Pursuing Distance Learning; Analysis of the Basic Education Learning Continuity

Plan of DepEd

Billy Villanueva

Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University

Mid-La Union Campus, College of Graduate Studies
City of San Fernando, La Union

ABSTRACT
Continuing education has been a challenge globally as a result of the spread of
covid-19. To cope up with the challenges of the so called new-normal, many countries
has started adopting alternative methods to pursue education. Countries with advance
technology transitioned to alternatives utilizing the online platform, while on the other
hand, developing countries are struggling to impose the same due to challenges in
technology. In the Philippines, while the government is putting safeguards to prevent the
spread of the deadly virus, the Department of Education (DepEd) is working to temporary
transition the modality of teaching from conventional “face-to-face” learning, or the
traditional "brick-and-mortar schools” to the so-called “blended learning” for the current
school year. However, many of the stakeholders of the education system are skeptic with
the effectiveness of the blended learning particularly criticizing its design and
implementation. In addition, many are in doubt of the capacity of the government to
sustain initiative. This study aims to analyze of the Basic Education Learning Continuity
Plan (BE-LCP) of DepEd and provide a recommendation in the implementation of the
blended learning as an alternative to continuing education in the Philippines.
 INTRODUCTION:

Covid-19 pandemic exposed many challenges and weaknesses in the current

global systems. This includes lifestyle, business, governance and policy making, health,
education and others. The pandemic led the shift of standards of these systems in order
to adopt to now called “new normal”. Education system is among those which were
severely impacted. According to UNICEF monitoring, 129 countries of the world have
experienced nationwide closures due to covid-19, where 63.3% of world's total enrolled
students are affected. This accounts to around 1.2 billion students worldwide.

The opportunity of students to continue their education despite the pandemic is

crucial not just to the mental well-being of learners (Ramij and Sultana, 2020) but also to
the economy. Education plays a vital role in the development of society as it paves the
path for people to become a productive members of the society. The Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) which is the Unites Nations’ blueprint for a sustainable future
also highlighted the importance of ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and
promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.

In the Philippines the suspension of classes as a result of the pandemic started

March of this year and was extended for several months. This August of 2020 some
private institutions opted to resume classes using alternative learning schemes such as
blended learning which adopts the use of online platforms and modules for teaching.
Public schools on the other hand officially opened the school year 2020-2021 on October
5. Based on the national enrollment data as of October 1, 2020 DepEd recorded a total
of 24.72 million students who returned to the basic education for public and private
schools.

As the core institution with the mandate to formulate, implement, and coordinate
policies, plans, programs and projects in the areas of formal and non-formal basic
education, DepEd is now faced with the challenge of continuing the education system
amid the pandemic. DepEd’s solution to learning continuity is the use of the blended
education under Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan (BE-LCP).
 Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan is a package of education interventions
that will respond to basic education challenges brought about by COVID-19 which
adopted through DepEd Order No. 12, s. 2020. In developing the BE-LCP, DepEd
engaged internal and external stakeholders for inputs in the design of a learning delivery
strategy and operational direction that ensures the health, safety, and well-being of all
learners, teachers, and personnel of the Department. depending on the COVID-19
restrictions and the particular context of the learners in the school or locality. (Almario &
Austria, 2020)

Blended learning will adopt different modalities for learning delivery which will
include one or a combination of the following, depending on the COVID-19 restrictions
and the particular context of the learners in the school or locality. Face-to-face learning
where the students and the teacher are both physically present in the classroom.
Distance learning, where learning takes place between the teacher and the learners who
are geographically remote from each other during instruction. This modality has three
types: Modular Distance Learning (MDL), Online Distance Learning (ODL), and television
(TV)/Radio-Based Instruction. And homeschooling which aims to provide learners with
quality basic education that is facilitated by qualified parents, guardians, or tutors who
have undergone relevant training in a home-based environment. However, there remain
several issues in its implementation, including the supervision of licensed teachers and
alignments with the curriculum. Thus, this modality will be the subject of a later DepEd
issuance before its expansion (Almario & Austria, 2020).

