Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
BUREAU OF SECONDARY EDUCATION

DROP
OUT
REDUCTION
PROGRAM

H a n d b o o k

July 2008
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface ii
Introduction ii
Acronyms and Abbreviations i
v
Section One. The Dropout Reduction Program 1

What is the DORP? 1

What are the underlying assumptions of the DORP? 2
What are the guiding principles of the DORP? 2
What are the legal bases of the DORP? 3
What is the conceptual framework of the DORP? 4
What is the DORP operational framework? 7
What are the strategic components of the school DORP? 8
What are the critical factors that contribute to the successful 10
implementation of the DORP?
Who are the target clients of DORP? 10

Section Two. The School DORP in Action 11

What is a DORP Cycle? 11

Phase 1: Planning 13
Phase 2: The Implementation of the School 14
DORP Plan
Phase 3: Evaluation 18

Section Three. The Management of the School DORP 20

What is the DORP’s management structure? 20

- Roles and Responsibilities 21

Section Four. The Evaluation of the DORP 25

Why evaluate the DORP? 25

Who should be responsible for the evaluation of the School 25
DORP?
When should the DORP evaluation be done? 26
What kind of data may be used to evaluate DORP? 27
What steps are suggested to evaluate the DORP? 27

Appendices 29

Appendix A1: Sample of the Student-Learning Plan 30

Appendix A2: Sample of the Student-Learning Plan (LMP) 31
Appendix B: DORP Critiquing Criteria 32
Appendix C: Student Profile 35
i
 PREFACE

Philippine education today faces two serious problems: low student achievement
and high dropout rate. Unless these problems are properly addressed, the EFA
(Education For All) goal of making every Filipino functionally literate by 2015, will
not be attained.

This handbook is intended to help schools solve the

problems. In making this handbook the writers followed

these guidelines:

The Handbook should-

 be in the language of the users;

 highlight the best schools practices in reducing dropout rate and
increasing learning;
 freely use graphics to explain complex concepts and processes;
 present DORP (Drop Out Reduction Program) as an integral part of the
SIP (School Improvement Plan) and LMP (Learning Management
Program), Guidance Counseling and other regular class programs; and
 be open to better ideas, approaches, and challenges so that it will grow
with the times.

We acknowledge the assistance of –

 the Schools Divisions of Biliran, Leyte, Southern Leyte, Ormoc City,

Tacloban City, Benguet and Baguio City that helped in the field
validation of the Handbook;
 Ms. Prudencia M. Sanoy and Ms. Shirley Ison, of the National Project
Management Office who served as content and process evaluators;
 Mr. Rey Macalindong, SKM (Sinclair Knight Merz) Team Leader; Ms.
Dolores Duque; Mr. William Leguip and Ms. Riezl Robles who provided
administrative support;
 Dr. Maria C. Aquino, Engr. Federico B. Ordinario, Jr., and Dr. Francisco
A. Trespeces, the team that wrote the Handbook.

Dr. Lolita M. Andrada

Director IV
Bureau of Secondary Education
Department of Education

ii
 INTRODUCTION

The total Philippine population as of 2007 stood at 88.7 million; for 2008 it was projected to
be
90.5 million (2000 Census-Based Population Projections).

How literate is the population? Is it sufficiently equipped with the basic

competencies for individual development and effective democratic citizenship?

The 2003 Functional Literacy, Education and Mass Media Survey (FLEMMS),
disclosed that out of 57.4 million Filipinos who are 10 to 64 years old, 3.8 million
ten years old and above, do not know how to read and write and a total of 9.2
million are not functionally literate.

According to the National EFA Committee (Manila, Philippines, 2006), a survey of

young people, 7-21 years old showed that 65% do not participate in any community
activities; only 37% can sing the national anthem, and only 38% can recite the
Panatang Makabayan. The Committee further noted that the low participation in
community activities, lack of awareness of Philippine history, and weak engagement
with matters of public interest, provided a picture of educational disadvantage from
the viewpoint of nation building.

The EFA report also pointed out that the school system is disadvantaged because of
its poor completion rate and low academic performance.

For example, in 2002-2003, only 90.32% of the total population of children 6-11
years old, enrolled at the start of the school year. The 9.68% that did not enroll
constituted nearly 1.2 million children who most likely will eventually join the ranks
of the adult illiterate.

The 90.32% of the children who enrolled showed these trends:

For every 1,000 Grade 1 entrants, 312 or 31.2% will leave school before
finishing Grade 6; 249 or 24.9% will finish the six-year program at an average
of 9.6 years, each one repeating some grade levels two to three times; and
only 439 or 43.9% will graduate in six years. Of these graduates only six will
have sufficient mastery of English, Science and Mathematics.

At the secondary level, for every 1000 entrants to first year high school, 389
or 38.9% will leave school without completing four years; 353 or 35.3% will
graduate after repeating two to three times; and only 248 or 24.8% will
graduate within the required four years.

Taking the two levels together a typical group of 1000 Grade 1 entrants,
eventually yields only 395 or 39.5% finishing high school; only 162 or 16.2%
finishing elementary and secondary school in 10 years; and 233 or 23.3%
finishing elementary and high school each taking up more than 10 years to
complete the basic education schooling cycle. The National Education for All
Committee (NEC) further notes that it is highly probable that a very small
number of these high school graduates will have acquired the necessary
competencies expected from ten years of schooling.
iii
NEC further observes that Philippine schools, as a whole, have failed to achieve
overall excellence, as well as, assure general fairness to the 90% of school-aged
children that they take into Grade 1 each year, a failure that has continued yearly
for the past four decades.

