Table 1 Level of Adaptation of Programs on Climate Change in Terms

of Reducibility
LSPU-SCC

LSPU-SINILOAN

LSPU-LB

AVERAGE

Items

Mea
n

Standard
Deviation

Remark
s

Mea
n

Standard
Deviatio
n

Remark
s

Mea
n

Standard
Deviatio
n

Remark
s

Mea
n

Standard
Deviatio
n

Remarks

1.
Purchasing
commodities/materials
that are only required.

4.52

0.57

Almost
Always

4.52

0.57

Almost
Always

4.62

0.56

Almost
Always

4.55

0.57

Almost
Always

2.
Using
commodities/materials
that are only needed.

4.57

0.70

Almost
Always

4.57

0.70

Almost
Always

4.48

0.70

Almost
Always

4.54

0.70

Almost
Always

3. Buying products that
have long life span.

4.60

0.67

Almost
Always

4.60

0.67

Almost
Always

4.57

0.62

Almost
Always

4.59

0.65

Almost
Always

4. Repairing broken
materials instead of
replacing them.

4.23

0.70

Almost
Always

4.23

0.70

Almost
Always

4.38

0.67

Almost
Always

4.28

0.69

Almost
Always

5. Walking instead of
using private vehicles
for certain distances.

4.22

0.87

Almost
Always

4.22

0.87

Almost
Always

4.45

0.62

Almost
Always

4.30

0.79

Almost
Always

6.
Using
public
transportation in going
to the University.

4.63

0.58

Almost
Always

4.63

0.58

Almost
Always

4.62

0.64

Almost
Always

4.63

0.60

Almost
Always

7. Using indigenous
materials rather than
using plastic materials.

4.18

0.79

Often

4.18

0.79

Often

4.32

0.72

Almost
Always

4.23

0.77

Almost
Always

8.
Using
made with
materials.

4.23

0.74

Almost
Always

4.23

0.74

Almost
Always

4.37

0.66

Almost
Always

4.28

0.71

Almost
Always

9.
Using
energyefficient light bulbs and
rechargeable batteries.

4.25

0.73

Almost
Always

4.25

0.73

Almost
Always

4.43

0.62

Almost
Always

4.31

0.69

Almost
Always

10. Reusing plastic
bags, cups, containers,
plastic bottles and
others.

4.40

0.67

Almost
Always

4.40

0.67

Almost
Always

4.43

0.65

Almost
Always

4.41

0.66

Almost
Always

Overall

4.3
8

0.70

Almos
t
Alway
s

4.3
8

0.70

Almos
t
Alway
s

4.47

0.65

Almos
t
Alway
s

4.4
1

0.68

Almos
t
Alway
s

products
recycled

Overall
Interpretation
Legend:
Scale
5
4
3
2
1

Level of acceptability is highly implemented
Range
4.21-5.00
3.41-4.20
2.61-3.40
1.81-2.60
1.00-1.80

Remarks
Almost Always
Often
Sometimes
Seldom
Almost Never

Interpretation
Highly Implemented
Implemented
Moderately Implemented
Lowly Implemented
Not Implemented

Table 1 presents the respondent' level of adaptation of programs on
climate change in terms of reducibility. For LSPU-SCC, it revealed that items
1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9, and 10 got the remarks of “Almost Always”, except item 7
got the remark of “often”. As reflected, item predictor number 6 “using public
transportation in going to the University” got the highest mean of 4.63 and
with SD of 0.58, and item number 7 “using indigenous materials rather than
using plastic materials” got the lowest mean of 4.18 and with SD of 0.79.
The overall mean score of 4.38 indicated that the level of adaptation of
programs on climate change reducibility is “highly implemented”, this is
supported by the study of Jackson (2008) stated that in order to achieve a
decent waste management system, rules and regulations in university
campuses must minimize the production of waste at each and every school
community and every student level. The less utilization of materials results in
less waste generated university. And also supported the study of Daniel
(2011) that every individual could contribute to reducing waste by different
means like buying and using less, especially buying the products that have
long life span, repairing the broken materials in spite of replacing them,
choosing walking as a healthy option instead of using private vehicles for
certain distances, increasing the use of public transportation, using
indigenous materials rather than using plastic materials.
For LSPU-Siniloan, it showed that purchasing commodities/materials
that are only required, buying products that have long life span and using

