Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Mixed methods analysis reveals high awareness of gender-responsive initiatives in Region I’s SUCs, suggesting an effective framework for institutional equity.
This study aimed to evaluate and analyze the awareness and implementation of gender mainstreaming in State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) in Region I, with the goal of informing a three-year strategic plan. Specifically, it assessed the extent to which SUCs integrate gender-sensitive curricula, gender-responsive research programs, and gender-responsive extension initiatives, while identifying challenges encountered in their implementation. Employing a sequential explanatory mixed methods design, the researcher utilized a validated, researcher-developed questionnaire complemented by one-on-one interviews. The study engaged 382 respondents, comprising school administrators, faculty, non-teaching personnel, and students, for the quantitative phase, and four GAD focal persons for the qualitative phase during the 2022–2023 academic year. Statistical tools such as frequencies and means were used to interpret the data. Findings revealed that respondents were highly aware of gender-responsive academic and institutional programs, and that these were very highly implemented across SUCs. The study culminated in the development of a thematic model and a validated strategic plan to enhance gender mainstreaming efforts. Framed within the broader historical context, the research underscores how contemporary gender initiatives in Region I’s SUCs serve as a progressive response to deeply rooted cultural norms and colonial legacies that once shaped educational and gender structures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gadaza et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: