Chapter 4 & 5 Template

National University
COLLEGE OF ALLIED HEALTH

Department of Nursing
551 MF Jhocson Street, Sampaloc Manila
Trunk line: 712-1900 Telefax: 749-8154 www.national-u.edu.ph
THE QUALITY OF LIFE AMONG THE BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN NURSING

STUDENTS ON BLENDED LEARNING AT NATIONAL UNIVERSITY-MANILA
An Undergraduate Proposal Thesis Presented to the Faculty of Nursing
In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN

NURSING
Researchers:
Taguba, Ma. Cecilia B.
Tan, Joana Nicole A.
Tejedo, Kurt Yoko E.
Torres, Liz Desiree C.
Tungol, Maria Alecsandra C.
Thesis Adviser:
Nelson J. Moleta Jr. RM, RN, LPT, M.Ed, MSN
Date of Submission
October 13, 2022
Nursing Department
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I. The Problem
Introduction.
………………………………………………………………………….1
Statement of the Problem
…………………………………………………………….3
Significance of the Study
…………………………………………………………….4
Scope and Limitations
……………………………………………………………….4
Chapter II. The Review of Literature and Studies
Review of Literature
………………………………………………………………….5
Synthesis
…………………………………………………………………………….12
Theoretical Framework .
…………………………………………………………….13
Conceptual Framework
……………………………………………………………..14
Operational Definition of Terms ..
………………………………………………….14
Statement of Hypothesis
…………………………………………………………….15
Chapter III. Research Methodology
Research Design
…………………………………………………………………….16
Setting of the Study
………………………………………………………………....16
Sampling Scheme .
………………………………………………………………….17
Sampling Design ..
………………………………………………………………….17
Sample Size
………………………………………………………………………....17
Instrumentation
……………………………………………………………………...18
Data Collection and Procedure
…………………………………………………….20
Analysis of Data
…………………………………………………………………….21
Statistical Treatment of Data
………………………………………………………..21
Ethical Considerations
……………………………………………………………....22
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Quality of Life is a highly subjective measure of how a person is satisfied and content
with their current position in life, as defined by the World Health Organization. It centers on
the individual’s perception of life factors that affect their daily living. It focuses on the
mental, social, and physical well being of the individual which can result in either a poor or
rich quality of life depending on how they react to certain factors of life. Measuring an
individual’s quality of life is a complicated procedure as the factors that affect them can be
differently perceived depending on the person. A negative event in life could be a motivation
which could result in a better Quality of Life, or it could also deteriorate someone’s will to
move forward which can negatively affect their quality of life as well. In order to accurately
measure the quality of life, one must keep in mind that each individual is different in terms of
dealing with the problems they encounter. With that in mind, it is still a necessary procedure
as the result of the respondents’ quality of life can greatly affect the goals, expectations,
standards, and life values. As these achievements contribute in molding each individual’s
path in the future, the foundation through education is a major basis. The conventional
method of learning consists of factors that have already been affecting and changing lives,
but with the change in the educational system various learning modalities emerged and along
with it are new factors that can create another level of challenge on the Quality of life.
Blended learning is a combination of Remote Asynchronous and Synchronous
Learning that are online learning modalities constructed to address the educational needs of
students amidst the pandemic. Under normal conditions, learning skills and concepts of a
skill-based program, like Bachelor of Science in Nursing, are already difficult as it is, and
transitioning to a modern setting of using new technology and lack of hands-on
demonstrations, resulted in the rise of additional challenges. With the challenges brought by
technological advances and personal hurdles, blended learning has made an impact to
student’s quality of life.
Nursing education faces a fundamental transition from traditional to distance learning.
Students deemed campus-based education to be beneficial to their learning in courses that
used a mixed pedagogical approach with both distant and campus-based learning. A blended
learning method, which includes both campus-based and distant learning, may provide
students with enhanced motivation in their learning process when compared to distance
learning alone. As a result of the COVID-19 epidemic in march 2020, a number of
universities throughout the world were compelled to shift quickly from traditional campus-
based learning to distance learning using digital resources. This move posed a significant
challenge for both teachers and students, and it merits a thorough examination. To improve
didactic tactics in nursing education, additional information about students' experiences with
various pedagogical approaches, including distant learning, is needed.
Understanding the feelings and expectations of students when confronted with such a
significant transition is critical in assisting educational and teaching authorities in allocating
adequate resources and reorienting university education for nursing students. It is vital to
learn from these experiences and describe the strong and weak aspects in order to be able to
manage this issue in the near future. Therefore, the researchers came up with the study
entitled The Quality of Life among the Bachelor of Science in Nursing students on Blended
Learning at National-University Manila.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The study aims to describe and assess the quality of life among the Bachelor of
Science in Nursing students at National University-Manila.
Specifically the study aims to answer the following questions:

1.What are the socio-demographic profile of the respondents in terms of:
1.1 Age
1.2 Gender
1.3 Religion
1.4 Marital status
1.5 Year level
1.6 No. of units enrolled
1.7 Residence
2. To determine the level of the respondents Quality of Life in terms of:
2.1 Physical Health
2.2 Psychological
2.3 Social Relationships
2.4 Environment
2.5 Over-all Quality of Life and General Health

3. To determine the level of the respondents’ perceived implementation of Blended Learning.
4. How significant is the difference exist among respondents’ Quality of Life and perceived
implementation of Blended learning when grouped according to their socio-demographic
variable.
5. How significant is the correlation exist among respondents’ Quality of Life to their socio-
demographic variable.
6. How significant is the correlation exist among respondents’ perceived implementation of
Blended learning to their socio-demographic variable.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The study mainly focused on assessing the quality of life among the Bachelor of
Science in Nursing students at National University-Manila. Furthermore, the study would be
of importance to the following.
● Nursing Students - This study was beneficial to the respondents in a way that helped
them cope up with their struggles during blended learning. Furthermore, this helped the
respondents balance their quality of life in terms of utilizing blended learning in their day-to-
day lives.
● Academic Institution - The outcome of this study provides the professors with how
blended learning affects the quality of life of the nursing students. With this, the Academic
Institution would create intervention plans or strategies among nursing students to balance
quality of life and academic requirements that did not affect the day-to-day living of the
nursing students in terms of quality of life.
● Support system/Family - This study promoted understanding between the nursing
students and their support system or family in terms of quality of life. In addition, this paper
allows the support system/family to comfort the students while utilizing blended learning by
providing them their own space with proper ventilation and avoid making noise to allow the
students to focus more during class.
● Nursing researchers - This study helps the nursing researchers assess the quality of
life among Bachelor of Science in Nursing. The researchers are able to study furthermore and
investigate the other phenomenon of this topic. This study also serves as a basis to improve
future studies.
SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS
The study focuses on the Quality of Life among the Bachelor of Science in Nursing
students at National University-Manila. The respondents of the study are from level I to IV
Bachelor of Science in Nursing who are enrolled in the academic year 2021-2022 at National
University-Manila, located at 551 M.F. Jhocson St, Sampaloc, Manila utilizing online
blended learning modalities.
The study utilized the World Health Organization Quality of Life - BREF
(WHOQOL-BREF) questionnaire and Blended Learning Student survey were used to gather
data, and via online survey google forms. The information and results were acquired from
level I to level IV of Bachelor of Science in Nursing students.

CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
Quality of Life
Determining someone’s overall physical wellness can be done through lab tests and
diagnostic procedures, but measuring someone’s quality of life may be complicated as this is
highly subjective. Measuring an individual’s quality of life can determine what interventions
or changes are needed to improve or maintain their current state. A more general term known
as quality of life (QoL) encompasses experiences, states, assessments, behaviors, skills, and
emotional responses to situations (Chattu, et. al., 2020). Depending on the environment, one's
health, and psychological state, it is defined and determined differently. Nursing students'
lives become challenging by the effort they put out to learn concepts ranging from basic to
complicated issues and health concerns for preserving human health as a whole. Because of
this, it's crucial to evaluate nursing students' Quality of Life (QoL) to see if they have high
levels of well-being as they engage in their studies. (Cruz, et. al. 2018). According to (Bruno,
2017), the word "quality of life" refers to a person's physical, mental, psychological, and
emotional health, social connections with family and friends, health, education, and other
aspects of their existence.
Poor Quality of Life (QoL) is linked to an unhealthy lifestyle, psychological distress,
and academic failure in medical students, which may impact how they treat patients in the
future (Bamashmous, Banjari, Malibary, Omer, & Zagzoog, 2019). Given the fact that health
workers are responsible for the Quality of Life of their client, they also must take care of their
own Quality of Life. Being able to assess and be aware of their Quality of Life promotes a
healthy lifestyle to the students. This helps them to handle their academics and prevent
acquiring psychological distress.

Physical Health
Physical pain in general can cause a massive impact to an individual’s overall
function. The body works as a system, and having problems on certain parts can cause a
negative relation to the individual’s skills and abilities. In the healthcare field, it is inevitable
to suffer physically due to workload. With that in mind, health problems show a significant
relationship towards the healthcare professionals’ job and their overall quality of life (Zahra,
N., Sheha, E., & Elsayed, H., 2020).
Most of the students spend their time at school or in doing school activities or
requirements. This hinders them from participating in different leisure activities to release
their academic stress due to different amounts of workload. According to Pavlova Iuliia,
Vynogradskyi, Bogdan, Kurchaba, Tetiana, Zikrach, Dmytr, physical activity during leisure
time has been found to improve the physical and mental aspects of young adults' quality of
life. The Physical Role Scale, General Health Scale, Social Activity Scale, and Role
Emotional Scale all indicated that higher levels of leisure-time physical activity were
associated with improved quality of life in women (p < 0.01). This bolsters the notion that
engaging in various leisure activities will enhance the quality of life.
The quality of students' sleep can impact their daily lives. According to Kay M.
Johnson, Nancy Simon, Mark Wicks, Karen Barr, Kim O'Connor, and Doug Schaad's (2017)
study, insufficient sleep on a typical weeknight (less than 6 hours, 6-6.9 hours, or 7 or more
hours) was linked to a variety of adverse outcomes, including: (1) higher Epworth sleepiness
scale scores, (2) dozing off behind the wheel, (3) signs of burnout or depression, (4) a decline
in quality of life, and (5) lower perceived academic success (all p values ≤0.01). This shows
that it is important to give attention to the sleep satisfaction and duration to prevent having
burnout and to promote quality of life.