65 reveals that the rating given by the respondents on the level of adaptation of programs on climate change in terms of reducibility are on the same range. The average standard deviation of 0.SD=0.64 interpreted as “Almost Always”. SD=0. The grand mean of 4.49 interpreted as “Highly Implemented”. and Using public transportation in going to the university respectively with a remarks of strongly agree.64. it further indicated the mean score of 4. Thus. most of the respondents are inclined to reduce waste to adapt the program on climate change. all the samples under reducibility resulted to “Almost Always” with an overall mean of 4. For LSPU-LB.62.52.SD=0. 62.61 and 0. . As was indicated.57.62 and 4. 0.47.56. implies that the level of adaptation on climate change in terms of reducibility was rated strongly agree and verbal interpretation of highly adapted. obtained by the following questions such as Purchasing Commodities/Materials that are only required. 4.63 with standard deviation of 0. Buying products that have long life span.public transportation in going to the University have the highest weighted mean of 4.

67 Almost Always Overall 4.37 0.65 Almost Always 4.86 4.36 0.35 0.81 Often 3.82 Often 4.72 Almost Always 4.81 7.73 Almost Always 4.61-3. Reusing the back clear portion of used bond papers. Using styrofoam in packing food products.47 0.72 Almost Always 4.Table 2 Level of Adaptation of Programs on Climate Change in Terms of Reusability LSPU-SCC Items Mea n Standard Deviation 1. 4.15 0.7. it revealed that items 1. AVERAGE Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks 0.30 0.60 1.42 0.6.30 0.56 Almost Always 4.8.25 0.37 4.40 1.64 Almost Always 9.30 0.23 0.43 0.71 Almost Always 4.9. For LSPU-SCC.41-4.07 0.67 Almost Always 4.57 Almost Always 4.60 Almost Always 4. 4.18 0. Using the everdependable bayongs when shopping.76 Almost Always 4.72 Almost Always 4.20 2.48 0. Reusing scrap materials into a new and functional item.4 0 0.69 Almost Always Almost Always 4.27 0.46 0.63 Almost Always 10.47 0.43 0.23 0. 4.68 Almost Always 4.94 Often 6.65 Almost Always 4.77 Almost Always Almost Always 4.74 Almost Always 4.59 Almost Always 4.00 3. Using used boxes.43 0. 4.29 0.68 4.28 Overall Interpretation Legend: Scale 5 4 3 2 1 Level of acceptability is highly implemented Range 4.53 Almost Always Often 4. Renting/ borrowing an item instead of buying new product. LSPU-LB Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation 0.43 0.43 0.81-2.03 5.35 0.78 Often 4.59 Almost Always 4.47 0. 4.64 Almost Always 4. Using a second-hand item.59 Almost Always 4. 4.45 0.60 Almost Always 4.41 0.62 Almost Always 4.74 Almost Always 4.45 0. LSPU-SINILOAN Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation 0.63 0.32 2. Throwing away materials that are of no use.71 Almost Always 0.72 Almost Always 4.21-5. Making projects out of discarded materials.00-1.40 0.60 Almost Always 4.30 0.52 0. and 10 .69 Almost Always 4.15 0.65 Almost Always 4.54 Highly Implemented 4. Using reusable carry bags and containers. 4.77 Almost Always 4.40 4.74 Almost Always 0.47 0.80 Remarks Almost Always Often Sometimes Seldom Almost Never Interpretation Highly Implemented Implemented Moderately Implemented Lowly Implemented Not Implemented Table 2 presents the level of adaptation of programs on climate change in terms of reusability.37 0.42 8.62 Almost Always 0.43 0.76 Almost Always 4.

aluminium.68 and standard deviation of . Local authorities play a vital role in reduction of waste. recycling waste materials such as papers.28 indicated that the level of adaptation of programs on climate change reusability is “highly implemented”. item number 8 “using used boxes” got the highest mean of 4. got the remarks of “often”. The overall mean score of 4.62.82.5. it showed that sample number 1. that zero waste institutes stated that reduction in waste production is the first step in waste management. and item number 4 “renting/ borrowing an item instead of buying new product” got the lowest mean of 4. glass. Mainly.47 and with SD of 0.3. And items 2. Reduction is the first and most important stage in the hierarchy. Less production means less effort for management. As reflected. Industrial level also concerned about reduction but not sufficient enough to make a change.4.got the remarks of “almost always”.03 and with SD of 0. There are efforts by the government on different levels like media and public education to minimize school colleges waste. The idea of reduction is to be careful of material source stream and waste management exercises to reduce raw materials. bottles to maintain clean environment got the highest weighted mean of 4. this is supported in a 2005 article. school colleges waste can be minimized if it is treated carefully within the school premises. It includes taking an active view in purchasing and using only what is necessary for individual and community. For LSPU-Siniloan.

the local government units (LGUs) are the main actors.69.40. obtained by the question such as Do you recycle? With a remarks of strongly agree. For LSPU-LB. . implies that the level of adaptation on climate change in terms of recyclability was rated strongly agree and verbal interpretation of highly adapted.58 among the respondents with a verbal interpretation of “Almost Always while the lowest mean of 4.35 and 0. The average standard deviation of 0. The main problem is the funding for the implementation of solid waste management schemes as under RA 9003.0. some students lack discipline to separate the biodegradables from the non-biodegradables despite knowing that sorting garbage helps nurture the beauty of the surroundings.71 reveals that the rating given by the respondents on the level of adaptation of programs on climate change in terms of recyclability are on the same range.46 with standard deviation of 0. SD=0. Further. it further indicated the mean score of 4.60 interpreted as “Highly Implemented”. Leones (2015) stated that more than a decade since the enforcement of its waste management law. The grand mean of 4. On the school problem. improper waste disposal remains one of the Philippines’s big environmental problem.63 standard deviation in terms recyclability is the segregation of non-biodegradable and biodegradable waste for easier classification of waste materials interpreted also as “Almost Always”. the overall weighted mean is 4.32.

69 Almost Always 4.38 0.54 Almost Always 4.48 0.Table 3 Level of Adaptation of Programs on Climate Change in Terms of Recyclability LSPU-SCC Items 1.64 Almost Always . Recycling waste materials such as: papers.37 0. LSPU-SINILOAN LSPU-LB AVERAGE Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks 4. glass.69 Almost Always 4.68 0. aluminum. bottles to maintain clean environment.

69 Almost Always 4. And item 5 got the remark of As reflected.71 Almost Always 4.68 Almost Always 9.43 0. Segregation of Non-Bio and Biodegradable waste for easier classification of waste materials.35 0.37 0.4.33 0.78 Almost Always 4.3 0.69 Almost Always 7.00 3.72 Almost Always 4. memos.74 Almost Always 4.45 and with SD of 0. 4.45 0. and .65 Almost Always 4.25 0.32 0.37 0.73 Almost Always 4.3 2 0.21-5.6.67 Almost Always 4.46 0. Assigning homework which need not be written to reduce the use of papers. Using of old handouts to minimize paper consumption.42 0.65 Almost Always 8.76 Almost Always 4. Supplying recycled containers or outreached materials in the classrooms to minimize garbage. Recycling paper plates and cups to lessen waste in the canteen.32 0. Recycling used office supplies to make new products. and reminders on how to recycle waste to maintain a clean surroundings.3 7 0.45 0.15 0.63 Almost Always 4.48 0.3 0.53 Almost Always 4.40 1. 5.6 Often 4.57 Almost Always 4.00-1.75 Almost Always 4.72 Almost Always 4.52 0.71 Almost Always 4. 6.72 Almost Always 4.78 Often 4.65 Almost Always 4. it revealed that item 1.8. 4.68 Almost Always Overall Interpretation Legend: Scale 5 4 3 2 1 Level of acceptability is highly implemented Range 4. 4.43 0.60 Almost Always 4. and 10 got the remarks of “almost always”.72 Almost Always 4.34 0.69 Almost Always 10.42 0.20 2.61-3.73 Almost Always 4.41-4.60 1.2. item number 10 “using of old handouts to minimize paper consumption” got the highest mean of 4. “often”.37 0.56 Almost Always 4.41 0.73 Almost Always 4.35 0.71 Almost Always 4.42 0.38 0. 3. 4.69 Almost Always 4.7.80 Remarks Almost Always Often Sometimes Seldom Almost Never Interpretation Highly Implemented Implemented Moderately Implemented Lowly Implemented Not Implemented Table 3 presents the level of adaptation of programs on climate change in terms recyclability.27 0.6 Almost Always 4.43 0.27 0. For LSPU-SCC.72 Almost Always 4.38 0. Disseminating announcements.30 0. Placing of recycle bins in the school vicinities.9.65 Almost Always Overall 4.31 0.2.67.32 0. Reusing old magazines and paper to make handicrafts.81-2.27 0.17 0. 4.37 0.74 Almost Always 4.48 0.59 Almost Always 4.3.65 Almost Always 4.71 Almost Always 4.38 0.72 Almost Always 4.44 0.74 Almost Always 4. 4.

For LSPU-LB. it further indicated the mean score of 4. The average standard deviation of 0.60 reveals that the rating given by the respondents on the level of adaptation of programs on .) shop with cloth bags d.SD=0.52. cups.78. and 4.43 and 0.item predictor number 5 “supplying recycled containers or outreached materials in the classrooms to minimize garbage” got the lowest mean of 4.33 and 0.) repair items instead of throwing them away and f.) compost your food and yard waste. e.72 standard deviation interpreted as “Almost Always” which indicates that most of the respondents are fond of reusing scrap materials in producing or making new item with a overall mean of 4.17 and with SD of 0.) use products made with recycled materials b. For LSPU-Siniloan. 68. as clearly shown on the table. this is supported in the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2006 provide tips on how to reduce waste in the community and here are the following: a.) reuse plastic bags.71 standard deviation interpreted as “Highly Implemented”.) use energyefficient light bulbs and rechargeable batteries. Reusing scrap materials into a new and functional item has the highest weighted mean of 4. The overall mean score of 4. containers.54.SD=.06 obtained by the following questions such as throwing away materials that are of no use and using used boxes respectively with a remarks of strongly agree.32 indicated that the level of adaptation of programs on climate change recyclability is “highly implemented”. c. etc.

56 Almost Always 4. Throwing or disposing the garbage properly. The grand mean of 4.climate change in terms of reusability are on the same range.74 Almost Always 4.74 Almost Always 4.70 0.56 Almost Always 4.56 Almost Always .74 Almost Always 4.58 0.7 0. implies that the level of adaptation on climate change in terms of reusability was rated strongly agree and verbal interpretation of highly adapted.58 0.7 0. Table 1 The Status of Go Green LSPU as to Solid Waste Management. LSPU-SCC Items 1.7 0.46.58 0.56 Almost Always 4.74 Almost Always 4. LSPU-SINILOAN LSPU-LB AVERAGE Mean Standard Deviation Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks 4. Segregating waste (biodegrable from nonbiodegradable) 2.58 0.

