Assessing the Impact of the Fulbright-Philippine Agriculture Scholarship Program.pdf

8/10/2019 Assessing the Impact of the Fulbright-Philippine Agriculture Scholarship Program.pdf

1/121

PREPARED

OR:

PHILIPPINE AM ERICAN EDUC TION L

FOUNDATION

BY:

N E L I S ~ A

JAMORA


2/121

Assessing the Impact of the

Fulbright Philippine Agriculture

Scholarship

Program

'I'lie Pu lbrig ht-P hil ipl) ir~e Agriculture

Scliolarsl i i~)Pr og ra n~ FPASP) \ \,as es l i~ b l i s l~ e t ln

1999 to Large(. t lie c lev elo p~ i~ en tf I i~t m ati esource

capacity for

th e P l ~ i i i i e g r i c ~ l t r : ~ l ~ ~ d

fisheries sectors.

lb

tlus end , the 1V AS P 11ad ft11ly or

partially ft~ndetl 43 grantees for grac1r1at.c degrees

and research gran t s in the U. . 'I'l~e resulL3 were

drawn from a survey of

85

former sollolars

(74

response r ate orr t of 1 19 FPA SP gran tees who

.

completed thei r progratns) , supple~~ie~i tet ly ,J'ocused

group discussions (FGDs) in Los Balios, Laguna;

/\

I

I\.

fi

I

. .

Dihnan, Qtrezon City; General Santos City, Soul11

C ot ab ab ; ant1 MuAoz, Nue va IIcija.

I

'I'he ass es sm en t ol' the F PA SP found robust qu ali tat i ve evidences [:hat the

pro gram is ac l~ ie vi ng ts goal oE developing . ltno\\.ledge 211111 e s p e r t i s e i n l l ~ e

agricul ture an d f is l~ ery ectors . Scl iolars reported diverse a nd s igni lic:~nl; ~ n pa ct s

not only on t l ie sc l~ ol ar s hemselves, b ut on thei r work ins t i tu t ions a s well . Many

(44%) recognized the uniqueness of Llie

U.S.

progrnm and fel t that they could not

have clone t ile salne gra du ate degree an d specialization a t a univers i ly in t lie

Phi l ippines . MajoriCy (88%) aff irnied i l la t t l~ e i r PA SP g ra nt h as inet t l ~ e oal or

objectives of tbe FPASP. Moreover, almost a11 scholars (90 ) cxpressetl their

will ingness to serv e th e Dep arlrn ent of Agriculture a s an atl\riser, lechnical resource

person, or

co n s t ~ l t an t .

While only GG% of the r esp on de nts were g ua ran tee d of a job upon returning

home, 98% of the responde nt s i e tu rn ed to the Ph i l ippines a t some po in t an e r t li e ir

FPASP grant . Overwl~elrningly,FPASP scl iolar respondents confi rmed that l l ie i r

cu rre nt job e ntail work rela ted to agriculture. l 'he large st sh ar e of alum ni \vorltetl

for the government , e i th er a t public univers it ies (35%) or a t bure aus or agencies

(32 ).

Th is ref lects th at scl iolars were appropriately targeted to conlr ibt~ te o the

agr icu l tu re sec to r a l l e r the i r FPASP g mn ts .


3/121

Scl~ olar s e li eve t ha t thei r FPASP gran ts greally enr ic l~ cd l~ ci r cademic

ant1 pro fess io~ ~ali ves. About 54% consit le red t ha t t l ~ e i r o rlc p r o ~ n o t i o ~ ~s due, to a

large exten t , to t l ~ e lci lls at id Ic~~o\vledgehat they gained Croni being a WASP

scholar. Anol:l~er39 fel t that they have benefi ted, to a large extent , Ll~rougl~

i ~ ~ l p r o v e di v i ng s l ; n~~t l a rdsu e to having been a I?PASI' scl~olal..

S i g n i f i c a n t a c c o n ~ p l i s l ~ ~ n e ~ l t sl ~ a t c lio la rs c ite d i ~ ~ c l u d eheir role in

i t ~ t r o d u c i ~ ~ gl ~ r u ~ g e s11d i~ npvations in progriun imple~nentationor work set-up,

s t rong influence in the inst i tut ions ' progm m planning, an d the imp ortan1 posil ions

or jobs t liey l~ e ld s a re sul t of the ir tm ining. S chola rs Tronl the university rellortetl

t h e i ~ ~ t r o d u c t i o nf net\. courses or new ac id e ~ t~ icrograms and the inentoriug of

both u i ic lergraduate and g radua te s tu de ~i t sn their research.

W l ~ i l e l any respo~ l c l e~ i t selt that i l , is too early for impacts to be seen in a

wider base, scholars cited their roles in national workshops or training or1

a gr ic ul iu re issues, th e i n ~ p o r k ~ ~ ~ tosilions they he ld th a t n lalte 1lle111 crilic al in

,deciding on broad er agr icult ura l issues, an d th e scientific irnowledge an d exp ertise

t l l a t they sha re wit11 the s ludel i ts , Carn~ers, nd p ol i cy ~~ ~a l ter s .5% conl i rc~~ct ll ~ a l

they i r e ac t ive in severa l agriculture-relate(~re-relate rganizat io t~s .

Durin g th e FGDs, PP ASP 'scholars described a variety of ways in \vl~ich heir

F P AS P exper i e t ~cesed to e1111aocing lie h um an resource capacity in th e agricu lture

'sector. These include: their own increased professional ltriowledge or their

agriculture specialization; current prolessional acli ivit ies relating to agricultural

issues, including organizing worltsl~opsltrai~iings,o i ~ i g m e dia i ~ ~ t e r v i e w s ,n d

participating in exlensiotl activit ies; research responsibili t ies \vhicll include

collaborative resea rch a nd projects with

agricultt~re pro~essio~rals

n t,he U.S. an d the

P hi lip l~ in es ; e a c l ~ i ~ ~ gesponsi l~i l it ies ha t would develo11 the f i ~ tu reL U I I I I I ~esource

capacity in the P lii lippine agric ultu re sector;

anti

a s s ~ t ~ n e c lead ersh ip positions since

they c am e bnclt.

Al lnos t a l l sc l~olars

00 )

r e c o ~ ~ ~ ~ n e n d e drevi tal izat iot~ f t ile FPASP o r a

s in ~ il a r griculture-s1,ecific Fulb rigl~ t-sp ons ore d prograrll. A long-tern1 Lraining

prograln shoul tl be in p lace to sus ta in t ile c levelo l ,me~~t f the l ~ u ~ n a nnt1

i ns ti tt tt io n al ca p ac it y of n g ri c ul tu m l u n iv e rs it ie s a n d n a t io n a l r e s e a ~ ~ l ~ys t e~ i l s n

tlie Pl~ilip ~itles.


4/121

Assessing the Impact of the

Fulbright Philippine Agriculture

Scholarship Program

Executive Summary

ntroduction

'I'he Pn lbrig l~t-l ' l~ il ippin e gricrl lt t tre Sc ho lar sl~ ip rog ram (PPt\SI') is one of

t i l e severa l p rogran t s :~d t~t i t~ i s le redndcr the J. W i l l i a t ~ ~ti lb ri gl ~ t )t.ogr:rlll. 11 is

sector-specific an d is targetecl to develol) l~r tln an esource ca pacity for the P l~il ip pit ie

agricul tura l a t ~ d is ller ies sectors . T l ~ e ppl icat ion of this PPAS P tnodel'' in f ive

batches of scl rolars was des igt~e d to produce a cr i t ical m ass of e spe rts a nd

inst i tut ional capacity bui lt ling, essen t ial to the d eve lopn ~en t f the agricrr l t i~re nd

f ishery sector. S ince i t s es ta b l i s l~ m ent n 1999 the PPASP 11ad fi~lly r partially

' f i ~ n d e d 43 gra nlee s for gra dua te degrees an d research gra nts in the U.S. Sonie of

t h e s c l ~o l a r seceived counterpart Itrnding forln their U.S. university, ei ther through

grad uate as s i s ta nl s l ~i ps r univers i ty fel lowsltips.

. T h e IT A SP w as u n i q u e b ecau s e it

\\ds

l l ~ eonly agricul ture-speci tk

s ch o l a r s l~ i p ro g ran l i n t h e P l ~ i l i p p in es h a t s en t s c l ~o l a r so pu r su e g r a d u a t e s h d i e s

Bnd to do researcl~t1 the U.S. It recognized illa t tar ge tin g indivitIuaIs worIiing on

ag ric t~l tur e increase s i tnpact a n d help su stain capacity-bui lding. Progratn

part icipan ts were usual ly worlt ing on an agric ul t rrr e-re late topic prior to t raining.

.

Ih i s t ra in ing s tm tegy enhanced con tinued agr icr~ l tu re- re la tedwork after scholars

cotnplete the ir F l 'hSP-R~nclecl raining.

Study results

'l'l~is s tud y surveyed 'a s a n ~ p le l 9

PPASP

sc l lo lar a l t~n in iwl ro l~ave

completetl their grants. Scholnrs were notified of the survey by e-lnail ant1 a lotal of'

88 scholar respondents, '74% response rate, completed the qtrestionnaire eit l~er11

the \veb or by sen ding back t i le quest ionnaire a s e-mai l at tachm ent .