Psychological
Due to today's current condition, students become more stressed in this time of
pandemic due to limited interaction, sudden lifestyle changes, restriction, and social isolation
that affects their life satisfaction. Also, according to Rogowska, Kusnierz, and Ochnik’s study
(2021), University students were found to have a 48 percent prevalence of low life
satisfaction and a 34 percent prevalence of high stress during the second wave (W2) of the
pandemic. On the other hand, a thorough analysis revealed a population-wide incidence of
heightened stress symptoms of 27% during the COVID-19 pandemic. On the other hand, a
meta-analysis showed that 45% of Chinese people experienced extreme stress throughout the
crisis. Nearly 50% of Australian adults reported experiencing psychological distress during
the first wave of the covid-19 pandemic, which was inversely related to coping techniques
like humor, acceptance, and positive reframing and positively related to self-blame, venting,
behavioral disengagement, and self-distraction. Additionally, their research suggests that
those with higher stress levels tended to utilize more passive than active coping mechanisms
during the pandemic, lowering life satisfaction. Enjoying life and determining its meaning
can be classified as how an individual is satisfied with their current state. A study on the life
satisfaction and quality of life of Spanish nurses revealed that self-care and compassion
positively affect the quality of life, directly impacting the care they deliver. Emphasizing
nurses' self-care and compassion for themselves ensure their general wellbeing. (Sansó, N.,
Galiana, L., Oliver, A., Tomás-Salvá, M., & Vidal-Blanco, G., 2020).
Body positivity and confidence shows to have an effect on the quality of life of an
individual. Women of all ages reported having similar body image worries, according to
research by Carolyn Becker, Christina L. Verzijl, Lisa S. Kilpela, Salome A. Wilfred, and
Tiffany Stewartl (2017). The quality of life, adverse effects, and functional impairment are all
highly correlated with having a negative body image. This supports that acceptance to bodily
appearance has a significant effect on the behavior and quality of life of an individual.
Determining how often an individual goes through a hard time is essential to identify
their current overall state. In a study by Ruiz-Fernandez, Perez-Garcia, and Ortega-Galán
(2020), the authors discovered a substantial correlation between healthcare professionals'
degrees of burnout, weariness, and compassion satisfaction and their quality of life. This can
be due to exposure from challenges brought by the nursing profession. Additionally, these
circumstances result in stress, tiredness, and anxiety (Dev, V.; Fernando, A.T., III; Lim, A.G.;
Consedine, N.S., 2018). In relation, satisfaction towards their profession and quality of care
they provide has caused a decrease in general, and eventually cause negative impact to their
overall state. (Cocker, F.; Joss, N., 2016; Lim, W.Y.; Ong, J.; Ong, S.; Hao, Y.; Abdullah,
H.R.; Koh, D.L.; Mok, U.S.M., 2020)
Environment
The physical environment, according to Terras and Ramsay (as referenced by Ng, C.
F., 2021), includes sensory stimulation from the constructed environment including lightning,
noise, and temperature as well as the actual presence of other people. These environmental
factors can significantly influence students' learning and performance as it may cause
attentional distraction and may reduce student's concentration. In contrast, spending time in
nature is connected to a good impact on a person's wellbeing, according to a study by Payne,
E., Loi, & Thorsteinsson (2020). Numerous studies, particularly experimental studies, have
discovered compelling evidence that being exposed to the outdoors can have a positive effect
on your psychological health, especially in lowering high levels of stress. As a result, they
proposed that a brief visit to a natural setting could lead to benefits in psychological health.
According to the article entitled “Student Well-being and the Physical Environment”
by Ferco Seating (2016), the physical environment has a strong influence on the learning
experience of the students, which can be beneficial or not depending on the architecture and
design of the facility or building. It may have a profound effect on students' physical,
emotional and mental health. The design of any structure, how it grows, and how it is
furnished and maintained are all important factors in addressing both the physical and
emotional well-being of the students. The location of the students' homes or places where
they spend the majority of their time, where they study, etc., all have a significant impact on
their health and general well-being. Furthermore, good physical environmental factors such
as exposure to natural light, a fresh air flow and steady temperature, peaceful environment,
etc. helps the students to stimulate productivity and it enhances their academic performance.
Social Relationship
Although not everyone is open on sharing their personal life, especially their sex life,
it is still a factor to an individual’s quality of life. According to Ji, Jiang, Lin, Zhang, Zheng,
Cheng, Lin, Hu, and Zhuo (2017), Sex Life Satisfaction (SLS) has a significant relationship
to quality of life. Putting importance to the nurses’ SLS can help them alleviate job stress
and be given psycho-social support.
Working in the hospital will expose you to various people, as it is inevitable to
collaborate with different professionals in the health field. Having people to receive social
support from can be a way for nurses and other medical staff to improve their coping skills.
This can be due to conducted educational and training programs curated for coping
mechanisms for these professionals (Fathi & Simamora, 2018).
The results of a study by Bruno (2017) showed that individuals with stronger Mobility
and Accessibility presence had more positive evaluations in the majority of their subscales, as
well as more positive opinions of their health, quality of life, and social support. The results
demonstrate that there is a wide range of preferences among the participants. In the majority
of the domains covered, there are considerable differences. The results show that mobility
and accessibility significantly affect quality of life, social support, and health, and that these
factors should be given precedence in transportation plans.
Socio-demographic profile
In order to define people in a specific group or population, a combination of social
and demographic factors is required. In this study the socio-demographic profile includes the
age, gender, religion, marital status, year level, no. of units enrolled, and residence. To
precisely ascertain whether it has a direct impact on the respondent's Quality of Life, several
factors are used. Age is a significant determinant of physical performance and fitness, which
is a key aspect of quality of life. In light of this, growing older can negatively influence a
person's physical condition, which may ultimately have an impact on their range of talents
and abilities (Puciatio, Borysiuk, & Rozpara, 2017). Along with age, the progression of the
major courses in the nursing program should also be considered as a factor which results in
the students feeling overwhelmed, as these courses are implemented much later in their
curriculum (Cruz et al., 2018). Gender is a discussed factor in various fields of work.
Although the health-field is a female-dominated profession, there is still a prominent increase
of men’s involvement in the field. With that in mind, gender differences in this line of work
is still a factor that has a relation to Quality of Life, which is yet to be discussed in a separate
study.
Women score poorer on the Quality of Life scale than men do in the time
management, physical health, and psychological areas, according to a study by Kobayasi et
al. (2017). This can be due to women having greater levels of anxiety and sadness brought by
gender disparities. According to Chaar et al. (2018), religion is linked to Quality of Life as
evidenced by the study's findings, which show that someone's Quality of Life is positively
correlated with their level of purpose, tranquility, and faith. Relational spirituality is
perceived to be beneficial in terms of a spiritual coping model to assist the patients through
their healing process. That being said, relational spirituality can be a prominent factor to
nursing students who practice and apply their faith through their learning process. A nursing
student’s unit per semester is determined by the curriculum that the university implemented.
An individual’s work load is weighed and listed to what their current level needs to expand
their knowledge on. Increased workload and increasing topic difficulty have a detrimental
effect on students' motivation in mental, physical, social, and academic areas (Cruz et al,
2018). Residence is also a contributing factor in an individual’s Quality of Life. In contrast to
the results of individuals in underdeveloped countries, certain countries had relatively good
ratings on overall level of well-being, according to a study that focused on the Quality of Life
of nursing students in 9 different countries (Cruz et al, 2018). This could be due to varying
cost of living and lifestyle status of the countries.
Blended Learning
His definition of online blended learning includes instructional media, techniques, and
a mix of in-person and online training. Moskal, Dzinban, and Hartmen defined blended
learning as changes in higher education institutions as a result of combining old and new
methods (as cited in Malik, G., Fatima, A., Hussain, & Sarwar, 2017), but they suggested that
a better definition is required so that institutions of higher education can align their goals in
order to successfully implement blended learning. In this way, blended learning has been
shown to help both individuals and businesses make more effective use of their time and
resources.
Blended learning combines traditional face-to-face instruction with online learning
strategies to give students access to a range of media (Dziuban, Graham, Moskal, Norberg, &
Sicilia, 2018; Wright, 2017). According to previous studies, 35 percent of the eyes of
university lecturers use design blended learning, and 12 percent of the 12.2 million elements
of online teaching is introduced into the blended course (Dziuban et al., 2018 ). The illness
known as Covid-2019 first surfaced on December 31, 2019, in Wuhan, China, before
spreading to other parts of the world. It is anticipated that the epidemic's continuous growth,
stringent isolation policies, and delays in the start of schools, colleges, and universities across
the nation would have an influence on students' mental health (Pragholapati, 2020).
Recent years have seen a surge in research into the new educational norm. Others
focused on each student's unique learning experiences throughout the epidemic, while others
focused on national policies, professional development, and curriculum. Copeland et al.
(2021) and Fawaz et al. investigated how COVID-19 affected the mental health and coping
strategies of college students (2021). According to Copeland et al. (2021), isolation,
health/economic effects, and uncertainty negatively impacted students' behavioral and
emotional functioning, specifically their ability to pay attention and cope with stress (i.e.,
mood and wellness behavior). In the study by Fawaz et al., pupils also raised concerns about
the methods used for teaching and evaluating them, a task load that was too heavy, technical
difficulties, and confinement (2021). Students sought support from educators and family
members as well as engaging in recreation activities to deal with these challenges.
They discovered that the lockdown significantly disrupted students' ability to learn.
Additionally, students spoke about certain challenges they had when enrolled in online
courses. Students who are marginalized and from remote locations are more likely to
experience anxiety, sadness, poor Internet connectivity, and a toxic home learning
environment. Contrary to Kapasia et al(2020) .'s findings, Gonzales et al. (2020) found that
isolating students during the pandemic had a significant positive impact on their performance.
These results were associated with students' regular application of learning techniques, which
increased the effectiveness of their learning.
Synthesis
Determining an individual’s quality of life was not that easy as it is highly subjective.
However, it is important to determine the level of an individuals’ quality of life to identify
interventions or if there are changes that need to be obtained to improve or maintain quality
of life. Having the ability to assess and be aware of their quality of life promotes a healthy
lifestyle which prevents acquiring psychological distress.
The students' quality of life may be affected by various factors such as age, gender,
religion, year level, no. of units enrolled, and residence. An increase in age was thought to
have an indirect association with Quality of Life. In line with the age, the nursing program's
curriculum contributes to the students' overwhelming feelings that affect their quality of life.
Thus, the increased effort and difficulty of the subjects caused by the increased number of
nursing units every semester has a detrimental effect on the students' quality of life.
Gender differences in this field are also considered a factor in affecting students'
Quality of Life, which explains why women have lower Quality of Life scores than men due
to different factors such as anxiety and sadness due to gender disparities.
There are various factors that can affect the quality of life. Sensory stimulation from
the environment such as lightning, noise, and temperature, as well as the physical presence
of other people can have a substantial impact on students' learning and performance since
they can generate attentional distraction and impair concentration. Many studies,
particularly experimental studies, have discovered strong evidence that exposure to nature
can have a major impact on your psychological health, particularly in terms of reducing
increased stress levels. It is also reported that students are more anxious in this time of
pandemic due to limited interaction, abrupt lifestyle changes, restriction, and social isolation,
all of which impact their life satisfaction. A person's total function can be significantly
impacted by physical pain in general. With this in mind, health concerns have a strong link to
the job of healthcare professionals and their overall quality of life. They also learned that
practicing compassion and self-care have a beneficial effect on their quality of life, which
directly affects the care they provide.
The physical environment has a major influence on how well students learn.
Exposure to natural light, a stable temperature and fresh air flow, a quiet environment, and
other physical environmental elements help students to be more productive and improve their
academic performance. In addition, Body positivity and confidence have been shown to
improve a person's quality of life. Negative body image is associated with poorer wellness
habits, negative outcomes, poor quality of life, and functional impairment. The vast majority
of students spend their time in school, which prevents them from engaging in recreational
activities. A study found that leisure time positively impacts both the physical and
psychological aspects of young adults' quality of life. Females who engaged in more physical
exercise in their spare time had a greater quality of life. This proves that participating in
leisure activities promotes better quality of life.
In relation to this, The quality and duration of students' sleep may have an effect on
their daily lives. Weeknight sleep deprivation has been associated with worse perceived
academic performance, higher Epworth exhaustion scale scores, dozing off while driving,
burnout or depression symptoms, and reduced quality of life satisfaction. Also, the measure
of sex life satisfaction (SLS) is linked to quality of life. Putting a priority on the SLS of
nurses can help them cope with job stress and receive psychosocial support.
According to the findings, mobility and accessibility have a significant impact on
quality of life, social support, and health, and transportation plans should focus on these
areas. This shows that individual’s with better mobility had a more favorable opinion on their
health and quality of life.
To determine an individual's present overall state, it is necessary to determine how
frequently they have a challenging time. It has been discovered that burnout, exhaustion, and
compassion satisfaction all have a substantial impact on health care providers' quality of life.
This could be as a result of the hardships that the nursing profession brings.
Students' who have higher meaning, peace, and faith have a positive relation to their
Quality of Life. It is beneficial in terms of a spiritual coping model to assist the patients
throughout their healing process which explains the relationship of religion to the Quality of
Life of the student. Moreover, students' residence contributes to the factor affecting their
quality of life because some countries showed high scores on overall well-being compared to
those in developing countries.
Pandemic causes drastic changes in providing education. It affects how nurses learn
since nurses need to practice and hone their skills well. It changes into online or blended
learning from traditional classes. Instructional media, techniques, and online training are all
components of online blended learning. It assists individuals in gaining adaptation in their
learning and making more efficient use of time and resources. Blended learning consists of
Remote synchronous learning and remote asynchronous learning modalities. Blended
learning aims to provide flexible learning to students. It allows them to study in their phase
when they do not have or cannot provide access to the Internet due to slow Internet
connection and cannot afford to provide Internet. On the other hand, students use various ICT
learning technologies such as Zoom Cloud Meeting, Microsoft Teams, and VLE to conduct
synchronous learning.