79 Almost Always 4.3.27 0.23 0.32 0.3.40 1. Creating commodities out of traditional waste products.4 0.23 0.32 0. 8.62.4 0.83 Almost Always 4.68 Almost Always 4.21-5.79 Almost Always 5.00-1.84 Almost Always 4.8 Almost Always 4.14.27 0.7.84 Often 4.68 Almost Always 4.68 Almost Always 4.74 Almost Always 4.74 Almost Always 4.81-2.37 0.32 0. For LSPU-SCC. 6.28 0.2.25 0.68 Almost Always 4. bottles.25 0. 7.38 0.00 3.83 Almost Always 4. Overall Overall Interpretation Legend: Scale 5 4 3 2 1 Level of acceptability is highly implemented Range 4. 4.28 0.84 Almost Always 4.80 Remarks Almost Always Often Sometimes Seldom Almost Never Interpretation Highly Implemented Implemented Moderately Implemented Lowly Implemented Not Implemented Table 4 presents the status of go green LSPU as to solid waste management.37 0.76 Almost Always 4.79 Almost Always 4.).78 Almost Always 4. Throwing hazardous waste products elsewhere. and item number 4 “burning of waste at high temperature” got the lowest mean of 3. Using sanitary landfills.23 0.84 Almost Always 4.83 Almost Always 4.74 Almost Always 4. etc.6 and 9 got the remarks of “Almost always”. Using materials that are environmental friendly. Throwing or disposing the garbage properly got .2 5 0. Recycling materials such as plastic cups.25 0. Burning of waste at high temperature.78 Almost Always 4.32 0.92 and with SD of 1. Disposing electric waste products in the garbage can. etc. As revealed.38 0.32 0.23 0. For LSPU-Siniloan.41-4.38 0.5.28 0.20 2.25 0.8 Almost Always 4.83 Almost Always 4.27 0.27 0.83 Almost Always 4.32 0.40 0. Composting organic waste materials (vegetable peels.74 Almost Always 4.61-3. And items 4.4 0.60 1.83 Almost Always 4.79 Almost Always 4. it revealed the status of Go Green LSPU in terms of solid waste management. item number 2 “throwing or disposing the garbage properly” got the highest mean of 4. eggshells.76 Almost Always 4.32 0. 9.79 Almost Always 4.80 Almost Always 4. it reflected that items 1.83 Almost Always 4.32 0.86 Almost Always 4.83 Almost Always 4.58 and with SD of 0.8 Almost Always 4.28 0.38 0.3 3 0.78 Almost Always 4.78 Almost Always 4. 4.8 and 10 got the remarks of “often”. 10.

it further indicated the mean score of 4. Segregating waste (biodegrable from nonbiodegradable) Mea n Standar d Deviatio n 4.the highest weighted mean of 4.74 LSPU-SINILOAN Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Almost Always 4.23 and 0. For LSPU-LB.37 and 0. The grand mean of 4.37.74.83 standard deviation also interpreted as “Almost Always” with an overall mean of 4. Status of Go Green in terms of Water Conservation LSPU-SCC Items 1.58 0.74 Almost Always 4.58 0. implies that the level of adaptation on climate change in terms of reusability was rated strongly agree and verbal interpretation of highly adapted.70 and 0.56 obtained by the following questions such as segregating waste ( bio-degradable from non-biodegradable) and throwing or disposing the garbage properly as respectively with a remarks of strongly agree.58 0.76 standard deviation resulting to “Highly Implemented” solid waste management in LSPU Siniloan Campus.58 0.74 Almost Always .76 reveals that the rating given by the respondents on the level of adaptation of programs on climate change in terms of reusability are on the same range. Table 5.SD=0. The average standard deviation of 0.SD=0.56 standard deviation interpreted as “while disposing of electric waste products in the garbage can got the lowest mean of 4. 58. and 4.70.74 LSPU-LB AVERAGE Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remark s Mea n Standar d Deviatio n Remark s Almost Always 4.

