Academic Pertformance of Ip Students
Submitted By angging
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
The Philippine archipelago is made up of 7, 107 islands with total area of 300, 00 square kilometer. It has a current population of nearly 88 million people, 75% of which belong to 8 major ethnic groups and the remaining 25% are divided among different minor ethnic groups and indigenous tribes.
The country has more than 110 ethnic tribes and cultural communities whose cultures and traditions are in varying states of extinction. These vanishing ancestral traditions and customary laws used to define social relationships and values and promoted efficiency of economic activities.
Section 30 of the IPRA stipulates that “the state shall provide equal access to various cultural opportunities to the IP’s through the educational system, private or public cultural entities, scholarships, grants and other incentives without prejudice to their right to establish and control their educational systems and institutions by providing education in their own language, in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning. Indigenous children/youth shall have the right to all levels and forms of education of the State”.
The Basic Education Assistance for Mindanao (BEAM) is a DepEd project supported by the Government of the Philippines and the Government of Australia through the Australian Agency for International Development (AUSAID). It is aiming to improve the access to and the quality of basic education in the Southern and Central Mindanao thereby contributing to the attainment of peace and development in the Southern Philippines.
Under the BEAM Project, three IP Pilot Schools in Malita, Davao del Sur are beneficiaries, namely: the B’laan National High School situated at Barangay Little Baguio; Demoloc Valley National High School at Barangay, Demoloc; and Ticulon National High School at Barangay Ticulon. One common criteria for these schools to qualify in the BEAM Project as Pilot Schools is that 90 to 95% of its students are indigenous peoples. Barangay Little Baguio is the home for most of the B’laan groups in Malita, Demoloc consist of mostly Taga-kaolos, while Ticulon comprise the Manobos.
The researcher embark on this study considering that there is dearth of available literatures on the academic performance of IP students in the Philippines, particularly in the municipal and provincial levels. Thus, this study is conceptualized.
Statement of the Problem
The study aims to assess the academic performance of IP and non-IP high school students in English, Science and Mathematics in IP Pilot Schools in Malita, Davao del Sur.
Specifically, the study will seek answer to the following questions: 1. What is the academic performance of IP and non-IP high school students in: a. English; b. Science; and c. Mathematics? 2. Is there a significant difference in the academic performance of IP and non-IP high school students in English, Science, and Mathematics? 3. What are the factors affecting the academic performance of IP and non-IP high school students in terms of:
c. school-factors; and
d. student-factors? 4. Is there a significant relationship between the different factors on the academic performance of the IP and Non-IP high school students in English, Science, and Mathematics?
Scope and Limitation
The study will focus on finding the academic performance between the IP and non-IP high school students in English, Science and Mathematics in IP Pilot Schools in Malita, Davao del Sur which includes the B’laan National High School, Demoloc Valley National High School, and Ticulon National High School. The factors affecting academic performance will be delimited to the following variables, namely: parent-factors, teacher-factors, school-factors, and student-factors. The academic performance of IP and non-IP students in English, Science and Mathematics will be measured in terms of the National Achievement Test (NAT) result of 2010. The respondents of the study will be the second year high school students only because they were the ones subjected to the National Achievement Test (NAT). The study will be conducted from November to December 2011.
Significance of the Study
The results and findings of the study may offer and give benefit to the following:
The findings of the study can be used as basis by the DepEd Officials in improving and designing curriculum and teaching strategies that would suit to IP high school students.
School Heads The school head will be given first-hand data on the factors affecting academic performance of their students. Given the information they can design measures to improve or further hasten performance of IP and non-IP high school students.
Classroom Teachers The classroom teachers will better understand their students’ level of performance and its causes. With the findings of the study, the teachers will be properly guided and directed on their approach with their students. This is very important knowing the fact that teachers are the ones having direct contact with the student.
The parents will be given right information about the performance of their siblings at school, hence, can be the partners of teachers in helping students achieve, improve or hasten academic performance.
The results of the study will open the eyes of the students on their weaknesses and strengths towards achieving, improving or hastening academic performance.
The findings and the results of the study can be used as reference by future researchers who will engage themselves in similar study. Through the conduct of this study, available literature can be accessed by the future researchers.
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this study, the following terms are defined operationally:
Academic performance- it refers to the grades of I.P and Non I.P students in the subject.
ACPC – it is an acronym for Asian Council for People’s Culture which assisted the different indigenous tribes in the Philippines in setting up Schools for Indigenous Knowledge and Traditions (SIKAT).
Assessment- it refers to the process of gathering intrapersonal or interpersonal on the students’ current behavior, language or motor skills in any environment that involves a part of the students’ current plan or planned educational program.
AUSAID – it is an acronym for Australian Agency for International Development.
BEAM – it is an acronym for Basic Education Assistance in Mindanao.
DepEd – it is an acronym for the Department of Education.
Educational attainment– it refers to the highest education that the head of the family have attained or achieved.
Facilities- this refers to the materials and equipment that are owned by the school.
Factors- this refer to the parents, teachers, school, and students contributing to the academic performance of high school students in English, Science, and Mathematics.
Family income- it refers to the total earnings that parent have gained or received for a given period, for example in a monthly period.
HOTS – it is acronym for Higher Order Thinking Skills. It is a test item that contains close constructed, open-ended and multiple choice questions.
Instructional materials- it refers to some resources like books, journals, and pamphlets that are utilized for instructional purposes.
IPRA – it is an acronym for Indigenous Peoples’ Right Act known as Republic Act 8371.
IPs - it is an acronym for Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines, who are aptly referred to in the 1987 Constitution as Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs).
IP students – the IP is used as an adjective describing the group of students who belong to either B’laan, Taga-Kaolo, or Manobo tribes.
IP Pilot Schools – these refer to schools operated to cater and serve IP students and is funded under the BEAM Project.