'Nle assess tne nt of Llle PP ASP foi ~n d lxong quan t i tat ive an d qua l i lal ive

evidence i l tat t he pro gritn is ac l~i ev ing ts goal of developing knowledge ant1

expert ise in the agricul ture and l is l~e ry ectors . Scho lars reported diverse and

signi ticant i lnpacts not only on l l ~ e cl lolars t l~elnselve s , bu t on their work

inst i tut ions a s wel l.


5/121

After they re tu rn to t lie P ld ip p ines , the su rvey revea led t11it sc l~ o la rseach,

do a gricul tural ' research, collaborate \v i th local an d in tern ationa l colleagues,

organize worlcsliopsltrainings, do media intervie\vs, socialize with other Fulbright-

Agriculture scl lo lars , and in many otl ier ways conti . ibute to the human capacity

bu i l t l ing o f the ag r icu l tu ra l sec to r . Ovcrwl ic l~n i~~g ly .PAS1 ' sc l~o l :~~ .espondents

conf irm th a t the i r c t t r ren t job en ta i l work re la ted to ag r ic t~ l t t ~r e .

scholars

ssessment of

th FPASP

All re sgo ~ld en t s e lt th a t : 1) the train ing provided an opportunity Lo gain

valuable profess ional espert ise and esperience; (2) the PPASP esperience \ \ ,as

in te res t ing a nd in te l lec t i~a l ly ha llenging ; and 3) the F PASP es l~e r ienc e rov ided

excellent preparation for the scholars' futtlre professional tvorlt.

88% a l ' li rn~ed ha t the i r FI 'ASP gr an t h a s ine t t l ~ e oa l o r ob jec lives ol' thc

L~I'ASI?. Most: sc:liolars fc lt 1:lint: I.rilin ing

~ i l s I C C C S S ~ I . ~

O r I:I~cir 1)rorcssionaI

tleve lopn~ ent 98%). A ln ~ os t ll scho lars (90%) es1)ressetl thei r \villin gl~c ss o scrve

t h e D e p a r t ~ n e n t of Ag r ic u lk ~re a s a n adv iser, tec l~n ica l resource person , o r

consult&lt . 90% reco~nniendecl , revital ization of t l ie PPASP or a s imilar

agriculture-s l~ecif ic u lbr ig li t-s l~onsored rogram.

M any (44%) iecognized t h e urliquene ss of tlie U.S. pro gra m a nd l'elt t h a t tliey

coultl 1101:have done the sa m e gri du at e degree ant1 s l~ecializat. ion t I university in

the Pl~ilil)l)ines:Sti l l , som e of the sc l~ ol ar s 19%) would consider s t~t t ly ing n the

Ph i lip p in es, w l~ i l e th e r s

(24 )

would apply to graduate schools in other corlnlries

s u ch a s A u s t r a li a , J ap an , Can a t l a, an d th e N e t l~e r l an d s .

KSAs g ined

Scholars considered 'scientiGc methods (GG ) a s t h e m o s t i ~ n p o r t a n t


6/121

Current activities of FPASP scholars

I

111e largest sliare of scliolars worlterl for the governn~ent, ither a t public

trniversities (35%) or a t governnlerlt bureaus or agencies

(32%).

Almost all of the,

currently employed respondents were still doing work relatctl lo agricultore. This

reflects that scliolars \\.ere appropriately targeted to contribute to the agriculture

sector 'after their PlyASPgrants.

65% have published a t leas t once in inlernatio~ially refereed ournnlslboolts;

55% in locally refereed journals. 25% reported having published boolts as one of the

main autl~ors/editors.One-half ol' the respondents (51%) were featured in media

ar t ic les l~~rogra~~~s.5% are. active in agriculture-related organizations, including

professior~al ocieties, associations, and networlts. I n addition, 20% of the scholars

.have been awarded with consult.ing projects or grants by international agencies,

while :~nolher35% were awardcd projecl:~ r grn )ls by local agcnc:ics.

bloreover, al~nostall scllolars have niaiutainetl relalionsl~ipswil.11 ll~cir

former major professor or thesis supervisor o research collaborator in the U.S. after

returning to the Philippines (91%). Many reported that they have collaborated wit11

their for~ner lajor professor or thesis supervisor or research collaborator i n the U.S.

(2G%) since coml)leting their grants.

Almost all FPASP respondents returned home

While only GG% of the res~~ondentsere giiara ~~leqdl' a job ul)on returning

Iiome, 98 of the respondents returned lo the P11ilipl)ines a t sonie point aCter their

FPASP grnnt. Only one scliolar adn~itted o l ~a venot returnetl because she is

currently pursuing her P11.D. 74 returned lo the same institution at which they

were eml)loyed before beginning their PPASP grant. 'Shis higli level of rettrrn rate

removes any nl)pwhension on brain tlmin.

lm pacts to the FPASP scholar

Scholars believe tha t ,llleir PPASP grants greatly enrichetl l ;l~eir ~cade~nic

and prolkssiorlal lives. About'54% considered tl~at;heir \vork pron~olion s due, to a

large extenl, to the sltills and Itnowledge that they gained k o ~ n eing a PPASP

scl~olar.Another 39% felt that they have benefited, to a iarg+extent, throt~gli

improved living standards due to having been

a

PPASP scholar.

I n

addition, 47 of

llie resl~ondentsclai~netl l;at the sltills they gained fro111 i;heir FPASP grnnls

assisted them in obtaining a inore .senior position. 98% rriunlted "slcills and

Iznowlcdgc ggainctl ~vorn xpericncc" a s 1 1 1 ~ nosl; in~l)orl.anl;cncljt 1being I IPPASI'

scliolar. Scl~ol:~rslso cllerishecl the new cultural exl~erience, s well as being mure

flexible or open lo new ideas. 111addition, Lhe respondents noted

I IIsIL

Lhe IPPASI'

helped tlletrl to develop or widen their professional netwo~:lts

.


7/121

Prior to Llleir FPA SP train ing , 31 of the scl~ ola rs e a r n e d l e s s t l ~ a n

PhP150,OOO per year. A t thei r pre sen t employm ent, 41 of tlie respon den ts reported

earning more tha n l'hP250,OOO'per year . l lecent return ees ar e earnin g PhP204,538

per ye ar , inucli less comparecl , to t i le f irs t ba tc i~ of sc l~o larsw l ~ o now carn :

P111'57S,111 p er ye ar o n a ver age .

.59 of . responden ts a f l i rn ~e d ha t ho lders

of

M S

egrees receive l~igher

i n c o p t h an t ilose t v it l ~B.8. clegrees. Moreover, an ot he r 55 co nfi i~ ne d h a t P11.D.

degree holde rs get 11igI1er n c o~ neh an

M S

egree ho lders in t l ~ e i r u r ren t worli.

lmpacts to work institution

Sign if ican t ; accompl is l~n~en ts11at scholars cited include their role in

i nt ro dd ci ng c l ~ a r ~ g e su ~ d n ~ ~ o v a t i o ~ ~ a~ ; rogram implem entation or worlc ael-up,

s lr un g i n f l u c ~ ~ c cl l l l ~ o~ ~ s t i l u l . i u t ~ s '1rogrn111 I : I I I I I ~ I I ~ , :\nd 1.11( ~ I I I ~ I V ~ . I ; I I I I . ~ ) ~ ~ i ~ . i O l l ~

or jobs they l ~e l t l s a re su l t of i l ~ e i r rain ing. Scholars f rom t l ~ e nivers i ty rel)orletl

.

the in t roduct io t r of ne\v courses o r new acadernic p rograms a t ~ d l ~ ementoring or

b o t h u ~ ~ d e r g r a d n a t en d g r a d u a te s t u d e n l s i n t l ~ e i research.

S l~ ec il ic al ly , h e con trib ut.io ns to i ~ ~ ~ p r o v i ~ ~ gile re se ar dl cap acily oC

rile

o rg a~~ iza l ; io n snc lude : resource genera t ion , a l jp ly i~~ge c h n i c a l , q t ~ a ~ ~ l i l : a l i v e ,t ~ d

si~nulal:iotimodels to a specilic coni~nodily ; da pt i t ~g echniques an d 111odels r~ it edo

P l ~ i l i p p i t ~ eo n d i t i o ~ ~ sn d commod i(.ie s; p r o g ran ~ l ~~ ro jec troposal prepnralion for

gra nt lirllding; connecting a n d collaborating svith U.S. professors on re se ar cl ~

.pro jec ts; a n d p ro gra m m r u ~ a g e ~ n e ~ ~ tn d i ~ ~ i p l e n ~ e l i b t i o n

I

terms of contr ibutions to teaching capacity , t i le scholars l~avebeen

i~ivolvocl n proposing new courses , supervis ing and ~ n e r~ lo ri n g~ i d e r g r a c l t ~ a t cn d

gradua te s tuden ts , deve lop ing labora to ry exercises and s tu de n t m an i~ a ls , e iich ing

tr~~tlergr clu telgr du teourses , rev is ing undergradua te and g radua te p rogram

c u r r i c u l u n ~ , l ~ p l y i n gnnova tive tools in teaching, a n d beconling mo re resourcelttl in

t l ~ e i reachi ng style.

