Chapter IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents, analyses and interprets the data gathered out of the instruments used in the study presented
according to the specific problems.
Part I-Respondents’ Profile

Table 2
Distribution of Respondents as to Age
Age Bracket Frequency Percentage
46-above 5 12
41-45 2 5
36-40 8 20
31-35 10 24
26-30 12 29
20-25 4 10
Total 41 100

Table 3
Distribution of the Respondents as to Gender
Gender Frequency Percentage
Male 4 10
Female 37 90
Total 41 100

Table 4
Distribution of Respondents as to Civil Status
Civil Status Frequency Percentage
Single 11 27
Married 30 73
Total 41 100

Table 5
Distribution of Respondents as to Degree Fully Earned
Degree Frequency Percentage
BSEd 36 88
BSN 1 2
MAEd 4 10
 Total 41 100

Table 6
Distribution of Respondents as to Number of Years in Teaching
Year Bracket Frequency Percentage
26-above 3 7
21-25 1 2
16-20 3 7
11-15 2 5
6-10 8 20
1-5 24 59
Total 41 100

Table 7
Distribution of Respondents as to Seminars Attended About Solid Waste Management

Seminar Level Frequency Rank

School Level 3 2
District Level 5 1
Division Level 1 3
Regional Level 0
National Level 0

Table 8 - Level of Implementation of Solid Waste Management Practices

Solid Waste Collection/Storage Practices Weighted Qualitative Rank
Mean Description
1. Waste are disposed in properly labelled bins
2. Solid wastes are collected daily
3. Solid waste are collected in designated area
4. Wastes are collected by the maintenance staff
 and students
5. Collection of garbage is done by the
municipal/barangay truck

Average Mean

B. Solid Waste Disposal Practices Weighted Mean Qualitative Rank

Description
1. Composting
2. Re-using
3. Conversion to other uses or recycling
4. Open burning
5. Selling to junkshops
6. Storing for future use
7. Donating
8. Burying in pits
9. Feeding to animals

Average Mean
C. Solid Waste Recovery and Processing Practices Weighted Qualitative Rank
Mean Description
1. Composting
1. Practice the 3 R (Reduce, re-use, recycle)
2. Proper waste segregation
3. Composting of biodegradable materials
4. Full implementation of the MRF ( Material
Recovery Facility)
5. Production of energy out of waste
(eg.biogas)
6. Zero-burning/incineration

Average Mean
 Table 9 – Effectiveness of the Existing Solid Waste Management Practices
Solid Waste Collection/Storage Practices Weighted Mean Qualitative Rank
Description
1. Waste are disposed in properly labelled
bins
2. Solid wastes are collected daily
3. Solid waste are collected in designated
area
4. Wastes are collected by the
maintenance staff and students
5. Collection of garbage is done by the
municipal/barangay truck

Average Mean
 Solid Waste Disposal Practices Weighted Mean Qualitative Rank
Description
1. Composting
2. Re-using
3. Conversion to other uses or recycling
4. Open burning
5. Selling to junkshops
6. Storing for future use
7. Donating
8. Burying in pits
9. Feeding to animals

Average Mean

Solid Waste Recovery and Processing Practices Weighted Qualitative Rank

Mean Description
1. Practice the 3 R (Reduce, re-use, recycle)
2. Proper waste segregation
3. Composting of biodegradable materials
4. Full implementation of the MRF ( Material
Recovery Facility)
5. Production of energy out of waste
(eg.biogas)
6. Zero-burning/incineration

Average Mean

Table 10 – Problems Encountered in the Implementation of the Existing Solid Waste Management
Problems Encountered Weighted Mean Qualitative Rank
Description
1. Increasing population
2. Inadequate monitoring
3. Non-compliance on waste segregation
 at source
4. Public indifference (I don’t care
attitude)
5. Inefficient collection of wastes
6. Lack of environmental
awareness/sensitivity
7. Lack of training on proper solid waste
management practices
8. Disposal area is not strategically
located
9. No safe designated/processing area for
infectious/hazardous waste
10. Non operation of a good MRF
11. Non operation of a good disposal
facility
12. Inadequate school policies on waste
management practices

Average Mean

Table 11 – Measures/Intervention Undertaken for Improvement

Measures/Interventions Undertaken for Weighted Mean Qualitative Rank
Improvement Description
1. Each classroom is provided with properly
labelled waste bins.
2. A compost pit is provided for the compostable
waste.
3. A material recovery facility is fully implemented.
4. Fines or corresponding work are impost to
students found littering.
 5. Display of “no littering”, slogans and other
signages related to managing solid waste at
strategic places.
6. Daily cleaning is implemented.
7. Weekly ground improvement is imposed.
8. Waste management is lectured by teachers.
9. Resource speakers are invited to talk about solid
waste management.
10. “No use of plastic cups and Styrofoam policy” is
imposed.
11. Students and vendors take their wastes at
home.
12. Search for the Cleanest and Greenest School is
implemented.
13. Reward is given to best solid waste
management implementer.

Average Mean

Table 12. Difference of Responses on the Level of Implementation of Solid Waste Management Practices among the 9 Public
Secondary Schools in Paracelis District
Items Fcomputed Ftable Significant Value Interpretation
Solid Waste
Management Practices