FACTORS AFFECTING ACADEMIC PERFORMANCES OF THE SELECTED 4PS

BENEFICIARIES IN JULIA ORTIZ LUIS NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, STO.

DOMINGO, NUEVA ECIJA

Rolan T. Guerero

An Undergraduate Thesis presented to the Faculty of the Department of

Social Sciences, College of Arts and Sciences, Central Luzon State University

Science City of Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, Philippines

In partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

BACHELOR OF ARTS IN SOCIAL SCIENCES

1
 Introduction

Academic performance is something that is measured by examination, and it is the

outcome of education. The grades of the students are examples of the outcome of education

wherein they did a lot to achieve or to get high grades. The one reason why some students

striving to get a high grades is because of extrinsic motivation, in opposite to this there is also

another reason, the parents pressured them to get a high grades it’s because this can be helpful

for the future. There are some factors that can affect the academic performance of the students

such as the poverty, lack of interest, these could affect the academic status of the students it’s

because if they don’t have money they cannot buy something they need in school or lack of

interest because of the growing poverty instead of attending class they chose to work mangalakal

in exchange of money. It doesn’t require diploma, or even a high grade on that kind of work.

This is the main reason why the government created a program for the poor Pilipino people to

help them, to achieve a better living soon.

The 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

high number of 4Ps beneficiary with the 992 enrolled 4Ps students the reason why it has high

number of enrolled 4Ps in this school is that it is much near than any other public high school in

Sto. Domingo. The school population is about 1,535 students, more or less 61% of the total

population of the students are beneficiaries of Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program.

(Phillippines Department of Education) the location of the school is in the Barangay Sagaba, Sto.

Domingo, Nueva Ecija.

2
 The Pantawid pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) is a program that transfers cash to

beneficiary families with conditionalties. The 4Ps is a program here in the Philippines that

patterned in Latin America and Brazil, the program Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino aims in

reducing extreme poverty, provides primary and secondary education for the children and also to

improve the health of the family members. Fernandez and Olfindo (2011).

This is a program for human development of the national government in partnership with the

DepEd, DOH, DILG. It is an investment in human capital to ensure the children’s education,

health, nutrition of the poor family.

3
Significance of the Study

This study is significant because of its ability provide insights regarding Pantawid

Pamilyang Pilipino Program to the education of the beneficiaries, it serves as a form of feedback

to the government in determining the effectiveness in helping the beneficiaries’ education.

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to identify the factors affecting with the academic performance of the

beneficiaries in Julia Ortiz Luis National High School of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino

Program (4Ps).

Objectives:

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

 To evaluate academic performance of selected 4Ps beneficiaries

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

academic performance

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

Scope and Limitation of the Study

This study will focus on the Academic Performance of Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino

Program (4Ps) in Julia Ortiz Luis National High School, Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija. A survey

questionnaire will use to get the needed information from the 30 respondents per year level a

total of 150.

4
History of the School

The Julia Ortiz Luis National High School (JOLHS) was founded in 1945 when Ex-Governor
Juan O. Chioco was the Liberation Governor of Nueva Ecija appointed by president Sergio
Osmena 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 installed to the land owned by the Chioco brothers and sister,
The Chioco family agreed to have the school be constructed at their lot for a condition that the
school should be named after their late mother Julia Ortiz Luis.

The civic spirited Parent-teacher Association of Sto. Domingo, seeing that the youths of their
community were eager to pursue higher education but majority of parents had limited financial
means, decided to go on a delegation to negotiate with Chioco brothers and sister 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 clamouring need of his
community, Ex Mayor Matias G. Andres convinced members of heirs in his family to donate the
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 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 and the name Julia Ortiz Luis High School by 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 brothers and sister. One day, Congressman
Amadeo Perez of Pangasinan called the attention of Dr. Flor O. Chioco why the name of the high
school was changes. Perez told Dr. Chioco that even the school was no longer located on its

5
former 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 origina
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 in 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 second Reading. On May 16, 1959, the bill was finally
approved on Third 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 far out. 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 dessiminate agricultural technologies to their parents.
There were many outstanding alumni of Julia Ortiz Luis High School who occupied
distinguished positions in respective profession only we regret for we have no concrete records
of them. If this high school was founded, the parents of graduates would have been sending their
sons and daughter somewhere else. Enormous amount could have been dug from their pocket for
their childrens 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
 Review of Related Literature

The implementing Rule and regulation of Education in Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program

(4Ps), In order to receive monetary support for the education of the beneficiaries, conditions

must be met by the beneficiaries:

Children-beneficiaries aged 3-18 must enroll in school, and maintain an attendance of at least

85% of class days every month. Compliance rates recorded for the months of March and April

2015: 98.99% for school attendance of children aged 6-14; 98.33% for school attendance of

children in daycare aged 3-5; 97.05% for school attendance of children aged 15-18. - (Philippine

CCT, 2015)

“Parental education and family socioeconomic status level have positive correlations with the

student’s quality of achievement (Jeynes, 2002). 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 (Barnard, 2004; Shumox and Lomax, 2001). 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 work, activities and the information being taught at school.” - (Lane G.

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

8
equality, education, health as well as nutrition of its beneficiary.”

– ((PIDS) Vol. 31 No. 2, 2013)

“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.”

– (Soriano 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 (PMT); 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.” - (Ma Cecilia

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

9
this program, health workers provide medicine and also monitor the health of the children.” -

(Soriano Lim, 2013)

“Studies in Britain have indicated that the reason why some students aren’t successful is because

of the "extrinsic" reasons or so the so called parental pressure instead of out of "intrinsic" interest

in a particular discipline.” - (Hopkins, 1958)

“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, it

is must to invest in 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)

“DSWD is one of the agencies that tirelessly work to help end child labor in the country.

Through this module, we will communicate to the Pantawid Pamilya parents and families the

10
negative effects of child labor on children, and persuade them to rethink their beliefs on child

labor,” (Taguiwalo) The program Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino also working to help reduce or

diminish child labor in the Philippines and put them to the real environment the school. To help

the children to have a better future to become what they want someday. Not that as the young

age they are working hard for them to be able eat or to provide money for their family.” - (4Ps

Social Marketing Unit, 2017)

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

But for many of our poor countrymen, education remains an elusive dream, or is it? (SMU)”.

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 works for their

family. - (SMU, 2014)

“Findings show that they have approaching proficiency GPA, 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. 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

11
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)

12
 Methodology

This part of the study describes the theory of the study, conceptual framework and

conceptual paradigm as well as the method used in this study.

Rational choice theory

Rational choice theory influenced Homan’s construction of social exchange theory. The

main focus for rational choice theory is the actor. Actors are believed to be rational beings that

act with intention, seeking to maximize the achievement of their goals or rewards. They also

have preferences. Rational choice theory is most interested in the fact that actions are performed

in a way that best fits with the preference of the actor. According to rational choice theory, there

are at least two major constraints on action. First is scarcity of resources it easier for those with

ample resources to achieve goals than it is for those with few resources. Also related to scarcity

of resources is opportunity costs, which refers to the opportunities that must be given up in order

to achieve a higher order goal in many instances, it is preferable to choose a lower order goal

over a higher order goal may come at the cost of one or more other lower order goals. The

second constraints is institutional, this refer to family and school rules, religious and social

norms, government laws, and other behavioral expectation and restrictions to which individual is

exposed to adhere.

Scarcity of resources

The students with ample resources will strive or study hard to get high grade than those

students that only have few resources. The 4Ps beneficiaries, let say have resources but limited

13
only, but with the help of the program of the government called Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino the

government provide monetary support for the students beneficiaries for them to fulfill their

dreams, to improve their studies and to have better future.

Institutional constraint

In this maybe the family, school, or the government controls or restrict the students to

achieve their goals to get a high grade. Say for example family doesn’t support their children for

their needs, school doesn’t improve their quality of teaching, and also government doesn’t

provide good school materials that will cause unwillingness of the students to study hard.

14
 Conceptual Framework

Socio-Demographic
Characteristics
– Age
– Gender
– Religion
– Year Level
– GPA
– Family Monthly
Income
– Number of Family
Mmber
– Number of Siblings Academic
– Parents Occupation Performance of 4Ps
– Parents Level of
Beneficiaries
Education

Relationship between
parents’ involvement to
students’ academic
performances

15
This concept consists of three groups. The first group composing the socio-demographic

characteristics such as: age, gender, religion, year level, GPA, family monthly income, number

of family member, parent’s occupation, and parents educational attainment. The second one

consists of relationship between parents’ involvement to 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 will correlate to see the significant relationship between the

two variables.

Research Design

This study focused on the academic performance of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino

Progra (4Ps) beneficiaries. This paper will use 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 parents

involvement to students academic performance, this study will use correlation analysis.

Respondents

The respondents of this study are the 4Ps beneficiary students of Julia Ortiz Luis National

High School. There were one hundred fifty (150) respondents in this study.

Procedure for Data Collection

First of all before the collection of data the researcher wrote a letter addressed to the

principal and guidance counselor of Julia Ortiz Luis National High School to take permission for

16
data collection, by explaining the purpose of the study. After getting permission of the

principal/guidance counselor I went to the respective classrooms to conduct. The students were

advised to be fearless in responding to the question provided in the questionnaire with the

assurance that their responses would be kept confidential.

And some of the remaining questionnaires were conducted house to house in some

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

the respondents for their permission for data collection.

Statistical Techniques Used

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

frequency, percentage with some mean, minimum, maximum, 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 of results were made through pie and bar

diagrams.

Sampling Procedure

The researcher of this study used random sampling procedure.

Locale

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

Ecija.

17
Instrumentation

This research used survey questionnaire in gathering data. The respondents will answer

the questions provided in the questionnaire.

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

18
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 program Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino.

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

CCT – Conditional Cash Transfer defined as program that the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino

Patterned.

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

Nueva Ecija where my chosen respondents’ 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.

19
 Chapter 4

Socio-Demographic Characteristics

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

As seen in table 1, of the 150 respondents, 20.67% belong to the age bracket of 17 to 19

years old; followed by the age group of 14 to 16 years old were 54.00% of the

respondents belonged; followed again by the 25.33% who belonged to the age bracket of

11 to 13 years old.

Table 2

Mean 14.89

Maximum 18

Minimum 12

Table 2 statistically shows the mean 14.89, maximum 8 and minimum 12 of age of the

respondents.

20
 Table 3 Sex

Sex Frequency Percentage

Male 56 37.33

Female 94 62.67

Total 150 100.00

Table 3 shows the sex of the respondents, there are 150 respondents, 37.33% are male and

62.67% are female. In this table we can see that the respondent in this study is dominated by

female and expectedly 94 out of 150 respondents are female..

Sex

Male
37%

Female
63%

Figure 1 Sex

Graph showing the total percentage of male and female.

21
 Table 4 Religion

Religion Frequency Percentage

Roman Catholic 101 67.33

Iglesia ni Cristo 16 10.67

Aglipayan 12 8.00

Christian Born Again 20 13.33

Others 1 0.67

Total 150 100.00

Table 4 shows the religion of the respondents, 67.33% of the respondents are Roman Catholic,

13.33% are Christian Born Again, while 10.67% are Iglesia ni Cristo, 8.00% are Aglipayan, and

only (1) 0.67% respondent is belong to the religion Baptist. The Roman Catholic set as the top

religion of my respondents because 101 out of 150 are Roman Catholic.

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.

22
 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

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, a total of 150.

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

Figure 3

Graph showing the number of respondents per year level.

23
 Table 5 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

As seen in table 5 general average, (44) 29.3% of the respondents belongs the general

average bracket 80 to 84, followed by (83) 55.3% belong to the general average bracket 85 to 89,

and lastly (23) 15.3% belong to the general average bracket 90 to 96. The data presented in this

table indicates that 23 of the respondents have general average ranging 90 to 96 set on the

bottom, and 83 of the respondents have the general average ranging 85 to 89 which is the highest

number of respondents answered that their general average are ranging 85 to 89.

Table 6

Mean 86.16

Maximum 96.0

Minimum 80.0

As seen in table 6, the mean of general average is 86.16, followed by 96.0 maximum of

general average, and the minimum general average of 80.0. So, in here most of the respondents

have the general average of 86.15.

24
 General Average
90 -96
11%

85 - 89
25%
80 -84
64%

Figure 4

Graph showing the percentage of general average.

Table 7 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

Table 7 emphasizes the gross monthly earning of respondents per family. 70.00% of the

respondents have a family monthly income of Php 1,000 to less than Php 3,000. Followed by

25
21.33% of the respondents have family monthly income of Php. 3,001 to less than Php. 5,000.

Followed again by 3.33% have family monthly income of Php. 5,001 to less than Php. 7,000.

And the 5.33% of the family monthly income of the respondents have the highest monthly

income of 7,001 to 10,000. A seen in this table 105 of the family of the respondents have income

of 1,000 to 3,000 per month, and the 5 out of 150 respondents answered that their family

monthly income is ranging 5,001 to 7,000. If we can see in mother’s and father’s occupation

table 10 and 11, 127 (86.67%) of mother’s are housewife and 94 (62.67%) of father’s are farmer.

This may be the reason why 105 (70%) of the family only have family monthly income ranging

Php. 1,000 to Php. 3,000. There are also 8 (5.33%) have the highest family monthly income

ranging Php. 7,001 to Php. 10,000 it is because there are parents who are working abroad or

working in a factory or working in a government.

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

This figure shows the family monthly income in graph form.

26
 Table 8 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 8 tells that 50.7% of the respondents have household size of 3 to 5; followed by 44.7%

have household size of 6 to 9 and 4.7% of the respondents have household size of 10 to 12 per

family. As seen in this table, 76 of my respondent have household size ranging 3 to 5. So that in

this study more than half (76) of the respondents have household size ranging 3 to 5, and the

least household size have 10 to 12 members per family.

Table 9

Mean 5.84

Standard deviation 1.77

Maximum 12

Minimum 3

Table 9, this table shows the mean, standard deviation, maximum, minimum of the household

size of family. The mean of the household size is 5.84; followed by standard deviation of 1.77;

followed again by maximum of 12; and lastly the minimum household size of 3.

27
 10 to 12 Household Size
5%

3 to 5
6 to 9 50%
45%

Figure 6, showing the household size in graph form.

Table 10 Mother’s Occupation

Mother's occupation Frequency Percentage

Housewife 127 84.67

Other than housewife 23 15.33

Total 150 100.00

Data in table 11 tells, 84.67% or 127 out of 150 of the mother of the respondents is housewife or

not employed, while 15.33% of the mothers have work other than housewife or self employed;

there are labandera, sari sari store owner, OFW, rice seed dealer, sewer, yakult seller, and also

there are respondents answered that their mother is dead.

28
 Other than Mother's Occupation
housewife
15%

Housewife
85%

Figure 7 showing the graph form of mother’s occupation with percentage label.

Table11

Father's occupation Frequency Percentage

Farming 94 62.67

Non-farming 56 37.33

Total 150 100.00

Table 11 presents the father’s occupation of the respondent. 62.67% of father of the respondents

are farmer, then 37.33% are employed and self-employed. Most of the father of the respondents

are farming is the source of their income.

29
 Non-
farming Father's Occupation
3%

Farming
97%

Figure 8 shows the percentage of farming and non-farming occupation of the father’s respondent.

Table 12 Mother’s Educational Attainment

Mother's highest educational

attainment Frequency Percentage

Elementary level 12 8.00

Elementary graduate 17 11.33

High school level 32 21.33

High school graduate 64 42.67

Vocational 1 0.67

College undergraduate 9 6.00

College graduate 14 9.33

Not applicable 1 0.67

Total 150 100.00

Table 12 is the presentation of the mother’s highest educational attainment. The table above

shows that 14 out 150 of mother of the respondents are college graduate a total of 9.33%, there

30
are 6.00% mother that are college undergraduate, only 0.67 or 1 of the mother graduate in

vocational course, next 42.67% of mother are high school graduate, followed by 21.33% are high

school level, followed again by 11.33% of mother are elementary graduate, 8.00% are not

elementary graduate and one respondent answered that his/her mother is dead.

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 shows the graph form of mother’s highest educational attainment of the respondents.

Table13

Father's highest educational

Frequency Percentage
attainment

Elementary level 16 10.67

Elementary graduate 21 14.00

High school level 19 12.67

31
 Father's highest educational
Frequency Percentage
attainment

High school graduate 74 49.33

Vocational 4 2.67

College undergraduate 5 3.33

College graduate 10 6.67

Not applicable 1 0.67

Total 150 100.00

The table above shows that 10 out of 150 father of the respondents are college graduate with the

percentage of 6.67%, followed by 3.33% are college undergraduate, followed again by 2.67%

earned a vocation course, next with the highest number of the father are high school graduate

with the total percentage of 49.33%, almost half are high school graduate, 12.67% are not high

school graduate, 14.00% are elementary graduate, 10.67% are not graduated in elementary, and

there is 0.67% or 1 father is dead according to the answer of the respondent.

32
 Father's highest educational
college attainment
graduate not applicable elementary
college
7% 1% level
undergraduate 10%
3%
elementary
vocational graduate
3% 14%

high school
graduate
49% high school level
13%

Figure 8 showing the graph form of father of the respondent’s educational attainment.

Table 14 Evaluate the Academic Performance

Sometim
Evaluate Academic Always Seldom Never Total
es
Performance count (%) count (%) count (%) N (%)
count (%)

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

56 150
Joining school activities. 53 (35.33) 30 (20.00) 11 (7.33)
(37.33) (100.00)

127 150
Submitting projects. 0 (0.00) 13 (8.67) 10 (6.67)
(84.67) (100.00)

50 150
Joining competition. 19 (12.67) 20 (13.33) 61 (40.67)
(33.33) (100.00)

33
 Sometim
Evaluate Academic Always Seldom Never Total
es
Performance count (%) count (%) count (%) N (%)
count (%)

25 150
Participate in class discussion. 97 (64.67) 27 (18.00) 1 (0.67)
(16.67) (100.00)

78 150
Got a high score in exams. 36 (24.00) 35 (23.33) 1 (0.67)
(52.00) (100.00)

26 113 150
Have failed grades. 2 (1.33) 9 (6.00)
(17.33) (75.33) (100.00)

150
I do my assignment regularly. 117 (78.0) 20 (13.33) 11 (7.33) 2 (1.33)
(100.00)

I study and prepare for quizzes 32 150

95 (65.33) 22 (14.67) 1 (0.67)
and tests. (21.33) (100.00)

I study harder to improve my

109 18 150
performance when I got low 20 (13.33) 3 (2.00)
(72.67) (12.00) (100.00)
grades.

I spend my vacant time in

49 150
doing assignment or studying 59 (39.33) 34 (22.67) 8 (5.33)
(32.67) (100.00)
my lessons.

I spend less time with my

friends during school days to 57 150

59 (39.33) 30 (20.00) 4 (2.67)
concentrate more on my (38.00) (100.00)

studies.

34
 Evaluate Academic Performance. Data presented in table 14, question number 1 indicates

that 141 (94%) out of 150 respondents answered that they attend class regularly, 4 answered

seldom with the percentage rate of 2.67%, 5 of the respondents answered 5 (3.33%), and none of

the respondents answered never. So, in question number 1 majority of the respondents attends

class regularly.

Question number 2, 53 (35.33%) of the respondents answered they always join school

activities, 30 (20%) answered seldom, 56 (37.33) answered sometimes they join school activities,

and 11 (7.33%) of the respondents answered they never participate or join school activities.

In question number 3 with the question if they are submitting projects, 127 (84.67%) of

the respondents answered they always submit their projects, 13 (8.67%) answered seldom,

followed by 10 (6.67%) answered they sometimes submit their projects, and none of the

respondents answered never or it tells that most of the respondents submits projects.

Question number 4, tells that 19 (12.67%) of the respondents always join competition, 20

(13.33%) answered seldom, 50 (33.33%) answered they sometimes join competition, and 61

(40.67%) said they never join competition.

In question number 5 tells that 97 (64.67%) are always participate in class discussion, 27

(18.00%) answered seldom or they are rarely participate in class discussion, next 25 (16.67%)

answered they sometimes participate in class discussion, and 1 (0.67%) out of 150 answered that

they don’t participate in class discussion.

Question number 6 tells that 36 (24.00%) of the respondents answered they always got a

high score in exams, 35 (23.33%) answered seldom they got high score in exam, 78 (52.00%) of

35
the respondents answered they sometimes got a high score in exam, 1 (0.67%) answered that

they never got a high score in exam.

Question number 7 tells that 2 (1.33%) of the respondents answered he/she always have

failed grade/s, 9 (6.00%) answered seldom, 26 (17.33%) of the respondents answered they

sometimes got a failed grade, and luckily 113 (75.33%) answered that they never got a failed

grade/s.

Question number 8, tells that 117 (78.0%) of the respondents do their assignments

regularly, 20 (13.33%) answered seldom or they’re rarely do their assignments if there is, 11

(7.33%) answered they sometimes do their assignments, 2 (1.33%) of the respondents answered

they never do their assignments.

In question number 9 tells that 95 (65.33%) of the respondents are preparing and studying

for quiz and test, followed by 22 (14.67%) answered seldom, 32 (21.33%) answered sometimes

they are preparing and studying for their quizzes and test, 1 (0.67%) answered never or don’t

prepare.

In question 10 tells that 109 (72.67%) of the respondents study hard to improve their

previous grade, 20 (13.33%) answered seldom, 18 (12.00%) answered sometimes, and 3 (2.00%)

answered that they don’t study hard to improved their previous grades.

Question 11 shoes that 59 (39.33%) answered that they spend their vacant time to do their

assignments and study lessons, 34 (22.67%) answered seldom, 49 (32.67%) answered

sometimes, and 8 (5.33%) of the respondents answered that they never spend time in studying

their lessons.

