Practical Reseearch 2 Temlate

ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM FOR LET AMONG TEIs
GUAGUA NATIONAL COLLEGES - GRADUATE SCHOOL 148
Enhancement Program for Licensure Examination of Student-Teachers
among Teacher Education Institutions : A Baseline for a
Proposed Development Plan
A Dissertation Presented to
the Faculty of the Graduate School
Guagua National Colleges
Guagua,Pampanga
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy Major in Educational Management
Pilar Butron-Limin
April, 2016
APPROVAL SHEET
This dissertation entitled ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM FOR LICENSURE

EXAMINATION OF STUDENT TEACHERS AMONG TEACHER EDUCATION
INSTITUTIONS IN REGION III: A BASELINE FOR A PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT PLAN prepared and submitted by Pilar B. Limin in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in Educational Management, has
been examined and recommended for acceptance and oral examination.
DR.WILLIAM G. BACANI
Adviser
_______________________________________________________________________
ORAL EXAMINATION
Approved by the Committee of Oral Examiners with a grade of 95%

on April 23,2016.
Lolita D. Nazal, Ed.D. Abner C. Manaloto,Ph.D.

Chairman Member
Merlita C. Razon,Ph.D. Concepcion K. Pasion,Ph.D. Arceli S. Lopez, Ph.D.

Member Member Member
_______________________________________________________________________
APPROVAL
Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor
of Philosophy in Educational Management.
Comprehensive Examination passed on September 19, 2015 with a grade of 96.33%
Maria Lourdes S. Pelagio, Ph.D. Lolita D. Nazal, Ed.D.

President OIC, Graduate School
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The researcher would like to express her deepest gratitude to the following people,
for without them, this study would not have been possible;
Dr. William G.Bacani, for his advices and masterful support which gave the
researcher more determination to finish this study;
Dr. Abner C. Manaloto, professor in the Graduate school, for his encouragement,
significant advices and moral support for the completion of the study;
Chief Librarians and Staff of Guagua National Colleges, College Department,
Philippine Normal University (PNU) Graduate School Library, Holy Angel University
(HAU) Library for generously providing reference materials needed for the study;
Classmates in the Doctoral program of Guagua National Colleges, best friends, close
friends, colleagues in the academe, for the encouragement ,support and liveliness in
continuing the study; Mrs. Fatima M. Carlos , for providing the needed statistical
assistance;Mrs. Maria Victoria B. Bacani, as grammarian of the study; Engr. Roland
Sotto for the moral support; Best , for the words of encouragement, Sir Dads, Ate Rose,
Madame Cel , Sir Joel for the Inspiration , encouragement, and support
Dr. Merlita C. Razon,VPAA and Deans among school-participants, for providing
the information regarding the Enhancement Program of the College of Education;
The support staff of the school participants for the assistance and information;
Arnold, my ever faithful and supportive husband, for the love, moral support,
encouragement and financial support; Alexise, Axel Nash and Alfred Xian, my three
wonderful kids for giving me joy, love, happiness ,inspiration and understanding during
busy moments; JM, Grace, Marina, JR, Joemar, for the moral and financial support;
Tatay Braulio, Mama Dely, and Mama Maling for guidance and understanding;
To the omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God Almighty, for making all these
things possible in the meaningful existence of the Researcher.
Dedication
The researcher would like to dedicate this research study to all the members
of Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) for giving their
valuable time, strength, commitment and effort
in the pursuit of knowledge and helping in the preparation of
future teachers who will become professional teachers and
will eventually mold others to become instruments for
providing quality education in the next generation of students.
This is also lovingly dedicated to my family
ARNOLD
ALEX, NASH and XIAN
TATAY BRAULIO, MAMA DELY, GRACE, MARINA, JAY-R and JOEMAR
TATAY FRED, MAMA MALING, AL, MARIE, ANGIE, NIECES and NEPHEWS
And most especially to
The LORD AMIGHTY

- Phy
Table of Contents
Page
Title Page .. i
Approval Sheet. ii
Acknowledgement iii
Dedication iv
Table of Contents .. v
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
Abstract. 1
INTRODUCTION 2
Review of Related Literature .. 4
Synthesis . 17
Relevant Theories
Theoretical Framework .. 19
Statement of the Problem .. 23
Hypotheses of the Study . 25
Significance of the Study. 25
DESIGN
Research Method .. 30
Participants . 31
Research Setting . . 32
Research Instruments 32
Validation of the Survey Questionnaire 34
Data Gathering Procedure 35
Ethical Considerations...
Statistical Treatment.. 36
RESULTS
DISCUSSION.
Conclusion.
Recommendations.
Proposed Development Plan
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
A - The Survey Questionnaire for

Faculty Review-Facilitators
B - The Survey Questionnaire for

Student-Teacher Participants.
C Letter Addressed to the OIC of

Graduate School to Conduct the Study..
D Letter Addressed to Authorities for the Validation

of the Instrument ..
E- Letter Addressed to the Vice President for Academic

Affairs of School -Participants to Conduct the Study
F- Letter Addressed to the Deans of

School -Participants to Conduct the Study
G- Map of Region III..
H Informal Interview Sample Questions .
I Consolidated Summary of the Frequency Count and

Percentage of the Demographic Profile of
Student-Teacher Participants.
JConsolidated Responses of Participants on the Assessments

Effectiveness of the Enhancement Program
K - List of Recognized Accredited HEIs in Region IIII.. .
L- Chart Showing the National Performance of the

School-Participants in the Licensure Examination for
Teachers (LET) for Three Past Three Years
M - Curriculum Vitae.
List of Tables
Table
1 Distribution of School-Participants in Region III.. 27
2 Distribution of Faculty Review-Facilitators and

Student-Teacher Participants..........31
3.1 Demographic Profile of the Faculty-Review Facilitators
3.2 Demographic Profile of the Student-Teacher Participants..
3.3 Frequency Count, Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating

of the Academic Performance on the Three Subject
Categories of Student-Teacher Participants
4.1 Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating on the

Assessment of the Faculty-Review Facilitators and
Student-Teacher Participants on the Enhancement
Program in Terms of Objectives..
4.2 Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating

on the Assessment of the Faculty-Review Facilitators on the
Enhancement Program in Terms of Content.

Enhancement Program in Terms of Instructional Strategies
Employed by the Faculty-Review Facilitators ..

Enhancement Program in Terms of Reading or Resource
Materials Availability. ..

Enhancement Program in Terms of Learning Styles of the
Student-Teacher Participants .
4.6 Summary of the Weighted Mean, Descriptive Rating and Rank

of the Assessments of the Faculty-Review Facilitators
and Student-Teacher Participants on the Enhancement Program

on the Perception of the Faculty-Review Facilitators on the
Relevance of the Enhancement Program to the Licensure
Examination for Teachers ..

on the Perception of the Student-Teacher Participants on the
5.3 Summary of the Weighted Mean, Descriptive Rating and Rank

on the Perception of the Faculty-Review Facilitators on the
6 Frequency Count and Percentage of the Attitudes of

Student- Teacher Participants Towards the
Enhancement Program .

on the Seriousness of Problems Encountered by the
Faculty-Review Facilitators in the Implementing Phase of the
Enhancement Program ..

on the Seriousness of Problems Encountered by the
Student-Teacher Participants in the Implementing Phase of the
Enhancement Program ..
7.3 Weighted Mean and Rank of the Suggested Measures

to Remedy or Minimize the Problems Encountered by the
Faculty-Review Facilitators .
8 Test of Difference between the Assessments of

Faculty-Review Facilitators and Student-Teacher Participants
on the Effectiveness of the Enhancement
Program.
List of Figures
Figure
1 Research Paradigm . 22
Abstract
This research endeavor explored and assessed the effectiveness of the enhancement program
for Licensure Examination among selected accredited Teacher Education Institutions in
Region III during the academic year 2015-2016.The descriptive method of research was
employed. Two sets of survey questionnaires were subjected for validation of expert
professionals for improvement. Informal interviews were conducted to validate the
responses obtained. Two hundred twenty nine (229) student-teacher participants and twenty
three (23) faculty- review facilitators served as the participants of the study. The researcher
personally administered and retrieved the survey questionnaires. Moreover, the researcher
utilized appropriate statistical tools such as the frequency distribution, mean, percentage,
rank, Likert scale and t-test. Findings revealed that both participants very strongly agreed
that the objectives, contents, instructional strategies, reading materials, and learning styles
of the students are all effective in the enhancement program and relevant to the Licensure
Examination .It also was divulged in the study that there is a significant difference between
the assessments of both participants in terms of five dimensions of the enhancement
program. Results also showed that student-teacher participants liked the idea of the
inclusion of an enhancement review program which ranked first. Problems encountered by
both participants were categorized as minor problems. Suggested measures to remedy the
problems were offered. Finally, conclusions and recommendations were used to come up
with the proposed development plan for the enhancement program.
Keywords: Enhancement Program, Licensure Examination, Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs), Faculty-
Review Facilitators, Student-Teacher, Proposed Development Plan
Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) provide continuous process of beginning
with a phase of initial and continuing throughout the teachers professional life through its
regular and sustained periods of in-service training. Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs)
have the potential to bring changes within educational system that will shape the
knowledge and skills of future generations. They serve as the key change agents in
transforming education and society, so such a future is possible .They educate new teachers
and provide professional development by updating their knowledge and skills.
(UNESCO: Quality Education, 2005. http://portal.unesco,org./education/en/ev.php)
The aforementioned statements pose the challenge: How do Teacher Education
Institutions (TEIs) serve such goals?
No single factor can contribute more to an improved student achievement than
the guarantee of a quality teacher in every classroom. No amount of classroom facilities
and instructional materials can produce the desired learning outcomes without a teacher
at the center stage.
Quality is synonymous to competence, creativity and commitment, contextualized in
the teaching profession. Competence highlights a teachers adequate knowledge, skills and
proficiency in a variety of teaching strategies and inherent trustworthiness. Creativity is
akin to originality, flexibility and innovativeness. Worthwhile values of compassion and
commitment provide the ingredients that make teaching truly humane and enriched with
a sincere feeling of accountability.

The quest for quality teacher rests on three important factors that need great concerns:
a.) teacher preparation; b.) continuing professional development and c.) steep values
formation.
Teacher Education Institutions play a critical role in preparing the future teacher.
Its pre-service program starts with highly selective admission standards in order to be able
to train the deservingly trainable in terms of academic potentials, attitude and aptitude. Once
admitted, strict retention policies allow them to continue on a rigorous preparation through a
flexible, relevant and responsive curriculum.
Thus, they undergo a 4-year curriculum consisting of general education subjects
grounded on a well-rounded liberal arts offerings, professional education courses aimed
at molding them according to the demands of the profession and specialization courses
which provide the needed concentration in a particular discipline.
The final year requires an on-campus and off- campus internship which situates
them in real teaching arena. As a final qualification to teach, the candidates are required to
pass a licensure examination given twice a year by the Professional Regulation
Commission(PRC).
It is in this light that the researcher realized the need to assess and evaluate the
performance of student-teacher participants in the Enhancement Program among
accredited Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs ) offering programs of Bachelor of
Elementary Education and Bachelor of Secondary Education.
The aforementioned realization inspired the current researcher, being an educator for
almost 19 years, a program chair in the College of Education for 3 years and a member of
the Committee on Research of one of the private colleges in Pampanga, to pursue this study
on the implementation of the Enhancement Program in Licensure Examination for
Teachers(LET) for student teachers among Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs). The
researcher sought to assess the effectiveness of the said program in improving the national
passing percentage of institutions offering Education courses in Region III as well as the
problems encountered by the faculty- review facilitators and student-teacher participants in
the implementation of the program.
This study had the goal of providing points for reflections among school-
participants to realize the impact of developing and maintaining a well-organized
enhancement program , and such effort does not only concern in helping student teachers
financially but also in producing competent, committed, compassionate and noble
professionals who will practice their gained skills and knowledge with the application of
appropriate attitudes in the real world of teaching. Through the study, it is also hoped that
administrators, faculty review-facilitators, teachers, and parents may also acquire valuable
inputs in attaining the set goals of the Enhancement Program among Teacher Education
Institutions (TEIs).
To give more credence to this task that has been undertaken, the researcher had
reviewed the following related literature to show some proofs of the methodology, and
dependability.
The Teacher Educational Institutions have vital role in improving the standards of the
system of education by preparing competent and effective teachers. It has generally been
agreed that the quality of a nation is judged by the quality of its citizens. The latter is
mostly determined by the educational system in the nation which, in turn, is decided by the
quality of teachers it has. Thus, the real dynamic force of the education system is the teacher.
investments, facilities and all other factors become meaningless if the real functionaries
(The teachers) fail to support and implement the new reforms. Thus teacher is the knight for
any educational system. The quality of teacher education would largely depend upon the
effectiveness of teacher education institutions( Kayani, 2011) However, the quality of
university and college teaching has been discussed in recent years and the need to improve
university and college teachers teaching skills and pedagogical thinking is now being
acknowledged. Many countries have made decisions about the compulsory pedagogical
training of teachers of higher education. (Gibbs and Coffey, 2004).Higher Education
Institutions understands the importance of professional growth of teachers of higher
education( Kayani, 2011). Teacher education institutions have a great responsibility in
producing quality teacher. It is a fact that quality has been used as a vehicle for delivering
policy requirements within available resources (Lee, 2003).
The vision and mission of the College of Education in every Teacher Education
Institutions(TEIs) is to produce productive individuals that will cater the needs of the both
the primary and secondary education. This is the very reason why the enhancement /in-
campus review classes are being conducted for the student teachers as part of the curriculum
and review classes after finishing the four-year course degree, that is, to prepare them fully
on the next level of their lives which is the licensure examination. In so doing, the college of
education implements the said activities as part of the Enhancement program being provided
free by some school administration and for some with an affordable fee.
The researcher felt that the teacher training programs play a pivotal role in
addressing the challenge of gaining a hundred percentage passing rate in the national
level of the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET). According to Seng (1999),
quality education will only be realized through snowball effect if it started out in
teacher training programs. It was articulated in her study that education students
who have been given quality education will likewise provide the same to their
students when they become professional teachers.
To have clearer concepts on how Filipinos give importance to education, it was
emphasized by Perez(2006) in her study that Filipinos have known to value education more
than anything else that is why each barangay has each own elementary school and each
municipality has one or more secondary schools. The needs for teachers grew each year.
Research has consistently shown that teachers are the most important factor in how well
kids learn and how much our educational system makes progress. Research has also
indicated that the best teachers bring three things in their classrooms: skills and knowledge
acquired from education in their subject areas; hands-on teaching experiences; and
demonstrated competencies through a standards-based licensure examination. These three
Es - Education, Experience and Examination are essential to the development of an
effective teacher.
Obtaining a license by teacher-education graduates satisfies the prescribed requirement
in the practice of teaching profession. Hence, awareness in the success indicators of licensure
performance can greatly help students in their preparation. Knowing what must be given,
the researcher believes that greater emphasis will facilitate a more rigid and more
comprehensive review. Knowledge on the relationship that exists between licensure
performance and academic performance will motivate examinees to improve their learning
styles to ensure a higher percentage of retention on lessons incorporated in their college
courses and making them realize the value or worth of every task intended for them to
accomplish( Radam, 2007).
Teachers or would-be teachers are expected to be more conscious of how great their
roles are in enabling teacher-education graduates to obtain their license. Hence, they are
expected to impart the most needed learning competencies prescribed by the CHED parallel
to the competencies of the PRC prior to licensing.
CHED has four objectives in monitoring and evaluating the performance of Higher
Education Institutions (based on the Primer in IQuaME,2005) and one of this is HEIs should
perform effectively i.e., they are committed to continuous improvement, they make
sufficient use of the resource that are available to them, and they take effective steps to
increase the likelihood of their students achieving the learning outcomes requited to
graduate. Thus qualifying them to obtain a professional license through taking the board
examination.
The Professional Regulatory Commission (PRC) amended the Board Law, also
known as Republic Act No. 9293 , an Act amending certain sections of R.A.No.7836,
otherwise known as the Philippine Teachers Professionalization Act of 1994. It is an Act
to strengthen the regulation and supervision of the Practice of Teaching in the Philippines
and prescribing a Licensure Examination for Teachers and for other purposes. This act also
stated the policy that the State recognizes the vital role of teachers in nation-building and
development through a responsible and literate citizenry. Towards this end, the State shall
ensure and promote quality education by proper supervision and regulation of the licensure
examination and professionalization of the practice of teaching profession.(www.prc.gov.ph)
The Professional Regulatory Commission (PRC) sought to review that the system of
examination for teachers is following a 70-percent failing rate in all its tests. Examiners
undertake the review, but after the review, the results still gave a very discouraging, and
perhaps, gravely disparaging, nationwide results. The Professional Regulatory Commission
(PRC) has been tracking down the unlicensed teachers in the countrys elementary and
secondary schools for some time now. Teachers should pass the Licensure Examination for
Teachers (LET) or else they will be laid off in their profession.
The LET at the elementary levels (BEEd) consists of two parts: General
Education ( 40%) and Professional Education (60%) . For the secondary levels, it consists
of three parts: general education ( 20%), professional education (40%),and field of
specialization (40%) . The areas covered by the Field of Specialization is consist of English,
Filipino, Mathematics, Science, Social Science/ Social studies, Values Education, Physical
Education. Health and Music, Agriculture and Fishery Arts, Home Economics, Industrial
Arts and Related Disciplines.(http://www.slreviewcenter.com.ph) The subjects covered by
the Professional Subject is consist of Teaching Profession, Facilitating Learning, Child
and Adolescent Development, Principles of Teaching, Education Technology, Curriculum
Development, Field Studies, and Practice Teaching.
All the examination questions prescribed by the Board for Professional Teachers are
designed to test whether the teacher-examinee possesses the minimum standard of
technological competencies expected of a newly qualified teacher (Gil, 1996).
However, statistics reveals since August 1996, when the Board for Professional
Teachers and the PRC first administered the LET, until August 2002, only an average of
32.58% were able to pass the examination. The aforementioned data proved that a greater
percentage of graduates from teacher-training institutions in the entire country are
incapable of passing the LET. Hence, Sibayan (1998) justly proved his statement: The lack
of quality control in teacher education is the lack of qualified teacher. If teachers are not
qualified to teach, then they must not be allowed to teach at all. The teacher, according to
Villamin (1996), like candle, sheds light as it burns its own flame, for no teacher can
share knowledge and experience which he does not have. This statement necessitates a real
measure of a teachers competence, which is passing the licensure examination.
Based on the 1995 report of Task Force on Higher Education as cited by Hermosisima
( 2003), one of the most commonly mentioned indicators of quality higher education
programs in the country is the performance of the graduates in the licensure examinations.
In the context of Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) ,this points to the performance of
teacher education graduates in the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) as an
indicator of quality education provided by the TEIs.
The researcher found it very significant to note that in the study conducted by
Seng (1999) that there is really a significant relationship between academic
performance and LET results since the null hypothesis relating academic performance in
both general and professional education courses was rejected because all the computed
person r values were even higher than the critical values for rejection at 0.05 level of
significance. This is partly related to the current study in determining the significance of
academic performance of the education graduates and their performance in the
enhancement program in their preparation for taking the board examination.
In the study conducted by Radam (2007) which focused on the identification of
the LET performance indicators of the BEED and BSED graduates in the different
components. For BEED, the professional education, general education, and the general
weighted average were incorporated in the variable, the same areas were considered
for the BSEd, in addition to the majorship/field of specialization .In her dissertation entitled
The indicators of Licensure Examination For Teachers(LET) Performance Capability of
the Philippine Normal University Isabela Campus Graduates, it was revealed based on the
findings,that in the BEED Program ,there was a positive significant correlation that
resulted among variables involved such as PNUAT scores ,professional education GPA,
general education GPA and college GPA which are significantly related to all the LET
components namely LET professional education average, LET general education
average and LET General Weighted Average. Academic award received in high school is a
significant correlate of LET general education component and LET Average while
student teaching rating correlated with LET professional education and LET average.
For the BSE, PNUAT test scores, professional education GPA, general education
GPA ,college GPA, award received in college are the variables significantly related to all
the LET components. High School GPA is also considered a significant correlates of LET
Professional education component, LET general education, and LET average.
It was further revealed in her study that the LET performance of the BEED subjects in
all components was best predicted by general education, college GPA and award received
in college. Those students who obtained higher grades in general education and graduated
with honors in college have greater chance of passing the LET. On the other hand, BSE
subjects predictors of LET performance are professional education GPA , students
teaching rating and test scores for the LET professional education, general education GPA,
attendance in review classes and over all scores for LET, the LET general education and
professional education for the LET major and professional education GPA ,student
teaching rating and score for the LET average. All of these data were accurately gathered
by Radam(2007) through the use of Microsoft Excel, Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences(SPSS) and important statistical treatment such as measures of central tendency,
and standard deviation(S.D.)It was also emphasized in her the study that there are benefits
obtained from the greater number of PNU graduates in the conduct of LET review classes .
Majority of the graduates passed the LET, in all components, with a mean rating that exceeds
the minimum required by the PRC.
Another study conducted by Matriano and Almazan (2011) determined the
different predictors affecting the result in the Licensure Examination for Teachers
(LET) among the graduates of the Teacher Education Program. It was articulated
that Republic Act No. 7836 was issued in 1994 and amended by RA 9293 stressed
that no person shall engage in teaching and/ or act as a professional teacher as
defined in this Act whether in the preschool, elementary or secondary level, unless
the person is a duly registered professional teacher, and a holder of a valid
certificate of registration and a valid professional license or a holder of a valid
special/temporary permit. The major reason for seeking to create a profession of
teaching is that it will increase the probability that all students will be well- educated
because they are well taught that professionalism seeks to heighten accountability
by investing in knowledge and its responsible use (Englund, 1993).
The school has the obligation to its students to ensure success in their future
career and life by looking into possibility of strengthening the Teacher Education
curriculum as well as the training preparations of students who will later take the
board examination.
Another study conducted by Gerolangin (2000) which identified the education

graduate factors and faculty reviewer related factors that significantly affect the
licensure examination performance of the graduates of College of Education of Bulacan
State University (BSU) during the school year 1996-1998 revealed that sex and
area of specialization appeared to be significant predictors of students performance
in the licensure examination. It is an indicative of the need to continuously upgrade the
training of students in the major disciplines. One revealing finding of the study is
that generally the licensure examination performance of the male respondents is 1.57
less than the licensure performance of the female education graduates in any area of
specialization regardless of age.
The role of Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) is significant in providing quality
education to students up to giving opportunities for him to be able to attain eligibility.
Based on the analysis which was publicly presented by PBED on March 17, 2014
(http://pbed.ph/taxonomy/term/2/downloads) ,out of the numerous TEIs in the country, it
was found out that from the list of schools with first-time test-takers , 99 schools got a
passing rate from 20% to 30% for the secondary licensure examination. Out of all these
schools ,51 are located in Luzon,14 are found in Visayas, and 34 are from Mindanao. When
it comes to the schools ownership,63 of these schools are private while 36 are sustained by
peoples taxes. On the other hand, there 20 schools offering both Bachelor of Elementary
Education and Secondary Education whose students had passing rates that range from 20%
to 30% on their first-take. Out of the 20 schools, 9 are found in Luzon, 1 from Visayas, and
10 from Mindanao. From these schools, 15 are private while 5 are government owned.
It is important to note that the Commission of Higher Education (CHED) is

