000 10042nam a2201225Ia 4500
000 08229ntm a2200229 i 4500
001 69096
003 0
005 20250921111107.0
008 171106n 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
_aFernandez-Pangilinan, Maria Janice.
_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
_aStakeholders' view on the effectiveness of Our Lady of Fatima University as an educational institution /
_d
_b
_n
_cMaria Janice Fernandez-Pangilinan.
_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.
_axvi, 169 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, 2008.;A thesis presented to the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences and Education, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree in Master of Arts in Education Major in Educational Administration.
_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: The study looked into the extent of effectiveness of the five areas: Faculty, Instruction, Library, Physical Plant and Facilities, and Student Personnel Services based on the perceptions of the university's stakeholders (faculty members, non-teaching staff & students). Specifically, the study sought answers on the extent of effectiveness of the aforementioned areas in terms of transferring educational information, program delivery, faculty and staff focus and learning environment. This study aimed to answer the following questions: 1. As perceived by the respondents (students and school personnel), how effective are the following areas in attaining quality education: 1.1 Faculty; 1.2 Instruction; 1.3 Library; 1.4 Physical Plant and Facilities; and 1.5 Student Personnel Services? 2. Is there a significant difference in the perceptions of the two groups of respondents (school personnel and students) on the level of effectiveness of the aforementioned areas? 3. What are the problems encountered by the stakeholders in the implementation of the areas mentioned? 4. Based on five quality indicators, what measures can be recommended for future improvement of the university? The research adopted a descriptive survey method using a set of questionnaires for gathering primary data. Secondary data were sourced from books, magazines, journals, unpublished researches and other printed materials. The research instruments were collected a week after their administration. Weighted mean was used to test the extent of effectiveness of each provision, however, percentage was used in the problems encountered and in the proposed measures for the improvement of each area. In order to determine if there is a significant difference in the perceptions of the two groups of respondents (school personnel and students), t-test was used at 0.05 level of significance. There is no significant difference in the perceptions of the two groups of respondents (students and school personnel) on the level of effectiveness in the following areas: 1.1 Faculty; 1.2 Instruction; 1.3 Library; 1.4 Physical Plant and Facilities; and 1.5 Student Personnel Services. Based on the retrieved data, the findings of the study were derived: The integration of services for the benefit of stakeholders affects the overall institutional effectiveness and ultimately enhances institutional performance and serves the needs of other stakeholders inside and outside the university. Based on the perceptions of the two groups of respondents (school personnel and students), library has ranked first in terms of the extent of effectiveness. Second ranked is the area of faculty. It is followed by the instruction area. Next is the student personnel services area. Finally, the weakest among the areas is physical plant and facilities. The areas are ranked according to the highest weighted mean to the least, though, all of the five (5) areas of quality indicators are said to be effective. There is no significant difference in the perceptions of the two groups of respondents. It can be deduced that everything in the school is justified for both students and school personnel. The administrative setup offers harmonious relations among students and personnel. Inter-institutional cooperation, interrelationships, and effective communication always occur among students, administration and other school personnel. Perceived Effectiveness of the Five Areas: 1. Faculty Area The school personnel perceived that faculty development is the strongest division of faculty. All the divisions are effective except for remuneration and fringe benefits which is moderately effective. For the weakness, the Rank, Tenure, and Remuneration and Fringe Benefits are moderately effective but functioning well. 2. Instruction Area Based on the perceptions of the two groups of respondents (school personnel and students), all the divisions of the instruction area are functioning effectively. The strong points are administrative measures for effective instruction and instructional process. Classroom management and co-curricular activities are the weak divisions. The ratio of teacher to students in a laboratory class is inappropriate. Academic requirements are not relaxed in favor of participation in co-curricular activities. 3. Library Area The data retrieved from the two groups of respondents (school personnel and students) show that all the divisions of the library area are functioning effectively. The strong points of the library area are the selection, organization and maintenance of collection administration and services and utilization. The weakest division of library is holdings. This division is functioning moderately effective in terms of the accessibility and adequacy of facilities, equipment and instructional materials. 4. Physical Plant and Facilities Area According to the two groups of respondents (school personnel and students), offices and staff rooms have the highest rating in the area of physical plant and facilities. This division is effective and functioning very well. Buildings and classrooms are the weakest division of physical plant and facilities. 5. Student Personnel Services Area As perceived by the two groups of respondents (school personnel and students), the student personnel services area has a very effective guidance program and services. The weal points include co-curricular programs and activities and student assistance program. These are functioning moderately effective in health services, food services and student welfare services. Based on the findings of the study, the researcher concludes that: The Our Lady of Fatima University is considered to be an effective educational institution based on the five areas/ quality indicators. Physical plant and facilities were given the least attention by the administration whereas the library was given more attention and priorities for growth and development though all the five areas are functioning effectively. The institutional evaluation by internal stakeholders is very pertinent. As the primary clientele of the institution, the internal stakeholders should also be the primary evaluator. School-wise decision-making processes were viewed as more important in the development of an effective school. Based on the findings and conclusion drawn from the study, the following recommendations are set forth: The administration should have a critical review on the school's weak divisions like building, campuses, health services, library holdings, co-curricular programs, salary and fringe benefits scheme. The governing bodies should set an environment for open communication, and institutionalize strategic development and planning activities in all sectors of the university to identify and to have a common understanding of each other's needs.
_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 _c32110
_d32110