Holy Cross College

EMPLOYABILITY AND
PRODUCTIVITY STUDY OF
THE BACHELOR OF
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
GRADUATESPresented by: Group 5
Bachelor of Elementary Education Year 4
CHAPTER
I
INTRODUCTION
• Higher Education Institutions (HEI’s) are accountable for producing
dynamic and competitive graduates ready for creating quality workforce
for the development of the country. Hence, universities and colleges
trace their graduates and evaluate their careers and employment status
(Caingoy and Barroso, 2020).

• In fact, in the Philippines, Commission on Higher Education (CHED)

emphasizes the significance of conducting tracer studies in HEIs
considering that the academic institutions cannot achieve a CHED
Certificate of Program Compliance without conducting a tracer study.
INTRODUCTION
• In teaching profession, another significant factor lies in the Licensure
Examination for Teachers (LET) results. Failure to pass this examination
hinders their job placement and eligibility in teaching (Dangan, 2015).

• This will mirror the relevance of the program and skills taught to graduates’
current employability, assessing programs based on the attributes of
alumni.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
This study aims to determine the employment status and productivity of
the Bachelor of Elementary Education in Holy Cross College, Academic Year
2016-2017, 2017-2018 and 2018-2019.
Specifically, this study sought to answer the following questions:
1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:
a. Civil Status
b. Sex
c. Residing Address
d. Year Graduated
e. Eligibility
2. What factors drove the graduates to pursue the course?
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
3. If there is any, what urged the graduates in continuing advance studies?
4. What is the nature of their job at present?
a. What employment factors do the graduates consider in their job?
b. What is their initial gross monthly earning in their first job after college?
5. How relevant is the curriculum they had in college to their job?
a. What competencies learned in college did the graduates consider as
useful in their job?
6. What action should be done to improve the curriculum and make it
relevant at all times?
CHAPTE
R II
METHODOLOGY
RESEARCH DESIGN
• Quantitative Research
• Descriptive research method
SAMPLING
• Convenience sampling technique was used in the selection of the
respondents.
INSTRUMENT
• This study utilized the Graduate Tracer Study from the Commission
on Higher Education (CHED).
DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
• The researchers used descriptive statistics in their study for the
analyzation of data.
PARTICIPANTS
The graduates of Bachelor of Elementary Education
from Holy Cross College A.Y 2016-2019 are selected DATA COLLECTION
as the respondents of the study.

Numbe of Number of Response

PROCEDURE
& ETHICAL
BATCH Graduates Responden Rate • The researchers sought permission to the school registrar for the
ts
official list of the graduates.
A.Y.
2016- 38 14 36.84% •
CONSIDERATION
The researchers asked their research adviser Dr. Pablito P. Gantan
2017
Jr., to check the questionnaire that has been modified.
A.Y 2017- 35 16 45.71%
2018 • The official list of the BEED graduates have been obtained and an
approval from the adviser to float the online survey
A.Y 2018- 32 18 56.25% questionnaire.
2019

Total 105 48 45.71% • The researchers started contacting the gradues using the
Messenger App and they provided them an informed consent
letter before taking the online survey-questionnaire.

Table 1. Research Respondents and Research Rates • Interpretation and analyzation of the responses.
CHAPTER
III
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 2. Personal profile of the respondents

Indicator Frequency Percent

Civil Status    
Single 40 83.33
Married 8 16.67
Sex    
Male 5 10.42
Female 43 89.58
Municipality    
Arayat 15 31.25
Candaba 11 22.92
Masantol 1 2.08
San Luis 2 4.17
Santa Ana 18 37.50
Missing value 1 2.08
Table 3. Educational profile of the respondents

Indicator Frequency Percent

Year Graduated    
A.Y. 2016-2017 14 29.17
A.Y. 2017-2018 16 33.33
A.Y. 2018-2019 18 37.50
Licensure Exam Passer    
Yes 23 47.92
No 8 16.67
Missing values 17 35.42
a
Reasons for taking the degree    
High grades in the course 2 4.17
Good grades in high school 7 14.58
Influence of parents/relatives 29 60.42
Peer influence 2 4.17
Inspired by a role model 21 43.75
Strong passion for the profession 20 41.67
Prospect for immediate employment 3 6.25
Status or prestige of the profession 8 16.67
Availability of course offering in chosen institution 11 22.92
Prospect of career advancement 9 18.75
Affordable for the family 10 20.83
Prospect of attractive compensation 3 6.25
Opportunity for employment abroad 2 4.17
No particular choice or no better idea 1 2.08
a
Denominator per indicator is 48.
Table 4.Trainings/Advance studies attended by the respondents after college

Indicator Frequency Percent

TESDA cetification courses 6 12.50

Graduate studies 7 14.58

In-service trainings 6 12.50

Missing values 29 60.42

Table 5. bParticipants’ reasons for pursuing advance studies

Indicator Frequency Percent

For promotion 0 0.00

For professional development 19 100.00

b
Denominator is 19; only those who have trainings/advance studies.
Table 6. Employment status of the participants

Indicator Frequency Percent

Currently employed 33 68.75

Regular 15 45.45
Temporary 3 9.09
Contractual 12 36.36
Self-employed 2 6.06
Casual 1 3.03

Currently unemployed 11 22.92

Never been employed 3 6.25
Missing value 1 2.08
Table 7. cParticipants’ current work classification

Indicator Frequency Percent

Clerks 3 9.09

Officials of Government and Special-Interest 7 21.21

Organizations, Corporate Executives, Managers, Managing
Proprietors and Supervisors