continuously monitoring the performance of TEIs in the Licensure Examination for
Teachers (LET). As part of its mandates, CHED monitors and evaluates all HEIs.
Monitoring and evaluation of whole institution is necessary for two purposes. First, CHED
needs to make judgments about effectiveness of institutions in their entirety. Second, CHED
needs to monitor and evaluate the development of these institutional systems that ensure the
quality and standards of programs. Systematic monitoring will generate pressure for
improvement ( based on CMO No. 16, series 2005).
Meanwhile, due to the poor performance in the board examination of some TEIs,
CHED had to recommend the closure of these TEIs. It was emphasized in the study that it is
important to inform the public about the list of schools belonging in the lower 50% of the
national test-takers passing rate as part of its information and consumer protection campaign.
It was recommended from the analysis that TEIs should explore other pre-college screening
instruments or standards such as a national entrance examination for teachers and conduct a
parallel review of LET questions and the teacher education curriculum of TEIs for improved
alignment to the licensure examination. It was also noted that conducting analysis and
providing sound research could help policy makers in their reform efforts such as the
closing down programs of TEIs that have consistently performed poorly for five years and
requiring TEIs (especially SUCs and LCUs) to make LET results readily available to
parents and prospective students(PBED,2014).
The curriculum, instruction and assessment should be aligned with standards. There
should be alignment between the planned and actual curricula with the established
standards. Teachers use research for identifying appropriate teaching strategies to enhance
delivery of instruction. Teachers understand the role of classroom and assessments, what the
available assessment tools measure and how student work is assessed and evaluated(School
Improvement Planning in Washington State , n.d)
After pursuing college education, a teacher education graduate is required to take
board or licensure examination. This will entitle him to enjoy eligibility, likewise his
tenure in the teaching profession. This will likewise measure his capacity to teach.
In preparation for the examination, it is also important to consider several measures
such as the board review. As a result of the studies undertaken by Valdepenas (1997) and
Cabatic ( 1997), it was found out that board review is not a predictor of licensure
performance. Dimanligs (1998) study,in contrast , contradicts the said findings and
stressed the importance of board review since it established a significant relationship. The
said findings came about as a result of studying the level of performance of license takers
in the engineering and nursing exam. Radams (2007) findings concluded that attendance
in PNU LET review classes predicts LET General Education performance.
A study was conducted at Bataan Polytechnic State College (BPSC) by
Enriquez (2006) which is related to the current study in determining the effectiveness
of the in-campus review classes in the Licensure Examination for Teachers. It was
revealed in the study that scholastic achievement in the general education subjects
when combined with other variables was found to be the best predictor of success of
the education graduates in the LET and it was followed by attendance in LET review.
Moreover, when compared with the national passing rate, teacher education graduates
LET performance surpassed the national passing rate by 19.21%.
Based on the findings and conclusions drawn from the study conducted by Radam
(2007) it was proposed and strongly recommended the conduct of LET review classes
should be a primary concern of school administrators, teachers and students prior to
graduation.
Another study was conducted by Gerolangin (2000) which identified the education
graduate factors and faculty reviewer related factors that significantly affect the
licensure examination performance of the graduates of College of Education of Bulacan
State University during the school year 1996-1998. It was found out that education
graduate related factors such as sex and area of specialization contributed significantly
to the licensure examination performance of the education graduates while the faculty-
reviewer factors, which appeared to be significant predictors of students performance
in the licensure examination are educational qualification, academic rank, teaching status
and teaching experience. This implied that the aforementioned teacher factors should be
considered in hiring faculty members in the college of education, and in selecting faculty
reviewers who would be tasked with the responsibility of preparing students for the
licensure examinations. The factors may even be considered in the ranking and
promotion of faculty members since they appeared as effective indicators of teachers
productivity in the college of education.
On the basis of the findings of the said related studies, there are implications to
improve the teacher education program. With a pool of educationally qualified faculty-
reviewers , much can be done in terms of pre-service and review enhancement
particularly in professional education courses like foundation of education, historical,
philosophical and legal basis of education ; principles and methods of teaching, test,
measurement and evaluation ,educational research and the like.

Studies have proven the effectiveness of using instructional materials to aid
Instructions. Because of the advancement and technology, particularly with the use of
computers, review procedures on LET can be given a meaningful and wonderful twist. This
was proven by a study conducted by Perez( 2008)when she developed an Interactive Pre-
Board Licensure Examination for Teachers for Technological University of the Philippines
(TUP) Review Center. Different tools were employed in the Project design and
development with a better system primarily created using Visual Basic 6.0 , Microsoft
Access for its Database, adobe Photoshop for images and graphics and PCMM RealSpeak
for audio capability and data from sample questionnaires from LET Review Administrators,
LET Review Lecturers, Professional Education Professors and BSE Graduating students /
prospective LET review-takers and IT specialists who were the respondents of the said
study. It was revealed from the comprehensive analysis of the results of the evaluation, that
the project was found to be acceptable in terms of functionality and present market
demand which was evident on the final grand mean of 4.50 with a descriptive rating of
Very Good.
The project developed is used as supplemental or support material for LET review. It
is primarily created to measure the acceptability of the instructional material according to
objectives, contents, manner of presentations and usefulness. It was clearly conceived that
the target users were the ones who really expressed their satisfaction and acceptance to the
project developed which is evident on their final mean score of 4.677.
In final analysis, the project is a good tool to revolutionalize the ways LET
Review classes are being conducted. This only proved that Enhancement Program in the
College of Education will never be exempted to the changes of our modern society.
According to leaders in the field, the true purpose of assessment is to evaluate a
students level of understanding, and should be used to provide appropriate feedback and
guidance in planning future instructions (Owen, 2015).
Students learn more when they are challenged by teachers who have high
expectations for them, encourage them to identify problems, involve them in collaborative
activities, and accelerate their learning( Burris & Welner,2005).When the students feel
secure, recognized, and respected, they are more likely to be respectful in return and
behave more appropriately (Boynton & Boynton, 2009).In her discussion of authenticity
in teaching( Cranton ,2006) did not focus on content or method but created a meaningful
relationships with students in which both learners and teachers are able to be open and
have an awareness of students are as learners.
Enhancement comes from the verb to increase or improve and it can describe
anything that is an improvement to the quality or value of something.
(https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/enhancement). Among Teacher Education
Institutions , aside from the student teaching program for student teachers , enhancement
program for Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) initially developed as part of the
curriculum which aims to improve student teachers understanding and comprehension level
in preparation for successful board examination. The program focuses on improving student
teachers understanding of what effective learning behaviors are and gives them the skills to
encourage these in the classroom. Training is run by outstanding teachers who take the role
of a faculty-review facilitators in order to gain a deeper understanding of how effective
learning behaviors can be encouraged. It is as one of the course that is splits into sessions for
one semester or beyond, giving student teacher participants time to apply their learning in a
mock test or pre-board examination after finishing the course.
The International Student Support Center of the offers free classes such as
writing classes, library classes, speaking classes, academic culture classes, technology
classes and career classes. These programs provide opportunities for students to enhance a
degree , add skills, or provide valuable experiences through classes, travel and group
activities. (http://www.scps.nyu.edu/student-affairs/student-life/international/international-
student-support-center/academic-enhancement-programs.html)
On the other hand, universities and other schools provide programs that enhance the
academic skills of students. In the US, Academic Enhancement Program (AEP) which is a
collaborative effort involving law school administration, faculty and students with the goal
of assisting all students in developing the critical experiences and skills necessary for
academic success in law school and beyond. It is also designed to promote academic
excellence through enhancement and supportive services for students at all levels of
academic performance.( https://law.wisc.edu/academicenhancement/) Even first year
students, the learning curve for mastering the law school curriculum can be steeper than
expected because the study of law is unique and challenging. This is also true for other
courses with board examination such education, accounting , nursing, engineering,
pharmacy, medical technology and the like .Enhancement program or classes should be
provided by the school to help graduates pass the board examination.
The development and preparation of competent teachers should be the first and for
most priority perquisite to quality education. Undertaking periodic review and updating
the pre-service curricula in the light of the current changes and career needs, such as the
need for more competent teachers in areas like science and mathematics (Plamo, 2003).
The mission of the College of Education is to address critical societal needs through
advancement of scholarship, enhancement of learning and teaching, and service to global
society. This can be fulfilled by taking a comprehensive, collaborative approach across a
wide range of disciplines and professions, including educator preparation, leadership,
counseling, special education, higher education, public policy, information sciences and
technology. A college strives to pursue the highest level of excellence through all its
programs. Strategic goals should be established that will help the college fulfill its mission
and purpose and achieve its vision. Each unit within the college will develop plans that
include measurable objectives, metrics and strategies for achieving these set goals.
(https://education.missouri.edu/about/mission-strategic-plan/)
Development plan for student-teachers should be strengthen and improve for them to
become more competent and prepare in the teaching profession. In the study conducted by
by Nepomuceno(2015), she used the descriptive quantitative type of research to assess the
needs of the secondary teachers as well as the difficulties they met to come up with the
proposed student teaching program.
Education and training are emerging as key drivers of a countrys competitiveness
(World Economic Forum, Global Competitiveness Report 2006).The world is characterized
by rapid change, increasing globalization and growing complexity in terms of economic and
socio-cultural relations. The speed of these changes provides a context within which the
future objectives of education and training systems must be placed. Globally, many
countries are transforming their education systems and establishing increasingly ambitious
and challenging goals.

Synthesis
The review of related literature focused on the very nature of the performance of
the education graduates in the Licensure Examination for Teachers and the Teacher
Education programs that will help education graduates in their preparation for the Licensure
Examination for Teachers.
The reading materials were centered on the predictors affecting the results of the
graduates performance in the licensure examination as well as the significance of
conducting review classes . This only indicated that there was really a need to
continuously upgrade the training of students in the three subject categories namely
general education subjects, major/ content subjects and professional education courses.
Specific discussion on predictors affecting the performance of the education graduates
in the LET examination such as scholastic achievement, sex, field of specialization and
the education graduate factors and faculty- reviewer related factors that significantly affect
the licensure examination performance of the graduates of College of Education was also
part of the literature.
More so, the related literature concentrated on the predictors affecting the result
in the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) but not on the implementation of the
Enhancement program which includes in-campus LET review. Likewise, some studies
and related literature focused only in one particular Teacher Education Program but the
findings of related studies on the significance of board review/review classes as
predictor in the board examination somehow helped the researcher in her current
study.
Few studies on the implementation of the LET review, but not on the assessment
of the enhancement review program, provided supporting ideas to the present study and at
the same time showed points for further investigations.
Among the identified ideas which were carried out in this present study includes the
qualifications of the faculty review -facilitators such as educational qualification,
academic rank, teaching status ,teaching experience and the education graduate-
related factors such as age and area of specialization.
However, the premise of the present research endeavor was on the assessment
of the Enhancement Program /in- campus review program among Teacher Education
Institutions (TEIs) in three (3) provinces of Region III. It specifically focused on the
assessment of the implementation of the in-campus review classes as part of the
Enhancement program of TEIs. The assessment was in terms of five dimensions namely:
programs objectives, contents, instructional strategies employed, reading/ reference
materials and learning styles of the review-takers. The attitudes, academic performance
of the education graduates, performance rating in the LET exam, the problems met by
both faculty review-facilitators and student- teacher participants were also assessed
by the researcher.
It is hoped that through the conclusions drawn from this study, recommendations
and suggestions may be offered by the researcher to somehow make the implementation
of the Enhancement program / in-campus review program more meaningful to the entire
provinces of Region III and other regions in the country. Premised from the findings of the
study, a proposed development plan is to be proposed to help the TEIs in the proper
implementation of the Enhancement Program and to be able to address problems met in the
implementation of the program.
Relevant Theories
Some of the present approaches for studying adventure education are based
on grounded theory, folk pedagogies, and existing social science theory. These approaches
share some problems, including: (a) an overemphasis on outcomes without specifying
processes, (b) a misunderstanding of how different types of evaluation contribute to
theory, and (c) under-theorized evaluation and program models. As an alternative,
program theory evaluation, which focuses on a theory- program-outcome model, in
which all three components are specified simultaneously, can help avoid these mistakes
while contributing a more sophisticated understanding of how programs have effects. One
of the conclusions Hattie, Marsh, Neill, and Richards (1997) drawn from their meta-
analysis of adventure education outcomes was that the field of adventure education had
matured. They argued that the results provided ample evidence that a wide array of
outcomes do occur in adventure education and that future research should investigate the
theoretical concerns and processes that lead to positive changes. It may seem odd to
suggest that adventure education programs foster growth in the participants (i.e.,
outcomes) while at the same time asserting that there is little understanding of how this
change occurs.
For these reasons, an effort to complement this work is by demonstrating
the important role of a program theory in research designed to assess if, and how,
programs work. The authors focus is on theory-driven programs that are purposively
designed to achieve educational and personal development goals.
In particular, proposed thinking about research and evaluation from a theory-

program-outcome perspective emphasizes joint consideration of all three aspects
in program design, evaluation, and research. A framework originally developed by
Hamilton (1979) clarifies the need for theory and illustrates a means for building
evidence about how programs work.
For the purpose of this discussion, education is conceptualized as one form of
experiential education characterized by: (a) the planned use of adventuresome activities,
(b) a real- life activity or learning context, (c) goal-directed challenges that must be
solved individually and in groups, (d)cooperative small group living and activity
participation, (f) trained leaders/facilitators, and (g) specific, pre-planned educational or
developmental goals. All of these program components can be understood as mechanisms
of change or participant learning.
On the other hand, purposeful program theory is now widely used in government
and not-for-profit organizations, provides a coherent picture of how change occurs and
how to improve performance(Funnel and Rogers, 2011). According to Patton (2011), this
theory starts from needs assessment to intervention, from implementation to outcomes
evaluation,from policy formulation to policy execution and evaluation.
Learning is fulfilling and meaningful if laws of learning are applied. The three laws
of learning by Edward Thorndike supports the behavioral learning which is emphasized in
his Law of Exercise wherein practice strengthens the learning and disuse weakens
it.(http://faculty.coe.uh.edu./smcneil/cuin6373/idhistory/laws_of_learning.html).Thus,
enhancement should be given to students in order for maximum learning to be achieved.
Theoretical Framework
In order to provide foundation for this study, Stufflebeam CIPP Evaluation Model was
used as the theorectical framework model. The CIPP evaluation model is a Program
Evaluation model which was developed by Daniel Stufflebeam and colleagues in 1960s.
Daniel Leroy Stufflebeam, Ph.D. is the man behind the CIPP model. He is a
distinguished University Professor of Education at Western Michigan University,
Kalamazoo.He founded the Evaluation Center at Ohio State University in 1965 and was its
director until 2002.(www.thereadingroom.com/author/daniel-l-stufflebeam/39047/)
CIPP is an acronym for Context, Input, Process and Product. CIPP is an evaluation
model that requires the evaluation of context, input, process and product in judging a
programmes value.CIPP is a decision-focused approach to evaluation and emphasizes the
systematic provision of information for programme management and operation. ( retrieved
on December 2,2015 from https: //en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIPP model )
Designed to assist administrators in making informed decisions, CIPP is a popular
evaluation approach in educational settings (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2011).
This approach seeks to improve and achieve accountability in educational programming
through a learning-by-doing approach (Zhang et al., 2011).
The CIPP model is an attempt to make evaluation directly relevant to the needs of
decision-makers during the phases and activities of a programme. Stufflebeams context,
input, process and product (CIPP)evaluation model is recommended as a framework to
systematically guide the conception, design, implementation, and assessment of service-
learning projects, and provide feedback and judgment of the projects effectiveness for
continuous improvement.
The CIPP framework was developed as a means of linking evaluation with programme
decision-making. It aims to provide an analytic and rational basis for programme decision-
making based on a cycle of planning, structuring, implementing ,reviewing and revising
decisions, each examined through a different aspect of evaluation-context, input, process
and evaluation. ( retrieved on December 2,2015 from https: //en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIPP
model )
The context evaluation stage of the CIPP model creates a big picture of where both the
program and evaluation fit (Mertens and Wilsons, 2012). This stage assists in decision-
making related to planning and enables the evaluator to identify the needs, assets, and
resources of a community in order to provide programming that will be
beneficial(Fitzpatrick, Sanders and Worthens ,2011).Context evaluation also identifies the
political climate that could influence the success of the program(Mertens and Wilsons,2012).
To achieve this, the evaluator compiles and assesses background information and interviews
program leaders and stakeholders.Key stakeholders in the evaluation are identified. In
addition, program goals are assessed and data reporting on the program environment is
collected. Data collection can use multiple formats. These include both formative and
summative measures such as environmental analysis of existing documents, program
profiling, case study interviews and stakeholders interviews (Mertens and Wilsons,2012).
Throughout this process, continual dialogue with the client to provide updates is integral.
To complement context evaluation, input evaluation can be completed. In this
stage, information is collected regarding the mission, goals and plan of the program. Its
purpose is to assess the program strategy. merit and work plan against research, the
responsiveness of the program to client needs, and alternative strategies offered in similar
program (Mertens and Wilsons,2012).The intent of this stage is to choose and appropriate
strategy to implement and to resolve the program problem( Fitzpatrick, et.al. 2011)
The next stage of the CIPP is the process evaluation which investigates the quality of
program implementation. In this stage, program activities are monitored, documented and
assessed by evaluator((Fitzpatrick, Sanders and Worthens ,2011).Primary objectives of this
stage are to provide feedback regarding the extent to which the planned activities are
carried out, guide staff on how to modify and improve the program plan, and assess the
degree to which participants can carry out their roles ( Stufflebeam, 2003).
The final component to CIPP, product evaluation, assesses the positive and negative
effects of the program had on its target audience((Mertens and Wilsons,2012), assessing both
the intended and unintended outcomes ( Stufflebeam, 2003).Both short-term and long term
outcomes are judged.During this stage, judgments of stakeholders and relevant experts are
analyzed, viewing outcomes that impact the group, sub-groups and individual. Applying a
combination of methodological techniques assure all outcomes are noted and assisted in
verifying evaluation findings(Mertens and Wilsons,2012; Stufflebeam, 2003).
There are four aspects of CIPP evaluation namely context, input, process and product
which assist may assist a decision-maker to answer four basic questions: 1. What should we
do?- This involves collecting and analyzing needs assessment data to determine goals,
priorities and objectives. 2. How should we do it? This involves the steps and resources
needed to meet the new goals and objectives and might include identifying successful
external programs and materials as well as gathering information. 3. Are we doing it as
planned?- This provides decision-makers with information about how well the programme is
being implemented. By continuously monitoring the program, decision- makers learn such
things as how well it is following the plans and guidelines, conflicts arising, staff support and
morale,strengths and weaknesses of materials, delivery and budgeting problems. 4. Did the
programme work? By measuring the actual outcomes and comparing them to the
anticipated outcomes, decision-makers are better able to decide if the program should be
continued,modified, or dropped altogether. This is the essence of product evaluation.
Using the CIPP in the different stages of the evaluation as it allows evaluators to evaluate the
program at different stages, namely: before the program commences by helping evaluators to
assess the need at the end of the program to assess whether or not the program had an effect.
( retrieved on December 2,2015 from https: //en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIPP model )
The assessment of the enhancement program for board examination of the student-
teacher participants will be evaluated under the four aspects of the CIPP model.
To answer the specific problems of this study, the researcher organizes and
systematically describes the theoretical framework of the current research endeavor.
The conceptual framework is concretized and chronologically described through a
modified CIPP model of assessment that originated from the initial letters of four types of
assessment functions which constitute the method: CONTEXT,INPUT, PROCESS and
PRODUCT.
The researcher applied these four assessment functions as they are contextualized in
this particular research undertaking.
As can be gleaned on the research paradigm shown on Figure 1, the arrangement of
the concepts is properly concretized through the symbolic presentation of four ovals
connected to one another. The first oval which is the CONTEXT referring to
Implementation of the Enhancement Program rooted from the goal of the Teacher Education
Institution to provide quality education. Connected to the second oval is the INPUT that
must be considered for the proper assessment of the program to be able to come up with an
improved development plan. The four ovals connected by arrows signifying that there were
feedbacks in the flow of the process in the assessment which is continuous and systematic.
The study attempted to assess the implementation of the Enhancement Program of student-
teacher participants among accredited Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) for the
Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) in Region III during the Academic Year 2015-
2016. Since not all Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) in Region III offers review classes
for student-teacher participants as part of the Enhancement Program , it is necessary to make
an evaluation on the in-campus review in order to determine if there is really an impact on
the national performance rating of the Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) in the
Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET).
The research paradigm of the study which shows the relationship of the different
variables involved in the implementation of the in-campus review program. The first oval
which is the CONTEXT assessment, connected to the second oval which is the INPUT ,the
demographic profile of the faculty review-facilitators and the student-teacher participants
are to be described. This includes information about the faculty review facilitators age,
academic rank, area of specialization, educational qualifications, teaching experiences, and
professional growth. The student-teacher participants profile includes age, program, area of
specialization, academic performance in three subject categories namely general education,
major/content subjects and professional subjects, and length of time spent in the review
classes. Also included are the assessments of the Enhancement Program in terms of
objectives, contents, instructional strategies used by the facilitators, reading or resource
materials availability and learning styles of student-teacher participants. The attitudes of the
student-participants towards the enhancement program as well as the problems encountered
by the faculty review-facilitators and student-teacher participants are also included.
On the other hand, inside the third oval is the PROCESS assessment which includes
the following: assessment of data through survey questionnaires for the faculty-review
facilitators and student-teacher participants; unstructured interviews with the Deans and/or
Associate Dean/Program Chair/ Program Head, faculty-review facilitators and student
teacher participants; and documentary analysis (PRC documents and CHED Memoranda)
The last oval which is the PRODUCT includes an Improved Development Plan for
the BEED and BSED programs of Teacher Education Institution (TEIs)
THE CIPP MODEL OF EVALUATION BY STUFFLEBEAM
FORMATIVE SUMMATIVE
CONTEXT INPUT PROCESS PRODUCT

Specifying the most Assessing the
appropriate implementation Assessing the
Establishing approach to meet
needs and of the outcome of the
the identified
objectives programme programme
needs
Profile of the
faculty review- Survey
facilitators Questionnaire
Enhancement Profile of the Proposed
(For Faculty- Development
Review Classes Student-teacher
participants Review
for Licensure Facilitators and
Plan
Examination Assessment on the Student- Teacher for
among In-campus Review Participants) Enhancement
Selected program in terms of Programs of
Accredited objectives, content, Unstructured
resource materials, Teacher
Teacher Interviews
instructional Education
Education strategies and
Documentary Institutions
Institutions learning styles of
the students Analysis (TEIs)
Problems Met by (PRC data,
Participants in the documents,
Implementing Memoranda,
Phase CHED Memo)
The CIPP Model of Evaluation by Stufflebeam Stages and Process

as Applied to the Assessment on the Effectiveness of Enhancement
Program for Licensure Examination of Student-Teachers: A
Baseline for a Proposed Development Plan
Figure 1: Research Paradigm
Figure 1: Research Paradigm
The CIPP Model of Evaluation by Stufflebeam Stages and Process as Applied to
the Assessment on the Effectiveness of Enhancement Program for Licensure
Examination for Teachers: A Baseline for a Proposed Development Plan

