Abstract

A survey was conducted to the BSED4 students in their opinions about four-day

class schedule at SLSU- San Juan. The data was gathered by running questionnaires.

Most of the respondents agreed in the four-day class schedule. They have their

own opinions of the advantages and disadvantages of the said implementation. Some of

them answered that they are pressured because of loaded subjects. And for those who

agreed, they stated that they can make use of the free-day for the accomplishment of their

projects or research works which is better for them.

I. INTRODUCTION

In a daring move to lessen transportation expenses on the part of the students, and

to cut its own operational cost, four-day class was implemented in Envarga

University. It automatically affects the prices of basic commodities such as water and

electricity (Manuel S. Envarga, 2005-2006). Furthermore, the University President

proposed for the adoption of the four-day class per week by four campuses of SLSU

( Bontoc, Hinunangan, San Juan and Sogod) for purposes of providing faculty and

staff one day free of academic subjects for research activity. The said scheme will

help faculty and students become more dynamic and productive not only in

academics but more importantly in research, by the Resolution No. 101 s. 2006.

Particularly it answers the following questions:

1. Do you like the four-day class?

2. Explain why?
 a. Reasons for saying yes.

b. Reasons for saying no.

3. If the answer to question no one is yes, do you like to have the free day on a

Wednesday?

4. If not on Wednesday, on what day would you like the free day to fall?

5. What advantages and disadvantages have you experienced from the

implementation of the new schedule?

The significance of the study is to find out the percentage of our respondents of who

agreed or not in the four-day class implementation. This study focuses on the data of

BSED4 students in SLSU- San Juan campus because the respondents are divided by a

group of researchers (A.Y. 2006-2007). The data that is being collected is confidential

and is the basis of the study.

II. METHODOLOGY

• Research Design

The research was about four-day class which is conducted to BSED4

students at SLSU- San Juan. In gathering the data of this study, the

descriptive survey research design was used (Mason and Bramble, 1989;

McMillan and Schumacher, 1993).

• Research Locale

The research was conducted at the SLSU- San Juan campus. The San Juan

campus is one of the branches of SLSU- Sogod which is the main campus.

• The Sample

The respondents are 70% of the population of the BSED4 students at

SLSU- San Juan.

• The Research Instrument

The researchers used questionnaires in order to know the respondents

opinions about the four-day class schedule. SPSS program were also used

in finding all the measurements that can be used in the survey.

• Data Collection Technique

As soon as the respondents were identified, the researcher ran a survey

questionnaire to determine the opinions of the respondents. The

researchers personally approached the subjects to ask them to fill out the

questionnaire and collected it upon accomplishing the questionnaire.

• Data Analysis Procedure/ Statistical Technique

The study used mean, median, mode, minimum, maximum, range,

standard deviation, frequencies and percentage for interval or ratio data.

While for nominal data, frequencies, percentage, mode and CHI- square

was used.
 Opinions of BSED4 students in the
Four-day class schedule

__________________________

A Research Paper Presented to the faculty of

Southern Leyte State University (SLSU)

__________________________

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for Math 5

_________________________

By:
Buctot, Maylyn
Cuta, Donna Mae
Elicot, Anne
Martinez, Charles Nicolas
Resare, Myrna
March 2007
III. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

1. Profile of the Respondents

Statistics

Like to have
Like the Reasons for Reasons for free day on Like free Disadvant
Gender Civilstat Course 4day class saying yes saying no wednesday day to fall Advantages ages
N Valid 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 1.77 1.03 1.00 1.27 2.87 2.50 1.63 4.80 4.17 3.87
Median 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 2.50 3.00
Mode 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 5 2 3
Std. Deviation .43 .18 .00 .45 2.16 .86 .89 .76 2.78 2.22
Variance .19 3.33E-02 .00 .20 4.67 .74 .79 .58 7.73 4.95
Skewness -1.328 5.477 1.112 .601 -1.215 .825 -4.665 .414 .381
Std. Error of Skewness .427 .427 .427 .427 .427 .427 .427 .427 .427 .427
Range 1 1 0 1 5 2 2 4 7 6
Minimum 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Maximum 2 2 1 2 6 3 3 5 8 7

Most of the respondents were females and there is only one married out of the 30 respondents. There are 73.3% of the
respondents like the four-day class schedule as shown in table 1.0. It means there is a significant difference in the opinions of the
BSED4 students about the four-day class since Asymp. Sig. = 0.011 which is less than
α= 0.05. Those who agreed in the four-day class were almost having the same reasons that are; they have more time for their projects
or research work. While those who don’t agree reason out that they are pressured because of loaded subjects. There are 63.3% like free
day to fall on Wednesday while 10% doesn’t want to and 26.7% having no comments about it.
 Frequency Table

Table 1.0

Like the 4day class

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid yes 22 73.3 73.3 73.3
no 8 26.7 26.7 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0

Like the 4day class

Observed N Expected N Residual

yes 22 15.0 7.0
no 8 15.0 -7.0
Total 30

Test Statistics
Like the
4day class
Chi- 6.533
Square
df 1
Asymp. .011
Sig.
a 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is
15.0.
Table 1.2
Re asons for saying ye s

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid more time for projects
14 46.7 46.7 46.7
or assignment
time to enjoy free day 3 10.0 10.0 56.7
less expences 3 10.0 10.0 66.7
more time to study 1 3.3 3.3 70.0
less pressure 1 3.3 3.3 73.3
disagree 8 26.7 26.7 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0

Re asons for saying ye s

Observed N Expected N Residual

more time for projects
14 5.0 9.0
or assignment
time to enjoy free day 3 5.0 -2.0
less expences 3 5.0 -2.0
more time to study 1 5.0 -4.0
less pressure 1 5.0 -4.0
disagree 8 5.0 3.0
Total 30

Te st Statistics

Reasons for
saying yes
Chi-Squarea 26.000
df 5
Asymp. Sig. .000
a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than
5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 5.0.