Theoretical Framework
In this study, the researchers made use of Abraham Maslow's (1962) theory of quality
of life, which is still regarded as a reliable explanation of quality of life today, along with his
book Towards a Psychology of Being. The idea of human needs serves as the foundation for
Maslow's theory of progression toward happiness and true being. He described his method as
an existentialist psychology of self-actualization focused on personal progress.According to
this notion, people who take more ownership of their lives and actively use all of their best
qualities would feel more liberated, powerful, joyful, and healthy. Maslow's idea of self-
actualization also seems to hold a lot of promise for contemporary medicine. Because most
chronic illnesses persist despite the best biological treatments, it's feasible that understanding
and pursuing the noble path of human development will truly change our patients' experience
for the better. The secret potential for enhancing life resides in assisting the patient in
realizing that his or her thirst for life, wants, and desire to contribute are all one and the same
thing deep down in human existence.However, you won't learn this hidden meaning of life
until you have thoroughly examined your own existence and life to learn who you really are.
With the students’ quality of life as a variable, Maslow’s theory is relevant to this study as it
talks about the quality of life of the nursing students at National University-Manila.
Conceptual Framework
Most of us have experienced different methods where technology is the new mode of
teaching and learning. The most famous difference between synchronous and asynchronous
delivery. Education has often used a blend of these methods of delivery for homework,
supporting references, and projects tend to be asynchronous, while the classroom discussion
tends to be synchronous (Yu, 2020).
Figure 1
In order to conceptualize the study, researchers used the input, process, and output
(IPO) paradigm. The input presents the blended learning. The process displays the
respondents' sociodemographic profile, which includes their age, gender, religion, year of
birth, number of enrolled units, and place of residence. The output presents the final result of
the study which is the improved Quality of Life of respondents during Blended Learning in
terms of their social, emotional, psychological, physical, and environmental well-being.
OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TERMS
The following are defined as used in this study:
Definition of terms
Blended Learning - This is a combination of asynchronous and synchronous learning
modality which is adapted by the National University-Manila through a flexible learning

approach. This is a flexible learning approach of National University which utilizes mainly
Remote Asynchronous Learning and Remote Synchronous Learning.
Quality of Life - This is the degree of the respondent’s emotional, mental, and
physical state in relation to blended learning.
STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS
The study was intended to verify the subsequent hypotheses:
1. There is significant difference on respondents' Quality of Life and perceived
implementation of Blended Learning according to their socio-demographic profile variable.
2. There is significant relationship on respondents’ Quality of Life and perceived
implementation of Blended Learning according to their socio-demographic profile variable.

CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This study was conducted to determine the Quality of life among Bachelor of Science
in Nursing students at National University, Manila on blended learning. This chapter
describes the research design, setting, sample and sampling design, data collection procedure,
survey instrument used and how survey data was analyzed.
Research Design
A quantitative technique was used in this study's descriptive and correlational
research design to gather data that was useful for drawing findings and practical insights.
The researchers used the descriptive type of research for the study that aims to gather,
analyze, and present collected data that described the characteristics of the variables of the
study. This assesses and describes the socio-demographic profile and quality of life among
the respondents on a blended learning approach.
Additionally, the correlational research design approach is used by the researchers to
ascertain the link between an independent variable and a dependent variable, which is one of
the study's variables.It was effectively examine the relationship of the quality of life of the
enrolled students in Bachelor of Science in Nursing to their socio-demographic profile in a
blended learning approach.
In this study, quality of life–related variables and blended learning modalities was
described and correlated to the socio-demographic profile of the respondents. The students'
quality of life was not altered by manipulation in a mixed learning setting. Instead, when
blended learning became more widespread, the Bachelor of Science in Nursing students'
personal experiences were evaluated.
A self-efficacy questionnaire measures a person's confidence in their ability to
develop a sense of personal strength and used it in their daily life (Riopel, 2021) — for online
learning was utilized in this study in which participants from level I to IV of the Bachelor of
Science in Nursing of National University-Manila were chosen depending on their immediate
availability.
Setting of the Study
The study was conducted in National University-Manila to Bachelor of Science in
Nursing students from Level I to IV, which is located at 551 M.F Jhocson Sampaloc, Manila
1008. The data was collected through an online survey questionnaire utilizing the Google
forms.
Sample Scheme
The samples was selected from a population of Bachelor of Science in Nursing
students of National University-Manila based on the following criteria.
a. Inclusion Criteria
1. Respondents must be bonafide students of National University-Manila.
2. Respondents must be officially enrolled in the academic year 2021-2022.
3. Respondents must be taking up Bachelor of Science in Nursing Program regardless of
year level (level 1 to level 4).
4. Those who had consented for the study.

5. Those who have completed answering the survey and submitted on the prescribed
date.
b. Exclusion Criteria
1. Those who did not consented to the study.
2. Those with incomplete answer to the questionnaire
3. Those who failed to submit on the prescribed date.
Sampling Design
To find the respondents, the researchers used probability sampling which in
particular, the stratified random sampling where in the respondents of the study were divided
into subgroups based on their academic level to ensure that every stratum is adequately
represented (Taherdoost, 2016). In this study, the researchers gathered data from the enrolled
students of Bachelor of Science in Nursing at National University-Manila.
Sample Size
As of October 2021, the total number of enrolled students in the Bachelor of Science
in Nursing program is shown in Table 1. This is the population data where samples were
conducted.
Table 1. Summary of population of Bachelor of Science in Nursing students

Bachelor of Science in Nursing Students
Year Level Population
Level I 334
Level II 170
Level III 105
Level IV 51
Total Population 660
The researchers used Yamane's Simplified Formula for Proportions to calculate the
sample size needed with a target population of 660 from Bachelor of Science in Nursing
Students. A 98% confidence level is assumed. To get the sample size, researchers used the
simplified formula below:
where, n = number of required samples; N = total population; e = margin of error
(0.05)
Table 2. Summary of population of Bachelor of Science in Nursing students using the Yamane’s
Simplified Formula
Bachelor of Science in Nursing Students
Year Level Population Sample Size

Level I 334 126
Level II 170 64
Level III 105 40
Level IV 51 19
Total Population 660 249
Table 2. Utilizing the simplified formula, the required number of samples to be included in
this study is 126 respondents from level I; 64 respondents from level II; 40 respondents from
level III; and 19 respondents from level IV with a total of 249 respondents.
INSTRUMENTATION
The research instrument used in the study is an online questionnaire survey via
Google Forms to gather the needed data from the respondents to determine if each problem
statement is answered. The survey form consists of three parts. The sociodemographic profile
of the respondents is included in the first section. The Quality of Life questionnaire is
included in the second section. The final section then includes information or queries about
blended learning.
The first part consists of the respondent’s socio-demographic profile including student
number, age, sex, religion, year level, number of units enrolled, and residence. On the other
hand, the outline of the questionnaire on the second part was based on the Quality of Life
(WHOQOL) instrument as a tool of collecting data designed by the World Health
Organization (WHO), which encompasses a variety of subjective quality of life factors. One
of the most well-known tools for comparing quality of life across cultures is the WHOQOL-
BREF, which is accessible in more than 40 languages. The survey questionnaire's questions
are modified by the researchers to ensure that each one was relevant and accurate in order to
address the research aim and objectives. The questionnaire is changed by the researchers into
a 26-item one with four domains: physical health (6 items), psychological health (8 items),
social relationships (2 items), environmental health (8 items), as well as questions about
quality of life and general health (2 items). Every question on the WHOQOL-BREF is scored
using a response scale with a five-point ordinal scale that runs from 1 to 5. The scores are
then linearly translated to a 10–100 scale. Each ordinal value was given a percentage by the
researchers in order to more accurately assess data and distinguish the differences and
severity of the answer. Additionally, the area of physical health include mobility, daily
activities, functional capacity, energy, discomfort, and sleep. Among the psychological
domain examinations are self-image, negative thoughts, positive attitudes, self-esteem,
mentality, learning ability, memory focus, religion, and mental status. The category of social
interactions includes sex life, social support, and personal relationships. The environmental
health domain includes the following topics: financial resources, safety, health and social
services, living physical environment, opportunities to learn new skills and information,
recreation, general environment (noise, air pollution, etc.), and transportation.
A similar study in Saudi Arabia was conducted wherein the quality of life of their
medical students was measured using WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire. The study validated
the tool because it found no relationship between academic year and gender and quality of
life for students. Additionally, the study found that students who performed better had worse
psychological health and social interaction scores (Malibary et. al., 2019).
For the third part of the online questionnaire, a constructed blended learning student
survey by Long Island University was adapted and utilized for the study. This is a 36-item
survey form that gathers the respondents’ thoughts regarding their experiences in a blended
learning set up. To verify that each item is accurate and pertinent to the research aim and
objectives, the researchers additionally modify the questionnaire into a 26-item one. The
subjective items are disregarded when the questionnaire is revised to provide precise data that
can be measured. Each question in the survey is assessed using a response scale with a five-
point ordinal scale that runs from 1 to 5. After that, the scores are linearly scaled to a range of
10 to 100. The researchers assigned a percentage to each ordinal value in order to more
precisely examine the data and identify the variations and severity of the response. It asks
questions about factors students should think about before enrolling in a blended learning
environment, the amount of interaction between professors and students, the quality of
education they will receive despite being confined to an online environment, and personal
growth and realizations while participating in a blended learning environment.
A study conducted in 2019 utilized The Blended Learning Student Survey by Long
Island University. With 234 responses from the students, they were able to determine the
feedback of students regarding their online summer courses. The survey showed that the
students were very satisfied with their online learning experiences. They were also able to
find out how the students were more flexible in terms of finishing requirements. It also
showed how many opportunities there are in achieving their goals in their academic
programs, which also resulted in having more time to explore other additional courses to
expand their knowledge on (Office of Assessment Santa Clara University, 2019).
DATA GATHERING PROCEDURE
A request letter to carry out the study is written. A questionnaire checklist was
modified by the researcher, approved by the subject-matter professor, and then distributed.
Because of the benefits of the survey approach, the researcher from National University of
Manila used an online survey to carry out the study. The respondent's value to the study was
explained by the researchers to the respondents. The researchers explained certain
terminologies to the respondents so that they can complete the questionnaire fully aware of
their role as the study's subject. The responders were asked to respond with all honesty To
guarantee that each stratum is fairly represented, the researcher employs stratified random
sampling, a sort of probability sampling in which the participants are separated into
subgroups according to their academic standing (Taherdoost, 2016).
In this study, since the researcher's goal is to determine the Quality of life among
Bachelor of Science in Nursing Students at National University-Manila, the researcher
believes that this method is the most appropriate in choosing the sample for the research.
Following the completion of the questionnaire by the respondents, the researchers
immediately tallied the data collected for this study and computed the results for
interpretation in accordance with the items selected by the respondents.