Using materials that are environmental friendly. Burning of waste at high temperature.74 Almost Always 4.79 Almost Always 4.37 0.7 0.5.23 0.8 Almost Always 4.38 0. Recycling materials such as plastic cups.7 0. 4. 4.8 Almost Always 4.4 0. and 10 got the remarks of “often”.27 0.20 2.56 Almost Always 4.83 Almost Always 4.4.2.28 0.28 0.21-5.84 Almost Always 4.27 0. item number 8 “turning the tap off as soon as you've washed your hands” got the highest mean of 4.79 Almost Always 4.8 Almost Always 4.74 Almost Always 4.74 Almost Always 4. As revealed.83 Almost Always 4.00 3. 4.60 1. And items 3.81-2.4 0.83 Almost Always 4. 4.78 Almost Always 5.37 0.76 Almost Always 4.38 0.83 Almost Always 4. 4.4 0.61-3.41-4.25 0.70 0. etc. Throwing hazardous waste products elsewhere.78 Almost Always 4.56 Almost Always 4. 4.79 Almost Always Overall Overall Interpretation Legend: Scale 5 4 3 2 1 Level of acceptability is highly implemented Range 4. Using sanitary landfills. Disposing electric waste products in the garbage can.78 Almost Always 4.7.6.86 Almost Always 4. 4.38 0.83 Almost Always 9.32 0.28 0.84 Almost Always 4.27 0.83 Almost Always 10.32 0. 4.38 0.32 0.40 0.80 Remarks Almost Always Often Sometimes Seldom Almost Never Interpretation Highly Implemented Implemented Moderately Implemented Lowly Implemented Not Implemented Table 5 presents the status of go green LSPU as to water conservation.79 Almost Always 7.8.33 0.27 0. eggshells.76 Almost Always 4.68 Almost Always 4.00-1.32 0. Creating commodities out of traditional waste products.42 and with SD of 0. Throwing or disposing the garbage properly.28 0.25 0.67.).2.25 0.23 0.68 Almost Always 4.83 Almost Always 4.32 0.79 Almost Always 4.7 0.25 0.25 0.68 Almost Always 4.74 Almost Always 8.84 Often 4.32 0.40 1. and 9 got the remarks of “almost always”.83 Almost Always 4. For LSPU-SCC.32 0.78 Almost Always 4.56 Almost Always 4. bottles.23 0.32 0. and item number 3 “throwing the garbage in the river/lake” got the lowest mean of .68 Almost Always 4. Composting organic waste materials (vegetable peels. it reflected that items 1.80 Almost Always 4. etc.56 Almost Always 3.23 0.84 Almost Always 6. 4.

95 Almost Always 4.58 0. Turning off the lights when leaving the room 4.34 0.56 Almost Always 3. one of the most critical issues confronting the Philippine water sector is the lack of an appropriate institutional framework to address issues of development and management of water and related resources.63 0. this is supported as mentioned in the study of Barba (2005).76 Almost Always 4.37 0. pollution. It is this fragmented approach to water management which causes an overlap of work and conflicts among agencies and results in a fractional water management plan that does not adequately meet the requirements for sustainability.53 Almost Always 4.28.78 Agree 4.56 Almost Always 4.37 0. etc. flood control. 4.60 0. there are over 30 government agencies and departments separately dealing with water supply.51 Almost Always 2.83 and with SD of 1.3.52 Almost Always 4.59 Agree 4. At present.77 0. hydropower. Using energy efficient light bulbs.78 0.83 Almost Always . irrigation.52 Strongly Agree 4.6 0.76 0. Walking or riding a bicycle instead of driving to school. Table 6 The Status of Go Green as to Energy Conservation LSPU-SCC LSPU-SINILOAN Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation LSPU-LB Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation AVERAGE Items Mean Standard Deviation Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks 1.73 0. watershed management.17 indicated the status of go green LSPU as to water conservation is “implemented”. 4.27 0.49 Almost Always 4. The overall mean score of 4.

