Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM

Background of the Study

Education is one of the most important aspects of human resource development. The

students’ performance plays an important role in producing best quality graduates who will

become great leaders and manpower for the country thus responsible for the country’s economic

and social development.

In an educational institution, the students are the main character in the plot, without them,

the school, the teachers, and facilities will be worthless. The topmost priority of educators is the

quality of students' performance in academic standards. Students' motivation to participate in

class activities on a regular basis has become an important concern of an educator. However due

to the effect of globally uncured disease (COVID-19) students are now advised to stay at home.

For the meantime the system of education has shifted from face to face to modular learning.

Thus, student’s participation and performance were limitedly measured by their submitted

modules and outputs.

Educators, trainers, and researchers have long been interested in exploring variables

contributing effectively for quality of performance of learners. These variables are inside and

outside school that affect students’ quality of academic achievement. These factors may be

termed as student factors, family factors, school factors and peer factors (Crosnoe, Johnson &

Elder, 2004). The formal investigation about the role of these demographic factors rooted back in

17th century (Mann, 1985). Generally, these factors include age, gender, geographical

belongingness, ethnicity, marital status, socioeconomic status (SES), parents’ education level,

parental profession, language, income and religious affiliations. These are usually discussed
under the umbrella of demography (Ballatine, 1993). In a broader context demography is

referred to as a way to explore the nature and effects of demographic variables in the biological

and social context. Unfortunately, defining and measuring the quality of education is not a

simple issue and the complexity of this process increases due to the changing values of quality

attributes associated with the different stakeholders’ view point (Blevins, 2009; Parri, 2006).

Besides other factors, socioeconomic status is one of the most researched and debated factor

among educational professionals that contribute towards the academic performance of students.

The most prevalent argument is that the socioeconomic status of learners affects the quality of

their academic performance. Most of the experts argue that the low socioeconomic status has

negative effect on the academic performance of students because the basic needs of students

remain unfulfilled and hence, they do not perform better academically (Adams, 1996). The low

socioeconomic status causes environmental deficiencies which results in low self-esteem of

students (US Department of Education, 2003). More specifically, this study aims to identify and

analyze factors that affect the quality of students’ academic performance.

Unfortunately, defining and measuring the quality of education is not a simple issue and

the complexity of this process increases due to the changing values of quality attributes

associated with the different stakeholders’ view point (Blevins, 2009; Parri, 2006). The

Department of Education (2002), is taking into consideration the basic concepts and philosophies

of learning vis-à-vis the need for the truly preparing its students for the complex and global

world of work. About the factors that affect the learning and the performance. These factors may

be termed as student factors, family factors, school factors and teacher factors (Crosno et al,

2004).
 Acosta (2002), attempted to discover the teachers’ profile, competencies and students’

academic achievement in selected public schools in Bulacan. Based on her findings, she

concluded that the low academic achievement of students despite the perceived high level of

competency of their teachers implies that the latter have not been effective in attaining their

objectives. Bernardo's paper (2000), about the problem of learning, linked the problems of

student's achievement, of teaching and poor teaching practices. He believes that education in the

Philippines is not designed in ways that are suited to how students and teachers can best develop

their skills. He also presumed that poor quality of inputs to the learning process yield poor

quality outputs, which explains the poor achievement.

On October 5, public schools were reopened in the middle of a still untamed coronavirus

outbreak in the country that has so far claimed many lives and left many Filipinos jobless. To

make sure that learning remains unhampered, DepEd will be implementing a distance learning

approach – a learning delivery mode where interaction takes place between the teacher and the

students who are geographically remote from each other during instruction. This means lessons

will be delivered outside the traditional face-to-face setup. As technology and internet

connectivity remain a problem for most students, DepEd will be providing printed module

materials for them.

The purpose of this study is to identify and correlate the factors affecting students'

performance in modular learning. This sought to determine the direct relationships between

identified factors (Mother’s Educational Attainment, Father’s Educational Attainment,

Capability to Connect to the Internet, Mother’s Employment Status during the Pandemic,

Father’s Employment Status during the Pandemic, Availability of Instructional Support of

Parents, and Availability of Learning Devices at Home) and the student's academic performance.
The study will contribute towards unravelling the significant determinants of students'

performance that need to be addressed. This will also serve as a guide for future educators and

practitioners for the improvement in the quality of education in modular learning. In addition, the

results will also serve as platform for schools to initiate discussions on the possible causal factors

and how the school may be able to address these problems so that academic performance can be

improved.

Theoretical Framework

Education has a pivotal role in nation as well as individual character building. It is a life

line for any society and nation. Education of a child needs multidimensional efforts. Students,

teachers, institute and parents all have their importance in their process of learning.

The purpose of this qualitative case study is to examine the factors that affects the

academic performance of Grade 11 students of Pulot National High School year amidst the

COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, this study was anchored by the following:

A characteristic that may affect the value of parental involvement in students’ academic

achievement is parental educational level. The literary review on students’ academic

achievements has reviewed the importance of parents’ education. Many studies describe that

parents’ education level plays an important role in the amount of parent involvement and the

most of these researches have been with secondary school students (Sui-chu & Williams 1996).