36
 Question number 12 tells that 59 (39.33%) of the respondents always spend less time

with their classmates to focus on their studies, 30 (20.00%) answered seldom, 57 (38.00%)

answered that they sometimes spend less time with their classmates to focus on their studies, and

4 (2.67%) answered never or this statement want to say that the respondents who answered never

are don’t even focus on their studies or they spend more times with their friends.

Table 15 part 2 Evaluate Academic Performance

Part 2 Evaluate Academic Performance Frequency Percentage

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

Compared to your classmates, what is your level of in-class

participation?

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

37
 Part 2 Evaluate Academic Performance Frequency Percentage

How do responsibilities outside the school affect at your

success at school?

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

Hours per week you devoted to your class beyond the time you

spent class? (Reading, Doing homeworks, Studying)

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

The data presented in table 15 shows that in question number 1 “How do you prepare for

your class?” 28 (18.7%) answered that they prepare for their class by reading the text or assigned

readings, followed by 84 (56%) of the respondents prepare for their class by studying taken notes

in class, followed again by 35 (23.3%) prepare for their class by doing their assigned

assignments, and 3 (2%) of the respondents talking to their classmates instead of preparing for

their class.

38
 Question number 2 with the question “Compared to your classmates, what is your level

of in-class participation?” 68 (45.3%) answered that their classmates participate more than them,

51 (34%) answered that they participate as same as their classmates, followed by 24 (16%)

answered that they more participate than their classmates, and 7 (4.7%) of respondents said that

they are not participating in class.

Question number 3 “How do responsibilities outside the school affect at your success at

school?”, 12 (8%) of the respondents said that their responsibilities outside the school doesn’t

affect their success in school, 63 (42%) answered that their responsibilities outside the school

occasionally affect their success in school, followed by 65 (43.3%) answered that it often affect

their success in school, and 10 (6.7%) said that their responsibilities outside the school always

affect their success in school.

Question number 4 “Hours per week you devoted to your class beyond the time you spent

class? (Reading, Doing homeworks, Studying)”, 12 (8%) of the respondents answered that they

don’t spent time reading, doing homework or studying, followed by 63 (42%) answered that they

spend less than hour studying, doing homeworks , and reading, followed again by 65 (43.3%)

answered that they spend 1 to 3 hours of studying, and 10 (6.7%) said that they devoted 4 to 6

hours of reading, doing homeworks, studying in class.

39
 Table 16 Relationship between parental involvement and students’ academic performance

Neve

Occasi Rarel r

Relationship between parental involvement Always onally y done Total

and students’ academic performance count (%) count count at all N (%)

(%) (%) count

(%)

150
115 24 8 3
Does your parent motivate you to study hard? (100.0
(76.67) (16.00) (5.33) (2.00)
0)

21 150
Does your parent encourage you to join 47 7
75 (50.00) (14.0 (100.0
activities in school? (31.33) (4.67)
0) 0)

26 150
Does your parent help you in doing your 44 11
69 (46.00) (17.3 (100.0
projects? (29.33) (7.33)
3) 0)

40 150
Does your parent help you in doing your 48 12
50 (33.33) (26.6 (100.0
homeworks? (32.00) (8.00)
7) 0)

29 23 150
Does your parent support you when you join 33
65 (43.33) (19.3 (15.3 (100.0
competition? (22.00)
3) 3) 0)

40
Relationship

between parental

involvement and Always Occasionally Rarely Never done at all Total

students’ count (%) count (%) count (%) count (%) N (%)

academic

performance

Does your parent

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

weekend?

Does your parent

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

school vacation?

Does your parent

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

your school?

The table 16 Relationship between parental involvement and students’ academic

performance, question number 1 tells that 115 (76.67%) of the respondents answered that their

parents always motivate them to study hard or strive for their education, 24 (16%) answered their

parents occasionally motivate them to study hard, 8 (5.23%) of the respondents answered their

parents rarely motivate them to study hard, and 3 (2%) answered that their parents never

motivate them at all.

41
 Question number 2 “Does your parent encourage you to join activities in school?” in this

question 75 (50%) of the respondents said that their parents always encourage them to join

school activities, followed by 47 (31.33%) tells that their parents occasionally encourage them to

join school activities, followed again by 21 (14%) answered that their parents rarely encourage

them, and 7 (4.67%) of the respondents answered that their parents never done encourage them

to join school activities.

Question number 3 “Does your parent help you in doing your projects?” in this question

69 (46%) of the respondents answered that their parents always help them in doing their school

projects, followed by 44 (29.33) of the respondents tells that occasionally their parents help them

doing their projects, followed again by 26 (17.33%) answered rarely, and 11 (7.33%) of the

respondents tells that their parents don’t help them to do their school projects.

In question number 4 “Does your parent help you in doing your homeworks?” in this

question 50 (33.33%) of the respondents answered that their parents always help them to do their

assignments, 48 (32%) of the respondents answered that their parents occasionally do their

assignments, followed by 48 (26.67%) answered that their parents rarely help them do their

homeworks, and 12 (8%) of the respondents answered that their parents never help them in doing

their homeworks.

Question number 5 “Does your parent support you when you join competition?” in this

question 65 (43.33%) of the respondents answered that their parents always support the when

they are joining competition, followed by 33 (22%) answered that occasionally their parents

support them when they join or joining competition, followed again by 29 (19.33%) answered

42
that their parents rarely support them when they join competition, and 23 (15.33%) of the

respondents answered that their parents never support them when they join competition.

