1

CHAPTER I
Problem and Its Setting

Introduction

In the past, academic performance was often measured

more by ear than today. Teachers' observations made up the

bulk of the assessment, and today's summation, or numerical,

method of determining how well a student is performing is a

fairly recent invention. Grading systems came into existence

in America in the late Victorian period, and were initially

criticized due to high subjectivity. Different teachers

valued different aspects of learning more highly than

others, and although some standardization was attempted in

order to make the system more fair, the problem continued.

Today, changes have been made to incorporate differentiation

for individual students' abilities, and exploration of

alternate methods of measuring performance is ongoing.

Performance in school is evaluated in a number of ways.

For regular grading, students demonstrate their knowledge by

taking written and oral tests, performing presentations,

turning in homework and participating in class activities

and discussions. Teachers evaluate in the form of letter or

number grades and side notes, to describe how well a student

 2

has done. At the state level, students are evaluated by

their performance on standardized tests geared toward

specific ages and based on a set of achievements students in

each age group are expected to meet.

Academic performance or achievement is the outcome

of education the extent to which a student, teacher or

institution has achieved their educational goals.

Academic achievement is commonly measured

by examinations or continuous assessment but there is no

general agreement on how it is best tested or which aspects

are most important procedural knowledge such

as skills or declarative knowledge such as facts. Academic

performance is how well one does in school. Poor grades are

considered bad academic performance and many athletes are

forced to stop playing due to this.

Research Locale
 3

The Divine Word College of Calapan (DWCC) is

a Catholic institution of higher learning run by the Society

of the Divine Word (SVD) in Calapan City, Oriental

Mindoro, Philippines. It was established as Mindoro Junior

College on April 1946 The first year was in normal

education, liberal arts, pre-law, including short term

courses in typing and stenography, on July 1, 1946. It was

in January 1981 that its name was changed.

As the time passed the Divine Word College of Calapan

offered a course of criminology. The Bachelor of Science in

Criminology or Criminal Justice is a 4-year college degree

program intended for individuals who wish to have a career

in the fields of law enforcement, security administration,

crime detection and prevention or correctional

administration.

The BS in Criminology program aims to foster the values

of leadership, integrity, accountability and responsibility

while serving fellowmen, community and the country. The

course is comprised of CHED mandated general education

subjects, profession-related courses and 2-phase practicum.

BSCrim students will learn various theories, policies,

practices and laws associated with criminal behavior and the

 4

methods applied to manage such deviant activities.

Subjects in this course include Introduction to

Criminology, Law Enforcement Administration, Criminal

Detection and Administration, Criminal Law, Correction

Administration, Forensic Chemistry, and Physical Education

in connection to Criminology.

Their facility is based on the different laboratories.

More particularly in the field of Fingerprint

Identification, Question Document Examination, Police

Photography, Forensic Chemistry and Toxicology, and

Ballistics.

Theoretical Framework

This chapter presents all about the different theory

that can be drawn in the dependent and independent variable.

Kelly’s Covariation Model or also knows as Attribution

Theory ( Kelly 1967) states that the person has information

from multiple observation at different time and situations,

and can perceive the covariation of an observed effect and

its causes.
 5

Fiske and Taylor (1991) also added that Attribution

Theory deals with how the social perceiver uses information

to arrive at causal explanation for events. It examines what

information is gathered and how it is combined to form a

causal judgment.

Correspondents Inference Theory, Jones and Davis (1965)

demonstrate their theory in order to understand the process

of making an internal attribution. They say that we tend to

do this when we see a correspondence between motive and

behavior. It also described the conditions under which we

make dispositional attributes we perceive as intentional.

The other theory Triarchic Theory of Intellectual

Abilities, Sternberg (1985) discuss that there are three

kinds of intellectual abilities exist, namely analytical

creative and practical ability. Measures of abilities tend

to focus mainly on analytical abilities, whereas all these

types of ability need to be regarded as equality important.

The more we teach and assess students based on a broader set

of abilities, the more racially, ethnically, and socio

economically diverse are achiever will be.

It also focuses on the ability of the students.

 6

The last theory is Mental - Self Government, Sternberg

(1990) discuss that the students’ learning and thinking

styles together with their ability levels, play an important

role in students’ performance. It refers to an inventory of

different thinking styles that gives an indication of

people’s preference of thinking patterns. And it is focuses

on the thinking styles which constitutes preference in the

use of abilities.

Conceptual Framework

Based on the foregoing theories, the following

conceptual framework was drawn:

IV DV
FACTORS

A. Student
B. Teacher
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE
C. Facilities and
Equipment
D. Family Support
E. Peer relationship

Academic Enhancement
The framework shows Program
the independent and dependent

variables of the study. The single headed arrow shows the

relationship of the independent variables to the dependent

variable. The broken line represents the implication drawn

 7

from this study. The first box, independent variable, is

the selected factors that will serve as the predictor. The

second box contain the variables being predicted which is

the academic performance which comprised the average grade

in Ballistics, Forensic, and General Chemistry, Question

Document Examination and Finger Printing.

The factors were correlated to the academic

performance.

Based on the findings of the study, a Academic

Enhancement program will be proposed. This will be based on

the analysis and interpretation of all data gathered

pertinent to each one of the variables and indicators.

Statement of the problem

From the above framework, the study aims to determine

the factors affecting the academic performance of third year

Criminology students.

Specifically, it requires answering the following

problems:

1. What are the factors affecting the academic

performance of third year Criminology students?

2. What is the level of academic Performance of third

year Criminology students?

 8

3. Is there a relationship factors and the academic

performance of third year Criminology students?

4. What is the proposed Academic Enhancement for

Criminology students?

Statement of the null hypothesis

From the above-stated problems, the following

hypothesis was tested:

There is no relationship between the selected

factors and the academic performance of third year

Criminology students.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

The study focused on the determination of the factors

which could greatly affect the academic performance of Third

year Criminology students who are the respondents of the

study.

The selected factors are limited only to the student,

teacher, school facilities and equipment, family’s support/

assistance and peer relationship

The study was conducted from November 2013 to February

2014 at Divine Word College of Calapan.

 9

Significance of the Study

The study would be substantial in informing the

researcher herself, Criminology students, administrators,

teachers, curriculum planners, parents, and other

researchers about factors affecting the academic performance

of third year Criminology students.

It will help the researcher think and suggest of

remediation materials to be used in Criminology teaching.

Through these, learners will be motivated to work out

more on their lessons resulting to better performance in

their subjects.

Administrators can pave the way in improving and

enriching academic programs for Criminology students. They

may initiate enrichment activities such as seminars or other

programs that can enhance the learning of the students.

Teachers can find many ways to make their students more

competitive and make their teaching more interesting to

motivate the students to excel.

This could also serve as a basis for enhancement of the

curriculum of for Criminology students.

 10

Parents will also benefit from the outcome of this

study with their usual support and day-to-day encouragement

to their kids to study well.

And for future researchers, this can serve as a guide

and reference in conducting similar study.

Definition of terms

The following terms are operationally defined in order

to understand the concepts used in the study:

Academic Performance. This refers to the academic

performance or the average grades of Criminology students in

their major subjects.

Factors. These pertains to the components which could

influence the teaching and learning process of the

criminology students inside and outside the classroom

Family’s support. This pertains to both moral and

financial support of the family to the student.

Teacher factor. This refers to the qualifications,

effectiveness, efficiencies as well as the strategies and

techniques of the teachers which could influence the

students to perform well in class.

 11

Peer factor. This refers to the friends that are based

on mutual respect; appreciation and liking which could

influence an individual motivate them to study well or could

be a bad influence to them.

School facilities and equipment. These are the

materials and structure which could be of support to the

students in the actual teaching and learning process such as

laboratories, multimedia room, and library and alike.

Student factor. It refers to the own capacity,

capability, study habits and motivation of the student to

learn

Third year Criminology students. The respondents of the

study who are regular third year students of Divine Word

College of Calapan

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the review of related literature

that has credence to the foregoing study

Related Literature
 12

Humans evaluate the acceptability of behavior using

social norms and regulate behavior by means of social

control. In sociology, behavior is considered as having no

meaning, being not directed at other people and thus is the

most basic human action, although it can play a part in

diagnosis of disorders such as the autism spectrum

disorders. According to moral values, human behavior may

also depend upon the common, usual, unusual, acceptable or

unacceptable behavior of others (Hergenhahn, 2005).Behavior

differs based from the external environment they were

brought up with.

