Strategic Planning and Management Practices on Quality Education Enhancement

Strategic Planning and Management Practices on Quality Education Enhancement

Vincent S. Verano¹, Doreen D. Agrazamendez², Koiser S. Sarazain³, Marleonie Bauyot⁴

¹School Head, Tungkalan National High School, Davao City, Philippines

²School Head, Gasco and Centina IS, Davao City, Philippines

³Teacher, Tamayong Elementary School, Davao City, Philippines

⁴Faculty, Ateneo de Davao University, Davao City, Philippines

DOI : https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.803173S

Received: 15 June 2024; Accepted: 03 July 2024; Published: 07 August 2024

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the relationships between strategic planning, management practices, and quality education enhancement in basic education institutions. Data was collected from 200 public school teachers in Davao City using surveys on strategic planning, management practices, and performance capacities related to educational quality. Results showed high levels of strategic planning, with stakeholder perspective being the most manifested indicator. Management practices were also high, with designing a vision being most prominent. Quality education enhancement was high, with the school policy environment being the top indicator. A significant but weak relationship was found between strategic planning and quality enhancement, while management practices showed no significant relationship. Regression analysis indicated that strategic planning was a statistically significant predictor of quality education enhancement, albeit with a small effect size. Overall, the findings underscore the interplay of factors impacting educational quality improvement.

Keywords: Strategic Educational Planning, Management Practices, Quality Education Enhancement, Resource-Based View, Educational Leadership

INTRODUCTION

The quest for quality education has been a longstanding pursuit, yet it remains an elusive goal for many educational systems worldwide. Despite concerted efforts, the learning process must often meet the ideal standard. Numerous challenges, such as insufficient funding, inadequate infrastructure and teaching staff, corruption, insecurity, lax supervision, subpar learning outcomes, and ineffective policy implementation, plague it. Poorly crafted government policies have also been identified as a contributing factor to the deterioration of educational quality.

Educational institutions across the globe have grappled with the endless battle to overcome these threats against quality education. Empirical studies have underscored various factors that either contribute to or hinder the improvement of educational quality. However, these studies have largely overlooked the paradigm of strategic planning and management practices and their potential influences on enhancing the quality of education.

The researchers conducted the present study to address this gap and highlight the influence of strategic planning and management practices on enhancing educational quality in basic education institutions. This research endeavor aligns with the call for well-defined and futuristic education policies at the school level, as education is widely recognized as a catalyst for economic and social progress (Aithal & Aithal, 2020).

The study employed a rigorous research design and data collection methods to explore the relationship between strategic educational planning, management practices, and quality education enhancement. By investigating these factors, the research aimed to provide valuable insights and recommendations for policymakers, educational administrators, and stakeholders, ultimately contributing to the ongoing efforts to improve the quality of education worldwide.

Hypotheses

H_o1: There is no significant relationship between the level of strategic planning and quality education enhancement.

H_o2: There is no significant relationship between management practices and quality education enhancement.

H_o3: There is no model that best describes quality education enhancement.

Theoretical Framework

This study anchored on Resource-Based View (RBV) (Barney,1991 as cited in Khan et al., 2023). The theory provided a lens to analyze how strategic educational planning and management practices can leverage and allocate resources effectively to enhance the quality of education. This framework emphasized the strategic deployment of tangible and intangible resources, such as qualified faculty, modern infrastructure, advanced technology, and innovative teaching methods, to achieve sustainable competitive advantage in the education sector. The Resource-Based View (RBV) theory provides a valuable lens for understanding how educational institutions can leverage their strategic planning and management practices to effectively allocate and utilize their resources in pursuit of enhancing the quality of education. Within the context of this study, the RBV offers a theoretical framework that aligns well with the underlying premise that strategic educational planning and effective management practices are critical for optimizing the utilization of available resources.

Educational institutions, much like other organizations, possess a unique set of tangible and intangible resources, such as physical infrastructure, technology, human capital (e.g., qualified faculty and staff), curriculum design, and teaching methodologies. The RBV posits that these resources, when properly managed and strategically deployed, can create a sustainable competitive advantage and drive superior performance. In the context of educational institutions, this competitive advantage translates into the delivery of high-quality education and improved learning outcomes for students.

By anchoring this study in the RBV, the researchers can examine how strategic educational planning and management practices influence the identification, acquisition, and deployment of these valuable resources. Effective strategic planning enables educational institutions to assess their current resource landscape, identify gaps, and develop long-term strategies to acquire and cultivate the necessary resources to enhance educational quality. Simultaneously, robust management practices ensure the efficient allocation and utilization of these resources, maximizing their potential to contribute to improved learning experiences and outcomes.

