ORAL DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM

Name of Researchers: Artates, Maureen

Santos, Charlene
Ducos, Malaiah
Sarmiento, Joseph Jay
Libacao, Christine
Reyes, Kristina
Mora, Hassin Jay
Research Title: “ Impact of TikTok towards communication skills among senior high school students
of Amungan National High School during School Year 2022-2023”
Legend : Five point rating Scale
ITEM EVALUATION WEIGHT MARKS ACTUAL
CRITERIA (A) (B) MARKS
(1-5 rating scale) (A) X (B) =
(C)/5
1 Introduction 20
(background
information, problem
statement/research and
questions,
aim/objectives, and
significance of the
study)
2 Literature Review 25
(Relevant studies,
reasonable review
parameter, recent
development, assessed
research results,
organized issues)
3 Research Methodology 25
(Description of research
design, methodology,
and variables)
4 Feasibility Study and 20
Final Results
(in terms of scope,
delimitation, time,
resources, and
practicality,
observation-statictical
analysis, graphs,
tables,discussions, and
conclusions)
5 Overall Performance 10
(Presentation skills,
demonstration of
confidence during Q and
A session spontaneity)
Total
Outstanding – 5 Very Satisfactory – 4 Satisfactory – 3 Fair – 2 Needs Improvement – 1
FINAL DECISION:
Directions : Put a check (/) on the appropriate box.

 Outstanding – Contents of the study presented and elucidated with clarity and conviction.

 Very Satisfactory – Research study composed of relevant information to meet solution to its target
problem.

 Satisfactory – With minor amendments/ comments to improve the objectives, problem statement,
work plan of research etc.

 Unatisfactory – With less than 50 points mark

 Needs improvement – Failure to provide clear explanation of the contents of the study. Corrections
on every chapter needed.

COMMENTS/SUGGESTION/COMMENDATION:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of the Researchers: Date of Defense:
PANELISTS:

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 1 Panelist 2

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 3 Panelist 4
____________________________
Printed Name and Signature
Research Adviser
 ORAL DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM
Name of Researchers: Hipolito, Philmark
Mestica, Althea Faye
Laguer, Janna
Deguidoy, Gerlie
Racil, Kris
Bedico, Henry
Tricano, Baltazar
Research Title: “ Level of awareness and practice of public school core values of DepEd among
Senior High School Students of Amungan National High School for the School Year 2022-2023”
Legend : Five point rating Scale
ITEM EVALUATION WEIGHT MARKS ACTUAL
CRITERIA (A) (B) MARKS
(1-5 rating scale) (B) X (B) =
(C)/5
1 Introduction 20
(background
information, problem
statement/research and
questions,
aim/objectives, and
significance of the
study)
2 Literature Review 25
(Relevant studies,
reasonable review
parameter, recent
development, assessed
research results,
organized issues)
3 Research Methodology 25
(Description of research
design, methodology,
and variables)
4 Feasibility Study and 20
Final Results
(in terms of scope,
delimitation, time,
resources, and
practicality,
observation-statictical
analysis, graphs,
tables,discussions, and
conclusions)
5 Overall Performance 10
(Presentation skills,
demonstration of
confidence during Q and
A session spontaneity)
Total
Outstanding – 5 Very Satisfactory – 4 Satisfactory – 3 Fair – 2 Needs Improvement – 1
FINAL DECISION:
Directions : Put a check (/) on the appropriate box.

 Outstanding – Contents of the study presented and elucidated with clarity and conviction.

 Very Satisfactory – Research study composed of relevant information to meet solution to its target
problem.

 Satisfactory – With minor amendments/ comments to improve the objectives, problem statement,
work plan of research etc.

 Unatisfactory – With less than 50 points mark

 Needs improvement – Failure to provide clear explanation of the contents of the study. Corrections
on every chapter needed.