Profile of the
faculty review-
facilitators
Profile of the
Student-teacher Survey
Enhancement participants Questionnaire
Review
Classes for Assessment on Proposed
Licensure the In-campus Unstructured Development
Examination Review program Interviews Plan
in terms of for the
among objectives, Enhancement
Selected content, resource Programs of
materials, Documentary
Accredited Teacher
instructional Analysis
Teacher (PRC Education
strategies and
Education learning styles of documents, Institutions
CONTEXT
Institutions the students Memoranda, (TEIs)
CHED Memo)
Problems Met by
Participants in the
Implementing
Phase
Statement of the Problem
Generally, the study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the Enhancement
Program for Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) of student-teacher participants
among selected accredited Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) in Region III during
Academic Year 2015-2016.
Specifically, this study sought answers to the following questions:

1. How may the profile of the faculty review-facilitators for the enhancement review
program be described and assessed in terms of the following factors:
1.1 age group,
1.2 academic rank,
1.3 educational attainment,
1.4 length of teaching experience,
1.5 area of specialization,
1.6 length of experience in conducting an enhancement review program,and,
1.7 professional growth
1.7.1 professional affiliations/organizations,
1.7.2 number of seminars/workshops/ in-service trainings/conferences
attended relevant to area of specialization?
2. How may the profile of the student-teacher participants be described based on:
2.1 age group,
2.2 field of specialization,
2.3 program,
2.4 academic performance in three subject categories, and
2.4.1 general education subjects
2.4.2 major/content subjects
2.4.3 professional subjects
2.5 length of time spent for the enhancement review program ?
3. How may the enhancement review program among school -participants be
described and assessed in the following dimensions:

3.1 objectives
3.2 contents
3.3 instructional strategies used by the faculty review- facilitators
3.4 reading or resource materials available ,and
3.5 learning styles of student-teacher participants?
4. How do the faculty review-facilitators and the student-teacher participants perceive the
relevance of enhancement review program for licensure examination?
5. What are the attitudes of the student-teacher participants towards the enhancement
review program ?
6. What are the specific problems encountered by the faculty review-facilitators and the
student-teacher participants in the planning and implementing phases of the
enhancement review program and the suggested measures to remedy or minimize the
problems encountered ?
7. Is there a significant difference between the assessments on the enhancement
review program of faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher participants?
8. Based on the findings, conclusions and recommendations drawn from the study, what
proposed development plan may be proposed?
Hypotheses of the Study
H0 That there is no significant difference between the assessments on the
enhancement review program of faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher
participants.
H1 That there is significant difference between the assessments on the

enhancement program of faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher participants.
Primordially, this research undertaking is indeed very significant since this is an
endeavor that would describe and assess the contemporary status of the Enhancement
Program in Licensure Examination for graduating education students among the Teacher
Education Institutions of Region III- Central Luzon. Specifically, this research would
greatly benefit the following:
To the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), the recommendations will be
offered would serve as baseline for policy planning and formulation relative to curriculum
development, strategic planning, and designing programs, projects and activities of Higher
Education Institutions(HEIs).
To the various Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) in Region III, the findings of
the study will be essential inputs for them to conceptualize, design, and implement
interventions that would improve their Enhancement program for licensure examination.
To the Deans of the College of Education, the findings of the research will be utilized
in revisiting the hiring guidelines on faculty selection and recruitment for the Education
Department and in the screening of students who will take education courses.
To the Faculty- Review Facilitators, the result of the study will provide them with
adequate understanding and proper guidance in terms of the innovative teaching-review
strategies and instructional materials that must be employed in the conduct of review
sessions.
To the Would-Be Teachers, the information that may be revealed in this study may be
of great help to them to realize the value of diligence, commitment and competence in the
teaching profession.
Finally, the research findings will contribute much in the field of education and will
further serve as a source of reference by future researchers who wish to conduct the same
study that may possibly help in the performance of education graduates and TEIs in
licensure examinations.
METHOD
This part comprehensively discussed the research design, research setting,
and participants, creation and validation of the instruments and its administration, data
gathering procedure, statistical treatment and data that were employed in the data
analysis.
Research Design
This study employed the descriptive quantitative method of research. The
descriptive research method refers to the method used to describe data and characteristics
used to describe the population. In descriptive - survey method research (Jackson, 2009)
participants answer questions administered through interview or questionnaires.
The purpose of using the descriptive research method is to acquire accurate, factual,
systematic data that can provide an actual picture of the data set for review. The
descriptive part of the study specifically deals with describing and analyzing the data
gathered by giving proper interpretation so that findings and conclusions are to be derived
at. On the other hand, quantitative part of the study treated the value of the quantitative
results through giving verbal interpretations which were gathered through the survey
questionnaires and informal interviews(Hale,2015).
In this particular research study, the Enhancement Program for Licensure
Examination for Teachers (LET) during the Academic Year 2015- 2016 of accredited
Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) in Region III was evaluated through a systematic
attempt in assessing objectives, contents, and other concerns.
Participants
The faculty review-facilitators and the student-teachers during the academic year
2015-2016 of selected accredited Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) in Region III were
the participants of the study. They were asked to answer the specific questions in the survey
questionnaires. All the faculty review-facilitators who were involved in the implementation
of the enhancement review-classes were considered as participants. A total of two hundred
twenty- nine (229) student- teacher participants and twenty- three (23) faculty review
facilitators were identified from the participating schools.
Table 1 .Frequency Distribution and Percentage of Faculty-Review Facilitators

and Student-Teacher Participants
Accredited Teacher Education Faculty Review- Student-Teacher

Institutions Facilitators Participants

Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
Angeles University Foundation (AUF) 3 13.04 67 29.26
Baliuag University (BU) 5 21.74 28 12.23
Guagua National Colleges (GNC) 2 8.70 24 10.48
Republic Central Colleges (RCC) 6 26.09 51 22.27
Wesleyan University- Philippines (WU-P) 7 30.43 59 25.76
TOTAL 23 100.00 229 100.00
Research Instruments
In doing the research undertaking, the researcher employed the survey questionnaire
as the main tool. However, this was supplemented by informal interviews.
The personally made survey questionnaire was the main instrument in the data
gathering of the study. There were two (2) survey questionnaires designed and constructed
by the researcher. Each questionnaire was concisely described below:
Survey Questionnaire for the Faculty-Review Facilitators
The survey questionnaire for the faculty review-facilitator participants gathered
data about the age , academic rank, highest educational attainment , field of specialization,
length of teaching experience , length of experience in conducting an enhancement review
classes, and professional growth. In addition, it also sought information about the
assessment on the effectiveness of the enhancement program in terms of five (5)
dimensions namely objectives, content, instructional strategies employed, resource and
reading materials utilized and learning styles of the student-participants. Furthermore, it

included the seriousness of the problems encountered by the faculty review-facilitators as
well as the suggested measures to remedy or minimize these identified problems.
Survey Questionnaire for the Student-Teacher Participants
The survey questionnaire for the student-teacher participants gathered data about
the profile of the student-teacher participants which includes age, program, field of
specialization, academic performance ,and length of time spent in the enhancement review
classes. It also sought information on assessment on the effectiveness of the enhancement
program in terms of five (5) dimensions namely objectives, content, instructional
strategies employed, resource and reading materials available and learning styles of the
student-teacher participants Moreover, it also gathered data on the attitudes of the student-
teacher participants towards the program and the problems they met in the implementation
of the enhancement review program.
The factors that were considered in including these variables were taken from the
related literature, from the informal interview conducted and personal involvement as well
as the observations of the researcher on the implementation of the program .
On the other hand, the informal interviews was employed to validate the responses of
the participants and to elicit other information not revealed by the survey questionnaires.
National data was utilized in gathering the overall performance rating of
the school participants for three years in the Licensure Examination for Teachers.
Validation of the Questionnaires
To ensure that the survey questionnaires will bring out the needed data, they were
subjected to content validation. Well-experienced experts in educational management

research and statistics were consulted who gave comments and suggestions to improve the
two survey questionnaires. These experts were Dr. Abner C. Manaloto, a full-time professor
in the Institute of Religion at University of Santo Tomas, Manila with 10-year experience
conducting review classes, Dr. William G. Bacani, OIC-Assistant Schools Superintendent in
the DepEd Division of Tarlac, Tarlac City and Dr. Arceli S. Lopez, SGOD of Currirulum
and Governance, DepEd, Division of Pampanga. To determine the limitations and
constraints that may possibly be encountered in the final administration of the two (2) sets
of survey questionnaires , a pre- testing was administered to fifteen ( 15) education
graduates and faculty-review facilitators who became part of the enhancement review
program from the previous academic year and who were not part of the current research
work.
Data Gathering Procedure
The researcher utilized an organized and systematic flow in the conduct of the
research undertaking. Permission was sought from and granted by school authorities such
as the Vice-President for Academic Affairs (VPAA) and the Deans of the College of
Education prior to the actual administration of the instruments to the participants.
The researcher personally administered the floating of the survey questionnaires.
To ensure that the survey elicits sincere and honest responses, the researcher gave a
comprehensive orientation to the participants before they will accomplish the

questionnaire in some of the school-participants. Instructions given include objectives of the
study ,the significance of the generous assistance the participants will offer to the
researcher , assurance that utmost confidentiality will be observed, directions in answering,
allowing the participants to ask questions if there are any, and provisions for enough time to
answer all items. Unstructured interviews were also conducted among the participants when
the researcher deemed it necessary to supplement data. Observations of the school
environment was also done to substantiate findings gathered through the instruments. On
the other hand, in some of the school-participants wherein the student- teacher participants
are not within the school campus since they were endorsed to different public schools as
part of their Pre-service Training or Practice Teaching, the researcher was advised to leave
the questionnaires to the Deans of the College of Education and wait for a text message
within two (2) to three (3) weeks for the retrieval of the accomplished questionnaires.
Lastly, the researcher personally retrieved all the accomplished survey questionnaires.
After retrieving the questionnaires, immediately followed was the tallying and computation.
The assistance of the expert statistician was sought for the interpretation and analysis of the
data gathered.
Ethical Considerations
The faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher participants as participants of the
study were assured that all proceedings would be treated with utmost respect and
confidentiality. On the survey questionnaires, putting the name of the participants is
optional.
Statistical Treatment
The following statistical tools were utilized in the analysis and interpretation
of the data gathered:
1. Frequency Tally and Percentage. This statistical tool was employed to determine
and categorize the demographic profile of both the faculty-review facilitators and student-
participants in each specific question reflected in the survey questionnaire .It was
used in determining the responses on the assessment of the enhancement program in terms
of five areas as well as the attitudes and problems met by the participants.
Formula: P = ( f/n) 100%
Where: P= percentage
f=frequency
n=total number of participants
2. Mean. This refers to the average of the sum of the observed values divided by the
number of observations (Subong & Beldia, 2005). This was used to categorize and
supplement the responses of
the both faculty-review facilitators and student- participants on their assessment of the
enhancement program , on their problems encountered and attitudes towards the program.
Formula: M= fx / n
Where: M= mean
= (sigma) summation
fx = product of the frequency and the weight of the summative
n=total number of participants
3. Norms for Interpretation. In the proper interpretation of the results of the
computations, the following norms for interpretation was utilized:
3.1 Likert Scale: This was employed to analyze the attitudes of the options of the
participants, and they were analyzed using the five point scale value.
The 5-point Likert Scale model was used to measure the participants responses
on the assessment of the effectiveness of the enhancement program among the school-
participants in terms of its objectives, contents, instructional strategies used by the faculty
review-facilitators, reading materials and learning styles of the student-participants.
A. For the participants responses on the assessment on the effectiveness of the
enhancement program in terms of objectives, contents, instructional strategies
employed by the faculty-review facilitators, reading materials available and learning
styles of the student-participants, the following norms for interpretation were employed:
The Likert Scale Model
Rating Response Category Range Interval

5 Very Strongly Agree 4.20 - 5.00
4 Strongly Agree 3.40 - 4.19
3 Moderately Agree 2.60 3.39
2 Strongly Disagree 1.80 - 2.59
1 Very Strongly Disagree 1.00 - 1.79

5 Practiced to a Great Extent 4.20 - 5.00
4 Practiced to a Some Extent 3.40 - 4.19
3 Practiced to a Degree Extent 2.60 3.39
2 Practiced to a Minimal Extent 1.80 - 2.59
1 Not Applicable 1.00 - 1.79

5 Very Adequate 4.20 - 5.00
4 Adequate 3.40 - 4.19
3 Moderately Adequate 2.60 3.39
2 Inadequate 1.80 - 2.59
1 Very Inadequate 1.00 - 1.79

5 Very Effective 4.20 - 5.00
4 Effective 3.40 - 4.19
3 Moderately Effective 2.60 3.39
2 Less Effective 1.80 - 2.59
1 Very Ineffective 1.00 - 1.79
B.For the relevance of enhancement program to the licensure examination for teachers ,
the following 5-point Likert Scale Model was used:

5 Very Strongly Agree 4.20 - 5.00
4 Strongly Agree 3.40 - 4.19
3 Moderately Agree 2.60 3.39
2 Strongly Disagree 1.80 - 2.59
1 Very Strongly Disagree 1.00 - 1.79
C.For the specific problems met by the faculty review facilitators and student-participants
in the implementation of the enhancement program, the following 5-point Likert Scale
was used:
5 Very Serious Problem 4.20 - 5.00

4 Serious Problem 3.40 - 4.19
3 Moderate Problem 2.60 3.39
2 Minor Problem 1.80 - 2.59
1 Not a Problem 1.00 - 1.79
D. For the student-participants responses on their academic performance in their

professional subjects, general education subjects and major subjects, the following 5-
point Likert Scale Model was used:
5 Very Good 4.20 - 5.00

4 Good 3.40 - 4.19
3 Fair 2.60 3.39
2 Poor 1.80 - 2.59
1 Very Poor 1.00 - 1.79
4.Test of Difference. The t test assesses whether the means of two groups are statistically
different from each other. This analysis is appropriate to compare the means of two
groups (http:www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/stat_t.php). The t-test is probably the
most commonly used statistical data analysis procedure for hypothesis testing. There are
several kinds of t-tests but the most common is the two-sample t-test also known as
Students t- test or the independent samples t-test(Creech, 2013). Retrieved from
http://www.statisticallysignificantconsulting.com/Ttest.htm .This tool was employed to
determine whether there is a significance difference between the assessments of the faculty-
review facilitators and student- teacher participants on the effectiveness of the enhancement
program in terms of five dimensions.
( X1 X2 ) ( 1 - 2 )
Formula: t = _______________________________________
( N1 1) s2 + ( N2 1) s2 [ 1 + 1 ]
N1 + N2 2 N1 N2
Results
This part presents the analysis and interpretation of the data gathered to answer
the problems stated in the Introduction . Twenty three (23) survey questionnaires were
distributed among the faculty- review facilitators in the five (5) selected accredited Teacher
Education Institutions in Region III. Two hundred twenty- nine (229) survey questionnaires
were answered by the student-teacher participants .
Findings of the study are presented, analyzed and interpreted in eight parts.
The first part is on the demographic profile of the faculty-review facilitators. This
includes age, academic rank, area of specialization ,highest educational attainment, length of
teaching experience, length of experience in conducting in-campus review classes, and
professional growth.
The second part is on the demographic profile of the student-teacher participants. This
includes age, program, field of specialization, academic performance in three subject
categories namely: general education, major /content subjects and professional subjects, and
length of time spent in review classes.
The third part dealt on the assessment of the faculty-review facilitators and student-
teacher participants on the effectiveness of the enhancement program in terms of five
dimensions namely: objectives, contents, instructional strategies employed by the faculty-
review facilitators, reading or resource materials availability, and learning styles of the
student-teacher participants.
The fourth part discussed the relevance of the enhancement program to the Licensure
Examination for Teachers (LET) as perceived by the faculty- review facilitators and student-
teacher participants.
The fifth part revealed the attitudes of the student-teacher participants towards the
enhancement review program.

The sixth part dealt on the seriousness of the problems met by both the faculty-review
facilitators and student-teacher participants in the implementing phase of the enhancement
review program.
The seventh part discussed the suggested measures to remedy the problems
encountered by the faculty-review facilitators.
The eighth part discussed the analysis whether there is significant difference between
the assessments of the faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher participants on the
effectiveness of the enhancement program.
PART I: Demographic Profile of the Faculty-Review Facilitators
Table 2.1 Summary of the Frequency Count and Percentage of Profile of the
Faculty-Review Facilitators in terms of the Age Group, Academic Rank, Highest
Educational Attainment, Length of Teaching Experiences, Area of Specialization
and Length of Years in Conducting Review Classes
1.1AGE GROUP FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Below 25 2 8.70
26-35 3 13.04
36-45 7 30.43
46-55 6 26.09
56-65 4 17.39
66-above 1 4.35
TOTAL 23 100.00
1.2. ACADEMIC RANK FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)
Professor 10 43.48
Associate Professor 1 4.35
Assistant Professor 5 21.74
Instructor 7 30.04
TOTAL 23 100.00
1.3.HIGHEST EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)
Doctor of Philosophy & Doctor of Education 0 0
Doctor of Philosophy 9 39.13
Doctor of Education 3 13.04
Master of Arts with Ph.D./Ed.D. units 3 13.04
Master of Science with Ph.D./Ed.D. units 0 0
Master of Arts 8 34.78
Master of Science 0 0
BSED/BEED with MA/MS units 0 0
BS /AB with Education units and MA units 0 0
TOTAL 23 100.00
1.4 LENGTH OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)
5 years below 2 8.70

6-10 2 8.70
11-15 7 30.43
16-25 8 34.78
Over 26 Years 4 17.39
TOTAL 23 100.00
1.5 AREA OF SPECIALIZATION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)
General Education 9 39.13
Core Subjects/ Major Subjects 3 13.04
Professional Subjects 11 47.83
TOTAL 23 100.00
1.6 LENGTH OF YEARS IN CONDUCTING FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)
REVIEW CLASSES
5 years below 9 39.14
6-10 7 30.43
11-15 4 17.39
16-25 3 13.04
Over 26 Years 0 0
TOTAL 23 100.00
Faculty-Review Facilitators According to Age Group
From the results in Table 2.1 on the summary of the frequency distribution and percent
of the demographic profile of the faculty-review facilitators, it is depicted that the highest
frequency were those whose ages range from 36 - 45 years old with 7 or 30.43 percent. The
next were those from ages 46-55 with a frequency of 6 or 26.09 percent. Age range
below 25 obtained a frequency of 2 or 8.70 percent. Only 1 or 4.35 percent belonged to
the age range of 66 above.
This reveals that most of the faculty-review facilitators were in their adult age ,
and only a smaller number for young teachers. It likewise implies that faculty review
facilitators are experienced teachers due to the length of teaching experience, have the
mastery of their area of specialization, and are more qualified to conduct review classes.
Faculty-Review Facilitators According to Academic Rank
Majority of the twenty-three (23) faculty-review facilitators obtained an academic
rank of Professor with a frequency of 10 or 43.48 percent and only 1 of them had a rank of
Associate Professor. Faculty-review facilitators who had a rank of Instructor obtained a
percentage of 30.04 or with a frequency of 7.
Faculty-Review Facilitators According to Highest Educational Attainment
Out of the twenty-three (23) faculty-review facilitators , nine (9) obtained the highest
degree of Doctor of Philosophy with a 39.13 percent. Eight or 34.78 % percent of the
faculty-review facilitators are holders of Master of Arts which is the minimum requirement
to teach in the college level. Comparable results were obtained by those who earned Doctor
of Education and Master of Arts with Ph. D units. They both obtained a frequency of 3 or
13.04 percent. The faculty-review facilitators of the participating schools had varied highest
educational attainment.
From the results, it can be gleaned that the faculty-review facilitators involved in the
enhancement program from the school-participants were highly educationally qualified to
the task of conducting review since they possessed the appropriate degrees and area of
specialization.
Faculty-Review Facilitators According to Length of Teaching Experience
Majority of the twenty-three (23) faculty-review facilitators had already taught for 16
to 25 years after obtaining a frequency of 8 or 34.78 percent. It is evidently observed that 4
or 17.39 percent are still active in the teaching profession and had teaching experience of
over 26 years. Two of them are still very young in the field of education since their
teaching experience is below 5 years.
Faculty-Review Facilitators According to Area of Specialization
Of the twenty-three (23) faculty-review facilitators, 11 or 47.83 percent specialized in
professional subjects. Nine of them handle general education subjects as evidenced by 39.13
percent. Only three specialized in teaching core subjects or major subjects.
Faculty-Review Facilitators According to Length of Experience in Conducting

Enhancement Review Classes
Evidently observed from Table 3.1 is that the highest frequency of 9 was obtained by
those with below 5 years experience in conducting an enhancement review classes. This
finding divulged that majority of the faculty-review facilitators are not yet seasoned
faculty to handle Enhancement review classes. Meanwhile, only 3 or 13.04 percent was
obtained by those who had experience of 16-25 years in conducting review classes for
board examination.
Faculty-Review Facilitators in terms of the Professional Affiliations
1.7 PROFESSIONAL GROWTH

1.71 Professional Affiliations FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)
PAFTE 5 21.74
PALT 1 4.35
SANGFIL 1 4.35
Philippine Association for Graduate 3 13.04
Education (PAGE III)
Philippine Society for Educational and 2 8.70
Research Evaluation ( PSERE)
CDCE III 2 8.70
National Educators Academy of the 1 4.35
Philippines ( NEAD)
International Association of Educators and 5 21.74
Researchers
DATEP 1 4.35
Association of the Public Schools 1 4.35
Principals
APCAS 2 8.70
Knights of Rizal 2 8.70
MSP/MTAP 1 4.35
PNBTE-Critical Thinking 1 4.35
PGCA Pampanga 1 4.35
Australian Counseling Association 1 4.35
Angeles City Public School Teacher 1 4.35
Association (ACPUSTA )
Faculty-Review Facilitators According to Professional Affiliations
As revealed from the data gathered in Table 2.2, the faculty- review facilitators are
members of various professional organizations or affiliations in the Philippines and abroad.
Comparably noted is that five of them with the highest percentage of 21.74 are members of
the International Association of Educators and Researchers and the PAFTE III. Three of
them are members of the Philippine Association of Graduate Education (PAGE III).
Faculty-Review Facilitators in terms of the Number of Seminars/Workshops/
Trainings/ Conferences Attended
1.7.2Number of Seminars/ Workshops/ FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Trainings Attended Employed as a Teacher
International Level
More than 15 0 0.00
13 to15 0 0.00
10 to 12 1 4.35
7 to 9 2 8.70
4 to 6 4 17.39
1 to 3 10 43.48
None 0 0.00
National Level
More than 15 5 21.74
13 to15 2 8.70
10 to 12 4 17.39
7 to 9 3 13.04
4 to 6 3 13.04
1 to 3 5 21.74
None 0 0.00
Regional Level
13 to15 0 0.00
10 to 12 5 21.74
7 to 9 6 26.09
4 to 6 0 0.00
1 to 3 3 13.04
None 0 0.00
Division Level

13 to15 1 4.35
10 to 12 2 8.70
7 to 9 3 13.04
4 to 6 3 13.04
1 to 3 1 4.35
None 0 0.00
School Level
More than 15 13 56.52
13 to15 2 8.70
10 to 12 1 4.35
7 to 9 2 8.70
4 to 6 0 0.00
1 to 3 4 17.39
None 0 0.00
Note: Multiple Responses for Item 1.7.2
Faculty-Review Facilitators According to Number of Seminars/ Workshops/Trainings/

