1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

“Education must continue even in the midst of pandemic.”

-Sec. Leonor Magtolis Briones.

This statement urged all schools to adapt with the challenges brought by the

pandemic. Pandemic made a lot of difference in the world. Numerous people lost their

job, and the students' academic performance was affected. The Department of

Education has decided to turn the students' studies into distance learning through the

use of modules and online classes in their home. With this approach, both students

and teachers can prevent COVID-19 virus.

One of the most recent public health emergencies of global concern is the

recent COVID-19 pandemic, which started in China and almost infected every

country in the whole world. This disease is caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-

CoV-2, previously known as 2019-nCoV) and has received global attention from

growing infections and on how to eradicate the disease and flatten the curve of

infections (Guo et al., 2020). The present COVID-19 pandemic has brought

extraordinary challenges and has affected the educational sectors, and no one knows

when it will end. Every country is presently implementing plans and procedures on

how to contain the virus, and the infections are still continually rising. In the

educational context, to sustain and provide quality education despite lockdown and

community quarantine, the new normal should be taken into consideration in the

planning and implementation of the “new normal educational policy,” (Tria, 2020).
 2

This article presents opportunities for responding issues, and problems that are

currently arising and will arise in the future due to COVID-19 pandemic through the

lens of education in the Philippines - the new educational norm. Within the new

normal, the situation presents a unique challenge to every educational leader’s

decision-making process. The planning and implementation of the “new normal

educational policy” will reduce the cases of the COVID-19 virus.

Online class education has made it possible to provide classes to students all

over the world with a single internet connection, in contrast to traditional classroom

instruction. Online instruction still has disadvantages, such as a lack of social

interactions. There are many similarities between face-to-face learning and online

learning. It is still necessary for students to show up to class, understand the content,

turn in assignments, and finish group projects. Teachers still need to create lessons,

improve the quality of education, respond to student inquiries in class, grade

assignments, and inspire students to learn. Despite these fundamental similarities, the

two modalities differ greatly from one another. Online instruction is frequently

student-centered and calls for active learning, in contrast to traditional classroom

instruction, which is teacher-centered and involves passive learning on the part of the

students.

In 2020 President Rodrigo Roa Duterte approved the distance learning

modality implemented by the DepEd. Due to their unfamiliarity with this system,

many students found distance learning challenging. What are the students' feelings

now that face-to-face classes are returning to the schools in the Philippines after

nearly two years of distance learning? Either they are content with the fact that it
 3

already includes face-to-face classes or they wish to return to the online form of

learning.

The above discussions paved the way for the researcher to conduct this study

to compare the perception of the Grade 11 students on the differences of face-to-face

learning and online mode of learning.

Statement of the Problem

This study intends to determine the differences between Face-to-Face and

Online mode of learning to the Grade 11 Students of Saint Charles Academy this

School Year 2022 – 2023. Specifically, the study seeks to answer the following

questions:

1. What is the profile of the Grade 11 student-respondents of Saint

Charles Academy according to the following:

a. Name;

b. Age;

c. Section; and

d. Sex

2. How did the pandemic affect the academic performance of the

students?

3. What are the differences faced by the students in online and face-to-

face mode of learning?

4. Which mode of learning is better for students? Online or Face-to-Face?

 4

Significance of the Study

The study's main goal was to demonstrate how well Grade 11 Students of

Saint Charles Academy compare the differences between Face-To-Face and Online

Mode of Learning. Additionally, the following will benefit from the study's findings.

Teachers. The study's findings will push teachers to develop concepts that will give

students the right direction during the new normal. This might also help them become

more competent.

Students. The respondents will be aware of the value of understanding the efficacy of

online learning and face to face classes.

School Administrators. The school administration entails overseeing all aspects of the

school, from ensuring a secure learning environment to managing the school budget.

To further describe school administration, explore the various areas of school

administration as well as who performs these school administrative functions.

Parents. The results of the study with face-to-face instruction will assist parents in

ensuring that their children have a lot to learn in face-to-face classes, and online

learning will assist parents in understanding how they can encourage their children to

learn despite the challenges presented by distance learning.

Future Researchers. The findings of the study will act as a resource and manual for

future researchers who will carry out the identical experimental investigation or other

study associated with face-to-face and online mode of learning.

 5

Scope and Delimitation

This research is a comparative study that aims to compare the perception of

the students on the differences between face-to-face and online learning. The

researchers selected the Grade 11 students of Saint Charles Academy for the school

year 2022 - 2023 as the respondents of this research so as to have an easy collection

of the data. The time span of this study will be from October 2022 to May 2023.

Definition of Terms

For a better understanding of this study, here are some of the terms with their

definitions that were used in conducting this research.

COVID-19 - Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the

SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Online Learning Modality - A learning delivery modality where learning takes place

between the teacher and the learners who are geographically remote from each other

during instruction.

Face-to-Face Learning Modality - This is where the teacher and the student meet in a

set place for a set time, for either one-on-one learning or, most commonly, in group

class lessons similar to what happens in school.

Perception - Perception can be defined as a combination of knowledge and idea has

gained as a result of having an experience in relation to a topic.

Blended Distance Learning Modality - is a method of teaching that integrates

technology and digital media with traditional instructor-led classroom activities,

giving students more flexibility to customize their learning experiences.

 6

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter of the paper presents the review of related literature, the related

studies, and the conceptual framework.

