Chapter Iv

CHAPTER IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of the data to answer
the research questions postulated in the present study. Below are the discussions and
tabulated results based on the data gathered from the respondents of ZPPSU EPDU
Kabasalan Campus.
Researched Problem Number 1. What is the Profile of the College Students in

terms of the following variables? Sex, Age, and Year Level & Programs.
Table 1:
Sex Frequency Percentage

(N=110) (%)
Male 36 32.7
Female 74 67.3
Total 110 100
Frequency and Percentage in terms of Sex
This table shows the frequency distribution of the sex of the students. 110
students where purposively selected. Based on the data gathered 74 (67.3%) of the
respondents were females. Moreover, only 36 (32.7%) of the respondents were male.
Our gathered data presented was clearly stated that most of our respondents are
females.
Venkatesh and Morris (2000) used Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
amongst 342 employees in a workplace and found that females tend to use the
technology that requires less effort and thus, effort expectancy is stronger for women
than men. They have also said that women were having lower perceived ease of use
because they were having higher levels of computer anxiety as compared to their male
counterparts. Venkatesh et al. (2003) also revealed that females are more anxious than
men when it comes to IT utilization and this nature of the females reduced their self
effectiveness which in turn led to increased perceptions of the effort required to use
IT.
In Addition, recent research has demonstrated the necessity to investigate the
age gaps of respondents to understand how does this individuals utilizes gadgets in
terms of their technological skills. By studying 2104 Spanish Internet users, Bigne,
Ruiz and Sanz (2005) highlighted that gender does not exhibit significant difference
when it comes to mobile shopping but rather age, societal status and knowledge of
Internet shopping are the main determinants of using M-Commerce.
Table 2:
Age Frequency Percentage

(N=110) (%)
18 - 19 years old 32 29.1

20 - 21 years old 44 40
22 - 23 years old 13 11.9
24 - 25 years old 15 13.6
26 and above 6 5.4
Total 110 100
Frequency and Percentage in terms of Age
The data reveal the respondent’s acknowledgement of their family structure.
This study had 110 respondents from 1st year to 3rd year college were the highest is
40% out of 100% are 20-21 years old base on our conducted data gathering and the
lowest are 26 and above year-old, with 14.1% out of 100%. This implies that highest
percentage of the ZPPSU EPDU Kabasalan Students are aged between 20 to 21 years
old students which means this age gaps are more often uses gadgets and more skillful
in terms of utilizing gadgets.
In this part are the random selected students from 1 st year to 3rd year college
students of ZPPSU Kabasalan Campus of A.Y. 2023-2024.
Table 3:
Year Levels & Programs Frequency Percentage

(N=110) (%)
3rd Year Students

 BSIT FT 3B 20 18.18
 BTVTED 3 10 9.09
2nd Year Students

 BTVTED 2A 20 18.18
 BTVTED 2B 10 9.09
1st Year Students

 BTVTED 1C 10 9.09
 BTVTED FSM 1A 10 9.09
 BSIT 1A 10 9.09
 BSIT GTT 1B 10 9.09
 BSMT 1C 10 9.0 9
Total 110 100
Frequency and Percentage in terms of Year Level

As per conducted the survey, mostly of the respondents gathered data was the
1st year student. According to our collected data the most populated year level are the
1st year students with approximately 600 students with in A.Y 2023-2024.
This table shows the Year level and programs were the respondents belong
with selected amount of students. In the 3rd year level, there are 30 respondents; 20
BSIT Food Tech B and 10 BTVTED. In the 2 nd year level, there are also 30
respondents; 20 BTVTED A and 10 BTVTED B. lastly, there are 50 respondents in 1st
year level; with 10 BTVTED 1C, 10 BTVTED FSM 1A, 10 BSIT 1A, 10 BSIT GTT
1B and 10 BSMT 1C. All of them are randomly selected on each of their section to
answer the research survey. Hence, it was bases accordingly to their section’s
population.
1.1 Researched Problem Number 2. What is the form of usage of communication
gadgets in terms of: Entertainment Purposes, Social Interactions, Educational
Activities and Entrepreneurial Endeavors.
Table 5:
I used gadgets for ... Mean Interpretation

ENTERTAINMENT 2.61 Agree
SOCIAL 3.01 Strong Agree

EDUCATION 3.42 Strong Agree
ENTREPRENEUR 2.33 Disagree
OVERALL MEAN…. 2.84 Agree
Usage Patterns of Communication Gadgets
Legend: 1.0-1.75(Strongly disagree),1.76-2.50,(Disagree) 2.51-3.25(Agree) 3.26-4.0

(strongly agree)
This table showed the gathered data analysis of usage patterns of
communication gadgets of ZPPSU Kabasalan Campus Students in terms of
Entertainment, Social, Education and Entrepreneur. The survey of this part interprets
that most of the students particularly in terms of Social and Education was Strongly
Agree which means this variables was utilized at most time of their daily living.
According to our research and surveys, online class was the common learning
process of students of ZPPSU Kabasalan Campus due to no facilities to be utilized for
face-to-face classes and other school activities to socialized with their teacher, peers
and classmates. Otherwise, the survey found out also that some college students uses
their gadgets for Entertainment and Entrepreneur just for fun and some are for
livelihood to sustain financial needs.

Leeper, Skipper, and Witherspoon (1968) claimed that student learning is
possible through concrete rather than abstract experiences. The learning of the student
is enhanced by the help of physical facilities.
Furthermore, Student can learn more effectively and work actively in a
comfortable atmosphere by the presence of all the school facilities. Facilities are the
factors which play an important role in the betterment of learning achievements of the
students.
1.2 Researched Problem Number 3. What are the effects of gadget usage on
college students' well-being in terms of: Physical health, Emotional well-being,
Mental health and Social interactions and relationships
Table 6:
I used gadgets for ... Mean Interpretation

PHYSICAL 2.62 Agree
EMOTIONAL 3.1
MENTAL 3.11
SPIRITUAL
OVERALL MEAN….
Effects of Gadget Usage on Well-being

(strongly agree)
Table 6 shows the well-being of the junior high school students in terms of
social. The highest mean 3.11 on the statement I have been feeling good about my
relationship with others because, even though they are from the broken family they
know how to deal with other people. Since they are not getting enough attention from
their family the students tend to seek attention from others. They like to socialize with
others as they want to get response from the people around them that they don’t get
from their family. Then the lowest mean is 2.81 on the statement they can get well
with people and they socially treated fairly because, they believed they are treated
least fairly because they feel they are not accepted by the society because of not
having the traditional family. And the overall mean is 2.91 prescribed as agree.
This implies that the highest percentage of junior high school students in term
of social well-being that they have been feeling good about their relationship with
others. Having close relationships with others gives students social well-being.
According to the study of Amy C & Jennifer C. (2011) close relationships of
high quality contribute to mental and physical well-being, whereas bad quality close
relationships cause stress and jeopardize health and happiness. Relationship quality is
determined by one's sense of a partner's responsiveness—that is, one's view that a
partner understands, values, and supports significant aspects of one's self. People who
believe their partners are receptive to them feel more connected, fulfilled, and
dedicated to their relationships.
In addition Reis, Clark, & Holmes, (2004). The current research focuses on the
responsiveness dynamic in dyadic relationships — relational mechanisms that
promote or weaken reciprocation of responsiveness between partners, altering the
quality of both partners' relationships over time. We propose that people's
interpersonal goals for their relationships, such as compassion goals to help others and
self-image goals to create and maintain desired self-images, predict positive and
negative responsiveness dynamics, affecting both people's relationship quality.

1.3 Researched Problem Number 4. What are the social responsibilities of college
students in terms of: Environmental stewardship, Ethical conduct, Human rights
advocacy, Economic participation and Philanthropic activities.
Table 7:
thru the used of gadgets and social media I.... Mean Interpretation
ENVIRONMENTAL
ETHICAL
HUMAN RIGHTS
ECONOMICS
PHILANTRHOPY
OVERALL MEAN….
Social Responsibilities

(strongly agree)
emotional. The highest mean 2.98 on the statement they feel optimistic about the
future. Even though they are not in a traditional type of family structure they are not
losing their hope that one day everything will be fine, even in small accomplishments,
can allow them to accomplish larger goals in the future. The lowest mean 2.75 on the
statement they control their feelings by not showing them because most of the
students want to show their feelings towards other people to build better relationships.
That’s because being aware of our emotions can help us talk about feelings more
clearly. And the overall mean is 2.82 prescribed as agree.
This implies that the highest percentage of junior high school in students
in terms of emotional well-being that they feel optimistic about their future. This just
show how emotionally strong they become growing up.
Though statistically speaking, children who came from a broken family
manifest disturbing behaviors growing up. Though it takes time, some of them
managed to prove themselves that being in a broken family is a blessing, not a curse.
They are emotionally stronger. People from a broken family know how to handle
different kind of emotions like abandonment, guilt, unhappiness, anger and well,
happiness. Experiencing this roller coaster kind of life enhances them to become
strong. They believe even the hardest point of their life won’t knock them down.
Lacea (2015).
Table 8:
Spiritual Mean Interpretation

I feel a personal relationship with the 3.03 Agree
Divine/God
My faith gives me feeling of security 3.30 Strongly Agree
I feel prayer enriches my life 2.77 Agree
I will overcome all problems with God’s 3.23 Agree
help
I feel inner strength 3.31 Strongly Agree
OVERALL MEAN 3.13 Agree
Well – being of Junior High School Students in terms of Spiritual

(strongly agree)
spiritual. The highest mean 3.31 on the statement I feel inner strength despite of their
family structure their belong they have inner strength that means that they have self-
discipline and ability to withstand difficulties and obstacle, when they have a
problems they don’t give up easily. The lowest mean 2.77 on the statement they
agreed on I feel prayer enriches my life. Even though it is the lowest they still agree
on it and they are not losing their hopes but we cannot take away their thoughts in
mind they feel doubts and they become impatiens in times prayers not enriches their
life. And the overall mean is 3.13 prescribed as agree.
This implies that the highest percentage of junior high school students in terms
of spiritual well-being that they feel inner strength and my faith gives them feeling of
security.
According to Hill & Pargament, (2003).Spirituality is an important aspect of
human life and family life. Over millennial and across cultures, spiritual beliefs and
practices have rooted and sustained families. Today, the vast majority of families
around the world, both within and outside of organized religion, use some sort of
expression to communicate their spiritual needs. The rising range and complexity of
spiritual beliefs and practices in society and within families, as well as the importance
of spirituality in partner and family interactions. It looks at the significance and
importance of spirituality in a societal framework, as well as how it ebbs and flows
over the life cycle of a multigenerational family. The spiritual dimension in couple
and family relationships is explored, with research and practical recommendations to
identify spiritual sources of distress and spiritual resources for coping, healing, and
resilience that meet the values and preferences of families. It is necessary to define
religion and spirituality in order to understand the role of spirituality in contemporary
family life .Religion is an organized, institutionalized religion system characterized by
common traditions, theology, rituals, and a community of believers. Religions give
norms and prescriptions for personal virtue, relational conduct, and family life
through sacred writings and teachings. Congregational affiliation gives clergy advice
as well as a faith community.
Table 9:
Mental Mean Interpretation
Thinking about myself and how I normally 2.89 Agree

feel, in general I mostly experience
positivity.
I’ve been feeling good about myself 2.75 Agree
I feel that I am satisfied with my life 2.83 Agree
Currently I feel mentally good 2.97 Agree

Well – being of Junior High School Students in terms of Mental
Legend: 1.0-1.75(Strongly disagree), 1.76-2.59,(Disagree) 2.51-3.25(Agree) 3.26-4.0

(strongly agree)
Mental. The highest mean 2.97 on the statement “currently mentally good”, even
though they came from broken family they still mentally stable because when we say
mentally good it means that the person can control their thoughts and actions. The
lowest mean is 2.75 on the statement “I’ve been feeling good about myself” because
maybe some students had a difficulty loving their own self, it takes hard work and
some major adjustments to learn to accept their selves and to address the unhappiness
in their life. And the overall mean is 2.86 prescribed as agree.

of mental well-being that they currently mentally good.
According to Cheng, Y., Zhang, L., Wang, F., et al. (2017), when the impacts
of family structure and function on mental health are combined, the exterior form of
family (family structure) may not be as essential as the interior quality of role (family
function). A main strategy for family practice with their mental health would be to
improve the residents' family function. The family is the most basic social unit in
society, and it can have a significant impact on mental health at any age. Adult
populations are also under increased stress in their professional and personal lives as a
result of severe rivalry in industrialization and globalization, and more adults are
likely to suffer from mental problems. Furthermore, conflicts between cultures and
values that arise as a result of globalization might have an impact on adults' career,
family life, and mental. As a result, a study of adult population family structure and
function, as well as mental health, has significant practical implications, particularly
for emerging countries that are now at a competitive disadvantage in the global
marketplace.
Table 10:
Physical Mean Interpretation

I feel able to relax when I want to 2.97 Agree
I feel energetic and interested when I need 2.95 Agree
to be
Feeling good about myself 3.05 Agree
Normally feel in general I mostly experience 2.95 Agree
positive feelings
Feel healthy 3.13 Agree
Well – being of Junior High School Students in terms of Physical
Legend: 1.0-1.75(Strongly disagree), 1.76-2.59,(Disagree) 2.51-3.25(Agree)

3.26-4.0 (strongly agree)
physical. The highest mean 3.13 is the students agreed that they feel healthy, they feel
healthy because even though they come from not traditional family structure they are
happy and contented with the family they have they are accepting what they are right
now. When you are happy you are healthy. The lowest mean 2.95 on the statement is
the students normally feel in general that they able to feel relaxed when they want to,
it is because of the reason even if they want to rest or feel relaxed they can’t because
of the life they already have. The world of children must be happy and carefree, they
don’t have jobs to keep or bills to pay, but for this children and teenagers the world is
different where they must fine their selves busy like doing household shores and other
have problems with their daily expenses, how will they eat tomorrow, how will they
go to school, who will give them. So instead of relaxing they will find a way. And the
overall mean is 3.01 prescribed as agree.
of physical well-being the students agreed that they feel healthy, students who are
physically active tend to have higher grades.
Foster and Kalil (2007) argue that social selection is crucial when attempting
to assess family structure's correlations with child outcomes; that is, an individual's
qualities are likely to impact whether or not he or she would engage in stable, ongoing
partnerships. As a result, one's personality qualities influence the type (or types) of
family structure his or her children grow up in, as well as their subsequent growth and
well-being. This study controls for socio demographic parameters that are linked to
both family structure and child outcomes in order to account for observable selection
mechanisms. Correcting for such factors significantly lessens, but does not fully
explain, the relationships between family structure and child outcomes
Table 11:
Well-Being Mean Interpretation

Social 2.91 Agree
Emotional 2.82 Agree
Spiritual 3.13 Agree
Physical 2.86 Agree
Mental 3.01 Agree
SUMMARY of the well-being of the respondents
Legend: 1.0-1.75(Strongly disagree), 1.76-2.59,(Disagree) 2.51-3.25(Agree) 3.26-

4.0 (strongly agree)
This table show the mean of the Junior High School Students based on their
well-being. The highest mean is the spiritual 3.13 for the reason why the spirituality is
high because even though the selected Junior High School Students came from the
broken family their feelings/believes is something greater than their self, something
more to being human than sensory experience, but still does not lose faith in the Lord.
Even though their situation is like that, they struggle a lot they face many trials they
don’t lose the spiritual aspect of their lives, only here it shows that in any of family
structure that this students belong the spiritual wellness of this students will prevail.
Then lowest mean in terms on the well-being of the Junior High School student is on
the Emotional 2.82, because most of the broken families don’t share how they feel,
it’s better to be alone than to tell other people. This shows that this students have trust
issues not only to the people around them but from their selves. One of the parent’s
role is to provide emotional support which this students didn’t get, parent who is
emotionally present to the child will definitely reinforce positive out to the child well-
being. Therefore they have low emotional well-being because they see other families
as complete so we become more sensitive because people see that we were different
from them.
of well-being the students is spiritual well-being, students well-being is strong despite
of the problems they face in life they still have faith and relationship with Almighty
father.
Spiritual well-being is one of a core human component that provides driving
force to give person stability, meaning, fulfillment in life, faith in self ( Rovers &
kocum, 2010). It was defined according to Moberg (2002) as a sense of transcendence
beyond one’s circumstances, and other dimensions such as the purpose of life,
reliance on inner resource, and sense of within-person integration or connectedness.
Moreover, spiritual well-being has two dimensions; horizontal (existential dimension
refers to the sense of purpose in life, peace and life satisfaction, and vertical
( religious) dimension refers to the sense of well-being in relation to God or higher
power.
Research Problem Number 4: Is there is a significance difference in the well-
being of the respondents when data is grouped according to profile
Table 12:
The profile of the respondents in terms of Age and the Wellbeing of the students
using ANOVA test.
Sum of Df Mean F Sig. Interpretatio

Squares Square n
Between .080 1 .080 .344 .560 Not
Groups significant
Social Within 14.395 62 .232
Groups
Total 14.474 63
Between .047 1 .047 .256 .615 Not
Groups significant
Emotional Within 11.371 62 .183
Groups
Total 11.418 63
Between .162 1 .162 .826 .367 Not
Groups significant
Spiritual Within 12.187 62 .197
Groups
Total 12.349 63
Between .519 1 .519 2.969 .090 Not
Groups significant
Mental Within 10.840 62 .175
Groups
Total 11.359 63
Between .012 1 .012 .053 .819 Not
Groups significant
Physical Within 13.703 62 .221
Groups
Total 13.714 63
The table shows ANOVA Table of the profile of the respondents in terms of
Age and the Social Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the Sig.
value .560 is greater than to the significance level of 0.05 the null hypothesis is
accepted and conclude that the population means are equal. The differences between
the age and the wellbeing of the students in terms of social is not statistically
significant. This table implies that there is no significant relationship between the
respondents' age and their students’ well-being, implying that your wellbeing is not
determined by your age.
Age and the Emotional Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the Sig.
the age and the wellbeing of the students in terms of emotional is not statistically
Age and the Spiritual Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the Sig.
the age and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Spiritual is not statistically

Age and the Mental Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the Sig.
the age and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Mental is not statistically
Age and the Physical Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the Sig.
the age and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Physical is not statistically

Table 13:
The profile of the respondents in terms of Ethnicity and the Wellbeing of the
students using ANOVA test.
ANOVA
Sum of df Mean F Sig. Interpretation

Squares Square
Between 1.147 3 .382 1.720 .172 Not significant
Groups
Social Within 13.328 60 .222
Groups
Total 14.474 63
Groups
Emotional Within 10.310 60 .172
Groups
Total 11.418 63
Groups
Spiritual Within 11.095 60 .185
Groups
Total 12.349 63
Between .023 3 .008 .040 .989 Not significant
Groups
Groups
Total 11.359 63
Between .699 3 .233 1.074 .367 Not significant
Groups
Within 13.015 60 .217
Physical Groups
13.714 63
Total
The table shows ANOVA Table of the profile of the respondents in terms
of Ethnicity and the Social Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the
Sig. value .172 is greater than to the significance level of 0.05 the null hypothesis is
the Ethnicity and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Social is not statistically
respondents' Ethnicity and their students’ well-being, implying that your wellbeing is
not determined by your Ethnicity.
of Ethnicity and the Emotional Well-being of the students. Based on the result since,
the Sig. value .103 is greater than to the significance level of 0.05 the null hypothesis
is accepted and conclude that the population means are equal. The differences
between the Ethnicity and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Emotional is not
statistically significant. This table implies that there is no significant relationship
between the respondents' Ethnicity and their students’ well-being, implying that your
wellbeing is not determined by your Ethnicity.
of Ethnicity and the Spiritual Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the
the Ethnicity and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Spiritual is not statistically
of Ethnicity and the Mental Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the
the Ethnicity and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Mental is not statistically
of Ethnicity and the Physical Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the
the Ethnicity and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Physical is not statistically