Distance education is no longer new in the Philippines. Open and Distance

Education’s main mission is to be the vanguard of modern information and
communication technologies to deliver quality education especially marginalized sectors
and areas of the country. The possible of distance education to deliver education to many
Filipinos was more renowned with the passing of Republic Act 10650, or the Open
Distance Learning Act, which offers precise strategies to allow other schools to offer
degree programs in the distance education mode of instruction (Villar, 2014).

However, the Philippines is still currently embracing technology in the application

of online education, even prominent universities propose researches to help the public
schools to adopt online education for policy formulations toward inclusive education, and
some top university discusses issues in the implementation of online education (Arinto,
2016).

FRAMEWORK

In the study conducted by Tayebinik & Puteh (2013) they concluded that blended
instruction can foster the sense of community belonging and remove the frustration
created by mere online environment. However, the face-to-face element should not be
replaced because of the significant effect of body language, tone of voice, facial
expressions and eye contact on communication.

Distance education offers a potential answer to this dilemma by enabling

institutions to be more competitive without necessarily requiring a brick-and-mortar
commitment. However, understanding the how educators, students, and parents are
navigating, processing and coping with the impact of COVID-19 is critical in the outcome
of distance learning.

Distance education is currently an important topic for educational planners,

administrators, academic institutions, and policymakers as it can be considered a
potential solution to continue the education systems despite the restriction imposed to
contain the spread of covid-19. It is paramount for the policymakers to create a strategic
plan to deal with the needs in the in the implementation of the learning delivery through
distance learning.

Strategic planning is part of a multilevel continuum of planning processes defined

by the scope and duration of the planning. There are three distinct levels of interrelated
planning—strategic, operational, and tactical—with strategic being the highest level of the
planning trilogy (Kaufman, 2005). While ultimately, all three levels will be involved in the
successful implementation of a distance learning program, the focus of this paper will be
limited to the strategic level of planning.

In a study conducted by Kenneth Phillip Pisel Jr in 2001 he enumerated a 10 phase

model that should be considered in developing and implementing a strategic plan for
distance learning. The 10 phases of the model and a detailed depiction of the model is at
Figure 1.

Figure 1. 10 Phase Strategic Planning Model

Objective

The following questions will serve as the focal points of the study:

1. What are the internal and external factors considered in the formulation of DepEd’s
Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan (BE-LCP)?
2. Is the 10 phase Strategic Planning Model considered by DepEd in the formulation
of BE-LCP?
3. What are the recommendations to be considered in the implementation of the
distance learning initiative of the department of education?
 METHODOLOGY:

This study is entirely descriptive in nature and is based on the secondary data. The
data is taken from DepEd’s Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan which will be cross
reference to Pisel’s Strategic Planning Process model.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

1. Factors Considered in crafting the BE-LCP

In developing the BE-LCP, the Department analyzed data on basic education as

well as the epidemiological picture for the incoming school year, to make informed
decisions (Almario & Austria, 2020). Likewise, the inputs of the different strands through
their lead Undersecretaries and Assistant Secretaries, and of the different regions through
their Regional Directors (RDs) were also considered. The technological capacity of the
DepEd is also among the considerations where definitely a certain limitation lies.

DepEd conducted a survey to get a sense of what its immediate stakeholders think
about distance learning from 789,690 respondents (53 percent school personnel, 31
percent parents/guardians, and 16 percent learners). Almost half or 46 percent of the
respondents said they are open to having lessons and class activities either online or on
television or radio. A great majority or 59 percent of parents and guardians indicated their
openness in distance learning, while only 41 percent of school personnel and 35 percent
learner respondents are open to it. This presents a major communication challenge for
DepEd, and a need to improve the degree of openness to technology-based distance
learning platforms. (See figure 2)

A survey among 787,066 teachers across the various key stages of basic
education on their readiness for distance education was conducted (Figure 3). The
responses indicated that most of the teacher or 87 percent have available computers
(laptop or desktop) at home as shown in figure 4. In terms of access to internet of the
those who have available computers only 49 percent indicated that they have internet
connection at home and amongst those who have internet (See Figure 5.)
 Figure 2. Preferred Learning Delivery Modalities

Figure 3. Teacher Respondents by Key Stage

Figure 4. Teachers’ Ownership of Figure 5. Teachers’ Ownership of

Computer at Home Computer and Access to
Connectivity at Home
2. The 10 phase Strategic Planning Model

Phase I – Planning Initiation. In this phase there are three essential items that
should occur to set the plan in motion. First is decision to start which begins with an idea
which can either come from internal or external to the institution. Second is identification
of assets available for planning, in the department of education we can consider the
teaching personnel, experts in the field of education, technology infrastructure and funds
as assets that needs to be identified. And the third item is the assignment of a team to
conduct the planning where members of has a defined role and must represent the
different sections or stakeholders of the organization.

In the case of DepEd the decision to start the plan to pursue distance education
has been triggered by the necessity of continuous education despite the restrictions
imposed during the pandemic. According to UNESCO, COVID-19 has not only disrupted
essential school-based services but has also been a source of stress and anxiety to
learners due to loss of peer interaction and disrupted routines. It is essential to re-
establish the regular and safe delivery of services such as school feeding, mental health,
and psychosocial support in the coming school year.

The BE-LCP also recognized the assets considered in the formulation of the plan
which also highlighted its insufficiency in terms of technology and training for educators.
In addition, the BE-LCP also discussed the creation committees assigned for its
development and implementation.

Phase II – Planning Guidance and Scheduling. This phase is composed of two

functions: leadership intent is articulated and a planning schedule is established.
Leadership intent is a guiding statement that clearly defines the purpose of the planning
effort. The guidance should include the direction of the organization and the constraints
relative to the planning effort. Planning schedule is established to sustain the pace of
process as it moves forward.
 The BE-LCP discussed the guiding principles and rationale in its implementation
as it was enumerated in the methodology. The planning schedules is not emphasized in
the paper, though it appeared that the crafting of the plan happened from April 27, 2020
during the meeting of the Philippine Forum for Inclusive Quality Basic Education or Educ
Forum until June 19, 2020 when it was adopted by DepEd. This signifies that the
development of the plan lasted for roughly around 2 months which may be considered
narrow given the fact that the implementation is massive. The paper also mentioned that
BE-LCP is considered the soonest solution.

Phase III – Analyses. There are two critical and distinct elements in this phase,
the environmental analysis and the needs/gap analysis. In this phase of the planning
process the environmental factors are assessed. The SWOT (an acronym for Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis, is the core of the environmental scan
which puts critical assessment of the seven areas of internal strengths and weaknesses
and seven areas of opportunities and threats existing in the external environment as
shown in figure 6.

Figure 6. SWOT Analysis Framework

While need/gap analysis is essential in identifying the difference between the

status quo and the goals of the institution. It puts consideration in the capacity of the
organization to achieve the set goals and the gaps that exist between the two. It also
defines the direction of the strategy in launching effective distance learning initiative. This
process follows the Mission phase of the model. This sequence allows it to be based on
a comparison of the knowledge derived from the SWOTs analysis and the Mission phase
of the model—a comparison of the environment and the organizational vision.

The BE-LCP manifested the assessment for critical factors both internal and
external by looking at the strengths and weakness of infrastructure, manpower, finance,
academic programs, and its stakeholder. However, factors such as politics, capacity of
parents/para-teachers, socio-economic condition of the stakeholders are not directly
discussed in the BE-LCP. This factors are crucial in the analysis which could impact the
results of the implementation.

Phase IV – Mission Refinement. The Mission phase describes how distance

learning is important to and aligned with the core mission and future vision of the
institution. It is, perhaps, the most challenging phase because participants can spend so
much time arguing about where they need to go that they run out of steam when it comes
to actually going there. It is critical that the mission and vision define an achievable
objective, but planners must guard against it becoming more of an intellectual than a
practical exercise. If planners are not cautious, it may lead to seeing the plan as the end
rather than the means to achieve it. (Pisel, 2001)

It is pointed out in the BE-LCP that it is anchored with the four pillars of Sulong
EduKalidad, however, the community quarantine drastically refined the learning
environment, hence streamlining the priorities in the curriculum is necessary.
Streamlining of curriculum priorities however, may possible impact the quality of
education which will be access by the learners.

