PROJECT BACKGROUND

The project School Based Training Program (SBTP) on Evaluation of Students Learning Outcomes was conceptualized after a thorough and careful analysis of the project proponent on the academic achievements of the school. The project proponent did a series of SUG tests and it came out that one of the major problems of the school that needed immediate solution was on the low academic achievement. One of the solutions was to conduct the above-mentioned training. It was based on the Decision Making Tool: Paired Comparison Analysis.
2

The Problem
One of the major problems of Osmea National High School was on the low academic achievements of the students. Based on the results of the 2004 National Achievement Test (NAT), the average MPS was 51.38% in the three learning areas tested (English, Math & Science). In the 2004 Regional Achievement Test (RAT), the school got an average MPS of 49.40%, which ranked number 7 among the 12 schools in Samar Division which were randomly tested. Looking at the 2005 NAT, the school mean percentage score was 39.81%. Based on the data above, it showed that the school was getting poor academic performance.
3

The Project
The project Three day School Based Training Program (SBTP) on Evaluation of Students Learning Outcomes was realized in 2006 to address the problem of the school on the low academic achievement of the students.

The Profile of the School

Osmea National High School is one of the secondary schools in Samar Division. It was founded in 1997 through the efforts of the local government of Marabut, Samar. The school is located along the National Highway in Barangay Osmea, Marabut, Samar which is about 400 meters from the barangay proper. It occupies a land area of 2.99 hectares donated by the Unimasters Conglomeration, Incorporated.
5

The Profile of the School

The school was administered by a Teacher-In-Charge (TIC) with eight (8) regular permanent teachers and six (6) provincial funded teachers. The school has 11 catchment barangays. In the school year 2005 2006, the students population was 432.
6

PHASE I (Planning, Appraisal & Design)

PLANNING After a thorough and careful analysis of the problems of the school, the project proponent being the TIC of the school, conducted a meeting with the teachers and the Parents Teachers Association and agreed to come up with a School- Based Training Program as one of the interventions on the low academic achievements of the students. The objective of the said training was to equip teachers with the knowledge and skills on the proper assessment and evaluation of students learning outcomes. 7

PHASE I (Planning, Appraisal & Design)

APPRAISAL

After the planning, it was determined by the project proponent together with the teaching staff of the school that the training was feasible and it went well as planned. Below was the expenses incurred during the training: Training Materials Php 675.00 Foods (snacks & lunch) 2,973.00 Honorarium of Resource Persons 2,000.00 Miscellaneous 340.00 TOTAL 5,988.00
8 Note: No registration fee was collected from the participants.

PHASE I (Planning, Appraisal & Design)

DESIGN Below was the training design / matrix
Time
8:00 8:45 8:45 10:00 10:00 12:00 12:00 1:00 1:00 3:00 Preparation of Table of Specifications Workshop 1 Preparation of TOS

Day 1 (January 8, 2006)

Registration Opening Program Review of Blooms Taxonomy

Day 2 (January 21, 2006)

Test Item Construction

Day 3 (January 22, 2006)

Performance-Based Assessment

Workshop 2 Construction of Test Item LUNCH BREAK Test Item Analysis Workshop 3 Test Item Analysis

Holistic & Analytic Rubrics

Workshop 4 Making of Holistic & Analytic Rubrics

3:00 5:00

Evaluation & Wrap-up

9

PHASE II (Selection, Approval & Control) Selection & Approval The Project proponent made a project proposal together with its training design and it was submitted to the office of the schools division superintendent for approval. The project proposal was approved on January 2, 2006 with the condition that the training will be done on a Saturday and Sunday.
10

PHASE II (Selection, Approval & Control) ACTIVATION In order to realize the project, the project proponent sought help from the Parents Teachers Association (PTA) for the funding need. The PTA shouldered the whole amount for the training. Resource persons were invited to discuss the different topics. The project proponent being the TIC of the school issued a school memorandum to ensure the attendance of teachers in the training.
11

PHASE III (Operation, Control & Handover) OPERATION The project proponent conducted conference with teachers to organize different working committees. As stated in the training matrix, the training workshop was done in three days. The participants elected their seminar officers to help facilitate the active involvement and participation of the participants.
12

PHASE III (Operation, Control & Handover)

CONTROL The project proponent did the supervision and control within three days during the training workshop. He made sure that the participants actively participated and submitted the required outputs.
13

PHASE III (Operation, Control & Handover)

HANDOVER After the training-workshop in January 2006, the project proponent left school in April 2006 to finish his masters degree. The project was handed-over to the new school head for the continued supervision, monitoring and evaluation of the project.
14

PHASE IV (Evaluation & Refinement)

EVALUATION & REFINEMENT After the three-day training-workshop, each participant was given a one page evaluation sheet and the result was consolidated by the analyst of the training and it was outstanding. When the project proponent left school in April 2006, there was no monitoring and further evaluation made by the new school head whether the teachers were applying their knowledge and skills learned from the training on the proper assessment & evaluation of students learning outcomes in their respective classes.
15

PICTORIALS

16

PICTORIALS

17

PICTORIALS

18

PICTORIALS

19

PICTORIALS

20

In every meaningful project undertaken for the best of intentions, initiators and prime movers usually encounter problems. However, problems arise to make one realize that in the implementation of programs and projects, seemingly insignificant details should not be taken for granted.
21