111 rela tion lo st re ng tl le ni t~ g ile extensio n cap aci ty of the ir inslitutio rla, 111e

scllo lars provided train ing an d served a s resource spealrers or technical espe rls lo

fa rule r, p riv ate se ctor en ti t i es , local g o v e r t ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ tn it s, an d g o v e r t ~ ~ n e n l~ g e ~ ~ c i e a .

mpacts to agriculture sector

M any r e s p o ~ ~ c l e t ~ t se l t th a t i t i s too ear ly For in ~ pa c t so be seen in a cvicler

base because they 11ave ju s t recently returnecl to th e P l~il ippi nesan d 11ave o111y

begun lo es tab l is l~Ll~eir resence in t l ~ e ir espective f ie lds . Non etl~ ele ss , u t of t lre

29 a f fi rmat ive iesponses, sc l~o lars i ted the i r ro les in na t iona l wor lcs l~ops r tm iu i r~ g

o n a g r ic u lt u re i ss ue s, t h e i m p o r t a n t g os it io ns t l ~ e y ~ e l d h a t m a lt e t l i e ~ i ~ritical in

dec id ing on b roader ag r ic i~ l tu r a l ssues , and the scientific knowledge and expert ise


8/121

that they share with the strrdenls, h r~ners , nd policy~nalcers.

75

confirniecl that

they are active in several agriculture-related organizations.

.

During the l'ocusecl group discussions, FPASP scliolars described a variety oC

ways in which ll~eir TASP

experiences

let1 to cnliatroing the hi in~atl esource

capacity in the agriculture sector. These include

Their own 'incqmecl professional lcnowledge of their agriculture

specialization

Current proCessiona1 dctivities relating to agricultural issues, incl~rdi~lg

organizing worlcsliopsltrai~~ings,oing nledia interviews, and participat.itlg

in extension activities

Research responsibilities wl~ich nclude collaborative research

a ~ ~ d

1rojects

with agriculture proSessionalu in 11ie U.S. and the Philippines

. 'l'eaching responsibilities illat would develop the firtitre

human

resource

,capacity in the Plii il)l)ine agriculttrre sector

i\asr~~nedeadersl~il)11ositio1ls since Lhey came b:lck, in(:I~(lingprvjecl

leaders, department chairs, laboraloryhiursery heaclll'arm nlanager, ant1

laclinical resource gersoli to governinent committees.

Continue training support to the Philippine

agriculture sector.

The

PPAS1

or siniilar agriculture-rela te scholarship progmm s h o ~ ~ l de

revived. long-term program shoirld be in place to enslire the development of the

.human and institutional capacity of agricultural universities and national research

systen~sl~rough raining and collaborative research so that institutional progralns

can be self-sustaining and co~~tribtrt eo the long-term developtnent of the

agricirlture sectors in both the

U S

nd the Pl~ilippi~ies.TIlisan be to be achieved

through graduate training of nlen and women and by providing Iina~icial upport to

scientists in the Philippines to c o ~ ~ d i ~ c toUi basic and applied research on

agriculture-related issues.


9/121

l' l iis ;ludy tvo t~lrl o1 be possible willloul llie goiclar~ce f l lio P liili l~p iiie~ulh riglil oard,

parlicularly ol Dr. Esrneralda Cur~ana~lrb0 lorrner C tlED Con ~n iis sio ~lc r alr~rnirlo

Ocarnpp. Special rnention lo Dinah Pura Deposilario (F13ASP

2006

and Evaiigeli~ e

Go~ iza les or lielping ine orgal ize arid clocuriienl ili e focused group discussions arid

i~ lst ilu liona l n~krv iew s; i(ath;ina Gonzales ancl Yolly Casas for the reseat.ch ancl

adn~i~iistrat iveupporl: Richard Bernslen,

my

adviser and friend froill Micliiga~iSlate

[Jniversliy, wlio continue to inenlor Ine professionally and personally; Neil Para~r'ii nd

Jo rge~ iAbellera w l ~ o ccoln~nodaled us

ill

General Santos City; ari "Iquirio

and

Soledad Roguel for tlle overvi~lielrningwelco~newe.received

i r ~

4ueva Ecija: lo the

FPAAA mernbers wlio parlicipa led in ihe IzGDs: and to all Fulbriglil-Agricul ~re ;choiars

wllo respondecl io l lle online survey ..Fullding s~ lp po ri or lliis study calrlc frorn the

Ph i l ipp ino-Ar~ ie r lc~~ iducational Fovndation s~rci the Philippine D e~ )a rli~ ion If

Agricvllure.

Jainora

N. 2009

Assessing tlie llnpacl 1 tlie Fu lbiigl~CPliilippineAgricultt~re ciinlnrsltip

Program. Philippine-AmericanEducalional Foundation. Makati City, IJliilippines.

I


10/121


11/121

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lnlroduction .....................................................................................................................

Melhodology ...................................................................................................................

A

.

Analylical~framework

....................

B

Research objectives ..............................................................................................

C Research questions ............................................................................................0

D

.

Survey methods

0

. . .

E L ~ m ~ l a l ~ o n s1 the study

............................

:.

: .........................

2

Results and Discussion

..........................................................................................

3

A nternet search .................................... ..............................

13

..........................

I . Decision lo pursue the FPASP grant in the U.S .................................................13

C.Trainee assessment of FPASP grant 4

.

D Acquis~llon i I


12/121

LIST O F TABLES

Table .Overview of ll ie FPASP 4

Table 2 Results of lnlernet Search lmpacl lor Trainees 13

Table 3 Queslion: Please indicate il you agree or disagree wilh each of the sla le~ nenls boul

your personal experiences during your FPASP degreelgranl 15

.

Table 4 Most inipo rlanl KSAs acquired during lraining 16

Table :Before and Currenl employer type o l respondents 19

Tab16 6 Overview ol FPASP scholars by type of gran l 20

Table 7.Top KSAs by type of grant............................................................................................... 21

Table

8

Overview of FPASP scholars by gender .........................................................................2

Table 9 Top I


13/121

ssessingthe impact

of the

~u~bri~ht phi l ippinegriculture

Scholarship

Program

.

CH PTER

lntroduciion

The Fulbright-Phil ippine Agriculture Scholarship Program (FPASP) is one

model of government engagemen t in training. The FPASP m odel is sector-specific and

is targeted to develop human resource capacity lor the Philippine agricultural and

fisheries sectors. The application of lhis FPASP model in live batches of scholars was

designed lo produce a critical mass 1 experts and institutional capacity building,

essential to lhe development 1 lhe agriculture and lishery sector. Since its

establishment in

1999

the FPASP has lully or partially lunded

143

grantees lor graduate

degrees and research grants in the

U.S.

Some of the scholars received counterpart

funding lrom their U.S. university, either through graduate assistantships or university

lellowships.

Degree training has direct impacts on the trainees by advancillg their

prolessional careers, as well as indirect impacts on building capacity al.the i~i sli lul ion

they join alter compleling the program. Many institutions in tile coulilry have been

directly impac ted by the FPASP training, including the Department of Agriculture

(DA),

llalional agricultural research and extension system (NARES), and Slate Universities

and Colleges (SUCs).

To date, the contribution of these scliolars and the impact 01 the WASP

011

inslitutional capacity building for the Philippine agricultural sector have not been

systema tically documented. Thbs, the purpose

1

this study is to evaluate the irnpacts

1

the FPASP on the individuals who received training with FPASP lunding and on

universities/research nstitutions in the Philippines to where the trainees returned l o alter

their U.S. training.

In doing lhis assessment, the study adop ted the mod ified Kirkpatrick framework

as a guide in evaluating training impacts lrom lour dillerent perspectives: Reaction

(whether trainees like the training). Learning (whelher they learned som ething lrom the

training), Perlormance (whelher trainees applied whal they have learned), and Results

(whal are the impacts).


14/121

Impact on lrainees can be any changes in lheir personal and professional lives

as a result of lhe ir lraining. lnslilulional capacily building involves improvements in the

abilily ol an organizalion to perlorm its leaching and research mandate efleclively,

efficienlly and sustainably. O lh er commonly used terms and lheir working definilions

which are used in lh is sludy are defined, as follows:

Training : A learning activity in a selling predominanlly inlended for le ac lii ~l g r

'imparling cerlain. knowledge and inforrnalion to the parlicipanls with formally

designaled instructors or lead persons, learning objeclives, and outcomes, which

maybe conduc led full-lime or inlerrnillenlly.

Research: A syslernalic invesligalion, including basic or applied, designed lo

develop or conlribule to general knowledge.

Trainee: All sludenls fully, parlially or indirectly supporled by lhe FPASP lo

undertake trailiilig bolh degree (MS. and Ph.D.) and non-degree (research)

grants. The term was interchangeably used to reler to the alumni , recipienls ,

granlees , or scholars

01

lli e FPASP.

Chapler

II

describes the slruclural organizalion of lhe FPASP and provides

details of its program and some trainee-specific informalion. From lhis,

an

analylical

framework was built to evaluate the training program. Chapler

Ill

oullines the

melhodology used lo examine the itnpacls of lraining on trainees and on universilies and

research inslilulions in the Philippines and presents lhe research objeclives. Chapler IV

describes llie impacts ol degree lraining and research on lhe trainees' personal and

professional lives. Chapler V presents the case studies on inslitulional capacity building.

'Finally. Chapter VI summ arizes key findings and recommendations of lhis sludy.


15/121

CHAPTER 8

The FuIbright Agriculture

Program

The FPASP, a lso.kno wn as the Fu lbright-Agricullure Program, is one the several

programs adminislered under the

J.

