thesis on english speaking policy of sjtit
DESCRIPTION
A Study on the Impact of the English speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology, Surigao City.TRANSCRIPT
1
CHAPTER 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE
Introduction
English was first introduced to the Filipinos through the
American public school system and, for half a century, the
language was systematically promoted as a civilizing tool. Today,
beliefs and attitudes about English, as well as the various ways
in which the language is used, may be traced to the Filipino
experience of American Colonial Education. (Martin, 2012)
The 1987 Philippine Constitution states that “for purposes
of communication and instruction, the official language of the
Philippines are Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law,
English.” This law is carried out through DECS Order No. 52
series 1987, also known as the Bilingual Education Policy
(henceforth BEP) of the Department of Education (henceforth
DepEd), which was first introduced in 1974 and then re-issued
with minor modifications in 1987. The BEP aims to develop
bilingual Filipinos competent in both English and the national
language. This BEP is the recognized language-in-education policy
that is still in place today in the education sector.
On 17 May 2003, President Arroyo issued EO No. 210, which
aimed to establish a policy to strengthen the use of English as a
2
medium of instruction because of the “need to develop the
aptitude, competence and proficiency of our students in the
English language to maintain and improve their competitive edge
in emerging and fast-growing local and international industries,
particularly in the area of Information and Communications
Technology.” (Arroyo, 2003)
In her 2006 SONA, Arroyo claimed success in the structural
reforms her government had implemented. She described having
coffee with a call centre agent as a touching experience: “I had
coffee with some call center agents last Labor Day. Lyn, a new
college graduate, told me, ‘Now I don’t have to leave the country
in order for me to help my family. Salamat po. (Thank you.)’ I
was so touched, Lyn, by your comments. With structural reforms,
we not only found jobs, but kept families intact.” (Arroyo, 2006)
Arroyo’s 2007 SONA had a more boastful tone when she
declared that the Philippines “ranks among top off-shoring hubs
in the world because of cost competitiveness and more importantly
our highly trainable, English proficient, IT-enabled management
and manpower” (Arroyo, 2007).
However, there is a widespread perception that English
language proficiency among the Filipinos is deteriorating.
Robert S. Keitel, Regional Employment Advisor of the United
3
States Embassy in Manila, reports that only four percent of
Filipino applicants are hired by call centers while the remaining
ninety-six percent were not because of their “sub-standard
English skills” despite 400,000 graduates being produced every
year. Keitel (2008) notes the “mismatch between the call centers’
expectations of applicants and the preparedness of graduates from
Philippine HEIs”, thus forcing call centers to collaborate
closely with colleges and universities higher education
institutions or HEIs. Keitel writes: It has been an evolution for
academe to recognize that call center employment is an
appropriate career opportunity for their graduates. Such
recognition has necessitated changes in the curriculum.
Initially, one reaction was, “we speak English already... are we
not one of the largest English speaking countries in the world?”
Yes, Filipinos speak English but it is a variety called Filipino
English, and it is not the international (global) English
required for call center employment. (Keitel, 2008)
Marcelo (2010) states that, it used to be that the
Philippines’ biggest competitive advantage in the global job
market is the proficiency of our skilled workers in the English
language. This advantage, however, is fast being eroded by rising
competition from other countries coupled with declining mastery
of the English language by our college graduates.
4
By these statements, it is rather important to stress out
the importance of the English language to schools in order to
enable college graduates to be globally competitive as they
venture the world of globalization. That is why; Saint Jude
Thaddeus Institute of Technology implemented an English speaking
policy on the school year 2010-2011 to make the institution a
training ground for language skill enhancement and to produce
globally competitive graduates.
The policy was proposed by the school president, Mr. George
M. Salabao and was implemented by the deans of the departments.
The way to learn and master of language is to use it – not
occasionally but regularly (Lorenzo & KC Shiota et.al., 2005). We
are in a world that is increasingly becoming competitive out
those who do not have core competencies or universally accepted
skills, not least on the aspect of language use. (Trailblaizer
et.al., 2001)
According to Eugene E. White, he stated that the law
proficiency performance of the students in the school evaluation
test, a failure which attribute largely to the students poor
English comprehension. In addition, White said through using the
language daily, the students acquire the skill almost
unconsciously, and definitely they can fashion their fluency to a
desired level over time.
5
It is clear that English Language Proficiency plays a
significant role in the cause of globalization among students.
Because of that, there is a need to pursue this study in order to
assess the Impact of the English Speaking Policy to the First
Year and Second Year College and Grades Seven and Eight Students
of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology for they are
observed to achieve lesser impact of the said policy.
Statement of the Problem
This study aimed to ascertain the Impact of the English
speaking policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology
(SJTIT) to the First Year and Second Year College and Grade Seven
and Eight High School Students of SJTIT, Surigao City.
To perceive a clear understanding of the problem, the
following inquiry was taken into account:
1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:
A. High School Respondents
A1.1 Age ( ) 11 ( ) 12 ( ) 13 ( ) 14 ( ) 15
A1.2 Sex ( ) Male ( ) Female
A1.3 Language spoken at home
( ) Surigaonon ( ) Visaya
( ) Tagalog ( ) English
A1.4 Area of Residence ( ) Urban ( ) Rural
A1.5 Elementary school graduated from
6
( ) Public ( ) Private
A1.6 Grade Level
( ) Grade Seven ( ) Grade Eight
B. College Respondents
B1.1 Age ( ) 16 ( ) 17 ( ) 18 ( ) 19 ( ) 20-above
B1.2 Sex ( ) Male ( ) Female
B1.3 Language spoken at home
( ) Surigaonon ( ) Visaya
( ) Tagalog ( ) English
B1.4 Area of Residence ( ) Urban ( ) Rural
B1.5 High school graduated from ( ) Public ( ) Private
B1.6 Course
( ) BEED ( ) BSCRIM ( ) BSIT ( ) BSCA ( ) BSBA ( ) BSED
B1.7 Year Level ( ) First Year ( ) Second Year
2. To what extent is the impact of the English speaking policy of
St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology to the students in
terms of:
2.1 Academic Performance;
2.2 Social Relations;
2.3 Personal Development
3. Is there a significant difference on the impact of English
speaking policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology as
perceived by the First Year and Second Year College and Grade
7
Seven and Grade Eight High School students when they are grouped
according to their profiled variables?
4. Based on the findings, an enhancement program was proposed.
Hypothesis
Problems 1, 2 and 4 are hypothesis free. Problem 3 is
hypothesized as:
HO. There is no significant difference on the Impact of
English Speaking Policy to the First Year and Second Year College
and Grade Seven and Grade Eight High School Students when they
are grouped according to their profiled variables.
Theoretical Framework
This study is anchored on the theory of Canale and Swain’s
(1983) Theory of Communicative Competence. The Theory of
Communicative Competence has four dimensions which are: 1.)
grammatical competence – the mastery of formal features of
language 2.) socio-linguistic competence – knowledge of the
socio- cultural rules of language use, 3.) discourse competence
or the knowledge/skill in making connection of a series of
utterances to form a unified whole both in spoken and written
language forms, and 4.) strategic competence or skill in the use
of appropriate strategy to compensate for whatever breakdown in
communication due to deficiency in other aspects of communicative
competence (Tabacug, 1990).
8
By far the most important development in TESOL has been the
emphasis on a communicative approach in language teaching (Coste,
1976; Roulet, 1972; Widdowson, 1978). The one thing that everyone
is certain about is the necessity to use language for
communicative purposes in the classroom. Consequently, the
concern for teaching linguistic competence has widened to include
communicative competence, the socially appropriate use of
language, and the methods reflect this shift from form to
function.(Christina Bratt Paulston, "Introduction: English
Teaching as a Foreign or Second Language." Linguistic and
Communicative Competence. Multilingual Matters, 1992)
This theory supports the idea that English Speaking can
enhance the academic, social, and personal aspects of a student’s
life. This will also help the researcher evaluate the Impact of
the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology to the First Year College Students.
Conceptual Framework
Most researchers however, show clearly that the problem is
more likely the impact of the policy to the students.
When establishing English Only Policy, everyone must
consider the following mandate, rules and reminder (Beykont and
Crawford, et.al 1997)
9
1. Always speak and participate in English.
2. Speak sentences in English.
3. Remind your friends to speak English.
Accordingly, students should be aware of the limitation
placed upon English only policies and keep such in mind when
considering the use of an actual implementation of an English
only policy (Estrada, E.J. and Lopez L.M., 1992). The fact that
English is the most significant language in the world in terms of
Economics; it makes the most influential and most valuable form a
certain perspective (Navarro, R.A., 2005).
This study aims to determine the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology to
the First Year and Second Year College and Grade Seven and Grade
Eight High School students of the institution. This conceptual
framework served as a guide in this present study.
1. Profile of the respondentsA. HIGH SCHOOLA1.1 AgeA1.2 SexA1.3 Area of ResidenceA1.4 Language spoken at homeA1.5 Elementary School graduated fromA1.6 Grade levelB. COLLEGEB1.1 AgeB1.2 SexB1.3 Area of ResidenceB1.4 Language spoken at homeB1.5 High school graduated fromB1.6 Year levelB1.7 Course
2. Extent of the Impact of the English Speaking Policy as perceived by the First Year and Second Year and Grade Seven and Grade Eight Students2.1 Academic Performance2.2 Social Relations2.3 Personal Development
3. An Enhancement Program
10
Figure 1
Schematic Diagram of the Study
11
Scope and Limitation of the Study
This study was conducted among the First Year and Second
Year College students and Grade Seven and Grade Eight High School
Students of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology, enrolled
in the Academic Year and School Year 2014-2015. The study was
conducted on the second semester of the academic year 2014-2015.
Significance of the Study
The findings of this study would be beneficial to the
following:
School Administrators – The result of this study would help
them identify the strengths and weaknesses of the said policy. It
will also serve as a basis for the improvement of the guidelines
on the policy. This study would equip them to properly motivate
students to speak English inside and even outside the campus.
Faculty – The findings of this study would help them carry
out their responsibilities as molders of minds and properly teach
and encourage their students in speaking English.
Students – This study would enable them to be more attentive
to their responsibilities as students and be more aware of the
trends of globalization and work better towards being globally
competitive persons.
Parents – This study would help them assess the progress of
their children towards the proficiency in English. It would
12
awaken their consciousness of the English speaking policy imposed
by the institution.
Other researchers – this study would serve as a reference
and guide to those who will conduct future studies regarding the
impact of the English speaking policy.
Definition of Terms
To ensure better understanding in this study, the following
terms shall be defined conceptually and operationally:
Aptitude – the capacity of a person to do something well.
Bilingual education involves teaching academic content in
two languages, in a native and secondary language with varying
amounts of each language used in accordance with the program
model.
Communicative competence is a term in linguistics which
refers to a language user's grammatical knowledge of syntax,
morphology, phonology and the like, as well as social knowledge
about how and when to use utterances appropriately.
Competitive edge – the competitive advantages of a person.
Discourse competence - the knowledge/skill in making
connection of a series of utterances to form a unified whole both
in spoken and written language forms.
English proficient – a person skillful in the English
language.
13
Fluency - speaking spontaneously and meaningfully with no
extensive pauses or excessive repetition.
Globalization – the cause of being adopted globally, in
terms of business or profession.
Grammatical Competence - the mastery of formal features of
language.
Language-in-education – The language used in teaching.
Mastery – the capacity of a person to be apt in an area.
Proficiency – the skillfulness of a person in an area.
Socio-cultural – this involves social and cultural factors.
Socio-linguistic competence – knowledge of the socio-
cultural rules of language use.
Strategic competence - skill in the use of appropriate
strategy to compensate for whatever breakdown in communication
due to deficiency in other aspects of communicative competence.
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
14
This chapter contains the literature and studies, both local
and foreign, reviewed by the researchers which are related to
this research.