RELATED LITERATURE

Foreign Literature

A literature on the students' preferred methods of learning was undertaken at

Politehnica University of Timisoara's Department of Communication. Most of the

studies carried out in the field focus on the advantages and disadvantages of e-

learning vs. face-to-face learning. Naved et al. argue that, unlike face-to-face learning,

e-learning has its advantages, such as flexibility, no need to travel to school, and a low

cost, requiring only an Internet connection. However, this does not mean that e-

learning does not have its shortcomings, such as inequities in accessing technology or

learning computer skills, or even a lack of physical space for this teaching/learning

process. E-learning is dependent on technology, the Internet, and various devices that

not all potential beneficiaries can access. Students’ experience of quality learning is

not only related to the teachers’ skills and abilities to capture attention during the e-

learning process but also to their own training, characteristics, and digital skills. In e-

learning, physical space should foster involvement in interpersonal relationships, thus

encouraging didactic communication. In addition, some studies show that e-learning

does not have the same impact as face-to-face learning. It seems that online students

may lose their focus and miss deadlines for different tasks. Over time, both teachers

and students may experience various negative effects from e-leaning, such as sight
 7

problems (due to long periods in front of the screen) or back pain, and, at the same

time, they may feel the lack of activities in open spaces. Other studies have

highlighted results that do not favor one type of education over another but show a

preference for combining them. Alsaaty et al. point out that a large percentage of

students in the sample analyzed in their study have assimilated information more from

face-to-face learning than from e-learning. However, they have positively perceived

their experience in e-learning, even though, at first, they encountered difficulties

related to usage. The American researcher Michael Tagoe has concluded that students

prefer blended courses that combine online activities with face-to-face ones.

Another researched topic in the field of e-learning and/or face-to-face learning

has been the students’ attitudes and emotional states. Some studies describe students

as being less satisfied with e-learning and preferring classic face-to-face courses. The

students accustomed to face-to-face learning and who subsequently enrolled in an

online platform have developed high levels of negative emotions, such as fear, anger,

or helplessness. On the other hand, some studies show the students’ preferences for e-

learning, especially those of introverts, who may feel shy and lack confidence, of

those who have learning challenges, of those who find public speaking a burden, as

well as of those who are reluctant to speak in class. It seems that some communities

of e-learning students develop feelings of belonging and connections with other

colleagues, which could gradually become a resource for knowledge and for the

development of various fields of study. Thus, despite the fact that the presence of

students on online platforms can be quite difficult to perceive, the sense of belonging

of the communities studying in online education is an important factor in the learning

process.
 8

Within this context, the study focused on the students of the Politehnica

University of Timisoara, aiming to identify their attitudes towards e-learning, capture

the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning compared to face-to-face learning, the

latter being subject to steep and multiple changes in a relatively short period of time.

The students’ perspectives have been chosen, as they are the beneficiaries of the

teaching act and can provide key information about this form of education, thus

contributing to the sustainability of the educational process. In addition, this has not

been studied nearly at all by specialists, hence the novelty of this study. The analysis

has also focused on identifying the differences between two groups of subjects, the

first formed by first-year students and representing the category of those who

benefited exclusively from e-learning during their studies, and the second formed by

upper-year students who benefited mainly from face-to-face learning during their two,

three, or four years of study. The results of the present research show that, among the

studied population, there is a greater preference for face-to-face learning compared to

e-learning. It should be noted that this preference is higher among those who

benefited in their formation process only from e-learning and lower among those who

benefited also from face-to-face learning. These results are further confirmed by the

fact that more than half of the respondents stated that they wanted to return to the

classic teaching format after the pandemic ends. As mentioned above, the desire is

stronger among those who only benefited from e-learning during their studies.

Apart from that, a literature review on students' learning methods also carried

out at a university in New York. In pre-pandemic, there were consistent challenges

with online learning that stemmed from the content of the course, technical

difficulties, and the nature of the assignments. Students typically swayed away from
 9

taking online courses due to previous negative experiences such as an unprecedented

workload, increased student involvement, lack of interaction with peers, lack of

professor presence, malfunctioning electronic devices, and difficulties with self-

teaching and time management. The above challenges may have cause of students to

underperform in online courses and contributed to low retention rates. Another

challenge for online learning was the difference in student and teacher expectations

which led to confusing and dissatisfying course outcomes. Students taking online

courses expressed that instructors expected them to learn in the same manner as those

in-person. If given a choice, most students said they prefer not to take all their courses

online, and very few believed they would learn more in the online modality.

The relationship between student achievement and learning modality has

provided a series of mixed and inconsistent results. For example, some studies show

student achievement in the online learning modality was better than the in-person

modality, while others depict the opposite. Also noted was a disparity in grade

distribution leading to grade inflations in online courses. Despite conflicting results,

some studies showed no significant difference between the learning modalities and

student achievement. Studies conducted during the pandemic continue to depict

mixed results when investigating students' achievements in the online learning

modality. Studies showed a higher number of students receiving higher grades in

online courses, grade inflations, and students were more successful when enrolled in

in-person learning. Albeit the mixed results between online and in-person learning

modalities on student achievement before and during the pandemic, this study

hypothesized that students would rate online learning and online STEM courses more
 10

negatively than in-person. We also sort to determine whether there is a negative

correlation between grades and perceptions of the online modality.

