000 08852nam a2201225Ia 4500
000 06703ntm a2200205 i 4500
001 74037
003 0
005 20250920174317.0
008 180917n 000 0 eng d
010 _z
_z
_o
_a
_b
015 _22
_a
016 _2
_2
_a
_z
020 _e
_e
_a
_b
_z
_c
_q
_x
022 _y
_y
_l
_a2
024 _2
_2
_d
_c
_a
_q
028 _a
_a
_b
029 _a
_a
_b
032 _a
_a
_b
035 _a
_a
_b
_z
_c
_q
037 _n
_n
_c
_a
_b
040 _e
_erda
_a
_d
_b
_c
041 _e
_e
_a
_b
_g
_h
_r
043 _a
_a
_b
045 _b
_b
_a
050 _a
_a
_d
_b2
_c0
051 _c
_c
_a
_b
055 _a
_a
_b
060 _a
_a
_b
070 _a
_a
_b
072 _2
_2
_d
_a
_x
082 _a
_a
_d
_b2
_c
084 _2
_2
_a
086 _2
_2
_a
090 _a
_a
_m
_b
_q
092 _f
_f
_a
_b
096 _a
_a
_b
097 _a
_a
_b
100 _e
_e
_aSupelana-Peralta, Luz.
_d
_b4
_u
_c0
_q16
110 _e
_e
_a
_d
_b
_n
_c
_k
111 _a
_a
_d
_b
_n
_c
130 _s
_s
_a
_p
_f
_l
_k
210 _a
_a
_b
222 _a
_a
_b
240 _s
_s
_a
_m
_g
_n
_f
_l
_o
_p
_k
245 0 _a
_aPerceptions of the Master Teachers' jobs by administrators and peers in some selected public elementary schools in Manila: a correlational analysis /
_d
_b
_n
_cLuz Peralta- Supelana.
_h6
_p
246 _a
_a
_b
_n
_i
_f6
_p
249 _i
_i
_a
250 _6
_6
_a
_b
260 _e
_e
_a
_b
_f
_c
_g
264 _3
_3
_a
_d
_b
_c46
300 _e
_e
_c28 cm.
_a62 pages
_b
310 _a
_a
_b
321 _a
_a
_b
336 _b
_atext
_2rdacontent
337 _3
_30
_b
_aunmediated
_2rdamedia
338 _3
_30
_b
_avolume
_2rdacarrier
340 _2
_20
_g
_n
344 _2
_2
_a0
_b
347 _2
_2
_a0
362 _a
_a
_b
385 _m
_m
_a2
410 _t
_t
_b
_a
_v
440 _p
_p
_a
_x
_v
490 _a
_a
_x
_v
500 _a
_aThesis (M.A.)-- Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, 1999.;A thesis presented to the faculty of the Graduate School of Arts, Sciences, Education & Nursing in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in School Principalship.
_d
_b
_c56
504 _a
_a
_x
505 _a
_a
_b
_t
_g
_r
506 _a
_a5
510 _a
_a
_x
520 _b
_b
_c
_aABSTRACT: This study was conducted to determine the perceptions of the master teacher's jobs by administrators and peers in some selected public elementary schools in Manila. The perception of the master teacher's jobs were checked against the job description stated in Circular no. 22, s. 1991, Revised Duties and Functions of Master Teachers. Specifically, this study sought to answer the following questions: 1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of age, sex, civil status, position, experience and educational qualification? 2. What are the actual tasks of master teachers as perceived by administrators and peers in the following areas: a. pupil development b. staff development c. curriculum development d. research e. others 3. What is the summary of the perceptions of the master teachers' jobs by administrators and peers as checked against their official duties and functions stated in Circular no. 22, s.1991? 4. Is there significant relationship among the perceptions of the respondents in terms of the master teacher's jobs in the same areas stated in problem no. 2 ? Findings: Based on the results of the study, the findings were as follows: 1. a. 31 or 34.8% of the respondents belonged to ages 40 - 49. b. 85 or 96% were female. c. 52 or 58% were married. d. 48 or 53.9% were non-master teachers. e. Majority of the respondents have been teaching in the public elementary school for 26-30 years in service. f. 66 or 74.1% revealed that the respondents have acquired the minimum degree requirement i.e. BSEEd / BSE plus some units for elementary method to qualify for their positions. 2. The master teachers performed at an average level (very satisfactory) in the areas of pupil development (with a grand weighted mean of 4.27); staff development (with a grand weighted mean of 4.23) and curriculum development (with a grand weighted mean of 4.00) The master teachers performed low (satisfactory) in the areas of research (with a grand weighted mean of 3.92) and other administrative duties and functions (with a grand weighted mean of 3.75) 3. The master teachers performed low (satisfactory) in the areas of research (with a grand weighted mean of 3.92); and other administrative duties and functions (with a grand weighted mean of 3.76). Therefore master teachers performed low