More findings describe that the higher education level of the parents, the students more likely

will have better academic achievement. This research is only with the secondary school students

(Sandefur, et al.,1999). Jacqulynm, (2005) have pointed out the relationship of parents’

education level to their children academic achievements. A mother’s education has a more
influence than father, so mother’s education is more important. Karshen (2003) says that students

whose parents are well educated get higher positions than those whose parents are not educated.

Educated parents help their children in school work activities. Dave and Dave (1971) found that

high achievers belong to homes with parents’ higher education level. The failed students belong

to those who have lower parents’ education level. Williams (1980) and Teach man (1987) found

that more educated parents create environment that facilitate learning. They involve themselves

in children’s school activities and school environment. Okagaki and French (1978) studied that

parents’ education is a distal indicator indirectly correlated with children education

achievements. Good and Brophy (1997) say that educated parents show interest in their

children’s academic performances they meet and co-operate with educational administrators to

ensure children seriousness in their studies. On the other hand, Hawkes (1995) says that student

performance does not necessarily depend on parents’ professional competency or educational

attainments. The literature review indicates a positive and significant relationship between

parents’ education level and students’ academic achievements.

According to Cunha and Heckman (2007), a seminal contribution to the economic

approach regarding child development is the model of skill formation. The skills referenced in

this model include both cognitive skills (e.g. IQ) and non-cognitive skills (such as patience, self-

control, and perseverance). These skills are the products of investments, environments, and

genes. In this model, altruistic parents “invest” in their children; for example, by spending time

with them and by paying for childcare, schooling, extra lessons, food, and toys. Governments

can also invest in children; for example, by providing publicly funded childcare or schooling.

Skill formation is a multistage process, with each stage corresponding to a period in the life cycle

of a child. Investments at one stage produce skills at the next. Some stages, so-called “sensitive
periods,” may be more productive in producing some skills than other stages, and some inputs

may be especially productive at some specific stages, compared to others. A skill produced at an

earlier stage has been shown to augment the level of the same skill later on. This effect is termed

“self-productivity,” and embodies the idea that the effects of investment early on persist as a

child continues to develop.

In the present existence, technology is regarded as imperative to enhance learning. When

students need to improve their skills and abilities regarding academic concepts, then internet

serves as the imperative source of obtaining knowledge and information. In textbooks,

sometimes the knowledge is limited, hence, in order to acquire better understanding of the lesson

plans, the students make use of the internet, take down notes and can acquire a better

understanding. In the present existence, technology is even made use of in the preparation of

projects, reports, and assignments. Earlier when technology was not adequately made use of in

schools, then students used to prepare their assignments using stationary items. In the present

existence, not only in higher educational institutions, but also in secondary schools, it is been

made use of to a major extent. The use of technology also helps in correcting the errors and

making the assignment appropriate.

Provision of Resources – The provision of resources includes, providing the children with the

basic materials, technology, infrastructure, civic amenities and other sources that are used to

promote learning. In secondary school, in order to achieve the academic goals, there are

numerous resources that the individuals need, these include, technology, books, reading

materials, stationary items, uniforms, bags and even private tuitions at home, in case they find

some subject areas difficult and need assistance. The provision of resources mainly depends

upon the financial position of the parents. When they are financially strong, they can obtain all
the needed resources. On the other hand, families belonging to deprived, marginalized and socio-

economically backward sections of the society are unable to provide the resources and students

need to depend upon other means to accomplish their tasks.

Technology has undergone significant progression that benefits many, including

educational stakeholders. Smartphones, the Internet-enabled devices incorporated with computer

applications and software, are among the eminent breakthroughs in this latest century. A lot of

research has been done to investigate students’ preparedness to incorporate learning with mobile

devices, some of which are Malaysian based by Abas, Peng, and Mansor (2009), Hussin, Manap,

Amir, and Krish (2012) and Hamat, Embi, and Hassan (2013). Positively, the respondents in

their studies welcomed the integration of learning with mobile gadgets. Hussin et al. (2012)

researched student readiness for mobile learning in four aspects: basic, skill, psychological and

budget.

Conceptual Framework

Figure 1 shows the Research Paradigm of the proposed study. It includes the independent

variables namely, 1) Mother’s Educational Attainment, 2) Father’s Educational Attainment 3)

Capability to Connect to the Internet, 4) Mother’s Employment Status during the Pandemic, 5)

Father’s Employment Status During the Pandemic, 6) Availability of Instructional Support of

Parents, and 7) Availability of Learning Devices at Home. The dependent variable is the

Academic Performance of the Grade 11 students.

 INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE

The Profile of the respondents in terms of:

1. Mother’s Educational Attainment
a. Attended Higher Education (i.e.
with college degree and above)
b. Attended Basic Education (i.e.
primary to secondary level)
2. Father’s Educational Attainment
a. Attended Higher Education (i.e.
with college degree and above)
b. Attended Basic Education (i.e.
primary to secondary level)
3. Mother’s Employment Status during the
Pandemic Academic Performance of Grade 11
a. Employed Students for the First Quarter, School
b. Not Employed Year 2020-2021
4. Father’s Employment Status during the
Pandemic
a. Employed
b. Not employed
5. Capability to Connect to the Internet
a. Capable
b. Not capable
6. Availability of Instructional Support of
Parents
a. Available
b. Not available
7. Availability of Learning Devices
Available at Home
a. Available
b. Not available

Figure 1

Research Paradigm

Statement of the Problem

 This study was conducted to determine the factors that affect the academic and to test the

degree of relationship between these factors and the academic performance in the New Normal

of the Grade-11 students of Pulot National High School.

Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1. Mother’s Educational attainment;

1.2. Father’s Educational attainment;

1.3. Mother’s Employment status during the Pandemic;

1.4. Father’s Employment status during the Pandemic;

1.5. Internet connectivity;

1.6. Availability of instructional support of parents; and

1.7. Availability of learning materials at home?

2. What is the level of academic performance of the Grade 11 students?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the educational attainment of

parents and the academic performance of their child/children?

4. Is there a significant relationship between the employment status of parents

and the academic performance of their child/children?

5. Is there a significant relationship between internet connectivity and the

academic performance of the respondents?

6. Is there a significant relationship between the availability of instructional

support of parents and the academic performance of their child/children?

7. Is there a significant relationship between the availability of learning materials

at home and the academic performance of the respondents?

 8.

Research Hypotheses

Based on the statement of the problems, the researchers presented the following for

testing and analysis:

1. There is no significant relationship between the educational attainment of parents and the

academic performance of the Grade 11 students.

2. There is no significant relationship between the employment status of parents and the

academic performance of the Grade 11 students.

3. There is no significant relationship between internet connectivity and the academic

performance of the Grade 11 students.

4. There is no significant relationship between the instructional support of parents and the

academic performance of the Grade 11 students.

5. There is no significant relationship between the availability of learning devices at home

and the academic performance of the Grade 11 students.

Scope and Delimitation

The study focused on the profile of thirty-six (36) Grade-11 Humanities and Social

Sciences (HUMSS) and Technical Vocational and Livelihood (TVL) students of Pulot National

High School, School Year 2020-2021. The study aimed to determine the profile of the

respondents in terms of educational attainment of parents, employment status of parents, internet

connectivity, availability of instructional support of parents; and availability of learning materials

at home and the determine whether these factors affect the academic performance of the
respondents. Data were delimited on the response of the respondents in the Learner Enrollment

Survey Form (LESF).

There may be other factors affecting the academic performance of the respondents, but

these factors were not covered in the study. The findings of this study were limited only to the

response given by the respondents in their LESF.

Significance of the Study

The researchers believe that the result of this study would be beneficial to everybody

whose concern would be on the improvement of teaching-learning process. Specifically, the

significance of the study is directed to:

Pulot National High School (PNHS) Senior High School Teaching Staff. That it may

help the teaching staff to determine the appropriate teaching strategies in congruence to the

students’ needs. It will also help the teaching staff in the formulation of policies and

interventions for better teaching and learning process especially in the New Normal of education.

The parents and the participants. That it may help in the determination of the factors

that could affect the academic performance and in turn, helps them to come up with the

necessary interventions or adjustments.

The future researchers. The findings of the study will support further researchers

concerning the factors that affects the academic performance of the students in the New Normal.

It can be their basis and pattern that can help them with their research for it to have strong

foundation.
 Chapter 2

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This section describes the research process containing the comprehensive description of

the research design, research locale, research instruments, data gathering and processing

procedures, and the statistical tools and treatments utilized by the researchers.

Research Design

In facilitating the gathering of data, methods were devised depending on the purpose and

scope for which the study was undertaken. The researchers adopted the descriptive-correlational

research design. It was used to identify whether a relationship exist between two or more

variables. It comprised of collecting data to determine whether, and to what extent, a relationship

exists between two or more quantifiable variables. In addition, it utilized numerical data to

explore relationships between two or more variables. The degree of relationship was expressed in

terms of a coefficient of correlation. If the relationship exists between variables, it implies that

scores on one variable were associated with or vary with the scores on another variable. The

exploration of relationship between variables provided insight into the nature of the variables

themselves as well as an understanding of their relationships. If the relationships were substantial

and consistent, the researchers would enable to make predictions about the variables.

In this study, the Learner’s Enrolment Survey Form (LESF) of the 36 identified Grade 11

students were utilized in identifying the factors that may affect the academic performances of the

participants. The profile of the participants was correlated with their academic performance for
the first quarter of the school year. It was designed to measure the degree of relationship that

exists between their profiles (identified factors) and their academic performance in the first

quarter.

Locale of the Study

This study was focused on 36 students (18 Humanities and Social Sciences students, and

another 18 students from the Technical-Vocational-Livelihood). According to the latest number

of enrollees for the school year, there were 36 enrolled Grade-11 students.

Statistical Treatment of Data

The data gathered from the Learner Enrolment Survey Form (LESF) and the

Performances of the participants were organized, tabulated and analyzed using appropriate

statistical treatments such as Frequency Distribution, Mean, and Pearson Product Moment

Coefficient of Correlation.

Frequency Distribution and Percentage was applied to describe the demographics of

the participants in terms of the identified factors which include: (1) mother’s educational

attainment, (2) father’s educational attainment, (3) capability to connect to the internet, (4)

employment status of mother during the pandemic, (5) employment status of father during the

pandemic, (6) Availability of Instructional Support at home, and (7) availability of learning

devices at home.

Mean was used to determine the academic performance of the Grade 11 students of Pulot

National High School during the First Quarter of School Year 2020-2021.

The following formula was used to calculate the mean.

