Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 50 no. 10 (2025)

Barriers and Recommendations of Stakeholders’ Engagement in the School-Based Management Programs

Angie Alcala | Jessie Quesea

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

School-Based Management (SBM) served as a key strategy for enhancing education governance in the Philippines by promoting participatory decision-making and shared accountability among stakeholders. Despite its promise, its implementation in public secondary schools remained constrained by resource limitations, communication issues, and inconsistent stakeholder participation. This study explored barriers and formulated recommendations to strengthen stakeholder engagement in SBM implementation in public secondary schools in Lucena City. Anchored on Republic Act No. 9155 and DepEd Order No. 007, s. 2024, the study employed a convergent parallel mixed-methods design integrating quantitative and qualitative data to obtain a comprehensive understanding of stakeholder experiences. A total of 360 stakeholders, comprising school heads, teachers, parents, alums, and community representatives, responded to a structured survey, while a purposive sample participated in semi-structured interviews. Quantitative findings revealed significant barriers across the four SBM dimensions: conflicting work schedules (WAM = 3.64), poor communication systems (WAM = 3.03), limited authority in resource allocation (WAM = 3.35), inadequate access to school data (WAM = 3.55), lack of experiential learning tools (WAM = 3.62), and weak monitoring systems (WAM = 3.58), with significant variations in perceptions across demographic profiles. Qualitative analysis reinforced these findings, highlighting limited empowerment, a lack of transparency, and insufficient collaboration. Integration of both data strands confirmed that structural and relational barriers jointly impeded effective stakeholder participation. Based on these insights, the study proposed Enhanced Programs, Projects, and Activities (PPAs) that include leadership capacity-building, curriculum co-creation workshops, transparency initiatives, and resource governance training to promote inclusive, participatory, and sustainable school governance.



References:

  1. Abraham, P. (2015). Strengthening PTAs. http://www.elsbee.com/sentence.htm
  2. Adewusi, S. (2020). How to do a thematic analysis. http://epublications.bond.edu.au/ejsie/vol1/iss1/2
  3. Air, M. (2016). Institutional support framework. https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-09/24_0827_s-n_approach_developing_interoperable_info_sharing_framework_2021_final_508.pdf
  4. Almendrala, A. (2019). Accountability. http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/education/statistics/statistics-definition-function-role-in-education-and-its-concepts/64805
  5. American Society for Quality. (2018). Continuous improvement. https://asq.org/quality-resources/continuous-improvement
  6. Anderson, G. (2016). Types of SBM accountabilities. http://www.fldoe.org/bii.instruct_mat/
  7. Antenor, R. (2018). School leadership. http://www.edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Textbook
  8. Asian Development Bank. (2017). SBM’s scalability.   http://amstat.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10691898.2009.11889531
  9. Australian Council for Educational Research. (2016). SBM in Australia. http://www.sitepoint.com
  10. Bandur, H. (2018). SBM in Indonesia. http://nrich.maths.org/6458
  11. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. (2020). Financial inclusion and literacy initiatives in the Philippines. https://www.bsp.gov.ph/
  12. Barber, M., & Mourshed, M. (2017). SBM’s role in teacher evaluations. http://www.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss
  13. Bartle, A. (2017). Involvement of stakeholders. http://www.docstoc.com
  14. Bautista, R. (2013). Fiscal autonomy. http://iteslj.org/Articles/Kitao-Materials.html
  15. Belfield, C., Levin, H., & Kelly, K. (2022). The economics of education. Worth Publishers.
  16. Bernhardt, V. (2017). Data analysis for continuous school improvement. Routledge.
  17. Booth, T., & Ainscow, M. (2021). Index for inclusion: Developing learning and participation in schools. CSIE. https://www.eenet.org.uk/resources/docs/Index%20English.pdf
  18. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (2017). Reproduction in education, society, and culture. Sage. https://books.google.com/books/about/Reproduction_in_Education_Society_and_Cu.html?id=vl0n9_wrrbUC
  19. Bray, J., & Mukundan, J. (2023). SBM in India and Sri Lanka. https://ww2.amstat.org/publications/jse/v4n1/nash.html
  20. Britannica Encyclopedia. (2018). Accountable. https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/accountable
  21. Bronfenbrenner, U. (2019). Ecological systems theory. In Child development theories (pp. 103–142). Routledge.
  22. Bryk, A., & Schneider, B. (2022). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell Sage Foundation. https://www.russellsage.org/publications/trust-schools-0
  23. Bryson, J. (2018). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations. John Wiley & Sons.
  24. Bryson, J., Patton, K., & Bowman, R. (2011). Working with stakeholders: How to plan and engage. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.07.001
  25. Bush, T., & Glover, D. (2019). SBM promotes ethical leadership. http://www.professorjackrichards.com/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-using-instructional-materials-in-teaching-esl/
  26. Bustamante, R. (2007). Shared decision-making. https://www.education.com/reference/article/impact-spreadsheets-education
  27. Cabardo, C. (2016). Levels of school stakeholders to the different school-initiated activities and the implementation of school-based management. http://www.statisticsteacher.org
  28. Caldwell, B. (2023). SBM provides professional growth. https://www.shorewood.k12.wiki.us
  29. Caldwell, B., & Spinks, J. (2023). SBM empowers schools. http://amstat.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09332480.2015.1099361
  30. Carbonell, C., Cruz, J., & Cruz, R. (2017). Community participation in school governance: The case of parent-teacher associations in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 37(4), 548–561.
  31. CHED Memorandum Order No. 20, s. 2013. (2013). General education curriculum: Holistic understanding, intellectual and civic competencies. Commission on Higher Education. https://ched.gov.ph
  32. CHED Memorandum Order No. 46, s. 2012. (2012). Policy-standard to enhance quality assurance in Philippine higher education through outcomes-based and typology-based quality assurance. Commission on Higher Education. https://ched.gov.ph
  33. Chen, Y., Zhang, C., Zhu, Q., & Cheung, W. (2015). Examining the impact of information transparency on online word-of-mouth: An information asymmetry perspective. Decision Support Systems, 71, 74–82.
  34. Cherlin, A. (2019). Marriage and divorce: How do families fare? American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200873
  35. Christie, P., & Lingard, B. (2021). SBM promotes lifelong learning. https://pidswebs.pids.gov.ph/CDN/PUBLICATIONS/pidsdps1932.pdf
  36. Coleman, J. (2018). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120.
  37. Darling-Hammond, L. (2020). The flat world and education: How America’s commitment to equity will determine our future. Teachers College Press.
  38. Davis, L. (2017). Stakeholder collaboration and educational outcomes: The missing link. International Journal of Education Policy, 32(2), 134–150.
  39. Day, C., Sammons, P., Hopkins, D., Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Gu, Q., & Brown, E. (2011). Successful school leadership: Linking with pupil learning and wellbeing. McGraw-Hill Education.
  40. Department of Education (DepEd). (2021). The School-Based Management (SBM) framework and guidelines. Department of Education. https://www.deped.gov.ph/
  41. Dewey, J. (2018). Experience and education. Kappa Delta Pi.
  42. Durlak, J., Weissberg, R., Dymnicki, A., Taylor, R., & Schellinger, K. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432.
  43. Dweck, C. (2015). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.
  44. Eagly, A. (2017). Social role theory. In Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 458–478). Sage.
  45. Epstein, J. (2018). School, family, and community partnerships: Your guide to connecting educators and families. Corwin.
  46. Epstein, J., & Dauber, S. (2021). School programs and teacher practices of parent involvement in inner-city schools. The Elementary School Journal, 91(3), 295–318.
  47. Financial Literacy Asia Report. (2019). Regional insights on financial literacy and inclusion. Asian Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/
  48. Fielding, N. (2024). Achieving successful research groups. Cambridge University Press.
  49. Florian, L. (2019). On the necessary inclusion of special education within teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(1), 7–12.
  50. Formento, N., Howard, E., & Pierson, A. (2020). Continuous improvement in education. Routledge.
  51. Fullan, M. (2017). SBM facilitates shared accountability.
  52. Gamage, D. (2015). SBM enhances teacher motivation.
  53. Gilligan, C. (2022). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard University Press.
  54. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2022). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. Routledge.
  55. Harris, A. (2023). SBM encourages teacher collaboration.
  56. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
  57. Hoy, W., & Miskel, C. (2019). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice. McGraw-Hill Education.
  58. International Labour Organization (ILO). (2019). Global employment trends for youth 2019: Technology and the future of jobs. International Labour Organization. https://www.ilo.org/
  59. Kumari, S. (2021). Financial literacy and decision-making among youth: An analytical study. Journal of Economics and Education Studies, 13(4), 215–229.
  60. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2019). Transformational school leadership: Theoretical and empirical evidence of its effects. Review of Research in Education, 3–49.
  61. Louis, K., Murphy, J., & Smylie, M. (2016). Caring leadership in schools: Findings from research. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 310–338.
  62. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2020). OECD/INFE 2020 international survey of adult financial literacy. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/financial/education
  63. Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA). (2020). Philippine labor force survey 2020. https://psa.gov.ph/
  64. Putnam, R. (2020). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon and Schuster.
  65. Republic Act No. 9155. (2001). Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001.
  66. Tschannen-Moran, M. (2024). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools. John Wiley & Sons.
  67. Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (2015). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Harvard University Press.
  68. World Bank. (2018). Global financial development report 2018: Learning from financial crises. World Bank Group. https://www.worldbank.org/
  69. World Bank. (2020). SBM promotes accountability and transparency.and transparency..

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic