Final Manuscript Edited Final

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE SATISFACTION LEVEL AND PARTICIPATION
OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ONLINE LEARNING
A Research Report Presented to
The Faculty of the Senior High School Department
Central Philippine University
Iloilo City
In partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the subject
Research Report
By
Al Thea Alpis Ryan Deferia
Ellian John Blance Iiamay Lyn Diestro
Jan Matthew Calvo Nj Farnazo
Janiela Marie Castaño Ned Julhean Joaquin
Angel Lou Rala
May, 2021
Senior High School
Jaro, Iloilo City
i
APPROVAL SHEET
A Research Report
For Research Report Subject
By
Al Thea Alpis, Ellian John Blance, Jan Matthew Calvo, Janiela Marie Castaño, Ryan
Deferia, Iiamay Lyn Diestro, Nj Farnazo, Ned Julhean Joaquin, Angel Lou Rala
Approved by the Research Oral Examination Committee:
_________________________________________________
Ella Lee Galve Adviser
_________________________________________________
Thea Lyn Salaya Member
_________________________________________________
Jaime Mercado III Member
_________________________________________________
Shena Jean Arcelo Member
______________________________________
EDGAR A. ERIMAN
Principal/ SHS
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The researchers would like to express their heartfelt gratitude and appreciation to
the following persons whose valuable assistance and support paved the way to make
this research paper possible.
Ms. Ella Lee Galve, research adviser, for the dedicated guidance, moral support,
encouragement, and wisdom on how to further improve our study;
Mrs. Ronamae Abogadil, research adviser, for the relentless support and
valuable critique and advice for the betterment of our study;
Mrs. Ma. Ligaya Caniel, statistician, for analyzing our data and for providing a
solid statistical support for our study;
Ms. Ma. Cristine Joy Dureza, grammarian, for making note of any ungrammatical
statements in our study;
Engr. Rex Bieren Deferia, research validator, for providing an expert opinion and
for strengthening the validity of our research paper;
Ms. Thea Lyn Salaya, Mr. Jaime Mercado III, and Ms. Shena Jean Arcelon,
panel members, for giving an assessment and for providing valuable advice for our
study.
Prof. Edgar Eriman, Principal, SHS, for his continuous support through
responding to the request of the researchers in the process of data gathering.
Parents of the researchers, for their constant motivation, encouragement, and
support which helped the researchers accomplish this research study.
iii
Above all, this study would not be possible without the grace of the Almighty
God. His presence helped the researchers pursue this study up to the last chapter.
Thus, this research study is humbly offered to Him.
Al Thea Alpis
Ellian John Blance
Jan Matthew Calvo
Janiela Marie Castaño
Ryan Deferia
Iiamay Lyn Diestro
Nj Farnazo
Ned Julhean Joaquin
Angel Lou Rala
Researchers
iv
Table of Contents
PAGE
TITLE PAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
APPROVAL SHEET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background and Rationale of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Statement of the Problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Research Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Theoretical Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Conceptual Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Significance of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Scope and Delimitation of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
II. REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Conceptual Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Related Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Synthesis of the Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
III. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . 28
Research Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Population and Sampling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Research Instrument. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
v
Validity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
.
Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
.
Ethical Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Data 31
Collection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Data Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Student Satisfaction in Online Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Student Participation in Online Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you
attend your Online Class regularly? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Are you
interested in the daily discussions in Online Learning? . . . . 41
Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: From your
own perspective, do you absorb all the lessons in Online

43
Learning? . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you
understand lessons that involve problem-solving in Online

45
Learning? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you think
that it is easy to pass the subject given that it is an online

47
learning procedure? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you think
that this online learning modality prepares you enough for

49
the subjects at the college level? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
vi
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 52
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Major Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Appendix A (Letter to the Research 75
Validator ) . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix B (Letter to the Principal) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Appendix C (Letter to the Secretary) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Appendix D (Letter to the Respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Appendix E (Letter to the Panel Member 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Appendix F (Letter to the Panel Member 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Appendix G (Letter to the Panel Member 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Appendix H (Reliability Test Results) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Appendix I (Research 88
Questionnaire) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix J (Certification for Plagiarism 90
Checking) . . . . . . . .
Appendix K (Tables) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
vii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1 Student Satisfaction in Online Learning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2 Student Participation in Online Learning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3 Student Participation on Student Satisfaction. . . . . . . . . . . 40
4 Student Participation on Student Satisfaction:
Are you interested in the daily discussions in Online
Learning? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
From your own perspective, do you absorb all the lessons
in Online Learning? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Do you understand lessons that involve problem-solving in
Online Learning? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
7 Student Participation on Student Satisfaction :
Do you think that it is easy to pass the subject given that it
is an online learning procedure? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Do you think that this online learning modality prepares
you enough for the subjects at the college level? . . . . . . . . 50
LIST OF FIGURE
FIGURE PAGE
1 Assumed flow of relationship among variables of the study 7
viii
By:
Al Thea Alpis, Ellian John Blance, Jan Matthew Calvo, Janiela Marie Castaño,
Ryan Deferia, Iiamay Lyn Diestro, Nj Farnazo,
Ned Julhean Joaquin, Angel Lou Rala
ix
ABSTRACT
This study aimed to determine the relationship between Senior High School
students’ satisfaction level and participation in online learning. A total of 324
respondents from the Senior High School department of Central Philippine University
were included in the after-only survey using an online-administered questionnaire. The
data collected from the respondents were analyzed through statistical mean to rule the
descriptive data about the variables and Gamma analyses to determine their
relationship. Results have shown that students are satisfied and are highly participating
in online learning. Moreover, there is a significant relationship between the satisfaction
and participation of students in online learning. Students’ attendance, interest,
comprehension, and perceived service quality also affects their satisfaction with online
learning.
x
CHAPTER I
Introduction
This chapter deals with the background and rationale of the study, the objectives,
hypotheses, theoretical and conceptual framework, and definition of terms, significance
of the study, and the scope and delimitation of the study.
Background and Rationale of the Study
Due to Covid-19, the opening of classes was postponed, both public and private
schools were obliged to adapt to the new normal. The Department of Education allowed
private and non-DepEd schools to start their classes provided that they should strictly
use only distance learning modalities and that there are no face-to-face classes. The
Commission on Higher Education also prohibited face-to-face classroom interaction.
Central Philippine University as a private school, implemented online classes and used
online Learning Management System called the Canvas.
In times like this, the relationship between the satisfaction level of students in
online learning and their participation should be given attention given that the students
here in the Philippines are adapting to the new learning modality. According to Afrah and
Dhaqane (2016), student satisfaction reflects the productivity of all parts of the
instructive learning, as well as student satisfaction, is an essential marker of the quality
of teaching and learning encounters of an organization. Now that almost all of the
universities here in our country are implementing online classes, its influence to the
satisfaction level of students must be identified. In addition, the satisfaction level of
students and their participation can be affected by other factor.

2
Student satisfaction is a key indicator of how well students are learning (Kearsley
& Moore, 1996; Yildirim & Yukselturk, 2008). Investigating student satisfaction in online
environments is worthwhile, according to Gloeckner, Kaminski, and Switzer (2009),
because emerging technologies have changed the way students and instructors interact.
Online learners who are unable to manage their learning effectively are unlikely to be
satisfied, according to Artino (2007) and Puzziferro (2008). The types of technological
tools used during learning can also influence the level of interaction in online settings.
Furthermore, a lack of confidence in using information and communication technology
(ICT) during online learning can reduce student satisfaction and result in lower
performance rates (Belland et al, 2013).
According to the Community of Inquiry (Anderson, Archer, & Garrison, 2000),
which identifies social, cognitive, and teaching presence as central to the student
learning experience, Avgerinou, Fernandes, and Rubin (2013) discovered that learning
management system (LMS) features have a significant impact on perceptions of
community according to the inquiry framework. Learner-instructor interaction and
learner-content interaction, along with technology effectiveness, were found to be
reliable measures of students' positive perceptions by Kuo et al. (2013).
Learning convenience combined with the efficacy of e-learning resources
influenced satisfaction the most, according to Diteeyont, Keengwe, and Lawson-Body
(2012). Long (2011), Bordelon (2012), Allen and Seaman (2013) suggested that
satisfaction is an underlying predictor of success in a variety of learning environments,
especially online modalities. Satisfied students tend to be more involved, inspired, and
responsive; they contribute to a positive learning environment; and they perform better.
Students who are dissatisfied or ambivalent lead to settings in which teachers tend to
have a lot of trouble promoting positive learning circumstances.

3
In such situations, faculty members may struggle to connect with their students
and may mistakenly believe that the problem is mainly due to student frustration with
online learning (Dziuban et al., 2007). Since student satisfaction with online learning may
be context based, a precise configuration of student satisfaction with online learning is
proving elusive. Students only respond to items that they anticipate but are never
explicitly specified, or to what they have already assumed about the course, to convey
their level of satisfaction. When students experience dissonance with these
expectations, they can experience ambivalence, which is characterized by both positive
and negative feelings. Weigert (1991) and Long (1992) characterize these mixed
emotions (2011).
Student satisfaction is a measure of an institution's quality, according to Bodfish
and Bryant (2014) in their study titled "The Relationship of Student Satisfaction to Key
Indicators for Colleges and Universities." An institution will determine which services are
adequate and should be a priority for change by measuring the level of satisfaction of
students. They also added that conducting such study allows students to take part in the
school’s decision-making.
Past studies also shown that student satisfaction is complex, with several
components or variables that can influence it to varying degrees. In his research article
titled "Key Determinants of Student Satisfaction," Kevin Elliott (2002) stated that a
student's life is a network of interconnected events and experiences. Thus,
understanding it and its aspects require multi-dimensional consideration and thorough
evaluation.
It is in this light that this study was conducted. This study aimed to determine the
relationship between satisfaction level of students in online learning and their
participation, specifically senior high school students. Another reason why this study was
4
conducted was to find out the level of satisfaction of students in online learning as a
whole. Also, the researchers wanted to find out the students’ academic inclinations as a
whole.
This research paper aimed to know the relationship between the satisfaction
level and participation of students in online learning, specifically Senior High School
students of Central Philippine University.
Statement of the Problem
With the sudden change in teaching methodology due to the outbreak of 2019
Corona Virus, the life and learning process of student was greatly affected.
Teaching and learning solely depends on either Modular or Online Learning
procedures. This study focused on Online Learning Procedure and aimed to determine
the relationship between satisfaction level and participation of students in online
learning.
The following were the objectives of the study:
1. Determine the level of satisfaction of students in online learning as a
whole.
2. Determine the students’ participation in online learning as a whole.
3. Determine the relationship between students’ level of satisfaction and
participation in online learning.
Research Hypothesis
5
In view of the preceding problem, this null hypothesis was advanced to be tested:
Ho: There is no significant relationship between the students’ satisfaction and
their participation in online learning.
Theoretical Framework
According to the study “The Role of Interactivity in Student Satisfaction and
Persistence in Online Learning” by Croxton (2014), the results indicate that interactivity
is a significant component of online learners’ satisfaction and persistence, and that
preferences for online interactivity types differ depending on the type of learner.
Interaction between student and teacher was also found to be a primary factor in online
student satisfaction and persistence. In Social Cognitive Theory of Bandura (2001),
knowledge is developed as people participate in activities, gain feedback and participate
in other types of human interaction in public and social contexts. This theory purports
that people acquire knowledge and skills through a triadic reciprocal relationship
between person, behavior, and environment. In addition to motivating students, active
learning environments with high levels of interactivity between students and their
surroundings often promote overall learning achievement and satisfaction. Some
students foresee a lack of engagement in the online learning setting and perceive that
this is an expected trade-off of online learning experiences. According to the tenets of
social cognitive theory, however, a well-designed online course should not sacrifice
interaction, but instead provide an active-learning environment in which students are
highly engaged in the learning process through interactions with peers, instructors, and
content.
In 2002, Cotton, de Jonge, and Dollard, proposed a theory called Happy
Productive Theory. The happy-productive model compares students to employees, who

6
would perform better at work if they are happy with their working conditions: satisfaction
correlates with student productivity. Various evidence provided for this theory shows that
if psychosocial distress is high, it leads to a low satisfaction rate from the students. The
theory also suggests that students’ satisfaction can be determined by psychosocial
factors such as the school, the home environment, and interests of the students.
The Theory of Involvement by Astin (1984/1999) describes student involvement
as the amount of physical and psychological energy that the student devotes to the
academic experience. It explains what the student does and how the student acts that
determines and distinguishes involvement. It stresses the student's active participation in
the process of learning. The theory's core concepts are made up of three elements: the
student's "inputs," which include demographics, history, and previous experiences; the
student's "climate," which encompasses all of a student's college experiences; and the
"outcomes" which refer to a student's attributes, awareness, attitudes, values, and
actions.
The aforementioned theories, when combined and taken into the context of this
study, would provide an assumption: a student who is happy or satisfied with the
learning set-up would strive to participate and interact more, thus, allowing him or her to
develop more knowledge, and will eventually produce better academic results, and vice
versa.
Conceptual Framework
The focus of this study was to see if there was a correlation between student
satisfaction and their participation with online learning. This study's researchers also
7
wanted to know how satisfied students were with online learning as a whole. The
researchers also wanted to know about the students' participation as a whole.
Online learning is a new modality of learning for students nowadays and may
influence the satisfaction of students that can be a great factor for their participation and
academic performance. In an online learning procedure, students are participating in
their online classes. Students are also satisfied with their online learning. Moreover,
students who participate more shows great satisfaction with their online learning. Thus, a
highly participating student may achieve high satisfaction with online learning.
Independent Variables Dependent Variables
Participation of Level of Satisfaction

Students in Online of Students in
Learning Online Learning
Figure 1. Assumed flow of relationship among variables of the study.
Definition of Terms
To establish a frame of reference for both the researcher and reader, and to
facilitate better understanding and correct interpretation of this study, the following terms
were defined conceptually and operationally:
Online Learning. An online education, also known as "e-learning," which is a form
of education that takes place over the internet. It refers to educational processes that
utilize information and communications technology to mediate synchronous as well as
asynchronous learning and teaching activities.
In this study, online learning refers to students’ mode of learning.

8
Satisfaction Level. Refers to the perceived level of pleasure and contentment
derived from individual performance.
In this study, it refers to the judgement of students in online learning that was
correlated to the participation of the students.
Senior High School. Refers to the last two years of the K to 12 program that has
been implemented by the Department of Education here in the Philippines since 2012-
namely, grades 11 and 12. Students are now required to choose their preferred senior
high strands upon their entrance and to begin studying the subjects that are going to
introduce them to career path that they want to take.
In this study, it refers to the year level of students that was involved in the study.
Student Participation. An assessment of a student's performance in a course
outside of their assessments.
In this study, student participation refers to the engagement in class discussions,
engagement in online discussions and student behavior in group settings of Senior High
School students of Central Philippine University that was correlated to the satisfaction
level of students in online learning.
Students. Can be children, teenagers, or adults who are going to school, but it
may also be other people who are learning, such as in college or university.
In this study, they were the participants of the study that answered the online-
administered questionnaire.
Significance of the Study
This research study was conducted in order to identify the satisfaction level of
students in online learning and their participation. The results obtained from this study
were envisioned to benefit the following:

9
Students. This study wass considered significant to students as they are the
primary subject of the study. This study also allows them to expand their knowledge
about the relationship between their satisfaction in online classes and their academic
participation. Through this, they may also be able to develop new ideas and
perspectives, and most importantly, it allows them to take part in the organization‘s
decision-making.
Teachers. This study is important to teachers because it gives way for them to be
able to create a productive learning environment. Furthermore, they may also be able to
develop a teaching strategy that fits their students’ learning needs.
Administration. This study is important to the administration as it may provide
them with information needed for them to be able to develop solutions or plans to sustain
quality education in the modern world.
Researchers. Through this study, the researches would be able to determine the
relationship between student satisfaction and participation in online classes. This also
allows them to further improve their knowledge, skills, and strategies on conducting a
research.
Future Researchers. This study is significant to future researchers as it may be
used as a reference material or as a guide to those who are looking to conduct the same
correlational study. It also provides additional data and insights to researchers.
Scope and Delimitation of the Study

10
This study focused in determining the relationship between the satisfaction level
and participation of Senior High School students of Central Philippines University in
online learning and their participation in the academic year 2020-2021.
The sample population of this study was limited to the Senior High School
students taking up online classes for school year 2020 to 2021. The desired sample size
was taken using Slovin’s formula with a five percent (5%) margin of error. Respondents
from STEM, HUMSS, and ABM, were taken equally using stratified random sampling.
Stratified random sampling ensures that each population subgroup is properly
represented in the survey. As a result, stratified random sampling provides better
population coverage because the researchers have more control over the subgroups
and can ensure that all of them are included in the sampling (Murphy, 2020).
This research was designed to have a careful knowledge about the satisfaction
of students with online learning, their participation, and its relationship. Their problems
can be solved by having awareness and finding ways how to adapt with the new learning
modality.
A questionnaire-checklist was used for the completion of the study. The
questions focused about the level of satisfaction of students, specifically Senior High
School Students, with online learning and their participation. From their answers, the
researchers were able to determine the relationship between the satisfaction level and
participation of students in online learning.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
This chapter consists of three parts: (1) Review of Related Literature, (2) Review
of Related Studies; and (3) Synthesis. Review of Related Literature presents the brief
overview of ideas and concepts related to the present study. Review of Related Studies
presents studies that have been conducted which showed that satisfaction of students in
online learning have a relationship with the participation of students. The results of these
studies prove that satisfaction level of students has a positive relationship with their
participation; however, some studies reported conflicting results. Synthesis presents the
salient points of related studies in line with the present study.
Conceptual Literature
Level of Satisfaction
In an article by Gonzales (2016), it was stated that there are a couple of reasons
why it is extremely important to have a customer service mentality for continuing and
professional education leaders. First, students have a lot of choices, so education
leaders have to provide value for their academic deliveries, and by offering excellent
service, they can provide that value. The second reason is that they need to be
concerned about customer service if they are interested in providing an excellent student
experience.
Customer satisfaction is the product of a company's ability to build customer
loyalty (Lotich, 2016). An organization's emphasis on customer loyalty should be part of
a larger customer satisfaction plan. Because students can be considered customers, this
necessitates a thorough understanding of their needs and the implementation of
systems
12
and processes that not only meet but also exceed expectations, delighting the service
user.
Not satisfied (1), slightly satisfied (2), satisfied (3), very satisfied (4), and
extremely satisfied (5) were the different levels of satisfaction among students (5). When
students' needs are not met, they are dissatisfied, and this disappointment may be the
product of poor learning service quality or unreasonable expectations. Some of the
standards of a slightly satisfied student may be met, but not all of them. Slightly satisfied
students may be pleased with some aspects of the service provided to them and would
still express dissatisfaction with other facets. Satisfied students, on the other hand, get
what they expect. They may deem the experience as satisfactory but they will neither
compliment nor criticize the learning service quality. Very satisfied students, on the
contrary, are those who are likely to spread a positive word of mouth about the
experience. Lastly, extremely satisfied students are students whose expectations are
constantly being exceeded by the learning service quality. Such students will encourage
others to seek for the same experience.
Online Learning
Online learning is generally known as contrast to face-to-face learning (Ryan et
al., 2016). The term online learning is frequently defined as referencing courses offered
exclusively online in the context of higher education. The absence of the actual
classroom is its most popular aspect, which is replaced by the use of web-based
technology that deliver out-of-class learning experiences regardless of time , location
and pace (Bernard et al., 2014; Chigeza and Halbert, 2014; Northey et al., 2015; Israel,
2015; Potter, 2015). The online learning environment is usually implemented using so-
called learning management systems (LMS) or virtual learning environments (VLE)
(Kazanidis and Pellas, 2015).

13
According to Blomeyer, Clark and Smith (2005), online learning is a form of
distance learning, a formal study in which time or space separates teacher and learner.
Distance education can be provided by non-electronic techniques (such as
correspondence study) or by electronic techniques. Electronic methods are mainly
telecommunications-based (such as audio and video conferencing) and internet-based
(such as computer-based information technologies). Electronic and non-electronic media
are combined by mixed methods. Telecourse study, for instance, often combines videos
with independent study by mail. Distance learning is generally defined in the surveys
from the U.S. Department of Education as which only include electronic or mixed
methods. It is sometimes called the supplemental use of electronic technologies to
provide educational experiences at a distance. It could also be said that students
enrolled in distance education courses are involved in distance learning.
There is a convergence of several factors in the emergence of online learning:
the development of the Internet and the World Wide Web, teaching through the use of
computers, the use of media to bring teachers and learners together at a distance, and
the integration of technology into all facets of education (Blomeyer, Clark and Smith,
2005). The latest form of distance education is online learning, and it is also a form of e-
learning. Increasingly, K-12 online learning, which started as a way to expand curriculum
and educational access, is an instrument of education reform.
In addition to focusing on online contexts, online learning also comprises a wide
variety of computer-based learning platforms and distribution systems, genres, modes
and media, such as digital, teaching material, simulations, gaming and the use of new
media across all fields on fixed and mobile platforms. Due to its ability to offer more
convenient access to information and training at any time and from any location, online
learning has become popular (Bakia et al., 2010). The emphasis also includes (a)
14
expanding the availability of learning opportunities for learners who can’t or chose not to
engage in conventional face-to-face deals, (b) more cost-effectively arranging and
disseminating instructional content, or (c) enabling instructors to manage more learners
while retaining the consistency of the learning result that is comparable to face-to-face.
In a study by Kuo et al. (2013) titled “A Predictive Study of Student Satisfaction in
Online Education Programs”, they mentioned that academic leaders in the United States
believed that online learning is essential to the long-term growth of educational
institutions since the increase in demand for them is significantly higher than that of face-
to-face learning. They have also stated that the learning outcomes from both modalities
have no major difference
In a publication of The Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs
at Princeton University and The Brookings Institution called “The Future of Children,”
Bell and Federman (2013) mentioned that the adoption of online learning could possibly
be compromised by fraud and cheating, the cost of e-learning, and the challenges faced
by students from low-income families.
However, according to Loeb (2020), most online courses, especially those that
serve K-12 students, have a format that is much more similar to in-person courses. The
teacher assists the students in conducting virtual discussion, assigns homework, and
follows up with individual students. These courses are synchronous sometimes
(teachers and students all meet at the same time) and they are sometimes
asynchronous (non-concurrent).
Senior High School Students
The implementation of the K to 12 Basic Education Program in the Philippines
involves the introduction into the new 6-year secondary education system of the Senior
15
High School (SHS) or grades 11 and 12, the final 2 years (Martinez and Uy, 2019). The
SHS curriculum aims to prepare students for either further education or employment,
although previous curricula focused primarily on post-secondary education readiness.
According to Formoso (2016), by the end of the program, students can freely
choose from the tracks offered and get their SHS diploma. Students can choose an
expertise in the Philippines based on proficiency, aspirations, and school capacity. The
career path selection will define the content of the topics that a student will take in
Grades 11 and 12. Each Senior High School student can choose from three tracks:
Academic; Technical-Vocational-Livelihood; and Sports and Arts. Three strands are
included in the academic track: Business, Accountancy, Management (BAM);
Humanities, Education, Social Sciences (HESS); and Science, Technology, Engineering,
Mathematics (STEM).
This study focused on the academic track. The Academic Track is subdivided
into courses that are particular to each degree. The main objective of this senior high
school track is to prepare students for more advanced university courses. The
Accountancy, Business and Management Strand, Humanities and Social Sciences
Strand, and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Strand are the four
senior high strands under this framework (Formoso, 2016).
Accountancy, Business and Management Strand, also referred to as ABM, is
intended for students planning to take up college in business administration, marketing,
accountancy, or economics. Usually, students planning to take a degree in hotel and
restaurant management can also pick this strand.
The Strand of Humanities and Social Sciences, otherwise known as HUMSS, is
for students planning to take up Writing (novelists in particular), Sociology, Community

16
Studies, Law, and Political Science. Those who want to take up the priesthood tend to
select this strand as well.
Students that are planning to study Applied and Pure Sciences, Mathematics,
and Engineering in college, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Strand,
more commonly referred to as STEM, is the perfect choice. Students who choose this
field also end up studying Chemistry, Calculus, Biology, and Physics.
Senior high school education is a key stage that lays a solid foundation for the
lifelong development of students (Deb et al., 2015). At this stage, high school students
will face many adaptive and developmental tasks, while adaptation and development in
the field of learning is one of the most significant development tasks.
Senior high school students in the Philippines are between 17 and 18 years of
age and because of DepEd’s K to 12, they have now the opportunity of two more years
of basic education (Mamolo, 2019). It can be noted that senior high school students tend
to think of themselves as college students because of the heavy school work that
teachers have given them and the expectation of acting accordingly, which creates
uncertainty on their part. In reality, however, they are students in high school who may
prefer to be treated as such (Cañoneo et al., 2017).
Amid some reports that implementation of SHS is a failure, as most of its
graduates did not land jobs after graduation due to skills-jobs mismatch, DepEd clarified
that the primary goal of the program is to improve the quality of education in the country
and not only to provide employment to its graduates immediately (Montemayor, 2018).
However, the department noted that, in order to improve the alignment of education with
the employment requirements of companies, it still needs to strengthen its collaboration
with the community and private sectors.

17
Student Participation
Student Participation is defined in Collins Dictionary (2021) as the extent to which
students participate or involve themselves in a class, course, etc.
Students’ classroom participation makes them more motivated, supports their
learning, improves their communication and promotes higher order thinking skills (Aziz,
Quraishi, and Kazi, 2018). Additionally, De Vita (2000, as cited in Murray, 2018), stated
that participation: encourages students to take part in a valuable cognitive process in
which they crystallize concepts, scrutinize them, and express their own thoughts; aids in
the development of students' listening skills; creates a forum for students to share and
examine concepts, allowing them to develop higher-order research and assessment
skills; and teaches students about cultural diversity and how to make cultural differences
in the classroom a positive experience for all. Participation, however, is not advocated by
educators merely on the basis that it endows students with important skills that have
transferability to contexts outside of higher education, it is also seen as fundamental to
the learning process itself (Murray, 2018).
According to Abidin (2007, as cited in Abdullah, Abu Bakar, and Mahbob, 2012),
participation in the circumstances occurs when students influenced by factors, such as
socio-cultural, cognitive, affective, linguistic, or the environment and these often lead to
student participation and interaction with other students and instructors become less and
speak only at appropriate time. In marginal interaction, students are more likely to listen
and less likely to speak up in class. This group of students, unlike those who actively
engage in classroom discussions, tends to listen and take notes rather than participate
in classroom discussions. Lastly, in silent observation, students prefer to avoid oral
involvement in the classroom. They tend to obtain classroom materials by taking notes
using different methods such as tape-recording or writing.

18
Vonderwell and Zachariah (2005) indicated that online learner participation and
patterns of participation are influenced by technology and interface characteristics,
content-area experience, student roles and tasks, and information overload. They further
stated that in an online learning course, technology, the course interface, group actions,
and student personas can all affect participation and learning outcomes. On the other
hand, Hrastinski (2008), in his theory of online learning as online participation, argued
that online learner participation is a dynamic method of engaging in and sustaining
relationships with others that is supported by physical and psychological resources, is
not synonymous with speaking or writing, and can include cooperation with peers, but it
ultimately involves all kinds of relationships.
Active participation of students with discussions in the classroom is important for
the purpose of achieving effective learning and plays an important role in the success of
education and personal development of students in the future (Tatar, 2005; Abdullah,
Abu Bakar, and Mahbob, 2012). According to Liu (2005, as cited in Putra, 2017),
students who participate actively tend to have better academic achievement compared
to students who do not. Additionally, Putra (2017) defined participation as the active
involvement of students in the learning process which includes student’s emotional
aspects which encourages them to contribute and be responsible for their academic
achievement.
It is commonly argued that a key challenge for e-learning is to
encourage learner participation (Stefan Hrastinski, 2008). Online learner participation is
a method of learning through participation and establishing relationships with others. It's
a multi-step process that includes doing, talking, thinking, feeling, and belonging, and it
happens both online and offline.

19
Since online students have less opportunities to communicate with the institution
and possibly more demands on their time and energy, achieving student engagement in
online courses may be more critical than in on-campus courses. In other words,
participation could be the most important factor in making online learning a necessary
part of higher education and an institution's future (Meyer, 2014).
Participation is central to learning, according to research (Wenger, 1998), and is
connected to interaction and a sense of community in online learning (Delahunty,
Verenika, & Jones, 2014). Online interaction takes place in synchronous chat rooms,
asynchronous discussion groups, and via email, and can be thought of as participation in
a constructive conversation, with online interaction serving as a substitute for face-to-
face tutorial discussions (Delahunty et al., 2014).
Student Satisfaction
The satisfaction of students can be described as a short-term attitude that results
from an evaluation of the educational experience, services and facilities of students
(Fernando, Lalitha and Weerasinghe, 2017). The importance of student satisfaction in
the literature of higher education has emerged with the growth of higher education in the
world. Industry-based satisfaction models were applied at the beginning to explain
student satisfaction and later developed models based on higher education to explain it.
Al-Sheeb et al. (2018) defined student satisfaction as student success or
satisfaction with their overall academic experience. Student satisfaction was assessed
on the basis of the extent of positive ratings given to the quality of education at the
institution, the students’ overall experience, whether students would choose to re-
register at the same university if they had the option to start over, and whether the other
courses they took helped them adapt to university life.

