Republic of the Phiiippines Depa rtment of Educati on National Capital Region SCHOOLS DIVISION OFFICE QUEZON CJTY Nueva Ecija SL BagoBantay, Quezon City ~ywwd@-edqcph
July 12, 20 l 7
MEMORANDUM TO: Assistant Schools Division Superintendents Chiefs, CID/SGOD E lementary/ Secondary School Principals District/Division Supervisors Head Teachers/ Officers In-Charge
SEARCH FOR OUTST AN DlNG PRINCIPALS l. In line with the grand celebration of National Teachers Day on October 5, 2017, the Schools Division Office will conduct a division-wide search for Outstanding Principals. 2. The search aims to bestow distinct honor and recognition to outstanding school principals whose exemplary educational leadership and dedicated public service have contributed immensely to the best interest of this Division. 3. Enclosed are the criteria, guidelines, rubrics and validation tools for the Search. 4. All principals/school heads who have met the criteria/ requirements are highly encouraged to participate in the Search. 5. Below are the steps to be taken with their corresponding deadline
r- ~~~inatoracc_~I~~~~-~~~~~--~--- --·_----~-=--1i --= ~~~~~~ ~
___
pre~are~ all r~qu~~~~ocuments_____ ____
•
Nominee
•
Documents are submitted to the Screening Committee
SecF~tariat
___
__
of the
September 8. 2017 ,
· - - - - - - - - - - -- - · - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
•
Se~tember ~~--
Secretariat evaluates the nomination forms and completeness of the documents submitted
I
--------·-------
---r-1
SecretariAfsLili~i~;~~ination form~ I ~---~---------------------1
September 12, 2017
,
; -
anddocurnen1s to the Preliminary Screening and Selection Committee (PSSC)
September 13 , 2017
I
•
PSSC conducts preliminary judging based on Documents
September 20, 2017
t•
~;~t;:,:%~-ih;
'boct Ii« and '"bmi1' the''"'" 101he
--i--ll --sej)iember
Final Screening and Selection Committee (FSSC) ---~~
•
I :
20 J 7 - -
-------- - - - - - - - - - < September 25 , 20 17
_l
~--------
FSSC conducts judging based on D~__':_~_:nt ~~~~~ ___
22,
-
:!::~~:::: ::e~~~::::Hd "lidatio"1ode1e1=e - _ls;~::;'5292:;17
6. Immediate dissemination of thi s Memorandum is desired.
J
(Enclosure No. 1 to Regional Memorandum No146, s. 2015)
Directions Accomplish the nomination form and C:i ttach a one-page write-up (letter size bond paper, single space) about the nominee and why the nominee deserves the award. NOMINATION FORM Regional Search for Outstanding Principals
Recent 2x2 Picture Of the
THE SCREENING AND SELECTION COMMITrEE
nominee
Mesdames/Sirs: A~er
reviewing the rules and criteria for the Division Search for Outstanding Principals, I hereby nominate:
Name of Nominee: category : Level: I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the information contained in the accompanying supporting documents are true and correct. The Nominee and the undersigned understand that the decision of the Screening and Selection Committee is final and that we agree to abide by it. Name of Nominator:
Signature of Nominator
Position
- -- - -- - - - - -
Date Signed
(Enclosure No. 2) Region~!
RULES AND MECHANICS Search for Outstanding Principals
WHAT IS THIS AWARDS? There are ten (10) awards to t-e given away. The Final Screening and Selection Committee may choose not to give awards in any of the ccegories if the c.andidate/s fall short of the standards set by the Committee. The committee may also revoke an award given should the winner be found to have committed falsification of documents submitted or have been found guilty of any ease that was pending during the search period. Note: School OIC refers to any teacher or he3d teacher who acts as a school head.
I.
WHO ARE ELIGIBLE TO JOIN? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
II.
Must be a model of morality and integrity both in public and private life; Must have good human relations in the school and in the community; Must be a Filipino citizen with full time appointment as Principal; Must have served as school head for at least three (3) years; Must have Outstanding performance ratings for the last three (3) years; Must have not been found guilty of any administrative or criminal offense.
WHO ARE NOT QUALIFIED? 1. Previous awardees in a similar search in the Regional or National Level organized/sponsored by either the Department of Education or any private organization (regardless of the year/s they joined). 2. School heads who have been suspended for any administrative or criminal offense.