Question number 5 “Does your parent teach you during weekend?” 31 (20.67%) of the

respondents answered that their parents teach them during weekend always and occasionally,

because in this question number 5 both 31 respondents answered always and occasionally, 58

(38.67%) of the respondents answered that their parents rarely teach them during weekends, and

30 (20%) answered that their parents never teach them during weekend.

In question number 6 “Does your parent teach you during school vacation?” tells that 32

(21.33%) answered that when school vacation their parents always teach at home, followed by

18 (12%) answered that occasionally their parents teach them at home during school vacation,

followed again by 45 (30%) answered that their parents rarely teach them dung school vacation,

and with the highest percentage 55 (36.67%%) of the respondents said that their parents never

teach them at home during school vacation.

Question number 7 “Does your parent attend meeting in your school?” in here 132 (88%)

of the respondents said that their parents always attend school meeting, followed by 10 (6.67%)

of the respondents said that their parents occasionally attends school meetings, followed again by

6 (4%) said that their parents rarely attend school meeting, and with the lowest percentage of the

respondents said that 2 (1.33%) their parents never attend school meetings.

43
 Table 17 Parental involvement to students’ academic performance

2-3 Once A few

Rarel
Daily days/ a times/m
Parental involvement to students’ y Total
count week week onth
academic performance count N (%)
(%) count count count
(%)
(%) (%) (%)
54 36 29 150
How often do you and your parents 18 13
(36.00 (24.00 (19.33 (100.00
talk about future goals? (12.00) (8.67)
) ) ) )

How often do you and your parents

44 32 26 24 150
talk about problems that you may be 24
(29.33 (21.33 (17.33 (16.00 (100.00
having at school with peers, teachers, (16.00)
) ) ) ) )
or school work?

How often do you and your parents 46 39 37 150

14 14
talk about what content is being taught (30.67 (26.00 (24.67 (100.00
(9.33) (9.33)
in the classroom? ) ) ) )
How often do you and your parents 97 26 17 150
2
talk about the importance of learning (64.67 (17.33 (11.33 8 (5.33) (100.00
(1.33)
to do things on your own? ) ) ) )
How often do your parents assist you 53 36 26 19 150
16
with the assignments and studying at (35.33 (24.00 (17.33 (12.67 (100.00
(10.67)
home? ) ) ) ) )

The table above shows the parental involvement to students’ academic performance, a

seen in this table according to question number 1,out of 150 of the respondents 54

(36%)answered that their parents always talk about their future, 36 (24%) answered that their

parents talk about their future 2 to 3 times per week, followed by 18 (12%) answered that they

talk about it once a week, followed again by 13 (8.67%) answered a few times a month, and 13

44
(8.67%) with the lowest percentage answered that their parents rarely talk about their future

goals with them.

Question number 2 shows that 44 (29.33%) of the respondents answered that their parents

always talk about the problem regarding their teachers or school problem, 32 (21.33%) answered

2 to 3 days per week, followed by 26 (17.33%) answered once a week, and 24 (16%) of the

respondents answered both a few times a month and rarely.

Question number 3 shows that 46 (30.67%) of the respondents answered that their parents

talk about the content that being taught in classroom, followed by 39 (26%) answered 2 to 3

times per week, followed again by 37 (24.67%) of the respondents answered once a week, 14

(9.33%) answered a few times a month, and 14 (9.33%) of the respondents answered that their

parents rarely talk about what content is being taught in classroom.

In question number 4 shows that 97 (64.67%) of the respondents answered parents talk

about the importance of learning to do things on their own, 26 (17.33%) answered 2 to 3 days, 17

(11.33%) answered that once a week parents talk about the importance of learning to do things

on their own, 8 (5.33%) of the respondents answered a few times a month, and with the lowest

percentage of 2 (1.33%) answered that their parents rarely talk about the importance of learning

to do things on their own.

Question number 5 tells that 53 (35.33%) their parents assist them with their assignments

and studying at home, 36 (24%) answered 2 to 3 times a week, 26 (17.33%) answered once a

week, 16 (10.67%) answered a few times a month, and 19 (12.67%) of the respondents answered

that their parents assist them with their assignments and studying at home.

45
 Table 18 Factors that affects academic performance

Strongl

Strongl Disagre y
Agree
Factors that affects academic y agree e disagre Total
count
performance count count e N (%)
(%)
(%) (%) count

(%)

85 ( 27(18.0 23(15.3 15(10.0 150(100.0

Financial problem
56.67) 0) 3) 0) 0)

50(33.33 19(12.6 48(32.0 33(22.0 150(100.0

Parents level of education
) 7) 0) 0) 0)

42(28.00 22(14.6 54(36.0 32(21.3 150(100.0

Family size
) 7) 0) 3) 0)

42(28.00 21(14.0 52(34.6 35(23.3 150(100.0

Distance of the school
) 0) 7) 3) 0)

39(26.00 19(12.6 35(23.3 57(38.0 150(100.0

Unwillingness to study
) 7) 3) 0) 0)

62(41.33 34(22.6 40(26.6 14(9.33 150(100.0

Lack of allowance
) 7) 7) ) 0)

61(40.67 19(12.6 48(32.0 22(14.6 150(100.0

Environment
) 7) 0) 7) 0)

46
Factors that
Agree Strongly agree Disagree Strongly disagree Total
affects academic
count (%) count (%) count (%) count (%) N (%)
performance

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

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

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

Table 18 shows the factors that affects academic performance. It tells in number 1 that 85

(56.67%) of the respondents answered agree that financial problem affect their academic

performance, 27(18%) answered that financial problem strongly affect their academic

performance, 23(15.33%) answered disagree, and 15(10%) answered strongly disagree that

financial problem cannot affect their academic performance. In this we can see that most or 50%

of the respondents have agreed that financial problem affects student’s academic performance

it’s because in table 10 and 11 shows that most of the mother are housewife and father are

working as farmer which is only seasonal.

In row 2, shows 50 (33.33%) of the respondents agreed that parent’s level of education

affects their academic performance, 19(12.67%) answered they strongly agree that parent’s level

of education affect their academic performance, 48(32%) answered disagree, and 33(22%)

answered that parent’s level of education don’t affect their academic performance. In this we can

47
see that many of the respondents agreed that parent’s level of education affect their school

academic performance.

In row 3 shows that 42(28%) answered agree that size of their family affect their

academic performance, 22(14.67%) answered strongly agree, 54(36%) of the respondents

disagree that size of family don’t affect their academic performance, and 32(21.33%) answered

strongly disagree that this really don’t affect their academic performance. In row 4 shows that

21(14%) of the respondents agree that distance of the school affects their academic performance,

21(14%) answered strongly agree, 52(34.67%) of the respondents disagree in this, and

35(23.33%) of the respondents strongly disagree that distance don’t affect their academic

performance.

In row 5 shows that 39 (26%) of the respondents answered agree that unwillingness to

study affect their academic performance, 19 (12.67%) answered strongly agree, 3 5(23.33%)

answered disagree that unwillingness to study affects their academic performance, and 57(38%)

of the respondents answered strongly disagree.

In row 6 shows that 62(41.33%) of the respondents answered agree that lack allowance

affects their academic performance, 34(22.67%) answered strongly agree, 40(26.67%) answered

disagree, and 14(9.33%) of the respondents answered strongly disagree that lack of allowance

don’t affect their academic performance. This explains 41.33% of the respondents agreed the

lacking of allowance affect their academic performance, this may cause that they cannot go to

school because they don’t have money to pay for their fare or don’t have money to buy food, or

school needs. So, the effect of this is their grade may be gets lower or they will get fail grade.

48
 In row 7 show that 61 (40.67%) of the respondents agree that their environment affects

their academic performance, 19 (12.67%) answered strongly agree, 48 (32%) disagree in this,

and 22(14.67%) strongly disagree that their environments don’t affect their academic

performance. It explains that 40.67% of the respondents agreed that environment affects their

academic performance; one factor that effects is their peer.

In row 7 shows that 66 (44%) of the respondents agreed that guidance from parents have

good effect on their academic performance, 18 (12%) of the respondents answered strongly

disagree, 34 (22.67%) disagree that guidance from parents have effect on their academic

performance, 32 (21.33%) answered strongly disagree.

In row 8 shows that 58 (38.67%) answered agreed that negative situation at home affects

their academic performance, 20 (13.33%) strongly agree on this that negative situation at home

really affects their academic performance, 40 (26.67%) disagreed that negative situation at home

don’t affect their academic performance, and 32 (21.33%) answered strongly disagree to this.

In row 9 shows that 61 (40.67%) of the respondents agreed that quality of teaching in

their school affects their academic performance, 25 (16.67%) strongly agreed to this, 37

(24.67%) of the respondents disagreed that quality of teaching in school affects their academic

performance, and 27 (18%) of the respondents strongly disagree that quality of teaching in

school affects their academic performance. In this 40.67% of the respondents agreed that quality

of teaching affect their academic performance. This can be negative effect or in a positive way.

49
 Table 19 4Ps benefits as perceived by the student’s beneficiaries

No
Yes Total
4Ps Benefits as perceived by school students count
count (%) N (%)
(%)

Does the 4Ps program help you to pay for your school
147(98.00) 3(2.00) 150 (100.00)
fees?

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

135(90.00) 15(10.00) 150 (100.00)
uniforms, notebooks, etc.)

4Ps help to provide for your everyday allowance. 132(88.00) 18(12.00) 150 (100.00)

Does 4Ps program help you to value your education? 141(94.00) 9(6.00) 150 (100.00)

Does 4PS program really help you to improve your

134(89.33) 16(10.67) 150 (100.00)
education?

Does the program monitor your monthly attendance? 146(97.33) 4(2.67) 150 (100.00)

Table 19 4Ps benefits as perceived by school students, In question number 1 shows that

147 (98%) of the respondents answered Yes that the program really helps them to pay for their

school fees, and 3 (2%) have answered No.

Question number 2 shows that 135 (90%) of the respondents have answered Yes the

program 4Ps helps them to buy for their school needs, and 15 (10%) have answered No.

Question number 3 shows that 132 (88%) of the respondents answered Yes the program

provides allowance for the students beneficiaries, and 18 (12%) answered No.

50
 Question number 4 shows that 141 (94%) of the respondents answered Yes that the

program help them to value their education, and 9 (6%) answered No.

Question number 5 shows that 134 (89.33%) of the respondents answered Yes the

program help them to improve their studies or to go on and study hard, and 16 (10.67%)

answered No.

Question number 6 shows that 146 (97.33%) or almost 100% of the respondents have

answered Yes their daily/monthly attendance monitored by the school registrar in cooperation

with the DSWDMSWD, and 4 (2.67%) answered No.

All in all in table 19 we can see that most of the respondents have agreed in the question

almost all have answered Yes, although there are some respondents answered No.

