argued that communities that aspired to social change like the school would have

to study the impact of their own actions and explore their own norms and values. He was

the first person to use the term action-research, based on the assumption that methods

of social-science research could be applied directly to solve social problems. The basic

assumption was that each group that is involved in planning and carrying out the research

and in evaluating the research findings (Elsevier Inc., 2011).

Lewin’s theory on research in social change described action research as a

comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and
research leading to social action that uses a spiral of steps, each of which is composed

of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding about the result of the action. This step is

sometimes referred to as the Lewinian spiral (Wikipedia, 2016).

Lewin (1947), revealed that the underlying goal of the researcher is to test a

particular intervention based on a pre-specified theoretical framework, the nature of the

collaboration between the researcher and the practitioner is technical and facilitatory. The

researcher identifies the problem and a specific intervention, then the practitioner is

involved and they agree to facilitate with the implementation of the intervention (Masters,

1995).

Lewin’s Theory suggested the action research cycle and process as it follows the

following steps: Plan, Act, Observe, and Reflect. From the point of view of teachers and

teaching, it involves deciding on a particular focus for research; planning to implement an

activity, series of activities, or other interventions; implementing activities; observing the

outcomes; reflecting on what have planned and then planning series of activities (Nuňez,

2015).

The theory of John Dewey (1929) on Pragmatism stated that the interpretation of

educational situations began with reflection on pupil’s motives and problems. Teachers

were expected to think reflectively. Reflective thinking requires the continual evaluation

of beliefs, assumptions, and hyphotheses against existing data and against other

plausible interpretation of data. The knowledge that teachers construct in this way helps

them to change their teaching.

Moreover, the Theory of the Dynamics of Research and that research output is a

product of the dynamic relationship of the following research factors: The individual
attributes which will reflect the capability of the teachers to do research and secondly, the

institutional attributes which will contain the support of the institution to motivate the

teachers to carry out research endeavors.

Conceptual Framework

The study will focus on determining the research competency, work productivity

and School Based Action Research (SBAR) on different themes of the elementary school

teachers in the Division of Cotabato.

`As shown in Figure 1, Box 1 is moderating variable of the study which is the

teachers’ profile measured in terms of age, sex, highest educational attainment, length

of service and number of research trainings attended.

Box 2 as Independent variable of the study consisted of indicators used to find out

the level of research competency among the elementary school teachers in terms of

framing of research questions and capability of developing instrument, critical review of

the literature and comprehensive theoretical knowledge, data collection related

competencies, and data analysis related competencies.

Box 3 as one of the Independent variables of the study comprised indicators used
to determine the work productivity of teachers in terms of their individual goals, time
management, taking breaks, eliminate distractions, research productivity and
instructional productivity.

Box 4 is the dependent variable will be School Based Action Research (SBAR)
outputs on different themes in terms of teaching and learning, child protection, human
resource development and governance cum cross-cutting themes.
 The arrows between the two boxes shows relationship between the independent
and dependent variable used in the study.
Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Teachers’ Profile
 Age
 Sex
 highest educational
attainment
 length of service; and
 number of research
trainings attended?

Research Competency
School Based Action Research (SBAR)
a. Framing of research
outputs on Different Themes
questions and capability of
developing instrument Theme 1 -Teaching and Learning

b. Critical review of the literature Theme 2- Child Protection

and comprehensive
theoretical knowledge Theme 3- Human Resource Development

Theme 4- Governance cum Cross-cutting

c. Data collection related
competencies Themes

d. Data analysis related

competencies

Work Productivity
a. Individual Goals
b. Time Management
c. Taking Breaks
d. Eliminate Distractions Figure 1. Conceptual framework of the study.
e. Research Productivity
f. Instructional Productivity
 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ON

RESEARCH COMPETENCY, WORK PRODUCTIVITY AND SCHOOL BASED

ACTION RESEARCH (SBAR) OUTPUTS ON DIFFERENT THEMES
IN COTABATO DIVISION

PART I. RESPONDENT'S SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE

Name (optional): __________________________________ Age: _________
Sex (Please Check): male female
Highest Educational Attainment (Please Check):
Doctorate Degree Holder
Doctorate Level
Master’s Degree Holder
Master’s Level
Baccalaureate Degree
Length of Service:____________________
Number of trainings attended (in terms of research):___________________

PART II. RESEARCH COMPETENCY

(Adopted from Savaskan (2013). Readiness for action research: are teacher candidates ready to become an agent
of action research? International Journal of Innovative Interdisciplinary Research. 49-60.)

Instruction: Please rate your research competency by putting mark ( / ) on the options
corresponding on your choice with use of the following:
Scale Description Interpretation
5 Very Competent The statement is completely true.
4 More Competent The statement is generally true.
3 Competent The statement is moderately true.
2 Less Competent The statement is partly true.
1 Incompetent The statement is not true.

