This paper presents how school-based management (SBM) as a means to restructure and improve education through self-governance within the school. It accounts various SBM development initiatives over years highlighting the system’s ideal practices, driving and restraining variables that surround the delivery of quality education through management efforts based on sound educational management theories. Quality education is not only about physical inputs, such as classrooms, teachers, and textbooks, but also about incentives that lead to better instruction and learning. Education systems are extremely demanding of the managerial, technical, and financial capacity of governments, and, thus, as a service, education is too complex to be efficiently produced and distributed in a centralized fashion. Thus, the government adopts this innovation to decentralize the authority to the school level. Responsibility and decision-making over school operations is transferred to principals, teachers, parents, sometimes students, and other school community members. The school-level actors, however, have to conform to, or operate, within a set of centrally determined policies. SBM programs transfer authority over one or more of the following activities: budget allocation, hiring and firing of teachers and other school staff, curriculum development, textbook and other educational material procurement, infrastructure improvement, setting the school calendar to better meet the specific needs of the local community, and monitoring and evaluation of teacher performance and student learning outcomes. SBM also includes school-development plans, school grants, and sometimes information dissemination of assessments, evaluation and reporting of educational results.
3.Presentation of Facts
The Philippine education system started to operated when Act No. 74 was first instituted in 1901. This milestone in Philippine history established a highly centralized public school system with all schools and colleges under the direct regulation and supervision of the Bureau of Public Schools and the Bureau of Private Schools. In 1975, a massive reorganization was implemented in conformity with the integrated reorganization plan of the government which in turn started the education department’s decentralization. It started series of changes in structure, management operations and bureaucratic procedures aimed at increasing its effectiveness and efficiency. Operating on the concept of decentralization which responds to the varying needs of the different regions were given to the regional level exercising in line functions. Education Act of 1982, Executive Order 117, s. 1987, otherwise known as Reorganization Act of Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports, made it clear that the ministry (now the Department of Education) “shall be primarily responsible for the formulation, planning and implementation and coordination of policies, plans, programs, projects, in formal, and non-formal education at all levels and areas in all levels and providing for the establishment and maintenance of a complete, adequate, and integrated system of education relevant to the goals of national development.”
Reform efforts to improve the structural delivery of the Philippine educational system were facilitated through various education studies initiated by the government and other agencies. One outcome of this study is the Congressional Commission on Education (EdCom) that pursued major reform initiatives in the three-tier education system of the country. The result of the enacted tri-focalization policy, the Commission on Higher Education was set up in 1994 to verse tertiary education, Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) and DECS having sole responsibility for the formulation, planning, implementation and coordination of all educational efforts.