1

d health. To attain this, one must be well-nourished and of good environment.

Virtually every human action affects the environment. The way in which people

treat the environment influences their own physical health as well as the physical

health of others. According to Anderson:

Health is the state of well-being which enables one to

live effectively and enjoyable. It implies a freedom from disabling defects

and a vigor which enables one to accomplish the tasks

f the Problem

1. t is the demographic profile of teaching and non-teaching personnel der

c. Civil Status

d. Educational Attainment

e. Position

f. Monthly salary

2. What are the lifestyles of teaching and non-teaching personnel of Central

Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus in terms of;

a. Eating Habits;

b. Drinking Habits; and

c. Smoking Habits

3. What is the work efficiency of teaching and non-teaching personnel of

Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus?

 2

4. Is there a significant relationship between lifestyle and work efficiency of

teaching and non-teaching personnel of Central Bicol State University of

Agriculture-Calabanga Campus?

Objectives of the Study

The main objective of this study is to determine the lifestyle and work

efficiency of teaching and non-teaching personnel of Central Bicol State

University of Agriculture- Calabanga 2016-2017.

Specific Objectives:

1. Describe the demographic profile of teaching and non-teaching personnel in

terms of;

a. Age

b. Gender

c. Civil Status

d. Educational Attainment

e. Position

f. Monthly salary

2. Find out the lifestyle of teaching and non-teaching personnel in terms of;

a. Eating Habits;

b. Drinking Habits; and

c. Smoking Habits

3. Determine the work efficiency of teaching and non-teaching personnel of

Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus.

 3

4. Identify the significant relationship between lifestyles and work efficiency of

teaching and non-teaching personnel of Central Bicol State University of

Agriculture-Calabanga Campus.

Significance of the Study

This study is considered important to the following:

Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) This study may help in the

promotion of industrial peace through education, expeditious and fair resolution of

labor disputes, enhancement of labor-management cooperation and promotion of

tripartism in policy and decision making in order to preserve jobs and enhance

the quality of employment in the country.

Department of Health (DOH) This study will serve as basis in crafting law to

uphold the health condition of the employees.

Commission on Higher Education (CHED) The result of the study may

provide a knowledge that will assist each individual in society to attain his/her

potential as a human being.

CBSUA- Administration This will give them the awareness of the present

lifestyles and work efficiency of the personnel so that they can take appropriate

action to ensure their health condition.

Teaching and Non-Teaching Personnel The result of the study will help

them realize the effects of their lifestyles to their work.

Future researchers This study will give them future insights and widen their

scope of the study.

 4

Scope and Limitation of the Study

This study determined the lifestyles and work efficiency of teaching and non-

teaching personnel of Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga

Campus. The study considered the demographic profile in terms of age, gender,

civil status, educational attainment, position and monthly salary.

The lifestyles considered the eating habits and vices such as smoking and

drinking. Then work efficiency was based on the Performance Evaluation System

rating of teaching and non-teaching personnel in the year 2015.

 5

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

This chapter presents the literatures that served as guide to the present study

and provided background for the discussion of lifestyle and work efficiency to

have a strong view and understanding of the study.

Lifestyle

Lifestyle refers to an overall way of living. It comprises the attitude behavior

and habits of a person in a daily life. Person’s lifestyle is affected by many

variables such as environment, economic status, and many more. Crompton

(1998), pointed out, the claim that lifestyles have become more significant in self-

formation and social identification needs to be taken seriously.

Annadale (1998), also defined lifestyles not only to fulfill utilitarian needs, but

also give material form to develop self-identity. Lifestyle is an important marker

affecting health and also contributes to differences in social identities.

Cockerham (2000), added that there are other structural variables affecting

lifestyle. According to him, age and gender also produce distinct patterns in

health lifestyles.

Yet, as Frohlich et al. (2001), pointed out that lifestyle to the socio-medical

discourse, is used in reference to individual behavioural patterns that affect

disease status. However, they observe that “the term lifestyle, widely adopted by

researchers in health promotion, social epidemiology, and other branches of

 6

public health, has taken on a very particular and different meaning from that

intended by Weber.”

Lifestyle, then, is seen as a system of individual differences in the habitual use

of declarative and procedural knowledge structures that intervene between

abstract goal states (personal values) and situation-specific product perceptions

and behaviors. Brunso, Scholderer and Grunert 2002

Mirowsky and Ross (2002), said that “individuals weave these disparate habits

and practices into a coherent lifestyle designed to preserve and promote health.”

While individuals tend to do what others like them do, it is individuals who take

“otherwise incoherent or diametric practices allocated by subcultural forces” and

coalesce them into a healthy lifestyle.

The Department of Nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health (2003)

stated that, living a healthy lifestyle contributes to lower risks of contracting

various serious illnesses. It lowers the risks of having coronary heart disease,

cancer and diabetes.

However lifestyles on some studies focus on the analysis of social structure

and of the individuals’ relative positions inside it. Like lifestyles to according as

distinctive elements of status groups strictly connected with dialectic of

recognition of prestige: the lifestyle is the most visible manifestation of social

differentiation, even within the same social class, and in particular it shows the

prestige which the individuals believe they enjoy or to which they aspire

(Alexandra Sifferlin, 2003).

While Thorstein Veblen (2003), with his ‘emulation’ concept, opens this

perspective by asserting that people adopt specific ‘schemes of life’. According to

him, in particular specific patterns of ‘conspicuous consumption’, depending on a

 7

desire for distinction from social strata they identify as inferior and a desire for

emulation of the ones identified as superior.

Finally, Pierre Bourdieu in 2003, renew that lifestyle is made up mainly of

social practices and closely tied to individual tastes. It represents the basic point

of intersection between the structure of the field and processes connected with

the habits.

In 2006 Alfred Adler stated that lifestyle was understood as a style of

personality. The sense that the framework of guiding values and principles which

individuals develop in the first years of life, end up defining a system of

judgement which informs their actions throughout their lives.