Ʃx
x́=
n
 where x́ (read as ‘x bar’) is the mean of the set of x values,

Ʃx is the sum of all the x values, and

n is the number of x value

The Pearson Product Moment Coefficient of Correlation was used to determine the

index of relationship between the independent and the dependent variables:

x – independent variables

y – dependent variables

The following formula was used:

r=
∑ ( x - x́ ) ( y - ý )
√ ∑ ( x - x́ )2 Σ ( y - ý )2

Strength or degree of the correlation

Range of r Degree of Relationship

± 1.0 Perfect
±0.81 to ±0.99 High, to Very High
±0.61 to ±0.80 Marked, Substantial
±0.41 to ±0.60 Moderate
±0.21 to ±0.40 Define but small
±0.01 to ±0.20 Almost negligible
0.00 No relationship

To interpret the results of the null hypothesis for their acceptance or rejection, the 0.05 level of

significance was considered the criterion point of reference. The significant relationship was based on the

p-value of the value of certain test and was compared with the 0.05 level of significance. In this case, if

the p-value is less than 0.05, then the null hypothesis is rejected.

Chapter 3
 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents all the data gathered in the study, it was organized, tabulated and were

subjected to appropriate statistical analysis which formed the basis of the answers to the questions raised

in this study.

In order to describe the demographics of the participants in terms of educational attainments

of their parents, the researchers find it important to generate a database on their profile and of their

parents.

9. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of

9.1. Mother’s educational attainment?

Table 1: Mother’s Educational Attainment

n=36
  FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Higher Educational Bachelor's degree or more 4 11.11
Attainment Some college 5 13.89
Lower Educational High school diploma 18 50.00
Attainment Less than high school 9 25.00
Total 36 100

Table 1 shows that most mothers have attained lower educational level. As gleaned on the table,

18 (50%) have finished High school and 9 (25%) have attended below High School level. These

comprised the 75% of the population. On the other hand, 4 (11.11%) have bachelor’s degree or more and

5 (13.89%) have attended but not finished a degree in college. These comprised the 25% of the

population.

9.2. Father’s educational attainment?

Table 2: Father’s Educational Attainment

n=36
  FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Higher Bachelor's degree or more 2 5.56
Educational 4 11.11
Attainment Some college
Lower High school diploma 17 47.22
Educational 13 36.11
Attainment Less than high school
Total 36 100
 Table 2 shows that majority of the fathers have lower educational attainment. As shown in the

table, 17 (47.22%) have finished high school and 13 (36.11%) have attended high school level and below.

These comprised the 83.33% of the population. On the other hand, 2 (5.56%) have bachelor’s degree or

more and 4 (16.67%) have attended but not finished a degree in college. These comprised the 16.67% of

the population.

9.3. Capability to connect to the internet?

Table 3: Capability to Connect to the Internet
n=36
  FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Capable (Yes) 11 30.56
Not Capable (No) 25 69.44
Total 36 100.00

Based on the table, 11 (30.56%) participants were capable to connect to the Internet while
25 (69.44%) were not capable of connecting to the Internet. This would tell that most of the
participants have difficulty in accessing the Internet. This can be attributed to poor signal
connections and the type of handsets they have.

9.4. Mother’s employment status during the pandemic?

Table 4: Mother’s Employment Status During the Pandemic
n=36
  FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Employed 25 69.44
Not Employed 11 30.56
Total 36 100.00

Table 4 shows the Mother’s Employment Status During the Pandemic. The data
shows that most of the mother was employed with a frequency of 25. On the other hand,
there are 11(30.56%) who were not employed.

9.5. Father’s employment status during the pandemic?

Table 5: Father’s Employment Status During the Pandemic
n=36
  FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
 Employed 30 83.33
Not Employed 6 16.67
Total 36 100.00

Table 5 shows that there are 30(83.33%) fathers who were employed during the
pandemic. Also, data shows that few (16.67%) of the fathers were not employed, with a
frequency of 6.

9.6. Availability of instructional support at home?

Table 6: Availability of Instructional Support at Home
n=36
  FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Available (Yes) 29 80.56
Not available (No) 7 19.44
Total 36 100.00

Table 6 shows the availability of Instructional Support from parent/guardian at

home. It shows that 80.56 percent with a frequency of 29 were given assistance by their
parent/guardian at their home. On the other hand, 7(19.44%) respondents were not.

9.7. Availability of learning devices at home?

Table 7: Availability of Learning Devices at Home
n=36
  FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Available (yes) 32 88.89
Not available (no) 4 11.11
Total 36 100.00

Table 7 shows the availability of Learning devices at Home. The data shows

that most of the student, 32(88.89%) has learning devices at home. On the other hand, there

are only 4(11.11%) who doesn’t have learning devices.

10. What is the Level of the Academic Performance of Grade 11 Students?

Table 8: Performance Level of Grade 11 students for

the First Quarter of School Year 2020-2021
 Level Numerical Rating f %
Outstanding 90-100 0 0
Very Satisfactory 85-89 17 47.22
satisfactory 80-84 19 52.77
Fairly satisfactory 75-79 0 0
Did not meet Below 75 0 0

expectation
Average: 84

Table 8 reveals the academic performance of grade 11 students, across all the subjects offered

during the first semester, School Year 2020-2021. It shows that 17 or 47.22 percent of the respondents

who had a Very Satisfactory performance. On the other hand, 19 or 52.77 percent of them had a

satisfactory performance.