ANALYSIS OF THE SURVEY DATA
After determining the completeness of the survey, data were encoded using Microsoft
Excel and was verified. The researchers utilized a descriptive type of data analysis to analyze
complete data. This thoroughly describes the respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics
and Quality of Life (QoL). The respondents’ socio-demographic profiles are listed along with
the respective number of students per profile (age, gender, religion, year level, no. of units
enrolled, and residence). A multivariate regression analysis was utilized as well as to assess
and describe the relation of socio-demographic profile to the respondents’ Quality of Life. All
tests were preset at p<0.05 level of significance.
In order to find the desired results of the data gathered, the researchers tend to use the
different statistical formulas to tabulate and calculate the gathered data in this study including
frequency and percentage formula, weighted mean, standard deviation, and spearman’s rho.
Statistical Treatment of Data
The data to be gathered in this study was subjected to the following statistical treatment:
I. Frequency Count
The frequency count is used to identify or determine the total number of respondents
in terms of their socio-demographic profile and to summarize the survey data gathered. To
turn a raw frequency of the respondents’ socio-demographic profile into relative frequency
the percentage formula is used.
II. Percentage Formula
The responses to the questionnaire were systematically analyzed by tallying the
answers. The socio-demographic profile of nursing students at National University-Manila is
calculated using a percentage calculation, taking into account their age, gender, religion, year
of study, number of enrolled units, and place of residence. To show the size of each answer as
compared to the population, the percentage was taken. The formula for percentage is:
III. Weighted Mean
To calculate the average of the collected data, the researchers utilized a weighted
mean formula. According to guidelines set by the World Health Organization, the
respondent's Quality of Life is calculated by using weighted mean. The formula for weighted
mean is:
Where, ▁x = mean of the respondents’ Quality of Life based on WHO standards; x =
measurement or value; w = weight of the respondents’ socio-demographic profile in blended
learning
IV. Standard Deviation
The dispersion of the data set in relation to its mean was quantified by the researchers
using standard deviation. When the standard deviation is low, it means that the data points
typically fall relatively close to the mean; when it's high, it means that the data points are
dispersed across a wide range of values. The formula for Standard Deviation is:

where, x_i^ is each value in the data set; ▁x is the mean; n is the number of values in
the data set
V. Chi-square Test
To ascertain whether there is a correlation between the respondents' perceived
implementation of blended learning to their socio-demographic profile and quality of life, the
researchers conducted the Chi-square Test. The formula for Chi-square Test is:
where, x^2 = chi squared; Oi = observed value; Ei = expected value
VI. Two-way Anova Test
To determine whether there is a significant difference between the two independent
factors on a dependent variable, the researchers utilized two-way ANOVA to evaluate the
data collected. This statistical analysis is done to see if the respondent's quality of life differs
from how they perceive blended learning to be applied to their socio-demographic profile.
Chapter IV
Presentation and Analysis of Findings
The results of the data gathered from the study's survey and discussion on the Quality
of Life among the Bachelor of Science in Nursing Students on Blended Learning at National
University-Manila will be shown in the following chapter. The study included 304
respondents, and upon data cleaning, all the 304 data are valid.
Socio-Demographic Profile of Respondents
Table No. 1 Frequency & Percentage Distribution of Respondents Demographic Profile According to
Their Age
Age Frequency Percent
18 years old up to 20 years old 191 62.8%
Total 304 100.0%
As per the data gathered, the majority of the respondents were ages 18 to 20 years old
with a total number of 191 or 62.8%. Respondents aging 21 to 23 years old had a total
number of 109 or 35.9%, and respondents aging 24 to 27 years old were only 4 or 1.3% from
the total number of respondents. The majority of responders with ages 18 to 20 years old is
largely due to the ratio of the remaining seniors to the increasing number of freshmen and
sophomores a year in the Nursing Department of National University-Manila. In addition, it
is well recognized that younger individuals are more inclined to engage than older individuals
(Sandberg, F., 2016).
Their Gender
Gender Frequency Percent
Male 59 19.4%
Female 245 80.6%
Total 304 100.0%

Based on the table, it shows the frequency distribution of the respondents’ gender.
The total number of respondents were 304 with the female showing a greater number
amounting to 245 or 80.6%, while the male had a total number of 59 or 19.4%. The Nursing
department is known to have more women in the field rather than men. With the increasing
number of nursing students enrolling per year, the number of men enrolled increases yet the
population of women still dominate the nursing department. According to a study, women are
known to engage in answering and participating in research studies rather than men (Bethony,
J., Diemert, D., Gazzinelli, M., Grahek, L., Lobato, L., & Per5eira, F., 2014)
Their Religion
Religion Frequency Percent
Roman Catholic 230 75.7%
Christian 32 10.5%
Iglesia ni Cristo 11 3.6%
Other Religion 30 9.9%
No Religion 1 0.3%
Total 304 100.0%
The frequency distribution of the respondents' religion is displayed in the table above.
It shows that the majority of respondents—230 in all, or 75.7%—were Roman Catholics. 32
respondents, or 10.5%, identified as Christians. There were 11 or 3.6% of Iglesia ni Cristo
responses. Moreover, there were 30 respondents, or 9.9%, who have other religion. One of
the responders answered no religion with 0.3% . In total, the researchers gathered 304
responses. According to a study, Philippines is heavily influenced by the Roman Catholic
Church, which holds a dominant position in terms of both the number and percentage of
adherents in the country's religious structure. More than 80% of Filipinos continuously
declared their devotion to the Catholic branch of Christianity throughout the decade of 2010
(Balabeykina, 2020). Given this, Roman Catholics represented the majority of the
respondents who were nursing students at National University-Manila.
Their Marital Status
Marital Status Frequency Percent
Single 303 99.7%
Married 1 .3%
Total 304 100.0%
As presented above, it shows the frequency distribution of the respondents’ marital
status. The majority of the respondents are single with a total number of 303 or 99.7% and
there is only 1 married among all the respondents. The researchers obtained a total of 303
responses for this table. According to a study, only seven percent of all undergraduates are
married, which explains why the number of single students is higher compared to those who
are married. (NO CITATION)
Their Year Level
Year Level Frequency Percent
1st Year 154 50.7%
2nd Year 82 27.0%
3rd Year 52 17.1%
4th Year 16 5.3%
Total 304 100.0%
The data from the above table displays the frequency distribution of the respondent's
Year Level. It was determined that 154 respondents, or 50.7%, were first-year students, who
made up the majority of the respondents. There were 82 or 27.0% second-year students.
There were 52 respondents, or 17.1%, third-year students. Additionally, 16 or 5.3% of
students are fourth-year students. The researchers obtained a total of 304 responses for this
table. At the Nursing Department of National University-Manila, the ratio of seniors to the
increasing number of freshmen and sophomores is the primary reflection of the significant
number of responses in first year, followed by the second year, third year, and fourth year
students. The researchers calculated a sample size based on the population of nursing students
at National University-Manila, which is the foundation for the number of respondents
required for the study. The sample size is primarily set to have a significant number of
responses in the first year.
Their No. of Units Enrolled
No. Of Units Enrolled Frequency Percent
10 up to 15 units 23 7.6%
16 up to 20 units 255 83.9%
21 up to 26 units 26 8.6%
Total 304 100.0%
As presented in the table, it shows the frequency distribution of the respondents’ no.
of units enrolled. The majority of the respondents were taking 16 up to 20 units with a total
number of 255 or 83.9%. Respondents taking 21 up to 26 units had a total number of 26 or
8.6%, and respondents taking 10 up to 15 units were 23 or 7.6% from the total number of
respondents. A “unit” or “credit” in college represents the amount of academic work
necessary to graduate (Lucier, 2019). One explanation that students detest online learning and
may have reduced their overall number of units by enrolling in only the most important
courses that they needed and postponing others.
Their Residence
Residence Frequency Percent
City 268 88.2%
Province 36 11.8%
Total 304 100.0%
The table above indicate the frequency and percentage distribution of the respondents
according to their residence. The majority of the respondents are from urban area (city) with
the total frequency number of 268 or 88.2%, while the respondents from rural area (province)
are 36 or with a total of 11.8%. According to the article of Arellano, D. (2017) majority of the
parents of the students intended to enroll their children to a school near at their homes in
order to save time and money commuting, and to assure that the students are safe and secure.
In addition, long commutes are exhausting, especially with the horrendous traffic in Manila.
Level of the Respondent’s Quality of Life

Table No. 8 Respondents Quality of Life According to Their Physical Health
Physical Health Level Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
1.) Physical pain prevents me from doing what I 3.03 1.13 Moderately Healthy
need to do.
2.) I take certain medications/medicine to function. 1.87 1.04 Slightly Healthy
3.) I have enough energy for everyday life. 3.10 0.87 Moderately Healthy
4.) I am able to get around to places I need to. 3.24 1.02 Moderately Healthy
5.) I am satisfied with my sleep. 2.20 1.03 Slightly Healthy
6.) I accept my bodily appearance 2.94 1.16 Moderately Healthy
Over-all Physical Health 2.73 0.52 Moderately Healthy
1.00-1.79 Not Yet Healthy
1.80-2.59 Slightly Healthy
2.60-3.39 Moderately Healthy
3.40-4.19 Healthy
4.20-5.00 Extremely Healthy
The table above shows the mean perception distribution of the respondents towards
the level of quality of life according to their physical health. The overall mean obtained
(2.73), which is interpreted as moderately healthy. According to Cruz (2018), the heavy
workload in school may limit students to engage in exercise on a regular basis. Being
physically healthy among students holds importance in improving the quality of life, being
healthy without a presence of disease is one of the factors in determining the quality of life of
an individual. Quality of life of students can also be affected by lower practice of physical
activity (Azzi D, Melo J, Neto A, Castelo P, Andrade E & Pereira L, 2022).
Table No. 9 Respondents Quality of Life According to Their Psychological Health

Psychological Health Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
1.) I enjoy my life. 3.23 1.04 Moderately Stable

2.) My life is meaningful. 3.41 1.06 Stable
3.) I am able to concentrate well. 2.75 0.94 Moderately Stable
4.) I am satisfied with my capacity to study. 2.68 1.04 Moderately Stable
5.) I am satisfied with myself. 3.06 1.01 Moderately Stable
6.) I experience hopelessness 2.82 0.96 Moderately Stable
7.) I experience anxiety 3.15 1.07 Moderately Stable
8.) I experience sadness. 3.17 0.96 Moderately Stable
Over-all Psychological Health 3.03 0.52 Moderately Stable
1.00-1.79 Not Yet Stable
1.80-2.59 Slightly Stable
2.60-3.39 Moderately Stable
3.40-4.19 Stable
4.20-5.00 Extremely Stable
The table displays the mean perceived distribution of the respondents’ quality of life
in relation to the level of quality of life according to their psychological health. The over-all
psychological health obtained a mean of (3.03), which is interpreted as moderately stable.
Psychological health is a known major contributor to one’s Quality of Life. According to
Cruz (2018), The wellbeing of nursing students is influenced by their psychological health,
which is in turn influenced by how they perceive stress. Therefore, psychological health is the
most significant QOL indicator in the research.
Table No. 10 Respondents Quality of Life According to Their Social Relationships

Social Relationships Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
1.) I am satisfied with my personal relationships. 3.59 0.83 Satisfied

