Mobile Infocast System for President Ramon Magsaysay State University-Masinloc

Campus

A Thesis
Presented to
The Faculty of the College of Communication and Information Technology
President Ramon Magsaysay State University
Masinloc, Zambales

In Partial Fulfilment
Of the Requirement for the Degree
Bachelor of Science in Information Technology

By:

Marvin E. Tabudlo
Ana Rose T. Mariano
Eizel E. Macaraig
Oedipus Rex E. Montefalcon
Lucky H. Edquibal

May 18, 2021

 Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

COVID – 19 tremendously changed how all the system works, especially the

education system in Philippines. Students were instructed to stay at home and attend to

classes through their desktop computers, laptop computers, mobile phones, tablets or

modules.

This pandemic affected one of the most critical parts of the educational system –

the exchange and dissemination of information.

President Ramon Magsaysay State University – Masinloc is one of the

Universities who are now embracing the great change on Philippines’ way of teaching

and learning. As of today, the said university has a total of 636 enrolled college students

and 29 faculty members, who are using our modern gadgets today to accomplish their

duties and responsibilities. The University is currently using Facebook, one of the well –

known social media platforms, as the information dissemination system.

Information dissemination system is a system software which was built to

distribute or broadcast information through a device platform and internet connection. As

we are living in the 21st century, we are continuously being exposed to various

developing devices – enhanced computers systems, smart phones, tablets and many more.

As of today, numerous studies were already conducted, informing us that

advances in technology have led to wider use of mobile devices due to their ability to

access high speed wireless data networks, which is currently happening right now on the
situation of our learning system due the said pandemic. This is where an information

dissemination
 2

system became more relevant. Due to its great importance to an organization, the said

system may sound simple to implement, but like other software systems, it should

undergo quality and acceptability tests.

As mentioned earlier, President Ramon Magsaysay State University – Masinloc

Campus is currently using Facebook as its information dissemination system. But

numerous questions started to rise up knowing that it is a third - party entity to the whole

system such as its dependability, reliability, maintainability and especially, security.

Hence the researchers were motivated to develop an application entitled “Mobile

Infocast System for President Ramon Magsaysay State University-Masinloc

Campus” which aims to provide reliable tool for information gathering and

dissemination for the benefit of students, faculty members and administrative staff of

President Ramon Magsaysay State University-Masinloc Campus.

The proposed system will undergo several tests guided by ISO/IEC 25010:2011,

A product quality model composed of eight that relate to static properties of software and

dynamic properties of the computer system. The model is applicable to both computer

systems and software products.

Statement of the Problem

The researchers aim to develop a Mobile Infocast System for President Ramon

Magsaysay State University – Masinloc Campus.

Specifically, it seeks answers to the following questions:

 4

1. What is the respondents’ evaluation on the level of the system quality of the

Mobile Infocast System using ISO 25010:2011 in terms of:

1.1 Functional Suitability;

1.2 Performance Efficiency;

1.3 Reliability;

1.4 Security;

1.5 Maintainability;

1.6 Portability;

1.7 Compatibility;

1.8 Usability;

1. What is the respondents’ evaluation on the level of acceptability of the Mobile

Infocast System in terms of:

2.1 Content;

2.2 Accuracy;

2.3 Ease of use;

2.4 Timeliness;

2.5 Security?

Scope and Limitation

The study only covered the system of disseminating necessary information from

administrative and faculty staff of President Ramon Magsaysay State University –

Masinloc and gathering the responses and acknowledgement of all the recipients.
 5

The Mobile Infocast System is only limited to the following primary features:

posting university - related updates, acknowledgement and comment storing, and

acknowledgement statistics reporting.

The said application can only be accessed through mobile phones with an Android

operating system and must be connected to internet. Likewise, it can only by utilized by

authorized users, validated by the system’s administrator.

All end – users of this system are required to register on the app. The system will

request their details such as username, ID number, full name, email address and a

password. The system will also request end – users to set their profile such as profile

picture and short biographical details.

There will be three (3) classifications of end – users on this system – the faculty

staff, the students and system administrator.

The faculty staff are the ones who can create university – related posts which are

for acknowledgement. After registration, each of them is advised to create a group, based

on the subject or organization he/she is handling. After creating a group, he/she is advised

to add students on it e.g., enrolled BSIT – 4 students should be added to a group named

BSIT4. These groups are necessary for choosing audiences before posting. Creating a

post includes choosing a group as audience, inserting a photo and caption. The system

also enables the faculty staff to react on their own posts by tapping the “heart” icon. They

can also insert a comment on their own post, if deemed necessary. The system also

enables the faculty staff to edit or delete their posts e.g., posts with typographical errors.

Lastly, they can bookmark a post which is very helpful for critical updates and check the

number of reacts on their posts.

 6

The students, on the other hand, can perform most of the actions on the system,

same from the faculty staff’s except creating, editing and deleting posts and constructing

groups. Students will be instructed also to register on the system once it was installed

then setting up profile. Their acknowledgement on the posted announcements can be

done through tapping the “heart” icon and leaving a comment. But keep in mind that once

a comment is already posted, it cannot be deleted by the composer. Students can also

bookmark posts, which is very helpful for critical updates.

Lastly, the system administrator is the only authorized person who can manage

the system and its database which is called Firebase Realtime Database, a cloud-hosted

database from Google. All the actions that the faculty staff and the students can perform

on the system is given to him/her, especially for troubleshooting.

Significance of the Study

This study is deemed to be significant to the following:

PRMSU Administration. The application will be the primary tool in disseminating

information to the students of President Ramon Magsaysay State University - Masinloc.

The institution will be able to maintain the security of the information it will send and

will have a control at its fullest potential than to the third-party system or application.

Faculty Members. The application will ensure that all the information/announcements

posted by the instructors can easily reach all the students through specific features

integrated inside the program.

Students. The system will serve as the “go to” application of PRMSU- Masinloc students

for critical school announcement and concerns of the said school. By just launching the
 7

application, all registered students will immediately have a view to all the critical

updates.

Future Researchers. This study and the system will both serve as the foundation of

reliable and secured information dissemination. This study will serve as reference for the

future studies in relation with the system.

 Chapter 2

FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY

This chapter presents the review of related literature and studies, theoretical

framework, conceptual framework, research paradigm and definition of terms.

Review of Related Literature

Use of Educational Technology

According to Mark Alipio (2020) parallel to the Department of Education, the

Commission on Higher Education (CHED) advised other institutions of higher education

in the Philippines to implement distance education methods of learning for its classes,

such as the use of educational technology, to maximize the academic term despite the

suspensions. The commission has also advised other institutions of higher education in

the Philippines to implement distance education methods of learning for its classes, such

as the use of educational technology, to maximize the academic term despite the

suspensions. Several other public and private tertiary institutions implemented such

arrangements for its classes; however, several student groups appealed to CHED to

suspend mandatory online classes in consideration of the logistical limitations and well-

being of a majority of students.

Wider Use of Mobile Devices

Liah Shonhe and Priti Jain (March, 2017) stated that “advances in technology

have led to wider use of mobile devices due to their ability to access high speed wireless

data networks. Usage of Mobile technology present information seekers with a variety of
 9

advantages such as, 24/7 connectivity and self-service, limitless access and time saving.

