ALUMNI CREDENTIAL VERIFICATION

BLOCKCHAIN BASED SYSTEM

Agustin, Mark Bacaron, John Remster Blas, Pamela Romo, Mercy Joy

College of Computer Studies

Research Development and Innovation Center

Emmanuel G. Galupo Jr., MSCS

Technical Adviser

Jeffrey F. Calim., MSIT Content Adviser

April 2023
 Endorsement

This thesis entitled: “Alumni Credential Verification Blockchain Based System” prepared by
John Remster Bacaron, Mark Agustin, Pamela Blas and Mercy Joy Romo of BSCS 3YB-1, in
partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Bachelor of Science in Computer Science
has been examined and now recommended for Oral Examination.

This is to certify that John Remster Bacaron and his group are ready for the Oral Examination.

Emmanuel G. Galupo Jr., MSCS

Technical Adviser

Jeffrey F. Calim, MSIT

Content Adviser
 Table of Content

Preliminaries
Title Page - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -1
Endorsement - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2
Table of Content - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3

Table List/List of Figures - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -4

Acknowledgement - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -7
Abstract - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -8

Chapter I
1.0 Introduction ----------------------------------------------9
1.1 Project Context - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10
1.2 Purpose and Description - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -10
1.3 Objectives - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -11
1.4 Statements of the Problem - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - – 12
1.5 Scope and Limitation - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 14
Chapter II
2.0 Related Literature Studies - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 14
Chapter III
3.0 Methodology - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -19
3.1 System Design - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19
3.1.2.1 Planning - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - 20
3.1.2.2 Design - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - 20
3.1.2.3 Flowchart - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - 21
3.1.2.4 Development - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - 24
3.1.2.5 Testing and Debbuging - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - 24
3.1.2.6 Feedback - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - 25
3.1.2.7 Implementing/Deployment- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - 25
3.2 Introduction - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -26
3.3 Research Design - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -26
3.4 Research Setting - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -26
3.5 Population and Sample - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -26
3.6 Statistical Treatment - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -28
Chapter IV
4.0 Results and Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -30
Chapter V
5.0 Conclusion and Recommendation- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -48
5.1 Conclusion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -48
5.2 Recommendation - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -49
References - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -50
 Table List

Table 1.0: Likert Scale - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 29

Table 2.0: Functional Suitability Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 29

Table 3.0: Performance Efficiency Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 31

Table 4.0: Security Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 32

Table 5.0: Usability Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 33

Table 6.0: Summary of Evaluation Results by IT Professional- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -35

Table 7.0: Functional Suitability Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 35

Table 8.0: Performance Efficiency Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 36

Table 9.0: Security Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -36

Table 10.0: Usability Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 38

Table 11.0: Summary of Evaluation Results by Blockchain Developers- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -39

Table 12.0: Functional Suitability Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -39

Table 13.0: Usability Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 40

Table 14.0: Summary of Evaluation Results by Alumni- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 42

Table 15.0: Functional Suitability Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 42

Table 16.0: Usability Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 43

Table 17.0: Summary of Evaluation Results by Registrar- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 44

Table 18.0: Functional Suitability Criteria- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 45

Table 19.0: Usability Criteria - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 45

Table 20.0: Summary of Evaluation Results by Student - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 47

5
 List of Figures

Figure1: Visual Presentation of Agile for System Design - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18

Figure 2: Project System Flowchart - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19

Figure 3: Conceptual Framework - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20

Figure 4: Ethereum blockchain and smart contract Diagram- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21

Figure 5: Merkle Tree Diagram - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 22

6
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, we would want to thank our Almighty God for the wisdom he has
bestowed upon us, for the courage and perseverance we have shown in the hardest of times, for
the peace of mind, and for the guidance we have received day by day in order to accomplish this
thesis project.

This project would not have been possible without the support and guidance of a lot of
people. Our family, for their unending support and understanding during the successful
accomplishment of this project. Your love and support have helped us get this far.

Many thanks to Mr. Emmanuel G. Galupo Jr., MSCS, our technical adviser, and Mr.
Jeffrey F. Calim., MSIT, our content adviser, for their guidance and consistent supervision, as
well as for providing important information about the study and their assistance in completing
this endeavour.

To our group members Agustin, Bacaron, Blas and Romo, and our classmates who
willingly contributed their skills, suggestions, and support to our group.

7
 ABSTRACT

In the traditional system of education, students go through a cycle of earning different

credentials at various points along the way. But authenticating and confirming these certificates

is difficult since it takes time, there's a risk of damage or loss, and there are more people engaging

in fraud. The development of a blockchain-based system to speed up the authentication and

verification of student credentials is suggested in this study as a solution to these problems.

Blockchain technology makes it possible for data stored in smart contracts to be immutable and

unchangeable under specific circumstances. Through the supply of digital signatures by the

issuing institutions, the Merkle tree implementation provides simple certificate verification. This

lessens the dangers associated with fraudulent or duplicate certificates by establishing a

transparent and secure method for tracking and certifying student records. Numerous advantages

are provided by the proposed Alumni Credential Verification blockchain-based system for

employers looking to acquire reputable and capable workers. Employers no longer run the danger

of hiring someone based on fabricated information because they can now confirm the veracity of

a candidate's qualifications. By ensuring the selection of eligible candidates without squandering

time, effort, or money, this approach seeks to streamline the hiring process.

8
 CHAPTER I

1.0 Introduction

The basic structure of student cycle taking admission in kindergarten, after that changing

the admission of school into primary, secondary and high school. After completing high school,

student needs to get admission into college and completing all requirements need to get a degree.

This is the basic cycle of student’s studies but the problem of this studies is that student needs to

produce all his/her certificate in each stage for validation. This process of validation takes a lot

of time and poses a risk in losing and damaging the certificate. Due to the large amount of student

graduate, it is very hard to track and validate all the records because of this problem the tampering

and production of fake or duplicate certificate rises. The researcher proposes a system that can

solve the current issue using blockchain technology. The data under the blockchain smart contract

cannot change under the predetermined condition. And with the use of Merkle tree it is easy to

verify each certificate by providing a digital signature in each certificate that the institution issued.

