See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/341413441

RESEARCH CAPABILITIES OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

Article · January 2018

CITATIONS READS
3 18,139

3 authors, including:

Lexie Caja Estacio Alvin Barcelona

University of Asia and the Pacific UST ANGELICUM COLLEGE
1 PUBLICATION   3 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   6 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Alvin Barcelona on 16 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ICCD (International Conference on Community Development), 1 (1), 2018, 370-377 E-ISSN 2622-5611

RESEARCH CAPABILITIES OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

Lexie C. Estacio1*, Alvin B. Barcelona2, Ivy P. Mejia3
1
Instructor. School of Education and Human Development. University of Asia and the Pacific, 2Head,
Mathematics Department, UST Angelicum College, 3Science Education Specialist,
National Institute for Science and Mathematics Education Development. University of the Philippines

Abstract - The purpose of the study was to describe the level of research capabilities of students in the
senior high school department of a local university. Differences in the capabilities of students when
grouped according to gender were also investigated. In addition, in-depth understanding of their
perceived research capability levels was explored. A sequential explanatory mixed-method approach
was employed, with 46 Grade 12 students being chosen as respondents through convenience sampling.
The study started from a quantitative exploration of the students’ conceptual understanding of the four
components of research (the nature of inquiry, understanding of literature and studies, research method,
and interpreting results). The Research Achievement Test (RAT) developed prior to this study was used
to quantitatively describe the students’ research competencies. Observations on their test performances
were used to develop the interview component of the test. Results showed that overall, the students’
research capabilities were only at the average level. Male and female students were comparable in the
ability to conduct research. Opportunities for quantitative instruction were lacking in the context of the
participants. The implications for research instruction are discussed in the paper.

Keywords: research capabilities, research literacy, K12, senior high school

INTRODUCTION

K12 in the Philippines

The promulgation of Republic Act No. 10533, otherwise known as the Enhanced Basic Education
Act of 2013, increased the number of years for basic education in the Philippines. The previous duration
of 10 years of basic education was expanded to 13 years to accommodate Kindergarten and Grades 11
and 12. The expanded period has been popularly referred to in the country as K12.The shift to this new
educational system necessarily led to the design of a curriculum relevant to the ever fast-paced modern
world (K12 Philippines, 2015a). K12 was fully implemented beginning school year 2016-2017.
Students of Grades 11 and 12, which together form what is more aptly called senior high school
(SHS), go through a core curriculum under a track of their choice. Four career tracks are offered:
1. Academic
a. ABM (Accountancy, Business, and Management)
b. STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)
c. HUMMS (Humanities and Social Science)
d. General Academic
2. Arts and Design
3. Sports
4. Technical-Vocational-Livelihood
The core curriculum is complemented afterwards with applied and specialized subjects specific
to the chosen track (K12 Philippines, 2015b).
Practical Research is one of the new subjects in the enhanced basic education curriculum. It is an
applied track subject that is twofold, covering quantitative and qualitative research consecutively. In
this subject, students are expected to learn about qualitative and quantitative research designs and their
application in the actual conduct of a research. SHS students carry out a research capstone project as a
culminating requirement for their respective tracks. Practical Research aims to develop research literacy
among SHS students, while recognizing that there may be other possible intervening factors in the
delivery of the subject (teacher competency, availability of learning resources, etc.).