Later in 2007, particularly in Milton Rokeach’s work, Arnold Mitchell’s VALS

research and Lynn Kahle’s LOV research, lifestyles’ analysis developed as

profiles of value. Reaching the hypothesis that it is possible to identify various

models of scales of values organized hierarchically, to which different population

sectors correspond.

Then with Daniel Yankelovich and William Wells of 2010 we move on to the

so-called AIO approach in which attitudes, interests and opinions are considered

as fundamental lifestyles’ components. Analysis from both synchronic and

diachronic points of view and interpreted on the basis of socio-cultural trends in a

given social context.

A further development leads to the so-called profiles-and-trends approach.

The core of which is an analysis of the relations between mental and behavioural

variables. Then, bearing in mind that socio-cultural trends influence both the
 8

diffusion of various lifestyles within a population and the emerging of different

modalities of interaction between thought and action.

So to sum up according to Jocano (2012), lifestyle is a process in an individual

associated with adoption and recurrent practices, values, with care practically

value and practices to other individual or group.

An article by Elise Sole of healthy living 2014 mention four lifestyle habits that

determine our life expectancy. The first is smoking, second alcohol, it also include

poor diet and last is inactivity or physical activity.

Some authors, for instance Richard Jenkins and A. J. Veal 2015, suggested

an approach to lifestyles. They said that it is not everyday actions which make up

the plane of analysis but those which the actors who adopt them consider

particularly meaningful and distinctive life.

A reminder from Mehmet Oz (2015), we are responsible to our body not the

doctors. As God’s stewards let us make a commitment to change our lifestyle.

Remember the words “Genetics loads the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger” so don’t

pull it too soon.

Work Efficiency

In Today's world coping with Job pressure is really tough. Anyone who held

down a full-time job knows that an average work day is not always long enough

to get everything you need to do. However, your productivity can be greatly

improved by adopting habits designed to make you work more efficiently. An

efficient worker uses the most of each minute of the day, giving his or her fullest

attention to the most important tasks first. Being efficient at work won't just
 9

improve your productivity and win you points with your boss, it'll also make you

feel accomplished, satisfied that you've had a full and productive work day.

In the early 2000s, Viswesvaran and Ones and Rotundo and Sackett,

conducted two narrative reviews on frameworks of individual work performance.

Both reviews concluded that three broad dimensions of work performance could

be distinguished: task performance, organizational citizenship behavior, and

counterproductive work behavior.

According to Viswesvaran & Ones in 2000, work performance includes

work behaviours which are relevant to organisational goals within the individual’s

control and measurable, observable, and scorable.

Anderson (2002), also pointed out that in many cases, the performance of

the older workers differed from that of the younger ones. The age of a person

affects the work performance due to their capacity to handle job.

Then, job performance is an extremely important criterion that relates to

organizational outcomes and success. Among the most commonly accepted

theories of job performance comes from work of Campbell and colleagues in

2003.

While Massie and Douglas as of (2003), noted that performance serves

many functions. It is the most usual means for determining compensation.

Performance is frequently an important factor in determining who gets promoted

in higher position.
 10

Furthermore, to Maier, et al. (2003), job performance of an individual may

vary considerably depending on the employees. They need acceptance to his

duties and responsibilities with enthusiasm or with resentment.

Work efficiency or work performance refers to the degree of achievement

of the mission at work place that builds up an employee job according to Cascio

in 2006. Furthermore, he defined as the value an organization can expect from

discrete behaviors performed by an employee over time.

Decenzo (2007), said that “Employee training is a learning experience: It

seeks a relatively permanent change in employees that improve job

performance.” It helps the employees enhance their skills and abilities for better

work performance.

Buchana (2010), stated that individual performance is generally

determined by three factors. Motivation, the desire to do the job, ability, the

capability to do the job, and the work environment, the tools, materials, and

information needed to do the job.

Nimalathasan (2010), noted some suggestions in improving the

employees’ job performance. These were: 1). Organization should develop good

working condition; 2). Organization should develop good relationship among

employees; 3). Organization should induce employees to perform well; 4).

Employees should be trained to adopt new technology and or develop their

career; 5). Organization should evaluate employees’ performance; 6).

Organization should provide unbiased promotion; 7). Organization should

implement equal employment opportunities; 8). Organization should design

working procedure including hours work, over time payment and hour’s payment;
 11

9). Proper working environment should be designed; and 10). Organization

should design good grievance procedure, disciplinary procedure and separation

procedure.

A study on job performance was conducted by Rebecca Chua in the year

2013 of the University of the East. The study revealed that management styles

varied according to age, civil status, and educational qualifications. The result of

her study also revealed that performance in general was above standard, and no

respondent was rated “poor”.

In the article of Bullock (2013), he defined Job Performance as the overall

expected value from employees’ behaviors carried out over the course of a set

period of time. Performance is a property of behaviour or plainly stated what

people do at work.

Theoretical Framework

The study is anchored on the theory on humanistic approach also known as

“Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs of Abraham Maslow. According to Maslow there

are several levels of needs that a person must strive to meet to attain the highest

level of personality fulfillment. He represents the theory using the pyramid ranking

starts from the most basic at the bottom and the highest need at the top. He point

out that people must satisfy the primary basic needs such as food, water and

rest. Followed by the Safety and Security need that includes personal security,

financial security, health and well-being and safety net against accidents/illness

and their adverse impacts. Then the third level of human needs is interpersonal
 12

and involves feelings of belongingness. The self-esteem and the self-

actualization at the top. This theory support the study for it emphasized that the

need for good health or healthy lifestyle is a must.

The Lifestyle Theory (1978), also supports the study. It is also known as

Lifestyle-exposure theory that acknowledges that not everyone has the same

lifestyle and that some lifestyles expose people to more risks than do other

lifestyles. The "lifestyle theory" was developed by Hindelang, Gottfredson, and

Garofalo. Lifestyles are patterned, recurrent or "routine activities". According to

them, lifestyle theory focuses on the relationship between lifestyles and the

effects of lifestyles. With this theory it proves that lifestyle affects several factors

as needed to be proved in the study.

The Theory of Performance by Campbell (1993), is another bridge to this

study. Campbell proposed a general model of individual differences in

performance which became very influential. In his model, Campbell differentiates

performance components, determinants of job performance components and

predictors of these determinants. Campbell describes the performance

components as a function of three determinants (1) declarative knowledge, (2)

procedural knowledge and skills, and (3) motivation. Declarative knowledge

includes knowledge about facts, principles, goals, and the self. It is assumed to

be a function of a person’s abilities, personality, interests, education, training,

experience, and aptitude-treatment interactions. Procedural knowledge and skills

include cognitive and psychomotor skills, physical skill, self-management skill,

and interpersonal skill. Predictors of procedural knowledge and skills are again

abilities, personality, interests, and education, training, experience, and aptitude-

 13

treatment interactions and additionally practice. Motivation comprises choice to

perform, level of effort, and persistence of effort. This theory explains work

efficiency of individual that is part of the study.

LIFESTYLE THEORY
Hindelang, Gottfredson,
and Garofalo
(1978)
“Lifestyles are patterned,
recurrent or "routine
activities
MASLOW’S HIERARCHY
OF NEEDS
THEORY OF
Abraham Maslow PERFORMANCE
(1943)
Campbell, J. P.
(1993)
"The performance
components as a function
of three determinants."

“Lifestyle,
Work
Efficiency of
the Teaching
and Non-
Teaching
Personnel”

Figure 1. The Converging Radial diagram presenting the theories that support the
study on Lifestyle and Work efficiency.
 14

Assumptions of the Study

The study was premised the following assumptions:

1. The lifestyle and work efficiency of teaching and non-teaching personnel

vary from each other.

2. There is a significant relationship and difference between the lifestyle and

work efficiency of teaching and non-teaching personnel.

Conceptual Framework

In order to come up with the goals of the study the researches designed a

conceptual framework as shown in Figure 2.

The two major inputs taken in the study was the demographic profile in terms

of age, gender, civil status, educational attainment, position and monthly salary,

and lifestyles in terms of eating habits, smoking and drinking habits and the

performance rating as of 2015 of the teaching and non-teaching personnel. To

identify the demographic factor, lifestyle and work efficiency of personnel of

Central Bicol State University of Agriculture year in 2016, questionnaire, data

analysis, and informal interview were conducted. The output of the study is the

expected proposed activity on lifestyles and work efficiency to achieve the goals

and objectives of the study.

 15

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

Demographic profile of
the respondents

-age
-gender
-civil status
-Educational attainment “HEALTHY LIFESTYLE,
-position HEALTHY YOU”
Assessment of lifestyle a Seminar on Lifestyle
-monthly salary
and evaluation of work and Work Efficiency.
efficiency. Pamphlets on Healthy
Lifestyles and work
efficiency of the lifestyle
teaching and non-
teaching personnel

Figure 2. Conceptual Model showing the Input, Process and Output of the
Lifestyles and Work Efficiency of teaching and non-teaching personnel of
CBSUA-Calabanga

Statement of the Hypothesis

Ho1. There is no significant relationship between lifestyles and work

efficiency of teaching and non-teaching personnel of Central Bicol State

University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus.

 16

Definition of Terms

The terms used in this study were defined operationally and conceptually for

clarity and understanding.

Lifestyle is a way living that reflects the attitude and values of a person or

group. As used in this study lifestyle refers to food habits and vices such as

smoking and drinking that together constitute the mode of living of an individual

or group.

Demographic Profile refers to the demographic characteristics of a

population. In this study it refers to the characteristics of personnel that include

Age, Gender, Civil Status, Educational Attainment, Position and Monthly salary.

Teaching Personnel refer to professional personnel directly involved in

teaching students, who work with students as a whole class in a classroom. In

this study it refers to college professor of CBSUA-Calabanga.

Non-Teaching Personnel refers to employees whose jobs do not involve

teaching like administrator, administrative aide, accountant, guidance counsellor,

directors, maintenance and security personnel.

Gender is the range of characteristics pertaining to, and differentiating

between and from masculinity and femininity. It is used in the study to identify if

the respondent is a female or a male.

Civil Status The marital status is the civil status of each individual in relation

to the marriage laws or customs of the country.

 17

Salary a fixed regular payment typically paid on a weekly, monthly and yearly

basis made by an employer to an employee. In the study only monthly salary is

being asked.

Work Efficiency Performing or functioning in the best possible manner with

the least waste of time and effort, having and using requisite knowledge, skill,
and industry, competent and capable. This is used in the study to identify the job
performance rating of the teaching and non-teaching personnel the data will be
obtain through getting their Performance Evaluation System last 2015.
 18

CHAPTER III

Methodology

This chapter presents the process on how this study was conducted so that

the objectives will be realized. It includes the research design, locale of the study,

population instrument, questionnaire preparation, administration of the

questionnaire, documentary analysis and methods of data analysis.

Research Design

This study used descriptive and correlational method. Descriptive method was

employed to determine the lifestyles and work efficiency of teaching and non-

teaching personnel of CBSUA-Calabanga. The correlational method was used

find out whether lifestyles have significant relationship to the work efficiency of

teaching and non-teaching personnel of CBSUA-Calabanga, 2016-2017.

Locale of the Study

Brief History

The Calabanga Polytechnic College (CPC) began serving in 1965 as a

national secondary trade school for boys in the municipality of Calabanga,

Camarines Sur. Its state grant to operate as a trade school was provided under
 19

Republic Act. No. 4420 of June 19, 1965, with the school known as the

Calabanga National School of Arts and Trades (CNSAT).

The early instructional program of CNSAT was on building construction and

furniture’s as well as cabinet making that started with 111 students receiving

technical skills training and vocational instruction. A number of other courses

were added in the succeeding years. Cognizant of the occupational demands

emerging with the changing time, the CNSAT increased its curricular offerings

that included two-year post-secondary courses of instruction. The school grew

rapidly with substantial increased of enrolment, which necessitated more

permanent building and facilities. The school then was getting ready for a

possible conversion into a college institution. Its vision of changing its status into

college institution was realized when the school was converted into Calabanga

Polytechnic College on March 29, 1995 by virtue of R.A 7957.