Generally, the respondents’ average was 84 percent which means that they had a satisfactory

performance. The data show that the respondent’s performance in all the subjects needs to be improved.

Problems about academic learning in this new normal need to be addressed to improved students’

performance. Majority of the respondents had reasonably satisfactory performance, which is not a good

sign when it comes to the teaching-learning process, is concerned. This implies that students learned at a

minimal level

3. Is there a significant relationship between the mother’s educational attainment and the academic

performance of their child/children?

The Pearson Product Moment Coefficient of Correlation was used to determine the index of

relationship between the independent and the dependent variables:

Formula:

r=
∑ ( x - x́ ) ( y - ý )
√ ∑ ( x - x́ )2 Σ ( y - ý )2
 This part reveals the results on the test of a significant relationship between identified factors

associated with the academic performance and academic performance of the respondents. It shows the

details of the results, which used Pearson r in testing the relationship between the variables.

1. Mother’s Educational Attainment

Mother’s Educational
Attainment (x) Academic (x-) (y-) (x-) (y-) (x-)2 (y-)2
(1) – Lower Performance (y)
(2) - Higher
2 84 0.75 0 0 0.5625 0
1 84 -0.25 0 0 0.0625 0
1 85 -0.25 1.00 -0.25 0.0625 1
1 85 -0.25 1 -0.25 0.0625 1
1 84 -0.25 0 0 0.0625 0
1 82 -0.25 -2 0.5 0.0625 4
2 83 0.75 -1 -0.75 0.5625 1
1 86 -0.25 2 -0.5 0.0625 4
1 86 -0.25 2 -0.5 0.0625 4
1 84 -0.25 0 0 0.0625 0
1 84 -0.25 0 0 0.0625 0
2 84 0.75 0 0 0.5625 0
1 82 -0.25 -2 0.5 0.0625 4
1 84 -0.25 0 0 0.0625 0
2 87 0.75 3 2.25 0.5625 9
1 89 -0.25 5 -1.25 0.0625 25
1 86 -0.25 2 -0.5 0.0625 4
1 85 -0.25 1 -0.25 0.0625 1
2 84 0.75 0 0 0.5625 0
1 85 -0.25 1 -0.25 0.0625 1
1 86 -0.25 2 -0.5 0.0625 4
2 82 0.75 -2 -1.5 0.5625 4
2 81 0.75 -3 -2.25 0.5625 9
1 81 -0.25 -3 0.75 0.0625 9
2 84 0.75 0 0 0.5625 0
1 87 -0.25 3 -0.75 0.0625 9
1 86 -0.25 2 -0.5 0.0625 4
1 85 -0.25 1 -0.25 0.0625 1
1 82 -0.25 -2 0.5 0.0625 4
1 83 -0.25 -1 0.25 0.0625 1
1 82 -0.25 -2 0.5 0.0625 4
1 87 -0.25 3 -0.75 0.0625 9
2 85 0.75 1 0.75 0.5625 1
1 86 -0.25 2 -0.5 0.0625 4
1 84 -0.25 0 0 0.0625 0
 1 87 -0.25 3 -0.75 0.0625 9
Sum = Sum = Sum =
Mean = 1.25 Mean = 84
-6.25 6.75 131
Solution:

r=
∑ ( x - x́ ) ( y - ý ) ¿ -6.25 =
-6.25
=
-6.25
r=-0.21
√∑ ( x - x́ ) Σ ( y - ý ) √(6.75)(131) √(884.25) 29.74
2 2

Variable n Pearson r tabular-value decision Remarks

a. Mother's 36 -0.21 0.35 Accept H0 No significant
Educational relationship
Attainment
** Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

There is negative and defined but small correlation between the Mother's Educational Attainment

and the academic performance of the respondents with the computed r value of -0.296. The computed r

value is less than the tabular-value of 0.35 means that the null hypothesis is accepted. Thus, there is no

significant relationship between Mother's Educational Attainment and Academic Performance of the

Respondents.

2. Father’s Educational Attainment

Father’s
Educational Academic
Attainment (x) Performanc (x-) (y-) (x-) (y-) (x-)2 (y-)2
(2-Higher e (y)
1-Lower)
1 84 -0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
2 84 0.83 0 0 0.6889 0
1 85 -0.17 1 -0.17 0.0289 1
1 85 -0.17 1 -0.17 0.0289 1
1 84 -0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 82 -0.17 -2 0.34 0.0289 4
2 83 0.83 -1 -0.83 0.6889 1
1 86 -0.17 2 -0.34 0.0289 4
1 86 -0.17 2 -0.34 0.0289 4
1 84 -0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 84 -0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 84 -0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
2 82 0.83 -2 -1.66 0.6889 4
1 84 -0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 87 -0.17 3 -0.51 0.0289 9
1 89 -0.17 5 -0.85 0.0289 25
 1 86 -0.17 2 -0.34 0.0289 4
1 85 -0.17 1 -0.17 0.0289 1
1 84 -0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
2 85 0.83 1 0.83 0.6889 1
1 86 -0.17 2 -0.34 0.0289 4
1 82 -0.17 -2 0.34 0.0289 4
1 81 -0.17 -3 0.51 0.0289 9
1 81 -0.17 -3 0.51 0.0289 9
1 84 -0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 87 -0.17 3 -0.51 0.0289 9
1 86 -0.17 2 -0.34 0.0289 4
1 85 -0.17 1 -0.17 0.0289 1
1 82 -0.17 -2 0.34 0.0289 4
2 83 0.83 -1 -0.83 0.6889 1
1 82 -0.17 -2 0.34 0.0289 4
1 87 -0.17 3 -0.51 0.0289 9
1 85 -0.17 1 -0.17 0.0289 1
1 86 -0.17 2 -0.34 0.0289 4
2 84 0.83 0 0 0.6889 0
1 87 -0.17 3 -0.51 0.0289 9
Sum = Sum =
Mean = 1.17 Mean = 84 Sum = 131
-5.89 5.0004
Solution:

r=
∑ ( x - x́ ) ( y - ý ) ¿ -5.89 =
-5.89
=
-5.89
r=-0.227
√∑ ( x - x́ ) Σ ( y - ý ) √(5)(131) √(655) 25.59
2 2

Variables n Pearson r tabular- decision Remarks

value
b. Father's 36 -0.227 0.35 Accept H0 No
Educational significant
Attainment relationship
** Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

There is a defined but small and negative relationship between the Father's Educational

Attainment and respondents’ Academic Performance with a computed r value of -0.227. The r value is

less than the tabular-value of 0.35 means that the null hypothesis is accepted. Thus, there is no significant

relationship between Father's Educational Attainment and Academic Performance of the Respondents.

3. Capability to connect to the Internet

 Capability to
Connect to the Academic
Internet (x) Performance (x-) (y-) (x-) (y-) (x-)2 (y-)2
(0=Not capable; (y)
1=capable)
0 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
1 84 0.69 0 0 0.4761 0
0 85 0.31 1 0.31 0.0961 1
0 85 0.31 1 0.31 0.0961 1
1 84 0.69 0 0 0.4761 0
0 82 0.31 -2 -0.62 0.0961 4
0 83 0.31 -1 -0.31 0.0961 1
0 86 0.31 2 0.62 0.0961 4
0 86 0.31 2 0.62 0.0961 4
1 84 0.69 0 0 0.4761 0
0 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
0 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
1 82 0.69 -2 -1.38 0.4761 4
0 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
0 87 0.31 3 0.93 0.0961 9
1 89 0.69 5 3.45 0.4761 25
0 86 0.31 2 0.62 0.0961 4
1 85 0.69 1 0.69 0.4761 1
0 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
1 85 0.69 1 0.69 0.4761 1
0 86 0.31 2 0.62 0.0961 4
0 82 0.31 -2 -0.62 0.0961 4
0 81 0.31 -3 -0.93 0.0961 9
1 81 0.69 -3 -2.07 0.4761 9
0 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
0 87 0.31 3 0.93 0.0961 9
0 86 0.31 2 0.62 0.0961 4
0 85 0.31 1 0.31 0.0961 1
1 82 0.69 -2 -1.38 0.4761 4
1 83 0.69 -1 -0.69 0.4761 1
0 82 0.31 -2 -0.62 0.0961 4
0 87 0.31 3 0.93 0.0961 9
0 85 0.31 1 0.31 0.0961 1
1 86 0.69 2 1.38 0.4761 4
0 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
0 87 0.31 3 0.93 0.0961 9
Sum = Sum =
Mean = 0.31 Mean = 84 Sum = 5.65
7.6396 131
Solution:
r=
∑ ( x - x́ ) ( y - ý ) ¿ -5.65 =
-5.65
=
-5.65
r=-0.186
√∑ ( x - x́ ) Σ ( y - ý ) √( 7.64 )(131) √(1 000.84 ) 31.64
2 2

Variables n Pearson r tabular- decision Remarks

value
c. Capability to 36 -0.186 0.35 Accept H0 No
Connect to the significant
Internet relationship
** Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

The table shows that there is a defined but small and negative relationship between the

Capability to Connect to the Internet and respondents’ Academic Performance with a computed r

value of -0.186. The r value is less than the tabular-value of 0.35 means that the null hypothesis

is accepted. Thus, there is no significant relation-ship between Mother's Educational Attainment

and Academic Performance of the Respondents.