2.) I am satisfied with the support I get from my 3.80 0.98 Satisfied
friends.
Over-all Social Relationships 3.69 0.79 Satisfied
1.00-1.79 Not Yet Satisfied
1.80-2.59 Slightly Satisfied
2.60-3.39 Moderately Satisfied
3.40-4.19 Satisfied
4.20-5.00 Extremely Satisfied
The table shows the mean perceived distribution of the respondents’ quality of life in
regards to their social relationships. The overall social relationships under their quality of life
were determined to have a mean of (3.69), meaning that the respondents’ reported having
satisfied social relationships. Peers and support groups shows great contribution to an
individual’s Quality of Life through protecting one another’s mental health. A known social
determinant of health is their relationship and social interaction with others (Bergeron, G.,
Lundy De La Cruz, N., Gould, L.H. et al., 2020). As the table showed that the respondents
have a satisfied social relationship, their quality of life can be perceived better through this.
The groups they socialize with creates a psychological and emotional impact to their overall
health and eventually improves their quality of life (Fu J, Cheng Z, Liu S, Hu Z, Zhong Z,
Luo Y, 2021).
Table No. 11 Respondents Quality of Life According to Environment

Environment Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
1.) I feel safe daily. 3.13 0.97 Moderately Satisfied

2.) My physical environment is healthy 3.17 0.93 Moderately Satisfied
3.) I have enough resources to meet my needs. 3.34 0.96 Moderately Satisfied
4.) Information needed in my day-to-day life is 3.40 0.89 Satisfied
available.
5.) I have the opportunity for leisure activities. 3.07 0.90 Moderately Satisfied
6.) I am satisfied with the conditions of my current 3.41 1.03 Satisfied
living place.
7.) I am satisfied with my access to health services 3.23 0.99 Moderately Satisfied
8.) I am satisfied with my mode of transportation. 2.90 1.12 Moderately Satisfied
Over-all Environment 3.21 0.71 Moderately Satisfied
1.00-1.79 Not Yet Satisfied
1.80-2.59 Slightly Satisfied
2.60-3.39 Moderately Satisfied
3.40-4.19 Satisfied
4.20-5.00 Extremely Satisfied
The Quality of Life of the respondents under the Environmental domain shows a
mean score of (3.21) or Moderately Satisfied. This finding shows that an individual’s Quality
of Life may be affected through environmental factors such as the feeling of safety and
security, resources available, accessibility to certain facilities, transportation, and etc. The
respondents' everyday activities are affected by the presence or absence of these elements.
Regarding that, their quality of life may also be significantly influenced due to environmental
factors that support and aid them in meeting their basic needs, which in return affects their
general wellbeing. (Ramli, A., Zain, R.M., Zain, M.Z.M., Rahman, A.A.A., 2021).
Table No. 12 Respondents Quality of Life According to Their Quality of Life and General Health
Quality of Life and General Health Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
1.) How would you rate your quality of life? 3.56 0.77 Good
2.) I am satisfied with my health. 3.34 0.93 Average
Over-all Quality of Life and General Health 3.45 0.77 Good
1.00-1.79 Very poor
1.80-2.59 Poor
2.60-3.39 Average
3.40-4.19 Good
4.20-5.00 Very good
As indicated above, the overall Quality of Life and General Health of the respondents
results to a score of (3.45). The tool reveals that the respondents have a Good Quality of Life
and General Health when looking at the set of values used to analyze the data. The different
domains under the tool used to evaluate their Quality of Life is a determinant of their overall
general health and as well as their Quality of Life. The Physical, Psychological, Social
Relationship, and Environment domains were all factors to be evaluated before respondents
are able to accurately and appropriately evaluate their perception of their Quality of Life. At
certain domains they showed excellence and most were just average which resulted to the
respondents’ reporting a Good Over-all Quality of Life and General Health.
Level of Respondents’ Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning
Table No. 13 Level of Respondents’ Perceived Importance of Implementation of Blended Learning

Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
1.) Not coming to campus often is convenient for me. 3.06 0.91 Moderately important
2.) I have the flexibility to do my assignments in my own
3.38 0.97 Moderately important
time at any place.
3.) My schedule works with the program I took. 3.39 0.90 Moderately important
4.) I chose the University, not the course modality. 2.53 0.99 Slightly important
5.) Household duties make it difficult for me to attend face-
to-face classes.
Over-all Perceived Importance of Implementation of
Blended Learning
100-1.79 Not at all important
1.80-2.59 Slightly important
2.60-3.39 Moderately important
3.40-4.19 Very important
4.20-5.00 Extremely important
The table above shows the mean perception distribution towards the level of the
respondents’ perceived importance of implementation of Blended learning. It indicates that
the over-all perceived importance of implementation of Blended learning obtained a mean of
(3.01), which is interpreted as Moderately important. It was evident that the respondents do
recognize the value of this learning modality through the advantages it provides. As most of
the questions asked are determined to be moderately important, the respondents’ perception
may be influenced by the adjustment period and rapid transition from traditional classroom
setting to blended learning. Moreover, the online learning modality was able to show the
impact of blended learning not only for their academics but also to their life outside the
course, which in return may influence and improve the quality of their skills and performance
(Lee, C. & Ma, L., 2021).
Table No. 14 Level of Respondents’ Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning (according to the
amount of interaction)
1.) Other students in this blended course. 2.91 0.77 Maintained
2.) The instructor in this blended course. 3.26 0.75 Maintained
Over-all Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning
according to the amount of interaction 3.09 0.76 Maintained
100-1.79 Much decreased
1.80-2.59 Somewhat decreased
2.60-3.39 Maintained
3.40-4.19 Somewhat increased
4.20-5.00 Much increased
The table above shows the mean distribution towards the level of the respondents’
perceived implementation of blended learning according to the amount of interaction of
instructors and students. The over-all perceived implementation of blended learning
according to amount of interaction obtained a mean of (3.09), which is interpreted as
maintained. Transitioning from traditional online settings to blended learning, the students’
participation and means of communication were affected through various ways.
Communicating lectures, announcements, feedback, and simple or deep conversations
between student and instructor may be elements that are affected which could eventually
have an impact to their over-all academic performance. Aside from the expected connection
errors and miscommunication through online, the flexibility of the schedule provided by the
instructors to the students made a positive impact to how students manage their time as it is
accessible and relevant to their current conditions (Hajhosseini, F. & Taghizadeh, M., 2021).
Through this, the data shown above determined that the interaction between students and
instructors are maintained at a level that is still efficient for both ends. (PACHECK KUNG
NAG MAMAKE SENSE HAHA)
Table No. 15 Level of Respondents’ Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning according to the
quality of interaction
1.) Other students in this blended course. 3.02 0.72 Maintained
2.) The instructor in this blended course. 3.13 0.75 Maintained
according to the quality of interaction 3.08 0.73 Maintained
100-1.79 Much worse
1.80-2.59 Somewhat worse
2.60-3.39 Maintained
3.40-4.19 Somewhat better
4.20-5.00Much better
The table displays the mean perceived implementation of blended learning according
to the quality of interaction of instructors and students. The over-all perceived
implementation of blended learning obtained a mean of (3.08) which is interpreted as
maintained. Blended Learning provides students with access to online information and
resources according to their interests and expertise levels. It improves lecturers' and students’
time management skills and helps the classroom environment by providing possibilities for
professional cooperation (Guillén-Gámez et al. 2020; Owston et al. 2019). Through that the
quality of interaction between the instructors and students are determined to have minimal to
no changes compared to the quality of interaction during the traditional face-to-face setting.
Table No. 16 Level of Respondents’ Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning (modality in

general?) (NOT SURE KUNG ANO PINAKA TOPIC NITO)
1.) The university provides sufficient resources for this
3.03 0.87 Average
specific blended course.
2.) The course provides extensive information (e.g., links)
3.33 1.89 Average
about technical support for online learning.
3.) The course syllabus identifies and clearly delineates the
3.41 0.82 Moderately agree
role of online environment will play in the total course.
4.) Overall, I am satisfied with this blended course. 3.06 0.87 Average
5.) I am looking forward to taking other blended courses at
2.96 1.00 Average
the same university in the future.
6.) A Blended course format helps me to manage my time
3.09 0.92 Average
better.
7.) The online components of this course effectively
reinforced what I was learning in the face-to-face sessions 3.09 0.85 Average
of this course.
8.) The face-to-face session of this course effectively
reinforced what I was learning via the online components of 3.42 0.86 Moderately agree
this course.
Over-all Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning 3.18 1.01 Average
(modality in general?)
100-1.79 Strongly disagree
1.80-2.59 Moderately disagree
2.60-3.39 Average
3.40-4.19 Moderately agree
4.20-5.00 Strongly agree
As indicated above, it shows the perceived implementation of blended learning. The
over-all perceived implementation of blended learning obtained a mean of (3.18), which is
interpreted as average. As technology has been easier to use over the past several years,
blended learning has changed how classrooms look. Since the evidence shows that they have
the potential to maximize student engagement, blended learning (BL) environments—which
integrate synchronous and asynchronous activities and are located on a continuum between
face-to-face and online teaching and learning—are of special interest (Graham, 2019). The
current situation demands what is the best methodology for teaching and which ones may suit
best depending on the needs of the students.
Table No. 17 Level of Respondents’ Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning compared to

traditional face-to-face setting
1.) The workload in this course is lighter or heavier
3.45 0.86 Somewhat heavier
compared to traditional face to face courses.
2.) The course is more difficult during traditional face to
3.07 0.97 Average
face classes.
3.26 0.91 Average
compared to traditional face-to-face setting
100-1.79 Much lighter

1.80-2.59 Somewhat lighter
2.60-3.39 Average
3.40-4.19 Somewhat heavier
4.20-5.00 Much heavier
The table presents the perceived implementation of blended learning. The over-all
perceived implementation of blended learning compared to traditional face-to-face setting
was determined to have a mean of (3.26), which indicates average. The degree and amount of
workload of the students during traditional and face to face classes and the comparison of the
traditional and blended learning in terms of level of difficulty contributed to the outcome of
this data. Blended learning was a potential method in undergraduate medical to teach the
medical students and it was as effective as traditional learning for teaching medical students
(Sitthiphong, et al. 2021). As a result, the respondents viewed that the course whether
blended learning or traditional face-to-face had minimal differences in terms of quality and
effectivity as both were relevant to the course.
Table No. 18 Level of Respondents’ Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning resources and
components
1.) The provided class syllabus is helpful to me. 3.30 0.88 Moderately helpful
2.) The materials (e.g., PowerPoint presentation, video
presentation) provided in class helps me to understand 3.56 0.92 Very helpful
the lesson.
3.) Online interaction (e.g., discussion board, chats, e-
3.37 0.92 Moderately helpful
mails) benefits me.
4.) In-class quizzes and tests benefit me. 3.37 0.86 Moderately helpful
5.) I benefit from taking exams and quizzes online. 3.35 0.93 Moderately helpful
6.) The textbooks are useful to my online class. 3.58 0.99 Very helpful
7.) Online reading materials are helpful to my studies. 3.64 0.99 Very helpful
Over-all Perceived Implementation of Blended
Learning resources and components 3.45 0.93 Very Helpful
100-1.79 Not at all helpful
1.80-2.59 Slightly helpful
2.60-3.39 Moderately helpful
3.40-4.19 Very helpful
4.20-5.00 Extremely helpful
The table presents the perceived implementation of blended learning. The over-all
perceived implementation of blended learning was determined to have a mean of (3.45),
which indicates very helpful. Factors such as dissemination of class materials like
PowerPoint presentation and video presentation, textbooks, and online reading materials are
considered to be very helpful for the respondents. On the other hand, the dissemination of
syllabus, online interaction, in-class quizzes, and exams are considered as moderately helpful.
When attempting to create an online course that is more beneficial and useful for students
studying, understanding the elements that influence how students perceive the usefulness of
blended learning may be of substantial use. If the course material and activities are well
prepared and easy to use, students feel comfortable and have greater motivation to study
(Damijana et. al, 2019)
Table No. 19 Summary of the over-all perceived implementation of blended learning

