Thesis 2

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

The increasing demand of nurses all over the world greatly affects the decisions of the

people. Though the news about the nurse’s jobs is getting scarce they still take the nursing course.

And in order to become competitive among the millions of nursing students, one must start it in

school through studying hard and retaining information.

Bean and Metzner (1985) describe academic factors as student’s primary involvement

with the academic process at the college and purports that among non traditional student’s

academic factors are less important than environmental factors in influencing retention (Metzner

and Bean, 1987). Academic Integration, sometimes been used to describe a cluster of academic

factors that can influence retention, and has been defined as “the development of a strong

affiliation with the college environment both inside and outside of class” (Nora, 1993 p. 235)

For nursing students, the academic factors deemed most important for retention include

Personal Study Skills, Study Hours, Attendance, Class Schedule and General Academic Services

(college library, college counseling and computer library).

Personal study skills, refers to specific elements, attitudes about the responsibility for

study and effort expended on academic pursuits, affect nursing student retention through

academic performance and psychological outcomes. Consistent with higher education, the

increasingly academically diverse nursing student population presents with varying study skills

(Heller, Oros and Durney-Crowley, 2000; Tanner, 1998). Additionally, used of varied study skills

has been associated with better academic outcomes (Napoli & Wortman, 1998), which in turn

positively influence retention. Effort expended on planning and study activities yields better

academic outcome (Flowers, 2002).

In the NURS model, personal study hours refer to the number of hours allocated

exclusively to positive study activities in which positive study behaviors and attitudes are actively

used. In this model, students with more personal study hours are expected to have more positive

academic outcomes and retentions than will students with inadequate personal study hours.

Adequate study hours are individually based and are defined as the least number of personal

study hours needed to achieve the short-term academic outcomes (passing exam, completing

accurate care plan, etc.) and long-term academic outcomes (successfully completing nursing

course components).

1

The Metzner and Bean (1987) model included absenteeism as an academic variable

influencing attrition; however, the NURS model focuses on attendance. Nevertheless, the

literature regarding attendance reveals several interesting phenomena that are relevant for nursing

education. First, attendance (or absenteeism) should be monitored to help identify at-risk

students. Second, attendance should be monitored in relation to other variables with the purpose

of identifying students most at risk for attrition. In nursing, attendance is somewhat more

complex than it is among the general college population. Consequently, students may not

comprehend, value, or expect rigid attendance policies will be upheld, especially among

beginning students who have had no prior exposure to nursing courses.

Attendance may be further differentiated between various nursing course components

such as theoretical (classroom hours), skills laboratory, and/or clinical hours. Clearly, clinical

attendance is a valuable dimension to learning and assists the student in connecting theoretical

information, nursing skills, and client’s competency. Absences create complicated disadvantages;

attendance creates valuable advantages. Attendance needs to be viewed in relation to other

variables and to the other dimensions of the NURS model if at risk students are to be identified

early.

Availability of courses, flexibility of courses, and convenience are factors that can

influence retention through academic and psychological outcomes (Bean and Metzner, 1985;

Burr, Burr, & Novak, 1999). Consistently, across three study samples, most nursing students have

identified “class schedule” as influencing retention. Responses ranged from “severely restrictive”

to “greatly supportive” (Jeffreys, 1993, 1998, 2000, 2002). Class schedule is included in the

NURS model because students’ perceptions of class schedule, with its physical demands and time

constraints can influence retention positively or negatively and in varying degrees. Students’

perception of class schedule is the most important aspect to assess.

General academic services are designed to assist students with their academic goals and

are available to all college students, regardless of academic major. They include the library,

counseling, and computer laboratories.

General academic services that are convenient accessible, and helpful will encourage

more active use of these support services.

The assessment of nursing students’ perceptions of general academic services is valuable

(Lehna, Jackonen, & Wilson, 1996). Greater, comprehensive use of services, in conjunction with

other academic factors, positively influences retention by enhancing academic and psychological

outcomes. For example, maximizing use of various library services appropriate to course

objectives can assist with improved study skills and academic integration, thus enhancing

2

retention. Counseling services have shown to be beneficial to nursing student academic and

psychological outcomes (Lehna et at., 1996). Higher education literature reports that counseled

students have higher rates than non-counseled students (Turner & Berry, 2000; Wilson, Mason, &

Ewing, 1997), Kraemer (1997) stated that commuter students who frequently use computer

laboratory facilities on campus are more involved in cognitive development than are other

students; enhanced cognitive development enhances retention.

Also according to a journal of The Canadian Nurse; Mar 1, 2003 by BOLAN,

CHRISTINE M. and GRAINGER, PATRICIA “Success in nursing programs influenced by such

academic factors as overall. Similarly, non-academic factors associated attrition from nursing

programs perception of nursing as a career. (12) Other non-academic factors in attrition...” this

article states that nursing programs become successful in retaining information to their learners

by the influence of the academic factors.

This study aimed to determine the academic factors such as hospital performance,

strategic studying, personal study skills, attendance, and class schedule and identify whether these

factors could distinguish differences among students, based on academic performance in the

experiential program.