Achievement is a fundamental aspect of everyday life,

affecting people‘s work, interpersonal relationships, sense

of being, and leisure. Academic achievement is strongly

influenced by demographic and psychological

factors. Research on academic achievement of young students,

provides no reliable and consistent indication

concerning the extent of creativity, age and gender on acade

mic achievement (Komarraju, Karau, and Schmeck, 2008).

According to Pytel (2006), struggling in school resulti

ng to failing in classes isone of the reasons why students

 13

tend to drop out, and that this behavior pattern show

upearly in the life of the student.

Educational services are often not tangible and are

difficult to measure because they result in the form of

transformation of knowledge, life skills and behaviour

modifications of learners (Tsinidou, Gerogiannis, &

Fitsilis, 2010)

The environment and the personal characteristics of

learners play an important role in their academic success.

The school personnel, members of the families and

communities provide help and support to students for the

quality of their academic performance. This social

assistance has a crucial role for the accomplishment of

performance goals of students at school (Goddard, 2003).

Besides the social structure, parents’ involvement in their

child’s education increases the rate of academic success of

their child (Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995).

Although assessment of problem behaviors in other

settings should be explored, the school setting may be the

most important context for investigating problem behavior.

Teachers with special education training and experience who

spend large portions of the school day with their students may be
 14

particularly well suited to rate problem behaviors that are

believed to interfere with academic performance. Teachers are

also a common source of information about students who are being

assessed for academic and behavioral problems (Barriga,Doran,

Newell, Morrison and Robbins, 2002).

A negative or disruptive behavior is defined as behaviors

exhibi ted by a student that interrupts normal classroom

procedure. Researchers suggest that students who exhibit

maladaptive behaviors throughout the early years of school are

more likely to gravitate to other students engaging in negative

behaviors, face academic failure, and have trouble interacting

with their peers. Without intervention, these negative behaviors

can persist and appear to be fairly stable over time (Akey,

2006; Barriga et al., 2002).

Traditionally, positive behaviors such as compliance with

classroom rules and expectations, interest and engagement in

class activities, and mastery of subject matter have been

associated with positive academic outcomes , while negative

behaviors such as inattention, distractibility, and withdrawn

behaviors have been associated with negative academic

outcomes (Akey, 2006; Kane, 2004). Negative behaviors,

especially when exhibited within the classroom, can have a direct

 15

impact on the quality and amount of instruction delivered by the

teacher.

Teachers who spend an inordinate amount of time addressing

negative student behaviors invariably spend less time focused on

classroom instruction. While negative behaviors have been associ

ated with negativeacademic outcomes, research has shown that

positive and socially appropriate student behaviors such as

independence, appropriate classroom conduct, compliance with

classroom rules, and socially appropriate interactions with

peers, contribute to positive academic outcomes.

These positive interactions can create a more pleasurable

environment conducive to positive student and teacher

communications. As a result, teachers become more involved in the

students learning process, which may in turn increase student

motivation to learn and engagement in school activities (Akey,

2006).

Positive behaviors have been associated with an increased ability

and willingness to complete classroom projects through

motivation from both students and teachers. It is suggested

that these positive behaviors contribute to positive academic

outcomes because they promote academically oriented behavior,

 16

such as intellectual curiosity, active listening and an interest

in schoolwork.

It is reasonable to assume that positive social

interactions can contribute to academic achievement independently

even when there are diverse learning styles among students. This

is true in particular for learning that occurs within groups,

such as cooperative learning groups, or when a student must

adhere to specific sets of rules or regulations necessary to

classroom assignments or projects. Amicable behavior encourages

classroom learning indirectly by facilitating achievement-

oriented behavior.

CHAPTER III
Research Methodology

This chapter presents the research design, respondents

of the study, research instrument, reliability test, data

gathering procedure, and statistical treatment of data.

 17

Research Design

The researcher used descriptive-creational research. A

descriptive-co relational study as described by Manuel and

Medici, and as cited by Ariola (2006) involves description,

recording, analysis, and interpretation of the present

nature composition processes and phenomena and their

relationships.

In this study, the factors affecting the academic

performance were determined. Factors are comprised of

student, teacher, facilities and equipment, family’s support

and peer relationship while academic performance was

measured based on their average grade in five major

subjects.

The results were correlated to determine if there is

significant relationship between the two sets of variables.

Respondents of the study

The respondents of the study are the third year

criminology students of Divine Word College of Calapan. This

was chosen by the researcher because they already taken the

 18

major subjects which were pre-requisites before internship.

The whole population was used by researcher as shown in the

table 1.

Table 1
Respondents of the Study
Respondents of the Population Sample
study
Third year
Criminology students 32 32

Research Instrument

The researcher devised a self–made questionnaire

comprising of five parts.

The first part determined the factors which could

affect the academic performance of third year Criminology

students which was comprised of items pertaining to the

students, teachers, facilities and equipment, family’s

support and peer relationship.

Table 2
Parts of the Questionnaire
Parts Content Number of items
A Student 5
B Teacher 5
C Facilities and Equipment 5
 19

D Family’s support/ assistance 5

E Peer – peer relationship 5
Total 25

The respondents answered the questionnaire by putting a

checkmark on the scale which corresponds to their answer.

Their answer was ranked from 1 to 5 where 5 is the highest

(Likert, 2012). The scale for determining the factors which

could influence the academic performance are as follows:

Table 3
Scale for the Factors
Numerical Confidence Verbal Verbal
Scale Limit for Description Interpretation
the Mean
5 4.50 – 5.00 Always Very High
4 3.50 – 4.49 Sometimes High
3 2.50 – 3.49 Rarely Moderate
2 1.50 – 2.49 Frequently Low
1 1.00 – 1.49 Never Very Low

The academic performance was assessed based of their

average grades in the selected major subjects. This was done

to limit the academic performance on criminology related

subjects which will later on be part of the board

examination for criminology.

The average grade was obtained in the five major

subjects and was interpreted as follows:

 20

Table 4
Scaling for the Interpretation of the Level of
Academic Performance

Scale Interpretation
94 – 100 Excellent Performance
88 – 93 Superior Performance
82 – 87 Average Performance
76 – 81 Low Performance
Below – 75 Very Low Performance

Reliability of the Instrument

The questionnaire was answered by 10 respondents twice

after a week prior to its actual administration.

The 10 respondents were selected randomly and were not

included in the actual administration.

Pearson’s r was used to determine the reliability of

the questionnaires.

The result of the reliability and validity test is

presented in table 5 wherein the r values fall at the range

of ±0.71 to ±0.90 described as high correlation. This means

that the research instrument is reliable.

Table 5
Reliability Test of the Questionnaire
Parts of the questionnaire R Interpretation
 21

A. Student factor 0.8351 Reliable

B. Teacher factor 0.8761 Reliable
C. School facilities and equipment 0.8637 Reliable
D. Family support/ assistance 0.8557 Reliable
E. Peer – peer relationship 0.7648 Reliable

Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher sought permission from dean of

Criminology of Divine Word College of Calapan in the

administration of the questionnaire.

Similarly, the researcher also asked permission from

the teachers of the different major subjects for the grades

in Ballistics, Finger Printing, Organic Chemistry, Questions

and Documentation Examination and Forensic Chemistry.

Gathering of data was personally done by the

researcher. When the data were finally gathered, the same

were sorted, then tabulated and subjected to the proper

statistical tools.

Statistical Treatment

The following are the statistical tool formulas used in

the study:

Mean was used to determine the average of the internal

and external factors.

 22

a) mean
= [∑ ]
n
fx m

Correlation was used to get the relationship between

the factors and the academic performance of third year

Criminology students.

b) The Pearson’s product moment of where:

- mean

∑ - summation of values

f –frequency

xm - midpoint score or class mark

where:

r– the Pearson’s r correlation

n- number of respondents

x- each scores of the independent variable

y- each scores of the dependent variable

 23

- summation of the scores

It was interpreted using the following scale:

Table 6
Correlation Description

Scale / Range Description

±1 perfect correlation
±0.91 to ±0.99 very high relationship
±0.71 to ±0.90 high correlation
±0.41 to ±0.70 Marked or moderate relationship
±0.21 to ±0.40 Low or slight correlation
±0.01 to ±0.20 negligible correlation
0 no correlation
(Calmorin & Piedad, 2009)

CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
 24

This chapter presents analysis and interpretation of

the data based on the question given in the statement of the

problem.

1. What are factors affecting the academic performance of

third year Criminology students?

Table 7
Mean Perception of the Respondents in terms of Student
factor
Items Mean Rank Description
1 4.13 1.5 Frequently
2 4.13 1.5 Frequently
3 3.78 5 Frequently
4 3.84 4 Frequently
5 3.97 3 Frequently
Overall Mean 3.97 Frequently

The table above presents the mean perception of the

respondents in terms of students factor with a mean scores

of 4.13(rank 1.5), 4.13 (rank 1.5), 3.97 (rank 3), 3.84

(rank 4), 3.78 (rank 5) and an overall mean of 3.97 which

are all described as frequently.

This means that the respondents practice punctuality in

their classes and other activities in school; exert effort

in making projects and other school requirements and pass it

on time; actively participates during class discussions and

other activities in school; prepares for examinations

 25

(written and oral) a week before examination day; and study

their lessons 2 hours or more a day.

This indicates that the student-respondents are

studying well and have good study habits.

Table 8
Mean Perception of the Respondents in terms of Teacher
factor
Items Mean Rank Description
1 4.31 2 Frequently
2 4.50 1 Always
3 4.13 4 Frequently
4 4.28 3 Frequently
5 4.06 5 Frequently
Overall Mean 4.26 Frequently

The table above shows the mean perception of the

respondents in terms of teacher factor with mean scores of

4.50 (rank 1), 4.31 (rank 2), 4. 28 (rank 3), 4.13 (rank 4),

4.06 (rank 5) and with an overall mean of 3.97; described as

frequently.

Results show that teachers are qualified and properly

trained to teach criminology students; practices

punctuality; assesses the students’ performance (written,

oral) based on what they teach; uses varied teaching

strategies and techniques which could make the lesson

interesting and understandable and extend hours in dealing

 26

w/ the students’ needs and problems related to their studies

at a high extent.

This indicates that most of the teachers satisfy the

expectations of the students beyond the minimum requirement

in terms of qualification, efficiency and effectiveness as a

teacher to facilitate learning of criminology third year

students.

Table 9
Mean Perception of the Respondents in terms of School
facilities
Items Mean Rank Description
1 4.09 1 Frequently
2 4.03 2 Frequently
3 4.00 3 Frequently
4 3.97 4 Frequently
5 3.94 5 Frequently
Overall Mean 4.01 Frequently

The table presents the mean perception of the

respondents in terms of teacher factor which tallied the

mean scores of 4.09 (rank 1), 4.03 (rank 2), 4.00 (rank 3),

3.97 (rank 4), 3.94 (rank 5) and with an overall mean of

4.01; described as frequently.

This indicates that the school provides convenient and

well ventilated classrooms which are conducive for learning;

multimedia equipment for convenient teaching and learning

 27

process; laboratory room and equipment enough for the use of

criminology students; enough books in the library intended

for criminology subjects; and has subscription in the

internet provider enough for the use of students in their

research activities faster.

This implies that the institution is providing enough

facilities needed by the students in the learning process

for the development of an individual holistically.

Table 10
Mean Perception of the Respondents in terms of Family
support
Items Mean Rank Description
1 4.69 1 Always
2 4.47 2 Frequently
3 4.28 5 Frequently
4 4.41 3 Frequently
5 4.34 4 Frequently
Overall Mean 4.44 Frequently

The table above shows the mean perception of the

respondents’ in terms of Family support recorded the mean

scores of 4.69 (rank 1), 4.47 (rank 2), 4.41 (rank 3), 4.34

(rank 4), 4.28 (rank 5) and an overall mean of 4.44.

Results reveal that the students are supported by

their parents financially in their studies; criminology is

 28

their own choice; are allowed by their parents in attending

seminars, field trips, community extension activities and

other school gatherings (party) beyond school hours;

motivated by their parents to study hard through their words

of wisdom and past experiences; are given by their parents

incentives both monetary and encouraging words when they

achieve something exemplary in school.

This indicates that the motivation and support of the

parents/ family of criminology students is very high.

Table 11
Mean Perception of the Respondents in terms of Peer
relationship
Items Mean Rank Description
1 4.28 1 Always
2 3.63 5 Frequently
3 4.13 2 Frequently
4 3.94 4 Frequently
5 4.09 3 Frequently
Overall Mean 4.01 Frequently

It can be gleaned from table 11 the mean perception of

respondents in terms of peer relationship noted a score of

4.28 (rank 1), 4.13 (rank 2), 4.09 (rank 3), 3.94(rank 4),

3.63 (rank 5) and an overall mean of 4.01, described as

frequently.
 29

These results reveal that the respondents carefully

choose their friends and acquaintances which could help them

in their studies; establish friendship to those with similar

interest particularly those who belong to Criminology

department; are greatly influenced by their friends in their

studies; cooperatively doing school tasks like assignments

and projects with their friends but least of them make

friends which could protect me from my enemies and from

bullies.

The result implies that the students establish

friendship to those people that they can work with in

relation to their studies.

2. What is the level of Academic Performance of third year

Criminology students?

Table 12
Academic performance of Third Year Criminology students
Scale Frequenc Percentag Interpretation
y e
94 – 100 0 0 ExcellentPerformanc
e
88 – 93 0 0 Superior
Performance
82 – 87 11 34.38% Average Performance
76 – 81 20 62.50% Low Performance
Below – 75 1 3.13% Very Low
Performance
 30

It can be gleaned from table 12 the average grades of

the respondents in Forensic Ballistics, Question Document

Examination and Police Photography.

The values indicate that 20 of the students got an

average grade from 76% to 81%, which is 62.50% described as

low performance; 11 students who got an average grade of 82%

to 87% which is 34.38%, described as average performance

while one of the students got an average grade below 75%

which is 3.13 %, described as low performance.

3. Are there a relationship factors and the academic

performance of third year Criminology students?

Table 13
Summary table of the correlation of factors to the
level of academic performance
Factors Level of Academic performance
r P Description Interpretation
Student factor 0.13508 0.46106 negligible Not
correlation significant
Teacher factor 0.32044 0.07377 Low or
slight Not
correlation Significant
Facilities/ -0.0409 0.82398 negligible Not
equipment correlation Significant
Family’s 0.36557 0.03963 Low or
support slight Not
correlation Significant
Peer 1.00000 0.00000 Perfect
relationship correlation Significant
 31

The above shows the correlation between the factors and

the level of academic performance.

Since the computed r values 0.13508 and -0.0409 are

less than the p values of 0.46106 and 0.82398 for student

and facilities in relation to level of academic performance

at 5% level of significance, thus the null hypothesis is

accepted. Therefore there is no significant relationship

between the level of academic performance and factors in

terms of students and facilities & equipment.

This implies that the student factor and facilities do

not greatly affect the performance of the criminology

students.

In the aspect of teacher factor and family support

which obtained r values of 0.32044 and 0.36557 are greater

than the p values of 0.07377 and 0.03963 respectively which

is described as low or slight correlation.

This indicates that two variables have minimal effects

on the academic performance of students but still classified

as not significant. This means that the teachers and

parent’s support could influence by motivating the students

and exerting effort in teaching but not the main factor

which could influence them to excel in the academic aspect.

 32

In contrast, the peer relationship obtained an r value

of 1.0000 which is greater than the p value of 0.00000 at 5%

level of significance which is described as perfect

correlation thus the null hypothesis is rejected. This means

that there is significant relationship between peer

relationship and academic performance.

The result implies that activities with peers could

influence the performance of the students in academics. The

peers may influence them to perform well and perform low in

their subjects particularly in their major subjects.

As reflected in the performance, the students are the

classified under the range of average performance meaning

their peers on the average influence them to study but not

that serious.

4. What is the proposed Academic Enhancement for

Criminology students?
 33

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of findings,

conclusions, and recommendations the researcher proposes

after having come up with her analysis.

Summary of findings

Results of the analysis indicate the following

findings:

1. The factors which affect the academic performance of

the respondents are the teacher with a mean score of

4.26, family support with 4.44, peer and facilities

with 4.01; and student with 3.97 are all described

as frequently.

2. Twenty (20) students got an average grade from 76%

to 81%, which is 62.50% described as low

performance; 11 students got an average grade of 82%

to 87% which is 34.38%, described as average

performance while one of the students got an average

grade below 75% which is 3.13 %, described as low

performance
 34

3. There is no significant relationship between the

selected factors such as parents, teachers,

facilities and family support to the level of

academic performance of the third year Criminology

students.

Conclusions

The researcher has come up with the following

conclusions based on the findings of the study:

1. The teachers at a high extent are doing their part to

influence the students to perform well in academics

while the students are not that motivated to focus in

their studies.

