“Delving into Review Coordinators’ Dynamics: A System Theory Analysis LET Preparation Programs in Davao City’s Private Non-Sectarian Higher Education Landscape”

“Delving into Review Coordinators’ Dynamics: A System Theory Analysis LET Preparation Programs in Davao City’s Private Non-Sectarian Higher Education Landscape”

¹Alkhaser V. Sappayani, ²Glein Bustamante, ³John Mart Elesio

¹Program Head, Davao Central College

²SHS Teacher II, Department of Education-Division of Davao City

³Professor, Holy Cross of Davao College

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8120388

Received: 21 December 2024; Accepted: 27 December 2024; Published: 25 January 2025

ABSTRACT

The Philippine government acknowledges that teachers play a crucial role in building the nation and fostering development by creating responsible, literate citizens. To support this mission, the state commits to ensuring high-quality education through effective oversight of licensure examinations and the advancement of teaching as a professional practice. This qualitative case study investigated the dynamics of Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) Review Coordinators in private non-sectarian higher education institutions in Davao City, specifically examining their systemic planning mechanisms, dynamic implementation systems, and systemic outcomes and impacts. Anchored in Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s Systems Theory Model (1968), which emphasizes wholeness, interdependence, and dynamic interaction, the study employed structured interviews with three purposively selected LET Review Coordinators, analyzing the data through thematic analysis. The findings revealed nine major themes across three domains: (1) systemic planning mechanisms encompassing performance-based program assessment, resource management and adaptation, and collaborative professional development; (2) dynamic implementation systems comprising system-based operational management, collaborative leadership and communication, and adaptive program implementation; and (3) systemic outcomes and impacts including performance-based program assessment, resource management and adaptation, and collaborative professional development. The study’s implications underscore the necessity of balancing structured frameworks with adaptive approaches in review programs, while highlighting the need for standardized assessment tools and enhanced institutional support. Future directions recommend implementing structured assessment systems, addressing facility constraints, providing targeted coordinator training, and conducting exploratory factor analysis to understand the structural relationships between systemic elements affecting review coordinators’ performance.

Keywords: LET Review Coordinators, Systems Theory, Higher Education, Professional Development

INTRODUCTION

The preparation for professional teacher licensing examination presents significant challenges in the educational landscape, where Review Coordinators in private non-sectarian institutions serve as key architects in managing curriculum alignment, resource allocation, and stakeholder engagement. While teaching licensure remains mandatory across institutions in the Philippines, various factors affect education graduate’s success, including time constraints, comprehension issues, examination timing, and psychological pressures. This situation demands a well-orchestrated systematic approach, particularly as institutions face mounting pressure to maintain competitive passing rates while adapting to evolving educational standards and requirements. More so, the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) will now implement a stringent accountability measure targeting teacher education programs that repeatedly demonstrate poor performance. Specifically, Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) that consistently exhibit substandard outcomes in the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) and fail to meet the minimum academic standards established by CHED will receive a formal notice mandating immediate program closure (EDCOM 2, 2024).

The Philippine government is aware of how important teachers are to the formation of a responsible and educated populace, which in turn helps construct a stronger nation. In order to accomplish this, the State must ensure and advance the quality of education by properly supervising and regulating the license examination and professionalizing the teaching profession (Section 2, Republic Act 1783, 1994). In addition, Article III, Section 13, Examination and Registration states that, unless otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of this Act, all applicants for registration as professional teachers shall be required to pass a written examination that shall be given at least once a year at such locations and times as the Board may determine after receiving approval from the Commission. Unless otherwise permitted by this Act, in order to practice as a professional teacher in the Philippines, a person must possess a current certificate of registration from the Commission as well as a current professional license from the Commission. Additionally, under section 18, “Oath Before Practice,” each registrant is required to take an oath before engaging in professional teaching activities.

More so, the Teacher Education Institutions in the Philippines are required to perform well on the board test due to the importance of the licensure examination for teachers. To this goal, Teacher Education Institutions assess the curriculum, revise the course syllabi, and put strict admissions and retention guidelines in place. To prepare teacher education students for the licensure examination for teachers, Teacher Education Institutions also run extensive pre-board review programs. These courses serve as audits of previous coursework that aim to closely resemble the board exams that aspiring graduates must pass.