Table 14:
The profile of the respondents in terms of Family Monthly Income and the
Wellbeing of the students using ANOVA test.
ANOVA
Sum of Df Mean F Sig. Interpretation
Squares Square
Between .487 3 .162 .696 .558
Groups
Social Within 13.988 60 .233 Not
Groups significant
Total 14.474 63
Between .991 3 .330 1.901 .139
Groups Not significant
emotional Within 10.426 60 .174
Groups
Total 11.418 63
Between 1.141 3 .380 2.035 .119
Groups
Spiritual Within 11.209 60 .187 Not
Groups significant
Total 12.349 63
Between .097 3 .032 .171 .915 Not
Groups significant
Groups
Total 11.359 63
Between .405 3 .135 .608 .612 Not
Groups significant
Physical Within 13.309 60 .222
Groups
Total 13.714 63
of Ethnicity and the Social Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the
Sig. value (.558) is greater than to the significance level of 0.05 the null hypothesis is
the Ethnicity and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Social is not statistically
of Ethnicity and the Emotional Well-being of the students. Based on the result since,
the Sig. value (.139) is greater than to the significance level of 0.05 the null
hypothesis is accepted and conclude that the population means are equal. The
differences between the Ethnicity and the wellbeing of the students in terms of
Emotional is not statistically significant. This table implies that there is no significant
relationship between the respondents' Ethnicity and their students’ well-being,
implying that your wellbeing is not determined by your Ethnicity.
of Ethnicity and the Spiritual Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the
the Ethnicity and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Spiritual is not statistically
of Ethnicity and the Mental Well-being of the students. Based on the result since, the
the Ethnicity and the wellbeing of the students in terms of Mental is not statistically
of Family monthly income and the Physical Well-being of the students. Based on the
result since, the Sig. value (.612) is greater than to the significance level of 0.05 the
null hypothesis is accepted and conclude that the population means are equal. The
differences between the Ethnicity and the wellbeing of the students in terms of
Physical is not statistically significant. This table implies that there is no significant
relationship between the respondents' Ethnicity and their students’ well-being,
implying that your wellbeing is not determined by your Ethnicity.
Table 15:
The significance difference between the well-being of the students and their sex.
T-test
F T Df Sig. Interpretation
Equal variances .537 -.709 29 .470

assumed Not Significant
Social
Equal variances not -.610 11.358
assumed
Equal variances .139 -1.266 29 .712
assumed Not Significant
Emotional
Equal variances not -1.377 18.083
assumed
Equal variances .007 .067 29 .932 Not
assumed Significant
Spiritual
Equal variances not .066 14.506
assumed
Equal variances 1.28 1.235 29 .266 Not
assumed 7 Significant
Mental
Equal variances not 1.126 12.492
assumed
Equal variances .000 -.105 29 .996 Not
assumed Significant
Physical
Equal variances not -.099 13.321
assumed
The table shows the result using T-test between well-being of the students in
terms of Social and their sex, there is no significant difference. This implies that sex
of the respondents does not define the social well-being of the students.
terms of Emotional and their sex, there is no significant difference. This implies that
sex of the respondents does not defines the Emotional well-being of the students.
terms of Spiritual and their sex, there is no significant difference. This implies that sex
of the respondents does not defines the Spiritual well-being of the students.
terms of Mental and their sex, there no a significant difference. This implies that sex
of the respondents does not defines the mental well-being of the students.
terms of Physical and their sex, there is no significant difference. This implies that sex
of the respondents does not defines the physical well-being of the students.
Research Problem 5: Is there a significance relationship between family