NAEP – it is an acronym for National Assessment of Educational Progress which assess US students achievement in ten program areas, namely: art career and occupational development citizenship, literature, mathematics, music, reading, science, social studies and writings.
NAT – it is an acronym for National Achievement Test given to second year high school students to measure their academic performance in a given period of time.
NCIP – it is an acronym for National Commission for Indigenous Peoples. It is a government agency in the Philippines
National Commission for Indigenous People (NCIP) as a partnership initiative, was the establishment of the Institute for Indigenous Peoples’ Education (IIPE) based in Davao City and funded by the Australia-Philippines Facility on Basic Education Assistance for Mindanao (BEAM).
Parent-factors- these refer to the educational attainment and income of the parents that may influence the academic performance of the students in English, Science, and Mathematics.
RAMSE - it is an acronym for Regional Assessment in Mathematics, Science and English given to students to assess performance in the given field.
School-factors – these refer to the school-related factors that affect the academic performance of students in English, Science, and Mathematics.
SIKAT – it is an acronym for Schools for Indigenous Knowledge and Traditions. Its programme envisions a system at par with mainstream education, founded on the ways of life, traditions and culture of indigenous peoples.
Student-factors – these refer to the student-related factors that affect the academic performance of students in English, Science, and Mathematics.
Teacher-factors- these refer to the teacher’s techniques and strategies in teaching that may influence the student’s academic performance English, Science, and Mathematics.
TIMSS – it is an acronym for Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study
UNESCO – it is an acronym for United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Assessment of Learning
A significant part the BEAM project is the student assessment initiative which has developed and applied assessment instruments designed to measure student learning outcomes in English, Science and Mathematics known as the Regional Assessment in Mathematics, Science and English (RAMSE). The test was administered to students in 2004 in randomly selected schools in the Regions XI, XII and the ARMM. It includes test items that assess the Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS). The test contains close constructed, open-ended and multiple choice questions.
Some results of the RAMSE 2005 revealed the following: a) students were inclined to answer multiple choice test types rather than close constructed or open-ended; b) students have difficulty answering test items that assessed Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS); c) females performed better than males; d) non-IPs (Indigenous People) performed better than IP Pupils; e) students performed better when given “sufficient” support from the community.
The following are some of the recommendations drawn by the DEPED XI, XII, and ARMM senior officials after the results were presented to them: a) provide pupils and students more exposure on activities to answer close constructed and open-ended questions; b) train teachers to the development of test items addressing HOTS; c) implement a monitoring and evaluation system that would check if the trainings attended were really applied in the classrooms; d) provide IPs with more resources, both human and material in which the curriculum maybe modified to suit their socio-cultural, socio-linguistic and even psycho-social needs; e) maintain giving regular and quality homework to develop students habit of reviewing lessons taught for the day. Homework should also be checked and returned; and f) continue to involve stakeholders in programs and projects of DepEd.
In the US, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) assess students achievement at approximately, 5 years of intervals in each of ten program areas, art career and occupational development citizenship, literature, mathematics, music, reading, science, social studies and writings, test are constructed to measure the achievement of the objectives of the students of ages 9, 13, and 17. The objectives of the National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP) may have considerable impact of the course of American education. Another objective is to enable experts in test construction to develop related achievement tests and questionnaires.
Bertrant and Cedula (1980) stated that evaluation is a dynamic process to be carried on constantly as teachers go about the daily job assessing the needs of their students. They further maintain that assessment of learning does not wait for the behavior to happen. They influence its occurrence first by knowing their children’s need by testing, measuring and evaluating behavior and meet them by teaching new behavior.
Berdine and Meyer (1987) mentioned stages in the assessment process. These are: screening and identification, eligibility and diagnosis, instructional program and planning, instructional program evaluation. There are two common focal points that are evident throughout the assessment process: the pupil and the teacher according to these authors, the classroom teacher is a valuable participant in all phases of the assessment process. The assessment of pupil performance is an integral part of education.
Thus, it can be seen that evaluation should not only focus on teacher’s attention on the growth of a learner and his total environment, but that it also provides a reason for continuous curriculum betterment that are sufficient to warrant careful attention to evaluation as an integral part of planning and action.
Indigenous Education in the Philippines
Indigenous education in the Philippines has been a recent phenomenon, starting only in the past decade. Legislation supporting indigenous peoples rights as well as giving legitimacy to establishing indigenous schools were only authored in the past 8 years. The Asian Council for People’s Culture (ACPC) assisted the different indigenous tribes in the country in setting up Schools for Indigenous Knowledge and Traditions (SIKAT). The SIKAT programme envisions a system at par with mainstream education, founded on the ways of life, traditions and culture of indigenous peoples. This paper takes a closer look at one of the SIKAT Schools-the Sagu-Ilaw SIKAT of the Bukidnon Tribe in Nortern Mindanao.
Sagu-Ilaw was set up in 2002 with the assistance of ACPC. Since then, despite the perennial problem of funding, it has been surviving on its own. It was designed as a tertiary type teacher-training school whose students teach the tribe’s children in their respective communities. Recent linkages with the Department of Education have led to conflict over control of the school, leading the tribe to fear for the continued loss of their identity. Other linkages are currently being established for the survival and further development of the school.