1.) Over-all Perceived Importance of Implementation of

Blended Learning
2.) Over-all Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning
3.07 0.97 Maintained
according to the amount of interaction
3.13 0.75 Maintained
according to the quality of interaction
3.18 1.01 Average
(modality in general?)
3.26 0.91 Average
compared to traditional face-to-face setting
3.45 0.93 Very Helpful
resources and components
The table above shows the summary of the elements under Blended learning as
perceived by the respondents. Through the data gathered, Blended learning is perceived to be
moderately important as the amount and quality of interaction between the students and
instructors were both maintained whether it was traditional or not. Their over-all
understanding of the implementation of blended learning is found to be average as well as the
perception they have as they compared it to the traditional face-to-face setting. Under the
blended learning modality, the resources and components it provided the students is found to
be very helpful to their course due to its availability, accessibility, flexibility, and relevance
to their current conditions. (PACHECK PO KUNG NAGMAMAKE SENSE)
(SOP4)
Table No. 19 Comparison Among Respondents Over-all Quality of Life and Blended Learning Experience
When Grouped According to Their Age Profile
Type III Verbal
Mean Probability Decision
Source Sum of df F Interpretatio
Square Value Rule
Squares n
Corrected
4.826a 9 .536 2.098 .030
Model
Intercept 71.778 1 71.778 280.828 .000
Over-All
Not Yet
Quality of 1.157 2 .579 2.264 .106 Accept Ho
Significant
Life
Blended Not Yet
1.014 3 .338 1.322 .267 Accept Ho
Learning Significant
Over-All
Quality of
Not Yet
Life * 1.216 4 .304 1.189 .316 Accept Ho
Significant
Blended
Learning
Error 75.144 294 .256
Total 663.000 304
Corrected
79.970 303
Total
a. R Squared = .060 (Adjusted R Squared = .032)
The hypothesis was tested as shown in table (19), where the (F) value regarding the
over-all quality of life reached (2.264) with a probability value of (.106), which indicates that
the result of statistical analysis accepts the null hypothesis and confirms that there is no
significant difference among the respondents’ over-all quality of life when they are grouped
according to their age profile. Additionally, the probability value obtained for the blended
learning experience by the respondents is (.267), which also indicate that the result accepts
the null hypothesis and confirms that there is no significant difference among the
respondents’ blended learning experience when they are grouped according to their age
profile. Furthermore, the (F) value regarding the over-all quality of life and blended learning
obtained (1.189) with probability value of (.316), which is found to be not yet significant.
Therefore, the result accepts the null hypothesis and further concludes that there is no
significant difference among the respondents’ over-all quality of life and blended learning
experience when they are grouped according to their age profile.
When Grouped According to The No. Of Enrollees
Type III Verbal

Mean Probability Decision
Source Sum of df F Interpretatio
Square Value Rule
Squares n
Corrected
2.293a 9 .255 1.604 .113
Model
Intercept 137.397 1 137.397 865.396 .000
Over-All
Not Yet
Quality of .803 2 .402 2.529 .081 Accept Ho
Significant
Life
Blended Not Yet
1.178 3 .393 2.474 .062 Accept Ho
Learning Significant
Over-All
Quality of
Not Yet
Life * 1.388 4 .347 2.185 .071 Accept Ho
Significant
Blended
Learning
Error 46.678 294 .159
Total 1277.000 304
Corrected
48.970 303
Total
a. R Squared = .047 (Adjusted R Squared = .018)
The table above shows the comparison among respondents’ over-all quality of life
and blended learning experience when grouped according to the no. of enrollees. It reveals
that the (F) value regarding the over-all quality of life reached (2.259) with a probability
value of (.081), which indicates that the result of statistical analysis accepts the null
hypothesis and confirms that there is no significant difference among the respondents’
over-all quality of life when they are grouped according to the no. of enrollees.
Additionally, the probability value obtained for the blended learning experience by the
respondents is (.062), which also indicate that the result accepts the null hypothesis and
confirms that there is no significant difference among the respondents’ blended learning
experience when they are grouped according to the no. of enrollees. Furthermore, the (F)
value regarding the over-all quality of life and blended learning obtained (2.185) with
probability value of (.071), which is found to be not yet significant. Therefore, the result
accepts the null hypothesis and further concludes that there is no significant difference
among the respondents’ over-all quality of life and blended learning experience when they
are grouped according to the no. of enrollees.
Table No. 21 Comparison Among Respondents Over-all Quality of Life and Blended Learning
Experience When Grouped According to Their Gender
Null Hypothesis Test Probability Value Decision

Independent-
The distribution of Blended Learning is Samples Reject the null
1 the same across categories of Sex. Mann-Whitney
.016
hypothesis.
U Test
Independent-
The distribution of Over-all Quality of
Samples Reject the null
2 Life is the same across categories of Mann-Whitney
.015
hypothesis.
Sex.
U Test
Asymptomatic significances are displayed. The significance level is .05.
The table above shows the comparison among respondents’ Blended learning and
over-all Quality of Life when grouped according to their gender profile. It can be claimed that
non-Parametrical test under Mann-Whitney U Test were employed to compare Blended
Learning as over-all Quality of Life based on respondents’ gender profile. Moreover, the
probability value is less than 5% which is 0.01, wherein it was found to be significant.
Evidently the researchers have enough claims to reject the null hypothesis. This further
concludes that there was a significant difference among respondents’ Blended Learning
experience when they are grouped according to their gender profile. The influence varies
depending on gender even though the resources and courses supplied are fairly distributed to
each student. Their gender profile also affects how well and motivated they are while using
various blended learning modalities. (Alqahtani, M., Elumalai, K., Sankar, J., & R., K.,
2022). Additionally, the score obtained for the over-all quality of life of the respondents is
also less than the significant level which results to a decision of rejecting the null hypothesis
meaning that Quality of Life has a significant difference to their gender profile. This may be
due to the genders’ certain emotional and psychological capacities. The impact of their
emotions and psychological health greatly affects their over-all quality of life (Chaar et al.,
2018). Through these findings, the respondents’ gender is a reliable determinant for their
perception on blended learning and over-all quality of life as it depicts their condition
appropriately.
When Grouped According to Their Religion
Independent-
The distribution of Blended Learning is Retain the null
1 Samples .348
the same across categories of Religion. hypothesis.
Kruskal-Wallis Test
Independent-
Samples Reject the null
2 Life is the same across categories of .044
Kruskal-Wallis hypothesis.
Religion.
Test
A non-Parametrical test under the Kruskal-Wallis's test was utilized to know the
significant difference among respondents’ quality of life and perceived implementation of
blended learning when grouped according to their religion. The table shows the comparison
among respondents’ Blended learning and overall Quality of Life when grouped according to
their religion. Moreover, the probability value obtained for the blended learning is .348,
which is greater than the significance level of .05 by that, the researchers have enough claim
to retain the null hypothesis, meaning, that there is no significant difference in respondents’
perceived implementation of blended learning according to their religion. Although the

principles and vision of an individual can be a factor on how they make decisions and mold
the path they make, it is still not enough to be a determining factor to their motivation in the
blended learning and impact on the over-all quality of life. Furthermore, the probability value
obtained for the overall quality of life is .044, which is less than the significance level of .05,
with that, there being a significant difference in the respondents' quality of life according to
their religion, the researchers have adequate evidence to reject the null hypothesis. According
to Chaar et al. (2018), the study's findings, which reveal that a person's Quality of Life is
positively correlated with their level of purpose, serenity, and faith, support the notion that
religion and Quality of Life are related. Regarding a spiritual coping paradigm to help the
patients through their healing process, relational spirituality is thought to be advantageous.
Having said that, relational spirituality can play a significant role for nursing students who
live out and use their faith in their educational journey.
When Grouped According to Their Marital Status

Independent-
The distribution of Blended Learning is
Samples Retain the null
1 the same across categories of Marital .7891
Mann-Whitney hypothesis.
Status.
U Test
Independent-
Mann-Whitney hypothesis.
Marital Status.
U Test
1
Exact significance is displayed for this test
The comparison between respondents’ Blended learning and over-all Quality of Life
when classified according to their marital status was presented in this table. A non-
Parametrical test under the Mann-Whitney U test were utilized to determine the significant
difference between blended learning and over-all quality of life based on respondents’ marital
status. Moreover, the probability value obtained for the blended learning is .789, which is
greater than the significance level of .05. This gives the researchers adequate evidence to
support the null hypothesis, which claims that there is no significant difference in
respondents’ quality of life and perceived implementation of blended learning when
classified to their marital status. Moreover, the probability value obtained for the over-all
quality of life is 0.99, which is greater than the significance level of .05, the researchers have
enough claim to retain the null hypothesis, meaning that there is no significant difference in
respondents’ over-all quality of life and perceived implementation of blended learning
according to their marital status.
When Grouped According to Their Year Level
Independent-
The distribution of Blended Learning is
1 the same across categories of Year .093
Level.
Test
Independent-
Year Level.
Test
A non-Parametrical test under the Kruskal-Wallis Test was utilized to know the
significant difference among respondents’ quality of life and perceived implementation of
blended learning when classified into their year level. The table above presents the
comparison between respondents’ quality of life and perceived implementation of blended
learning when grouped into their year level. Moreover, the probability obtained for the
blended learning is .093, which is greater than the significant level of .05. This provides the
researchers with sufficient data to support the null hypothesis, which states that there is no
discernible difference between the respondents' perceptions of the quality of their lives and
the implementation of blended learning according to their year level. Furthermore, the
probability value obtained for the over-all quality of life is 0.138, which is greater than the
significance level of .05, the researchers have enough claim to retain the null hypothesis,
meaning that there is no significant difference in respondents’ over-all quality of life and
perceived implementation of blended learning according to their year level.
When Grouped According to Their Residence
Independent-
1 The distribution of Blended Learning is Samples Retain the null
.918
the same across categories of Residence Mann-Whitney U hypothesis.
Test
Independent-
The distribution of Over-all Quality of Samples
2 Retain the null
Life is the same across categories of .567
Mann-Whitney U hypothesis.
Residence
Test
The probability value of the respondents' residence's link to blended learning and
quality of life is calculated using the Mann-Whitney U Test. Given that the probability value
(.918) of blended learning and respondents' residency is higher than the significance level
(.05), the null hypothesis was chosen to be retained. Same goes with the correlation of
respondents’ residence to the over-all quality of life, the null hypothesis was retained as the
probability value (.567) was greater than the significance level (.05).
(SOP5)
Table No. 25 Significant is the correlation exist among respondents’ Quality of Life to their socio-
demographic variable.
Over-all Chi-square Probability Verbal
df Decision Rule
Quality of Life Value Value Interpretation
Very
Age 10.658a 4 .031 Accept H1
Significant
Very
Gender 10.330a 2 .006 Accept H1
Significant
Not Yet
Religion 12.155a 6 .059 Accept H0
Significant
Very
Marital Status 9.163a 2 .010 Accept H1
Significant
Not Yet
Year Level 5.727a 6 .454 Accept H0
Significant
Number of Not Yet
7.120a 4 .130 Accept H0
Enrollees Significant
Not Yet
Residence .325a 2 .850 Accept H0
Significant
The table above shows the significant correlation between the respondents’ quality of
life to their socio-demographic profiles: Age, Gender, Religion, Marital Status, Year level,
No. of Enrollees, and Residence.
The connection between age and quality of life is highly significant with a probability
value of (.031), which is below the significant threshold of (.05). As a result, the alternative
hypothesis is accepted. Fitness level and performance, which are important components of
quality of life, are significantly influenced by age. Given this, growing old can have a
negative effect on a person's physical health, which may then have an effect on their variety
of skills and capabilities (Puciatio, Borysiuk, & Rozpara, 2017).
Just like age, the respondents’ gender is also determined to have a very significant
correlation with quality of life due to having a probability value of (.006), meaning that the
alternative hypothesis is accepted. According to Kobayasi et al. (2017), in many professional
domains, gender is a discussion point. Despite the fact that women still outnumber men in the
health area, there has been a noticeable rise in male involvement. In light of this, gender
disparities in this field of work continue to be a problem that affects quality of life. Students
studying nursing at National University-Manila were the evidence of the statement about the
proportion of men and women in the healthcare profession.
Chaar et al. (2018) found a favorable correlation between purpose, tranquility, and
faith and Quality of Life. Relational spirituality is seen as a spiritual coping paradigm to help
patients heal. Nursing students who practice and apply their faith in their learning can benefit
from relational spirituality. But, in this study unlike the first two sociodemographic factors,
religion was found out to have a probability value of (.059) that is greater than the significant
value, resulting to accepting the null hypothesis and determining that religion and quality of
life does not have a significant relationship yet.
The marital status of the respondents was able to get a probability value of (.010),
which is less than the significance threshold of (.05). The alternative hypothesis was
accepted, and a very significant association between married status and quality of life was
found. The marital status of the respondents was able to get a probability value of (.010),
which is less than the significance threshold of (.05). (RRL)
Although the year level of the respondents varies, it was found to not have a
significant correlation to quality of life due to a probability value of (.454) that is greater than
the significance level of (.05).
The number of enrollees were also determined to not have a significant correlation to
quality of life as it acquired a probability value of (.130) which is greater than the
significance level, resulting in the acceptance of the null hypothesis
Residence acquired a probability value of (.850) which means no significance
correlation to quality of life of the respondents, due to the value being greater than the
significance level (.05).
(SOP6)
Table No. 26 Significant is the correlation exist among respondents’ perceived implementation of blended
learning to their socio-demographic variable.
Blended
Chi-square Probability Verbal
Learning df Decision Rule
Value Value Interpretation
Experience
Not Yet
Age 4.019a 6 .674 Accept H0
Significant
Very
Gender 15.842a 3 .001 Accept H1
Significant
Not Yet
Religion 10.113a 9 .341 Accept H0
Significant
Not Yet
Marital Status .449a 3 .930 Accept H0
Significant
Not Yet
Year Level 7.304a 9 .606 Accept H0
Significant
Number of Not Yet
5.444a 6 .488 Accept H0
Enrollees Significant
Not Yet
Residence .325a 2 .850 Accept H0
Significant
The table above shows the significant correlation between the respondents’ perceived
implementation of blended learning to their socio-demographic profiles shown in the table.
The correlation between the respondents’ age and their perceived implementation of blended
learning is not significant with a probability value of (0.674), which is above the significant
threshold of (0.05). As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted.
The respondents’ gender is determined to have a very significant correlation with the
respondents’ perceived implementation of blended learning due to having a probability value
of (0.001), meaning that the alternative hypothesis is accepted.
Religion was found out to have a probability value of (.341) that is greater than the
significant level, which accepts the null hypothesis and determining that religion and the
perceived implementation of blended learning among respondents does not have a significant
relationship yet. (RRL)
The marital status of the respondents obtained a probability value of (.930), which is greater
than the significance threshold of.05. Therefore, the null hypothesis was accepted, and
confirms that there is no significant correlation between the respondents’ marital status and
perceived implementation of blended learning.
The respondents’ year level was found to not have a significant correlation to the
respondents’ perceived implementation of blended learning due to a probability value of
(.606) that is greater than the significance level of (.05).

