Problem 1: Profile of the Respondents

1.1 Age
Table 1
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the
Respondents by Age
Age
21- 30
31- 40
41- 50
51- 60
61 and above
Total

Frequency
11
24
10
3
2
50

Percent
22.0
48.0
20.0
6.0
4.0
100.0

As shown in Table 1, 24 or 48% of the respondents are aged 31- 40years

old, 11 or 22 % are aged 21- 30 years old, 10 or 20% are aged 41- 50 years old,
3 or 6 % are aged 51- 60 years old and 2 or 4 % are aged 61 and above. This
implies that majority of the respondents are in the middle adulthood stage
wherein they are matured enough, responsible and decided about pursuing their
chosen career. According to Ho (2005), faculty members belonging to the age
bracket of 31 to 40 years were considered as matured and could be relied on.

1.2 Sex
Table 2
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the
Respondents by Sex
Sex
Male
Female
Total

Frequency
15
35
50

Percent
30.0
70.0
100.0

Table 2 shows that 35 or 70 % of the respondents are female and 15 or 30

% are male. This implies that respondents are both females and males. However,
females outnumbered the males. Traditionally, teaching is considered as a
womans job. The findings bear resemblance to the study by Geniza (2002).
Genizas study showed that out of more than 300 teacher respondents, 155
(52.54 %) are female, indicating that teaching has been culturally associated with
females.

1.3 Civil Status

Table 3

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the

Respondents by Civil Status
Civil Status
Single
Married
Total

Frequency
9
41
50

Percent
18.0
82.0
100.0

As shown in Table 3, 41 or 82 % of the respondents are married and only

9 or 18 % are single. It is clearly seen that majority of the respondents are
married people. Married people are said to be responsible, caring and
committed. According to Suratos (2002), married faculty members are found
technical and professional competent, and tend to observe as well as practice a
set of ethical and moral principles, standards and values.

1.4 Highest Educational Status

Table 4
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the
Respondents by Highest Educational Status
Highest Educational
Status
College Graduate
Masters Graduate
Doctorate Graduate
Total

Frequency

Percent

28
17
5
50

56.0
34.0
10.0
100.0

As shown in Table 4. 28 or 56 % of the respondents are college graduate,

17 or 34 % are masters graduate and 5 or 10 % are doctorate graduate. It
appears that more than half of the respondents are college graduate. However,
some of the respondents have masters and doctorate degree. This may imply

that almost half of the respondents are pursuing education for higher degree.
Pursuing graduate education means updating intellectual qualities which is very
important in the teaching profession . According to Villaluz (2005), strong
knowledge of content is of best influence in enhancing Pedagogical Content
(PCK), and this is achievable by pursuing the requisite higher education or
degree in the discipline.

1.5 Years of Service in the School

Table 5
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the
Respondents by Years of Service in the School
Years of Service in the
School
5 years and below
6-10 years
11- 15 years
16- 20 years
21 years and above
Total

Frequency

Percent

13
18
11
6
2
50

26.0
36.0
22.0
12.0
4.0
100.0

As shown in Table 5. 18 or 36 % of the respondents have 6 to 10 years of

service in the school, 13 or 26 % have 5 years and below, 11 or 22 % have 11 to
15 years, 6 or 12 % have 16 to 20 years and 2 or 4 % have 21 years and above.
It is noted that there is a sudden decline of number of respondents after five
years in the profession. This could be attributed to career paths. Matchete
(2009), reveals that the decline in the length of teaching experience of the
teachers could be attributed to the brain drain that the Philippines is
experiencing at present. According to her, teachers are very much in demand

abroad; hence, most of the qualified and experienced teachers opted to leave the
country for a greener pasture.