Conferences Attended
As presented in Table 2.3 ,majority of the twenty-three (23) faculty-review facilitators
attended various seminars internationally, locally inside the country such as the national,
regional, division and school levels relevant to their area of specialization or related field of
expertise. This only implies that the faculty-review facilitators have the willingness to widen
their horizon and to learn new trends and strategies in teaching their area of specialization.
Ten (10) or 43.48 percent of the faculty-review facilitators attended 1 to 3 category
International level seminars or conferences. Meanwhile in the national level , 21.74 percent
attended more than 15 seminars. In the regional category, 26.09 percent attended more than
15 seminars while in the division level, 30.43 percent attended more than 15 seminars or
conferences. Majority of the faculty-review facilitators have more than 15 seminars in the
school level with the percentage of 56.52.
PART II: Demographic Profile of the Student-Teacher Participants
Student-Teacher Participants
1.1AGE GROUP FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

19-20 145 63.32

21-22 49 21.40
23-24 15 6.55
25-26 5 2.18
27-28 4 1.75
29-above 11 4.80
TOTAL 229 100.00
1.2. PROGRAM FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)
BEED 96 41.92
BSED 133 58.08
TOTAL 229 100.00
1.3.FIELD OF SPECIALIZATION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)
Science 16 6.99
Mathematics 20 8.73
English 49 21.40
Filipino 31 13.54
TLE 4 1.75
MAPE 12 5.24
Social Studies 1 0.44
General Education 85 37.12
Others: Pre-School Education 11 4.80
TOTAL 229 100.00
1.5 LENGTH OF TIME SPENT FOR THE
ENHANCEMENT REVIEW CLASSES FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)
Less than 5 hours per week 91 39.74
6 hours per week 79 34.50
More than 10 hours per week 0 00.00
TOTAL 229 100.00
Based on the summary of the frequency count and percent of the demographic
profile of the student-teacher participants , it is depicted from Table 3.1 that the highest
frequency were those whose ages range from 19-20 years old with 145 or 63.32 percent.
The next were those from ages 21-22 with a frequency of 49 or 21.40 percent. Age range
from 29-above obtained a frequency of 11 or 4.80 percent. Only 4 or 1.75 percent had an
age range of 27-28.
This shows that most of the student-teacher participants were young and they were
able to continue college after graduating from high school and smaller number of student-
teachers were in their mid adulthood and still pursuing the degree.
Majority of the student-teacher participants were enrolled in the BSED program

which was revealed from the obtained frequency of 133 or 58.08 percent. Meanwhile those
enrolled in the BEED program got a frequency of 96 or 41.92 percent.
Out of the 229 student-teacher participants, 37.12 percent specialized in the General
Education with a frequency of 85 while 4.80 percent specialized in Pre-School Education
with a frequency of 11.Out of the 133 BSED student-teacher participants, majority were
English major with a frequency of 49 or 21.40 percent. On the other hand, only 1.75
percent chose TLE as their area of specialization and only 0.44 percent were Social
Studies major.
This only revealed that Social Studies and TLE were the least preferred major
Subject while most student-teacher participants preferred to choose English and Filipino
as major subjects. Science and Mathematics as subjects are considered difficult by so many
students and specializing in Science is more expensive since it requires laboratory hours and
additional fees for laboratory. This is why few students prefer Science as a major area of
specialization.
Out of the 229 student-teacher participants, highest percentage which is 39.74 was
obtained by those who spent below 5 hours per week for their enhancement review classes.
This means that review classes are being held 3 hours per week as a subject which is part
of the curriculum of the program supported by the informal interview conducted by the
researcher with the heads of the College of Education and the student-teacher participants.
Fifty-nine student-teacher participants spent eight (8) hours per week for their enhancement
review classes which showed that some of the school-participant prioritizes or give
importance on the enhancement review program in order to help and prepare the student-
teacher participants for board examination.

Table 3.2 Frequency Count, Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Academic
Performance of the Student-Teacher Participants in Three Subject Categories
_____________________________________________________________________
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF THE STUDENT-TEACHER PARTICIPANTS
______________________________________________________________________
Subject Categories Weighted Mean Descriptive Interpretation
General Education Subjects 4.13 Good
Major Subjects/Content Subjects 4.31 Very Good
Professional Subjects 4.12 Good
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Descriptive Interpretation
5 4.12 4.31 4.19 Good
_______________________________________________________________________
As revealed in Table 3.2, the student-teacher participants are academically inclined
to their major area of specialization (BSED) or content subjects(BEED) which obtained
a weighted mean of 4.31 with a descriptive rating of Very Good. Meanwhile, both
General Education subjects and Professional subjects categories were rated Good by the
student-teacher participants supported by the weighted means of 4.13 and 4.12,
respectively. The student-teacher participants academic performance obtained an average
weighted mean of 4.19 with a descriptive interpretation of Good.
PART III: Assessment on the Effectiveness of the Enhancement Review Program

among School- Participants
Faculty-Review Facilitators and Student Teacher Participants Assessment on the

Effectiveness of the Enhancement Review Program in terms of Five Dimensions
Table 4.1 Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Assessment

of Faculty Review Facilitators and Student-Teacher Participants on the Effectiveness
of the Enhancement Review Program in terms of Objectives
Faculty-Review Facilitators Student-Teacher Participants

Objectives
Weighted Mean Descriptive Weighted Mean Descriptive
Interpretation Interpretation
1. Help the student-teacher 4.87 Very Strongly 4.39 Very Strongly

participants have comprehensive Agree Agree
understanding on the relevance
of the review classes in relation
to their preparation for the LET
examination.
2. Develop a meaningful 4.83 Very Strongly 4.29 Very Strongly
interpersonal relationship and Agree Agree
establish sense of
independence and self-esteem
to take the LET exam.
3. Improve comprehension level 4.96 Very Strongly 4.30 Very Strongly
after the enhancement review Agree Agree
classes had been conducted.
4. Encourage goal-setting and Very Strongly Very Strongly
wise decision- making in
4.87 Agree
4.34 Agree
preparation for the board
examination
5. Enhance sense of responsibility 4.91 Very Strongly 4.36 Very Strongly
of student teacher participants Agree Agree
and determination to pass the
board examination.
Very Strongly Very Strongly
WM 4.888 Agree 4.336 Agree
Table 4.1 depicts the similar descriptive rating of the faculty-review facilitators and
student-teacher participants pertinent to their assessment on the objectives of
the enhancement program. Ostensibly, the five indicators were rated by the faculty-
review facilitators and student-teacher participants Very Strongly Agree as validated by a
general weighted means of 4.888 and 4.336 respectively. Notable observation is that the
faculty-review facilitators strongly believed that the enhancement program improved the
comprehension level of the student-teacher participants as justified by a weighted mean of
4.96. This assessment reveals that the student-teacher participants are well-motivated and
interested to comprehend during the review classes and the enhancement program trained
students to listen well and learn. Meanwhile, student-teacher participants highest weighted
mean of 4.39 for objective No.1.Included in the top 3 indicators as assessed by the faculty-
review facilitators also described as very strongly agree are: enhance sense of
responsibility and determination of the student-teacher participants to pass the board

examination. This was even supported by some of the comments of the student-participants
as reflected in the accomplished questionnaires that they are determined to pass the board
examination which obtained a weighted mean of 4.91; help the student-teacher participants
have comprehensive understanding on the relevance of the review classes in relation to
their preparation for LET examination; and encourage goal-setting and wise-decision-
making in preparation in preparation for the board examination with a similar weighted
mean of 4.87. Meanwhile , the indicator to develop a meaningful interpersonal relationship
and Establish sense of independence and self-esteem to take the LET got a weighted
mean of 4.83 with a descriptive rating of very strongly agree.
On the other hand, student teacher participants assessment on the indicator To
help the student-teachers have a comprehensive understanding on the relevance of the
review classes in relation to their preparation for the LET examination recorded the highest
weighted mean of 4.39 which implies that this objective is considered by the participants
as the most important objective of the enhancement program. Other objectives that
registered high weighted means are Enhance sense of responsibility and determination to
pass the board examination and Encourage goal-setting and wise decision-making in
preparation for the board examination given the weighted means of 4.36 and 4.34,
respectively. Comparable weighted mean is also noted between the two objectives Improve
comprehensive level after the enhancement review classes that gained a weighted mean of
4.30 and Develop a meaningful interpersonal relationship and establish sense of
independence and self-esteem to take the LET exam that obtained a weighted mean of 4.29.
Table 4.2 Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Assessment of

Faculty Review Facilitators and Student-Teacher Participants on the
Effectiveness of the Enhancement Review Program in terms of Content

Content Weighted Mean Descriptive Weighted Mean Descriptive
1. Relevant and abreast 4.87 Very Strongly 4.23 Very Strongly
with the current trends Agree Agree
and issues in education.
2. Achieved throughout the 4.74 Very 4.11 Strongly Agree
Strongly Agree
enhancement review
program. 4.87 Very Strongly 4.22 Very Strongly
3. In congruence to the Agree Agree
existing curriculum.
4.Attainable during the 4.65 Very Strongly 4.13 Strongly Agree
duration of the enhancement Agree
review program.
5. Parallel to the contents 4.65 Very Strongly 4.18 Strongly Agree
given in the board Agree
examination.
WM 4.756 Very Strongly 4.174 Strongly
Agree Agree
Apparent observation in Table 4.2 is the parallel assessment of the faculty-review
facilitators in terms of the five indicators in the content of the enhancement program with a
general descriptive rating of very strongly agree. Majority of the faculty-participants
very strongly agreed that the contents included in the enhancement program are relevant and
abreast with the current trends and issues in education and in congruence to the existing
curriculum which both obtained a weighted mean of 4.87. Two other indicators obtained a
similar weighted mean of 4.65 with a descriptive rating of very strongly agree and these
are: the contents are attainable during the duration of the enhancement program and are
parallel to the contents given in the board examination. Faculty review-facilitators very
strongly agree that contents are achieved throughout the enhancement program with a
weighted mean of 4.74. This only implies that faculty -review facilitators are determined to
review all the topics included in the existing curriculum which are aligned to the test items
in the board examination.

It is also reflected in Table 4.2 the assessment of the student participants in terms
of content. Notable observation is that the participants very strongly agreed that the
contents of the enhancement review program are relevant and abreast with the current trends
and issues in education and in congruence to the existing curriculum which garnered
weighted means of 4.23 and 4.22, respectively. Student-teacher participants, on the other
hand, viewed that the contents of the enhancement program are parallel to the contents
given in the board examination, attainable during the duration of the enhancement program
and achieved throughout the enhancement review program. These are supported by the
obtained weighted mean of 4.18, 4.13, and 4.11, respectively. The overall weighted mean
computed is 4.174 with a descriptive interpretation of Strongly Agree.
Table 4.3 Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Assessment

of Faculty-Review Facilitators and Student-Teacher Participants on the Effectiveness
of the Enhancement Review Program in terms of Instructional
Strategies Employed by the Faculty-Review Facilitators
Instructional Strategies Faculty-Review Facilitators Student-Teacher Participants

employed by the Faculty
Weighted Mean Descriptive Weighted Mean Descriptive
Review - Facilitators Interpretation Interpretation
1.Multimedia Approach 4.65 Practiced to a 4.38 Practiced to a
(PowerPoint presentation) Great Extent Great Extent
2.Lecture Method 4.35 Practiced to a 4.28 Practiced to a

Great Extent Great Extent
3. Thematic Teaching 4.48 Practiced to a 4.07 Practiced to a
Great Extent Some Extent
4. Discussion and Evaluation 4.57 Practiced to a 4.37 Practiced to a
5. Inquiry-based method 4.52 Practiced to a 4.21 Practiced to a
WM 4.514 Practiced to a 4.262 Practiced to a

Described in Table 4.3 is the assessment of the faculty-review facilitators and student
teacher participants pertinent to the instructional strategies employed by the faculty-review
facilitators which was given a descriptive rating of practiced to a great extent equivalent
to an average weighted mean of 4.514 and 4.262 respectively. Apparently noted is that
faculty- review facilitators utilized the multi-media approach through power point
presentation in conducting the review sessions for the enhancement program with a
weighted mean of 4.65 . This only means that faculty adapt to the modern era of technology
or modern style of teaching. Comparable weighted means obtained by discussion and
evaluation and inquiry- based approach which obtained the weighted means of 4. 57 and
4.52 ,respectively with descriptive interpretation of practiced to a great extent. However,
lecture method was rated by the faculty review facilitators as practiced to a great extent
which garnered a weighted mean of 4.35, the lowest weighted mean among the five
instructional strategies employed.
Shown also in Table 4.3 is the assessment of the student-teacher participants on the
effectiveness of the enhancement program in terms of instructional strategies employed by
the faculty-review facilitators. It can be noted that the all the methods were rated practiced
to a great extent except the thematic teaching which was rated as practiced to some
extent after obtaining a weighted mean of 4.07. The use of multi-media approach got the
highest weighted mean of 4.38, followed by discussion and evaluation with a weighted
mean of 4.37.The lecture method is the third with obtained weighted mean of 4.28 while
the fourth is the inquiry-based approach.
Table 4.4 Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Assessment of Faculty-Review Facilitators
and Student-Teacher Participants on the Effectiveness
of the Enhancement Review Program in terms of Reading
or Resource Materials Availability
Reading or Resource Faculty-Review Facilitators Student-Teacher Participants

Materials Availability
WM DR WM DR
1.Printed reading materials
and e-sources are well 4.70 Very Adequate 4.20 Very Adequate
provided by the faculty
review-facilitators.
2 .Hand- outs are given 4.87 Very Adequate 4.16 Adequate
during the enhancement
review classes.
3. Books used in the review 4.52 Very Adequate 3.79 Adequate
classes are available in
the library.
4. Copies of sample test 4.78 Very Adequate 4.17 Adequate
items are well-provided.
5.Pamphlets and soft copies 4.61 Very Adequate 3.98 Adequate
are available for use.
WM 4.696 Very Adequate 4.06 Adequate
Table 4.4 revealed the assessment of the faculty review facilitators and student-
teacher participants on the frequency of the reading or resource materials availability in
schools. The five indicators were all rated as very adequate by the faculty- review
facilitators which obtained an overall weighted mean of 4.696 while student-teacher
participants obtained an average weighted mean of 4.06 with a descriptive rating of

adequate . Prominent observation in the table is the highest weighted mean of 4.87
obtained by the indicator ,hands-out are given during the enhancement classes. This was
followed by the indicator, copies of the sample test items were provided with a weighted
mean of 4.78. This only explains that faculty- review facilitators prefer organizing the
concepts to be presented through hand-outs and considered test-items patterned to LET
examination as an effective measures needed by the student-teacher participants for an
effective comprehension and learning .The use of printed materials, e-sources, pamphlets and
soft-copies obtained comparable weighted means of 4.70 and 4.61, respectively. The
availability of books in the library got the lowest mean of 4.52.
Meanwhile, among the five indicators, printed materials and e-sources are well-
provided by the faculty-review facilitators was rated by the student-teacher participants as
very adequate with a weighted mean of 4.20. The other four indicators were rated
adequate by the student-teacher participants. The obtained average weighted mean for all
the indicators is 4.06 with a descriptive rating of adequate. Nevertheless, it should be
noted that books available in the library got the lowest weighted mean of 3.79, followed by
pamphlets and soft-copies available for use got a weighted mean of 3.98.Comparable
weighted means of 4.17 and 4.16 were obtained by two indicators namely copies of sample
test items are provided, and hand outs are given during enhancement classes, respectively.
Table 4.5 Frequency Count, Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Assessment of the
Faculty-Review Facilitators and Student-Teacher Participants on the
Effectiveness of the Enhancement Review Program in terms of Learning Styles
of the Student -Teacher Participants
Learning Styles of the Faculty-Review Facilitators Student-Teacher Participants

Student- Teacher
Weighted Mean Descriptive Weighted Descriptive
Participants Interpretation Mean Interpretation
1. Verbal: Students prefer the
use of words ,both in speech 4.17 Effective 4.25 Very Effective
and in writing.
2. Visual: Students prefer the use
of pictures, diagrams, images, 4.57 Very Effective 4.38 Very Effective
and spatial understanding to
help them learn.
3. Social: Students like to learn 4.70 Very Effective 4.33 Very Effective
new things as part of a group.
4. Solitary: Students like to work 3.78 Effective 3.78 Effective
and learn alone, and prefer
self-study when learning.
5. Combination: Students 4.57 Very Effective 4.39 Very Effective
learning style is a
combination of two or more
learning styles.
WM 4.358 Very Effective 4.226 Very Effective
Findings presented in Table 4.5 discloses the assessment of the faculty-review
facilitators and student-teacher participants in terms of the learning styles of their students
during the enhancement review classes. Both participants rated it as very effective with
obtained weighted means of 4.358 and 4.226 respectively. On the assessment of the
faculty- review facilitators, it was obviously revealed in the table is the lowest weighted
mean of 3.78 of solitary learning style which was rated effective. This means that faculty-
review facilitators observed that students prefer not to work alone but rather enjoy learning
within a group. On the other hand, learning style that obtained 2nd lowest weighted mean
of 4.17 is the visual learning style with a descriptive rating of effective. The highest
weighted mean of 4.70 was obtained by the social learning style with a descriptive rating of
very effective. Two learning styles got similar weighted mean of 4.57 with a descriptive
rating of very effective namely visual and combination.
Described also in Table 4.5 is the assessment on the learning styles of the student-
teacher participants as assessed by themselves. Obviously revealed in the table is the lowest
weighted mean of 3.78 of solitary learning style which was rated effective. This means
that some students like to work alone and prefer self study when learning . The other
four learning styles were given the descriptive rating of very effective by the student-
teacher participants and the average weighted mean obtained is 4.226 which is very
effective. Nevertheless, combination of the different learning styles recorded the highest
weighted mean of 4.39, followed by visual learning style with a weighted mean of 4.38.
Learning style that obtained 3rd highest weighted mean of 4.33 is the social learning style.
Lastly, verbal learning style obtained weighted mean of 4.25.
Table 4.6 Summary of the General Weighted Mean, Descriptive Rating and Rank on the Assessment of
the Faculty Review Facilitators and StudentTeacher Participants
on the Effectiveness of the Enhancement Review Program
among School-Participants
Faculty- Review Facilitators Student-Teacher Participants
Weighted Descriptive Rank Weighted Descriptive Rank
Dimensions Mean Interpretation Mean Interpretation
A.Objectives 4.888 Very Strongly 1 4.336 Very Strongly 1
Agree Agree
B.Content 4.756 Very Strongly 2 4.174 Strongly Agree 4
Agree
C.Instructional 4.514 Practiced to a 4 4.262 Practiced to a 2
Strategies employed Great Extent Great Extent
by the Faculty-
Review Facilitators
D.Reading or 4.696 Very Adequate 3 4.06 Adequate 5
Resource Materials
Availability
E. Learning Styles 4.358 Very Effective 5 4.226 Very Effective 3
of the Student-
Teacher Participants
Table 4.6 gives a clear picture of the assessment of participants in accordance with the
five dimensions of the enhancement review program. Evidently shown that the objectives
of the program ranked first as assessed by both faculty-review facilitators and student-
teacher participants with weighted means of 4.888 and 4.336 respectively. Apparent
findings are the weighted means of 4.358 and 4.226 garnered by the fifth indicator which
ranked fifth and third respectively appeared as lowest among the obtained weighted means
of the five indicators as assessed by both faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher
participants. Both participants viewed that the learning styles adapted by the students are
Very Effective. Two indicators were assessed differently by both the participants. These
are the content of the program and reading or resource materials availability. Content of the
program was ranked second in the assessment of the faculty-review facilitators while in the
assessment of the student-teacher participants, it ranked fourth with weighted means of 4.756
and 4.174, respectively. The faculty- review facilitators assessed the reading materials
availability as Very Adequate which ranked third with a weighted mean of 4.696 while
students rated it as Adequate which ranked fifth with a weighted mean of 4.06.
PART IV: RELEVANCE OF THE ENHANCEMENT TO THE LICENSURE

EXAMINATION TO TEACHERS (LET) AS PERCEIVED
BY THE PARTICIPANTS
Table 5.1 Frequency Count, Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Perception of the
Faculty-Review Facilitators on the Relevance of Enhancement Review Program
to the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET)
Frequency
Items 5 4 3 2 1 WM DR
1. The enhancement program is Very

of great help in helping the 19 4 0 0 0 4.83 Strongly
student-teacher participants in Agree
preparing themselves for a
successful board examination.
2. The contents of the Very
enhancement review program 17 6 0 0 0 4.74 Strongly
are responsive and aligned Agree
to the Licensure Examination
for Teachers (LET).
3.The instructional strategies
employed by the faculty Very
review- facilitators are 4.78 Strongly
effective in preparing the
18 5 0 0 0
Agree
student- participants in
the Licensure Examination
for Teachers (LET).

4. The reading materials used Very
are abreast and updated on 18 5 0 0 0 4.78 Strongly
the goal of the Licensure Agree
Examination for Teachers
(LET).
5. The program extends Very
individualized mentoring to 14 8 1 0 0 4.57 Strongly
the student- teacher Agree
participants.
Very
WM 4.74 Strongly
Agree
Shown in Table 5.1 is the perception of the faculty-review facilitators on the
relevance of the enhancement program to the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET). It
can be noted that the descriptive rating given to all the indicators is Very Strongly Agree
as evidenced by the computed means for each indicator and the general weighted mean of
4.74. Strikingly observed from the table is that the enhancement program is of great help to
the student-teacher participants in their preparation for a successful board examination
which obtained the highest weighted mean of 4.83. This was followed by two
indicators that recorded similar weighted mean of 4.78 namely: (a) instructional strategies
employed by the faculty-review facilitators are effective in preparing the student-teacher
participants in the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) , and (b) the reading materials
used are abreast and updated on the goal of the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET).
The faculty-review facilitators very strongly believed that the contents of the enhancement
review program are responsive and aligned to the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET)
which was proven by the weighted mean of 4.74. The lowest weighted mean of 4.57
described from the table was given to the fifth indicator, the program extends
individualized mentoring to the student-teacher participants.