William Fulbrighl Program. It provided awards lo

Filipinos lo pursue graduale deg rees (M S . and P1i.D.) and short-lerm research work in .

tlie U.S. The principal goal of any Fulbright program is to increase mutual

understanding between the people of the Uniled Slales (U.S.) and tlie people of o llier

counlries. While the program also awarded counterparl granls to American academics

and specialisls lo leach, train, conduct research, and consull will1 inslilulions in llie

Philippines working to promole agricullure, foreslry and lislieries modernizalion, lliis

sludy only focused on Filipino scholars.

The FPASP lakes pride

ill

ils lraining program.

Il

was one of a kind bccause il

was the only agricullure-specific scholatship

in

the Pliilippines lhal sen1 scholars lo

pursue graduate sludies in l lie U.S. Tlie closesl program is lhe Sou llieasl Asian

Regional Center for Graduale Sludy and Research in Agricullure (SEARCA) Graduate

Scliolarship in Agriculture that sends Filipinos and other Soulheast Asian nalionals lo

schools in Soulheast Asian counlries.

The FPASP recognized llial largeling individuals working on agrfcullure

increases inipac l and help suslain capacily-building. Program parlicipanls were usually

working on an agricullure-related lopic prior lo lraining. This lraining slralegy enhanced

conlinued agricullure-relaled work afler lrainees complele their FPASP-funded lraining.

As w ith other Fulbriglil programs, FPASP scholars were selecled'compelilively a l the

1

nalional level. Cornpelilion for granls was open lo Filipinos who are 40 years old or

younger al lhe lime of applicalion and had at least two years of relevanl work

experience. They were selected and interviewed by a panel of judges, including

members of llie Fulbright Board and lhe Philippine American Educational Foundalion

(PAEF) on the basis 01 academ ic merit. The FPASP provided granls to cover cosls, such

as internalional travel, luition and fees, monllily maintenance allowance, books and

supplies, and insurance.

FPASP

Training

Outputs

To dale, lhe FPASP has supported a lolal of 126 scholars and 17 students are

expected to finish their programs by year 2010, an average of 29 trainees per year from

2001 lo 2006 (Table I) .' The FPASP emphasized lraining studenls in lhe lield of

agricullure. Many scholars specialized in plant science (31 ), followed by social science

(22 ) and animal science

(17 ).

Ollier scholars studied in the fields of environmenv

nalural resources, agricullurelfood engineering, ioreslry, food science and

marinelfishery . The largest share of trainees earned M.S. degrees (56 ). followed by

Ph.D. (23 ) degrees. About 53 of lh e trainees were female and 47 were male. For

he

FPASP

v a s pulon hold in

2 5;

no scliolars wero son lo llic U.S. in llial year.


16/121

the purpose of this study, the frame population includes only trainees who have finished

their programs, as of August

2000:

Table

1

overv iew o f the

FPASP

2 6

28 20 18 15 17 19 9 1

By type of grant

Maslers 81 57 74 62 56 64 76

Research

3 21

28

24 19 22 68

BY discipline

Animal 'Science

24 17 22 18 13 15 59

AgrilFood

Engineering

8 6

7 6 5 6 71

Environ~nenV

I

Natural Resources

8 9 8 6

7

67

Forestry

4 3 3 3

1

1 33

Food Science

4 3 3 3 2 2 67

Plant Science 45 31 34 29 31 35

91

Social Science 32 22 29 24 22 25 76

Female

76 53 63 53 48 55 76

Male

67 47 56 47 40 45

71

Total

43

119 88

74

a\

Tarnel

t ~ o ~ u l a l i o nlolal tiu~nber1 FPASP scllolars

b\ Frarrie populalion = l l iose

who

llnisl~ed

l leir programs

by Augusl2005

c\

Percenl ol

frame populalion

who relurned

l l te

queslionnaire

Scholars were sent to 54 schools across [he

U S

Figure 1 shows a [nap 1

FPASP

scholars by their U.S. location. Many scholars went to state of N ew Yorlc (n=l5)

and stud iedat Cornell University, New York University, State University of N ew Yorlc and


17/121

Syracuse University. The slate of Florida had 11 scholars in Florida lnstilule of

Technology, Florida Inte rnationa l University, University of Florida , and University of

Miami. Cornell University and Ok lahoma Stale University each h ad

8

FPASP scholars

the largest number of trainees in an institution.

Figure

I

Map of FP ASP scholars in the

U.S.


18/121

Given lhe divergence between the target populalion

(N=143),

frame population

(N=119)

and lhe trainees who returned lhe survev

iN=881.

an eflort was made to see

how the characteristics of the sam ple respondenls biifered iron1 the characlerislics of the

larael and frame ~o ~ u la t i o n .uch an assessment is needed in order to delermine

il

lhe

reQpondenls were represenlalive o l the largel populalion a requirement lor malting

meaningful inferences about lhe targel popu lalion.

Th e pe;cenlage of trainees who responded was very similar com pared lo lhe

larget and frame populalion. liowever, a higher percentage of lrainees lrom lhe social

science lrainees

(91

response rale) relurned the survey. The percenlage of

respondenls supporled for their Ph.D. degrees was slighlly lower compared l o the largel

populalion. On the olher hand, l he share of M.S. lrainees was slighlly higher compared

lo the large l populalion. While the make-up of the frame populalion by granl period

mirrored lhe la rge l populalion, lrainees who finished lheir degrees recently (balch

2006)

were slighlly more represen led among trainees who re lurned lhe queslionnaire wilh

94

response rale.

These resulls were not surprising and confirmed a priori. Trainees who were lully

supported for degree training would be m ore lilcely lo respond lo the survey request than

lhose who were supporled for research grants. Furlher, lrainees who linished lheir

degrees recenlly would be more likely to parlicipale because ol lheir recent allilialion

wilh the FPASP. Thus, the respondents are generally represenlalive

o

the FPASP

training parlicipanls.


19/121


20/121

2) Diliman, Quezon Ci ly for scholars working at the Un iversily of the

Philippines, Diliman, Deparlmenl of Agricullure DA) and its altached bureaus or

agencies, and ollier privale companies or universilies based in M elro Manila;

3) Muiioz, Nueva Ecija for scholars a l lhe Philippine Rice Resea rch lnstilule

PhilRice), Cenlra l Luzon Slale U niversily CLSU), and the Philippine Carabao

Cenler PCC); and

4)

General San los Cily, Soul11 Cotabalo for scholars at Mindanao Stale

Universily, Dole, Monsanlo, and other privale companies.

A.

nalytical framework

Informalionlda ta collected lrom the trainees through the survey and inslilulional

case sludies through the FG Ds were analyzed lo provide an overall assessment of Ihe

impacl of FPASP-supporled lraining l o the individual Oulpul), l o their work inslilulion

Oulcome), and to lh e agricullural sector

in

the national or regional level Impact). Figure

2 illustrales the process and serves as lhe lramework of this study.

Figure

2.

FPASP s Impact Pathway end Evaluat ion Framework

output

+i )

I i r;

Individual:

.

Institutions:

Trainina Parlicioanls Researcli Irislilulions. Universilico

/

eaclion:

.Learning:

d

hey learn lrom ll~eraining?

Did

lhey apply whal lhey have learned?

Results Evalualion:

Whal are the impacls lo lhe inslilulionhociely?


21/121

O ulp u ls are the direcl resulls of the FPASP, i.e. the Irainees. Ou tco mes are all

Ihe changes and effecls lh al happen in the environment as a res ull of FPASP's output

(e.g. Irainees' aclivilies). Impacts are the changes wilhin the environment as a resull

from lrainees ' aclivilies. The repor l also idenl ilied key exlernal and inlerna l faclors (e.g..

government researchlextension support, privale seclor collaboralion) Ihal have

contributed to the

impac l of FPASP training, and provided recommendalions for

continued supporl l o graduate degree training in lhe field of agricullure.

The model res ted heavily on lh e Kirkpalrick's evaluation framework, which is one

of the most widely used mode ls for evaluating training. F irst published by Donald'

Kirkpalrick in 1959 as par1 of his disserlalion, Kirkpatrick later redefined and updated his

lraining evalualion model - I ) reaclion, (2) learning, 3) performance, and (4) results -

in his 1990 book, Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels . The four levels

aclually refe r lo differenl perspeclives, not levels, and are not hierarchical. Ralher, each

level evaluales a differenl aspect of training and answers different queslions.

5

~ese ich

bjectives

specif ic Object ives:

Following the Kirkpatrick's Evalualion Model, the specific objeclives o l lh is study

are arranged based on the four evalualion calegories: Reaclion, Learning, Performance

and Resulls Evalualion.

.a) Reaction

1 To determine lli e trainees' general satisfaction with their training

2. To assess the relevance of training on trainees' personal and professional lives

. b) Learning

1. To identify knowledge, skills and alliludes (I


22/121

C esearch qu stions

To maintain the focus on the objectives of the study, the following research

questions were exp lored, following the adapted training evaluation model.

a) Reaction

1 What aspects of ihe training did trainees like and enjoy?

,

2. What aspects of the training did trainees consider relevan l/useful?

b).Learning

1. What know ledge did trainees acquire?

2. What skills did lrainees develop or enhance?

3. What changes occurred in trainees' attitudes?

4.

Wh al major problems did lrainees encounter during their training?

c) Performance:

1. Did trainees utilize their learning and newly acquired

I


23/121

designed online using SurveyGizmo (www.surveygizmo.com), an online creative

platform for survey research. SurveyGizmo appeared to be very use r-friendly and have

met the demands of the online survey. At this same period, the database of scholars,

including relevant conla cl details, was organized.