Related Literature
Foreign
Theorists and practitioners bring their own experiences and
perspectives to the situation thus, the definition of speaking
skills have many versions. Rivers (1972) states that speaking
means expression of metaphor, which illumines many aspects of our
foreign language situation. Speaking is vehicle of delivering
meaning which people do not realize they are using it. Language
is also a tool to deliver thinking, emotion and feeling and need
in order to communicate with each other.
To speak fluently and confidently in a variety of situations
is a central human need and an important goal of education.
Effective speakers of English have communicative oral competence.
This particular type of competence, according to Scarcella and
Oxford (1992), consists of linguistic/grammatical
competence in grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation;
pragmatic/sociolinguistic competence in appropriate use of
language for the context; discourse competence in coherence and
cohesion; and strategic competence in using communication
15
strategies. Hedge (2000) adds fluency to the list, which is most
relevant to speech production.
Fluency is defined by Ellis and Sinclair (1989) as speaking
spontaneously and meaningfully with no extensive pauses or
excessive repetition. Hedge (2000: 261) is more specific in her
definition: "Fluency means responding coherently within the turns
of the conversation.- linking words and phrases, using
intelligible pronunciation and appropriate intonation, and doing
all of this without undue hesitation." Faerch, Haastrup and
Phillipson (1984 in Hedge 1993: 275) define fluency in terms of
competence as, "The speaker's ability to make use of whatever
linguistic and pragmatic competence they have." They include
three types of competence: semantic which links propositions and
speech acts to give coherence; lexical-syntactic which links
syntactical components and words and, thirdly, articulatory
fluency which links speech segments.
As Brown (1994) and Richards (1990) viewing, they divide
oral communication into monologues (planned and unplanned) and
dialogues (interpersonal and transactional). Interpersonal
conversation "lubricates the social wheels," (McCarthy 1991: 136)
develops social roles and relationships and is relatively
unpredictable. It ranges from an informal chat to a more formal
and predictable meeting or interview. Transactional
conversations, on the other hand, tend to be much more
16
predictable as information is exchanged in order to fulfill a
need such as at a doctor's appointment or buying oranges at a
greengrocers' or a market stall. Other types of genre, such as
story narratives, have a predictable pattern and an example can
be found in Hedge (2000).
According to Nunan (1989) successful oral communication
involves a number of important features. These include the
development of fluency and the ability to manage both
transactional and interactional dialogues, using both fillers as
well as long and short turns. This negotiation of meaning
requires effective listening skills and speaking skills.
Furthermore, it includes successful articulation of sounds, as
well as "mastery of stress, rhythm, intonation patterns." (Hedge
2000:296).
Brown (1994) identified certain typical speaking
difficulties characteristics of spoken language that most
learners find difficult. The following features as typical
problem items: clustering of words into chunks, breath groups or
phrases; redundancy of language; reduced forms such as
contractions, elisions, reduced vowels; performance variables
such as hesitations, pauses, fillers, backtracking, and
corrections; colloquialisms, idioms, slang and colloquial
phrases; delivery speed; stress, rhythm, and intonation (as
17
English is stress-timed intonation patterns convey important
messages) and interaction with conversational negotiation.
Martin Bygate, Speaking (1987), whose theoretical inputs
concerning the elements of speaking will be analyzed and their
views compared. There are two basic aspects that Bygate
distinguishes when considering the skill of speaking. These
include the knowledge of the language and the skill in using this
knowledge. The knowledge of producing the language has to be used
in different circumstances as they appear during a conversation
by means of the skill. The ability to use the knowledge requires
two kinds of skills, according to Bygate - production skills, and
interaction skills.
Production skills involve two aspects - facilitation and
compensation, brought about by processing conditions. Both
devices help students, besides making the oral production easier
or possible, sound more naturally. Interaction skills, on the
other hand, involve routines and negotiation skills. Routines
present the typical patterns of conversation including
interaction and information routines. Negotiation skills serve as
a means for enabling the speaker and listener to make themselves
clearly understood. This is achieved by two aspects: management
of interaction and turn-taking.
Jeremy Harmer, The Practice of English Teaching (2001),
discussing the elements of speaking that are necessary for fluent
18
oral production, distinguishes between two aspects - knowledge of
"language features", and the ability to process information on
the spot, it means "mental/social processing".
In order to wage a successful language interaction, it is
necessary to realize the use of the language features through
mental/social processing-with the help of the rapid processing
skills’, as Harmer calls them (p.271).‘Mental/social processing
includes three features language processing, interacting with
others, and on-the-spot information processing.
In order to speak, according to Swain's Comprehensible
Output Hypothesis, referred to Task-based learning, learners must
practice speaking. On the basis of this hypothesis, Skehan (1996)
identifies six purposes for output. These include to negotiate
meaning and thus improve input, to attend to syntactic accuracy;
to check predictions and hypothesis; to promote automaticity; to
understand and manage discourse, and, lastly, to express personal
opinions in a personal voice.
Local
The Department of Education (DepEd) said that it was seeing
improvement from its efforts to improve English proficiency among
public school students if students’ performance in achievement
tests is to be considered.
Education Secretary Jesli Lapus said that the department was
also pursuing its programs to further improve English proficiency
19
by pushing ahead with its National English Proficiency Program
(NEPP) to strengthen its Teachers Mentoring Teachers program.
Under the program, a total of 10,500 teachers and school
administrators have trained on English proficiency for this year.
Lapus noted that there was continuous improvement in the
performance of students in the National Achievement Test (NAT)
within the five-year analysis particularly in English subject.
“We recognize English proficiency is critical in learning as
other key subjects such as Science and Mathematics use English in
textbooks and other reference materials,” said Lapus.
“Filipinos’ edge in the English language is also vital as
more work opportunities here and abroad place premium on language
skills,” Lapus assured.
It will be recalled that Andrew King, country director of
IDP Education Philippines, a group accredited by the Australian
government to administer the International English Language
Testing System (IELTS) exam to Filipinos who seek to enter
Australia as workers, migrants or students in its universities,
recently revealed a seeming drop in Filipinos’ proficiency in
English from the results of Filipino takers of the IELTS they
administered in 2008.
In the IDP Education Pty. Ltd’s review of IELTS results they
had administered in countries all over the world for 2008, he
20
said that the Philippines’ average overall score was 6.69, which
was below the 7 passing score of the Australian government.
In their analysis of the results and the Philippines’ system
of English instruction in schools, King said that the
deteriorating level of English proficiency could be attributed to
the deficiencies in the proficiency of the teachers teaching
English as well as the poor quality of resources or textbooks
being used in schools. (The Philippine Star, 2009)
With catching up in terms of English proficiency skills,
there is a need to continuously improve the country’s
competitiveness in English proficiency if it wants to stay as one
of the most attractive areas for business process outsourcing
(BPO) investment, national Economic Development Authority (NEDA)
director general Augusto Santos said Tuesday in press briefing in
Malacanang.
He said the country has to remain competitive in terms of
English proficiency as China, which has as advantage in terms of
manpower is already catching up. It’s a world of competition, a
global community, Santos said.
The NEDA chief said although there is still no cause for
alarm, there should be continuous improvement in English
proficiency to ensure country remains highly competitive.
Aside from the BPO industry, Filipinos are easily hired
abroad because their English proficiency skills are higher than
21
those from workers in neighboring countries. English is the
number one language in the entire world. If we want to increase
competitiveness, we Filipinos have to continuously improve our
proficiency in English: Santos said.
Santos said a recent study showed that China is moving to
boost the English proficiency of its people. “We have to continue
beefing up our English proficiency skills,” he stressed.
MBC President Ramon del Rosario said the move to improve
English proficiency is largely market-driven due to the rise in
the business process outsourcing (BPO) industry in the
Philippines.
He said the business sector is addressing the problem by
pushing for the improvement of the overall quality of education
in the country. He added that English proficiency is advantageous
not just to the BPO industry but also to the local tourism sector
especially with more English-speaking tourists going to the
Philippines. (DAVID DIZON, abs-cbnNEWS.com, 2008)
Granted that English is a second language to the vast
majority of the Filipinos, therefore, is it fair to expect a
college educated Filipino to be fluent in English, or is it not?
If a Filipino is not fluent in English, should that Filipino be
required to take remedial English classes before that nurse can
be hired overseas? - (Daly City, 2008)
22
The Department of Education reported that 80 percent of
secondary school teachers in the Philippines failed in an English
proficiency test in 2007. So where is the veracity of those
claims that the Philippines have a substantial pool of English-
proficient workers?
Aside from its bountiful natural resources, the other main
wealth of the Philippines is perhaps its people. Despite the
poverty and corruption that still pervade in the country, the
current generation of Filipinos has ably demonstrated they can
surpass the achievements of their elders and raise the standard
of living in the country. If not for the youth, the country would
not have made a name in the outsourcing business. Their exposure
to global cultures and practices has also pushed them to apply
these yardsticks in their own country, spurring improvement and
innovations.
Some parochial nationalists argue that this is just fine
with them; let the nation build its future on a local Malay-based
language such as Tagalog. What they overlook is that the majority
of educated Filipinos has been writing in English or has been
translated into English from Spanish for well over a century.
Today the large majority of Filipino writers, historians,
scholars and journalists are working almost entirely in English.
English is very much part and parcel of the Philippine's national
birthright.
23
Unfortunately for the ardent nationalists, the sheer
practicality of trying to acquire a college graduate level
education in the humanities solely in Filipino is not feasible.
Young people in third world countries, especially in the
case of the Philippines, can spurn the serious study of foreign
languages in the name of national sovereignty but ironically they
will end up sacrificing a large portion of their own national
memory and individual heritage.
A nation that forgets its past identity and place in world
history is ill-prepared for the inevitable challenges of future
colonial pressures. Pop culture flooding the Philippines from
other Asian countries is as shallow as anything Hollywood churned
out in the 1950s.
Filipino regional languages and their many spoken dialects
are beautiful and deeply expressive of local cultures and the
modern Philippine nation. They represent ancient and modern oral
and written traditions which capture the finest nuances of the
Filipino character and the Filipino world. However, as is true in
all parts of the world, local languages are dying off or being
hybridized at a rapidly increasing rate.
The current government policy seems to give every poor
Filipino a bit of fractured English and send them on their way
abroad, hopefully to earn foreign exchange. No class of people
should be groomed to be overseas workers; they need jobs here at
24
home, near their families, in the country they love. The high
social cost of this public policy is broken homes, not to mention
that intelligent and motivated citizens are being forced overseas
when they should be home mentoring their children.
Tremendous resources, local and foreign, are now being spent
on teaching English to impoverished elementary school kids. The
current mantra being that English is one's passport out of the
Philippines to high-paying jobs. It would be better to strongly
promote English for high school and college students, especially
reading and writing skills, so they can build a strong new nation
from within, on their own terms.
High-quality text books, instructional material, libraries
and reading centers should be available in every high school and
college with standardized testing and mandatory reading
assignments. Not only English but Chinese and Spanish should be
promoted by the Board of Education. For the evolving Philippine
middle class this would create a new generation of highly
articulate readers and writers with excellent abilities to
access information and form critical opinions and thoughtful
analysis of their society and leaders. (Jonathan Best in Business
World 2007)
According to Mr. Angelo Garcia, every year, thousands of
young Filipino graduates end up jobless, no matter what
university they came from. The battle of who knows more and who
25
is best among these graduates in their chosen field is not the
only basis that any company is looking for and when applying for
a job, good communication skills is in English a requirement.
"Language is now considered a skill," says Test of English for
International Communication's (TOEIC) Bambina Buenaventura.
According to her, big companies, both here and abroad, are
now looking for good English communication skills among potential
employees. Sadly, these companies are disappointed.
English has been dubbed as the “language of the world”. Over
a billion people in the world have considered English as their
second tongue. Filipinos are expected to arm themselves with
English to communicate with the world.
Related Studies
Foreign
The study is about Teachers’ sense of self-efficacy; English
proficiency and instructional strategies which show that novice
Iranian EFL teachers feel more efficacious in applying
instructional strategies than in managing an EFL class.
