Program Design - Docx 2025

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 8

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region XIII - Caraga
Division of Surigao del Norte
MAINIT I DISTRICT
MAGPAYANG NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Magpayang, Mainit, Surigao del Norte

3-DAY SCHOOL-BASED JOURNALISM WORKSHOP AND TRAINING


January 16 – 18, 2025
Conference ROOM

ACTIVITY DESIGN

I – Program Title: 3-DAY SCHOOL-BASED JOURNALISM WORKSHOP AND


TRAINING
II – Duration: 3 days, January 16 – 18, 2025
III- Venue: Conference Room/ Tesda Magpayang Multipurpose Gym
IV- Management Level of Program: School-Based
V- Delivery Mode: Lecture, Training and Workshop
VI- Rationale:

Based on the Republic Act No. 7079, an act of providing for the
development and promotion of Campus Journalism and other purposes. It is the
declared policy of the state to uphold and develop student’s skills and promote
the development and growth of campus journalism.
With this, the Magpayang National High School initiates to enhance
the innate capacity and ability of our learners to write logically, correctly and
accordingly in the field of Journalism. This 3-days training and workshop would
be a facet of new learning that will be used as an edge on the next generation of
writers.

VII – Objectives
1. Equip students with essential journalism skills, including writing, interviewing,
research, and critical thinking.
2. Encourage students to express themselves creatively through various journalistic
forms, such as articles, podcasts, or video reports.
3. Foster an understanding of media ethics, responsibility, and the impact of
journalism on society.

VIII-End of Program Output: Individual Output

IX- Expected Final Outcomes/Success Indicators


1. 100% of the participants attended and participated during the
orientation and workshop
2. Write article for school publication purposes.

ACTIVITY MATRIX: JANUARY 16, 2025


DATE/TIME ACTIVITY FOCAL PERSON

MORNING SESSIONS

7:00 – 9:00 Arrival & Registration Secretariat

9:00 – 9:30 Acknowledgement of Ms. Amy Love B. Loquias


Participants/Statement of Purpose

9:30 – 12:00 Training and Workshop Orientation Ms. Divine Grace M. Vidal
11:30 – 12:00 Lunch Break

AFTERNOON SESSIONS

1:00 – 1:15 Ice Breaker Ms. Chosel S. Paguican

1:15 – 5:OO Training and Workshop Proper

 Editorial Writing
 News Writing

DAY 2 JANUARY 17, 2023

MORNING SESSIONS

7:00 – 8:00 Arrival & Attendance Secretariat

8:00 – 8:30 Opening Program Mr. Ryjie D. Munez

8:30 – 11:30 Training and Workshop Proper

 Sport Writing
 Photojournalism

11:30 – 12:00 Lunch Break

AFTERNOON SESSIONS

1:00 – 1:15 Ice Breaker Ms. Arniel Casido

1:15 – 4:30 Workshop Proper:

 Editorial Cartooning
 Collaborative Desktop
Writing
 Script Writing and Radio
Broadcasting

DAY 2 JANUARY 17, 2023

MORNING SESSIONS

8:00-11:30 Workshop Proper: 1:15 – 4:30

 Copy reading and Headline


Writing
 Feature Writing

Science and Technology Writing

11:30 – 12:00 Lunch Break

4:30 – 5:00 Forum/Closing Program Speakers, Participants and


Committee

X- Budget and Expenses


1. Resource Speakers’ Token and Certificate
6 pax x P1000.00 = P6000.00
2. Snack and Lunch for Resource Speaker
12 snacks (12 pax) x P100.00 = P1200.00
6 lunch (6pax) x P300.00 = P1,800.00
3. Snack for Student Participants
30 pax (6 snacks) x 40 = P7,200.00
4. Certificate for Participants (30 students + 15 teachers)
45 pax x P5 = P375.00

Total Expenses = P16,575.00

XI – Source of Fund
School MOOE

Prepared and Respectfully Forwarded:

DIVINE GRACE M. VIDAL RYJIE D. MUNEZ


Journalism Coordinator – English Journalism Coordinator - Filipino

Availability of Funds: Reviewed by:

JESSICA L. MAGLINTE MA. VENUS D.


SERAFIN , EdD
Administrative Assistant II Principal 1

Recommending Approval:

ANGELITO M. NAQUILA, EdD


Public Schools District Supervisor

Approved by:
DOMINICO P. LARONG, JR, PhD
Chief, CID

GAD Checklist for Designing and Evaluating Education


Projects
Title of the Activity:
CONDUCT OF ACQUAINTANCE PARTY OF MAGPAYANG NATIONAL HIGH
SCHOOL
January 16 – 18, 2025

Dimension & Question (col.1) Response (col. 2) Score for Result or


item/element comment
Partly
Project Identification & Planning No Yes (col. 3) (col. 4)
Yes
1. Participation of women and men in
project identification (max. score: 2; 2.0
for each item or question, 0.67)
1.1 Has the project consulted and
involved women in the problem or issue
that the intervention must solve and in 0.67
the development of the solution?
(possible scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)
1.2 Have women’s inputs been
considered in the design of the project? 0.67
(possible scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)
1.3 Are both women and men seen as
stakeholders, partners, or agents of 0.67
change? (possible scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)
2. Collection of sex-disaggregated
data and gender-related information 2.0
prior to project design (possible
scores: 0, 1.0, 2.0)
2.1 Has the project tapped sex-
disaggregated data and gender-related
information from secondary and
primary sources at the project
identification stage? Or, does the 2.0
project document include sex-
disaggregated and gender information
in the analysis of the development issue
or problem?
3. Conduct of gender analysis and
identification of gender issues (see 2.0
box 3 ) (possible score: 0, 1.0, 2.0)
3.1 Has a gender analysis been done to
identify gender issues prior to the
project design? Or, does the discussion
2.0
of development issues in the project
document include gender gaps that the
project must address?
GAD Checklist for Education 6
Project Design
4.Gender equality goals, outcomes,
and outputs (max. score: 2; for each 2.0
item, 1)
4.1 Do project objectives explicitly
refer to women and men as students,
1.0
parents, teachers, or administrators?
(possible scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0
4.2 Does the project have gender
equality outputs or outcomes? (possible 1.0
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0)
5.Matching of strategies with gender
issues (possible scores: 0, 1.0, 2.0) 2.0

5.1 Do the strategies match the gender


issues and gender equality goals
identified? That is, will the activities or 2.0
intervention reduce gender gaps and
inequalities?
6.Gender analysis of the designed
0.55
project (max. score: 2)
6.1 Gender division of labor (max.
score: 0.67; for each item question, 0.55
0.22)
6.1.1 Are the families in the target
community reliant on the work of girls
or boys for income? If so: Will flexible
0.22
education schedules help females or
males fit in their other tasks? (possible
scores: 0, 0.11, 0.22)
6.1.2 Does the project offer
opportunities (through curricula,
instructional materials, role models) for
expanding roles of women and men, 0.22
girls and boys, at home and in the
community, economy, and society?
(possible scores: 0, 0.11, 0.22)
6.1.3 Has an assessment been made of
the education and training needs of both
0.11
females and males? (possible scores: 0,
0.11, 0.22)
6.2 Access to and control of resources
(max. scores: 0.67; for each question, 0.33
0.22)
6.2.1 Does the project ensure that
opportunities for training and
scholarships that may be provided are
equally accessible to women and men,
0.11
girls and boys? To different categories
of females and males (rural/urban,
ethnic groups)? (Possible scores: 0,
0.11, 0.22)
6.2.2 Is information about educational 0.22
opportunities readily available to
females and males? (possible scores: 0,
0.11, 0.22)
6.2.3 Have all methods of education
delivery been considered? (possible 0.22
scores: 0, 0.11, 0.22)
6.3 Constraints (max. score: 0.67; for
0.50
each item, 0.33)
6.3.1 Has the project addressed any
time and distance constraints so that
0.17
girls and boys could attend class?
(possible scores: 0, 0.17, 0.33)
6.3.2 Has the project considered the
financial costs of participation that may
0.33
restrict attendance of females or males?
(possible scores: 0, 0.17, 0.33)
7.Monitoring targets and indicators
2.0
(possible scores: 0, 1.0, 2.0)
7.1 Does the project include gender
equality targets and indicators for
welfare, access, consciousness-raising,
2.0
participation, and control? Examples of
gender differences that may be
monitored.
-Net enrolment or school participation
rate- passing for female and male
students (NEAT, NSAT, HSRT)-
Participation in training of activity-
Employment generated by project
8.0 Sex-disaggregated database
1.0
(possible scores: 0, 1.0, 2.0)
8.1 Does the proposed project
monitoring framework or plan include
1.0
the collection of sex-disaggregated
data?
9.Resources (max scores: 2; for each
1.0
item, 1)
9.1 Is the budget allotted for the project
sufficient for gender equality promotion
0.5
or integration? (possible scores: 0, 0.5,
1.0)
9.2 Does the project have the expertise
to integrate GAD or promote gender
equality and women’s empowerment?
Or, is the project committee to investing
0.5
project staff time in building capacity
for integrating GAD or promoting
gender equality? (possible scores: 0,
0.5, 1.0)
10. Relationship with the agency’s
0.99
GAD efforts (max scores: 2; for each
item or question, 0.67)
10.1 Will the project build on or
strengthen the agency/
PCW/government’s commitment to the 0.33
advancement of women? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)
10.2 Does the project have an exit plan
that will endure the sustainability of
0.33
GAD efforts and benefits? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)
10.3 Will the project build on the
initiatives or actions of other
0.33
organizations in the area? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)

Total GAD Score- PROJECT


IDENTIFICATION DESIGN STAGES
(Add the score for each item of the 10 16.37
elements, or the figures in the thickly
bordered cells.)

Interpretation of the GAD - Proposed Activity is gender-sensitive


(Proposal passes the GAD Test)
0-3.9 GAD is invisible in the activity (the proposal is returned0
The proposed activity has promising GAD prospects (proposal earns a “conditional
pass”, pending identification of gender issues and strategies and activities to address
4.0- 7.9
these, and inclusion of the collection of sex-disaggregated data in the monitoring and
evaluation plan).
8.0-14.9 Proposed activity is gender-sensitive (proposal passes the GAD test).
15.0-20.0 Proposed activity is gender-responsive (proponent is commended).
Rater: Noted:

MA. VENUS D. SERAFIN, EdD MARILOU C. NAQUILA, EdD.


School Principal 1 District GAD Focal Person

You might also like