370
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
The significance of undertaking research and being involved in the research process cannot be
underestimated especially in this global era. Powell (2016) defined “research literacy” as “the capacity
to obtain, process and understand basic information needed to make informed decisions about research
participation” (p. 3, italics in the original). Very few will contest the relevance of promoting research
literacy in educational institutions since it helps individuals understand this complex and ever-changing
world.
Research literacy is higher and research participation is more evident among undergraduate and
graduate students. This situation can be mainly attributed to the undertaking of research projects at the
bachelor’s and master’s levels as a major academic requirement and as proof of one’s scholarship.
Nevertheless, students in basic education are also being given learning exposure to research. McKee
(2003) pointed out three reasons for conducting research: it (1) increases knowledge and understanding,
(2) provides evidence for decision- and policy-making, (3) advances professional practice and generates
new ideas that can lead to service innovation and improvement.
It is for this reason that teaching students how to conduct research is part of the curriculum in the
basic education program. Students need research skills as outlined by the Common Core State Standards
(CCSS) in the case of United States. These research skills will prepare students for college, workforce
training, and life in technological society. As students undertake research projects, they improve their
ability to gather, understand, evaluate, synthesize, and summarize information. More importantly,
students can conduct original research to answer questions, analyze related literature, and solve
problems (CCSS, 2013).
Research Capabilities of SHS Students in the Philippines
The Philippine educational system recognizes the importance of acquiring research knowledge
and skills in the precollege years. A clear proof of this recognition may be seen in the inclusion of
Practical Research as a subject in the new K12 curriculum.
Our study involved SHS students in a private, not-for-profit higher education institution (which
we will disguise and refer to in this paper as ABC University or ABCU) in Metro Manila. In 2016, the
DepEd granted ABCU the permit to operate a SHS. ABCU thus joined the ranks of many universities
in the country delivering research courses to their SHS students.
In ABCU’s case, however, the SHS courses form part of an academic program that integrates the
SHS years into a plan of studies that has strong liberal education roots and that seamlessly leads to
undergraduate and graduate degrees. This innovative linkage between SHS and university-level
education made the research course offered by ABCU to its Grade 12 students a very interesting case
to look into.
We considered it worthwhile to see if the students’ are developing research skills that can prepare
them for the university-level components of the integrated plan of studies. We also sought to gather the
perceptions of the SHS students and their school dean regarding the students’ research experiences.
Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework that guided our study.

METHOD

Research Design
The study used mixed-method research. The design is sequential, which is indicated by the
procedural notation “Quan -->Qual. ”Quantitative data were first collected, followed by the gathering
of qualitative data. The results of the quantitative method were intended to inform the modifications, if
there would be any, in the predetermined qualitative method.

Participants
There are three sections of Grade 12 students in ABC University. We (the researchers) were
given permission to administer the Research Achievement Test (RAT) to two sections. A total of46
students (31 females and 15 males), equivalent to 51% of the total population of Grade 12 students
enrolled in the research writing course, participated in the study. The participants were all the Grade 12
students who were present in class at the time the RAT was administered. They were all under the

371
Humanities and Social Science (HUMMS) track. Whenwe conducted the study, the students had already
learned the steps in doing research and were about to begin writing their final paper requirement. The
same batch of SHS students completed the course Statistics and Probability in school year 2016-2017
when they were in Grade 11. The course covered the introduction to inferential statistics and data
analysis.

Research Components/ Dimensions

a. Conceptualizing research problems
b. Reviewing and synthesizing RRL
c. Research methods
d. Communicating of results

Perceptions of the
Research Students’ Research
Capabilities
Achievement Test a. By students
b. By the Dean

Research Capabilities
of SHS Students

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

The Dean of the college that oversees the SHS also participated in the study by giving insights
on the conduct of the research course, the students’ performance in the course, and the plans for the
improvement of the course.

Measures
Quantitative instrument
A Research Achievement Test (RAT) developed under the K to 12 Research Curriculum was
administered to Grade 12 SHS students. The test touches on four factors: the nature of the research
problem, review of related literature, research method, and interpreting the results of the study (see
Appendix A).

Qualitative instruments
The Research Capability Interview Questionnaire (RCIQ) was used to validate the students’
performance on the test (see Appendix B). The questions were anchored on the four dimensions of the
RAT. The questionnaire was also used to find out the students’ perception of their research capability.
Another set of questions was sent to the Dean of the college to gather more insights about the students’
research capability.

Data Collection
Three sets of data were gathered in the study. The first was the quantitative data set obtained from
the RAT. The second and third sets, consisting of qualitative data, were drawn from the interviews with
the SHS students and their Dean.
To collect the data, our research team secured permission from the Dean to administer the RAT
among the Grade 12 students and afterwards interview six students and the Dean herself. The
administration of the RAT to two sections was arranged directly with the course instructor. After
analyzing the results of RAT and preparing the RCIQ, our team requested the course instructor to allow

372
six students (three boys and three girls) to be excused from class for one-on-one interviews. The RCIQ
for the teacher was administered instead to the Dean due to the former’s unavailability.
The data collection procedure employed in the study is illustrated in Figure 2.

