LEARNERS’ EVALUATION FOR TEACHERS: BASIS OF INDIVIDUALIZED

TEACHING ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM

An Action Research Proposal Presented to the

Schools Division of Iloilo

Christopher G. Aguilar
Josefina C. Baylen
 2

Context and Rationale

The Philippine’s Department of Education has been applying great effort in

evaluating performance assessment systems to reassure teacher in two areas. First is

through DO 42, s. 2017 or the National Adoption and Implementation of the Philippine

Professional Standards for Teachers (http://www.deped.gov.ph/orders/do-42-s-2017)

and Results-based Performance Management System (RPMS) as stated in

DepEd Order No. 2, s. 2015. The Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers

(PPST) is aimed to determine the needs of teachers in both elementary and secondary

public schools as basis for professional development program and increasing teaching

performance. The RPMS is an effort of the Department of Education to actualize its

strategic goals and vision through a systematic approach for continuous and consistent

work improvement and individual growth (Able, 2016). In view of this, the researchers

sought to create another form of evaluation from the perspective of the learners to

complete a triangulation method of assessment and further edify the results of the two

evaluations found in PPST and RPMS

Perceptively, the results of the PPST and RPMS should be validated by the

learners’ evaluation since the increasing dilemma for teachers continues if they haven’t

received sufficient feedback from their principals, or they may have qualms concerning

with the improvement that they have made; consequently, they can provide erroneous

answers while making the self-assessment practice void.

Teachers may feel pressured thus affecting performance (Skills Recognition,

2017) when assessed by supervisors. Patricia (2015) reported that writing performance

appraisals is time consuming as some disadvantages of the assessments. Moreover,

Teacher Evaluation 2.0 reported that many teachers overwhelmingly responded

personal evaluations don’t give them useful feedback on their performance in the

classroom.
 3

On the other hand, more than 80 years of research confirms that well-designed,

correctly administered, and properly interpreted student surveys are valid and reliable

measures of effective teaching (Alaemoni, 1999 in Teacher Evaluation 2.0), often, those

teachers who excel in performance underwent student evaluations.

Pavia National High School through the Learners’ Evaluation Form for Teachers

can identify strengths and weaknesses of teachers’ classroom performance as directly

observed by the learners that might not otherwise observed by the teacher, master

teachers, head teachers, and principals within the school. The Learners’ Evaluation

Form for Teachers allows the teacher to zero in on the teaching needs and plan

accordingly by implementing class programs of the Department of Education to affect

positive changes in the classroom through mentoring of immediate supervisor/master

teacher.

Pavia National High School authorities may use Learners’ Evaluation Form for

Teachers anytime as time saving with appropriate feedback, and no pressures on the

students to evaluate teaching effectiveness. Thus, this survey form will be initiated for

validity and reliability testing as basis for proper evaluation and individualized

enhancement program but is limited to Pavia National High School practice.

Action Research Questions

This study will focus on the validation and determination of the reliability of the

Learner Evaluation Form for Teachers and to identify both the least and most dominant

domains as the basis of individualized teaching enhancement program.

Specifically, this study will seek to answer the following questions:

1. What is the evaluation of teacher’s teaching practices when the respondents

are grouped according to grade level?

2. What is the worth of Learners’ Evaluation Form for Teachers on classroom

management and instruction as suggested by students and teachers?

 4

3. What is the design of the individualized enhancement program for teaching

performance in terms of classroom management and instruction?

Proposed Innovation, Intervention, and Strategy

Learners’ Evaluation Form for Teachers will give the learners the voice to tell

what changes the teachers can make and what practices can they implement to help

them perform better in class. This is nothing to do with the content of the subject. It’s

general to what they can do to improve the learning process.

Mentoring base on the outcomes of the student evaluation for teachers: the

principals, assistant principals, head teachers, and master teachers will participate in on-

going teaching enhancement through provisions of follow-up teaching improvement on

quarterly basis during the academic year; and establishing school-based continual

review and refinement of teaching practices.

The activities, phases, and components of the conduct of research are as

follows:

Phase I: Validity and Reliability Testing

The proposed Learners’ Evaluation Form for Teachers will be subjected for

content, criterion, and construct validity by the experts in the field.

Phase II. Pilot Testing

The validated and reliability tested Learners’ Evaluation Form for Teachers will

be pilot-tested at Pavia National High School.

Phase III. Design of Enhancing Teaching Performance Program

The individualized enhancing teaching performance program will be designed

based on the results of the pilot-tested evaluation.

Phase IV: Feedback

 5

A feedback form about Learner Evaluation Form for Teachers will be given to the

learners who will evaluate the teacher; as well as the teacher who will be evaluated as

the basis of qualitative analysis.

The rating scale for the responses is presented below:

3-Yes- always/at all times/on all occasions

2-At Times- sometimes/occasionally/now and then

1-No- never/not at any time/not at any occasion

Table 1 outlines the Action Research schedule of evaluation sessions with stages of

concern, possible indicators, and relevant support.

Table 1
Schedule of Evaluation Sessions

Date Time Activities

January 21-25, 2019 7:30–12:00 Class Observation and Conducting

Learners’ Evaluation for Teachers

Class Observation and Conducting

1:00-4:00 Learners’ Evaluation for Teachers

The purpose of evaluation, as Everitt and Hardiker (1992, p.129) stated that it is

to reflect critically on the effectiveness of personal and professional practice. It is to

contribute to the development of ‘good’ rather than ‘correct’ practice. Rogers and Smith

(2006) posited that evaluation has two bases of either about proving something is

working or needed, or improving practice or a project. The first often arises out of our

accountability to supervisors, school heads and, crucially, the learners we are teaching

with. The second is born of a wish to do what we do better as Chelimsky (2017)

demarcated evaluation as an aid to strengthen our practice, organization and programs.

 6

Yonghong and Chongde (2006) also suggested that teacher performance

evaluation should find its theoretical foundation in teacher performance constructs. The

authors propose a new construct of teacher performance and make necessary analysis

for the construct of reliability and validity in empirical approaches. Marsh’s (2014) study

on students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness was perceived to be useful by faculty

as feedback about their teaching, by students for use in course selection, and by

administrators for use in personnel decisions. Thus, the students’ evaluation for teachers

will help identify teachers’ deficiency that can validate the RPMS and PPST results and

further improve teaching-learning process.

The results of the study of Frick, Chadha, Watson, Wang and Green (2007)

indicated strong associations among student ratings of first principles of instruction,

academic learning time, perceptions of learning gains, satisfaction with courses,

perceived mastery of course objectives, and their overall evaluation of courses and

instructors. They suggested that instructors through students’ evaluation can implement

the theoretically-derived first principles of instruction by challenging students with real-

world problems or tasks, activating student learning, demonstrating what is to be

learned, providing feedback on student learning attempts, and encouraging student

integration of learning into their personal lives based on the results of the students’

evaluation of teaching performance. Whereas Uttl, White and Gonzales’ (2016) meta-

analysis of faculty's teaching effectiveness had found a large correlation between

student evaluation of teaching ratings and learning.

Action Research Methods

The descriptive and qualitative methods of research will be suited in conducting

the present study as it is aimed to describe the weakest dominant domains of the
 7

teaching performance. Biton (2010) told that descriptive method of research gives

information about the population as Adena and Sylvester citing Merriam in Aguilar

(2012) define qualitative research as an umbrella concept covering several forms of

inquiry that help us understand and explain the meaning of the social phenomena with

as little disruption of the natural settings. Often qualitative studies are undertaken

because there is a lack of theory, or because the existing theory fails to adequately

explain a phenomenon. Since the concepts on the effectiveness of Learners’ Evaluation

of Teachers have yet to be examined through observations and intuitive understanding.

It is critical for the study to develop a strong theoretical foundation that will coalesce the

meanings, concepts, definitions, characterizations, and description of both evaluation

effectiveness and observation.