Using the Alumni Credential Verification blockchain Base System, companies hiring for an

employee can now verify the legitimacy of the students or the person’s credentials. With the help

of this system, the researcher can now avoid hiring people out of lies or fake credentials. With the

help of this system, the process of easy hiring procedure will be free from hassle and toxicity.

And lastly, with the help of this system once been practice, people who uses fake credentials will

be afraid to continue this kind of deeds.

The target of this researcher is to help the companies hire more credible and competent

employees. In order to produce quality outputs and not to waste anyone’s time, dedication, and

money, the researcher desire to make this system known to everyone especially to company or

business owners.

9
1.1 Project Context

With the increase of student graduates, it also raises the applicants who are determined to

climb the career ladder with the use of fake credentials. The legitimate and qualified individuals

are not easy to find. The urgent need to hire new employees is tempting to skip over thoroughly

verifying application information that can ultimately put the company in a very vulnerable state.

With the intervention of blockchain technology, it promises to solve problems that involve

administrative control not only in the virtual currencies, blockchain is open, and it is a distributed

ledger that can record, save, or store any transactions, information, or contracts between two

parties efficiently and in a permanent way. Through blockchain technology, the researchers can

visualize information embedded in a digital code and stored in a transparent, shared database,

where they are protected from deletion, revision, or tampering. In today’s era, every agreement,

signatures, transactions, conversation, important information, process, payments, and even our

signatures would be done digitally and could be identified, validated, stored, and shared without

putting them at risk.

1.2 Purpose and Description

Academic counterfeiting has been a longstanding issue in the academic community. The

purpose of this project is to generate a digitize certificate that can be upload in the blockchain

with the technique in which it is mainly implemented and has value to certify and it will be easily

verified by the system using a series of cryptographic functions to resolve the issues in the

academic community. And to establish a secure relation with the company and the institution.

Forgeries are well known in the Philippines. These forged documents are often used by

individuals in order to obtained experience and support for employment. Even before the

pandemic, the production of fake certificates is popular especially to the students who are willing

to use this document for their own benefits. University of Recto, a term to nonexistent schools,
10
are well-known in falsifying documents residing around universities in Manila are one of the

reasons why forged documents still exist. (Hadi et. al, 2015) states that forgery and falsification

of documents is an act of committing fraud. In which fraud act as serious committed crime such

as corruption, bribery and extortion. This instance made the researchers to produce a system

named "Alumni Credential Verification Blockchain Based System" in which verifying documents

are the main objective. The system will verify credentials that was given only by university to

ensure that the documents are true otherwise certificates which are not verified will received

actions instantly. The researchers aim to provide an action ensuring security and legitimacy of

documents for the institution.

Project Objectives

The study entitled Certificate Verification Student Blockchain Login Portal aims to have

a legitimate credential certificate in digitalize form and verify them in short amount of time.

Providing them an immutable, tamperproof and non-repudiation property of blockchain.

1.4.1. The researcher develops a Blockchain based system that allows to verify

credentials.

1.4.2. Evaluate the Alumni Credential Verification Blockchain based System with the help

of I.T Expert using the ISO 25010.

1.4.2.1. Functional Suitability.

1.4.2.2. Performance Efficiency.

1.4.2.3. Security.

1.4.2.4. Usability

11
 1.4.3. Evaluate the Alumni Credential Verification Blockchain based System with the help

of Blockchain software developer using the ISO 25010.

1.4.3.1. Functional Suitability.

1.4.3.2. Performance Efficiency.

1.4.3.3. Security.

1.4.3.4. Usability

1.4.4. The Alumni, Registrar staff the target user to evaluates the Alumni Credential

Verification Blockchain based System using the ISO 25010

1.4.4.2 Functionality

1.4.4.1 Usability

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to create a decentralized Alumni Credential Verification Blockchain based

System that enables the student preserves their credential and certification in a secure digital asset.

This research also intends to answer the following question.

1.5.1. How does the researcher develop a system that can verify credentials?

1.5.2. How will the I.T experts and evaluate the system analysis using the ISO 25010 in

terms of:

1.5.2.1. Functional Suitability.

1.5.2.2. Performance Efficiency.

1.5.2.3. Security.
12
 1.5.2.4. Usability

1.5.3. How will the Blockchain Software Developer experts and evaluate the system

analysis using the ISO 25010 in terms of:

1.5.3.1. Functional Suitability.

1.5.3.2. Performance Efficiency.

1.5.3.3. Security.

1.5.3.4. Usability

1.5.4. How The Alumni, Registrar staff the target user to evaluates the Alumni
Credential

Verification Blockchain based System using the ISO 25010:

1.5.4.1 Functionality

1.5.4.2 Usability

1.5.5. How will the Blockchain Software Developer experts and evaluate the system analysis

using the ISO 25010 in terms of:

1.5.5.1. Functional Suitability.

1.5.5.2. Performance Efficiency.

1.5.5.3. Security.

1.5.5.4. Usability

1.5.6. How The Alumni, Registrar staff the target user to evaluates the Alumni Credential

Verification Blockchain based System using the ISO 25010:

13
 1.5.6.1 Functionality

1.5.6.2 Usability

Scope and Limitation

This project will benefit many companies by providing them with a legitimate credential

certificate that they can verify in just a short amount of time and also for the student to have

access to their own credential by accessing the Alumni Credential Verification Blockchain based

System”.

The limitation is it only verifies what the user and institution issued, stored in the system.

Other students who are not enrolled in the institution where the system is deployed cannot access

the system. Even with this limitation, it can still be a huge help to reduce fraud and build trust to

the institution and the companies.

CHAPTER II

Related Literature and Studies

Foreign

Revitalizing blockchain technology potentials for smooth academic records management

and verification in low-income countries

According to Alnafrah and Mouselli (2021), the issuance, maintenance and

documentation of academic records is an urgent requirement after finishing a degree. This needs

an improvement because it’s a necessary document for students and teachers used in university.

Along with these are the problems associated with issues among universities. Therefore, the

researchers proposed this blockchain-based platform to verify and issue student credentials.