The number of enrollees were also determined to not have a significant correlation to the
respondents’ perceived implementation of blended learning as it obtained a probability value
of (.488) which is greater than the significance level, resulting in the acceptance of the null
hypothesis.
Residence acquired a probability value of (.850) which means there is no significance
correlation between the respondents’ residency and their perceived implementation of
blended learning.
Chapter V
Summary, Conclusion, Recommendations
This chapter aims to present the summary of the findings, conclusions and
recommendations based on the data analyzed on the previous chapter.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (PER SOP)
The primary findings of the study are as follow:
1. The study shows the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of:
1.1. Age
Majority of the respondents are 18-20 years old. Wherein 62.8% of the respondents
are 18-20 years old, 35.9% are 21-23 years old, and the remaining 1.3% ages 24-27 years old.
1.2. Gender
There were 304 total responses; 245 of them were women, or 80.6% of the total; the
remaining 59 were men, or 19.4% of the total.
1.3. Religion
Majority of respondents—230 in all, or 75.7%—were Roman Catholics. 32
respondents, or 10.5%, identified as Christians. There were 11 or 3.6% of Iglesia Ni Cristo
responses. Moreover, there were 31 respondents, or 10.2%, who have other religion. In total
the researchers gathered 304 responses.
1.4. Marital Status
The majority of the respondents are single with a total number of 303 or 99.7% and
there is only 1 married among all the respondents. The researchers obtained a total of 304
responses for this table.
1.5. Year Level

It was determined that 154 respondents, or 50.7%, were first-year students, who made
up the majority of the respondents. There were 82 or 27.0% second-year students. There were
52 respondents, or 17.1%, third-year students. Additionally, 16 or 5.3% of students are
fourth-year students. The researchers obtained a total of 304 responses for this table.
1.6. No. Of Units Enrolled
The majority of the respondents were taking 16 up to 20 units with a total number of
255 or 83.9%. Respondents taking 21 up to 26 units had a total number of 26 or 8.6%, and
respondents taking 10 up to 15 units were 23 or 7.6% from the total number of respondents.
1.7. Residence
The majority of the respondents are residing at an urban community (city), with the
total frequency number of 268 or 88.2% while, the respondents residing in rural area
(province) are 36 or with a total of 11.8%.
2. The study shows the respondents’ level of Quality of life in terms of:
2.1 Physical Health
The over-all psychological health obtained a mean of (3.03) which is interpreted as
moderately stable. Medication and sleep obtained scores that reached within the scale of
(1.80 - 2.59), which is interpreted as Slightly Healthy. The rest of the domain which consisted
of sensation of pain, everyday energy, ability to go places, and bodily appearance were found
to be Moderately Healthy.
2.2 Psychological
The over-all psychological health obtained a mean of (3.03), which is interpreted as
Moderately stable. While the respondents’ perception of life as meaningful obtained a score
of (1.06) or Stable, The rest of the questions that asked for the other aspects of psychological
health like; enjoyment, concentration, satisfaction of capacity to study, and feeling of
hopelessness, anxiety, and sadness obtained scores within the range of (2.60 - 3.39), meaning
that these elements are perceived to be Moderately stable.
2.3 Social Relationships
The overall social relationships under their quality of life were determined to have a
mean of 3.69, meaning that the respondents’ reported having satisfied social relationships. As
the domain explored their satisfaction on both the respondents’ personal relationships and the
support they receive from these group of people, their quality of life in regards to social
relationship is deemed to be satisfied based on both scores landing on the interval of (3.40 -
4.19).
2.4 Environment
The Quality of Life of the respondents under the Environmental domain showed a
mean score of (3.21) or Moderately Satisfied. As information needed for everyday and
satisfaction on current living place acquired scores between (3.40 - 4.19), these elements
under the environment domain is determined to be satisfactory as per the respondents. The
data gathered for safety, health security, resources, leisure activities, accessibility of certain
services, and transportation all acquired a score between (2.60 - 3.39), which interprets to be
Moderately satisfied.
2.5 Over-all Quality of life and General Health
The Over-all Quality of Life and General Health of the respondents resulted to a score
of (3.45) or interprets to the idea that the respondents’ quality of life and general health is
good. The respondents rated their quality of life and was determined to be good, while the
satisfaction in regards to health is just average.
3. The study shows the respondents’ perceived implementation of Blended learning
3.1 Level of Respondents’ Perceived Importance of Implementing Blended Learning
It shows that the mean score for the perceived value of implementing blended
learning was (3.01), which is considered to be of Moderate importance. The respondents
reported that the choice in university aside the course is slightly important as the score
gathered is within the scale of (1.80 - 2.59). The convenience of having flexible time,
relevance of course to their schedule, and other activities aside from academics are other
elements received scores that land on the scale of (2.60 -3.30) meaning it is Moderately
important in the Blended learning.

3.2 Level of Respondents’ Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning
According to the Amount of Interaction
A mean score of (3.09) was achieved for the overall perception of blended learning
implementation in terms of the level of interaction, which is considered to be maintained.
Both students and instructors are determined to have the same perception regarding the
quantity of interaction during the blended learning modality, due to the fact that it acquired a
mean score within the scale of (2.60 - 3.39) or Maintained.
According to the Quality of Interaction
The over-all perceived implementation of blended learning according to the quality of
interaction obtained a mean of 3.08, which is interpreted as maintained. Both students and
instructors are determined to have the same perception regarding the quality of interaction
during the blended learning modality, due to the fact that it acquired a mean score within the
scale of (2.60 - 3.39) or Maintained.
According to its Modalities
The over-all perceived implementation of blended learning according to its modality
obtained a mean of (3.18), which means that the modalities of blended learning experienced
by the respondents is average. These consists of the resources, information, syllabus, courses,
and schedule.
Compared to Traditional Face-to-face Setting
The over-all perceived implementation of blended learning compared to traditional face-
to-face setting was determined to have a mean of (3.26), which indicates average. Although
the difficulty is determined to be average whether online or traditional, the workload is
reported to be somewhat heavier.
According to its Resources and Components
The over-all perceived implementation of blended learning was determined to have a
mean of (3.45), which indicates very helpful. PowerPoint presentation, textbooks, and online
reading materials is all very helpful as the scores acquired landed on the scale between (3.40 -
4.19), while the syllabus, online interaction, and quizzes and tests are all determined to
moderately helpful.
3.6 Over-all Perceived Implementation of Blended Learning
The amount and quality of contact between students and instructors were maintained whether it
was conventional or not, making blended learning appear to be of moderately important. Their general
understanding of how blended learning is implemented and their perspective of it as compared to the
conventional face-to-face setting are both determined to be average. Due to availability, accessibility,
flexibility, and relevance to the students' present circumstances, the materials and components offered
through the blended learning modality are deemed to be very helpful to the students' courses.
4. Significant difference among respondents’ Quality of Life and perceived
implementation of Blended learning according to Socio-demographic variable.

4.1 Age
The statistical analysis's conclusion accepts the null hypothesis and confirms that there
is no discernible difference between the respondents' overall quality of life when they are
grouped according to their age profile, as shown in table (19), where the hypothesis was
tested. The (F) value regarding the over-all quality of life reached (2.264) with a probability
value of (.106). Additionally, the respondents' probability value for their experience with
blended learning was (.267), indicating that the result accepts the null hypothesis and
confirms that there is no significant difference in the respondents' blended learning
experiences when they are grouped according to their age profile. Additionally, the (F) value
for overall life quality and integrated learning was (1.189) with a probability value of (.316),
which is still not considered to be significant. As a result, the finding supports the null
hypothesis and leads to the additional conclusion that when respondents are classified
according to their age profile, there is no discernible difference in their overall quality of life
or their experience with blended learning.
4.2 No. Of Enrollees
There is no statistically significant difference between the respondents' overall quality
of life when they are grouped according to the number of enrollees, as shown by the fact that
the (F) value for the over-all quality of life reached (2.259) with a probability value of (.081).
This indicates that the statistical analysis accepted the null hypothesis. Additionally, the
respondents' probability value for their blended learning experience was (.062), indicating
that the result accepts the null hypothesis and that there isn't a significant difference between
the respondents' blended learning experiences when they are grouped according to the
number of enrollees. Additionally, a probability value of (.071) was used to calculate the (F)
value for overall quality of life and blended learning, which was achieved at (2.185), and is
now not significant. As a result, the finding supports the null hypothesis and leads to the
additional conclusion that when respondents are categorized according to the number of
enrollees, there is no discernible difference in their overall quality of life or their experience
with blended learning.
4.3 Gender
It was determined that the probability value, which is less than (.05) and equals (.016)
for blended learning and (.015) for quality of life, is determined to be significant. Evidently,
there are enough assertions for the researchers to reject the null hypothesis. When
respondents are categorized according to their gender profiles, it is further concluded that
there was a considerable disparity in the respondents' experiences with blended learning.
Additionally, because the respondents' overall quality of life score fell below the threshold
for significance, the null hypothesis was rejected, indicating that there is a significant
relationship between quality of life and gender profile.
4.4 Religion
The researchers have enough evidence to support the null hypothesis, which states that
there is no significant difference in respondents' quality of life and perceived implementation
of blended learning according to their religion, since the probability value obtained for the
blended learning is (.348), which is greater than the significance level of (.05). With a
significant difference in the respondents' quality of life and perceived implementation of
blended learning according to their religion, as well as the probability value obtained for the
overall quality of life being (.044), which is less than the significance level of (.05), the
researchers have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.