Within the Philippine settings, in Pangasinan, Guinto (2023) in her study discussed the importance of tailored support programs addressing specific challenges, highlighting the necessity of fostering interactive online learning environments. Additionally, the research conducted by Abao et al., (2023) presents a comprehensive strategy for fostering improved student outcomes in institutions of higher learning, encompassing key recommendations such as strengthening curricular enhancement programs, reinforcing constructive alignment, and intensifying retention policy and mentoring practices. On the other hand, Igcasama et al., (2021) mentioned that facilities and resources were the factors contributing to the failing of the education graduates who took the licensure examination for teachers. Moreover, Amanonce et al., (2020) revealed in their comprehensive study that improving the conduct of pre-board examination review programs significantly enhances students’ preparedness and academic performance. Their research demonstrated that structured, targeted review initiatives can effectively bridge knowledge gaps, boost confidence, and ultimately increase the likelihood of success in high-stakes professional certification exams. Benchmarking from LET performing institutions and selecting the best faculty to teach a course, ensure the validity and reliability of review instructional materials and assessment tools with LET competencies, strict implementation on the admission and retention policy, and evaluate on a regular basis the effectiveness of the course audit in all areas (Dagdag et al., 2017).

In the global arena, the  United States faces ongoing challenges in developing a diverse and high-quality teacher workforce. Recruiting and retaining millions of educators is complex, with responsibility shared between state and local communities and supported by federal guidance. Success depends on sharing research-based practices, understanding local needs, and promoting innovative approaches that learn from existing efforts (Wilsom & Kelly, 2022). The National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) exposed a critical gap in teacher education, revealing that many aspiring elementary educators fail professional license exams due to misalignment between state knowledge requirements and undergraduate preparation programs. The study of 817 institutions highlighted significant deficiencies in curriculum design that hinder candidates’ ability to meet professional licensure standards (Downey, 2019).

Despite extensive research on teacher licensure examination preparation, a critical knowledge gap exists in understanding the specific systemic dynamics and operational challenges faced by Review Coordinators in private non-sectarian higher education institutions, particularly in the context of Davao City. While existing studies have explored isolated factors affecting licensure examination performance, such as resource limitations, curriculum design, and student support strategies, there remains a significant lack of comprehensive, system-level analysis that specifically examines the intricate role of Review Coordinators as pivotal agents in managing licensure examination preparation. Previous research has predominantly focused on individual institutional factors or student-centric perspectives, neglecting the complex interplay of organizational processes, stakeholder interactions, and systemic constraints that Review Coordinators navigate. The emerging regulatory pressures from the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) and the high-stakes nature of the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) further underscore the need for an in-depth, system theory-based investigation that can provide holistic insights into the strategic mechanisms employed by Review Coordinators to enhance examination preparation and institutional performance.

Teacher Education Institutions are required to perform well on the board test due to the importance of the licensure examination for teachers. To this goal, Teacher Education Institutions assess the curriculum, revise the course syllabi, and put strict admissions and retention guidelines in place. To prepare teacher education students for the licensure examination for teachers, Teacher Education Institutions also run extensive pre-board review programs. These courses serve as audits of previous coursework that aim to closely resemble the board exams that aspiring graduates must pass. Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) that consistently exhibit substandard outcomes in the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) and fail to meet the minimum academic standards established by CHED will receive a formal notice mandating immediate program closure. Thus, there is an urgency to conduct this study to fill the gap.

Research Objectives

1. To investigate the systemic planning mechanisms employed by LET Review Coordinators.
2. To analyze the dynamic implementation systems utilized by LET Review Coordinators.
3. To assess the systemic outcomes and impacts by the LET Review Coordinators.

Research Questions

1. How do you design and establish systemic planning mechanisms in preparing for licensure examination programs?
2. What dynamic implementation systems do LET Review Coordinators utilize in executing their licensure examination preparation programs?
3. How do you assess and evaluate the systemic outcomes and impacts of their licensure examination preparation programs?

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored in Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s Systems Theory Model (1968), which provides an ideal theoretical framework for examining the dynamics of LET review coordinators in Davao City’s Private Non-Sectarian Higher Education Landscape. The theory’s core principles of wholeness, interdependence, and dynamic interaction perfectly align with the complex nature of review coordination programs, where multiple components—coordinators, instructors, students, resources, and processes—function as an integrated system. Its emphasis on open systems and environmental interaction is particularly relevant as LET preparation programs must continuously adapt to external factors such as PRC requirements, educational policies, and market demands. The theory’s focus on feedback loops and hierarchical organization supports the analysis of how review coordinators navigate institutional structures, manage program effectiveness, and respond to stakeholder needs. This theoretical lens enables a comprehensive understanding of how review coordinators operate within the broader educational ecosystem while maintaining program quality and achieving desired outcomes in teacher licensure preparation.