III.
WHO CAN NOMINATE? District Supervisors/Education Program Supervisors/Stakeholders (PTA Officers/Teachers in the present station) are authorized to nominate principal to the Search.
IV.
WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA? There shall be three stages for this Search with the following percentages: •
Stage 1- Document Analysis (600/o) The Document Analysis shall include all supporting documents submitted to the search Committee which will be graded using some specific criteria (see enclosure).
• stage 2 - Interview ( 20°/o) The Interview shall gauge the nominee's ability to answer questions relevant to the award category. Some rubrics on assessing interview responses will be used for this purpose (see enclosure).
•
V.
Stage 3 -Validation (20°/o) The Validation aims to assess th~ ncminee in terms of morality and integrity both in public and private life, and his/her human relations in the school and in the community. A validation tool will be provided to the screer.ing and selection committees in the district level (see enclosure),
WHAT ARE THE STEPS IN THE SEARCH PROCESS? 1. Nomination a. The nominator accomplishes th.:: nomination form. b. The nominee prepares all documents following the criteria on Documents analysis and have these certified by the Assistant Schools Division Superintendent in-charge of the principal-nominee's district.
c. The documents are submitted to the Secretariat of the Screening and 5election Committee. 2. Evaluation of the nomination forms and supporting documents by the Secretariat. a. The Secretariat evaluates the nomination forms and determines if he documents submitted are complete. b. The Secretariat submits the nomination forms and supporting documents to the screening and Selection Committee (SSC). 3. Evaluation of the nomination forms and pertinent documents, and preliminary judging by the Screening and Selection Committee (SSC). a. The PSSC conducts the preliminary judging of the Search based on Documents Analysis only. b. The minimum raw score in Documents Analysis is so points to qualify to the next level of the Search. c. The PSSC prepares the short list of preliminary winners for submission to the Final Screening and Selection Committee (FSSC) 4. Final judging by the Final Screening and Selection Committee (FSSC) a. The FSSC conducts the final judging upon receipt of the resu lts of the preliminary judging by the PSSC on Documents Analysis. b. The FSSC conducts the Interview and Validation to determine the winners
VI.
WHAT IS THE COMPOSmON OF THE PSSC AND FSSC?
There shall be a Preliminary Screening and Selection Committee (PSSC), and Final Screening and Selection Committee (FSSC) in the Division Level of this Search with the following suggested composition: Final Screening and Selection Committee (FSSC)
Chair: Vice Chair: Members:
_!?~_:
Elizabeth E. Quesada, SDS UI. Ligaya A. Regis, Chief SGOD President of PRINSA President of PEPSA President of QCPSTA
Preliminary Screening and Selection Committee (PSSC)
Chair: Members:
Secretariat: VII.
Dr. Ugaya A. Regis, Chief SGOD
1. Mrs. Alice L.abiles, PSDS 2. Mrs. Helen Flora, PSDS 3. Mrs. Corazon Silvestre, PSDS 4. Mrs. Perlita P. Depatillo, PSDS Maria Cristina N. Marquez, Head ICT
WHAT ARE THE NECESSARY ATTACHMENTS?
1. Duly accomplished nomination form with one-page write up about the nominee. 2. Personal Data Sheet 3. Certification that nominee has not been suspended for any administrative or criminal offense. 4. Certified true copies of Performance Rating in the last three (3) years signed by the Assistant Schools Division Superintendent in-charge of the principal-nominee's district. 5. Supporting documents following the specific criteria on Documents Analysis. Photocopies must be certified true and verified against the original.
(Enclosure No. 2)
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION Search for.· Outsitanding School Principal {Elementary and Secondary)
KEY RESULT AREACKRAl I. Instructional Leadership (20 pts.)
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR -
CRITERIA
Average increase of NAT MPS for the past three school years 10 above - 10 pts. 7-9 - 8 pts. 4-6 - 6 pts. 1-3 - 4 pts. Below 1- 2 ots. 2. Number of Number of students' Students' winnings winnings in contests in contests (5 pts.) for the past three (only the highest level school years cist to 3rd shall be credited with place). the corresponding a. DepEd sanctioned I point/s.) c/ust.er/districtat least 20 winn!ngs to get 1 point. Division - at least 15 winnings to get 2 pts. National- at least 5 winnings to get 4 pts. International - at least 2 winnings to get 5 1. Improved Learn;ng Outcomes (10 pts.)
SUPPORTING DOCUMENT NAT results certified by the ASDS. Report on NAT performance for the past three school years (table and graph) Memorandum on the contest
Students' Certificates
I I
Invitational contest are those not organized by the DepEd.
pts. b. I nvitation- at least 10 winnings to get 1 pt.
3. Curriculum Development - 5 1. Co-curricular pts. ( There 5~~~ld be I activities - 1 pt. at least 5 activities each to get 1 int)
po
.
i 2. Ext.r~~urncular
I
act1v1t1es - 1 pt. / 3. Localization and indigenization of the curriculum - 1 I I pt. 4. Use of community as laboratory of iearning - 1 pt. I I
Letter of invitation DepEd endorsement of the contest List of programs, projects and activities on curriculum development Documentation (pictures, videos) List of Instructional Materials and Curriculum enrichment activities per learning area.
II. Learning Environment (15 pts.)
5. Curriculum enrichment activities - 1 ot. 1. Project on School Improvement
1. Management of physical facilities (5 pts.)
( constmction, repair, beautification, etc.)
Brigada Eskwela report. Reports on School Improvement projects (program of works, pictures)
Amount of projects (from external funding) 1M & above - 5 pts
700K··999,999 - (4) 400K-699,999 - (3) lOOK-399,999 - (2) Below lOOK - (1) 2. Provision of safe learning environment (5 pts.)
I I
I
3. Functional ancillary services and laboratories ( 5 pts. Maximum)
III.
Human Resource Management & Development (10 pts)
1. Conduct of HRMD
programs
i
1. Institutionalization of the following DepEd programs • Child Protection Policy - 1 pt. Disaster Risk "' Reduction Management 1 pt. • Eco-friendly School - 1 pt. Gender Awareness Development (GAD)-1 pt. • Child Friendly School System 1 pt.
Annual Plans and Accomplishment Reports for the following: • CPP • DRRM • Eco-friendly School /YES-0 • GAD • CFSS
II
1. Science Documentation of Laboratories - 1 pt. schools facilities 2. TLE Labs/shops - 1 (photos, videos)
pt. 3. Clinic - 1 pt. Logbooks on utilization Office 1 4. Guidance I I pt. 5. Library/Leaming Center - 1 pt. 6. Canteen - 1 ot. No. of • Training Needs • I nduction Program Assessment (TNA) School Plan for • " INSETS Professional • Trainings, Seminars, Workshop Development ·--
I
Total no. of INSETS, trainings etc. • 17 - 20 - :i pts . • 13-16 ·- ·:Y pts . • 9-12 - 3 pts. • 5-8- 2 pts. • 1-4 - 1pt. Note: Promotion includes natural vacancy promotions, £RF/Upgrading/Reclassification
IV.
Parents' Involvement and Community Partnership (15 pts.)
Total no. cf teachers promoted : • 9-10 - 5 pts. • 7-8-4 pts. • 5-6- 3 pts . • 3-4- 2pts. • 1-2 - 1 pt. 1. SBM Level (5 pts.)
Documentations on school-based trainings.
1
1. Teachers' Promotion
I I
Level 1 (1 pt.) Level 2 (3 pts.) Level 3 ( 5 pts.)
Certification on SBM level.
1. School Governing Council - 1 pt. 2. School Planning T~.am -1 pt, 3. SBM-PASBE Team - 1 pt. 4. QMS-M&E Team 1pt. 5. Homeroom and General PTA - 1 pt. 6. Alumni Association -1 pt.
List of Officers Oath of office Minutes of meetings Attendance sheets.
! Strategic Planning SIP Writing Communication of the
Documentation on strategic planning SIP, AIP, SOB
2. SBM Teams (5 pts.)
3. Stakeholders' Participation and Involvement (5 pts.)
(no. of teachers promoted) - 5 pts
I
ISIP:1 SIP - 1 pt. fJ
I ..
v.
School Leadership and Management Operations (20 pts.)
3 AIP - 2 pts. . • 3 SOB - 2 pts. 1. Improved efficiency 1. Drop-out Rate indicators (15 pts.) • Zero drop-out (5 pts.) 2. Cohort-survival rate i II 100% (5 pts.) R 90-99.99% (3 pts.) .. 80-89.99% (2 pts.)
i
Efficiency indicators reports
.. 79% and below (1 pt.) 3. Completion rate • 100% (5 pts.) • 90-99.99% (3 ;:>ts.) " 80-89.99% (2 pts.) II • 79% and below (1 pt.)