structure and the well-being of the students?
Table 16:
The relationship between family structure and wellbeing Pearson-r Correlation
Correlations
family wellbeing Interpretation
structure
family structure Pearson 1 .088
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .487
N 64 64
Pearson .088 1 Not Significant
Correlation
Wellbeing
Sig. (2-tailed) .487
N 64 64
Based on the result of the study using the Pearson-r correlation there is no
significant relationship between the family structure of the students and their well-
being in terms of social, emotional, spiritual, mental and physical. The strength and
direction of the linear relationship between the two variables are measured by these
numbers. The correlation coefficient can be anywhere between -1 and +1, with -1
denoting perfect negative correlation, +1 denoting perfect positive correlation, and 0
denoting no association at all. (A correlation coefficient of 1 indicates that a variable
is associated with itself.) Since, the coefficient value lies between ± 0.50 and ± 1, then
it is said to be a strong correlation. This implies that there is no relationship between
family structure and well-being of the students.
Research Problem 6. On the basis of the findings what program intervention

program can be developed?
Intervention program
FREEDOM OF FEELINGS: WELL-BEING AWARENESS
RATIONALE
This Intervention Program is purposely promulgated so that students may
identify their well-being because of the family structures that they have. This program
aims to improve students' physical, emotional, social, spiritual, and mental well-being.
In line with this, the researchers experience during the high school days wherein they
become one of the students who has not traditional family prompted to make a
program that can help the students cope with their wellbeing. To be able to the school
and the educational system to combat the anticipated problem that may arise in the
future, this intervention program is made.
OBJECTIVES
1. To make the students aware with their mental, physical, social, emotional, and
spiritual wellbeing.
2. To increase the ability of the students in nurturing good emotions and
compassionately seeing and transcending unpleasant ones.
3. To cope with the stress and work with other people productively.
4. To instill confidence in parents so that they would send their children to
school despite the fact that they have family issues.
TARGETED PARTICIPANTS
1. Junior High School student who experience living alone.
2. Junior high school student who lives with their grandparents.
3. Junior high school student who has a single-parent and step family.
4. And other identified students who experience problems with their family.
INTERVENTION STRATEGIES
Majority of the Junior high school students who were enrolled in particular
national high schools on the west coast during the academic year 2020-2021 had
experience low well-being in social, physical, spiritual, mental and emotional. It is

due to the structure of the family that junior high school have. Most people don't care
about what happens at home and frequently don't mention it if they don't witness it. In
the Tulungatung area where our study is taking place, most of the family members are
not living with their parents, but rather with their guardians. Due to the lack of parents
with whom to discuss and comprehend their problems, the majority of the children
work and suffer from emotional trauma, and as a result, they only have faith in
themselves. The junior high school students’ problems with their family is shouldered
by the high school teacher, because it affects the students social, physical, spiritual,
mental and emotional well-being and they can’t focus with their academic. This is
why intervention program is adopted by the schools to remedy with the problems of
the students. The following strategies are hereto below presented to wit;
1. Home visiting the students to bridge the gap between the school and the
students’ home and families.
2. Identification of the students who has low wellbeing by their academic
performance and behavior in school.
3. Encouraging students to participate in meaningful activities, such as clubs,
societies, interest groups, and associations that focus on issues of concern to
young people, such as health; creating a welcoming environment where all
students feel supported and safe
4. Using evidence-based approaches linked to personal safety, resilience, help-
seeking, and protective behaviors, explicitly teach social and emotional skills
throughout the curriculum.
5. Involvement of parents in solving school issues and enhancing the academic
performance and self-esteem of students.