20
Universities have changed their policies from product orientation to student
orientation with the advancement of technology, the elimination of manufacturing
monopoly, the provision of various services by universities and institutes and increasing
competition. Students, on the other hand, are always looking for providers who provide
better services as one of the most important environmental factors that are effective in
the success of universities (Motefakker, 2016). Because of the existence of different
distributors of research and educational services that provide relatively equal quality,
most students have many services to choose from when selecting their best service. The
issue of student satisfaction, which guarantees the survival of universities, is of particular
importance under such competitive circumstances and because of the uncertainty about
the future.
Related Studies
Student Participation in Online Learning
The study entitled “Performance in E-Learning: Online Participation and Student
Grades” conducted by Davies and Graff (2005) revealed that greater online interaction
did not lead to significantly higher performance for students achieving passing grades;
however, students who failed in their courses tended to interact less frequently. The
observed positive results of online participation and interaction do not always translate
into higher grades at the end of the year, with students who participated more often
receiving no higher grades. Students who failed one or more modules, on the other
hand, interacted less often than students who passed.
“The Correlation between Attendance and Participation with Respect to Student
Achievement in an Online Learning Environment” is a study conducted by Rapposelli

21
(2014). The results of this study supported previous studies that found a correlation
between student attendance and participation and final grade achievement. This finding
suggests that the number of people who participate has a minimal but significant impact
on student achievement.
Student Satisfaction in Online Learning
In a study by Almusharraf and Khahro (2020) titled, "Students' Satisfaction with
Online Learning Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic," they have found that
students were highly satisfied with online learning as the school has provided support in
various forms like online workshops and seminars to assist students throughout the
online classes. The school has also given the effort to solve IT issues, online class login
problems, academic advising, extracurricular activities, mental and social counseling.
Overall, the students were highly satisfied since the pandemic, in the context of their
study, was handled adequately.
A study by Bui et al. (2019) titled, “Does E-Learning Service Quality Influence E-
Learning Student Satisfaction and Loyalty? Evidence from Vietnam,” they mentioned
that the most key component of overall e-learning service quality was e-learning system
quality, which was followed by e-learning teacher and course materials quality, and e-
learning administrative and support service quality. The overall e-learning service quality
was positively related to e-learning student satisfaction, which in turn influenced e-
learning student loyalty. Also, overall e-learning service quality has a direct effect on e-
learning student loyalty.
In a study by Gondal, Qadri, and Zaheer (2015) titled, "E-Learning and Student
Satisfaction," they have found that most of the students were satisfied with the education
received in e-Learning; having instructor support as the factor that affected student
22
satisfaction the most. They have also stated that this proves that online learning has a
lot of potential in improving higher education in countries like Pakistan.
Student Participation on Student Satisfaction
In the study of Harsasi, Muzammil, and Sutawijaya (2020) entitled “Investigating
Student Satisfaction in Online Learning: The Role of Student Interaction and
Engagement in Distance Learning University”, the statistical analysis has found that
interaction among students, interaction between students and teacher, and interaction
between students and content have positive impact on student engagement. The results
also showed that student engagement has a positive impact on student satisfaction.
“Connecting Student Engagement to Student Satisfaction: A Case Study at East
Carolina University” is a study conducted by Bland et al. (2016). The study stated that
there were no statistically significant relationships between student engagement and
overall satisfaction. When analyzed with student responses to questions about their
satisfaction in the classroom, the researchers found no variation in student satisfaction
by race, gender, or class level.
In a study by Josias (2005) titled “The Relationship between Job Satisfaction and
Absenteeism in a Selected Field Services Section within an Electricity Utility in the
Western Cape,” results indicated that there was a weak inverse relationship between the
number of employees’ absences and their job satisfaction. They have also investigated
biographical variables like gender, age, and job level, and have found that all of these
except job level have a significant relationship with satisfaction.
In a study by Bai and Liao (2018) titled “The Relation between Interest
Congruence and College Major Satisfaction: Evidence from the Basic Interest
Measures,” they have found that all interest indicators were significantly correlated with
23
students’ major satisfaction which is in contrast with prior studies in academic settings
which show that there is generally low or no correlation between interest and
satisfaction.
In a study by El-Hilali, Al-Jaber, and Hussein (2015) entitled “Students’
Satisfaction and Achievement and Absorption Capacity in Higher Education,” they have
found that absorption capacity was influenced by students’ participation, satisfaction,
and various teaching methods. They have found that satisfaction highly influences
absorption capacity.
In a study by Pike (1993) titled “The Relationship between Perceived Learning
and Satisfaction with College: An Alternative View,” the results have shown that there is
a positive relationship between perceived learning and satisfaction with college: the
learners’ perception of their knowledge positively affects their satisfaction.
In a study by Betoret, Roselló, and Artiga (2017) entitled “Self-Efficacy,
Satisfaction, and Academic Achievement: The Mediator Role of Students' Expectancy-
Value Beliefs,” they have found that expectancy-value beliefs can predict student
satisfaction. Moreover, students with strong self-efficacy are keen to visualize successful
scenarios and these students tend to experience more satisfaction than those with low
self-efficacy.
In a study by Mendes, Pedro, and Lourenco (2018) titled “Perceived Service
Quality and Students’ Satisfaction in Higher Education: The Influence of Teaching
Methods,” the results have shown that perceived service quality highly influences
student satisfaction though this differs when students are exposed to different teaching
approaches. Although, the difference was not found significant.

24
Synthesis of Literature
The studies conducted by Harsasi, Muzammil, and Sutawijaya (2020), Bland et
al. (2016), Josias (2005), Bai and Liao (2018), El-Hilali, Al-Jaber, and Hussein (2015),
Pike (1993), Betoret, Roselló, and Artiga (2017), and Mendes, Pedro, and Lourenco
(2018) were related to the present study since the researchers and the new study
focused on the relationship between the satisfaction level of senior high school students
in online learning and their participation. Moreover, the research studies conducted by
Davies and Graff (2005) and Rapposelli (2014) were also related to the present study
since their studies focused on the participation of students in online learning. Also, the
studies of Almusharraf and Khahro (2020), Bui et al. (2019), and Gondal, Qadri, and
Zaheer (2015) were also related to the present study since the focus of their studies
were about the satisfaction of students in online learning.
Previous studies show different findings about the relationship between
the satisfaction and participation of students in online learning. In the study of Harsasi,
Muzammil, and Sutawijaya (2020), they found out that student engagement is improved
by interactions among students, interactions between students and teachers, and
interactions between students and content. According to the findings, student
participation has a positive effect on student satisfaction. This is contradictory to the
study of Bland et al. (2016). There were no statistically significant correlations between
student participation and overall satisfaction, according to the study. The researchers
found no differences in student satisfaction by ethnicity, gender, or class level when they
examined student responses to questions about their classroom satisfaction. This
means that student participation does not influence student satisfaction. In a study by
Josias (2005), the number of employees absent and their work satisfaction had a poor
25
inverse relationship, as per the findings. They also looked into biographical factors like
gender, age, and job level, and discovered that all of them, with the exception of job
level, have a major impact on satisfaction. Also, in a study by Bai and Liao (2018), they
discovered that all interest variables were strongly associated with students' main
satisfaction. In a study by El-Hilali, Al-Jaber, and Hussein (2015), they discovered that
students' participation, satisfaction, and different teaching methods all affected
absorption capacity. They discovered that satisfaction has a significant impact on
absorption capability. Moreover, in the study of Pike (1993), the finding indicated a
positive relationship between perceived learning and college satisfaction: learners'
perceptions of their knowledge have a positive impact on their satisfaction. In a study by
Betoret, Roselló, and Artiga (2017), expectancy-value beliefs have been shown to
predict student satisfaction. Furthermore, students with high self-efficacy enjoy
visualizing good scenarios and report higher levels of satisfaction than students with low
self-efficacy. This means that students who believe that they will pass their subjects are
more likely to be satisfied. However, in the study of Mendes, Pedro, and Lourenco
(2018), the findings revealed that perceived service quality has a significant impact on
student satisfaction, though this varies as students are exposed to various teaching
methods. The difference, however, was not found to be significant.
Moreover, the studies mentioned above show contradicting results regarding the
participation of students in online learning. The study of Davies and Graff (2005)
revealed that while increased online interaction did not result in substantially higher
results for students who received passing grades, students who failed their courses
interacted less frequently. The positive effects of online participation and interaction are
not always reflected in higher grades at the end of the year, with students who
participated more often earning no higher grades. In contrast, students who failed one or
26
more modules interacted less often than those who passed. The study Rapposelli (2014)
is opposing which the results indicate a connection between student attendance and
participation and final grade achievement. This result implies that the participation of
students has a small but substantial effect on student achievement.
There is, however, a similar idea between the studies of Almusharraf and Khahro
(2020), Bui et al. (2019), and Gondal, Qadri, and Zaheer (2015). The research
conducted by Almusharraf and Khahro (2020) observed that students were really
satisfied with online learning because the school offered support in the form of online
workshops and seminars to help students during their online classes. In addition, the
school has made an attempt to resolve IT issues, online class login issues, academic
coaching, extracurricular programs, and mental and social therapy. Overall, the students
were satisfied because the pandemic was adequately handled in the sense of their
studies. This was related to the studies of Bui et al. (2019), and Gondal, Qadri, and
Zaheer (2015). The study of Bui et al. (2019) observed that e-learning system quality
was the most important component of overall e-learning service quality, followed by e-
learning instructor and course materials quality, and e-learning administrative and
support service quality. E-learning student satisfaction was positively linked to overall e-
learning service efficiency, which in turn affected e-learning student loyalty. In addition,
the overall quality of e-learning services has a strong impact on e-learning student
loyalty. Also, the study of Gondal, Qadri, and Zaheer (2015) mentioned that the majority
of students were pleased with their e-Learning education, with teacher encouragement
being the most important factor affecting student satisfaction. They also noted that this
demonstrates that online learning has a great deal of potential in developing higher
education.
27
These factors were being studied by researchers to determine the level of
satisfaction of students in online learning as a whole and the students’ participation in
online learning as a whole. Moreover, this study aimed to identify if there is a significant
relationship between student satisfaction and student participation.

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
This chapter deals with the methodology and research design used in this study,
the sampling procedure, the respondents, the instrument used in gathering the needed
data, validation of questionnaires, data gathering procedures, scoring of variables and
the statistical devices in the analysis of the data.
Research Design
This is a descriptive-correlational study which employs a non-experimental
design, specifically, post-test only or after-only survey using researcher-made
questionnaire. Descriptive-correlational research design aims to describe naturally
occurring variables and correlate them with one another. It measures a relationship
between two variables without the researcher controlling either of them. A descriptive-
correlational research design aims to describe the given variables and find out whether
there is either positive correlation, negative correlation, or zero correlation between
them. A positive relationship between variables means higher scores tend to be
associated with higher scores on one variable on the other, while a negative relationship
means, on one variable, higher scores tend to be associated with lower scores on the
other. On the other hand, a zero correlation or no relationship means a change in one
variable may not necessarily see a difference in the other variable.
This study utilized a non-experimental design, specifically, after-only survey or
post-test survey. Non-experimental research designs are appropriate for studies that
don’t require experimental manipulation. They are not suitable for studies centrally
concerned on cause and effect relationships. Post-test only or after-only survey design
was utilized
29
in the study. This is often used in studies where researchers’ aim is to observe a certain
phenomenon as they occur naturally or describe the characteristics of a population with
no external variables presented.
Population and Sampling
The target population of this study was the Senior High School Students of
Central Philippine University. Since the total target population is composed of 1,668
students, the researchers used the Slovin’s formula, with 95% confidence level and 5%
margin of error, to determine the sample size of 323 students. Then, stratified sampling
was used to ensure better coverage of the population. Stratified random sampling
ensures that within the entire sample population of a research study, each subgroup of a
given population is adequately represented. The researchers have determined that 26,
98, and 12 students will be taken from Grade 11 ABM, STEM, and HUMSS, and 50,
124, and 14 students from Grade 12 ABM, STEM, and HUMSS, respectively. The
number of students per strata were rounded up and came to a total of 324 respondents.
Research Instrument
The primary instrument that was used to gather the data is an online-
administered questionnaire which requires the respondents to read and answer the
questions themselves. The link for the online-administered questionnaire was given to
the respondents through online messaging platforms. Instructions and questions were
addressed to the respondents in the questionnaire. The questionnaire was administered
individually by the researchers.
The instrument that was used consists of four parts: Part I consists of the
respondents’ identification; Part II which is the satisfaction of the respondents in online

30
learning; and Part III which consists of the respondent’s participation in online learning.
Also, a suggestion box was given at the end of the questionnaire.
The questionnaire prepared by the researchers was checked by a Mechanical
Engineer from ACE Medical Hospital Iloilo. The validator’s suggestions and corrections
were applied.
Respondent’s Identification. This part consists of the respondent’s name, email
address, year and strand, and general average for 1st semester of A.Y 2020-2021. Filling
out the respondent’s name and general average is optional. The respondents were
required to fill out their email address, and year and strand. The link of the questionnaire
was given by the researchers to the respondents.
Student Satisfaction Level. This part consists of questions that determined the
satisfaction of students in online learning. The data gathered was used to find out if
student’s satisfaction has a significant relationship with the student’s participation. A
table was made for the gathered data and was analyzed using appropriate statistical
tools.
Student Participation. This was collected using the questionnaire made by the
researchers. This part consists of questions that determined the performance of students
in online learning. The data was gathered to find out if student’s participation has a
significant relationship with student’s satisfaction. A table was made for the gathered
data and was analyzed using appropriate statistical tools.
Validity
Content validity was used for the validation of the research instrument. Content
validation aimed to identify the degree of the instrument’s relevance, as well as the
items’ adequateness, to what it seeks to measure or represent. The theories presented

