0% found this document useful (0 votes)
72 views

Thesis Chapter 3

The document summarizes the research methodology used in a study about designing a soccer field. It describes the 200 respondents who were randomly selected and asked to choose the best design scheme based on criteria. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used, including questionnaires to collect data on 3 proposed design schemes. The responses were analyzed using weighted mean and rating scales to determine the optimal design.

Uploaded by

Rodel Marata
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
72 views

Thesis Chapter 3

The document summarizes the research methodology used in a study about designing a soccer field. It describes the 200 respondents who were randomly selected and asked to choose the best design scheme based on criteria. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used, including questionnaires to collect data on 3 proposed design schemes. The responses were analyzed using weighted mean and rating scales to determine the optimal design.

Uploaded by

Rodel Marata
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the methods and procedures obtained from the research. It
further includes the subject of the study, methods used, instrument used and statistical tools to be used.

3.1 Subject of the Study

The 200 respondents were selected randomly and asked to choose and select the best scheme for
the conceptual design of the soccer field based upon several criteria.

3.2 Research Design

In this study, the researchers came up with three (3) design schemes for the improvement of
Ludo’s Soccer Field at at Purok 9-A, Riverside, Bayug, Hinaplanon, Iligan City which used both quantitative and
qualitative research methods. For quantitative research method ,the data is obtained from 200 respondents who will
choose one of the three schemes for the conceptual design of the improvement of soccer field. For qualitative
research method, the data is to be obtained from the ratings, comments and suggestions of the respondents of the
scheme.

3.3 Research Design Criteria

A. Concept and Design

A.1 Aesthetic Appeal & Appearance

Is the concept and appearance of the conceptual design of a soccer field aesthetically pleasing?

A.2 Organization of Structures

Is there an organized structure of design of the Soccer Field?

A.3 Convenience to the Public

Is it convenient for the general public to use the soccer field?

A.3 Parking area Capacity

Is there sufficient parking space for the owners of private vehicles

3.4 Methods Used

The methods used in collecting data for the research are as follows:

1. The researchers collected data from the existing online sources for standard dimensions of facilities in the
soccer field.
2. The researchers devised the three (3) different design scheme based of the existing soccer fields in the
Philippines
3. For the Conceptual Design, the researcher secures first the permission from the selected soccer players in
Iligan City for conducting the study. Upon the approval the researchers personally distributed the
questionnaire to the respondents with respect to its design criteria with aesthetic appeal & appearance,
organization of structures, convenience to the public and parking area capacity for the 200 randomly
selected respondents, followed by the calculation of the respective data. And lastly, the interpretation of the
gathered data on this study based on the answers of the respondents.

3.5 Research Instruments


The instrument used was a survey questionnaire checklist to gather the needed data based on the design
criteria to determine the best appropriate design. The draft of the questionnaire was drawn out based on the
researcher’s reading, previous studies, published related studies. A questionnaire was used as the main
data gathering instrument for this study. It includes four design criteria for the respondents to choose from.

1st scheme is composed of parking area, loading and unloading area, security building, big letter standee
“ILIGAN CITY”, drinking fountain, separate building for dressing rooms and comfort rooms, food court beside
parks. 2nd scheme is composed of huge parking area, security building, loading and unloading area, soccer
field with a fountain and the big letter standee “ILIGAN CITY” outside at the front, separate building for
dressing rooms and comfort rooms, food court. 3rd scheme is composed of parking area, security building,
building for dressing rooms and comfort rooms, loading and unloading area, fountain and drinking fountain,
big letter standee “ILIGAN CITY”, parks, souvenir shop and food courts. The three schemes will be
presented to the 200 respondents during the survey and the respondents will rate it.
A rubric was created and used by the respondents to evaluate the schemes presented to them wherein
the schemes were rating with corresponding points based on each category (aesthetic appeal and
appearance, organization of structures, convenience to the public, parking area capacity).
3.6 Statistical Treatment
In determining the results on the conceptual design of the soccer field that is chosen by the randomly
selected soccer players, the data was treated using the following statistical tools:
a. Weighted Mean
It is used to describe the feasibility of the proposed modification and perceived levels of aesthetics
and practical values of the design.

𝑓𝑖
𝑋 =∑ 𝑛

Where:
𝑋= weighted mean
f = frequency of the respondents
i = weight given to each scaled response
n = total number of respondents
b. Rating Scale
To interpret the criteria, a rating scale was used. Every criterion in the in the rubric used by the
evaluator was rated as:
Interval Descriptors
4.25 – 5.00 Excellent
3.25 – 4.24 Very Good
2.50 – 3.25 Good
1.75 – 2.49 Average
1.00 – 1.74 Poor

You might also like