CHAPTER I

Introduction

Test results are used as indicators of the students’ academic performance. Grades

are not only reflective of the performance of students but also of educational outcomes,

and the motivations and support derived by students from the school environment and its

family. For one, extrinsic motivation as embodied by parents’ pressure to obtain good

grades may result to good academic performance. Other factors that can likewise affect

the academic performance of students include poverty and lack of interest.

Realizing how poverty impedes the school attendance of students from poor

families, who instead of attending school end up engaging in child labor, the government

through the Department of Social Welfare and Development introduced the Pantawid

Pamilyang Pilipino Program to give cash grants to poor families with the condition that

their school-aged children will attend school regularly.

The educational component of the program is a success as attested by the

compliance rates (97.05%) of students from 15-18 years r for the months of March and

April 2015. This is because of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program is reaching the

poor Pilipino families and support them through this program about the health, education,

and nutrition of the beneficiaries (Philippine CCT, 2015).

1
The Research Site

Julia Ortiz Luis National High School is one of the three public high schools in

Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija that teaches students in grade seventh to eleventh. This

school has the highest number of 4Ps beneficiaries with a total number of 992 students.

The school population is 1,803 students. More or less 35% of the total student

populations are student beneficiaries of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program

Enrollment rate in Julia Ortiz Luis National High School is increasing. In the

school year 2014 – 2015 there are only 1,568 students. The following year (2015 – 2016)

1,707 students enrolled and in the previous school year 2016 – 2017 students increased

with the total number of 1,803 students.

The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) is a conditional cash transfer

program patterned after Latin America and Brazil. Generally, the program has the

primary aim of reducing extreme poverty, ensures primary and secondary school

attendance among school-aged children, and improve the physical well-being of family

members especially pregnant mothers and children (Fernandez, 2011). As the program

targets human development, partnerships between DepEd, DOH and DILG have been

established.

Finally, the program can be considered to be an investment in human capital that

ensures children’s education and proper health and nutrition among poor families.

2
Significance of the Study

This study is significant because of its ability to provide insights regarding the

educational outcomes of the beneficiaries of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program in

Julia Ortiz National High School.

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to identify the factors affecting the academic performance 4Ps

beneficiaries in Julia Ortiz Luis National High School. Specifically, this study looked at

the following:

Objectives:

 To find out the socio-demographic characteristics of selected 4Ps beneficiaries in

Julia Ortiz Luis National High School

 To describe the academic performance of selected 4Ps beneficiaries in Julia Ortiz

Luis National High School

 To determine the significant relationship between parents’ involvement and the

academic performance of selected 4Ps beneficiaries in Julia Ortiz Luis National

High School

 To determine factors affects academic performance of 4ps beneficiaries in Julia

Ortiz Luis National High School

3
Scope and Limitation of the Study

This study focused on the Academic Performance of selected 4Ps beneficiaries in

Julia Ortiz Luis National High School, Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija.

Locale of the Study

Julia Ortiz Luis National High School (JOLHS) was founded in 1945 when Ex-
Governor Juan O. Chioco was appointed by President Sergio Osmena as the Liberation
Governor of Nueva Ecija.

One of the requirements for the establishment of a high school was a school site
of about ten (10) hectares. Parents who were responsive enough had tried their best to
look for the prospective site. JOLHS was first put up on the land owned by the Chioco
siblings with the condition that the school be named after their late mother Julia Ortiz
Luis.

The civic spirited Parent-teacher Association of Sto. Domingo saw interest of to

study in the context where majority of parents had limited financial means, decided to go
on a delegation to negotiate with the Chioco siblings for a deed of donation. Unluckily,
the Chioco family refused to give any piece of land where the school can be run. Bitterly
they had been determined to get back their land.

At that time, the late President Quirino had already given an amount of Forty-
eight Thousand Pesos (P48, 000.00) for the construction of a new school house. Looking
for a permanent site, where the high school could rise became a serious problem.
Concerned parents of Sto. Domingo went to their Municipal mayor Matias G. Andres and
voiced out the problem. Viewing the clamoring need of his community, former Mayor
Matias G. Andres convinced the heirs in his family to donate a space (eight hectares of
land) where the school will permanently stand.

When a new administration was at the helm of the municipal government, several
attempts had been made to change the name Julia Ortiz Luis High School. In behalf of

4
the majority of the members of the municipal council headed by then mayor Ceferino de
Leon, the plan to change the name (JOLHS) did not materialize.

Then came the new administration for the Provincial Government under Governor
Amado Q. Aleta which adopted the name Julia Ortiz Luis High School through the
Provincial Board of Nueva Ecija allegedly through the initiative of Governor Aleta.
Hence, in 1958 the name Julia Ortiz Luis was scraped and instead Sto. Domingo High
School was used. The news regarding the change of the name of the said high school
reached the Chioco siblings.

One day, Congressman Amadeo Perez of Pangasinan called the attention of Dr.
Flor O. Chioco why the name of the school was changed. Perez told Dr. Chioco that
despite the relocation school on a new site, for the sake of the philatrophic gesture and in
gratitude and rembrance to the Chioco family, the name Julia Ortiz Luis should be
retained, because without the lot where the original school building was constructed, the
high school could not have been established.

Congressman Perez averred further that, in as much as he was not from Nueva
Ecija, he could not present a bill in congress for the restoration of the name, but instead
he would request Congessman Baltao (LP Nueva Ecija) to present the bill. At that time,
Ex-mayor Narciso V. Andres, nephew of the late Ex-mayor Matias G. Andres was a
blooming political candidate in the municipality of Sto. Domingo. He consented to the
restoration of the name of the high school to Julia Ortiz Luis High School in recognition
and appreciation for the political support that the late Congressman Baltao and Ex-
Governor Chioco had made for him. Congressman Baltao presented House Bill No. 225
changing the name of Sto. Domingo High School to Julia Ortiz Luis High School. The
bill was approved in the House on March 1959 and elevated to the Senate.

Dr. Chioco informed Senator Cipriano Primicias, who was then Senate Floor
Leader that the high school was named after his mothers’ name upon knowing the matter,
the senator reported the bill to the floor of the Senate and on May 11, 1959, the bill was
approved on the second reading. On May 16, 1959, the bill was finally approved on third

5
reading. Thus on June 21, 1959, House Bill No. 2755 became Republic Act No. 2508 and
the name Julia Ortiz Luis was restored through Congressional Act.