Education in the Context of Philippine Indigenous Peoples
The Indigenous Peoples (IPs) of the Philippines, who are aptly referred to in the 1987 Constitution as Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs), comprise one of the most dynamic and culturally-diverse sectors of Philippine society. It has been claimed by them, however, that the highly Western-entrenched current educational system is not reflective of the unique and diverse cultures and specific circumstances of IPs, which in turn results to their systemic alienation from their cultural identity and rootedness to their ancestral domains. Moreover, the existing educational system is acknowledged to have contributed to the further marginalization and exploitation of IPs in various parts of the country. While some of them have managed to preserve their rich cultures and traditions by resisting subjugation by Spanish, American and Japanese colonizers, the situation is best understood by revisiting our colonial past, which defines the evolution of policies in this country that have favored the interests of our subjugating colonial masters and an elitist mainstream society. In the process, all these led to the historical exclusion of IPs from the rest of the Filipino society and perpetuated historical injustice inflicted to them. These are exhibited through social discrimination, economic marginalization, political disenfranchisement and cultural displacement (Buasen Jr., 2010). In the post-war era, the vital role of education in nation-building has been given credence but there was a failure for not having established the foundation of educating our people from where we were before colonization. A centrally-imposed and colonial-driven educational system inappropriate to the specific and unique circumstances as well as cultural peculiarities of Indigenous Peoples had become seriously anathema to the sector and is a big issue to reckon with. Corollary to the afore-stated indention, NCIP embarks on a two-pronged approach of pursuing the indigenization agenda with the existing educational system through the formal education stream and the alternative learning system with partner agencies and organizations, while at the same time, advocating for the recognition and sustainability of indigenous learning systems as part of the community of life of ICCs/IPs. With primordial focus on IP community-based schools and culture-sensitive educational interventions, some of the more vulnerable IP groups are subject to focused targeting on basic literacy with gradual progression scheme. There are initiatives for the basic education of Indigenous Peoples that were started, both with the Department of Education and with local-based partners, and developed through various workshops and dialogues with IPs, and these are all subject to continuing validation and refinement on ground (Buasen Jr., 2010). A major achievement with the Bureau of Alternative Learning System (BALS) of the Department of Education (DepEd) is the official issuance of DepEd Order No. 101, series of 2010, last September 16, 2010 which provides for the Development and Pilot-testing of the IP Core Curriculum and Instructional Materials for Alternative Learning System (ALS) nationwide. Making use of the culture-sensitive and generic Core Curriculum for IPs on Alternative Learning System that was developed in 2006. Modules and the corresponding instructional materials, reference guides and facilitators’ manuals were translated, also by the IPs, and these have gone through series of focused group discussions, rigid scrutiny and refinements, both in the field and in the policy levels. Since the entire IP community is considered as the entire school, the philosophy adhered to in the process was that the clientele system must be in synergistic partnership with the delivery system (Buasen Jr., 2010).
Another DepEd-recognized initiative, which was supported by the National Commission for Indigenous People (NCIP) as a partnership initiative, was the establishment of the Institute for Indigenous Peoples’ Education (IIPE) based in Davao City and funded by the Australia-Philippines Facility on Basic Education Assistance for Mindanao (BEAM). Now turned over to the management of DepEd Regional Office XI, the IIPE placed a high premium on the learnings gained from the conduct of Educational Field Exposure and Cultural Dialogues in various IP-serving schools in the country prior to its operations. Experiences in the field served as references for the development of a culturally-appropriate curriculum making use of the minimum competencies prescribed in the formal basic education. The said curriculum was subjected to validation workshops and school-based trials in selected formal elementary and high schools located in IP-inhabited districts of Southeastern and Central Mindanao. The IIPE, which also serves as a training venue for school administrators, teachers, tribal leaders and sectoral groups such as youth/children and women, used to be a consortium of government agencies and non-government organizations based in Davao City that are actively working for increased access and improved quality education that is culturally-sensitive, appropriate, wholistic and relevant for ICCs/IPs in Mindanao. The consortium partners included the NCIP, DepEd-Region XI, Philippines Australia BEAM, MEDCo, MindanaWon, MINCODE, LumadsDev and the Assisi Development Foundation (Buasen Jr., 2010). Through a Core Group composed of School Presidents and authorized representatives of State and Private Universities and Colleges who attended the 1st and 2nd National Conferences on Indigenous Peoples’ Higher Education in Davao City and co-sponsored by the University of Southeastern Philippines (USEP), Minority Care International and the NCIP, a National Steering Committee on Indigenous Peoples’ Higher Education (NSC-IPHEd) is currently being put in place to advocate for IP Higher Education in the Philippines. The proposed Network is jointly facilitated by the NCIP, USEP and the Assisi Development Foundation. This initiative aims to establish partnership with CHED, DepEd and TESDA in advancing quality, relevant and culture-based higher education for IPs; to advocate and promote IP rights to education; to organize seminar-workshops in developing mechanisms for the integration of indigenous knowledge systems and practices (IKSPs) to instruction, research, extension and production; to plan out future gatherings and conferences on IP Education; and to establish linkage and support among Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and various stakeholders (Buasen Jr., 2010). In partnership with the Department of Education (DepEd) Technical Working Group on Muslim and Indigenous Peoples’ Education and other stakeholders on IP Education under the operational ambits of the Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA), NCIP helped draft a National IP Education Policy Framework during the Conference Workshop on July 22-24, 2008 at the Development Academy of the Philippines, Tagaytay City. The draft framework, which has undergone series of validation workshops by IPs and NCIP technical personnel, is a concerted effort based on various IP education initiatives and experiences nationwide that were shared during the inception workshop which were translated into vision and goals, principles, components, and priority activities as indicated in a draft action plan. These will serve as springboards for the formulation of an Indigenous Peoples’ Education Roadmap subject to series of continuing validation activities with the ICCs/IPs. The formulation of the said roadmap will be a quantum leap for the over-arching concern for all community-based efforts to be mainstreamed in policies, plans and programs for formal basic and higher education as well as non-formal and