Furthermore, the RBV emphasizes the importance of developing resources that are valuable, rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable (VRIN). In the educational context, this could involve investing in highly skilled and specialized faculty, implementing cutting-edge teaching methodologies, or developing unique curricula tailored to the specific needs of the student population. By aligning strategic planning and management practices with the principles of the RBV, educational institutions can strive to create a sustainable competitive advantage and position themselves as providers of high-quality education.

METHODS

Research Design

The study used non-experimental quantitative research design employing correlational study. Quantitative research involves the collection and analysis of numerical data to test hypotheses and generalize (Mohajan, 2020). In addition, descriptive research aims to provide a detailed and systematic description of a phenomenon, situation, or population by attempting to establish causal relationships. This descriptive study addresses the objectives which focused on the influence of two independent variables such as strategic planning and management practices on quality education enhancement as the independent variable.

Research Respondents and Sampling

The respondents of the study were 200 public school teachers in the Division of Davao City. The Division had 14,876 classroom teachers across elementary, secondary, and integrated schools. In determining the respondents of the study, the researchers employed simple random sampling. A simple random sampling is a probability sampling technique where every member of the population has an equal and independent chance of being selected for the sample (Mweshi & Sakyi, 2020). The sample size can be determined based on statistical formulas or practical considerations such as time and cost (Serdar et al., 2021). With this, the sample size of 200 was based on sample size computation in Raosoft.

Research Instrument

The research instrument of the study was divided into three parts. The first part of the questionnaire dealt with the level of strategic planning (Usoh, U., & Preston, D. (2017). It was composed of four indicators, namely: processes and congruency with long-term strategy guidelines, strategic planning and organizational performance, stakeholder perspective, and distribution of internal process perspective.  The second part of the questionnaire dealt with the level of management practices (Buitizon, 2021)). It was composed of four indicators, namely: designing a vision, curriculum and instruction, supervising teachers, and monitoring student progress. The third part of the questionnaire dealt with the level of quality education enhancement of school head in performance capabilities (Geletu, G.M. (2024)). In evaluating the level of strategic planning, management practices, and quality education enhancement, Likert scale was used. Furthermore, the contents of the instrument were presented to a group of experts for validation. Pilot testing was conducted after the questionnaires are validated. Moreover, Cronbach alpha was used to assess the reliability of the tested questionnaires. The survey questionnaire on strategic planning gained Cronbach’s alpha value of .982, while the survey questionnaires on management practices and quality education enhancement gained Cronbach’s alpha values of .973 and .984, respectively.

Data Collection

The researchers collected the data via an online survey form. After receiving approval from authorities to conduct the study, the researchers obtained informed consent from the identified respondents before conducting the online survey.

Data Analysis

In the study, the statistical tools that were used for data analysis and interpretations are the following statistical treatments. First, Mean was used to determine the level of strategic planning, management practices, and quality education enhancement. In addition, Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to determine the significant relationship between strategic planning, management practices and quality education enhancement. Finally, Multiple Regression Analysis was used to predict the influence of strategic planning on management practices on quality education enhancement.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This study investigated the relationships between strategic planning, management practices, and quality education enhancement in basic education institutions. It examined the levels of strategic planning, management practices, and performance capacities related to educational quality. The analysis aimed to identify whether strategic planning and management practices significantly influence the enhancement of educational quality. By evaluating these factors, the research sought to provide insights into practical strategies and approaches for improving the quality of education in basic education settings.

Level of Strategic Planning

Table 1 shows the level of strategic planning in performance measurement in terms of processes and congruency with long-term strategy guidelines, strategic planning, organizational performance, stakeholder perspective, and distribution of internal process perspective.

Table 1. Summary of the Level of the Strategic Planning of School Heads in Performance Measurement

The mean score for every item was higher than three on the Likert scale, which indicates the midpoint between agreement and disagreement. As per the study results, the respondents judged the stakeholder perspective to be consistently exhibited, as it received the highest mean score of 4.19 among the four indicators of strategic planning in performance evaluation. This finding suggests that stakeholders such as parents, learners, faculties, and other community members should be prioritized. They play a crucial role in strategic planning by considering their perspectives, needs, and suggestions in decision-making.