Problem 2: Level of Job Satisfaction

2.1 Achievement
Table 6
Respondents Level of Job Satisfaction
In Terms of Achievement
Achievement
I will continue to stay in this company until I
retire
I have acquired the finest professional
competency
My work gives me a feeling of personal
accomplishment
Grand Mean

Weighted
Mean
3.50

Verbal Interpretation

3.44

Somewhat Satisfied

3.48

Somewhat Satisfied

3.47

Somewhat Satisfied

Satisfied

Table 6 shows that I will continue to stay until I retire obtained the highest
weighted mean of 3.50, verbally interpreted as Satisfied. This is followed by My
work gives me a feeling of personal accomplishment with a weighted mean of
3.48, and then by I have acquired the finest professional competency with a
weighted mean of 3.44. Both statements are given an interpretation of
Somewhat Satisfied
As a whole, the Achievement got a weighted mean of 3.47, verbally
interpreted as Somewhat Satisfied. The results might mean that the institution
should give more opportunities for advancement such as more challenging task,
trainings and education. Being excellent in work may mean that they are
personally and professionally competent.

Herzberg (1964) mentioned, achievement is one of the motivating factors

which may bring employees into higher performance. Likewise, Dajoc (1991)
states that growth opportunity is the primary factor, which keeps worker with their
job.

2.2 Recognition
Table 7
Respondents Level of Job Satisfaction
In Terms of Recognition
Recognition
I am recognized for the quality of my efforts
The company values my contribution to my
department
The company appreciates my good
performance through gifts or incentives.
Grand Mean

Weighted
Mean
3.96
3.62

Verbal Interpretation

3.34

Somewhat Satisfied

3.64

Satisfied

Satisfied
Satisfied

Table 7 shows that I am recognized for the quality of my efforts obtained

the highest weighted mean of 3.96, verbally interpreted as Satisfied. This is
followed by The company values my contribution to my department with a
weighted mean of 3.62, verbally interpreted as Satisfied. The company
appreciates my good performance through gifts or incentives got the lowest
weighted mean of 3.34, verbally interpreted as Somewhat Satisfied.
As a whole, the Recognition got a weighted mean of 3.64, verbally
interpreted as Satisfied. This may imply that respondents efforts and
contribution to the institution is valued and recognized by the institution.

Herzberg

(1964),

mentioned

that

recognition

makes

employees

experience job satisfaction.

2.3 Work Itself

Table 8
Respondents Level of Job Satisfaction
In Terms of Work Itself
Work Itself
My work give me challenges
I am satisfied on how often I take part in
problem solving
My work met my personal expectation about
the work itself
Grand Mean

Weighted
Mean
3.52
3.64

Verbal Interpretation

3.52

Satisfied

3.56

Satisfied

Satisfied
Satisfied

Table 8 shows that I am satisfied on how often I take part in problem

solving obtained the highest weighted mean of 3.64, verbally interpreted as
Satisfied. This is followed by My work give me challenges and My work met
my personal expectation about the work itself. Both statements have a weighted
mean of 3.52, verbally interpreted as Satisfied.
As a whole, the Work Itself got a weighted mean of 3.56, verbally
interpreted as Satisfied. This may imply that respondents are satisfied with their
jobs when they are given challenging tasks and being able to handle it well.
Limcaco (1992) stated that the reasons why teachers leave the service
are lack of challenge, non- recognition of achievement and discrimination.

2.4 Responsibility

Table 9
Respondents Level of Job Satisfaction
In Terms of Responsibility
Responsibility
The amount of work output expected of me is
reasonable
I am given enough freedom to handle my task
I like the level of responsibility assigned to me
Grand Mean

Weighted
Mean
3.64

Verbal Interpretation

3.32
3.72
3.56

Somewhat satisfied
Satisfied
Satisfied

Satisfied

Table 9 shows that I like the level of responsibility assigned to me

obtained the highest weighted mean of 3.72, verbally interpreted as Satisfied.
This is followed by The amount of work output expected of me is reasonable
with a weighted mean of 3.64, verbally interpreted as Satisfied and then by I
am given enough freedom to handle my task with a weighted mean of 3.32,
verbally interpreted as Somewhat Satisfied.
As a whole, the Responsibility got a weighted mean of 3.56, verbally
interpreted as Satisfied. This may imply that respondents are satisfied with the
responsibility given to them. Assignments, tasks and outputs expected to the
respondents are reasonable and they are given freedom to handle the task.

