Chapter III

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This study is designed to establish the extent of awareness on the

prohibited acts and penalties under R.A. 7610 among elementary and secondary

school teachers of Bagabag, Nueva Vizcaya and its influence to their level of

compliance. The presentation, analysis and interpretation of data in this chapter

follow the sequence of the specific questions posted in Chapter I.

Problem 1. What is the profile of the school teachers of Bagabag, Nueva

Vizcaya in terms of age, civil status, highest educational

attainment and length of service?

The profile of the respondents is presented through tables with frequency

and percentages.

Table 1

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents according to Age

Age Range Frequency (f) Percentage (%)

50 – 59 years old 31 28.70
40 – 49 years old 34 31.50
30 – 39 years old 33 30.60
20 – 29 years old 10 9.30
Total 108 100.00
Mean Age: 42.94
 Based on the above table, majority of the respondents belong to the age

group of 40 – 49 years old with 34 or 31.50%, followed by the age group of 30 –

39 years old with 33 or 30.60%; followed by age group of 50 – 59 years old with

31 or 28.70%; and 10 or 9.30% belongs to the age group of 20 – 29 years old.

It could be gleaned further that the school teachers of Bagabag, Nueva

Vizcaya were generally less than 42.94 years old, which further suggests that the

respondents were middle age. Dulay (2003) cited Cagungao (2002) that people

who were in the prime of their middle-age could withstand the rigors of work. Such

persons were likewise depicted and were generally mentally and physically

healthy.

Table 2

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents according to Civil

Status
Civil Status Frequency (f) Percentage (%)
Single 10 9.30
Married 95 88.00
Widow 3 2.70
Total 108 100.00

Based on the above table, almost all the respondents were married with 95

or 88.00%; 10 or 9.30% were single; and 3 or 2.70% were widow.

Table 3

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents according to Highest

Educational Attainment
Highest Educational Attainment Frequency (f) Percentage (%)
Doctorate Degree 1 0.90
Master’s Degree with Doctorate Units 4 3.70
Master’s Degree 12 11.10
Bachelor’s Degree with Master’s Units 78 72.20
Bachelor’s Degree 13 12.00
Total 108 100.00

Based on the above table, majority of the respondents were Bachelor’s

Degree with master’s units as manifested by 78 or 72.20%; followed by Bachelor’s

Degree with 13 or 12.00%; 12 or 11.10% of the respondents were Master’s

Degree; 4 or 3.70% were Master’s Degree with Doctorate units; and 1 or 0.90% is

holding doctorate degree.

Data indicate that the respondents are all professionals, possessing the

necessary skills and knowledge that come with their educational qualifications. The

highest frequency indicates the respondents’ contemplation for higher levels of

education.

This view with the finding of Bullecer (2002) when her respondents analyzed

education as an unending process from which teachers keep themselves abreast

with current trends, thrusts and issues in education. This favorable desire to

establish their competitive edge could lead them in total preparedness as the call

of opportunity comes (Dalloran, 2001).

Table 4

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents according to Length

of Service
Length of Service Frequency (f) Percentage (%)
30 – 39 years 13 12.00
20 – 29 years 26 24.10
10 – 19 years 35 32.40
1 – 9 years 34 31.50
Total 108 100.00
Mean Length of Service = 15.52

Based on the above table, majority of the respondents were serving 10 –

19 years as manifested by 35 or 32.40%; followed by respondents serving 1 – 9

years with 34 or 31.50%; 26 0r 24.10% were teachers serving 20 -29 years; and

13 or 12.00% were teachers serving 30 – 39 years.

The computed mean for the respondents’ length of service is 15.52, which

indicates that most of them have at least fifteen (15) years serving as a school

teacher.

Table 5 shows the mean difference and descriptive interpretation of the

respondents’ awareness on the prohibited act and penalties of R.A. 7610.

It can be gleaned from the table that respondents are very much aware of

the prohibited acts and penalties under R.A. 7610 as indicated by the weighted

mean of 3.48.

The respondents rated the 8 indicators with mean scores ranging from 3.41

to 3.56 with qualitative description of “very much aware”.

Table 5

Mean and Descriptive Interpretation of the Respondents’ Awareness on Prohibited

Acts and Penalties of R.A. 7610

Qualitative
AWARENESS OF R.A. 7610 Mean
Description
1. Punishing a child by pinching shall suffer the 3.43 Very Much
penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period Aware
of six (6) years and one (1) day imprisonment.
2. Punishing children by having objects such as 3.54 Very Much
books, chalks, erasers thrown at them shall Aware
suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its
minimum period of six (6) years and one (1)
day imprisonment.
3. Punishing a child by kicking, choking or hitting 3.56 Very Much
any area of the head shall suffer the penalty Aware
of prision mayor in its minimum period of six
(6) years and one (1) day imprisonment.
4. Name-calling or giving other name for the 3.50 Very Much
purpose of embarrassing a child shall suffer Aware
the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum
period of six (6) years and one (1) day
imprisonment.
5. Punishing a child by cursing shall suffer the 3.45 Very Much
penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period Aware
of six (6) years and one (1) day imprisonment.
6. Saying harsh languages or degrading words 3.49 Very Much
to a child shall suffer the penalty of prision Aware
mayor in its minimum period of six (6) years
and one (1) day imprisonment.
7. Shouting in order to embarrass a child shall 3.41 Very Much
suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its Aware
minimum period of six (6) years and one (1)
day imprisonment.
8. Any person who discriminate against children 3.46 Very Much
of indigenous cultural communities shall Aware
suffer a penalty of arresto mayor in its
maximum period of six (6) months
imprisonment and a fine of not less than five
thousand pesos (P5,000.00) but not more
than ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00).
3.48 VERY MUCH
OVERALL MEAN
AWARE
 It could be noted further that among the indicators of the extent of