Table 5.2 Frequency Count, Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Perception
of the Student-Teacher Participants on the Relevance of Enhancement Review
Program to the Licensure Examination for Teachers
Frequency
Items 5 4 3 2 1 WM Descriptive
Interpretation
1. The enhancement program is

of great help in helping the 131 83 11 4 0 4.49 Very Strongly
student-teacher participants in Agree
2. The contents of the
enhancement review program 111 88 27 3 0 4.34 Very Strongly
are responsive and aligned Agree
for Teachers (LET).
employed by the faculty 107 93 27 2 0 4.33 Very Strongly
review- facilitators are Agree
student- participants in
for Teachers (LET). 107 83 36 3 0 4.28 Very Strongly
4. The reading materials used Agree
are abreast and updated on
the goal of the Licensure
Examination for Teachers (LET).
5. The program extends
individualized mentoring to 87 98 40 2 2 4.16 Strongly Agree
the student- teacher
participants.
4.32 Very Strongly
WM Agree
Table 5.2 reveals the perception of the student-teacher participants on the relevance
of the enhancement review program to the Licensure Examination for Teachers
(LET).Obviously noticed is that student-teacher participants perceived the program extends
individualized mentoring as Strongly Agree with a weighted mean of 4.16 and the lowest
among the five indicators. The other four indicators were rated Very Strongly Agree by
the student-teacher participants evidently shown by the computed weighted mean for each.
Ranked first is the indicator which very strongly perceived by the students that the
program helps the students in preparing themselves for a successful board examination ,
with a weighted mean of 4.49.This was followed by the second indicator which pertains to
the alignment of the contents of the enhancement program to the Licensure Examination for
Teachers (LET) with an obtained a weighted mean of 4.34.Third indicator ranked third with
a weighted mean of 4.33.Ranked fourth based on the computed weighted mean is the
indicator reading materials used are abreast and updated on the goal of the Licensure
Examination of Teachers with garnered a weighted mean of 4.28.
Table 5.3 Summary of the General Weighted Mean, Descriptive Rating and Rank on
the Relevance of the Enhancement Review Program to the Licensure
Examination of Teachers as Perceived by Faculty -Review Facilitators
and StudentTeacher Participants
Faculty- Review Facilitators Student-Teacher Participants

Items
WM Descriptive Rank WM Descriptive Rank
1. The enhancement program is Very Very
of great help in helping the 4.83 Strongly 1 4.49 Strongly 1
student-teacher participants in
Agree Agree
2. The contents of the Very Very
enhancement review program 4.74 Strongly 4 4.34 Strongly 2
are responsive and aligned
Agree Agree
for Teachers (LET).
employed by the faculty 4.78 Very 2.5 4.33 Very 3
review- facilitators are
Strongly Strongly
student- participants in Agree Agree
for Teachers (LET).
4. The reading materials used Very Very
are abreast and updated on 4.78 Strongly 2.5 4.28 Strongly 4
the goal of the Licensure
Examination for Teachers
Agree Agree
(LET).
5. The program extends Very Strongly
individualized mentoring to 4.57 Strongly 5 4.16 Agree 5
the student- teacher
participants.
Agree
Very Very
WM 4.74 Strongly WM 4.32 Strongly
Agree Agree
Table 5.3 indicates how the faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher
participants perceived the relevance of the enhancement program to the Licensure
Examination for Teachers (LET). Among the five items, item number 1 ranked first as
perceived by both participants with the weighted means of 4.83 and 4.49 respectively with
a descriptive rating of Very Strongly Agree". This implies that both participants strongly
believed that the enhancement program is of great help in helping the student-teacher
participants in preparing themselves for a successful board examination. Rank 2 on the
perception of the student-teacher participants is item 2 which gained a weighted mean of
4.34 with a descriptive rating of :Very Strongly Agree. Meanwhile, faculty- review
facilitators ranked item 2 as fourth with an obtained weighted mean of 4.74. Both items 3
and 4 obtained a similar weighted mean of 4.78 with a descriptive rating of Very Strongly
Agree and both got a rank of 2.5 as perceived by the faculty-review facilitators.
Meanwhile, Item 3 was rated by the student-teacher participants as Very Strongly Agree
with a weighted mean of 4.33 and ranked third while item 4 ranked fourth with a weighted
mean of 4.28.Finally, interestingly noted is that the last item ranked last in both participants
perception with garnered the weighted means of 4.57 with a descriptive rating of Very
Strongly Agree, and 4.16 with a descriptive rating of Strongly Agree, respectively.
PART V: ATTITUDES OF THE STUDENT-TEACHER PARTICIPANTS

TOWARDS THE ENHANCEMENT REVIEW PROGRAM
Table 6.Frequency Count, Percentage and Rank of the Attitudes of the

Student-Teacher Participants towards the Enhancement Program
Items Frequency Percentage Rank

1. I like the idea of having enhancement 218 95.20 1

review program.
2. I am really interested in joining the 205 89.52 2
enhancement review classes. .
3. I prefer to take review classes outside the 102 44.54 7
school offered by prominent review
centers in the province or cities
4. I feel bored during review classes. 50 21.83 9
5. I am only forced to come during
enhancement review classes offered by 60 26.20 8
the school because it is mandatory and
ordered by the Dean.
6.I am thankful that the school offers such 144 62.88 5
program for student-teachers which is free
of charge.
7. The review-facilitators are not effective 31 13.54 10
and efficient in conducting review
classes.
8.I am always eager to attend in every review 143 62.45 6
class.
9. I participate actively in the review classes. 159 69.43 4
10. I am always challenged by the test items
presented by the faculty review- 183 79.91 3
facilitators for each subject area.
Note: Multiple Responses
Table 6 reveals the attitudes of the student-teacher participants towards the
enhancement review program. Among the ten items, rank 1 is I like the idea of having an
enhancement program which obtained a frequency of 218 out of 229 student-teacher
participants and percentage of 95.20. Rank 2 which gained 89.52 percent with a frequency of
205 is I am really interested in joining the enhancement review classes. Item 10 I am
always challenged by the test items presented by the faculty-review facilitators for each
subject area ranked third which obtained a percentage 79.91 with a frequency of 183.
Ranked fourth is Item 9 I participate actively in the review classes with a percentage of
69.43 and a frequency of 159. Finally, rank 5 is item 6 I am thankful that the school offers
such program for student-teachers which is free of charge which obtained a frequency of
144 and percentage of 62.88. This only indicates that the student-teachers are thankful and
appreciative for the effort of the school in offering enhancement review program which is
offered for graduating students to prepare them in the board examination.
PART VI: PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY THE FACULTY-REVIEW

FACILITATORS AND STUDENT-TEACHER PARTICIPANTS IN THE
IMPLEMENTING PHASE OF THE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
Table 7.1 Frequency Count, Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Problems
Encountered by the Faculty Review Facilitators in the Implementing
Phase of the Enhancement Review Program
________________________________________________________________________
PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY FACULTY-REVIEW FACILITATORS_____
Weighted Mean Descriptive Interpretation
1. Minimal support received from the institution. 2.09 Minor Problem
2. Absenteeism and tardiness of the student- 2.70 Minor Problem
3.Less cooperation and support from the student- 2.52 Minor Problem
4. Scarcity of available materials. 2.13 Minor Problem
5. The review rooms are not conducive for
learning.
6. Un availability of resource materials. 2.04 Minor Problem
7 .Students lack of interest and lack of 2.09 Minor Problem
participation.
8. Lack of proper accommodation on the part of 2.09 Minor Problem
the administration.
9. Time allotted for the review is not enough to 2.09 Minor Problem
attain the completion of the content.
10. Low Scores of the student-participants in 2.00 Moderate Problem
the mock test administered.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
N Minimum Maximum Average Weighted Mean Descriptive Interpretation
10 2.00 2.70 2.288 Minor Problem
__________________________________________________________________________________
Table 7.1 features the seriousness of the problems encountered by the faculty-review
facilitators in the implementation of the enhancement program. Obviously depicted from the
table is that nine out of ten identified problems were rated Minor Problem by the faculty-
review facilitators with a general weighted mean of 2.288. Item 10 low scores student
teachers in the mock test administered was rated as Moderate Problem. This simply
means that problems are not so serious and can be remedied through appropriate measures.
These problems can be addressed in a systematic way by proposing an improved
enhancement program as part of the development plan of the college of education. As
shown in the table, item 10 obtained the highest weighted mean of 3.13. This only implies
that faculty-review facilitators are not satisfied and with the low scores of students upon the
administration of the mock test. Faculty-review facilitators need to evaluate the retention
and the comprehension levels of the student-teachers through the administration of a mock
test. It is clearly noted that the faculty regarded the identified problem absenteeism and
tardiness of the student-teacher participants as rank 2 with a computed weighted mean of
2.70. Some students disregard the importance of punctuality in review classes. Rank 3 was
obtained by item 3 Less support and cooperation from the student- teacher participants
which garnered a weighted mean of 2.52. This could be due to the fact that some students
are not motivated enough to attend review classes or faculty are probably employing
inappropriate instructional strategies for the subject area they are assigned. This could also
be due to the fact that student- teachers are endorsed in the different schools, either public
or private (those TEIs with laboratory school for basic education group inside the campus )
prioritizing their pre-service training or off-campus and on-campus practice teaching over
the enhancement program. Rank 4 relative to the seriousness of the problems encountered
by the faculty-review facilitators is Item 4 scarcity of available materials with a
computed weighted mean of 2.13 as minor problem. Lastly, ranked fifth are items 6, 7 and
8 with of similar mean of 2.09. Faculty regarded item 6 unavailability of resource
materials could be due to insufficient resource or reading materials, item 7 lack of interest
and participation of student teachers could be due to the inappropriate instructional
strategies employed by the faculty-review facilitators for each subject area they handle and
item 8 lack of proper accommodation on the part of the administration could be due to
the teachers incentive which is not a priority of the administration.
Table7.2 Frequency Count, Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Problems Encountered by
the Student-Teacher Participants in the Implementing
Phase of the Enhancement Review Program
_________________________________________________________________________
PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED MET BY THE STUDENT-TEACHERS PARTICIPANTS
_______________________________________________________________________________
Items Mean Descriptive Interpretation
1. Minimal support received from the institution. 2.52 Minor Problem
2. Absenteeism and tardiness of the faculty 2.37 Minor Problem
review- facilitators.
3. No encouragement and support from the Dean 2.26 Minor Problem
and faculty.
4. Review-facilitators are not well-prepared. 2.37 Minor Problem
5. The review rooms are not conducive for 2.47 Minor Problem
learning.
6. Unavailability of resource materials. 2.53 Minor Problem
7. Test items given are not patterned from LET 2.51 Minor Problem
examination.
8. Review-facilitators do not apply appropriate 2.55 Minor Problem
instructional strategies.
9. Time allotted for the review is not enough to 2.57 Minor Problem
attain the completion of the content.
10. Other faculty review- facilitators lack the 2.52 Minor Problem
expertise on the topics.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
N Minimum Maximum Mean Descriptive Interpretation
10 2.26 2.57 2.466 Minor Problem
_____________________________________________________________________________
Table 7.2 features the seriousness of the problems encountered by the student-teacher
participants in the implementation of the enhancement program. Obviously depicted in the
table is that all the ten identified problems were rated Minor Problem by the student-
teachers participants with a general weighted mean of 2.47. This simply means that
problems are not so serious and can be remedied easily through appropriate measures. These
problems can be addressed in a systematic way by proposing an improved enhancement
program as part of the development plan of the college of education. As shown in the
table, item 9 Time allotted for the review is not enough to attain the completion of the
content of the program appears to be the most serious among the ten items which obtained
the highest weighted mean of 2.57. This only implies that student-teacher participants need
additional time allotment for the review in order to achieve all the contents included in the
program per subject area. Rank 2 is the review facilitators do not apply appropriate
instructional strategies with a computed weighted mean of 2.55. Rank 3 was obtained by
item 6 unavailability of resource materials which garnered a weighted mean of 2.53. This
means that student- teacher participants need additional resource materials which could be
provided by the administration and be made available in the library. Rank 4 relative to the
seriousness of the problems met by the student-teacher participants is Item 10 other
faculty-review facilitators lack the expertise on the topics which obtained weighted mean
of 2.52. This could be attributed to the educational attainment, length of teaching
experience and number of years in conducting review of the faculty-review facilitators and
could be due to the limited number of faculty review facilitators who can handle
enhancement classes. Lastly, ranked fifth are item 1 minimal support received from the
institution and item 7 test items are not patterned to LET examination with a similar
weighted mean of 2.51. Students regarded item 1 as minor problem which could be due to
the inadequate facilities and other materials. On the other hand, in relation to item 7 which
could be attributed to the idea that faculty-review facilitators are not aware that test item
analysis through multiple choice type of examination is necessary to train the would-be
takers of board examination to deal with LET-patterned questions and the proper way to
analyze them.
PART VII. SUGGESTED MEASURES TO REMEDY OR MINIMIZE THE

PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY THE FACULTY REVIEW-
FACILITATORS
Table 7.3. Weighted Mean and Ranking of the Suggested Measures to Remedy or
Minimize the Problems Encountered by the Faculty-Review Facilitators in the
Implementation of the Enhancement Review Program
Items Weighted Mean Rank

1. Administration must fully support the enhancement review program 4.70 2
2. Proper motivation and encouragement by the head of the education 5.65 8
department should be extended to the education students.
3. Student- teachers should be motivated and encouraged to show 4.39 1
cooperation.
4. The administration should extend financial support for the honoraria 5.26 6
or incentives of the faculty review- facilitators.
5. Rooms utilized for the review classes should be spacious, well-ventilated 6.74 9
and well-lighted.
6.More resource materials and other professional literature should be 5.00 3
available for use.
7 .Student -teachers should be fully aware on the objectives of the 5.04 4
enhancement program.
8. Administrators should give importance to the enhancement review program. 5.48 7
9. Additional and convenient time should be given in conducting the 6.96 10
enhancement review classes.
10. Student-teachers should be encouraged to review and give more focus on 5.22 5
the subject areas they find more difficult.
N Minimum Maximum Weighted Mean
10 4.39 6.96 7.0645
Data on Table 7.3 present the weighted mean and the ranking of the suggested
measures to remedy or minimize the problems met by the faculty-review facilitators. Rank 1
and the highly suggested measure is item 3 student-teachers should be motivated and
encouraged to show cooperation with a computed weighted mean of 4.39. This could be
achieved through the collaborative effort of both the faculty and students. Rank 2 is
item 1 administration must fully support the enhancement program which obtained a
weighted mean of 4.70. Rank 3 is item 6 more resource materials and other professional
literature should be available for use which gained a weighted mean of 5.00 . Rank 4
gained a weighted mean of 5.04 is item 7 student-teachers should be fully aware of the
objectives of the enhancement program. Faculty-review facilitators need to give emphasis
on the objectives during the orientation period. Finally, the faculty-review facilitators
suggested that student-teachers should be encouraged to review and give more focus on the
subject areas they find more difficult, which got a weighted mean of 5.22.
It is also depicted that faculty-review facilitators are amenable of the allotted time
for the enhancement classes which ranked last among the ten items, with a weighted mean
of 6.96. Moreover, faculty seemed satisfied with the rooms being utilized in conducting
review classes which ranked 9 and obtained a weighted mean of 6.74.
PART VIII. Analysis whether there is a significant difference on the assessments of

faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher participants on the effectiveness of
enhancement program
Table 8. Test of Difference between the Assessments of the Faculty-Review Facilitators

and Student-Teacher Participants on the Effectiveness of the
Enhancement Program in terms of Five Dimensions
_______________________________________________________________________________
Assessments on the Effectiveness of the Enhancement Program in terms of Five Dimensions
_______________________________________________________________________________
4.888 4.336
4.756 4.174
4.514 4.262
4.696 4.060
4.358 4.226
______________________________________________________________________________________
Paired Samples Statistics

Mean N Std. Std. Error
Deviation Mean
Pair 1 VAR00001- 4.6424 5 .20825 .09313
VAR00002 4.2116 5 .10322 .04616
Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.
Pair 1 VAR00001 &
VAR00002 5 .088 .888
Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence
Deviation Error Interval of the T df Sig.(2-
Mean Difference tailed
Lower Upper
Pair 1
VAR00001- .43080 .22411 .10023 .15253 .70907 4.298 4 .013
VAR00002
T-TEST PAIRS =VAR00001 WITH VAR00002 (PAIRED)

/CRITERIA = (CI (.9500)
Critical t value = 2.132
Results in Table 8 indicate that the alternate hypothesis has a significant
difference in the assessments of faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher participants
on the effectiveness of enhancement program in terms of five dimensions. This is based on
the derived computed t-value of 4.298 which is entirely greater than the critical value of
2.132. The result reveals that the assessment of the student-teacher participants on the
effectiveness of the enhancement program in terms of five dimensions is slightly lower than
the assessment of faculty-review facilitators. Such result supports the idea that the faculty
review facilitators and student-teacher participants showed different assessments on the
effectiveness of the enhancement program in terms of five dimensions. Therefore, the null
hypothesis is rejected since the t-value is 4.298 > 2.132.
DISCUSSION
In terms of demographic profile of the 23 faculty-review facilitators, the age group
of 36-45 obtained the highest frequency of 7 out of 23 or 30.43 percent. This was
followed by the age group 46-55 with a frequency of 6 or 26.09 percent. Most of the
faculty-review facilitators obtained an academic rank of Professor that numbered 10 out of
23 participants or 43.48 percent. The participants involved in the enhancement program are
highly educationally qualified since majority of them are Ph.D holders and M.A. holders
with Ph. D units . Majority of them had teaching experience of 16 to 25 years which
obtained a frequency of 8 or 34.78 percent, and 17.39 percent are still active in the teaching
profession and with a teaching experience of over 25 years. Most of the faculty-review
facilitators handle professional subjects as their area of specialization in the enhancement
program as it obtained a frequency 11 or 47.83 percent. Nine out of 23 faculty-review
facilitators have below 5 years experience in conducting enhancement review classes. Most
of them are affiliated to various professional organizations in the national or even
international level. Faculty-review facilitators aimed to grow professionally and enhance
their professional teaching skills and instructional strategies by attending seminars,
conferences, workshops and trainings organized by prestigious professional affiliations in
the regional, national and international levels. As articulated in the study conducted by
Kayani(2011) professional development through intensive, in-service training can greatly
enhance the capacity of universities /colleges teachers in operationalizing the innovative
concept of teaching learning process. Teaching is very important profession. Training in
this regard to cope with the new advancement and their successful transferring of
knowledge and capacity building is necessary.
In terms of the demographic profile of the two hundred twenty nine (229) student-
teacher participants, the highest frequency in terms of age group was observed among those
who are between 19 and 20 years old. One hundred thirty three (133) of them or 58.08
percent are enrolled in the BSED program while 96 or 41.92 percent are BEED. Out of
96 BEED , 85 or 37.12 percent specialized in the General Education while 11 or 4.80
percent specialized in Pre-School Education. This only proved that Teacher Education
Institutions are offering programs to suit the needs of the community relevant to the K to 12
curriculum of the basic groups. Out of the 133 BSED student-teachers, 49 are English major,
31 are Filipino Major,16 are Science major while the rest of the major fields of specialization
have smaller percentages. It is significant to note that area of specialization appeared to be a
significant predictor of students performance in the licensure examination. As revealed in
the study of Gerolangin (2000), it is an indicative of the need to continuously upgrade the
training of students in the major disciplines. Majority of the student-teacher participants
spent less than 5 hours per week in the enhancement review program which obtained the
highest percentage of 39.74. Meanwhile, 25.76 percent spent 8 hours per week in the
enhancement program. This was validated from the informal interviews conducted by the
researcher among the participants in one of the school- participants. Based on the interview
conducted with the participants, student-teachers are required to attend in-campus review
classes after their practice teaching hours in public schools. This is a significant point to note
since it was articulated and emphasized in the study conducted by Radam (2007) that there
are benefits obtained from the greater number of PNU graduates in the conduct of review
classes for Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) which is supported by her finding
that majority of the graduates passed the LET, in all components, with a mean rating that
exceeds the minimum required by the PRC. Radams (2007) findings concluded that
attendance in PNU LET review classes predicts LET General Education performance.
In terms of the academic performance of the student-teacher participants, it was
revealed that majority of them are academically inclined in their major fields of
specialization which obtained a weighted mean of 4.31 with a descriptive rating of Very
Good. It is a significant factor to pass the board examination since 40 percent of the test
items in the Secondary level of the LET comes from the major/content area. General
Education and Professional Education categories were rated Good by the student-teacher
Participants with descriptive weighted means of 4.13 and 4.12, respectively. On the other
hand, Radams (2007) findings concluded that attendance in PNU LET review classes
predicts LET General Education performance. It was further emphasized that those
students who obtained higher grades in general education have greater chance of passing the
LET. It does not necessarily mean that student-teacher participants are predicted not to have
the chance of passing the LET since they are only good in both the General Education and
Professional Education subject categories. Moreover, Radam (2007) BSE subjects
predictors of LET performance are professional education GPA , students teaching rating
and test scores for the LET professional education, general education GPA, attendance in
review classes and over all scores for LET, the LET general education and profession
education subjects. The obtained weighted mean of the academic performance of the
student- teacher participants in three subject categories can be an important predictor in
passing the board examination with the attendance and performance in the enhancement
review classes. This was validated from the study conducted by Seng (1999) that there is
really a significant relationship between academic performance and LET results.
In the analysis of assessments on the effectiveness of the enhancement review
program in terms of five dimensions, both faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher
participants gave a descriptive rating of Very Strongly Agree for the indicators of
objectives of the enhancement program while for the contents , the faculty-review
facilitators rated it as Very Strongly Agree whereas student-teacher participants gave a
descriptive rating of Strongly Agree. For the instructional strategies employed by the
faculty, both participants have similar assessment of Practiced to a Great Extent. This
supported is by what was articulated in the work of Lepage, Hammerness, & Duffy, (2005)
that not only do teachers need to be able to keep order and provide useful information to
students, they are so need to be increasingly effective enabling a diverse group of students to
learn ever more complex material and to develop a wider range skills. Where as in previous
decades teachers were expected to prepare only a small minority for the most ambitious
intellectual work, that are now expected to prepare virtually all students for higher order
thinking .The teacher should not only be a communicator but also a mobilizer, motivator,
and coordinator, (Rao, 2007)
In terms of reading or resource materials availability, faculty gave a rating of Very
Adequate while that of the rating given by student-teachers participants is Adequate.
Based on the results, similar descriptive rating of Very Effective was given by both
participants to the learning styles of the student- teacher participants.
Among the five indicators on the relevance of the enhancement program to the
Licensure Examination for Teachers, both the faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher
participants perceived that the objectives, contents, instructional strategies and resource
materials of the enhancement program are relevant to the Licensure Examination for
Teachers which were supported by the descriptive rating of Very Strongly Agree. The
indicator that the program extends individualized mentoring to the student-teacher
participants was rated by the student-teachers as Strongly Agree while faculty-
review facilitators rated it as Very Strongly Agree. It was revealed that both faculty-
review facilitators and student-teacher participants perceived that relevance of the
enhancement to the Licensure Examination for Teachers as Very Strongly Agree as

indicated by the weighted means of 4.74 and 4.32, respectively. The perception of the
participants on the relevance of the enhancement program to the Licensure Examination for
Teachers(LET)was validated by the study conducted by Matriano and Almazan (2011) that
the school has the obligation to its students to ensure success in their future career and life
by looking into possibility of strengthening the Teacher Education curriculum as well as the
training preparations of students who will later take the board examination. Furthermore, it
was articulated in the article appeared in website of PBED, that the role of Teacher Education
Institutions (TEIs) is significant in providing quality education to students up to giving
opportunities for students to be able to attain eligibility. In addition, it was recommended
from the analysis that TEI should conduct a parallel review of LET questions and the
teacher education curriculum of TEIs for improved alignment to the licensure examination.
( http://pbed.ph/taxonomy/term/2/downloads)
In terms of the attitudes of the student- teacher participants towards the enhancement
program, they have the positive attitudes towards inclusion of the program in the existing
curriculum shows by the indicator that they like the idea of having an enhancement
program for LET in their schools which ranked first followed by their interests in attending
enhancement review classes which ranked second and further supported by the indicator that
they are always challenged by the test items presented by the faculty-review facilitators for
each subject area which ranked third.
In the analysis of the problems encountered by the faculty-review facilitators, the
participants categorized all the problems presented as Minor Problem except for the
problem on low scores of the student-teacher participants in the mock test which was given
the rating of Moderate Problem. Other problems met by them that obtained higher
weighted means are (a) absenteeism and tardiness of the student-teachers, (b)less support
and cooperation from the student-teachers , and (c) scarcity of resource materials .On the
other hand, student-teacher participants gave an overall rating of Minor Problem to all the
ten problems presented. In terms of the seriousness of the problems, it is the time allotment
for the enhancement review classes that recorded the highest weighted mean. This was
further supplemented by the statement of the one of the student-participants I find my
review class very boring in a way because of the schedule. I wish they had moved the time
earlier so we can use our time efficiently. I also would like that they provide facilitators or
teachers who are expert in the area. I wish that they do not push us to learn by ourselves,
rather help us with our questions. Other problems identified are (a) review-facilitators do
not apply the appropriate instructional strategies,(b) unavailability of resource materials (c)
other faculty-review facilitators lack the expertise on the topics, and (d) minimal support
from the institution. The identified problem regarding the lack of expertise of the faculty-
review facilitators on the assigned topics is attributed to the limited number of faculty who
can rightfully handle the subject particularly the major subjects. This could be supplemen-
ted by the unstructured interview conducted by the researcher among student-teacher
participants and the written comments and suggestions reflected in the accomplished survey
questionnaires for the student-teachers. According to one of them as stated, LET is a very
serious challenge which can lead the student teachers to be professional so I suggest that
the school must focus on choosing different teachers from their respective major/subject
to teach them better and to learn more as much as possible. Another comment came from
the student-participants is I am really hoping that our review class will help me pass the
LET. The expertise of the teachers/facilitators is very important to help the students
prepare for LET but unfortunately, our teacher/ facilitator is not that effective, efficient
and competent to help us pass the LET.
Pertinent to the suggested measures to remedy or minimize the problems encountered
by the faculty-review facilitators, it is highly suggested that student-teachers should be
motivated and encouraged to show cooperation which ranked first. Other highly
recommended measures include (a) administration must fully support the enhancement
review program, (b)more resource materials and other professional literature should be
available for use, (c) student-teachers should be fully aware on the objectives of the
enhancement program, and (d) student-teachers should be encouraged to review and give
more focus on the subject area that they find more difficult.
Conclusion
On the basis of the aforementioned findings of the study, the following conclusions
have been drawn:
Majority of the faculty-review facilitators are in their late adulthood and old age
which is an indicative of being experienced in the field of teaching, belonging to age group
45-55 and over 65 years; educationally and professionally qualified to handle subjects in
their field of specialization; with 16-25 years experience in the teaching profession; and less
than five years in conducting enhancement review classes. Most of them are Ph.D holders
and MA holders with Ph.D units, enjoying the academic rank of Professor and Associate
Professor; and attended numerous seminars relevant to their profession and area of
specialization locally and in the national and international level. Majority of them attended
more than 15 seminars in the division and school levels and they are affiliated with
various professional organizations in the country and abroad.