as perceived by administrators and peers as against their outstanding rating on their year - end evaluation. Conclusions: The result of the statistical treatment of the data revealed the following: Very high positive correlation between pupil development and curriculum development (r = .16929); high positive correlation between pupil development and research (.75154); very small negative correlation between pupil development and other administrative duties and functions (-21105); very small negative correlation between pupil development and staff development )-.03178). The null hypotheses tested at 0.05 level of significance was rejected. There was a high positive correlation between pupil development and research, also between curriculum development and research. There was a significant relationship among the perceptions of the respondents in terms of master teachers' jobs and their official duties and functions. Observations, interviews as well as questionnaire proved that master teachers could not really do all the duties and functions expected of them with outstanding ratings. The actual performances of the master teachers were not congruent with their year - end performance rating. There was a gap between what is expected of them and what they are actually do due to the following reasons: 1. Overlapping of multifarious activities like preparation of reports, checking lesson plans, observing teachers and other curricular and extra curricular activities. 2. There are very few master teachers in each grade. Other subject areas do not yet have master teachers. 3. Some master teachers are overloaded, while others are underload. 4. Lack of administrative prodding. 5. Negative influences or feedback of people around. Recommendations: In view of the findings and conclusion of the study, the following are recommended: 1. Pursuing graduate study for an effective and efficient performance as expected from master teachers. 2. Reviewing the provisions on the areas of research and other supervisory functions in order to maximize and reach the optimum degree of service in these areas. 3. Intensive training on research should be given to master teachers. 4. Enhancing further the knowledge, skills, abilities and competencies of master teachers in the areas of staff and curriculum development through seminar workshops for quality education among the pupils. 5. Requesting from the legislative or policy making body of the DECS for a review or revision if necessary, of the existing policies on the duties and functions of master teachers into more realistic and workable areas of learning. 6. Orienting further administrators, non-master teachers specifically Guidance Counselors, teachers with special assignment and master teachers to help reduce if not eliminate misconceptions on the functions of master teachers to promote harmonious relationships in the school. 7. More research studies in the effectiveness of the career Progression Scheme for Public School Teachers (Master Teacher Plan). 8. Making research studies on the master teacher's plan functional. 9. Enhancing the right attitude and commitment to one's duty from both the master teachers and all the respondents.
_u
521 _a
_a
_b
533 _e
_e
_a
_d
_b
_n
_c
540 _c
_c
_a5
542 _g
_g
_f
546 _a
_a
_b
583 _5
_5
_k
_c
_a
_b
590 _a
_a
_b
600 _b
_b
_v
_t
_c2
_q
_a
_x0
_z
_d
_y
610 _b
_b
_v
_t2
_x
_a
_k0
_p
_z
_d6
_y
611 _a
_a
_d
_n2
_c0
_v
630 _x
_x
_a
_d
_p20
_v
648 _2
_2
_a
650 _x
_x
_a
_d
_b
_z
_y20
_v
651 _x
_x
_a
_y20
_v
_z
655 _0
_0
_a
_y2
_z
700 _i
_i
_t
_c
_b
_s1
_q
_f
_k40
_p
_d
_e
_a
_l
_n6
710 _b
_b
_t
_c
_e
_f
_k40
_p
_d5
_l
_n6
_a
711 _a
_a
_d
_b
_n
_t
_c
730 _s
_s
_a
_d
_n
_p
_f
_l
_k
740 _e
_e
_a
_d
_b
_n
_c6
753 _c
_c
_a
767 _t
_t
_w
770 _t
_t
_w
_x
773 _a
_a
_d
_g
_m
_t
_b
_v
_i
_p
775 _t
_t
_w
_x
776 _s
_s
_a
_d
_b
_z
_i
_t
_x
_h
_c
_w
780 _x
_x
_a
_g
_t
_w
785 _t
_t
_w
_a
_x
787 _x
_x
_d
_g
_i
_t
_w
800 _a
_a
_d
_l
_f
_t0
_q
_v
810 _a
_a
_b
_f
_t
_q
_v
830 _x
_x
_a
_p
_n
_l0
_v
942 _a
_alcc
_cBK
999 _c27708
_d27708