They also perceive their efficacy to motivate and engage
students to learn English not as high as their efficacy for
instructional strategies. Second, the teachers perceive their
reading skill to be the most highly developed language skill and
listening to be the least developed language skill. Third, the
teachers report that their use of grammatically oriented
26
strategies is lower than that of communicatively oriented
strategies.
The most important finding was the positive relationship
between perceived level of language proficiency and sense of
self-efficacy. The higher the teachers’ perceived proficiency in
language skills, the more efficacious they felt.
Moreover, the higher the teachers’ sense of self- efficacy
the more tendencies they had to use communicative-based
strategies in their classes and inclination to focus more on
meaning rather than accuracy. This result is different from the
findings of other studies (Chacón, 2005; Sato, 2005), which show
grammar was the central focus of EFL teachers’ instructional
activities.
This study adds to the previous literature by examining the
relationships among teachers’ sense of efficacy and other
factors. However, this is a new contribution to the field of
teacher-efficacy since self-efficacy of foreign language teachers
in general, and an EFL teacher in particular, is an understudied
area of research. Furthermore, this study was conducted to fill
in the gap in the literature and to study the relationship of
language proficiency of EFL teachers and their sense of self-
efficacy.
Based on the premise that teachers are key agents of change
(Ghaith & Shaaban, 1999) and that their self-efficacy should be
27
considered in the successful implementation of educational
practice, these findings suggest implications for programs
concerned with professional development of teachers. School
administrators should develop intervention programs either to
maintain or enhance teachers’ sense of efficacy. Since language
proficiency was related to a teachers’ sense of self efficacy, it
is suggested that teacher education programs and schools provide
English language enhancement classes for EFL teachers in order
for them to maintain or improve their language proficiency. EFL
teachers require adequate preparation in all four skills so that
they build a strong sense of efficacy to use the language and
engage students in learning English.
Further research is needed in order to determine the various
factors that contribute to teachers’ sense of efficacy. The
teaching experience of the teachers in this study ranged from 1-5
years.
Further research is needed to examine how years of
experience influence the development of teachers’ sense of
efficacy and under what conditions efficacy is maintained and
enhanced. More specifically, it would be useful to examine the
role of such factors as teachers’ English language enhancement,
professional preparation, readiness to teach, and in-service
training in maintaining and enhancing teachers’ sense of
efficacy.
28
Local
English proficiency of Filipinos has recovered and
improved in the last two years, especially in the fields of
written and spoken English, a study by research outfit Social
Weather Stations (SWS) said Thursday. The survey, conducted from
March 30 to April 2, 2008, showed that the ability of Filipinos
to write in English improved from 48 percent in March 2006 to 61
percent in April 2008. Filipinos' proficiency in spoken English
also improved from 32 percent in March 2006 to 46 percent in
April 2008.
Filipinos’ understanding of spoken and written English also
improved in April and even surpassed previous levels set 15 years
ago. The SWS said Filipino adults understanding of spoken English
was at 75 percent in December 1993, dipped to 65 percent in March
2006 and went back up to 76 percent in April 2008. Filipinos who
read in English also started high at 73 percent in December 1993,
dipped to 65 percent in March 2006 and improved to 75 percent in
April 2008.
Filipinos' ability to think in English also improved from 27
percent in March 2006 to 38 percent in April 2008. SWS president
Mahar Mangahas said the improvement in Filipinos' English
proficiency shows a greater awareness among Filipinos to improve
their skills in written and spoken English. "The most important
finding is that there is an improvement in all the expected
29
properties. This is all age groups, of different classes and
sectors. These are the people actively thinking of improving
themselves. They are drawing from their own foundation and
improving themselves first," he told reporters. He added that the
increasing dependence on the Internet is also pushing people to
review their English skills.
The survey said eight percent of the Filipino adults polled
claimed they made full use of the English language; 39 percent
said they made fair use of the English language; 29 percent said
they made partial use of the English language, and 17 percent
said they made almost no use of the English language.
The SWS interviewed 1,200 respondents nationwide for the
survey, which was conducted for the Promoting English Proficiency
Project of the American Chamber of Commerce in the Philippines
and the Makati Business Club (MBC).
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the research design, research locale,
respondents of the study, the research instrument, sampling
design, and the statistical treatment of the data gathered.
Research Design
30
The Impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude
Thaddeus Institute of Technology to the First Year and Second
Year College and Grade Seven and Grade Eight Students of the
current school year was determined and described. Also, the
significant difference on the Impact of English Speaking Policy
to the First Year and Second Year College and Grade Seven and
Grade Eight High School Students when they are grouped according
to their profiled variables was ascertained. Thus, descriptive
method was used in this study.
Determination of Sample Size
The total population of the Grade Seven and Grade Eight High
School Students, and First Year and Second Year College students
of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology is 247. The Estimate
Proportion feature of the Statdisk software was used to determine
the sample size. The sample size is 151.
Sampling Design and Technique
The sampling technique that was used is the Stratified
Random Sampling Technique to ensure that the respondents will be
represented according to their respective departments.
The Respondents
The respondents of this study were the First Year and Second
Year College and Grade Seven and Grade Eight High School Students
31
of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in the academic year
2014-2015 and school year 2014-2015, respectively.
Research Instrument
The researchers made a questionnaire that was given to the
respondents; the first part of the questionnaire consists of the
profile of the respondents; the second part consist of the
extent of the Impact of the English Speaking Policy to the
respondents in terms of the academic performance, social
relations and their personal development.
Validation of the Instrument
The research instrument that the researchers used was
validated by the research experts.
Data Gathering Procedure
Seeking Permission conduct the study. The researchers’
first job was to ask permission to the Vice President for
Academic Affairs as well as to the High School Principal and the
Department Heads to allow the researchers to administer the
distribution and retrieval of the questionnaire from the
respondents, which are the Grade Seven, Grade Eight, First Year
College and Second Year, High School and College Students,
respectively.
Preparation of the Questionnaire. After the formulation of
the questionnaire, the questionnaire was checked and validated by
the researchers’ instructor in this subject.
32
Data Processing Method. After the validation of the
questionnaire, the researchers conducted the survey to the
sample. The questionnaires were recovered and collected, then the
answers were tallied according to each item and the data were
prepared for the statistical treatment.
Statistical Treatment
The following statistical techniques were used for the
analysis and interpretation of data.
Frequency Count and Percentage was used to analyze the data
related to problem number 1, the profile of the respondents of
the sample from the First Year and Second Year College and Grade
Seven and Grade Eight High School Students of St. Jude Thaddeus
Institute of Technology in terms of: Age, Sex, Area of Residence,
Elementary/High School Graduated, Language Spoken at home, Course
and Grade/Year Level.
Arithmetic Mean and Standard Deviation was used to determine
the extent of the Impact of the English Speaking Policy of St.
Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology to the respondents in terms
of their: Academic Performance, Social Relations and Personal
Development.
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to test the
significant difference on the Impact of the English Speaking
33
Policy to the First Year and Second Year College and Grade Seven
and Grade Eight High School students.
The following parameters shall be used in the collection of
data in problem 2:
Scale Range Interpretation
5 4.20-5.00 Strongly Agree
4 3.40-4.19 Agree
3 2.60-3.39 Moderately Agree
2 1.80-2.59 Disagree
1 1.00-1.79 Strongly Disagree
CHAPTER 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents, analyzes, and interprets the
following data gathered from the research questionnaire relative
to the research subjects of this study. It presents the
34
demographic profiles of the respondents such as Age, Sex,
Language Spoken at Home, Area of Residence, Elementary
School/High School Graduated From, Course, and Grade/Year Level.
Furthermore, this chapter also discusses the impact of the
English Speaking Policy as perceived by the respondents in terms
of their academic performance, social relations, and personal
development. It further presents whether the impact of the
English Speaking Policy are affected by their demographic
profiles.
The data are presented using tables in accordance to the
sequencing of the sub-problems under the Statement of the Problem
portion in Chapter 1.
The profile of the respondents is looked upon in terms of
Age, Sex, Language Spoken at Home, Area of Residence, Elementary
School/High School Graduated From, Course, and Grade/Year Level.
Table 1 presents the demographic profiles of the high school
respondents.
Table 1Profile of the High School Respondents as to Age, Sex, Language
Spoken at Home, Area of Residence, Elementary SchoolGraduated From and Grade Level
Profile Frequency %
Age1. 13 years old 3 33.32. 14 years old 5 55.6
35
3. 15 years old 1 11.1Sex
1. Male 5 55.62. Female 4 44.4
Language Spoken at Home1. Surigaonon 9 100.0
Area of Residence1. Urban 4 44.42. Rural 5 55.6
Elementary School Graduated From1. Public 5 55.62. Private 4 44.4
Grade Level1. Grade 7 5 55.62. Grade 8 4 44.4
Total Number of Respondents 9
Table 1 showed that there were 9 high school respondents. 3
or (33.3%) were in the age 13 years old, 5 or (55.6%) were in the
age 15 years old, 1 or(11.1%) was in the age 15 years old; As to
sex, 5 or (55.6%) were males and 4 or (44.4%) were females. As to
the language spoken at home, 9 or (100.0%) speak Surigaonon at
home. As to the area of residence, 4 or (44.4%) lived in the
urban area, while 5 or (55.6%) lived in the rural area. As to the
elementary school graduated from, 5 or (55.6%) graduated in
Public Elementary Schools while or 4 or (44.4%) graduated in
Private Elementary Schools. Furthermore, the table also shows
that 5 or (55.6%) of the respondents were Grade 7 while 4 or
(44.4%) of them were Grade 8.
36
Table 2 presents the demographic profiles of the college
respondents.
Table 2Profile of the College Respondents as to Age, Sex, Language
Spoken at Home, Area of Residence, High SchoolGraduated From and Year Level
Profile Frequency %Age
1. 16 years old 8 5.62. 17 years old 43 30.3
37
3. 18 years old 38 26.84. 19 years old 35 24.65. 20- above 18 12.7
Sex1. Male 59 41.52. Female 83 58.5
Language Spoken at Home1. Surigaonon 116 81.72. Visaya 26 18.3
Area of Residence1. Urban 115 81.02. Rural 27 19.0
High School Graduated From1. Public 125 88.02. Private 17 12.0
Course1. BEED 21 14.82. BSCrim 56 39.43. BSCA 41 28.94. BSBA 16 11.35. BSIT 6 4.26. BSED 2 1.4
Year Level1. First Year 78 54.92. Second Year 64 45.1
Total Number of Respondents 142
Table 2 showed that there were 142 college respondents. 8 or
(5.6%) out of 142 were in the age 16 years old, 43 or (30.3%)
respondents were in the age 17 years old, 38 or (26.8%) of them
were in the age 18 years old, 35 or (24.6%) of them were in the
age 19 years old and 18 or (12.7%) of them were in the age 20
years old -above; As to sex, 59 or (41.5%) were males and 83 or
38
(58.5%) were females; As to the language spoken at home, 116 or
(81.7%) speak Surigaonon at home while 26 or (18.3%) speak
Visaya; As to the area of residence, 115 or (81%) lived in the
urban area, while 27 or(19%) lived in the rural are; As to the
high school graduated from, 125 or (88.0%) graduated from Public
High Schools while 17 or (12.0%) graduated from Private High
Schools. Furthermore, the table also showed that 21 or (14.8%) of
the respondents were taking BEED, 56 or (39.4%) were taking
BSCrim, 41 or (28.9%) were taking BSCA, 16 or (11.3%) were taking
BSBA, 6 or (4.2%) were taking BSIT, and 2 or (1.4%) were taking
BSED. And also, 78 or (54.9%) were First Year Students and 64 or
(45.1%) were Second Year Students.
Table 3 presents the mean distribution of the high school
respondents’ perception towards the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in
terms of their academic performance.