14
A framework to manage smart educational certificates and thwart forgery on a

permissioned blockchain

Some of traditional way changed since the digital world starts. Transactions can be done

online including banking, shopping, etc. The documents of this resultants are stored on a

centralized and is controlled by a single admin. In which, this can be poses of danger and are at

risk of attacks from unknown authority. Also, there's a chance that the admin be in-charge of

modifying, deleting of existing data due to personal reason. This explains that today's technology

can easy to forge hard and soft copies of the documents. In fact, there are numerous incidents

where credentials of students and institutions being forged which makes the quality of education

system weaker. (Dumpeti and Kavuri, 2021)

Blockchain-technology-supported platforms for diamond authentication and certification

in luxury supply chains

On this research, the authors describe that the consumers of diamonds do have concern

regarding the authenticity of their purchases as it is also this proves the quality of the diamond.

Since the traditional way of certifying an authentic jewelry are issued on a paper that specify

many details, this cannot be proved due to a certain problem. First, it can be faked. Second, the

source of information is more likely less clear. However, with the use of blockchain technology,

a platform like Everledger2 can provide a unique digital thumb-print differ in each diamond in

terms of its appearance and other qualities. And with the help of this technology, this can certify

every diamond permanently for everybody. (Choi, 2019)

15
A blockchain-based models for student information systems

The author states that the blockchain are a new way for achieving of data integrity by

using decentralized which stores a good data. As well as it can be implemented within a

management that automates a system for private sectors of an institution. Since education is a

core area were a person need to share and modify their information, these can take place in

different measure of security levels. With the help of blockchain, students have freedom accessing

their personal data. This technology stores data that is immutable and permanent data encrypted

using cryptographic algorithms onto decentralized structure. (Mohammed Ali, Farouk, & Sharaf,

2021)

Digital Certifications in Moroccan Universities: Concepts, Challenges, and Solutions

Moroccan university provides a service which includes digital signature which certifies

and authorized by the law corresponding to a confidence service for the digital transactions. Barid

eSign is an online certification were approved by an authority of Moroccan State. A service which

provides strong authentication, digital signature, etc. This paper proposes a method a much secure

and decentralized model under blockchain technology on issuing certification. (Litoussi et al.,

2022)

Blockchain For Educational Certificate Distribution

According to Asiri (2020), that the certificates and diplomas certifies a person as a result

of attending college which has important role in applying a job. Implying that these credentials

are not just a paper. As these documents is a proof that the student is graduated from a university

as well as a proof of their skills. The following are some drawbacks of a paper credentials. (1)

16
These credentials need to be manually issued and verified. (2) The process of issuing this

certificate is time-consuming.

And can be forged and buy through a mill diploma website. With blockchain technology, as a

distributed ledger technology, this enables much higher level of security. The main advantage of

using this technology is by using cryptographic hashing which provide unchangeable features.

Blockchain for Education: A New Credentialing Ecosystem

A part of this research article the author describes the value of blockchain technology

which can be a benefit for education. This technology let everyone to validate their credentials

and qualifications and to do this with high measures of security. As it avoids record forgery and

fraud. Also, this empowers everyone by giving complete control over their data. (Smolenski,

2021)

Local

Blockchain Technology as a Competitive Advantage for Higher Education Institutions in

the Philippines

The trust that blockchain delivers to the organization is so great that clients' trust

continuously grows. All stakeholders concerned in a student's growth will be using blockchain to

keep track records. All data is immutable and transparent. Existing challenges, worries, and

dilemmas are resolved in real time, providing a huge competitiveness. The use of blockchain in

education has various applications. Digital verification and certification are one of them, a

blockchain platform based on Ethereum that schools can design and use. (Salandanan, 2020)

17
CredenceLedger: A Permissioned Blockchain for Verifiable Academic Credentials

These documents are often shared by recipients with another institution or third parties,

such as an employer, for ethical and useful objectives. A third party or entity must confirm the

authenticity of a document by calling the original provider and asking if the certificate was truly

issued by them. Furthermore, the original issuer may check their centralized or localized

certificate databases. If the original issuer lacks a database to offer, the traditional method of

verifying the security measures embedded into the hardcopy certificate will be used. As a result,

document verification takes time and can be hard or simple depending on the institution.

The decentralized verification of academic credentials presented in this study is built on a private

blockchain technology, specifically the open source Multichain. (Arenas & Fernandez, 2018)

Blockchain technology in the Philippines: Status, trends, and ways forward

According to researchers that the blockchain technology has become a major list of

recorded data, commonly referred to as blocks, that are connected in a network utilizing

encryption. Every block in the blockchain has its own cryptographic hash based on the date stamp

of the preceding block, as well as transaction records (i.e., Merkle tree). It operates on open ledger

concepts and takes pleasure in the way it monitors and stores data, develops data trust, and reduces

intermediaries. A public blockchain, a private blockchain, or a combination of public and private

blockchain are the three basic element types of blockchain technology. The aim behind this type

of blockchain technology is to strictly provide an authorized person the access that is meant for

them in a particular network. This process avoids information from leaking to those who do not

have access to it. (Bongo & Culaba, 2019)

18
 CHAPTER III

Methodology

This chapter reveals the methods of research to be employed by the researcher in

conducting the study which includes the algorithm, system design and statistical tool.

Figure: 1 Visual Presentation of Agile for System Design

System Design

For this project the researchers have decided to use the Agile development system that

involves the following steps; The planning stage where the researcher gather all the necessary

information that can lead to this project achieve its goal, setting roles for each team, discussing

the resources that needed to develop the system and what will be the problems that the researcher

may encounter. The next stage is the designing stage where the team discusses and introduces

them to the requirements outlined in the first step. Also, in this stage the team introduces the

function and identities and the essential tool, the programming language, syntax libraries and the

basic framework. At the same stage the user interface is also being discussed by the researcher.

The next stage after making plans and having designs for the system the researcher now develops

the system itself, executes all the functionalities and solves all the problems that may encounter

19
and test it in the next stage. The testing stage conducts a series of tests to ensure that the system

is fully functional. If potentially bugs found or flaws are found the researcher will fix the problem

immediately. Also, in this stage consumer feedback is collected. Deployment stage the system is

now fully developed and now available to the consumer.