The data show according to the NEC that most students either do not complete the
full 10 years of basic education, or graduate without mastering the basic
competencies.

In sum, there is still a large number of Filipinos who are not basically literate (3.8
million) and up to 9.2 million who are not functionally literate. These Filipinos are
educationally disadvantaged or handicapped to engage intelligently in various
social, economic, civic and political activities and use to advantage their rights and
privileges as members of society. Moreover, they cannot participate fully nor
contribute significantly to the task of nation building.

With an intractable high dropout rate and graduates not mastering the basic
education competencies, how then can the Philippine EFA Action Plan achieve its
goal of making every Filipino functionally literate by 2015?

This Handbook on the Dropout Reduction Program (DORP) attempts to explain how.

iv
 Acronyms and Abbreviations

ALS – Alternative Learning System

D-DORP – Division Dropout Reduction

Program DEDP – Division Education

Development Plan DORP – Dropout

Reduction Program

EASE – Effective Alternative Secondary Education

EFA – Education For All

LGU – Local Government Unit

LMP – Learning Management

Program M&E – Monitoring and

Evaluation NEC - National EFA

Committee OHSP – Open High

School Program OI – Other

Interventions

OSY – Out of School Youth

PTCA – Parent-Teacher-Community

Association R-DORP – Regional Dropout

Reduction Program REDP – Regional

Education Development Plan SARDO –

Student-at-Risk at Dropping Out

S-DORP – School Dropout Reduction Program

SII – School Initiated

Interventions SIP – School

Improvement Plan SLP –

Student-Learning Plan
v
 1

Section One: THE DROPOUT

REDUCTION PROGRAM
(DORP)

This section presents what DORP is all about. It covers the definition, goal,
objectives, underlying assumptions, guiding principles, legal bases, conceptual
framework, process flow, operational framework, the critical success factors in
managing the DORP, and its beneficiaries.

What is the DORP?

It is an intervention program to reduce the high dropout rate and improve learning
outcomes in public and private schools of the country, using formal, non-formal and
informal approaches.

The program aims to facilitate access of every Filipino to quality basic education,
which equips him with the basic literacy tools and content that are essential for his
growth and development as a person and as a citizen of a democratic society. To
achieve this aim, DORP has the following specific objectives:

1. reduce, if not totally eliminate school dropout;

2. increase retention rate;

3. increase significantly the achievement level of the Students-at-Risk of

Dropping Out (SARDO);

4. retrieve learners who are out of school;

5. increase the capability of schools to establish, implement, monitor,

evaluate and continuously improve the DORP;

6. design and continuously improve DORP practices and learning materials; and

7. benchmark the best DORP practices.

 2

What are the underlying assumptions of the DORP?

1. If the continued increase in the rate of school dropout is not arrested, then
the EFA goal of making every Filipino functionally literate by 2015 would not
be achieved.

2. The increase in dropout rate could be arrested if the causes of the dropout
problem are properly identified and described and appropriate intervention
programs are initiated to remove the causes.

3. If the school, the home, the community and the SARDO are actively involved
in planning, developing, and implementing the DORP, then the DORP would
succeed.

4. The likelihood of students leaving school could be reduced if students’ felt

needs are being satisfied and learning experiences are pleasurable.

5. Learning is scaffolding. New knowledge, skills and attitudes are developed,

shaped, modified or reconstructed on the basis of previous ones. If student
attendance is irregular and previous lessons are not fully mastered, then the
scaffolding process is weakened.

6. The full mastery of basic competencies could be achieved if the instructional

process has a strong remedial component.

7. If the school has a strong and effective DORP, which is collaboratively

planned and managed by the school head, teachers, students, parents, and
other key stakeholders, then the school dropout rate would be diminished.

8. The school DORP would have higher probability of success if it is provided

adequate technical and administrative support by the Division, Regional and
Central offices.

What are the guiding principles of the DORP?

1. DORP as an intervention should contribute significantly to the attainment of

the School Improvement Plan (SIP) objective to reduce dropout rate and
increase retention and achievement rates.

2. DORP should not merely keep the SARDO in school nor prevent them from
dropping out; it should also seek to help them master the basic learning
competencies.

3. Home visit as a DORP intervention, whether scheduled or unscheduled,

focused or unfocused, should be properly planned; objectives, expected
outputs and approaches should be clear and specific.
4. DORP must educate the SARDO to be independent, critical and creative
problem solvers; hence, the SARDO should be involved actively in planning,
executing and evaluating intervention programs intended to address their
problem. They must actively participate not merely as objects but also as
subjects of their own development.
 3

5. DORP should not only prevent students from dropping out; it should also seek
to retrieve those who have dropped out.

6. DORP has for its clients, learners in disadvantaged circumstances; as such,

the program must not depend solely on formal or conventional modes of
learning; it should explore alternative modes that best meet the learning
needs of its clients.

7. Being in distressed and disadvantaged situations (poverty, poor health,

physical handicap, low intelligence quotient) is not conducive to the
development of a positive self-concept; hence, DORP should endeavor to
build up the self-confidence and self- reliance of the SARDO.

8. Good decisions are informed decisions; thus, decisions on the type of

intervention appropriate to an individual should be based on a careful
analysis of adequate, relevant, accurate and up-to-date information.