METHOD

The research design employed was qualitative case study specifically a single case study. Single case research is a qualitative approach in which the investigators explore a bounded system (a case) over time, through detailed, in-depth data collection. Qualitative case studies are distinguished by the sized of the bounded case, such as whether the case involves one individual, several individuals, a group, an entire program, or an activity. Stake (1995) as cited by Creswell (2007) stated that a single instrumental case study focuses on an issue or concern, and then selects one bounded case to illustrate this issue. The research locale was in Davao City specifically one of the private Higher Institutions in the city that offers Teacher Education Program. Moreover, there were three research participants and they were all LET Review Coordinators. They were purposely selected because they have the wealth of knowledge in terms of experiences and management. Nikolopoulou (2023) stated that purposive sampling selects units based on the qualities you require in your sample. Ultimately, the research instruments used was structured-interview guide that undergoes validation processes and have checked by the research adviser. Several procedures are available for conducting case study as mentioned by Stake (1995) as cited by Creswell (2007). First, researchers determine if a case study is appropriate to the research problem. Researchers need to identify their case (single case). Yin (2003) as cited by Creswell (2007) recommends six types of information to collect: documents, archival records, interviews, direct observations, participant-observations, and physical artifacts. The collected data from the semi-structured interviews underwent systematic transcription, coding, analysis, and interpretation using thematic analysis. This analytical method, particularly suited for textual data such as interview transcripts, involves meticulous examination to identify recurring patterns, themes, concepts, and meaningful insights from participants’ responses. The process followed a structured six-step framework: data familiarization through repeated transcript reading, systematic coding of significant statements, generating preliminary themes by clustering related codes, reviewing and refining themes for coherence, defining and labeling final themes, and presenting detailed written findings. This systematic approach ensures methodological rigor while minimizing potential researcher bias, enabling a deep understanding of participants’ experiences while maintaining the integrity of their perspectives (Caufield, 2023).

RESULTS

Figure 1. Systemic Planning Mechanisms employed by LET Review Coordinators

As presented in Figure 1, from the collected data during the in-depth interview (IDI) of the participants, three (3) major themes have emerged in the systemic planning mechanisms employed by LET review coordinators, these are: performance-based program assessment, resource management and adaptation, and collaborative professional development. Also, six (6) core ideas have emerged; strategic content planning, structured timeline implementation, resource allocation and management, quality control measures, multi-level communication, and team-based planning and execution.

This section presents the key responses that influenced the development of core ideas within the systemic planning mechanisms implemented by LET Review Coordinators.

Systematic Program Management

“We went through several revisions before finalizing what we have now because we needed to cover the three main areas for the in-house review—Gen. Ed., Prof. Ed., and our specialization fields.” (L)”We checked the TOS for the LET online to make sure everything was aligned properly.” (L)”We double checked what are the different subjects or topics to be included in the review session.” (P)

Resource Optimization and Quality Assurance

“We have to stick to our allotted budget each semester to cover the costs for instructional materials, teacher payments, and facilities.” (L)”We need to carefully plan in terms of that like the costs of facilities and materials to be used.” (P)”We set a clear budget, making sure we stayed within our target range without overspending.” (E)

“The teacher must be LPT, second, the teacher had already handled/taught the assigned subject.” (L)”To maintain discipline, we track attendance for each session.” (E) “We physically check in the classroom they are assigned and record their time in and out.” (E)

Collaborative Implementation Framework

“We consulted with our program head and teachers from each major.” (L)”It is a matter of communication and collaboration to come up with a smooth and organized flow of the review.” (P)”I worked closely with Ms. Alicante, my co-coordinator, to coordinate with subject teachers on the scheduling, planning, and all other details.” (E)

Figure 2. Dynamic Implementation Systems utilized by LET Review Coordinators

As presented in Figure 2, from the collected data during the in-depth interview (IDI) of the participants, three (3) major themes have emerged in the systemic planning mechanisms employed by LET review coordinators, these are: system-based operational management, collaborative leadership and communication, adaptive program implementation. Also, nine (9) core ideas have emerged; structured schedule implementation, resource management, documentation process, team relationship building, multi-channel communication, shared responsibility, problem solving strategies, flexible resource allocation, proactive planning.

Figure 3. Systemic Outcomes and Impacts by the LET Review Coordinators

As presented in Figure 3, from the collected data during the in-depth interview (IDI) of the participants, three (3) major themes have emerged in the systemic planning mechanisms employed by LET review coordinators, these are: performance-based program assessment, resource management and adaptation, and collaborative professional development. Also, nine (9) core ideas have emerged; informal evaluation systems, board exam success metrics, internal assessment methods, facility challenges, resource solutions, adaptive strategies, team support systems, professional growth, and leadership engagement.

