Department of education



Download 261,41 Kb.
Page2/3
Date conversion08.12.2018
Size261,41 Kb.
1   2   3

PRETEST RESULTS
Number of Respondents = 54

Pretest reliability = 0.867



Items

Pretest

Mean

QD

Rank

  1. Concept/Definition of Indigenous Peoples

42.3

LK

3

  1. IPEd

37.4

LK

6

  1. DO 62, s. 2011

35.8

LK

7

  1. Indigenous Knowledge System and Practices

28.6

NK

10

  1. Mother-Tongue Based/Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE)

54.3

K

2

  1. Contextualizing Education

40.0

LK

5

  1. Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013

56.2

K

1

  1. ACCESS Principle

42.1

LK

4

  1. Indigenized Curriculum

34.0

LK

8.5

  1. Culture-Responsive Curriculum

34.0

LK

8.5

QD – Qualitative Description

Legend

1 20.00 - 29.49 No Knowledge NK

2 29.50 – 49.49 Little Knowledge LK

3 49.50 - 69.49 with Knowledge K

4 69.50 - 89.49 with Much Knowledge MK

5 89.50 – 100 with Very Much Knowledge VMK
After the Opening Program, the Training team administered the Pretest to the 54 participants. This was conducted to determine their beginning understanding/knowledge about Indigenous Peoples Education. The 10-item pretest has a reliability coefficient of 0.867 which means that the pretest was reliable. A test is reliable if it has a reliability coefficient of 0.80 and above.
The pretest results revealed that the participants were already knowledgeable about Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 and Mother-Tongue Based / Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE). These must be due to the various orientation meetings and advocacy on the said topics.
In addition, the participants had little knowledge on the concept/definition of Indigenous People, IPEd, DO 62, s. 2011, contextualizing education, ACCESS Principle, Indigenized Curriculum and Culture-responsive curriculum. Moreover, they had no knowledge on Indigenous Knowledge, Systems and Practices (IKSP).

Overall, the participants had little knowledge about the topics before the discussion in the IPEd Advocacy Meeting.




The IPEd Advocacy Meeting Proper
July 3, 2013 (Wednesday)
Dr. Estelito Balatan started the Advocacy Meeting by leveling the expectation. It was done through a writeshop where the grouped participants wrote their expectations about the Advocacy meeting and how they could help realize these together with the advocacy team.

Dr. Jose Sario Poblete presented the concepts and definitions of Indigenous Peoples including Indigenous Peoples Education (IPEd) and its Framework based on DepEd Order No. 62, 2011.

Dr. Purificacion Macarubbo firmed up DO 62 by letting the participants dramatize their experiences with IPs.
Dr. Corazon T. Barrientos, OIC Asst Regional Director, inspired the participants and the Advocacy Team.
Dr. Poblete introduced Indigenous Knowledge, Systems and Practices (IKSP)
July 4, 2013 (Thursday)
Dr. Balatan and Dr. Macarubbo further connected the K to 12 curriculum to IPEd by highlighting general concepts and features.
Dr. Eddie Galutan facilitated the workshop to dramatize the four (4) ACCESS Principles in relation to IPEd.
Dr. Dennis Agbayani presented the salient features of MTB-MLE.
Dr. Samuel Soliven logically presented how to integrate IKSP in the K to 12 Curriculum as a way of indigenizing, localizing and contextualizing the curriculum. He helped the participants walk through standards-based teaching by capturing IP culture-responsive topics. He also shared IPEd in connection to GAD concepts.
In conclusion, Dr. Soliven facilitated the making of an IPEd Advocacy Plan. The awarding of certificates of attendance and appearance followed.