Conceptual Framework

Figure 1

3

Performance of the students who attended their hospital duties before Lecture

Performance of the students who attended Lecture before having their hospital duties

RLE performance grade according to their clinical instructor

Affects their performance during their clinical duty by utilizing this academic factor to improved their knowledge and concepts about hospital skills

Academic factorsPersonal Study SkillAttendanceGeneral Academic ServicesStudy HoursClass Schedule

Most common academic factor affecting the RLE of the 4rth year nursing student

INPUT

→ Academic Factors which affect the RLE performance of 4th Year Nursing Students.

OUTPUT

→ Ameliorate the RLE performance of the 4th Year Nursing Students

PROCESS

→ Identify the Academic Factors affecting the RLE performance of 4thYear Nursing Students.

→ Note the effects of this Academic Factors.

→ Test the significant relationship of Academic Factors with the RLE performance of 4th year Nursing Students.

Research Paradigm

Figure 2

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to determine “Academic Factors Affecting the RLE Performance of the

Selected 4th Year Nursing Students in Our Lady of Fatima University”.

Specifically, it sought to answers the following questions:

1. What were the most common academic factors that greatly influenced the RLE of the 4 th

year nursing students?

2. How did these academic factors affect the RLE performance of the 4 th year nursing

student’s scale during their Hospital duty hours?

3. What were the results of their performance in their hospital duty hours?

4. Is there a significant relationship between the academic factors and the RLE performance

of the 4th year nursing student during their hospital duty hours?

5. Is there a significant difference between the grades of the students who attended hospital

duties before lecture and those who had their lecture before having their hospital duties?

Hypotheses:

There is no significant relationship between the academic factors and the RLE

performance of the 4th year nursing students.

There is no significant difference between the grades of the students during their Lecture

class hours and during their hospital duty hours.

4

CHAPTER II

METHODS OF RESEARCH AND PROCEDURES

This chapter discusses the procedures to be done by the researchers to attain their needed

data. This includes the Research Design, Scope and Delimitations, Population and Locale

of the Study, Sampling Design, Data Gathering Procedure and Treatment of Data.

Research Design

Survey Research was used in the study to determine the performance of the students. This

was conducted through a paper-pen questionnaire. Here, the researchers used questionnaires and

photocopies of the RLE record book of the students for measuring instrument in collecting data

and to determine the academic factors affecting their RLE performance of the selected 4 th year

nursing students in Our Lady of Fatima University.

Population and Locale of the Study

The researchers chose respondents in the 4 th year level following a certain criteria. That

the respondents should have their record grades of Nursing Care Management (NCM) 101 and

102 to use as the basis of this research study. Fifty (50) respondents were used in this study. The

respondents were composed of 31 students who attended lecture first before their duties and 19

students who attended their duties first before lecture.

The locale of this study was in Our Lady of Fatima University—Lagro, Quezon City.

This was conducted in the 1st semester of the year 2008-2009.

Data Gathering Tools

The primary tool used in this study was Questionnaire. Because this was a simplified

questions addressed to the respondents. In part 1 of the questionnaire multiple choice type of

question was used to determine the respondent’s preference. Then in part 2 of the questionnaire,

the researchers used Likert scale to show the amount of agreement and disagreement of the

respondents.

5

NORMS:

5 – Strongly Agree

4 – Agree

3 – Moderately Agree

2 – Disagree

1 – Strongly Disagree

For the RLE performance grade of the 4th year nursing students, the NCM 101 and 102

were taken. The following norms were used:

Data Gathering Procedure

The first step done by the researchers was to select for the potential respondents of these

study. The researchers took samples through Non-Probability scheme. They used Quota Sampling

which was a type of Non-probability Sampling. In a non-randomized form, the researchers

selected the respondents from the cross-section of the population. A helped from friends and

relatives of the researchers who were also 4th year nursing students were sought to identify and

locate the respondents of this study. Thus the identification of the respondents became purposive

and chain referral at the same time.

After they had identified and located the respondents, the researcher approached and

visited them personally to introduced herself, build rapport and stated the objectives of their

study. The respondents agreed to participate in the study.

A questionnaire was given to answer. They were also asked whether they can photocopy

their RLE performance grade. All the respondents were assured that their grades and response

were appreciated and treated confidentially.

Statistical Treatment of Data

The researchers compiled and tabularized all the data to organize the RLE grades of the

selected 4th year nursing students. They also used questionnaires and photocopied RLE grades of

the fifty (50) 4th year nursing students as respondents.

The statistics used were the relative frequency (rf), standard deviation (SD) and the t-test

for the difference of the NCM 101 and 102 of the RLE grades the students and to the significant

relationship of their academic factors and the RLE performance. Additionally, the researchers had

chosen the Pearson r Formula for their research study.