Majority of the student-teacher participants belonged to the age group 19-20. Those
who enrolled in the BSED program dominated those who belonged to the BEED program.
Majority of the BSED student teacher-participants are English major and Filipino major.
Few of them are Science major, TLE major, MAPEH major and Social Studies major.
Majority of them performed Very Good in their major/ content subject categories while
Good in their general education and professional education subjects. Majority of them
spent less than 5 hours a week in their enhancement review classes.
In the analysis of assessments on the effectiveness of the enhancement review
program in terms of five dimensions, both participants have similar assessments on the
three indicators namely (a) objectives with a descriptive rating of Very Strongly Agree
(b) instructional strategies employed by the faculty-review facilitators with a descriptive
rating of Practiced to a Great Extent and (c) learning styles of the student-teacher
participants with a descriptive rating of Very Effective.
Meanwhile, participants gave a different assessment on the two indicators namely
(a ) contents which was assessed by the faculty as Very Strongly Agree and students as
Strongly Agree and (b) reading or resource materials availability which obtained a
descriptive rating of Very Adequate and Adequate as assessed by the faculty and
student-teachers participants, respectively.
Majority of the student-teachers have positive attitude towards the inclusion of the
enhancement review program in the existing curriculum.
Relative to the summary on the relevance of the enhancement program to the
Licensure Examination for Teachers, both faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher
participants gave similar perceptions of Very Strongly Agree for the following:(a) the
enhancement program is of great help in helping the student-teachers in preparing
themselves for a successful board examination;(b) the contents of the enhancement program
are responsive and aligned to the Licensure Examination for Teachers;(c) the instructional
strategies of the faculty-review facilitators employed; and (d) the reading materials used are
abreast and updated on the goal of the Licensure Examination for Teachers. Meanwhile,
student-teacher participants perceived as Strongly Agree the last indicator that the
program extends individualized mentoring to the student-teacher participants while faculty-
review facilitators perceived it as Very Strongly Agree.
With respect to the problems encountered by the faculty-review facilitators, the
Moderate problem identified by them is the low scores of the students in the mock test
administered and the rest of the problems identified were categorized as Minor
Problems. On the other hand, all the problems identified by the student-teachers were
Minor Problems with the highest weighted mean is the time allotted for the review is not
enough to attain the completion of the contents.
In terms of the suggested measures to remedy or minimize the problems identified by
the faculty-review facilitators, the following should be taken into consideration:( a) student-
teachers should be motivated and encouraged to show cooperation; (b) administration must
fully support the enhancement program; and (c) more reading materials and professional
literature should be available for use.
Pertinent to the analysis whether there is a significant difference between the
assessments of the faculty-review facilitators and student-teacher participants ,it was found
out that there is significant difference since the t-value 4.298 is entirely greater than the
critical value of 2.132.The findings support the alternate hypothesis which reveals that the
assessment of the student-teacher participants is slightly lower than the assessment of the
faculty-review facilitators. Therefore, the study reveals that the null hypothesis is rejected
and the alternate hypothesis is accepted.
Recommendations
In view of the findings and conclusions drawn from the study, the researcher hereby
recommends the following:
1. Faculty-review facilitators who are not yet MA / Ph. D holders should be
encouraged to pursue post-graduate studies aligned to their specialization to
become equipped with the needed competencies and skills for an effective and
encouraging conduct of the review classes through offering them scholarship or
financial assistance. The head of the college should hire teachers who are
experienced and expert in the field of specialization and assign them in the
implementation of the enhancement program.( CHED policy)
2. To strengthen the professional growth of newly-hired faculty or those who have at
least two or three years expeience, seminars and trainings about conducting review
classes must be given to faculty-review facilitators. Other sessions must be held to
tackle different strategies and techniques in teaching, instructional planning, and
assessing test results. New teachers should also be prioritized in assigning or
recommending faculty to attend seminars or trainings.
3. Student-teacher participants should be encouraged to attend review classes by
providing them with competent faculty-review facilitators who are aligned with
their own field of specialization since student teachers have varied major/ content
subjects or field of specialization.

4. In order to motivate and encourage student teachers to cooperate during review
sessions, the administration through the heads of the instruction cluster, vice
chairman for the academic affairs, heads/ program heads, and deans of the colleges
or universities, assigning of expert, experienced, effective and competent faculty-
review facilitators for every subject area should be taken into consideration and
priority of the department.
5. Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) with existing enhancement review program
should strengthen their advocacy of helping the student teachers in their
preparation for a successful board examination through a rigid and complete
review program which includes the rationale, objectives, contents , topics per
subject area, appropriate instructional strategies, resource materials and
professional literature available for use. All student-teachers must have a copy of
these to be compiled together with the hand-outs, sample LET-patterned test items,
pamphlets, assessments, summary of concepts, and mock test papers.
6. With the full support of the administration, deans of the college of education
should include the individualized mentoring and coaching to student teachers
particularly to those who find difficulty in other subject area such as professional
education subjects.
7. A comprehensive orientation on the enhancement review program should be done
by the faculty-review facilitators with the student-teachers. Setting of right goals,
attitudes and expectations should also be discussed.
8. Faculty-review facilitators should employ the appropriate instructional strategies
and varied techniques such as thematic teaching and lecture method aside the
multi-media approach. Other strategies should be used also to suit the needs of the
student teachers.
9. To motivate student teachers to attend review classes, seminars should be given to
student teachers relevant to taking the Licensure Examination with emphasis on
the objectives of the review program so that student teachers will be fully aware of
its significance or importance. Since Enhancement Program has a great impact in
education, student-teachers or the would-be-takers of the Licensure Examination
should be encouraged to attend review sessions and give more focus to the
subjects which they find difficult.
10. Convenient time/ schedule and time allotment for the review should be extended
for the program to be able to discuss the contents of each subject area.
Note: Minimum of 8 or maximum of 10 recommendations based on the 9 problems
11. Incentives or honoraria should be given to faculty review facilitators for extending
individualized mentoring and coaching to student-teachers specifically in the major
/ area of specializations.
12. The enhancement review program should be evaluated at the end of every
academic year so that its strengths and weaknesses can be identified.
13. There should be an annual evaluation of the performance of the faculty-review
facilitators that will give them information on their strengths and weaknesses as a
review facilitator in order for them to improve their instructional strategies or
retain good traits they possess as facilitators.
14. The Commission on Higher Education should encourage Teacher Education
Institutions should encourage other TEIs to include review classes for three subject
categories namely general education subjects, major/content subjects and
professional subjects in their curriculum , not only in the fourth year level but also
during the second year or third year levels.
15. Faculty-review facilitators or faculty-in-charge should be encouraged to use LET-
patterned test items in conducting the review classes. Test items presented during
the review sessions should be discussed comprehensively by the review-facilitators
to student-teachers.
16. With the genuine support of the administration, the Deans and faculty-review
facilitators, in coordination with the Chief Librarians of Teacher Education
Institutions should scout, recommend and purchase resource materials that are
abreast and updated in congruence to the Licensure Examination for Teachers.
17. Revision of syllabi for every subject/course should be done per academic year
specifically in the professional education subjects to eliminate topics that are too
obsolete and no longer part of the educational system and integrate topics that are
essential and might be included in the Licensure Examination for Teachers.
18. A handbook consisting of the salient concepts with consolidated test items
patterned to LET may be proposed by the faculty review facilitators in their area of
specialization to be used in the conduct of the review classes.

19. Future researches should include other variables such as the results of the mock
test , test results of the Licensure Examination for Teachers(LET), academic
performance by grade, entrance examination results, correlation between them, and
accredited or non-accredited school-participants that offer enhancement review
program during summer or after graduation.
20. A similar study should be conducted in other regions or on a wider scope to gain
deeper insights on the implementation of the enhancement program.
PART II
A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE

ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
TEACHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS (TEIs)
I. Rationale:
Taking board examinations is one of the ultimate and challenging experiences of an
education graduate. This will be the opportune time for them to utilize and apply all the
knowledge, concepts, skills, techniques and competencies that they have acquired in their
four year of stay in the school with the expertise of their professors and genuine concern
of the administration. This part of their experiences can change their lives in their career as
an educator or teacher. Passing the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) scheduled
twice a year is quite challenging since this will be the first step for them to attain eligibility
and license to teach in private educational institutions and most especially in the public
schools in the country. This proposed development plan will serve as a reference or guide in
providing relevant information to the heads, faculty and student-teachers to be more aware
on the goals of the enhancement program and for student-teachers to be more prepared
emotionally, psychologically, physically and academically/mentally to take the board
examination as they continue their journey as a student-teacher. It gives emphasis on the role
of the administration, heads, faculty and student-teachers in the implementation of the
enhancement program as part of the development plan. Ultimately, this proposed
development plan will help the student-teachers to have strong self-determination, wise
decision- making ability, high comprehension level and confidence in preparing themselves
for a successful board examination. This will also help the Teacher Education Institutions
to achieve a high overall performance in the Licensure Examination for Teachers in the
regional and national levels.
II.Objectives:
1. To promote awareness on the vision, mission, objectives, core values and goals of the
department and school.
2. To revisit the schools rules, policies, regulations on school discipline.
3.To institute an organized and systematic development plan for the education department
pertaining to the enhancement program.
4.To extensively orient the student-teachers on the importance of enhancement program
through in-campus review program within two semesters of the academic year and
including summer.
5.To strengthen the Enhancement program and become aware of its impact on the
departments goals through annual evaluation of the program and diagnosis of its
strengths and weaknesses.
6. To help student- teachers in preparing themselves for a successful board examination.

7. To produce student-teachers/graduates who are equipped with skills, competencies and
knowledge in different subject areas in congruence with the goals and contents of the
Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) .
8.To ensure that the school adopts a development plan with emphasis on the improved
9. To further improve the national passing rate of the first-timers/ takers of the department
in LET examination annually.
References
Boynton, C.and Boynton, M.( 2005).Educators Guide in Preventing and Solving Discipline
Problems: Chapter 1. Developing Positive Teacher- Student Relations.
Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/105124/chapters/
developing_positive_teacher-students_relations.aspx
Burris,C.C.& Welner,K.G.(2005, November).Choosing the achievement gap by
detracking. Phi Delta Kappan. 86(8).594-598.
Cabatic,E.S.(1991) .Students Variables as Predictors of the Performance of the Graduates
of Saint Marys Collegein the Civil Engineering Board Examination: Their
Implications to Engineerings Education Management. Saint Marys
University,Bayombong NuevaVizcaya.
Coffey, M. and Gibbs, G.( 2000). Can Academics Benefit from Training? Some
Preliminary Evidence. Teaching in HigherEducation. Vol.5. pp. 385389.
Cranton, P.(2006).Fostering authentic relationships in the transformative classroom.
New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education.2006 (109),33-46
doi:10.1002./ace.203
Creech, Steve(2013).Hypothesis Testing and Statistics T-Test. Retrieved from
http://www.statisticallysignificantconsulting.com/Ttest.htm
Dimanlig,E.L.(1998).Performance of the Philippine Womens University College of
Nursing Graduates in the 1997Nursing Licensure Examination: Its Relationship
to Selected Correlates Philippine Womens University, Manila.
Enriquez, Charity S. (2006) Philippine Association for Graduate Education
(PAGE )Region III Graduate Education Journal. Predictors of Success of
Teacher Education Graduates in The Licensure Examination.

Volume I, No. 1.November. Manila.
Fitzpatrick, J., Sanders, J. & Worthen, B. (2011).Program Evaluation: Alternative
approaches and practical guidelines. (4th Ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Canadian Publisher: Pearson.ISBN:978-0-205- 57935-8.
Gerolangin, Cezar M.( 2000). Predictors of Performance of Education
Graduates in the Licensure Examination : Perspectives in the
Management of Teacher Education Institutions. Bulacan: Bulacan State
University.
Gil, A. (1996).Dialogue: What Kind of Tests will be Asked? The Philippine Journal of
Education. Vol. LXXV, No. 3
Hamilton, S. F. (1979, April). Evaluating Experiential Learning Programs. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, San Francisco. (ERIC Document Reproductive Service No.
ED170357)
Hattie, J., Marsh, H. W., Neill, J. T., & Richards, G. E. (1997). Adventure
Education and Outward bound: Out-of-class Experiences that Make a
Lasting Difference. Review of Educational Research, 67, 43- 87.
Hermosisima,M.C.(2003) The PNU GraduatesPerformance in the Licensure
Examination for Teachers (2002-2003):Approximating Sources of
Variance.Philippine Normal University, Manila.
Jackson, S.L.(2009). Research Method and Statistics: A Critical Thinking Approach 3rd
Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadswort
Kayani, M.M.(2011) Analysis of Professional Competency Enhancement program of

NAHE on the Performance of College Teachers. International Journal of Business
and Social Science Vol. 2 No. 18, October.
Lee, H. B. A.( 2003). The Dialogue between Higher Education Research and Practice. R.
Begg, Ed.London: Kluwer Academic Publishers
Lepage, P., Hammerness, K. and Duffy, H. (2005). Preparing Teachers for a Changing
World. (J. B. Linda Darling-Hammond, Ed.) San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Matriano , Eric A. Ph.D. and Christine Gil O. Almazan . (2011). The Journal,
Research Review for Business, Education, Management , Technology and
Computer Studies: Predictors of Success in the Licensure Examination
for Teacher among Graduates of Teacher Education Programs of
Columban College Academic Year 2006-2010.Volume 7, No.1 , October.
Nepomuceno, Rose Marie C.(2015). Needs Assessment of Secondary Student Teacher:
Basis for a Proposed Student Teaching Program Holy Angel University,
Angeles City.
Owen, I.(2015).How important are grades ?Retrieved from
http://teaching.marker.com/education/articles #138-how-important-are-grades
Perez,Sherry B.(2006). Development of Interactive Pre-Board Licensure Examination
for Teachers for Technological University of the Philippines Review Center.
Technological University of the Philippines, Manila.
Plamo, Reermeline B.(2003). Competencies of Student Teachers along Five
Constructs. Araullo University: Horizon. Araullo University Research Journal.
Abstracts of Theses and Dissertations.Cabanatuan City.
Primer on IQuaME(2005). Institutional Monitoring and Evaluation for Quality

Assurance in Higher Education. Based on the CMO No.16,Series 2005.
Commission on Higher Education.
Radam, Judith M.(2007). The Indicators of Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET)
Performance Capability of the Philippine Normal University Isabela Campus
Graduates. Philippine Normal University Isabela Campus, Manila.
Rao, D. B. (2007). Encyclopeadia of Teacher Education (Vol. 1, III, IV). New Dehli:
Discover Publishing House.
School Improvement Planning in Washington State: Common Characteristics of High
Performing Schools(n.d). Retrieved November 14, 2013 from Office of
Superintendent of Public Instruction, website.http:www.k12.wa.us/school
improvement/success.aspx.
Seng, Menela G. (1999). HAU Graduate Journal. The Performance of HAU
Education Graduates In the Licensure Examination for Teachers in
SY 1996 and 1997: A Basis for an Enrichment Program. Volume II ,
May. Angeles City. Holy Angel University.
Sibayan, B. P.(1998)Point of View: Lack of Quality Control in Teacher Education.
The Philippine Journal of Education. Volume LXXVII,No.8
Stufflebeam, D. (2003). The CIPP model of evaluation.
Springer international handbooks of education: International handbook of
educational evaluation. Retrieved from http://www.credoreference.com.ezproxy.
lib.ucalgary.ca/entry/spredev/the_cipp_model_of_evaluation.
Subong, P. & Beldia ,M. (2005).Statistics for Research. Sampaloc, Manila: REX
Bookstore.
Valdepenas ,R.P. (1997).Determinants of the Licensure Examination Performance of
Engineering Graduates in Region 2.Cagayan State University,Tuguegarao
Villamin ,A.M. (1996) Dialogue: Continuing Education. The Philippine Journal of
Education .Volume LXXV, No.5
World Economic Forum, Global Competitiveness Report 2006.
Zhang, G.,Zeller,N., Griffith, R. D., Williams, J., Shea, C. & Misulis, K. (2011). Using
the Context, Input, Process, and Product Evaluation Model (CIPP) as a
Comprehensive Framework to Guide the Planning, Implementation, and
Assessment of Service-Learning Programs.Journal of Higher Education and
Outreach Engagement 15(4) 57 -83.
B. Electronically-Based Sources
August 12, 2015 Retrieved from http://www.statsoft.com/Textbook/Basic-
Statistics. Basic Statistics, Correlation.
August 13, 2015 Retrieved from http://www.ask.com/question/teacher-board
exam-result. What is Licensure Examination for Teachers?
August 15, 2015 Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facilitator
Definition of facilitator.
August 15,2015 Retrieved from http://web2visit.com/government/www-prc-gov-
ph-philippine-regulation-commission-website. Definition of PRC.
August 18 ,2015 Retrieved from http://www.iglobal.co/philippines/san-
fernando- city-pampanga/government/commission-on-higher-education-
ched-region-3- regional-office/map.html Commission on Higher Education.
August 20 , 2015 Retrieved from http://infed.org/mobi/evaluation-theory-and-

practice/.Theories on Program Assessment and Evaluation.
Augsust 21, 2015 Retrieved from http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/58936/the_role
_theory_research_and_ evaluation_in_adventure_education/.
August 21, 2015 Retrieved from
http://www.oregonlaws.org/glossary/definition/approved _
teacher_education_institution.
September 9, 2015 Retrieved from
PBEd Newsletter.Teachers schools with Board Examination March 17, 2014
(http://pbed.ph/taxonomy/term/2/downloads)
September 30,2015 Retrieved from
http://www.ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/1.-Education-Science-and-
Teacher-Training.pdf. Accredited HEIs
October 01,2015 Retrieved from
http://portal.unesco,org./education/en/ev.php
UNESCO: Quality Education, (2005)
October 02, 2015 Retrieved from
http://www.ntc.edu.ph/programs/college-of-education/vision-and-mission/
October 03, 2015 Retrieved from
http://faculty.coe.uh.edu/smcneil/cuin6373/idhistory/laws_of_learning.html
October 03,2015 Retrieved from
www.google.com.ph/search?q+map+of+philippines&rlz=1C2CHNY
enPH389&biw=1024&bih=636&tbm=isch&imgil=ZMlw
November 6, 2015 Retrieved from

Comprehensive Examination for Teachers. (http://www.slreviewcenter.com.ph)
December 2, 2015 Retrieved from
Funnel, and Rogers,P.J. (2011)Purposeful Program Theory: Effective Use of
Theories of Change and Logic Models
https://books.google.com.ph/books/about/Purposeful_Program_Theory.html?id=A9Iid
1tcGwgC&redir_esc=y
December 2,2015 Retrieved from
https: //en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIPP model
December 03, 2015 Retrieved from
Hale, Jamie. The 3 Basic Types of Descriptive Research Methods.
http://psychcentral.com/blog/arc
January 05, 2016 Retrieved from
The T-test. (http:www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/stat_t.php).
(https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/enhancement).
(http://www.scps.nyu.edu/student-affairs/student-life/international/international-
student-support-center/academic-enhancement-programs.html
Academic Enhancement Programs ( https://law.wisc.edu/academicenhancement/
(https://education.missouri.edu/about/mission-strategic-plan/)
January 15,2016 Retrieved from Board Law .www.prc.gov.ph

www.thereadingroom.com/daniel-l-stuffelbeam/39047/
APPENDIX A
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FACULTY-REVIEW FACILITATOR

Guagua, Pampanga
GRADUATE SCHOOL
Date: _____________
Dear Sir/ Madam:
Greetings of Peace and Understanding in the name of the Lord!
I am a Ph.D.student in the Graduate School of the Guagua National Colleges, Guagua

Pampanga and presently conducting a study entitled ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
FOR LICENSURE EXAMINATION OF STUDENT TEACHERS AMONG
TEACHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS IN REGION III: A BASELINE FOR A
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN. This is in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree , Doctor of Philosophy(Ph.D), major in Educational
Management.
Kindly accomplish the attached questionnaire as accurately as possible. Rest assured that
your responses will be treated with utmost care and confidentiality.
Your kind consideration and approval regarding this matter will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you in anticipation for your genuine concern.
Very truly yours,
PILAR BUTRON-LIMIN
Researcher
Noted:
WILLIAM G.BACANI, Ph.D.

Adviser
LOLITA D. NAZAL, Ed.D.