Table 3Mean Distribution of the High School Respondents’ Perception on the Impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus
Institute of Technology as to the Academic Performance
Academic Performance Mean Standard Deviation
Verbal Description
1. English Speaking improves vocabulary and grammar
4.00 0.87 Agree
2. Helps participate in any oral activities 3.56 0.73
Agree
39
3. English speaking policy enhances writing and listening skills
3.67 0.71Agree
4. Helps me get good grades 3.67 0.71 Agree5. Speaking English enables me
to understand other subjects with English as the medium of instruction
3.67 0.71
Agree
6. English speaking improves my performance in other subjects
4.00 0.71Agree
7. English speaking enables me to understand written outputs in English.
3.89 0.93Agree
8. English speaking helps me in presenting reports in English.
3.56 1.00Agree
9. I can convey my ideas before my classmates in English. 3.78 0.67
Agree
10. English Speaking helps in enhancing my language proficiency.
3.67 0.87Agree
Overall mean 3.74 Agree
As shown in table 3, Item 1, English Speaking improves
vocabulary and grammar, got a mean of 4.00 with a standard
deviation of 0.87, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 2,
Helps participate in any oral activities, got a mean of 3.56 with
a standard deviation of 0.73, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 3, English speaking policy enhances writing and listening
skills, got a mean of 3.67 with a standard deviation of 0.71,
with a verbal description of Agree. Item 4, Helps me get good
grades, got a mean of 3.67 with a standard deviation of 0.71,
with a verbal description of Agree. Item 5, Speaking English
enables me to understand other subjects with English as the
40
medium of instruction, got a mean of 3.67 with a standard
deviation of 0.71, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 6,
English speaking improves my performance in other subjects, got a
mean of 4.00 with a standard deviation of 0.71, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 7, English speaking enables me to
understand written outputs in English, got a mean of 3.89 with a
standard deviation of 0.93, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 8, English speaking helps me in presenting reports in
English, got a mean of 3.56 with a standard deviation of 1.00,
with a verbal description of Agree. Item 9, I can convey my ideas
before my classmates in English, got a mean of 3.78 with a
standard deviation of 0.67, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 10, English Speaking helps in enhancing my language
proficiency, got a mean of 3.67 with a standard deviation of
0.87, with a verbal description of Agree.
As a summary, Item 1, English Speaking improves vocabulary
and grammar, and item 6, English speaking improves my performance
in other subjects, got the highest mean of 4.00 with a standard
deviation of 0.87 and 0.71 respectively, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 2, Helps participate in any oral
activities, and item 8, English speaking helps me in presenting
reports in English, got the lowest mean of 3.56 with standard
deviation of 0.73 and 1.00, respectively.
41
The perception of the high school respondents about the
impact of the English Speaking Policy in terms of their academic
performance got an over-all mean of 3.74, with a verbal
description of Agree.
Table 4 presents the mean distribution of the perception of
the college respondents towards the impact of the English
Speaking Policy in terms of their academic performance.
Table 4Mean Distribution of the College Respondents’ Perception on the
Impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology as to the Academic Performance
Academic Performance Mean Standard Deviation
Verbal Description
1. English Speaking improves vocabulary and grammar 4.06 0.94
Agree
2. Helps participate in any oral activities 3.83 0.89
Agree
3. English speaking policy 3.86 0.99 Agree
42
enhances writing and listening skills
4. Helps me get good grades 3.81 1.07 Agree5. Speaking English enables me to
understand other subjects with English as the medium of instruction
4.01 0.88
Agree
6. English speaking improves my performance in other subjects 4.06 0.79
Agree
7. English speaking enables me to understand written outputs in English.
3.91 0.97Agree
8. English speaking helps me in presenting reports in English. 3.96 0.90
Agree
9. I can convey my ideas before my classmates in English. 3.73 0.81
Agree
10. English Speaking helps in enhancing my language proficiency.
4.13 0.89Agree
Over-all mean 3.67 Agree
As shown in table 4, Item 1, English Speaking improves
vocabulary and grammar, got a mean of 4.06 with a standard
deviation of 0.94, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 2,
Helps participate in any oral activities, got a mean of 3.83 with
a standard deviation of 0.89, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 3, English speaking policy enhances writing and listening
skills, got a mean of 3.86 with a standard deviation of 0.99,
with a verbal description of Agree. Item 4, Helps me get good
grades, got a mean of 3.81 with a standard deviation of 1.07,
with a verbal description of Agree. Item 5, Speaking English
enables me to understand other subjects with English as the
medium of instruction, got a mean of 4.01 with a standard
deviation of 0.88, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 6,
43
English speaking improves my performance in other subjects, got a
mean of 4.06 with a standard deviation of 0.79, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 7, English speaking enables me to
understand written outputs in English, got a mean of 3.89 with a
standard deviation of 0.97, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 8, English speaking helps me in presenting reports in
English, got a mean of 3.96 with a standard deviation of 0.90,
with a verbal description of Agree. Item 9, I can convey my ideas
before my classmates in English, got a mean of 3.73 with a
standard deviation of 0.81, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 10, English Speaking helps in enhancing my language
proficiency, got a mean of 4.13 with a standard deviation of
0.89, with a verbal description of Agree.
As a summary, Item 10, English Speaking helps in enhancing
my language proficiency, got the highest mean of 4.13 with a
standard deviation of 0.89, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 9, I can convey my ideas before my classmates in English,
got the lowest mean of 3.73 with a standard deviation of 0.81,
with a verbal description of Agree.
The perception of the college respondents about the impact
of the English Speaking Policy in terms of their academic
performance got an over-all mean of 3.69, with a verbal
description of Agree.
44
Table 5 presents the mean distribution of the high school
respondents about the impact of the English Speaking Policy of
St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in relation to their
social relations.
Table 5Mean Distribution of the High School Respondents’ Perception on the Impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus
Institute of Technology as to Social Relations
Social Relations Mean Std. Deviation
Verbal Description
1. Communicate to people both local and foreign 4.11 0.93
Agree
2. I can speak English in front of other people 3.78 0.67
Agree
3. Shares ideas to other people using the English language 3.67 0.71
Agree
45
4. Helps me to socialize better with other people 3.44 0.73
Agree
5. I can understand other people who speak English. 3.33 0.87
Moderately Agree
6. I can translate English language to Filipino or our regional dialect.
3.89 0.93Agree
7. I can help others who have difficulty in English speaking.
3.44 1.13Agree
8. Through English speaking I can make new friends and acquaintances.
3.44 0.88Agree
9. English speaking helps me understand concepts conveyed by other people.
3.44 0.73Agree
10. I can become a good acquaintance to other people. 4.11 1.05
Agree
Over-all mean 3.67 Agree
As shown in table 5, Item 1, Communicate to people both
local and foreign, got a mean of 4.11 with a standard deviation
of 0.93, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 2, I can speak
English in front of other people, got a mean of 3.78 with a
standard deviation of 0.67, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 3, Shares ideas to other people using the English language,
got a mean of 3.67 with a standard deviation of 0.71, with a
verbal description of Agree. Item 4, Helps me to socialize better
with other people, got a mean of 3.44 with a standard deviation
of 0.73, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 5, I can
understand other people who speak English, got a mean of 3.33
with a standard deviation of 0.87, with a verbal description of
Moderately Agree. Item 6, I can translate English language to
46
Filipino or our regional dialect, got a mean of 3.89 with a
standard deviation of 0.93, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 7, I can help others who have difficulty in English
speaking, got a mean of 3.44 with a standard deviation of 1.13,
with a verbal description of Agree. Item 8, Through English
speaking I can make new friends and acquaintances, got a mean of
3.44 with a standard deviation of 0.88, with a verbal description
of Agree. Item 9, English speaking helps me understand concepts
conveyed by other people, got a mean of 3.44 with a standard
deviation of 0.73, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 10, I
can become a good acquaintance to other people, got a mean of
4.11 with a standard deviation of 1.05, with a verbal description
of Agree.
As a summary, Item 10, I can become a good acquaintance to
other people, and item 1, Communicate to people both local and
foreign got the highest mean of 4.11 with a standard deviation of
1.05 and 0.93 respectively, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 5, I can understand other people who speak English, got the
lowest mean of 3.33 with a standard deviation of 0.87, with a
verbal description of Moderately Agree.
The perception of the high school respondents about the
impact of the English Speaking Policy in terms of their social
47
relations got an over-all mean of 3.67, with a verbal description
of Agree.
Table 6 presents the mean distribution of the college
respondents’ perception towards the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in
terms of their social relations.
Table 6Mean Distribution of the College Respondents’ Perception on the
Impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology as to Social RelationsSocial Relations Mean Std.
DeviationVerbal
Description1. Communicate to people both
local and foreign 3.91 0.98Agree
2. I can speak English in front of other people 3.66 0.99
Agree
3. Shares ideas to other people using the English language 3.86 0.86
Agree
4. Helps me to socialize better 3.77 0.96 Agree
48
with other people5. I can understand other people
who speak English. 3.79 1.16Agree
6. I can translate English language to Filipino or our regional dialect.
3.63 1.04 Agree
7. I can help others who have difficulty in English speaking.
3.48 1.07
Agree
8. Through English speaking I can make new friends and acquaintances.
3.36 1.00Moderately
Agree
9. English speaking helps me understand concepts conveyed by other people.
3.67 1.05Agree
10. I can become a good acquaintance to other people. 3.77 0.93
Agree
Over-all mean 3.69 Agree
As shown in table 6, Item 1, Communicate to people both
local and foreign, got a mean of 3.91 with a standard deviation
of 0.98, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 2, I can speak
English in front of other people, got a mean of 3.67 with a
standard deviation of 0.99, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 3, Shares ideas to other people using the English language,
got a mean of 3.86 with a standard deviation of 0.86, with a
verbal description of Agree. Item 4, Helps me to socialize better
with other people, got a mean of 3.77 with a standard deviation
of 0.96, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 5, I can
understand other people who speak English, got a mean of 3.79
with a standard deviation of 1.16, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 6, I can translate English language to Filipino or
49
our regional dialect, got a mean of 3.63 with a standard
deviation of 1.03, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 7, I
can help others who have difficulty in English speaking, got a
mean of 3.48 with a standard deviation of 1.08, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 8, Through English speaking I can make
new friends and acquaintances, got a mean of 3.36 with a standard
deviation of 1.00, with a verbal description of Moderately Agree.
Item 9, English speaking helps me understand concepts conveyed by
other people, got a mean of 3.68 with a standard deviation of
1.06, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 10, I can become a
good acquaintance to other people, got a mean of 3.77 with a
standard deviation of 0.96, with a verbal description of Agree.
As a summary, Item 1, Communicate to people both local and
foreign got the highest mean of 3.91 with a standard deviation of
0.98 and with a verbal description of Agree. Item 8, Through
English speaking I can make new friends and acquaintances, got
the lowest mean of 3.36 with a standard deviation of 1.00, with a
verbal description of Moderately Agree.
The perception of the college respondents about the impact
of the English Speaking Policy in terms of their social relations
got an over-all mean of 3.69, with a verbal description of Agree.
Table 7 presents the mean distribution of the high school
respondents’ perception about impact of the English Speaking
50
Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in terms of
their personal development.
Table 7Mean Distribution of the High School Respondents’ Perception on the Impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus
Institute of Technology as to Personal Development
Personal Development Mean Std. Deviation
Verbal Description
1. Speaking English develops my self confidence. 4.00 0.87
Agree
2. I can speak English without hesitation. 3.11 0.60
Moderately Agree
3. I don’t experience stage fright or resentment because of speaking English.
3.33 0.71Moderately
Agree
4. I can speak English with a neutralized accent. 2.88 0.33
Moderately Agree
5. English speaking helps develop 3.33 1.00 Moderately
51
my self-esteem. Agree6. English speaking helps me
become a better person. 3.44 1.01Agree
7. I can reflect on principles/norms that are spoken or written in English.
3.00 1.32Moderately
Agree
8. English speaking helps me study efficiently. 3.11 1.05
Moderately Agree
9. I can make my ideas organized through English. 3.44 0.73
Agree
10. English speaking develops my self-efficacy. 3.78 0.97
Agree
Over-all mean 3.34 Moderately Agree
As shown in table 7, Item 1, Speaking English develops my
self confidence, got a mean of 4.00 with a standard deviation of
0.87, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 2, I can speak
English without hesitation, got a mean of 3.11 with a standard
deviation of 0.60, with a verbal description of Moderately Agree.