The following formula to compute:

6

NORMS:1.0– Excellent1.25 - 2.0 – Very Good2.25 - 2.75 – Good3.0 – Passing

Relative Frequency

rf = f x 100%

n

Where rf = relative frequency

f = frequency

n = sample size

Standard Deviation

s = Ʃ (x - )²

n

Where s = standard deviation

x = raw data

= sample mean

n = sample size

t-test

t= DF- LF

SDF² + SLF²

nDF nLF

df= smaller between n1-1 and n2-1

Where DF = average mean duty first

LF = average mean lecture first

SDF = standard deviation duty first

SLF = standard deviation lecture first

nDF = sample size duty first

nLF = sample size lecture first

Pearson r

r = ___________n Σxy – (Σx)(Σy)_____

[ n Σx² - (Σx)²] [ n Σy² - (Σy)²]

Where n = sample size

Σxy = summation of average perception score and average RLE

score

Σx = summation of the average perception score

Σy = summation of the average RLE score

7

CHAPTER III

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter discusses an in-depth exploration of each academic factor that may reveal

several aspects that will potentially affect students differently. The following tables will explain

the significant relationship and the differences of the variables in this study.

Table 1

Distribution of the most common Academic Factor according to 4th year nursing students.

Academic Factors Frequency Relative Frequency

Personal study skills 22 44 %

Study hours 10 20 %

Class schedule 11 22 %

Attendance 1 2 %

General academic services 6 12 %

The results showed that 44% of the students chose personal study skills as their most

common academic factor. Next to it 22% chose class schedule, 20% study hours, 12% chose

general academic services and lastly 2% of the students chose attendance.

Use of varied personal study skill has been associated with better academic outcomes

(Napoli and Wortman, 1998) which in turn positively influence the result of the student’s

performance.

Table 2

8

Distribution of how the Academic Factor affects the hospital duty according to 4th year nursing

student’s scale.

StudentQUESTIONS

2 3 4 5 Average

1 4 4 5 5 4.5

2 5 5 5 5 5

3 4 5 5 3 4.25

4 4 4 5 5 4.5

5 5 5 2 5 4.25

6 3 3 1 1 2

7 5 4 5 5 4.75

8 3 4 4 5 4

9 5 4 5 5 4.75

10 3 3 1 1 2

11 5 5 5 5 5

12 5 5 5 5 5

13 5 5 2 5 4.25

14 3 3 1 1 2

15 4 4 4 5 4.25

16 4 3 5 4 4

17 5 4 5 5 4.75

18 5 4 5 4 4.5

19 5 5 4 2 4

20 4 4 5 5 4.5

21 3 4 5 5 4.25

22 5 5 3 5 4.5

23 3 3 4 5 3.75

24 5 3 4 5 4.25

25 1 1 1 1 1

26 3 4 4 4 3.75

9

NORMS:5 – Strongly Agree4 – Agree3 – Moderately Agree2 – Disagree1 – Strongly Disagree

27 4 3 3 4 3.50

28 5 5 3 5 4.50

29 5 5 5 5 5

30 4 3 4 4 3.75

31 4 5 4 3 4

32 5 4 4 4 4.25

33 5 5 5 4 4.75

34 1 1 1 1 1

35 1 5 3 1 2.50

36 4 4 3 4 3.75

37 5 4 5 5 4.75

38 3 3 4 3 3.25

39 3 4 2 4 3.25

40 5 5 5 4 4.75

41 5 4 5 5 4.75

42 3 4 3 5 3.75

43 3 2 2 2 2.25

44 1 3 4 3 2.75

45 5 5 5 4 4.75

46 3 3 2 2 2.50

47 1 5 3 1 2.50

48 5 5 5 4 4.75

49 4 4 3 5 4

50 5 4 4 5 4.50

TOTAL 195 198 187 193 193.25

The table showed that majority of the student’s scale (total of 39 student’s) had an

average of 3.0-5.0 which means they agreed that by utilizing the academic factors will improve

their knowledge and concepts about hospital skills and attending lectures is a pre-requisite to

actual hospital duties. It also showed the total average of their scale which was 193.25.

Table 3

StudentQUESTIONS

2 3 4 5 Average

10

Results of the performance of the 4th year nursing students during their hospital duties in

NCM 101 and 102.

Student NCM 101 NCM 102 Average Interpretation

1 2.25 1.75 2 Very Good

2 1.75 2.25 2 Very Good

3 2 2.25 2.13 Very Good

4 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

5 2.50 1.75 2.13 Very Good

6 2.50 2.00 2.25 Good

7 2.25 1.75 2 Very Good

8 1.75 2.25 2 Very Good

9 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

10 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

11 2.50 2.50 2.50 Good

12 2.25 1.75 2 Very Good

13 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

14 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

15 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

16 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

17 2.50 2.25 2.38 Good

18 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

19 2.50 2.75 2.38 Good

20 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

21 2.75 2.50 2.63 Good

22 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

23 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

24 2.00 2.00 2 Very Good

25 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

26 2.50 2.50 2.50 Good


11

NORMS:1.0– Excellent1.25 - 2.0 – Very Good2.25 - 2.75 – Good3.0 – Passing

27 2.50 2.25 2.38 Good

28 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

29 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

30 2.25 1.75 2 Very Good

31 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

32 2.50 2.25 2.38 Good

33 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

34 2.50 2.00 2.25 Good

35 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

36 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

37 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

38 2.00 2.25 2.13 Very Good

39 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

40 2.50 2.50 2.50 Good

41 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

42 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

43 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

44 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

45 2.50 2.50 2.50 Good

46 2.50 2.00 2.25 Good

47 2.00 2.50 2.25 Good

48 2.75 2.00 2.36 Good

49 2.50 2.00 2.25 Good

50 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

TOTAL 114.75 111.75 113.11

The table showed that the 4th year nursing student’s performance during their hospital

duty in NCM 101 and 102 were all passed. Because their grades were in between 1.25 – 2.75, this

means very good or good. It also showed the average of each grades in the table. Majority of the

students does have good performance during their hospital duties.