51
Table 20 Correlation on SDC and Relationship between parents and students academic

performance

General Average

c1 Correlation
.141
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .086

N 150

c2 Correlation
-.085
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .299

N 150

c3 Correlation
-.057
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .489

N 150

c4 Correlation
.062
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .453

N 150

52
c5 Correlation
-.221**
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .006

N 150

c6 Correlation
-.040
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .631

N 150

c7 Correlation
-.055
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .502

N 150

c8 Correlation
.074
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .368

N 150

53
 Correlation

General Average

d1 Correlation
.101
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .217

N 150

d2 Correlation
-.072
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .382

N 150

d3 Correlation
-.044
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .596

N 150

d4 Correlation
-.027
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .744

N 150

d5 Correlation
-.069
Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .403

N 150

54
Sig. also called the T-value

N – Refers to the total number of the respondents

** tells that there is a relationship

In the tables above shows the correlation of Socio-Demographic Characteristics and

Relationship between parental involvement and students academic performance.

We can say that this is significant if the T-value is ⬇ lower than .05 and if the T-value is

⬆ higher than .05 there is no significant relationship. In the table above shows the row

highlighted using green color has negative relationship which is when the students don’t support

by their parents when they join competition there is a possibility that the general average of the

students will get low, and the rest of the row highlighted using yellow have no significant

relationship in the socio-demographic characteristics of the students.

55
 Chapter 5

Summary, Conclusion and Recommendation

Summary

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

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

primarily conducted to know the academic performance of the students beneficiaries.

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

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

study 94 are females and 56 are males. The average age of the respondents is 14.89.

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

questionnaires were made by the researcher and it has 6 parts the SDC of the respondents, the

evaluation of students’ academic performances, the relationship between parent’s involvement to

students’ academic performances, the factors that affect academic performance of the students,

and the 4Ps beneficiaries as perceived by student’s beneficiaries.

Generally most of the respondents are Roman Catholic. In regards to the family

background of the respondents most of the fathers of the respondents are famer and their mothers

are housewife. As we can see in the tables above most of the respondents have the monthly

income ranging 1,000 to 3001 a month. Also most of the parents are high school graduate.

56
Conclusion

The result of the study says that the respondents of this study are dominated by female

with the total of 94 female out of 150. In terms of religion Roman Catholic are the most religion

of the respondents with the 101 respondents. In family background, most of the parents of the

respondents are high school graduate. They have the family monthly income ranging 1,000 to

3,000 Pesos a month the reason why is because most of their parents are farmer and housewife.

There some family with family monthly of 7,001 – 10,000 pesos per month because there are

some parents are working abroad or working in the government, the mean of the household size

is 5.84, and the mean of the general average of the student’s is 86.16.

To sum up the evaluation of the student’s academic performance, I rated the most

frequent answers of the respondents in question number 1 commonly answer are always, 2

sometimes, 3 always, 4 never, 5 always, 6 sometimes, 7 never, 8 always, 8 always, 9 always, 10

always, and 11 always.

To the table relationship between parent’s involvement and student’s academic

performance the usual answer of the respondent to the question are 1 always, 2 always, 3 always,

4 always, 5 always, 6 rarely, 7 never done at all, 8 always.

In the table factors that affects academic performance I also show the usual answer of the

respondents in the question, 1 agree, 2 agree, 3 disagree, 4 disagree, 5 strongly disagree, 6 agree,

7 agree, 8 agree, 9 agree, and 10 agree.

And lastly in the table correlation shows that most in the table don’t have correlation,

only one has, which is the question “Does your parent support you when you join competition?”

this tells that if the parents don’t support their children their grade of the will gets lower.

57
Recommendation

Based on the results of this study the following recommendations are presented:

1. I recommend to DSWD/MSDW that they should also monitor the grade of the student’s

beneficiaries not just the attendance.

2. The DSWD/MSWD may also use the data of this study to access the effectiveness of their

program regarding to the education of the student’s beneficiaries. This also may be the basis for

them to improve their program.

3. For the future researcher of related studies, that they should prepare their thesis proposal as

fast as they can and conduct it earlier. For you to have enough time in writing you thesis.

4. Follow up studies are recommended to have more respondents and not focus only in one

school instead make a comparison between 2 or 3 school that has the 4Ps students beneficiaries.

58
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+Domin
go,+3133+Nueva+Ecija/@15.6063216,120.8835245,13.02z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x3396d56a3f99
5a25:0x80409fd3b18048db!8m2!3d15.5997373!4d120.8773467

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.

Fernandez, L. &. (2011). Overview of Philippines' conditional cash transfer program. The Pantawid
Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps). Washington, DC: World Bank.

Hopkins, J. M. (1958). "Some Non-intellectual Correlates of Success and Failure among University
Students". Brit, J. Educ. Psychology, 28: 25-36.

59
Lane 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.

60
Appendices

61
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

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
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

62
 8. Number of Family Members _________
9. Mother’s Occupation ______________
Father’s Occupation _______________
10. Parents educational attainment
Mother:
[ ] 1 Elementary level [ ] 5 Vocational
[ ] 2 Elementary Graduate [ ] 6 College Undergraduate
[ ] 3 High School level [ ] 7 College Graduate
[ ] 4 High School Graduate
Father:
[ ] 1 Elementary level [ ] 5 Vocational
[ ] 2 Elementary Graduate [ ] 6 College Undergraduate
[ ] 3 High School level [ ] 7 College Graduate
[ ] 4 High School Graduate

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.

63
 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.

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

64
 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

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?

65
1. Daily 4. A few times a month
2. 2-3 days per week 5. Rarely
3. Once a week

Parental involvement with the

1 2 3 4 5
student 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?

66
 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

1. Yes 2. No

4Ps Benefits as perceived by students beneficiaries 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?

67
68