The findings from this research implied that institutions with forced online

learning modalities consider student preferences for in-person learning and modify

online learning to address student preferences. It also suggested that students majoring

in or taking liberal arts courses in the STEM field would rather be in-person.

Institutions may freely consider moving non-STEM classes online during a pandemic.

However, for classes that require a hands-on lab component, institutions may want to

consider keeping those courses in-person but ensure physical distancing and other

safety measures are in place to reduce the spread of the virus. A lack of technical

savviness is a barrier to the teaching and learning process. It may serve as a best

practices approach to train faculty and students on using technology in online learning

courses before starting the semester or at the onset. Finally, the findings found a split

in preference for students being self-taught; therefore, the study implied that

instructors might consider remaining engaged synchronously in helping students

navigate the online learning modality and reduce the feeling that they are on their

own.

Local Literature

COVID-19 has become a global health crisis. As of October 6, 2020, almost

36 million people have been infected and over one million have died. In the

Philippines, this translates into almost 325,000 infected and 6,000 deaths

(Worldometer, 2020). To curb the spread of COVID-19, most governments have

opted to employ quarantine protocols and temporarily shut down their educational
 11

institutions. As a consequence, more than a billion learners have been affected

worldwide. Among this number are over 28 million Filipino learners across academic

levels who have to stay at home and comply with the Philippine government’s

quarantine measures (UNESCO, 2020). To respond to the needs of learners,

especially of the 3.5 million tertiary-level students enrolled in approximately 2,400

HEIs, certain HEIs in the country have implemented proactive policies for the

continuance of education despite the closure. These policies include modified forms

of online learning that aim to facilitate student learning activities. Online learning

might be in terms of synchronous, real-time lectures and time-based outcomes

assessments, or asynchronous, delayed-time activities, like pre-recorded video

lectures and time-independent assessments (Oztok et al., 2013).

The Philippine government had made the decision to implement quarantine

protocols and to close educational institutions in the meantime due to the widespread

spread of COVID 19. Over 28 million Filipino students were impacted by this

unexpected situation when classes were suspended. Schools all around the Philippines

have been forced to drastically shift to online learning due of the COVID-19 outbreak.

Although the move has been difficult, it was implemented to ensure the safety of both

students and teachers. Students all throughout the nation are still enrolled in classes

more than a year later. It appears that for the time being, online learning is the norm

for pupils while the fight against the epidemic continues. Online learning still has

several difficulties, despite having been the norm for more than a year. Not everybody

has access to a quick and dependable internet connection to use online learning

resources. Students miss being on campus and interacting with their peers. Some

students have trouble focusing on online classes. Case in point are top universities in
 12

the country, viz., De La Salle University (DLSU), Ateneo de Manila University

(ADMU), the University of Santo Tomas (UST), and the state-run University of the

Philippines, Diliman (UPD). DLSU has resorted to remote online learning, which

combines both synchronous and asynchronous activities. For students who cannot

participate in online learning, there are flexible options for completing course

requirements throughout the academic year (De La Salle University, 2020a). ADMU

has suspended synchronous online classes but continued asynchronous online learning

so that “all students can learn at their own pace” (Villarin, 2020). UST, like DLSU,

has opted to continue with synchronous and asynchronous online classes, and a

flexible grading of student outputs and assessments (University of Santo Tomas,

2020). Other private universities and institutions such as STI College, St.

Scholastica’s College, Adamson University, Far Eastern University, the University of

the East, Ateneo de Davao University, and the University of San Carlos have

continued with their online classes as well.

The HEIs’ (Higher Education Institutions) pivot to modified forms of online

learning attempts to concretize the government’s stance to continue learning despite

the pandemic. As the Philippine’s Department of Education (DepEd) Secretary,

Leonor Briones quipped, “Education must continue even in times of crisis whether it

may be a calamity, disaster, emergency, quarantine, or even war” (Department of

Education, 2020). The Philippines’ Commission on Higher Education (CHEd), on the

other hand, advised HEIs to continue the “deployment of available flexible learning

and other alternative modes of delivery in lieu of on-campus learning” (Commission

on Higher Education, 2020). These pronouncements aim to encourage the continuance

of learning. Without implementing rules and regulations, however, private HEIs are
 13

left to make their own policies. In order for students to be able to learn even in the

midst of this pandemic, they recommended that flexible and alternative learning

methods, notably known as "Online Classes," be implemented (Biana, Dacela, &

Joaquin, 2020). Recently, the education system has faced an unprecedented health

crisis (i.e., COVID-19 pandemic) that has shaken up its foundation. Thus, various

governments across the globe have launched a crisis response to mitigate the adverse

impact of the pandemic on education. This response includes, but is not limited to,

curriculum revisions, provision for technological resources and infrastructure, shifts

in the academic calendar, and policies on instructional delivery and assessment.

Inevitably, these developments compelled educational institutions to migrate to full

online learning until face-to-face instruction is allowed. As a result of the sudden

changes with the learning system, students who have no experience with online

learning encountered some complexities regarding the unexpected shift from

traditional classes to online classes (Santos, 2020). On top of that, learners and even

educators said that they have difficulties embracing this new curriculum due to lack of

knowledge about technology (Magsambol, 2020). Learning virtually, on the other

hand, encourages students to make the most of their abilities and their use of

technology in the current world (Manuel, 2020).

