Data Encoding and

Presentation
JANET C. FERNANDO
LECTURE 4
BQTR 202
Review: Presentation of Data
• Once data has been collected, it has to be
classified and organized in such a way that it
becomes easily readable and interpretable, that
is, converted to information.
• Before the calculation of descriptive statistics, it
is sometimes a good idea to present data as
tables, charts, diagrams or graphs.
• Most people find ‘pictures’ much more helpful
than ‘numbers’ in the sense that, in their
opinion, they present data more meaningfully
Survey Questionnaire
Filled-out Questionnaire
 /
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/ /
/
/
/
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
Assign numbers as labels (names) for the different
possible values of variables.
Survey Result Tally in Excel
Respondent 1
Questions 1 to 10
Statement of the Problem
Activity 4. Data Encoding and Data
Presentation

Frequency,
Percentage and
Rank Distribution

Table 1. Profile of
the Respondents
 Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents
in Terms of the Selected Variables
Age Frequency Percentage Rank
20-25 years
26-30 years
31-35 yeas
36-40 years
41-45 years
46-50 years
50-55 years
56-60 years
Total
Sex
Female
Male
Total
Civil Status
Single
Married
Separated
Widow
Total
Position Title
Others
Master Teacher I
Teacher III
Teacher II
Teacher I
Total
Educational Attaintment (EA)
Ph.D/Ed.D
with Ph.D/Ed.D units
MAT/MAED
with MAT/MAED
Bachelors' Degree (BSE/BEEd)
Total
Length of Service (LS)
5 years below
5-10 years
11-15 years
16-20 years
21-25 years
25-30 years
31 years above
Total
Seminars/Training Attended (S/TA)
International Level
National Level
Regional
Division
School Based
Total
Activity 4. Data Encoding and Data
Presentation
2. Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative
Materials as Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With
Respect To Creativity, Functionality, and Safety
Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative Materials as
Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With Respect To Creativity,
Functionality, and Safety
Table 3
Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative
Materials as Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With
Respect To Creativity

Table 4
Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative
Materials as Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With
Respect To Functionality

Table 5
Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative
Materials as Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With
Respect To Safety

Table 6
Summary of the Level of Acceptability of the Developed
Manipulative Materials as Perceived by the Teacher-
Respondents With Respect To Creativity, Functionality,
and Safety
Activity 4. Data Encoding and Data
Presentation
Activity 4. Data Encoding and Data
Presentation
TEACHERS A (CREATIVITY)
RESPONDENT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Table 3 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Level of 3
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
Acceptability of 5 4 4 4 5 4 5 5 4 5 5
6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
the Developed 7 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 5 5 5
Manipulative 8 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
9 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 4 5
Materials as 10 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 4 5 5
Perceived by the 11
12
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
Teacher- 13 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5

Respondents With 14
15
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Respect to 16 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Creativity 17
18
4
5
5
5
4
5
4
5
4
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
19 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
20 5 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 5 5
Weighted mean of teachers’
answer per question
 Rank of the Weighted Mean
(highest to lowest)

4.82

Average of all
weighted means
 Table 3
Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative Materials as
Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With Respect To Creativity
Creativity Weighted Mean Verbal Interpretation Rank
The manipulative instructional materials in Mathematics . . .

1. show teachers’ innovativeness by using materials locally grown. 4.65 Very Much Acceptable 9

1. provide creative visualization attractive to pupils. 4.90 Very Much Acceptable 3

1. are original and a novelty to the pupils thus arousing their interests. 4.60 Very Much Acceptable 10

1. reflect sensitivity with regard to gender, race/ethnicity, intellectual, 4.85 Very Much Acceptable 6
and physical abilities.

1. reflect teachers’ dedication and passion for teaching in its creation. 4.85 Very Much Acceptable 6

1. harness the artistic talent of the teacher together with their skills in 4.90 Very Much Acceptable 3
concept development.

1. contain clear information through visualization that adds life to the 4.85 Very Much Acceptable 6
discussion.

1. present simultaneously creative information needed to explain a topic 4.75 Very Much Acceptable 8
or perform a task.
1. develop appreciation for things in the environment to inspire pupils 4.90 Very Much Acceptable 3
to find new interpretations of problems.

1. can address 21st Century skill development such as collaboration, 4.95 Very Much Acceptable 1
creative thinking, and problem solving.

Composite Mean 4.82 Very Much Acceptable

 Table 4
Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative Materials as
Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With Respect to Functionality
 Table 4
Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative Materials as
Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With Respect to Functionality
Functionality
Weighted
The manipulative instructional materials in Verbal Interpretation Rank
Mean
Mathematics . . .
1. respond to the needs of the pupils for learning.
4.50 Very Much Acceptable 8
2. provide authentic instruction which are
immediately transparent to the pupils the
application to the different real life situations. 4.45 Much Acceptable 9
3. acquaint pupils to the use of local materials and
enhance their appreciation of their environment. 4.80 Very Much Acceptable 5
4. contribute to pupils’ ability, skills, and creativity.
4.30 Much Acceptable 10
5. have provision for use in activity integrated to
other learning areas. 4.90 Very Much Acceptable 2.5
6. adapts to any size of learning groups and
learning time. 4.90 Very Much Acceptable 2.5
7. arouse pupils’ interest in learning and apply to
varying attitudes and abilities of pupils. 4.95 Very Much Acceptable 1
8. can be utilized as teaching aide to different
grade levels. 4.85 Very Much Acceptable 4
9. can be replicated to add to the array of
instructional materials in the school. 4.75 Very Much Acceptable 6
10. are inexpensive, portable, and readily available
in the surrounding area. 4.65 Very Much Acceptable 7
Composite Mean 4.71 Very Much Acceptable
 Table5
Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative Materials as
Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With Respect to Safety
 Table 5
Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative Materials as
Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With Respect to Safety

Safety
Weighted
The manipulative instructional materials in Verbal Interpretation Rank
Mean
Mathematics . . .
1. are well crafted (smooth with soft edges) .
4.75 Very Much Acceptable 8.5
2. are safe for use individually or in group work
activity. 4.90 Very Much Acceptable 4
3. have smooth texture and safe from splinters.
4.75 Very Much Acceptable 8.5
4. have no small parts hazardous to small
children. 4.75 Very Much Acceptable 8.5
5. have no toxic element.
4.80 Very Much Acceptable 6
6. are environment friendly.
4.95 Very Much Acceptable 2
7. are free from harmful elements.
4.90 Very Much Acceptable 3
8. are durable and not easily broken.
4.75 Very Much Acceptable 8.5
9. are made of materials familiar to them as they
originate or occur naturally in their place 4.95 Very Much Acceptable 1
10. are biodegradable and will not add to solid
waste disposal problem. 4.85 Very Much Acceptable 5
Composite Mean
4.84 Very Much Acceptable
 Table 6
Level of Acceptability of the Developed Manipulative Materials as
Perceived by the Teacher-Respondents With Respect to Creativity,
Functionality, and Safety

Aspects Weighted Verbal Interpretation Rank

Mean
Creativity 4.82 Very Much Acceptable 2
Functionality 4.71 Very Much Acceptable 3
Safety 4.84 Very Much Acceptable 1
Overall Mean 4.79 Very Much Acceptable