I 2. Resource mobilization and financial management (5 pts.)
Liquidation reports 1
4. Complete (100%) liquidation of cash advances/MOOE • Before due date (3 pts.)
I
• On the due date (1 t.)
VI.
ProfessionaI Growth and Outstanding Accomplishments (20 pts.)
1. Education (4 pts.)
Doctoral Degree (4pts.) Transcript of records CAR (Doctoral) (3 pts.) MA Degree (2 pts.) CAR (MA) (1 pt.)
2. Trainings (4 pts.)
International (at least 1, 3 day-training) - (4 pts.)
Certificates of trainings
National (1, 3 days) (3 pts.) Division (3, 3 days)(1 pt.) International - (4 pts.) National (3 pts.) 3. Resource Speakership ( 4 pts.) Regional (2 pts.) Division (1 pt.)
Letter of invitation Memorandum Training matrix Certificate of recognition.
4. Publication (4 pts.)
Copy of book, journal, • Authorship (book) newspaper 4 pts. • 2 Articles in journals (3 pts.) • 2 Articles in newspapers (2 pts.)
5. Research/ Innovation (4 pts.)
• Division (3 pts.) • Cluster/District (2 pts.) School ( 1 pt.)
i•
Copy of the research/ innovation
(Enclosure No. 6) Rubric :~.Jr Assessing Interview Responses
Answer reftected a
general un oerslanding of the quest;on: lviay have ro1ssod a .Jetail.
Spoke clearly and artic ulately; W as
co11!1dent in lm\>wledge; Integrated profes s;onal
language. throu ghout theresponse; No "urn's , uh's, er's" ate.'
Answer reflect ed a p artial un derstanding of
the: question;
Answer did not reflect an understanding of the
question orimswered an unasked question:
Spoke articulately m ost of the li me .. Us'old g1mera1 worcs at Urnes instead of d etails: lntegra. ted a '.)aod amoJnt of
Spoke in a somewhat nervous manner;. lacked comidence in knowledge; Sketchy use
Nervous; Incomplete th oughts, Not articulate; N o use ct professional language; Response
of professional
riddled with '·'urn's, uh's,
prufes smnal·lsngu0Je
language; Many "um·s ,
er's. etc.";
throughout rnspons e.
uh's , er's , etc .":
Some "urn 's, un·s, er·s··
experiences iri an organized , accurate and detailed manner: Engaged listene r wit h
·Recogn ized that
opinions might be at oddswith listener's
· I de11bfied that It was
Body language conveyed eage rness to respond; Sat in u pri ght and alert manner, Seeme-d n atural an d -at ease:
Integrated kno1Vledge contem or experien ces in a generally organized and accurate mann er:
Inte grated sorn e krlowledge , content or experlenc es: Response
Failed to integrate knowledge, content or experiences; Inaccurate
andior inconiplete
was somewhat ramblin g or missirig details;
rnsponses; Listener was
lr.vited response from
Listener needed to
confused;
the listen er;
clarifv resp onses;
D id ~m racognize tiat ooinions might oe at odds with lis!imer s, identifi ed that response was own opinion; Expressed opm•ons in a gen ereily tactfu l manner:
Did not recognize that
Bojy langu age
co1w&yed intere5t :n r8 spon dm g; Set in an upr ight rr.anner, Senmed fairly nawrat mGst of th~ t:m.:: ;
opinions might be at odds with li stener' s; .Did
not idenlif'f that response was own opinion; Expressed opinions in an open, but un rolessional manner Body fangu age was difficulty to interpret (Too nervou s and/or too casual). Sat up11ght at times, but slouched at others; Extraneous movements cletracted
Did not rec ogn ize that opinions might be at odds with listener's , Did not identrtv that response was owri . opinion; Expressed opinions in.a biased , or inapproprratemanner;
Body lan guage convey ed. d:smterest and/or extreme · nervmisness; Slouch.e d. or moved nent{lUsly throoghoutthe int erview;
from response: Gestures fu !ly facilitated and enhanced tr1e responses: Hand and facial movements were
Sustained , approp riate and natural eye con tact;
Conveyed in!erest 1n the topic and th e l•stener; Snowe d
were approp1 iale and t.:dded G es~_ne:s
to e!fectivene>s of the response; Hand an d faci al movr:ments w ::: re generally natural a11d t1rned t o emphasize : .ay o oints; Appropriate fBir!y consi stent .'JM natur9J eye contact; Gen era:!y conveyed mt;lrn st 1ry the topic an d listener,
Sh rJ'Ncd gene1, •l"f r,ood levels of c:;r.rider ce ir:
Gestures were smnm~ h at limited. unnatural and/or stiff; Hand and/ol fa ciaf mo'1ernents were timed
Ge51ures· were not' evident or were excepbonally distracting to lhe listen er ;
mappropnataty or were distracting; lnlermittertt or inconsisten t ev e contact: Conveyed noncintetest in the topic arldlor listener; Did not seem confident of interactions with the listener;
L1m1ted or no eye contact: Seemed disen gaged With top[c
an d/oriistener;
interacung w ith listen er
Total: ____ _
Dfes5eo 1n <:
Dressea 1n a highly profession al man ner (.suit . sport coal, tie.
