EMELITA C.

VENTIC

PART A THEORY:

I. Problem:

The problem identified is the high rates of stress and burnout experienced by healthcare professionals,
especially during the recent COVID-19 pandemic the high incidence of stress and burnout among
healthcare workers, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

II. Rationale of the study:

Addressing worldwide health crises like the recent COVID-19 outbreak relies heavily on the efforts of the
medical workforce. Nevertheless, the epidemic has imposed substantial psychological and physiological
demands on healthcare professionals, resulting in elevated rates of stress and burnout. There is a strong
correlation between the high rates of stress and burnout in the healthcare industry and the quality of
care and the safety of patients. Medical workers are susceptible to stress and burnout, and we need
measures that can help. The purpose of this research is to examine the causes of stress and burnout in
the healthcare industry and the efficacy of therapies designed to alleviate these problems.

III. Main and sub-problems:

Main Problem:

What causes stress and burnout in the healthcare industry, and how successful are current efforts to
alleviate these problems?

Sub-Problems:

1. What are the demographic and work-related factors associated with stress and burnout among
healthcare workers?
2. What is the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on stress and burnout among healthcare
workers?
3. What is the effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions in reducing stress and burnout
among healthcare workers?
4. What is the effectiveness of organizational interventions, such as job redesign and work schedule
changes, in reducing stress and burnout among healthcare workers?
5. What is the impact of social support on stress and burnout among healthcare workers?

IV. Statistical treatment of the study:

The statistical treatment for this study will involve descriptive statistics, such as mean, median, and
standard deviation, to describe the characteristics of the sample population. Inferential statistics, such as
correlation analysis, t-test, and ANOVA, will be used to determine the relationship between variables and
to test the effectiveness of interventions. Multiple regression analysis will be used to identify the factors
that contribute to stress and burnout among healthcare workers and to determine the strength of the
relationship between these factors and stress and burnout.
EMELITA C. VENTIC

PART B COMPUTATION:

I. The null hypothesis is that the distribution profile of opinions of graduate students about the
quality of graduate education in the Philippines is not significantly divergent from the normal probability
curve.

The alternative hypothesis is that the distribution is significantly divergent from the normal
probability curve.
Standard Deviation:
x Frequency (f) f⋅x f⋅x2=(f⋅x)×( Mean x=
x)
ΣFx =

√
1 7 7 7
2 9 18 36 n 2
( ∑ f ⋅ x)
3 14 42 126 ∑ f ⋅ x 2−
4 10 40 160 n
5 12 60 300 167 n−1
=
52

√
n=52 ∑f⋅x=167 ∑f⋅x2=629
(167)2
=3.21 = 629− 52
II. The expected frequency of each opinion category based
51 on the normal
distribution with mean μ = 3.21 and standard deviation σ = 1.34 is as follows:

 Strongly agree: 4.732

 Agree: 10.868
 Uncertain: 16.965
 Disagree: 12.948
 Strongly disagree: 6.468

(12−4.732)2 (10−10.868)2 (14−16.965)2 (9−12.948)2 (7−6.468)2

III. Chi-Square= + + + +
4.732 10.868 16.965 12.948 6.468
=12.998

IV. Degrees of Freedom

Df=5-1=4

V. P Value from Chi-Square

Chi-square score:12.998

DF:4 The P-Value is .011286. The result is

SL: 0.05 significant at p < .05.

VI. Conclusion

With df = 4 and chi-square = 6.73, the p-value is less than 0.05, which means that the observed
distribution is significantly divergent from the normal probability curve at the 95% confidence level.

Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that the distribution profile of the opinion of
graduate students about quality graduate in the Philippines is significantly divergent from the normal
probability curve.
EMELITA C. VENTIC

II.

a. Frequency Distribution Table

MATHEMATICS ENGLISH
Class Interval Tally Frequency Frequenc
93-99 I 1 Class Interval Tally
y
86-92 IIII 4 94-100 II 2
79-85 II 2 87-93 IIIII-I 6
72-78 IIIII-I 6
80-86 IIIII-II 7
65-71 III 3
58-64 IIIII-I 6
73-79 IIIII 5
51-57 III 3 66-72 IIIII-II 7
44-50 III 3 59-65 IIII 4
37-43 IIIII-I 6 52-58 III 3
30-36 I 1 45-51 II 2
23-29 II 2 38-44 II 2
16-22 III 3 31-37 I 1
N= 40 24-30 I 1
N= 40
b. Frequency Polygon

Frequency Polygon in Mathematics

7
6
5
Frequency

4
3
2
1
0
12 19 26 33 40 47 54 61 68 75 82 89 96 103
Midpoint

Frequency Polygon in English

8
7
6
5
Frequency

4
3
2
1
0
20 27 34 41 48 55 62 69 76 83 90 97 104
Midpoint
EMELITA C. VENTIC

c. Mean= 57.925
Median=60
Mode=76
d. Standard Deviation and Quartile Deviation

Variance σ2 =321.14938
Count n =40
Mean μ =71.275
Sum of Squares SS =12845.975

σ=
√ SS
n

=
√ 12845.975
40
=17.920641-standard deviation

1st quartile=59.75

2nd quartile= 73

3rd quartile= 85.5

Quartile Deviation= Q3-Q1/2

85.5−59.75
=
2
=12.875 quartile deviation

III. Correlation
X Y XY X2 Y2
15 40 600 225 1600
18 42 756 324 1764
22 50 1100 484 2500 =
17 45 765 289 2025 8 ( 6389 )−146 (348)
A 17 43
20 46
731
920
289
400
1849
2116
√( 8∗2708 ) −(146 ¿ )(8 ( 15216 ) −( 348 ) )¿
2 2

16 41 656 256 1681 =0.652 Correlation

21 41 861 441 1681
correlation coefficient of 0.652 is closer to 1
146 348 6389 2708 15216
than to 0, which suggests that there is a
ΣX ΣY ΣXY ΣX2 ΣY2
moderate positive correlation between the
two variables.