Identify PIAs

School Improvement Plan
Identify PIAs
Phase 1: Assess Objectives
1.To identify and analyze 4. To analyze school

the PIAs processes
2. To set general 5. To determine the root
objectives cause/s of the PIAs
3. To listen to the voice of
the learners and other
stakeholders
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 2
STEP 2. Identify/Review
Priority Improvement Areas
Present and discuss the

information gathered
2.1
during the preparatory
activities
2.2 Identify/Review PIAs
Activity 2.1: Present and discuss the information
gathered during the preparatory activities
KEY SIP needs to be

Idea evidence-based
Maximize your SRC

Initiate the discussion on
the status of the school by
presenting the SRC or a
summary of the SCDT.
Look into gaps with Division targets

(use Gap Analysis Template)
SIPs are meant to
bridge the gap between the
current state of the school
and the
desired state as per DEDP
Annex 3: Gap Analysis Template
Annex 3: Gap Analysis Template
B. SCHOOL PERFORMANCE
B2. CURRENTLY CONTRIBUTING
B5. GROUPS
A. DIVISION
B3. INHIBITING B4. PROJECTS THAT
TARGETS B1. DATA NEEDED YES/
EXPLANATION FACTORS IMPLEMENTED REQUIRE
NO
ATTENTION
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Division Targets
B5. GROUPS
A. DIVISION
NO
ATTENTION
Dropout Rate:

0.1%
Promotion

Rate: 91%
National
Achievement
Test (NAT)
Mean
Percentage
Score (MPS):
65
Gap Analysis
B5. GROUPS
A. DIVISION
NO
ATTENTION
1. School dropout High dropout rates due

Overall dropout rates in
rates over the to the following:
Dropout Rate: school over the last three Disadvantage
previous three years No - financial matters
0.1% years have not been lower d students
2. Reasons for - health problems
than 4%.
dropping out - disasters
Younger
Overall promotion rates
School promotion Inhibiting factors still learners,
Promotion over the last three years
rates over the No undetermined from particularly
Rate: 91% have been around 10%
previous three years available data. those from
less than the target.
Grade 1.
National
MPS for Filipino, Math,
Achievement 1. MPS for English Younger
Science, and Hekasi are
Test (NAT) 2. MPS for Filipino MPS for English ranges learners,
greater than 65 for
Mean 3. MPS for Math Yes from 49.88 to 53.96 for particularly
Grades 3, 6, 8, and 10.
Percentage 4. MPS for Science grades 3, 6, 8, and 10. those from
Overall MPS is at least
Score (MPS): 5. MPS for HEKASI Grade 3.
65.5 for each grade level.
65
Step 2.1: Present and discuss the information
ASK YOUR SPT:

1. What surfaced as the most pressing
need/problem?
2. What trends surfaced from your data?
3. Did your school improve? Stagnate? Worsen?
4. What did you find alarming from the data?
5. What needs the most improvement?
1. Write down results of the

discussion to come up with
an initial list of
improvement areas.
Use metacards so
2. Group related or similar it’s easy to group
problems. the problems
together.
For Year 2 and Year 3
BEGIN WITH
THIS STEP.
Present the data collected
from monitoring the
progress of prior AIP
(SRC/Monitoring forms)
to the SPT
1. You may use the Gap Analysis Template (Annex 3) and

the guide questions again.
2. Review the list of improvement areas in the SIP.
ACTIVITY:
CHECKING
SAMPLE DATA
OUTPUT CHECK:
 Documentation of the discussion
 Initial list of improvement areas
 Gap Analysis Template (Annex 3)
STEP 2. Identify/Review
Priority Improvement Areas
Present and discuss the

information gathered
2.1
during the preparatory
activities
2.2 Identify/Review PIAs
Activity 2.2: Identify/Review the Priority
Improvement Areas
 There is no limit to the number of

PIAs.
 It is important that the SPT makes
“PIAs are the most
a priority list of PIAs.
pressing needs or
problems within and  PIAs have varying difficulties.
outside of the
school that
surfaced from your
school and learners’
data.”
16
Prioritization Rubric
CRITERIA DESCRIPTION SCALE
The number of other
Strategic improvement areas that will
Importance benefit when the improvement
area is addressed.
The urgency or need to improve 5 – Very high