The use of handheld devices has skyrocketed, leaving information providers with no

option but to implement mobile web platforms that will enable mobile information

dissemination.”

Transmitting Information by Cellphone and Email

The different characteristics of each information dissemination medium have been

studied in different fields. Sattler (2011) found that an effective message could be issued

by a credible source and transmitted in a quick and stable way through warning message

transmission by cell phone and e-mail.

Important Roles in Information Dissemination

Uchida, Takahata, Shibata & Shiratori (2011) stated that some traditional media,

including cell phones, television, and oral communication, also play important roles in

information dissemination. In some serious disaster cases, when all electronic networks

are paralyzed, traditional media such as oral communication, albeit slower, can still be

employed.

2021 Facebook Data Breach

According to Kate O'Flaherty (2021), Senior Contributor at Forbes, the phone

numbers and email addresses of 533 million Facebook users have been exposed in a data

breach. Over the weekend, it emerged that the details of 533 million Facebook users,

including phone numbers and email addresses, had been leaked online. Facebook claims
 10

this data is from an old breach that took place in 2019. But now the information has been

made widely available in a hacking forum online, it could potentially have been accessed

by anyone.

Review of Related Studies

A Proposed Electronic Selective Dissemination of Information Through SMS and

Email in an Academic Library (2019)

According to a study entitled A Proposed Electronic Selective Dissemination of

Information Through SMS and Email in an Academic Library (2019), “information

without dissemination is useless because it has a significant role in the society whether in

business, education, government, or research. Information, as a basic necessity in the

learning and information center, can support the institution best when closely integrated

into the academic process. In the field of librarianship, dissemination of information to

primary customers is a basic function of a library. It is the responsibility of the library

and the librarian to disseminate information for study, teaching and research. Therefore,

students, faculty and researchers are entitled to be informed of newly acquired

information resources and that they will be able to fully utilize them. One method for

addressing this problem is through e-Selective Dissemination of Information (e-SDI). It is

a system that attempts to facilitate users’ information retrieval and filtering. The primary

purpose is to provide researchers with the latest publications on a specified topic. It is an

information alerting service designed to keep individuals informed of new developments

in their particular fields of interest by providing at regular intervals a listing of citations.”

 11

Efficient Information Dissemination Systems by Anton Riabov (March, 2004)

According to to a study entitled Efficient Information Dissemination Systems by

Anton Riabov (March, 2004), “increasingly available and widespread broadband Internet

connections contribute to the growing interest in these new and important applications

that can efficiently support group interaction. These new applications have the potential

to shape the future of the Internet and change the way people communicate once again.

In this work we will use the term Information Dissemination Systems to describe systems

that deliver individual copies of the same data from one source computer or a cluster of

computers to client computers (subscribers) via the Internet.”

Information Dissemination Analysis of Different Media towards the Application for

Disaster Pre-Warning: Media Coverage Ratio (May, 2014)

According to a study entitled Information Dissemination Analysis of Different

Media towards the Application for Disaster Pre-Warning, “media coverage ratio

determines whether the media could be used in information dissemination for pre-

warning of a disaster. Oral communication, cell phones, and short messages as the top

three (100%, 99%, and 97% respectively) had the top three coverage ratios; reflecting our

dependence on these media in our daily lives.”

Information Dissemination Analysis of Different Media towards the Application for

Disaster Pre-Warning: Frequency of Media Usage (May, 2014)

According to a study entitled Information Dissemination Analysis of Different

Media towards the Application for Disaster Pre-Warning, “the frequency of media usage
 12

is an important factor, reflects the popularity of the respective medium, and determines

the difficulty of information acquisition. Oral communication is the most frequently used

medium in our daily lives. Cell phone and short messaging forms of communication

come second as they are used more than 10 times per day. Television and news portals as

mass media have lower usage numbers but longer watching times. Microblogs are very

popular as well (7.5 usage times per day).”

Theoretical Framework

SOFTWARE PRODUCT QUALITY

ISO 25010:2011

The Quality Model (ISO/IEC 25010) is the cornerstone of a product quality

evaluation system. The quality model determines which quality characteristics will be

taken into account when evaluating the properties of a software product.

The quality of a system is the degree to which the system satisfies the stated and

implied needs of its various stakeholders, and thus provides value. Those stakeholders'

needs (functionality, performance, security, maintainability, etc.) are precisely what is

represented in the quality model, which categorizes the product quality into

characteristics and sub-characteristics.

a. Functional Suitability. This characteristic represents the degree to which a

product or system provides functions that meet stated and implied needs when used under

specified conditions. This characteristic is composed of the following sub-characteristics:

functional completeness, functional correctness, and functional appropriateness.

 13

b. Performance Efficiency. This characteristic represents the performance relative

to the number of resources used under stated conditions. This characteristic is composed

of the following sub-characteristics: time behavior, resource utilization and capacity.

c. Compatibility. Degree to which a product, system or component can exchange

information with other products, systems or components, and/or perform its required

functions while sharing the same hardware or software environment. This characteristic is

composed of the following sub-characteristics: co-existence and interoperability.

d. Usability. Degree to which a product or system can be used by specified users

to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified

context of use. This characteristic is composed of the following sub-characteristics:

appropriateness recognizability, learnability, operability, user error protection, user

interface aesthetics, and accessibility.

e. Reliability. Degree to which a system, product or component performs

specified functions under specified conditions for a specified period of time. This

characteristic is composed of the following sub-characteristics: maturity, availability,

fault tolerance, recoverability.

f. Security. Degree to which a product or system protects information and data so

that persons or other products or systems have the degree of data access appropriate to

their types and levels of authorization. This characteristic is composed of the following

sub-characteristics: confidentiality, integrity, non - repudiation, accountability,

authenticity.
 14

g. Maintainability. This characteristic represents the degree of effectiveness and

efficiency with which a product or system can be modified to improve it, correct it or

adapt it to changes in environment, and in requirements. This characteristic is composed

of the following sub-characteristics: modularity, reusability, analyzability, modifiability,

testability.

h. Portability. Degree of effectiveness and efficiency with which a system,

product or component can be transferred from one hardware, software or other

operational or usage environment to another. This characteristic is composed of the

following sub-characteristics: adaptability, installability, replaceability.

The product quality model defined in ISO/IEC 25010 comprises the eight

quality characteristics shown in the following figure:

Figure 1. The Quality Model

ISO 25010 is a great framework to define software metrics important for a

particular project. It is not a comprehensive, detailed map, but rather a guide researchers

can use, depending on the circumstances. Every development project has different

priorities and metrics and this standard allows enough leeway to with all of them.
 15

Conceptual Framework

The researchers aim to develop a Mobile Infocast System for President Ramon

Magsaysay State University - Masinloc to be assessed by the target end – users: the

students, faculty members, and the administrative staff. A diagram that best illustrate the

conceptual framework of the study is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Research Paradigm

First, the researchers identified the current challenges the whole university is

facing in using Facebook as its information dissemination tool. The Agile Method was

applied in developing the proposed Mobile Infocast System, along with the survey

questionnaire, interviews guided by ISO/EIC 25010 Quality Model where the

 16

respondents are the students, faculty staff, and administrative staff of President Ramon

Magsaysay State University – Masinloc.

