Chapter IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter of the paper presents the data gathered from the 30 STEM students in
Caloocan City Business High School who served as respondents of this research . It also
provides the analysis and interpretation of data that has been organized according to the research
questions enumerated in the first chapter of this paper.

This section is composed of figures and tables relative to the demographic information
given by the respondents in the questionnaire. This included data on Senior High School
academic strand and college courses.

What are your considerations in choosing strands in SHS?

The respondents were asked to identify what strand was their first choice for senior high
school. Figure 1 shows the distribution of the respondents in terms of this variable.

    Figure 1. Distribution of Respondents by consideration in choosing strands

 These respondents have been selected through purposive sampling wherein the students
were asked if STEM wasn't their first choice of strand or if their current strand is connected to
the college course they will take in the future. The students who answered yes were chosen as the
respondents. The 12.5% of the students in Aristotle considered  HUMSS as their first choice. The
other 12.5% considered TVL. 37.5% considered ABM. The rest (37.5%) considered GAS.
Meanwhile in Becquerel 40% of the students chose HUMSS. 20% chose TVL. As for ABM 30%
of the students considered it. None of the students chose GAS. Curie the third section had 58%
of its students who selected HUMSS. The 25% of the students considered selecting TVL. The
others (16%) contemplated on choosing ABM. None of the students also chose GAS.

Why did you choose your current strand rather than your first choice?

Every student has a different reason for choosing their current strand. The researchers
have decided to narrow it down to the three most common reasons: Family, College Alignment
and Financial Capabilities.

            
              Figure 2.1
In Figure 2. It is shown that 25% of the students in Aristotle,  20% of the students in
Becquerel, 41% of the students in Curie had been influenced by their family in choosing their
strand. 75% in Aristotle, 80% in Becquerel, 58% in Curie have said otherwise
         

              Figure 2.2
In the next table it can be observed Majority of the students in both Aristotle (62.5%) and
Becquerel (60%) did not choose their current strand because of their alignment in college.
Meanwhile in Curie only 25% did not choose their parent strand because of their college
alignment. 37.5% in Aristotle, 40% in Becquerel, 75% in Curie did select the STEM strand
because of their college course.
              Figure 2.3 
 In the table above it can be seen that 25% of Aristotle, 10% of Becquerel, 25% of Curie
had chosen this strand because of financial capability. Majority of their students have said
otherwise (87.5% in Aristotle, 90% in Becquerel, 75% in Curie)

What are the advantages and disadvantages of enrolling in a strand unrelated to the
course?

Taking a strand unrelated to your course can be quite challenging. This can be both a
good thing and a bad thing depending on the situation.

Aristotle
70
60
50
40
30 62.5
20 37.5
10
0
yes no
Q6
 Figure 3.1
One factor that can affect the enjoyment and decision of the students is their prior
knowledge about the different strands being offered. In figure 5 it can be seen that 62.5% in
Aristotle 100%, in Becquerel and 83% in Curie had prior knowledge about the different strands
being offered. The rest (37.5 % in Aristotle and 16% in Curie.) did not have prior knowledge
about the strands.
Having little to no prior knowledge can have a negative effect on the students' learning
experience. In fact 62% of Aristotle students, 40% of Becquerel students, and 41% of Curie
students regret their decision.
 

Figure 3.2
It is also worth noting that only 12.5% students of Aristotle, 30% students of Becquerel
and 25% students of Curie always cope up with their strand. Majority (87% of Aristotle, 70% of
Becquerel, and 75% of Curie students.) only cope up with their strand sometimes. 
 Figure 3.3
   However 100% Aristotle students, 100% Becquerel students, and 75% Curie students have said
that their strand challenges them to improve their strengths and overcome their weaknesses. And
despite there being a large number of students regretting their strand decision, there is still a
large number of students who enjoy being at their strand. (87.5% Aristotle students, 90%
Becquerel students and 75% Curie students.)

Figure 3.4
Figure 3.5
 Figure 3.6
        50% Aristotle students, 50% Becquerel students, and 58% Curie students are planning to
participate in bridging programs in the future. The rest (50% Aristotle students, 50% Becquerel
students, and 41% Curie students.) do not plan to do so.