Item 3, I don’t experience stage fright or resentment because of
speaking English, got a mean of 3.33 with a standard deviation of
0.71, with a verbal description of Moderately Agree. Item 4, I
can speak English with a neutralized accent, got a mean of 2.88
with a standard deviation of 0.33, with a verbal description of
Moderately Agree. Item 5, English speaking helps develop my self-
esteem, got a mean of 3.33 with a standard deviation of 1.00,
with a verbal description of Moderately Agree. Item 6, English
speaking helps me become a better person, got a mean of 3.44 with
a standard deviation of 1.01, with a verbal description of Agree.
52
Item 7, I can reflect on principles/norms that are spoken or
written in English, got a mean of 3.00 with a standard deviation
of 1.32, with a verbal description of Moderately Agree. Item 8,
English speaking helps me study efficiently, got a mean of 3.11
with a standard deviation of 1.05, with a verbal description of
Moderately Agree. Item 9, I can organize my ideas through
English, got a mean of 3.44 with a standard deviation of 0.73,
with a verbal description of Agree. Item 10, English speaking
develops my self-efficacy, got a mean of 3.78 with a standard
deviation of 0.97, with a verbal description of Agree.
As a summary, Item 1, Speaking English develops my self
confidence, got the highest mean of 4.00 with a standard
deviation of 0.87, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 4, I
can speak English with a neutralized accent, got the lowest mean
of 2.88 with a standard deviation of 0.33, with a verbal
description of Moderately Agree.
The perception of the high school respondents about the
impact of the English Speaking Policy in terms of their personal
development got an over-all mean of 3.34, with a verbal
description of Moderately Agree.
Table 8 presents the mean distribution of the perception of
the college respondents about the impact of the English Speaking
53
Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in terms of
their personal development.
Table 8Mean Distribution of the College Respondents’ Perception on the
Impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology as to Personal Development
Personal Development Mean Std. Deviation
Verbal Description
1. Speaking English develops my self confidence. 4.09 1.07
Agree
2. I can speak English without hesitation. 3.53 0.86
Agree
3. I don’t experience stage fright or resentment because of speaking English.
3.30 0.92Moderately
Agree
4. I can speak English with a neutralized accent. 3.45 0.86
Agree
5. English speaking helps develop 3.89 0.99 Agree
54
my self-esteem.6. English speaking helps me
become a better person. 3.95 0.98Agree
7. I can reflect on principles/norms that are spoken or written in English.
3.60 0.98Agree
8. English speaking helps me study efficiently. 3.65 1.03
Agree
9. I can make my ideas organized through English. 3.70 0.94
Agree
10. English speaking develops my self-efficacy. 3.91 0.87
Agree
Over-all mean 3.71 Agree
As shown in table 8, Item 1, Speaking English develops my
self confidence, got a mean of 4.09 with a standard deviation of
1.07, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 2, I can speak
English without hesitation, got a mean of 3.53 with a standard
deviation of 0.86, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 3, I
don’t experience stage fright or resentment because of speaking
English, got a mean of 3.30 with a standard deviation of 0.92,
with a verbal description of Moderately Agree. Item 4, I can
speak English with a neutralized accent, got a mean of 3.45 with
a standard deviation of 0.86, with a verbal description of Agree.
Item 5, English speaking helps develop my self-esteem, got a mean
of 3.89 with a standard deviation of 0.99, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 6, English speaking helps me become a
better person, got a mean of 3.95 with a standard deviation of
0.98, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 7, I can reflect
on principles/norms that are spoken or written in English, got a
55
mean of 3.60 with a standard deviation of 0.98, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 8, English speaking helps me study
efficiently, got a mean of 3.65 with a standard deviation of
1.03, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 9, I can organize
my ideas through English, got a mean of 3.70 with a standard
deviation of 0.94, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 10,
English speaking develops my self-efficacy, got a mean of 3.91
with a standard deviation of 0.87, with a verbal description of
Agree.
As a summary, Item 1, Speaking English develops my self
confidence, got the highest mean of 4.09 with a standard
deviation of 1.07, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 3, I
don’t experience stage fright or resentment because of speaking
English, got the lowest mean of 3.30 with a standard deviation of
0.92, with a verbal description of Moderately Agree.
The perception of the college respondents about the impact
of the English Speaking Policy in terms of their personal
development got an over-all mean of 3.71, with a verbal
description of Agree.
Table 9 presents the tests of significant difference of the
high school respondents towards the impact of the English
Speaking Policy when grouped according to age.
56
Table 9The Test of Significant Difference on the High SchoolRespondents Perception on the Impact of the English
Speaking Policy When Grouped According AgeDependent Variables
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
AcademicPerformance
0.403 0.685 Accept Not Significant
Social Relations
1.022 0.415 Accept Not Significant
Personal Development
0.428 0.670 Accept Not Significant
*significant at 0.05
When the respondents were grouped according to age, the
perception of the high school respondents about the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology in relation to their academic performance, social
relations, and personal development, the p values were 0.685,
0.415, and 0.670, respectively, led the researchers to accept the
null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant difference on the
perception of the high school respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology when grouped according to age.
Table 10 presents the test of significant difference on the
perception of the high school respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy when grouped according to sex.
Table 10The Test of Significant Difference on the High SchoolRespondents Perception on the Impact of the English
Speaking Policy When Grouped According SexDependent Variable
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
Academic 0.134 0.725 Accept Not
57
Performance SignificantSocial
Relations0.15 0.906 Accept Not
SignificantPersonal
Development1.288 0.294 Accept Not
Significant*significant at 0.05
When the respondents were grouped according to sex, the high
school respondents’ perception on the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in
terms of their academic performance, social relations, and
personal development, the p values were 0.725, 0.906, 0.294,
respectively, led the researchers to accept the null hypothesis.
Thus, there is no significant difference in the perception of the
high school respondents on the impact of the English Speaking
Policy when grouped according to sex.
As to the language spoken at home, the null hypothesis
cannot be tested because; the high school respondents only speak
one language at home which is Surigaonon.
Table 11 presents the test of significant difference on the
perception of the high school respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy when grouped according to area of
residence.
Table 11The Test of Significant Difference on the High SchoolRespondents Perception on the Impact of the English
Speaking Policy When Grouped According to theArea of Residence
Dependent Variable
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
Academic 0.134 0.725 Accept Not
58
Performance SignificantSocial
Relations0.15 0.906 Accept Not
SignificantPersonal
Development1.288 0.294 Accept Not
Significant*significant at 0.05
When the respondents were grouped according to the area of
residence, the high school respondents’ perception on the impact
of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology in terms of their academic performance, social
relations, and personal development, the p values were 0.725,
0.906, 0.294, respectively, led the researchers to accept the
null hypothesis. Hence, there is no significant difference in the
perception of the high school respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy when grouped according to the area of
residence.
Table 12 presents the test of significant difference on the
perception of the high school respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy when grouped according to the elementary
school graduated from
Table 12The Test of Significant Difference on the High SchoolRespondents Perception on the Impact of the English
Speaking Policy When Grouped According to theElementary School Graduated From
Dependent Variable
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
AcademicPerformance
0.040 0.874 Accept Not Significant
Social Relations
0.116 0.744 Accept Not Significant
Personal Development
0.305 0.598 Accept Not Significant
59
*significant at 0.05
When the respondents were grouped according to elementary
school graduated from, the high school respondents’ perception on
the impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus
Institute of Technology in terms of their academic performance,
social relations, and personal development, the p values were
0.725, 0.906, 0.294, respectively, led the researchers to accept
the null hypothesis. Therefore, there is no significant
difference in the perception of the high school respondents on
the impact of the English Speaking Policy when grouped according
to elementary school graduated from.
Table 13 presents the test of significant difference on the
high school respondents’ perception on the impact of the English
Speaking Policy when grouped according to grade level.
Table 13The Test of Significant Difference on the High SchoolRespondents’ Perception on the Impact of the English
Speaking Policy when Grouped According To Grade Level
Dependent Variable
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
AcademicPerformance
0.134 0.725 Accept Not Significant
Social Relations
0.15 0.906 Accept Not Significant
Personal Development
1.288 0.294 Accept Not Significant
*significant at 0.05
60
When the respondents were grouped according to grade level,
the high school respondents’ perception on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology in terms of their academic performance, social
relations, and personal development, the p values were 0.847,
0.744, 0.598, respectively, led to acceptance of the null
hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant difference in the
perception of the high school respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy when grouped according to grade level.
Table 14 presents the test of significant difference of the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology when grouped according to age.
Table 14
The Test of Significant Difference on the CollegeRespondents Perception on the Impact Of The English Speaking Policy When
Grouped According To AgeDependent Variables
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
AcademicPerformance
0.814 0.519 Accept Not Significant
Social Relations
1.638 0.168 Accept Not Significant
Personal Development
0.988 0.416 Accept NotSignificant
When the respondents were grouped according to age, the
perception of the college respondents about the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
61
Technology in relation to their academic performance, social
relations, and personal development, the p values were 0.519,
0.168, and 0.416, respectively, led the researchers to accept the
null hypothesis. Hence, there is no significant difference on the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology when grouped according to age.
Table 15 presents the test of significant difference of the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology when grouped according to sex.
Table 15The Test of Significant Difference on the High School
Respondents’ Perception on the Impact of theEnglish Speaking Policy When Grouped
According to SexAcademic
Performance1.367 0.244 Accept Not
SignificantSocial
Relations1.703 0.194 Accept Not
Significant Personal
Development1.667 0.199 Accept Not
Significant*significant at 0.05
When the respondents were grouped according to sex, the
college respondents’ perception on the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in
terms of their academic performance, social relations, and
62
personal development, the p values were 0.244, 0.194, 0.199,
respectively, led to the acceptance of the null hypothesis. Thus,
there is no significant difference in the perception of the
college respondents on the impact of the English Speaking Policy
when grouped according to sex.
Table 16 presents the test of significant difference of the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology when grouped according to language spoken at home.
Table 16The Test of Significant Difference of the Perception of theCollege Respondents on the Impact of the English SpeakingPolicy When Grouped According to Language Spoken at Home
*significant at 0.05
When the respondents were grouped according to the language
spoken at home, the perception of the college respondents about
the impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus
Dependent Variable
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
AcademicPerformance
6.640 0.011 Reject Significant
Social Relations
5.878 0.017 Reject Significant
Personal Development
5.232 0.024 Reject Significant
63
Institute of Technology in terms of their academic performance,
social relations, and personal development, the p values were
0.011, 0.017, 0.024, respectively, led the researchers to reject
the null hypothesis. Thus there is a significant difference on
the college respondents’ perception about the impact of the
English Speaking Policy when grouped according to the language
spoken at home.
Table 17 presents the test of significant difference of the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology when grouped according to area of residence.
Table 17The Test of Significant Difference on the College
Respondents’ Perception on the Impact of theEnglish Speaking Policy When Grouped
According to Area of ResidenceDependent Variable
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
AcademicPerformance
0.500 0.481 Accept Not Significant
Social Relations
0.924 0.338 Accept Not Significant
Personal Development
0.663 0.417 Accept Not Significant
*significant at 0.05
When the respondents were grouped according to the area of
residence, the college respondents’ perception on the impact of
the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
64
Technology in terms of their academic performance, social
relations, and personal development, the p values were 0.481,
0.338, 0.417, respectively, led to the acceptance of the null
hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant difference in the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy when grouped according to the area of
residence.
Table 18 presents the test of significant difference of the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology when grouped according to the high school graduated
from.
