1

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This section presents the findings and answers to the problems posed in the study. These

are presented in tables for easy and better understanding. Preceding the tables are the discussions

on the analysis and interpretations of data collected.

Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Learner-Respondents

Table 2 shows the socio-demographic characteristics of learner-respondents

which includes age, sex, family monthly income and number of siblings.

Age

The respondents’ ages ranged from 10 to 13 years with a mean of 11.28 and a

standard deviation of 0.60 indicating a narrow distribution of the ages of the respondents.

Table 2 also shows that majority (55 %) of learner-respondents were 11 years old

followed by those who were 12 years of age with 38.5 percent. The remaining

respondents were 10 and 13 years old with 3.80 and 1.90 percent respectively. This

implies that the pupils were in correct age group with their grade level as prescribed by

the Department of Education in DO no. 20 s. 2018 that the qualification for kindergarten

learners in both public and private schools should be 5 years old by June 1 in every

calendar year. Therefore, at the age of 11, they are expected to be in grade 6.

Sex

Table 2 shows that out of 104 learner-respondent, 59 or 56.73% were females and

45 or 43.27% were males. Findings show that there were more female grade 6 learner-
 2

respondents in the selected public elementary schools in the Division of Science City of

Muñoz during the study.

Girls tend to be more successful than boys during elementary and early secondary

education, even in math and science that are traditionally considered to be “masculine

subjects” (Holmlund, H., and Sund, K. 2008). The finding that girls better school

achievement than boys in various school subjects is supported by a number of other

studies (Demie, F. 2001; Gibb, S.J., eta al., 2008). Girls are better adapted to learning

activities, less school anxious, have a more positive attitude toward school (Resing et al.,

1999), have higher self-discipline (Duckworth and Seligman 2006), more effective self-

regulation (Matthews et al., 2009), and less tendency to avoid work (Steinmayr and

Spinath 2008). All of this gives an advantage to girls in traditional school setting and

enables them to obtain higher school marks than boys.

Month Family Income

Learner-respondents' average monthly family income is 16,327.90 pesos, with a

standard deviation of 12,029.90 pesos and a range of 5,000.00 to 65,000.00 pesos.

Table 2 shows that the monthly income bracket of 5,000–14,999 had the most

responses, 48.08 %, followed by those who are earning 15,000–24,999 with 37.50%. The

monthly salary bracket with the lowest number of learner-respondents was 25,000 to

74,999.00 with 14.4%.

Based on The Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (2011),

the low-income students do not sustain persistence when faced with the academic

challenge which is the ultimate cause for the difficulties in school, whereas the children

from higher socioeconomic status groups are better equipped to persist because they mat
 3

attack challenging tasks with a better self-concept and positive attitude. Thus, the low-

income child who is unable to persist in the face of difficult academic tasks will continue

to fall further behind, in fact widening the achievement gap (Brown, 2009).

Number of Siblings

The mean number of siblings was 2.00 with the standard deviation of 1.30 and

number of siblings ranging from only child to 7 siblings.

Table 2 also shows that majority (61.54%) of the respondents had 2-3 siblings

followed by Then, an only child with three siblings received 29 responses, equating to

27.88 percent. Furthermore, the bracket with the least number of answers, with an

equivalent of 10.58 percent, is 4, 5, and 7 siblings for 11 learner-respondents.

Based on the study of Eamon (2005), the size of a family has some effects on the

academic performance of students. Students who belong to larger families tend to have

low levels of achievement and lower levels of secondary graduation, on the average than

children who belong to smaller families. The reality is that parents of many children

cannot afford to divide quality time with their children, conversely, parents with two to

three children can afford the time to increase their time is only shared with less number of

children.
 4

Table 2. Socio – Demographic Profile of the Respondents

PROFILE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

(N=104)

Age

10 4 3.80

11 58 55.80

12 40 38.50

13 2 1.90
Mean = 11.28

SD = 0.60

Gender

Male 45 43.30

Female 59 56.70

Monthly Family Income

65,000 – 74,999 1 1.00

55,000 – 64,999 1 1.00

45,000 – 54,999 2 1.90

35,000 – 44,999 4 3.80

25,000 – 34,999 7 6.70

15,000 – 24,999 39 37.50

5,000 – 14,999 50 48.10

Mean = 16,327.90
 5

SD = 12,029.90

Number of Siblings

Only child 13 12.50

1 30 28.80

2 34 32.70

3 16 15.40

4 6 5.80

5 4 3.80

7 1 1.00

Mean = 2.00

SD = 1.30

B. Resilience of Learner-Respondents

The resilience of learner-respondents was determined in terms of personal, social

and family factor.

Personal

In Table 3, the item “I know that I succeed if I carry on,” got a highest weighted

mean of 3.63 which has verbal description of “Strongly Agree”. This indicates that the

learner-respondents were confident in their ability to succeed as they progressed.

 6

The item “Believing in myself helps me to overcome difficult times” also got a

verbal description of “Strongly Agree” and a weighted mean of 3.62. It is important that

they have confidence in themselves in order to meet life's challenges.

The item “I am comfortable together with other persons” got the lowest weighted

mean of 3.14 verbally described as “Agree”. This indicates that the majority of

respondents feel uncomfortable with other people.

All of the sub-items under the personal factor received a weighted average of

3.44, which is classified as "Strongly Agree." This finding suggests that when it came to

personal factors, learner-respondents were strong. It means that the learner-respondents

had the ability to stay aware of their emotions and manage their behavior and tendencies.

Social

Table 3 describes the responses of the learners, the statement “I have some close

friends who back me up,” got a highest weighted mean of 3.44 which has verbal

description of “Strongly Agree”. This shows that the learner-respondents are secure in

their ability to rely on others for support.

Furthermore, the item “I have some close friends who really care about me,”

received the second highest weighted mean of 3.37, with a verbal explanation of

“Strongly Agree.” It basically means that the majority of the respondents are kind and

polite because they are cared for by others.

With a verbal clarification of "Agree," the items "It is easy for me to make other

people laugh" and "I am good at getting in touch with new people" received the lowest
 7

weighted averages of 3.20 and 3.24, respectively. This means that the learner-respondents

have a weak sense of humor and find it difficult to get along with strangers.

The weighted average of all sub-items under the social factor was 3.36, which is

rated as "Strongly Agree." This result indicates that learner-respondents were high when

it came to social influences. It means that the learner-respondents had the ability to

handle social interactions effectively, physical and emotional comfort given to them by

their family, friends, co-workers and others.

Family

Table 3 shows the learners' answers. The sentence "I enjoy being with my family"

received the highest weighted mean of 3.65, which corresponds to a verbal definition of

"Strongly Agree." This shows that the learner-respondents enjoy spending time with their

families. In addition to having the highest weighted mean, the sentence " I am happy with

the family that I have" has the second highest weighted average of 3.62. This indicates

that the learner-respondents are satisfied with the type of family they have.

Although the item “I can easily open up problems with my family” has the lowest

weighted average of all the family factor sub-items, it still has a “Strongly Agree”

description. However, the overall weighted average for this factor is 3.51, with the verbal

description "Strongly Agree". It indicates that the learner-respondents had a family that

get along and function productively through problem solving, organization and providing

a positive emotional climate.

 8

Table 3. Resilience of the Respondents

Statement Mean Description

Personal

I believe in my own abilities 3.58 Strongly Agree

Believing in myself helps me to overcome difficult times 3.62 Strongly Agree

I know that I succeed if I carry on 3.63 Strongly Agree

I know how to reach my goals 3.54 Strongly Agree

No matter what happens I always find a solution 3.45 Strongly Agree

I am comfortable together with other persons 3.14 Agree

I believe that I will succeed in the future 3.34 Strongly Agree

I know that I can solve my personal problems 3.39 Strongly Agree

I am pleased with my self 3.35 Strongly Agree

I have realistic plans for the future 3.54 Strongly Agree

I completely trust my judgements and decisions 3.37 Strongly Agree

At hard times, I know that better times will come 3.35 Strongly Agree

I easily laugh 3.48 Strongly Agree

It is important for me to be flexible in new circumstances 3.42 Strongly Agree

I keep up my daily routines even at difficult times 3.45 Strongly Agree

Pooled Mean 3.44 Strongly Agree

 9

Table 3. Resilience of the Respondents continued…

Social

I am good in getting in touch with new people 3.24 Agree

I easily establish new friendships 3.34 Strongly Agree

I easily adjust to new social environment 3.21 Agree

It is easy for me to make other people’s laugh 3.20 Strongly Agree

I have some close friends who really care about me 3.37 Strongly Agree

I have some close friends who back me up 3.44 Strongly Agree

I always have someone who can help me when needed 3.29 Strongly Agree

I have some close friends/family members who are good 3.54 Strongly Agree
at encouraging me