Professionals 15 45.45

Service workers and shop and market sales workers 4 12.12

Special occupation 3 9.09

Missing value 1 3.03

c
Denominator is 33; only those currently employed.
Table 8. dReasons of the participants for unemployment

Indicator Frequency Percent

Family concern and decided not to find a job 2 14.29

Lack of work experience 3 21.43

No job opportunity 6 42.86

Did not look for a job 2 14.29

Resignation 1 7.14

d
Denominator per indicator is 14, only those currently unemployed and never been employed.
Table 9. cMajor line of business of the participants’ current company

Indicator Frequency Percent

Construction 1 3.03
Education 16 48.48
Electricity, gas and water supply 1 3.03
Health and social work 5 15.15
Other community, social and personal service 3 9.09
activities
Public administration and defense 1 3.03
Wholesale and retail trade, repair of motor 3 9.09
vehicles, motorcycles and personal and household
goods
Missing values 3 9.09
Table 10. cParticipants’ place of work

Indicator Frequency Percent

Local 33 100.00

Abroad 0 0.00
Table 11. cParticipants’ current work as their first job

Indicator Frequency Percent

Yes 17 51.52

No 15 45.45

Did not answer 1 3.03

Table 12. eParticipants’ reasons for staying on their first job
Indicator Frequency Percent
Salaries and benefits 16 35.56
Career challenge 14 31.11
Related to special skill 6 13.33
Related to course or program of study 9 20.00
Proximity to residence 4 8.89
Peer influence 2 4.44
Family influence 7 15.56

e
Denominator is 45; those never been employed are excluded
Table 13. eParticipants’ first job as related to the program they took in college

Indicator Frequency Percent

Yes 25 55.56

No 16 35.56

Missing values 4 8.89

Table 14. eParticipants’ reasons for accepting their first job

Indicator Frequency Percent

Salaries and benefits 10 22.22

Career challenge 15 33.33

Related to special skills 18 40.00

Proximity to residence 4 8.89

Table 15. fParticipants’ reasons for changing first job
Indicator Frequency Percent

Salaries and benefits 6 40.00

Career challenge 8 53.33

Related to special skills 1 6.67

Proximity to residence 3 20.00

f
Denominator per indicator is 15; only those who changed their jobs
Table 16. eParticipants’ length of stay in their first job

Indicator Frequency Percent

Less than a month    

1 to 6 months 10 22.22

7 to 11 months 6 13.33

1 year to less than 2 years 8 17.78

2 years to less than 3 years 12 26.67

3 years to less than 4 years 6 13.33

Missing value 2 4.44

Table 17. eParticipants’ way of finding their first job
Indicator Frequency Percent
Response to an advertisement 2 4.44
As walk-in applicant 16 35.56
Recommended by someone 15 33.33
Information from friends 3 6.67
Arranged by school’s job placement officer 4 8.89
Family business 1 2.22
Job fair or public employment service office (PESO) 0 0.00
Missing values 4 8.89
Table 18. eParticipants’ time spent before landing to their first job

Indicator Frequency Percent

Less than a month 16 35.56
1 to 6 months 15 33.33
7 to 11 months 5 11.11
1 year to less than 2 years 4 8.89
2 years to less than 3 years 2 4.44
3 years to less than 4 years 0 0.00
Missing values 3 6.67
Table 19. eParticipants’ job level position

First Job Current Job

Indicator
Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
Rank or clerical 9 20.00 8 17.78

Professional, technical or 15 33.33 14 31.11

supervisory
Managerial or executive 1 2.22 2 4.44

Self-employed 8 17.78 9 20.00

Table 20. eParticipants’ gross monthly earning in their first job

Indicator Frequency Percent

< Php 5,000 2 4.44

Php 5,000 to < Php 10,000 11 24.44

Php 10,000 to < Php 15,000 15 33.33

Php 15,000 to < Php 20,000 8 17.78

Php 20,000 to < Php 25,000 5 11.11

Php 25,000 and above 0 0.00

Missing values 4 8.89

Table 21. Participants’ perception of their curriculum’s relevance to first job

Indicator Frequency Percent

Yes, it is relevant. 33 68.75

No, it is not relevant. 9 18.75

Missing values 6 12.50

Table 22. eParticipants’ competencies learned in college which are useful in their first job

Indicator Frequency Percent

Communication skills 31 68.89

Human relations skills 23 51.11

Entrepreneurial skills 8 17.78

Problem-solving skills 20 44.44

Critical-thinking skills 22 48.89

CHAPTER
IV
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
To sum up:
Bachelor of Elementary Education graduates of Holy Cross College A.Y.
2016-2019 are highly employable and have acquired beneficial skills
for their employment. However, having only half of the employed
respondents work as professionals in the field of education concludes
that the curriculum is not relevant and effective for all the graduates
and that education might not be the calling of other graduates.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Re-enhance the curriculum

01
program based on current
demands and needs of the
learners and the labor market
02 Continuously render skills
related to th learner’s field of
specialization

03 04
Provide seminars, trainings Provide LET pre-coaching
and emphasize experiential reviews
learning.

05 Continuously conduct tracer

study
 GROUP 5
Employability and Productivity Study of the
Bachelor of Elementary Education Graduates
Espino, Evelyn S.
Labrador, Diether Daniel N.
Pelayo, Cristy Mae P.
Reyes, Jhyra Angel M.
Santos, Mylene M.

THANK YOU!