COMMENTS/SUGGESTION/COMMENDATION:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of the Researchers: Date of Defense:
PANELISTS:

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 1 Panelist 2

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 3 Panelist 4
____________________________
Printed Name and Signature
Research Adviser
 ORAL DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM
Name of Researchers: Esposo, Yiessha Judea
Esquillo, Nathalia
Garais, Kristel
Santos, Catlyn
Ondajon, Katleen
Sabellena, Raylen
Caday, John Carlo
Research Title: “Impact of procrastination to the academic performance among senior high school
students of Amungan National High School School Year 2022-2023”
Legend : Five point rating Scale
ITEM EVALUATION WEIGHT MARKS ACTUAL
CRITERIA (A) (B) MARKS
(1-5 rating scale) (C) X (B) =
(C)/5
1 Introduction 20
(background
information, problem
statement/research and
questions,
aim/objectives, and
significance of the
study)
2 Literature Review 25
(Relevant studies,
reasonable review
parameter, recent
development, assessed
research results,
organized issues)
3 Research Methodology 25
(Description of research
design, methodology,
and variables)
4 Feasibility Study and 20
Final Results
(in terms of scope,
delimitation, time,
resources, and
practicality,
observation-statictical
analysis, graphs,
tables,discussions, and
conclusions)
5 Overall Performance 10
(Presentation skills,
demonstration of
confidence during Q and
A session spontaneity)
Total
Outstanding – 5 Very Satisfactory – 4 Satisfactory – 3 Fair – 2 Needs Improvement – 1
FINAL DECISION:
Directions : Put a check (/) on the appropriate box.

 Outstanding – Contents of the study presented and elucidated with clarity and conviction.

 Very Satisfactory – Research study composed of relevant information to meet solution to its target
problem.

 Satisfactory – With minor amendments/ comments to improve the objectives, problem statement,
work plan of research etc.

 Unatisfactory – With less than 50 points mark

 Needs improvement – Failure to provide clear explanation of the contents of the study. Corrections
on every chapter needed.

COMMENTS/SUGGESTION/COMMENDATION:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of the Researchers: Date of Defense:
PANELISTS:

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 1 Panelist 2

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 3 Panelist 4
____________________________
Printed Name and Signature
Research Adviser
 ORAL DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM
Name of Researchers: Diaz, Rhodora
Ronquillo, Blessy
Esquillo, Princess
Odero, Jessica
Garcia, Loris

Research Title: “Students Perception of English Language as a Medium of Instruction in the SHS
Academic Track of Amungan National High School during the S.Y. 2022-2023”
Legend : Five point rating Scale

ITEM EVALUATION WEIGHT MARKS ACTUAL

CRITERIA (A) (B) MARKS
(1-5 rating scale) (D) X (B) =
(C)/5
1 Introduction 20
(background
information, problem
statement/research and
questions,
aim/objectives, and
significance of the
study)
2 Literature Review 25
(Relevant studies,
reasonable review
parameter, recent
development, assessed
research results,
organized issues)
3 Research Methodology 25
(Description of research
design, methodology,
and variables)
4 Feasibility Study and 20
Final Results
(in terms of scope,
delimitation, time,
resources, and
practicality,
observation-statictical
analysis, graphs,
tables,discussions, and
conclusions)
5 Overall Performance 10
(Presentation skills,
demonstration of
confidence during Q and
A session spontaneity)
Total
Outstanding – 5 Very Satisfactory – 4 Satisfactory – 3 Fair – 2 Needs Improvement – 1
FINAL DECISION:
Directions : Put a check (/) on the appropriate box.

 Outstanding – Contents of the study presented and elucidated with clarity and conviction.

 Very Satisfactory – Research study composed of relevant information to meet solution to its target
problem.

 Satisfactory – With minor amendments/ comments to improve the objectives, problem statement,
work plan of research etc.

 Unatisfactory – With less than 50 points mark

 Needs improvement – Failure to provide clear explanation of the contents of the study. Corrections
on every chapter needed.