Table 18The Test of Significant Difference on the College
Respondents’ Perception on the Impact of theEnglish Speaking Policy When Grouped
According to the High SchoolGraduated From
Dependent Variable
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
AcademicPerformance
2.170 0.143 Accept Not Significant
Social Relations
1.621 0.205 Accept Not Significant
PersonalDevelopment
0.412 0.522 Accept Not Significant
*significant at 0.05
When the respondents were grouped according to high school
graduated from, the college respondents’ perception on the impact
of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
65
Technology in terms of their academic performance, social
relations, and personal development, the p values were 0.143,
0.205, 0.522, respectively, led the researchers to accept the
null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant difference in the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy when grouped according to high school
graduated from.
Table 19 presents the test of significant difference of the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology when grouped according to course.
Table 19The Test of Significant Difference on the College
Respondents’ Perception on the Impact of theEnglish Speaking Policy When Grouped
According to Course Dependent Variable
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
AcademicPerformance
0.812 0.543 Accept Not Significant
Social Relations
1.422 0.220 Accept Not Significant
PersonalDevelopment
1.883 0.101 Accept Not Significant
*significant at 0.05
When the respondents were grouped according to course, the
college respondents’ perception on the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in
66
terms of their academic performance, social relations, and
personal development, the p values were 0.543, 0.220, 0.101,
respectively, led to acceptance of the null hypothesis. Thus,
there is no significant difference in the perception of the
college respondents on the impact of the English Speaking Policy
when grouped according to course.
Table 20 presents the test of significant difference of the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology when grouped according to year level.
Table 20The Test of Significant Difference on the College
Respondents’ Perception on the Impact of theEnglish Speaking Policy When Grouped
According to the Year LevelDependent Variable
F p-value Decision on HO
Conclusion
AcademicPerformance
0.141 0.708 Accept Not Significant
Social Relations
0.126 0.723 Accept Not Significant
Personal Development
0.264 0.608 Accept Not Significant
When the respondents were grouped according to year level,
the college respondents’ perception on the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in
terms of their academic performance, social relations, and
personal development, the p values were 0.708, 0.723, 0.608,
67
respectively, led the researchers to accept the null hypothesis.
Thus, there is no significant difference in the perception of the
college respondents on the impact of the English Speaking Policy
when grouped according to course.
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter summarizes the findings of the study. It also
drafts conclusions and recommendations based on the findings.
Summary
This study aimed to determine the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology to
the First Year and Second Year College and Grade Seven and Grade
Eight High School students of the institution.
To accomplish the goal of the study, the researchers made a
questionnaire to determine the perception of the chosen
respondents towards the impacts of the English Speaking Policy of
68
St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology. The first part of the
questionnaire was the profile of the respondents. The second part
was the research questionnaire which enumerates the impacts of
the English Speaking Policy in terms of their academic
performance, social relations and personal development. After the
formulation of the questionnaire which was validated by the
research experts, a survey was conducted to the sample, then the
data were collected and tallied.
To treat the data, the following methods were used:
Frequency Count and Percentage was used to analyze the profile of
the respondents. Arithmetic Mean and Standard Deviation was used
to analyze the perception of the respondents. Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) was used to determine whether the respondents’
perception about the impacts of the English Speaking Policy is
affected by their demographic profiles.
Findings
The following are the findings of the research study.
1. Table 1 showed that there were 9 high school respondents. 3
or (33.3%) were in the age 13 years old, 5 or (55.6%) were
in the age 15 years old, 1 or(11.1%) was in the age 15 years
old; As to sex, 5 or (55.6%) were males and 4 or (44.4%)
were females. As to the language spoken at home, 9 or
(100.0%) speak Surigaonon at home. As to the area of
69
residence, 4 or (44.4%) lived in the urban area, while 5 or
(55.6%) lived in the rural area. As to the elementary school
graduated from, 5 or (55.6%) graduated in Public Elementary
Schools while or 4 or (44.4%) graduated in Private
Elementary Schools. Furthermore, the table also shows that 5
or (55.6%) of the respondents were Grade 7 while 4 or
(44.4%) of them were Grade 8.
2. Table 2 showed that there were 142 college respondents. 8 or
(5.6%) out of 142 were in the age 16 years old, 43 or
(30.3%) respondents were in the age 17 years old, 38 or
(26.8%) of them were in the age 18 years old, 35 or (24.6%)
of them were in the age 19 years old and 18 or (12.7%) of
them were in the age 20 years old -above; As to sex, 59 or
(41.5%) were males and 83 or (58.5%) were females; As to the
language spoken at home, 116 or (81.7%) speak Surigaonon at
home while 26 or (18.3%) speak Visaya; As to the area of
residence, 115 or (81%) lived in the urban area, while 27
or(19%) lived in the rural are; As to the high school
graduated from, 125 or (88.0%) graduated from Public High
Schools while 17 or (12.0%) graduated from Private High
Schools. Furthermore, the table also showed that 21 or
(14.8%) of the respondents were taking BEED, 56 or (39.4%)
were taking BSCrim, 41 or (28.9%) were taking BSCA, 16 or
(11.3%) were taking BSBA, 6 or (4.2%) were taking BSIT, and
70
2 or (1.4%) were taking BSED. And also, 78 or (54.9%) were
First Year Students and 64 or (45.1%) were Second Year
Students.
3. As shown in table 3, Item 1, English Speaking improves
vocabulary and grammar, got a mean of 4.00 with a standard
deviation of 0.87, with a verbal description of Agree. Item
2, Helps participate in any oral activities, got a mean of
3.56 with a standard deviation of 0.73, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 3, English speaking policy
enhances writing and listening skills, got a mean of 3.67
with a standard deviation of 0.71, with a verbal description
of Agree. Item 4, Helps me get good grades, got a mean of
3.67 with a standard deviation of 0.71, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 5, Speaking English enables me to
understand other subjects with English as the medium of
instruction, got a mean of 3.67 with a standard deviation of
0.71, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 6, English
speaking improves my performance in other subjects, got a
mean of 4.00 with a standard deviation of 0.71, with a
verbal description of Agree. Item 7, English speaking
enables me to understand written outputs in English, got a
mean of 3.89 with a standard deviation of 0.93, with a
verbal description of Agree. Item 8, English speaking helps
me in presenting reports in English, got a mean of 3.56 with
71
a standard deviation of 1.00, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 9, I can convey my ideas before my classmates in
English, got a mean of 3.78 with a standard deviation of
0.67, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 10, English
Speaking helps in enhancing my language proficiency, got a
mean of 3.67 with a standard deviation of 0.87, with a
verbal description of Agree. As a summary, Item 1, English
Speaking improves vocabulary and grammar, and item 6,
English speaking improves my performance in other subjects,
got the highest mean of 4.00 with a standard deviation of
0.87 and 0.71 respectively, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 2, Helps participate in any oral activities, and
item 8, English speaking helps me in presenting reports in
English, got the lowest mean of 3.56 with standard deviation
of 0.73 and 1.00,respectively. The perception of the high
school respondents about the impact of the English Speaking
Policy in terms of their academic performance got an over-
all mean of 3.74, with a verbal description of Agree.
4. As shown in table 4, Item 1, English Speaking improves
vocabulary and grammar, got a mean of 4.06 with a standard
deviation of 0.94, with a verbal description of Agree. Item
2, Helps participate in any oral activities, got a mean of
3.83 with a standard deviation of 0.89, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 3, English speaking policy
72
enhances writing and listening skills, got a mean of 3.86
with a standard deviation of 0.99, with a verbal description
of Agree. Item 4, Helps me get good grades, got a mean of
3.81 with a standard deviation of 1.07, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 5, Speaking English enables me to
understand other subjects with English as the medium of
instruction, got a mean of 4.01 with a standard deviation of
0.88, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 6, English
speaking improves my performance in other subjects, got a
mean of 4.06 with a standard deviation of 0.79, with a
verbal description of Agree. Item 7, English speaking
enables me to understand written outputs in English, got a
mean of 3.89 with a standard deviation of 0.97, with a
verbal description of Agree. Item 8, English speaking helps
me in presenting reports in English, got a mean of 3.96 with
a standard deviation of 0.90, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 9, I can convey my ideas before my classmates in
English, got a mean of 3.73 with a standard deviation of
0.81, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 10, English
Speaking helps in enhancing my language proficiency, got a
mean of 4.13 with a standard deviation of 0.89, with a
verbal description of Agree. As a summary, Item 10, English
Speaking helps in enhancing my language proficiency, got the
highest mean of 4.13 with a standard deviation of 0.89, with
73
a verbal description of Agree. Item 9, I can convey my ideas
before my classmates in English, got the lowest mean of 3.73
with a standard deviation of 0.81, with a verbal description
of Agree. The perception of the college respondents about
the impact of the English Speaking Policy in terms of their
academic performance got an over-all mean of 3.69, with a
verbal description of Agree.
5. As shown in table 5, Item 1, Communicate to people both
local and foreign, got a mean of 4.11 with a standard
deviation of 0.93, with a verbal description of Agree. Item
2, I can speak English in front of other people, got a mean
of 3.78 with a standard deviation of 0.67, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 3, Shares ideas to other people
using the English language, got a mean of 3.67 with a
standard deviation of 0.71, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 4, Helps me to socialize better with other
people, got a mean of 3.44 with a standard deviation of
0.73, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 5, I can
understand other people who speak English, got a mean of
3.33 with a standard deviation of 0.87, with a verbal
description of Moderately Agree. Item 6, I can translate
English language to Filipino or our regional dialect, got a
mean of 3.89 with a standard deviation of 0.93, with a
verbal description of Agree. Item 7, I can help others who
74
have difficulty in English speaking, got a mean of 3.44 with
a standard deviation of 1.13, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 8, Through English speaking I can make new
friends and acquaintances, got a mean of 3.44 with a
standard deviation of 0.88, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 9, English speaking helps me understand concepts
conveyed by other people, got a mean of 3.44 with a standard
deviation of 0.73, with a verbal description of Agree. Item
10, I can become a good acquaintance to other people, got a
mean of 4.11 with a standard deviation of 1.05, with a
verbal description of Agree. As a summary, Item 10, I can
become a good acquaintance to other people, and item 1,
Communicate to people both local and foreign got the highest
mean of 4.11 with a standard deviation of 1.05 and 0.93
respectively, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 5, I
can understand other people who speak English, got the
lowest mean of 3.33 with a standard deviation of 0.87, with
a verbal description of Moderately Agree. The perception of
the high school respondents about the impact of the English
Speaking Policy in terms of their social relations got an
over-all mean of 3.67, with a verbal description of Agree.
6. As shown in table 6, Item 1, Communicate to people both
local and foreign, got a mean of 3.91 with a standard
deviation of 0.98, with a verbal description of Agree. Item
75
2, I can speak English in front of other people, got a mean
of 3.67 with a standard deviation of 0.99, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 3, Shares ideas to other people
using the English language, got a mean of 3.86 with a
standard deviation of 0.86, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 4, Helps me to socialize better with other
people, got a mean of 3.77 with a standard deviation of
0.96, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 5, I can
understand other people who speak English, got a mean of
3.79 with a standard deviation of 1.16, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 6, I can translate English
language to Filipino or our regional dialect, got a mean of
3.63 with a standard deviation of 1.03, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 7, I can help others who have
difficulty in English speaking, got a mean of 3.48 with a
standard deviation of 1.08, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 8, Through English speaking I can make new
friends and acquaintances, got a mean of 3.36 with a
standard deviation of 1.00, with a verbal description of
Moderately Agree. Item 9, English speaking helps me
understand concepts conveyed by other people, got a mean of
3.68 with a standard deviation of 1.06, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 10, I can become a good
acquaintance to other people, got a mean of 3.77 with a
76
standard deviation of 0.96, with a verbal description of
Agree. As a summary, Item 1, Communicate to people both
local and foreign got the highest mean of 3.91 with a
standard deviation of 0.98 and with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 8, Through English speaking I can make new
friends and acquaintances, got the lowest mean of 3.36 with
a standard deviation of 1.00, with a verbal description of
Moderately Agree. The perception of the college respondents
about the impact of the English Speaking Policy in terms of
their social relations got an over-all mean of 3.69, with a
verbal description of Agree.
