TITLE:

STATISTICS MANAGEMENT Performance Indicators Projection Techniques

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Need for Performance Indicators Generating Performance Indicators Natural factors Demographic factors Economic factors Social factors Spatial factors Educational factors Summary of Indicators to Achieve Efficiency, Equity, and Quality Improvement

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Need for Performance Indicators
Indicators of actual performance in relation to plan objectives and targets may be both quantitative and qualitative. They point out the extent of identified aspects of management. They are employed by managers/planners as aids in the process of planning and systems provision. They also provide targets; monitor changes in, as well as facilitate research on the system; estimate future costs; and forecast outflow of individuals with different kinds of education and training. Performance indicators are bases for determining the systems efficiency and effectiveness and for implementing plans. They also serve as baseline data for target setting, so that managers/planners may take appropriate measures for performing the necessary course correction (if deviation from the national mean is detected) or for further raising the level of the systems efficiency and effectiveness, so that optimal benefits will be derived from it.

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Generating Performance Indicators

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Generating Performance Indicators

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Generating Performance Indicators

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Generating Performance Indicators

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Generating Performance Indicators

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Generating Performance Indicators

Socio-economic
Socio-economic indicators include:

access to modern health facilities and information, including family planning; possession of good health; birth and death rates; access to basic social and economic infrastructure; possession of technical skills; opportunity for improvement in real income and purchasing power; increasing feeling of social justice; participation of group decision making affecting work and leisure, through joint ownership of societys means of production; and literacy rate of the population.

 The following are specific indicators for determining the internal, operational and external efficiency and effectiveness of the system in order that the goals, objectives and targets for the plan will be achieved. Application of performance indicators as example to this topic are: To determine the internal efficiency of the secondary school, such as participation rate, retention rate, survival rate, completion and graduation rates, teacher-pupil ratio, class-teacher ratio, perpupil cost, book-pupil ratio, pupils performance, teachers performance, availability of resources percentage of output absorbed in the system, etc. For the operation efficiency of the system managers/planners look at the structural changes in the system; teaching-learning processes; adequacy of physical facilities; effective supervision and management; knowledge of managerial development and redirection; presence of adequate resources; provision for research and evaluation; effective dissemination of desirable cultural values and attitudes to personnel and administrators knowledge and awareness of various innovations/techniques being experimented and implemented in the construction. For the external efficiency of the system, managers/planners should examine the employability of graduates. Are the graduates of the construction engineering system employed, unemployed, underemployed after finishing a course? Does the firm produce desirable outputs with right attitude and values toward work? Do personnel tend to respond to the economic and other needs of society? Are personnel innovative and creative? Are personnel aware of the duties and responsibilities of good and worthy citizens of the society?

All the foregoing indicators which managers/planners generate from data/information taken from surveys and from existing situations in the different levels (from the regional to the institutional) serve s baseline data for setting objectives/targets for the plan period. Planners and managers use these indicators for setting objectives/targets. Planners at the office who analyze, synthesize an integrate all these plans determine the national average of the various indicators. The results of the various average national rates and ratios are to be presented to all regional directors so that they will know whether their regions are above or below the national averages. With this information, the regions/firms with low performance indicators will try to improve their performance. They may, for example, implement projects to improve retention rate to increase achievement rate. On the other hand, aside from increasing their performance further, the regions/firms above the national averages will give more emphasis on the qualitative aspects of management or on the improvement of the quality of their graduates/personnel.

Development of Performance Indicators in the DECS (Examples)

The Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) has been developing indicators to measure its performance. The initial attempt took place in 1975 when the Office of Planning Services (OPS) undertook the Decentralized Education Planning Program (DEPP), which focused on disadvantaged, depressed and undeserved (DDU) schools. The DEPP aimed at identifying the indicators of sufficiency or insufficiency or the inequitable distribution of resources in the elementary schools of the country. To identify the DDU schools in the various areas of the country, OPS conducted a comprehensive situational analysis of public elementary schools through the use of five variables, namely: (1) school sites, (2) availability of classrooms and school buildings, (3) teachers capabilities, (4) instructional materials, and (5) school furniture and equipment.

 In 1979, the Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC) launched the Program for Decentralized Educational Development (PRODED). In drawing up the educational disparities or deprivation picture, it simultaneously employed several performance criteria, such as the following: Access criterion used to look into disparities at entry points to the school system and measured mainly by (a) participation or enrolment ratio, (b) literacy rate, (c) survival rate, (d) transition rate, (e) drop-out rate, and (f) achievement rate: Internal efficiency criterion measured by the cohort survival rate;

Quality criterion measured by the SOUTELE achievement; and

Effectiveness criterion measured by returns to investment.

 Subsequently, the Economic and Social Impact Analysis of Women in Development (ESIAWID) gave further opportunity for the MEC to review its indicators. It defined 29 indicators for education. Nine of these are key indicators and the rest, supportive. Key indicators are those which satisfy the criteria of measurability, appropriateness, comprehensiveness, relevance, sensitivity and impact-orientation. Supportive indicators, on the other hand, satisfy the criteria of measurability, appropriateness and may show only some aspects of the extent to which the goals are being attained.

