A Comparative Analysis on the Preference of

Senior High School Students of Mapúa

University between Virtual and Face-To-Face
Modes of Instructional Delivery based on
Student Well-Being

by

Gianne Charlize L. Carlos

Niña Angeline P. Manaois
Joshua Emmanuel D. Santiago
Alexandrea J. Sara

A Research Paper Submitted to the Mapúa Senior High

School Office in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

Research Project (RES04)

Mapúa University
March 2023

DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

This section discusses the results that the researchers were able to generate based on

the objectives of the study. The analysis was performed with statistical methods that were
adequately applied. Guided by the existing statistical principles governing the tests, the

proponents of the study were able to interpret all numeric values and produce some findings.

Moreover, the researchers also found it essential to support the outputs with related studies

that fully supported and strengthened the validity of the results.

Prior to dissemination, the proponents of the study had to carefully check the quality

of the research instrument to ensure that the questionnaire was completely reliable. When the

survey was already validated and the experts affixed their signatures to the questionnaire, the

researchers conducted a pilot test, where the first thirty (30) participants were asked to

provide their truthful ratings on the approved survey through an online platform called

Google Forms. Once the minimum requirement for pilot testing was reached and the initial

data set was secured, the researchers plugged all responses into Minitab, where the item

analysis was performed. After applying Cronbach’s Alpha, it was found that the questionnaire

had a reliability value of 0.7113, which means that the survey was already acceptable. Since

the standard value for determining internal consistency was 0.7000, the researchers

considered the survey reliable. Hence, the questionnaire was officially distributed to the

qualified respondents until the sample size specified was reached.

Table 1. Summary of Respondents

SEX FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

Male 59 56.19%
 Female 46 43.81%
Total 105 100.00%

Table 1 provides an overall summary of the participants who took part in the study by

answering the survey. When the questionnaire was created and disseminated, each respondent

was asked to indicate his or her sex based on physiological design. The demographic profile

was neither included in the analysis nor a moderating variable in the conceptual framework.

This was added merely for descriptive purposes in order for the researchers to gain an idea of

how the participants were categorized. It can be seen from the tabulated values that the study

was able to gather a total of 105 senior high school students of Mapua University. The

number of males who answered the questionnaire was 59, which comprised 56.19% of the

total number of samples. On the other hand, out of 105 students, the females who responded

numbered 46, which was about 43.81% of the subjects. Although the number of females was

evidently thirteen (13) less than the number of males, the discrepancy was still deemed

insignificant, which did not affect the results that much.

Table 2. Comparative Analysis between Face-to-Face and Online Modes of Learning

VARIABLE VALUE

Z -5.728
 Asymptotic P-Value 0.000

Table 2 presents the output of the comparative analysis that the researchers conducted

in fulfillment of the primary objective, which was to compare face-to-face and online modes

of instructional delivery to check whether the preferences of students between the two setups

significantly differed. Due to the fact that the researchers incorporated a four-point Likert

Scale, the data sets were all measured on an ordinal level. In addition, the researchers noted

the idea that the two modes of learning were rated by the same set of participants. Hence, it

was only proper for the proponents to apply the non-parametric equivalent of paired t-test,

which was the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test. The null hypothesis stated that the difference

between the ranks of in-person and virtual modes of education was not statistically

significant, while the alternative hypothesis, in its usual course, claimed otherwise. When the

test was conducted, the researchers found that the asymptotic p-value was measured at 0.000,

which was obviously less than the significance level of 0.05. At this point, the proponents of

the study were able to reject the null hypothesis and take the claim of the alternative,

acknowledging the existence of any notable variation between the two paired groups. This

highly suggests that one mode of learning stood out in terms of preference over the other,

leaving one setup less favored. Investigating the matter further, the descriptive analysis

revealed that the preference of students for face-to-face classes had a mean of 3.07 while

online education obtained an average of 2.34. This explains why the discrepancy using the

Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test was viewed as significant. The researchers were led to the idea

that after the COVID-19 pandemic, learners longed for face-to-face sessions to resume. The

results can be justified by the study of Headspace (2018), face-to-face learning allows for a

more efficient learning process due to its integration of reading, writing, presentations, group

projects, discussions, film clips, and practical demonstrations. Furthermore, students are
essentially able to focus more on their studies since there are fewer distractions at home, and

their instructors' and classmates' voice and body language will provide them with more

information and substantial understanding. A study conducted by Arkorful and Abaidoo

(2015) found that e-learning sometimes results in a lack of interaction with students due to

remoteness and contemplation. The absence of face-to-face instruction and teachers make e-

learning less effective than current modes of education. Face-to-face learning, on the other

hand, allows students to concentrate harder in class, learn more and gain a richer

understanding of the subject material through their teachers and other classmates.