I have strong bonds between my friends 3.49 Strongly Agree

I experience good relations with both men and women 3.47 Strongly Agree

Pooled Mean 3.36 Strongly Agree

Family

I can easily open up problems with my family 3.30 Strongly Agree

There are strong bonds in my family 3.51 Strongly Agree

I enjoy being with my family 3.65 Strongly Agree

In my family we enjoy finding common activities 3.45 Strongly Agree

I am happy with the family that I have 3.62 Strongly Agree

Pooled Mean 3.51 Strongly Agree

Over – all Mean 3.44 Strongly Agree

 10

Legend: 3.25 – 4.00 Strongly Agree

2.50 – 3.24 Agree
1.75 – 2.49 Disagree
1.00 – 1.74 Strongly Disagree

C. Parents’ Involvement

Parents’ involvement of learner-respondents was assessed in terms of

communication with school, parental involvement, and parental self-efficacy.

Communication with School

Table 4 shows that the item “My parents give the academic support that I need in

school” has the highest weighted mean of 3.66, with a verbal description of “Strongly

Agree.” This indicates that the learner-respondents' parents provided academic support.

Then, item "My parents can talk openly with my teachers" got the next highest weighted

mean of 3.62 with a verbal description of "Strongly Agree”. It implies that the majority of

parents can freely ask their children's teachers about their schooling.

Thus, item “My parents believe that I am challenged in the school’s academic

curriculum” got the lowest weighted mean of 3.18 verbally described as “Agree.” This

outcome indicates that parents believe their child is challenged by the academic

curriculum at their child's school.

All the sub-item under Communication with School gained an average weighted

mean of 3.47 which is the same as “Strongly Agree”. This result implies that the parents

of learner-respondents were actively involved with the school in order to monitor their

child's progress.
 11

Parental Involvement

Table 3 describes that the item “My parents ask about my future goals” earned

the highest weighted mean of 3.73 with a verbal description of “Strong Agree”. It means

that the parents of learner-respondents are concerned and want to know what their

children's goals are. Furthermore, the item “My parents monitor my progress in school”

had the second highest weighted average of 3.66, with a verbal description of “Strongly

Agree.”

All eight (8) of the listed sub-items were interpreted as "Strongly Agree." These

items received a weighted average of 3.58. The rating received by respondents in this

factor demonstrates that majority of parents on the learner-respondents are actively

involved when it comes to their children's personal life and schooling.

Parental Self-Efficacy

Table 4 shows that under this factor, the highest weighted mean is 3.70 and

described as “Strongly Agree” in response to “My parents support me when learning at

home”. This implies that the majority of parents are supportive of their child's learning

activities that should be done at home. The item “My parents motivate me to try hard in

school” came in second with a weighted mean of 3.67 with a verbal description of

“Strongly Agree”. It means that parents encourage their children to work harder in

school.

All the five (5) items spelled out under this factor, the average weighted mean of

responses of learners under Parental Self-Efficacy as “Strongly Agree” having a

 12

numerical value of 3.55. This result implies that parents were confident about their ability

to successfully raise their children.

Table 4. Parents’ Involvement of the Respondents

Statement Mean Description

Communication with School
My parents always consult my teacher regarding my 3.38 Strongly Agree
performance in school
My parents always in touch with my teacher (e.g., 3.45 Strongly Agree
messenger, phone calls or texts).
My parents can talk openly with my teachers. 3.62 Strongly Agree

My parents easily understand what my teacher is 3.52 Strongly Agree

saying about my schooling
Table 3. Parents’ Involvement of the Respondents continued…

My parents always ask questions to my teacher if 3.47 Strongly Agree

he/she wants to clarify something
My parents believe that I am challenged in the 3.18 Agree
school’s academic curriculum.
My parents give the academic support that I need in 3.66 Strongly Agree
school.
Pooled Mean 3.47 Strongly Agree

Parental Involvement

My parents ask about my future goals 3.73 Strongly Agree

My parents talk about problems that I may be having 3.50 Strongly Agree
in learning at home
My parents ask about what content of the lesson I find 3.61 Strongly Agree
difficult
My parents told me to learn and do things 3.59 Strongly Agree
independently
My parents assist me when studying at home 3.57 Strongly Agree

Statement Mean Description

My parents help me with my assignments and 3.53 Strongly Agree
activities in school
My parents monitor my progress in school 3.66 Strongly Agree