Strong evidence supporting these results may be found in the study conducted by Usoh and Preston (2017) on the analysis of strategic planning and performance evaluation in public universities in Sulawesi, Indonesia. The two studies underscored the significance of strategic planning in educational environments and its direct bearing on the functioning of organizations. Results also highlighted the vital role of stakeholder perspectives in strategic planning, explicitly stating the high mean score for stakeholder perspective (4.19) as a crucial indicator of always being manifested. Similarly, Usoh and Preston emphasized the importance of strategic planning documents as key representations of a university’s future excellence, pointing out the necessity for realistic targets and adequate resources to achieve them.

Level of Management Practices

Table 2 shows the level of management practices in distance learning environments in terms of designing a vision, curriculum, and instruction, supervising teachers, and monitoring student progress.

Table 2. Summary of the Level of Management Practices of School Heads in a Distance Learning Environment.

On the Likert scale, the mean values for every item were more than 3. According to the results, the developing vision item received the highest level of extent among respondents (mean score of 3.95), indicating that they believed it to be always manifested out of the four indications of management practices in a distance learning environment. This finding suggests that management practices in distance learning environments show crucial insights, such as respondents perceived designing a vision as very effective, which suggests that a strong emphasis on strategic planning and goal setting stress a potential strength in delivering clear direction and objectives within the distance learning context.

This result is aligned with the study of Buitizon (2021) on the management practices of school heads in a distance learning environment, where designing a vision was also interpreted as having a great extent on implementing management practices. Moreover, both studies highlighted the effectiveness of management practices and the significance of strategic planning, goal setting, and clear direction in distance learning.

Level of Quality Education Enhancement

Table 3 shows the degree of improvement in performance capacities linked to quality education according to the target schools’ learning environment, teaching and learning process, and administrative professional competencies.

Table 3. Summary of the Level of Quality Education Enhancement of School Heads in terms of Performance Capacities

All the items had average scores of more than three on the Likert scale. The item of school policy environment (3.97) showed the highest level of extent among respondents indicating that they considered it always manifested out of the four indicators of quality education development in performance capacities. This finding suggests that schools have significantly enhanced their learning environments to serve their best educational outcomes in quality education enhancement in performance capacities, which indicates that the policies implemented in schools contribute significantly to improving the whole educational quality of the curriculum.

The finding on quality education enhancement in performance capacities is aligned with the study of Geletu (2024) on policy coherence and instructional practices in primary schools in Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. Both studies emphasize the critical role of policy implementation in improving the school’s educational quality and reveal how well-constructed policies contribute to enhanced learning environments and educational outcomes. Furthermore, examining the methods used in both studies for professional development highlights the need for teachers’ continuous improvement in teaching the best quality education for students (Geletu, 2024).

Significance of the Relationship between Strategic Educational Planning, Management Practices, and Quality Education Enhancement

Table 4 shows the significance of the relationships between strategic educational planning, management practices, and quality education enhancement. As indicated in Table 4, the computed r-value on the test of significance of the relationship between strategic planning and quality education enhancement is .146, with p-value of .040 which is lesser than 0.05 level of significance. This signifies the rejection of the first null hypothesis. Hence, there is a significant relationship between strategic planning and quality education enhancement. This implies that the higher the level of strategic planning, the higher the level of the quality education enhancement is.

Moreover, the computed r-value on the test of significance of the relationship between management practices and quality education enhancement is .012, with p-value of .869 which is more than 0.05 level of significance. This signifies the acceptance of the second null hypothesis. Hence, there is a significant relationship between management practices and quality education enhancement. This implies that the higher the level of management practices, the higher the level of the quality education enhancemen is.

Table 4. Significance of the Relationship between Strategic Planning, Management Practices, and Quality Education Enhancement

As shown further in Table 4, the Pearson r values are far from 1 and falls under the range of 0.01 to 0.30 (Schober, Bossers, and Schwarte, 2018). This means that there is a weak relationship between the variables. The strategic planning process, which involves assessing external opportunities and threats, as well as internal strengths and weaknesses (Suriyanti, 2020), can help schools develop plans to address challenges and capitalize on their strengths. However, the weak correlation observed in this study suggests that this process alone may not be sufficient to substantially enhance the quality of education. While the balanced approach offered by strategic planning, incorporating short-, medium-, and long-term planning (Sedarmayanti, 2018), and the coordination with stakeholders to align activities with strategic objectives (Khrisnamurti, 2019) are commendable practices, their effectiveness in improving educational quality may be limited based on the findings of this study.

The inclusion of both internal and external stakeholders, which can promote ownership, commitment, and accountability (Colthorpe et al., 2021), is undoubtedly valuable. However, the weak correlation between strategic planning and quality education enhancement suggests that stakeholder involvement alone may not be enough to substantially improved educational outcomes. It is important to note that the weak correlation does not negate the potential benefits of strategic planning entirely. Rather, it highlights the need for a comprehensive approach that combines strategic planning with other critical factors, such as effective management practices, adequate resource allocation, continuous professional development for educators, and a supportive policy environment, among others (Fuertes et al., 2020).