COMMENTS/SUGGESTION/COMMENDATION:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of the Researchers: Date of Defense:
PANELISTS:

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 1 Panelist 2

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 3 Panelist 4
____________________________
Printed Name and Signature
Research Adviser
 ORAL DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM
Name of Researchers: Diaz, Rhodora
Ronquillo, Blessy
Esquillo, Princess
Odero, Jessica
Garcia, Loris

Research Title: “Students Perception of English Language as a Medium of Instruction in the SHS
Academic Track of Amungan National High School during the S.Y. 2022-2023”
Legend : Five point rating Scale

ITEM EVALUATION WEIGHT MARKS ACTUAL

CRITERIA (A) (B) MARKS
(1-5 rating scale) (E) X (B) =
(C)/5
1 Introduction 20
(background
information, problem
statement/research and
questions,
aim/objectives, and
significance of the
study)
2 Literature Review 25
(Relevant studies,
reasonable review
parameter, recent
development, assessed
research results,
organized issues)
3 Research Methodology 25
(Description of research
design, methodology,
and variables)
4 Feasibility Study and 20
Final Results
(in terms of scope,
delimitation, time,
resources, and
practicality,
observation-statictical
analysis, graphs,
tables,discussions, and
conclusions)
5 Overall Performance 10
(Presentation skills,
demonstration of
confidence during Q and
A session spontaneity)
Total
Outstanding – 5 Very Satisfactory – 4 Satisfactory – 3 Fair – 2 Needs Improvement – 1
FINAL DECISION:
Directions: Put a check (/) on the appropriate box.

 Outstanding – Contents of the study presented and elucidated with clarity and conviction.

 Very Satisfactory – Research study composed of relevant information to meet solution to its target
problem.

 Satisfactory – With minor amendments/ comments to improve the objectives, problem statement,
work plan of research etc.

 Unatisfactory – With less than 50 points mark

 Needs improvement – Failure to provide clear explanation of the contents of the study. Corrections
on every chapter needed.

COMMENTS/SUGGESTION/COMMENDATION:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of the Researchers: Date of Defense:
PANELISTS:

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 1 Panelist 2

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 3 Panelist 4
____________________________
Printed Name and Signature
Research Adviser
 ORAL DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM
Name of Researchers: Pura, Mae Angelou
Alvarado, Ryzza Mae
Manila, Ruche Vest
Orianza, May
Gotoman, Renzo
Umiten, Den Ivan

Research Title: “Assessing the Level of Awareness in School Policies, Rules and Regulations among
Senior High School Students of Amungan National High School SY 2022-2023”
Legend : Five point rating Scale

ITEM EVALUATION WEIGHT MARKS ACTUAL

CRITERIA (A) (B) MARKS
(1-5 rating scale) (F) X (B) =
(C)/5
1 Introduction 20
(background
information, problem
statement/research and
questions,
aim/objectives, and
significance of the
study)
2 Literature Review 25
(Relevant studies,
reasonable review
parameter, recent
development, assessed
research results,
organized issues)
3 Research Methodology 25
(Description of research
design, methodology,
and variables)
4 Feasibility Study and 20
Final Results
(in terms of scope,
delimitation, time,
resources, and
practicality,
observation-statictical
analysis, graphs,
tables,discussions, and
conclusions)
5 Overall Performance 10
(Presentation skills,
demonstration of
confidence during Q and
A session spontaneity)
Total
Outstanding – 5 Very Satisfactory – 4 Satisfactory – 3 Fair – 2 Needs Improvement – 1
FINAL DECISION:
Directions: Put a check (/) on the appropriate box.

 Outstanding – Contents of the study presented and elucidated with clarity and conviction.

 Very Satisfactory – Research study composed of relevant information to meet solution to its target
problem.

 Satisfactory – With minor amendments/ comments to improve the objectives, problem statement,
work plan of research etc.

 Unatisfactory – With less than 50 points mark

 Needs improvement – Failure to provide clear explanation of the contents of the study. Corrections
on every chapter needed.

COMMENTS/SUGGESTION/COMMENDATION:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of the Researchers: Date of Defense:
PANELISTS:

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 1 Panelist 2

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 3 Panelist 4
____________________________
Printed Name and Signature
Research Adviser
 ORAL DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM
Name of Researchers: Cabiles, Tricia
Umiten, Denise Bea
Ondoa, Teodora
Mesiano, Joanna Erika
Sanchez, Dariane
Limuardo, Richard

Research Title: “Reading Literacy among the Grade 11 Student in Amungan National High School”
Legend : Five point rating Scale

ITEM EVALUATION WEIGHT MARKS ACTUAL

CRITERIA (A) (B) MARKS
(1-5 rating scale) (G) X (B) =
(C)/5
1 Introduction 20
(background
information, problem
statement/research and
questions,
aim/objectives, and
significance of the
study)
2 Literature Review 25
(Relevant studies,
reasonable review
parameter, recent
development, assessed
research results,
organized issues)
3 Research Methodology 25
(Description of research
design, methodology,
and variables)
4 Feasibility Study and 20
Final Results
(in terms of scope,
delimitation, time,
resources, and
practicality,
observation-statictical
analysis, graphs,
tables,discussions, and
conclusions)
5 Overall Performance 10
(Presentation skills,
demonstration of
confidence during Q and
A session spontaneity)
Total
Outstanding – 5 Very Satisfactory – 4 Satisfactory – 3 Fair – 2 Needs Improvement – 1
FINAL DECISION:
Directions: Put a check (/) on the appropriate box.

 Outstanding – Contents of the study presented and elucidated with clarity and conviction.

 Very Satisfactory – Research study composed of relevant information to meet solution to its target
problem.

 Satisfactory – With minor amendments/ comments to improve the objectives, problem statement,
work plan of research etc.

 Unatisfactory – With less than 50 points mark

 Needs improvement – Failure to provide clear explanation of the contents of the study. Corrections
on every chapter needed.

COMMENTS/SUGGESTION/COMMENDATION:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of the Researchers: Date of Defense:
PANELISTS:

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 1 Panelist 2

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 3 Panelist 4
____________________________
Printed Name and Signature
Research Adviser
 ORAL DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM
Name of Researchers: Dalusong, Gabriel
Cezar, Kyla Marie
Reglos, Edrick Joy
Fortin, Ernalyn
Piano, Carl Ernest
Lara, Julie Ann

Research Title: “Influence of original Pilipino music in the patriotic spirit of post millennial among
the students of Amungan National High School SY 2022-2023”
Legend : Five point rating Scale

ITEM EVALUATION WEIGHT MARKS ACTUAL

CRITERIA (A) (B) MARKS
(1-5 rating scale) (H) X (B) =
(C)/5
1 Introduction 20
(background
information, problem
statement/research and
questions,
aim/objectives, and
significance of the
study)
2 Literature Review 25
(Relevant studies,
reasonable review
parameter, recent
development, assessed
research results,
organized issues)
3 Research Methodology 25
(Description of research
design, methodology,
and variables)
4 Feasibility Study and 20
Final Results
(in terms of scope,
delimitation, time,
resources, and
practicality,
observation-statictical
analysis, graphs,
tables,discussions, and
conclusions)
5 Overall Performance 10
(Presentation skills,
demonstration of
confidence during Q and
A session spontaneity)
Total
Outstanding – 5 Very Satisfactory – 4 Satisfactory – 3 Fair – 2 Needs Improvement – 1
FINAL DECISION:
Directions: Put a check (/) on the appropriate box.

 Outstanding – Contents of the study presented and elucidated with clarity and conviction.

 Very Satisfactory – Research study composed of relevant information to meet solution to its target
problem.

 Satisfactory – With minor amendments/ comments to improve the objectives, problem statement,
work plan of research etc.

 Unatisfactory – With less than 50 points mark

 Needs improvement – Failure to provide clear explanation of the contents of the study. Corrections
on every chapter needed.

COMMENTS/SUGGESTION/COMMENDATION:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of the Researchers: Date of Defense:
PANELISTS:

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 1 Panelist 2

____________________________ __________________________
Printed Name and Signature Printed Name and Signature
Panelist 3 Panelist 4
____________________________
Printed Name and Signature
Research Adviser