(sk1rt/b,0Jse dres s
dress). Neat and well"
oantsib!cuse shi rt and
groomed;
t;e), Genernlly n.:;a1and we1l-groomed
:>rofess;cn ::j!
Excellent (28-32 pts.) Proficient (21-27 pts.)
msr:n ~r
Dressed in a casual , but not necessa1ily
Dress w as inappropriate
profession al manner
and/or unkempt:
(Revealmg blouse, open co!larlno tie j: Fairly neat
Developing Proficiency (15-20 pts.)
Unacceptable (0-14 pts.)
(Enclosure No. 7) This validation tool shall be administered by the Final Screening and Selection Committee (FSSC) without the knowledge of the nominee. Thrre (3) individuals, who can provide truthful and unbiased information about the nominee, snail be chosen as respondents. For school principals, the three (3) respondents must be a Superior, Subordinate, and Community Leader.
VALIOATION TOOL (Assessing Mora lity and Integrity, Human Relations in the School and Community, and Impact to Learning Search for Out standing School Heads (Elementary and Secondary)
To the Respondent: Using the STAR (Situation, Task, Action, Result) Technique, please describe the nominee in terms of the three domains (A. Morality and Integrity; B. Human Relations in the School and Community; and, C. Impact to Learning). Rate each situation from based on the following scale:
Not at all true of the 0
1
3
2
Highly
true of the nominee
Nominee
Use separate sheets of paper if necessary.
A. Morality and Integrity Cite three (3) specific situations that will best describe the nominee in terms of morality and integrity. Situation
Task
Action
Result
Score (0-3)
Situation 1
-
Situation 2
Situation 3
I
B. Human Relations in the School and Community
Provide specific situations that will best describe the nominee's relationship with each of the following: I. Parents-Teachers Association
2. Local Government Units 3. Civic Groups/Church groups Situation
Task
Action
Result
Score
(0-3)
Situation 4 Parents Teachers Association
Situation 5
Local Government Units
I
i
i
I
I I
I
L
I
Situation 6
Civic Groups/Church groups
i
I C. Impact to Learning
1. Cite two (2) situations that best describe the nominee's contribution and impact to pupils'/students' learning.
Situation
Situation 7
Situation 8
Task
Action
Result
Score (0-3)
2. Cite two (2) self-initiated projects of the nominee that have significant impact to pupils'/students' learning. ·-·
Situation
Action
Task
Result
Score (0-3)
Situation 9
I I
I
Situation 10
I Name of Respondent: Address: Cell phone Number: Company: Position/Designation: Signature: Name of Validator/Investigator: Position/Designation: Signature: Date of the Investigation: Location:
Time:
. ,.
SCORE SHEET
Validation Tool for Assessing Morality and Integrity, Human Relations in the School and Community, and Impact to Learning Search for Outstanding School Principals (Elementary and Secondary) Nominee: _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Situation
Category:-- - - - - - - -
Respondent
Respondent
Respondent
1
2
3
1
--
-- -- --
- - --
2
-3 4
5 6 7
8 9
I
-+
t I
10
Total Score
Score in Validation
J_ = Total Score/90 X 100 X 25%
Score