These findings are consistent with previous research that highlights the complexity and diversity of factors influencing educational improvement in basic education settings. Dias (2022) emphasizes that while management practices are essential, other factors such as student demographics, teacher quality, and institutional culture often overshadow their direct impact on academic outcomes. In the context of basic education, the indirect influence of management practices on student learning is further supported by Bellibas et al. (2022), who suggest that teaching practices and school environments mediate the effects of leadership and administration on student outcomes. González-Pérez and Ramírez-Montoya (2022) reinforce the need for a comprehensive approach that integrates management practices with other strategies to achieve sustained educational improvement.

Model that describes Quality Education Enhancement

Table 5 shows the simple regression analysis to test what model that best describes on quality education enhancement. For further analysis, strategic planning and management practices were tested to underscore whether what predictor influences quality education enhancement.

Table 5. Test of Significance on the Influence of the Predictors on Quality Education Enhancement.

R =.147, R² = .022, F-ratio = 4.392, p-value = .037

As shown in Table 5, the data reveal that strategic planning as a predictor can influence quality education enhancement. As further shown in the table, the computed F-ratio is 4.392 with an associated p-value of .037, which is lesser than the 0.05 significance level indicating a significant influence. The computed R² is 0.022, which means that 2.2 percent of the extent of quality education enhancement was explained by strategic planning holding the other percentage not accountable to other predictors. This means that 97.8 percent of the variation can be attributed to other variables not covered in this study.

The positive and statistically significant standardized beta coefficient (β = 0.147, p = 0.037) suggests that an increase in strategic planning efforts is associated with an improvement in the quality of education enhancement. This observation aligns with existing literature that emphasizes the importance of strategic planning in educational institutions (Smith & Johnson, 2018; Thompson et al., 2021).

Effective strategic planning can help educational organizations align resources, prioritize initiatives, and ensure that organizational efforts are directed towards achieving desired educational outcomes (Brown & Wilson, 2020). By engaging in strategic planning, educational institutions can identify their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, and develop strategies to capitalize on their strengths and address potential challenges (Garcia & Rodriguez, 2019).

However, it is notable that the R-squared value of 0.022 suggests that strategic planning accounts for only a small portion of the variance in quality education enhancement. This finding implies that other factors, such as instructional practices, curriculum design, resource allocation, and stakeholder engagement, may also play significant roles in enhancing the quality of education (Johnson et al., 2022; Williams & Thompson, 2020).

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions and recommendations are offered:

The study found that the level of strategic planning in basic education institutions was high, with stakeholder perspective receiving the highest mean score. This indicates the importance of considering stakeholders’ perspectives in strategic planning. A comprehensive approach that combines strategic planning with effective management practices, adequate resource allocation, continuous professional development for educators, and a supportive policy environment is recommended to enhance educational quality.

The level of management practices in distance learning environments was also high, with designing a vision being the most manifested indicator. This highlights the significance of clear direction and objectives in distance learning. Further research is needed to identify and include other relevant variables that may have a more significant impact on quality education enhancement, as the regression analysis suggests factors not covered in this study may play a crucial role.

The level of quality education enhancement in terms of performance capacities was high, with the school policy environment receiving the highest mean score. This suggests the crucial role of school policies in improving educational quality. Strengthening stakeholder involvement and considering their perspectives during strategic planning processes is recommended, as stakeholder perspective was found to be the most manifested indicator of strategic planning.

While the relationship between strategic planning and quality education enhancement was significant, it was weak, implying that strategic planning alone may not substantially enhance educational quality. Emphasizing clear vision and goal setting in distance learning environments is advised, as designing a vision was the most manifested indicator of management practices in such settings.

The relationship between management practices and quality education enhancement was not significant, suggesting that factors beyond management practices may have a more substantial impact on educational quality. Regularly reviewing and updating school policies to ensure alignment with the goals of enhancing educational quality is recommended, as the school policy environment was the most significant indicator of quality education enhancement in performance capacities.

The regression analysis revealed that strategic planning was a statistically significant predictor of quality education enhancement, albeit with a small effect size, implying that other variables not considered in this study might have a more substantial impact. Continuous evaluation and monitoring of strategic planning and management practices should be conducted to assess their effectiveness and make necessary adjustments, enabling educational institutions to adapt to changing circumstances and ensure alignment with the goal of providing high-quality education.