31
in the study were the basis for the validation of the instrument. All research studies
should have a valid theoretical framework to justify the importance and significance of
the work. Moreover, the research instrument undergone a validation. A Mechanical
Engineer from ACE Medical Hospital Iloilo was asked to check the content and format of
the instrument.
Reliability
The test-retest method was used to determine the reliability of the research
instrument. This method involves giving the same test twice to the same group of people
at different times or after a certain time has elapsed. The same questionnaire was
administered twice among the same respondents to see if the scores obtained are still
the same.
Ethical Consideration
In this research study, ethical principles were taken into consideration. These
principles were considered through methods which include asking for permission and
approval from the participants if they were willing to participate in the study, giving them
individual letters beforehand as to formally inform them about the research study they
were participating in, making sure that the respondents were not coerced to participate
in the study, reassuring the participants’ safety and making sure that they were not
subjected to any harm in the study, protecting the privacy and confidentiality of their
personal information and keeping their anonymity throughout the study, researchers only
gathered data relevant to the research questions, giving proper credit in using other
people’s works to avoid plagiarism in conducting the study, and practicing honesty and
objectivity in recording and presenting the findings of the study.
Data Collection
32
After the validation of the research instrument, a letter was sent to the principal to
request for permission to conduct the study. The researchers then release consent
forms to the 324 respondents online with the use of Google forms. After securing
permission from the respondents, the researchers discusses the purpose of the study to
the selected respondents. Following that, the respondents were aware of their rights and
ethical considerations. The researchers also attended to the participants’ questions and
clarifications. Moreover, data was gathered with the use of an online-administered
questionnaire designed by the researchers. The said questionnaires were put in Google
forms and it was given to the respondents through online messaging platforms. After the
respondents have answered the questionnaire, their answers were analyzed with the
use of statistical methods of analysis.
The data collected for this research were the answers to the questions in the
questionnaire were sent by the researchers to the respondents. All the responses of the
respondents were gathered and analyzed by the researchers. The data was organized
with the use of descriptive and inferential statistics such as mean, standard deviation,
frequency count, percentage, crosstabulation, and gamma analysis.
Data Analysis
The data collected were coded, organized and analyzed using the Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Descriptive and Inferential analysis were used
to test if there is a significant relationship between variables.
The results of the analyzed data were taken from the three parts of the
questionnaire: Part I for the respondent’s identification, Part II for the satisfaction of
students in online learning which was assumed to have a significant relationship with the
33
participation of students, and Part III for the participation of the respondents in online
learning.
For the satisfaction and participation in online learning of the Senior High School
students of Central Philippine University, the use of mean, standard deviation, frequency
count, and percentage were computed.
For the analysis of the relationship between the satisfaction of students in online
learning and their participation in online class, crosstabulation and gamma analysis were
used.
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This section discloses the analysis and interpretation of the data gathered. The
first area represents the analysis and interpretation of the satisfaction level of the
respondents in online learning. The second area shows the analysis and interpretation of
the participation of the respondents in online learning. The third area illustrates the
relationship between satisfaction level and participation of the respondents in online
learning.
Student Satisfaction in Online Learning
Table 1 shows that more than half (53.7%) of the respondents are satisfied with
the Online Learning Modality and less than one-third (31.8%) are slightly unsatisfied with
the Online Learning Modality. On the other hand, a little less than two-thirds (63.3%) of
the respondents are satisfied with their teachers' methods in Online Learning
Procedures and only less than one-twentieth (3.7%) are very unsatisfied. Regarding
their online interaction with their teachers, less than one-half (45.4%) are satisfied and
more than one-third (35.8%) are slightly unsatisfied. Moreover, more than one-third
(39.8%) of the respondents are satisfied, and more than one-fourth (29.0%) are slightly
unsatisfied with their online interaction with their classmates. Almost two-fifths (39.5%)
of the respondents are satisfied and only less than one-tenth (8.6%) are very satisfied
with the learning materials provided by the school. A little more than one-twentieth
(5.6%) of the respondents are very unsatisfied with their teachers' availability and
response when they have questions and clarifications and less than one-fifth (18.2%)
are very satisfied. Furthermore, a little more than one-half (50.9%) of the respondents
35
are satisfied and almost one-fourth (24.7%) are slightly unsatisfied with the resources
like video presentations relevant to their online classes. More than one-half (52.8%) of
the respondents are satisfied with the Online Learning Procedure and less than one-third
(31.8%) are slightly unsatisfied. Thus, the Overall Mean Score = 2.63 shows that the
respondents are overall satisfied with their online learning. This means that the
respondents are satisfied with the online learning procedure, methods, interactions, and
resources regarding their online classes.
This supports the findings of the study entitled “Students’ Satisfaction With
Online Learning Experiences During COVID-19 Pandemic” by Almusharraf and Khahro
(2020) which stated that students were highly satisfied with online learning as the school
has provided support in various forms like online workshops and seminars to assist
students throughout the online classes; however, in a different satisfaction level.
Additionally, the results also show agreement to the study of Bui et al. (2019) titled
“Does E-Learning Service Quality Influence E-Learning Student Satisfaction and
Loyalty? Evidence From Vietnam” as they stated that the overall e-learning service
quality, which includes e-learning system quality, e-learning teacher and course
materials quality, and e-learning administrative and support service quality, is positively
related to e-learning student satisfaction. This also supports the study by Gondal, Qadri,
and Zaheer (2015) titled “E-Learning and Student Satisfaction” where they found out that
most of the students were satisfied with the education received in e-learning; having
instructor support as the factor that affected student satisfaction. Students are satisfied
with online learning given that they are also satisfied with the learning procedures,
methods, and resources provided in online learning.

36
Table 1. Student Satisfaction in Online Learning

Very Slightly Satisfied Very Total
Unsatisfie Unsatisfie Satisfied
d d
Level of satisfaction f % f % f % f % f %
Are you satisfied with the Online 22 6.8 103 31.8 174 53.7 25 7.7 324 100
Learning Modality?
Are you satisfied with your 12 3.7 78 24.1 205 63.3 29 9.0 324 100
teachers' methods in Online
Learning Procedures?
Are you satisfied with the online 29 9.0 116 35.8 147 45.4 32 9.9 324 100
interaction between you and your
teachers?
classmates?
Are you satisfied with the learning 52 16.0 116 35.8 128 39.5 28 8.6 324 100
materials provided by the school?
Are you satisfied with the 18 5.6 91 28.1 156 48.1 59 18.2 324 100
teachers' availability and response
when you have questions and
clarifications?
resources like video presentations
relevant to your online classes?
Overall, are you satisfied with the 29 9.0 103 31.8 171 52.8 21 6.5 324 100
Online Learning Procedure?
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8
Mean 2.62 2.77 2.56 2.53 2.41 2.79 2.78 2.57

Score
Overall Satisfaction 2.63 S
Student Participation in Online Learning
Table 2 shows that more than three-fourths (85.5%) of the respondents always
attend their online classes. On the other hand, less than three-fourths (66.4%) of the
37
respondents are sometimes interested in the daily discussions in online learning. Almost
one-fourth (24.1%) of the respondents find it hard to absorb all the lessons in online
learning. A little more than one-fourth (26.2%) of the respondents find it hard to
understand lessons that involve problem-solving in online learning. Almost one-fourth
(24.1%) of the respondents think that it is easy to pass the subject given that it is an
online learning procedure. Moreover, only less than one-tenth (8.0%) of the respondents
think that this online learning modality prepares them enough for the subjects at the
college level. Overall Mean Score = 2.19 shows that the respondents are highly
participating in online learning. This means that the respondents are engaging and
involve themselves in online classes
These results are in contrast with a study conducted by Rapposelli (2014) titled,
“The Correlation Between Attendance and Participation With Respect to Student
Achievement in an Online Learning Environment” which found that there is a correlation
between student participation and academic achievement. However, these results are
supported by a study entitled “Performance in E-Learning: Online Participation and
Student Grades” conducted by Davies and Graff (2005) which revealed that greater
online interaction does not necessarily lead to better academic achievement and results.
Instead, it was stated in the study that academic achievement is more likely to affect
students’ online participation, not the other way around. In conclusion, despite being
unable to absorb most lessons in online learning and not believing that online classes
will prepare them for college, students would still attend classes and participate.
Table 2. Student Participation in Online Learning

No, I find it Sometimes Yes, always Total Mean
Academic hard Score
Performance f % f % f % f %
Do you attend your 4 1.2 43 13.3 277 85.5 324 100.0 2.84
38
Online Class
regularly?
Are you interested in 33 10.2 215 66.4 76 23.5 324 100.0 2.13
the daily discussions
in Online Learning?
From your own 78 24.1 226 69.8 20 6.2 324 100.0 1.82
perspective, do you
absorb all the lessons
in Online Learning?
Do you understand 85 26.2 192 59.3 47 14.5 324 100.0 1.88
lessons that involve
problem-solving in
Online Learning?
Do you think that it is 36 11.1 210 64.8 78 24.1 324 100.0 2.13
easy to pass the
subject given that it is
an online learning
procedure?
Do you think that this 26 8.0 152 46.9 146 45.1 324 100.0 2.37
online learning
modality prepares you
enough for the
subjects at the college
level?
Overall mean score 2.19
Student Participation on Student Satisfaction
Table 3 shows the relationship between the attendance of students and student’s
satisfaction in online learning. It shows that more than half (51.99%) of the respondents
who are always attending their online classes are satisfied with the resources like video
presentations relevant to their online classes. Gamma value = .261 and Sig=.038
39
show that respondents who regularly attend classes show positive results and mainly
are satisfied with the resources like video presentations relevant to their online classes.
This implies that students are eager to attend their classes given that they are pleased
and contented with the resources given by the school for their online classes.
This agrees with the study of Josias (2005) entitled “The Relationship Between
Job Satisfaction and Absenteeism in a Selected Field Services Section Within an
Electricity Utility in the Western Cape.” The results indicated that there was a weak
inverse relationship between the number of employees’ absences and their job
satisfaction. It indicates that the lower the satisfaction, the higher is the number of
absences, and the higher the satisfaction, the lower the number of absences. This
means that if they are satisfied, they are more likely to be present whereas if they are
unsatisfied, they are more likely to be absent.
Table 3. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you attend your Online Class
regularly?
Do you attend your Online Class regularly? No, I find it hard Sometimes Yes, always Total
Are you satisfied with the Online Learning
Modality? f % f % f % f %
Very Unsatisfied 0 0.0 3 6.98 19 6.86 22 6.79
Slightly Unsatisfied 2 50.0 21 48.84 80 28.88 103 31.79
Satisfied 2 50.0 14 32.56 158 57.04 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 0 0.0 5 11.63 20 7.22 25 7.72
40
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100

Gamma value=.218 Sig = .102 Pearson’s R = .073
Are you satisfied with your teachers' methods in Online Learning Procedures?
Very Unsatisfied 0 0 3 6.98 9 3.25 12 3.70
Slightly Unsatisfied 2 50 11 25.58 65 23.47 78 24.07
Satisfied 2 50 24 55.81 179 64.62 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 0 0 5 11.63 24 8.66 29 8.95
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Gamma value=.106 Sig= .470 Pearson’s R=.054
Are you satisfied with the online interaction between you and your teachers?
Satisfied 1 25 20 46.51 126 45.49 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 1 25 4 9.30 27 9.75 32 9.88
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Gamma value=0.54 Sig = .690 Pearson’s R=.036
Are you satisfied with the online interaction between you and your classmates?
Satisfied 1 25 15 34.88 113 40.79 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 1 25 4 9.30 43 15.52 48 14.81
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Gamma value=.152 Sig= .198 Pearson’s R = .059
Are you satisfied with the learning materials provided by the school?
Satisfied 0 0 11 25.58 117 42.24 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 2 50 2 4.65 24 8.66 28 8.64
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Gamma value = .224 Sig= .069 Pearson’s R=.071
Are you satisfied with the teachers’ availability and response when you have questions and clarifications?
Satisfied 1 25 22 51.16 133 48.01 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 1 25 7 16.28 51 18.41 59 18.21
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Gamma value = .025 Sig=.843 Pearson’s R=.013
Are you satisfied with the resources like video presentations relevant to your online classes?
Satisfied 2 50 19 44.19 144 51.99 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 0 0 5 11.63 51 18.41 56 17.28
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Gamma value = .261 Sig=038 Pearson’s R=.115
Overall, are you satisfied with the Online Learning Procedure?
Satisfied 2 50 20 46.51 149 53.79 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 0 0 3 6.98 18 6.50 21 6.48
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Gamma value= .159 Sig= .254 Pearson’s R = .094
Table 4 shows the relationship between the interest of students in daily
discussions and student’s satisfaction in online learning. It shows that more than half
(56.58%) of the respondents who are always interested in the daily discussions in online
learning are satisfied with the Online Learning Modality. Gamma value = .348 and
Sig = .000 show that the respondents are interested in the daily discussions in online
learning and they are satisfied with the current online learning procedure. It implies that
41
the students are interested in listening and attending online discussions since they are
satisfied with their online learning experience.
This supports the study of Bai and Liao (2018) entitled “The Relation Between
Interest Congruence and College Major Satisfaction: Evidence From the Basic Interest
Measures,” which they have found that all interest indicators were significantly correlated
with students’ major satisfaction. Higher satisfaction means higher interest. Students are
more likely to be interested in their classes when they are satisfied.
Table 4. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Are you interested in the daily
discussions in Online Learning?
Are you interested in the daily discussions No, I find it hard Sometimes Yes, always Total
in Online Learning?
Very Unsatisfied 8 24.24 8 3.72 6 789 22 6.79
Satisfied 7 21.21 124 57.67 43 56.58 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 2 6.06 12 5.58 11 14.47 25 7.72
42
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100