Most lessons were held on school grounds and were referred to as "Traditional

Classes" in the Philippines prior to the adoption of online learning. The connection

between students and teachers was simpler back then because of the traditional

learning model, as a result of the fact that students can ask their specific teachers any

questions they may have. Additionally, classrooms serve as a place for students to

socialize, be evaluated individually, collaborate, and learn how to adapt in a certain

 14

context. By encouraging a student to speak in front of the class, it will also improve a

student's capacity for public speaking. On the other hand, students could experience

scheduling issues or unanticipated emergencies that will force them to miss class.

According to some students, riding public transportation home from school can be

rather upsetting and irritating, especially for those whose houses are far from where

they attend school (Dela Peas, 2020).

RELATED STUDIES

Foreign Studies

There are several studies available that seek to compare face-to-face and

online classes. The results of these studies vary with the courses offered, the

characteristics of the students enrolled (e.g., gender, age, learning style, and level of

academic competence), and the instruction being offered. Thus, it appears that when

the literature comparing online and face-to-face classes is reviewed, the researcher

can make a case for either one or both being more or equally effective, depending on

the variables used. Therefore, for this case study another framework for comparing

the two instructional formats was clearly needed. Chickering and Gamson’s (1987)

seminal work on the principles of good teaching practice has influenced web-based

delivery systems, such as blackboard or web, in the design and philosophy of courses.

After all, good teaching practice is good teaching practice whether the classroom is a

physical one or an electronic one, a sentiment shared by officials of the NEA (2001),

an agency in the process of researching online learning and developing a set of

evaluative criteria. The seven principles of good teaching practice outlined by

Chickering and Gamson (1987) included the following: (a) encourages contacts
 15

between students and faculty, (b) encourages cooperation among students, (c)

encourages active learning, (d) gives prompt feedback, (e) emphasizes time on task,

(f) communicates high expectations, and (g) respects diverse talents and ways of

learning. Even with the implementation of all of these principles, experts (Chickering

& Ehrmann, 1996) claimed that neither technology nor faculty alone can transform

learning in an electronic environment. Students must take action regarding their own

learning and create opportunities to “search out additional resources or

complementary experiences, establish their own study groups, or go to the professor

for more substantial activities and feedback (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996).” In other

words, an online learning environment still requires a “learning community.”

Heretofore, the emphasis on successful online teaching has resided with the creator of

the course and not with course participants. Chickering and Ehrmann’s emphasis on

student responsibility is an added dimension to the growing body of literature on

cyber classrooms, and their work addresses the physical classroom as well.

One recent report on the “Pedagogy of Online Teaching and Learning,” by the

faculty at the University of Illinois, supported a broad scope approach to online

instruction, yet at the same time pointed out the importance of emotional interaction

between teacher and student, as well as among students themselves, theoretically

present in the traditional classroom. The absence of an emotional component in online

courses is viewed by some as problematic, especially in terms of undergraduate

education (University of Illinois Faculty Seminar, 1999). Can electronic classrooms or

web-supported classrooms be equivalent in terms of effectiveness? Or can they be

even more effective than the traditional face-to-face classroom? The answer may be

that they have the potential to transform the way in which learners understand the
 16

course material and provide a social component often missed in the traditional

classroom the willingness of and the necessity for shy or introverted students to

participate in classroom discussion. Additionally, students have more time to respond

to discussion questions than when they are face-to-face in a time-designated

classroom. The ability of the electronic classroom to deliver instruction in a 24/7

format means that learning is no longer confined to exact periods (Schrum, 2000).

Students can access courses whenever they have a question or can interact with

classmates whenever they choose. Thus, despite the difficulties inherent in online or

online assisted classes, a major advantage virtual learning provides is the ability to

“independently store data collected through interaction with the student, thus

providing the possibility for following student moves as a source of data and later

providing feedback to them. Two instructional benefits are apparent and include (a)

learner interaction with concepts can be stored and retrieved for later analysis, and (b)

the immediate feedback the learner receives allows a greater degree of learner control

by providing individualized opportunities for review (Hargis, 2001, p. 475-76; see

Galagan, 2000, pp. 24-31, for a discussion on learning and Hicks, 2000, p. 75). These

web interactions and the ability of the teacher to retrieve and later analyze them and

then return to the student with questions or statements are invaluable to the learning

process. Often teachable moments go untaught or certainly never revisited; yet,

through this storage capacity, remarks made by students online are preserved and can

be used to extend learning. Not surprisingly, Bill Gates has remarked that the school

of the future will not be one that relies on paper and pencil, but rather on collaboration

and web-based curriculum (Robbins, 2001).

 17

Local Studies

According to Ignacio (2021), learning with this new curriculum has been

difficult and places a heavy burden on individuals who are struggling to adjust to the

sudden changes this epidemic has brought about. In institutions, instructors combine

synchronous and asynchronous learning methods to deliver their lectures. Due to the

unexpected changes, several students and even some professors are unable to

effectively use our renowned technology, which affects their ability to learn and

teach. However, despite the criticism, the majority of Philippine institutions are

working on initiatives to improve education for all students in the face of this

pandemic. The petitioners argue that “access to the internet connection and learning

devices continued to be a privilege up to this day, placing those with poor internet

access at a disadvantage when it comes to online classes.” [For a better picture, 45%

of Filipino citizens (46 million) and 74% (34,500) of public schools do not have

access to the internet (Jones, 2019)]. Furthermore, “adding more workload for the

students increases their burden and contradicts the purpose of the lockdown, which is

to help their families prepare and adjust to the situation at hand.” Finally, there is an

issue about the “lack of environments conducive to learning at home and the

effectiveness of the online lectures” (Bagayas, 2020). Social media hashtags like,

#NoStudentLeftBehind, #NoSchoolLeftBehind, #EndOnlineClasses, #EndTheSem,

and #NoToOnlineClasses strengthen these sentiments further.