informal education of IPs. This will be complemented by NCIP’s priority program of documenting the indigenous knowledge systems and practices (IKSPs) and customary laws of the different indigenous cultural communities in tandem with the IPs themselves. These are essential to both policy and technical levels especially in the indigenization of school curricula, both for competencies and content, and how the educational system is operationalized in IP context (Buasen Jr., 2010). The NCIP asserts that culturally appropriate and responsive education enables the Indigenous Peoples to stand up, be counted and protect their rights as well as improve their multi-dimensional well-being in terms of social, cultural, economic and political situation. As such, education is indispensably considered by NCIP as an essential tool for “enabling” through recognition and empowerment, for “ensuring” by way of protection, and for “enhancing” as in promotion and development, of Indigenous Peoples’ rights and welfare, their ancestral domains, the assertion for self-governance and their cultural integrity. Relative to this, an Educational Assistance Program (EAP) is implemented as one of the big and most sought-after programs of the agency. Currently serving 16,353 grantees from 124 IP-inhabited Congressional Districts nationwide, the NCIP-EAP aims to improve the over-all quality of life, efficiency and enlightened empowerment of ICCs/IPs thru increased access to educational opportunities. In school year 2009-2010, there were 14,471 (88.49%) College grantees, 1,182 (7.23%) High School grantees and 700 (4.28%) Elementary grantees who qualified and availed of the program as per approved implementing guidelines. As of school year 2008-2009, there are 15,036 graduates assisted since the program was implemented under NCIP in 1999, and thus, a total of 28,534 beneficiaries from school year 1999-2000 to school year 2008-2009 (Buasen Jr., 2010). Following the parlance of indigenous context, an IP community must always be viewed as an entire school in itself that connotes the indispensable value of experience and practicality. As such, the approach must exhibit creative flexibility in content and pedagogy that puts a mandatory premium on practical relevance and responsiveness, historical, ethnographic and cultural sensitivity, community-centeredness, and rights-based, modular, and life-long learning focus. IPs must actively and substantially participate in all phases, levels or stages of any intervention. As a pre-requisite, community protocols such as their free and prior informed consent (FPIC) must be respected and properly obtained with community consultations being made a built-in component in all engagements. Simply put, the immediate aim for IP education is to build/increase capacity and skills of each child, youth and adult for an empowered understanding of the world around him/her and for productively participating in matters concerning the tribe while preserving and taking pride in his/her indigenous cultural roots and identity (Buasen Jr., 2010).
According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (2003), ‘Local and indigenous knowledge’ refers to the cumulative and complex bodies of knowledge, know-how, practices and representations that are maintained and developed by peoples with extended histories of interactions with the natural environment. UNESCO says that these many terms coexist because the wide range of social, political and scientific contexts have made it all but impossible to for a single term to be suitable in all circumstances.
UNESCO has recognized the importance of Indigenous Knowledge Systems, that it launched the Local Indigenous Knowledge Systems (LINKS) Project in 2002. As a cross-cutting intersectoral project, LINKS brings together all five programme sectors of UNESCO in a collaborative effort on local and indigenous knowledge. The LINKS Project focuses on this interface between local and indigenous knowledge and the Millennium Development Goals of poverty eradication and environmental sustainability. It addresses the different ways that indigenous knowledge, practices and worldviews are drawn into development and resource management processes. It also considers the implications this may have for building equity in governance, enhancing cultural pluralism and sustaining biodiversity (UNESCO, 2003).
Local and indigenous knowledge includes the sophisticated understandings, interpretation and meanings that are accumulated and developed by peoples having extended histories with the natural environment (UNESCO, 2003). For the vast majority of rural and indigenous peoples these knowledge systems provide the basis for local-level decision-making about fundamental aspects of day-to-day life (economic, social, cultural, ecological).
Indigenous knowledge is also one of the key action themes identified by UNESCO in the UN Decade for Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014). Indigenous and local knowledge spans several important areas. However, for this paper, it shall be limited to indigenous education in the Philippines.
Situation of Indigenous Education in the Philippines
The country has more than 110 ethnic tribes and cultural communities whose cultures and traditions are in varying states of extinction. These vanishing ancestral traditions and customary laws used to define social relationships and values and promoted efficiency of economic activities. Unfortunately, environmentally devastating socio-economic ventures, large-scale indiscriminate mining and industrial logging have brought incalculable damage to their primary source of livelihood and cultural sanctuary. The consequent destruction of their environment resulted in the further degradation of ancestral cultures which are largely shaped by the indigenous people’s interaction with the natural elements.
This resulting loss of their cultural identities, coupled with the devastation of their environment, have resulted in the serious economic displacement and cultural disempowerment of these communities. Tribal communities in various geographical areas are thus among the most impoverished and marginalized sectors of Philippines society (ACPC, 2005).
Though the Philippine Republic has been in existence for more than 100 years, it has only been since the late 1980s and the 1990s that the government sought to address the plight of the indigenous peoples. The present constitution, which was written in 1987, in Article XIV Sec 1 states: “The State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels, and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all. The State shall recognize, respect, and protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to preserve and develop their cultures, traditions, and institutions. It shall consider these rights in the formulation of national plans and policies.” These mandates were unfortunately not supported by specific legislation or policies. It was not until 1990s that further legislation was authored to protect the rights of the indigenous peoples.
In October 1997, then President Fidel V. Ramos signed into law Republic Act 8371-the Indigenous Peoples’ Right Act (IPRA). This legislation lays down the legal framework for addressing indigenous peoples’ poverty. It seeks to alleviate the plight of the country’s “poorest of the poor” by correcting, through legislation, the historical errors that led to the systematic dispossession of and discrimination against the indigenous peoples. The IPRA law enforces the 1987 Constitution’s mandate that the State should craft a policy “to recognize and promote the rights of indigenous peoples within the framework of national unity and development’’ and “to protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social and cultural well-being” (Asian Development Bank, 2002.
The IPRA law also serves as the basis for the establishment of indigenous schools. Section 28 of the IPRA law states: “The State shall, through the National Commission on Indigenous People (NCIP), provide a complete, adequate and integrated system of education, relevant to the needs of the children and young people of ICCs/IPs.” Section 30 further states: “The State shall provide equal access to various cultural opportunities to the ICCs/IPs through the educational system, public or cultural entities, scholarship, grants and other incentives without prejudice to their right to establish and control their educational systems and institutions by providing education in their own language, in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning. Indigenous children/youth shall have the right to all levels and forms of education of the State.” However, even with these recent legislations on indigenous peoples and indigenous rights, there remain very few indigenous schools in the country. In the Philippines, education is divided into formal and non-formal education. The formal sector is further divided into three levels: primary, secondary and tertiary. Each can be private or public. Ever since the Americans establishing the public school system in the country, no efforts were done on establishing schools that utilized indigenous knowledge. In fact, it was required in all schools that the American system be used-language and all. All Filipinos were required to learn only in English. It was only in the past 20 years that Filipino has been reintroduced as a language of instruction in schools, though English still has preference. Native regional languages have never been encouraged, much less those of the indigenous peoples. Only a handful of indigenous schools are in existence, all of them due solely on the efforts of the tribal elders, often with very minimal support from the government-if any.
Schools for Indigenous Knowledge and Traditions
Among the organizations in the country that promoted indigenous learning is the Asian Council for People’s Culture (ACPC). It was ACPC that came up with the SIKAT Programme. SIKAT is the Filipino word for ‘rising’ and at the same time the acronym for ‘Schools for Indigenous Knowledge and Traditions’. The combination of both meanings expresses well what the SIKAT programme is all about. It envisions a system at par with mainstream education, founded on the ways of life, traditions and culture of indigenous peoples, as a stepping stone to promote sincere development of the communities (Meneses, 2004).
The idea for the development of a culturally-responsive education was first expressed in 1999 by several of the indigenous leader present in one of ACPC’s training. ACPC decided to facilitate the building of a national network of indigenous community educators who would develop and promote a dynamic and culturally responsive curriculum for indigenous communities. This inter-tribal council of elders launched the movement for the promotion of indigenous education. They then put forth a document- the Kalinga Declaration- which envision; “Indigenous education founded on the life ways, tradition, worldview, culture and spirituality of the native community is a basic right of all indigenous people. It is a pathway of education that recognizes wisdom embedded in indigenous knowledge’’, (ACPC, 2004).
Since the Kalinga Declaration, ACPC facilitated teacher trainings, curriculum development workshops, tribal leaders’ forum and other activities to prepare the communities and their indigenous teachers for the establishment of their Schools for Indigenous Knowledge and Traditions.
According to Meneses(2004), the basic principles of SIKAT are:
SIKAT is an idea that originated from the indigenous people themselves, the concept and the results of its implementation are therefore also owned by them. Important decisions are made by the SIKAT Council of Elders, consisting of 15 elected members of different tribes nationwide.
The SIKAT- program is about indigenous people defining, developing and implementing their own education; content, inputs in curricula, lesson plans, and manuals come from the indigenous people involved in the SIKAT-program.
While globalization brings along many positive consequences and possibilities, it also brings the danger of cultural homogenization. The SIKAT- program offers indigenous people a chance to revitalize their culture giving indigenous people the chance to contribute to society and suggest innovation based upon their perspectives. The cultural variety among indigenous communities offers indigenous people, from remote areas, to meet for an enriching inter- tribal interaction.
Indigenous worldviews are in ways holistic. For one thing, indigenous people have expressed their survival to be inherently connected to their natural environment not only on a material level, but also on a spiritual level. Indigenous communities’ environment carries the soul of their ancestors, of their identity. The concept of ancestral domain and environmental sustainability urgently needed to safeguard this ancestral domain has a central place in the SIKAT curriculum.
Local representatives who are immersed in trainings like developing curriculum are the ones expected to eventually teach and sustain their respective community SIKAT school.
Rooted in Day to Day Reality
One reason for indigenous people to want to establish culturally responsive education is the experience that what children learn in Mainstream schools are often not relevant in their day-to-day lives. Handbooks, curricula in mainstream education are highly westernized. Many indigenous children even become indifferent of their cultural background. The high dropout rate among indigenous students can be attributed to a school calendar that does not take into account the planting and harvesting season vital to many indigenous communities. SIKAT wants to develop a relevant curriculum to equip them with skills, knowledge and values to help contribute to society, and take pride in their indigenous identity, instead of being uncomfortable about it.
SIKAT-participants often express aversion to be called para-teachers, or their education to be categorized as non-formal education. Through this they want to express that indigenous education should be recognized as quality basic education for their children, and not a form of additional education, just because it is different from mainstream education. Therefore advocacy and lobbying with the government, especially the Department Education is an important point of attention.
Achievement or Academic Performance of Indigenous Students
Thomson et al., (2003) examined the performance of Australia’s Indigenous students who participated as part of the early secondary school (Year 8) cohort of the IEA Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS 2003). The performance of Indigenous students in this report has been compared to that of Australia’s non-Indigenous students across a number of variables that are known to affect student achievement in TIMSS. In total, 562 Year 8 Indigenous students from 207 schools across Australia participated in the study. Indigenous status in the report includes both Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The analyses in this report categorised Indigenous students according to variables including gender, the student’s state and geographic location, student background characteristics and attitudes to learning, education resources in students’ homes, and the school’s socioeconomic composition. The average performance of Indigenous students in mathematics and science has been disaggregated by these variables in an attempt to identify those characteristics that may relate to Indigenous educational achievement. The analyses showed considerable differences in the level of Indigenous and non-Indigenous student achievement, and confirms findings from a large body of studies that have shown that Australia’s Indigenous students consistently perform at levels well below their non- Indigenous counterparts across all content domains in international studies. Some of the examined variables related in a consistent manner to the mathematics and science achievement of Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. However in some circumstances, the relationship between some variables exacerbates or assists Indigenous achievement to a greater extent compared to that of non-Indigenous students. Mitrou et al., (2002) stated that more than half of indigenous students aged 4-16 years (58%) in Western Australia were rated by their teachers as having low overall academic performance. Further, they stated that there is a high level of disparity in the overall academic performance of indigenous and non-indigenous students. The incidence of low academic performance is considerably higher among indigenous students than non-indigenous students. Teacher rated academic performance for indigenous students for numeracy and literacy was similar to overall academic performance in 2002, 59% of indigenous students in western Australia were rated as having low academic performance in literacy, and 57% were rated as having low academic performance in numeracy.
Factors Affecting Academic Performance of IP Students
Three key factors were found to be the predominant drivers associated with low academic performance. While these were not the only factors associated with academic performance they represent those which had the most impact. They were selected as the most powerful due to both the strength of their association with low academic performance and the high proportion of indigenous students affected by them. The three factors were emotional or behavioral difficulties, school attendance, and the educational attainment of the carers of indigenous students Mitrou et al., (2002). The most common specific emotional or behavioral difficulty experienced by indigenous students (as assessed by their teachers) was hyperactivity followed by conduct problems and problems with social behavior such as sharing. Students with conduct problems display a range of behaviors including lying, stealing and fighting along with tamper tantrums and disobedience Mitrou et al., (2002). According to Zubrick and Silbum (2006), the following factors were identified as significantly predictors of low academic performance: a) student-factors – speech difficulties, functional limitations risk of clinically significant emotional or behavioral difficulties in language other than English mainly spoken in the classroom, whether student usually does homework or study in a homework class and whether the carer has seen the class teacher in the past six months about a problem the student was having ar school; b) carer factors – primary carer’s education, labor force status and attendance at an Aboriginal funeral in the last 12 months; c) family and household factors – number of homes lived in and whether gambling causes problems in the household; and school environment factors – student-to-teacher ratio, days absent from school, unexplained absence from school, school suspension and repeating a year at school.
Conceptual Framework of the Study
IP high school students * B’laan * Manobo * Taga-kaolo
Non-IP high school students
IP Pilot Schools
* B’laan National High School * Demoloc Valley Nat’l. HS * Ticulon National High School
Factors Affecting Academic Performance
* Teacher Factors * Student Factors * School Factors * Parent Factors
Academic Performance in * English * Science * Mathematics
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram showing the relationship of dependent and independent variables of the study
As shown in the figure above, the IP Pilot Schools in Malita, Davao del Sur consist of the B’laan National High School, Demoloc Valley National High School, and Ticulon National High School in which most of the enrollees are IP students particularly the B’laan, Manobo and Taga-Kaolo tribes. The type of schools and students are the independent variables of the study.
The academic performance (the dependent variable) of the IP and non-IP high school students in English, Science and Mathematics can be influenced by some factors, namely: teacher-factors, student-factors, school-factors, and parent-factors (the moderating variables).
Ho1: There is no significant difference in the academic performance of IP and non-IP high school students in English, Science, and Mathematics.
Ho2: There is no significant relationship between the different factors on the academic performance of the IP and Non-IP high school students in English, Science, and Mathematics in terms of:
c. school-factors; and
This study will be conducted at the IP Pilot Schools in Malita, Davao del Sur, namely: the B’laan National High School which is located at Sitio Caldoz, Barangay Little Baguio; the Demoloc Valley National High School at Barangay Demoloc; and the Ticulon National High School at Barangay Ticulon. Little Baguio, Demoloc, and Ticulon are far-flung barangays of the municipality of Malita, Davao del Sur.
Little Baguio is approximately 40 km away from Barangay Poblacion. It is mainly compose of valleys and rolling hills. It is blessed with cold temperature, thus, called as “Little Baguio”. The barangay is dominated by B’laan tribe.
Demoloc is km away from Barangay Poblacion. It has a land area of 7,431 hectares compose of valleys and rolling hills. The barangay is dominated by Taga-Kaolo tribe (83.1%), followed by Cebuanos (10.5%), and the rest in other tribes like Ilonggos and Tagalogs.
Ticulon is ___ km away from Barangay Poblacion. It occupies an area of 2, 560 sq. km which comprise about 2.13% of the total land area of the municipality of Malita. Residents of Barangay Ticulon comprise the Cebuanos, B’laans and Taga-Kaolos who settled in the different sitios.
Plate 1. Map of the municipality of Malita
Research Design The descriptive-correlational design will be used in this study. Descriptive method is a general procedure employed in studies that have for their chief purpose the description of phenomenon (Good et.al., 1992). According to Good and Scate (1972), a descriptive survey will be used when the data to be gathered concerns the present condition providing the value of facts and focusing the attention to the most important things to be reported.
Correlational study aimed at finding relationships between variables under studies. In this study, the relationship between the different identified factors and academic performance of the IP and non IP high school students will be tested.
A researcher-made questionnaire will be used in gathering the needed data in this study. The questionnaire will be composed of the following parts: Section I – Profile of the Respondents; and Section II – Factors Affecting Academic Performance. This questionnaire will be answered by the students.
Another questionnaire will be designed which will be answered by the teacher, more specifically by the class adviser. Data on the National Achievement Test 2010 results in English, Science, and Mathematics will be asked.
The questionnaire will be checked as to its reliability and validity by conducting a pre-test before using it to the sample respondents. Moreover, it will be presented to the Thesis Committee of the Southern Philippines Agri-Business and Marine and Aquatic School of Technology (SPAMAST) for checking. Likewise, the questionnaire will be presented for validation and checking to three school principals of the schools covered in this study.
Sampling Design and Technique
Census survey will be conducted to the non-IP high school students considering that it has less population of only 22 students. Moreover, proportionate stratified sampling technique will be used in determining the sample size of the IP high school students because of its big population. Based on the population of the IP high school students, the sample size will be computed using the Sloven’s formula at 5% margin of error (Please refer to Appendix 3 for the Sloven formula and computation of the sample size). Sample size will then proportionately distributed to each school included in this study.