OIC, Graduate School
Direction : Please fill in the needed information by putting a check () mark on the corresponding
space for the answer. Rest assured that your responses will be treated with utmost care and
confidentiality.
PART I - PROFILE
Name _____________________________ (Optional)
School _____________________________
1.1 Age Group:
Below 25 36 45 56 65
26- 35 46 55 66 - above
1.2 Academic Rank ____________________________

1.3 Highest Educational Attainment
Doctor of Philosophy/ Education
Doctor of Philosophy
Doctor of Education
Master of Arts with Ph.D.or Ed.D. units
Master of Science with Ph.D. or Ed.D units
Master of Science/ Master of Arts
Bachelor of Secondary/Elementary Education with MA /MS units
Bachelor of Science/Arts with Education units and MA units
Others (please specify) ___________________________
1.4 Length of Teaching Experience
5 years below 11 - 15 years Over 26 years
6 - 10 years 16 - 25 years
1.5 Area of Specialization
General Education Subjects/ Major Subjects
English Science Philosophy, Theology
Filipino Mathematics Social Sciences
Professional Subjects (Methods, Strategies of Teaching, Practice
Teaching, Test and Evaluation, Assessment, etc. )
Core Subjects (Educational Technology, Field Studies)
Others (please specify) __________________________
1.6 Length of Experience in Conducting an Enhancement Review Classes
Below 5 years 11- 15 years Over 20 years

6-10 years 16-20 years
1.7 Professional Growth
1.7.1 What professional affiliations or organizations are you connected with?
Please specify ____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
1.7.2 Number of Seminars/Workshops/Trainings/Conferences Attended on Area of

Specialization Please check () the appropriate box.
Level More than 15 13 to 15 10 to 12 7 to 9 4 to 6 1 to 3 None

International
National
Regional
Division
School wide
PART II- ASSESSMENT on the EFFECTIVENESS of the ENHANCEMENT REVIEW

PROGRAM among SCHOOL-PARTICIPANTS
Please use the following guide in giving your answer for the items below.
Kindly check () the column that corresponds to your choice.
5 Very Strongly Agree
4 Strongly Agree
3 - Moderately Agree
2 Strongly Disagree
1 Very Strongly Disagree
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
2.1 Objectives. The objectives of the Enhancement
Review Classes are basically designed to:
2.1.1. Help the Student-teacher participants have a
comprehensive understanding on the relevance of the
review classes in relation to their preparation for the LET
examination.
2.1.2 Develop a meaningful interpersonal relationship and
established sense of independence and self-esteem to take
the LET exam.
2.1.3 Improve comprehension level after the enhancement
review classes had been conducted.
2.1.4 Encourage goal-setting and wise decision- making in
preparation for the board examination
2.1.5 Enhance sense of responsibility of student teacher
participants and determination to pass the board
examination.
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
2.2. Content. The contents of the review classes are:
2.2.1 Relevant and abreast with the current trends and issues
in education.
2.2.2 Achieved throughout the enhancement review program.
2.2.3 In congruence to the existing curriculum.
2.2.4.Attainable during the duration of the enhancement

review program.
2.2.5. Parallel to the contents given in the board examination.
Please articulate to what extent that the following instructional strategies are employed by
the faculty review-facilitators by putting check mark () in the column that corresponds to
your choice. Degree of Responses
5 Practiced to a Great Extent
4 Practiced to a some extent
3 - Practiced to a degree extent
2 - Practiced to a minimal extent
1 - Not applicable
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
2.3. Instructional Strategies used by the Faculty Review -
Facilitators
2.3.1 Multimedia Approach ( PowerPoint presentation)
2.3.2 Lecture Method
2.3.3. Thematic Teaching
2.3.4. Discussion and Evaluation in
2.3.5 Inquiry-based method
5 - Very adequate
4 - Adequate
3 - Moderately adequate
2 - Inadequate
1 -Very inadequate
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
2.4 Reading or Resource Materials Availability
2.4.1 Printed reading materials and e-sources are well
provided by the faculty review-facilitators.
2.4.2 Hand- outs are given during the enhancement review
classes.
2.4.3 Books used in the review classes are available in the
library.
2.4.4 Copies of sample test items are well-provided.
2.4.5 Pamphlets and soft copies are available for use.
5 - Very effective
4 - Effective
3 - Moderately effective
2 - Less effective
1 -Very Ineffective
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
2.5 Learning Styles of the Student- Teacher
2.5.1 Verbal: Students prefer the use of words ,
both in speech and in writing.
2.5.2 Visual: Students prefer the use of pictures, diagrams,
images, and spatial understanding to help them learn.
2.5.3 Social: Students like to learn new things as
part of a group.
2.5.4 Solitary: Students like to work and learn alone,
and prefer self-study when learning.
2.5.5 Combination: Students learning style is a
combination of two or more learning styles.
PART III: RELEVANCE of ENHANCEMENT REVIEW PROGRAM to the LICENSURE

EXAMINATION FOR TEACHERS (LET)
Kindly check () the column that corresponds to your choice
4 Strongly Agree
2 Strongly Disagree
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
3.1 The enhancement program is of great help in helping the
student-teacher participants in preparing themselves for a
3.2 The contents of the enhancement review program are
responsive and aligned to the Licensure Examination for
Teachers (LET).
3.3 The instructional strategies employed by the faculty
review- facilitators are effective in preparing the student-
participants in the Licensure Examination for Teachers
(LET).
3.4 The reading materials used are abreast and updated on the
Goal of the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET).
3.5 The program extends individualized mentoring to the
student-teacher- participants.
PART IV FACULTY REVIEW-FACILITATORS PROBLEMS in the PLANNING and

IMPLEMENTING PHASES of the ENHANCEMENT REVIEW PROGRAM
Direction: Please indicate which of these problems bother you and to what extent
you are bothered by them. Kindly check () the column in which your answer falls.
5 - Very Serious Problem
4 - Serious Problem
3 - Moderately Serious Problem
2 - Minor Problem
1 - Not a Problem
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
4.1 Minimal support received from the institution.
4.2 Absenteeism and tardiness of the student- participants.
4.3 Less cooperation and support from the student-
participants.
4.4 Scarcity of available materials.
4.5 The review rooms are not conducive for learning.
4.6 Un availability of resource materials.
4.7 Students lack of interest and lack of participation.
4.8 Lack of proper accommodation on the part of the
administration.
4.9 Time allotted for the review is not enough to attain the
completion of the content.
4.10 Low Scores of the student-participants in the mock test
administered.
4.11 Others ( Please specify)
PART V - SUGGESTED MEASURES to REMEDY or MINIMIZE the PROBLEMS

ENCOUNTERED by the FACULTY REVIEW-FACILITATOR
ITEMS Please rank the

following
according to your
priority( 1 being
the highest and
10- being the
lowest)
5.1 Administration must fully support the enhancement review
program.
5.2 Proper motivation and encouragement by the head of the
education department should be extended to the education
students.
5.3 Student- teachers should be motivated and encouraged to show

cooperation.
5.4 The administration should extend financial support for the
honoraria or incentives of the faculty review-facilitators .
5.5 Rooms utilized for the review classes should be spacious, well-
ventilated and well-lighted.
5.6More resource materials and other professional literature should
be available for use.
5.7 Student -teachers should be fully aware on the objectives of the
5.8 Administrators should give importance to the enhancement review
program
5.9 Additional and convenient time should be given in conducting the
enhancement review classes.
5.10 Student-teachers should be encouraged to review and give more
focus on the subject areas they find more difficult.
5.11Other suggestions are accepted. Please specify them. Use the
space provided below this item.
Comments/ Suggestions:
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
Thank you very much and God Bless Always!

The Researcher
Pilar B. Limin
APPENDIX B
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENT-TEACHER PARTICIPANTS

Guagua, Pampanga
GRADUATE SCHOOL
Date: _____________
Dear Student Teacher:
Greetings of Peace and Understanding in the name of the Lord!
I am a Ph.D.student in the Graduate School of the Guagua National Colleges, Guagua

Pampanga and presently conducting a study entitled ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
FOR LICENSURE EXAMINATION OF STUDENT TEACHERS AMONG
TEACHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS IN REGION III: A BASELINE FOR A
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN. This is in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree , Doctor of Philosophy(Ph.D), major in Educational
Management.
Kindly accomplish the attached questionnaire as accurately as possible. Rest assured that
your responses will be treated with utmost care and confidentiality.
Your kind consideration and approval regarding this matter will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you in anticipation for your genuine concern.
Very truly yours,
PILAR BUTRON-LIMIN
Researcher
Noted:
WILLIAM G.BACANI, Ph.D.

Adviser

Direction : Please fill in the needed information by putting a check () mark on the
corresponding space for the answer. Rest assured that your responses will be treated with
utmost care and confidentiality.
PART I - PROFILE
Name _____________________________ (Optional)
School _____________________________
1.1 Age Group :
19 -20 23-24 27-28
21-22 25-26 29- above
1.2 Program BEED BSED Others

1.3 Field of Specialization (if BSED)
Science
Mathematics
English
Filipino
TLE
MAPE
1.4 Academic Performance in Three Subject Categories
Please use the following guide in giving your answer for the items
below. Kindly check () the column that corresponds to your choice
5 - Very Good ( 90 - 97 )
4 - Good ( 86 89)
3 - Fair (80 - 85 )
2- Poor (71 - 79 )
1 - Very Poor ( 65 - 70)
SUBJECT CATEGORIES 5 4 3 2 1
1.4.1.General Education Subjects
1.4.2. Major Subjects /Content Subjects
1.4.3. Professional Subjects
1.5. Length of Time Spent for the Enhancement Review Classes

Please check the item that corresponds to your answer.
Less than 5 hours per week
6 hours per week
7 hours per week
8 hours per week
9 hours per week
More than 10 hours per week
PART II- ASSESSMENT on the EFFECTIVENESS of the ENHANCEMENT
REVIEW PROGRAM among SCHOOL-PARTICIPANTS
Kindly check () the column that corresponds to your choice.
4 Strongly Agree
2 Strongly Disagree
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
2.1 Objectives. The objectives of the Enhancement
Review Classes are basically designed to:
2.1.1. Help the Student-teacher participants have a
comprehensive understanding on the relevance of the
review classes in relation to their preparation for the LET
examination.
2.1.2 Develop a meaningful interpersonal relationship and
established sense of independence and self-esteem to take
the LET exam.
2.1.3 Improve comprehension level after the enhancement
review classes had been conducted.
2.1.4 Encourage goal-setting and wise decision- making in
preparation for the board examination
2.1.5 Enhance sense of responsibility of student teacher
participants and determination to pass the board
examination.
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
2.2. Content. The contents of the review classes are:
2.2.1 Relevant and abreast with the current trends and issues
in education.
2.2.2 Achieved throughout the enhancement review program.
2.2.3 In congruence to the existing curriculum.
2.2.4.Attainable during the duration of the enhancement
review program.
2.2.5. Parallel to the contents given in the board examination.
Please articulate to what extent that the following instructional strategies are employed by
the faculty review-facilitators by putting check mark () in the column that corresponds to
your choice. Degree of Responses
5 Practiced to a Great Extent
4 Practiced to a some extent
3 - Practiced to a degree extent
2 - Practiced to a minimal extent
1 - Not applicable
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
2.3. Instructional Strategies used by the Faculty Review -
Facilitators
2.3.1 Multimedia Approach ( PowerPoint presentation)

2.3.2 Lecture Method
2.3.3. Thematic Teaching
2.3.4. Discussion and Evaluation in
2.3.5 Inquiry-based method
5 - Very adequate
4 - Adequate
3 - Moderately adequate
2 - Inadequate
1 -Very inadequate
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
2.4.1 Printed reading materials and e-sources are well
provided by the faculty review-facilitators.
2.4.2 Hand- outs are given during the enhancement review
classes.
2.4.3 Books used in the review classes are available in the
library.
2.4.4 Copies of sample test items are well-provided.
2.4.5 Pamphlets and soft copies are available for use.
5 - Very effective
4 - Effective
3 - Moderately effective
2 - Less effective
1 -Very Ineffective
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
2.5 Learning Styles of the Student- Teacher
2.5.2 Visual: Students prefer the use of pictures, diagrams,
images, and spatial understanding to help them learn.
part of a group.
PART III: RELEVANCE of ENHANCEMENT REVIEW PROGRAM to the LICENSURE

EXAMINATION FOR TEACHERS (LET)
Kindly check () the column that corresponds to your choice
4 Strongly Agree
2 Strongly Disagree
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
3.1 The enhancement program is of great help in helping the
student-teacher participants in preparing themselves for a
3.2 The contents of the enhancement review program are
responsive and aligned to the Licensure Examination for
Teachers (LET).
3.3 The instructional strategies employed by the faculty
review- facilitators are effective in preparing the student-
participants in the Licensure Examination for Teachers
(LET).
3.4 The reading materials used are abreast and updated on
the goal of the Licensure Examination for Teachers
(LET).
3.5 The program extends individualized mentoring to the
student-teacher participants.
PART IV- ATTITUDES of the STUDENT-TEACHER PARTICIPANTS towards the

EHANCEMENT REVIEW PROGRAM
ITEMS Please check all
the applicable
entries
4.1. I like the idea of having enhancement review program.
4.2. I am really interested in joining the enhancement review classes. .
4.3 I prefer to take review classes outside the school offered by
prominent review centers in the province or cities.
4. 4. I feel bored during review classes.
4.5 I am only forced to come during enhancement review classes
offered by the school because it is mandatory and ordered by the

Dean.
4.6 I am thankful that the school offers such program for student-
teachers which is free of charge.
4.7 The review-facilitators are not effective and efficient in
conducting review classes.
4.8. I am always eager to attend in every review class.
4.9. I participate actively in the review classes.
4.10. I am always challenged by the test items presented by the faculty
review-facilitators for each subject area.
Others( Please specify)
PART V- PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED by the STUDENT-TEACHER PARTICIPANTS in

the IMPLEMENTATION of the ENHANCEMENT REVIEW PROGRAM
Direction: Please indicate which of these problems bother you and to what extent
you are bothered by them. Kindly check () the column in which your answer falls.
4 - Serious Problem
2 - Minor Problem
1 - Not a Problem
ITEMS 5 4 3 2 1
5.1 Minimal support received from the institution.
5.2 Absenteeism and tardiness of the faculty review-
facilitators.
5.3 No encouragement and support from the Dean and
faculty.
5.4. Review-facilitators are not well-prepared.
5.5 The review rooms are not conducive for learning.
5.6 Unavailability of resource materials.
5.7 Test items given are not patterned from LET
examination.
5.8. Review-facilitators do not apply appropriate
instructional strategies.
5.9 Time allotted for the review is not enough to attain the
completion of the content.
5.10 Other faculty review- facilitators lack the expertise on
the topics.
Others (Please specify)
Comments/ Suggestions:
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
________
The Researcher
Pblimin
APPENDIX C
Letter Addressed to the OIC of the Graduate School of Guagua National Colleges
Presenting the Research Proposal

Guagua, Pampanga
GRADUATE SCHOOL
November 15 , 2015

OIC , Graduate School
Guagua, Pampanga
Madame:
Greetings of Love and Peace in Jesus name!
I am Pilar B.Limin, a Ph.D. candidate of our prestigious institution. I already completed

the academic requirements for the course and successfully passed the comprehensive
examination held on September 19, 2015.
In connection with this, I would like to ask permission from your office to have my
schedule for the title proposal defense in the most convenient time that you may offer.
Herewith are the title of my dissertation proposal, statement of the problem and
the survey questionnaires for faculty-review facilitators and student-teachers.
Your generous considerations will help me a lot to finish my dissertation on time.
Very truly yours,
Pilar Butron-Limin
Ph. D. Student
APPENDIX D
Letter Addressed to Authorities for the Validation of the Instrument

Date _________________________
_____________________________
_____________________________
_____________________________
Madam/Sir:
Warm Greetings of Peace and Understanding!
I am Pilar B. Limin, a Ph. D. candidate of the Graduate School of Guagua National

Colleges of Guagua, Pampanga. At present, I am in the process of trying to validate
the research instrument I personally designed for my study.
In connection with this, please help me validate the said instrument to make it more
reliable and academically acceptable. I strongly believe that your expertise in this matter
will help a lot in the improvement of my instrument.
Attached herewith are the copies of my survey questionnaires for your suggestions and
recommendations.
Thank you for your positive and moral support. God Bless!
Very truly yours,
PILAR BUTRON-LIMIN
Researcher
Noted:
WILLIAM G. BACANI, Ph.D.

Adviser

APPENDIX E
Letter Addressed to the Vice President for Academic Affairs of the School-
Participants Seeking Permission to Conduct the Research Study
December 14, 2015
Dr. Archimedes T. David

Vice President for Academic Affairs
Angeles University Foundation
Angeles City
Sir:
Warm Greetings of Peace and Understanding in the Name of Jesus!
I am Pilar B. Limin, Ph. D. student of Guagua National Colleges. I am currently

doing my research work in connection with my dissertation entitled Enhancement
Program for Licensure Examination of Student Teachers among Teacher
Education Institutions in Region III: A Baseline for a Proposed Development Plan.
In this regard, I would like to request permission from you to administer my survey
questionnaire to your BEED-IV and BSED-IV(Student Teachers) and competent Faculty-
in-Charge. I know that you share with the same interest and enthusiasm in helping promote
the cause of research and knowledge.
Thank you very much for the assistance you will extend to this request. More power
and God bless
Very truly yours,
Pilar Butron- Limin (SGD)

Researcher
Noted:
William G. Bacani, Ph.D.(SGD)

Adviser
Lolita D. Nazal, Ed.D.(SGD)

December 17, 2015
Dr. Flordeliza Castro

Baliuag University
Baliuag, Bulacan
Madame:


and God bless
Very truly yours,
Pilar Butron- Limin(SGD)

Researcher
Noted:

Adviser

December 14, 2015
Dr. Merlita C. Razon

Acting Head, Instruction Cluster
Dean, College of Arts, Sciences and Education
Guagua, Pampanga
Madame:


and God bless
Very truly yours,

Researcher
Noted:
William G. Bacani, Ph.D. (SGD)

Adviser

December 8, 2015
Dr. Gloria B. Abrazado

Republic Central Colleges
Angeles City
Madame:


and God bless
Very truly yours,

Researcher
Noted:

Adviser

January 05, 2016
Dr. Estrella Buenaventura

Wesleyan University-Philippines
Cabanatuan City
Madame:


and God bless
Very truly yours,

Researcher
Noted:

Adviser

APPENDIX F
Letter Addressed to the Deans of the School- Participants Seeking

Permission to Conduct the Research Study
December 14, 2015
Dr. Elvira S. Balinas

Dean, College of Education
Angeles University Foundation
Angeles City
Madame:

and God bless
Very truly yours,

Researcher
Noted:

Adviser

December 08, 2015
Dr. Llorieta P. Calara

Dean, College of Arts and Sciences -Education
Angeles City
Madame:


and God bless
Very truly yours,

Researcher
Noted:

Adviser

January 05, 2016
Dr. Gladys Mangiduyos

Dean, College of Education and Social Works
Cabanatuan City
Madame:


and God bless
Very truly yours,

Researcher
Noted:

Adviser

APPENDIX G
SAMPLE QUESTIONS FOR THE INFORMAL INTERVIEW
For the Deans/Academic Heads/Program Heads of the College of Education:
1. Do you have an Enhancement Program or In-campus Review Classes for LET as part of your
curriculum in your college?
2. When will the start of your Enhancement Program?
3. How many graduating students enrolled in your two programs, BEED and BSED?
4. What are the objectives and contents of your program?

5. What are the problems you encountered as a Dean in implementing the program?
For Faculty- Review Facilitators:
1. What are the problems you encountered as a Faculty-Review Facilitators in
implementing the program?
2. What are your graduating students attitudes towards the Enhancement Program?
3. What do you think is the impact of having such program in your department?
4. Do you have some suggestions to improve the program? What are these and how can they be
implemented?
For Student- Teacher Participants:
1.What are the problems you encountered in attending in-campus review classes as part of
the Enhancement program?
2.What are the common attitudes of student teacher like you towards the
Enhancement Program? What are your learning styles?
3.Do you have some suggestions to improve the program? What are these and how can
they be implemented?
APPENDIX H
MAP OF REGION III

APPENDIX I
Table 1. School -Participants with their Location, Accreditation Level Status and National
Performance in Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) for the Past Three Years
National Performance Rating in Licensure Examination for Teachers(LET) for

Teacher Education Accreditation the Past Three Years
Institutions Level Status
(TEIs)/Location 2013 2014 2015
March Sept Jan Aug March Sept
Elem Sec Elem Sec Elem Sec Elem Sec Ele Sec Elem Sec
m
Angeles University PAASCU- 45.4 57.1 59.5 67.8 40.0 35.7 55.5 67.1 37. 37. 38.7 72.
Foundation Level IV 5% 4% 2% 6% 0% 1% 6% 9% 50 93 1% 00
(Angeles City) % % %
Baliuag University PACUCOA 11.5 57.6 12.3 32.5 19.1 25.0 18.4 37.2 30. 61. 28.3 46.
(Baliuag, Bulacan) Level IV 4% 9% 5% 6% 5% 0% 8% 9% 36 54 3% 30
% % %
Guagua National PACUCOA 7.41 21.0 8.33 24.5 27.7 35.7 11.8 26.3 14. 20. 18.9 43.
Colleges (Guagua, Level II-A % 5% % 3% 8% 1% 6% 2% 71 83 2% 24
Pampanga) % % %
Republic Central PACUCOA 13.3 35.1 18.1 36.2 24.6 24.0 24.2 18.9 17. 18. 20.9 46.
Colleges (Angeles Level II 3% 4% 8% 5% 2% 7% 1% 2% 48 75 0% 48
City) % % %
Wesleyan ACSCU- 17.8 34.6 9.26 31.7 17.7 29.7 8.00 28.1 10. 34. 15.1 39.
University- AAI- 8% 7% % 8% 8% 9% % 3% 53 45 1% 25
Philippines Institutional % % %
(Cabanatuan City) Accreditation
Status
APPENDIX J
CONSOLIDATED DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF THE PROFILE OF THE

STUDENT-TEACHER PARTICIPANTS AMONG SCHOOL PARTICIPANTS
1.1Age Group AUF BU GNC RCC WU-P

F P F P F P F P F P Total Total %
19-20 46 68.66 17 60.71 11 45.83 29 56.86 42 71.19 145 63.32
21-22 12 17.91 6 21.43 8 33.33 12 23.53 11 18.64 49 21.40
23-24 6 8.96 2 7.14 2 8.33 2 3.92 3 5.08 15 6.55
25-26 1 1.49 1 3.57 0 0.00 2 3.92 1 1.69 5 2.18
27-28 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 7.84 0 0.00 4 1.75
29-above 2 2.99 2 7.14 3 12.5 2 3.92 2 3.39 11 4.80
TOTAL 67 100 28 100 24 100 51 100 59 100 229 100.00
Program F P F P F P F P F P
BEED 17 25.37 9 32.14 18 75.00 25 49.02 27 45.76 96 41.92
BSED 50 74.63 19 67.86 6 25.00 26 50.98 32 54.24 133 58.08
TOTAL 67 100 28 100 24 100 51 100 59 100 229 100.00
Field of F P F P F P F P F P
Specialization
Science 9 13.43 0 0.00 4 16.67 0 0.00 3 5.08 16 6.99
Mathematics 12 17.91 1 3.57 0 0.00 3 5.88 4 6.78 20 8.73
English 11 16.42 16 57.14 2 8.33 11 21.57 9 15.25 49 21.40
Filipino 13 19.40 0 0.00 0 0.00 12 25.53 6 10.17 31 13.54
TLE 0 0.00 2 7.14 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 3.39 4 1.75
MAPEH 4 5.97 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 8 13.56 12 5.24
Social Studies 1 1.49 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.44
General 6 8.96 9 32.14 18 75.00 25 49.02 27 45.76 85 37.12
Education
Others: Pre- 11 16.42 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 11 4.80
School
Education
TOTAL 67 100 28 100 24 100 51 100 59 100 229 100.00
Length of Time
Spent for the
Enhancement F P F P F P F P F P
Classes
Less than 5 67 100.0 0 0.00 24 100.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 91 39.74
hours per week
6 hours per 0 0.00 28 100.0 0 0.00 51 100.0 0 0.00 79 34.50
week
7 hours per 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 00.00
week
8 hours per 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 59 100.0 59 25.76
week
9 hours per 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 00.00
week
More than 10 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 00.00
hours per week
TOTAL 67 100 28 100 24 100 51 100 59 100 229 100.00
APPENDIX K
CONSOLIDATED DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