Phase V – Assumptions. In this phase the gaps in the planning process is filled
with hypothesis so that the planning would continue. While there are several possible
courses of events in the present or the future that can be assumed true in the absence of
proof, and normally beyond the control of the planning team, only the items necessary to
enable planners to complete an estimate of the situation and make decisions can become
assumptions.
 A valid assumption has three characteristics: it is logical, realistic, and essential
for the planning to continue. Because of their influence on planning, the fewest possible
number of assumptions should be included. As planning proceeds, additional
assumptions may be needed, some early assumptions may prove to be faulty, and still
others may be replaced with facts or new information gained during the planning process.
All planning assumptions should be documented to ensure that everyone involved—
particularly those who join the process later—has a common frame of reference. This
documentation also facilitates the Periodic Review phase by clearly stating what was
assumed in planning. (Pisel, 2001)

The assumptions in the BE-LCP can be attributed in the projection of the

epidemiology picture and acceptance of parents to certain modalities, this was later on
translated to the algorithm of learning delivery (See figure 7)

Figure 7. Algorithm for Learning Delivery Modalities

Phase VI – Strategy Development and Courses of Action (COA). The results

of the gap analysis will be used in this phase to craft a strategic direction, the strategic
options to be considered and assessed to be able to move forward. By scouring through
the significance of the SWOT analysis the course of action should be derived taking
advantage of the internal strengths and external opportunities while trying to guard
against threats and working to improve weaknesses. Subsequently, tentative COAs are
then developed, any number of COAs may be developed but will later on may be
reduced to around three before being analyzed and presented for a decision. And the
last step in the development of the tentative COA is to refine and expand them to
ensure that they are consistent with the mission and vision of the institution. This is an
essential element in the process by which broad involvement of staff is ensure and
stakeholders are informed.

We may consider this phase to have happened during the submission of inputs of
different stakeholders the Educ Forum. The possible course of action was then forwarded
to the Office of the Secretary which has been specified in the BE-LCP.

Phase VII – Functional Analyses. The strengths and weaknesses of the COAs
which were developed will be identified through this phase by comparing to different
criteria such as it compliance to relevant policies; is it feasible given the available or
projected resources; adequately achieves the stated mission; acceptability of the cost;
sufficiently different so as to a certain range of alternatives. This process plays an
essential role in the acceptance of the stakeholder for this will allow functional details to
surface from experts which may not be visible to a planning team. This phase will be
finalized after a decision to adopt a recommended COA is documented

This phase was not specifically highlighted in the BE-LCP, though it was
mentioned the inputs of Educ Forum has been submitted to the Office of the Secretary
and was reviewed by the chairperson of the Committee on Basic Education for both
houses of the congress. The functional analysis is a very important phase in the strategic
planning which could have been indicated in plan.

Phase VIII – Implementation. Implementation is the phase where the lead shifts
away from the planning team to those who will actually execute the plan. The institutional
leadership must clearly define who has the authority and responsibility for implementation
and formally task all elements of the organization that are responsible for support.
Resources are allocated and any assumptions made about funding, personnel, or other
assets are reconciled. Detailed operational or tactical plans, that identify near-term
objectives that must be achieved as part of the strategic plan, are developed and
implemented. An implementation timetable is established to update and refine any
milestones remaining from Phase II and add any new milestones as necessary.

The implementation of the BE-LCP started as DepEd opens the academic year
2020-2021. Though the plan came from the national level, BE-LCP gave Regional
Directors the discretion to decide on learning modalities in the context of local condition
consistent to the Covid-19 guidelines.

Phase IX – Assessment. Post-implementation assessment is very essential in the

strategic planning as it represents the continuation of the planning process. This is also
a common failure point for in strategic planning, this happens when the process ends at
the implementation phase. The formative assessment is part of a continuous loop which
feeds into previous phases of the process. Metrics should be defined and establish in
order to gauge the success of output/outcome of process. Consistent, meaningful
evaluation, with a willingness to act upon the findings for the process is vital to the plan
to succeed.

The Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Framework of BE-LCP is anchored on the

Basic Education Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (BEMEF), tailored to the needs
of the learners during this emergency. This framework includes the assessment of
outcomes/outputs, particularly defining the indicators and the offices accountable.
However, the assessment process did not provide a specific range of scores/scale for
every indicator and the timeline when a certain criterion will be evaluated.