Table 4

12

Significant Relationships between Academic Factors and the RLE Performance.

Student x y xy x² y²

1 4.5 2 9 20.25 4

2 5 2 10 25 4

3 4.25 2.13 9.0525 18.0625 4.5369

4 4.5 2.25 10.125 20.25 5.0625

5 4.25 2.13 9.0525 18.0625 4.5369

6 2 2.25 4.5 4 5.0625

7 4.75 2 9.5 22.5625 4

8 4 2 8 16 4

9 4.75 2.38 11.305 22.5625 5.6644

10 2 2.38 4.76 4 5.6644

11 5 2.50 12.5 25 6.25

12 5 2 10 25 4

13 4.25 2.13 9.0525 18.0625 4.5369

14 2 2.13 4.26 4 4.5369

15 4.25 2.25 9.5625 18.0625 5.0625

16 4 2.25 9 16 5.0625

17 4.75 2.38 11.305 22.5625 5.6644

18 4.5 2.38 10.71 20.25 5.6644

19 4 2.38 9.52 16 5.6644

20 4.5 2.38 10.71 20.25 5.6644

21 4.25 2.63 11.1775 18.0625 6.9169

22 4.5 2.38 10.71 20.25 5.6644

23 3.75 2.38 8.925 14.0625 5.6644

24 4.25 2 8.5 18.0625 4

25 1 2.38 2.38 1 5.6644

26 3.75 2.50 9.375 14.0625 6.25

27 3.5 2.38 8.33 12.25 5.6644

28 4.5 2.38 10.71 20.25 5.6644

29 5 2.13 10.65 25 4.5369

30 3.75 2 7.5 14.0625 4

31 4 2.38 9.52 16 5.6644

32 4.25 2.38 10.115 18.0625 5.6644

Student x y xy x² y²

13

33 4.75 2.13 10.1175 22.5625 4.5369

34 1 2.25 2.25 1 5.0625

35 2.5 2.13 5.325 6.25 4.5369

36 3.75 2.25 8.4375 14.0625 5.0625

37 4.75 2.25 10.6875 22.5625 5.0625

38 3.25 2.13 6.9225 10.5625 4.5369

39 3.25 2.13 6.9225 10.5625 4.5369

40 4.75 2.50 11.875 22.5625 6.25

41 4.75 2.38 11.305 22.5625 5.6644

42 3.75 2.25 8.4375 14.0625 5.0625

43 2.25 2.25 5.0625 5.0625 5.0625

44 2.75 2.25 6.1875 7.5625 5.0625

45 4.75 2.50 11.875 22.5625 6.25

46 2.5 2.25 5.625 6.25 5.0625

47 2.5 2.25 5.625 6.25 5.0625

48 4.75 2.36 11.21 22.5625 5.5696

49 4 2.25 9 16 5.0625

50 4.5 2.38 10.71 20.25 5.6644

TOTAL 193.25

113.11437.3825 800.3125 257.0971

Computed value:

r= 0.03 – Positive Negligible Relationship

The computed value of r (0.03) a positive negligible relationship means that there is a

minimal correlation between the academic factors and the RLE performance of the 4 th year

nursing students during their hospital duty hours. The student’s performance depends on whether

to perform well or not in their duties. See page 22 Appendix A computation B for computation.

14

Table 4.1

HYPOTHESES TEST

STATISTICS

CRITICAL

VALUE

COMPUTED

VALUE FOR t

DECISION

HO: ρ = 0

There is no significant

relationship between

the academic factors

and the RLE

performance of the 4th

year nursing students.

HA: ρ ≠ 0

There is a significant

relationship between

the academic factors

and the RLE

performance of the 4th


t – test for the

significance of r

two – tailed at

α = 0.05 level of

significance

± 2.0210 t = 0.21 Accept HO: ρ = 0

- 2.0210 0.21 + 2.0210

Figure 3

Test for the significance of r

Since the computed t- value (0.21) is lesser than the critical value (± 2.0210) then Ho

should be accepted. Accepting Ho means that there is no significant relationship between the

academic factors and the RLE performance of the 4 th year nursing students during their hospital

duty hours at 0.05 level of significance. See page 23 appendix A computation B for computation.

15

Acceptance Region

Rejection Region

Table 5Interpretation for the Significant Difference between the NCM 101 and 102 Grades of the 4th


HYPOTHESES TEST STATISTICS CRITICAL VALUE

COMPUTED VALUE

DECISION

Ho: µDF =µLF

There is no significant

difference between the

grades of the students

during their Lecture

class hours and during

their hospital duty

hours.

HA: µDF ≠ µLF

There is a significant

difference between the

grades of the students

during their Lecture

class hours and during

their hospital duty

hours.

t-test for two sample means

Level of Significance:α= 0.05

± 2.1010 0.19 Accept Ho: µDF =µLF

16

- 2.1010 0.19 + 2.1010

Figure 4Illustration for testing the Significant Difference between the NCM 101 and 102 Grades of the

4th year nursing students.

Computation shows that the computed t- value (0.19) is lesser than the critical t- value (±

2.1010), this lead to the acceptance of the null hypothesis.

Acceptance of the null hypothesis means that there is no significant difference between

the grades of the students who attended hospital duties before lecture and those who had their

lecture before having their hospital duties. See appendix B on page 25 – 26 for computation.

17

Rejection RegionAcceptance Region

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter will discuss the outcomes of the data being gathered and the

recommendations of this research study. The interpreted perceptions of the selected respondents

in the questionnaires will also be presented in this chapter.

Summary of Findings

Based on the data gathered and the computations obtained from the statistical treatment,

the following findings are:

1. Out of the five academic factors, personal study skill got the highest frequency of 22 or

44% relative frequency. Then class schedule got 11 or 22%, study hours 10 or 20%,

general academic services 6 or 12% and lastly attendance which only got 1 or 2% of

relative frequency.

2. Majority of the student’s scale had an average 3.0-5.0 which means they agreed that by

utilizing the academic factors will improve their knowledge and concepts about hospital

skills. It also showed the total average of their scale which was 193.25.

3. The 4th year nursing student’s performance during their hospital duty in NCM 101 and

102 were all passed. Because their grades were in 1.25 – 2.75, this means very good or

good. Even after the researchers computed their average, the results were still very good

and good.

4.

5.

Conclusions

The following are the formulated conclusions based on the findings above:

1. The most common academic factor used by the 4 th year nursing students was Personal

Study Skills.

2. Academic factors affect the RLE performance of the nursing students during their

hospital duty by utilizing the factors to improved knowledge and concepts about hospital

skills and improved their hospital rating

3. The results of the RLE performance grade of the 4th year nursing students were all

passed.

18

4. There was no significant relationship between the academic factors and the RLE

performance of the 4th year nursing students.

5. There was no significant difference between the grades of the students who attended

hospital duties before lecture and those who had their lecture before having their hospital

duties.

Recommendations

In regards to the presented conclusions, the following recommendations are:

1. Advising the students to recognize also the other academic factors aside from the

personal study skill. This will give them the chance to choose among the factors that will

best suit their type of studying.

2. Students are aware on what the academic factors can do to their performance.

3. The students should maintain and keep up a good performance in their hospital duties.

4. Students should strengthen more the used of academic factors. Though majority of them

believe that those factors has a good effect on their performance, they should utilize it

seriously during their study

5. This only suggests that before having a hospital duty, students must first attended their

theoretical lecture first. Because lectures will give them knowledge and background

about the things they should do in their duties.

19

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS

Sagundina, Rosal Quiba, The Relationship Between Intellective and Selected Non-Intellective

Factors and the Didactic and RLE Performance of BSN II Students of the Delos Santos for the

School year 1987-1988.

MAGAZINES/JOURNAL/INTERNET

Factors that affect Academic Performance among Pharmacy Students:

Academic Problems:http://www.CampusBlues.com

The Role of Academic and Non-Academic Factors in Improving College Retention. ACT

Policy Report.html.http://www.

APPENDIX A

20

Computed A

Relative frequency

rf = 22 x 100% = 44 %

50

rf = 10 x 100% = 20 %

50

rf = 11 x 100% = 22 %

50

rf = 1 x 100% = 2 %

50

rf = 6 x 100% = 12 %

50

Computation B

Pearson r

Pearson r = ___________n Σxy – (Σx)(Σy)_____

[ n Σx² - (Σx)²] [ n Σy² - (Σy)²]

r = ______50 (437.3825) – (193.25) (113.11)___________

[ 50 (800.3125) – (193.25)²] [ 50 (257.0971) – (113.11)²

r = ______10.6175____

[2,670.0625] [60.9829]

r =___10.6175_____

162, 828.1544

r = 10.6175

403.5197076

21

r = 0.03

t = r n – 2

1 - r²

t= 0.03 50 – 2

1 - (0.03)²

t= 0.03 __48___

0.0996

t= 0.03 √48.01920768

= 0.207887678

APPENDIX B

22

t= 0.21

Table 5.1

Significant Differences of Duties First before Lecture.


1 2.25 1.75 2 Very Good

2 1.75 2.25 2 Very Good

3 2 2.25 2.13 Very Good

4 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

5 2.50 1.75 2.13 Very Good

6 2.50 2.00 2.25 Good

7 2.25 1.75 2 Very Good

8 1.75 2.25 2 Very Good

9 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

10 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

11 2.50 2.50 2.50 Good

12 2.25 1.75 2 Very Good

13 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

14 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

15 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

16 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

17 2.50 2.25 2.38 Good

18 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

19 2.50 2.75 2.38 Good

TOTAL 42.75 41.5 41.92 Good

This table showed the grades of the RLE performance grade in NCM 101 and 102 of the

4th year nursing students who had their duties first before attending their lectures. It also showed

the average and the (x- )² of each grade in the NCM’s.

Table 5.2

23

Significant Difference of Lecture first before Duty.


1 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

2 2.75 2.50 2.63 Good

3 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

4 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

5 2.00 2.00 2 Very Good

6 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

7 2.50 2.50 2.50 Good

8 2.50 2.25 2.38 Good

9 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

10 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

11 2.25 1.75 2 Very Good

12 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

13 2.50 2.25 2.38 Good

14 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

15 2.50 2.00 2.25 Good

16 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

17 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

18 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

19 2.00 2.25 2.13 Very Good

20 2.25 2.00 2.13 Very Good

21 2.50 2.50 2.50 Good

22 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

23 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

24 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

25 2.25 2.25 2.25 Good

26 2.50 2.50 2.50 Good

27 2.50 2.00 2.25 Good

28 2.00 2.50 2.25 Good

29 2.75 2.00 2.36 Good

30 2.50 2.00 2.25 Good

31 2.25 2.50 2.38 Good

TOTAL 72 70.25 71.19

24

This table showed the grades of the RLE performance grade in NCM 101 and 102 of the

4th year nursing students who had their lectures first before having their hospital duties. It also

showed the average and the (x- )² of each grade in the NCM’s.

Computation C

A. Standard Deviation Computation: Duties before Lecture

GIVEN: gen. average = 2.21

Standard deviation = 0.4811 = 0.1635

18

B. Standard Deviation computation: Lecture before Duty

GIVEN: gen. average = 2.30

Standard deviation = 0.6435 = 0.02145

30

t= 1- 2

S1² + S2²

n1 n2

df= smaller between n1-1 and n2-1

= 19-1 C.V. = ±2.1010= 18

GIVEN:

25

DF= 2.21 nDF= 19 SDF = 0.1635

LF= 2.30 nLF= 31 SLF = 0.02145

t= DF- LF

SDF² + SLF²

nDF nLF

= ___2.21 – 2.30____

(0.1635)² + (0.02145)² 19 31

= ______- 0.09 _______

0.0014 + 0.0000148

= __ - 0.09___0.037706797

t =

APPENDIX C

26

0.19

Table 6Interpretation of Coefficient of Correlation

r Interpretation

± 1 Perfect Relationship

± 0.91 - ± 0.99 Very High Relationship

± 0.71 - ± 0.09 High Relationship

± 0.41 - ± 0.70 Marked or Moderate Relationship

± 0.21 - ± 0.40 Low or Light Relationship

± 0.01 - ± 0.20 Negligible Relationship

± 0 No Relationship

APPENDIX D

27

OUR LADY OF FATIMA UNIVERSITY# 1 Esperanza Street Hilltop Mansion Heights

Lagro, Quezon City

____________________

Mrs. Romela CruzInstructor, Nursing ResearchEnglish Department—OLFU

Madam:

This is to submit herewith the list of proposed research titles of Group 3, BSN 3C1-4, Saturday / 4:30 pm – 7:30 pm for your favorable consideration and approval.

*1. Academic Factors Affecting the RLE Performance of the Selected 4 th Year Nursing Students in Our Lady of Fatima University.

2. Psychological Effects of Forceful Taking of Nursing Course to the Student’s Eagerness’ to Study in Our Lady of Fatima University.

3. Cognitive Aspects in the Learning Skills of 3rd year Nursing Students Before and After their Hospital Duties in Relation to Sleep Duration.

4. Psychological Effects of having a Special Child to a Family as Perceived by the Parent in Selected Schools in Quezon City.

5. Physiological Changes Caused by Irregular Sleeping Habits among Nursing Students at Our Lady of Fatima University in Quezon City.

Very truly yours,

MARY ANNE R. SAMSON Leader: Group 3

APPENDIX E

28


Lagro, Quezon City

____________________

Mrs. Theresa DomingoCoordinator—Math DepartmentOLFU—Quezon City

Madam:

I have the honor to request your good self to be the statistician of our group (3C1-4 Nursing Research 4:30-7:30 pm, 1st semester, school year 2008-2009)

In this connection, may I submit the following proposed titles for your favorable consideration and approval:






Very truly yours, Noted:

MARY ANNE R. SAMSON MRS. ROMELA CRUZ Leader: Group 3 Instructor, Nursing Research

APPENDIX F

29

OUR LADY OF FATIMA UNIVERSITY#1 Esperanza St., Hilltop Mansion Heights

Lagro, Quezon City

______________________

Nelia R. Capulong, RN MANDean, College of NursingOLFU- Regalado Ave. Fairview QC

Madam,

This is to submit herewith the list of proposed research titles (3 rd Group, BSN 3C1-4, Saturday 4:30 pm – 7:30 pm) for your favorable consideration and approval.