This section presents the key responses that influenced the development of core ideas within the dynamic implementation systems utilized by LET Review Coordinators.

Systems-Based Operational Management

– “We simply follow our approved schedule and assign tasks ahead of time” (L)- “We strictly follow our schedule and post it in our group page” (P)- “We make sure to post updates every week on our Facebook page so everyone can see any announcements or changes in the schedule” (E)

“we see to it that everything is prepared such as the projector, extension wire, microphone, and speaker” (P)”we book the resource rooms, especially for subjects that have a lot of students” (E) “teachers are individually provided with projectors borrowed from school facilities” (E)

“I really make sure I communicate with my co-coordinator.” (P)”A group page is created so that students can ask queries about the review.” (P)”Coordinators remind the assigned teachers about their schedule by posting updates in our exclusive Facebook group.” (E)

“record the assessments” (L)”keep track of teachers’ attendance” (E)”submit letters to the Office of the President to verify that the review coaches” (E)

Collaborative Leadership and Communication

“I have a good relationship with my co-review coordinator because we are able to compromise” (L)”I have a good and positive relationship with my co-review coordinator and also, and day by day I am learning from her” (P)”It’s heartwarming to have a workmate who gears the same as yours” (E)

“We talk in person and via messenger” (L)”post it in our group page so that students are informed of any announcements” (P)”we set up online meetings with students” (E)

“we decided to divide the section into two, to be facilitated by the assigned review lecturer and the assigned review coordinator” (L)”it is just a matter of reaching out and communicating with my co-review coordinators” (L)”constant communication with a co-coordinator helps a lot in resolving any concerns” (E)

“if any room isn’t available, we quickly find a replacement” (E)”if an assigned teacher can’t make it, we immediately find a substitute” (E)”we are able to compromise and adjust to accomplish our task” (L)

“we don’t have enough area to cater to the other section simultaneously so we decided to divide the section into two” (L)”we check the cleanliness and seating arrangements of the regular rooms” (E)”most instructors bring their own [projectors], which we are extremely grateful for” (E)”assign tasks ahead of time” (L)”We make sure to announce any changes ahead of time” (E)

This section presents the key responses that influenced the development of core ideas within the systemic outcomes and impacts by LET Review Coordinators.

Performance-Based Program Assessment

“we don’t really have a specific set of criteria for evaluation since we treat this review program more like a subject” (L)”I think there is no specific criteria but still we were able to evaluate the effectiveness” (P)”As far as I know, there are no specific criteria in evaluating the overall success of the program” (E)

“high percentages during board exam” (L)”we based it on the national rating and percentage of the school’s passer” (P)”we can also see it from the percentage of the list of passers, especially first takers” (E)

“number of passers in the mock board exams, the final grades that the students actually end up with” (L)”having the majority of students pass during the mock board exam” (P)- “the scores they got from each field of specialization” (E)

Resource Management and Adaptation

“our student population keeps growing, but our facilities haven’t quite kept up” (L)”facilities are not conducive at all since it is not well ventilated” (P)”With just two or four electric fans in a room, it was hard for students to concentrate in that heat” (E)

“60% of the questions come from previous assessments, and we source the remaining 40% from other LET references” (L)”we are just lucky because the lecturers are generous in terms of letting their projector be borrowed” (P)

“we try to keep the scheduling flexible – we can switch around Prof Ed and Gen Ed classes as needed” (L) “I was able to address this one by simply managing my time and identifying a set of priorities” (P)”these challenges actually pushed me to do better, to face obstacles head-on” (E)

Collaborative Professional Development

“open communication really helps” (L)”I am thankful for our Program head because he is also hands-on in the review program” (P)”I’m genuinely grateful for my team, especially the CELA B group during my tenure” (E)

“these challenges didn’t stop me from putting my all into the program” (E)”grateful for the opportunity in handling this kind of program, it helps me a lot as a teacher and as an individual” (P) “It was a struggle to turn between to give a heart out for humanity or sticking to your standard principle as a teacher” (E)

“regular reminders and one-on-one consultations” (L)”Program head because he is also hands-on in the review program” (P)”ultimately made me more committed to the work” (E)

DISCUSSION

This chapter centers on analyzing and thoroughly discussing the study’s results, while also exploring their implications and possible avenues for future research.

Systemic Planning Mechanism

The LET Review program demonstrates a highly structured approach to program management, primarily manifested through two key aspects: strategic content planning and structured timeline implementation.

