Implementation of Board of Trustees Resolution Number 34, Series 2015: Follow-Up Study for Policy Enhancement
Main Article Content
Abstract
The paper is a follow-up of the previous paper on the graduate school survey that focuses on the implications of Resolution No. 34, series of 2015. It takes up the current profile of the school on enrolment and number of graduates, policy compliance, blended-learning needs, faculty commitment, and feedback on the affordability, competitiveness, and patronage of graduate school programs and services. It adopted a descriptive design with 34 faculty members and 307 graduate school students as respondents. The survey covers three academic periods–from the academic year 2015-2016 to 2018-2019. Data were sourced from interview questionnaires, annual reports, and college documents. Frequency count and percentage were utilized for the treatment of quantitative data, and thematic analysis was followed for the explication of qualitative data. The full implementation of small-class size and adjusted salary scheme for the faculty resulted in a seemingly more accessible and less expensive graduate education for students. However, significant guidelines of the policy were not fully complied such as the submission and utilization of the blended-learning materials designed for small classes.The faculty needs further training in course website development, class material digitization, and instructional video development. On the other hand, students considered graduate education to be affordable and competitive for to them, cost, location, quality, and reputation are imperative for their continued patronage of the college graduate program. These outcomes call for the re-visitation and amendment of Resolution No. 34, series of 2015, and its guidelines to ensure its full implementation.


Downloads
Article Details
References
Agrey, L. & Lampadan, N. (2014, June). Determinant factors contributing to student choice in selecting a university. Journal of Education and Human Development, 3(2), 391-404.
Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (2001). What is descriptive research? Retrieved from http://members.aect.org/edtech/ed1/41/41-01.html
Barbour, V., Clark, J., Connell, L., MacDonald, R., Norton, M., Rpss, Simpson, P., and Winker, M. (2013, August 27). Better reporting of scientific studies: why it matters? PLoS medicine, 10(8).
Bilbao, P., Corpuz, B., Llagas, A., Salandanan, G. (2018). The Teaching Profession. Quezon City:Lorimar Publishing Inc.
Braun V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Clark T., Altman D., & De Stavola, B. (2002, April 13). Quantification of the completeness of follow-up.
Clark, T., Bradburn, M., Love, S., & Altman, D. (2003, July 21). Survival analysis part I: basic concepts and first analyses. British Journal of Cancer. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12865907.
Creswell, J., & Clark, V. (2017, September). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Retrieved from https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/designing-andconducting-mixed-methods- research/book241842
Hagel, P., & Shaw, R. (2007). The influence of delivery mode on consumer choice of university. European Advances in Consumer Research, 8, 531-536.
Hoeffer, R. (2019). Four steps to create a winning logic model. Retrieved from http://richardhoefer.com/4-steps-to-create-a-winninglogicmodel/
Hyndman, B. (2018, August 13). Ten reasons teachers can struggle to use technology in the classroom. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/ten-reasons-teachers-can-struggle-to-use-technology-in-the-classroom-101114
Inoa, R. & Cascio, S. (2018, February 06). Tech engages today’s students, but teachers need support. Retrieved from https://edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2018/02/tech-engages-todays-students-teachers-need-support
ICEF Monitor. (2014, November 19). Pricing education in an era of increasing competitiveness and student expectations. Retrieved from http://monitor.icef.com/2014/11/pricing-education-era-increasing-competitiveness-student-expectations/
Julian, D. (1997, August). The utilization of the logic model as a system level planning and evaluation device. Evaluation and Program Planning, 20(3). Retrieved https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0149718997000025
Malaga, J.R. (2014). Graduate school survey: Inputs for the proposed new instructional delivery and salary scheme. Completed paper submitted to the Research and Development Services, Carlos Hilado Memorial State College, Talisay City, Negros Occidental.
Malaga, R. (2010). Digital divide among the faculty of a state educational institution in the Philippines. Retrieved https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=7448.
Renger, R., & Titcomb, A. (2002). A three-step approach to teaching logic model. The American Journal of Evaluation.
Salkind, N. (2010). Follow-up. 23(4), 493-503. Retrieved from http://methods.sagepub.com/reference/encyc-of-research-design/n157.xml
Tang T., Tang, D., & Tang, C. (2004, August). College tuition and perceptions of private university quality. International Journal of Educational Management, 18, 304-316.