Very Truly Yours,

MARY ANNE R. SAMSONLeader: Group 3

Noted:

Mrs. Nelia R. Capulong, RN MAN Dean, College of Nursing

APPENDIX G

30


Lagro, Quezon City

________________________

Ramonita A. SalazarDean, College of Arts & ScienceOLFU- Lagro, Fairview QC

Madam,

This is to submit herewith the list of proposed research titles (3 rd Group, BSN 3C1-4, Saturday 4:30 pm – 7:30 pm) for your favorable consideration and approval.






Very Truly Yours,

SAMSON, MARY ANNE R.Leader, Group 3

Noted:

Ramonita A. Salazar Ed. DDean, College of Arts & Science

APPENDIX H

31

OUR LADY OF FATIMA UNIVERSITYLagro, Quezon City

September 23, 2008Dear Respondents;

We are presently conducting a study on “Academic Factors affecting the RLE Performance of the Selected 4th Year Nursing Students in Our Lady of Fatima University”.

This questionnaire serves as an instrument to complete this research study. In this regard, the researchers are earnestly requesting your participation to answer the attached questionnaire.

Your answer will be highly appreciated by the researchers. Tank you for the time and effort you lend. May our God bless you!

Sincerely Yours,The Researchers

QUESTIONNAIRE:

Name: _____________________________ Section: __________ Gender: _________

__ I have attended lecture first before having my hospital duty__ I had my hospital duties before having theoretical lecture

Put a check on the circle that corresponds to your answer.

2. which of the following academic factorsgreatly influence your performance inyou’re hospital duty

Personal study skills Study hours Class schedule Attendance General academic servicesA B C D E

For numbers 2 – 5 kindly refer to the following scale:

5 – Strongly agree 4 – Agree 3 – Moderately agree 2 – Disagree 1 – Strongly disagree

1 2 3 4 52. Utilizing this academic factor improved your ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

knowledge and concepts about hospital skills.

3. Utilizing this academic factor improved your ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )hospital performance rating.

4. Attending lectures is a pre-requisite to actual ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )hospital duties.

5. The performance rating of students who attended ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )lecture sessions before having their RLE isbetter than those who had their duty before attending lecture hours.

CURRICULUM VITAE

32

I. Personal Data:

NAME : Samson, Mary Ann Ramos

DATE OF BIRTH : November 11, 1989

PLACE OF BIRTH : Mandaluyong City

ADDRESS : Block 29 Lot 14 Phase 3 Dela Costa Homes II Novaliches Caloocan City

II. Educational Attainment:

COLLEGE : Bachelor of Science in NursingOur Lady of Fatima University – Lagro, Quezon City

SECONDARY : Saint Anthony Nova SchoolMangga St. Amparo, Novaliches Caloocan City – 2006

ELEMENTARY : Saint Anthony Nova SchoolMangga St. Amparo, Novaliches Caloocan City – 2002

III. Civil Service Eligibility: N/A

IV. Work Experience: N/A

V. Seminars Attended:

VASCULAR DISORDERSTheme: “Compare the Various Diseases of the Vessels”SJB 603, Our Lady of Fatima University – Lagro, Quezon CityJanuary 14, 2008

HALAMANG GAMOTTheme: “Araw – araw Kalusugan ay PAGYAMANIN SITIO KISLAP ating “BUHAYINSitio Kislap CourtMarch 3, 2008

I. Personal Data:

33

NAME : Abubo, Michelle T.

DATE OF BIRTH : May 24, 1982

PLACE OF BIRTH : Quezon, City

ADDRESS : Block 4 Lot 4 Amlac Ville Payatas B.


GRADUATE : National College of Business and Arts- 2003

COLLEGE : Bachelor of Science in NursingOur Lady of Fatima University – Lagro, Quezon City

SECONDARY : Lagro High School (Payatas Annex)Payatas, Quezon City – 1998

ELEMENTARY : Saint Vincent Rolling Hills SchoolQuezon City- 1995

III. Civil Service Eligibility:N/A

IV. Work Experience:

SM Department Store – FairviewCashier – October – March 2004

Faculty, Holy Spirit of Mount CarmelJune – March 2005

SM Supermarket – FairviewCashier – November – April 2006

Social Service Development Department – Quezon City HallClerk – September – May 2007


34

BLOBAL CAMPAIGN AGAINST TERRORISM FOR POLITICAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVEPOLMENTMini Theater Building – NCBASeptember 25, 2002

SYMPOSIUMTheme: “Speak Your Mind”Mini Theater – National College of Business AdministrationFebruary 27, 2002

KNOWLEDGE POWER AGAINSTS CANCER SEMINARSJB 505 – Our Lady of Fatima University, Lagro Quezon CityApril 23, 2008

35

I. Personal Data:

NAME : Enorme, Jerrie Misthy Narca

DATE OF BIRTH : May 20, 1990

PLACE OF BIRTH : Makati City

ADDRESS : # 48 Caridad St. Hilltop Mansion Heights Lagro, Quezon City


COLLEGE : Bachelor of Science in NursingOur Lady of Fatima University

SECONDARY : Don Antonio De Zuzuarregui Sr. Memorial AcademyAntipolo – 2006

ELEMENTARY : Francisco Benitez Elementary SchoolMakati, Metro Manila – (1996 – 1999)

Bagong Nayon II Elementary SchoolAntipolo City – (1999 – 2002)




CARDIAC DISEASESSJB 603, Our Lady of Fatima University – Lagro, Quezon CityJanuary 7, 2008


36

I. Personal Data:

NAME : Jaum, Mark Vincent S.