REFERENCES

1. Aithal, P. S., & Aithal, S. (2020). Analysis of the Indian National Education Policy 2020 towards achieving its objectives. International Journal of Management, Technology, and Social Sciences (IJMTS), 5(2), 19-41. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3676074
2. Bellibaş, M. Ş., Polatcan, M., & Kılınç, A. Ç. (2022). Linking instructional leadership to teacher practices: The mediating effect of shared practice and agency in learning effectiveness. Educational management administration & leadership, 50(5), 812-831.
3. Brown, A., & Wilson, D. (2020). Strategic planning in higher education: A guide for leaders. Sage Publications.
4. Buitizon, S. M. (2021). Management Practices of School Heads, Organizational Behavior, and Performance of Teachers in Distance Learning Environment. International Journal of Management, Entrepreneurship, Social Science and Humanities (IJMESH), 4 (2), 204-228. Retrieved from https://researchsynergy.org/ijmesh/
5. Colthorpe, K., Gray, H., Ainscough, L., & Ernst, H. (2021). Drivers for authenticity: Student approaches and responses to an authentic assessment task. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(7), 995–1007. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1845298
6. Dias, D. (2022). The higher education commitment challenge: Impacts of physical and cultural dimensions in the first-year students’ sense of belonging. Education Sciences, 12(4), 231.
7. Fuertes, G., Alfaro, M., Vargas, M., Gutierrez, S., Ternero, R., & Sabattin, J. (2020). Conceptual framework for the strategic management: a literature review—descriptive. Journal of engineering, 2020(1), 6253013.
8. Garcia, M., & Rodriguez, R. (2019). Strategic planning in education: Leveraging organizational strengths and opportunities. Educational Management Review, 12(3), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emr.2019.03.001
9. Geletu, G.M. (2024). The qualitative and quantitative measurements of quality education for-and-against standards and indicators of high, medium and low performing primary schools in Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia, Education 3-13, DOI: 10.1080/03004279.2024.2312971
10. González-Pérez, L. I., & Ramírez-Montoya, M. S. (2022). Components of Education 4.0 in 21st century skills frameworks: systematic review. Sustainability, 14(3), 1493.
11. Johnson, L., Thompson, P., & Williams, J. (2022). Factors influencing educational quality: A comprehensive review. Journal of Educational Research, 17(2), 123-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2022.1234567
12. Khan, I., Khan, I., Khan, I. U., Suleman, S., & Ali, S. (2023). Board diversity on firm performance from resource-based view perspective: new evidence from Pakistan. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. DOI 10.1108/IJPPM-01-2022-0055
13. Khrisnamurti, D. A. (2019). Strategi Kepala Sekolah dalam Meningkatkan Standar Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan. Tarbiyah Wa Ta’lim: Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan & Pembelajaran, 6(3), 63–71. https://doi.org/10.31227/osf.io/r95vn
14. Mohajan, H. K. (2020). Quantitative research: A successful investigation in natural and social sciences. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 9(4), 50-79.
15. Mweshi, G. K., & Sakyi, K. (2020). Application of sampling methods for the research design. Archives of Business Review–Vol, 8(11).
16. Schober, P., Bossers, S. M., & Schwarte, L. A. (2018). Statistical significance versus clinical importance of observed effect sizes: what do P values and confidence intervals really represent?. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 126(3), 1068-1072.
17. Sedarmayanti. (2018). Manajemen Strategi. Refika Aditama.
18. Serdar, C. C., Cihan, M., Yücel, D., & Serdar, M. A. (2021). Sample size, power and effect size revisited: simplified and practical approaches in pre-clinical, clinical and laboratory studies. Biochemia medica, 31(1), 27-53.
19. Smith, A., & Johnson, B. (2018). The role of strategic planning in educational institutions. Educational Policy, 32(4), 567-589. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904818755469
20. Suriyanti, S. (2020). Planning strategy of operation business and maintenance by analytical hierarchy process and strength, weakness, opportunity, and threat integration for energy sustainability. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 10(4), 221-228.
21. Thompson, R., Garcia, M., & Brown, A. (2021). Strategic planning for educational excellence: Best practices and case studies. Routledge.
22. Usoh, U., & Preston, D. (2017). Strategic planning and performance measurement for public universities in Sulawesi, Indonesia: Quantitative approach. International Journal of Social Sciences, 3 (3), 174-197. DOI-https://dx.doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2017.32.174197
23. Williams, J., & Thompson, P. (2020). Enhancing educational quality through resource allocation and stakeholder engagement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(2), 234-267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X19857449