Stage/Phases

Planning

The team assigns roles for each member to do their assigned task and brainstorming to

gather all ideas that each member has. The team researches all the information needed to execute

the project from history, related topics and what will be the potential problem that may encounter

before, during and after the project is executed. After gathering all the information, choose a title

that best suits the project. The phase ended with the teams finalizing all requirements needed from

documentation, backend of the system and the front-end of the system. Design

Figure: 2 Conceptual Framework

20
 Figure 2 shows the conceptual framework of the project. Starting from the admin or

registrar signing in to the system using their MetaMask Wallet to access and by issuing a

certificate. The system will create a digital signature through the use of blockchain technology, a

series of cryptographic hashing will be provided after to be tamper to the certificate. Next, the

graduate listed can pass the registered credential and can verify by the employee through

accessing Certichain.

Flowchart

Figure 3: Project System

21
The system starts by connecting to MetaMask wallet and logging in as central authority. The

admin institute, by issuing a certificate, the admin has two choices, either reject creation or

accepting a student credential to be verified. Next, once added, the admin and employee can verify

the existence of student’s authenticity.

Figure 4: Ethereum blockchain and smart contract Diagram

The figure 4 shows how the Ethereum blockchain and smart contract work in certificate

verification blockchain based systems. Smart contract is the automation mechanism in storing

and securing the contract inside the blockchain technology. The contract is deployed in the

blockchain and will add a new chain of blocks that holds the sets of information that are

distributed, but not edited having an immutable ledger that cannot be altered, deleted, or

destroyed. The researcher implemented Ethereum based blockchain technology that was written

in solidity programming as the main apparatus of our project. The front-end of the system is

designed using the web3 application that allows the Ethereum blockchain network to run the

system that can be accessed using the smart gadgets.

22
 Figure 5: Merkle Tree Diagram

The researcher uses the merkle tree as efficient data verification. It uses hashes to encode

files that are much smaller to the actual file itself. We send only the hash of the file to see if it

matches the actual file. The way the merkle tree works is from the root of the hash it obtained the

lower nodes of the Merkle tree from untrusted peers. All of these nodes exist in the same tree-like

structure described above, and they all are partial representations of the same data. The nodes from

untrusted sources are checked against the trusted hash. If they match the trusted source (meaning they

fit into the same Merkle tree), they are accepted and the process continues. If they are no good, they

are discarded and searched for again from a different source.

Development

In developing the system, the researcher used visual studio code 2022 to develop the Ethereum

blockchain and smart contract, merkle tree and the front-end of the system. The researcher installs all

the needed requirements to make the system work such as the node.js where you will install the

dependencies of the program. As for the smart contract to run, the researcher uses ganache-truffle suite

and install all the dependencies needed and compile to know if the contract is correct and the ganache

23
provides an ETH coin to test the project in web3 browser. Truffle migrate is where the contracts will

deploy and what host or server it runs. The researcher uses the ganache rpc server

HTTP://127.0.0.1:7545 for testing the system. To launch the system in the web3 server the researcher

downloaded and installed the metamask extension and imported a private key provided by the ganache

to have 100 ETH coin to process the system. For certificates to have a merkle root the researcher uses

a merkle tree algorithm to provide hash for each certificate as well as digital signature were employees

can verify through the system.

Testing and Debugging

For the issued certificate the researcher conducts multiple ways on how the system will verify

each certificate from changing the content of the file to changing the wallet address. Every time that

the system experiences any error, the researcher finds what is the cause of the error and fixes it quickly.

The result is that only certificates that have hash with the added merkle root are the ones that can be

verified by the system, as well as revoked certificates. Lastly, certificates that is not existed will display

remain as non-existing credential.

Feedback/Evaluation

The evaluation form given to the user will be a judgment for our system. This will show how

the system interacts with the user if any of the system needs changes in the aspect of its behavior or

the user interface of the system. The feedback of the user will let us know what we need to improve

in terms of the performance of the system. The main respondents will be graduating students both

male and female that will test the system as a whole and provide them with the evaluation usability,

functionality and experience of respondents have when using the system. The researcher will consult

a software developer with experience in developing blockchain and have them evaluate the system in

technical terms and the validity of the built model.

24
Implementation/Deployment

In the deployment of the system, users are guided by the interface showing how the system

works and how each button functions. The user is provided steps on creating an account, the system

will guide them on how they can manage their information, and credential. The central authority, as

the main admin of the system can add institute and authorize them to create certificate with digital

signature that can be use to verify their authenticity by the system. While the employee can only access

the view certificate page.

Introduction

This area will discuss the actions to be considered in gathering data for the study. The

researchers selected descriptive as research design since the procedure of evaluation will be

through a survey. As well its setting to be done through hybrid meetings. This section also

provides the number of respondents that need to participate in the study. As well as ethical

procedures such as proper disposal of data to be done.

Research Design

This project utilizes quantitative research particularly as descriptive since gathering of data will

be survey basis. Through surveys, researchers will also be aware of the system's full potential.

The goal of the study is to evaluate the system as well as to see its effectiveness and advantages

in which the future user can obtain.

Research Setting

The study will be conducted through hybrid meetings, in which the research setting will

occur inside selected institutions and Zoom Meeting applications. The idea of this setting is to

have a flexible way of conducting evaluation due to limited access to in -person surveys amidst

pandemic season. Online questionnaire was conducted through Google Form while in -person

questionnaire through traditional concept using pen and paper.

25
Population and Sample

This study will use stratified sampling since the survey questionnaire will be distributed

according to respondents’ criteria and role as a user of the system. The researchers will have the

following respondents: : (12) Twelve alumni from institution selected, male or female; Three (3)

Registrar staff; (2) Two I.T Expert, 21 years old or above, male or female, with experience of

teaching related to I.T field for 2 years and above; and (3) Three Blockchain Experts, starting 23

years old, male or female, with at least 3-5 years of experience as blockchain developer, the

selected participant of blockchain developer are from I.T social media server. The respondents

will be a total of 20.

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT:

The survey will consist of 4 parts. First part is providing a consent form to be answered by

respondents to assure their safety. For the second part, their personal information to be collected

that will be used on a project. Third, a survey in which the following question will evaluate the

system performance. Last, the respondents are open to give feedback regarding their thoughts on

the project and the option to send them information about the survey. The questionnaire to be

answered by the respondents consist of information that can be used for our system and some are

optional, in which he/she who will take part of the test will have the choice to answer or not. After

the testing and survey, answers will be hidden and only the team and specific respondent will

have access to view the survey again.