Table 1.3
 Re asons for saying no

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid pressure bec. of
7 23.3 23.3 23.3
loaded subjects
adjust to new schedule 1 3.3 3.3 26.7
agree 22 73.3 73.3 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0

Re asons for saying no

Observed N Expected N Residual

pressure bec. of
7 10.0 -3.0
loaded subjects
adjust to new schedule 1 10.0 -9.0
agree 22 10.0 12.0
Total 30

Te st Statistics

Reasons for
saying no
Chi-Squarea 23.400
df 2
Asymp. Sig. .000
a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than
5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 10.0.

Table 1.4
Like to hav e fre e day on we dne sday

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid yes 19 63.3 63.3 63.3
no 3 10.0 10.0 73.3
no comments 8 26.7 26.7 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0
 Like to hav e fre e day on we dne sday

Observed N Expected N Residual

yes 19 10.0 9.0
no 3 10.0 -7.0
no comments 8 10.0 -2.0
Total 30

Te st Statistics

Like to have
free day on
wednesday
Chi-Squarea 13.400
df 2
Asymp. Sig. .001
a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than
5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 10.0.

Table 1.5
Like fre e day to fall

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid monday 1 3.3 3.3 3.3
friday 2 6.7 6.7 10.0
No comments 27 90.0 90.0 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0

Like fre e day to fall

Observed N Expected N Residual

monday 1 10.0 -9.0
friday 2 10.0 -8.0
No comments 27 10.0 17.0
Total 30

Te st Statistics

Like free
day to fall
Chi-Squarea 43.400
df 2
Asymp. Sig. .000
a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than
5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 10.0.
Table 1.6
Adv antage s

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid time for rest 4 13.3 13.3 13.3
have more time for
11 36.7 36.7 50.0
school works/research
less expences 1 3.3 3.3 53.3
less pressure 1 3.3 3.3 56.7
more time to study 3 10.0 10.0 66.7
time for leisure for
1 3.3 3.3 70.0
some students
classes not suspended
1 3.3 3.3 73.3
for meetings
no comments 8 26.7 26.7 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0

Adv antage s

Observed N Expected N Residual

time for rest 4 3.8 .3
have more time for
11 3.8 7.3
school works/research
less expences 1 3.8 -2.8
less pressure 1 3.8 -2.8
more time to study 3 3.8 -.8
time for leisure for
1 3.8 -2.8
some students
classes not suspended
1 3.8 -2.8
for meetings
no comments 8 3.8 4.3
Total 30

Te st Statistics

Advantages
Chi-Squarea 27.067
df 7
Asymp. Sig. .000
a. 8 cells (100.0%) have expected frequencies less
than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 3.8.

Table 1.7
 Disadv antage s

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid overloaded subjects 5 16.7 16.7 16.7
more pressure 3 10.0 10.0 26.7
more time for recreation 10 33.3 33.3 60.0
overcrowded school days 2 6.7 6.7 66.7
have time for internet
1 3.3 3.3 70.0
works
have a long time for every
1 3.3 3.3 73.3
subjects which is boring
no comments 8 26.7 26.7 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0

Disadv antage s

Observed N Expected N Residual

overloaded subjects 5 4.3 .7
more pressure 3 4.3 -1.3
more time for recreation 10 4.3 5.7
overcrowded school days 2 4.3 -2.3
have time for internet
1 4.3 -3.3
works
have a long time for every
1 4.3 -3.3
subjects which is boring
no comments 8 4.3 3.7
Total 30

Te st Statistics

Disadvant
ages
Chi-Squarea 17.600
df 6
Asymp. Sig. .007
a. 7 cells (100.0%) have expected frequencies less
than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 4.3.

3. Graphical presentation
Fig. 1.0
Like the 4day class
no

yes

Fig. 1.1

Reasons for saying yes

disagree

more time for projec

less pressure

more time to study

less expences

time to enjoy free d

Fig. 1.2
Reasons for saying no

pressure bec. of loa

adjust to new schedu

agree

Fig. 1.3

Like to have free day on wednesday

no comments

no yes
Fig. 1.4
Like free day to fall

monday
friday

No comments

Fig. 1.5
Advantages

time for rest

no comments

classes not suspende

time for leisure for have more time for s

more time to study

less pressure

less expences
Fig. 1.6

Disadvantages

overloaded subjects

no comments

more pressure

have a long time for

have time for intern

overcrow ded school d

more time for recrea

IV. CONCLUSION

After the data was gathered, the researchers found out that 73.3% of the BSED4

Students at SLSU- San Juan like the four-day class schedule and the remaining

percentages are those who doesn’t like. Therefore, not all the respondents agreed in the

four-day class schedule that was implemented by the University President Gloria M.

Reyes.
Reference List:

Resolution No. 101, (2006). Approving the adoption of four-day class per week. Southern
Leyte State University, Philippines.

Envarga, Manuel S. (2005-06). Www.mseuf.edu.ph. Lucena City Philippines.

Mason, E. and Bramble, W. (1989). Understanding and Conducting Research.2nd Ed;

New York; McGraw-Hill.

McMillan, J. and Schumacher, S. (1993). Research in Education-Concepts, Methods and

Applications. New York; Harper Collins College Publishers.