7. As shown in table 7, Item 1, Speaking English develops my
self confidence, got a mean of 4.00 with a standard
deviation of 0.87, with a verbal description of Agree. Item
2, I can speak English without hesitation, got a mean of
3.11 with a standard deviation of 0.60, with a verbal
description of Moderately Agree. Item 3, I don’t experience
stage fright or resentment because of speaking English, got
a mean of 3.33 with a standard deviation of 0.71, with a
verbal description of Moderately Agree. Item 4, I can speak
English with a neutralized accent, got a mean of 2.88 with a
standard deviation of 0.33, with a verbal description of
Moderately Agree. Item 5, English speaking helps develop my
self-esteem, got a mean of 3.33 with a standard deviation of
77
1.00, with a verbal description of Moderately Agree. Item 6,
English speaking helps me become a better person, got a mean
of 3.44 with a standard deviation of 1.01, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 7, I can reflect on
principles/norms that are spoken or written in English, got
a mean of 3.00 with a standard deviation of 1.32, with a
verbal description of Moderately Agree. Item 8, English
speaking helps me study efficiently, got a mean of 3.11 with
a standard deviation of 1.05, with a verbal description of
Moderately Agree. Item 9, I can organize my ideas through
English, got a mean of 3.44 with a standard deviation of
0.73, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 10, English
speaking develops my self-efficacy, got a mean of 3.78 with
a standard deviation of 0.97, with a verbal description of
Agree. As a summary, Item 1, Speaking English develops my
self confidence, got the highest mean of 4.00 with a
standard deviation of 0.87, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 4, I can speak English with a neutralized
accent, got the lowest mean of 2.88 with a standard
deviation of 0.33, with a verbal description of Moderately
Agree. The perception of the high school respondents about
the impact of the English Speaking Policy in terms of their
personal development got an over-all mean of 3.34, with a
verbal description of Moderately Agree.
78
8. As shown in table 8, Item 1, Speaking English develops my
self confidence, got a mean of 4.09 with a standard
deviation of 1.07, with a verbal description of Agree. Item
2, I can speak English without hesitation, got a mean of
3.53 with a standard deviation of 0.86, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 3, I don’t experience stage
fright or resentment because of speaking English, got a mean
of 3.30 with a standard deviation of 0.92, with a verbal
description of Moderately Agree. Item 4, I can speak English
with a neutralized accent, got a mean of 3.45 with a
standard deviation of 0.86, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 5, English speaking helps develop my self-
esteem, got a mean of 3.89 with a standard deviation of
0.99, with a verbal description of Agree. Item 6, English
speaking helps me become a better person, got a mean of 3.95
with a standard deviation of 0.98, with a verbal description
of Agree. Item 7, I can reflect on principles/norms that are
spoken or written in English, got a mean of 3.60 with a
standard deviation of 0.98, with a verbal description of
Agree. Item 8, English speaking helps me study efficiently,
got a mean of 3.65 with a standard deviation of 1.03, with a
verbal description of Agree. Item 9, I can organize my ideas
through English, got a mean of 3.70 with a standard
deviation of 0.94, with a verbal description of Agree. Item
79
10, English speaking develops my self-efficacy, got a mean
of 3.91 with a standard deviation of 0.87, with a verbal
description of Agree. As a summary, Item 1, Speaking English
develops my self confidence, got the highest mean of 4.09
with a standard deviation of 1.07, with a verbal description
of Agree. Item 3, I don’t experience stage fright or
resentment because of speaking English, got the lowest mean
of 3.30 with a standard deviation of 0.92, with a verbal
description of Moderately Agree. The perception of the
college respondents about the impact of the English Speaking
Policy in terms of their personal development got an over-
all mean of 3.71, with a verbal description of Agree.
9. As shown in table 9, when the respondents were grouped
according to age, the perception of the high school
respondents about the impact of the English Speaking Policy
of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in relation to
their academic performance, social relations, and personal
development, the p values were 0.685, 0.415, and 0.670,
respectively, led the researchers to accept the null
hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant difference on the
perception of the high school respondents on the impact of
the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute
of Technology when grouped according to age.
80
10. When the respondents were grouped according to sex, the
high school respondents’ perception on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology in terms of their academic performance, social
relations, and personal development, the p values were
0.725, 0.906, 0.294, respectively, led the researchers to
accept the null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant
difference in the perception of the high school respondents
on the impact of the English Speaking Policy when grouped
according to sex.
11. As to the language spoken at home, the null hypothesis
cannot be tested because; the high school respondents only
speak one language at home which is Surigaonon.
12. As shown in table 11, when the respondents were grouped
according to the area of residence, the high school
respondents’ perception on the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology
in terms of their academic performance, social relations,
and personal development, the p values were 0.725, 0.906,
0.294, respectively, led the researchers to accept the null
hypothesis. Hence, there is no significant difference in the
perception of the high school respondents on the impact of
the English Speaking Policy when grouped according to the
area of residence.
81
13. As shown in table 12, When the respondents were grouped
according to elementary school graduated from, the high
school respondents’ perception on the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology
in terms of their academic performance, social relations,
and personal development, the p values were 0.725, 0.906,
0.294, respectively, led the researchers to accept the null
hypothesis. Therefore, there is no significant difference in
the perception of the high school respondents on the impact
of the English Speaking Policy when grouped according to
elementary school graduated from.
14. As shown in table 13, when the respondents were grouped
according to grade level, the high school respondents’
perception on the impact of the English Speaking Policy of
St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in terms of their
academic performance, social relations, and personal
development, the p values were 0.847, 0.744, 0.598,
respectively, led to acceptance of the null hypothesis.
Thus, there is no significant difference in the perception
of the high school respondents on the impact of the English
Speaking Policy when grouped according to grade level.
15. As shown in table 14, when the respondents were grouped
according to age, the perception of the college respondents
about the impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude
82
Thaddeus Institute of Technology in relation to their
academic performance, social relations, and personal
development, the p values were 0.519, 0.168, and 0.416,
respectively, led the researchers to accept the null
hypothesis. Hence, there is no significant difference on the
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of
Technology when grouped according to age.
16. As shown in table 15, when the respondents were grouped
according to sex, the college respondents’ perception on the
impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus
Institute of Technology in terms of their academic
performance, social relations, and personal development, the
p values were 0.244, 0.194, 0.199, respectively, led to the
acceptance of the null hypothesis. Thus, there is no
significant difference in the perception of the college
respondents on the impact of the English Speaking Policy
when grouped according to sex.
17. As shown in table 16, when the respondents were grouped
according to the language spoken at home, the perception of
the college respondents about the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology
in terms of their academic performance, social relations,
and personal development, the p values were 0.011, 0.017,
83
0.024, respectively, led the researchers to reject the null
hypothesis. Thus there is a significant difference on the
college respondents’ perception about the impact of the
English Speaking Policy when grouped according to the
language spoken at home.
18. As shown in table 17, when the respondents were grouped
according to the area of residence, the college respondents’
perception on the impact of the English Speaking Policy of
St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology in terms of their
academic performance, social relations, and personal
development, the p values were 0.481, 0.338, 0.417,
respectively, led to the acceptance of the null hypothesis.
Thus, there is no significant difference in the perception
of the college respondents on the impact of the English
Speaking Policy when grouped according to the area of
residence.
19. As shown in table 18, when the respondents were grouped
according to high school graduated from, the college
respondents’ perception on the impact of the English
Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology
in terms of their academic performance, social relations,
and personal development, the p values were 0.143, 0.205,
0.522, respectively, led the researchers to accept the null
hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant difference in the
84
perception of the college respondents on the impact of the
English Speaking Policy when grouped according to high
school graduated from.
20. As shown in table 19, when the respondents were grouped
according to course, the college respondents’ perception on
the impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude
Thaddeus Institute of Technology in terms of their academic
performance, social relations, and personal development, the
p values were 0.543, 0.220, 0.101, respectively, led to
acceptance of the null hypothesis. Thus, there is no
significant difference in the perception of the college
respondents on the impact of the English Speaking Policy
when grouped according to course.
21. As shown in table 20, when the respondents were grouped
according to year level, the college respondents’ perception
on the impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude
Thaddeus Institute of Technology in terms of their academic
performance, social relations, and personal development, the
p values were 0.708, 0.723, 0.608, respectively, led the
researchers to accept the null hypothesis. Thus, there is no
significant difference in the perception of the college
respondents on the impact of the English Speaking Policy
when grouped according to course.
Conclusions
85
Based on the findings presented, the following conclusions
have been derived:
1. All or (100%) of the high school respondents speak
Surigaonon; Majority or (81.7%) of the College Respondents
speak Surigaonon.
2. As to the high school respondents’ academic performance,
Item 1, English Speaking improves vocabulary and grammar,
and item 6, English speaking improves my performance in
other subjects, got the highest mean of 4.00 with a standard
deviation of 0.87 and 0.71 respectively, with a verbal
description of Agree. Item 2, Helps participate in any oral
activities, and item 8, English speaking helps me in
presenting reports in English, got the lowest mean of 3.56
with standard deviation of 0.73 and 1.00, respectively. The
perception of the high school respondents about the impact
of the English Speaking Policy in terms of their academic
performance got an over-all mean of 3.74, with a verbal
description of Agree.
3. As to the college respondents’ academic performance, Item
10, English Speaking helps in enhancing my language
proficiency, got the highest mean of 4.13 with a standard
deviation of 0.89, with a verbal description of Agree. Item
9, I can convey my ideas before my classmates in English,
got the lowest mean of 3.73 with a standard deviation of
86
0.81, with a verbal description of Agree. The perception of
the college respondents about the impact of the English
Speaking Policy in terms of their academic performance got
an over-all mean of 3.69, with a verbal description of
Agree.
4. As to the high school respondents’ social relations, Item
10, I can become a good acquaintance to other people, and
item 1, Communicate to people both local and foreign got the
highest mean of 4.11 with a standard deviation of 1.05 and
0.93 respectively, with a verbal description of Agree. Item
5, I can understand other people who speak English, got the
lowest mean of 3.33 with a standard deviation of 0.87, with
a verbal description of Moderately Agree. The perception of
the high school respondents about the impact of the English
Speaking Policy in terms of their social relations got an
over-all mean of 3.67, with a verbal description of Agree.
5. As to the college respondents’ social relations, Item 1,
Communicate to people both local and foreign got the highest
mean of 3.91 with a standard deviation of 0.98 and with a
verbal description of Agree. Item 8, Through English
speaking I can make new friends and acquaintances, got the
lowest mean of 3.36 with a standard deviation of 1.00, with
a verbal description of Moderately Agree. The perception of
the college respondents about the impact of the English
87
Speaking Policy in terms of their social relations got an
over-all mean of 3.69, with a verbal description of Agree.
6. As to the high school respondents’ personal development,
English Speaking Policy has great impact in developing their
self confidence, while it has less impact in enabling them
to speak with a neutralized accent.
7. As to the college respondents’ personal development, Item 1,
Speaking English develops my self confidence, got the
highest mean of 4.00 with a standard deviation of 0.87, with
a verbal description of Agree. Item 4, I can speak English
with a neutralized accent, got the lowest mean of 2.88 with
a standard deviation of 0.33, with a verbal description of
Moderately Agree. The perception of the high school
respondents about the impact of the English Speaking Policy
in terms of their personal development got an over-all mean
of 3.34, with a verbal description of Moderately Agree.
8. As to the high school respondents’ age, sex, area of
residence, elementary school graduated from, and grade
level; the high school respondents have the same perception
on the impact of the English Speaking Policy.