DATE OF BIRTH : November 28, 2008

PLACE OF BIRTH : Fort Bonifacio, Taguig City

ADDRESS : Block 93 Lot 33 Adela St. Brgy. Rizal, Makati City


COLLEGE : Bachelor of Science in Nursing

Our Lady of Fatima University

SECONDARY : Pateros National High School

Pateros – 2006

ELEMENTARY : Camiling Central Elementary School

Camiling, Tarlac - 2002




TUBERCULOSIS

Our Lady of Fatima University – Lagro, Quezon City

January 31, 2008

Heart Diseases: MID,CAD

OLFU-Lagro, QC

Jan. 10, 2008

37

I. Personal Data:

NAME : Mabeza, Lorelyn Sta. Maria

DATE OF BIRTH : April 05, 1990

PLACE OF BIRTH : Ipo Dam Norzagaray, Bulacan

ADDRESS : # 0162 Manggahan St. Bigte Norzagaray, Bulacan


COLLEGE : Bachelor of Science in nursing


SECONDARY : Curvada Minuyan High School

Norzagaray, Bulacan - 2006

ELEMENTARY : Timoteo Poliarpio Memorial Elementary School

Norzagaray, Bulacan - 2002




Tuberculosis


Jan. 31, 2008

38

I. Personal Data:

NAME : Rocero, Darwin Carmelo

DATE OF BIRTH : July 16, 1989

PLACE OF BIRTH : Sapang Palay Emergency Hospital

ADDRESS : Block 43 Lot 3 SJDM Bulacan




SECONDARY : Colegio De San Gabriel Arcangel

Area E Fatima SJDM, Bulacan – 2006

ELEMENTARY : Colegio De San Gabriel Arcangel

Area E Fatima SJDM, Bulacan – 2002




VASCULAR DISORDERS

Theme: “Compare the Various Diseases of the Vessels”

SJB 603, Our Lady of Fatima University – Lagro, Quezon City

39

January 14, 2008

I. Personal Data:

NAME : Salinas, Divine Grace G.

DATE OF BIRTH : February 16, 1986

PLACE OF BIRTH : Manila

ADDRESS : Block 1 Lot 18 Palosapis St. Amparo Subdivision, Caloocan City




SECONDARY : Saint Anthony Nova School

Mangga St. Amparo, Novaliches Caloocan City – 2003

ELEMENTARY : Amparo Subdivision Caloocan City

1999

III. Civil Service Eligibility:

IV. Work Experience:


Tuberculosis


Jan. 31, 2008

40

I. Personal Data:

NAME : Soliven, Phoebe Anne Nipal

DATE OF BIRTH : October 7, 1990

PLACE OF BIRTH :

ADDRESS : Block 6 Lot 25 Valencia St. Pamahay Homes Novaliches

Quezon City




SECONDARY :

ELEMENTARY :




PNUEMONIA and TUBERCULOSIS

SJB 603, Our Lady of Fatima University – Lagro, Quezon City

January 21, 2008

HALAMANG GAMOT

Theme: “Araw – araw Kalusugan ay PAGYAMANIN SITIO KISLAP ating “BUHAYIN

Sitio Kislap Court

March 3, 2008

41

I. Personal Data:

NAME : Tumolva, Raiza Loise Cabrera

DATE OF BIRTH : October 6, 1989

PLACE OF BIRTH : Tumauini, Isabela

ADDRESS : 106 – E Ilang – Ilang St. Interior Batasan Hills, Quezon City



SECONDARY : Regional Science High SchoolTumauini, Isabela – 2006

ELEMENTARY : Tumauini North Central SchoolTumauini, Isabela – 2002




CARDIAC DISEASESSJB 603, Our Lady of Fatima University – Lagro, Quezon CityJanuary 7, 2008


42

I. Personal Data:

NAME : Villahermosa, Maria Sarah Czarina Roman

DATE OF BIRTH : February 21, 1990

PLACE OF BIRTH : San Lorenzo Hospital Novaliches, Quezon City

ADDRESS : Lot 4 Block 101 Pangarap Village 2 Caloocan City



SECONDARY : Saint Anthony Nova School2003 – 2006

Our Lady of the Holy Rosary2002 – 2003

ELEMENTARY : Our Lady of the Holy Rosary Academy2002




LUNG, PROSTATE, BREAST CANCERTheme: “Say no to Cancer, Yes to Healthy Lifestyle”SJB 603, Our Lady of Fatima University – Lagro, Quezon CityJanuary 28, 2008


43

Thesis 2

Documents

Transcript of Thesis 2