Fixing dripping hot water faucets. Turning off the computer when not in use.42 0.66 0.71 Almost Always 4.60 1.4. 4.95.7.67 Almost Always 4.5 Almost Always 4.61-3.79 Almost Always 4. and item number 3 “walking or riding a bicycle instead of driving to school” got the lowest mean of 4.73 Almost Always 4.62 Almost Always 4.48 0.86 Almost Always 4.67 Almost Always 8.27 and with SD of 0. 4.76 Almost Always Overall Interpretation Legend: Scale 5 4 3 2 1 Level of acceptability is highly implemented Range 4.45 Almost Always 4.7 Almost Always 4.20 2.45 0.80 Almost Always 5.41 0.68 Almost Always 9.38 0.9. Raising awareness of the importance of water by creating colorful posters on water use and water saving.67 Almost Always 4. Closing the door after people walk through the doorway.6.68 Almost Always 4. and 10 got the remarks of “almost always”.52 0. 4.57 0.68 0.53.12 0. item number 1 “turning off the lights when leaving the room” got the highest mean of 4.12 0.67 Agree 4.81-2.72 0.40 1.76 Almost Always 4.5 0.69 Agree 4.47 0. 4.52 indicated the status of go .42 0.59 Almost Always 4.5 2 0.2 5 0.81 Almost Always Overall 4.5. The overall mean score of 4. Reusing paper and bottles.60 Almost Always 10.70 Almost Always 7.70 Almost Always 6. As revealed.42 0.57 0.4 2 0.44 0.3 0.2.43 0. that items 1. 4.77 and with SD of 0.00-1.81 Agree 4. And item 3 got the remark of “often”.21-5.00 3. Switching off the ventilations when not in use.54 Almost Always 10. Changing the thermostat settings in rooms during warmer and cooler months.42 0. 4.72 Agree 4.59 Agree 4.57 0.1 8 0.4.8.58 0.81 Almost Always 4.43 0.67 Agree 4.37 0.41-4. 4.58 0.4 0.67 Almost Always 4.38 0.7 Almost Always 4.68 Agree 4. 4.48 0.80 Remarks Almost Always Often Sometimes Seldom Almost Never Interpretation Highly Implemented Implemented Moderately Implemented Lowly Implemented Not Implemented Table 6 reflected from LSPU-SCC.38 0.69 Almost Always 4. Recycling materials into a useful one.67 Almost Always 4.45 0.85 Often 4.85 Often 4.4 0.

59.68. SD=0.52.58.65 standard deviation interpreted as “Highly Implemented. while reusing paper and bottles had the lowest mean of 4.49 standard deviation interpreted as “Almost Always”.58.59. including schools. 4.52 and 0.50. it further indicates the mean score of 4. Government policy initiatives and evolving society awareness are changing energy-use patterns.78 and 0. 4. SD=0. using energy efficient light bulbs.67 obtained by the following questions such as turning off the lights when leaving the room. 4. The grand mean of 4. The average standard deviation of 0. closing the door after people walk through the doorway and turning off the computer when not in use with a remarks of strongly agree. 73. it revealed the status of go green LSPU in terms of energy conservation.38 and 0.69 standard deviation also interpreted as “Almost Always” with overall mean of 4. changing the thermostat settings in rooms during warmer and cooler months.” From LSPU-LB.67 reveals that the rating given by the respondents on the level of adaptation of programs on climate change on the status of Go Green LSPU as to Energy Conservation are on the same range.57 SD=0. this is supported as stated in an article entitled “Energy-efficient Schools” Energy conservation is a critical issue affecting everyone.47.green LSPU as to energy conservation is “highly implemented”. implies that the status of Go Green . SD=0. and 4. SD=0. Turning off the lights when leaving the room got the highest weighted mean of 4. For LSPU-Siniloan.

43 0.67 0. Table 7 The Status of Go Green LSPU as to Greening of Classrooms and Offices LSPU-SCC LSPU-SINILOAN LSPU-LB AVERAGE Items Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks Mea n Standard Deviation Remarks 1.LSPU as to energy conservation was strongly agree and verbal interpretation of highly adapted.57 Almost Always 4.59 Strongly Agree 4.7 Almost Always 4. 4. Participating in a clean-up drive.58 0.56 0.62 Almost Always .