In view of the emerging complexity and consequent educational challenges of

the world’s technology advancements and increasing economic

interdependencies, the CPC has undertaken certain institutional readjustment;

and the passage of R.A. 6292 on December 18, 2000 has made CPC an integral

part of the Camarines Sur State Agricultural College, now Central Bicol State

University of Agriculture as CBSUA Calabanga Campus.

 20

Figure 3. Map of Calabanga Showing the location of the study cite

Population of the Study

The respondents of the study were the permanent teaching and non-teaching

personnel who answered the survey questionnaire.

Research Instrument

To facilitate the gathering of data the researchers used Documentary

Analysis. The researchers asked the Performance Evaluation System rating of

 21

teaching and non-teaching staff in 2015 and conducted a survey questionnaire to

know their lifestyles.

Questionnaire Preparation

The draft of the questionnaire was prepared by the researches through the

help of various references to obtain the data needed in the study. It was validated

and suggestions were considered in the finalization of the questionnaire.

Administration of the Questionnaire

The request for the conduct of the survey questionnaire was approved by the

administration. The moment the request was granted, the researchers distributed

the questionnaire to the respondents. They were asked to respond truthfully to

each of the item.

Informal Interview

Informal interview to the respondents was also done to collect necessary data

that would support the study.

Documentary Analysis

The researchers coordinated to the Human Resource Personnel and the Dean

of the three Colleges of CBSUA-Calabanga and asked for the data needed in the
 22

study specifically their Performance Evaluation System rating last 2015. The

collected information was treated to come up into the realization of the objectives

of the study.

Methods of Data Analysis

The data were treated using descriptive statistics, Spearman’s Rho

Frequency. Percentage was used to present the demographic profile of the

respondents in terms of age, gender, civil status, educational attainment, position

and monthly salary.

Formula:

Percentage (%) = __n__ x 100

N
Where:
n = observe item
N = grand total of item

The Spearman’s Rho was employed to identify the significant relationship of

the lifestyle and work efficiency of teaching and non-teaching personnel.

Formula:

Where:
 23

Σxy= the sum of the xy column

Σx2= the square root of the product of the sum of the x 2 column

Σy2= the sum of the y2 column

 24

CHAPTER IV

Results and Discussion

This chapter presents the findings, analysis and interpretation of the data

gathered in response to the problem identified in the study in tabular and textual

form. The data were presented, analysed and interpreted in the following

sequence: demographic profile; eating habits; drinking and smoking habits;

Performance Evaluation System result and relationship between lifestyle and

work efficiency.

Table 1 shows the demographic profile of the respondents. It presents the

Age, Gender, Civil Status, Educational Attainment, Position and Monthly salary of

teaching and non-teaching personnel of Central Bicol State University of

Agriculture-Calabanga.

Table 1. Profile of the Respondents of Central Bicol State University of

Agriculture- Calabanga 2016

Attributes Frequency Percentage

Age
26-30 2 4.0
31-35 8 16.0
36-40 9 18.0
41-45 8 16.0
46-50 7 14.0
51-55 7 14.0
56-60 9 18.0
Total 50 100.0
Gender
Male 22 44.0
Female 28 56.0
Total 50 100.0
Continuation Profile of the Respondents
 25

Civil Status
Single 10 20.0
Married 40 80.0
Total 50 100.0
Education Level
Bachelor’s Degree 15 30.0
With Masteral Units 10 20.0
Masteral Degree 10 20.0
Masteral Degree with
4 8.0
Doctorall Units
Ph.D/Ed.D 9 18.0
Others 2 4.0
Total 50 100.0
Position
Teaching Staff 35 70.0
Non-Teaching Staff 15 30.0
Total 50 100.0
Monthly Salary
41,000 – 50,000 1 2.0
31,000 – 40,000 9 18.0
21,000 – 30,000 18 36.0
10,000 – 20,000 20 40.0
10,000 & below 5 10.0
Total 50 100.00

Personal Profile of the Respondents. It could be gleaned from the data that

the highest number of respondents fell between the age range 36-40 and 56-60.

This consisted 18% of the total respondents. This could imply that most of the

permanent personnel of the institution are in the middle age and retirees. Four

percent of the respondents fell between the age range of 26-30. The findings

indicate that few numbers of young personnel are permanent in the population of

Central Bicol State University of Agriculture.

 26

As to gender, 56 % are females and 44% are males. This implies that

permanent personnel are mostly females.

The table also revealed that the respondents are dominated by married

respondents in terms of civil status. There are 10 single and 40 married

personnel out of 50 respondents. Married personnel comprised 80% of the total

respondents. There are no widows or widowers among the respondents.

In terms of educational attainment, 30% of the respondents had their

bachelor’s degree. This implies that most of the permanent personnel took up

four year course and graduated with a degree. 20% had their Masteral Units and

with Masteral Degree. This inferred that least number of respondents had their

Masteral Units and Masteral Degree after they graduated. 4% are others like four

year technical courses, Bachelor of Arts and Sciences and Accountancy.

With reference to the respondents’ position, most of the respondents are

teaching compose of 35 out of 50 respondents. The remaining are non-teaching.

This can be noted that more than half (70%) of the total respondents are teaching

while only 30% are non-teaching.

For the monthly salary, 40% of the respondents earn a range of P10,000-

P20,000 a month. 2% of the respondents range P41, 000-P50, 000 monthly. 36%

of the respondents range P21, 000-P30, 000 income a month. This means that in

general, their salary is enough for the basic necessities of the family.

Table 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D represent the indicators of lifestyle of the

respondents such as eating habit, drinking habit and smoking habit. It is believed

that this indicator affects the lifestyle and work efficiency of the respondents.
 27

Also, the summary of the lifestyle and work efficiency of the teaching and non-

teaching personnel along the three indicators is presented.

Table 2a. Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of the Teaching and Non- Teaching
Personnel along Food Habit of CBSUA-Calabanga 2016

Non-
Indicators Teaching Teachin AWM Interp. Rank
g
I eat three meals daily. 3.89 3.87 3.88 A 1
I eat vegetables. 3.77 3.80 3.79 A 2.5
I eat fish. 3.77 3.80 3.79 A 2.5
I eat meat. 3.31 3.87 3.59 A 4
I drink 8 or more glasses of water daily. 3.49 3.47 3.48 A 5
I eat breakfast before going to work. 3.31 3.53 3.42 A 6

I eat fruits. 3.51 3.27 3.39 A 7

I drink milk. 2.69 2.87 2.78 S 8
I do not drink soft drinks, energy drinks or
2.51 2.67 2.59 S 9
any bottle drinks.
I do not eat junk foods. 2.31 2.53 2.42 O 10
AWP 3.26 3.37 3.31 A

Legend:
Value Scale Mean Range Interpretation
4 3.26 – 4.00 Always (A)
3 2.51 – 3.25 Sometimes (S)
2 1.76 – 2.50 Occasionally (O)
1 1.00 – 1.75 Never (N)

Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of the Teaching and Non- Teaching Personnel

along Food Habit. Table 2 shows the respondents Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of

the Teaching and Non- Teaching Personnel along Food Habit. The teaching

personnel are always eating three times a day (3.89), always eating vegetables

(3.77) and fish (3.77). On the other hand, they eat junk foods occasionally (2.31).
 28

Similarly, non-teaching also eat three times a day (3.87), eat plenty of

vegetables (3.80) and fish (3.80). But, few intake junk foods (2.53). In summary,

permanent personnel reported that they always eat three times a day (3.88),

vegetables (3.70) and fish (3.70). Further, they said they sometimes drink milk

(2.78), soft drinks, energy drinks or any bottled drinks (2.59) and occasionally eat

junk foods (2.42). The teaching average is (3.26) and non-teaching personnel

(3.37) then indicated an average of (3.21) which means the group always

practice proper eating habits.

This implies that for the respondents, it is very important that an individual

must be conscious in their health considering the proper selection of food to eat.

So, as “individuals we must practice a lifestyle designed to preserve and promote

health.” (Mirowsky and Ross 2002).

Table 2b. Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of Teaching and Non- Teaching
Personnel along Smoking Habit of CBSUA- Calabanga 2016

Non-
Indicators Teaching Teachin AWM Interp. Rank
g
I do smoke 1.20 1.27 1.23 N 1

I smoke every after meal. 1.14 1.27 1.20 N 2

I enjoy smoking 1.14 1.20 1.17 N 3
I am smoking whenever I have problems in
1.09 1.20 1.14 N 4.5
work.
I can consume 3-5 sticks of cigarettes daily. 1.14 1.13 1.14 N 4.5
AWP 1.14 1.21 1.18 N
Legend:
Value Scale Mean Range Interpretation
4 3.26 – 4.00 Always (A)
3 2.51 – 3.25 Sometimes (S)
2 1.76 – 2.50 Occasionally (O)
1 1.00 – 1.75 Never (N)
 29

Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of Teaching and Non- Teaching Personnel along

Smoking Habits. Table 2B presents the Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of Teaching

and Non- Teaching Personnel along Smoking Habit. Teaching personnel,

indicated they do not smoke (1.20), then they don’t smoke after meal (1.14), they

never enjoy smoking (1.14) and cannot consume 3-5 sticks of cigarettes daily

(1.14). Furthermore, they never smoke whenever they have problems in work

(1.09).

In regards with non-teaching, it showed they do not smoke (1.27), then they

don’t smoke after meal (1.27), they never enjoy smoking (1.20) and cannot

consume 3-5 sticks of cigarettes daily (1.13). Moreover, they never smoke

whenever they have problems in work (1.20). Taking the two groups responses

together, they never smoke (1.23), they don’t smoke every after meal (1.20), then

cannot consume 3-5 sticks of cigarettes daily (1.14). As average, teaching

personnel never engage in smoking (1.14) as well as non-teaching (1.21) and a

total of 1.18.

Findings revealed that permanent personnel do not engage in vices like

smoking. An article by Elise Sole of healthy living 2014 mentions that smoking

habits is a determinant of a lifestyle that affects our health. (Elise Sole 2014)

Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of Teaching and Non- Teaching Personnel

along Drinking Habits. Table 2C represents Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of

Teaching and Non- Teaching Personnel along Drinking Habit. The teaching

personnel occasionally drink moderately (2.40) and drink alcohol beverages

(2.00). Likewise, they never drink alcohol beverages whenever they have

problems in work (1.40).

 30

Table 2c. Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of Teaching and Non- Teaching
Personnel along Drinking Habits CBSUA-Calabanga 2016

Non-
Indicators Teaching Teachin AWM Interp. Rank
g
I drink moderately 2.40 2.00 2.20 O 1

I drink alcoholic beverages. 2.00 1.47 1.73 N 2

I enjoy drinking alcoholic beverages. 1.74 1.53 1.64 N 3
I get satisfaction in drinking alcoholic
1.57 1.60 1.59 N 4
beverages.
I am drinking alcoholic beverages whenever I
1.40 1.53 1.47 N 5
have problems in work.
AWP 1.82 1.63 1.72 N
Legend:
Value Scale Mean Range Interpretation
4 3.26 – 4.00 Always (A)
3 2.51 – 3.25 Sometimes (S)
2 1.76 – 2.50 Occasionally (O)
1 1.00 – 1.75 Never (N)

With the non-teaching personnel, they occasionally drink moderately (2.00),

they never get satisfaction in drinking alcoholic beverages (1.60). However, they

do not drink alcoholic beverages (1.47).

In summary, teaching personnel occasionally drink alcoholic beverages (1.82),

while non-teaching personnel never drink alcoholic beverages (1.63). Over all,

most of the respondents never engage in drinking alcoholic beverages (1.72).