Between 10 15 Aug usl200 8, the online survey was pre-tested lo lour people, 2

of which were FPASP scholars and the other two were non-scholars. This proved to be

very helpful in finding loopholes and problems in the survey instrument. The

questionnaire was further revised and improved on from 1 5 20 August 2008. It was

officially released on 21 August 2008.

A total of 119 e-mail invitations were sent, oul of 143 scholars (83 of total

population). The invitation was not s enl to scholars who were still enrolled in the U.S. as

of August 2000. Rem inders to answer the survey were se nt out regularly lo encourage

parlicipation. Some scholars were also contacled by phone and asked lo parlicipale in

the survey.

lnlernet Search

An internet search, us ing Google (www.google.com) was 'conducted to

supplement other methods used to'locale former trainees. This strategy was also used

lo look for significant conlribulions that the irainees or their supervisor may not have

reported. Information found on the inlernet was com pared will1 information iound in the

PAEF database (e.g., curren t employer, university affiliation, etc.) to determ ine i l l h e hit

referred to the actual trainee. o standardize this step, the first and last names of the

trainee were typed in the search box, but only the firs1 page of the search resulls was

browsed. If no positive is found in the first page, the search is done again but restricted

to websiles from the Philippines only.

ocused group discussions

Finally, an inslilulional case study was conducled at four locations in the

Philippines (1) Los Baiios, Laguna; (2) Quezon City, Metro Manila; 3 Muiioz, Nueva

Ecija, and 4) General Santos City, Sou lh Cotabalo to document the capacity-building

impacts of the FPASP-funded training. In addition to interviewing former trainees at

trainees' work inslitulions, interviews were conducted with key institutional adminislralors

to obtain an independent assessmen1 of the contribution of FPAS P-supporled training l o

capacily building al the university. The visits were carried out to solicit anecdotal

information and qualitative inlormalion that would enrich the impact information lhat

trainees reported i n the participant survey.


24/121

E Limitations

of

the study

In assessing the impacl of training, the sludy acknowledged several issues and

problems that inherently limit lh e analysis.

First, because the lags involved in observing the impacls of training on linal

outcomes are substantial; it taltes many years for the true quality and va lue of training to

become evident.

Second, il is difficult to attribule outcome effects to a particula r training cause .

This is because there are many unaccounted external factors thal aflecl impact,

including lhe qualily of training and lhe exle nl lo which the trainees apply their I(SAs lo

generate impacts. Moreover, it is dilficult lo isolate the contribution of FPASP from

training received elsewhere.

Finally, the study anticipated several sources of survey errors. ~ h e s e rrors ca n

be grouped into three major categories coverage, non-response, and measu rement

(Couper, 2000). Coverage error represents lhe divergence belween the frame and large1

populalion. This problem was earlier addressed in Chapter

II.

Non-response error,

sometimes considered a selection bias, is expected when certain groups of individuals

return the Survey and olher groups do not. This leads lo problems wilh stalistical

inference and with the robustness of results:Meaiurement error refers to lhe devia tion

o f the respondent s answers from their true values. This could arise lrom the

respondent s lack of motivation, problem in comprehension, .or deliberate dislorlion of

answer.

It

could also arise from the survey queslionnaire s poor wording o r design or

from technical problems encountered whilea nswering the survey.


25/121

CH PTER IIV

Results and Discussion

A

Internet search

The inlernel search confirmed probable matches for 136 (95%) of ihe 143

trainees (Table 2). For anolher 7 (5%) trainees, no posilive matches were found. For

these matched individuals, the inlernel search found information such as the trainees'

names referred l o in research papers; journal articles or books written or co-aulhored by

trainees (38%); and their names lisled in nalional or inlernalional conferences programs

(27%), instilutional directories or personal web pages (64%), and in news arlicles (76%)

.tiling

or reporiing trainees' activilies and accom plislimen~s?

Table

2

Results of Internet Search Impact for Trainees

Positive hi1 136 95%

Number'of l ra i~ iee swith at least one hit)

Publicalion 55

38%

Award 12 8%

Conference paperslprograms 38

27

News arlicles 109 76%

DirectorylHas personal webpage 91 64%

18 Decision

to

pursue

the FPASP

grant in the U S

The queslionnaire ask& respondenls lo ranlt iaclors lha l influenced lheir

decision lo pursue a graduale degreelgranl in the U.S. For tliis question, several

possible reasons were listed ankl lhe respondenl was asked to rank each laclors on a

scale from 1 (very imporlant) to 4 (not important). Most lrainees fell thal lraining was

necessary for lheir professional~developmenl98%). Also high on the list was the desire

lo gain an inlernalional perspeclive (98% and [he scholarship or linancial assislance.

received from the FPASP (98%). Olher laclors lhat respondenls considered imporlanl in

lheir decision lo take advantage of the FPASP training opportunity are prese~iledn

Figure 3. Sixty-six percent ranked 'encouraged by employers' as leas1 mporlant.

The resulls ere gallrered Iron)

lhe

l irsl page

of lho

search results and do no1 comprel~cnsivcly over Ills inlernel

presence o l

lhe trainee.

13


26/121


27/121

Figure 4. Question: Do you feel that your F ulbright experience has m et the goal or

object ives of the FPASP?

N o

Don ' t know

9

Table 3. Question: Please indicate if yo u agree o r disagree wi th each of the

statements about yo ur personal experiences du ring you r FPASP degreelgrant.

My FPASP experience provided m e an opportunity to gain

100

valuable professional expertise and experience.

I

received sufficient professional guidance and support from

the F ulbright staffloffice in the

U S

84 95

eceived sufficient professional guidance and support from

IheFulbright staffloffice in the Philippines. 87

99

My FPASP expe rience was interesting and inlelleclually

challenging.

My FPASP experience provided m e w il h excellent preparation

lor my future prolessional work.

88

100

My FPASP experience was relevant to my current workljob

responsibility.

83 94

39

respondents (44 ) reported having had some academic and non-academic

related problems during their training. Out of the

39

nine respondents had some

disagreements with their adviser or m ajor prolessor. Other. difficulties encountered

included adjustment to culture (n=5) and problems in research work (n=5) and academic

courses (n=5). Five scholars had problems financially, involving delays in gelling

monlhly stipend and additional money for research, and in dealing with the health

insurance. Three scholars encountered problems on their personal health, and another

two scholars had l o deal with family problem s back in the Philippines.

Sevenly-two (82 ) respondenls were married during lheir FPASP-funded

training arid 27 (31 ) had their family (spouse andlor children) living with them during


28/121

their U.S. training. ~ w e n t ~ - l h r e earried scholars altested l o some advanlages of having

their families around, inc luding lh e emotional support and salisfaclion of being 'able to

share the Fulbright experience to their families. Twelve respondents reported some

disadvantages involving tighter budgel and schedule.

D.

Acquisition of

KSAs

Trainees mus t lirst acquire the knowledge, skills, and allilude s (I


29/121

To validate respondents: answers on previous questions on KSAs, lrainees were

asked lo select from a list of spec ific choices how lhey applied the acquired KSAs. This

question allempled to find out i f trainees were able to apply their acquired KSAs in their

profession, as par1 of the Perfo rmance level of the l


30/121

E. mployment details

1 Current employment

Trainees were asked about their current or most recent employmenl (Fig. 6).

Eighty-two percent of the respondents were currenlly employed, either full-time

(78 ),

part-lime

(I ),

or self employedlconsultanl

(2 ).

Twelve lrainees (14 ) are currently

studying for their P1i.D. and 4 trainees are currenlly unemployed, in the middle of looking

for a job, or have just recently retired.

The largest share of lrainees worked for the government, eilher a l public

universities (35 ) or at government bureaus or agencies (32 ) (Table 5). Majority of the

respondents were involved in research (64 and outreach and extension work (43 ).

Some were leaching (40 ) or involved in the

administralionlmanagement

(40 ) in their

work institutions. In terms of amount of time spent on a specific activity, teaching

consumed

47 of respondents' lime on average, followed by research at36 .

Almost all of the currently employed respondents were s till doing work related to.

agriculture

(88 ).

This reflecls that scholars were appropriately targeted to contribute lo

the agricu llure seclor after their FPASP grants. About 24 said that they supp lemented

their income from their primary job w ith outside consulling.

Figure

6.

Current employmenl status of responden ts

Sell.employed1

Co~isullanl

Nol employed 2 Employed; Parl:lime

5

.

am a sludenl

14


31/121

Table 5. Be fore and Current employer lype 1 respondenls

Before Current

Employer type Cou n l percentn ' Count ~ e rc e n l

Public universily

33 38% 25 35%

Private' univers iiy

6%

4 .

6%

30 23ov ern m en t gency 34% 32%

Inlernalional org

5 6%

7

10%

Mullinalional company

2

2%

5 7%

Local private company

8

9%

2

..

3

a\

oul

1 08

ernploycd respondenls;\b out

1

7 o~rlploycd e spondo~ ~ln

2.

tnployment

before

starting

FPASP

grant

The questionnaire also soliciled information from the trainees about their

employment befo re they began 'their gradua te studies. As a requirement for all

scholarship applicants, all trainees we re em ployed in an agriculture-relaled field prior to

'their FPASP grant. The largest share worked at universities, either public

(38 )

or

privale (GoA), and at governmenl agencieslbureaus (34%) (Table 5). Thirteen scholars

said thal they supplemenled their income from lheir primary job w ith outside consulting.

Similarly, majorily of the respondents were'involved in research

(44 )

and

outreach and extension work (41%). Some were teaching' (32%) or involved in ll ie

administralionlmanagement

(22%) in lheir work instilulions. In terms of amount 1 lime

spent on a specific activily, leaching consumed 10% of respondents' time on average,

followed by research at 33%.

E.

Significance

of

degree l v l

This seclion analyzes lhe difference in impact according lo lhe type 01 grant

:

received from the FPASP. Asiit is usually al least twice as expensive to fund Ph.D.

degree lraining, compared to M.S. degree training, it is sometimes argued tha l lraining

funds should be prioritized towards funding

M.S.

sludenls. A similar argument can be

put forward for research grants of the FPASP. Not surprisingly, more scholars were

funded for their M.S. degrees.(n=81), compared lo

Ph.D.

(n=32) and research (n=30)

(Table 6). The most number of M.S. scho lars went to the U.S. in 2002. About one-third

of M.S. scholars were funded for degrees in social sciences

(32 ),

while more PI1.D.

scho lars were funded for degrees in the plan1 sciences (50%). Slightly more females

were funded across lype of grants.


32/121

Table 6 Overview of FPASPscholars y ype of grant

By balch year

Animal Science

15 19 4

13

17

AgrilFood Engineering

8 10

0

0

0 0

EnvironnienV l\lalural Resources

7

9

3

9

3

Foreslry

2 2

2

6

0 0

Food Scienca

1 1 3 9

0 0

Plant Sclence

15

19

16

50

14

47

Social Science 26 32 2 6 4 13

'By gender

Female

42

52 18 . 56 16 53

Male 39 48 14 44q0 14 47

Byproblems encounlered

P1i.D. scholars (67 ) experienced slightly higher rates

01

acadel~licand non-

academic related problems, compared lo M.S. scholars (51 ). Very few research

scholars (n=2), on the other hand, reporled problems during lheir granl.

One

probable

reason for this is the lenglh of stay across type of grants. M.S. and Ph.D. scholars

usually stay in lhe

U.S.

for at two least years, while research scholars undertake their

work in less than a year. Moreover, research scholars are oflen older and m ore nlature.

Again, the problems encounlered relale to conflict wilh their adviser or major professor,

adjuslment to culture, and problems in research work and academ ic courses.

By

career advancement

About one-ha lf of employed respondents who received Ph.D. degrees (15 ) and

research g?anls (50 ) from FPASP currenlly work a l a un iversily. This is not surprising,


33/121

since a PI1.D. degree is usually a requirement for a job at a universily, especially lor

academic positions. The other hall o l the respondents with PI1.D. degrees work lo r the

governmen l (27 ) and international organizations

(9 )

based in lhe Philippines.

Similarly, 28 of research scholars are in government agencies and O A are in

inlernaliona l organizalions. In conlrasl, M.S. scholars were more widely distributed in

terms of lype o l work inslilulion. Tliirly-live percenl of the M.S. graduates are working lor

the goyernmenl;

34

are at a university;

12

are in multi-national companies; and

anolher

12

are in inlernalional organizations.

Again, almost all respondents across lype of grant are still active in agricullure'

through their current work affiliations, implying lha l returned FPA SP scholars, regardless

o l degree, are lruly contribuling in the advancement of the agricultural seclor i n one way

or anolher. Surpris ingly, no P1i.D. scholar admitled lo have sought consullancy to

augmeilt lheir current income lrom lheir principal job, compared l o

30

o l M.S. scholars

and

22

of Ph.D. scholars.' This may mean lliat PI1.D. scholars do not need to augment

their income from lheir primary job, or thal M.S. scholars are more active in seeking out

outside consultancy to boo sl up lheir current income.

Application o ICS s

Table 7 shows top KSAs 'by type of grant as reported by respondenls. M.S.

scholars considered 'research skills' as the mosl iriiporlant KSA, while Ph.D. and

research scholars, overwhelmingly answered 'scientific methods' as mo sl imporlanl. In

terms app lying their acqu ired .I


34/121

F

Gender considerations

of

training

This seclion assesses the dillerences in impacl according lo gender.

The

FPASP and PAEF successlully maintained a balanced roster of male and lemale

scholars. While there are slightly more female respondenls, the percentage ol lemale

and male scholars do not dilfer signilicanlly across years, discipline, and grant type

(Table

.8).

he 'survey also did not lin d major difference i n response.rales by gender

(Female: 76 , Male: 71 ).

Table 8 Overview of FPASP scholars by gender

By batch year

200

11

14

16

21

2006 15

20

13 19

By discipline

. Animal Science

AgrilFood Engineering

Environment/ Nalural Resources

Forestry

Food Science

MarinelFishery

plan1 Science

Social Science

By granl type

M.S. 42 55 39 58

PI1 D , 18 24 14 21/0

Research 16 21 14 2I0h

Total 7 87


35/121

Byproblems encountered

The questionnaire asked whelher lrainees experienced any problems during lheir

FPASPgrant. Slightly more males 60 ) reporled having academic and non-academic

problems during lheir stay in the U.S. N ineleen female scholars (40 ) admilled lo

having problems while studying or doing research. Problems most ciled by female

respondents involve conflicl wilh llieir adviser or major professor (n=4), financial (n=4),

and visa-relaled (n=4) mallers. Male respondents reporled conflict wilh 'tlieir adviser or

major'professor (n=5), adjuslm enl to cullure (n=3), and problems in research (n=3) work

and academic courses (n=3).

By

career advancement

While slighlly more female scholars (81 ) are currently employed compared lo

male scholars (69 ), lhere appears no significant difference in career advancement

between men and women. Those who are unemployed are eillier relired, in l li e middle

of looking for a job, or in graduate school pursuing Ph.D. A majority of the female

respondenls were working ether a l a ,university (39 ) or at a governmenl agencylbureau

(31 ). Likewise, a majority of male scliolars are in universilies (42 ) and government

agencylbureau (33 ). Almos t all male (94 ) and female (82 ) scholars conlinue lo

conlribute lo the agricultural seclor through lheir work. On the other hand, male

respondents appear lo b e more aggressive in securing oulside consullancles as

30

of

employed FPASP scho lars supplemenled lheir currenl income, compared lo 18 of

employed female respondents.

App lication of I(SAs

Table 9 shows lop KSAs by gender as reporled by respondenls. Both male and

female scholars had the same ranking for the firsl four KSAs. Female.respondents

considered 'broader knowledae' as the i l l i mosl imoorlant KSA, while ma le resoondenls

reported 'communications sGlls' as the fifth most irnporlanl

KSA

acquired d&ing lheir

FPASP grant.

The questionnaire asked whelher trainees experienced any problems in applying

their acquired KSAs in lheir workplaces. A smaller porlion of male respondents

soh

versus 27 for female respondenls) said lhey had no problems at all in applying llieir

acquired KSAs. A large share of male respondenls considered the 'lack of operaling

budget' (65 ) as significan t factor, followed by

the 'lack of equipment' (60 ) that

hindered their applicalion of acquired KSAs. More female respondenls considered 'lack

of equipment' (54 ) as a lo p factor, and 'lack of opera ting budget' (44 ) as secondary.

Bo lh ma le (55 ) and female (31 ) scholars considered the 'lack of access to up to date

information' as third major fa ctoi that limited lheir KSA application.


36/121

Table 9. Top KSAs b y gender

Rank Female Ma le

1

scientific methods

2 research skills

3

'critical thinking

scientific methods

research skills

critical thinking

.

4 allilude towards work attitude towards work

5 broader knowledge communication skills

G Significance of

type

of e~w plsyer

Parlicipatlt location can be an indicator of potential impact and the level in which

impact lakes place. The lindings reported in the previous section showed thal Inany ol

lhe graduates were currently working at a university (41 ) and at governmenl

agencieslbureaus (32 ). Since the FPASP had been specifically targeted lo respond lo

the needs of the agriculture sector, almost all scholars conlinue to work in the field

(88 ). The num ber of scholars who sought outside consultancies is spread out by

employer type 8 are working at universities, 4 scholars are lor the governmenl, and 5

are in international and multi-national institutions.

H Monetary and non-monetary impacts of training

I

Employing the Kirkpatrick Model, two types of impacts on individual trainees

were assessed monelary and non-monetary.

1

Monetary Impacts

Monetary benefits, such as salary and outside consulting opporlunities, are the

easiesl lo quantify, but usually dillicull to obtain because many people consider this lo

be a sensitive question. Respondents were asked to approximate the annual salary (in

Philippine peso) thal they earned from their previous job (i.e., job prior to FPASP grant)

and lheir current job. Remarkauly, 58 of the 72 employed respondents (81 ) provided

salary details for lheir current or most recent job. Seventy-one (81 ) o ul of 88 scholars

provided inlormalion on their prior salary.

Table 10 shows the salary levels of lormer trainees in two dillerenl periods

prior to the FPASP grant (Belore) and their current employment (Currenl). Not

surprisingly, prior to their FPASP training, a lhird (31 ) of the trainees earned less than

PhP150,OOO pe r year. At their present employment, 90 of the respondenls reporled

earning more than PhP150,OOO per year. However, it must be emphasized that all of the

diiference between the salaries thal lhe trainees earned prior lo the FPASP grant,

compared lo lheir current salaries, can not be a ttributed to FPASP. First, salaries thal

trainees reported prior to grant are for diflerent years. Also, even i f the lrainees had not


37/121

earned a graduate degree, their salaries would have increased due to additional time in

service. Table 10 shows average salary levels by FPASP batch year when the scholar

went to the U.S. for the FPASP). As expected, current income is generally higher for

those who linished their programs earlier. Recent returnees are earning PhP204,538 per

year, much less compared to the firs1 batch of scholars who now earn P h P 5 7 5 ,l ll per

year on average.

Table 10. Number of scholars b y sa lary levels and by pe r iod

Incom e Grou p Before Current

Annual salary

in

P ~ P )

Number Percent Number Percent

Total

71

58

Averaae Ann ual Salarv PhP 226.159

Ph P 446.805

Table

1 1

Average annual sa lary in nominal PhP) b y batch and by type of grant

Batch year

Before Current

Averaqe PI1P) Counl Average PhP) Counl

2001 201,000 12 575,111 9

2002

323,841 17 804.1 65 14

Type of grant

Masters 180,878 .50 411,120 36

Research 413,282 12 636,261 13

The dilference in salaries received by respondenls was also analyzed based on

the academic degrees they received. Table 10 illustrates lhe increase in salaries lrom

B.S. to M.S. to Ph.D. Before FPASP, a respondent with a B.S. degree earned on

average) about PhP180,878 a year. At their present employmenl, alter receiving their

M.S. degrees, they now earn PhP411,120 a year, more than twice their previous

income.


38/121

Respondenls who were funded for their Ph.0. degrees, assum ing that they had

their M.S. degrees somewhere, received PhP228,222 per year before their FPASP

grant. After coming back, they now receive, on average, PhP315,889 per year, a 138%

increase from their previous i n ~ o m e . ~esearch scholars received the highest 'Before'

and 'Current' salary at PhP413,282 and PhP636,261 per year, respectively..

In addition, the survey asked respondenls whether there is a difference in salary

levels

0

or those who have M.S. degrees versus lhose who have Bachelor's degrees

and 2) for those who have Ph.D. degrees versus those who have M.S. degrees in their

respective institutions. Filly-nine percent of respondents affirmed thal holders of M.S.

degrees receive higher income than those wilh B.S. degrees. M oreover, anolher 55%

confirmed that P1i.D. degree holders get higher income than M.S. degree ho lders in their

current work.

2 Non monetary Impacts

Respondents were asked to describe and give concrele examples of any

changes or impacts on their personal and prolessional lives tha l they could allribute lo

their FPASP grant.

Forty-one respondenis (47%) confirmed lhat the skills lhey gained from the

FPASP grant assisted them in getting a more senior position; 17 scholars (19%) were

not sure and answered Don't know . In a anolher question, considering how the

promotion is due to the I


39/121

Table 12 Question. What were the main benefits to you personally of being a FPASP

.

scholar?

Rank Benefits Ratin a out of 4 0

1

Skills and knowledge gained from experience

2

,

lmproved research skills

3 a Cultural experience

4

More open to new ideas1more flexible

5 Professional contacts

6

Leadershiplpeople skillsllea~nwork

7 Improved writing skills

Opened up new career opportunities

9 Proposal writing skills

10

Improved computer skills

11 Improved English language skills

13 More able lo attract R D funding

14 Increased influence in national policy

3 AchievementslContributions

While the previous section looked into personal impacts of the FPASP,

iespondents were also asked to describe their significanl accomplishments especially

those related to the agriculture. This queslion sought lo identify impacts of training

beyond the individual level (i.e., Results evaluation stage of the K irkpatrick model).

.

The survey specifically asked how the FPASP scholars have contributed or have

Influenced decision-making in their work setting. Sixty-five scholars (74 ) responded

.

positively to this queslion. Significant accomplishments that trainees cited include their,

role in introducing changes and innovations in program implementation or work set-up;

strong influence in the institutions' program planning, and the important positions or jobs

,

they he ld as a resu lt of their training (Table 13). Scholars from the university reported the

introduction of new courses o r ,new academic programs and the mentoring of both

undergraduate and graduate

.

students in their research. More than half ,o f the

respondents (53 ) reported they had supervised at least student.

In addition, respondents were also asked how they have contributed to change or

have influenced policy in the broader agriculture sector (Table 14). This queslion elicited

fewer responses, as several scholars strongly fell that it is too early for impacts to be

,. seen in a wider base. Many respondenls have just recently returned to the.Philippines

and have only begun to establish their presence in their respective fields. Nonetheless,

out of the 29 affirmative responses (33 ), scholars cited their roles in national

workshops~r raining on agriculture issues, the important positions they heldthat make


40/121

them critical in deciding on broader agricullural issues, and the scientific knowledge and

experlise that they share wilh the students, farmers, and policyniakers.

A majorily of the FPASP scholars have been active in having their research

o~ tlp ul s published both in inlernalionally (65 ) and in locally (55 ) refereed

journa ls/books (65 ).6 Most of the M.S. and Ph.D. trainees published lheir gradua le

research in journals lbooks (64 for Ph.D., 51 for M.S.) and also presented lheir

research at a conference lseminar (100 for Ph.D., 73 for M.S.). Another

25

have

also'published books as one of the main authors or editors. In addition, many

respondents have been awarded w ilh consu lling projeclslgrants from the government or '

local agencies (35 ) and from inlernational agencies (20 ). More than half of the

scholars (5I0l0) have also been featured in a magazine, newspaper, internet websile

arlicle, or in a television program.

I Returned to

home country

Brain drain is a matter of concern to program administrators and donors, slnce the

goal of capacity building in developing countries is not achieved i f

trainees slay in lhe

U.S. lnc ide ~il al vidences indicate lha l some students who earn graduate degrees in Ihe

U.S. do not return home due lo low wages and poor socio-economic condilions.

However, the app rehension about brain drain lacks strong supporting documents.

The survey asked lrainees i f they returned lo lhe Philippines immediately afler

the FPASP g r a d and

i f

not, where tliey went a nd why they did not immedialely return to

their home country. Ninety-eight percent of the survey respondents returned

,immediately to the Philippines after lheir FPASP grant. Only 1 scholar admitted to have

not returned because she is currently pursuing her PI1.D. Another scho lar delayedh er

return for personal reasons, but eventually went home. This high level of relurn rale

clearly tramples any apprehension on brain drain.

Of those who relurned, 74 of the respondents went back lo the same inslllulion

al which they were employed prior lo the FPASP. This is not surprising as 66 of the

sample were guaranteed of a job, through .a study-leave program, upon lheir return to

Ihe Philippines.

Il

is importanl to note that while some respondents (n=18) are currenlly

in lhe U.S. and pursu ing Ph.D. degrees, almost all trainees returned and most are

currenlly working i n lh e Philippines. The m ain reason of scholars who want to stay in

the U.S. is the opporlunity for furlher graduate study, and lh is mostly hold true for M.S.

funded scholars seeking l o transfer lo Ph.D.

.

6

Have

published

rescarch

in

leasl journalhook, eilher inlernalpnally or locally.


41/121


42/121

Table

14

Question How have you contributed lo change or have influenced policy in

the Philippine agricullure and fisheries seclor?

My involvemenl is niore as resource person and adviser lo

organized

grourps 01 induslry and prolessioriab. I

Imve been lapped by DA.Al'1 as a subjecl rrialler specialis1 and tve are working on an e.online nialcrial.

By working as corisullanl in NGOs, cooperalives arid SMEs in ll ie regional level, I gave ideas and slrare nry

policy papers and ir;lornralion in improving produclion and prol~lsd my clienls. ?liey work lor a common

goal in acllieving rural develo~~rnenl.orkinq n /l ie gfassrools is an avenue lo lranslale nalional plans inlo

&?alilies arid a&ons.

any 01 our nalional plans-are no1 implemenlable a1 local selling. i y slrowing ,

evidences and niagnilying llrese inilialives and ebvaling Nreni lo nalional scab, I believe, policy niakers 1v11

be able lo adopl sonie ol our ideas lor policy change even il i l lake more years lo be realized.

I had llie opporluriily lo serve as llie clrab of llre organizirrg comniillee ol a nalional convenliorr in 2007

liosled by FPAAA on conlribuling lo a slralegic aclion agenda lor llre Philippine agricullural seclor. We

galliered FPASP alumni, policymakers, and agricullure slakeliolders lo pul logellrer priorily areas and

slralegies parlicularly lor Nre seclor.

I serve In regional leclirlical working groups lllal debrnible researclr llrrusls and priorilies, scrulinlze

proposals and research oulpuls. I also serve in M-Region Xl's pool of experis, and am olleri inviled lo give

leclures perlinen1 lo lriy field ol experlise

I have beer? aclively parlicipaling and conlribulirrg ilrrough comnienls/suggesions on llle rlco sell.

sulliciency plarr 01 PliilRice lo be subniilled lo llte Deparlmeril 01Agricullure

I wrole arlicles; joined seminars and workshops in lislleries. I have became presidenl 01 111s P1riiip;llne

lislrmies inslilulions rielwork arid chair of llle Weslern Visayas Regiorial Researclr Consorliuni in Agricullure

I Iiave bee" corrlacled by llie Oliice ol llie Secrelary 10 comrneril on Bioleclriology docunrenls. llrave also

made sorile rese sen la lions a1 UPLB on my pro/ecl and encouraged incoming graduale sluderrls lllrouglr

sliarirlg nly experience

I parficipaled in a naliorial congress on inlegraled coaslal nlanagemenl lreld in lloilo in Ocluber 2007

wherein we discussed how we can improve ecosyslern-basednianagemenl of lisheries resources.