The Agile methodology is a way to manage a project by breaking it up into

several phases. It involves constant collaboration with stakeholders and continuous

improvement at every stage. Once the work begins, teams will cycle through a process of

planning, executing, and evaluating. Continuous collaboration is vital, both with team

members and project stakeholders.

The researchers applied the appropriate statistical tools for system development

such as frequency, percentage, mean and Likert scale, to interpret the data gathered.

Definition of Terms

In order to have a better understanding of the study and its concepts, the following

terms are hereby defined:

Agile. Able to move quickly and easily.

Accessibility. This refers to the degree to which a product or system can be used by

people with the widest range of characteristics and capabilities to achieve a specified goal

in a specified context of use.

Accountability. This refers to the degree to which the actions of an entity can be traced

uniquely to the entity.

Adaptability. This refers to the degree to which a product or system can effectively and

efficiently be adapted for different or evolving hardware, software or other operational or

usage environments.
 17

Bookmark. A place holder for a web page that will allow you quick access to that page

instead of having to browse to it or search for it.

Confidentiality. This refers to the degree to which a product or system ensures that data

are accessible only to those authorized to have access.

Database. An organized collection of structured information, or data, typically stored

electronically in a computer system.

Dissemination. This refers to the action or fact of spreading something, especially

information, widely.

Functional appropriateness. This refers to the degree to which the functions facilitate

the accomplishment of specified tasks and objectives.

Functional completeness. This refers to the degree to which the set of functions covers

all the specified tasks and user objectives.

Functional correctness. This refers to the degree to which a product or system provides

the correct results with the needed degree of precision.

Infocast. Enables users connect with the clients or community members through a

complete, featured online-based platform.

Interoperability. This refers to the degree to which two or more systems, products or

components can exchange information and use the information that has been exchanged.

Integrity. This refers to the degree to which a system, product or component prevents

unauthorized access to, or modification of, computer programs or data.

Installability. This refers to the degree of effectiveness and efficiency with which a

product or system can be successfully installed and/or uninstalled in a specified

environment.
 18

Learnability. This refers to the degree to which a product or system can be used by

specified users to achieve specified goals of learning to use the product or system with

effectiveness, efficiency, freedom from risk and satisfaction in a specified context of use.

Mobile. Able to move or be moved freely or easily.

Operability. This refers to the degree to which a product or system has attributes that

make it easy to operate and control.

Paradigm. Determines how members of research communities view both the phenomena

their particular community studies and the research methods that should be employed to

study those phenomena.

Recoverability. This refers to the degree to which, in the event of an interruption or a

failure, a product or system can recover the data directly affected and re-establish the

desired state of the system.

Replaceability. This refers to the degree to which a product can replace another specified

software product for the same purpose in the same environment.

Resource utilization. This refers to the degree to which the amounts and types of

resources used by a product or system, when performing its functions, meet requirements.

Reusability. This refers to the degree to which an asset can be used in more than one

system, or in building other assets.

System. A set of principles or procedures according to which something is done; an

organized framework or method.

Testability. Degree of effectiveness and efficiency with which test criteria can be

established for a system, product or component and tests can be performed to determine

whether those criteria have been met.

 19

User error protection. Degree to which a system protects users against making errors.

User interface aesthetics. Degree to which a user interface enables pleasing and

satisfying interaction for the user.

 Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research design used in conducting this study. It

includes the research method, research locale, sampling technique, data gathering

procedure and statistical treatment.

Research Method

The researchers applied descriptive research method which refers to research

questions, design of the study, and data analysis conducted on the said topic. As stated in

the previous chapter, the researchers used agile method, survey questionnaire, interviews,

and statistical tools such as frequency, percentage, mean and Likert scale.

According to Gay (1992: 217), descriptive research involves collecting data in

order to test hypotheses or to answer questions concerning the current status of the

subject of the study. A descriptive study determines and reports the way things are.

Descriptive research is scientific research that describes about event, phenomena or fact

systematically dealing with certain area or population. (Gay, 1992).

According to Seels and Richey (1994: 127), developmental research is "the

systematic study of designing, developing and evaluating instructional programs,

processes and products that must meet the criteria of internal consistency and

effectiveness.

System Engineering

Rapid application development is a software development methodology that uses

minimal planning in favor of rapid prototyping. A prototype is a working model that is

 21

functionally equivalent to a component of the product. In the RAD model, the functional

modules are developed in parallel as prototypes and are integrated to make the complete

product for faster product delivery. Since there is no detailed preplanning, it makes it

easier to incorporate the changes within the development process. RAD projects follow

iterative and incremental model and have small teams comprising of developers, domain

experts, customer representatives and other IT resources working progressively on their

component or prototype. The most important aspect for this model to be successful is to

make sure that the prototypes developed are reusable.

Rapid applications development (RAD) appears to have first become topical with

the publication of a text by James Martin with the same title (Martin, 1992). Martin

defines the key objectives of RAD as: high quality systems, fast development and

delivery and low costs. These objectives can be summed up in one sentence: the

commercial need to deliver working business applications in shorter timescales and for

less investment.

Figure 3. Rapid Application Development Model

 22

Business Modelling. The business model for the product under development is

designed in terms of flow of information and the distribution of information between

various business channels. A complete business analysis is performed to find the vital

information for business, how it can be obtained, how and when is the information

processed and what are the factors driving successful flow of information.

Data Modelling. The information gathered in the Business Modelling phase is

reviewed and analyzed to form sets of data objects vital for the business. The attributes of

all data sets are identified and defined. The relation between these data objects is

established and defined in detail in relevance to the business model.

Process Modelling. The data object sets defined in the Data Modelling phase are

converted to establish the business information flow needed to achieve specific business

objectives as per the business model. The process model for any changes or

enhancements to the data object sets is defined in this phase. Process descriptions for

adding, deleting, retrieving or modifying a data object are given.

Application Generation. The actual system is built and coding is done by using

automation tools to convert process and data models into actual prototypes.

Testing and Turnover. The overall testing time is reduced in the RAD model as

the prototypes are independently tested during every iteration. However, the data flow

and the interfaces between all the components need to be thoroughly tested with complete

test coverage. Since most of the programming components have already been tested, it

reduces the risk of any major issues.

 23

Research Locale

The study was conducted at President Ramon Magsaysay State University –

Masinloc. Masinloc is a coastal town situated between the Zambales Mountain in the

east and South China Sea on the west. The said town is composed of 13 barangays.

Figure 4. Vicinity Map of PRMSU – Masinloc

The Respondents and the Sampling Technique Used

The respondents are the faculty, staff and students of PRMSU-Masinloc Campus.

A total of 26 respondents, 16 respondents from faculty and administration staff and 10

respondents from the students of different departments, will serve as the respondents for

this study.
 24

The researchers will be used the representative sampling technique, where a

representative sample is defined as a small quantity or a subset of something larger. It

represents the same properties and proportions like that of a larger population. A

representative sample allows researchers to abstract the collected information to a larger

population.

Sampling is a technique of selecting individual members or a subset of the

population to make statistical inferences from them and estimate characteristics of the

whole population. Different sampling methods were used by researchers in market

research so that they do not need to research the entire population to collect actionable

insights.

Research Instrument

The researchers applied two well – known instruments in a research: interviews

and questionnaire.

These instruments allowed the researchers to capture respondents’ challenges on

the current system of information dissemination and expectations on the proposed Mobile

Infocast System for President Ramon Magsaysay State University – Masinloc.