Summary Table of the Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of Teaching and Non-

Teaching Personnel. Table 2D represents the summary of the lifestyle and work

efficiency of the respondents. Along eating habit (Mean=3.31, always), it

indicates that the respondents always practice good eating habit. Along drinking
 31

habit (Mean=1.72, never) and smoking habit (Mean=1.18, never), which mean

they never engage in such vices.

Table 2d. Summary Table of Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of Teaching and
Non- Teaching Personnel CBSUA- Calabanga 2016

Non-
Indicators Teaching Teachin AWM Interp. Rank
g
Eating Habits 3.26 3.37 3.31 A 1

Drinking Habits 1.82 1.63 1.72 N 2

Smoking Habits 1.14 1.21 1.18 N 3

AWP 2.07 2.08 2.07 O

This implies that permanent personnel of the institution do not engage in

iniquities such as drinking alcoholic beverages. This indicator of lifestyle shows

that personnel are manifesting healthy lifestyle towards good health.

Respondents are maybe reminded of that we are God’s steward of his creation

that’s why we need to take care of our own body by promoting good health and

healthy lifestyle. (Mehmet Oz 2015)

Work Efficiency

Table 3A and 3B show the over-all Performance Evaluation System rating of

teaching and non-teaching personnel in first semester and second semester of

the year 2015.

 32

Table 3a. Over-all Performance Evaluation System rating of teaching personnel

as of 2015 CBSUA- Calabanga 2016

Rating of the Teaching Personnel

Indicator
(%) Overall Rating
Very Satisfactory 100% 9.76

Legend:

10 O Outstanding
8 VS Very satisfactory
6 S Satisfactory
4 US Unsatisfactory
2 P Poor

Over-all Performance Evaluation System rating of teaching personnel as of

2015. Table 3A displays that the teaching personnel of Central Bicol State

University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus have very satisfactory result. It only

means that they function effectively and efficiently in their field.

Table 3B. Over-all Performance Evaluation System rating of non-teaching

personnel as of 2015 CBSUA- Calabanga 2016

Rating of the Teaching Personnel

Indicator
(%) Overall Rating
Very Satisfactory 100% 4.52

Legend:

5 O Outstanding
4 VS Very satisfactory
3 S Satisfactory
2 US Unsatisfactory
1 P Poor
 33

Over-all Performance Evaluation System rating of non-teaching personnel as

of 2015. Table 3B shows that the teaching personnel and non-teaching personnel

of Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus work

effectively. It indicates that their customers are very satisfied with their

performance.

Some suggestions in improving the employees’ job performance includes

“Organization should evaluate employees’ performance”, this also help the

employee and the employer to determine whether their employees are working

well and what influences them to do work effectively. (Nimalathasan, 2010)

Table 4A and 4B present the significant relationship between lifestyle (eating

habits, drinking habits and smoking habits) and work efficiency of the

respondents.

Table 4b. Lifestyle and work efficiency of teaching personnel of Central Bicol
State University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus 2016

(I-J)
Variables Sig Interp.
Spearman's rho
Eating Habits and Work .959 .019 Significant
Efficiency
Drinking Habits and Work .182 .614 Not Significant
Efficiency
Smoking Habits and Work .281 .432 Not Significant
Efficiency
Legend:
˃.05 = Not Significant
≤ .05 = Significant
≤ .01 = Highly Significant
≤ .001 = Very Highly Significant

Lifestyle and work efficiency of teaching personnel of Central Bicol State

University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus. The analysis of the correlational

 34

between lifestyle (eating habits, drinking habits and smoking habits) and work

efficiency of the teaching personnel.

The data revealed that among the correlations, only one noted to be

statistically significant, its relationship between eating habits and work efficiency

(sig. =0.019, significant). This indicates that eating habit of teaching personnel of

Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus influences their

work efficiency.

All the rest, drinking habit and work efficiency (sig. =0.014, not significant),

and smoking habit and work efficiency (sig. =0.432, not significant). It means that

this indicator does not affect the work efficiency of the respondents.

Table 4b. Lifestyle and work efficiency of non-teaching personnel of Central

Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus 2016

(I-J)
Variables Sig Interp.
Spearman's rho
Food Habits and Work .350 .086 Significant
Efficiency
Drinking Habits and Work -.001 .998 Not Significant
Efficiency
Smoking Habits and Work .882 .031 Significant
Efficiency
Legend:
˃ .05 = Not Significant
≤ .05 = Significant
≤ .01 = Highly Significant
≤ .001 = Very Highly Significant

Lifestyle and work efficiency of non-teaching personnel of Central Bicol State

University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus. The analysis of the correlational

between lifestyle (eating habits, drinking habits and smoking habits) and work

efficiency of the non-teaching personnel.

 35

The result implies that only between eating habit and work efficiency

(sig=0.086, significant), and smoking habit and work efficiency has a significant

result (sig. =0.031, significant). It displayed that this indicator affects the lifestyle

of non-teaching personnel of Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-

Calabanga Campus.

However, the remaining indicator resulted that between drinking habits and

work efficiency (sig. =0.998, not significant). This indicator does not influence the

work efficiency of the respondents.

Predominantly, lifestyle does not necessarily affect the performance of the

personnel as revealed by the data of the teaching personnel. However, in the

result of the non-teaching personnel, it revealed that lifestyle somehow influenced

their work efficiency. But, in general it only proved that the performance of an

individual is affected by several factors and his/her attitude towards work. They

need discipline, acceptance to his/her duties and responsibilities with enthusiasm

or with resentment. (Maier, et al. in 2003).

 36

CHAPTER V

Summary, Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations

This chapter presents the summary, findings, conclusions and

recommendations of this study.

Summary

The study employed the descriptive and correlational methods of research.

Sources of data in this study are the teaching and non-teaching personnel of

Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga. Of 50 respondents, 35

are teaching and 15 are non-teaching. This study utilized a survey questionnaire

on the demographic profile, lifestyle in terms of food habit, drinking and smoking

habit and work efficiency. Unstructured interview was also used to obtain

additional information from the respondents. Statistical tools used were:

descriptive statistics, and Pearson’s R of Correlation.