9. Teachers should be fully aware that fast learners who are bored or not
challenged by the mediocrity of the lessons which are generally attuned to
the average learner, can also be potential if not actual dropouts. DORP
therefore, in its zeal to focus on the SARDO must see to it that the bright
students, do not become underserved and disadvantaged.

10. DORP should not only be reactive and preventive, but should also be
proactive to cover the needs of those who dropped out and re-enrolled.

What are the legal bases of the DORP?

Article XIV of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides that the State shall:

1. protect and promote the right of every citizen to quality education at all
levels and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible
to all;

2. establish, maintain and support a complete, adequate and integrated

system of education relevant to the needs of the people and society; and

3. encourage non-formal, informal, and indigenous systems, as well as self-

learning, independent, and out-of-school study programs particularly
those that respond to community needs .

The Education Act of 1982 (BP Blg. 232) stipulates that “The State shall provide the
right of every individual to relevant quality education regardless of sex, age, creed,
socio-economic status, physical and mental condition, racial or ethnic origin,
political and other affiliation.”
 4

Republic Act (RA) 9155 (Governance for Basic Education Act of 2001) envisions a
curriculum that shall promote the holistic growth of Filipino learners and enable
them to acquire the core competencies and develop the proper values. This
curriculum shall be flexible to meet the learning needs of a diverse studentry, be
relevant to their immediate environment and social and cultural need.

Article 28 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (November
1989) provides that States Parties recognize the right of the child to education, and
with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal
opportunity, they shall in particular:

1. make primary education compulsory and available free to all;

2. encourage the development of different forms of secondary education,

including general and vocational education, make them available and
accessible to every child, and take appropriate measures such as
introducing free education and offering financial assistance in case of
need; and

3. take measures to encourage regular school attendance and reduce dropout rate.

What is the Conceptual Framework of the DORP?

The conceptual framework graphically represents how the DORP supports the
regular class program to attain the goal of the SIP and the DEDP in producing a
functionally literate learner/graduate. It also shows the relationship of the DORP to
the Alternative Learning System (ALS). This conceptual framework is illustrated in
Figure 1.
 5

DESIRED LEARNER

DEDP

SIP

ALS Regular Class ADM

Program

OHSP EASE
D

O
SII

R
Legend:
ADM- Alternative Delivery Mode OI
ALS – Alternative Learning System
DEDP – Division Education Development Plan
DORP – Dropout Reduction Program
EASE – Effective Alternative Secondary Education P
OHSP – Open High School Program
OI – Other Interventions
SII – School Initiated Interventions
SIP – School Improvement Plan
Line of authority
_ _ _ Line of coordination

Figure 1: The DORP Conceptual Framework

 6

The DORP and the Regular Class Program

The regular class program provides the major contribution to produce the desired
learner which is the goal of the SIP and the Division Education Development Plan
(DEDP). The DORP enhances the delivery of the regular program as it prevents
potential school leavers from leaving. Furthermore, DORP seeks to retrieve those
who are out of school and who want to join the regular classes.

DORP supports the regular class program through its strategic components, namely:
the Open High School Program (OHSP), the Effective Alternative Secondary
Education (EASE), School Initiated Interventions (SII) and Other Interventions (OI).

Alternative Delivery Mode (ADM). The OHSP and EASE as strategic components
of DORP are considered ADM because students do not attend the regular class
program while enrolled in the OHSP or EASE. The OHSP as an intervention has an
indirect link with the regular class program since it is distance learning; however,
the learner has the option to join the regular class anytime during the period of his
study.

The EASE students on the other hand, are temporary leavers of the regular class
program and they re-enter the class after satisfactory completion of the EASE
modules.

The SII and the OI are for the SARDO who do not qualify in the EASE and OHSP.
These students are members of the regular class program but who participate in
either of the two interventions (SII & OI) or a combination of both to prevent them
from dropping out.

More information about each component is given in subsequent discussions and

separate handbooks.

The DORP and the ALS

As mentioned earlier, the primary objective of the DORP is to prevent students from
dropping out, at the same time, it motivates those who are out of school to return
and finish basic education. In cases where a SARDO cannot be saved, he has the
option to participate in the ALS so that he can attain functional literacy.

ALS is a parallel learning that provides a viable alternative to the existing formal
instruction. This is done through its three programs, namely: Basic Literacy
Program, Accreditation and Equivalency Program and Indigenous Peoples Education
Program.

The out-of-school youths (OSYs) and adults enrolled in the ALS program, likewise,
have the option to re-enter the school to finish basic education either through the
regular class program or the OHSP of the DORP.
 7

What is the DORP operational framework?

The DORP operational framework presents how the program functions at the school
level and how the division, regional and central offices of the department support
the program in accordance with RA 9155 (Governance of Basic Education Act of
2001). This is shown in Figure 2.

Planning
EASE
Capacity Building

Policy
System Support
D
OHSP
Direction R -Technical S
D- S-
R- E
E D D I
Standards D -Administrative
O O
O D
D Research R SII R P
Advocacy R
P P
P P
P
Advocacy
M&E
Networking
OI
M&E

CENTRAL LEVEL REGIONAL LEVEL DIVISION LEVEL SCHOOL LEVEL

Figure 2: The DORP Operational Framework

In operationalizing the DORP, the school is the actual implementor of the various
interventions specified in the School DORP Plan (S-DORP Plan). The S-DORP Plan
supports the SIP as it contributes in improving school outcomes, specifically in
decreasing drop-outs, and in increasing completion, retention and achievement
rates.

Being the direct implementor, the school needs the support of the various levels of
the education system, namely: Central, Regional and Division.