Satisfied 14 42.42 149 69.30 42 55.26 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 1 3.03 12 5.58 16 21.05 29 8.95
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 10 30.30 101 46.98 36 47.37 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 2 6.06 15 6.98 15 19.74 32 9.88
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 9 27.27 90 41.86 30 39.47 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 3 9.09 26 12.09 19 25 48 14.81
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 6 18.18 92 42.79 30 39.47 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 3 9.09 10 4.65 15 18.74 28 8.64
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 10 30.30 111 51.63 35 46.05 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 7 21.21 27 12.56 25 32.89 59 18.21
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 9 27.27 120 55.81 36 47.37 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 3 9.09 31 14.42 22 28.95 56 17.28
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 7 21.21 122 56.74 42 55.26 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 2 6.06 6 2.79 13 17.11 21 6.48
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Table 5 shows that a little less than two-thirds (65%) of the respondents who
think that they always absorb all the lessons in Online Learning are satisfied with the
overall Online Learning Procedure. Gamma value = .560 and Sig= .000 shows that the
respondents think they can absorb all the lessons in an online learning method and they
are satisfied with the current online learning procedure. This implies that the students
believe that they can understand the lessons easily and it depends on their satisfaction
43
with the online learning procedure. Given this online learning procedure, other students
think that the lessons can be absorbed and understood given that they are satisfied with
their learning.
In a study by El-Hilali, Al-Jaber, and Hussein (2015) titled: “Students’ Satisfaction
and Achievement and Absorption Capacity in Higher Education,” they have found that
absorption capacity was influenced by students’ participation, satisfaction, and various
teaching methods. They have found that satisfaction highly influences absorption
capacity.
Table 5. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: From your own perspective, do
you absorb all the lessons in Online Learning?
From your own perspective, do you absorb No, I find it hard Sometimes Yes, always Total
all the lessons in Online Learning?
Slightly Unsatisfied 35 44.87 66 29.20 2 10 103 31.79
Satisfied 27 34.62 135 59.73 12 60 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 3 3.85 18 7.96 4 20 25 7.72
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
44
Satisfied 40 51.28 152 67.26 13 65 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 5 6.41 20 8.85 4 20 29 8.95
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 29 37.18 107 47.35 11 55 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 3 3.85 22 9.73 7 35 32 9.88
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 19 24.36 100 44.25 10 50 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 8 10.26 31 13.72 9 45 48 14.81
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 21 26.92 100 44.25 7 35 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 4 5.13 21 9.29 3 15 28 8.64
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 30 38.46 117 51.77 9 45 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 12 15.38 40 17.70 7 35 59 18.21
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 32 41.03 121 53.54 12 60 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 8 10.26 42 18.58 16 30 56 17.28
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 27 34.62 131 57.96 13 65 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 2 2.56 13 5.75 6 30 21 6.48
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Table 6 shows that only less than one-twentieth (2.13%) of the respondents who
think that they understand lessons that involve problem-solving in Online Learning are
very unsatisfied with the teachers' methods in Online Learning Procedures. Gamma
value = .318 and Sig= .000 show that the respondents completely understand their
lesson with problem-solving and they are satisfied with the method of teaching of their
teachers. This implies that the students believe that they can easily understand their
45
lessons involving problem-solving and it depends on the method of teaching of the
teachers.
This is a support to the study of Pike (1993) titled “The Relationship Between
Perceived Learning and Satisfaction With College: An Alternative View.” The results
have shown that there is a positive relationship between perceived learning and
satisfaction with college: the learners’ perception of their knowledge positively affects
their satisfaction. Students are more likely to understand their lessons, involving
problem-solving, given they are satisfied with their learning.

46
Table 6. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you understand lessons that
involve problem-solving in Online Learning?
Do you understand lessons that involve No, I find it hard Sometimes Yes, always Total
problem-solving in Online Learning?
Satisfied 38 44.71 109 56.77 27 57.45 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 4 4.71 13 6.77 8 17.02 25 7.72
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 45 52.94 125 65.10 35 74.47 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 5 5.88 19 9.90 5 10.64 29 8.95
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 30 35.29 93 48.44 24 51.06 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 4 4.71 21 10.94 7 14.89 32 9.88
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 27 31.76 84 43.75 18 38.30 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 7 8.24 30 15.63 11 23.40 48 14.81
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 26 30.59 86 44.79 16 34.04 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 2 2.35 19 9.90 7 14.89 28 8.64
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 44 51.76 89 46.35 23 48.94 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 6 7.06 38 19.79 15 31.91 59 18.21
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Very Unsatisfied 11 12.94 11 5,73 1 2.13 23 7.10
Satisfied 41 48.24 95 49.48 29 61.70 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 7 8.24 40 20.83 9 19.15 56 17.28
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 35 41.18 109 56.77 27 57.45 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 2 2.35 11 5.73 8 30 21 6.48
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
47
Table 7 shows that more than one-half (56.67%) of the respondents who
sometimes think that it is easy to pass the subject given that it is an online learning
procedure are satisfied with the overall Online Learning Procedures.
Gamma value = .207 and Sig= .021 shows that the respondents think it is sometimes
easy to pass the subject in an online learning method and they are satisfied with the
current online learning procedure. This implies that the students believe that it is easy to
pass the subjects in an online setting and it depends on their satisfaction with the online
learning procedure. Given this online learning procedure, other students think that it is
easy to pass and there is no reason to fail.
This finding supports the study of Betoret, Roselló, and Artiga (2017) titled “Self-
Efficacy, Satisfaction, and Academic Achievement: The Mediator Role of Students'
Expectancy-Value Beliefs,” which they have found that expectancy-value beliefs can
predict student satisfaction. Moreover, students with strong self-efficacy are keen to
visualize successful scenarios and these students tend to experience more satisfaction
than those with low self-efficacy. Students that are confident in passing their subjects
tend to be satisfied with their learning experience.

48
Table 7. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you think that it is easy to
pass the subject given that it is an online learning procedure?
Do you think that it is easy to pass the No, I find it hard Sometimes Yes, always Total
subject given that it is an online learning
procedure?
Slightly Unsatisfied 17 47.22 63 30 23 29.49 103 31.79
Satisfied 10 27.78 122 58.10 42 53.85 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 03 8.33 15 7.14 7 9.87 25 7.72
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 16 44.44 137 65.24 52 66.67 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 3 8.33 18 8.57 8 10.26 29 8.95
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 12 33.33 96 45.71 39 50 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 3 8.33 19 9.05 10 12.82 32 9.88
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 15 41.67 83 39.52 31 39.74 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 6 16.67 27 12.86 15 19.23 48 14.81
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 7 19.44 93 44.29 28 35.90 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 2 5.56 18 8.57 8 10.26 28 8.64
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 17 47.22 101 48.10 38 48.72 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 3 8.33 39 18.57 17 21.79 59 18.21
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 13 36.11 112 53.33 40 51.28 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 4 11.11 35 16.67 17 21.79 56 17.28
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 8 22.22 119 56.67 44 56.41 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 2 5.56 14 6.67 5 6.41 21 6.48
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
49
Table 8 shows that more than half (57.69%) of the respondents who think that
this online learning modality does not prepare them enough for the subjects at the
college level are satisfied with the Online Learning Modality. Gamma value = -.367 and
Sig = .000 shows that even if the respondents are satisfied with their online learning,
they do not think that this online learning modality prepares them enough for the
subjects in college. It means that students do not believe that online learning will help
them in their topics and courses in college even if they are satisfied with their online
learning procedure. A negative relationship between the students’ perception that online
learning can help them with their college courses and their overall satisfaction with
online learning. Students believe that this online learning procedure does not prepare
them enough for college subjects. It is very alarming and only shows that the method of
online learning procedure might fail in preparing the students for higher education in
college.
This is a contradiction to the study of Mendes, Pedro, and Lourenco (2018) titled
“Perceived Service Quality and Students’ Satisfaction in Higher Education: The Influence
of Teaching Methods.” The results have shown that perceived service quality highly
influences student satisfaction but this may differ when students are exposed to different
teaching approaches. Though, there were no reliable sources that studied the influence
of alternative teaching methods on students’ satisfaction and their perception of service
quality.
50
Table 8. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you think that this online
learning modality prepares you enough for the subjects at the college level?
Do you think that this online learning modality prepares you No, I find it Sometimes Yes, always Total
enough for the subjects at the college level? hard
Satisfied 15 57.69 96 63.16 63 43.15 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 6 23.08 10 6.58 9 6.16 25 7.72
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value= -.367 Sig = .000 Pearson’s R = -.230
Satisfied 13 50 103 67.76 89 60.96 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 8 33.77 15 9.87 6 4.11 29 8.95
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value= -.321 Sig= .001 Pearson’s R= -.173
Satisfied 12 46.15 75 49.34 60 41.10 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 10 38.46 14 9.21 8 5.48 32 9.88
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value= -0.356 Sig = .000 Pearson’s R= -.258
Satisfied 7 26.92 66 43.42 56 38.36 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 12 46.15 22 14.47 14 9.59 48 14.81
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value= -.308 Sig= .000 Pearson’s R = -.241
Satisfied 8 30.77 68 44.74 52 35.62 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 5 19.23 14 9.21 9 6.16 28 8.64
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value = -.210 Sig= .011 Pearson’s R= -.143
Satisfied 8 30.77 79 51.97 69 47.26 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 11 42.31 30 19.74 18 12.33 59 18.21
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value = - .260 Sig=.002 Pearson’s R= -.171
Satisfied 11 42.31 83 54.61 71 48.63 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 9 34.62 25 16.45 22 15.07 56 17.28
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value = -.142 Sig=.000 Pearson’s R= -.079
Satisfied 13 50 95 62.50 63 43.15 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 8 30.77 8 5.26 5 3.42 21 6.48
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
51
Overall, there is a significant relationship between the satisfaction and
participation of the respondents in online learning. This neglects the null hypothesis
which states that there is no significant relationship between the students’ satisfaction
and their participation in online learning. When students are participating in their online
classes, they are more likely to be satisfied with the online learning procedure, and vice
versa.
This supports the study of Harsasi, Muzammil, and Sutawijaya (2020) entitled
“Investigating Student Satisfaction in Online Learning: The Role of Student Interaction
and Engagement in Distance Learning University” where it was found out that interaction
among students, the interaction between students and teacher, and interaction between
students and content have positive impact on student engagement and that student
engagement has positive impact on student satisfaction. It, however, contradicted the
study of Bland et al. (2016) titled “Connecting Student Engagement to Student
Satisfaction: A Case Study at East Carolina University” which stated that there were no
statistically significant relationships between student engagement and overall
satisfaction as the researchers found no variation in student satisfaction by race, gender,
or class level. Nonetheless, the results above show that there is a significant relationship
between the students’ satisfaction and their participation in online learning.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION
This section discusses the summary, conclusion, and recommendations of the
study. The first part contains the summary of the study. The second part contains the
major findings based on the results of the study. The third part includes the conclusion
and implications in the conclusion. The fourth part contains the limitations encountered
by the researchers in conducting the study. The last part contains recommendations
based on the collected, analyzed, and interpreted data.
Summary
This study was conducted in order to determine the relationship between the
satisfaction level and participation in online learning of Senior High School students at
Central Philippine University. Moreover, this study was conducted to determine the level
of satisfaction and participation of students in online learning.
This study was conducted on Senior High School Students at Central Philippine
University. The participants of the study were participated by 324 senior high school
students which served as the final respondents of the study and ten participants from the
total population served as respondents for the reliability test.
The online-administered questionnaire was the main instrument to gather the
needed data from the respondents. It was composed of four parts: Part I consists of the
respondents’ identification; Part II which is the satisfaction of the respondents in online
learning; and Part III which consists of the respondent’s participation in online learning.
Also, a suggestion box was given at the end of the questionnaire.
The researchers used the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) for the
reliability test of the questionnaire. Ten participants from the total population served as
53
the sample for the reliability test. Cronbach’s Alpha = .907 shows a strong level of
reliability.
The researchers also used the SPSS to analyze the data gathered from the
respondents. For the level of satisfaction and participation of students, mean score was
used. For the analysis of the relationship of student satisfaction and participation of
Senior High School Students of Central Philippine University, gamma analysis was used.
Major Findings
Based on the results of the study:
1. More than half (53.7%) of the respondents are satisfied with online learning.
2. Around a third (31.8%) of the respondents are slightly unsatisfied with online
learning.
3. Majority (63.3%) of the students are satisfied with their teachers’ methods in
online learning procedures.
4. More than a fifth (24.1%) of the students are slightly unsatisfied with their
teachers’ methods in online learning procedures.
5. Less than half (45.4%) of the respondents are satisfied with the online interaction
between them and their teachers.
6. More than a third (35.8%) of the students are slightly unsatisfied with the online
interaction between them and their teachers.
7. More than a third (39.8%) of the students are satisfied with the online interaction
between them and their classmates.
8. Less than a third (29.0%) of the respondents are slightly unsatisfied with the
online interaction between them and their classmates.
9. More than a third (39.5%) of the respondents are satisfied with the learning
materials provided by the school.

54
10. More than a third (35.8%) of the respondents are slightly unsatisfied with the
learning materials provided by the school.
11. Less than half (48.1%) of the students are satisfied with their teachers' availability
and response when they have questions and clarifications.
12. More than a fourth (28.1%) of the students are slightly unsatisfied with their
teachers' availability and response when you have questions and clarifications
13. More than half (50.9%) of the respondents are satisfied with the resources
relevant to their online classes.
14. More than a fifth (24.7%) of the students are slightly unsatisfied with the
resources relevant to their online classes.
15. More than half (52.8%) of the students are satisfied with the overall online
learning procedure.
16. Less than a third (31.8%) of the students are slightly unsatisfied with the overall
online learning procedure.
17. Majority (85.5%) of the respondents attend online classes regularly.
18. More than a tenth (13.3%) of the students attend online classes sometimes.
19. More than half (66.4%) of the students are sometimes interested in the daily
discussions in online learning.
20. More than a fifth (23.5%) of the students are always interested in the daily
discussions in online learning.
21. Majority (69.8%) of the students absorb all the lessons in online learning
sometimes.
22. More than a fifth (24.1%) of the respondents find it hard to absorb all the lessons
in online learning sometimes.
23. More than half (59.3%) of the respondents understand lessons that involve
problem-solving in online learning sometimes.

55
24. More than a fourth (26.2%) of the students find it hard to understand lessons that
involve problem-solving in online learning.
25. Majority (64.8%) of the students sometimes think that it is easy to pass the
subject given that it is an online learning procedure
26. More than a fifth (24.1%) of the students always think that it is easy to pass the
subject given that it is an online learning procedure
27. Less than half (46.9%) of the students sometimes think that online learning
prepares them enough for the subjects at the college level.
28. Less than half (45.1%) of the students always think that online learning prepares
them enough for the subjects at the college level.
29. Gamma value = .261 and Sig=.038 show that respondents who regularly attend
classes are more likely to be satisfied with the online learning modality.
30. Gamma value = .348 and Sig = .000 show that there is a significant positive
relationship between students’ interest in the daily discussions and their
satisfaction with online learning.
31. Gamma value = .560 and Sig= .000 show that students who find it easy to pass
subjects in online learning are more likely to be satisfied.
32. Gamma value = .318 and Sig= .000 show that respondents who completely
understand their lessons are likely to be satisfied with online learning.
33. Gamma value = .207 and Sig= .021 show that students who understand lessons
that involve problem solving are more likely to be satisfied with online learning.
34. Gamma value = -.367 and Sig = .000 show that respondents do not think online
learning prepares them enough for the subjects in college but are still satisfied.
35. Overall Mean Score = 2.63 shows that the respondents are satisfied with their
overall online learning.

