Benchmarking CHED-supervised institutions in the Philippines: Towards developing quality indicators in higher education (1998-2000)

• Main Author: Montealto, Filomena G.
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Animo Repository 2002
• Subjects: Benchmarking (Management); Education; Higher; Total quality management; Educational Administration and Supervision
• Online Access: https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_doctoral/928
• Institution: De La Salle University

This study benchmarks the quality practices of state-funded tertiary schools in the Philippines, particularly the CHED-Supervised Institutions (CSIs). The benchmarking process involved two focus groups : 3 state universities and colleges (SUCs) as benchmarks and 5 CSIs, using 4 quality indictors: reputational, resources/capabilities, outcome/output, and value-added views. Two (2) survey questionnaires were devised: the first set was used to select the 5 best CSIs, and the second was used to measure institutional performance where the school administrators, students, faculty, and people from the community were the respondents. The results revealed existing negative gaps between the SUCs (benchmarks) and the CSIs (home practice) with the benchmarks obtaining superior ratings over the CSIs. The study showed some remarkable best practices of the SUCs (in the teaching and learning environment both in content and delivery, quality program offerings, high faculty profile, quality research, voluminous awards garnered, strong local and international linkages, high self-generating income, varied community extension services, and high performance of graduates in board examinations). It likewise showed the CSI's emerging best practices in some areas (functional organizational structure, well formulated program objectives, cost effectiveness expressed in terms of student-cost and faculty-student ratios, self-generated revenues expressed in terms of the rate of returns of investment, and high level of employee satisfaction). Recommendations were presented both at the macro and micro levels for the SUCs and the CSIs to develop some strategies for ongoing improvement to ensure quality and excellence in their respective institutions.