For 63 years, Julia Ortiz Luis High School had been productively serving the
public. Academically, the high school excels. National Irrigation Administration had
made the farmland of this school as one of their pilot areas. Students who graduated here
and also those who are still studying serve as agents who disseminate agricultural
technologies to their parents.

There were many outstanding alumni of Julia Ortiz Luis High School who
occupied distinguished positions in respective profession but no concrete records about
them were kept. If this high school was not founded, the parents would have been
sending their sons and daughter somewhere else to study. Enormous amount of money
could have been pulled from their pockets for their children’s educational expenses. With
the foundation of JOLHS, expenses of students had been minimized. This was the
undeniable and unforgettable gift given by the Andres clan to the people of Sto. Domingo
in general and to parents of those who graduated from Julia Ortiz Luis High School in
particular upon donating the eight hectares of land where the school stands now.
- (Andres, 2009)

6
(Google Map, 2017)

7
 CHAPTER II

Review of Related Literature

The implementing Rule and regulation of Education in Pantawid Pamilyang

Pilipino Program (4Ps) states that in order to receive monetary support for the education

of the beneficiaries, conditions must be met by the beneficiaries. Children-beneficiaries

ages 3 to 18 must enroll in school, and maintain an attendance of at least 85% of class

days every month (Philippine CCT, 2015).

“Parental education and family socioeconomic status have positive correlations

with the student’s quality of achievement. Home environment which affects the academic

performance of students is another factor. Educated parents can provide such an

environment that suits best for academic success of their children. The academic

performance of students greatly depends upon the parental involvement in their academic

activities to attain the higher level of academic success. According to Krashen (2005),

students whose parents are educated score higher on standardized tests than those whose

parents were not educated. Educated parents can better communicate with their children

regarding the school works, activities and the information being taught at school

(Lansangan, 2015).”

“The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program is a version of Conditional Cash

Transfer here in the Philippines this is a program of the government for the poorest of the

poor people. This was first implemented in 2007 during Arroyo Administration. This

program also promotes gender equality, education, health as well as nutrition of its

beneficiary ((PIDS) Vol. 31 No. 2, 2013).”

8
 “The 4Ps gives financial support for its beneficiary, but the beneficiary must

meet the 85% of attendance in school for them to get the monetary support for schooling.

This is to pay for the needs of the students in school such as fees, project, school supplies

and uniforms. Parents also have to attend meeting to school and encourage his/her

children to read, to do home works (Lim, 2013).”

“The 4Ps covers the Pilipino poor people for the education, health, and nutrition

of the family. They should comply for the education of children age 5 – 14 and health of

children age 0 – 5 this includes the pregnant mother. For the children age 0 – 5 must visit

the health centers regularly for checkups. The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program

(4Ps) also have rules to be a member (a) resident in program areas of the 4Ps; (b) the

household is identified as poor based on a proxy means test; and (c) the household should

include at least one child below 15 years old at the time of enrolment in the program or it

should include a pregnant woman (Catubig, 2015).”

“There are children in Brgy. Tibag, Talugtug, Nueva Ecija, who are excelled in

class. Through this program they can now buy new uniforms, school needs. This shows

that the program is reaching the poor family in the Philippines. And through the 4Ps

many poor people can have a better future, better living (Merano, 2014 - 2015).”

”Indigenous people have experienced life improvement after joining the program of the

government known as the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) the version of

Conditional Cash Transfer. In the study of kids of IPs are able to attend to school every

day with the help of this program, health workers provide medicine and also monitor the

health of the children (Soriano Lim, 2013).”

9
 “The educational Marshall Plan focused on education rather than infrastructure,

social rather than economic, global rather than regional. Instead of investing to grow

economy for the poor, the government should invest to education. This plan would be

helpful because it will produce workers with skills, in return the plan will be helpful for

the economy to grow. A worldwide program that pays a monthly stipend to poor families,

it would be given for the families for their children whose attended school, in Brazil they

call it Bolsa Escola program. This program also to free millions of children’s from child

labor and putting them to school (Cristovam Buarque, 2006).”

“The 4Ps is a program that involves monetary and non-monetary transfers to the

poor or rather poorest of the poor people. The countries that first implemented was Brazil

and Mexico, the objectives of the program is to serve the poor people, to provide cash,

and to eradicate extreme poverty in exchange to some conditionality’s like their children

must enrolled in a public school and must meet the 85% of school attendance, and also

for the health of the family. Philippines now replicate this program and we call it

Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program or 4Ps (Cecchini, 2011).”

“Every child has the right to education and every parent would want their

children to be educated. But for many of our poor countrymen, education remains an

elusive dream, or is it?” Education for the poor people is elusive, how do they finish

education if they don’t have money to support the needs for education. Instead of

studying, some poor children just work for their family (SMU, 2014).”

“Findings show that they have approaching proficiency GPA (Anas, 2016), with

female students performing better than males. They have slightly involved co-curricular

participation. Those from barangays were more active than those from town proper.

10
Youngest children join most of the activities. 4Ps has highly effective level of

implementation, more felt in barangays than in town proper. Families with 2-4 children

appreciate most the program. 4Ps has 88.33% completion rate and 1.85% drop-out rate.

Positive and statistically significant relationship exists between GPA and co-curricular

involvement and between GPA and the level of 4Ps implementation.” This shows that

female students are better than males, maybe the reason why females are more active is

that males don’t really focus they just come to school. Students who live in barangay are

more active than who live in town (Anas, 2016).”

“This researched aimed to evaluate 4Ps as a motivational tool for the recipients to

have their children finish secondary education. Furthermore, the result of this study may

guide policy makers to enrich the program to further the holistic development in every

Filipino family. The 4Ps helps the poor Pilipino people, especially for the education of

the children as motivational tool to push children to dream high, to achieve good life.

Life don’t stops, if you are poor you have to do something to change it (Anas, 2016).”

“In the process of educating the child, one has to anticipate various problems

which call for an intellectual appraisal; one is economic condition of the student which

may affect his/her school performance and social participation. The impact of educational

changes in the social milieu and the roles and ways of acting, personal habits and needs

and the like are factors which tend to influence and facilitate the transformation of

individual learner (Andaya, 2016).”