Systematic Program Management

The strategic content planning component reveals a methodical approach to organizing review materials and content. The coordinators employ a comprehensive revision process that ensures coverage of all essential areas including General Education, Professional Education, and specialization fields. This planning process is deliberately aligned with the Table of Specifications (TOS) for the LET examination, demonstrating a commitment to meeting official standards. The content structure is regularly reviewed and refined to maintain its effectiveness and relevance.

The Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) has implemented a refined Table of Specification (TOS) that strategically recalibrates the licensure examination’s content distribution. For elementary level candidates, the examination now comprises 40% general education and 60% professional education topics, while secondary level candidates face a more nuanced evaluation with 20% general education, 40% professional education, and 40% specialized subject content, reflecting a comprehensive approach to assessing educators’ knowledge and pedagogical competence (Teach Pinas, 2024).

The structured timeline implementation showcases a well-organized temporal framework for the review program. The coordinators have established clear timeframes for material preparation, submission of assessments, and actual review sessions. The weekend scheduling of review sessions reflects consideration for both teachers’ and students’ availability. Additionally, the timeline includes strategic preparation periods for mock board examinations, demonstrating forward-thinking program management.

Resource Optimization and Quality Assurance

This theme encompasses two critical aspects of the program: resource allocation and management, and quality control measures.

Resource Allocation and Management. The resource allocation and management aspect reflect careful attention to budgetary constraints and resource utilization. The program operates within a strictly managed budget that covers various operational aspects including instructional materials, teacher compensation, and facility costs. This demonstrates a pragmatic approach to resource management that ensures program sustainability while maintaining operational effectiveness.

Resource allocation is a crucial component of a broader management process that ensures all institutional resources are managed effectively and that the relationship between inputs and outputs is clear. It should align with the institution’s priorities for specific activities or outcomes while also considering the relative costs of achieving those result (TRAC Development Group, 2011).

Quality Control Measures. Quality control measures are embedded throughout the program’s implementation. These measures begin with strict teacher qualification requirements, including LPT certification and relevant teaching experience. The program maintains rigorous monitoring systems, including attendance tracking and classroom supervision. These quality control mechanisms ensure consistency in program delivery and maintain high standards across all review sessions. On the other hand, understanding budget constraints is essential for grasping economic decision-making. At its core, a budget constraint defines the combinations of goods and services a consumer can purchase based on their limited income and the prices of those items. It serves as a boundary that separates feasible options from infeasible ones and attainable choices from unattainable ones. Every decision made within this constraint involves a trade-off, representing an opportunity cost—what must be sacrificed to obtain something else. This constraint is not merely a financial limitation; it reflects the scarcity that influences all aspects of life, compelling individuals and societies to make choices (Faster Capital, 2024).

Collaborative Implementation Framework

The collaborative implementation framework is characterized by multi-level communication and team-based planning and execution. Clarke and Cooper (2000) in their seminal research illuminates the critical role of collaboration in knowledge management, revealing that successful knowledge initiatives fundamentally depend on creating shared contexts where employees actively engage in collective information exchange. Their empirical findings demonstrate that knowledge management is not a passive process, but a dynamic, interactive endeavor that thrives on interpersonal communication, cross-functional understanding, and the strategic integration of diverse organizational perspectives.

Multi-level Communication. Multi-level communication emerges as a crucial element of the program’s success. The coordinators have established various communication channels, including social media platforms and group pages, to facilitate information flow among all stakeholders. Regular updates and reminders ensure that both teachers and students remain informed about schedules, requirements, and program developments.

Team-based planning and execution emphasizes the collective nature of the program’s implementation. The coordination involves close collaboration between co-coordinators, program heads, and subject teachers. This collaborative approach ensures comprehensive coverage of all program aspects and allows for effective distribution of responsibilities. The team-based structure also facilitates knowledge sharing and mutual support among program implementers.

Dynamic Implementation System

The analysis of the Review Coordinators’ implementation systems revealed three main themes: Systems-Based Operational Management, Collaborative Leadership and Communication, and Adaptive Program Implementation. Each theme encompasses distinct but interconnected aspects of how the review program is managed and implemented.

Systems-Based Operational Management

This theme reflects the structured and systematic approach that Review Coordinators employ in managing the review program. Gallemard (2024) stated that institutional knowledge represents a comprehensive repository of organizational wisdom, encompassing collective expertise, accumulated insights, and distinctive organizational practices. This strategic asset integrates the cumulative experiences, best practices, and procedural understanding developed by employees, leaders, and stakeholders throughout the organization’s evolutionary trajectory, serving as a critical intellectual foundation for organizational learning and strategic continuity.