Urgency the area as soon as possible. 4 – High
3 – Moderate
The number of learners that will 2 – Low
Magnitude benefit when the improvement
area is addressed. 1 – Very low
The degree to which the

Feasibility improvement area is within the
school’s mandate and control.
Sample Rubrics
Improvement Strategic
Urgency Magnitude Feasibility Average Interpretation
Areas Importance
High
Moderate
dropout 2 5 3 3 3.25
Priority
rate
Low
High
promotion 1 5 5 4 3.75
Priority
rate
Low English Very High

3 5 5 5 4.5
literacy Priority
High
Flooding 4 5 3 2 3.5
Priority
High Dropout
Areas Importance
High
Moderate
dropout 2 5 3 3 3.25
Priority
rate
• Strategic importance –can benefit promotion rates

• Urgency – dropout considerably affects learners; and, over three School
Years, dropout rates have not improved (Annex 1A – 4.2)
• Magnitude – affects around 4.25% of all learners (Annex 1A – 4.2)
• Feasibility – there are factors that can be controlled (e.g., monitoring
attendance, home visits), but there are also factors outside of the school’s
control (e.g., learners’ financial situation)
Low Promotion
Areas Importance
Low
High
promotion 1 5 5 4 3.75
Priority
rate
• Strategic importance – no benefit to other identified priority improvement

areas
• Urgency – not being promoted considerably affects learners; and, over three
School Years, promotion rates have barely improved (Annex 1A – 5.2)
• Magnitude – affects 18.67% of all learners (Annex 1A – 5.2)
• Feasibility – there are factors that can be controlled (e.g., formative
assessment), but there are also factors outside of the school’s control (e.g.,
conditions at home)
Low Literacy
Areas Importance
Low English Very High

3 5 5 5 4.5
literacy Priority
• Strategic importance – can benefit dropout rates and promotion rates

• Urgency – learners are struggling even with the most basic concepts: a lot
of learners are still at frustration levels (see Annex 1A – 7.1)
• Magnitude – only a few learners are at independent levels (see Annex 1A –
7.1) and NAT MPS for English is low (see Annex 1A – 6.1)
• Feasibility – school has several means to improve literacy (e.g., improving
the learning experience in the classroom, tutoring, remedial)
Flooding
Areas Importance
High
Flooding 4 5 3 2 3.5
Priority
• Strategic importance – can benefit dropout rates, promotion rates, and low
literacy
• Urgency – needs to be addressed immediately before rainy season starts
• Magnitude – affects learners who have to pass through flood-prone roads
just outside the school
• Feasibility – school can only mitigate flooding, and only within its immediate
vicinity
Annex 5: Planning Worksheet
For Year 2 and Year 3
In cases where the PIA has

already been addressed,
Review the PIAs listed in the
choose another PIA to take on
Planning Worksheet
from the ones you have
identified.
You may use again the PIA

template to check these PIAs
Activity 2.2: Identify/Review PIAs
OUTPUT CHECK:
 PIA Template (Annex 4)
 First column of the Planning Worksheet (Annex 5)

Identify PIAs

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

Identify PIAs

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

School Improvement Plan

1.To identify and analyze 4. To analyze school

Present and discuss the

2.2 Identify/Review PIAs

KEY SIP needs to be

Maximize your SRC

Look into gaps with Division targets

1. School dropout High dropout rates due

ASK YOUR SPT:

1. Write down results of the

1. You may use the Gap Analysis Template (Annex 3) and

Present and discuss the

2.2 Identify/Review PIAs

 There is no limit to the number of

The urgency or need to improve 5 – Very high

The degree to which the

Low English Very High

• Strategic importance –can benefit promotion rates

• Strategic importance – no benefit to other identified priority improvement

Low English Very High

• Strategic importance – can benefit dropout rates and promotion rates

In cases where the PIA has

You may use again the PIA

You might also like