The learning environment is not the same as it was previously, yet the task

remains the same (Corcuera, 2020). People who 'lack access,' 'lack time,' 'lack
 18

modified training,' and 'lack enough knowledge about technology,' according to

Riasati, Allahaya, and Tan (2012), may struggle to cope with this new style of

learning (As cited in Daniels, Sarte, & Dela Cruz, 2019). Despite the objections, the

introduction of these materials could be a starting stone to improving the knowledge

of all learners, instructors, and even developers (Daniels et al., 2019). There have

been studies indicating virtual learning has a substantial impact to a student's growth

in learning, and with the continual development of web-based learning, it can lead to a

more effective and efficient educational experience, as well as an alternate way of

learning (Francisco & Barcelona, 2020). Because the Philippines is a developing

country, the use of an online learning system will be more efficient, effective, and

developed (Gorra & Bhati,2016). With the use of online learning, asynchronous types

of classes are offered via a platform, where all necessary materials and content can be

accessed by students at their leisure. Flipped classrooms also use video recorded

classes and lectures that students can watch at their leisure. Live lessons and lectures

take place in synchronous classrooms, which are conducted via video conferencing

systems where students and teachers can interact (Ignacio, 2021).

According to Gorra and Bhati (2016), using technology allows students to

engage and improve their capacity to adopt different strategies and knowledge that

can help them maximize their learning. However, if not used appropriately,

technology can serve as a distraction to students during their classes. Laptops and

mobile phones can be a distraction when they start to ring, causing the student to lose

focus on the discussion, when they are used to watch movies or videos that are

unrelated to the discussion, when they are used to cheat during classroom activities

and assessments, and when they are used to browse social media during live
 19

discussions and lectures. Some institutions discover that some students are not

properly prepared to face this new curriculum because most students frequently face

difficulties in adjusting to different learning styles, having to perform responsibilities

at home, and having a poor internet connection, which can lead to poor

communication between educators and students. Some teachers, on the other hand,

provide students enough time to prepare for their demands. Despite the unfavorable

things that transpired, some students are stated to feel more at ease knowing that

introducing online classrooms is the only method to restart classes in the midst of this

pandemic (Baticulon et al., 2021; Chua et al., 2020).

 20

Conceptual Framework

The profile of the respondents (name, age, section, and gender) as well as the

evaluation concerning the perception of the students on the differences between face-

to-face and online mode of learning will serve as the input data for the study. The

respondents also answer a survey questionnaire, which will be a Checkbox

Questionnaire and it will be administered through a printed survey, that will be the

processing part of the study. Lastly, the output of the study will be achieved by

comparing the perception of the Grade 11 students of Saint Charles Academy on the

differences between face-to-face and online mode of learning.

 21

Research Paradigm

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

What is the profile of the The researchers would

Grade 11 student- formulate a tactical plan

respondents of Saint Charles based on the gathered results

Academy according to the from the survey

following: questionnaires, which aims

in comparing the perception

a. Name;
Printed Survey of the Grade 11 students of
Questionnaire
b. Age;
(Checkbox Questionnaire) Saint Charles Academy on

c. Section; and the differences between

d. Sex face-to-face and online

mode of learning.
How did the pandemic

affect the academic

performance of the

students?

What are the differences

faced by the students in

online and face-to-face

mode of learning?

Which mode of learning is

better for students? Online

or Face-to-Face?
 22

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the methods to be used in the study. It also describes the

research design, respondents of this study, data gathering instruments, data collection

procedure, and the statistical treatment.

This research determined the perception of the respondents between the

differences of face-to-face learning and online learning by comparing the

respondent’s answers in the given questionnaire.

Research Design

Quantitative research was used in this study to gather quantitative data

obtained using survey questionnaire. The study is based on descriptive-comparative

research design. Descriptive-comparative, this is a design where the researcher

considers two variables (not manipulated) and establishes a formal procedure to

compare and conclude that one is better than the other. If significant difference exists,

it means one approach is better than the other. If there is no significant difference, the

two approaches are almost the same. In other words, based on the findings, the

researchers can compare and conclude that one is better than the other if significant

difference exists.

The researchers wish to conduct a study on the perception of the Grade 11

students of Saint Charles Academy on the differences between face-to-face learning

 23

and online learning. Researchers used checkbox questionnaires as research instrument

in gathering the data.

Respondents of this Study

The objective of this study was to compare the perception of the Grade 11

students of Saint Charles Academy on the differences between face-to-face learning

and online mode of learning. The respondents of this study are the 125 students from

a total population of 262 Grade 11 students of Saint Charles Academy in San Carlos

City, Pangasinan. Voluntary response sampling was used in the study, where the

students volunteered to answer the survey and become respondents.

Data Gathering Instrument(s)

In this research study, the researchers used a checkbox questionnaire

administered through a printed survey to gather the data needed to compare the

students’ perceptions on the differences between face-to-face and online learning.

Specifically, the questionnaire which will gather the perception on the differences

between face-to-face and online mode of learning shall be comprised of two (2) parts.