Structured Schedule Implementation. The coordinators demonstrate a strong commitment to systematic scheduling and execution of activities. They maintain strict adherence to approved schedules while ensuring proper dissemination of information through various platforms. As evidenced by Ms. P’s statement about strictly following schedules and Ms. E’s practice of regular online updates, there is a clear emphasis on maintaining organized and well-communicated schedules. This systematic approach helps ensure all stakeholders are informed and activities proceed as planned.

Resource Management. The data reveals meticulous attention to resource preparation and management. Coordinators actively manage both physical resources (such as projectors, microphones, and speakers) and space resources (classroom arrangements and facility bookings). Ms. P’s detailed account of equipment preparation and Ms. E’s description of room booking procedures demonstrate the comprehensive approach to resource management. This careful attention to logistics ensures the smooth operation of review sessions.

Documentation Process. A systematic approach to record-keeping and administrative requirements is evident. The coordinators maintain various types of documentation, from assessment records to attendance tracking and official communications. This is particularly highlighted in Ms. E’s practice of submitting verification letters and keeping attendance records, showing the importance of proper documentation in program implementation.

Collaborative Leadership and Communication

This theme highlights the interpersonal and communicative aspects of program management. Structured communication provides a systematic approach to information management, enabling standardization, tracking, and monitoring. While formal channels offer clarity, the research reveals a nuanced perspective on informal communication, acknowledging its potential for both organizational challenges and innovative potential. The delicate balance between maintaining professional integrity and fostering creative collaboration emerges as a critical consideration in communication strategy development (Gall & Hirst, 2010).

Team Relationship Building. Strong professional relationships emerge as a crucial factor in successful program implementation. All three coordinators explicitly mentioned the importance of good relationships with their co-coordinators. Ms. L’s emphasis on compromise, Ms. P’s acknowledgment of learning from colleagues, and Ms. E’s appreciation of like-minded workmates demonstrate how positive relationships facilitate effective coordination.

Multi-Channel Communication. The coordinators utilize various communication channels to ensure effective information dissemination. They combine traditional face-to-face communication with digital platforms like messenger and online group pages. This multi-channel approach, as evidenced by statements from all three coordinators, ensures comprehensive coverage in information sharing and accessibility for all stakeholders.

Shared Responsibility. The data shows a strong emphasis on collaborative work and shared accountability. This is demonstrated through the division of tasks, regular communication between co-coordinators, and collective problem-solving approaches. Ms. L’s description of task division and Ms. E’s emphasis on constant communication for problem resolution highlight this collaborative approach.

Adaptive Program Implementation

This theme captures the flexible and responsive nature of program management.

Problem-Solving Strategies. The coordinators demonstrate quick and effective problem-solving abilities, particularly in handling logistical challenges. Ms. E’s accounts of finding quick replacements for rooms and substitute teachers show the agile approach to problem-solving. This adaptability ensures program continuity despite unexpected challenges.

Oherron (2024) stated that adaptive program management enables you to efficiently manage a large workload, even amidst shifting priorities. It’s ideal for aligning and advancing multiple projects toward overarching goals while maintaining a strong emphasis on delivering value quickly. Rather than adhering to inflexible plans that can easily break down with any change, this approach allows for real-time adjustments to keep everything on track.

Flexible Resource Allocation. The data reveals a dynamic approach to resource management, where coordinators adjust and reallocate resources based on changing needs. This is evidenced in Ms. L’s strategy of dividing sections due to space constraints and Ms. E’s regular assessment of room arrangements. The coordinators show creativity in maximizing available resources while maintaining program quality.

Proactive Planning. A forward-thinking approach to program management is evident in the coordinators’ work. They emphasize advance preparation and anticipation of potential challenges. This is demonstrated through Ms. L’s practice of advance task assignment and Ms. E’s approach to early announcement of changes, showing how proactive planning contributes to smooth program implementation.

Systemic Outcomes and Impacts

The analysis of the Review Coordinators’ responses regarding program outcomes and impacts revealed three primary themes: Performance-Based Program Assessment, Resource Management and Adaptation, and Collaborative Professional Development. Each theme encompasses distinct yet interconnected aspects of how the review program is evaluated and managed.

Performance-Based Program Assessment

This theme reflects the methods and metrics used to evaluate the review program’s effectiveness. Performance tracking is the systematic process of monitoring and evaluating key metrics and outcomes to ensure that individuals, teams, and organizations achieve their goals (Guru Technologies, 2024). Performance tracking is the systematic process of monitoring and evaluating key metrics and outcomes to ensure that individuals, teams, and organizations are on track to achieve their goals. This involves regularly assessing performance indicators that reflect progress and identifying areas for improvement. By establishing clear benchmarks and collecting data, organizations can gain valuable insights into their operations, enabling them to make informed decisions and adjustments as needed. Effective performance tracking not only fosters accountability but also encourages a culture of continuous improvement, ultimately leading to enhanced productivity and success.