Framing of Research Questions and capacity of developing instrument

5 4 3 2 1
1. I can formulate a survey questionnaire.
 2. I can identify appropriate research instrument for my
research question.
3. I can generate information out of my questionnaire.
4. I can identify researchable question.
5. I can conduct the survey instrument in collecting data.
Critical Review of the literature and Comprehensive Theoretical Knowledge
5 4 3 2 1
1. I am skillful and knowledgeable about reviewing literature.
2. I can organize the review of related literature.
3. I can synthesize and critically review a body of literature.
4. I can distinguish my authors, references and other
literature cited.
5. I can locate related literatures in library clippings.
6. I can find research articles both primary and secondary
sources.
7. I can anchor my study on a theory.
8. I can analyze what is the best theory to be used.
9. I can make the conceptual framework.
10. I can conceptualized my study on a schematic
presentation.

Data collection related competencies

5 4 3 2 1
1. I can do a data collection through a questionnaire.
2. I can collect data through interviews, anecdotal records,
journals, group discussion and others.
3. I can communicate with others using the e-mail in the data
collection
4. I can use different means of data collection like
interviews, portfolios, questionnaires, journals, survey,
group discussion and others.
5. I can distinguish primary and secondary data from the
sources.

Data analysis related competencies

5 4 3 2 1
1. I can discuss the findings of the study.
2. I can formulate recommendation based on the finding.
3. I can identify different measurement scales.
4. I can interpret the data gathered.
 5. I can identify relationships between variables
6. I can forecast outcomes in data analysis.
7. I can analyze information through statistics.
8. I can determine sample from given population.
9. I can use appropriate statistical tool based on the
research problem and type of data.
10. I can generate data using appropriate statistical tool.

PART III - WORK PRODUCTIVITY

(Adapted from: Bea A. Gosadan, Ed.D. 2017 JPAIR Institutional Research, Philippine Association of Institution for
Research, Inc.)

Instruction: Please read the following statements and choose the responses (from 1=
Strongly Disagree to 5= Strongly Agree) that apply most accurately to you by putting
check ( / ) to the relevant columns.

Scale description interpretation

5 strongly agree
4 agree
3 moderately agree
2 disagree
1 strongly disagree
The item is always observed
The item is oftentimes observed
The item is sometimes observed
The item is seldom observed
The item is not/never observed

Statement 5 4 3 2 1

INDIVIDUAL GOALS
1. I do self-imposed deadlines.
2. I acknowledge micro-goals.
3. I keep vision in mind.
4. I create “to-do list”.
5. I acknowledge my potentials.
6. I understand my limits.
TIME MANAGEMENT
1. I track how much time is spent on a certain task.
2. I set a time to finish a task other than teaching.
3. I follow a “two-minute” rule.
4. I take time to finish a job one at a time.
TAKING BREAKS
1. I regularly take breaks.
2. I give myself something to eat during work break.
 3. I listen to music during break time.
4. I give myself something nice to look at during work break.
5. I give myself a nap during work break.
ELIMINATE DISTRACTIONS
1. I minimize interruptions in the job.
2. I learn to say “no” to those I believe as not my priority.
3. I get rid of time wasters.
4. I step away from social media during work.
5. I protect myself from unnecessary calls and messages during work.
RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY
1. I attend research seminars and workshops.
2. I present research outputs in local, national and international
conferences.
3. I published papers in national and international journals.
4. I print copies of my research for library references.
5. I share research findings and disseminate my research on-line.
INSTRUCTIONAL PRODUCTIVITY
1. I submit lesson plan/ DLL on time.
2. I use methods that fit my students’ needs and capabilities.
3. I employ more student activities and correlate it to life’s lessons.
4. I use visual aid examples to illustrate my lesson.
5. I use a system in giving and supervising tasks to my students.

PART IV - SCHOOL BASED ACTION RESEARCH (SBAR) OUTPUTS ON

DIFFERENT THEMES (source: BERA)

Instruction: Please rate your line of interest on research themes by putting mark ( / ) on
the options corresponding on your choice with use of the following:
Scale Description Interpretation
5 Very Interested The statement is completely true.
4 More Interested The statement is generally true.
3 Interested The statement is moderately true.
2 Less Interested The statement is partly true.
1 Not Interested The statement is not true.
 Research Themes 5 4 3 2 1
a. Teaching and Learning
b. Child Protection
c. Human Resource Development
d. Governance cum Cross-cutting Themes

PART V – PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED IN CONDUCTING RESEARCH

Instruction: Please check your rate on the number that corresponds to your perception.
Using the following scale below.
Scale Description Interpretation
4 Always a problem The statement is completely true.
3 Sometimes a problem The statement is generally true.
2 Rarely a problem The statement is moderately true.
1 Never a problem The statement is not true.

Problems encountered in conducting research 4 3 2 1

Background in Research
Poor background on Statistics for Research
Overlapping of Activities
Time Management
Administrative work
No manual/ sample research outputs
Lack of trainings on research
No institutional research support

Respondent’s Signature: __________________ Date: ________________

THANK YOU VERY MUCH….

JOHN CLYDE A. CAGAANAN

Researcher