awareness on the prohibited acts and penalties of R.A. 7610, the respondents

gave the three highest mean ratings to the indicators “Punishing a child by kicking,

choking or hitting any area of the head shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in

its minimum period of six (6) years and one (1) day imprisonment”; “Punishing

children by having objects such as books, chalks, erasers thrown at them shall

suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period of six (6) years and one

(1) day imprisonment”; and “Name-calling or giving other name for the purpose of

embarrassing a child shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period

of six (6) years and one (1) day imprisonment” with mean ratings of 3.56, 3.54 and

3.50, respectively.

Likewise, the respondents were very much aware to the indicators “Saying

harsh languages or degrading words to a child shall suffer the penalty of prision

mayor in its minimum period of six (6) years and one (1) day imprisonment”; “Any

person who discriminate against children of indigenous cultural communities shall

suffer a penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period of six (6) months

imprisonment and a fine of not less than five thousand pesos (P5,000.00) but not

more than ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00)”; and “Punishing a child by cursing

shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period of six (6) years and

one (1) day imprisonment” with mean ratings of 3.49, 3.46 and 3.45, respectively.

Similarly, the respondents rated the indicators “Punishing a child by

pinching shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period of six (6)

years and one (1) day imprisonment” and “Shouting in order to embarrass a child
shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period of six (6) years and

one (1) day imprisonment” with mean ratings 3.43 and 3.41, respectively,

qualitatively described as “very much aware”.

It could be inferred that the teachers’ awareness can be attributed to their

knowledge on the Teacher’s Code of Ethics, particularly on the section – Teacher

and the Students – which stipulated the prohibition against corporal punishment.

It could be also inferred that these teachers who assumed to be parents

themselves are knowledgeable that such acts would have physical and/or

emotional effects on their children. Since school children are under their care, they

are supposed to treat them as their own.

Because of the seminars and discussions regarding corporal punishments

and laws regarding child abuse conducted by the Department of Education, it

resulted on the very much aware response of the respondents on the provision of

R.A. 7610.

Table 6 shows the mean and descriptive interpretation of the respondents’

compliance on prohibited acts and penalties of R.A. 7610.

It can be gleaned from the table that respondents are completely complying

on the prohibited acts and penalties under R.A. 7610 as indicated by the weighted

mean of 3.75.

The respondents rated the 8 indicators with mean scores ranging from 3.68

to 3.80 with qualitative description of “completely complying”.

Table 6

Mean and Descriptive Interpretation of the Respondents’ Compliance on

Prohibited Acts and Penalties of R.A. 7610

Qualitative
AWARENESS OF R.A. 7610 Mean
Description
1. Refrain from punishing a child by pinching. 3.80 Completely
Complying
2. Refrain from punishing children by having 3.79 Completely
objects such as books, chalks, erasers thrown Complying
to them.
3. Refrain from punishing a child by kicking, 3.79 Completely
choking or hitting any area of the head. Complying
4. Refrain from name-calling or giving other 3.73 Completely
name for the purpose of embarrassing a child. Complying
5. Refrain from punishing a child by cursing. 3.71 Completely
Complying
6. Refrain from saying harsh languages or 3.75 Completely
degrading words to a child. Complying
7. Refrain from shouting in order to embarrass a 3.68 Completely
child. Complying
8. Refrain from discriminating children who are 3.78 Completely
members of an indigenous cultural community Complying
COMPLETELY
OVERALL MEAN 3.75
COMPLYING

It could be noted further that among the indicators, the respondents gave

the highest mean ratings to the indicator “Refrain from punishing a child by

pinching” with mean ratings of 3.80, qualitatively described as “completely

complying”.

Likewise, the respondents are completely complying on the indicators

“Refrain from punishing children by having objects such as books, chalks, erasers

thrown to them”; “Refrain from punishing a child by kicking, choking or hitting any

area of the head”; and “Refrain from discriminating children who are members of
an indigenous cultural community” with mean ratings of 3.79, 3.79 and 3.78,

respectively.

Similarly, the indicators “Refrain from saying harsh languages or degrading

words to a child”; “Refrain from name-calling or giving other name for the purpose

of embarrassing a child”; “Refrain from punishing a child by cursing”; and “Refrain

from shouting in order to embarrass a child” were rated by the respondents

“completely complying” with mean ratings 3.75, 3.73, 3.71 and 3.68, respectively.