Informal Evaluation Systems. The data reveals a notably informal approach to program evaluation. All three coordinators explicitly acknowledged the absence of formal evaluation criteria, with Ms. L characterizing the program as being treated “more like a subject.” This informal approach, while flexible, indicates a potential area for development in establishing more structured evaluation frameworks. The coordinators rely heavily on experiential assessment and observable outcomes rather than standardized evaluation metrics.

Board Exam Success Metrics. Board examination results emerge as a primary indicator of program success. The coordinators consistently reference national ratings and school passing percentages as key performance indicators. This focus on board exam outcomes demonstrates a results-oriented approach to program assessment, with particular attention to first-time takers’ performance. The emphasis on these external metrics suggests they serve as the most tangible measure of program effectiveness.

Internal Assessment Methods. The program utilizes various internal assessment tools, particularly mock board examinations and specialized field assessments. These internal evaluations serve as preliminary indicators of student readiness and program effectiveness. The coordinators track student performance through these assessments, using the results to gauge both individual student progress and overall program impact.

Resource Management and Adaptation

This theme captures the operational challenges and solutions implemented by the coordinators. The research reveals a nuanced approach to institutional management that embodies what Brandsen et al., (2022) describe as organizational plasticity – the ability to rapidly reconfigure resources, responsibilities, and strategies in response to emerging challenges. Comprehensive institutional management is a multifaceted approach that integrates various strategies and practices to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of educational institutions. This concept encompasses the holistic coordination of resources, policies, and stakeholder engagement, ensuring that all components of the institution work synergistically toward achieving its mission and goals.

Facility Challenges. Infrastructure limitations emerge as a significant concern across all coordinator accounts. The challenges primarily center on inadequate facilities relative to growing student populations and poor ventilation in review spaces. These physical constraints directly impact the learning environment and program delivery effectiveness, as highlighted by consistent mentions of heat and space issues across all interviews.

Resource Solutions. The coordinators demonstrate creativity in addressing resource limitations. Their solutions range from systematic approaches to test preparation (Ms. L’s 60-40 question sourcing strategy) to leveraging instructor generosity for equipment needs. These solutions reflect a pragmatic approach to resource management, often relying on collaboration and optimization of available resources.

Adaptive Strategies. The data shows strong evidence of flexible and adaptive management approaches. Coordinators implement various strategies to overcome challenges, including flexible scheduling, priority-based time management, and continuous adaptation to obstacles. This adaptability appears crucial for maintaining program effectiveness despite resource constraints.

Collaborative Professional Development

This theme highlights the human and developmental aspects of program management. Collaboration is crucial for effective community engagement, yet there is limited understanding of the practices involved in collaborative communication within partnerships. This communication process encompasses five key elements: connecting, conversing, committing, envisioning, and developing partner patterns. Connecting involves establishing relationships and building trust among partners, while conversing refers to open dialogue that fosters mutual understanding and shared goals (Dumlao & Shearman, 2023). Committing emphasizes the dedication of all parties to the partnership’s objectives, and envisioning encourages partners to imagine a shared future and align their visions. Finally, developing partner patterns focuses on creating sustainable practices that enhance collaboration over time. Together, these elements form a framework for effective collaborative communication, which is essential for fostering strong partnerships and achieving community engagement goals.

Team Support Systems. Strong collaborative relationships emerge as a crucial factor in program success. The coordinators consistently emphasize the importance of team support and open communication. This collaborative approach appears to facilitate both program implementation and problem-solving, creating a supportive environment for addressing challenges.

Professional Growth. The data reveals significant personal and professional development opportunities within the program management role. Coordinators report gaining valuable experience and skills through handling program challenges. Their responses indicate that the difficulties encountered often serve as catalysts for professional growth and skill development.

Leadership Engagement. Active leadership involvement appears as a significant factor in program success. The engagement of program heads and the development of leadership skills among coordinators contribute to effective program management. This leadership component manifests in both formal program oversight and informal mentoring relationships.

Implications

The findings reveal crucial insights into the management and effectiveness of LET review programs. The blend of systematic planning, dynamic implementation, and outcome assessment demonstrates that successful review programs require a balance between structured frameworks and adaptive approaches. The informal evaluation methods, while functional, suggest a need for more standardized assessment tools to better track program effectiveness. The challenges in resource management and facility constraints highlight the importance of institutional support in maintaining program quality. Additionally, the strong emphasis on collaborative leadership and professional development indicates that the success of such programs extends beyond academic preparation to include personal and professional growth opportunities for both coordinators and participants.