POSTTEST RESULTS

Number of Respondents = 54



Posttest reliability = 0.905

Items

Posttest

QD

Rank

  1. Concept/Definition of Indigenous Peoples

87.3

MK

5.5

  1. IPEd

87.3

MK

5.5

  1. DO 62, s. 2011

87.3

MK

5.5

  1. Indigenous Knowledge System and Practices

83.3

MK

12

  1. Mother-Tongue Based/Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE)

90.7

VMK

1

  1. Contextualizing Education

85.8

MK

9

  1. Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013

87.3

MK

5.5

  1. ACCESS Principle

82.8

MK

9

  1. Indigenized Curriculum

85.8

MK

9

  1. Culture-Responsive Curriculum

85.8

MK

11

  1. IPEd and GAD Concepts (GAD: Gender and Development)

88.2

MK

3

  1. IPEd Advocacy Planning

88.7

MK

2

Qualitative Description

Legend


20.00 - 29.49 No Knowledge NK

29.50 – 49.49 Little Knowledge LK

49.50 - 69.49 with Knowledge K

69.50 - 89.49 with Much Knowledge MK

89.50 – 100 with Very Much Knowledge VMK
After the IPEd Advocacy Meeting, the Training team administered the Posttest to the 54 participants. This was conducted to find their progress relative to their understanding/knowledge about Indigenous Peoples Education. The posttest has a reliability coefficient of 0.905 which means that the posttest was reliable. A test is reliable if it has a reliability coefficient of 0.80 and above.
The posttest results revealed that the participants became very much knowledgeable about Mother-Tongue Based / Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) and much knowledgeable about all the other IPEd topics including Gender and Development Concepts and IPEd Advocacy Planning..
Overall, the participants had much knowledge about IPEd after the Advocacy meeting.

GAINS based on the Pretest and Posttest


Items

Pretest

Posttest

Gains

Rank

  1. Concept/Definition of Indigenous Peoples

42.3

87.3

45

7

  1. IPEd

37.4

87.3

49.9

5

  1. DO 62, s. 2011

35.8

87.3

51.5

4

  1. Indigenous Knowledge System and Practices

28.6

83.3

54.7

1

  1. Mother-Tongue Based/Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE)

54.3

90.7

36.4

9

  1. Contextualizing Education

40.0

85.8

45.8

6

  1. Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013

56.2

87.3

31.1

10

  1. ACCESS Principle

42.1

82.8

40.7

8

  1. Indigenized Curriculum

34.0

85.8

51.8

2.5

  1. Culture-Responsive Curriculum

34.0

85.8

51.8

2.5


Legend for Pretest and Posttest

20.00 - 29.49 No Knowledge NK

29.50 – 49.49 Little Knowledge LK

49.50 - 69.49 with Knowledge K

69.50 - 89.49 with Much Knowledge MK

89.50 – 100 with Very Much Knowledge VMK
The gains were high in each of the IPEd topics. This was evident based on the difference between the pretest and posttest results wherein the posttest result was much higher than the pretest result.
The ranking shows that the top 4 concepts with the highest gains include Indigenous Knowledge, Systems and Practices or IKSP (gain = 54.7), indigenized curriculum (gain = 51.8), culture-responsive curriculum (gain = 51.8) and DO 62, s. 2011 (gain = 51.5).

CHALLENGES AND COMMITMENT



Statements

Mean

QD

We are ready to advocate IP Education in our school/division.

89.7

Strongly Agree

We are competent to address IP issues and concerns in the school/division.

87.3

Agree

QD – Qualitative Description

Legend


25.00 – 37.49 Strongly Disagree

37.50 – 62.49 Disagree

62.50 – 87.49 Agree

87.50 – 100.00 Strongly Disagree
After the IPEd Advocacy meeting, the participants strongly agreed that they are ready to advocate IPEd in their schools/divisions. They also claimed they are competent to address IP issues and concerns. These were also noted during the closing program when the participants expressed their favorable impressions and pledge of commitment to IPEd.

EVALUATION RESULTS


Indicators

Mean

QD

Rank

  1. Program, Planning, Management & Preparation

94.44

E

5

  1. Attainment of Objectives

94.26

E

6.5

  1. Delivery of activity content

94.88

E

3

  1. Participants’ Learning

95.71

E

2

  1. Trainer’s Conduct of the Session

94.84

E

4

  1. Provisions of Support Materials

94.26

E

6.5

  1. Activity Management Team

96.09

E

1

  1. Venue and accommodation

88.12

VS

8

Overall

93.75

E



1   2   3


The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2016
send message

    Main page