4. Mother’s Employment Status

Mother's employment
Academic
status (x)
Performance (x-) (y-) (x-) (y-) (x-)2 (y-)2
(0=not employed;
(y)
1=employed)
1 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
1 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
0 85 -0.69 1 -0.69 0.4761 1
1 85 0.31 1 0.31 0.0961 1
1 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
1 82 0.31 -2 -0.62 0.0961 4
1 83 0.31 -1 -0.31 0.0961 1
0 86 -0.69 2 -1.38 0.4761 4
1 86 0.31 2 0.62 0.0961 4
1 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
0 84 -0.69 0 0 0.4761 0
1 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
0 82 -0.69 -2 1.38 0.4761 4
0 84 -0.69 0 0 0.4761 0
0 87 -0.69 3 -2.07 0.4761 9
1 89 0.31 5 1.55 0.0961 25
1 86 0.31 2 0.62 0.0961 4
0 85 -0.69 1 -0.69 0.4761 1
0 84 -0.69 0 0 0.4761 0
 1 85 0.31 1 0.31 0.0961 1
1 86 0.31 2 0.62 0.0961 4
0 82 -0.69 -2 1.38 0.4761 4
1 81 0.31 -3 -0.93 0.0961 9
1 81 0.31 -3 -0.93 0.0961 9
0 84 -0.69 0 0 0.4761 0
1 87 0.31 3 0.93 0.0961 9
1 86 0.31 2 0.62 0.0961 4
1 85 0.31 1 0.31 0.0961 1
1 82 0.31 -2 -0.62 0.0961 4
0 83 -0.69 -1 0.69 0.4761 1
1 82 0.31 -2 -0.62 0.0961 4
1 87 0.31 3 0.93 0.0961 9
1 85 0.31 1 0.31 0.0961 1
1 86 0.31 2 0.62 0.0961 4
1 84 0.31 0 0 0.0961 0
1 87 0.31 3 0.93 0.0961 9
Sum = Sum =
Mean = 0.69 Sum = 3.27
7.6396 131
Solution:

r=
∑ ( x - x́ ) ( y - ý ) ¿ 3.27 =
3.27
=
3.27
r=-0.10
√∑ ( x - x́ ) Σ ( y - ý ) √( 7.64 )(131) √(1 000.84 ) 31.64
2 2

Variables n Pearson r tabular- decision Remarks

value
d. Employment 36 0.10 0.35 Accept H0 No
Status of Mother significant
During the relationship
Pandemic
** Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

The table shows that there is almost negligible positive relationship between the

Employment Status of Mother During the Pandemic and respondents’ Academic Performance

with a computed r value of 0.10. The r value is less than the tabular-value of 0.35 means that the

null hypothesis is accepted. Thus, there is no significant relation-ship between Employment

Status of Mother During the Pandemic and Academic Performance of the Respondents.

5. Father’s Employment Status during the pandemic

Father's Academic
(x-) (y-) (x-)(y-) (x-)2 (y-)2
employment Performance
 status (x)
(0=unemployed; (y)
1= employed)
1 84 0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
0 84 -0.83 0 0 0.6889 0
1 85 0.17 1 0.17 0.0289 1
1 85 0.17 1 0.17 0.0289 1
1 84 0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 82 0.17 -2 -0.34 0.0289 4
1 83 0.17 -1 -0.17 0.0289 1
1 86 0.17 2 0.34 0.0289 4
0 86 -0.83 2 -1.66 0.6889 4
1 84 0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 84 0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 84 0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 82 0.17 -2 -0.34 0.0289 4
1 84 0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 87 0.17 3 0.51 0.0289 9
1 89 0.17 5 0.85 0.0289 25
0 86 -0.83 2 -1.66 0.6889 4
1 85 0.17 1 0.17 0.0289 1
1 84 0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 85 0.17 1 0.17 0.0289 1
0 86 -0.83 2 -1.66 0.6889 4
1 82 0.17 -2 -0.34 0.0289 4
1 81 0.17 -3 -0.51 0.0289 9
1 81 0.17 -3 -0.51 0.0289 9
1 84 0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
0 87 -0.83 3 -2.49 0.6889 9
1 86 0.17 2 0.34 0.0289 4
0 85 -0.83 1 -0.83 0.6889 1
1 82 0.17 -2 -0.34 0.0289 4
1 83 0.17 -1 -0.17 0.0289 1
1 82 0.17 -2 -0.34 0.0289 4
1 87 0.17 3 0.51 0.0289 9
1 85 0.17 1 0.17 0.0289 1
1 86 0.17 2 0.34 0.0289 4
1 84 0.17 0 0 0.0289 0
1 87 0.17 3 0.51 0.0289 9
Sum = Sum = Sum =
Mean = 0.83 Mean = 84
-7.11 5.0004 131
Solution:

r=
∑ ( x - x́ ) ( y - ý ) ¿ - 7.11 =
- 7.11
=
-7.11
r=-0.277
√∑ ( x - x́ ) Σ ( y - ý ) √(5.0004)(131) √(655.05) 25.59
2 2
 Variables n Pearson r tabular- decision Remarks
value
e. Employment 36 -0.277 0.35 Accept H0 No
Status of Father significant
During the relationship
Pandemic
** Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

There is a negative relationship between the Employment Status of Father During the

Pandemic and the respondents’ Academic Performance. The computed r (-0.277) is defined but

small according to the degree of correlation. Since r = -0.277 was less than the tabular value of

0.35, the null hypothesis is therefore accepted. It means that there is no significant relationship

between Employment Status of Father During the Pandemic and respondents’ Academic

Performance.