It is composed of two parts. The first part consists of questions based on ISO/EIC

25010 System Quality Model and will be answered in a Likert scale design - strongly

agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree. The second part consists of

indicators to assess the respondents’ level of acceptability in terms of Content, Accuracy,

Ease of use, Timeliness and Security.

Validation of the Instrument

 25

To check the questionnaire, the drafted questionnaires will be pre-tested to ten

(10) respondents, mixed of faculty members and students, who have no direct

participation or involvement in the research study. The researchers will take note and

include all the noted discrepancies in the finalization of the questionnaire to avoid

possible problem from the direct respondents. The instrument will be presented to the

research adviser together with the panel committee during oral presentation.

Distribution and Data Collection Procedure

The researchers will seek first the approval of their adviser before distributing the

questionnaire. An endorsement letter from the adviser will be given to the Campus

Director of Masinloc Campus prior to the administration of the questionnaire. The

questionnaires will be distributed through Google Form, which will be sent to the email

addresses of the respondents. Once done, all answers will be compiled for analysis and

interpretation.

Statistical Treatment

The statistical tools used for analysis and interpretation of data are the following:

1. Frequency Distribution. Is a representation, either in a graphical or tabular

format, that displays the number of observations within a given interval. 

P = f/n x 100

Where: P = Percentage

f = frequency

n = total number of respondents

 26

2. Weighted Mean. A type of mean that is calculated by multiplying the weight (or

probability) associated with a particular event or outcome with its associated

quantitative outcome and then summing all the products together.

3. Interpretation of Data. Likert Scale Method. It will be used to provide data

interpretation on the level of system quality and respondent’s level of

acceptability.

Table 1
Likert Scale use to interpret on the respondent’s evaluation on the Level of the
System Quality

Nominal Scale Range of Scale Software Quality Evaluation

5 4.20-5.00 Excellent (E)

4 3.40-4.19 Very Good (VG)
3 2.60-3.30 Good (G)
2 1.80-2.50 Fair (F)
1 1.00-1.79 Poor (P)

Table 2
Likert Scale use to interpret on the respondent’s evaluation the Level of
Acceptability

Nominal Scale Range of Scale Level of Acceptability

5 4.20-5.00 Highly Acceptable (HA)
4 3.40-4.19 Acceptable (A)
3 2.60-3.30 Neutral (N)
2 1.80-2.50 Slightly Acceptable (SA)
1 1.00-1.79 Unacceptable (UA)
27
 Chapter 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the analysis and interpretations of the data gathered with the

use of research instrument in the form of a questionnaire designed to determine the level

of evaluation measured in terms of system quality and level of acceptability of the the

proposed Mobile Infocast System for President Ramon Magsaysay State University –

Masinloc. The presentations of the findings are in tabular and textual forms.

I. Level of System Quality of the Mobile Infocast System using the ISO
25010: 2011 Software Quality Characteristics.

Table 3
Level of System Quality in Terms of Functional Suitability

FUNCTIONAL Weighted
Descriptive Rating
SUSTAINABILITY Mean

1.     Set of functions covers all the

specified tasks and user 4.04 Very Good (VG)
objectives.

2.     Provides the correct results

with the needed degree of 3.81 Very Good (VG)
precision.

3.     Functions facilitate the

accomplishment of specified 4.12 Very Good (VG)
tasks and objectives.
OVERALL WEIGHTED
3.99 Very Good (VG)
MEAN

Based on Table 1, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “Set of

functions covers all the specified tasks and user objectives.” has a weighted mean of 4.04

with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. For indicator 2 “Provides the

correct results with the needed degree of precision.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean
 29

of 3.81 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. And lastly for

indicator 3 “Functions facilitate the accomplishment of specified tasks and objectives.”,

the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.12 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very

Good (VG).”

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Functional Suitability of the proposed

system resulted a mean rating of 3.99 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very

Good (VG).”

Table 4
Level of System Quality in Terms of Performance Efficiency

PERFORMANCE Weighted
Descriptive Rating
EFFICIENCY Mean

1.    Response and processing

times and throughput rates of a
product or system, when 3.81 Very Good (VG)
performing its functions, meet
requirements.
2. Amount and types of resources
used by product or system when
4.12 Very Good (VG)
performing its functions, meet
requirements.
3. Maximum limits of a product
or system parameter meet 4.35 Excellent (E)
requirement.
OVERALL WEIGHTED
4.09 Very Good (VG)
MEAN

Based on Table 2, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1

“Response and processing times and throughput rates of a product or system, when

performing its functions, meet requirements.” has a weighted mean of 3.81 with an

equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. For indicator 2 “Amount and types of
 30

resources used by product or system when performing its functions, meet requirements.”,

the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.12 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very

Good (VG)”. And lastly for indicator 3 “Maximum limits of a product or system

parameter meet requirement.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.35 with an

equivalent descriptive rating of “Excellent (E).”

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Performance Efficiency of the

proposed system resulted a mean rating of 4.09 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Very Good (VG).”

Table 5

Level of System Quality in Terms of Reliability

Weighted
RELIABILITY Descriptive Rating
Mean

1. System, product or component

meets needs for reliability under 3.96 Very Good (VG)
normal operation.

2. System, product or component

is operational and accessible 4.27 Excellent (E)
when required for use.

3. System, product or component

operates as intended despite the
4.08 Very Good (VG)
presence of hardware or software
faults.
4. A product or system can
recover the data directly affected
4.19 Very Good (VG)
and re-establish the desired state
of the system.
OVERALL WEIGHTED
4.13 Very Good (VG)
MEAN
 31

Based on Table 3, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “System,

product or component meets needs for reliability under normal operation.” has a

weighted mean of 3.96 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. For

indicator 2 “System, product or component is operational and accessible when required

for use.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.27 with an equivalent descriptive

rating of “Excellent (E)”. For indicator 3 “System, product or component operates as

intended despite the presence of hardware or software faults.”, the evaluation has a

weighted mean of 4.08 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG).”

Lastly, for indicator 4 “A product or system can recover the data directly affected and re-

establish the desired state of the system.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.19

with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG).”

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Reliability of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.13 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good

(VG).”

Table 6
Level of System Quality in Terms of Security

Weighted
SECURITY Descriptive Rating
Mean

1. Product or system ensures that

data are accessible only to those 3.85 Very Good (VG)
authorized to have access.
2. System, product or component
prevents unauthorized access to,
4.19 Very Good (VG)
or modification of, computer
programs or data.
 32

3. Actions or events can be

proven to have taken place, so
3.85 Very Good (VG)
that the events or actions cannot
be repudiated later.
4. Actions of an entity can
3.96 Very Good (VG)
be traced uniquely to the entity.
5. Identity of a subject or
resource can be proved to be the 4.19 Very Good (VG)
one claimed.
OVERALL WEIGHTED
4.01 Very Good (VG)
MEAN

Based on Table 4, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “Product or

system ensures that data are accessible only to those authorized to have access.” has a

weighted mean of 3.85 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. For

indicator 2 “System, product or component prevents unauthorized access to, or

modification of, computer programs or data.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of

4.19 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. For indicator 3 “Actions

or events can be proven to have taken place, so that the events or actions cannot be

repudiated later.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 3.85 with an equivalent

descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG).” For indicator 4 “Actions of an entity can be

traced uniquely to the entity.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 3.96 with an

equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG).” Lastly, for indicator 5 “Identity of a

subject or resource can be proved to be the one claimed.”, the evaluation has a weighted

mean of 4.19 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG).”