The first part seeks to answer the profile of Grade 11 student-respondents in terms of

their name, age, section, and gender. The second part aims to answer the checkbox

questionnaires. The printed survey questionnaire shall be distributed to the randomly

selected Grade 11 students of Saint Charles Academy.

Data Collection Procedure

This research needed in-depth responses from the researcher respondents.

Therefore, in order to gather basic information, the researchers disseminated a printed

survey questionnaire through going on the classrooms, primarily focusing on their

 24

target respondents — Saint Charles Academy Grade 11 students. The responses were

also gathered and compiled.

The researchers studied the results and used them to provide an accurate

analysis and comparison of face-to-face and online modes of learning after gathering

all relevant data and information.

Statistical Treatment

The researchers used the following tools for data analysis:

1. Frequency Distribution and Percentage Rate.

The researchers used frequency and percentage as statistical tools to answer

the first problem. The researcher analyzed the data by frequency count and percentage

distribution.

In the percentage distribution, the researchers used the formula:

f
Percentage = x 100
N

Where;

f = frequency of the respondents

N = total number of respondents

2. Mean.

It will be used to convert the checkbox questionnaire responses of respondents

into quantitative data from which the researchers can draw conclusions. The

researcher used mean results to answer the second, third, and fourth problem.

For the mean, the researcher used the formula:

 25

x=
∑ Xi
N

Where:

x = mean

∑ Xi = summation of scores

N = total number of respondents

 26

CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the data gathered, the results of the statistical analysis

done and interpretation of findings. These are presented in tables following the

sequence of the specific research problem regarding the perception of the Grade 11

Students of Saint Charles Academy on the differences between Face-to-Face and

Online Mode of Learning.

PRESENTATION

The main problem of the study is to compare the perception on the difference

between the Face-to-Face and Online mode of learning to the Grade 11 Students of

Saint Charles Academy, San Carlos City, Pangasinan, School Year 2022-2023. The

descriptive-comparative design was used in this study. There are 125 Grade 11

Students who served as the respondents to this study.

The data were analyzed using appropriate statistics to generate accurate

results.

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

Profile of the Respondents

 27

This section presents the profile of the 125 respondents from the Grade 11

students in terms of age, section, and sex. The formula of Frequency Distribution and

Percentage Rate that shown in Chapter 3 was used as the statistical treatment.

Table 1
Section of the Respondents
(N=125)

A. Section Frequency (f) Percentage (%)

Saint Pio 20 16

Saint Luke 19 15.2

Saint Jude 20 16

Saint Gabriel 17 13.6

Saint Michael 20 16

Saint Mark 20 16

Saint Philip and James 9 7.2

Total 125 100

According to Table 1, 16% of the respondents are Grade 11 Saint Pio, Saint

Jude, Saint Michael, and Saint Mark. 15.2% of the respondents are Grade 11 Saint

Luke. 13.6% of the respondents are Grade 11 Saint Gabriel. Lastly, 7.2% of the

respondents are Grade 11 Saint Philip and James answered the questionnaire.

Table 2
Age of the Respondents
(N=125)
 28

B. Age Frequency (f) Percentage (%)

16 years old 47 37.6
17 years old 71 56.8
18 years old 6 4.8
19 years old 1 0.8
Total 125 100

With regards to the profile of respondents in terms of age, those who are 17

years old are 71 or 56.8%, 47 or 37.6% are those who are 16 years old, 6 or 4.8% are

those who are 18 years old and 1 or 0.8% has the age of 19.

This finding shows that majority of the respondents are aged 17.

According to Oxford Dictionary (2021), age is the number of years that a

person has lived, or a thing has existed.

Table 3
Sex of the Respondents
(N=125)

C. Sex Frequency (f) Percentage (%)

MALE 47 37.6
FEMALE 78 62.4
Total 125 100

With regards to the profile of the respondents in terms of sex, out of 125

students 47 are males and 78 are females. Therefore, majority of our respondent are

Female because it has 62.4%.

According to Merriam- Webster (2019), sex is either of the two major forms

of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as

female or male especially based on their reproductive organs and structures.

Table 4

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE RESULTS

 29

(N=125)

SECTION I

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE FACE-TO-FACE ONLINE

LEARNING LEARNING
1. Which is better for you in terms of 118 7
productivity?
2. Which mode of learning is easy for you 83 42
to do your schoolwork?

3. Which mode of learning is difficult for 27 98

you to stay focused on your schoolwork?

4. Which mode of learning you are getting 103 22

all the help that you need with your
schoolwork?

5. Which mode of learning makes your 84 41

time management more effective?

6. Which mode of learning do you find the 110 15

most engaging in doing your projects or
activities?

7. Which mode of learning are you more 110 15

confident to participate in in class?

8. Which mode of learning makes it 24 101

harder for you to learn your lessons?

TOTAL 659 341

MEAN 5.27 2.78

SECTION II

ACADEMIC YES NO MAYBE

PERFORMANCE
(ONLINE
LEARNING)
1. Can we still 49 21 55
improve our learning
using online classes?
TOTAL 49 21 55
 30

MEAN 0.39 0.17 0.44

Table 4 above shows the academic performance results. In section one, the

mean result of Face-to-Face Learning is 5.27 while the mean result of Online

Learning is 2.78. In section two, the mean result of online learning, 0.39 answered

‘YES’, 0.17 answered ‘NO’, and 0.44 answered ‘MAYBE’.