56
36. Overall Mean Score = 2.19 shows that the respondents are highly participating
in online learning.
37. There is a significant relationship between the satisfaction and participation of the
respondents in online learning.
Conclusion
Based on the gathered data, there is a positive relationship between students’
participation and their satisfaction in online learning. According to a study by Harsasi,
Muzammil, and Sutawijaya (2020) entitled “Investigating Student Satisfaction in Online
Learning: The Role of Student Interaction and Engagement in Distance Learning
University”, the results have shown that student engagement has a positive impact on
student satisfaction. Thus, the null hypothesis was neglected. This study proves that
students’ participation significantly contributes to their satisfaction in online learning.
Given this, we can predict students’ satisfaction based on the degree of their
participation in online classes: the more they participate, the greater their satisfaction;
the less they participate, the lower their satisfaction.
Limitations
There are certain potential limits to this research. While the current study
provided some relevant findings and several limitations should be noted. These are the
following limitations of the study:
Sampling Problem. With the least probability to prove that the sample is
representative of the designated population or biased in some way, since researchers
used stratified random sampling, it may still acquire error since it is only an
approximation of the population from which it is drawn. This may result in a
miscalculation of the probability distribution and a false proposition.

57
The lack of previous research studies on the topic. The lack of previous research
studies on the topic limits resources of researchers. The researchers find it difficult to
grasp some information that will help and support the said study. Because of this
limitation, researchers struggled to find a basis for the literature review that would help
lay the foundations for explaining the research topic that is being investigated.
Generalizability of the Data. The main limitation in generalization is that it does
not provide evidence of a causal link for subgroups or individuals. The generalizability of
the findings is limited by sampling issues because the sample included only 324
participants from a single school district, generalizations of the findings to other contexts
should be avoided. The main limitation in generalization is that it does not provide
evidence of a causal link for subgroups or individuals.
The Errors in test administration. A post-test only or after-only survey was used
by the researchers, however, the answer of the respondents are not certain because of
some factors. This will result in confusion to the respondents and have unsure answers.
And also responses could be biased in some ways so this could affect the results or
outcome of the said study.
Reliability and validity of the instruments. The statistical section is an essential
part of any research study. The research methods, as well as the implementation of
statistical instruments and techniques, have evolved over time and have greatly aided
research efforts around the world. However, reliable results and inferences cannot be
made without adequate validation using different statistical methods and experiments.
Pandemic (Covid19). The pandemic greatly limits conducting this study. Due to
Covid-19, researchers were not able to conduct a face to face survey, instead, an online
survey was applied, and hence, sending emails or personal messages takes up a large
58
amount of time and selecting respondents was also hard. As some of the chosen
respondents ignore the researcher’s emails. The pandemic also limits our study in such
way members were not able to meet personally, thus, gathering data, literature, and
sharing ideas or opinions of the study were also limited.
Recommendations
Based on the collected, analyzed, and interpreted data, the researchers
concluded that there is a positive correlation between the satisfaction level and
participation of senior high school students in online learning.
Considering the findings and conclusions of the present study, the researchers
would like to recommend the following:
1. The administration, including the teachers, should provide good and
accessible learning materials and resources to students during online learning. In
this way, students will be more satisfied in this mode of learning.
2. In order to attain better student participation results, teachers should be
more responsive and provide better learning support to students. Through this, they
will be able to hear the perspective of students regarding their online classes or
discussions and adjust to each other’s needs in order to achieve their goals.
3. Interactive learning can also help students to be more satisfied and
participate well in online learning. Teachers should implement more activities that will
help motivate the students to interact more with them during online classes. Students
should also be given more opportunities to work interactively with their classmates.
4. Future researchers should use a wider scope of student respondents
from different grade levels and institutions in order to have a larger number of
59
responses which can help achieve more generalized data and can be a basis for
more research studies in the future.
5. Future researchers are recommended to determine the factors that affect
student satisfaction and participation in online classes. In this way, the perceived
factors will be given more focus, thus will continuously improve, which will then lead
to acquiring better results in this mode of learning.

60
References
A Brief Overview of Senior High Strands in the Philippines. (2016). Retrieved November
9, 020 from https://www.enderuncolleges.com/senior-high-strand/
Abdella, G., Al-Sheeb, B., & Hamouda, A. M. (2018). Investigating Determinants of
Student Satisfaction in the First Year of College in a Public University in the State
of Qatar. Education Research International, vol. 2018, Article ID 7194106.
Retrieved November 9, 2020 from https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7194106
Abdullah, B. & Narad, A. (2016). Academic Performance of Senior Secondary School
Students: Influence of Parental Encouragement and School Environment.
Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, vol. 8, 12. Retrieved
November 11, 2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304989961_Academic_Performance_of
_Senior_Secondary_School_Students_Influence_of_Parental_Encouragement_a
nd_School_Environment
Afrah, N. A. & Dhaqane, M. K. (2016). Satisfaction of students and academic
performance in Benadir University. Journal of Education and Practice, vol. 7, no.
24, pp. 59–63. Retrieved October 3, 2020 from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1112855.pdf
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online
education in the United States. Newburyport, MA: Sloan Consortium.
Almusharraf, N. & Khahro, S. (2020). Students Satisfaction with Online Learning
Experiences during the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Emerging
Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(21), 246-267. Kassel, Germany:

61
International Journal of Emerging Technology in Learning. Retrieved April 2,
2021 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/218355/.
Anderson, T., Archer, W., & Garrison, D., (2000). Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based
Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. Internet and Higher
Education, 11(2), 1-14. Retrieved October 3, 2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222474115_Critical_Inquiry_in_a_Text-
Based_Environment_Computer_Conferencing_in_Higher_Education
Artino, A. R. (2007). Online Military Training: Using a Social Cognitive View of Motivation
and Self-regulation to Understand Students’ Satisfaction, Perceived Learning,
and Choice. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(3), 191-202. Retrieved
October 4, 2020 from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ875059
Astin, Alexander. (1984). Student Involvement: A Development Theory for Higher
Education. Journal of College Student Development. 40. 518-529. Retrieved April
2, 2021 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220017441_Student_Involvement_A_D
evelopment_Theory_for_Higher_Education/citation/download
Avgerinou, M., Fernandes, R. & Rubin, B. (2013). The Effects of Technology on the
Community of Inquiry and Satisfaction with Online Courses. The Internet and
Higher Education. 17. 48–57. 10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.006. Retrieved October
3, 2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257496484_The_effects_of_technology
_on_the_Community_of_Inquiry_and_satisfaction_with_online_courses
Ayub, N. (2020). Effect of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation on Academic Performance.
Retrieved last December 14, 2020 from

62
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255712855_Effect_of_Intrinsic_and_Ex
trinsic_Motivation_on_Academic_Performance
Aziz, Fakhra; Quraishi, Uzm. (2018). Factors behind Classroom Participation of
Secondary School Students. Eric Journal: Institution of Education Sciences.
Retrieved April 2, 2021 from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1170644
Bai, Lili & Liao, Hsin-Ya. (2018). The Relation Between Interest Congruence and College
Major Satisfaction: Evidence From the Basic Interest Measures. Journal of
Career Assessment. 27. 106907271879396. 10.1177/1069072718793966.
Bakia, Marianne et al. (2013). The Effectiveness of Online and Blended Learning: A
Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature. Teachers College Record. 115. Retrieved April
2, 2021 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286792735_The_Effectiveness_of_Online_and
_Blended_Learning_A_Meta-Analysis_of_the_Empirical_Literature/citation/download
Bandura, A. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective. Annual review of
psychology. 52. 1-26. 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1. Retrieved October 17,
2020 from https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bell and, B. et al. (2013). A Predictive Study of Student Satisfaction in Online Education
Programs. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 14.
107-127. 10.19173/irrodl.v14i1.1338. Retrieved October 4, 2020 from
Berg, G. and Simonson, M. (2016). Distance learning: Encyclopædia Britannica.
Retrieved November 9, 2020 from https://www.britannica.com/topic/distance-
learning
63
Bernard, R.M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R.F. et al. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended
learning and technology use in higher Eucation: from the general to the applied.
Retrieved April 2. 2021 from https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-013-9077-3
Blackley, S., Rahmawati, Y., Fitriani, E., Sheffield, R. & Koul, R. (2018). Using a
Makerspace approach to engage Indonesian primary students with STEM.
Issues in Educational Research, 28(1), 18-42. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
http://www.iier.org.au/iier28/blackley.pdf
Bland et al. (2016), Connecting Student Engagement to Student Satisfaction: A Case
Study at East Carolina University. Journal of Assessment and Institutional
Effectiveness. Vol. 6, No. 2. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/jasseinsteffe.6.2.0123?seq=1
Blomeyer, R., Clark, T., & Smith, R. (2005). A Synthesis of New Research on K-12
Online Learning. Retrieved November 9, 2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304827914_A_Synthesis_of_New_Research_
on_K-12_Online_Learning
Bordelon, D. E. (2012). Where have we been? Where are we going? The evolution of
American higher education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 55(5),
100-105. Doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.483. Retrieved October 3, 2020 from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042812039456
Bryant, J., & Bodfish, S. (2013). The Relationship of Student Satisfaction to Key
Indicators for Colleges and Universities. Retrieved October 4, 2020 from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED570978
Chigeza, P., & Halbert, K. (2014). Navigating E-Learning and Blended Learning for Pre-
service Teachers: Redesigning for Engagement, Access and Efficiency.

64
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(11). Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2014v39n11.8
Canpolat, M., Kuzu, S., Yıldırım, B.,& Canpolat, S. (2015). Active listening strategies of
academically successful university students. Eurasian Journal of Educational
Research, 60,163-180, Doi: 10.14689/ejer.2015.60.10. Retrieved April 2, 2021
from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1076695.pdf
Cotton, S., Dollard, M. & Jonge, J. (2002). Stress and Student Job Design: Satisfaction,
Well-Being, and Performance in University Students. International Journal of
Stress Management. 9. 147-162. 10.1023/A: 1015515714410. Retrieved October
17, 2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225470183_Stress_and_Student_Job_
Design_Satisfaction_Well-Being_and_Performance_in_University_Students
Croxton, R. (2014). The Role of Interactivity in Student Satisfaction and Persistence in
Online Learning. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, vol. 10, no.
2, pp.314–325. Retrieved October 17, 2020 from
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Role-of-Interactivity-in-Student-
Satisfaction-Croxton/2a3cab58d3d0637d20d907d67fecf3c346851393
Davies, J. & Graff, M. (2005), Performance in e‐learning: online participation and student
grades. British Educational Research Association. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00542.x
Debele, Efa & Kelbisa, Ephrem. (2017). The Role of active learning methods for
classroom participation: The case of first year students of sociology in Samara
University. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 22. 11-18. 10.9790/0837-
2207131118.
65
Diteeyont, W., Keengwe, J., & Lawson-Body, A. (2012). Student and Instructor
Satisfaction with E-learning Tools in Online Learning Environments. Psychology,
Computer Science IJICTE. 8. 76-86. 10.4018/jicte.2012010108. Retrieved
October 4, 2020 from https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Student-and-
Instructor-Satisfaction-with-E-learning-Keengwe
Diteeyont/ef56a532d1e3257f6f9c6b740a56e7f940565ed1
Doménech-Betoret, F., Abellán-Roselló, L., & Gómez-Artiga, A. (2017). Self-Efficacy,
Satisfaction, and Academic Achievement: The Mediator Role of Students'
Expectancy-Value Beliefs. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 1193.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01193
Dziuban, Chuck & Moskal, Patsy & Thompson, Jessica & Kramer, Lauren & DeCantis,
Genevieve & Hermsdorfer, Andrea. (2015). Student Satisfaction with Online
Learning: Is it a Psychological Contract. Journal of Asynchronous Learning
Network. 19. 10.24059/olj.v19i2.496. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282699144_Student_Satisfaction_with_
Online_Learning_Is_it_a_Psychological_Contract/citation/download
El-Hilali, Nabil & Al-Jaber, Sara & Hussein, Lina. (2015). Students’ Satisfaction and
Achievement and Absorption Capacity in Higher Education. Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences. 177. 420-427. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.384.
Elliott, K. & Shin, D. (2002). Student Satisfaction: an alternative approach to assessing
this important concept. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management,
vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 197–209, 2002. Retrieved October 4, 2020 from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1360080022000013518
66
Fernando, R. L. s., Lalitha, S. & Weerasinghe, S. (2017). Students’ Satisfaction in
Higher Education Literature Review. Retrieved November 9, 2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325022530_Students'_Satisfaction_in_
Higher_ Philippine Journal of Science
Formoso (2016). Development of a Senior High School Career Decision Tool Based on
Social Cognitive Career Theory. Philippine Journal of Science. 146 (4): 445-455,
ISSN 0031 – 7683. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://philjournalsci.dost.gov.ph/images/pdf/pjs_pdf/vol146no4/development_of_
a_senior_high_school_career_decision_tool.pdf
Gbollie, C. & Keamu, H.P. (2017). Student Academic Performance: The Role of
Motivation, Strategies, and Perceived Factors Hindering Liberian Junior and
Senior High School Students Learning. Education Research International, vol.
2017, Article ID 1789084. Retrieved November 11, 2020 from
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/1789084
Gloeckner, G., Kaminski, K. & Switzer, J. (2009). Workforce readiness: A study of
university students’ fluency with information technology. Computers & Education,
53(2), 228-233. Retrieved October 3, 2020 from
https://www.dhi.ac.uk/san/waysofbeing/data/economy-crone-kaminski-2009a.pdf
Gonzales, B.(2016). Students as Customers: The New Normal in Higher Education, The
evolution: A modern campus illumination, Published on October 28, 2016.
Retrieved April 2, 2021 from https://evolllution.com/attracting-
students/customer_service/students-as-customers-the-new-normal-in-higher-
education/
67
Goulimaris, D. (2015). The Relation between Distance Education Students' Motivation
And Satisfaction. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 16.
10.17718/tojde.50678. Retrieved last December 14, 2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277609610_The_Relation_Between_Di
stance_Education_Students'_Motivation_And_Satisfaction
Hrastinski, Stefan. (2009). A theory of online learning as online participation. Computers
& Education. 52. 78-82. 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.009. Retrieved April2, 2021
from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222258718_A_theory_of_online_learni
ng_as_online_participation/citation/download
Josias, B. (2005, November). The Relationship between Job Satisfaction and
Absenteeism in a Selected Field Services Section within an Electricity Utility in
the Western Cape. Retrieved April 06, 2021, from
http://etd.uwc.ac.za/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11394/1476/Josias_MCOM_2005.pdf
Karamanska, D. and Todorova, M. (2015). A study of motivation and satisfaction of
students in E-learning environment. Applied Technologies and Innovations,
Vol.11, Issue2, pp.82-89. Retrieved last December 13 from
http://dx.doi.org/10.15208/ati.2015.09
Kazanidis and Pellas (2015). Factors Influencing E-Learning and Blended Learning in
Relation to Learning Outcome, Student Satisfaction and Engagement. . The
Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 16(1), pp. 46-55. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
68
Keengwe, J. & Kidd, T. (2010). Towards Best Practice in Online Learning and Teaching
in Higher Education. J Online Learn Teach. 6. 533-541. Retrieved November 11,
2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285633345_Towards_best_practice_in
_online_learning_and_teaching_in_higher_education
Kuo, Yu-Chun & Walker, Andrew & Belland, Brian & Schroder, Kerstin. (2013). A
Predictive Study of Student Satisfaction in Online Education Programs.
International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 14. 107-127.
10.19173/irrodl.v14i1.1338. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
Lathrop, A. (2011). Impact of Student Motivation in Online Learning Activities. Theses,
Dissertations, and Student Research in Agronomy and Horticulture. Retrieved
November 10, 2020 from https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/agronhortdiss/24
Lim, H. (2007). Community of Inquiry in an Online Undergraduate Information
Technology Course. Retrieved October 3, 2020 from
http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol6/JITEv6p153-168Lim258.pdf
Loeb, S. (2020). How Effective Is Online Learning? What the Research Does and
Doesn’t Tell Us. Education Week. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://www.edweek.org/technology/opinion-how-effective-is-online-learning-
what-the-research-does-and-doesnt-tell-us/2020/03
Long, W. A. (2011). Your Predictable Adolescent. Charleston, SC: BookSurge
Publishing.
Lotitch, P.(2016). Did You Know That There Are 5 Levels of Customer Satisfaction? The
Thriving Small Business.