2. Most of the students have low performance in their

major subjects.

3. The peers greatly affects the academic performance of

the students whether to perform or not to perform well

in academics while teachers, family, facilities, and

student factor do not merely influence the academic

performance of the third year criminology students.

 35

Recommendations

After thorough analysis of the results of the study,

the problems have been answered and the researcher has come

up with the following recommendations:

1. The teacher should sustain their efficiency and effective

as criminology teachers but focus more on collaborative,

teamwork and diad activities.

2. Conducts seminars regarding major subjects that can

improve academic performance and induce the third year

criminology students to participate actively when it

comes to recitation (written and oral). As well as the

addition of counseling process to those students who are

not interested and active to their subjects.

3. Conduct activities to the third year criminology

students to enhance their academic performance especially

by means the peer collaboration or teamwork activities

and projects.

4. Future researchers should conduct study on the

performance of the present third year criminology

students in their performance or obtained grade in the

coming board examination for criminology students to

 36

correlate the relationship in their performance while

studying.
 37

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 38

Appendix A
Permit to conduct the study

DIVINE WORD COLLGE OF CALAPAN

CALAPAN City
February 26, 2014

Ms. Janenovelle A. Cuenca

Dean, Criminology Department
DWCC

Ma’am:

I Aira Novie Albo, presently enrolled in Criminological

Research and Statistics with the research titled “Factors
and Academic Performance of Third Year Criminology Students
of Divine Word College of Calapan: A basis for a proposed
Academic Enhancement Program.”

In line with this, I am asking permission from your

good office in the administration of questionnaires and to
have an access to the grades of third year criminology
students in their major subjects such as Ballistics, Q and
E, Finger printing, Phptography and Forensic Chemistry.

Hoping for consideration and approval of this matter

and Thank You very much!

Respectfully yours,

Aira Novie Albo

Research Student

Noted by:

Ms. Joyce B. Lanuza, PhD

Research Adviser
 39

DIVINE WORD COLLGE OF CALAPAN

CALAPAN City

February 26, 2014

___________________________

College Instructor
DWCC

Ma’am:

I Aira Novie Albo, presently enrolled in Criminological

Research and Statistics with the research titled “Factors
and Academic Performance of Third Year Criminology Students
of Divine Word College of Calapan: A basis for Academic
Enhancement program.”

In line with this, I am asking permission to have a

copy of the grades of third year criminology students in
major subjects under your supervision.

Hoping for consideration and approval of this matter

and Thank You very much!

Respectfully yours,

Aira Novie Albo

Research Student

Noted by:

Ms. Joyce B. Lanuza, PhD

Research Adviser
 40

APPENDIX B
Questionnaires
FACTORS AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF THIRD YEAR CRIMINOLOGY
STUDENTS OF DIVINE WORD COLLEGE OF CALAPAN

The following questions help the researcher to

determine the extent of the factors which could affect the

Academic Performance of third year Criminology students.

Direction: Check the appropriate box which corresponds

to the statements below. Based your answer on the following

scale and quantification:

Scale and Quantification

Scale Verbal description Verbal interpretation
5 Always Very High
4 Sometimes High
3 Rarely Moderate
2 Frequently Low
1 Never Very Low

SELECTED FACTORS

A. Student Factor 5 4 3 2 1
1. I practice punctuality in my classes and other
activities in school.
2. I exert effort in making projects and other
school requirements and pass it on time.
3. I study my lessons 2 hours or more a day.
4. I prepare for examinations (written and oral)
a week before examination day.
5. I actively participate during class
discussions and other activities in school.
 41

B. Teacher Factor 5 4 3 2 1
1. The criminology teachers practice punctuality.
2. The teachers are qualified and properly
trained to teach criminology students.
3. The teachers used varied teaching strategies
and techniques which could make the lesson
interesting and understandable.
4. The teachers properly assessed the students’
performance (written, oral) based on what they
teach.
5. The teachers extend hours in dealing with the
students’ needs and problems related to their
studies.

C. School Facilities and Equipment 5 4 3 2 1

1. The school provides convenient and well
ventilated classrooms which are conducive for
learning
2. The school provides multimedia equipment for
convenient teaching and learning process.
3. The school provides laboratory room and
equipment enough for the use of criminology
students.
4. The school provides enough books in the
library intended for criminology subjects.
5. The school subscribes internet provider enough
for the use of students in their research
activities faster.
 42

D. Family Support / Assistance 5 4 3 2 1

1. I am supported by my parents financially in my
studies.
2. Studying criminology is my choice not my
parents’ choice.
3. My parent allows me in attending seminars,
field trips, community extension activities
and other school gatherings (party) beyond
school hours.
4. My parent motivates me to study hard through
their words of wisdom and past experiences.
5. My parents give incentives both monetary and
encouraging words when I achieve something in
school.

E. Peer – peer relationship 5 4 3 2 1

1. I choose friends and acquaintances which could
help me in my studies
2. I make friends which could protect me from my
enemies and from bullies.
3. I build friends to those with similar interest
particularly those who belong to Criminology
department
4. I do school tasks like assignments and
projects with my friends.
5. I am greatly influenced by my friends in my
studies.

Thank you very much !

 43

Appendix C
Computer Printouts

Table 1.1
Test Retest Results
Variable Computed r Interpretation
Student Factor 0.8351 Reliable
Teacher Factor 0.7648 Reliable
School Facilities 0.8637 Reliable
Family Support 0.8557 Reliable
Peer Relationship 0.8761 Reliable

Table 1

Mean Perception of the Respondents in Terms of Student

Factor

Items Mean Rank Description

1 4.13 1.5 Frequently
2 4.13 1.5 Frequently
3 3.78 5 Frequently
4 3.84 4 Frequently
5 3.97 3 Frequently
Overall Mean 3.97 Frequently

Table 2

Mean Perception of the Respondents in Terms of Teacher

Factor

Items Mean Rank Description

1 4.31
2 4.50
3 4.13
4 4.28
5 4.06
Overall Mean 4.26
2 Frequently
1 Always
4 Frequently
3 Frequently
5 Frequently
Frequently
 44

Table 3
Mean Perception of the Respondents in Terms of School
Facilities

Items Mean Rank Description

1 4.09
2 4.03
3 4.00
4 3.97
5 3.94
Overall Mean 4.01
‘
1 Frequently
2 Frequently
3 Frequently
4 Frequently
5 Frequently
Frequently

Table 4

Mean Perception of the Respondents in Terms of Family

Support

Items Mean Rank Description

1 4.69
2 4.47
3 4.28
4 4.41
5 4.34
Overall Mean 4.44
1 Always
2 Frequently
5 Frequently
3 Frequently
4 Frequently
Frequently

Table 5

Mean Perception of the Respondents in Terms of Peer

Relationship

Items Mean Rank Description

1 4.28
2 3.63
3 4.13
4 3.94
5 4.09
Overall Mean 4.01
1 Frequently
5 Frequently
2 Frequently
4 Frequently
3 Frequently
Frequently
 45

Table 6
Frequency and Percentage Distribution Table in Terms of
Academic Performance

Performance Frequency Percentage

77 and below 1 3.13
78 – 79 6 18.75
80 – 81 14 43.75
82 and above 11 34.38
Total 32 100.00%
 46

Correlation Report

Page/Date/Time 1 3/9/2014 7:39:50 PM

Database C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My
Documents\albo.S0

Pearson Correlations Section (Pair-Wise Deletion)

stu tea sch fam peer

perf
stu 1.000000 0.309143 0.541391 0.134024 0.331915
0.243707
0.000000 0.085131 0.001375 0.464595 0.063468
0.178905

tea 0.309143 1.000000 0.553449 0.380135 0.532694

0.135079
0.085131 0.000000 0.001017 0.031864 0.001697
0.461056

sch 0.541391 0.553449 1.000000 0.327804 0.434454

0.320440
0.001375 0.001017 0.000000 0.067020 0.012968
0.073768

fam 0.134024 0.380135 0.327804 1.000000 0.376476

-0.040933
0.464595 0.031864 0.067020 0.000000 0.033688
0.823979

peer 0.331915 0.532694 0.434454 0.376476 1.000000

0.365571
0.063468 0.001697 0.012968 0.033688 0.000000
0.039635

perf 0.243707 0.135079 0.320440 -0.040933 0.365571

1.000000
0.178905 0.461056 0.073768 0.823979 0.039635
0.000000

Cronbachs Alpha = 0.753356 Standardized Cronbachs

Alpha = 0.746905
 47

Appendix E

Curriculum Vitae