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Security of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.01 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good

(VG).”
 33

Table 7

Level of System Quality in Terms of Maintainability

Weighted
MAINTAINABILITY Descriptive Rating
Mean

1. System or computer program

is composed of discrete
components such that a change to 3.92 Very Good (VG)
one component has minimal
impact on other components.

2. Asset can be used in more than

one system, or in building other 4.12 Very Good (VG)
assets.

3. Effectiveness and efficiency

with which it is possible to assess
the impact on a product or
system of an intended change to
one or more of its parts, or to 4.19 Very Good (VG)
diagnose a product for
deficiencies or causes of failures,
or to identify parts to be
modified.
OVERALL WEIGHTED
4.08 Very Good (VG)
MEAN

Based on Table 5, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “System or

computer program is composed of discrete components such that a change to one

component has minimal impact on other components.” has a weighted mean of 3.92 with

an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. For indicator 2 “Asset can be used

in more than one system, or in building other assets.”, the evaluation has a weighted

mean of 4.12 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. Lastly, for

indicator 3 “Effectiveness and efficiency with which it is possible to assess the impact on
 34

a product or system of an intended change to one or more of its parts, or to diagnose a

product for deficiencies or causes of failures, or to identify parts to be modified.”, the

evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.19 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very

Good (VG).”

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Maintainability of the proposed

system resulted a mean rating of 4.08 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very

Good (VG)”.

Table 8
Level of System Quality in Terms of Portability

Weighted
PORTABILITY Descriptive Rating
Mean

1. Product or system can

effectively and efficiently be
adapted for different or evolving
4.08 Very Good (VG)
hardware, software or other
operational or usage
environments.
2. Effectiveness and
efficiency with which a product
or system can be successfully 4.46 Excellent (E)
installed and/or uninstalled in a
specified environment.
3. Product can replace
another specified software
4.23 Excellent (E)
product for the same purpose in
the same environment.
OVERALL WEIGHTED
4.26 Excellent (E)
MEAN

Based on Table 6, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “Product or

system can effectively and efficiently be adapted for different or evolving hardware,

software or other operational or usage environments.” has a weighted mean of 4.08 with
 35

an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. For indicator 2 “Effectiveness and

efficiency with which a product or system can be successfully installed and/or uninstalled

in a specified environment.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.46 with an

equivalent descriptive rating of “Excellent (E)”. Lastly, for indicator 3 “Product can

replace another specified software product for the same purpose in the same

environment.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.23 with an equivalent descriptive

rating of “Excellent (E)”.

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Portability of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.26 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Excellent (E)”.

Table 9
Level of System Quality in Terms of Compatibility

Weighted
COMPATIBILITY Descriptive Rating
Mean

1. System, product or component

exchange information with other
products, systems or components,
and/or perform its required 4.08 Very Good (VG)
functions, while sharing the same
hardware or software
environment.
2. System, product or component
can perform its required functions
efficiently while sharing a
common environment and 4.35 Excellent (E)
resources with other products,
without detrimental impact on any
other product.
3. System, product or components
can exchange information and use
4.5 Excellent (E)
the information that has been
exchanged.
OVERALL WEIGHTED
4.31 Excellent (E)
MEAN
 36

Based on Table 7, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “System,

product or component exchange information with other products, systems or components,

and/or perform its required functions, while sharing the same hardware or software

environment.” has a weighted mean of 4.08 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Very Good (VG)”. For indicator 2 “System, product or component can perform its

required functions efficiently while sharing a common environment and resources with

other products, without detrimental impact on any other product.”, the evaluation has a

weighted mean of 4.35 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Excellent (E)”. Lastly,

for indicator 3 “System, product or components can exchange information and use the

information that has been exchanged.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.5 with an

equivalent descriptive rating of “Excellent (E)”.

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Compatibility of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.31 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Excellent (E)”.

Table 10
Level of System Quality in Terms of Usability

Weighted
USABILITY Descriptive Rating
Mean

1. Recognize whether a product or

system is appropriate for their 3.92 Very Good (VG)
needs.
2. System can be used by
specified users to achieve
specified goals of learning to use
the product or system with 4.23 Excellent (E)
effectiveness, efficiency, freedom
from risk and satisfaction in a
specified context of use.
3. System has attributes that make
3.88 Very Good (VG)
it easy to operate and control.
 37

4. System protects users against

3.77 Very Good (VG)
making errors.
5. User interface enables pleasing
and satisfying interaction for the 4.04 Very Good (VG)
user.
6. Used by people with the widest
range of characteristics and
4.04 Very Good (VG)
capabilities to achieve a specified
goal in a specified context of use.
OVERALL WEIGHTED
3.98 Very Good (VG)
MEAN

Based on Table 8, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “Recognize

whether a product or system is appropriate for their needs.” has a weighted mean of 3.92

with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. For indicator 2 “System can

be used by specified users to achieve specified goals of learning to use the product or

system with effectiveness, efficiency, freedom from risk and satisfaction in a specified

context of use.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.23 with an equivalent

descriptive rating of “Excellent (E)”. For indicator 3 “System has attributes that make it

easy to operate and control.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 3.88 with an

equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. For indicator 4 “System protects

users against making errors.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 3.77 with an

equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. For indicator 5 “User interface

enables pleasing and satisfying interaction for the user.”, the evaluation has a weighted

mean of 4.04 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”. Lastly, for

indicator 6 “Used by people with the widest range of characteristics and capabilities to

achieve a specified goal in a specified context of use.”, the evaluation has a weighted

mean of 4.04 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG)”.

 38

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Usability of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 3.98 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good

(VG)”.

Table 11
Summary of Respondents’ Perception
on the Level of System Quality

Weighted Descriptive
System Quality Metrics
Mean Rating
Functional Suitability 3.99 Very Good (VG)
Performance Efficiency 4.09 Very Good (VG)
Reliability 4.13 Very Good (VG)
Security 4.01 Very Good (VG)
Maintainability 4.08 Very Good (VG)
Portability 4.26 Excellent (E)
Compatibility 4.31 Excellent (E)
Usability 3.98 Very Good (VG)
GRAND WEIGHTED MEAN 4.11 Very Good (VG)

Based on Table 9, the summary of the respondents’ perception on the level of

system quality of the proposed system resulted a mean rating of 3.99 for functional

suitability; 4.09 for performance efficiency; 4.13 for reliability; 4.01 for security; 4.08 for

maintainability; 4.26 for portability; 4.31 for compatibility and 3.98 for usability.

The proposed system got a descriptive rating of Very Good (VG) on all the

system quality metrics except for portability and compatibility which was evaluated with

a descriptive rating of Excellent (E).

To sum it up, the respondents’ evaluation on the proposed system’s quality

resulted a grand weighted mean rating of 4.11 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Very Good (VG)”.