69
Maclean, R. & Ordoñez, V. (2000). Education in Asia: Some Current Issues, Concerns
and Prospects. Retrieved November 9, 2020 from
http://www.ibe.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/archive/Publications/Prospects/
ProspectsOpenFiles/pr115ofe.pdf
Mahad, K. D. (2016). Satisfaction of Students and Academic Performance in Benadir
University. Journal of Education and Practice, Vol.7, No.24. Retrieved November
9, 2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334290373_Satisfaction_of_Students_
and_Academic_Performance_in_Benadir_University
Martinez & Uy. (2016). The implementation of the K to 12 Basic Education Program in
the Philippines. Department of Education.
Martirosyan, N., Saxon, D., and Wanjohi R. (2014). Student Satisfaction and Academic
Performance in Armenian Higher Education. American International Journal of
Contemporary Research, Vol. 4 No. 2. Retrieved last December 12, 2020 from
http://www.aijcrnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_2_February_2014/1.pdf
Mendes, Luis & Pedro, Eugénia & Lourenço, Luis. (2018). Perceived Service Quality and
Students’ Satisfaction in Higher Education: The Influence of Teaching Methods.
International Journal for Quality Research. Forthcoming. 10.18421/IJQR12.01-
10.
Meyer, K. (2014). Face-to-face versus threaded Discussions: the role of time and
Higher-order thinking, JALN Volume 7, Issue 3. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
http://itecideas.pbworks.com/f/v7n3_meyer.pdf
70
Montemayor, M. T. (2018). Senior High School Implementation Exceeds DepEd
Outlook. Retrieved November 9, 2020 from
https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1057609
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A Systems View of Online
Learning. Retrieved October 3, 2020 from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00131911.2020.1766204
Motefakker, N.(2016). The Study of the Level of Satisfaction of the Students of the
Faculty of Social Sciences with Welfare Services of Imam Khomeini International
University of Qazvin, Procedia Economics and Finance, Volume 36, ISSN 2212-
5671. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-
5671(16)30052-1.
Murphy, C. B. (2020). Pros and Cons of Stratified Random Sampling. Retrieved October
17, 2020 from https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/041615/what-are-
advantages-and-disadvantages-stratified-random-sampling.asp
Murray, N. (2018). Understanding Student Participation in the Internationalized
University: Some Issues, Challenges, and Strategies. Education Sciences.
Retrieved April 2. 2021 from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1200064.pdf
Muzammıl, M, Sutawıjaya, A , Harsası, M . (2020). INVESTIGATING STUDENT
SATISFACTION IN ONLINE LEARNING: THE ROLE OF STUDENT
INTERACTION AND ENGAGEMENT IN DISTANCE LEARNING UNIVERSITY.
Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, IODL 88-96. DOI:
10.17718/tojde.770928. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tojde/issue/56079/770928
71
Northey, Gavin & Bucic, Tania & Chylinski, Mathew & Govind, Rahul. (2015). Increasing
Student Engagement Using Asynchronous Learning. Journal of Marketing
Education. 37. 10.1177/0273475315589814. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279158746_Increasing_Student_Engag
ement_Using_Asynchronous_Learning
Pham, L., Limbu, Y.B., Bui, T.K. et al. Does e-learning service quality influence e-
learning student satisfaction and loyalty? Evidence from Vietnam. Int J Educ
Technol High Educ 16, 7 (2019). Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0136-3
Pike, G. (1993). The Relationship between Perceived Learning and Satisfaction with
College: An Alternative View. Research in Higher Education, 34(1), 23-40.
Retrieved April 6, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40196094
Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online Technologies Self-efficacy and Self-regulated Learning as
Predictors of Final Grade and Satisfaction in College-level Online Courses.
American Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 72-89. Retrieved October 3,
2020 from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08923640802039024
Rapposelli, J.A (2014). The Correlation between Attendance and Participation with
Respect to Student Achievement in an Online Learning Environment. Institute of
Education Sciences. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from https://eric.ed.gov/?
id=ED568182
Rosmayanti, D. and Yanuarti, H. (2019). The Relationship between Students’ Motivation
and their Learning Achievement. Professional Journal of English Education, vol1
i6 p783-788. Retrieved last December 17, 2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337253145_THE_RELATIONSHIP_BE
72
TWEEN_STUDENTS'_MOTIVATION_AND_THEIR_LEARNING_ACHIEVEMEN
Ryan, Sarah & Kaufman, Julia & Greenhouse, Joel & She, Ruicong & Shi, Judy. (2015).
The effectiveness of blended online learning courses at the community college
level. Community College Journal of Research and Practice. 40. 1-14.
10.1080/10668926.2015.1044584. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282998772_The_effectiveness_of_blen
ded_online_learning_courses_at_the_community_college_level/citation/downloa
Štimac, H. and Šimić, M. L. (2012). Competitiveness in Higher Education: a Need for
Marketing Orientation and Service Quality. Economics & Sociology, Vol. 5, No 2, 2012,
pp. 23-34. Retrieved November 9, 2020 from https://www.economics-
sociology.eu/files/06_Stimac_Leko_1_1.pdf
The K-12 Basic Education Program. (2012). Retrieved November 8, 2020 from
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/k-12-old/
Vonderwell, Selma & Zachariah, Sajit. (2005). Factors that Influence Participation In
Online Learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 38.
10.1080/15391523.2005.10782457. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234637459_Factors_that_Influence_Pa
rticipation_In_Online_Learning/citation/download
Weigert, A. J. (1991). Mixed Emotions: Certain Steps Toward Understanding
Ambivalence. Retrieved October 4, 2020 from
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1991-97985-000
73
Wenger (1998). Communities of Practice as a Social Theory of Learning. British Journal
of Educational Studies. Volume 64, 2016 - Issue 2. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2015.1133799
Yukselturk, E. & Yildirim, Z. (2008). Investigation of Interaction, Online Support, Course
Structure and Flexibility as the Contributing Factors to Students’ Satisfaction in
an Online Certificate Program. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 51-65.
Retrieved October 3, 2020 from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ825101
Zaheer, Muhammad & Babar, Masroor & Gondal, Uzma & Qadri, Mubashar. (2015). E-
Learning and Student Satisfaction. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295400881_ELearning_and_Student_S
atisfaction
74
APPENDICES
75
Appendix A
Letter to the Research Validator
January 27, 2021
Engr. Rex Bieren Deferia

Senior Mechanical Engineer
ACE Medical Center Iloilo
Iloilo City, Iloilo
Dear Engr. Deferia,
Greetings!
We, the members of the research group conducting research study entitled: “THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE SATISFACTION LEVEL AND PARTICIPATION OF
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ONLINE LEARNING” need your expertise in
validating the questionnaire/survey that serves as the instrument of the study that we
intend to conduct. Knowing your expertise and skills in the field of
education/business/other areas, we are very confident that you can help us determine
the errors in our instrument and help us correct them.
Attach herewith is the copy of our research objectives, hypotheses, schematic diagram,
and our research instrument.
We are hoping for your favorable response regarding this matter.
Thank you and God bless.
Truly yours,
Janiela Marie Castaño

Group Leader
Noted:
Ella Lee P. Galve

Research Adviser
76
Appendix B
Letter to the Principal
February 1, 2021
Edgar A. Eriman, M.Ed.

Principal
Senior High School
Dear Sir,
We, the members of research group are conducting a research study entitled
“THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE SATISFACTION LEVEL AND PARTICIPATION
OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ONLINE LEARNING”.
The target population of this study are the Grade 11 and 12 learners of University Senior
High School. We would like to ask your permission to allow us to gather data for our
research which will involve Grade 11 and 12 learners of the University Senior High
School.
With regards to liability, the members of this group can provide you with the assurance
that this is solely for educational purposes. Herewith is signed by our research teacher,
Ella Lee P. Galve, confirming our purpose.
Sincerely,
Janiela Marie P. Castaño

Group Leader
Noted:
Ella Lee P. Galve

Research Adviser
77
Appendix C
Letter to the Secretary
January 29, 2021
Ariane Rose Angelie Tolosa

Secretary
Senior High School Department
Dear Ma’am,
We, the Senior High School students currently taking up Research Report Project under
Miss Ella Lee P. Galve, would like to request from your good office the list of the Grade
11 and Grade 12 learners who were officially enrolled in our prestigious University for
the second semester A.Y 2020-2021.
The data are needed for our research entitled:

OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ONLINE LEARNING”
We are hoping for your positive response regarding this matter.
Respectfully yours,
Janiela Marie Castaño Al Thea Alpis Ellian John Blance

Name Name Name
Leader Member Member
Jan Matthew Calvo Ryan Deferia Iiamay Lyn Diestro

Name Name Name
Member Member Member
Nj Farnazo Ned Julhean Joaquin Angel Lou Rala

Name Name Name
Noted:
Ella Lee P. Galve

Research Adviser
78
Appendix D
Letter to the Respondents
February 8, 2021
Dear Respondents,
Christian greetings!
The undersigned students are conducting their study entitled:

OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ONLINE LEARNING”. We are asking for
your cooperation to answer our research instrument honestly. Rest assured that the
collected data will be dealt with confidentiality and will be used solely for educational
purposes.
Yours truly,
Name Name Name
Leader Member Member
Jan Matthew Calvo Ryan Deferia Iiamay Lyn Diestro

Name Name Name
Nj Farnazo Ned Julhean Joaquin Angel Lou Rala

Name Name Name
Janiela Marie Castaño Al Thea Alpis Ellian John Blance
Noted:
Ella Lee P. Galve

Research Adviser
Endorsed:
Edgar A. Eriman
SHS/Principal
79
Appendix E
Letter to the Panel Member 1
April 20, 2021
THEA LYN SALAYA

Assistant Principal
University Senior High School Department
Dear Ma’am Salaya,
Christian Greetings!
The Practical Research 2 STEM 12-18 will be having their final research defense
schedules from April 26, 2021 to May 7, 2021. On behalf of my students, I would like to
invite you to be a member of the panel for the research proposal of the research paper
with the research title:
The researchers are:

1. Alpis, Al Thea
2. Blance, Ellian John
3. Calvo, Jan Matthew
4. Castaño, Janiela Marie
5. Deferia, Ryan
6. Diestro, Iiamay Lyn
7. Farnazo, Nj
8. Joaquin, Ned Julhean
9. Rala, Angel Lou
Defense schedule will be on insert date and time via Zoom Meeting.
Herewith, I am sending you the research manuscript for your perusal. Looking forward to
a favorable response regarding this matter.
Kind regards,
ELLA LEE P. GALVE

Research Adviser
80
Appendix F
April 20, 2021
JAIME MERCADO III

Assistant Principal
Dear Sir Mercado,
The Practical Research 2 STEM 12-18 will be having their final research defense

1. Alpis, Al Thea
5. Deferia, Ryan
7. Farnazo, Nj
9. Rala, Angel Lou
Kind regards,
ELLA LEE P. GALVE

Research Adviser
81
Appendix G
April 20, 2021
SHENA JEAN ARCELIN

Assistant Principal
Dear Ma’am Arcelin,
The Practical Research 2 STEM 12- 18 will be having their final research defense

1. Alpis, Al Thea
5. Deferia, Ryan
7. Farnazo, Nj
9. Rala, Angel Lou
Kind regards,
ELLA LEE P. GALVE

Research Adviser
82
Appendix H
Reliability Test Results
Overall
RELIABILITY
/VARIABLES=Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14
/SCALE('ALL VARIABLES') ALL
/MODEL=ALPHA
/STATISTICS=DESCRIPTIVE CORR
/SUMMARY=TOTAL.
Reliability
Warnings
The determinant of the covariance matrix is zero or approximately zero. Statistics based
on its inverse matrix cannot be computed and they are displayed as system missing
values.
Scale: ALL VARIABLES
Case Processing Summary
N %
Cases Valid 10 100.0
Excludeda 0 .0
Total 10 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all

variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Based on
Alpha Standardized Items N of Items
.907 .906 14
83
84
85
86
Students Satisfaction Level
RELIABILITY
/VARIABLES=Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8
/MODEL=ALPHA.
Reliability
N %
Excludeda 0 .0
Total 10 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the

procedure.
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.893 8
87
Academic Performance
RELIABILITY
/VARIABLES=Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14
/MODEL=ALPHA.
Reliability
N %
Excludeda 0 .0
Total 10 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the

procedure.
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.688 6
88
Appendix I
Research Questionnaire
Note: These are questions for a study the researchers are conducting for our Practical
Research II course. By participating in this survey, you are indicating that you
understand that your responses are anonymous and will not be identified with you in any
way. This survey should take no more than 10 minutes of your time. Input the correct
information and encircle the number of your choice. There are no wrong or right
answers.
A. Respondent’s Identification
Respondent No._______
A.1 Name (Optional):_______________________________
A.2 Email:______________________________________
A.3 Year & Strand:_______________________________________
B. Students Satisfaction Level Grade Satisfaction Level