The Central Office sets the national program policy, direction and standards,
monitors, and evaluates the impact of the program. The Regional Office implements
and monitors the national program policy and direction at the regional level. The
Regional Office supports the Division DORP by providing technical and
administrative assistance to its implementors. This assistance is defined in the
Regional DORP (R-DORP) which is an integral part of the Regional Education
 8

Development Plan (REDP). The Division Office prepares its Division DORP (D-DORP)
based on the set program policy and direction and the needs of the schools.

The D-DORP sets the direction and strategies of the Division in addressing the
dropout problem. The various components of the D-DORP provide the services and
assistance to the school in implementing the S-DORP plans. This assistance comes
in the form of capacity building activities, technical and administrative support,
advocacy and linkaging, research, documentation, and dissemination of best
practices. The D-DORP supports the DEDP, and the DEDP supports the SIP in general
and the S-DORP in particular.

What are the strategic components of the school DORP?

Strategic components refer to the sub-programs of the DORP. These components

are strategic because each is an innovative strategy to address the dropout
problem.

The following are the strategic components of the DORP:

1. Open High School Program (OHSP). This is an alternative mode of

secondary education that addresses learning problems of students who
cannot join the regular class program due to justifiable reasons. These
reasons may include physical impairment, employment, distance of home to
school, education design, family problems, and the like.

This mode uses distance learning and makes use of multi-media materials
which the learner studies at his own pace and consults only with teachers and
capable persons when needed. Hence, as a requisite, the learner shall
undergo the Independent Learning Readiness test (ILRT) to assess his
capacity for self-directed learning and the Informal Reading Inventory (IRI) to
measure his reading level.

The learner, therefore plans and manages his own learning. This is done
through the use of a Student Learning Plan (Appendices A1 & A2). Teachers
and students together agree on the date, time, and manner of assessing
learning outcomes.

The learner has a maximum of six years to complete secondary education. He

has also the option to join the regular class anytime during the period he is in
the OHSP.

For complete information on the OHSP, please refer to the Open High
School Program Handbook.

2. Effective Alternative Secondary Education (EASE). This is an

alternative mode of learning for short-term absentees or temporary leavers of
the regular class program due to justifiable reasons: part-time job, illness in
the family, seasonal work, calamitous events, peace and order problem, and
the like. This learning mode uses modules which the students study while on
leave of absence.
 9

To qualify to the EASE program, a student should pass the reading and
writing ability tests in English and Filipino and the mathematical ability test.
He should also pass the coping ability assessment. These abilities are needed
inasmuch as the program entails self-directed study, with the teacher acting
as facilitator of learning. In case the student fails to pass these requirements,
the school may still consider him in the program by considering the
development level of the student.

The learners’ development level is indicated by their ability to solve

problems. (Lev Vygotsky, 1938) The greater their dependency on other
people for help, the lower is their development level; the lesser their
dependence on external help, the higher is their development level.

Teachers should give more and direct assistance to students on the lower
development level, collaborative assistance to those on the middle, and
nondirective assistance to those on the high level. Teachers should locate the
actual learners’ development level and help them move up to their proximal
potential development level.

In monitoring learner’s progress and assessing performance, the teacher

ensures that quality standards are being observed. Result of the assessment
shall be used to determine if the learner is ready to go back to the regular
class program.

This strategic component requires that the student signs an agreement that
details his responsibilities. The agreement is concurred by a parent or a
guardian.

For more details, please refer to the Handbook for EASE.

3. School Initiated Interventions (SII). These are innovative and

homegrown interventions developed by schools to prevent the SARDO from
dropping out and to increase their achievement rate. The SII is based on the
SARDO ‘s felt needs, hence, they participate with the school head, DORP
Council, SII Coordinator, teachers, parents and other key stakeholders in
planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating the program.

In some instances, a combination of two or more SIIs is implemented for an

individual or a group of students. In other instances, SII may be combined
with EASE or with OHSP.

For more information, please refer to the Handbook for School Initiated
Interventions.

4. Other Interventions (OIs). These are interventions developed not by the

school itself but by other agencies, which also resulted in increasing the
holding power of the school. For example, the provincial LGU of Leyte,
initiated ICOT-P (Income-Creating Opportunities thru Technology Projects)
which generated income for the third and fourth year high school students at
risk of dropping out due to lack of financial support. The project enabled the
students to convert an idle lot in their school into a profitable
 10

vegetable farm. The provincial LGU provided the production inputs and the
municipal LGU, the technical inputs. The income derived from the farm was
used to subsidize the financial needs of the at-risk students.

In the Division of Romblon, the municipal LGU of Ferrol, Romblon came up

with “Miscellaneous Nyo, Sagot ng LGU”, which appropriated municipal
budget to pay the miscellaneous school expenses of the SARDO.

What critical factors contribute to the successful implementation of the DORP?

1. Committed Leadership. This refers to the leadership of the school head,

the school DORP Council, the teachers and the Division DORP Council
involved in managing the program. The willingness to devote extra time and
effort to help the SARDO, the dropout returnees and the would-be enrollees
ensures the successful implementation of the DORP.

2. Trained DORP Council and Implementers. The competence to manage is

a pre- requisite of the DORP. The division and school DORP Councils and all
DORP implementors should be provided with capability-building activities to
enhance their knowledge, skills and attitudes to implement the DORP
successfully.

3. Availability of Materials. Materials, print and non-print should be available

as needed to ensure that learning objectives are achieved.

4. Participation and Support of Stakeholders. The active and direct

involvement of the students and their parents/guardians is a must in all the
DORP activities. Likewise, the support of the other stakeholders – local
government, PTCA, community officials, non government organizations and
others, is necessary inasmuch as, several risk factors are community related.

Who are the beneficiaries of DORP?

1. Students at risk of dropping out.

2. Out-of-school youths of school age who decide to complete basic education

through the Alternative Delivery Mode.
 11

Section Two: THE SCHOOL DORP IN

ACTION

The previous section explained that DORP is primarily a school-based program to

reduce if not eliminate school dropouts so that every learner would be sufficiently
schooled and become functionally literate.

This section discusses how the DORP cycle is operationalized in a school and how
the School DORP and Division DORP plans are prepared and put into action.

What is a DORP Cycle?

It is a recurring process of three major activities: (1) planning the division and
school DORP (2) implementing the DORP plans and (3) evaluating the effect of the
program.

These cyclical processes are presented in Figure 3 in graphic form. The “D” form of
the cycle and the upward direction of the arrows in the evaluation phase symbolize
the determination of DORP to address the dropout problem.
 12

Figure 3: The DORP Cycle

 13

The following is an explanation of the three (3) major phases.

Phase 1: Planning

This phase has three main stages: (1) conducting situational analysis, (2)
designing the proposed solution, and (3) appraising the proposed solution.

Step 1. Conducting the situational analysis. This step intends to answer

the following questions.

 What is the current dropout rate of the school? retention rate?

completion rate? achievement rate?

 Are there serious gaps between the desired and actual retention,
completion and achievement rates?

 What are the causes and effects of the gaps?

To answer the questions data have to be gathered by reviewing school

records, conducting interviews, observing administrative and instructional
practices, and holding focus group conversations.

The outputs of Step 1 are clear statements of the dropout problems, their
causes and corresponding issues.

Step 2. Designing the Solutions to the Problem.

Based on the results of Step 1, the goal and objectives are defined; and
alternative solutions are identified, analyzed for effectiveness and efficiency,
and the most promising solutions are selected.

The outputs of the Design Stage is a School DORP plan which has the
following elements:

 Situationer
o Problem statement
o Background/context of the problem
 General and specific objectives
 Intervention strategies
 Implementation and M & E Plans
 Management Plan
 Sustainability Plan
 14

Step 3. Appraising the School DORP Plan

The School DORP Plan shall be presented to the key stakeholders for
validation and improvement. Please see (Appendix B) for an example of the
criteria to evaluate a DORP Plan.

Phase II: Implementing the School DORP Plan

The implementation phase has these stages, namely: start-up, plan execution, and
progress monitoring and evaluation.

1. Start-up. The DORP Council and the school head review the plan once more
to ensure that the strategies, activities and schedule are practical and
responsive to the existing situations and acceptable to the implementors.

This is also the time to review the roles and responsibilities of the DORP
implementors and to design the management procedures.

2. Plan execution. It is the responsibility of a DORP Team to implement the

activities as planned and to make adjustments to correct plan deficiencies.

The implementors should see to it that the at-risk students are properly
identified and provided the needed assistance. One of the objectives of DORP
is to keep enrolled learners in school and improve their achievement. To help
achieve this objective, the Learning Management Program (LMP) shall be
integrated into the various DORP interventions at the school level when
appropriate.

Figure (4), the S-DORP implementation spiral process presents how DORP is
put into action. DORP implementation at the school level which caters to the
enrolled learners follows the processes as shown in the DORP Spiral. Re-
planning follows after completing each cycle. The re-planning stage follows
the same processes but at a different level or plane, hence the spiral flow.
The spiral flow enables the planners to profit from the lessons learned and
avoid repetition of the flaws in the previous cycle.
 15

Re-
Pla
n

Figure 4: The S-DORP Spiral Process

 16

The spiral consists of nine major activities which are the following:

1. Profile the learner

During enrollment the student shall accomplish the Student Profile Form
(Appendix C) in addition to the usual enrollment forms. The Student Profile
Form captures information on the risk factors for dropping out.

2. Gather and Update Supporting Data

As the school year progresses, the subject teachers and class adviser
continuously gather documentary data from DepEd Forms 1 and 2 (class
register and monthly report of enrollment, respectively) and observation data
which show tendencies of the student to drop out, such as the following:

 Absences and tardiness

 Declining academic achievement based on periodical exams, etc.

 Frequent violation of school rules and regulations

 Non-participation in class activities

 Non-submission of class requirements

The subject teachers shall furnish the supporting data to the class adviser
and decide whether the student is at risk of dropping out. If the student is not
a SARDO, he will continue with the usual class reinforcement and
enhancement activities.

3. Analyze the Problem

The class adviser, subject teachers, guidance counselor and the identified at-
risk student come together to analyze the problem, particularly its causes
and effects.

4. Conduct the Problem -Solving Conference

If the problem is serious and are beyond the capability of the classroom
stakeholders to resolve, the class adviser may call for a case conference with
the school head, parents, subject teachers, PTCA representative, student
organization and the SARDO himself.

5. Identify and design the appropriate solution

Based on the results of the problem- solving conference, the S-DORP Team
shall identify and design the appropriate DORP intervention.
 17

6. Implement the Solution

In support to the regular class program activities, the S-DORP Team

Implements the intervention according to the designed implementation plan.
The class adviser monitors or tracks the progress of the at-risk student.

7. Assess the Implementation and Results of the Intervention

The S-DORP Team shall assess the implementation and results of the
intervention. Results of the assessment shall determine whether the problem
of the SARDO was solved or not. If the problem was solved, the SARDO shall
undergo the regular class program.

8. Replan

If the problem of the SARDO is not solved, the S-DORP Team shall re-plan and
conduct another cycle until the problem is solved.

Un-enrolled Learners

A school dropout is a student who quits schooling during the school year
(simple dropout) or a student who completed a year level but failed to enroll
for the succeeding level. The prevention of simple dropout is addressed by
the DORP Spiral implementation processes. For the un-enrolled learners the
school shall design and implement interventions that encourage those
learners to go back and complete secondary schooling. Learners who no
longer want to return to the formal system shall be referred to the Alternative
Learning System.

The following strategies may be used to get un-enrolled students go back to

the formal or non-formal school:

 Enrollment Advocacy Campaign

In collaboration with the PTCA, LGU and other stakeholders, the school
undertakes this intervention prior to the enrollment period.

 House-to-House Enrollment Campaign

The LGU shall spearhead this campaign just after enrolment when the
un- enrolled learners are already known.

The S-DORP Team prepares a master list of probable enrollees per year
level prior to the enrollment period. Comparison of this master list
with the actual list of enrollment will determine the un-enrolled
students. The S-DORP team can also make use of the LGU spot map to
validate and locate the un-enrolled students.
 18

 Referral to ALS

The school in collaboration with the LGU shall refer to the ALS the un-
enrolled learners who no longer desire to go back to the formal
learning.

3. Monitor and Evaluate Progress of Implementation. Progress Monitoring

and Evaluation (PME) is a sub-stage of the Implementation Phase. PME is a
parallel activity with the actual plan implementation. The purpose of PME is to
track the progress of implementation to determine if the:

 DORP activities are undertaken as scheduled;

 learning contracts are fulfilled;

 implementation cost is according to budget;

 implementation processes and procedures are consistent with policies

set by the DORP Council;

 expected participation of stakeholders is rendered;

 emergent problems and issues are properly addressed; and

 feedback is immediately utilized to improve performance.

The results of the PME are management decisionmaking inputs to

correct and/or improve ongoing DORP implementation.

Phase III: Evaluation

Results monitoring. The following questions shall help the implementers

determine if DORP is producing the desired results:

 Are the EASE, OHSP, School Initiated Interventions and Other

Interventions able to keep the SARDO in school? Is there improvement
in their attendance, class participation, problem-solving competencies
and learning outcomes?

 Is the School DORP Council functioning as expected? How can it

improve its performance?

 Are the SARDO using the SLP to gain mastery of the basic learning
competencies?

 Is the SARDO tracking system at the school and classroom levels

producing the expected outputs?
 19

The school keeps track of the monthly attendance and dropout rates
through the Monthly Attendance Report (DepEd Form 2). It is the
practice of successful schools to display in a wall chart the monthly
status of attendance and holding power of each class.

The school shall be free to devise a tracking form agreed to by the

stakeholders to meet its information needs and those of the higher
authorities.

For detailed discussion on DORP evaluation please see Section 4 of this Handbook.
 20

Section Three: THE MANAGEMENT

OF THE SCHOOL DORP

Section 3 describes how DORP shall be managed at the school level and the
corresponding roles and responsibilities of those who are involved in the program.

What is the DORP’s management structure?

The DORP management structure consists of the essential management positions,

their assigned roles and responsibilities and relationships to one another. DORP
management structure varies according to school needs and population size. These
are the two essential factors to consider in designing a DORP organizational
structure.

When DORP is at its inception stage, the centralized structure may be preferred.
Then, as the school gains experience and competence, the structure may be
gradually transformed into a decentralized one as shown by Figure 5. A school
should adopt a management structure suited to its needs and competence.
 21

Figure 5: The S-DORP Organizational

Structure

At the center of the chart are the students, the beneficiaries of the DORP. Directly
managing them are the class advisers who in turn are under the direct supervision
of the school head. Providing support to the students are the subject teachers,
guidance counselor, DORP Council, DORP Coordinator and the parents. Below are
the responsibilities of the people who are directly managing the DORP.

Students

 Participate in selecting the appropriate DORP intervention with the

guidance of the class adviser;

 Enter into a DORP agreement or contract;

 Prepare, implement and assess self-directed learning plans;

 Fulfill the requirements of the selected intervention; and

 Report to the class adviser and subject teachers according to agreement.

 22

Class Advisers/Teachers

 Identify SARDO by subject area and year level;

 Prepare SARDO monitoring list;

 Diagnose students’ strengths, weaknesses, interests and learning difficulties;

 Design appropriate interventions with colleagues and the SARDO;

 Implement the interventions;

 Track / evaluate progress of SARDO;

 Assist the School Head in formulating DORP Plan;

 Conduct advocacy to the following stakeholders: parents , students,

community and LGUs;

 Submit a regular progress report on SARDO to the school head;

 Attend training – workshop on DORP ;

 Assist in the conduct of in-service trainings for DORP implementors;

 Plan with the other stakeholders especially students the DORP

classroom action plan; and

 Update information about the SARDO.

School Head

 Leads in designing DORP management structure and in making it functional;

 Leads in managing the school DORP plan;

 Generates financial and material resources to support DORP;

 Leads the planning and conduct of DORP advocacy;

 Participates in DORP trainings;

 Conducts school level training/enhancement;

 Leads in benchmarking best DORP practices in his school as well

those from the other schools;
 23

 Submits DORP reports to the Division DORP Coordinator;

 Reports DORP’s progress to the community through the State of the

School address (SOSA); and

 Provides incentives to accelerate DORP.

Guidance Counselor

 Upgrades continuously the guidance program on DORP;

 Prepares DORP guidance tools and forms;

 Conducts counseling sessions;

 Maintains a centralized DORP records; and

 Assists the Class Advisers/Teachers in:

- profiling of students
- preparing and updating SARDO Monitoring list
- conducting home visits
- conducting individualized interview
- facilitating homeroom and PTCA meetings
- updating of individual records of students
- diagnosing and solving problems of students

School DORP Coordinator

 Gathers and synthesizes data for the S-DORP plan;

 Assists the school head and the DORP team in preparing the S-DORP plan;

 Synchronizes the DORP activities;

 Monitors the implementation of the plan and provides feedback to implementors;

 Synthesizes progress reports of class advisers; and

 Prepares and submits school DORP reports to the school head and
the DORP Council
 24

S-DORP Council

 Sets policies and standards on school DORP management;

 Resolves sensitive DORP-related issues and concerns;

 Advises the School Head on DORP related matters; and

 Provides oversight information to decisionmakers in the school

The members of the council are the representative of the PTCA, LGU, department
heads, teachers, student government and non-government organizations.

Parent / Guardian

 Signs the agreement as one of the principal parties if necessary;

 Helps the SARDO implement the agreement;

 Assists the teachers in managing and evaluating the DORP intervention;

 Participates in DORP related activities; and

 Works as partners of the class adviser/teachers in monitoring the SARDO.

 25

Section Four: THE

EVALUATION OF THE
DORP

Why evaluate the DORP?

The evaluation can tell us if DORP is effective and efficient in reducing school
dropout rate and in increasing retention, completion and achievement rates. If it is
not, then we can improve it. Somehow, we have to find a good solution to the
dropout problem.

Who should be responsible for the evaluation of the School DORP?

The reduction of school dropout rate is a major responsibility of the school head.
Therefore, he should see to it that:

 the program is regularly and properly evaluated;

 the evaluation is well-planned and data gatherers and processors are

properly trained;

 financial, material, and manpower resources are adequate; and

 evaluation results are used to improve the DORP.

 26

However, the school head should share the responsibility to evaluate the DORP with
other key stakeholders. These are the following:

 The students. What do students think and feel about the DORP? To
what extent does it prevent students-at-risk from dropping out?
Corelational studies can only give probable answers, but dialogues with
students, parents and peers can give more insightful answers.

 The class or section advisers. They can provide relevant data on

student attendance, absenteeism, class behavior, and academic
performance.

 The guidance teachers. They can help analyze and interpret

evaluation data, particularly those with emotional and relational
elements. They can organize case conferences and conduct case
studies of serious dropout problems.

 The department heads. As leaders in particular subject areas, they

assist the school in DORP evaluation and in supervising and
coordinating implementation. Are absences and tardiness in Math
classes significantly different from those in other subjects? Is the rate
of failure significantly higher in English than in other subjects? These
are examples of evaluation questions which need answers from
department heads.

 The DORP Council. The body can set guidelines for the conduct of the
evaluation and can even help prepare the evaluation plan.

Note that external evaluation shall also be conducted to ensure credibility of

results. The Central Office evaluates the R-DORP Plan; the Regional Office the
D- DORP Plan and the Division Office the S-DORP Plan.

When should the DORP evaluation be done?

It depends on the purpose of the evaluation.

If the purpose is to determine the status of the school in terms of student retention,
completion and achievement at the start of the target period, then a pre-
assessment is needed.

If the purpose is to know the effect of the DORP one school year after it has been
implemented, then a post evaluation is needed. A significant difference in the
results of the pre and the post evaluation may be attributed to the DORP.

If the purpose is to fine-tune the DORP process, materials or structure, then

evaluation should be done while DORP is in operation. This is called formative
evaluation.
 27

If the purpose is to know if the DORP is being implemented as planned, then the
evaluation should be done while DORP is being implemented. This is often referred
to as progress monitoring and evaluation.

If the purpose is to determine if the DORP targets have been achieved, then
evaluation is done at the end of the school year. This evaluation is referred to as
summative or outcome evaluation.

What kind of data may be used to evaluate DORP?

It depends on the evaluation question. If the evaluation seeks to know how teachers
and students perceive DORP or feel about it, then qualitative data have to be
gathered.

Qualitative data are commonly expressed in words (statements, opinions, attitudes,

feelings, beliefs, preferences, etc.). They are obtained through individual and group
interviews and participant observation. To measure intensity, frequency, latency
and direction of attitudes, opinions, and beliefs, rating scales or rubrics are used.

If the evaluation seeks to know the measurable increase or decrease in dropout,

retention, completion and achievement rates, then quantitative data need to be
gathered.

Quantitative data are expressed in number: test scores, percentages, frequencies,

averages, ratios, coefficients, ranks, etc.

Both quantitative and qualitative data are needed to evaluate DORP.

What steps are suggested to evaluate the DORP?

The following steps are generic and may be used at the school or at the classroom level:

1. State clearly the purpose of the evaluation. Who are the users of the results
and what will the results be used for? What will be evaluated depends on the
objectives of the evaluation.

2. State the specific objectives, and the evaluation questions.

3. Decide what data to gather to achieve the objectives and answer the questions.

4. Plan how to analyze and interpret the results.

5. Select or prepare the data -gathering tools.

6. Orient or train the users of the tools.

 28

7. Gather and analyze data and interpret the results.

8. Summarize the findings and discuss them with the interested end users.

9. Formulate the recommendations and assess if they are acceptable and

implementable.

10.Disseminate and utilize the findings to improve the DORP.

At the end of the school year when the school head presents his Annual Report to
the stakeholders, the report on the DORP should give answers to four questions:

1. Has the DORP reduced significantly the school dropout rate?

2. Have the saved at-risk students achieved, at least, the minimum competency
standards?

3. Has the DORP brought back to school the unenrolled students and/or has
referred them to the Alternative Learning System?

4. Has the DORP contributed to the achievement of SIP objective on

improved retention and achievement rates?
 29

APPENDICES

Appendix A1: Sample of the Student-Learning

Plan Appendix A2: Sample of the Student-

Learning Plan (LMP) Appendix B: DORP Critiquing

Criteria

Appendix C: Student Profile

 30

Appendix A1

Sample of the Student-Learning Plan

(Open High School)

Learning Area: ENGLISH Year Level: First

Learner's Name: Date Taken:

Teacher:

No. of Desired Allotment Actual Initial Remarks

Module/Stude Competencies Period (To Accomplishm Evaluation
nt to be be ent Period
Worksheets developed determined
by the
learner)

Module 6: Being one week 2 weeks (Results of Instructional

Responsible the level
Steward of o Give the activities)
Nature meaning of
idiomatic
phrases

o Arrive at
a
consensus
o
Transcode
information
obtained
from a
listening
text
o Write a
text on how
one might
help in the
conservatio
n of our
natural
resources
 31

Appendix A2

Sample Form of the Student-Learning

Plan (LMP)

List of Indicators
Unmastered of Mastery
Knowledge Learning Learning of UMKs Time
and Skills Strategies Materials
Fram

e
 32

Appendix B

Drop Out Reduction Program

DORP Plan Critiquing Criteria (Please check the appropriate column.)

Yes No

Situationer

 Is it congruent to the SIP?

 Is it backed up by concrete data/information on internal efficiencies

(enrollment rate, completion rate, drop-out rate, achievement rate)?
 Does it fully describe the problems or conditions existing in the school?

 Does the problem jibe with the physical environment of the school as
describe in the SIP?
 Does it fully describe the profile of the SARDOs/target beneficiaries
as affected by the FICS or risk factors?
 Will the profile evoke immediate response/reaction to the problem
once it is read?
Goal

 Is the goal statement supportive or aligned to the purpose level

objective of the SIP?
 Is it broad and long term and reflective of the medium-term plan?

 Does it express future desired results?

 Is the goal clear? (it motivates action to solve the described problem)

Objectives

 Are the objective statements consistent with the goal and the school
situationer?
 Are they reflected in the AIP?

 Do they use absolute number to express target beneficiaries?

 Do they conform with SMART-C?

 33

Proposed Interventions

 Are the interventions identified consistent with the objectives and

school situationer? Is there an immediate and appropriate
intervention to address the critical risk factors?
 Are all types of learners/beneficiaries addressed by the intervention?

 Are they doable and realistic within a give time frame/PIP set?

 Are the materials intended for the interventions available (can be

purchased, solicited or produced)?
 Are the interventions doable with local resources-human, technical and
financial?
Implementation Plan/Matrix

 Is it congruent with the identified interventions?

 Does it contain activities for the proposed intervention, output

indicators,

time frame, persons responsible and resources needed?

Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

 Are the activities geared toward M&E? (e.g. student tracking system)

 Does it mention frequency of M&E?

 Does it identify person/s responsible for collecting data?

 Does it reflect the flow of data collection and submission?

 Does it include the appropriate M&E instruments to be filled up/

accomplished for a certain period of time?
 Does it reflect process documentation?

Sustainability Plan

 Is the plan described workable/doable overtime?

 Is the plan workable even with change in school leadership?

 Does it include the resources to be utilized: human, financial and

technical?
 Is it adaptable to users/beneficiaries in any given situation and
environment?
 Can it be adopted by other institutions with similar concerns?

 Are there specific actions to ensure continuity of the plan?

 34

Organizational Structure

 Does it have an organizational structure?

 Does the organizational structure include internal & external

stakeholders?
 Is there a clear delineation of roles/functions?

 Do the roles/functions contribute to the overall target of the program?

Comments/Suggestions:
 35

Appendix C

Student Profile

Name: Age: Year Level:

Name of Father: Occupation:
Name of Mother: Occupation:
Address:
Brother/Sisters Presently Enrolled:

A. Academic Profile

First Year FG Second Year FG Third Year FG Fourth Year FG

English English English English

Filipino Filipino Filipino Filipino

Mathematics Mathematics Mathematics Mathematics

Science Science Science Science

MAKABAYAN MAKABAYAN MAKABAYAN MAKABAYAN

TLE TLE TLE TLE

MAPEH MAPEH MAPEH MAPEH

AP AP AP AP

EP EP EP EP

Has failing grades in:

Has back subject in:
Has advance units in:

B. Medical/Health Profile

Date/s he/she has been reported absent due to sickness

Reported Sickness
Severe Malnutrition
Moderate Malnutrition
Mild Malnutrition
 36

C. Assessment/Screening Tests Result:

Administered
1. Personality
2. Behavior
3. Interview
4. Survey
5. Others

D. Analysis

E. Findings

F. Recommendations