SSP Best Practices Basic Research Oliver Guevarra Theme4

Republic of the Philippines 1
Department of Education
Region IV- A CALABARZON
Division of Batangas Province
BAYORBOR NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Mataasnakahoy, Batangas
BEST PRACTICES OF A LEADER AND PARTNER SCHOOL : AN INPUT

FOR SCHOOL-TO-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
AN ACTION RESEARCH SUBMITTED AS AN ENTRY TO THE 2017

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BASIC EDUCATION
RESEARCHERS (ICBER)
Authors:
Oliver R. Guevarra
Teacher III
Romana Glenda S. Lagmay

Master Teacher I
Mataasnakahoy District
Affiliation:
Batangas Researchers Association for Value-driven Education (BRAVEr)

Mataasnakahoy’s Organization of Leaders and Dedicated Educators
through Research (MOLDER)
December 5-7, 2017

Philippine International Convention Center, Pasay City, Philippines
Guevarra, Oliver R. and Lagmay, Romana Glenda S. (2017). Best Practices of Leader and Partner School: An Input
for School-to-School Partnership Program Development. Batangas Province.
Enclosure to the DepEd Regional Memorandum No. 389, s. 2017
TEMPLATE FOR RESEARCH ENTRY
Theme: Governance/ School Administration/ Leadership/

Management
Research Title: BEST PRACTICES OF A LEADER AND PARTNER

SCHOOL : AN INPUT FOR SCHOOL-TO-
SCHOOL PARTNERSHIP
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
Authors: Oliver R. Guevarra

Teacher III
Romana Glenda S. Lagmay
Master Teacher I
School/District: Bayorbor National High School/Mataasnakahoy District
E-mail Address: oliver.guevarra001@deped.gov.ph

Contact Number(s): 0908-2006295
Affiliation: Batangas Researchers Association for Value-driven

Education (BRAVE)
Mataasnakahoy’s Organization of Leaders and Dedicated
Educators through Research (MOLDER)
ABSTRACT
Purpose: This study was conducted to determine the best practices of leader
and partner school as an input for School-to-School Partnership Program
Development
Design/Methodology/Approach: Descriptive method of research was
utilized in the conduct of the study. The study involved forty-three (43)
teachers, two (2) school heads, one (1) district supervisor, thirty-five (35)
students/pupils and twelve (12) parents of Bayorbor National High School

and Santol-Manggahan Elementary School. Survey questionnaire was used
to determine the best practices of leader and partner school as an input of
SSP Program development. Frequency, percentages, ranking, mean,
weighted arithmetic mean and t-Test were used to analyzed the collected
data.
Findings: The results showed that teachers, students/pupils and other
stakeholders have positive attitude and perception on the implementation of
School-to-School Partnership Program. Leader School and partner school
greatly exemplifies best practices on the implementation of SSP Program.
Moreover, both leader and partner school demonstrates positive results on
the implementation of SSP Program. An action plan developed is very
beneficial to other schools to reached their full potentials.
Originality/Value: This study provide mechanism and guide to other schools
and will help them reached their full potential.
Keywords: School-to-School Partnership, Leader School, Partner School,
Best Practices
References:
Armstrong, P. (2015). Effective School Partnerships and Collaboration for

School Improvement: A Review of the Evidence. Research Report.
Retrieved from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/24523/1/DFE-
RR466__School_improvement_effective_school_partnerships.pdf
Coldron, J., Crawford, M., Jones, S. and Simkins, T. (2014) The restructuring
of schooling in England: The responses of well-positioned headteachers.
Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 42 (3), pp.
387403.http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/24523/1/DFERR466__School_improvement
_effective_school_partnerships.pdf
DepEd Order No. 44, s. 2016. Guidelines on the School-to-School
Partnerships for Fiscal Year 2016.
Garcia, Carlito D. and Reganit, Arnulfo Aaron R. (2010). Developing