Table 1. Population and sample size of the study
SCHOOL | POP. OFIPs | SAMPLESIZE | POP. OFNON-IPs | TOTAL | B’laan National High School | 63 | 42 | 7 | 49 | Demoloc Valley NHSTiculon National High School | 6661 | 4541 | 87 | 5348 | Total | 190 | 128 | 22 | 170 |
The Respondents of the Study
The respondents of this study will be the second year students of the IP Pilot Schools in Malita, Davao del Sur, namely: the B’laan National High School, the Demoloc Valley National High School, and the Ticulon National High School. The second year level is selected because the students under this year level are subjected to the National Achievement Test (NAT) which is used as the basis for analyzing the academic performance of the students. The other respondents will be the teachers or class advisers from whom the NAT results of the students in English, Science and Mathematics will be asked.
In analyzing the academic performance of the pupils, the following scale will be used: PARAMETER LIMITS | DESCRIPTION | ACADEMICPERFORMANCE | 91 above | Above advanced | Performance is very good | 86 – 90 | Proficient | Performance is good | 81 – 85 | Approaching proficiency | Performance is fair | 75 – 80 | Basic | Performance is poor | 74 below | Below basic | Performance needs improvement | | | |
In analyzing the factors affecting the academic performance of the IP and non-IP high school students, the following scale will be used: PARAMETER LIMITS | RESPONSE CATEGORY | INTERPRETATION | 4.26 – 5.00 | Strongly agree | Very strong factor | 3.26 – 4.25 | Agree | Strong factor | 2.51 – 3.25 | Fairly agree | Moderate factor | 1.76 – 2.50 | Disagree | Less factor | 1.00 – 1.75 | Strongly Disagree | Not a factor | Data Gathering Procedure
Permission from the school principals to conduct the study will be sought before data gathering. The researcher will personally administer the survey questionnaire to the respondents. The students will be requested to gather in one room to simultaneously administer the questionnaire. The purpose of the study and the instructions in answering the questionnaire will be explained. The students will be asked whether they understand the instructions or not. The questionnaire will be then distributed to the respondents and will be simultaneously answered and filled. After answering the questionnaire will be collected.
The following will be the statistical tools to be used in the analysis and interpretation of the data.
This will be used in describing the profile of the respondents. Formula: f
%= -------- x 100 N
where: % = percentage
f = frequency
n = total number of cases
Computation of the mean will be employed to determine the averages of quantitative data. Formula: x M = --------- N
Where: M = Mean
x = sum of the scores
N – total number of cases
This tool will be used to find out the relationship of two variables, in this study, the identified factors and academic performance. This will be used in answering the hypothesis. Formula: n∑xy – (∑x)( ∑y) r= -------------------------------------------------- [n∑x² - (∑x)²] [n∑y² - (∑y)²]
where: r = correlation between x and y ∑x = sum of the scores in x ∑y = sum of the scores in y ∑xy = sum of the products of x and y N = number of cases ∑x² = sum of the squared of x scores ∑y² = sum of the squared of y scores
To analyze the correlation coefficient (r), the following was used as basis: r VALUES DESCRIPTION
0.00 to 0.20 slight correlation ; almost negligible relationship
0.21 to 0.40 low correlation ; small relationship
0.41 to 0.70 moderate correlation ; substantial relationship
0.71 to 0.90 high correlation ; marked relationship
0.91 to 0.99 very high correlation; very dependable relationship 1.0 perfect correlation; perfect relationship
This tool will be used in analyzing significant differences as stated in the hypotheses. Formula: _ _ X1 – X2 t = ---------------------- S12 S22 -----+ ------ n1 n2
where: _ X1 = mean of the first group
X2 = mean of the second group
S12 = variance of the first group
S22 = variance of the second group
n1 = number of cases in the first group
n2 = number of cases in the second group
ACPC. 2004. Indigenous Education in the Philippines. Asian Council for People’s Culture.
ACPC. 2005. ACPC Research Report on Indigenous Education in the Philippines. Asian Council for People’s Culture.
ADB. 2002. Ethnic Minority and Poverty Reduction. Asian Development Bank. P13.
BERDINE, W.H. 1987. Assessment in Special Education. Volume 3. P444.
BUASEN, C.P. JR. 2010. Director IV, Office on Education, Culture and Health. Education in the Context of Philippine Indigenous Peoples.
MENESES, D.J. 2004. Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Higher Education. Volume 2. P1,4.
MEYER, S. 1987. Assessment of Learning: Guide for Special Education. P14.
MITROU, F., LAWRENCE, D., DE MAIO, J. 2002. Education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People. WAACHS Team.
THOMSON, S., McKELVIE, P., AND MURNANE, H. 2003. Achievement of Australia’s Early Secondary Indigenous Students: Findings from TIMSS.
TIMSS. 2003. Trends in International Mathematical and Science Study. (TIMSS) in Australia.
UNESCO. 2003. Education Rights of the Indigenous Peoples. Nov. 2003 Journal. P.13.
ZUBRICK, S. and SILBUM, S. 2006. The Western Australian Aboriginal Child Health Survey: Improving the Educational Experiences of Aboriginal Children and Young People. Curtin Unoversity of Technology and Telethon Institute for Child Health Research, Perth.
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE TEACHERS
Part I. Personal Background
Directions: Please supply the information. Choose the information from the items below by putting check (/) mark in the box the required information.
Name of Teacher:__________________________________________ (Family Name) (First Name) (M.I.)
Civil Status:______ Position: ________
Educational Attainment: ( ) Bachelor’s Degree ( ) M.A./M.S. Units ( ) Masters’ Degree Holder ( ) Doctors’ Degree Holder
Years in Teaching Career: ( ) 1 to 5 years ( ) 11 to 15 years
( ) 5 to 10 years ( ) 16 years and up
Specialization: ( ) English ( ) Science ( ) non-English ( ) non-Science ( ) Math ( ) non-Math
Part II. NAT Results of the Students for 2010 NAME OF STUDENT | TYPE OF STUDENT(IP or Non-IP) | SUBJECT AREA | | | ENGLISH | SCIENCE | MATH | 1. | | | | | | 2. | | | | | | 3. | | | | | | 4. | | | | | | 5. | | | | | | 6. | | | | | | 7. | | | | | | 8. | | | | | | 9. | | | | | | 10. | | | | | | 11. | | | | | | 12/ | | | | | | 13. | | | | | | 14. | | | | | | 15. | | | | | | 16. | | | | | | 17. | | | | | | 18. | | | | | | 19. | | | | | | 20. | | | | | | 21. | | | | | | 22. | | | | | | 23. | | | | | | 24. | | | | | | 25. | | | | | | 26. | | | | | | 27. | | | | | | 28. | | | | | | 29. | | | | | | 30. | | | | | | 31. | | | | | | 32. | | | | | | 33. | | | | | | 34. | | | | | | 35. | | | | | |
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE STUDENTS
Part I. Personal Background
Name of Student:___________________________________________
School enrolled at:__________________________________________
Age: __________ Sex: __________
Rank in Class: [ ] 1st or Top 1 [ ] 4th or Top 4 [ ] 2nd or Top 2 [ ] 5th or Top 5 [ ] 3rd or Top 3 [ ] Top 6 or beyond
Combined Monthly Income of Parents: [ ] less than P3,000 [ ] P9,000 – P11,999 [ ] P3,000 – P5,999 [ ] P12,000 – P 15,000 [ ] P6,000 – P8,999 [ ] above P15,000
Part II. Factors Affecting Academic Performance
Directions: The statement below describe the factors on the academic performance of the I.P and Non-I.P high school students. Each item is followed by a number of responses. Corresponding to each response is a numeric scale with the qualitative equivalents. Encircle the number of your response to each statement below using the guide. 5 - Highly Agree 4 - Moderately Agree 3 - Agree 2 - Fairly Agree 1 - Disagree A) Parent-Factors Particulars | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1. My parents provide all my basic needs in school | | | | | | 2. My parents show support by attending to school-related activities. | | | | | | 3. My parents help do my assignments given by the teachers. | | | | | | 4. My parents share their knowledge by doing a review of our lessons during night time. | | | | | | 5. My parents spent more on nutritious food and other needs rather than on their vices, such as smoking, drinking alcoholic beverages, and gambling. | | | | | | 6. My parents regularly follow-up our performance at school. | | | | | | 7. My parents always encourage us to go to school despite of difficulties (e.i. financial problems). | | | | | | 8. My parents hoped that their siblings can finish not only basic education but to finish a degree. | | | | | | | | | | | | B) Teacher-factors Particulars | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1. The teacher uses instructional or teaching materials. | | | | | | 2. The teacher provides students with standard and rules. | | | | | | 3. The teacher consistently follow-up the learners capability in doing activity. | | | | | | 4. The teacher encouraged the students to practice reading and studying | | | | | | 5. The teacher is willing to extend more effort in helping the students in his/her study habits by giving techniques and advices. | | | | | | 6. The teacher provides adequate illustrations and examples. | | | | | | 7. The teacher maintains clear communication with students | | | | | | 8. The teacher has high perseverance in the student’s attitude and behavior. | | | | | | 9. The teacher guides the students properly. | | | | | | 10. The teacher observes proper classroom instruction. | | | | | | C) Student-Factors Particulars | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1. I keep interest, courage and self-confidence in the class. | | | | | | 2. I am behave inside the class and refrain from bullying other students. | | | | | | 3. I keep willingness to exert efforts in all class activities. | | | | | | 4. I read books or articles related to English, science and mathematics | | | | | | 5. I submit all class requirements on time. | | | | | | 6. I jot down notes during class discussion. | | | | | | 7. I join activities related to English, Science and Mathematics | | | | | | 8. I refrain from copying the works of my classmates. | | | | | | 9. I am always present in class or seldom absent from class. | | | | | | 10. I come to class always on time or seldom late. | | | | | | D. School Factors Particulars | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1. Laboratory facilities and apparatus are adequate for the subject. | | | | | | 2. Library services are open and suggests student-friendly concept. | | | | | | 3. Classroom facilities have enough chairs and tables to the students. | | | | | | 4. Classroom is well ventilated. | | | | | | 5. Instructional materials such as books, journals, pamphlets are adequately available in the library. | | | | | | 6. Student-teacher ratio is within the standard or ideal size. | | | | | |
November 22, 2011
MRS. ANITA W. ISAIAS
Ticulon National High School
Dear Ma’am Isaias:
I am Mrs. Jane G. Muana, a graduate student of the SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES AGRI-BUSINESS AND MARINE AND AQUATIC SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY (SPAMAST) and is currently conducting a research entitled, “Assessment of the Academic Performance of IP students in IP Pilot Schools in Malita, Davao del Sur”.
In this regard, I am asking your support by allowing me to gather data from your students considering that the school you manage is part or included as respondents of my study being one of the IP Pilot Schools in the municipality of Malita.
Hoping for your benevolent heart to support me in my undertakings to ensure success and completion of my requirements in the graduate school.
Thank you. God Bless!
JANE G. MUANA Researcher
GRACE D. BUENCILLO, DBA
COMPUTATION OF THE SAMPLE SIZE
Formula: N n = ------------- 1 + (Ne2)
where: n = sample size N = population e = margin of error (5%)
Computation: 190 n = ------------------- 1 + (190*.052)
190 = ---------------------- 1 + (190*.0025)
190 = ---------------------- 1 + (1.45)
190 = ---------------------- 2.45