Participants and/or Other Sources of Data

The respondents involved in this study will be the junior and senior high school

learners of Pavia National High School and the teachers to be evaluated. To determine

the sample size of the respondents the researcher utilized the Slovin’s formula and

stratified random sampling method. The number of respondents will be determined

through a multi stage sampling since the population is stratified. Stratified in such a way

that identified subgroups or grade level in the population will be represented in the

sample in the same proportion that they exist in the population (Chandran, 2004). When

the number of samples per stratum or grade level will be obtained through stratified

random sampling, clustering by sections or strands will be employed utilizing fishbowl

method (Fox in Dela Cruz, 2008) since it is very likely to evaluate their teachers teaching

their subjects without disrupting their classes. The teachers will not be considered as the

respondents but subjects of the evaluation.

Table 2 shows the distribution of respondents by grade level.

Table 2
 8

Distribution of Learners by Grade Level

Grade Level Number Slovin’s Sample

7 1126 374 73

8 1063 374 69

9 1126 374 73

10 1044 374 67

11 808 374 52

12 628 374 41

Total 5795 375

Data Gathering Methods

The Learners’ Evaluation for Teachers with categories in classroom management

and instruction is adopted from the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers and

modified to suit learners’ span of attention.

The evaluation tool will be subjected for validation by the jurors of experts in the

field of education. The reliability testing will be conducted to a homogenous group but

not part of the study and will be analyzed through Cronbach alpha. Cronbach's alpha

decides the internal consistency or average correlation of items in a survey instrument to

gauge its reliability (Cronbach, 1951).

Permission to conduct the study will be forwarded to the office of the principal.

The approved permit will be attached to all the letters addressed to the respondents of

the study and their teachers of a particular subject together with the evaluation form.

Ethical Issues

The respondents and teachers will be independently informed to avoid biases

regarding the purpose of the evaluation. It must be clearly stated that the results of
 9

evaluation will be dealt with utmost confidentiality and intended for strengthening

teaching performance.

Data Analysis Plan

The data gathered will be subjected for statistical analysis using the following

tools: frequency count, to confirm the number of respondents and responses belonging

to a category; the mean, the weighted average of the whole or in short, the general

description of the population according to a specific category; rank, to determine the

degree of practices per category (OECD). The category of a certain domain with the

mean will be considered the least in classroom practices and became the basis of

designing the teaching enhancement performance program.

In interpreting the scores, the following arbitrary scales and interpretation were

used.

Range Response Point Description

1-1.69 Always 1 Can lead others

1.70-2.39 Seldom 2 Need enhancement training

2.40-3.00 Never 3 Urgent enhancement training

“Can lead others” simply means a teacher is mindful of the fact that he/she is the

instructional leader who understands and knows how to meet the learners’ learning

needs successfully within a positive environment. Teacher’s actions, including classroom

management must have outlined the importance of having a classroom where students

and teachers are clear on behavioral expectations as well as consequences for

inappropriate behavior. Teachers who falls on this category can train other teachers.

“Need enhancement training” means that teachers need teaching enhancement

conference with the Head Teacher to meet management and instructional goals in

connection to the lessons presented with seamless transitions between content delivery

and practice.
 10

“Urgent enhancement training” specifically means that the teacher and Head

Teacher should meet with urgency to address the specific gap of classroom

management and instruction.

Conversely, the comparison of more than two grade levels/strata means; the

one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) is the appropriate method. Hae-Young (2014)

noted that the ANOVA method assesses the relative size of variance among group

means (between group variance) compared to the average variance within groups

(within group variance). Qualitative’ methods will be used to answer questions about the

meaning and perspective towards the Learners’ Evaluation for Teachers from the

standpoint of the learners and the teachers. Qualitative research techniques according

to Hammarberg, Kirkman, and de Lacey (2016) include ‘small-group discussions’ for

investigating beliefs, attitudes and concepts of normative behavior. The feedback form in

this study will seek to understand the personal perspective of the participants through

thematic analysis.