9. As to the high school respondents’ language spoken at home,
the significant difference cannot be determined because the
high school respondents speak Surigaonon at home.
88
10. As to the college respondents’ perception on the impact
of the Englihs speaking policy when they are grouped
according to age, sex, area of residence, high school
graduated from, course, and year level, there is no
significant difference when the respondents are grouped
according to age, sex, area of residence, high school
graduated from, course, and year level
11. As to the college respondents’ perception when they are
grouped according to their language spoken at home, there is
a significant difference on the college respondents’
perception about the impact of the English Speaking Policy
when grouped according to the language spoken at home.
Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusions, the following
recommendations have been suggested.
1. As to the high school respondents’ academic performance, the
high school students are encouraged to speak English in
presenting reports, answers and the like.
2. As to the high school respondents’ academic performance,
teachers should encourage their students to speak English
during oral participation.
3. As to the college respondents’ academic performance, college
instructors should let the students convey their ideas in
English during class discussion.
89
4. As to the high school respondents’ social relations,
students are encouraged to read articles, books and other
reading materials to improve their vocabulary and grammar
skills, and view English movies so that the level of their
understanding of the English language would increase.
5. As to the college respondents’ social relations, when they
make new friends and acquaintances, students should speak
English in starting conversations.
6. As to the high school respondents’ personal development,
during reading activities, students are encouraged to read
aloud with proper pronunciation of words. They should mimic
audio materials that express proper pronunciation of English
words.
7. As to the college respondents’ personal development, events,
such as ECLP/English Week, which encourage students to speak
English, should be held occasionally. Students should have
the opportunity to join these events to expose them in
speaking in front of others.
Proposed Enhancement Program
This proposed Enhancement Program is designed to heighten
the impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus
Institute of Technology. This is recommended to the
administration, faculty and staff of the aforementioned
institution.
90
Rationale
The Enhancement Program on the English Speaking Policy of
St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology will help the
administration, faculty, and staff of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute
of Technology in terms of increasing the impact of the English
Speaking Policy to the students of the aforementioned
institution.
Objectives
This proposed Enhancement Program aims to:
1. Provide avenues for English Language proficiency among
students.
2. Promote English speaking inside the campus.
Plan Description
The Enhancement Program consists of the following
activities:
Designate students to act as monitors to have wider
scope of the policy implementation.
Conduct activities, such as ECLP/English Day/Week, to
promote English speaking.
Conduct film showing/reading activities to improve
vocabulary and grammar.
91
Evaluate current policy guidelines to ensure better
implementation.
Analyze the result of the enhancement program for more
improvements.
Evaluation
The proposed enhancement program will be evaluated in the
following year after its implementation. An instrument will be
used to assist its evaluation.
92
An Enhancement Program on the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology, Surigao City
Areas of
Concern
Objectives Strategy Responsible
Person
Resources
Designation of Student Monitors
To assign students to
act as monitors to implement the policy.
Evaluation and
Selection of
Student
Monitors
ELCP Director ELCP Director
Orientation of Student Monitors
To orient the
designated student
monitors of their
responsibi-lities.
Orientation/Seminar
ELCP Director ECLP Director
Weekly Film Showing/Reading Activity
To conduct weekly film showing/reading activeties to improve vocabu-lary and grammar.
Film Showing, Reading Booster,
Vocabulary Journal, Spelling Booster
English Instructors,
ECLP Instructors
English Instructors, ECLP Instructo
rs
Organization of Events that promote English Speaking
To organize events that promote English speaking
ECLP/English Day/Week
ECLP Director/Engli
sh Club Adviser
ECLP Director/English Club
Adviser
Student to student interaction for Learning
To promote student to student interaction
Peer Teaching English Instructors, Peer Tutor
English Instructors, Peer Tutor
93
English to learn the English language
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Isabel Pefianco Martin: Diffusion and directions: English language policy in the Philippines (2012)
Law
14th Congress of the Republic of the Philippines. 2008. An Act Establishing a Multi-lingual Education and Literacy Program (House Bill 3719)
.Online Sources
Arroyo, G. 2003. Establishing the Policy to Strengthen the Use of the English Language as a Medium of Instruction in the Educational System. Executive Order No. 210, 17 May 2003.<http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/index10.php?doctype=Executive+Orders&docid=a45475a11ec72b843d74959b60fd7bd645f73003691a4> (11 May 2011).
Periodicals and Journals
Arroyo, G. 2001. State of the Nation Address at the Opening of Congress, Batasang Pambansa, Quezon City on 23 July 2001.
Arroyo, G. 2006. State of the Nation Address at the Opening of Congress, Batasang Pambansa, Quezon City on 24 July 2006.
Arroyo, G. 2007. State of the Nation Address at the Opening of Congress, Batasang Pambansa, Quezon City on 23 July 2007.
Unpublished Works
Estioko, L. 1994. History of Education: A Filipino Perspective. Manila: Society of Divine Word.
94
Fernandez, D. 2009. he Red Carabao. In How, How the Carabao: Tales of Teaching English in the Philippines, I.P. Martin (ed), 21–24. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Loyola Schools.Gonzales, A. 1996. Language and nationalism in the Philippines: An update. In Readings in Philippine Sociolinguistics, M.L.S. Bautista (ed), 228–239. Manila: DLSU Press.
“APPENDIX A”
St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of TechnologySurigao City
February 17, 2015
MAYLONA B. PALENVice President for Academic AffairsThis Institution
Ma’am:
We are currently conducting the research study entitled “A Study on the Impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology As Perceived by the First Year and Second Year College and Grade Seven and Grade Eight High School Students of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology, Surigao City: A Basis for An Enhancement Program”.
In view of this, we would like to request your good office to allow us to administer our research questionnaires to the aforementioned respondents of the study.
Your approval will contribute to the accomplishment of this study. Thank you.
Respectfully,
DONNARD T. LASTIMOSAResearch Group Leader
Approved by:
95
MAYLONA B. PALENVice President for Academic Affairs
“APPENDIX B”Research Questionnaire
A Study on the Impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology As Perceived by the First Year
and Second Year College Students and Grade Seven and Grade Eight High School Students of St. Jude Thaddeus
Institute of Technology, Surigao City: A Basis for an Enhancement Program
I. Profile of the Respondents
Name: _____________________(optional)
Grade Level (High School): Year Level (College):( ) Grade Seven ( ) First Year( ) Grade Eight ( ) Second Year
Age(High School):
( ) 11 years old( ) 12 years old( ) 13 years old( ) 14 years old( ) 15 years old
Age (College):
( ) 16 years old( ) 17 years old( ) 18 years old( ) 19 years old( ) 20- above
Language Spoken at Home:
( ) Surigaonon( ) Tagalog( ) Visayan( ) English
Course:( ) BEED( ) BSED( ) BSCrim( ) BSCA( ) BSBA( ) BSIT
Sex: Type of Elementary/High School School Graduated From:
96
( ) Male( ) Female
Area of Residence:
( ) Urban( ) Rural
( ) Public( ) Private
II. Research Questionnaire
Direction: Rate the following Impact of English Speaking Policy using the scale below. Put a check on the rating.
5 – Strongly Agree4 – Agree 3 – Moderately Agree2 – Disagree1 – Strongly Disagree
IMPACT OF ENGLISH SPEAKING POLICY 5 4 3 2 1Academic Performance
11. English Speaking improves vocabulary and grammar12. Helps participate in any oral activities13. English speaking policy enhances writing and
listening skills14. Helps me get good grades15. Speaking English enables me to understand other
subjects with English as the medium of instruction
16. English speaking improves my performance in other subjects
17. English speaking enables me to understand written outputs in English.
18. English speaking helps me in presenting reports in English.
19. I can convey my ideas before my classmates in English.
20. English Speaking helps in enhancing my language proficiency.
Social Relations11. Communicate to people both local and foreign12. I can speak English in front of other people13. Shares ideas to other people using the English
language14. Helps me to socialize better with other people15. I can understand other people who speak English.
16. I can translate English language to Filipino or our regional dialect.
17. I can help others who have difficulty in English speaking.
97
18. Through English speaking I can make new friends and acquaintances.
19. English speaking helps me understand concepts conveyed by other people.
20. I can become a good acquaintance to other people.Personal Development
11. Speaking English develops my self confidence.12. I can speak English without hesitation.13. I don’t experience stage fright or resentment
because of speaking English.14. I can speak English with a neutralized accent.15. English speaking helps develop my self-esteem.16. English speaking helps me become a better person.
17. I can reflect on principles/norms that are spoken or written in English.
18. English speaking helps me study efficiently.19. I can make my ideas organized through English.20. English speaking develops my self-efficacy.
98
“APPENDIX C”
ENHANCEMENT
PROGRAM
99
Proposed Enhancement Program
This proposed Enhancement Program is designed to heighten
the impact of the English Speaking Policy of St. Jude Thaddeus
Institute of Technology. This is recommended to the
administration, faculty and staff of the aforementioned
institution.
Rationale
The Enhancement Program on the English Speaking Policy of
St. Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology will help the
administration, faculty, and staff of St. Jude Thaddeus Institute
of Technology in terms of increasing the impact of the English
Speaking Policy to the students of the aforementioned
institution.
Objectives
This proposed Enhancement Program aims to:
1. Provide avenues for English Language proficiency among
students.
2. Promote English speaking inside the campus.
100
Plan Description
The Enhancement Program consists of the following
activities:
Designate students to act as monitors to have wider
scope of the policy implementation.
Conduct activities, such as ECLP/English Day/Week, to
promote English speaking.
Conduct film showing/reading activities to improve
vocabulary and grammar.
Evaluate current policy guidelines to ensure better
implementation.
Analyze the result of the enhancement program for more
improvements.
Evaluation
The proposed enhancement program will be evaluated in the
following year after its implementation. An instrument will be
used to assist its evaluation.
101
An Enhancement Program for the English Speaking Policy of St.Jude Thaddeus Institute of Technology, Surigao City
Areas of
Concern
Objectives Strategy Responsible
Person
Resources
Designation of Student Monitors
To assign students to
act as monitors to implement the policy.
Evaluation and
Selection of
Student
Monitors
ELCP Director General Fund
Orientation of Student Monitors
To orient the
designated student
monitors of their
responsibi-lities.
Orientation/Seminar
ELCP Director General Fund
Weekly Film Showing/Reading Activity
To conduct weekly film showing/reading activeties to improve vocabu-lary and grammar.
Film Showing, Reading Booster,
Vocabulary Journal, Spelling Booster
English Instructors,
ECLP Instructors
General Fund
Organization of Events that promote English Speaking
To organize events that promote English speaking
ECLP/English Day/Week
ECLP Director/Engli
sh Club Adviser
General Fund
Student to student interaction for Learning English
To promote student to student interaction to learn the
Peer Teaching English Instructors, Peer Tutor
General Fund
102
English language
CURRICULUM VITAE
NAME : DONNARD TIGBAS LASTIMOSA
DATE OF BIRTH : APRIL 16, 1994
PLACE OF BIRTH : SURIGAO PROVINCIAL HOSPITAL
ADDRESS : NAVARRO ST., SURIGAO CITY
FATHER’S NAME : JOEY A. LASTIMOSA
MOTHER’S NAME : ROSELYN T. LASTIMOSA
FATHER’S OCCUPATION : DANCE INSTRUCTOR
MOTHER’S OCCUPATION : PROFESSIONAL TEACHER
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
TERTIARY : ST. JUDE THADDEUS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
SECONDARY : ST. JUDE THADDEUS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
ELEMENTARY: MARIANO ESPINA MEMORIAL CENTRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
103
CURRICULUM VITAE
NAME : ANDRES S. MALUÑAS, JR.
DATE OF BIRTH :
PLACE OF BIRTH :
ADDRESS :
FATHER’S NAME :
MOTHER’S NAME :
FATHER’S OCCUPATION :
MOTHER’S OCCUPATION :
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
TERTIARY : ST. JUDE THADDEUS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
SECONDARY :
ELEMENTARY: