GOAL SETTING, MONITORING AND FEEDBACKING PRACTICES AS PEERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT MECHANISMS
Session
Education and Development
Description
This paper examined the extent of school heads’ implementation of the Results-based Performance Management System (RPMS) as performance management mechanism in the Department of Education (DepEd). It focused on the 61 school heads and 271 teaching personnel of Bayawan City Division, Negros Oriental, Philippines for SY 2018-2019. It utilized the descriptive, comparative, and correlational methods of research in the sense that the extent of school heads’ implementation of goal setting, monitoring and feedbacking practices was surveyed and the results were related to teachers’ job performance. The extent of implementation of the RPMS was measured in terms of the following phases: a) planning and commitment, b) monitoring and coaching, c) review and evaluation, and d) rewards and developmental planning. The study used a researcher-made questionnaire divided into three parts, namely: 1) profile of the respondents, 2) extent of implementation of the RPMS, and 3) job performance of the teachers. It revealed that there is a very high extent of goal setting, monitoring and feedbacking practices as respectively assessed by both the school heads and teachers in all RPMS areas: a) planning and commitment (wx̄=4.49 and wx̄=4.47), b) monitoring and coaching (wx̄=4.43 and wx̄=4.44), c) review and evaluation (wx̄=4.43 and wx̄=4.47), and d) rewards and developmental planning (wx̄=4.38 and wx̄=4.45). There were also significant difference shown in the extent of school heads’ performance management mechanisms and teachers’ job performances when the former and the latter are respectively grouped according to their profile items as to length of experience, educational attainment and position held. It concluded that there is a strong and significant relationship between the extent of performance management mechanisms and teachers’ job performance as all the values of rs fall in the “strong relationship” categories with an overall rating of 0.712 and computed p-values less than the 0.05 level of significance.
Keywords:
Extent of Implementation, Performance Management Mechanisms, Results-based Performance Management System, Teachers’ Job Performance, Department of Education
Proceedings Editor
Edmond Hajrizi
ISBN
978-9951-550-47-5
Location
UBT Kampus, Lipjan
Start Date
30-10-2021 12:00 AM
End Date
30-10-2021 12:00 AM
DOI
10.33107/ubt-ic.2021.439
Recommended Citation
Comighud, Sheena Mae T.; Futalan, Maria Chona Z.; Cordevilla, Roullette P.; Calisang, Cristina P.; and Umbac, Jaymar r T., "GOAL SETTING, MONITORING AND FEEDBACKING PRACTICES AS PEERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT MECHANISMS" (2021). UBT International Conference. 458.
https://knowledgecenter.ubt-uni.net/conference/2021UBTIC/all-events/458
GOAL SETTING, MONITORING AND FEEDBACKING PRACTICES AS PEERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT MECHANISMS
UBT Kampus, Lipjan
This paper examined the extent of school heads’ implementation of the Results-based Performance Management System (RPMS) as performance management mechanism in the Department of Education (DepEd). It focused on the 61 school heads and 271 teaching personnel of Bayawan City Division, Negros Oriental, Philippines for SY 2018-2019. It utilized the descriptive, comparative, and correlational methods of research in the sense that the extent of school heads’ implementation of goal setting, monitoring and feedbacking practices was surveyed and the results were related to teachers’ job performance. The extent of implementation of the RPMS was measured in terms of the following phases: a) planning and commitment, b) monitoring and coaching, c) review and evaluation, and d) rewards and developmental planning. The study used a researcher-made questionnaire divided into three parts, namely: 1) profile of the respondents, 2) extent of implementation of the RPMS, and 3) job performance of the teachers. It revealed that there is a very high extent of goal setting, monitoring and feedbacking practices as respectively assessed by both the school heads and teachers in all RPMS areas: a) planning and commitment (wx̄=4.49 and wx̄=4.47), b) monitoring and coaching (wx̄=4.43 and wx̄=4.44), c) review and evaluation (wx̄=4.43 and wx̄=4.47), and d) rewards and developmental planning (wx̄=4.38 and wx̄=4.45). There were also significant difference shown in the extent of school heads’ performance management mechanisms and teachers’ job performances when the former and the latter are respectively grouped according to their profile items as to length of experience, educational attainment and position held. It concluded that there is a strong and significant relationship between the extent of performance management mechanisms and teachers’ job performance as all the values of rs fall in the “strong relationship” categories with an overall rating of 0.712 and computed p-values less than the 0.05 level of significance.