This study determined the demographic profile, lifestyle and work efficiency of

teaching and non-teaching personnel of Central Bicol State University of

Agriculture-Calabanga, Academic Year 2016-2017. Specifically, it answered the

following research questions: (1) What is the demographic profile of teaching and

non-teaching personnel of Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-

Calabanga Campus? (2) What is the lifestyle of teaching and non-teaching

personnel of Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus?

(3) What is the work efficiency of teaching and non-teaching personnel of Central

Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus? (4) Is there a significant

 37

relationship between lifestyle and work efficiency of teaching and non-teaching

personnel of Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-Calabanga Campus?

Findings

1. Out of 50 respondents, 9 or 18% belonged to 36-40 and 56-60 age groups,

28 or 56% are females; 40 or 80%, are married; 15 or 30% have bachelor’s

degree; 35 or 70% were in teaching position; and 20 or 40% of the respondents

are receiving P10,000-P20,000 as their monthly salary.

2. Respondents’ lifestyle indicators registered highest mean values along eating

habits, I eat three meals daily (Mean=3.88), I eat vegetables and fish

(Mean=3.79), and I eat meat (Mean=3.59). Whereas I drink milk (Mean=2.78), I

do not drink soft drinks, energy drinks or any bottled drinks (Mean= 2.59), and I

do not eat junk foods (Mean= 2.42), the lowest assessment ratings. Lifestyle

along smoking habits, highest mean value was, I do smoke (Mean= 1.23), and, I

am smoking whenever I have problems in work (Mean=1.14) and I can consume

3-5 sticks of cigarettes daily (Mean=1.14) got the lowest. Furthermore, lifestyle

along drinking habits, highest mean value was I drink moderately (Mean=2.20)

and the lowest mean value was, I am drinking alcoholic beverages whenever I

have problems in work (Mean=1.47).

3. As the result of work efficiency teaching personnel gained the ratings of

9.76 (very satisfactory) 10 as the highest. Then the non-teaching personnel rated

4.52 (very satisfactory) 5 as the highest.

4. Of the correlations between lifestyle and work efficiency of the teaching

personnel, only eating habits and work efficiency (sig. =0.019) received p-value
 38

less than or equal to .05. All the others had p-values greater than .05. Of the

correlations between lifestyle and work efficiency of the non-teaching personnel,

eating habits and work efficiency, and smoking habits and work efficiency

obtained calculated p-values of less than or equal to .05. While the other

received p-value greater than .05.

Conclusions

Based on the findings, the following conclusions were drawn;

1. Majority of the respondents are in the middle age and retirees, male personnel

are outnumbered by females and mostly married.

2. Personnel have high value mean along eating habit however lower mean value

in drinking habit and smoking habit that indicate good result because they do not

engage in vices.

3. Both teaching and non-teaching personnel rates very satisfactory in terms of

work efficiency.

4. In correlations between lifestyle and work efficiency, teaching personnel

generate no significant influence in lifestyle towards work efficiency but in non-

teaching personnel indicate significant influence in lifestyle towards work

efficiency.

Recommendations

From the given findings, the following conclusions are recommended:

 39

1. To the teaching personnel they have to maintain the healthy lifestyle they

possess and the good performance at work continues progress of the institution.

2. In regards with the non-teaching personnel, they need to lessen practicing

poor lifestyle like engaging in vices as it affects their performance at work.

3. Maintain the very satisfactory rating of the work efficiency both in non-

teaching and teaching personnel and as the whole.

4. In general, to the respondents they have to maintain good lifestyle for it

somehow influences the work efficiency of an individual. Good lifestyle means

good performance, and good performance can lead to the success of the

institution they belong to.

 40

LITERATURE CITED

ASUG, L.A. (2006). “Lifestyle of College Students in Camarines Sur State

Agricultural College-Calabanga Campus” (Unpublished Undergraduate
Thesis, Camarines Sur State Agricultural College Calabanga Campus,
Calabanga Camarines Sur, 2006)
Bryd, O.E., et. al. “Health Today and Tomorrow”, (Illinois: Douday and Co.,
Inc., 1960), p.182
Concepts of fitness and wellness a comprehensive lifestyle approach/ Six

Edition.

Central Bicol State University of Agriculture Revised Edition 2012 (University

Student Handbook)
Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., & Sager, C. E. (1993). “A theory of
performance”. In E. Schmitt, W. C. Borman, & Associates (Eds.),
Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 35–70). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.

Campbell CH, Ford P, Rumsey MG, et al. “Development of multiple job

performance measures in a representative sample of jobs.” Pers
Psychol. 1990;43:277–300.

Campbell JP, Hanson MA, Oppler SH. “Modeling performance in a population

of jobs.” In: Campbell JP, Knapp DJ, eds. Exploring the Limits in
Personnel Selection and Classification. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Publishers; 2001:307–333.

Rollins T, Fruge M. “Performance dimensions: competencies with twist

training.”1992; 29:47–51.

Caguimbal, N.C. (1992) “ Socio-Economic Profile and Health and Sanitation

Condition of the Families in Del Gallego, Camarines Sur” (A thesis
presented to the faculty of Graduate School, Naga College Foundation,
Naga City, 1992)

Garofalo, James. (1987). “Reassessing the lifestyle model of criminal

victimization” In Michael Gottfredson & Travis Hirschi (Eds.), Positive
criminology. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage. 

Health home 2014 (The National Journal of Better Living)

Health home 2015 (The National Journal of Better Living)

 41

Hindelang, Michael, Gottfredson, Michael & Garofalo, James. (1978). “Victims

of personal crime: An empirical foundation for a theory of personal
victimization.” Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/cherylsnappconner/2012/07/17/employees-really-
do-waste-time-at-work/

http://business.salary.com/why-how-your-employees-are-wasting-time-at-
work/slide/9/

http://www.thinkoutsidetheslide.com/are-we-wasting-250-million-per-day-due-
to-bad-powerpoint/

Huber M, Knottnerus JA, Green, L., Van Der Horst H, Jadad AR, Kromhout D,
Smid H.BMJ2011;343(d4163)http://savenhshomeopathy.org/wp
content/uploads/2012/09/Huber-Definition-Health-BMJ-21.pdf

Lindsay, N 2004 Pathfinder: Exploring Career and Educational Paths, Third

Edition,
JIST Publishing, Inc., Indianapolis, 2004, p.62-63.