Table 3. Regression Analysis on Preference

FACTOR COEFFICIENT P-VALUE

Constant 2.649 0.000

Physical Well-Being 0.267 0.003
Financial Well-Being -0.049 0.476
Mental Well-Being 0.235 0.003
Social Well-Being 0.134 0.090

Table 3 exhibits the values that were calculated upon doing the regression analysis,

which was in response to the final objective. It was previously stated that the researchers

wished to identify which of the factors such as physical well-being, financial well-being,

mental well-being, and social well-being notably influenced the preference of senior high

school learners of Mapua University in terms of learning modality. The four (4) regressors

indicated compelled the proponents of the study to apply multiple linear regression in order to

predict the outcome of the response variable. It can be observed from the tabulated figures

that among the independent variables specified, exactly two (2) were proven to contain

significant effects, represented by physical well-being and mental well-being, respectively.

The claim was based on the calculated p-value of 0.003, which was less than the significance

level of 0.05. The outcome implies that the personal choice of a senior high school student

between purely virtual and face-to-face classes highly depends on those aspects that are

directly pertinent to the body. In this case, the ability of a learner to move freely in a face-to-

face environment appears to be more evident than that in online distance learning. Being able

to roam around is treated by a student as essential as it leads to the degree to which the learner

shows liveliness and enthusiasm in classroom discussions. When the researchers tried to

analyze the survey, the students numerically indicated that they feel more energetic whenever

they attend physical classes than facing their laptops or personal computers while staying at

home or in dormitories. Furthermore, the researchers realized that the option that students

would select between two learning modalities takes mental conditions into account. Although

online meetings grant them the capability to access the internet whenever additional sources

are needed, senior high school students tend to be mentally exhausted whenever they attend

their classes in distance learning. It can also be viewed from the results that between the two

factors whose effects were considered significant, physical well-being contained the higher

slope coefficient, which was reflected at 0.267. The positive sign conveys similarities

between the two variables in terms of direction. In other words, as the physical well-being of

a student improves, the preference toward a learning modality increases in effect. Taking the

value into account, preference tends to increase by 0.267 for every unit of increase in physical

well-being. The results can be supported by the study of UNESCO (2020), stating that a lack

of access to school entails a loss of access to nourishment, protection, health, and other social

services. Along with this, in the results of the study of Plakhotnik et al. (2021), it was

discovered that the perceived impact of COVID-19 on a pupil's anxiety about diploma

completion affects stages of their well-being adversely. In other words, the more extra-

involved the students are about the impact of COVID-19 on their instructional performance,
the lower their stages of well-being. Aside from this, Wakui et al. (2021) found in their study

that “anxiety about the student’s home situations” and “delay in education” had stronger

associations with anxiety compared to others. Additionally, the negative mental health effects

of online learning among students can include raised anxiety and absenteeism (Bezuidenhout,

2018).

REFERENCES
Arkorful, V., & Abaidoo, N. (2015). The Role of E-Learning, Advantages and Disadvantages of Its
Adoption in Higher Education. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance
Learning, 12, 29-42. - References - Scientific Research Publishing.
https://www.scirp.org/(S(351jmbntvnsjt1aadkozje))/reference/referencespapers.aspx?
referenceid=3026945

Alibudbud, R. (2021). On online learning and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic:
Perspectives from the Philippines. Asian Journal Of Psychiatry, 66, 102867. doi:
10.1016/j.ajp.2021.102867

Bezuidenhout, A. (2018). Analysing the Importance-Competence Gap of Distance Educators

With the Increased Utilisation of Online Learning Strategies in a Developing World Context.
The International Review Of Research In Open And Distributed Learning, 19(3). doi:
10.19173/irrodl.v19i3.3585

Headspace (2018).Face To Face Vs. Online Learning Options. Headspace.

https://headspace.org.au/explore-topics/for-young-people/face-to-face-vs-online-
learning/#:~:text=Face%20to%20face%20learning,to%20what%20happens%20in%20school

Plakhotnik, M., Volkova, N., Jiang, C., Yahiaoui, D., Pheiffer, G., & McKay, K. et al. (2021). The
Perceived Impact of COVID-19 on Student Well-Being and the Mediating Role of the
University Support: Evidence From France, Germany, Russia, and the UK. Frontiers In
Psychology, 12. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.642689/full

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2020). School
reopening: ensuring learning continuity. UNESDOC Digital Library.
https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373610

Wakui, N., Abe, S., Shirozu, S., Yamamoto, Y., Yamamura, M., & Abe, Y. et al. (2021). Causes of
anxiety among teachers giving face-to-face lessons after the reopening of schools during the
COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health, 21(1). doi:
10.1186/s12889-021-11130-y