My parents hold high expectations to me. 3.44 Strongly Agree

 13

Pooled Mean 3.58 Strongly Agree

Parental Self - Efficacy

My parents motivate me to try hard in school 3.67 Strongly Agree

My parents support me when learning at home? 3.70 Strongly Agree

My parents understand the content of the lesson that I 3.48 Strongly Agree
need to learn
My parents explain the content of the lesson that I 3.52 Strongly Agree
need to learn
My parents are confident that they can teach me in 3.39 Strongly Agree
Math and English subjects?
Pooled Mean 3.55 Strongly Agree

Over -all mean 3.53 Strongly Agree

Legend: 3.25 – 4.00 Strongly Agree

2.50 – 3.24 Agree
1.75 – 2.49 Disagree
1.00 – 1.74 Strongly Disagree

Academic Performance of Learner-Respondents

The first quarter GPA (grade point average) of learner-respondents was used to

evaluate their academic performance.

The learner-respondents’ grades ranged from 80-94 with a mean first-quarter

GPA of 87.23 and a standard deviation of 1.30 which implies that the grades of the

respondents are not widely dispersed. (Table 5).

As shown in the table, 33.70% of the respondents had grades ranging 86-88

followed bay 89-91 with 31.70 % and 83-85 with 25%. This means that the biggest

number of respondents had grades that fall within the mean. Meanwhile, GPAs ranging
 14

from 80-82 and 92-94 received the fewest number of respondents which both obtained

4.80%.

Table 5. Respondents’ Academic Performance

GPA (FIRST QUARTER) FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

92 – 94 5 4.80
89 – 91 33 31.70

86 – 88 35 33.70

83 – 85 26 25.00

80 - 82 5 4.80

Mean = 87.23 SD = 1.30

Relationship Between Socio-Demographic Characteristics and Academic

Performance

The socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents considered in this study

were, age, sex, number of siblings and monthly family income which were correlated to

academic performance. Below are the discussions of the specific results.

Relationship between Age and Academic Performance

Table 6 shows that no significant relationship was observed between the age and

grade point average (GPA) of the respondents. This implies that the respondents' age

does not influence the academic performance of Grade 6 learners.

 15

This is contrary to the study of Grissom (2004) who concluded that the negative

relationship between age and academic achievement remains constant over time.

According to him, schools provide equalizing experiences, and thus the longer students

stay in the schooling process, the more the impact of age on student achievement is

diminished.

Relationship between Sex and Academic Performance

Table 6 shows that the respondents’ sex (r=.423) was found to have no significant

relationship with their grade point average (GPA). It implies that the respondents' sex

does not influence the academic performance of Grade 6 learners.

An opposing result was observed in the study of Fabunmi (2004) who

discovered that gender composition has a significant relationship with students’ academic

performance and that gender composition has a significant influence on secondary school

students’ academic performance.

Relationship between Monthly Family Income and Academic Performance

Table 6 shows that the respondents’ monthly family income (r=.0.30) was found

to be positively related with their grade point average (GPA). It implies that the

respondents' monthly family income has an impact on the academic performance of

Grade 6 learners. The higher the monthly family income, the better the performance of

the respondent.

Similarly, Yousefi et al. (2010) examined the effect of family income on test-

anxiety and academic achievement. The findings showed that family income significantly
 16

affected academic achievement of students. Findings revealed that father/guardian higher

social economic (income) status significantly contribute to higher academic performance

of graduate students. They proposed a linear model to improve the academic performance

of graduate students at University level (Ali et al., 2013).

Relationship between Number of Siblings and Academic Performance

Table 6 shows that number of siblings (r=.906) was found to have no significant

relationship with the learner-respondents' grade point average (GPA). It implies that the

respondents' number of siblings does not affect the academic performance of Grade 6

learners.

Most studies on sibship size confirm a negative effect on educational outcomes

with an increasing number of siblings (Downey 1995; Härkönen 2014) which is contrary

to the result of this study.

Among the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents, only monthly

family income was found to be significantly related to academic performance. Other

factors such as age, sex and number of siblings were not related to academic

performance. Thus, the hypothesis stating that there is no significant relationship between

the learners' socio-demographic characteristics and their academic performance was

accepted.

On the other hand, a research by Schwartz (2013) goes further, illustrating that

specific factors of age, gender and previous educational experiences influence student

performance and satisfaction in school.

 17

Table 6. Correlation Matrix between SDC and Academic Performance

SDC GPA r

Sex .079 .423

Age .057 .566

Monthly Family Income .225* .030

Number of Siblings .012 .906

*significant at 0.05 level (2- tailed)

Relationship between Resilience and Academic Performance

The learner-respondents' academic performance was found to have no association

with the personal component (r=.505), social component (r=.526), and family component

(r=.209) of resilience. This implies that resilience of the respondents in terms of personal,

social and family aspect does not affect their academic performance.

Similarly, Sarwar et al. (2010) claimed that there is no relationship between

resilience and academic achievement, according to marks gained by students at tenth

grade. Elizondo Omaña et al. (2010) also found that resilience does not predict academic

performance.

Therefore, the second hypothesis stating that there is no significant relationship

between the learners' resilience and the academic performance was accepted.

Personal

Table 7 shows that personal component of resilience (r=.505) was found to have

no significant relationship with the learner-respondents' academic performance. It implies

 18

that the respondents' personal resilience has no effect on the academic performance of

Grade 6 learners.

Social

Table 7 indicates that the social component of resilience (r=.526) was found to

have no significant relationship with the academic performance of the learner-

respondents. It means that the respondents' social resilience has no impact on Grade 6

students' academic

performance.

Family

Table 7 shows that the learner-respondents' academic performance was found to

have no significant relationship with the family variable of resilience (r=.209). It means

that the respondents' family resilience has no impact on the academic perfromance of

Grade 6 students.

Table 7. Correlation Matrix between Resiliency and Academic Performance

RESILIENCE ACADEMIC r
PERFORMANCE

Personal .066 .505

Social .063 .526

Family .124 .209

*No significant relationship

Relationship between Parents’ Involvement and Academic Performance

 19

Parents’ involvement in terms of communication with school, parental

involvement and parents’ self-efficacy were correlated with the students’ academic

performance. Result shows that parental self-efficacy was significantly related to

students’ academic performance which implies that parents who have high level of self-

efficacy could influence their child to study hard and come up with better or higher

academic performance. On the other hand, learner-respondents' academic performance

was found to have no significant relationship with Parents’ involvement in terms of

communication with school (r=.252) or parental involvement (r=.311).

Parent involvement is one factor that has been consistently related to a child's

increased academic performance (Hara & Burke, 1998; Hill & Craft, 2003; Marcon,

1999; Stevenson & Baker, 1987). While this relation between parent involvement and a

child's academic performance is well established, studies have yet to examine how parent

involvement increases a child's academic performance. 

Therefore, the third hypothesis stating that there is no significant relationship

between the learners' parents’ involvement and the academic performance was rejected in

one variable only which ids the parental self-efficacy.

Communication with School

Table 8 indicates that parent-school contact (r=.253) was found to was found to

have no significant relationship with the students’ academic performance. This implies

that that parents' contact with the school has no impact on Grade 6 students' academic

success.

Parental Involvement
 20

Table 8 reveals that parental involvement (r=.311) was found to was found to

have no significant relationship with the students’ academic performance. It means that

parental involvement does not influence the academic performance of Grade 6 students.

Singh et al., (1995) explored the effect of four components of parental

involvement on the achievement of 8th graders namely, parental aspirations for children’s

education, parent-child communication about school, home-structure and parental

participation in school related activities. They showed that parental involvement in school

activities was not related to achievement, whilst home structure had a slight negative

association.

Parental Self-Efficacy

Table 8 shows that parental self-efficacy (r=.029) was found to be positively

correlated with the grade point average of the learner-respondents (GPA). It means that

parental self-efficacy has an impact on Grade 6 students' academic achievement.

Empirical work suggests that parents with high self-efficacy are more likely to

monitor their children’s schoolwork and to participate actively at the school (Ardelt &

Eccles, 2001).

Table 8. Correlation Matrix between Parental Involvement and Academic

Performance

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT ACADEMIC r

PERFORMANCE
 21

Communication with School .102 .252

Parental Involvement .124 .311

Parental Self - Efficacy .215* .029

*significant at 0.05 level (2- tailed)

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In general, the study was conducted to determine the resilience, parents’

involvement and academic performance of grade 6 learners in selected public elementary

schools in the Division of Science City of Muñoz.

The population was composed of 104 learner-respondents who were randomly

selected from the identified elementary schools in the Division of Science City of Muñoz.

These were Muñoz Central School, DepEd-CLSU Elementary (Lab) School, Rang-ayan

Elementary School and Eduardo L. Joson Memorial School. The study was conducted

during the first semester for the school year 2020-2021.

 22

Survey questionnaire was utilized in gathering the data needed. The data were

analyzed using descriptive statistics namely: frequency counts, percentage, mean, and

standard deviation. Pearson-Product Moment Correlation Coefficient was employed to

determine the relationship of the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents,

the learners’ resilience, parents’ involvement and academic performance of the

respondents.

SUMMARY ( do your summary , conclusions and

recommendations based on the results… check the

figures….

Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Learner-Respondents

The majority of the respondents were 11 years old when the study was conducted,

indicating that they were of the required age set by the Department of Education. Most of

them were female learners. They came from a small family with 3 to 5 members. Their

monthly family income was average.

Resilience of Learner-Respondents
 23

In terms of resilience, the majority of respondents came from a close-knit family

or resilience family, which had the highest polled mean. Personal and social component

gained a pooled mean of 3.36 and 3. 44, respectively. Moreover, the over-all mean was

3.44 and described as “Strong Agree”.

Parents’ Involvement of Learner-Respondents

In terms of parents’ involvement, it had the over-all mean of 3.53 which fell under

the verbal description of “Strongly Agree”. Parental Involvement and Communication

with School received a pooled mean of 3.58 and 3.47, respectively.

Relationship between Socio-Demographic Characteristics and Academic

Performance of Learner-Respondents

Based on the data gathered, among the socio-demographic characteristics of the

respondents, the monthly family income (r=0.30) had a positive relationship to the

academic performance of the respondents. Therefore, the null hypothesis that there is no

significant relationship between respondents' socio-demographic characteristics and

academic performance was rejected.

Relationship between Resilience and Academic Performance of

Learner-Respondents

According to the findings, the respondents' academic performance and resilience

in terms of personal (r=.505), social (r=.526), and family (r=.209) had a negative

relationship to their academic performance. Therefore, the null hypothesis that there is no
 24

significant relationship between respondents' resilience and academic performance was

accepted.

Relationship between Parents’ Involvement and Academic Performance of

Learner-Respondents

Based on the findings, it was discovered that the respondents' academic

performance and their parents' involvement in terms of Communication with School

(r=.252) and Parental Involvement (r=.311) had a negative relationship. Parental Self-

Efficacy (r=.029), on the other hand, was positively related to the respondents' academic

performance. Therefore, the null hypothesis, which stated that there is no significant

relationship between respondents' parental involvement and academic performance, was

rejected.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of the study, the following conclusion were drawn:

1. Majority of the respondents’ mean age was 11.28 years old, female

respondents was 56.73% and from a relatively small family with an average

monthly income.

2. The resilience of the respondents had an overall mean of 3.44 described as

Strongly Agree. Among the three (3) components, family had the highest

mean of 3.51, followed by personal with a mean of 3.44, and social with a

mean of 3.36.

3. The first quarter GPA was used to determine academic performance, and it

had a mean of 87.23.

 25

4. Among the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents, monthly

family income was positively significant of academic performance of the

learner. Age, sex and number of siblings had a negative correlation with the

academic performance of the learner-respondents.

5. The respondents' resilience was not significantly related to their academic

performance.

6. Among the components of parents’ involvement, communication with school

and parental involvement was negatively correlated with the academic

performance of the learner-respondents. On the other hand, parental self-

efficacy was highly correlated with the academic performance of the

respondents.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the results and conclusions of the study, the following recommendations

were made.

1. Parents should provide their children with complete and balance diet. This is

essential not only for a healthy body but also for a healthy mind.

2. The Department of Education should continue to implement the School

Feeding Program in order to assist underprivileged and malnourished children.

3. The government should continue to implement the Pantawid Pamilyang

Pilipino Program (4Ps) to assist low-income families. This allows parents to

provide academic support to their children.

 26

4. School administrators and teachers should develop a program to improve a

child's resilience in school and in life.

5. Parents should guide and assist their children in their schoolwork. Their

involvement in their children's education may help them achieve success in

life in the future.

6. Parents must understand that it is preferable to involve themselves in school in

order to be aware of what is going on in their child's education.

7. Schools should provide activities that encourage parental participation.

Demonstrating and promoting volunteerism would also motivate all target

participants.

8. Future and additional research should be conducted to verify and strengthen

the findings of this study. Another correlation analysis may be performed by

the researcher to determine which socio-demographic characteristics,

resilience, and parental involvement have a significant impact on academic

performance.