Research Ethics

Researchers of this project follow Republic Act No. 10173 or the Data Privacy Act of 2012,

in which the research team is responsible for ensuring the safety of those who will take part in

the study.

Considering the following:

26
[1] Informed Consent:

wherein the respondents will be informed before the occurrence of data study. Researchers

will provide consent form to be answered in which selected respondents are allow to accept or

reject the following: wherein the selected individuals will receive formal letters provided by the

researchers. Wherein respondents have the option to answer the given questions where in

respondents to be selected are only disclosed to the research members.

[2] Data Protection and Disposal:

wherein personal information to be gathered are limited and will be used only for the

project benefits wherein personal data are only disclosed to the research team and user who

shared the information. Wherein data to be collected will stay at research premises such as

Gdrive, flash drive held by the capstone team while personal surveys will be collected by the

documentation committee. Wherein data will stored and will only remove once the research

is done by doing the:2.1 Data Destruction wherein methods of removing data such as

shredding and wiping data.

[3] Risk

wherein researchers will provide extra measures to avoid risk and problem while the

project is ongoing.

[4] Undue Inducement

Wherein the testing of the system is free from such inducement since it was built from a

non-monetized server. All the materials used on doing the capstone are free of charge.

27
Statistical Treatment

Mean was used to assign a quantitative value to a criterion in the table. Using

the average result The Likert’s Scale will be used by the researchers as a statistical

instrument to assess the certificate verification blockchain based system as well as the

front-end of the system’s capacity as an evaluation by the respondents and professionals.

Weighted Mean

An alternative measure of dispersion is the mean deviation equivalent to the

average absolute deviation from the mean:

Where: x =

Mean x1 =

elements or number w = weights

i= count

Mean was used to assign a quantitative value to a criterion in the table. Using

the average result, The Likert Scale will be used by the researchers as a statistical

instrument to assess the Alumni Credential Verification Blockchain based System as

well as the front-end of the system’s capacity as an evaluation by the respondents and

professionals.

Mean Average Interpretation Weight

3.50-4.00 Highly Acceptable 4

2.50-3.49 Acceptable 3

28
1.50-2.49 Slightly not Acceptable 2

1.00-1.49 Not Acceptable 1

Table 1.0: Likert Scale

29
 CHAPTER IV
Results and Discussion

The researchers used an Agile Methodology in able to test the system for a least amount of time

to determine the problem that needs to evaluate under its development. For the first run, the

developer has examined the connection between the system and the cryptocurrency wallet for the

transaction purposes resulted as success. The developers also undergone a project demonstration

with few Blockchain and IT experts as well as users. One of the blockchain expert tells the

developer about the wide outcome that the system may do. As well as the listing of authorized

MetaMask wallet addresses. Listing of authorized wallet addresses will be under the developer’s

wallet (Central Authority). The central authority will input the authorized wallet, institute name,

credential information, department head, as well as courses offered by the institution. And so, for

the user under institute, they will input its name and course of the alumni graduated under their

college.

The system was designed through the use of ReactJS for a simple and friendly user interface. The

system may identify the legitimacy of the alumni as well as their certificate that may later be

added by the institution such as college diploma. Results can be viewed by the authorities that do

background check for important manners.

Evaluation Results by IT Professional

Table 2.0: Functional Suitability Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

a. The system covers all 3.50 Highly Acceptable

the specified tasks and
user objectives.

30
 b. The system provides the Highly Acceptable
correct results with the
3.50
needed degree of
precision.

c. The system facilitates 3.50 Highly Acceptable

the accomplishment of
specified tasks and
objectives.

Total Mean: 3.50 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Functional Suitability Criteria evaluation result by the I.T Professional is

3.5 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform can perform

its necessary functionalities properly.

This table 2.0 show that the evaluation result by the It Professional. The table consist of

mean and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the

ratings from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable,

1.50-2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

Evaluation Results by IT Professional

Table 3.0: Performance Efficiency Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

31
 a. The system’s response 4.00 Highly Acceptable
and processing times
and throughput rates
when performing its
functions, meet
requirements..

b. The system’s amounts Highly Acceptable

and types of 3.50
resources used when
performing its
functions, meet
requirements.

c. The system’s 3.50 Highly Acceptable

maximum limits of
parameter meet
requirements..

Total Mean: 3.66 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Performance Efficiency Criteria evaluation result by the I.T

Professional is 3.66 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can

perform its necessary efficiency properly.

This table 3.0 show that the evaluation result by the It Professional. The table consist of

mean and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the

ratings from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable,

1.50-2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

32
 Evaluation Results by IT Professional
Table 4.0: Security Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

1. The system ensures 3.50 Highly Acceptable

that data are
accessible only to
those authorized to
have access.

2. The system prevents Highly Acceptable

unauthorized access 3.50
to, or modification of,
computer programs
or data.

3. The system can be 3.50 Highly Acceptable

proven to have taken
place, so that the
events or actions
cannot be repudiated
later. Specified tasks
and objectives..

4. The subject can be 3.50 Highly Acceptable

traced uniquely from
its own identity.

5. The system can 3.50 Highly Acceptable

identify the origin of
the subject and can
be proved the project
claims.

Total Mean: 3.50 Highly Acceptable

33
 The total mean for the Security Criteria evaluation result by the I.T Professional is 3.50 is

equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform its security

properly.

This table 4.0 show that the evaluation result by the It Professional. The table consist of

mean and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the

ratings from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable,

1.50-2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

Evaluation Results by IT Professional

Table 5.0: Usability Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

a. The system allows users 3.50 Highly Acceptable

to recognize if it is
appropriate for their
needs.

b. The system can be used Highly Acceptable

by specified users to
3.50
achieve specified goals
of learning to use the
application with
effectiveness,
efficiency, freedom
from risk and
satisfaction in a
specified context of
use.

34
 c. The system has attributes 3.50 Highly Acceptable
that make it easy to
operate and control.

d. The system protects 3.50 Highly Acceptable

users against making
errors.

e. The system’s user 3.00 Acceptable

interface enables
pleasing and satisfying
interaction for the user.

f. The system can be used 3.50 Highly Acceptable

by people with the
widest range of
characteristics and
capabilities to achieve a
specified goal in a
specified context of use.

Total Mean: 3.50 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Usability Criteria evaluation result by the I.T Professional is 3.41

is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform its necessary

efficiency properly.

This table 5.0 show that the evaluation result by the It Professional. The table consist of

mean and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the

ratings from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable,

1.50-2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

35
 Table 6.0: Summary of Evaluation Results by IT Professional
Criteria Mean Result

Functional Suitability 3.50 Highly Acceptable

Performance Efficiency 3.66 Highly Acceptable

Security 3.50 Highly Acceptable

Usability 3.41 Acceptable

Total Mean: 3.51 Highly Acceptable

The table show the total mean of each criterion evaluate by IT Professional. Functional

Suitability got a mean total of 3.50 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. Performance Efficiency

got a mean total of 3.66 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. Security got a mean total of 3.50 is
equivalent to Highly Acceptable. Usability got a mean total of 3.41 is equivalent to Acceptable.

The overall result got a total mean of 3.51 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable

Evaluation Results by Blockchain Developers

Table 7.0: Functional Suitability Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

d. The system covers all 4.00 Highly Acceptable

the specified tasks and
user objectives.

e. The system provides the Highly Acceptable

correct results with the
4.00
needed degree of
precision.

f. The system facilitates 4.00 Highly Acceptable

the accomplishment of
specified tasks and
objectives.

36
 Total Mean: 4.00 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Functional Suitability Criteria evaluation result by the Blockchain

Developer is 4 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform

can perform its necessary functionalities properly.

This table 7.0 show that the evaluation result by the Blockchain Developers. The table

consist of mean and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s

scale the ratings from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to

Acceptable, 1.50-2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not

Acceptable.

Evaluation Results by Blockchain Developers

Table 8.0: Performance Efficiency Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

d. The system’s response 3.33 Highly Acceptable

and processing times
and throughput rates
when performing its
functions, meet
requirements..

e. The system’s amounts Highly Acceptable

and types of
resources used when
performing its 4.00
functions, meet
requirements.

37
 f. The system’s maximum 3.33 Highly Acceptable
limits of parameter
meet requirements..

Total Mean: 3.55 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Performance Efficiency Criteria evaluation result by the Blockchain

Developer is 3.51 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can

perform its necessary efficiency properly.

This table 8.0 show that the evaluation result by the Blockchain Developers. The table

consist of mean and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s

scale the ratings from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to

Acceptable, 1.50-2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not

Acceptable.

Evaluation Results by Blockchain Developers

Table 9.0: Security Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

a. The system ensures 4.00 Highly Acceptable

that data are
accessible only to
those authorized to
have access.

b. The system Highly Acceptable

prevents
4.00
unauthorized access
to, or modification
of,

38
 computer programs
or data.

c. The system can be 4.00 Highly Acceptable

proven to have taken
place, so that the
events or actions
cannot be repudiated
later. Specified tasks
and objectives..

d. The subject can be 4.00 Highly Acceptable

traced uniquely from
its own identity.

e. The system can 4.00 Highly Acceptable

identify the origin of
the subject and can
be proved the project
claims.

Total Mean: 4.00 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Security Criteria evaluation result by the Blockchain Developer is

4 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform its security

properly.

This table 9.0 show that the evaluation result by the It Professional. The table consist of

mean and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the

ratings from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable,

1.50-2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

39
 Evaluation Results by Blockchain Developers
Table 10.0: Usability Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

a. The system allows users 3.70 Highly Acceptable

to recognize if it is
appropriate for their
needs.

b. The system can be used Highly Acceptable

by specified users to
3.70
achieve specified goals
of learning to use the .
application with
effectiveness,
efficiency, freedom
from risk and
satisfaction in a
specified context of
use.

c. The system has attributes 4.00 Highly Acceptable

that make it easy to
operate and control.

d. The system protects 3.70 Highly Acceptable

users against making
errors.

e. The system’s user 4.00 Highly Acceptable

interface enables
pleasing and satisfying
interaction for the user.

40
 f. The system can be used 4.00 Highly Acceptable
by people with

the widest range of

characteristics and
capabilities to achieve a
specified goal in a
specified context of
use.

Total Mean: 3.85 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Usability Criteria evaluation result by the Alumni is 3.85 is

equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform can be used

properly.

This table 10.0 show that the evaluation result by the Alumni. The table consist of mean

and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the ratings

from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable, 1.50-

2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

Table 11.0: Summary of Evaluation Results by Blockchain Developers

Criteria Mean Result

Functional Suitability 4.00 Highly Acceptable

Performance Efficiency 3.53 Highly Acceptable

Security 4.00 Highly Acceptable

Usability 3.85 Highly Acceptable

Total Mean: 3.75 Highly Acceptable

The table show the total mean of each criterion evaluate by Blockchain Developers.

41
Functional Suitability got a mean total of 4.00 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. Performance

Efficiency got a mean total of 3.53 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. Security got a mean total

of 4.00 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. Usability got a mean total of 3.85 is equivalent to

Acceptable. The overall result got a total mean of 3.75 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable.

Evaluation Results by Alumni

Table 12.0: Functional Suitability Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

a. The system covers 3.26 Acceptable

all the specified
tasks and user
objectives.

b. The system Highly Acceptable

provides the
3.83
correct results with
the needed degree
of precision.

42
 c. The system 3.26 Acceptable
facilitates the
accomplishment of
specified tasks and
objectives.

Total Mean: 3.27 Acceptable

The total mean for the Functional Suitability Criteria evaluation result by the Alumni is

3.27 is equivalent to Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform can perform its

necessary functionalities properly.

This table 12.0 show that the evaluation result by the Alumni. The table consist of mean

and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the ratings

from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable, 1.50-

2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable

Evaluation Results by Alumni

Table 13.0: Usability Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

a. The system allows 3.83 Highly Acceptable

users to recognize if
it is appropriate for
their needs.

43
b. The system can be Highly Acceptable
used by specified 3.63
users to achieve
specified goals of
learning to use the
application with
effectiveness,
efficiency, freedom
from risk and
satisfaction in a
specified context of
use.

c. The system has 3.63 Highly Acceptable

attributes that make
it easy to operate
and control.

d. The system 3.63 Highly Acceptable

protects users
against making
errors.

e. The system’s user 3.63 Highly Acceptable

interface enables
pleasing and
satisfying

interaction for the

user.

44
 f. The system can be 3.63 Highly Acceptable
used by people with
the widest range of
characteristics and
capabilities to
achieve a specified
goal in a specified
context of use.

Total Mean: 3.63 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Usability Criteria evaluation result by the Alumni is 3.63 is

equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform can be used

properly.

This table 13.0 show that the evaluation result by the Alumni. The table consist of mean

and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the ratings

from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable, 1.50-

2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

Table 14.0: Summary of Evaluation Results by Alumni

Criteria Mean Result

Functional Suitability 3.27 Acceptable

45
 Usability 3.63 Highly Acceptable

Total Mean 3.45 Acceptable

The table show the total mean of each criterion evaluate by Alumni. Functional

Suitability got a mean total of 3.27 is equivalent to Acceptable. Usability got a mean total of 3.63

is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The overall result got a total mean of 3.45 is equivalent to

Acceptable.

Evaluation Results by Registrar Table 15.0: Functional Suitability Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

a. The system covers all 4.00 Highly Acceptable

the specified tasks
and user objectives.

b. The system Highly Acceptable

provides the
4.00
correct results with
the needed degree
of precision.

46
 c. The system 3.32 Acceptable
facilitates the
accomplishment of
specified tasks and
objectives.

Total Mean: 3.77 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Functional Suitability Criteria evaluation result by the Registrar is

3.77 is equivalent to Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform can perform its

necessary functionalities properly.

This table 15.0 show that the evaluation result by the Registrar. The table consist of mean

and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the ratings

from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable, 1.50-

2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

Evaluation Results by Registrar Table

16.0: Usability Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

a. The system allows 3.62 Highly Acceptable

users to recognize
if it is appropriate
for their needs.

47
 b. The system can be Highly Acceptable
used by specified 3.62
users to achieve
specified goals of
learning to use the
application with

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

c. The system has 4.00 Highly Acceptable

attributes that make
it easy to operate and
control.

d. The system 3.32 Acceptable

protects users
against making
errors.

e. The system’s user 3.62 Highly Acceptable

interface enables
pleasing and
satisfying interaction
for the user.

48
 f. The system can be 4.00 Highly Acceptable
used by people with
the widest range of
characteristics and
capabilities to
achieve a specified
goal in a specified
context of use.

Total Mean: 3.69 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Usability Criteria evaluation result by the Registrar is 3.68 is

equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform can be used

properly.

This table 16.0 show that the evaluation result by the Registrar. The table consist of mean

and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the ratings

from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable,

1.502.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

Table 17.0: Summary of Evaluation Results by Registrar

Criteria Mean Result

Functional Suitability 3.77 Highly Acceptable

Usability 3.69 Highly Acceptable

49
 Total Mean 3.72 Highly Acceptable

The table show the total mean of each criterion evaluate by Registrar. Functional

Suitability got a mean total of 3.77 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. Usability got a mean

total of 3.69 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The overall result got a total mean of 3.72 is

equivalent to Highly Acceptable.

Evaluation Results by Student Table 18.0: Functional Suitability Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

a. The system covers 4.00 Highly Acceptable

all the specified
tasks and user
objectives.

b. The system Highly Acceptable

provides the
4.00
correct results with
the needed degree
of precision.

50
 c. The system 4.00 Highly Acceptable
facilitates the
accomplishment of
specified tasks and
objectives.

Total Mean: 4.00 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Functional Suitability Criteria evaluation result by the student is 4

is equivalent to Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform can perform its

necessary functionalities properly.

This table 18.0 show that the evaluation result by the student. The table consist of mean

and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the ratings

from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable, 1.50-

2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

Evaluation Results by Student Table

19.0: Usability Criteria

Statement Mean Interpretation

a. The system allows 4.00 Highly Acceptable

users to recognize
if it is appropriate
for their needs.

51
b. The system can be Highly Acceptable
used by specified 3.83
users to achieve
specified goals of
learning to use the
application with
effectiveness,
efficiency, freedom
from risk and
satisfaction in a
specified context of
use.

c. The system has 4.00 Highly Acceptable

attributes that make
it easy to operate
and control.

d. The system 3.83 Highly Acceptable

protects users
against making
errors.

e. The system’s user 3.62 Highly Acceptable

interface enables
pleasing and
satisfying

interaction for the

user.

52
 f. The system can be 4.00 Highly Acceptable
used by people with
the widest range of
characteristics and
capabilities to
achieve a specified
goal in a specified
context of use.

Total Mean: 3.86 Highly Acceptable

The total mean for the Usability Criteria evaluation result by the student is 3.86 is

equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The result shows that the system can perform can be used

properly.

This table 16.0 show that the evaluation result by the student. The table consist of mean

and the interpretation that proposed system to meet. The researcher used Likert’s scale the ratings

from 3.50-4.00 will equivalent to Highly Acceptable, 2.50-3.49 equivalent to Acceptable, 1.50-

2.49 equivalent to Slightly Acceptable, and 1.00-1.49 equivalent to Not Acceptable.

53
 Table 20.0: Summary of Evaluation Results by Student

Criteria Mean Result

Functional Suitability 4.00 Highly Acceptable

Usability 3.86 Highly Acceptable

Total Mean 3.93 Highly Acceptable

The table show the total mean of each criterion evaluate by Registrar. Functional

Suitability got a mean total of 4.00 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. Usability got a mean

total of 3.86 is equivalent to Highly Acceptable. The overall result got a total mean of 3.93 is

equivalent to Highly Acceptable.