Are you satisfied with the Online Learning 1 Very Unsatisfied
Procedure? 2 Slightly Unsatisfied
3 Satisfied
4 Very Satisfied
Are you satisfied with your teacher’s method 1 Very Unsatisfied
in Online Learning Procedures? 2 Slightly Unsatisfied
3 Satisfied
4 Very Satisfied
Are you satisfied with the online interaction 1 Very Unsatisfied
between you and your teachers? 2 Slightly Unsatisfied
3 Satisfied
4 Very Satisfied
Are you satisfied with the online interaction 1 Very Unsatisfied
between you and your classmates? 2 Slightly Unsatisfied
3 Satisfied
4 Very Satisfied
Are you satisfied with learning materials 1 Very Unsatisfied
provided by the school? 2 Slightly Unsatisfied
3 Satisfied
4 Very Satisfied
Are you satisfied with the teacher’s 1 Very Unsatisfied
availability and response when you have 2 Slightly Unsatisfied
questions and clarifications? 3 Satisfied
4 Very Satisfied
Are you satisfied with the resources like video 1 Very Unsatisfied
presentations in relevance to your online 2 Slightly Unsatisfied
classes? 3 Satisfied
4 Very Satisfied
89
Overall, are you satisfied with the whole 1 Very Unsatisfied

Online learning Procedure? 2 Slightly Unsatisfied
3 Satisfied
4 Very Satisfied
C. Student Participation
Do you attend your Online Class regularly? 1 No, I find it hard
2 Sometimes
3 Yes, I always
Are you interested on the daily discussion in 1 No, I find it hard
Online Learning? 2 Sometimes
3 Yes, I always
From your own perspective, do you absorb all 1 No, I find it hard
the lessons in online learning? 2 Sometimes
3 Yes, I always
Do you find it hard to understand lessons that 1 No, I find it hard
involve problem-solving in online learning? 2 Sometimes
3 Yes, I always
Do you think that is easy to pass the subject 1 No, I find it hard
since it an online learning procedure? 2 Sometimes
3 Yes, I always
Do you think that this online learning 1 No, I find it hard
modality prepares you enough for the 2 Sometimes
subjects at the college level? 3 Yes, I always
Since we are graduating this 2021, what are your suggestions to improve the overall
satisfactions of students in online Learning?
90
Appendix J
Certification for Plagiarism Checking
91
Appendix K
Tables
Table 1. Student Satisfaction in Online Learning

Very Slightly Satisfied Very Total
Unsatisfie Unsatisfie Satisfied
d d
Level of satisfaction f % f % f % f % f %
Are you satisfied with the Online 22 6.8 103 31.8 174 53.7 25 7.7 324 100
Learning Modality?
Are you satisfied with your 12 3.7 78 24.1 205 63.3 29 9.0 324 100
teachers' methods in Online
Learning Procedures?
teachers?
classmates?
Are you satisfied with the learning 52 16.0 116 35.8 128 39.5 28 8.6 324 100
materials provided by the school?
teachers' availability and response
when you have questions and
clarifications?
resources like video presentations
relevant to your online classes?
Overall, are you satisfied with the 29 9.0 103 31.8 171 52.8 21 6.5 324 100
Online Learning Procedure?
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8
Mean 2.62 2.77 2.56 2.53 2.41 2.79 2.78 2.57

Score
Overall Satisfaction 2.63 S
Table 2. Student Participation in Online Learning

No, I find it Sometimes Yes, always Total Mean
Academic hard Score
Performance f % f % f % f %
Do you attend your 4 1.2 43 13.3 277 85.5 324 100.0 2.84
92
Online Class
regularly?
Are you interested in 33 10.2 215 66.4 76 23.5 324 100.0 2.13
the daily discussions
in Online Learning?
From your own 78 24.1 226 69.8 20 6.2 324 100.0 1.82
perspective, do you
absorb all the lessons
in Online Learning?
Do you understand 85 26.2 192 59.3 47 14.5 324 100.0 1.88
lessons that involve
problem-solving in
Online Learning?
Do you think that it is 36 11.1 210 64.8 78 24.1 324 100.0 2.13
easy to pass the
subject given that it is
an online learning
procedure?
Do you think that this 26 8.0 152 46.9 146 45.1 324 100.0 2.37
online learning
modality prepares you
enough for the
subjects at the college
level?
Overall mean score 2.19
93
Table 3. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you attend your Online Class
regularly?
Do you attend your Online Class regularly? No, I find it hard Sometimes Yes, always Total
Satisfied 2 50.0 14 32.56 158 57.04 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 0 0.0 5 11.63 20 7.22 25 7.72
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Satisfied 2 50 24 55.81 179 64.62 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 0 0 5 11.63 24 8.66 29 8.95
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Satisfied 1 25 20 46.51 126 45.49 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 1 25 4 9.30 27 9.75 32 9.88
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Satisfied 1 25 15 34.88 113 40.79 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 1 25 4 9.30 43 15.52 48 14.81
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Satisfied 0 0 11 25.58 117 42.24 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 2 50 2 4.65 24 8.66 28 8.64
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Satisfied 1 25 22 51.16 133 48.01 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 1 25 7 16.28 51 18.41 59 18.21
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Satisfied 2 50 19 44.19 144 51.99 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 0 0 5 11.63 51 18.41 56 17.28
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
Satisfied 2 50 20 46.51 149 53.79 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 0 0 3 6.98 18 6.50 21 6.48
Total 4 100 43 100 277 100 324 100
94
Table 4. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Are you interested in the daily
discussions in Online Learning?
Are you interested in the daily discussions No, I find it hard Sometimes Yes, always Total
in Online Learning?
Satisfied 7 21.21 124 57.67 43 56.58 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 2 6.06 12 5.58 11 14.47 25 7.72
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 14 42.42 149 69.30 42 55.26 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 1 3.03 12 5.58 16 21.05 29 8.95
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 10 30.30 101 46.98 36 47.37 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 2 6.06 15 6.98 15 19.74 32 9.88
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 9 27.27 90 41.86 30 39.47 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 3 9.09 26 12.09 19 25 48 14.81
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 6 18.18 92 42.79 30 39.47 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 3 9.09 10 4.65 15 18.74 28 8.64
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 10 30.30 111 51.63 35 46.05 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 7 21.21 27 12.56 25 32.89 59 18.21
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 9 27.27 120 55.81 36 47.37 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 3 9.09 31 14.42 22 28.95 56 17.28
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
Satisfied 7 21.21 122 56.74 42 55.26 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 2 6.06 6 2.79 13 17.11 21 6.48
Total 33 100 215 100 76 100 324 100
95
Table 5. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: From your own perspective, do
you absorb all the lessons in Online Learning?
From your own perspective, do you absorb No, I find it hard Sometimes Yes, always Total
all the lessons in Online Learning?
Satisfied 27 34.62 135 59.73 12 60 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 3 3.85 18 7.96 4 20 25 7.72
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 40 51.28 152 67.26 13 65 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 5 6.41 20 8.85 4 20 29 8.95
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 29 37.18 107 47.35 11 55 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 3 3.85 22 9.73 7 35 32 9.88
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 19 24.36 100 44.25 10 50 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 8 10.26 31 13.72 9 45 48 14.81
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 21 26.92 100 44.25 7 35 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 4 5.13 21 9.29 3 15 28 8.64
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 30 38.46 117 51.77 9 45 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 12 15.38 40 17.70 7 35 59 18.21
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 32 41.03 121 53.54 12 60 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 8 10.26 42 18.58 16 30 56 17.28
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
Satisfied 27 34.62 131 57.96 13 65 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 2 2.56 13 5.75 6 30 21 6.48
Total 78 100 226 100 20 100 324 100
96
Table 6. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you understand lessons that
involve problem-solving in Online Learning?
Do you understand lessons that involve No, I find it hard Sometimes Yes, always Total
problem-solving in Online Learning?
Satisfied 38 44.71 109 56.77 27 57.45 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 4 4.71 13 6.77 8 17.02 25 7.72
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 45 52.94 125 65.10 35 74.47 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 5 5.88 19 9.90 5 10.64 29 8.95
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 30 35.29 93 48.44 24 51.06 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 4 4.71 21 10.94 7 14.89 32 9.88
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 27 31.76 84 43.75 18 38.30 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 7 8.24 30 15.63 11 23.40 48 14.81
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 26 30.59 86 44.79 16 34.04 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 2 2.35 19 9.90 7 14.89 28 8.64
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 44 51.76 89 46.35 23 48.94 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 6 7.06 38 19.79 15 31.91 59 18.21
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 41 48.24 95 49.48 29 61.70 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 7 8.24 40 20.83 9 19.15 56 17.28
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
Satisfied 35 41.18 109 56.77 27 57.45 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 2 2.35 11 5.73 8 30 21 6.48
Total 85 100 192 100 47 100 324 100
97
Table 7. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you think that it is easy to
pass the subject given that it is an online learning procedure?
Do you think that it is easy to pass the No, I find it hard Sometimes Yes, always Total
subject given that it is an online learning
procedure?
Slightly Unsatisfied 17 47.22 63 30 23 29.49 103 31.79
Satisfied 10 27.78 122 58.10 42 53.85 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 03 8.33 15 7.14 7 9.87 25 7.72
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 16 44.44 137 65.24 52 66.67 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 3 8.33 18 8.57 8 10.26 29 8.95
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 12 33.33 96 45.71 39 50 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 3 8.33 19 9.05 10 12.82 32 9.88
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 15 41.67 83 39.52 31 39.74 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 6 16.67 27 12.86 15 19.23 48 14.81
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 7 19.44 93 44.29 28 35.90 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 2 5.56 18 8.57 8 10.26 28 8.64
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 17 47.22 101 48.10 38 48.72 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 3 8.33 39 18.57 17 21.79 59 18.21
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 13 36.11 112 53.33 40 51.28 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 4 11.11 35 16.67 17 21.79 56 17.28
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
Satisfied 8 22.22 119 56.67 44 56.41 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 2 5.56 14 6.67 5 6.41 21 6.48
Total 36 100 210 100 78 100 324 100
98
Table 8. Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you think that this online
learning modality prepares you enough for the subjects at the college level?
Do you think that this online learning modality prepares you No, I find it Sometimes Yes, always Total
enough for the subjects at the college level? hard
Satisfied 15 57.69 96 63.16 63 43.15 174 53.70
Very Satisfied 6 23.08 10 6.58 9 6.16 25 7.72
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value= -.367 Sig = .000 Pearson’s R = -.230
Satisfied 13 50 103 67.76 89 60.96 205 63.27
Very Satisfied 8 33.77 15 9.87 6 4.11 29 8.95
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value= -.321 Sig= .001 Pearson’s R= -.173
Satisfied 12 46.15 75 49.34 60 41.10 147 45.37
Very Satisfied 10 38.46 14 9.21 8 5.48 32 9.88
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value= -0.356 Sig = .000 Pearson’s R= -.258
Satisfied 7 26.92 66 43.42 56 38.36 129 39.81
Very Satisfied 12 46.15 22 14.47 14 9.59 48 14.81
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Satisfied 8 30.77 68 44.74 52 35.62 128 39.51
Very Satisfied 5 19.23 14 9.21 9 6.16 28 8.64
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value = -.210 Sig= .011 Pearson’s R= -.143
Satisfied 8 30.77 79 51.97 69 47.26 156 48.15
Very Satisfied 11 42.31 30 19.74 18 12.33 59 18.21
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value = - .260 Sig=.002 Pearson’s R= -.171
Satisfied 11 42.31 83 54.61 71 48.63 165 50.93
Very Satisfied 9 34.62 25 16.45 22 15.07 56 17.28
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100
Gamma value = -.142 Sig=.000 Pearson’s R= -.079
Satisfied 13 50 95 62.50 63 43.15 171 52.78
Very Satisfied 8 30.77 8 5.26 5 3.42 21 6.48
Total 26 100 152 100 146 100 324 100

Final Manuscript Edited Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Manuscript Edited Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE SATISFACTION LEVEL AND PARTICIPATION

OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ONLINE LEARNING

A Research Report Presented to

The Faculty of the Senior High School Department

Central Philippine University

of the Requirements for the subject

Al Thea Alpis Ryan Deferia

Ellian John Blance Iiamay Lyn Diestro

Jan Matthew Calvo Nj Farnazo

Janiela Marie Castaño Ned Julhean Joaquin

Angel Lou Rala

Central Philippine University

Senior High School

Jaro, Iloilo City

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE SATISFACTION LEVEL AND PARTICIPATION

OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ONLINE LEARNING

For Research Report Subject

Approved by the Research Oral Examination Committee:

this research paper possible.

encouragement, and wisdom on how to further improve our study;

valuable critique and advice for the betterment of our study;

solid statistical support for our study;

statements in our study;

for strengthening the validity of our research paper;

responding to the request of the researchers in the process of data gathering.

Parents of the researchers, for their constant motivation, encouragement, and

support which helped the researchers accomplish this research study.

Thus, this research study is humbly offered to Him.

Ellian John Blance

Jan Matthew Calvo

Janiela Marie Castaño

Iiamay Lyn Diestro

Ned Julhean Joaquin

Angel Lou Rala

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

Background and Rationale of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Population and Sampling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Student Satisfaction in Online Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Student Participation in Online Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Do you

attend your Online Class regularly? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: Are you

interested in the daily discussions in Online Learning? . . . . 41

Student Participation on Student Satisfaction: From your

own perspective, do you absorb all the lessons in Online

understand lessons that involve problem-solving in Online

that it is easy to pass the subject given that it is an online

that this online learning modality prepares you enough for

Appendix A (Letter to the Research 75

Appendix C (Letter to the Secretary) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Appendix F (Letter to the Panel Member 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Appendix G (Letter to the Panel Member 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

Appendix H (Reliability Test Results) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

Are you interested in the daily discussions in Online

From your own perspective, do you absorb all the lessons

Do you understand lessons that involve problem-solving in

Do you think that it is easy to pass the subject given that it

is an online learning procedure? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Do you think that this online learning modality prepares

you enough for the subjects at the college level? . . . . . . . . 50

OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ONLINE LEARNING

Ryan Deferia, Iiamay Lyn Diestro, Nj Farnazo,

Ned Julhean Joaquin, Angel Lou Rala