I have conlribi~uled s par1 01 ll ie DA's policy and plannirig group, I have provided DA minagenlenl will1

arialysis and advice on key decisions alfecling agricullure and lire Wteries seclor ie. trade and larill

policy, import rules, commodily policy, program irnplemenlalion, legislalive agenda, and ollrer siriiilar issues.

serve as a merriber o l llle leam developirrg 11e prolocol lor lie Good Anir~ialHusbandry Pracllces Ilia1 will

be iniplemenled by 111e liveslock agencies under l i e DA as a means ol cerlilying/ accredilirig liveslock

larnis.

My proposal lor raimvaler calclrrnenl syslertrs in rairiled areas s now being considered and riiodeled by Ilre

NIA Region VI. Tlie projecl proposal won llre World Bank DlMP compelilion.

I have publislied two books covering issues on Food Securily, Tecl~nology. nd Trade in Agricullure. We

also conducled a press conference (covered by niedia) on llie 2008 Rice Crisis

I work wilh PlrilRice as a consullanVcoordinalor of llieir leclrnology promolion and exlension program a1

PliilRice. A1 preseril. I am i lie projecl leader ol l lle conlenl developrnenl projecl 01 ll ie Open Acadeniy lor

Phil Agricullure (OPAPA)


43/121

J. Continued collaboration

This section analyzes the characteristics of respondents who continued to and

did not conlinue to collaborale wilh their U.S. m ajorpro fess or'o r research advise r alter

completing their grant (Table

15).

Collaboration is assumed to resull lo greater

achievements and benefits lo both the Philippines and the U.S. Ninety-one percent

1

the respondenls. repo rted lhat they have remained in contact with their former major

professor or research adviser and

26

confirmed Illa t they continue lo collaborale on a

research project will1 lheir former niajor prolessor or research adviser. Several scholars

who continued to collaborate were recent graduates from batch

2006

(41 ). More than

lia ll of PI1.D. scholars have also maintained lheir proless ional lies wilh lheir U.S. major

professors or research advisers (58 ). However, it is important lo note lhat non-

collaboration does not necessarily mean that a trainee does not want to collaborale. In

some cases, there are limited opportunilies to collaborate, due to differences in Career

advancement, change in career priorilies, and the difliculty ol long-distance

collaboration.

Table 15. Question: Since completing your FPASP degreelgranl, have you collaboraled

on a research p roject with your former m ajor prolessor/tliesis

supervisor/collaboralor?

Batch year No Yes Total Yes

2001

10 5 15 33

2006

10 7

17

41

Gender

Female

31

16 47 34

Male 33 .

7 40 18

Type

of

grant

Masters 13 57 23

Research

15 3

18

7y

Total

64 23

87

26


44/121

K. The Fulbright-Philippine Agriculture Alumni

Association FPAAA)

The survey also asked scholars

i

lhey are involved

in any agriculture-rela ted organ izalions (e.g., professiona l

societies, associalions, nelworlts).

66

respondenls

(75 )

confirmed that they are active in seve ral agriculture-relaled

organizalions. Membership in lhese networks increases

the potential for future collaboration locally and

I

internationally. It also opens possibililies for publishing in

i

association journals, presenling research findings at

::

meetings, and opporlunilies to serve on committees and

boards. These prospects allow lrainees l o keep abreast of

iss ues an d people in their own profession. Table 16 lists

some

1

the agricullure-relaled organizalions that

..\? \ l l :. \I lll.l..l I

respondenls are involved in. Certainly, lop on the l isl is the

Fulbrighl-Philippine Agriculture A lumni Association (FPAAA).

Table

16.

Selecled agricullure-relaled organizations of FPASP scholars

Fulbrighl-Philippine AgricUlture A lurnni Association

.

Gamma Sigma D ella Hono r Society ol Agriculture

Crop Sc ience Sociely of the Philippines

Philippine Society of Agricultural Engineers

Philippine Society of Animal Science

Philippine Agricullural Economics and Developmenl Association

Philippine Velerinary Medical Association

American Phytopathological Sociely

Asian Fishe ries Sociely

Crop Science Society of Am erica

Philippine Associalion of Agricullurisls

Philippine Fruils A ssociation

Soulhern Agricullural Economics Association

American Agricullural Econom ics Association

American Society for Horticultural Science

American Society of Animal Science


45/121

Th e F PAA A is a n association of scholars who returned to the Phi lippines after

completing their FPASP grants. Officially, it has been registered at the Securities and

Excha nge Comm ission a s a non-profit organization. It is comm itted to contribute towards

the development of the agricullural sector in lhe Philippines by organizing agricullure-

relaled discussions and conferences across the counlry and publishing agricullure-

related research output

1

FPAAA members. I t is also active in prornol ing FPAAA

mem beis l o various stakeholders

in

lh e agricullure s ector lor .possible future

collabbration. Additionally, il provides a forum l o form ne w fr iendships and professional

relationships wilh peo ple of similar discipline.

The formation of the alumni association ensures that the contribution of the

scholar does no t end with their FP AS P grants. Indeed, through scholars' association

wilh the FPAAA, the trainees conlinue to contribute to the agricullure sector by

publishing in FPAAA-sponsored boolts and presenting research findings as resource

person or technical consultant at FPAAA-organized evenls. The following lists some of

the recent aclivities an d accomplishments of the alumni association.

The first Agri-Talakayan in Luzon was held on 25 November 2005 al lli e DA-Agricullural

Training lnslilule (ATI) Cenlral Ollice, Diliman, Quezon Cily. Tlie Agri-Talakayan is an

inilialive of llie FPAAA lo share and disseminate the knowledge and skills gained from

their scholarly works. The forum envisioned lo serve as a venue lo exchange ideas on

how lo pursue lhe modernizalion of lhe agricullure and fisheries in line will1 llie current

thrusts of the Deparlmenl of Agricullure.

The FPAAA came up wilh policy recommendalions in agricullure during ils national

congress al the lnternalional Rice Research Instilute (IRRI), Los Baiios, Laguna on 24

Augusl 2007. Tl ie FPAAA Nalional Congress llieme was Conlribuling lo a Slralegic

Acl ion Agenda for ll ie Ph ilippine Agriculture Seclor . Among the key suggeslions llia l lhe

FPAAA forwarded was lo develop physical inlraslruclure and the reslrucluring of

I

governmenl inslilulions in order lo facililale development. Tlie FPAAA also emphasized

the imporlance o l building local capacily, especially of lhe LGUs, lo manage agricullure

and fisheries.

An Agri-Tech Negosyo Forum and Exhibil was held al lhe ~ u r e a uf Soils and Waler

Managemenl (BSWM) Convenlionl-lall, Oue zon Cily on 12 Seplember 2000. 11 was

inlended lo dissem inate nlorma lion on local lechnologies and link polenlial inveslors and

entrepreneurs on agricullure-related businesses. This aclivily was also a par1 1 the 60 '

anniversary of the Fulbrighl Commission in the Philippines arid was carried out in

collaboralion with lhe Deparlment

1

Labor and Employmenl.

The firsl book published by lhe FPAAA, enlilled Con lribulion lo Philippine Agricullural

Modernizalion: Selected Papers of Fulbrighl-Philipp ine Agricullure Scholars, Volume

I ,

ediled by Liborio S. Cabanilla, Mario G. Andrada, and Liberly0 nciong, was released in

2006. A second book is in the pipeline focusing on agricultural echnologies.

On 8 April

2000

the Philippine Fulbrighl Scholars Associalion (PFSA) honored FPAAA

member and UP Visayas Chancellor Glenn Aguilar lor his achievemenls in Agricullure.


46/121


47/121

Table 17. Focused group discussions by localion

Locat ion

Num ber of

part icipants

Diliman, Quezon ity

1

Department

01

Agricullure and ils allached bureauslagencies

University ol llle Philippines, Diliman

Other nearby instilulions

L o s Bafios, Lag utla

Universily of the Philippines. Los BaRos

lnlernalional Rice Research lnslilule

Mufioz, N ueva Ec ija

Philippine Carabao Cenler

Philippine Rice Research lnslitule

Central Luzon State Universily

General Sar~tos,Sou th Cotabato 7

Mindanao Stale Universily, Gen San Campus

3

Dole Pliilippines 1

Monsanlo Pllilippines 1

0l lie r nearby inslilulions

2

A liitegration o FG s

Nature

01

obs

The dillerences in lerms of Ihe nalure of jobs of lhe

FGD

participanls in the

dilferent clusters were evident. The Los Batios scholars are mostly academicians; the

Manila parlicipanls are mainly government agency employees; many General Sanlos

scholars are lrom the private sector; while the Nueva Ecija group consisls mainly ol

government research scienlists.

The knowledge, skills, and attiludes KSAs) gained by the scholars included

those related to scientific me lhods, technical and quanlilative lools, m anagement skills,

and personal values. Scholars now betler appreciale the value of hypothesis-based

research and research-based teaching, the rigors involved in s cienlilic research, and the

power of observalion and crilical.thinking abilily. They also realize the importance ol

innovation in research.

The scholars also ciled several technical and quantitative knowledge they have

gained, including researchllaboratory and technical wriling s

Documents

Assessing the Impact of the Fulbright-Philippine Agriculture Scholarship Program.pdf