85 Often 4.76 Almost Always 4.35 0.44 0. 4.22 0.4 2 0.98 Often 4.84 Almost Always 4.3.83 Almost Always 4.00-1. Segregation of biodegradable and non-biodegradable waste materials.62 Almost Always 4. Placing of trash bins in different school areas. Raising awareness of the importance of water by creating colorful posters on water use and water saving. As revealed.1 8 0. 6.4 0.5 0. Participating in tree planting activities.88 Almost Always 4.73 Almost Always 4.4 0.38 0.91 Almost Always 4.48 0. 4.62 Almost Always 4.63 0.55 Almost Always 4.2.31 0.68 Almost Always 4.52 0.63 Almost Always 4.4 0.43 0.81 Almost Always 4.85 Often 4.57 Almost Always 4. 4.12 0.72 Almost Always 4.73 Almost Always 4.80 Remarks Almost Always Often Sometimes Seldom Almost Never Interpretation Highly Implemented Implemented Moderately Implemented Lowly Implemented Not Implemented Table 7 presents the status of go green LSPU as to greening of classrooms and offices. and 10 got the remarks of “almost always”.62 Almost Always 4.83 Agree 4.2.44 0.32 0.21-5.47 0.9. Overall Overall Interpretation Level of acceptability is highly implemented Legend: Scale 5 4 3 2 1 Range 4.35 0.66 Almost Always 4.46 0.12 0.27 0. 10.38 0.61-3.66 Agree 4.7. 4.86 Almost Always 9.8.59 0.64 Agree 4.77 Almost Always 10.44 0.46 0. 3.63 Almost Always 4.40 1.95 Almost Always 4.60 1.37 0.55 0. 4.37 0. Supporting school’s advocacy in protecting the school environment.87 Almost Always 4.86 Almost Always 4.65 Almost Always 4.84 Almost Always 8.52 . From LSPU-SCC.37 0.69 Almost Always 4.37 0. Monitoring and evaluating the progress of greening the school.39 0. And item 6 got the remark of “often”.33 0.7 Agree 4.4.68 Almost Always 4.72 Almost Always 4.55 Agree 4.12 0. Adopting an environmental vision statement to be achieved. 5. it reflected that items 1.5.3 0.64 Almost Always 4. Following environmental rules and regulations strictly.85 Almost Always 4.9 Almost Always 4.96 Almost Always 7.5 0.81-2.95 Agree 4.64 Agree 4. Placing of signage about greening the school in different school areas.20 2.25 0. item number 3 “supporting school’s advocacy in protecting the school environment” got the highest mean of 4.21 0.55 0.84 Agree 4.39 0.41-4.87 Agree 4.33 0.25 0.63 0. Inform the school community about solid waste management.00 3.

35 indicated the status of go green LSPU as to greening of classrooms and offices is “highly implemented”.67 and 0. From the LSPU-Siniloan showed the greening of classrooms and offices.33 and 0. 4.46 or 0.72 standard deviation interpreted as “Highly Implemented” which only inclined that LSPU Siniloan Campus highly implementing the greening of classrooms and offices. Toril National High School was the first Pilot School to implement the National Greening Program in 2011 in coordination with DepEd. obtained by the following . DSWD. SD=0. From LSPU-LB. DBM. SD=0.62. this is supported as mentioned in the study of Articona (2012). The result revealed that respondents are participating in a clean-up drive in LSPU Siniloan Campus having a mean of 4.63. it showed the status of Go Green LSPU as to Greening of Classrooms and Offices.62.12 and with SD of 0.98. and item number 6 “placing of signage about greening the school in different school areas” got the lowest mean of 4. It further indicates the mean score of 4.and with SD of 0.59. 58. CHED.87. SD=0. private sectors and other concerned agencies and institutions and declaring the implementations of the National Greening Program as a government priority.55 and 4.63 standard deviation.57 standard deviation interpreted as “Almost Always” while monitoring and evaluating the progress of greening the school got the lowest weighted mean scored at 4. The overall mean score of 4. The table further presents the overall mean of 4.

73 reveals that the rating given by the respondents on the level of adaptation of programs on climate change in terms of the status of Go Green LSPU as to Greening of Classrooms and Offices are on the same range. supporting school’s advocacy in protecting the school environment and inform the school community about solid waste management respectively with a remarks of strongly agree.44.questions such as participating in a clean-up drive. . The average standard deviation of 0. The grand mean of 4. implies that the level of adaptation on climate change in terms of the status of Go Green LSPU as to Greening of Classrooms and Offices was rated strongly agree and verbal interpretation of highly adapted.