Performance Evaluation Based On Master Teachers' Potentials: Directions to School Management

Abstract

One of the most sensitive issues in the Philippines society at present is the need for quality education in schools. The function of the educational system are seen in its management, instruction, and guidance. These three interrelated components aim to achieve quality education for the learners in all levels-elementary, secondary and tertiary. This study is aimed to determine the performance evaluation based on the master teachers’ potentials in the City Schools, Manila City, during the school year 2017-2018, it is further aimed to determine future directions to educational management. The descriptive method was utilized in this study using the questionnaire in evaluating the performance of master teachers according to their potentials as classroom manager, community leader, curriculum builder, resource consultant, teacher demonstrator, and support staff of the school administration. It is anchored on the concept that good teachers could be promoted to positions equivalent tothat of school administrators but remain as classroom teachers under the Master Teacher Plan. There were 377 respondents who were involved in this study, 71 master teachers, 18Principals and 288 classroom teachers. The statistical tools used in analysing the data were: frequency, percentage, weighted mean and Spearman Rho. There is no significant relationship in the evaluation of the three groups of respondents on the master teachers' performance in relation to the master teachers’ potential. From the data gathered, the study revealed the following: 1. There were a total of 377 respondents in this study, 18 principals, 71 master teachers and 288 teachers. 2. Gender distribution of master teachers, teachers and principals in the Division of Manila revealed 60 male respondents against 317 female respondents. 3. Most of the respondents, 283 of them were married; 55, single; and 39 widow/er. 4. Relative to M.A units earned by the respondents, the biggest group earned 37-42 units which made them academically qualified for promotion.5. Relative to teaching experience, the master teachers and principals had the most number of years. 6. Relative to monthly income most of the master teachers and principals earned 42,000-45,000 above. Teachers had 21,000 to "23,000 monthly income. 7. The master teachers were evaluated by the respondents according to the potentials of master teachers: classroom manager very satisfactory; community leader very satisfactory; curriculum builder very satisfactory; resource consultant very satisfactory; teacher demonstrator -very satisfactory; and, support staff of school administrator very satisfactory. On the correlation of performance to master teacher potentials, the teachers’ evaluation was of “high relationship”; the principals’ evaluation, of “high relationship”; and, master teachers evaluation of “mark correlation.”