OF THE ASSESSMENTS OF PARTICIPANTS ON THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF ENHANCEMENT REVIEW PROGRAM
A. Faculty-Review Facilitators Assessment on the Effectiveness of the

Enhancement Review Program in terms of Five Dimensions
Table 1.Frequency Count, Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Assessment
of the Faculty Review Facilitators on the Effectiveness of the Enhancement Review
Program among School-Participants in terms of Five Dimensions
Frequency
Objectives 5 4 3 2 1 WM DR
1. Help the student-teacher

participants have comprehensive 20 3 0 0 0 4.87 Very
understanding on the relevance Strongly
of the review classes in relation Agree
examination.
2. Develop a meaningful
interpersonal relationship and 19 4 0 0 0 4.83 Very
establish sense of Strongly
independence and self-esteem Agree
3. Improve comprehension level 22 1 Very
after the enhancement review 0 0 0 4.96 Strongly
classes had been conducted. Agree
4. Encourage goal-setting and Very
wise decision- making in 20 3 0 0 0 4.87 Strongly
preparation for the board Agree
examination
5. Enhance sense of responsibility Very
of student teacher participants 21 2 0 0 0 4.91 Strongly
and determination to pass the Agree
board examination.
Very
WM 4.888 Strongly
Agree
Content Frequency WM DR
5 4 3 2 1
1. Relevant and abreast Very

with the current trends 20 3 0 0 0 4.87 Strongly
and issues in education. Agree
2. Achieved throughout the Very

enhancement review 17 6 0 0 0 4.74 Strongly
program. Agree
3. In congruence to the Very
existing curriculum. 20 3 0 0 0 4.87 Strongly
Agree
4.Attainable during the Very
duration of the enhancement 15 8 0 0 0 4.65 Strongly
review program. Agree
5. Parallel to the contents Very

given in the board 15 8 0 0 0 4.65 Strongly
examination. Agree
Very
WM 4.756 Strongly
Agree
Instructional Strategies used by the Frequency

Faculty Review - Facilitators WM DR
5 4 3 2 1
Practiced
1.Multimedia Approach 15 8 0 0 0 4.65 to a Great
( PowerPoint presentation) Extent
Practiced
2.Lecture Method 10 12 0 1 0 4.35 to a Great
Extent
Practiced
3. Thematic Teaching 13 9 0 1 0 4.48 to a Great
Extent
Practiced
4. Discussion and 14 8 1 0 0 4.57 to a Great
Evaluation Extent
Practiced
5. Inquiry-based method 14 8 0 1 0 4.52 to a Great
Extent
Practiced
WM 4.514 to a Great
Extent
Reading or Resource Frequency WM DR

Materials Availability 5 4 3 2 1

and e-sources are well 17 5 1 0 0 4.70 Very
provided by the faculty Adequate
2 .Hand- outs are given Very

during the enhancement 20 3 0 0 0 4.87 Adequate
review classes.
3. Books used in the review Very
classes are available in the 13 9 1 0 0 4.52 Adequate
library.
4. Copies of sample test Very
items are well-provided. 20 1 2 0 0 4.78 Adequate
5. Pamphlets and soft copies Very

are available for use. 16 5 2 0 0 4.61 Adequate
Very
WM 4.696 Adequate
Learning Styles of the Frequency

Student- Teacher 5 4 3 2 1 WM DR
Participants
1. Verbal: Students prefer the
use of words ,both in speech 9 9 5 0 0 4.17 Effective
and in writing.

of pictures, diagrams, images, 14 8 1 0 0 4.57 Very
and spatial understanding to Effective
help them learn.
3. Social: Students like to learn Very
new things as part of a group. 16 7 0 0 0 4.70 Effective
4. Solitary: Students like to work

and learn alone, and prefer 6 7 9 1 0 3.78 Effective
5. Combination: Students
learning style is a 15 6 2 0 0 4.57 Very
combination of two or more Effective
learning styles.
Very
WM 4.358 Effective
B. Student-Teacher Participants Assessments on Enhancement Program
Table 2.Frequency Count, Weighted Mean and Descriptive Rating of the Assessment of
the StudentTeacher Participants on the Effectiveness of the Enhancement Review
Program among School-Participants in terms of Five Dimensions
Frequency
Objectives 5 4 3 2 1 WM DR
1. Help the student-teacher

participants have comprehensive 110 99 19 1 0 4.39 Very
understanding on the relevance Strongly
of the review classes in relation Agree
examination.
2. Develop a meaningful
interpersonal relationship and 100 95 34 0 0 4.29 Very
establish sense of Strongly
independence and self-esteem Agree
3. Improve comprehension level Very
after the enhancement review 102 96 29 2 0 4.30 Strongly
classes had been conducted. Agree
4. Encourage goal-setting and Very
wise decision- making in 110 88 29 2 0 4.34 Strongly
preparation for the board Agree
examination
5. Enhance sense of responsibility Very
of student teacher participants 114 88 24 2 1 4.36 Strongly
and determination to pass the Agree
board examination.
Very
WM 4.336 Strongly
Agree
Content Frequency WM DR
5 4 3 2 1
1. Relevant and abreast Very

with the current trends 89 108 29 1 2 4.23 Strongly
and issues in education. Agree
2. Achieved throughout the Strongly

enhancement review 75 110 40 3 1 4.11 Agree
program.
3. In congruence to the Very
existing curriculum. 85 113 27 4 0 4.22 Strongly
Agree
4.Attainable during the
duration of the enhancement 77 112 35 3 2 4.13 Strongly
review program. Agree
5. Parallel to the contents Strongly
given in the board 88 101 34 5 1 4.18 Agree
examination.
WM 4.174 Strongly
Agree
Instructional Strategies used by Frequency

the Faculty Review - Facilitators WM DR
5 4 3 2 1
1.Multimedia Approach Practiced to

( PowerPoint presentation) 118 85 22 2 2 4.38 a Great
Extent
2.Lecture Method Practiced to
101 94 30 4 0 4.28 a Great
Extent
3. Thematic Teaching Practiced to
68 114 42 5 0 4.07 a Some
Extent
4. Discussion and Practiced to
Evaluation 109 98 20 2 0 4.37 a Great
Extent
5. Inquiry-based method 4.21 Practiced to
91 99 36 3 0 a Great
Extent
Practiced to
WM 4.262 a Great
Extent
Reading or Resource Frequency WM DR

Materials Availability 5 4 3 2 1

and e-sources are well 101 83 35 10 0 4.20 Very
provided by the faculty Adequate
2 .Hand- outs are given

during the enhancement 92 93 33 10 1 4.16 Adequate
review classes.
3. Books used in the review
classes are available in the 63 78 72 10 6 3.79 Adequate
library.
4. Copies of sample test
items are well-provided. 89 99 32 9 0 4.17 Adequate
5. Pamphlets and soft copies

are available for use. 77 88 49 13 2 3.98 Adequate
WM 4.06 Adequate
Learning Styles of the Frequency

Student- Teacher 5 4 3 2 1 WM DR
Participants
1. Verbal: Students prefer the Very
use of words ,both in speech 87 115 25 2 0 4.25 Effective
and in writing.

of pictures, diagrams, images, 117 85 24 3 0 4.38 Very
and spatial understanding to Effective
help them learn.
3. Social: Students like to learn Very
new things as part of a group. 106 97 23 2 1 4.33 Effective
4. Solitary: Students like to work

and learn alone, and prefer 49 100 63 14 3 3.78 Effective
5. Combination: Students
learning style is a 113 94 20 2 0 4.39 Very
combination of two or more Effective
learning styles.
WM 4.226 Very
Effective
APPENDIX L
LIST OF RECOGNIZED ACCREDITED HEIs in REGION III-Central Luzon

Accredited HEIs
GENERAL TEACHER TRAINING
Elementary Education Secondary Education
Pampanga Agricultural College (PAC) Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology
(NEUST) - Cabanatuan City Campus
Angeles University Foundation Don Honorio Ventura Technological State University
(DHVTSU)
Araullo University Pampanga Agricultural College (PAC)
Aurora State College of Technology Zabali Campus Ramon Magsaysay Technological University -Ramon
Magsaysay Polytechnic College
Baliuag University Ramon Magsaysay Technological University (RMTU) - San
Marcelino Campus
Bataan Peninsula State UniversityDinalupihan Campus Bulacan State University (BSU) - Bustos Campus
Bulacan Agricultural State College-San Ildefonso Campus Bulacan State University -San Jose Del Monte
Bulacan State University-Bustos Bulacan State University -Meneses
Bulacan State University-City of Malolos Campus Ramon Magsaysay Technological University -Botolan
Bulacan State University-Meneses Aurora State College of Technology - Zabali Campus
Central Luzon State University-City of Muoz Campus Bataan Peninsula State University -City of Balanga
Campus
Columban College, Inc. Bataan Peninsula State University - Abucay Campus
Don Honorio Ventura Technological State University- Bataan Peninsula State University - Dinalupihan Campus
Bacolor Campus
Guagua National Colleges Bulacan Agricultural State College -San Ildefonso Campus
Holy Angel University Bulacan State University -City of Malolos Campus
La Consolacion University Philippines (Formerly Central Luzon State University -City of Muoz Campus
University of Regina Carmeli)
Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology- Tarlac College of Agriculture -Camiling Campus
Sumacab-Cabanatuan City Campus
Ramon Magsaysay Technological University-Iba Campus Tarlac State University-City of Tarlac Campus
Republic Central Colleges Angeles University Foundation
Tarlac College of Agriculture-Camiling Campus Araullo University
Tarlac State University-City of Tarlac Campus Baliuag University
Tomas del Rosario College Columban College, Inc.
University of the Assumption Dr. Yanga's College, Inc
Wesleyan University-Philippines General de Jesus College
Holy Angel University
La Consolacion University Philippines (Formerly
University of Regina Carmeli)
University of the Assumption
APPENDIX M
CURRICULUM VITAE
PILAR BUTRON-LIMIN
#08 Purok I, Pulung Santol,
Porac, Pampanga C-2008
Email add: [email protected]
PERSONAL DATA:
Date of Birth: October 20, 1976

Place of Birth: Tondo,Manila
Parents: Braulio A. Butron
Adelaida C. Butron
Spouse: Arnold M. Limin
Children: Alexise B. Limin
Axel Nash B. Limin
Alfred Xian B. Limin
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:
Graduate: Doctor of Philosophy

Major in Educational Management (Dissertation Writing, On-going)
Guagua National Colleges (GNC)
Guagua, Pampanga
Diploma in Science Teaching (DST)

Major in Biology
UP OPEN University (UPOU)
University of the Philippines
Los Banos, Laguna
Learning Center: University of the Philippines Manila
Pedro Gil Taft Avenue, Manila
May 2010
Master of Arts in Education

Major in Administration and Supervision
Don Honorio Ventura Technological State University ( DHVTSU)
Bacolor, Pampanga
April 2001
College Bachelor of Science in Secondary Education

Major in General Science
April 1997
Other Studies House Keeping NC II

TESDA Scholarship
May 2014
Cookery NC II
TESDA Scholarship (January 2015 April 2015)
May 28, 2015
Secondary Pulung Santol High School(MAIN)
Pulung Santol, Porac, Pampanga

April 1993
Primary Pulung Santol Elementary School(MAIN)
Pulung Santol, Porac, Pampanga
April 1989
WORK EXPERIENCES:
June 2000 to present Guagua National Colleges

Full-time Permanent Associate Professor I
College of Arts, Sciences and Education
June 1, 2013 to present Guagua National Colleges

Program Chair
College of Education
Educators Club
Adviser, College of Education
June 2003 to May 31, 2013 Guagua National Colleges

Science Coordinator
College of Liberal Arts
College of Arts and Sciences
Senior Science Club (SSC)

Adviser
College of Arts and Sciences
June 1997 May 2000 Guagua National Colleges

Full-time Secondary School Teacher
Other Related Works:

June 2009- May 2010 Chairman, Committee on Laboratory
PACUCOA VISIT LEVEL II-A
College of Education
College of Business Administration
June 2014 to present Committee on Research Staff
ELIGIBILITY:
Civil Service Professional , September 1997

Licensure Examination for Teachers , August 1997
CURRENT POSITION:
Program Chair, College of Education, Guagua National Colleges

Associate Professor I, Full-time Permanent Faculty, CASED
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FACULTY-REVIEW FACILITATOR
Direction : Please fill in the needed information by putting a check () mark on the
corresponding space for the answer. Rest assured that your responses will be treated with
utmost care and confidentiality.
PART I -DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF REVIEW-FACILITATOR
Name:_____________________________________________ (Optional)
School: ____________________________________________
1.1 Age Group :( Please check)
Below 25
26- 35
36 45
46 55
56 65
66 above
1.2 Academic Rank ______________________
1.3 Highest Educational Attainment
Doctor of Philosophy/Education
Doctor of Philosophy
Doctor of Education
Master of Arts with Ph.D. or Ed.D. units
Master of Science with Ph.D. or Ed.D. units
Master of Science/Master of Arts
BSE/BEED with MA/MS units
1.4 Length of Teaching Experience (please check)
5 years below
6 - 10 years
11 - 15 years
16 - 25 years
Over 26 years
1.5 Area of Specialization (Please check)

General Education Subjects/Major Subjects
English
Filipino
Science
Mathematics
Philosophy, Theology
Social Sciences
Professional Subjects (Methods, Strategies of Teaching, Practice
Teaching, Test and Evaluation, etc. )
Course Subjects (Educational Technology, Field Studies)

Others (please specify) __________________________
1.6 Length of Experience in Conducting Enhancement Review Classes (Please check)
Below 5 years
6-10 years
11- 15 years
16-20 years
Over 20 years
1.7 Professional Growth

1.7.1 What professional affiliations or organizations are you connected with?
Please specify _________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
1.7.2 Number of Seminars/Workshops/Trainings/Conferences Attended

Relevant to Area of Specialization (Please check the appropriate box)
Level More 13 to 15 10 to 12 7 to 9 4 to 6 1 to 3 None

than 15
International
National
Regional
Division
School wide
PART II- ASSESSMENT on the EFFECTIVENESS of the ENHANCEMENT

REVIEW PROGRAM among SCHOOL-PARTICIPANTS
2.1 Objectives
below .Kindly check ( ) the box that corresponds to your choice.
5 - Very effective ( 91% - 100% )
4 - Effective (75 % - 90 %)
3 - Moderately effective (60% - 74%)
2 - Less effective (35% - 59%)
1 -Very Ineffective (34% - below)
(5) (4) ( 3) ( 2 ) ( 1)
2.1.1. Develop an understanding about the

significance of review classes.
2.1.2 Develop a meaning interpersonal

relationship and established sense of
independence and self-esteem.
2.1.3 Develop comprehension after the review

classes had been conducted.
2.1.4 Encourage goal-setting and wise decision-

making in preparation for the board
examination.
2.1.5 Develop sense of responsibility and

determination to pass the board examination.
2.2. Contents
below .Kindly check ( ) the box that corresponds to your choice.
5 - Very effective ( 91% - 100% )
4 - Effective (75 % - 90 %)
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

2.2.1 Contents are all relevant to
the in-campus review program.
2.2.2 Contents are achieved or attained

throughout the in-campus review classes.
2.2.3 Contents are parallel or in congruence

to the existing curriculum.
2.2.4. Contents are attainable during the

duration of the in-campus review program.
2.2.5. Contents are parallel to the contents given

in the board examination.
2.3. Instructional Strategies used by the Faculty Review - Facilitators

Kindly check ( ) the box that corresponds to your choice.
5 - Very effective ( 91% - 100% )
4 - Effective (75 % - 90 %)
( 5) (4) (3) ( 2) (1)
2.3.1 The review-facilitators used multi-

media such as power point presentation
in conducting the review classes.
2.3.2 The review-facilitators employed the

Lecture method in conducting the
review classes.
2.3.3. The review-facilitators utilized thematic

teaching in conducting the review classes.
2.3.4 The review-facilitators used discussion

and evaluation in conducting the
review classes.
2.3.5 The review-facilitators used inquiry-based

method in conducting the review classes.

below. Kindly check ( ) the box that corresponds to your choice.
5 - Very adequate ( 91% - 100% )
4 - Adequate (75 % - 90 %)
3 - Moderately adequate (60% - 74%)
2 - Inadequate (35% - 59%)
1 -Very inadequate (34% - below)
( 5) (4) (3) (2) ( 1)
2.4.1 Printed reading materials are well

provided by the review- facilitators.
2.4.2 Hand- outs are given during the

review classes.
2.4.3 Books used in the review classes

are available in the library for use.
2.4.4 Copies of sample test items are

well-provided.
2.4.5 Pamphlets are available for use.
2.5 Learning Styles of the Student-Participants

5 - Very effective ( 91% - 100% )
4 - Effective (75 % - 90 %)
( 5) (4) (3) (2) ( 1)

2.5.2 Visual: Students prefer the use of pictures,
diagrams, images, and spatial understanding
to help them learn.
part of a group.


PART III: RELEVANCE of ENHANCEMENT REVIEW PROGRAM to

the LICENSURE EXAMINATION FOR TEACHERS

5 Very relevant ( 91% - 100% )
4 - Relevant (75 % - 90 %)
3 - Moderately relevant (60% - 74% )
2 - Less relevant (35% - 59% )
1 Not relevant (34% - below)
( 5) (4) (3) (2) ( 1)
3.1 The objectives of the in-campus review

program are geared towards the realization
of the departments goal.
3.2 The contents of the in-campus review

program are responsive and aligned to the
3.3 The instructional strategies employed by

the review-facilitators are effective in
preparing the student- participants in the
3.4 The reading materials used are abreast and

Updated on the goal of the
3.5 The learning styles of the student-participants

are of great help in preparing them for
the Licensure Examination for Teachers(LET).
PART IV FACULTY REVIEW-FACILITATORS PROBLEMS in the PLANNING

and IMPLEMENTING PHASES of the ENHANCEMENT REVIEW PROGRAM
Directions: Please indicate which of these problems bother you and to what extent
you are bothered by them. Kindly check () the box opposite each
item in which your answer falls.
4 - Serious Problem
2 - Minor Problem
1 - Not a Problem
(5) (4) ( 3) ( 2) (1)
4.1 Minimal support received from the

institution.
4.2 Absenteeism and tardiness of the

student- participants.
4.3 Less cooperation and support from the

Education students.
4.4 Scarcity of available materials.
4.5 Some rooms are not conducive for

learning.
4.6 In availability of resource materials.
4.7 Students lack of interest and lack of

participation.
4.8 Lack of proper accommodation on the
part of the administration.
4.9 Time allotted for the review is not enough

to attain the completion of the content.
4.10 Low Scores of the student-participants

in the mock test administered.
4.11 Others ( Please specify)

________________________________
________________________________
PART V SUGGESTED MEASURES to REMEDY or MINIMIZE the

PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED by the FACULTY- REVIEW FACILITATOR
(Please check all the applicable entries)
5.1 Administration must fully support the in-campus program.
5.2 Proper motivation and encouragement by the head of the education

department should be extended to the education students.
5.3 Education students should be motivated and encouraged to show
cooperation.
5.4 The administration should extend financial support for the honoraria
or compensation of the review-facilitators and should be given on time.
5.5 Rooms utilized for the review classes should be spacious,
well-ventilated and well-lighted.
5.6 More resource materials and other professional literature should be
available for use.

5.7 Students should be properly motivated before the review.
5.8 Administrators should give importance to the review program and

accommodate the review- facilitators by a warm welcome and
providing food.
5.9 Additional and convenient time should be given in conducting the
review classes.
5.10 Students should be encouraged to review and give more focus on the
subject areas they find more difficult.
Other suggestions are accepted. Please specify them. Use the space provided
below.
____________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Pilar Butron-Limin
( Researcher)

Practical Reseearch 2 Temlate

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Practical Reseearch 2 Temlate

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Practical Reseearch 2 Temlate

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM FOR LET AMONG TEIs

GUAGUA NATIONAL COLLEGES - GRADUATE SCHOOL 148

Enhancement Program for Licensure Examination of Student-Teachers

among Teacher Education Institutions : A Baseline for a

Proposed Development Plan

the Faculty of the Graduate School

Guagua National Colleges

of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy Major in Educational Management

GUAGUA NATIONAL COLLEGES - GRADUATE SCHOOL 148

This dissertation entitled ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM FOR LICENSURE

Approved by the Committee of Oral Examiners with a grade of 95%

Lolita D. Nazal, Ed.D. Abner C. Manaloto,Ph.D.

Merlita C. Razon,Ph.D. Concepcion K. Pasion,Ph.D. Arceli S. Lopez, Ph.D.

Comprehensive Examination passed on September 19, 2015 with a grade of 96.33%

Maria Lourdes S. Pelagio, Ph.D. Lolita D. Nazal, Ed.D.

GUAGUA NATIONAL COLLEGES - GRADUATE SCHOOL 148

researcher more determination to finish this study;

Chief Librarians and Staff of Guagua National Colleges, College Department,

assistance;Mrs. Maria Victoria B. Bacani, as grammarian of the study; Engr. Roland

Dr. Merlita C. Razon,VPAA and Deans among school-participants, for providing

the information regarding the Enhancement Program of the College of Education;

GUAGUA NATIONAL COLLEGES - GRADUATE SCHOOL 148

things possible in the meaningful existence of the Researcher.

of Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) for giving their

valuable time, strength, commitment and effort

in the pursuit of knowledge and helping in the preparation of

future teachers who will become professional teachers and

will eventually mold others to become instruments for

providing quality education in the next generation of students.

This is also lovingly dedicated to my family

And most especially to

The LORD AMIGHTY

GUAGUA NATIONAL COLLEGES - GRADUATE SCHOOL 148

List of Figures vii

Review of Related Literature .. 4

Statement of the Problem .. 23

Hypotheses of the Study . 25

Significance of the Study. 25

GUAGUA NATIONAL COLLEGES - GRADUATE SCHOOL 148

Validation of the Survey Questionnaire 34

Data Gathering Procedure 35

Proposed Development Plan

A - The Survey Questionnaire for

B - The Survey Questionnaire for

C Letter Addressed to the OIC of

D Letter Addressed to Authorities for the Validation

E- Letter Addressed to the Vice President for Academic

F- Letter Addressed to the Deans of

GUAGUA NATIONAL COLLEGES - GRADUATE SCHOOL 148

G- Map of Region III..

H Informal Interview Sample Questions .

I Consolidated Summary of the Frequency Count and

JConsolidated Responses of Participants on the Assessments

K - List of Recognized Accredited HEIs in Region IIII.. .

L- Chart Showing the National Performance of the

1 Distribution of School-Participants in Region III.. 27

2 Distribution of Faculty Review-Facilitators and

3.1 Demographic Profile of the Faculty-Review Facilitators