Future Directions

Future research in this area could explore several promising directions.

1. Implement a structured assessment system with clear, measurable criteria to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of review programs.
2. Address facility constraints by investing in more conducive learning environments. This includes improving classroom conditions, ensuring proper ventilation, and providing necessary technological resources to support effective learning.
3. Provide targeted training for review coordinators on time management, program evaluation techniques, and adaptive management strategies. This will help address the challenges of managing complex review programs and supporting student success.
4. It is further recommended for future researchers to conduct an exploratory factor analysis to identify the underlying structural relationships between various systemic elements affecting review coordinators’ performance and their interaction patterns within private non-sectarian LET preparation programs

REFERENCES

1. Abao, E., Petancio, J.A., Sanchez, J.M. & Sumalinog, G. (2023). Performance of beginning teachers in the licensure examination for teachers: a national study. DOI: 3389/feduc.2023.1240658
2. Amanonce, J. & Maramag, A. (2020). Licensure examination performance and academic achievement of teacher education graduates. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE). Vol. 9, No. 3. DOI: 10.11591/ijere.v9i3.20614
3. Brandsen, T., Verschuere, B., & Sørensen, E. (2022). Co-creation in governance: An agenda for future research. Public Management Review, 24(9), 1473-1492.
4. Caulfield, J. (2023). How to Do Thematic Analysis | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/thematic-analysis/
5. Clarke, P. & Cooper, M.A. (2000). Knowledge Management and Collaboration. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2379479 Knowledge Management And Collaboration
6. Creswell, J. Qualitative inquiry and research design. Choosing among five approaches. 2md edition. Sage Publications, Inc. https://revistapsicologia.org/public/formato/cuali2.pdf
7. Dagdag, J. (2017). Examining the Factors of Licensure Examination for Teachers Performance for Program Strategy Enhancement. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research. Vol. 5 No.4, 34-39. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/35650354/Examining the Factors of Licensure Examination for Teachers Performance for Program Strategy Enhancement
8. Downey, M. (2019). Why do so many new teachers stumble on licensing exams? Retrieved from https://www.ajc.com/blog/get-schooled/why-many-new-teachers-stumble-licensing-exams/OQoctgAotFhb8CwWXnfhjP/
9. Dumlao, R. & Shearman, S. (2023). Conceptual Foundations for Collaborative Communication. A Framework and Practice for Community-Campus Partners.
10. EDCOM 2 (2024). CHED to close down poor performing and non-compliant teacher education programs.
11. Faster Capital (2024). Budget Constraint: Navigating Scarcity: Budget Constraints and Utility. https://fastercapital.com/content/Budget-Constraint–Navigating-Scarcity–Budget-Constraints-and-Utility.html
12. Gall, D. & Hirst, D. (2010). Channels of communication. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/structured-communication
13. Gallemard, J. (2024). What is Institutional Knowledge | Importance, Types, Examples & How to Capture. https://blog.smart-tribune.com/en/institutional-knowledge
14. Guinto, V. (2023). Challenges on Online Licensure Examination for Teachers Review. International Journal of Latest Research in Humanities and Social Science (IJLRHSS) Volume 06 – Issue 10
15. Guru Technologies Inc. (2024). Performance Tracking: The Key to Unlocking Organizational Success. https://www.getguru.com/reference/performance-tracking
16. Gutterman, A. (2023). Stakeholder Engagement. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369366732 Stakeholder Engagement.
17. Igcasama, A.M., Layao, J., Magallano, S.M. & Maloloy-on M. (2021). Factors Affecting the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) Performance of Saint Michael College of Caraga from 2017-2019. Philippine E-Journals, Volume 3, No. 1. DOI:10.18868/cte.02.060121.01 in Nigerian School Systems. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED572007.pdf
18. Nikolopoulou, K. (2023). What Is Purposive Sampling? | Definition & Examples. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/purposive-sampling/
19. Oherron, R. (2024). Adaptive Program Management Helps You Navigate Complexity with Confidence. https://planisware.com/resources/portfolio-management/adaptive-program-management-helps-you-navigate-complexity-0
20. Teach Pinas (2024). LET COVERAGE 2024: Licensure Examination for Teachers. https://www.teachpinas.com/let-coverage-licensure-examination-for-teachers/
21. TRAC Development Group (2011). Prioritising and aligning resources to academic
22. Wilson, S. M., & Kelley, S. L. (2022). Landscape of teacher preparation programs