Table 3.

Demographic Profile of Respondents in Terms of

Year Level.
We used one of our statistical treatments which is the
Frequency and Percentage for Table 1-4 to answer the
demographic profiles.
The Frequency is the total number of our respondents from 1st-
year students accounting for 49 with a percentage of 29.52, 2nd-
year students 37 with a percentage of 22.29, 3rd-year students
28 with a percentage of 16.87, and the greatest number of
respondents from the 4th-year students 52 with a percentage of
31.33. With a total of 166 students.
Table 4. Demographic Profile of Respondents in Terms of
Degree Program.
Based on the table we can see that the majority of the total
number of respondents we have are from the BSITTM students
accounting for 114 with a percentage of 68.67. Next is the
BSIHM-HRCO 29 with a percentage of 17.47 and last is the
BSIHM-CIRO 23 with a percentage of 13.86.
Table 5. Mean of the Perception of the Respondents in
Sustainable Tourism When Grouped According to Year
Level
We use the statistical treatment which we called mean to get the
average value for table 5 and also 6.
The highest year level that has the highest mean value in terms
of the importance is the 4th year students. A total of 236.33÷52=
4.54.
Next is in terms of the economic and societal impact, 2nd year
students got the highest mean value wherein a total of
168.60÷37= 4.56. And then 166.00÷37= 4.49.
While the highest mean value of environmental impact is the 1 st
year, a total of 214.80÷49= 4.38. And 2nd-year, a total of
162.20÷37= 4.38 also.
With the overall outcome of each factor, the students despite
their year level strongly agree.
Table 6. Mean of the Perception of the Respondents in
Sustainable Tourism When Grouped According to Course
The highest mean value with 4.59, 4.56, 4.60, and 4.43 in terms
of the importance, economic, societal, and environmental impact
of sustainable tourism, is BSIHM-HRCO students respectively.
In terms of importance, a total of 133.00÷29= 4.59. In terms of
economic, a total of 132.20÷29= 4.56. In terms of societal, a
total of 133.40÷29= 4.60. And last, in terms of environmental, a
total of 128.60÷29= 4.43.
Overall, the students despite their degree program strongly agree
with the following factors.
Table 7. Test of Association between Demographic Profile
and Perception on Sustainable Tourism
With this table, we used 2 statistical treatments, they are
the Chi-Square Test of Association to determine the variables
of gender and degree and Spearman's Rank-Order
Correlation for the variables of age and year level. We do this
test with the assistance of our statistician.
The p-value across all demographic variables is greater than the
significance level of 0.05. Thus, at a 5% level of significance, it
can be concluded that there is no significant relationship
between all considered demographic profile variables and the
students’ perception on sustainable tourism. Therefore, we
accept the null hypothesis and reject the alternative hypothesis.
This may be because most of the students, regardless of age,
gender, year level, and course have a positive perception of
sustainable tourism.
Table 8. Analysis of Variance Between Perception of
Students on Sustainable Tourism
With this table, we use the statistical treatment called ANOVA
or Analysis of Variance. We used it to determine if there is a
significant difference between the perception of the students on
sustainable tourism when grouped according to year level and
degree program. A significance level of 0.05 was used in this
analysis.
The p-values are relatively high, suggesting that at a 5% level of
significance, there is no significant difference in the perception
of the students on sustainable tourism when grouped according
to year level or degree program. Therefore, we accept the null
hypothesis and reject the alternative hypothesis.
This may be because most of the students, regardless of year
level and degree program, have a positive perception of
sustainable tourism.