Competencies in Research and Thesis Writing. Mandaluyong City:
Books Atbp. Publishing Corporation, ISBN 978-971-0388-86-8.
Hill, R., Dunford, J., Parish, N., Rea, S., & Sandals, L. (2012) The growth of
academy chains: implications for leaders and leadership.
Nottingham: National College of School Leadership (NCSL).
1. Research Title: BEST PRATICES OF A LEADER AND PARTNER
SCHOOL : AN INPUT FOR SCHOOL-TO-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIP
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
2. Introduction
School-to-school partnership program offer unique insights into
another way of life. By collaborating on joint projects, learners develop
appreciation of cultural diversity, develop a competitive and creative mind,
and other skills that lead to the mastery of concepts in each subject. For
teachers, working with colleagues in other school, specifically with their
leader or partner school is a rewarding way to develop professionally, engage
young learners with the curriculum, and create further exciting opportunities
for sharing knowledge and wisdom.
The Department of Education (DepEd) believes that high performing
schools can be instruments for reform. Through school-to-school partnerships,
high-performing schools can share their best practices and help other schools
improve their school performance using Learning Action Cells (LAC), the
Continuous Improvement (CI) program and School-Based Management
(SBM). This requires that high-performing schools become Leader Schools
with active leadership roles, initiating partnerships with other schools and
taking on broader responsibilities to help elevate the performance of other
schools with in their district or division (DepEd Order No. 44, s. 2016 and
Armstrong, 2015).
The implementation of School-to-school partnership program started
last Fiscal Year 2016 wherein Bayorbor National High School was chosen as
the Leader School and Paaralang Elementarya ng Santol-Manggahan was
chosen as Partner School.
The school-to-school partnership program was implemented to provide
a mechanism and guidance for this kind of cooperation between and among
schools and to promote the culture of sharing because these schools which
are high-performing can be valuable resource as coaches, mentors or role
models for those schools that havenot yet reached their full potential (DepEd
Order No. 44, s. 2016).
In addition, the Department of Education (DepEd) believes that high-
performing schools can be instruments for reform. Through school-to-school
partnerships, high performing schools can share their best practices and help
other schools improve their perfomance using Learning Action Cell (LAC), the
Continuous Improvemnt (CI) Program, and School-Based Management
(SBM). This requires that high performing schools become Leader Schools
with active leadership roles, initiating partnerships with other schools and
taking on broader responsibilities to help elevate the perfomance of other
schools within their District or Division (DepEd Order No. 44, s. 2016).
In view of the foregoing, it is apt for the researchers to determine the
Best Practices of a Leader and partner School as an Input for school-to-
school program development in order to help other schools to elevate their
performance and reach their full potential.
3. Brief Review of Literature
According to Armstrong (2015) that schools working together leads to
better results. Along with our best schools, we will encourage strong and
experienced sponsors to play a leadership role in driving the improvement of
the whole school system, including through leading more formal federations
and chains.
According to Woods et al.,(2013) that the evidence for indirect impacts
of inter-school collaboration on school improvement is more widespread.
Many studies report improvements in areas such as staff professional
development and career opportunities (Hill et al., 2012; West, 2010); sharing
good practice and innovation (Stoll, 2015; Chapman et al., 2009a); reductions
and realignments in head teacher workload (alleviating burnout and
facilitating succession) and organisational and financial efficiency as a
consequence of inter-school collaboration
Stoll (2015) pointed out that research points to the positive influence of
inter-school collaboration on teachers and teaching, with practitioners
reporting an increased motivation to engage in professional dialogue with
their colleagues, knowledge mobilisation and a general shift towards more
learning-oriented and enquiry-based cultures in schools that have been
collaborating . There is also evidence of inter-school collaboration facilitating
curriculum development and problem-solving (Ainscow et al., 2006).
Inter-school collaboration can also provide opportunities for leadership
training and development as schools look to build leadership capacity to
address the additional workload that accompanies the partnership work. As
such, staff members have increased opportunities to take on leadership
responsibilities both within and between schools and work with, and observe,
leaders from other institutions (Hill, 2010; Hadfield and Chapman, 2009).
Sandals and Bryant ( 2014) stated that school leaders have welcomed
the encouragement to lead local school improvement through partnerships
such as teaching school alliances, MATs and federations, as well as system-
wide strategic partnerships. These schools led partnerships, some involving
schools of all phases, are playing an increasingly prominent role in shaping,
commissioning, brokering and delivering local school improvement services
in these 10 local systems.
Many studies report on schools entering into collaboration with other
schools on a voluntary basis because of an underlying need and mutual
benefit to do so. For example, small schools, often in rural and remote
locations, may enter into partnerships as a means of sharing resources and
taking advantages of economies of scale through shared contracts and
resource (Woods et al., 2010) or opportunities for joint professional and
curriculum development. Schools may also start working together to address
poor Local Authority provision and an associated paucity of adequate service
provision ( Coldron et al., 2014).
In other instances schools may enter into partnerships with other
schools to address their own poor performance. This has been a particular
feature of the NLE concept in which expert leaders partner poor performing
schools and import their expertise, knowledge and systems to facilitate
improvement (Hill and Mathews, 2010) and also of academy chains that have
taken on struggling schools as members to bring about radical improvement
and transformation (Hill et al., 2012).
4. Research Questions
Generally, this study focused on the best practices of a leader and
partner school as an Input for School-to-School Partnership Program
Development.
Specifically, this study seek answers to the following:
1. What is the attitude and perception of teachers, students and
stakeholders in the implementation of school-to-school partnership
program?
2. What are the best practices of leader and partner school in the
implementation of school-to-school partnership program in terms of:
1.1 Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
1.2 Leadership and Governance
1.3 Disaster Risk Reduction
3. Is there any significant relationship between the the attitude and
perception of teachers, students and stakeholders and the best
practices of leader and partner school on the implementation of
School-to-School Partnership Program? Is there any significant
difference between the best practice of leader and partner school in
the implementation of school-to-school partnership program?
4. Based on the findings, what action plan can be proposed for the
development of school-to-school partnership program to help elevate
the performance of other schools?
5. Scope and Limitations
The main focus of the study was to determine the best practices of a
leader and partner school as an input for School-to-School partnership
program development.
For this purpose, the researchers assessed the best practices of a
leader and a partner school as an input for school-to-school partnership
program development in terms of:
The study was limited to the responses of forty-three (43) teachers,
two (2) school heads, one (1) district supervisor, thirty-five (35)
students/pupils and twelve (12) parents of Bayorbor National High School
and Santol-Manggahan Elementary School.
The study was further delimited to the questionnaire items or indicators
of variables of investigation on their assessment on the best practices of a
leader and partner school as an input for school-to-school partnership
program development.
6. Research Methodology
This study describe the best practices of a leader and partner school
as an input for School-to-School partnership program development. To attain
this purpose, the researcher used the descriptive method of research since it
is most appropriate in determining current status and situations related to the
variables of the study being conducted.
Garcia and Reganit (2010) cited that descriptive research aims to
describe systematically, functionally, accurately, and objectively, a situation,
problem or phenomena.
A. Sampling
The researchers used purposive sampling in choosing the
respondents of the study. Purposive sampling is a type of non-
scientific sampling design based on selecting the individuals as
samples according to the purposes of the researcher as his controls.
An individual is chosen as part of a sample due to good evidence that
he is a representative of the total population (Paler-Calmorin,
2010).The study will involve forty-three (43) teachers, two (2) school
heads, one (1) district supervisor, thirty-five (35) pupils and twelve (12)
parents of Bayorbor National High School and Santol-Manggahan
Elementary School.
B. Data Collections
The researchers prepared the survey questionnaire and letter to
the teachers, school heads, district supervisor, students and parents
which was chosen as the respondents of the study. Sources of issues
and concerns regarding the best practices of a a leader and partner
school as an input in school-to-school partnership program
development was determined to form a good background of the study.
Various studies and researches was utilized as well as other
references that have a great semblance of the study. The literatures
confirmed the observation and inferences derived from them by the
researchers. A semi-structured questionnaire was formulated and
validated by experts from Bayorbor National High School to ensure
that the contents was correct and was accurately constructed. The
researchers administered the semi-structured questionnaire to the
teachers, school heads, district supervisor, student/pupils and parent
respondents. After the data was collected, the researchers performed
the analysis and interpretation of data using the different statistical
tools.
Statistical tools used in the study to interpret and analyzed the
data gathered by the researchers are listed below:
Frequency: This was used determine the number of times the
event occurred in an experiment or study. In this study, it was used for
questions 1 and 2.
Percentage: This was used to interpret the descriptive data on
the study. In this study, it was used to determine the percentage for
research questions 1and 2. It can be calculated using the formula
below:
Number of cases
Percentage = Total number of cases x 100
Ranking. This was used to determine the relationship between
a set of items such that, for any two items, the first is either 'ranked
higher than', 'ranked lower than' or 'ranked equal to' the second.
Specifically, it is used to rank the variables for each items in research
objective no.1 and 2.
Weighted Arithmetic Mean: This was used to determine the
average of all values in relation to all data gathered. In this study, it
was used to determine the responses in research question number 1
and 2. It can be calculated using the formula:
Ẋ = ∑fx
∑f
Where
Ẋ = weighted arithmetic mean
∑fx = sum of all products of f and x , where f is the
frequency of each weight and x, weight, i.e., 4, 3, 2, 1
∑f = sum of the subjects/respondents
The following 4-Point Rating Scale was used to interpret
the computed weighted mean on best practices of leader and
partner school as an input for School-to-School Partnership
Program Development.
4-Point Rating Scale
Weight Scale/Range Verbal Interpretation
4 3.45-4.00 Strongly Agree/Always
3 2.45-3.44 Agree/Often
2 1.45-2.44 Disagree/Sometimes
1 1.44 below Strongly Disagree/Never

Pearson r:This was used to determine the relationship between two sets
of variables, X and Y. In this study, it was the significant relationship between
the attitude and perception of teachers, students and stakeholders and the
best practices of leader and partner school on the implementation of School-
to-School Partnership Program.It was used to answer research question
number 3. It can be calculated using the formula below:
rxy = N∑XY - (∑X) (∑Y)

√[N∑X2 - ∑X)2 ] - [N Y2 - (∑Y)2]
where:
rxy = correlation between X and Y
∑ XY = sum of the product of X and Y
∑X = sum of X
∑Y = sum of Y
t-Test: This was used to determine the significant difference between
the best practices of leader and partner school in the implementation of
School-to-School Partnership Program. It can be calculated using the formula
below:
t = ____∑D
√N∑D2 - (∑D)2
N - 1
Where:
t = t-Test
∑D12 = Summation of Difference
N = Total Number of cases
C. Ethical Issues. The researchers requested the help of fellow
teachers in the interpretation and analysis of the responses. It was done to
refrain from bias that would hinder the reliability and validity of results.
In statistical analysis of data, the researchers sought help of the
mathematics teachers. A cover letter was attached to the questionnaire that
entails the permission in the conduct of the study and assurance that the
information given was confidential and was used only for the purpose of the
study.
7. Results and Discussion. This part presents and discusses the results of
the study in response to all specific questions stated in research questions
and supported herein by statistical tables and corresponding interpretation,
implications and theoretical bases.
Research Question No. 1. Attitude and Perception of Teachers, Pupils and
other Stakeholders in the Implementation of SSP Program
Table 1
Attitude and Perception of Teachers in the Implementation of SSP Program
The table shows the attitude and perception of teachers on the
implementation of School-to-School Partnership Program. It was revealed
that all items got a verbal interpretation of Strongly Agree. The item “Engage
in collaborative professional development activities such as CI, LAC and
Action Research” ranked 1 with a weighted mean score of 4.00 followed by
that of “Motivate the teachers to strengthen, support and even transform
individual partner”, “Encourage the teachers to expand their horizon in
teaching”, Assist teachers in overcoming difficulties in teaching and dealing
with students”, Show eagerness to learn and improve themselves in different
genre” ranked 2-5 with a weighted mean scores of 3.98, 3.95, 3.93 and 3.91
respectively.
As a whole, the teachers have a positive attitude and perception on
the implementation of SSP Program with a weighted arithmetic mean of
3.9627 and a verbal interpretation of Strongly Agree.
On the study conducted by Stoll (2015) and Ainscow et.al (2006) they
have pointed out that “research points to the positive influence of inter-school
collaboration on teachers and teaching, with practitioners reporting an
increased motivation to engage in professional dialogue with their colleagues,
knowledge mobilization and a general shift towards more learning-oriented
and enquiry-based cultures in schools that have been collaborating. There is
also evidence of inter-school collaboration facilitating curriculum development
and problem-solving”.
Table 2
Attitude and Perception of Students/Pupils in the Implementation of
SSP Program
The table shows the attitude and perception of students/pupils
on the implementation of School-to-School Partnership Program. It
was revealed that all the items got a verbal interpretation of Strongly
Agree. That of “Increase ownership for learning” ranked 1 with a mean
score of 4.00 followed by that of “Motivate to learn more”, “Gain
knowledge and experience of leadership and influencing change”,
“Increase confidence and skills” and “Recognize achievements
through accredited leadership and extra curricular awards” ranked 2-5
with a weighted mean scores of 3.97, 3.94, 3.91 and 3.89 respectively.
As a whole, SSP Program greatly influence students/pupils to
learn with a weighted arithmetic mean of 3.9714 and a verbal
interpretation of Strongly Agree.
According to the study conducted by Lindsay et al. (2007) found
that those schools that had entered into a collaboration with a common
purpose were more likely to succeed and sustain than those that had
been forced to collaborate. This suggests that attempts to facilitate
inter-school 30 collaboration via centrally driven initiatives may not
necessarily be the most effective way to facilitate sustainability.
Table 3
Attitude and Perception of Other Stakeholders in the
Implementation of SSP Program
The data shows the attitude and perception of other
stakeholders on the implementation of School-to-School Partnership
Program. It was revealed that all items got a verbal interpretation of
Strongly Agree.That of “improve program quality and staff
development, particularly when there is crossover between school and
community organization staff” ranked 1 with a weighted mean score of
4.00 followed by that of “foster better alignment of programming to
support a shared vision for learning, one which aligns curriculum to
support state and local standards” and “maximize resource use such
as facilities, staff, data and curriculum” ranked 2.5 with a weighted
mean scores of 3.92. On rank 4 and 5, that of “help gain access to and
recruit groups of students most in need of support services” and
“delineate of roles and responsibilities for the community providers
enhances efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery while
ensuring that the needs of the school are being met” got a weighted
mean scores of 3.83 and 3.75 respectively.
As a whole, other stakeholders also perceived the SSP
Program positively with weighted arithmetic mean of 3.9166 and a
verbal interpretation of Strongly Agree.
According to Martin, et.al (2005) “Parents, families, and
community members play a very important role in the education
system. It is important for them to realize how much influence they can
have over students and schools, especially when they become
involved in school matters ”.
On the study conducted by Stefanski, et.al (2016) concluded
that through this comparative analysis of the four partnership models,
we sought not only to provide a clearer picture of the possibility of
expanded family roles, but also to offer examples for schools and
organizations searching for ways to create more inclusive and
collaborative family–school–community partnerships. As depicted in
Figure 1, the implications for partnership policies and practices differ
across the four types. At the first level, partnerships must strive to
increase family access to resources and build trusting relationships
through open communication. More complex and comprehensive
forms of partnerships must build on this foundation by first increasing
ways in which family members can meaningfully participate in school–
community partnerships and have a voice in decision-making, then by
supporting leadership development and bridging the traditional power
gap that too often exists between public institutions and families,
especially those who live in high-poverty neighborhoods. Although
establishing more meaningful roles for families requires time and
resources, the literature we reviewed indicates that the rewards for
students, families, and schools are well worth the investment.
Research Question No. 2. Best Practices of Leader and Partner School on
the Implementation of School-to-School Partnership Program in terms of:
The table on the preceding page shows the best practices of
leader and partner school in the implementation of School-to-School
Partnership Program in terms of curriculum, instruction and
assessment. It was revealed that both leader and partner school have
a verbal interpretation of Always for item “conduct capacity building for
teachers on content, pedagogy, classroom management, differentiated
instruction, and inclusive education” ranked 1 with a weighted mean
scores of 4.00 respectively. On the other hand, that of “create teacher-
made learning materials for use in differentiated and innovative

instruction” and “contextualize learning materials and teaching guides”
ranked 2 and 3, and 3 and 2 for leader and partner school with a
weighted mean scores of 3.87 and 3.81, and 3.71 and 3.57
respectively.
Table 4
Best Practices of Leader ad Partner School on the Implementation of SSP
Program in terms of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
Moreover, that of “conduct activities fr teaching and assessment
including the purchase of supplies and materials necessary to conduct
them” and “implement LAC projects particulalry special education,
multimedia education and SHS” ranked 4 and 5 with a weighted mean
scores of 3.74, 3.55, 3.43 and 3.43 respectively. While that of
“organize,mobilize, and support activities of other lAC project teams”
and “tapping indigenous people (IP) resource persons from the
community to share their knowledge and practices” ranked 6 and 7 for
leader and partner school with a weighted mean scores of 3.48, 3.29,
3.23 and 3.14 respectively.
As a whole, both leader and partner school have best practices
in curriculum, instruction and assessment with a weighted arithmetic
mean of 3.68 and 3.51 and a verbal interpretations of Always
respectively. This means that there is a link between leader and
partner school for them to improve and develop their curriculum,
instruction and assessment.
According to the study conducted by Maheady, et.al (2016)
concluded that School-university partnerships of any size provide
opportunities for educators to play a more significant and constructive
role in educational reform efforts. While it would be better if more state
and federal funding were available to establish and sustain
comprehensive school-university partnerships, most teacher educators
must persist in the absence of such resources. This should not
diminish, however, the potential utility of collaborative efforts at any
scale. Collectively, we can create more visible and reliable links
among teacher education, instructional practice, and student learning,
a prerequisite for reestablishing professional credibility in the eyes of
critics. Doing so, however, will require substantive changes in how
teaching and learning are conceptualized, how clinical experiences are
designed and evaluated, and how well teacher educators learn to work
collaboratively with school partners.
Table 5
Best Practices of Leader and Partner School on the Implementation of SSP
Program in terms of Leadership and Governance
Table 5 shows the best practices of leader and partner school
on the implementation of SSP program in terms of leadership and
governance. It was revealed that 9 out of 9 items the leader school got
a verbal interpretation of Always while 7 items from partner school.
That of “showed transparency and accountability” ranked first on both
leader and partner school with a weighted mean scores of 4.00 and
3.93 respectively. While, that of “practice solid waste management”
and “implement water,sanitation and hygiene program” ranked 2 and 3
for leader school and 3 and 2 for partner school with a weighted mean
scores of 3.97 and 3.94, and 3.79 and 3.71 respectively.
Moreover, that of “develop better enrolment management” and
“conduct CI methodology, LAC and action research” ranked 9 on the

leader school and partner school with a weighted mean scores of 3.74
and 3.50 respectively.
As a whole, both leader and partner school have best practices
on leadership and governance with a weighted arithmetic mean scores
of 3.87 and 3.57 and a verbal interpretation of Always respectively.
This means that through SSP program leader school and partner
school showed transparency and accountability through the creation of
transparency board ans school report card. At the same the leader
school and partner school were crafted, implemented and practiced
innovative techniques on solid waste management.
Table 6
Best Practices of Leader ad Partner School on the Implementation of SSP
Program in terms of Disaster Risk Reduction
Table 6 shows the best practices of leader and partner school
on the implementation of SSP program in terms of disaster risk
reduction. It was revealed that both the leader and partner school got a
verbal interpretation of Always. The item “practice school-community

emergency preparedness drills” ranked 1 with a weighted mean scores
of 4.00 for both leader and partner school.
For leader school, that of “practice education continuity
strategies” ranked 2 with a weighted mean score of 3.97. In rank 3-7,
that of “join clean up after disaster”, “provide temporary learning
spaces following national and local designs”, “help nearby schools
become more resilient to disasters”, “conduct resource sharing and
rapid response”, and “conduct psychosocial support for students and
teachers after disaster” got a weighted mean scores of 3.90, 3.87, 3.84,
3.81 and 3.77 respectively.
For partner school, that of “conduct psychosocial support for
students and teachers after disaster” ranked 2 with a weighted mean
score of 3.93. In rank 3-7, that of “practice education continuity
strategies”, “help nearby schools become more resilient to
disasters”,“join clean up after disaster”, “provide temporary learning
spaces following national and local designs”, and “conduct resource
sharing and rapid response” got a weighted mean scores of 3.86, 3.79,
3.71, 3.64, and 3.57 respectively.
The table shows the best practices of both leader and partner
school in terms of disaster risk reduction. It was revealed that both
leader and partner school have a best practices in disaster risk
reduction with a weighted arithmetic mean of 3.9893 and 3.9507 and a
verbal interpretation of both Always respectively.
Research Question No. 3. Significant Difference Between Leader and Partner
School on the Implementation of School-to-School Partnership Program
Table 7
Computation of t-Test: Paired Two-Sample for Means on the Significant
Difference Between Leader and Partner School on the Implementation of
SSP Program
The table shows the computed t-Test: Paired Two-Sample for means
on the significant difference between leader and partner school on the
implementation of SSP Program. It was observed that the computed t-Test
value obtained is 1.6528 which is lesser than the tabular value of 3.22 with df
42 at 0.01 level of confidence. Hence, it is not significant. This means that
both leader and partner school exemplified best practices in the
implementation of School-to-School Partnership Program.
Table 8 in the preceding page shows the relationship between the
attitude and perceptions of teachers, students and pupils, and other
stakeholders and the best practices of leader and partner school on the
implementation of School-to-School Partnership Program. It was revealed
that perception of teachers, students/pupils, and other stakeholders have
significant relationship on the best practices of leader and partner school in
terms of curriculum, instruction and assessment, leadership and governance,
and disaster risk reduction on the implementation of SSP Program with R
values of 0.323, -0.538, -0.511, -0.374, 0.238, 0.855, 0.811, -0.511 and 0.312
and direction and strength of weak positive, moderate negative, weak
negative, weak positive, moderate positive, moderate negative and weak
positive and p-values of 0.000, 0.000, 0.001, 0.033, 0.002, 0.001, 0.005,
0.000 and 0.005 respectively. This means there is a significant relationship
between the attitude and perception of teachers, students/pupils and other
stakeholders and the best practices of leader and partner school on the
implementation of SSP Program.
Table 8
Computed Correlation Between the Attitude and Perception of teachers,
students and stakeholders and the Best Practices of Leader and Partner
School on the Implementation of School-to-School Partnership Program
Research Question No. 4. Action Plan for School-to-School Partnership
Program Development
Conclusions:
From the results, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. Teachers, students/pupils and other stakeholders have positive
attitude and perception on the implementation of School-to-School
Partnership Program.
2. Leader School and partner school greatly exemplifies best practices
on the implementation of SSP Program.
3. Both leader and partner school demonstrates positive results on the
implementation of SSP Program
4. An action plan developed is very beneficial to other schools to reach
their full potentials.
7. Recommendations
From the drawn conclusions, the following recommendations were

laid:
1. Teachers, students/pupils and other stakeholders may be given
incentives for their best support in the program.
2. Leader and partner school should work hand and hand to improve
other areas in SSP program.
3. Both leader and partner school may share their experiences and
best practices to other schools in order to help them improve and reach their
full potentials.
4. Other schools may use the action plan for them to improve
themselves and reached their full potentials.
8. List of References
Armstrong, P. (2015). Effective School Partnerships and Collaboration for

School Improvement: A Review of the Evidence. Research Report.
Coldron, J., Crawford, M., Jones, S. and Simkins, T. (2014) The restructuring
of schooling in England: The responses of well-positioned headteachers.
Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 42 (3), pp. 387-
403. Retrived from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/24523/1/DFE-
DepEd Order No. 44, s. 2016. Guidelines on the School-to-School
Partnerships for Fiscal Year 2016.
Garcia, Carlito D. and Reganit, Arnulfo Aaron R. (2010). Developing

Competencies in Research and Thesis Writing. Mandaluyong City:
Books Atbp. Publishing Corporation, ISBN 978-971-0388-86-8.
Hill, R., Dunford, J., Parish, N., Rea, S., & Sandals, L. (2012) The growth of
academy chains: implications for leaders and leadership. Nottingham:
National College of School Leadership (NCSL). Retrieved from
http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/24523/1/DFERR466__School_improvementeffective
_school_partnerships.pdf
Hill, R. and Matthews, P. (2010) Schools leading schools II: The growing
impact of National Leaders of Education. Nottingham: National College
of School Leadership (NCSL). Retrieved from
http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/24523/1/DFERR466__School_improvement_effectiv
e_school_partnerships.pdf http://asiasociety.org/china-learning-
initiatives/strong-school-school-partnerships-part-ii
Lindsay, G., Muijs, D., Harris, A., Chapman, C., Arweck, E. and Goodall, J.
(2007) School Federations Pilot Study: 2003–2007. Nottingham:
Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF). Retrieved from
http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/24523/1/DFERR466__School_improvement_effective
_school_partnerships.pdf
Maheady, Larry, Magiera, K., and Simmons, R. (2016). Building and
Sustaining School-University Partnerships in Rural Settings: One
Approach for Improving Special Education Service Delivery. Rural Special
Education Quarterly. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1147424.pdf.
Martin, Lorna (2005). School partnerships. A Guide to Parents, Schools and
Communities. Monitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth.
Paler-Calmorin, Laurentina (2010). Research and Statistics with Computer.
National Bookstore. Quad Alpha Centrum Bldg. Mandaluyong City, 1550.
Sandals, L. and Bryant, B. (2014) The evolving education system in England:
a “temperature check”. London: Department for Education (DfE).
Stefanski, Amanda et.al (2016). Beyond Involvement and Engagement: The
Role of the Family in School–Community Partnerships. School
Community Journal. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1124001.pdf
Stoll, L. (2015). Three greats for a self- improving school system: pedagogy,
professional development and leadership: executive summary (Teaching
schools R&D network national themes project 2012-14). London:
Department for Education (DfE).
Woods, P. A. and Simkins, T. (2014). Understanding the local: Themes and
Issues in the Experience of Structural Reform in England. Educational
Management and Leadership, 42 (3) pp. 324-40.

SSP Best Practices Basic Research Oliver Guevarra Theme4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SSP Best Practices Basic Research Oliver Guevarra Theme4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines 1

BEST PRACTICES OF A LEADER AND PARTNER SCHOOL : AN INPUT

AN ACTION RESEARCH SUBMITTED AS AN ENTRY TO THE 2017

Romana Glenda S. Lagmay

Batangas Researchers Association for Value-driven Education (BRAVEr)

December 5-7, 2017

Enclosure to the DepEd Regional Memorandum No. 389, s. 2017

TEMPLATE FOR RESEARCH ENTRY

Theme: Governance/ School Administration/ Leadership/

Research Title: BEST PRACTICES OF A LEADER AND PARTNER

Authors: Oliver R. Guevarra

E-mail Address: oliver.guevarra001@deped.gov.ph

Affiliation: Batangas Researchers Association for Value-driven

and partner school as an input for School-to-School Partnership Program

Design/Methodology/Approach: Descriptive method of research was

students/pupils and twelve (12) parents of Bayorbor National High School

to determine the best practices of leader and partner school as an input of

SSP Program development. Frequency, percentages, ranking, mean,

Findings: The results showed that teachers, students/pupils and other

stakeholders have positive attitude and perception on the implementation of

School-to-School Partnership Program. Leader School and partner school

greatly exemplifies best practices on the implementation of SSP Program.

Moreover, both leader and partner school demonstrates positive results on

the implementation of SSP Program. An action plan developed is very

beneficial to other schools to reached their full potentials.

Originality/Value: This study provide mechanism and guide to other schools

and will help them reached their full potential.

Keywords: School-to-School Partnership, Leader School, Partner School,

Armstrong, P. (2015). Effective School Partnerships and Collaboration for

Garcia, Carlito D. and Reganit, Arnulfo Aaron R. (2010). Developing

academy chains: implications for leaders and leadership.

Nottingham: National College of School Leadership (NCSL).

Retrieved from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/24523/1/DFE-

School-to-school partnership program offer unique insights into

another way of life. By collaborating on joint projects, learners develop

appreciation of cultural diversity, develop a competitive and creative mind,

teachers, working with colleagues in other school, specifically with their

leader or partner school is a rewarding way to develop professionally, engage

for sharing knowledge and wisdom.

The Department of Education (DepEd) believes that high performing

schools can be instruments for reform. Through school-to-school partnerships,

Continuous Improvement (CI) program and School-Based Management

(SBM). This requires that high-performing schools become Leader Schools

taking on broader responsibilities to help elevate the performance of other

The implementation of School-to-school partnership program started

chosen as Partner School.

The school-to-school partnership program was implemented to provide

are high-performing can be valuable resource as coaches, mentors or role

Order No. 44, s. 2016).

In addition, the Department of Education (DepEd) believes that high-

performing schools can be instruments for reform. Through school-to-school

Continuous Improvemnt (CI) Program, and School-Based Management

taking on broader responsibilities to help elevate the perfomance of other

In view of the foregoing, it is apt for the researchers to determine the

Best Practices of a Leader and partner School as an Input for school-to-

school program development in order to help other schools to elevate their

performance and reach their full potential.

According to Armstrong (2015) that schools working together leads to

experienced sponsors to play a leadership role in driving the improvement of

According to Woods et al.,(2013) that the evidence for indirect impacts

of inter-school collaboration on school improvement is more widespread.

Many studies report improvements in areas such as staff professional

and realignments in head teacher workload (alleviating burnout and