II. Level of Acceptability of the Mobile Infocast System as perceived by the

Faculty Staff and Students
 39

Table 12
Level of Acceptability in Terms of Content

Weighted
CONTENT Descriptive Rating
Mean
1. The system has a well-
structured database for the storage 4.15 Acceptable (A)
of data.
2. Information within the system
3.85 Acceptable (A)
is organized and secured.
3. The design of the system is
3.73 Acceptable (A)
appealing to the eyes of the user.
OVERALL WEIGHTED
3.98 Acceptable (A)
MEAN

Based on Table 10, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “The system

has a well-structured database for the storage of data.” has a weighted mean of 4.15 with

an equivalent descriptive rating of “Acceptable (A)”. For indicator 2 “Information within

the system is organized and secured.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.85 with

an equivalent descriptive rating of “Acceptable (A)”. Lastly, for indicator 3 “The design

of the system is appealing to the eyes of the user.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of

3.98 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Acceptable (A)”.

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Content of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 3.98 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Acceptable (A).”

Table 13
 40

Level of Acceptability in Terms of Accuracy

Weighted
ACCURACY Descriptive Rating
Mean
1. The data stored in the system is Highly Acceptable
4.27
accurate. (HA)
2. The computation of payment is Highly Acceptable
4.31
precise and correct. (HA)
3. Data inputs are accurately
stored in the system database and Highly Acceptable
4.46
exactly transferred in generating (HA)
reports.
OVERALL WEIGHTED Highly Acceptable
4.35
MEAN (HA)

Based on Table 11, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “The data

stored in the system is accurate.” has a weighted mean of 4.27 with an equivalent

descriptive rating of “Highly Acceptable (HA)”. For indicator 2 “The computation of

payment is precise and correct.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.31 with an

equivalent descriptive rating of “Highly Acceptable (HA)”. Lastly, for indicator 3 “Data

inputs are accurately stored in the system database and exactly transferred in generating

reports.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.46 with an equivalent descriptive

rating of “Highly Acceptable (HA)”.

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Accuracy of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.35 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Highly

Acceptable (HA).”
 Table 14
Level of Acceptability in Terms of Ease of Use

Weighted
EASE OF USE Descriptive Rating
Mean
1. The system is easy to use and
4.19 Acceptable (A)
user- friendly.
2. The information is easy to
4.19 Acceptable (A)
access.
3. The system is easy to
understand and is capable of 4.15 Acceptable (A)
being self-learned.
OVERALL WEIGHTED
4.18 Acceptable (A)
MEAN

Based on Table 12, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “The system

is easy to use and user- friendly.” has a weighted mean of 4.19 with an equivalent

descriptive rating of “Acceptable (A)”. For indicator 2 “The information is easy to

access.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.19 with an equivalent descriptive rating

of “Acceptable (A)”. Lastly, for indicator 3 “The system is easy to understand and is

capable of being self-learned.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.15 with an

equivalent descriptive rating of “Acceptable (A)”.

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Ease of Use of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.18 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Acceptable (A).”
 42

Table 15
Level of Acceptability in Terms of Timeliness

Weighted
TIMELINESS Descriptive Rating
Mean
1. Preparations of reports and
documents consume lesser time
4.15 Acceptable (A)
compared to the conventional
method.
2. Reports generation requires Highly Acceptable
4.58
less time and effort. (HA)
3. The information in the system
4.15 Acceptable (A)
is always timely.
OVERALL WEIGHTED Highly Acceptable
4.29
MEAN (HA)

Based on Table 13, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “Preparations

of reports and documents consume lesser time compared to the conventional method.”

has a weighted mean of 4.15 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Acceptable (A)”.

For indicator 2 “Reports generation requires less time and effort.”, the evaluation has a

weighted mean of 4.58 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Highly Acceptable

(HA)”. Lastly, for indicator 3 “The information in the system is always timely.”, the

evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.15 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Acceptable (A)”.

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Timeliness of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.29 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Highly

Acceptable (HA).”
 43

Table 16
Level of Acceptability in Terms of Security

Weighted
SECURITY Descriptive Rating
Mean
1. Data and information are well
3.96 Acceptable (A)
secured.
2. The access in the system is
4.12 Acceptable (A)
secured.
3. The system is free from Highly Acceptable
4.42
unauthorized use. (HA)
OVERALL WEIGHTED
4.17 Acceptable (A)
MEAN

Based on Table 14, the evaluation of the respondents for indicator 1 “Data and

information are well secured.” has a weighted mean of 3.96 with an equivalent

descriptive rating of “Acceptable (A)”. For indicator 2 “The access in the system is

secured.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.12 with an equivalent descriptive

rating of “Acceptable (A)”. Lastly, for indicator 3 “The system is free from unauthorized

use.”, the evaluation has a weighted mean of 4.42 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Highly Acceptable (A)”.

Overall, the respondents’ evaluation on the Security of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.17 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Acceptable (A).”
 44

Table 17
Summary of Respondents’ Perception
on the Level of Acceptability

System Acceptability Weighte

Descriptive Rating
Metrics d Mean
Content 3.91 Acceptable (A)
Highly Acceptable
Accuracy 4.35
(A)
Ease of Use 4.18 Acceptable (A)
Highly Acceptable
Timeliness 4.29
(A)
Security 4.17 Acceptable (A)
GRAND WEIGHTED
4.18 Acceptable (A)
MEAN

Based on Table 15, the summary of the respondents’ perception on the level of

acceptability of the proposed system resulted a mean rating of 3.91 for content; 4.35 for

accuracy; 4.18 for ease of use; 4.29 for timeliness and 4.17 for security.

The proposed system got a descriptive rating of Acceptable (A) on all the system

acceptability metrics except for accuracy and timeliness which was evaluated with a

descriptive rating of Highly Acceptable (HA).

To sum it up, the respondents’ evaluation on the proposed system’s acceptability

resulted a grand weighted mean rating of 4.18 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Acceptable (A)”.
 45

III. Economic Feasibility (Cost Benefit Analysis) of the Mobile Infocast

System for President Ramon Magsaysay State University – Masinloc
Campus

Particulars Amount

Option A: Utilizing of Mobile Infocast System

Mobile Infocast System 15,000.00

Web Hosting valid for 1 year 1,500.00

Total for Option A 16,500.00

Option B: Utilizing Facebook

Facebook 0.00

Others tools 1,500.00

Total for Option B 1,500.00

Savings (Php) 15,000.00

Percentage (%) of Saving 90.91%

The utilization of Facebook as the information dissemination system for President

Ramon Magsaysay State University – Masinloc Campus can save Php. 15,000.00 or

90.91% than acquiring the Mobile Infocast System. But the said University will have a

full control on the proposed system if acquired, unlike Facebook, especially on its

maintainability, reliability and security.

46
 Chapter 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter contains the summary of the findings, conclusions derived from the

finding and recommendations.

Summary of Findings

1. Respondents’ Perception on the Level of System Quality of Mobile Infocast

System for President Ramon Magsaysay State University – Masinloc Campus

1.1. Functional Suitability. Respondents’ evaluation on the Functional Suitability of

the proposed system resulted a mean rating of 3.99 with an equivalent descriptive

rating of “Very Good (VG).”

1.2. Performance Efficiency. Respondents’ evaluation on the Performance

Efficiency of the proposed system resulted a mean rating of 4.09 with an

equivalent descriptive rating of “Very Good (VG).”

1.3. Reliability. Respondent’s evaluation on the Reliability of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.13 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very

Good (VG).”

1.4. Security. Respondents’ evaluation on the Security of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.01 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very

Good (VG).”

1.5. Maintainability. Respondents’ evaluation on the Maintainability of the proposed

system resulted a mean rating of 4.08 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Very Good (VG)”.

 48

1.6. Portability. Respondents’ evaluation on the Portability of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.26 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Excellent

(E)”.

1.7. Compatibility. Respondents’ evaluation on the Compatibility of the proposed

system resulted a mean rating of 4.31 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Excellent (E)”.

1.8. Usability. Respondents’ evaluation on the Usability of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 3.98 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very

Good (VG)”.

2. Respondents’ Perception on the Level of Acceptability of Mobile Infocast System

for President Ramon Magsaysay State University – Masinloc Campus

2.1. Accuracy. Respondents’ evaluation on the Accuracy of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.35 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Highly

Acceptable (HA).”

2.2. Ease of Use. Respondents’ evaluation on the Ease of Use of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.18 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Acceptable (A).”

2.3. Timeliness. Respondents’ evaluation on the Timeliness of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.29 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Highly

Acceptable (HA).”

2.4. Security. Respondents’ evaluation on the Security of the proposed system

resulted a mean rating of 4.17 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Acceptable (A).”
 49

3. The development of Mobile Infocast System for President Ramon Magsaysay State

University – Masinloc Campus can save Php. 252,500.00 or 84.17% than hiring a

senior Android software developer in one year.

Conclusions

Based on the summary of the investigations conducted, the researchers have

concluded that:

1. Respondents’ evaluation on the proposed system’s quality resulted a grand

weighted mean rating of 4.11 with an equivalent descriptive rating of “Very

Good (VG)”.

2. Respondents’ evaluation on the proposed system’s acceptability resulted a

grand weighted mean rating of 4.18 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

“Acceptable (A)”.

3. The development of Mobile Infocast System for President Ramon Magsaysay

State University – Masinloc Campus can save Php. 252,500.00 or 60.41%

than hiring a senior Android software developer in one year.

Recommendations

The researchers would like to recommend the following:

1. Implementation of Mobile Infocast System to the University.

2. Roll out prepared tutorial videos on how to utilized the said system.

3. Maintain the system with an updated Android programming software.

4. Upgrade the system especially by future researchers.

 50

5. Increase usability and content by continuously asking feedback from all the end

users and implement as soon as possible.

6. Maintain compatibility of the system to all the end – users’ phones by getting the

lowest OS version a he/she is carrying. Conduct a system test using the lowest

version OS.

7. Maintain accuracy by identifying errors end – users are encountering in the

system. Compile these errors and apply correction.

Bibliography

Alipio, Mark. 2020. Education during COVID-19 era: Are learners in a less-economically
developed country ready for e-learning? ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for
Economics, Kiel, Hamburg

Shonhe, L.& Jain, P. March, 2017. Information Dissemination in The 21st Century: The
Use Of Mobile Technologies. Gaborone, Botswana: University of Botswana.

Riabov, Anton. March 2004. Information dissemination systems. Efficient Information

Dissemination System. Seattle, Washington, US.

Cabonero, David A.; Domincel, Chastene Judd G.; Bannog, Zellah W.; Dacanay, Mia
Jane A.; and Camonayan, Mark Paul G. 2019. "A Proposed Electronic Selective
Dissemination of Information Through SMS and Email in an Academic Library". Library
Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 3552. Saint Mary’s University, Philippines

Shields, Patricia and Rangarajan, N. 2013. A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating
Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management. Stillwater, OK.

Statista. March 2020. Increased media device usage due to the coronavirus outbreak
among internet users worldwide. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1106607/device-
usage-coronavirus-worldwide-by-country. Hamburg, Germany

Seels, B.B., & Richey, R.C. 1994. Instructional technology: The definition and
domains of the field. Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications
and Technology.
 51

Sattler, DN. 2011. Active shooter on campus: evaluating text and e-mail warning

message effectiveness. J Homel Secur Emerg Manag 8(1).

Uchida N., Takahata K., Shibata Y., Shiratori N. 2011. Never Die Network Extended

with Cognitive Wireless Network for Disaster Information System. Complex, Intell

Softw Intensive Syst (CISIS), 2011 International Conference on. IEEE 24–31.

Zhang N, Huang H, Su B, Zhao J, Zhang B (2014) Information Dissemination Analysis

of Different Media towards the Application for Disaster Pre-Warning: Media coverage

ratio. PLoS ONE 9(5): e98649. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098649

Zhang N, Huang H, Su B, Zhao J, Zhang B (2014) Information Dissemination Analysis

of Different Media towards the Application for Disaster Pre-Warning: Frequency of

media usage. PLoS ONE 9(5): e98649. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098649

O'Flaherty, K. Apri, 2021. Facebook Data Breach: Here’s What To Do Now.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2021/04/06/facebook-data-breach-heres-

what-to-do-now/?sh=4d77cc6f5708. Jersey City, New Jersey.

 52

Appendix A
LETTER TO RESPONDENTS

Republic of the Philippines

President Ramon Magsaysay State University
Masinloc Campus
Masinloc Zambales

COLLEGE OF COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Dear Respondents,

Good day!

We would like to request for your spare time to complete our questionnaire for
our proposed system entitled Mobile Infocast System for President Ramon Magsaysay
State University – Masinloc.

Your answers to these questions will enlighten us on what should we improve

more on the said system that we are developing.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Respectfully yours,
The Researchers
 53

Appendix B
LETTER OF APPROVAL

Republic of the Philippines

President Ramon Magsaysay State University
(Formerly Ramon Magsaysay Technological University)
Masinloc Campus
Masinloc, Zambales, Philippines

June 2, 2021

MYRA LIZA O. VIZCARRA, Ed. D.

Campus Director
PRMSU-Masinloc Campus
Masinloc Zambales

Dear Madam:

Greetings!

The undersigned students from the President Ramon Magsaysay State University are
currently pursuing their undergraduate thesis entitled “Mobile Infocast Application for
PRMSU – Masinloc Campus”. This is in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree leading to Bachelor of Science in Information Technology.

In lieu, the undersigned requests for your approval to allow us distribute the instrument to
your employees. Rest assured that whatever data given shall be treated with utmost
secrecy and confidentiality and only be used for this study.

Thank you for your favorable response.

Very truly yours,

_________________ _________________ _________________

Marvin Tabudlo Ana Rose Mariano Eizel Macaraig

_________________ ______________________
Lucky Edquibal Oedipus Rex Montefalcon

Noted:

NERISSA L. JAVIER, MSCS

Program Chair, BSIT
 54

Appendix C
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES

I. Respondents’ Evaluation on the Level of System Quality. Please put a check (√) on
the column that corresponds to your answer. Answer all questions and use the rating scale
indicated.

5 – Excellent 4 – Very Good 3 – Good 2 – Poor 1 – Very Poor

FUNCTIONAL SUSTAINABILITY 5 4 3 2 1
1.  Set of functions covers all the specified tasks and user objectives
2. Provides the correct results with the needed degree of precision
3. Functions facilitate the accomplishment of specified tasks and
objectives
PERFORMANCE EFFICIENCY 5 4 3 2 1
1. Response and processing times and throughput rates of a product
or system, when performing its functions, meet requirements
2. Amount and types of resources used by product or system when
performing its functions, meet requirements
3. Maximum limits of a product or system parameter meet
requirement
COMPATIBILITY 5 4 3 2 1
1. System, product or component exchange information with other
products, systems or components, and/or perform its required
functions, while sharing the same hardware or software
environment
2. System, product or component can perform its required functions
efficiently while sharing a common environment and resources
with other products, without detrimental impact on any other
product
3. System, product or components can exchange information and
use the information that has been exchanged
USABILITY
5 4 3 2 1
1. Recognize whether a product or system is appropriate for their
needs
2. System can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals
of learning to use the product or system with effectiveness,
 55

efficiency, freedom from risk and satisfaction in a specified

context of use
3. System has attributes that make it easy to operate and control
4. System protects users against making errors 

5. User interface enables pleasing and satisfying interaction for the

user
6. Used by people with the widest range of characteristics and
capabilities to achieve a specified goal in a specified context of
use
RELIABILITY 5 4 3 2 1
1. System, product or component meets needs for reliability under
normal operation
2. System, product or component is operational and accessible when
required for use
3. System, product or component operates as intended despite the
presence of hardware or software faults
4. A product or system can recover the data directly affected and re-
establish the desired state of the system
SECURITY 5 4 3 2 1
1. Product or system ensures that data are accessible only to those
authorized to have access
2. System, product or component prevents unauthorized access to, or
modification of, computer programs or data
3. Actions or events can be proven to have taken place, so that the
events or actions cannot be repudiated later
4. Actions of an entity can be traced uniquely to the entity

5. Identity of a subject or resource can be proved to be the one

claimed
MAINTAINABILITY
5 4 3 2 1
1. System or computer program is composed of discrete components
such that a change to one component has minimal impact on other
components
2. Asset can be used in more than one system, or in building other
assets. 
 56

3. Effectiveness and efficiency with which it is possible to assess the

impact on a product or system of an intended change to one or
more of its parts, or to diagnose a product for deficiencies or
causes of failures, or to identify parts to be modified
4. Product or system can be effectively and efficiently modified
without introducing defects or degrading existing product quality
5. Effectiveness and efficiency with which test criteria can be
established for a system, product or component and tests can be
performed to determine whether those criteria have been met
PORTABILITY
5 4 3 2 1
1. Product or system can effectively and efficiently be adapted for
different or evolving hardware, software or other operational or
usage environments
2. Effectiveness and efficiency with which a product or system can
be successfully installed and/or uninstalled in a specified
environment
3. Product can replace another specified software product for the
same purpose in the same environment

II. Respondents’ Evaluation on the Level of Acceptability. Please put a check (√) on
the column that corresponds to your answer. Answer all questions and use the rating scale
indicated.
5 – Very Accepted (VA)
4 – Accepted (A)
3 – Moderately Accepted (MA)
2 – Slightly Accepted (SA)
1 – Not Accepted (NA)
CONTENT
5 4 3 2 1
1. The system has a well-structured database for the storage of data.
2. Information within the system is organized and secured.
3. The design of the system is appealing to the eyes of the user.
ACCURACY 5 4 3 2 1
1. The data stored in the system is accurate.
 57

2. The computation of payment is precise and correct.

3. Data inputs are accurately stored in the system database and
exactly transferred in generating reports.
SECURITY 5 4 3 2 1
1. Data and information are well secured.
2. The access in the system is secured.
3. The system is free from unauthorized use.

EASE OF USE
5 4 3 2 1
1. The system is easy to use and user- friendly.
2. The information is easy to access.
3. The system is easy to understand and is capable of being self-
learned.
TIMELINESS
5 4 3 2 1
1. Preparations of reports and documents consume lesser time
compared to the conventional method.
2. Reports generation requires less time and effort.
3. The information in the system is always timely.
 
 58

Appendix D
USER’S MANUAL

1. User: Administrator / Teacher

1.1. Logging In

- To log in, use your registered email address as username. Ensure

that all the credentials are correct. Then hit Log In button.

Username

Password

Log In
Button
 59

1.2. Home Page

- The home page consists of the posts, audience filter and menus.
Please take note that Unpublish Post / Publish Post button will
only appear to Administrators.

- Use Audience Filter for viewing only posts dedicated to a

specific group or organization.

- Hit the heart - shaped button to insert a “Like” on the post as

acknowledgement.

- Hit the message balloon button to insert a comment on the post.

- Hit the ribbon- shaped button to bookmark the post.

Audience
Filter

Like

Comment

Posts

Profile

Bookmark

Likes Page

Create Post

Home Page
Group
Editor

1.3. Group Editor

 60

- Enables the user to create a group for a specific post by clicking

the pencil icon.

- Once created, search the group the name by clicking the Group
List. A drop – down list will appear. Look for the intended group
name. Use the search engine to find the name of the intended
member.

- Hit the Enroll button to add a member.

- Click Unenroll if a member should be removed from the group.

- Please take note that Disable button is only for administrators

which is for students who are already not part of the University.

Create Group

Group List

Member Search Engine

Enroll Member

Unenroll Member

Disable Member

1.4. Create Post

- Insert an image for the post by clicking the Android icon.

- On the Description section, insert the announcement for

dissemination.
 61

- Go to the Audience List to choose the intended group which be

will be audience of the post.

- Once done and everything’s ready, hit the Post button.

- Hit Cancel button if will not proceed in posting.

Post Button

Insert Image

Caption / Description

Audience List

Cancel

1.5. Likes Page

- Go to the Likes Page by simply hitting the heart – shaped

button on the bottom panel.

Audience

Post

Likes Page
 62

1.6. Profile

- Enables the user to have a look on their profile picture, on the

created and bookmarked posts.

- Enables also the user to edit their profile picture, name and bio
through hitting the Edit Profile button.

Edit Profile

Profile Picture

Created Posts

Bookmarked Posts

1.6.1. Edit Profile

Save

Change Photo

Profile Name

Bio Section
 63

2. User: Student
- Once installed and opened, user can either register if account is
not yet created or proceed to log in.

2.1. Logging In

- To log in, use your registered email address as username. Ensure

that all the login credentials are correct. Then hit Log In button.

Username

Password

Log In
 64

2.2. Home Page

- After successfully logging in, home page will appear next on the
window which will show posts the user can view.

- Use Group List for viewing posts dedicated to a specific group

the user is belong to.

- Hit the heart - shaped button to insert a “Like” on the post as

acknowledgement.

- Hit the message balloon button to insert a comment on the post.

- Hit the ribbon- shaped button to bookmark the post.

Group List

Posts

Like Button

Comment

Bookmark

Profile

Notifications
Home Page
 65

2.3. Notifications

- Go to the Notifications page by simply hitting the heart –

shaped button on the bottom panel.

Profile

Notification details
 66

2.4. Profile

- Enables the user to have a look on their profile details and

bookmarked posts.

- Enables also the user to edit their profile picture, name and bio
through hitting the Edit Profile button.

Profile Menu

Edit Profile Button

Bookmarked Posts

2.4.1. Edit Profile

Save Button

Change Photo Button

Profile Name

Bio Section
 67

2.5. Register

- Student users will be asked to complete the following details to

be able to complete the registration. Once done, hit Register
button.

Profile Name

Student ID Number

Student Full Name

Department

Student Email Address

Password