11
 CHAPTER III

Methodology

Research Design

This study focused on the academic performance of the Pantawid Pamilyang

Pilipino Program (4Ps) beneficiaries. This paper used quantitative research design. The

unit of analysis is the 4Ps beneficiaries (Students) of Julia Ortiz Luis National High

School (JOLNHS). To determine the relationship of the two variables the SDC and the

relationship between parent’s involvement and student’s academic performance, this

study used correlation analysis.

Respondents

The respondents of this study were the 150 4Ps beneficiaries in Julia Ortiz Luis

National High School.

Procedure for Data Collection

The researcher wrote a letter addressed to the principal and guidance counselor of

Julia Ortiz Luis National High School to ask permission for data collection. After getting

the permission of the principal and guidance counselor, I went to the respective

classrooms to proceed with the data collection. The students were advised to be fearless

in responding to the questions provided in the questionnaire with the assurance that their

responses would be kept confidential.

12
 Some of the remaining questionnaires were distributed house to house in some

barangays in Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija. Before giving the questionnaires, I ask the

consent of their parents.

Sampling Procedure

In this study I randomly selected respondents who were included in the list of 4Ps

beneficiaries given by the MSWD Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija.

Locale

This study conducted was in Julia Ortiz Luis National High School, Sto.

Domingo, Nueva Ecija.

Instrumentation

This research used survey questionnaire in gathering data.

Method of Analysis

Researcher used Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) to analyze the data

gathered in this study.

1. To find out socio-demographic characteristics of the selected 4Ps beneficiaries

2. To evaluate academic performance of selected 4Ps beneficiaries

3. To determine the significant relationship between parents’ involvement and

students’ academic performance

4. To determine factors that affects academic performance of 4ps beneficiaries

13
Statistical Techniques Used

Keeping in view the objectives of the study the data was analyzed statistically by

using frequency counts, percentage, and correlation techniques with the help of SPSS

Statistical Package for Social Science. The results were invariably described in the form

of tables and some graphical representations illustrated through pie and bar graphs.

14
 This concept consists of three categories. The first group is composed by the

socio-demographic characteristics such as: age, gender, religion, year level, GPA, family

monthly income, number of family member, parents’ occupation, and parents’

educational attainment. The second one consists of relationship between parents’

involvement and students’ academic performances. The last group is focusing on the

academic performance of the 4Ps beneficiaries. The two arrows are connected to the

academic performance of 4Ps beneficiaries, this shows the relationship of the socio-

demographic characteristics, and the relationship between parents’ involvement to

students’ academic performances correlated to see the significant relationship between

the two variables.

15
 Theoretical Framework

Talcott Parsons Structural Functionalism

Within this framework, institutions such as families, media, schools, and churches

are all understood as part of an interconnected web. Each of these institutions contributes

to the maintenance and stability of societies by performing some functions. This

approach to family studies stresses the relationships between families and the broader

societies they are a part of, relationships within families, and individual family members’

relationships to their broader family units.

Functionalism is a framework that conceptualizes societies as unified systems

akin to organisms. Just like each part of the organism has a particular function, or

purpose that contributes to the maintenance of the organism as a whole, each social

institution contributes to maintaining the social system. Since these institutions are

interconnected and interdependent, like the organs in a body, changes to one institution

often have effects on other aspects of the organism that is society.

In this framework, just like our body everyone has a function, in relation to the

society people, institutions have its own function. To able to function we need harmony

and cohesion, just like what the 4Ps doing they help the poor family especially to its

student beneficiaries to help them provide free education; provide what they need in

school and to have a better future.

The structural functionalism sees the education system functioning by teaching

people not only academically but also to be a good citizen and to get along with other

16
people that will contribute to the positive functioning of society. Lack of cooperation will

result to dysfunction in the society.

17
Definition of Terms

4Ps - Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program, defined by DSWD as a human development

program of the national government that invests in the health and education of poor

households, particularly of children aged 0-18 years old.

DSWD – Department of Social Welfare and Development, defined as a government

office that handle the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program.

MSDW – Municipal Social Welfare and Development, defined as a municipal office of

DSWD.

CCT – Conditional Cash Transfer where the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program is

patterned.

JOLNHS – Julia Ortiz Luis National High School is a public high school in Sto.

Domingo, Nueva Ecija where my chosen respondents are studying.

Academic Achievement/Performance – defined as knowledge attained or skill

developed in the school subjects, usually designated by test scores or by marks assigned

by teachers.

Beneficiaries – define as the person or group that receives benefits or advantage.

18
 Chapter IV

Results and Discussion

Socio-Demographic Characteristics

Table 1. A quarter of the respondents (25.33%) belongs to the age bracket of 11 to

13 years old; more than half (54%) belongs to the age group of 14 to 16 years old, and a

fifth (20.67%) belongs to the age bracket of 17 to 19 years old.

Table 1 Age.

Age Frequency Percentage

11 to 13 38 25.33
14 to 16 81 54.00
17 to 19 31 20.67
Total 150 100.00

Table 2. Statistically shows the mean age is 14.89, the maximum age is 18 and minimum

age is 12 years old.

Table 2. Mean, Maximum, Minimum age of respondents

Mean 14.89
Maximum 18
Minimum 12

Table 3. It shows the gender of the respondents. More than half (62.67%) are

females and 37.33% are males.

19
Table 3. Gender

Gender Frequency Percentage

Female 94 62.67
Male 56 37.33
Total 150 100.00

Gender

Male
37%

Female
63%

Figure 1. Gender

Graph showing the total percentage of male and female.

Table 4 shows the religion of the respondents, More than half (67.33%) are

Roman Catholics, 13.33% are Christian Born Again, 10.67% are Iglesia ni Cristo, 8% are

Aglipayans, and only 0.67% is a Baptist.

20
Table 4. Religion

Religion Frequency Percentage

Roman Catholic 101 67.33
Christian Born Again 20 13.33
Iglesia ni Cristo 16 10.67
Aglipayan 12 8.00
Others 1 0.67
Total 150 100.00

Christian Born Religion Others

Again
13% 1%

Aglipayan
8%

Roman
Iglesia ni
Catholic
Cristo
67%
11%

Figure 2. Religion

Graph showing the religion of the respondents.

Table 5 shows the equal number of respondents per year level, there are 30

(20.00%) respondents per year level from grade 7 to grade 11.

21
Table 5. Year Level

Year Level Frequency Percentage

Grade 7 30 20.00
Grade 8 30 20.00
Grade 9 30 20.00
Grade 10 30 20.00
Grade 11 30 20.00
Total 150 100.00

Year Level

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11

Figure 3. Year Level

Graph showing the number of respondents per year level.

Table 6 shows that more than half of the respondents has a general average of 85

to 89; almost 1 out of 3 (29.3%) has general average of 80 to 84; and 15.3% has the

general average of 90 to 96.

22
Table 6. General Average

General Average Frequency Percentage

80 to 84 44 29.3
85 to 89 83 55.3
90 to 96 23 15.3
Total 150 100.0

Table 7 shows that the mean general average is 86.16

Table 7. Mean, Maximum, Minimum of general average of the respondents

Mean 86.16
Maximum 96.0
Minimum 80.0

General Average
90 -96
11%

85 - 89
25%
80 -84
64%

Figure 4. General Average

Graph showing the percentage of general average.

23
 Table 8 illustrates the gross monthly family income of the respondents. Majority

of the respondents (70.00%) has a family monthly income of 1,000 pesos to less than

3,000 pesos.

Table 8. Family Monthly Income

Family Monthly Income Frequency Percentage

1,000 - 3,000 105 70.00
3,001 - 5,000 32 21.33
5,001 - 7,000 5 3.33
7,001 - 10,000 8 5.33
Total 150 100.00

7,001 -
10,000 Family Monthly Income
5%
5,001 - 7,000
4%
3,001 - 5,000
21%

1,000 - 3,000
70%

Figure 5. Family Monthly Income

This figure shows the family monthly income.

Table 9 tells us that 50.7% of the respondents has a household size of 3 to 5;

followed by 44.7% with a household size of 6 to 9 and 4.7% has a household size of 10 to

12 per family.

24
Table 9. Household Size

Household size Frequency Percentage

3 to 5 76 50.7
6 to 9 67 44.7
10 to 12 7 4.7
Total 150 100.0

Table 10 shows the mean, standard deviation, maximum, minimum of the

household size of family. The mean of the household size is 5.84.

Table 10. Mean, Maximum, Minimum of Household Size

Mean 5.84
Maximum 12
Minimum 3

10 to 12 Household Size
5%

3 to 5
6 to 9 50%
45%

Figure 6. Household Size

Figure showing the household size in graph form.

25
 Table 11 tells us that 84.67% of the respondents’ mothers are housewives while

15.33% works as labandera, sari sari store owner, OFW, rice seed dealer, sewer, and

yakult dealer. Others are deceased already.

Table 11. Mother’s Occupation

Mother's occupation Frequency Percentage

Housewife 127 84.67
Other than housewife 23 15.33
Total 150 100.00

Other than Mother's Occupation

housewife
15%

Housewife
85%

Figure 7. Mother’s Occupation

Showing the mothers’ occupation graph

Table 12 presents the occupation of the father. More than half (62.67%) are

farmers while 37.33% are employed as jeepney driver, DPWH worker, factory worker,

and electrician.

26
Table 12. Father’s Occupation

Father's occupation Frequency Percentage

Farming 94 62.67
Non-farming 56 37.33
Total 150 100.00

Non-
farming Father's Occupation
3%

Farming
97%

Figure 8. Father’s Occupation

Table 13 shows the mothers’ highest educational attainment. Close to half

(42.67%) are high school graduates, 21.33% reached high school, 11.33% are elementary

graduates, 9.33% are college graduates, 8% are elementary undergraduates, 6.00% are

college undergraduates, and 0.67% finished a vocational course.

27
Table 13. Mother’s Educational Attainment

Mother's highest
educational attainment Frequency Percentage
High school graduate 64 42.67
High school level 32 21.33
Elementary graduate 17 11.33
College graduate 14 9.33
Elementary level 12 8.00
College undergraduate 9 6.00
Vocational 1 0.67
Not applicable 1 0.67
Total 150 100.00

Mother's highest educational

attainment
college not applicable elementary
Total
graduate level elementary
1% 11%
8% 7% graduate
10%
college
undergraduate
high school
5%
level
vocational high school 19%
1% graduate
38%

Figure 9. Mother’s Educational Attainment

28
 Table 14 shows the highest educational attainment of fathers. Almost half

(49.33%) are high school graduates, 14% are elementary graduates, 12.67% are high

school undergraduates, 10.67% are elementary undergraduates, college graduates

comprise 6.67% of fathers, 3.33% are college undergraduates, 2.67% earned a vocation

course, , 10.67% are not graduated in elementary, 0.67% has a deceased father.

Table 14. Father’s Highest Educational Attainment

Father's highest Frequency Percentage

educational attainment
High school graduate 74 49.33
Elementary graduate 21 14.00
High school level 19 12.67
Elementary level 16 10.67
College graduate 10 6.67
College undergraduate 5 3.33
Vocational 4 2.67
Not applicable 1 0.67
Total 150 100.00

29
 Father's highest educational
college
undergraduate
attainment
3% college graduate not applicable elementary level
7% 1%
10%
vocational
3%
elementary
graduate
14%

high school level

13%
high school
graduate
49%

Figure 10. Father’s educational attainment

Showing the graph form of the fathers’ educational attainment

30
Table 15. Evaluate the Academic Performance

Evaluate Academic Always Sometimes Seldom Never Total

Performance count (%) count (%) count (%) count (%) N (%)
Attending the class
regularly. 141 (94.0) 5 (3.33) 4 (2.67) 0 (0.00) 150 (100.00)

Joining school
53 (35.33) 56 (37.33) 30 (20.00) 11 (7.33) 150 (100.00)
activities.
Submitting projects.
0 (0.00) 13 (8.67) 127 (84.67) 10 (6.67) 150 (100.00)
Joining competition.
19 (12.67) 50 (33.33) 20 (13.33) 61 (40.67) 150 (100.00)
Participate in class
discussion. 97 (64.67) 25 (16.67) 27 (18.00) 1 (0.67) 150 (100.00)

Got a high score in

36 (24.00) 78 (52.00) 35 (23.33) 1 (0.67) 150 (100.00)
exams.
Have failed grades.
2 (1.33) 26 (17.33) 9 (6.00) 113 (75.33) 150 (100.00)
I do my assignment
regularly. 117 (78.0) 11 (7.33) 20 (13.33) 2 (1.33) 150 (100.00)

I study and prepare

95 (65.33) 32 (21.33) 22 (14.67) 1 (0.67) 150 (100.00)
for quizzes and tests.

I study harder to
improve my
109 (72.67) 18 (12.00) 20 (13.33) 3 (2.00) 150 (100.00)
performance when I
got low grades.

I spend my vacant
time in doing
59 (39.33) 49 (32.67) 34 (22.67) 8 (5.33) 150 (100.00)
assignment or
studying my lessons.

I spend less time with

my friends during
school days to 59 (39.33) 57 (38.00) 30 (20.00) 4 (2.67) 150 (100.00)
concentrate more on
my studies.

Table 15 shows the academic performance of students. Almost everyone (94%)

always attends the class, more than half (64.67%) always participates in class discussion,
31
more than half (78%) always do their assignments, study and prepare for quizzes and test

(65.33%), study hard to improve one’s performance and to avoid getting low grades,

while 39.33% respectively always spend their vacant time in doing assignments and

studying lessons and spend less time with their friends.

More than a third (37.33%) sometimes join school activities, more than

half (52%) and sometime got high scores in exams. However, more than half (84.67%)

seldom submit their projects. Though they actively participate in class, close to a half

(40.67%) never joined any competition. On the other hand, three-fourths (75.33%) never

had a failing grade – a good indicator of their academic performance.

Table 16. Part 2 Evaluate Academic Performance

Part 2 Evaluate Academic Performance Frequency Percentage

1. How do you prepare for your class?
Reading the text or assigned readings. 28 18.7
Studying notes taken in class. 84 56.0
Doing homework. 35 23.3
Talking with my classmates or friends. 3 2.0
Total 150 100.0

Table 16 shows the students’ preparations in class. More than half (56%) do notes taking

in class, 23% study the notes they have taken in class, 18% do advanced reading and only

a small percentage of 2 discuss their lessons with friends and classmates.

32
Table 17. Part 2 Evaluate Academic Performance

2. Compared to your classmates, what is your

level of in-class participation? Frequency Percentage
My classmates participate more than I do. 68 45.3
I participate about same as my classmate. 51 34.0
I participate more than my classmate. 24 16.0
Not participating. 7 4.7
Total 150 100.0

Table 17 shows the perceived academic performance of 4Ps students in

comparison with their classmates. Close to half (45.3%) admits that their classmates

actively participate in class than they do, a third (34%) have the same level of

participation with their classmates, 16% brags to participate better than their classmates

and 4.7% show no class participation at all.

Table 18. Part 2 Evaluate Academic Performance

3. How do responsibilities outside the school affect at

your success at school? Frequency Percentage
They don’t ever affect my success at school. 12 8.0
They occasionally affect my success at school. 63 42.0
They often affect my success at school. 65 43.3
They always affect my success at school. 10 6.7
Total 150 100.0

Table 18 looks at the perception of 4Ps students on the relation of their academic

performance and responsibilities outside the school, e.g. household chores. The group is

33
divided in its perception. 42% said that these tasks occasional affect their success in

school while 43.3% observes that these tasks often affect how they fared in school.

Table 19. Part 2 Evaluate Academic Performance

4. Hours per week you devoted to your class

beyond the time you spent class?
(Reading, Doing home works, Studying) Frequency Percentage
I don’t spend any time. 12 8.0
Less than one hour 63 42.0
1 to 3 hours 65 43.3
4 to 6 hours 10 6.7
Total 150 100.0

Table 19 shows the amount of time spent by students in studying. Close to half

(43.3%) either spend 1-3 hours or less than an hour (42%) to study their lessons. Only a

small percentage (6.7%) study from 4 to 6 hours. Sadly, 8% do not spend any time

studying at all.

34
Table 20. Relationship between parental involvement and students’ academic

performance

Relationship
between parental
Never
involvement and Always Occasionally Rarely Total
done at all
students’ count (%) count (%) count (%) N (%)
count (%)
academic
performance
1. Does your parent
motivate you to 115 (76.67) 24 (16.00) 8 (5.33) 3 (2.00) 150 (100.00)
study hard?

2. Does your parent

encourage you to
75 (50.00) 47 (31.33) 21 (14.00) 7 (4.67) 150 (100.00)
join activities in
school?

3. Does your parent

help you in doing 69 (46.00) 44 (29.33) 26 (17.33) 11 (7.33) 150 (100.00)
your projects?

4. Does your parent

help you in doing 50 (33.33) 48 (32.00) 40 (26.67) 12 (8.00) 150 (100.00)
your home works?

5. Does your parent

support you when
65 (43.33) 33 (22.00) 29 (19.33) 23 (15.33) 150 (100.00)
you join
competition?

6. Does your parent

teach you during 31 (20.67) 31 (20.67) 58 (38.67) 30 (20.00) 150 (100.00)
weekend?

7. Does your parent

teach you during 32 (21.33) 18 (12.00) 45 (30.00) 55 (36.67) 150 (100.00)
school vacation?

8. Does your parent

attend meeting in 132 (88.00) 10 (6.67) 6 (4.00) 2 (1.33) 150 (100.00)
your school?

35
 Table 20 shows parental involvement in the schooling of their children. Almost

all parents (88%) always attends school meetings. More than half (76.67%) said that

their parents always motivate them study hard, half (50%) said their parents always

encourage them to join school activities. Close to half (43.33%) said that their parents

always demonstrate support when they join competitions and (46%) said their parents

always help them in doing their projects. Only a third (33.33%) observed that their

parents always assist them in doing their homework. More than a third (38.67%) said

that their parents sometimes teach them during weekends. However, more than a third

(36.67%) said that their parents never teach them during vacation.

36
Table 21. Parental involvement to students’ academic performance

Parental
A few
involvement 2-3 days/ Once a Rarely
Daily times/ Total
to students’ week week count
count (%) month N (%)
academic count (%) count (%) (%)
count (%)
performance
1. How often
do you and
your parents 54 (36.00) 36 (24.00) 29 (19.33) 18 (12.00) 13 (8.67) 150(100.00)
talk about
future goals?

2. How often
do you and
your parents
talk about
problems that
you may be 44 (29.33) 32 (21.33) 26 (17.33) 24 (16.00) 24(16.00) 150(100.00)
having at
school with
peers,
teachers, or
school work?

3. How often
do you and
your parents
talk about
46 (30.67) 39 (26.00) 37 (24.67) 14 (9.33) 14 (9.33) 150(100.00)
what content
is being
taught in the
classroom?

4. How often
do you and
your parents
talk about the
97 (64.67) 26 (17.33) 17 (11.33) 8 (5.33) 2 (1.33) 150(100.00)
importance
of learning to
do things on
your own?

5. How often
do your
parents assist
you with the 53 (35.33) 36 (24.00) 26 (17.33) 16 (10.67) 19(12.67) 150(100.00)
assignments
and studying
at home?

37
 Table 21 shows that on a daily basis, more than half (64.67%) talked about their

parents the importance of being independent learning, more than a third (36%) discuss

with their parents their future goals and (35.33%) said that their parents assist them in

doing their assignment and lessons, less than a third (30.67%) discussed with their

parents what has been discussed in class, and (29.33%) shared with their parents the

problems they encountered with peers, teachers and school work.

Table 22. Factors that affects academic performance

Factors that Strongly Strongly

Agree Disagree Total
affects academic agree disagree
count (%) count (%) N (%)
performance count (%) count (%)
1.Financial
problem 85 ( 56.67) 27 (18.00) 23 (15.33) 15(10.00) 150(100.00)

2. Parents level
of education 50 (33.33) 19 (12.67) 48 (32.00) 33(22.00) 150(100.00)

3. Size of Family 42 (28.00) 22 (14.67) 54 (36.00) 32(21.33) 150(100.00)

4. Distance of the
school 42 (28.00) 21 (14.00) 52 (34.67) 35(23.33) 150(100.00)

5. Unwillingness
to study 39 (26.00) 19 (12.67) 35 (23.33) 57(38.00) 150(100.00)

6. Lack of
allowance 62 (41.33) 34 (22.67) 40 (26.67) 14(9.33) 150(100.00)

7. Social
Environment 61 (40.67) 19 (12.67) 48 (32.00) 22(14.67) 150(100.00)

8. Guidance from
parents 66 (44.00) 18 (12.00) 34 (22.67) 32(21.33) 150(100.00)

9. Negative
situation at home 58 (38.67) 20 (13.33) 40 (26.67) 32(21.33) 150(100.00)

10. Quality of
teaching in 61 (40.67) 25 (16.67) 37 (24.67) 27(18.00) 150(100.00)
school
,

38
 Table 22 shows that respondents agreed that the following are factors associated

with their academic performance: (1) financial problem (56.67%), (2) guidance from

parents (44%), (3) lack of allowance (41.33%), (4) quality of teaching (40.67%), (5)

social environment (40.67%), (6) negative situation at home (38.67%) and (7) parents’

level of education (33.33%). Among the factors identified, 6 except one (quality of

teaching) is associated with home factors. We can deduce from here the role played by

the home environment and the social capital derived from one’s family as significant

contributor to the academic performance of students.

On the other hand, respondents disagreed that family size (36%) and distance of

the school (34.67%) affects their school performance. In addition they disagreed on their

unwillingness to study (38%).

Table 23. 4Ps Benefits as perceived by student’s beneficiaries

4Ps Benefits as perceived by Yes No Total

students beneficiaries count (%) count (%) N (%)
1. Does the 4Ps program help you to pay
147 (98.00) 3 (2.00) 150 (100.00)
for your school fees?
2. 4Ps program help you to buy school
135 (90.00) 15 (10.00) 150 (100.00)
needs (e.g. uniforms, notebooks, etc.)
3. 4Ps help to provide for your everyday
132 (88.00) 18 (12.00) 150 (100.00)
allowance.
4. Does 4Ps program help you to value
141 (94.00) 9 (6.00) 150 (100.00)
your education?
5. Does 4PS program really help you to
134 (89.33) 16 (10.67) 150 (100.00)
improve your education?
6. Does the program monitor your
146 (97.33) 4 (2.67) 150 (100.00)
monthly attendance?

39
 Table 23 shows the perceived benefits of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino

Program among the student beneficiaries. Almost all the respondents recognize the

contribution of the program in their education. 98% recognize that 4Ps is a big help in

financing their schooling. Aside from the money spent for the school fees of students, the

program also provides money so that students may be able to buy their school needs

(90%) and their everyday allowance (88%) for them to be more encouraged to go to

school. Not only that if provides financial assistance, the program also makes sure to

monitor the attendance of students (97.33%). With that, students embrace how valuable

education is in their lives (94%).

As the theory explains that everyone has its own function, in the context of

education, the only task of students is to study hard. Their family’s task is to ensure that

all the needed support be given to them and the money intended for their schooling will

be used accordingly. Their family is there to motivate them to finish their studies and to

enable them to grow as responsible citizens of the country. On the other hand, it is the

DSWD’s task to distribute their grants on time so that they may also use it timely.

40
Table 24. Correlation on SDC and Relationship between parents and students

academic performance

Relationship between parental involvement and students’ academic performance

General Average
Q1 Correlation
.141
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .086
N 150
Q2 Correlation
-.085
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .299
N 150
Q3 Correlation
-.057
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .489
N 150
Q4 Correlation
.062
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .453
N 150
Q5 Correlation
-.221**
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .006
N 150
Q6 Correlation
-.040
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .631
N 150
Q7 Correlation
-.055
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .502
N 150
Q8 Correlation
.074
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .368
N 150

The table above shows the correlation of two variables the relationship between

parental involvement and students’ academic performance and the general average of the

41
student’s beneficiaries. With a p-value of 0.06 and a correlation coefficient of -.221, the

findings show a negative correlation between the academic performance of the students

and the support shown by parents when they join competitions. It means that as parents

always demonstrate their support among their children to join a competition, it has a

negative effect on the academic performance of students.

Table 25. Parental involvement to students’ academic performance

Correlation Parental involvement to students’ academic performance

General Average
Q1 Correlation
.101
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .217
N 150
Q2 Correlation
-.072
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .382
N 150
Q3 Correlation
-.044
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .596
N 150
Q4 Correlation
-.027
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .744
N 150
Q5 Correlation
-.069
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .403
N 150

The table above shows no correlation between parental involvement and the

academic performance of students.

42
 Chapter V

Summary, Conclusion and Recommendation

Summary

This study is entitled Factors Affecting Academic Performance of Selected 4Ps

Beneficiaries in Julia Ortiz Luis National High School, Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija. This

study primarily looked at the academic performance of the students who are 4Ps

beneficiaries.

The participants in this study are the 4Ps student beneficiaries studying in Julia

Ortiz Luis National High School in Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija. There are 150

respondents in this study, majority of the respondents are females.

Survey questionnaire were used to gather information from the respondents. The

questionnaires has 5 parts: (1) the SDC of the respondents, (2) the evaluation of students

academic performances, (3) the relationship between parents’ involvement to students’

academic performances, (4) the factors that affect academic performance of the students,

and, (5) benefits derived from the program as perceived by student’s beneficiaries.

Conclusion

Majority of the respondents are aged 14 – 16 years old, dominated by females. In

terms of religion, majority are Roman Catholics. Respondents per year level are equally

divided. Majority of the respondents has the general average of 85 to 89.

43
With regards to the profile of their family, majority has a family monthly income ranging

from 1,000 to 3,000 pesos. Parents are either farmers and housewives. Many of the

parents are high school graduates. Household size is about 3 to 5 members per family.

I evaluate the students by asking question regarding their school performance and

I found out that many of the respondents always attend class, submit projects, participate

in class discussion, and prepare for their quizzes and test. The findings reveal the active

participation of students in school.

With regards to the relationship between parental involvement and students’

academic performance the result shows that parental support is important in the

educational needs of their children. Parents support their children by talking about school

problems if they have, the things that are being discussed in class, and emphasizing

independent learning among their students.

I found out that the factors that affecting academic performance are financial

problem, level education of parents, social environment, guidance from parents, negative

situation at home and quality of teaching in school.

Almost all of the respondents agreed that the program is helpful in their studies as

it provides monetary support for their school expenses in school.

The correlation part shows if that when parents always support their children in

joining competition this can result to a negative impact on the academic performance of

the students. This may be because these competitions are not academic in nature.

44
Recommendation

Based on the results of this study the following are recommended:

1. To DSWD/MSWD/4Ps Coordinators, I recommend that there be a monitor not only of

the attendance of students but more importantly their academic performance,

2. To the concerned agencies of the government, should sponsor livelihood training

program among the beneficiaries of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program to increase

their family income.

3. To future researchers, a more qualitative study on the education experience of 4Ps

students be conducted to better understand the factors that may have influenced their

academic performance. A quantitative analysis poses the limitation of identifying pre-

selected factors that may influence their academic performance and thereby in the process

prevents the nuancing of their experiences.

4. In the ethics part, it is highly recommended that all researches involving students

should make use of the informed consent form to ensure that everyone’s participation is

voluntary, and that parents’ consent should be secured as well.

45
Bibliography
(PIDS) Vol. 31 No. 2. (2013). Development Research News, pg. 10 -11.

Development Research News. (2013, April - June). PIDS, pp. 10 - 11.

Philippine CCT. (2015). Retrieved from Official Gazette:

http://www.gov.ph/programs/conditional-cash-transfer/

(2017). Retrieved from Google Map:

https://www.google.com.ph/maps/place/Julia+Ortiz+Luis+National+High+School
,+Santo+Domingo,+3133+Nueva+Ecija/@15.6063216,120.8835245,13.02z/data=
!4m5!3m4!1s0x3396d56a3f995a25:0x80409fd3b18048db!8m2!3d15.5997373!4d
120.8773467

4Ps Social Marketing Unit. (2017). Pantawid Pamilya pushes for child labor-freee
Philippines. Retrieved from Pantawid DSWD:
http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/component/content/article/461

Anas, D. G. (2016). The Implementation of 4Ps an the Scholastic Achievement of the

Secondary School Student in Oton, Iloilo.

Andaya, O. J. (2016). Factors that Affect the Academic Performance of Indigenous

People (IP) Students of Philippine Normal University-North Luzon. Asia Pacific
Journal of Research.

Andres, E. R. (2009). History of JOLNHS. .

Cecchini, S. a. (2011). Conditional Cash Transfer programmes: The recent experience in

Latin America and the Caribbean. Cuadernos de la CEPAL No. 95 (September).
Santiago, Chile: Unidad de Distribución de la CEPAL.

Cristovam Buarque, V. A. (2006). Education and Poverty Reduction. International

Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft /
Revue Internationale de l'Education, http://www.jstor.org/stable/29737077.

46
Fernandez, L. &. (2011). Overview of Philippines' conditional cash transfer program. The
Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps). Washington, DC: World BanLane
G. Lansangan, M. G. (2015). Correlates of Students' academic performance in
intermidiate level. Journal of business and Management Studies 1 (2)., 1- 7.

Ma Cecilia Catubig, R. V. (2015). Payment Schemes in Conditional Cash Transfer

Programs: The Case of 4Ps in the Davao Region, Philippines. Administrative
Sciences.

Merano, E. (2014 - 2015). 4P’s Program and the Academic Performance of Elementary
Pupils in Cabulisan Elementary School, Inopacan District. 15 -16.

Monica M. Montilla, E. A. (2015). Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps):

Assistance to Pupil’s Education. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and
Sciences.

Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph

Public School Finder. (n.d.). Retrieved from School Finder: http://public-

schools.findthebest.com.ph/l/27792/Julia-Ortiz-Luiz-National-High-School-in-
Santo-Domingo-NUE

SMU. (2014). Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino, DSWD. Retrieved from From Ripples to
Wave: http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/stories/360-from-ripples-to-
waves?format=pdf

Soriano Lim, H. A. (2013). Substantial Educational and Health Improvement of

Indigenous Learner Beneficiaries of Conditional Cash Transfer Program.
IAMURE International Journal of Social Sciences.

47
Appendices

48
Appendix A

49
 Appendix B

Dear Respondents,

Good day!