Table 5

DIFFERENCES FACED BY THE STUDENTS RESULTS

(N=125)

SECTION I

DIFFERENCES FACE-TO-FACE ONLINE LEARNING

FACED BY THE LEARNING
STUDENTS
9. Which mode of 115 10
learning is the most
convenient way for
you to socialize
more effectively?
10. Where do you 120 5
spend the most
money?
11. Which mode of 114 11
learning do you
spend more time
with your friends?
12. Which mode of 20 105
learning do you
spend more time
with your family?
13. Which mode of 29 96
learning do you
spend more time
with yourself?
14. Which mode of 49 76
learning made the
schoolwork harder?
15. Where do you 121 4
socialize better?
16. Which mode of 112 13
learning do you put
 31

your most effort

into?
17. Which mode of 27 98
learning do you
spend the least
money on?
18. Which mode of 115 10
learning are you
more active?
TOTAL 822 428

MEAN 6.58 3.42

SECTION II

DIFFERENCES YES NO MAYBE

FACED BY
THE
STUDENTS
(FACE-TO-
FACE
LEARNING)
1. Does it make 117 0 8
you spend more
money?
2. Does online 90 17 18
learning is more
boring than face-to-
face learning?
3. Did you make 115 6 4
new friends when
face-to-face
started?
4. Do you agree 111 4 10
that you can spend
more money during
face-to-face class?
TOTAL 433 27 40

MEAN 3.46 0.22 0.32

 32

DIFFERENCES YES NO MAYBE

FACED BY THE
STUDENTS
(ONLINE
LEARNING)
1. Does face-to-face 13 86 26
learning is more
boring than online
learning?
2. Does online class 90 13 22
affect the students on
socializing?
3. Do you agree that 11 95 19
you can spend more
money during online
classes?
TOTAL 114 194 67

MEAN 0.91 1.55 0.54

Table 5 above shows the academic performance results. In section one, the

mean result of Face-to-Face Learning is 6.58 while the mean result of Online

Learning is 3.42. In section two, the mean result of face-to-face learning, 3.46

answered ‘YES’, 0.22 answered ‘NO’, and 0.32 answered ‘MAYBE’. While, the

mean result of online learning, 0.91 answered ‘YES’, 1.55 answered ‘NO’, and 0.54

answered ‘MAYBE’.

Table 6

MODE OF LEARNING THAT IS BETTER FOR STUDENTS RESULTS

(N=125)

SECTION I

MODE OF FACE-TO-FACE ONLINE LEARNING

LEARNING LEARNING
THAT IS
BETTER FOR
STUDENTS
19. Which mode of 115 10
 33

learning is better?

20. Where do you 119 6

learn more?
21. Which mode of 33 92
learning have you
found least
engaging?
22. Which mode of 51 74
learning is less
stressful?
23. Which mode of 110 15
learning is effective
for you?
24. Which mode of 27 98
learning makes you
easily get bored?
25. Which mode of 46 79
learning is most
peaceful for you?
TOTAL 501 374

MEAN 4.01 2.99

SECTION II

MODE OF YES NO MAYBE

LEARNING
THAT IS
BETTER FOR
STUDENTS
1. Is face-to-face 111 4 10
learning better
than online
learning?
TOTAL 111 4 10
MEAN 0.89 0.03 0.08
2. Is online 102 11 12
learning better
than face-to-face
learning?
TOTAL 11 102 12
MEAN 0.09 0.82 0.10

Table 6 above shows the academic performance results. In section one, the

mean result of Face-to-Face Learning is 4.01 while the mean result of Online
 34

Learning is 2.99. In section two, the mean result of face-to-face learning, 0.89

answered ‘YES’, 0.03 answered ‘NO’, and 0.08 answered ‘MAYBE’. While, the

mean result of online learning, answered 0.09 ‘YES’, 0.82 answered ‘NO’, and 0.10

answered ‘MAYBE’.
 35

Chapter 5

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of findings based on the problems raised

earlier, the conclusions derived from the findings and the recommendations offered

for possible courses of action.

Summary of Findings

The main problem of the study is to compare the perception on the difference

between the Face-to-Face and Online mode of learning to the Grade 11 Students of

Saint Charles Academy, San Carlos City, Pangasinan, School Year 2022-2023. The

descriptive-comparative design was used in this study. There are 125 Grade 11

Students who served as the respondents to this study.

The data were analyzed using appropriate statistics to generate accurate

results.

1. Profile of the Respondents

With regards to the profile of respondents in terms of section, 116% of the

respondents are Grade 11 Saint Pio, Saint Jude, Saint Michael, and Saint Mark. 15.2%

of the respondents are Grade 11 Saint Luke. 13.6% of the respondents are Grade 11

Saint Gabriel. Lastly, 7.2% of the respondents are Grade 11 Saint Philip and James

answered the questionnaire.

With regards to the profile of respondents in terms of age, those who are 17

years old are 71 or 56.8%, 47 or 37.6% are those who are 16 years old, 6 or 4.8% are
 36

those who are 18 years old and 1 or 0.8% has the age of 19. This finding shows that

the majority of the respondents are aged 17.

With regards to the profile of the respondents in terms of sex, out of 125

students 47 are males and 78 are females. Therefore, majority of the respondent are

Female because it has 62.4%.