54
 CHAPTER V

Conclusion and Recommendation

Conclusion

The Researcher concludes that the Alumni Credentials Verification Blockchain Based System

proven that it can’t alter or forge the credentials if it has a digital signature. The system proves

that implementing the value to a certify will be easily verified by the system using a series of

cryptographic functions to resolve the issues in the academic community. The use of smart

contract as the main algorithm of the system was successful. Based on the evaluation result given

by the I.T Professionals, Blockchain Developer, Institute Registrar, Alumni, Student in the ISO

25010 standard, the researcher conclude that the Alumni Credentials Verification Blockchain

Based System got a three-point fifty mean (3.50) or equivalent to Highly Acceptable for the

criteria of Functional Suitability, three-point sixty-six mean (3.66) or equivalent to Highly

Acceptable for the criteria of Performance Efficiency, a three-point fifty mean (3.50) or equivalent

to Highly Acceptable for the criteria of Security, three-point forty four mean (3.44) or equivalent

to Highly Acceptable for the criteria of Usability with total of mean of three-point fifty one (3.51)

or equivalent to Highly Acceptable answered by I.T Professionals. The Blockchain Professionals

evaluate the system based on the criteria of Functional Suitability, Performance

Efficiency, Security, Usability with the total mean of three-point seventy-five (3.75) or equivalent to

Highly Acceptable. The researcher conclude that the system provides the necessary functionalities,

Usability and security that helps the user.

The respondents categorize by the Institute Registrar, Alumni, Student was successful evaluate

using the ISO 25010 standard got three-point seventy-two (3.72) mean total or equivalent to

Highly Acceptable for the criteria of Functional Suitability, Usability answered by Institute

Registrar. The alumni evaluation got total mean of three-point forty-two (3.42) or equivalent to

55
Acceptable for the criteria of Functional Suitability, Usability. Three-point ninetytree (3.93) total

mean or equivalent to Highly Acceptable for the criteria of Functional Suitability, Usability. The

researcher conclude that the system provides the necessary function to the user.

Recommendation

The primary objectives of the study were to create an immutable credentials that the employee

can verify its authenticity which can help the user to prove their own credentials the system

provides its own digital signature that can be use to verify the credentials. The objectives of the

study were accomplished and the researcher was able to create verification system.

The researcher recommendation to the future researcher which will implement our system, was

to deploy the contract to a smart chain testnet to access its transaction with the specified gas fee

that need. This will improve the deployment of the smart contract that can view in testnent

explorer real time, it is also better to have or connect the system to the google analytics were the

admin can view the amount of the user that use the system

The researchers also recommend to only add necessary functions to improve the system.

It is better to avoid adding functionalities that will not be useful or helpful in operating the system.

The researchers used ISO 25010 to evaluate the device. Though if the future researchers planned

to use other Software Evaluation Tool, the researchers recommend to use an Evaluation tool

which has relevance to Functional Suitability, Performance Efficiency, Security, Usability.

56
Reference

M. Conoscenti, A. Vetrò and J. C. De Martin, "Blockchain for the Internet of Things: A

systematic literature review", Proc. IEEE/ACS 13th Int. Conf. Comput. Syst. Appl., pp.
1-6, 2016.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Blockchain+for+the+Internet+of+Things%3A
+A+systematic+literature+review&as_occt=title&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C31

M. Atzori, "Blockchain-based architectures for the Internet of Things: A survey" in SSRN

Electron. J., 2017.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Blockchain-
based+architectures+for+the+Internet+of+Things%3A+A+survey&as_occt=title&hl=en
&as_sdt=0%2C31

A. Reyna, C. Martín, J. Chen, E. Soler and M. Díaz, "On blockchain and its integration with
IoT. Challenges and opportunities", Future Gener. Comput. Syst., vol. 88, pp. 173-190, Nov.
2018.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=On+blockchain+and+its+integration+with+Io
T.+Challenges+and+opportunities&as_occt=title&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C31

K. Yeow, A. Gani, R. W. Ahmad, J. J. P. C. Rodrigues and K. Ko, "Decentralized consensus for

edge-centric Internet of Things: A review taxonomy and research issues", IEEE Access, vol. 6,
pp. 1513-1524, 2018.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Decentralized+consensus+for+edgecentric+Int
ernet+of+Things%3A+A+review%2C+taxonomy%2C+and+research+issues
&as_occt=title&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C31

M. Pilkington, "Blockchain technology: Principles and applications" in Research Handbook on

Digital Transformations, Cheltenham, U.K.:Edward Elgar Publ. Incorporat, 2015.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Blockchain+technology%3A+Principles+and+
applications&as_occt=title&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C31

R. Beck, J. S. Czepluch, N. Lollike and S. Malone, "Blockchain-the gateway to trust-free

cryptographic transactions", Proc. 24th Eur. Conf. Inf. Syst. (ECIS), pp. 1-15, 2016.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Blockchain-
the+gateway+to+trustfree+cryptographic+transactions&as_occt=title&hl=en&as_sdt=0
%2C31

F. Tschorsch and B. Scheuermann, "Bitcoin and beyond: A technical survey on decentralized

digital currencies", IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 2084-2123, 3rd
Quart. 2016.

57
 https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Bitcoin+and+beyond%3A+A+technical+surve
y+on+decentralized+digital+currencies&as_occt=title&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C31

G. Wood, Ethereum: A secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger, Zug, Switzerland,

2014.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Ethereum%3A+A+secure+decentralised+gene
ralised+transaction+ledger&as_occt=title&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C31
V. Dhillon, D. Metcalf and M. Hooper, "The hyperledger project" in Blockchain Enabled
Applications, Berkeley, CA, USA:Apress, pp. 139-149, 2017.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=The+hyperledger+project&as_occt=title&hl=e
n&as_sdt=0%2C31

J. R. Douceur, "The Sybil attack", Proc. Int. Workshop Peer-to-Peer Syst., pp. 251-260, 2002.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=The+Sybil+attack&as_occt=title&hl=en&as_s
dt=0%2C31

M. Walport, Distributed Ledger Technology: Beyond Blockchain, London, U.K., 2016.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Distributed+Ledger+Technology%3A+Beyon
d+Blockchain&as_occt=title&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C31

Jawad Salic. Success factors in Lanao del sur construction projects: A study for the
development of project performance. International Journal of Humanities and Social
Sciences, 2017. https://www1.undp.org/

58