6. Availability of Instructional Support

Availability of
Instructional
Academic
Support (x)
Performance (x-) (y-) (x-) (y-) (x-)2 (y-)2
(0= not
(y)
available;
1= available)
1 84 0.19 0 0 0.0361 0
0 84 -0.81 0 0 0.6561 0
1 85 0.19 1 0.19 0.0361 1
1 85 0.19 1 0.19 0.0361 1
0 84 -0.81 0 0 0.6561 0
1 82 0.19 -2 -0.38 0.0361 4
1 83 0.19 -1 -0.19 0.0361 1
1 86 0.19 2 0.38 0.0361 4
1 86 0.19 2 0.38 0.0361 4
0 84 -0.81 0 0 0.6561 0
1 84 0.19 0 0 0.0361 0
1 84 0.19 0 0 0.0361 0
0 82 -0.81 -2 1.62 0.6561 4
1 84 0.19 0 0 0.0361 0
1 87 0.19 3 0.57 0.0361 9
0 89 -0.81 5 -4.05 0.6561 25
1 86 0.19 2 0.38 0.0361 4
1 85 0.19 1 0.19 0.0361 1
 1 84 0.19 0 0 0.0361 0
1 85 0.19 1 0.19 0.0361 1
1 86 0.19 2 0.38 0.0361 4
1 82 0.19 -2 -0.38 0.0361 4
0 81 -0.81 -3 2.43 0.6561 9
1 81 0.19 -3 -0.57 0.0361 9
1 84 0.19 0 0 0.0361 0
1 87 0.19 3 0.57 0.0361 9
1 86 0.19 2 0.38 0.0361 4
1 85 0.19 1 0.19 0.0361 1
0 82 -0.81 -2 1.62 0.6561 4
1 83 0.19 -1 -0.19 0.0361 1
1 82 0.19 -2 -0.38 0.0361 4
1 87 0.19 3 0.57 0.0361 9
1 85 0.19 1 0.19 0.0361 1
1 86 0.19 2 0.38 0.0361 4
1 84 0.19 0 0 0.0361 0
1 87 0.19 3 0.57 0.0361 9
Sum= Sum =
Mean = 0.81 Mean = 84 Sum = 5.23
5.6396 131
Solution:

r=
∑ ( x - x́ ) ( y - ý ) ¿ 5.23 =
5.23
=
5.23
r=-0.192
√∑ ( x - x́ ) Σ ( y - ý ) √(5.64)(131) √(738.84) 27.18
2 2

Variables n Pearson r tabular- decision Remarks

value
f. Availability of 36 0.192 0.35 Accept H0 No
Instructional significant
Support at Home relationship
** Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

There is a positive relationship between the Availability of Instructional Support at Home

and the respondents’ Academic Performance. The computed r (0.192) is almost negligible

correlation. Since r = 0.92 was less than the tabular value of 0.35, the null hypothesis is therefore

accepted. It means that there is no significant relationship between the Availability of

Instructional Support at Home and respondents’ Academic Performance.

7. Availability of Learning Devices at Home

Availability of Academic (x-) (y-) (x-) *(y- (x-)2 (y-)2

 Learning Performance
Devices(x) (y)
(0= not available; )
1= available)

1 84 0.11 0 0 0.0121 0
1 84 0.11 0 0 0.0121 0
1 85 0.11 1 0.11 0.0121 1
1 85 0.11 1 0.11 0.0121 1
1 84 0.11 0 0 0.0121 0
1 82 0.11 -2 -0.22 0.0121 4
0 83 -0.89 -1 0.89 0.7921 1
1 86 0.11 2 0.22 0.0121 4
1 86 0.11 2 0.22 0.0121 4
1 84 0.11 0 0 0.0121 0
1 84 0.11 0 0 0.0121 0
1 84 0.11 0 0 0.0121 0
1 82 0.11 -2 -0.22 0.0121 4
1 84 0.11 0 0 0.0121 0
1 87 0.11 3 0.33 0.0121 9
1 89 0.11 5 0.55 0.0121 25
1 86 0.11 2 0.22 0.0121 4
1 85 0.11 1 0.11 0.0121 1
0 84 -0.89 0 0 0.7921 0
1 85 0.11 1 0.11 0.0121 1
1 86 0.11 2 0.22 0.0121 4
1 82 0.11 -2 -0.22 0.0121 4
1 81 0.11 -3 -0.33 0.0121 9
1 81 0.11 -3 -0.33 0.0121 9
1 84 0.11 0 0 0.0121 0
1 87 0.11 3 0.33 0.0121 9
0 86 -0.89 2 -1.78 0.7921 4
1 85 0.11 1 0.11 0.0121 1
1 82 0.11 -2 -0.22 0.0121 4
1 83 0.11 -1 -0.11 0.0121 1
1 82 0.11 -2 -0.22 0.0121 4
1 87 0.11 3 0.33 0.0121 9
1 85 0.11 1 0.11 0.0121 1
1 86 0.11 2 0.22 0.0121 4
1 84 0.11 0 0 0.0121 0
0 87 -0.89 3 -2.67 0.7921 9
0.89 84 -2.13 3.5556 131
solution

r=
∑ ( x− x́ ) ( y− ý ) ¿
−2.13
¿
−2.13
¿
−2.13
r¿−0.098
√ ∑ ( x−x́ )2 Σ ( y− ý )2 √(3.56¿)(131)√¿ 466.36 21.6
 Variables n Pearson r tabular-value decision Remarks
g. Availability of 36 -0.098 0.35 Accept H0 No significant
Learning Devices at relationship
Home
X

There is a negative relationship between the Availability of Learning Devices at Home

and the respondents’ Academic Performance. The computed r (-0.098) is almost negligible

correlation. Since r = -0.098 was less than the tabular value of 0.35, the null hypothesis is

therefore accepted. It means that there is no significant relationship between the Availability of

Learning Devices at Home and respondents’ Academic Performance.