2.5 Opportunities for Promotion

Table 10
Respondents Level of Job Satisfaction
In Terms of Opportunities for Promotion
Opportunities for Promotion

Weighted
Mean

Verbal Interpretation

I am aware of the advancement opportunities

that exist in the company
The position and conditions I have right now
satisfies me
The challenging demands of my work boost my
professional competencies
Grand Mean

3.50

Satisfied

3.74

Satisfied

3.28

Somewhat Satisfied

3.51

Satisfied

Table 10 shows that The position and conditions I have right now satisfies
me obtained the highest weighted mean of 3.74, followed by I am aware of the
advancement opportunities that exist in the company with a weighted mean of
3.50. Both statements are given an interpretation of Satisfied. The challenging
demands of my work boost my personal competencies got the lowest weighted
mean of 3.28, verbally interpreted as Somewhat Satisfied.
As a whole, the Opportunities for Promotion got a weighted mean of 3.51,
verbally interpreted as Satisfied. The result may indicate that respondents feel
that there is a need to improve the promotion process in the institution.
Opportunities for promotion may cause the employee to perform better or exert
greater effort in his/ her job.
According to Markgraf (2000), promotion constitutes an important aspect
of workers labor mobility and can have a significant impact on other job
characteristics such as responsibilities and subsequent job attachment.

2.6 Salary/ Pay

Table 11
Respondents Level of Job Satisfaction
In Terms of Salary/ Pay

Salary/ Pay
I am satisfied with basic pay
The company provides annual raise
I am satisfied with the schedule of payroll
release
Grand Mean

Weighted
Mean
3.58
3.84
3.42

Verbal Interpretation

3.61

Satisfied

Satisfied
Satisfied
Somewhat Satisfied

Table 11 shows that The company provides annual raise obtained the
highest weighted mean of 3.84, followed by I am satisfied with basic pay with a
weighted mean of 3.58. Both statements are given an interpretation of Satisfied.
I am satisfied with the schedule of payroll release got the lowest weighted mean
of 3.42, verbally interpreted as Somewhat Satisfied.
As a whole, the Salary/ Pay got a weighted mean of 3.61, verbally
interpreted as Satisfied. This may imply that the respondents are satisfied with
the compensation they receive from the institution.
Herzberg (1964), said that basic salary was important as a survival need
because it protects against employee dissatisfaction. It could not, however,
strongly motivate. He did note that recognition, promotional opportunities and
self- worth are the key motivators. Thus, if companies tie these factors to pay
structure, they may have more ability to use salary to push for stronger
performance.
Problem 3: Difference in the Respondents Level of Job Satisfaction when
Grouped by Profile
The following tables illustrates the significant difference in the assessment
of the respondents on their level of job satisfaction when grouped according to

their profile as age, sex, civil status, highest educational status and years in the
service.
3.1 Age
Table 12
Significant Difference in the Level of Job Satisfaction
of the respondents by Age
Variable
Achievement
Recognition
Work Itself
Responsibility
Opportunity for
Promotion
Salary/ Pay

F- value
.660
.878
1. 306
2.608
1.127

p- value
.632
.485
.282
.048
.356

Decision
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Reject Ho
Accept Ho

Remarks
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Significant
Not Significant

.946

.446

Accept Ho

Not Significant

As shown in Table 12, the null hypotheses for Achievement (F=.660,

p=.632),

Recognition

(F=.878,

p=.485),

Work

Itself

(F=1.306,

p=.282),

Opportunity for promotion (F=1.127, p=.356), and Salary/ Pay (F=.946, p=.446)
were accepted since p- values are greater than .05, the assumed level of
significance. The results meant that the level of satisfaction of the respondents
for the five aspects of job satisfaction did not differ significantly when they were
grouped by age.
On the other hand, the level of satisfaction of the respondents differed
significantly with respect to the responsibility. This aspect of job satisfaction had
an F- value of 2.608 and with p- value of .048. The p- value was less than .05,
hence the null hypothesis was rejected.

3.2 Sex
Table 13
Significant Difference in the Level of Job Satisfaction
of the respondents by Sex
Variable
Achievement
Recognition
Work Itself
Responsibility
Opportunity for Promotion
Salary/ Pay

F- value
.596
.233
.397
.229
.960
.003

p- value
.444
.632
.531
.634
.332
.955

Decision
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho

Remarks
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant

As shown in Table 13, Achievement had an F-value of .596 and p-value

of .444, Recognition had F=.233 and p=.632, Work Itself had F=.397 and
p=.531, Responsibility had F=.229 and p=.634,Opportunity for Promotion had
F=.960 and p=.332, and Salary/ Pay had F=.003 and p=.955. All the p- values
were greater than .05, the level of significance, hence the null hypothesis was
accepted. This meant that the level of respondents job satisfaction when
grouped by sex were not significantly different.

3.3 by Civil Status

Table 14
Significant Difference in the Level of Job Satisfaction
of the respondents by Civil Status

Variable
Achievement
Recognition
Work Itself
Responsibility
Opportunity for Promotion
Salary/ Pay

F- value
.677
.699
.028
.331
4.793
5.095

p- value
.415
.407
.868
.568
.033
.029

Decision
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Reject Ho
Reject Ho

Remarks
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Significant
Significant

As shown in Table 14, the null hypotheses for Achievement (F=.677, p= .

415), Recognition (F=699, p=.407), Work Itself (F=.028, p=.868), and
Responsibility (F=.331, p=.568) were accepted since p- values are greater than .
05, the assumed level of significance. The results meant that the level of
satisfaction of the respondents for the four aspects of job satisfaction did not
differ significantly when they were grouped by civil status.
On the other hand, the level of satisfaction of the respondents differed
significantly with respect to the Opportunity for Promotion (F=4.793, p=.033) and
Salary/ Pay (F=5.095, p=.029). Both p- values were less than .05, hence the null
hypothesis were rejected.

3.4 by Highest Educational Status

Table 15
Significant Difference in the Level of Job Satisfaction
of the Respondents by Highest Educational Status
Variable

F- value

p- value

Decision

Remarks

Achievement
Recognition
Work Itself
Responsibility
Opportunity for Promotion
Salary/ Pay

1.196
.615
4.939
1.862
2.131
2.598

.311
.545
.011
.167
.130
.085

Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Reject Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho

Not Significant
Not Significant
Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant

As shown in Table 15, the null hypotheses for Achievement (F=1.196,

p=.311), Recognition (F=.615, p=.545), Responsibility (F=1.862, p=.167),
Opportunity for Promotion (F=2.131, p=.130) and Salary/ Pay (F=2.598, p=.085)
were accepted since p- values are greater than .05, the assumed level of
significance. The results meant that the level of satisfaction of the respondents
for the five aspects of job satisfaction did not differ significantly when they were
grouped by highest educational status.
On the other hand, the level of satisfaction of the respondents differed
significantly with respect to the Work Itself. This aspect of job satisfaction had an
F- value of 4.939 and with p- value of .011. the p- value was less than .05, hence
the null hypothesis was rejected.

3.5 by Years of Service in the School

Table 16
Significant Difference in the Level of Job Satisfaction
of the Respondents by Years of Service in the School
Variable

F- value

p- value

Decision

Remarks

Achievement
Recognition
Work Itself
Responsibility
Opportunity for Promotion
Salary/ Pay

1.357
.159
.222
.725
3.155
.225

.264
.958
.925
.579
.023
.923

Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Accept Ho
Reject Ho
Accept Ho

Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Significant
Not Significant

As shown in Table 16, the null hypotheses for Achievement (F=1.356,

p=.264),

Recognition

(F=.159,

p=.958),

Work

Itself

(F=.222,

p=.925),

Responsibility (F=725, p=.579), and Salary/ Pay (F=.225, p=.923) were accepted
since p- values are greater than .05, the assumed level of significance. The
results meant that the level of satisfaction of the respondents for the five aspects
of job satisfaction did not differ significantly when they were grouped by highest
educational status.
On the other hand, the level of satisfaction of the respondents differed
significantly with respect to the Opportunity for Promotion. This aspect of job
satisfaction had an F- value of 3.155 and with p- value of .023. The p- value was
less than .05, hence the null hypothesis was rejected.

Output in
EDU 641: Educational Statistics

Submitted by:

Benjie M. Manila
MEM- Student

Submitted to:

Prof. Leodegario SM. Bautista

Course Specialist