2. How did the pandemic affect the academic performance of the students?

With regards to the mean result conducted by the researcher in section one, the

mean result of Face-to-Face Learning is 5.27 while the mean result of Online

Learning is 2.78. In section two, in the question “Can we still improve our learning

using online classes?” the mean result of online learning, 0.39 answered ‘YES’, 0.17

answered ‘NO’, and 0.44 answered ‘MAYBE’.

3. What are the differences faced by the students in online and face-to-face mode

of learning?

With regards to the mean result conducted by the researcher in section one, the

mean result of Face-to-Face Learning is 6.58 while the mean result of Online

Learning is 3.42. In section two, the mean result of face-to-face learning, 3.46

answered ‘YES’, 0.22 answered ‘NO’, and 0.32 answered ‘MAYBE’. While, the

mean result of online learning, 0.91 answered ‘YES’, 1.55 answered ‘NO’, and 0.54

answered ‘MAYBE’.

4. Which mode of learning is better for students? Online or Face-to-Face?

With regards to the mean result conducted by the researcher in section one, the

mean result of Face-to-Face Learning is 4.01 while the mean result of Online

Learning is 2.99. In section two, the mean result of face-to-face learning in the
 37

question “Is face-to-face learning better than online learning?”, 0.89 answered ‘YES’,

0.03 answered ‘NO’, and 0.08 answered ‘MAYBE’. While the mean result of online

learning in the question “Is online learning better than face-to-face learning?”, 0.09

answered ‘YES’, 0.82 answered ‘NO’, and 0.10 answered ‘MAYBE’.

Conclusions

The researchers concluded that, majority of the respondents were under 17

years old and most of them were females with the total number of 78 while 47 were

males.

The Respondents’ academic performance is better in Face-to-Face Learning

with a mean result of 5.27 while the mean result of Online Learning is 2.78. In the

question “Can we still improve our learning using online classes?” 0.39 answered

‘YES’, 0.17 answered ‘NO’, and 0.44 answered ‘MAYBE’.

The respondents faced a lot of differences in face-to-face learning, the mean

result of Face-to-Face Learning is 6.58 while the mean result of Online Learning is

3.42.

The mode of learning that is better for respondents is Face-to-Face Learning

with a mean result of 4.01 while the mean result of Online Learning is 2.99. In the

question “Is face-to-face learning better than online learning?”, 0.89 answered ‘YES’,

0.03 answered ‘NO’, and 0.08 answered ‘MAYBE’. While, in the question “Is online

learning better than face-to-face learning?”, 0.09 answered ‘YES’, 0.82 answered

‘NO’, and 0.10 answered ‘MAYBE’.

The respondents responded well which only shows that Face-to-Face Learning

ignited the desires of the respondents to engaged themselves in teaching - learning

process productively and developed self-accountability.

 38

Recommendations

The study's findings and conclusions have led the researchers to make the

following recommendations:

1. For students, face-to-face learning should be the preferable method of

learning.

2. This study can serve as a source of information for the future researchers.

3. Teachers and administrators should enhance the social and academic

aspects of online learning for the students.

 39

APPENDIX A

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

I. Profile
Name (optional): ___________________________ Section: __________________
Age: ________ Gender: FEMALE MALE

II. Questionnaire

Section 1:
Directions: Put a (✓) check in the appropriate column that corresponds to your
perception regarding the mode of learning you prefer.
FACE-TO- ONLINE
FACE LEARNING
LEARNING
1. Which is better for you in terms of productivity?
2. Which mode of learning is easy for you to do your
schoolwork?
3. Which mode of learning is difficult for you to stay
focused on your schoolwork?
4. Which mode of learning you are getting all the help
that you need with your schoolwork?
5. Which mode of learning makes your time
management more effective?
6. Which mode of learning do you find the most
engaging in doing your projects or activities?
7. Which mode of learning are you more confident to
participate in in class?
8. Which mode of learning makes it harder for you to
learn your lessons?
9. Which mode of learning is the most convenient way
for you to socialize more effectively?
10. Where do you spend the most money?
11. Which mode of learning do you spend more time
with your friends?
12. Which mode of learning do you spend more time
with your family?
13. Which mode of learning do you spend more time
with yourself?
14. Which mode of learning made the schoolwork
harder?
15. Where do you socialize better?
16. Which mode of learning do you put your most effort
into?
 40

17. Which mode of learning do you spend the least

money on?
18. Which mode of learning are you more active?
19. Which mode of learning is better?
20. Where do you learn more?
21. Which mode of learning have you found least
engaging?
22. Which mode of learning is less stressful?
23. Which mode of learning is effective for you?
24. Which mode of learning makes you easily get
bored?
25. Which mode of learning is most peaceful for you?

Section 2:
Directions: Answer the following questions with Yes, No, or Maybe by putting a (✓)
check in the appropriate column.
FACE-TO-FACE LEARNING YES NO MAYBE
1. Does it make you spend more money?
2. Does online learning is more boring than face-to-face
learning?
3. Did you make new friends when face-to-face started?
4. Do you agree that you can spend more money during face-
to-face class?

5. Is face-to-face learning better than online learning?

ONLINE LEARNING YES NO MAYBE
1. Can we still improve our learning using online classes?
2. Does face-to-face learning is more boring than online
learning?
3. Does online class affect the students on socializing?
4. Do you agree that you can spend more money during online
classes?

5. Is online learning better than face-to-face learning?