Action Research Work Plan and Timeline

The objectives of this study will be achieved according to the following schedule

of activities, timelines, and duration of the activity. Table 3 presents the schedule of

activities in the conduct of the study.

Table 3
Schedule of Research Activities
Activity Timeline Duration

A. Planning
1. Preparation of the Action November 15-November
14 days
Research Proposal 29, 2018
 11

2. Submission of the Proposal to

Schools Division of Iloilo November 29, 2018 1 day

3. Preparation: Listing and

Clustering of
December 3-7, 2018 5 days
Sections/Strands.

4. Matching of Sections/Strands
and Teachers December 14, 2018 1 day

5. Orientation of the
Respondents. January 7-8, 2019 2 days

6. Preparation of Feedback
Forms January 10-11, 2019 2 days

B. Implementation
1. Soliciting principal consent.
January 14, 2019 1 day
2. Preparation of Evaluation
Forms January 15-16, 2019 2 days

3. Evaluation Proper (Pilot

Testing) January 21-25, 2019 5 days

4. Data analysis and

January 28-February 8,
Interpretation 9 days
2019
5. Design of Mentoring Teaching
Performance February 11-20, 2019 10 days

6. Implementation February 25-28, 2019 4 days

7. Feed backing March 4-8, 2019 5 days

C. Dissemination
1. Preparing Final Write-up March 11-22, 2019 12 days
2. Dissemination of Results May 20-24, 2019 5 days

Cost Estimates
 12

Shown in Table 4 is how the research will operate in terms of expenditures.

Items, units, unit costs, and total cost are included for transparency and accountability

purposes.

Table 4
Materials and Costs
Item Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
1. Bond Paper (Cactus – Short
5 reams 200.00 1,000.00
Size)
2. Pencils (Mongol 1) 70 pieces 7.00 490.00
3. Plastic Envelope (Short Size) 35 pieces 7.00 245.00
4. Record Book 1 piece 70.00 70.00
5. Ink 4 bottles 295.00 1,180.00

Grand
2,985.00
Total

Plans for Dissemination and Advocacy

Dissemination and utilization of evaluation results will be done in the school level

with the collaboration of the teachers, students, and administrator.

Dissemination and utilization will be done in two approaches:

First, evaluation results will be advanced to the office of the principal who will out

rightly schedule for a conference for governance processes. Then, the principal will

forward to the Department Heads and Master Teachers for analysis in aid for

individualized mentoring and specifying areas of concern in teaching for maintenance

and improvement purposes.

Second, the results will be presented during the Summer In-Service Training for

Teachers in 2019. It will be discussed thoroughly with the teachers. The roles of the

head teachers and master teachers in the enhancement program shall be likely

conferred. Then, in the preparation for the school year 2019-2020, the Learners’

Evaluation for Teachers will be fully implemented in the hope of not only validating the

RPMS and PPST results but in getting back the attention of the learners and bringing
 13

them back to the classroom through a competitive and innovative classroom

management and instruction.

Discussion of Results and Reflection

Results

Descriptive Data Analysis

The Evaluation of Teacher’s Teaching Practices by Grade 7 Learners

The evaluation of teacher’s teaching practices by grade 7 learners are presented

in Table 5.

The domain Invite with the category “let’s us learn to correct our mistakes” has a

mean a value of 1.72 with a standard deviation (SD) value of 0.729 is described as Need

Teaching Enhancement. Likewise, domain Spellbind with the “category provides

challenging performance tasks” has the mean score value of 1.80 with a standard

deviation (SD) value of 2.556.

Table 5
The Evaluation of Teacher’s Teaching Practices by the Grade 7 Learners
Domains Mean Standard Descriptor
deviation

makes me feel that he/she 1.44 .529 Can lead others

Consider cares about me

tries to understand how I feel 1.66 .562 Can lead others

about things with the subject

utilizes time for discussions 1.41 .525 Can lead others

Hold
manages student behavior 1.22 .452 Can lead others

explains clearly the topics that 1.18 .384 Can lead others
we covered
Resolve
helps me understand things 1.33 .562 Can lead others
when I make mistake

let’s us learn to correct our 1.72 .729 Need teaching Enhancement

mistakes
Invite .
let’s us engaged actively in 1.64 678 Can lead others
learning activities
 14

.
Spellbind makes our lessons interesting 1.56 542 Can lead others

provides challenging 1.80 2.556 Need Teaching Enhancement

performance tasks

respects my ideas and 1.80 .567 Need Teaching Enhancement

Agree responses

makes me comfortable in 1.49 .658 Can lead others

sharing my ideas to the class

gives feedback on work and 1.46 .558 Can lead others

exams as basis for
Fortify improvement
.
checks for understanding of 1.48 .559 Can lead others
the lessons

Table 6 descritive implication

Table 6
The Evaluation of Teacher’s Teaching Practices by the Grade 8 Learners
Domains Mean Standard Descriptor
deviation

makes me feel that he/she cares 1.47 1.376 Can lead others
about me

Consider tries to understand how I feel 1.71 .490 Need Teaching Enhancement
about things with the subject

utilizes time for discussions 1.40 .522 Can lead others

Hold

manages student behavior 1.18 .384 Can lead others

explains clearly the topics that 1.07 .263 Can lead others
we covered
Resolve
helps me understand things 1.53 2.434 Can lead others
when I make mistake

let’s us learn to correct our 1.53 .634 Can lead others

mistakes
 15

Invite
let’s us engaged actively in 1.47 .585 Can lead others
learning activities

makes our lessons interesting 1.53 .532 Can lead others

Spellbind

provides challenging 1.72 .569 Need Teaching Enhancement

performance tasks

respects my ideas and 1.50 .533 Can lead others

Agree responses

makes me comfortable in sharing 1.65 .593 Can lead others

my ideas to the class

gives feedback on work and 1.22 .418 Can lead others

exams as basis for improvement
Fortify
checks for understanding of the 1.30 .461 Can lead others
lessons

Description implication

Table 7
The Evaluation of Teacher’s Teaching Practices by the Grade 9 Learners
Domains Mean Standard Descriptor
deviation

makes me feel that he/she 1.21 .409 Can lead others

cares about me

Consider tries to understand how I feel 1.31 .537 Can lead others
about things with the subject

utilizes time for discussions 1.29 .530 Can lead others

Hold
manages student behavior 1.19 .395 Can lead others

explains clearly the topics that 1.21 .450 Can lead others
we covered
Resolve
helps me understand things 1.36 .552 Can lead others
when I make mistake

let’s us learn to correct our 1.57 .652 Can lead others

mistakes
Invite
let’s us engaged actively in 1.34 .548 Can lead others
learning activities
 16

makes our lessons interesting 1.33 .574 Can lead others

Spellbind
provides challenging 1.60 .528 Can lead others
performance tasks

respects my ideas and 1.34 .479 Can lead others

Agree responses

makes me comfortable in 1.33 .574 Can lead others

sharing my ideas to the class

gives feedback on work and 1.34 .479 Can lead others

exams as basis for
Fortify improvement

checks for understanding of 1.24 .432 Can lead others

the lessons

Description implication

Table 8
The Evaluation of Teacher’s Teaching Practices by the Grade 10 Learners
Domains Mean Standard Descriptor
deviation

makes me feel that he/she 1.27 .512 Can lead others

cares about me

Consider tries to understand how I feel 1.75 .642 Need Teaching Enhancement
about things with the subject

utilizes time for discussions 1.52 .563 Can lead others

Hold

manages student behavior 1.54 .589 Can lead others

explains clearly the topics that 1.14 .393 Can lead others
we covered
Resolve
helps me understand things 1.28 .453 Can lead others
when I make mistake

let’s us learn to correct our 1.39 .607 Can lead others

mistakes
Invite
 17

let’s us engaged actively in 1.45 .615 Can lead others

learning activities

makes our lessons interesting 1.92 3.868 Need teaching enhancement

Spellbind

provides challenging 1.70 .664 Need teaching enhancement

performance tasks

respects my ideas and 1.37 .545 Can lead others

Agree responses

makes me comfortable in 1.52 .563 Can lead others

sharing my ideas to the class

gives feedback on work and 1.33 .473 Can lead others

exams as basis for
Fortify improvement

checks for understanding of 1.22 .417 Can lead others

the lessons

Description implication

Table 9
The Evaluation of Teacher’s Teaching Practices by the Grade 11 Learners
Domains Mean Standard Descriptor
deviation

makes me feel that he/she 1.61 .670 Can lead

cares about me

Consider tries to understand how I feel 1.96 .533 Need Teaching Enhancement
about things with the subject

utilizes time for discussions 1.14 .351 Can lead

Hold
manages student behavior 1.26 .443 Can lead

explains clearly the topics that 1.42 .575 Can lead

we covered
Resolve
helps me understand things 1.52 .614 Can lead
when I make mistake

let’s us learn to correct our 1.52 .580 Can lead

mistakes
Invite
 18

let’s us engaged actively in 1.48 .544 Can lead

learning activities

makes our lessons interesting 1.78 .616 Need teaching enhancement

Spellbind

provides challenging 1.44 .541 Can lead

performance tasks

respects my ideas and 1.62 .567 Can lead

Agree responses

makes me comfortable in 1.74 .664 Need teaching enhancement

sharing my ideas to the class

gives feedback on work and 1.78 1.594 Need Teaching Enhancement

exams as basis for
Fortify improvement
Can lead
checks for understanding of 1.37 .490
the lessons

Description implication

Table 10
The Evaluation of Teacher’s Teaching Practices by the Grade 12 Learners
Domains Mean Standard Descriptor
deviation

makes me feel that he/she 1.37 .489 Can lead others

cares about me

Consider tries to understand how I feel 1.29 .460 Can lead others
about things with the subject

utilizes time for discussions 1.08 .273 Can lead others

Hold

manages student behavior 1.16 .370 Can lead others

explains clearly the topics that 1.05 .226 Can lead others
we covered
Resolve
helps me understand things 1.26 .446 Can lead others
when I make mistake
 19

let’s us learn to correct our 1.32 .471 Can lead others

mistakes
Invite
let’s us engaged actively in 1.18 .393 Can lead others
learning activities

makes our lessons interesting 1.13 .343 Can lead others

Spellbind

provides challenging 1.37 .489 Can lead

performance tasks

respects my ideas and 1.11 .311 Can lead

Agree responses

makes me comfortable in 1.11 .311 Can lead

sharing my ideas to the class

gives feedback on work and 1.26 .446 Can lead

exams as basis for
Fortify improvement

checks for understanding of 1.08 .273 Can lead

the lessons

2.What is the worth of Learners’ Evaluation Form for Teachers on classroom

management and instruction as suggested by students and teachers?

Table 11
Coding Framework: Interview Transcript

Teacher How helpful is the student evaluation form Initial Coding Final Coding
for your teaching? Framework Framework

Evaluation is very essential in teaching and

7 learning process of teachers through Important in
student’s evaluation, we teachers can improving
assess the effectivity and efficiency on the teaching-
strategies that we apply in our lessons. learning
This is also one way for us to know how far process
did we go and what else can we do more in
order to provide quality education for our
learners. Student’s evaluation has positive Tool of
effects to us teachers hence this should be improvement
implemented in public and private schools.
The student’s evaluation form is very helpful
8 and significant to teachers in terms of how Gauge of
you deliver your teaching strategy towards teaching
 20

your learners. delivery

This kind of evaluation also is very real
because students themselves give their Real/On
rating and observation. hand
This evaluation will enable the teacher to
focus on their strengths and enhance and Elixer for
improve their weaknesses. teaching
improvement
In my own perception, student evaluation is
9 helpful in my teaching because through their Mirroring
observations towards me as their teacher teaching
could enhance or develop more my performance
teaching strategies and classroom
management as well.

10
Classroom assessment and evaluation is
11 like a feedback. This is very helpful because Instrument
it calls on us teachers to become agents of for teaching
change in our classrooms actively using the modification
results of assessment to modify and
improve the learning environments that we
create.
There will be an acceptance of the principle
that all people can learn under the right
conditions.
An implication is that “If a program does not
achieve the intended goals, then it is
redesigned until it does.
The student evaluation form is very helpful
12 to teachers. With this they can identify or Basis of
know whether their ways of teaching are improvement
helpful to their students or not. In case if it’s
not, they will know which area they can
improve their teaching skills.

3. What is the design of the individualized teaching enhancement program for in

terms of classroom management and instruction?

 21

References

Able, D. (2016). Results-based Performance Management System for DepEd.

Slideshare. Retrieved on January 26, 2018, from
https://www.slideshare.net/dionesioable/results-based-performance-
management-system-rpms-for-dep-ed-57666817

Aguilar, C. (2012). The qualities of exemplary school administrators in effective

 22

secondary schools in Iloilo. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of San

Agustin, Iloilo City.

Biton, A. (2016). Conducting and reporting research. University of San Agustin. Iloilo
City.

Chandran, E. (2004). Research methods: A quantitative approach. Nairobi: Daystar

University.

Chelimsky E. (2017) Thoughts for a new evaluation society. Evaluation 3(1): 97-118.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.

Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.

Dela Cruz, K. (2008). School performance and leadership style of elementary school
administrators in Aklan. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of San
Agustin, Iloilo City.

Everitt, A. & Hardiker, P. (1996). Evaluating for Good Practice, London: Macmillan.

Frick, Chadha, Watson, Wang & Green. (2007). Theory-based course evaluation:
Implications for improving student success in postsecondary education.
American Educational Research Journal. Retrieved from
http://w.mdavidmerrill.com/Papers/TheoryBasedCourseEvaluation.pdf

Hae-Young, K. (2014). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) comparing means of more than

two groups. Restor Dent Endod. 39(1): 74–77. doi: 10.539/rde.2014.39.1.74

Hammarberg, K., Kirkman, M., & de Lacey, S. (2016). Qualitative research methods:
when to use them and how to judge them. Human Reproduction, 31(3), 498–501.
https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev334

Marsh, H. (2014). Students' Evaluations of University Teaching: Dimensionality,

Reliability, Validity, Potential Biases, and Utility. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 76(5), pp.707-754.

OECD (March 12, 2003). A dictionary of statistical terms (5th edition): Methodological
information international. Statistical Institute: F.H.C. Marriott. International
Statistical Institute: Longman Scientific and Technical.

Patricia (2015). Advantages and disadvantages of performance

management. Smart Church Management. Retrieved On November 26, 2018,
from
https://smartchurchmanagement.com/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-
performance-management/

Rogers, A. and Smith, M. K. (2006) Evaluation: Learning what matters. London: Rank
 23

Foundation/YMCA George Williams College. Retrieved from

www.ymca.org.uk/rank/conference/evaluation_learning_what_matters.pdf

Skills Recognition: The advantages and disadvantages of various assessment methods.

Retrieved on January 26, 2018, from http://www.skillsrecognition.net.au/the-
advantages-and-disadvantages-of-various-assessment-methods

Teacher Evaluation 2.0. (2009). The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge
and act on differences in teacher effectiveness. Retrieved on November 6, 2018
from https://tntp.org/assets/documents/Teacher-Evaluation
Oct10F.pdf?files/Teacher-Evaluation-Oct10F.pdf

Uttl, B., White, C. & D.W. Gonzales. (2017). Meta-analysis of faculty's teaching
effectiveness. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 54, 22-42.

Yonghong, C. & Chongde, L. (2006). Theory and practice on teacher performance

evaluation. Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag. DOI 10.1007/s11516-
005-0004-x
 24

Appendices

Proposed Student Evaluation Form for Teachers

Domain My Teacher... Yes At times No

(Dominyo) (Ang guro ko ay...) (madalas) (minsan) (hindi kailanman)

makes me feel that he/she really cares about me.

(ipinapadama sa akin ang pag-aalala)
Consider
(Isaalang-alang) tries to understand how I feel about things with the
subject.
(inuunawa ang aking nararamdaman)

Utilizes time for the discussion.

(hindi sinasayang ang oras)
Hold
(Hawak) manages student behavior.
(ginagabayan ang pag-uugali at kilos ng mga mag-
aaral)
explains clearly the topics that we covered.
(ipinapaliwanag nang malinaw ang mga paksang
Resolve natalakay)
(Pasya)
helps me understand things when I make mistake.
(tumutulong sa pag-uunawa ng aking pagkakamali)

lets us learn to correct mistake.

Invite (hinahayaang iwasto ang mga pagkakamali)
(Anyaya/Hikayat)
lets engaged actively in learning activities.
(nanghihikayat na makilahok sa mga gawain)
makes our lessons interesting.
(ginagawang kawili-wili ang mga aralin)
Spellbind
(Mapang-akit) provides challenging performance tasks.
(nagbibigay ng mapanghamon gawain)

respects my ideas and responses.

(ginagalang ang aking mga idiya at kuro-kuro)
Agree
(Sang-ayon) makes me comfortable in sharing my ideas to the class.
(hinahayaang makibahagi sa usapan at
pagkabahaginan ng mga idiya)

gives feedback on work and exams as basis for my

improvement.
Fortify (binibigyang-puna ang nga gawain at kinalabasan ng
(Makikibahagi) mga pagsusulit para sa karagdagang pag-unlad)

checks for understanding of the lessons.

(sinusuri ang antas ng pag-uunawa sa aralin)

Teacher’s Name: ___________________________________ check

Subject Taught: ____________________________________

Time: ____________________________________________
 25

Reactor’s Paper

For Students

What is your feedback about the Students Evaluation Form for Teachers?

Answer:

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________
 26

Reactor’s Paper

For Teachers

What is your feedback about the Students Evaluation Form for Teachers?

Answer:

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________
 27

DECLARATION OF ANTI-PLAGIARISM

1. We, CHRISTOPHER G. AGUILAR and JOSEFINA C. BAYLEN, understand

that plagiarism is the act of taking and using another’s ideas and works and

passing them off as one’s own. This includes explicitly copying the whole

work of another person and/or using some parts of their work without proper

acknowledgement and referencing.

2. We hereby attest to the originality of this research proposal and has cited

properly all the references used. We further commit that all deliverables and

the final research study emanating from the proposal shall be of original

content. We shall use appropriate citations in referencing other works from

various sources.

3. We understand that violation from this declaration and commitment shall be

subject to consequences and shall be dealt with accordingly by the

Department of Education and the Basic Education Research Fund.

Proponents: CHRISTOPHER G. AGUILAR

JOSEFINA C. BAYLEN

Signature: /

Date: February 10, 2019

 28

DECLARATION OF ABSENCE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

1. We, AGUILAR, CHRISTOPHER and BAYLEN, JOSEFINA, understand that

conflict of interest refers to situations in which financial or other personal

considerations may compromise our judgment in evaluating, conducting, or

reporting research.

2. We hereby declare that we do not have any personal conflict of interest that

may arise from our application and submission of our research proposal. We

understand that our research proposal may be returned to us if found out that

there is conflict of interest during the initial screening as per the Research

Management Guidelines (DO No. 16, s. 2017).

3. Further, in case of any form of conflict of interest (possible or actual) which

may inadvertently emerge during the conduct of our research, we will duly

report it to the research committee for immediate action.

4. We understand that we may be held accountable by the Department of

Education and the Basic Education Fund for any conflict of interest which we

have intentionally concealed.

Proponents: CHRISTOPHER G. AGUILAR

JOSEFINA C. BAYLEN

Signature: /

Date: February 10, 2019

29