I am Rolan T. Guerero a fourth year Social Science student at Central Luzon State
University and currently conducting a study entitled, “Factors Affecting Academic
Performance of Selected 4Ps Beneficiaries in Julia Ortiz Luis National High School,
Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija”. In this regard, I would like you to be one of the
participants with this research endeavor and your active participation is highly
appreciated. You are rest assured the confidentiality of this matter.

Thank you and God bless!

ROLAN T. GUERERO

Researcher

Part I

Socio-Demographic Characteristics

Please answer each question as accurately as possible by checking the correct answer or
filling in the space provided.

1. Name (Optional) _______________________

2. Age ______
3. Gender:
[ ] 1 Male
[ ] 2 Female
4. Religion
[ ] 1 Roman Catholic [ ] 5 Christian Born Again
[ ] 2 Protestant [ ] 6 Others, Please specify
[ ] 3 INC _____________________
[ ] 4 Aglipayan

50
5. Year Level _______
6. General Average ________
7. Family Monthly Income:
1 [ ] 1,000 – 3,000 3 [ ] 5,000 – 7,000
2 [ ] 3,000 – 5,000 4 [ ] 7,000 – 10,000
8. Number of Family Members _________
9. Mother’s Occupation ______________
Father’s Occupation _______________
10. Parents educational attainment
Mother:
[ ] 1 Elementary level Graduate
[ ] 2 Elementary Graduate [ ] 5 Vocational
[ ] 3 High School level [ ] 6 College Undergraduate
[ ] 4 High School [ ] 7 College Graduate
Father:
[ ] 1 Elementary level [ ] 5 Vocational
[ ] 2 Elementary Graduate [ ] 6 College Undergraduate
[ ] 3 High School level [ ] 7 College Graduate
[ ] 4 High School Graduate

51
Part II. Direction: When answering these questions, please consider your previous and
current experiences. This survey is to help me understand different aspects of the
relationship between parental involvement and students’ academic performance. I will
not be evaluating your individual responses. Please be as honest as possible - there are no
right or wrong answers

1. Always 3. Sometimes
2. Seldom 4. Never

Evaluate academic performance 1 2 3 4

1. Attending class regularly.

2. Joining school activities.

3. Submitting projects.

4. Joining competition.

5. Participates in class discussion.

6. Got a high score in exams

7. Have failed grade

8. I do my assignment regularly

9. I study and prepared for quizzes and tests

10. I study harder to improve my performance when I

got low grades.
11. I spend my vacant time in doing assignment or
studying my lessons.
12. I spend less time with my friends during school
days to concentrate more on my studies.

52
Answer the following question with honesty.

1. How do you prepare for your class?

1 [ ] Reading the text or assigned readings
2 [ ] Studying notes taken in class
3 [ ] Doing home work
4 [ ] Talking with my classmates or friends
5 [ ] I don’t do anything to prepare
2. Compared to you classmates, what is your level of in-class participation?
1 [ ] My classmates participate more than I do
2 [ ] I participate about same as my classmates
3 [ ] I participate more than my classmate
4 [ ] Not participating
3. How do responsibilities outside the school affect your success at school?
1 [ ] They don’t ever affect my success at school
2 [ ] They occasionally affect my success at school
3 [ ] They often affect my success at school
4 [ ] They always affect my success at school
4. How many hours per week you devoted to this class beyond the time you spent in
class (for example. Reading, Doing homework, and Studying)
1 [ ] I don’t spend any time
2 [ ] Less than 1 hour
3 [ ] 1 – 3 hours
4 [ ] 4 – 6 hour

53
Part III

1. Always 3. Rarely
2. Occasionally 4. Never done at all

Relationship between parental involvement and students’ 1 2 3 4

academic performance
1. Does your parent motivate you to study hard?
2. Does your parent encourage you to join activities
in school?

3. Does your parent help you in doing your projects?

4. Does your parent help you in doing your
homework’s?
5. Does your parent support you when you join
competition?
6. Does your parent teach you during weekend?
7. Does your parent teach you during school
vacation?
8. Does your parent attend meeting in your school?

54
Part IV

1. Daily 4. A few times a month

2. 2-3 days per week 5. Rarely
3. Once a week

Parental involvement with the student

1 2 3 4 5
acad. performance

1. How often do you and your

parents talk about future
goals?
2. How often do you and your
parents talk about problems
that you may be having at
school with peers, teachers, or
school work?
3. How often do you and your
parents talk about what
content is being taught in the
classroom?
4. How often do you and your
parents talk about the
importance of learning to do
things on your own?
5. How often do your parents
assist you with assignments
and studying at home?

55
Part V

1. Agree 3. Disagree
2. Strongly Agree 4. Strongly Disagree

Factors that affects academic performance 1 2 3 4

1. Financial problem

2. Parents level of education

3. Size of family

4. Distance of the school

5. Unwillingness to study

6. Lack of allowance

7. Environment

8. Guidance from parents

9. Negative situation at home

10. Quality of teaching in school

56
Part VI

1. Yes 2. No

4Ps related questions 1 2

1. Does the 4Ps program help you to pay for your school fees?

2. 4Ps program help you to buy school needs (e.g Uniforms,

Notebooks, etc..)

3. 4Ps helps to provide for your everyday allowance

4. Does 4Ps program helps you to value your education

5. Does 4Ps program really help you to improve your education

6. Does the program monitor your monthly attendance?

57
 Appendix C

Documentation

Waiting Shed in Front of Principal’s Office

58
Ma’am Jonah May Santos Guidance Counselor

Picture with the Guidance Counselor of JOLNHS

59
Picture of 8 – Rizal during data collection

Students while answering the questions

60
Grade 11 HumSS during data collection

4Ps beneficiaries of Grade 7

61
 Grade 8 students asking some questions

The Grade 9 students during data collection

62
Grade 7 students seriously answering questions

Grade 9 during data collection

63
Picture of Grade 10 during data collection

Picture of grade 7 students

64
Grade 7 student while answering the questions

Grade 9 students answering the question

65
Pictures of student during the collection of data

66
 At the School Library during data collection

Grade 9 students answering the questions Grade 10

67
Sir Dennis Fernando, JOLNHS teacher

Sir Aaron Bartolome, JOLNHS teacher

68
 House to House Conduct

Mikaela Sana and Diana Buado

Sheena Mae Sora with her father

69