Policy Analysis and Evaluation
POLICY ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION
State of the Art
A 1985 study on the state of the art of research undertaken by the Philippine Association for Graduate Education (PAGE) as commissioned by the Program for Decentralized Educational Development (PRODED) showed that 287 graduate schools and research centers throughout the country undertook hundreds of researches from 1962 to 1982. These researches were classified into nine (9) research areas and the third most researched area was on “Educational Policy Studies and Program Evaluation”. However, as with all other studies, educational policy and program evaluation studies were found to be local studies and therefore limited in scope. Quantitative data and statistical treatment were considered deficient, thus revealing the generally low level of sophistication in the analysis of data gathered. A review of the recommendations of these studies also showed little impact on educational policies or practices. Particularly the area on educational policy studies and program evaluation was found to have “no far-reaching implications.”
Fernando A. Bernardo, then Deputy Minister of Education, during his report to the Educators Congress in 1985, noticed the poor quality of research in the country when in the MECS (now DECS) itself, out of 1,083 positions, 453 or 42 percent were research items. He also pointed out that because of ministry decisions that were handed down without benefit of research or pilot studies, the MECS had been subjected to “fiascos or embarrassing situations.” Examples that brought all these were failure of the continuous progression scheme, the poor performance of barangay high schools, failure of the MATEA (Master of Arts in Teaching Elementary Agriculture) and MATVE (Master of Arts in Teaching Vocational Education) programs, etc.
The point is if national educational programs are implemented without benefit of research or pilot studies, so it follows that the policies that justified or paved
State of the Art
A 1985 study on the state of the art of research undertaken by the Philippine Association for Graduate Education (PAGE) as commissioned by the Program for Decentralized Educational Development (PRODED) showed that 287 graduate schools and research centers throughout the country undertook hundreds of researches from 1962 to 1982. These researches were classified into nine (9) research areas and the third most researched area was on “Educational Policy Studies and Program Evaluation”. However, as with all other studies, educational policy and program evaluation studies were found to be local studies and therefore limited in scope. Quantitative data and statistical treatment were considered deficient, thus revealing the generally low level of sophistication in the analysis of data gathered. A review of the recommendations of these studies also showed little impact on educational policies or practices. Particularly the area on educational policy studies and program evaluation was found to have “no far-reaching implications.”
Fernando A. Bernardo, then Deputy Minister of Education, during his report to the Educators Congress in 1985, noticed the poor quality of research in the country when in the MECS (now DECS) itself, out of 1,083 positions, 453 or 42 percent were research items. He also pointed out that because of ministry decisions that were handed down without benefit of research or pilot studies, the MECS had been subjected to “fiascos or embarrassing situations.” Examples that brought all these were failure of the continuous progression scheme, the poor performance of barangay high schools, failure of the MATEA (Master of Arts in Teaching Elementary Agriculture) and MATVE (Master of Arts in Teaching Vocational Education) programs, etc.
The point is if national educational programs are implemented without benefit of research or pilot studies, so it follows that the policies that justified or paved