This study was anchored on Kirkpatrick’s (1994) learning and evaluation theory, popularly known also as four level of evaluation model most widely used for the evaluation of training and learning. It attempted to assess the political participation of inmates at selected jails in Region III, as basis in the formulation of action plan towards standardized voting procedures.
The following findings were obtained: The political participation of inmate in terms of inmates’ leaning, inmate’s performance, and inmates’ initiative with a weighted mean of 3.66, 3.60, and 3.56; with the grand weighted mean was 3.61; to address the problems met in the political participation of inmates in terms of information drive, utilize inmates “idle time”, and lecture of inmates in political participation with a weighted mean of 3.84, 3.81 and 3.82; the significant difference in the assessments of respondents on the problems met in the political participation of inmates, as follows: the t-cal was 9.409, which was higher than the t-crit of 1.645, both significant at 0.05 level; and Section I, Article V of 1987 Philippine Constitution provide that “suffrage may be exercised be all citizens of the Philippines, not otherwise disqualified by law; hence, the COMOLEC has promulgated Resolution No. 9371 dated March 6, 2012 with regard rule on detainee voting.
Based on the findings, following conclusions were drawn: the political participation of inmates in terms of inmates’ learning and inmates’ performance were observed; and inmates’ initiative was moderately observed; with overall verbal description was moderately observed; the problems met in the political participation of inmates in terms of inmates’ learning was serious; inmates’ performance and inmates’ initiative were moderately serious; with overall verbal description was serious; the following measures were recommended to address the problems met in the political participations of inmates: inmates’ learning was information drive to inmates; inmates’ performance was utilize inmates “idle time”, and inmates’ change initiative was lecture of inmates in political participation; The hypothesis tested by the researcher in conduct of this study that “there is no significant difference in the assessments of respondents on the political participation of inmates presently; therefore, its subsequent implementation will likewise ensure the exercise of the right of suffrage of inmates as guaranteed by the constitution.
From the conclusion derived, the following recommendations were made: improved the desirable attributes relatively with inmates’ learning, inmates’ performance, and inmates’ initiative by enhancing their awareness on their right and privilege guaranteed by the constitution, vis- à-vis of empowering them through political participation as proscribe by the election laws; address the problems on understanding and the time constraints with regard to their political participation, including the changing of their unreceptive attitude during electoral exercise, through continuous and regular education of inmates in coordination with COMELEC officials; jail authorities to conduct information drive to inmates regarding political participation; to utilize the inmates “idle time” to comply with the requirement in the political exercise; and provide lecture with inmates on the necessity for positive response regarding their specific duties in the political participation; initiation of regular dialogues between jail personnel and jail inmates to resolve discrepancies in their respective views and perceptions with regard observance of the political participation of detainees as a matter of right, including the problems met relatively with the said lawful undertaking; similar study to be conducted in another time and setting which will focus on the observance of inmates political participation, including the problems met and the measures to address the same to confirm or negate the findings of the present study; and adoption and implementation of the action plan toward standardized coting procedures in the jail facilities, taking into considerations the different indicators embodied therein, such as inmates’ learning, inmates’ performance, and inmates’ initiative relative with electoral process.