4.5 Marital Status
The researchers have sufficient evidence to support the null hypothesis, which states that
of blended learning based on marital status, since the probability value obtained for blended
learning is (.789), which is greater than the significance level of (.05). Furthermore, because
the probability value obtained for overall quality of life is (0.99), which is greater than the
significance level of (.05), the researchers have enough evidence to maintain the null
hypothesis, implying that there is no significant difference in respondents' overall quality of
life and perceived implementation of blended learning based on marital status.
4.6 Year Level
The researchers have enough evidence to back up the null hypothesis, which states that
there is no substantial difference in respondents' quality of life and perceived implementation
of blended learning based on year level, since the probability value obtained for blended
learning is (.093), which is greater than the significance level of (.05). Additionally, because
the probability value for overall quality of life obtained is (0.138), which is greater than the
significance level of (.05), the researchers have sufficient evidence to support the null
hypothesis, implying that there is no significant difference in respondents' overall quality of
life and perceived implementation of blended learning based on year level.
4.7 Residence
The researchers have enough evidence to support the null hypothesis, which states that

of blended learning based on residence, since the probability value obtained for blended
learning is (.918), which is greater than the significance level of (.05). Further to that, because
the probability value obtained for overall quality of life is (0.138), which is greater than the
significance level of (.05), the researchers have enough data to back up the null hypothesis,
implying that there is no significant difference in respondents' overall quality of life and
perceived implementation of blended learning based on year level.
5. Significant Difference Among Respondents’ Quality of Life to Their Socio-
demographic Variable
The connection between age and quality of life is highly significant with a probability
value of (.031), which is below the significant threshold of (.05). Just like age, the
respondents` gender is also determined to have a very significant correlation with quality of
life due to having a probability value of (.006), meaning that the alternative hypothesis is
accepted. Moreover, religion was found out to have a probability value of (.059) that is
greater than the significant value, resulting to accepting the null hypothesis and determining
that religion and quality of life does not have a significant relationship. The marital status of
the respondents was able to get a probability value of (.010), which is less than the
significance threshold of (.05). Although the year level of the respondents varies, it was
found to not have a significant correlation to quality of life due to a probability value of
(.454) that is greater than the significance level of (.05). The number of enrollees were also
determined to not have a significant correlation to quality of life as it acquired a probability
value of (.130) which is greater than the significance level, resulting in the acceptance of the
null hypothesis. Residents acquired a probability value of (.850) which means no significance
correlation to quality of life of the respondents.

6. Significant Correlation Between the Respondents’ Perceived Implementation of
Blended Learning to Their Socio-demographic Profiles
The correlation between the respondents` age and their perceived implementation of
blended learning is not significant with a probability value of (0.674), which is above the
significant threshold of (0.05). The respondents` gender is determined to have a very
significant correlation with the respondents` perceived implementation of blended learning
due to having a probability value of (0.001), meaning that the alternative hypothesis is
accepted. Religion was found to have a probability value of (.341) that is greater than the
significant level, which accepts the null hypothesis and determining that religion and the
perceived implementation of blended learning among respondents does not have a significant
relationship yet. The respondents` year level was found to not have a significant correlation
to the respondents` perceived implementation of blended learning due to a probability value
of (.606) that is greater than the significance level of (.05). The number of enrollees were also
determined to not have a significant correlation to the respondents` perceived implementation
of blended learning as it obtained a probability value of (.488) which is greater than the
significance level, resulting in the acceptance of the null hypothesis.
CONCLUSION (PARAGRAPH FORM)
Considering the unexpected circumstances that caused changes in the classroom setting at
National University, which led to the implementation of blended learning approach rather
than the traditional face-to-face classes that has been there before. This study found out that
in the students’ socio demographic profile in age, and religion there is a significant difference
to the respondents’ quality of life.

RECOMMENDATION
Upon conducting this study, the researchers come up with the following recommendations:
1. To the nursing students, the researchers recommend to utilize this study to understand
the correlation and differences of the presented demographic data to the quality of life
of the students since blended learning was implemented.
2. The researchers recommend to the Academic Institution to consider creating
intervention plans or strategies among nursing students to balance quality of life and
academic requirements that will not affect the day-to-day living of the nursing
students in terms of quality of life.
3. To the support system/family, the researchers recommend to use this study to help .
4. To the future researchers, it is suggested to expand the scope of this study by
including nursing or non-nursing students from other institutions. They may conduct
interview utilizing video call platforms such as MS Teams and Google Meet. This
may provide a more in-depth understanding of their own perception of blended
learning.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arellano, D. (2017, January 5). 10 reasons living near a school is a smart choice. ZipMatch.
Retrieved October 4, 2022, from https://www.zipmatch.com/blog/living-near-school-
smart-modern-dwellings/
Azzi D., Melo J., Neto A., Castelo P., Andrade E., & Pereira L.(2022). Quality of life,
physical activity and burnout syndrome during online learning period in Brazilian
university students during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cluster analysis, Psychology,
Health & Medicine, 27:2, 466-480. Retrieved October 5, 2022 from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13548506.2021.1944656?
scroll=top&needAccess=true
Balabeykina O., Kuznetsova J. (2020). The religion impact on social and economic aspects of
the life (on example of the Roman Catholic church of the Philippines). Pskov Journal
of Regional Studies (43), pp.58-72. Retrieved October 1, 2022 from https://ras.jes.
su/index.php?
dispatch=products.print_publication&product_id=12637&format=pdf&version_id=91
79
Bethony, J., Diemert, D., Gazzinelli, M., Grahek, L., Lobato, L., & Pereira, F. (2014) Impact
of gender on the decision to participate in a clinical trial: a cross-sectional study.
Research Article. BMC Public Health. Retrieved October 1, 2022 from
https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-14-1156
Campus Explorer. (2022, January 13). Married college students - campus explorer. Campus
Explorer -. Retrieved October 5, 2022, from
https://www.campusexplorer.com/student-resources/married-college-students/
Chaar, E., Haliit, S., Hajj, A., Aaraj, R., Kattan, J., Jabbour, H., & Khabbas, L. (2018)
Evaluating the impact of spirituality on the quality of life, anxiety, and depression
among patients with cancer: an observational transversal study. Retrieved from
October 22, 2021, from
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00520-018-4089-1
Graham. (2018, December 7). Current research in blended learning: 15: V4: Handbook of
Distance. Taylor & Francis. Retrieved October 6, 2022, from
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315296135-15/current-
research-blended-learning-charles-graham
Guillén-Gámez, F. D. (2018, August 21). A study on the actual use of digital competence in
the Practicum of Education Degree - Technology, knowledge and learning.
SpringerLink. Retrieved October 6, 2022, from
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10758-018-9390-z
Hajhosseini, F. & Taghizadeh, M. (2021) Investigating a Blended Learning Environment:
Contribution of Attitude, Interaction, and Quality of Teaching to Satisfaction of
Graduate Students of TEFL. Retrieved October 13, 2022 from
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40299-020-00531-z
Keržič, D., Tomaževič, N., Aristovnik, A., & Umek, L. (2019, November 21). Exploring
critical factors of the perceived usefulness of blended learning for higher education
students. PLOS ONE. Retrieved October 6, 2022, from
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0223767
Lee, C. & Ma, L. (2021) Evaluating the effectiveness of blended learning using the ARCS
model. Retrieved 13, 2022 from
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jcal.12579
Lucier. (2019). Why are some classes worth more "units" than others? ThoughtCo. Retrieved
October 5, 2022, from https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-a-college-unit-793232
M. Cuadrado-García, M. E. Ruiz-Molina, and J. D. Montoro-Pons, “Are there gender
differences in elearning use and assessment? Evidence from an interuniversity online
project in Europe,” in Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2010, pp. 367–371.
Owston, R., York, D. N., & Malhotra, T. (2019). Blended learning in large enrolment
courses: Student perceptions across four different instructional models. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4310
qahtani, M., Elumalai, K., Sankar, J., & R., K., (2022) Effective Blended Learning in Higher
Education During COVID-19. Retrieved October 7, 2020 from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fd07/dba6ded47b8d98006e26588186429682eb3d.pdf
Sandberg, F. (2016) How age affects survey interaction-the case of Intelligence studies.
Halmstad University. Retrieved October 1, 2022 from
https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1064181/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Suwannaphisit, Anusitviwat, Tuntarattanapong, & Chuaychoosakoon. (2021, November 18).
Comparing the effectiveness of blended learning and traditional learning in an orthopedics
course - ScienceDirect. Retrieved October 6, 2022, from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2049080121009870

Chapter 4 & 5 Template

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Chapter 4 & 5 Template

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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 4 & 5 Template

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

National University

COLLEGE OF ALLIED HEALTH

THE QUALITY OF LIFE AMONG THE BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN NURSING

An Undergraduate Proposal Thesis Presented to the Faculty of Nursing

In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN

Taguba, Ma. Cecilia B.

Tan, Joana Nicole A.

Tejedo, Kurt Yoko E.

Torres, Liz Desiree C.

Tungol, Maria Alecsandra C.

Chapter I. The Problem

Statement of the Problem

Significance of the Study

Scope and Limitations

Chapter II. The Review of Literature and Studies

Operational Definition of Terms ..

Chapter III. Research Methodology

Setting of the Study

Data Collection and Procedure

Statistical Treatment of Data

Blended learning is a combination of Remote Asynchronous and Synchronous

transitioning to a modern setting of using new technology and lack of hands-on

student’s quality of life.

Nursing education faces a fundamental transition from traditional to distance learning.

Students deemed campus-based education to be beneficial to their learning in courses that

learning alone. As a result of the COVID-19 epidemic in march 2020, a number of

various pedagogical approaches, including distant learning, is needed.

significant transition is critical in assisting educational and teaching authorities in allocating

Learning at National-University Manila.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Science in Nursing students at National University-Manila.

Specifically the study aims to answer the following questions:

1.4 Marital status

1.5 Year level

1.6 No. of units enrolled

2. To determine the level of the respondents Quality of Life in terms of:

2.1 Physical Health

2.3 Social Relationships

2.5 Over-all Quality of Life and General Health

implementation of Blended learning when grouped according to their socio-demographic

6. How significant is the correlation exist among respondents’ perceived implementation of

Blended learning to their socio-demographic variable.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Science in Nursing students at National University-Manila. Furthermore, the study would be

of importance to the following.

nursing students in terms of quality of life.

● Support system/Family - This study promoted understanding between the nursing

students to focus more during class.

blended learning modalities.

level I to level IV of Bachelor of Science in Nursing students.

aspects of their existence.

Poor Quality of Life (QoL) is linked to an unhealthy lifestyle, psychological distress,

acquiring psychological distress.

Physical pain in general can cause a massive impact to an individual’s overall

N., Sheha, E., & Elsayed, H., 2020).

engaging in various leisure activities will enhance the quality of life.

burnout and to promote quality of life.