MADRELIJOS, R.S., DEMATERA, R.A. AND MARCHIAL, M.R. (2013)

“Relationship of Nutritional Status to the Academic Performance of
the Public and Private Pre-Schoolers in Calabanga” (Unpublished
Undergraduate Thesis, Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-
Calabanga, 2013)
Maslow, A (1954). “Motivation and personality”. New York, NY: Harper. p. 236.
ISBN 0-06-041987-3.

Ramos H. A. 2014 “Value Profile and Resolution of Conflicts of Public

School Teachers in Calabanga District (A thesis presented to the
Graduate School of Central Bicol State University of Agriculture,
Calabanga Campus, Calabanga Camarines Sur)
Spaargaren, G., and B. VanVliet (2000) "Lifestyle, Consumption and the
Environment: The Ecological Modernisation of Domestic
Consumption", Environmental Politics 9(1): 50-75.
The New Brainworld Dual Dictionary (Limited and International Edition),
English-Filipino,Filipino-Filipino, Philippines and International Copyright @
2010,2012 by Brainworld Publishing.
The New International Webster Collegiate Dictionary of the English

Language.
 42

Appendix A
43
44
45
 46

Appendix B

Good day!

The undersigned BEED 4A students of this University is currently conducting a

research entitled “Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of the teaching and non-teaching
personnel of Central Bicol State University of Agriculture”.

In line with this, may we ask for your support and cooperation by answering the
needed data in our questionnaire, rest assured that this will be treated with
confidentiality.

Thank you!

God bless you a hundredfold!

The Researches;

CARYL XYRA A. TABILOG

NIKKA J. NOLLASE
ARLENE ROSALINE MAY P. SAYANGCO

Noted:

NILDA P. OLORES PhD

Research Adviser
 47

Questionnaire

“Lifestyle and Work Efficiency of the Teaching and Non-Teaching Personnel”

Name: ____________________________________

Instructions: Kindly check the item that best describes your answer.

Part I: Demographic Profile of the Respondent

Age:

_____ 20-25 _____ 36-40 _____ 51-55 _____ 66-70

_____ 21-30 _____ 41-45 _____ 56-60
_____ 31-35 _____ 46 -50 _____ 61-65

Gender:

_____ Female _____ Male

Civil Status:

_____ Single _____ Annulled/Divorce

_____ Married _____ Widow
_____ Legally Separated

Educational Attainment:

____ Bachelor’s Degree _________________

____ Bachelor’s Degree plus units in Masteral Degree_________________
____ M.A _________________
____ M.A with Doctoral Units _________________
____ Ph.D/ EdD _________________
Others _________________

Position:

_____ Teaching Staff

_____ Non-Teaching Staff
Please specify your position: ___________________

Monthly Income:

_____ P 41,000 – P50, 000 _____ P 10,000 – P 20,000

_____ P 31,000 – P 40,000 _____ P 10,000 below
_____ P 21,000 – P 30,000
 47

Part II: Lifestyle of the Respondents

I. Eating Habit

4 3 2 1
(always) (sometimes) (occasionally) (never)
1. I eat breakfast before going to
work.
2. I eat three meals daily.
3. I eat vegetables.
4. I eat fish.
5. I eat meat.
6. I drink milk.
7. I do not drink soft drinks, energy
drinks or any bottle drinks.
8. I drink 8 or more glasses of
water daily.
9. I do not eat junk foods.
10. I eat fruits.

II. Smoking Habits

4 3 2 1
(always) (sometimes) (occasionally) (never)
1. I do smoke
2. I enjoy smoking
3. I can consume 3-5 sticks of
cigarettes daily.
4. I am smoking whenever I have
problems in work.
5. I smoke every after meal.
III. Drinking Habits

4 3 2 1
(always) (sometimes) (occasionally) (never)
1. I drink alcoholic beverages.
2. I enjoy drinking alcoholic
beverages.
3. I drink moderately
4. I am drinking alcoholic
beverages whenever I have
problems in work.
5. I get satisfaction in drinking
alcoholic beverages.
 49

PART III: WORK EFFICIENCY

Latest Performance Rating

First Sem. _________

Second Sem. ________

Thank you for your cooperation!

Godbless!
 49

Appendix C

Spearman’s Rho Results of the Relationship between

Lifestyle and Work Efficiency

Correlations

Food Habits Smoking Habits Drinking Habits Work Efficiency

Spearman's rho Food Habits Correlation Coefficient 1.000 -.621 -.476 .959

Sig. (2-tailed) . .055 .164 .019

N 10 10 10 10

Smoking Habits Correlation Coefficient -.621 1.000 .507 .182

Sig. (2-tailed) .055 . .135 .614

N 10 10 10 10

Drinking Habits Correlation Coefficient -.476 .507 1.000 .281

Sig. (2-tailed) .164 .135 . .432

N 10 10 10 10

Work Efficiency Correlation Coefficient .019 .182 .281 1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) .959 .614 .432 .

N 10 10 10 10

Correlations

Food Habits Smoking Habits Drinking Habits Work Efficiency

Food Habits Pearson Correlation 1 -.174 -.012 .350

Sig. (2-tailed) .405 .955 .086

N 25 25 25 25
Smoking Habits Pearson Correlation -.174 1 .152 -.001
Sig. (2-tailed) .405 .468 .998
N 25 25 25 25
Drinking Habits Pearson Correlation -.012 .152 1 .882
Sig. (2-tailed) .955 .468 .031
N 25 25 25 25
Work Efficiency Pearson Correlation .350 -.001 .031 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .086 .998 .882

N 25 25 25 25