6. Build linkages with community organizations, services and agencies to help
schools in the early identification of need and to cooperatively design targeted
assistance for all children and families.
7. Provide a seminar class/open forum where students can tell their problems to
their parents openly and give guidance to both parents and the students.
8. Support and maintain the families of teens who have both of their biological
parents, as they may be able to contribute to the well-being of adolescents
EXPECTED OUTPUT
1. Students can enjoy their life during high school days.
2. No students can feel that they are incomplete without having a complete
family.
3. All students will have a good well-being.
4. Students can cope with stress.
5. The students are aware with the status of their wellbeing.

Chapter Iv

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter Iv

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter Iv

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Researched Problem Number 1. What is the Profile of the College Students in

Sex Frequency Percentage

Venkatesh and Morris (2000) used Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)

In Addition, recent research has demonstrated the necessity to investigate the

Internet shopping are the main determinants of using M-Commerce.

Age Frequency Percentage

18 - 19 years old 32 29.1

The data reveal the respondent’s acknowledgement of their family structure.

in terms of utilizing gadgets.

students of ZPPSU Kabasalan Campus of A.Y. 2023-2024.

Year Levels & Programs Frequency Percentage

3rd Year Students

2nd Year Students

1st Year Students

Total 110 100

Frequency and Percentage in terms of Year Level

respondents; 20 BTVTED A and 10 BTVTED B. lastly, there are 50 respondents in 1st

I used gadgets for ... Mean Interpretation

SOCIAL 3.01 Strong Agree

Legend: 1.0-1.75(Strongly disagree),1.76-2.50,(Disagree) 2.51-3.25(Agree) 3.26-4.0

This table showed the gathered data analysis of usage patterns of

communication gadgets of ZPPSU Kabasalan Campus Students in terms of

process of students of ZPPSU Kabasalan Campus due to no facilities to be utilized for

livelihood to sustain financial needs.

is enhanced by the help of physical facilities.

Furthermore, Student can learn more effectively and work actively in a

I used gadgets for ... Mean Interpretation

Legend: 1.0-1.75(Strongly disagree),1.76-2.50,(Disagree) 2.51-3.25(Agree) 3.26-4.0

According to the study of Amy C & Jennifer C. (2011) close relationships of

determined by one's sense of a partner's responsiveness—that is, one's view that a

dedicated to their relationships.

responsiveness dynamic in dyadic relationships — relational mechanisms that

promote or weaken reciprocation of responsiveness between partners, altering the

quality of both partners' relationships over time. We propose that people's

negative responsiveness dynamics, affecting both people's relationship quality.

Legend: 1.0-1.75(Strongly disagree),1.76-2.59,(Disagree) 2.51-3.25(Agree) 3.26-4.0

clearly. And the overall mean is 2.82 prescribed as agree.

show how emotionally strong they become growing up.

Though statistically speaking, children who came from a broken family

Spiritual Mean Interpretation

Legend: 1.0-1.75(Strongly disagree),1.76-2.59,(Disagree) 2.51-3.25(Agree) 3.26-4.0

life. And the overall mean is 3.13 prescribed as agree.

According to Hill & Pargament, (2003).Spirituality is an important aspect of

of spirituality in partner and family interactions. It looks at the significance and

importance of spirituality in a societal framework, as well as how it ebbs and flows

and family relationships is explored, with research and practical recommendations to

religion and spirituality in order to understand the role of spirituality in contemporary

family life .Religion is an organized, institutionalized religion system characterized by

common traditions, theology, rituals, and a community of believers. Religions give

as well as a faith community.

Mental Mean Interpretation

Thinking about myself and how I normally 2.89 Agree

I feel that I am satisfied with my life 2.83 Agree

Currently I feel mentally good 2.97 Agree

OVERALL MEAN 2.86 Agree

Legend: 1.0-1.75(Strongly disagree), 1.76-2.59,(Disagree) 2.51-3.25(Agree) 3.26-4.0

in their life. And the overall mean is 2.86 prescribed as agree.