 With the use of data available in the Educational Statistics Data Bank (ESDB),several key indicators can be computed; they may be utilized for evaluating the educational systems performance at various levels in relation to the DECS goal of efficiency, effectiveness, equity and excellence.

In 1981, the ASEAN-Educational Management Information System (ASEAN-EMIS) enumerated indicators in the List of Performance Indicators for Elementary and Secondary Education. These indicators are categorized according to major indicators grouping based on four concerns of the DECS, namely: efficiency, effectiveness, equity, and quality improvement. Since an indicator may be an appropriate performance indicator relative to two or more concerns, these groupings are not mutually exclusive.

 Efficiency indicators are used for monitoring the attainment of one of the DECS concerns, viz., producing desired results or providing quality education at least possible cost. Cost basically refers to expenditures associated with the use of resources like personnel, measure the degree of utilization of the resources that are available to the educational system. In effect, efficiency indicators allow the comparison of actual outputs against given inputs.

 The following examples may be considered indicators of efficiency: (1) pupil-teacher ratio, (2) student-section ratio, (3) teacher-class ratio, (4) teacher-section ratio, (5) per-pupil cost, (6) retention rate, (7) survival rate, (8) group survival rate, (9) repetition rate, (10) transition rate, (11) completion rate, (12) promotion rate, (13) graduation rate, (14) failure rate, (15) drop-out rate, (16) cohort survival, and( 17) stay-out rate. Effectiveness indicators measure the ability of the DECS to perform its mandate of providing educational systems actual level of accomplishment relative to its thrust and goals.

 The following may be considered indicators of effectiveness: (1) participation rate, (2) retention rate, (3) survival rate, (4) group survival rate, (5) repetition rate, (6) transition rate, (7) completion rate, (8) promotion rate, (9) graduation rate, (10) failure rate, (11) drop-out rate, (12) scores in nationally administered achievement tests, (13) cohort survival rate, (14) stay-out rate, (15) number of sports activities conducted in schools, (16) and number of athletes participating in division meets.

Equity indicators are used for indicating the degree to which opportunities for education are provided for the population, regardless of economic status, place of residence and intellectual capability. They indicate equality of access, not only to physical facilities like schools, but also to quality education. The following may be considered indicators of equity: (1) pupil-teacher ratio, (2) student-section ratio, (3) teacher-class ratio, (4) teacher-section ratio, (5) class-classroom ratio, (6) section-classroom ratio, (7) pupil density, (8) P.E. pupil-teacher ratio, (9) per-pupil cost, (10) participation rate, (11) transition rate, (12) scores in nationally administered achievement tests, (13) pupil/student-textbook ratio, (14) proportion of teachers with graduate degrees, (15) P.E./sports area-student ratio, (16) pupil/student-P.E. equipment ratio, and (17) number of non-formal education centers.

Quality improvement indicators are intended to measure quality of the output of the educational system (e.g., quality of graduate) as well as quality performance inputs (e.g., teacher quality). These indicators measure performance relative to some given standards. The following may be considered indicators of quality improvement: (1) pupil-teacher ratio, (2) student-section ratio, (3) teacher-class ratio, (4) teacher-section ratio, (5) class-classroom ratio, (6) section-classroom ratio, (7) P.E. pupil-teacher ratio, (8) per-pupil/per-student-cost, (9) scores in nationally administered achievement tests, (10) pupil/student-textbook ratio, (11) P.E. /sports area-student ratio, (12) pupil/student-P.E. equipment ratio, (13) teacher turnover rate, (14) proportion of teacher with graduate degrees, (15) ratio of subject area teachers to major holders in given subject areas, (16) PMET scores of teachers, (17) NCEE scores of teacher trainees, (18) in-service training hours by subject area per teacher, (19) and performance rating of teachers.

Summary of Indicators to Achieve Efficiency, Equity, and Quality Improvement

I. Indicators Computed on an Annual Ratio Basis Pupil-Teacher Ratio Student-Section Ratio Teacher-Class Ratio Teacher-Section Ratio Class-Classroom Ratio Section-Classroom Ratio Pupil Density Student Density P.E. student-Teacher Ratio P.E. student-Teacher Ratio Per Pupil Cost Per Student Cost Participation Rate

Retention Rate Survival Rate Group Survival Rate Repetition Rate Transition Rate Completion Rate Promotion Rate Graduation Rate Failure Rate Drop-out Rate Scores in Nationally Administered Achievement Tests

Summary of Indicators to Achieve Efficiency, Equity, and Quality Improvement

II. Sample Indicators to Achieve Equity and Quality Pupil/Student-Textbook Ratio Proportion of Teachers with Graduate Degrees P.E./Sports Area-Student Ratio Pupil/Student-P.E. Equipment Ratio III. Sample Indicators Computed by Way of Special Studies Cohort Survival Rate Proportion/Teacher Turnover Rate Participation Rate (for ages 6-16) Indicators of Teacher Quality Stay-out Rate