PRACTICAL RESEARH 2

TVL 12 B (MONDAY AND FRIDAY)

Proposed Date

DATE RESEARCHER REMARKS DATE RESEARCHER REMARK

S
Dahan (Team Leader) Perez (Team Leader)
GROUP 1 Gregorio (Financer) GROUP 4 Mamaril (Financer)
Ocampo (Keeper) Sebastian (Keeper)
Sep. 27- Del Carmen (Writer) Oct. 08- Orlina (Writer)
Group De Jesus (Member) Group Alcoy (Member)
Oct. 14 – Llabore (Member) Oct. 25 – David (Member)
Individual Individual
Pingol (Member) Reyes (Member)
Villamayor (Member) Salonga (Team Leader)
Marcelino (Team Leader) GROUP 5 Abutin (Financer)
GROUP 2 Gadi (Financer) Buhay (Keeper)
Oct. 11-
Estorio (Keeper) Galang (Writer)
Sep. 30- Group
Garcia (Writer) Salas (Member)
Group Oct. 28 –
Malocloc (Member) Ando (Member)
Oct. 18 – Individual
Marquez (Member) Nicart (Member)
Individual Trinidad (Member)
Esguerra (Team Leader)
GROUP 3 De Jesus (Financer)
Salonga (Keeper)
Oct. 04- Ramos (Writer)
Group De Leon (Member)
Oct. 21 – Maglalang (Member)
Individual Saez (Member)

Please, let me know if you require additional information or further clarification regarding this matter.
M.Rocel 
 PRACTICAL RESEARH 2
ABM 12 A (TUESDAY AND THURSDAY)
Proposed Date

DATE RESEARCHER REMARKS DATE RESEARCHER REMARK

S
R. Robles (Team Leader) Tenorio (Team Leader)
GROUP 1 Andres (Financer) GROUP 4 Lacsina (Financer)
De guzman (Keeper) Manahan (Keeper)
Oct. 01 Cailao (Writer) Oct. 10 Guererro (Writer)
- Group Sunga (Member) - Group Manucdoc Member)
Oct. 17 – Mangalonzo (Member) Oct. 29 – Pastor (Member)
Individual Individual
Riano (Member) Reyes (Member)
Macam (Member) Rubiano (Member)
De Castro (Member) Vicente (Member)
S. Robles Team Leader) Victoria (Team Leader)
GROUP 2 Villanueva (Financer) GROUP 5 Cahilig (Financer)
Manahan (Keeper) Sarmiento (Keeper)
Oct. 03 Maquinano (Writer) Oct. 15 Gabriel (Writer)
- Group Espiritu (Member) - Group Villanueva (Member)
Oct. 22 – Melis (Member) Oct. 31 – Quinto (Member)
Individual Minor (Member) Individual Martinez (Member)
De Jesus (Member) Castro(Member)
Manalad (Team Leader)
GROUP 3 Sangil (Financer)
Ruiz (Keeper)
Oct. 08 Dela Cruz (Writer)
- Group Santos (Member)
Oct. 24 – Dungo(Member)
Individual Lacap (Member)
Ramos (Member)

Please, let me know if you require additional information or further clarification regarding this matter.
M.Rocel 
Tvl 12b

Examination Week (Sept. )

Chapter I,II,III - Draft Written Research Report (hand written ONLY)
To be announced (___________)
Quiz with a twist
After examination week(___________)
Conduct a survey/ dissemination of questionnaire
September 16
Draft Written Research Report for Oral Presentation ( Chapter I-III ) with title page, table of contents, reference page
(short yellow folder with binder clip)
To be announced (___________)
Awarding for the best researcher/s wearing casual (top only) plus picture taking with certificates
September 27 – October 11
Group Title Proposal
October 14- October 28
Individual Title Proposal (one-on-one with Ms. Fuentes)

F i r s t Q u a r t e r R e q u i r e m e n t s
Long Test
Chapter I,II,III Draft Written Research Report (hand written ONLY)

C L E A R A N C E
Certificate of Defense
Written Research Report
Evaluation Form

Please, let me know if you require additional information or further clarification regarding this matter.
M.Rocel 
 GUIDE TO THE INQUIRY, INVESTIGATION AND IMMERSION FINAL
DEFENSE
I. BEFORE THE DEFENSE
1. A student or group of students must apply for the final defense.
They must submit 3 copies of the evaluation tool/rubric,Draft Written Research Report for Oral
Presentation in folder with binder clip.
The following are the parts of research report:
a. Title Page
b. Table of Contents
c. Chapters I, II, III, IV, and V
d. Appendices (Bibliography, Letters, Questionnaire)
2. Be present on the date of the defense as scheduled by the instructor
3. Prepare the group by assigning the following tasks to each member for the presentation of the
thesis proposal:
a. Introduction of the members
b. Presentation of the title and the statement of the problem
c. Significance of the problem
d. Relevant theories (explanation on the relationship of the theories to each other)
e. Research design
f. Respondents of the study
g. Explanation of the paradigm of the study
h. The instrument of the study
i. Presentation of data
j. Summary of findings
k. Conclusions
l. Recommendations

II. DURING THE DEFENSE

1. Orientation from the chairperson of the panel
2. Group presentation maximum of 30 minutes
3. Actual defense- question and answer; maximum of 30 minutes
4. Evaluation

Please, let me know if you require additional information or further clarification regarding this matter.
M.Rocel 
 Evaluation Guide for the Research Paper

This proposed evaluation guide is intended the researcher assess if the main parts of the researcher
are done correctly. Ward and Fetler (as cited Venzon,2004) present the following questions when evaluating
these components of the research report.

I. Title
1. Is it readily understood?
2. Is it concise?
3. Is it informative?
II. Abstract
1. Does it state the problem where appropriate?
2. Is it methodology identified and described?
3. Are the results summarized?
4. Are the conclusions stated?
III. Problem
1. Statement of the Problem
a. Are the questions to be answered by the researcher stated precisely?
b. Is the problem stated concisely?
c. Is the problem stated clearly?
d. Is the problem researchable?
e. Is the significance of the problem discussed and the research justified?
2. Variables
a. Are the variables identified?
b. Are the variables differentiated?
c. Are the relevant terms operationally defined?
d. Are the parameters of the study identified?
IV. Theoretical Framework
1. Is the cited literature relevant to the research problem?
2. Does it provide a rationale of the research?
3. Are the sources mainly primary sources?
4. Is there a logical organization in the review?
5. Does the review conclude with a brief summary of the relevant literature and its implications
for the research problem under study?
V. Methodology
1. Subjects
a. Is the subject population (sampling frame) described?
b. Is the sampling technique described? Is it justified especially for non-probability
sampling?
2. Instruments
a. Is the instrument valid and related to the goals and setting?
3. Design
a. Is the design appropriate to the relevant theory and hypothesis?
VI. Results
a. Are the result presented with clarity and precision?
b. Are they logically organized?
c. Is the information presented sufficient to answer the hypothesis?
d. Are the tables and figures complete and easily understandable?
VII. Discussion
1. Is the result discussed in terms of the original problem?

Please, let me know if you require additional information or further clarification regarding this matter.
M.Rocel 
 2. If the hypotheses are stated, are they addressed in the discussion of results?
3. Are the conclusion warranted by the discussion of the results?
4. Are the implications of the findings discussed?
5. Are the recommendations for future research given?

Please, let me know if you require additional information or further clarification regarding this matter.
M.Rocel 