Phase X – Periodic Review. The Review phase enables the institution to adapt
to short-term volatility while maintaining its long-term strategic vision. Review is a critical
element of strategic planning. It recognizes that planning is a continuous systematic
process and that the plan is a living document existing within a dynamic environment
(Watkins, 2004). Periodic review is required to identify and assess the impact in changes
to internal strengths and weaknesses, external opportunities and threats, assumptions,
and the original mission and goals. The institution must establish some periodicity for the
review process. Ideally, it can be aligned with existing cycles, such as the annual budget
cycle or academic cycles. Finally, it must determine how lessons learned will be
communicated and modifications made to the larger organization. (Pisel, 2001)

Periodic review schedule is not indicated in the BE-LCP, tough it is very essential
for DepEd to assess and evaluate the progress of the implementation. As stated in the
BE-LCP, during this transition period, it is unavoidable that there will be a negative impact
on the learning of those who cannot easily cope with the change. Hence, support
interventions can only be implemented if there will be periodic reviews conducted.

CONCLUSION

While it is true that the prolonged school disruption may be associated with various
negative impacts on children, it is vital that the initiative such as the BE-LCP must undergo
rigorous planning in its formulation. Adopting a science-based model in the strategic
planning will streamline possible issues and negative results as early as the planning
stage. The results of the initiative can also be intensified by creating a more efficient
evaluation system which will farther define the scales for it performance rating, and
timeline for the evaluation. As the implementation of the BE-LCP has started, it is but
necessary for DepEd to conduct periodic review to provide possible intervention on the
challenges of its implementation.

The BE-LCP is testament that there is a huge difference between formulating a

solution the soonest time possible when it is needed, and coming up with a near-perfect
solution much later when everyone has already looked elsewhere. There will be issues
and problems in the implementation of the LCP, but these would provide the opportunity
for redesigning, which indicates further growth areas and sustains the cycle of innovation.
(Arinto, 2020)

REFERENCES

Almario, Ani Rosa and Austria, Reagan 2020. Helping K-12 Schools Transition to Post-
COVID 19 Times. Retrieved from https://authdocs.deped.gov.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2020/06/BE-LCP-Annex-E-Ani-Almario-Helping-K-12-Schools-
Transition-to-Post-COVID.pdf
Arinto, P. (2016). Issues and challenges in open and distance e-learning: Perspectives
from the Philippines. International Review of Research in Open and Distance
Learning. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i2.1913

Bishop, J. S., & Spake, D. F. (2003). Distance education: A bibliographic review for
educational planners and policymakers 1992-2002. Journal of Planning Literature,
17(3), 372-391.

DepEd Order 19 Series 2020. Retrieved from https://authdocs.deped.gov.ph/wp-

content/uploads/2020/06/DO-_s2020_012-Adoption-of-the-LCP-BE-LCP-for-SY-
2020-2021.pdf.

Kaufman, R. (2005). Defining and delivering measurable value: A mega thinking and
planning primer. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 18(3), 5-15. Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.576.9090&rep=rep1&ty
pe=pdf

Keller, G. (1983). Academic strategy: The management revolution in American higher

education. Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Pisel, K. P. (2001). The validation of a detailed strategic planning process model for the
implementation of distance education in higher education. Norfolk, VA: Old
Dominion University. Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1058&context=urban
services_education_etds

Pisel, K. P. (2008). A Strategic Planning Process Model for Distance Education. Online
Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Volume XI, Number II, Summer 2008
University of West Georgia, Distance Education Center. Retrieved from
https://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer112/pisel112.html

Tayebinik, M., & Puteh, M. (2012). Blended Learning or E-learning? International

Magazine on Advances in Computer Science and Telecommunications, 3(1), 103-
110. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2282881

Ramij, Md. Golam and Sultana, Afrin (2020). Preparedness of Online Classes in
Developing Countries amid COVID-19 Outbreak: A Perspective from Bangladesh
(June 29, 2020). Retreived from http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3638718

United Nations Children Foundation, Retrieved https://www.unicef.org/reports

10/16/2020

Villar, C. (2014). Republic Act No. 10650 | Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines. Retrieved December 14, 2019, from
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2014/12/09/republic-act-no-10650/