Data Analysis
Checking of assumptions
The results of the RAT and the grades of students in the research course were subjected to
outliers, linear relationship, test for normality, and homoscedasticity.

Figure 2. Data Collection Procedure for an Exploratory Sequential Mixed-Method on Research Capabilities of
Grade 12 SHS Students

Quantitative data analysis

To analyze the results of RAT, descriptive statistics and proficiency scores according to RAT
levels were used.To determinewhether there was a difference in the research capabilities of the students
when grouped according to sex, a t-test for independent means was conducted.

Qualitative data analysis

To obtain valid and rich data, athree-stage procedure—capta collection from interviews with
students and teachers, member checking, and data analysis—was carried out. For the capta stage, our
teaminterviewed six students using the guide questions from the RCIQ. The questions from the RCIQ
were already constructed but were later on modified based on the results of the RAT. The responses of
students were analyzed. The students’ interview responses likewise informed the modifications made
in the interview questionnaire for the Dean. The students’ responses were recorded and transcribed with
their permission.
A synthesis of each of the participant’s responses was made and shared with the participantsafter
each interview session. This step served as the step of member checking in a qualitative study.
Itvalidated the researchers’understanding of the research capabilities of the participants.
The transcribed responses were subjected to content analysis and Grounded Theory. In content
analysis, the texts are coded. A code is a unit of analysis that serves as a label for texts being studied.
Open coding was first performed. The coding units were then clustered together to form the contextual
units. Related contextual units were grouped together to form the themes. The frequency of themes in
the transcripts was also identified.

373
RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Level of Research Capabilities of SHS Students

The performance of the SHS students as a class is shown in Table 1. The positive skewness for
the nature of inquiry (0.08) and method (0.82) indicates that the students had difficulty in these
components of research. The negative skewness for knowledge of the literature of interest (-0.28) and
interpretation of results (-0.50) show that students were capable of handling these components.

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of the SHS Students’ Capabilities in the Four Components of Research (n=46)
Components Mean SD Skew. Kurtosis Min Max
Nature 5.89 1.58 0.08 0.12 3 10
Literature 3.30 1.17 -0.28 -0.52 1 5
Method 8.76 2.98 0.82 3.85 2 20
Interpretation 6.46 2.08 -0.50 -0.66 3 10
Overall 24.80 5.54 -0.43 0.92 9 38

The details of the performance of the students per component and as a whole were classified into
five: superior(Score + 2SD and above), above average( Score + 1SD to Score +2SD), average(Score -
1SD to Score +1SD), below average ( Score - 1SD to Score -2SD), and low/poor ( Score - 2SD and
below).
Table 2 shows the distribution of performance classifications in the test. More than half of the
students were at the above average level for the nature of inquiry (f = 24, 52%). Close to half were at
the average level for the literature part (f = 22, 48%). For the research method component, 30% were at
the above average level (f = 14, 30%) and another 30% at the average level (f = 14, 30%). Close to half
were at the superior level for the interpretation of results part (f = 21, 46%). Overall, the research
capability of the students wasat the average level (f=26, 57%).

Table 2. Distribution of Level of Research Capabilities of SHS Students (n=46)

Above Below
Superior Average Low/Poor
Components Average Average
% f % f % F % Total

Nature 52 7 15 9 20 0 0 100%
3 4
Literature 26 22 48 4 9 8 17 100%
7 2
Method 30 14 30 4 9 4 9 100%
0 2 4
Interpretation 20 8 17 3 7 5 11 100%
1 6
Overall 26 26 57 6 13 1 2 100%
2

Additional observations of the performance of students in each component were done. Focusing
on items with low p indexes, the following qualitative judgments were made: For the nature of inquiry,
the students could not identify the appropriate scope and delimitation of a study. For the knowledge of
literature, the students had difficulty selecting the required hypotheses, as well as giving credits to
primary sources. Among the four components of research capabilities, the students had the lowest
performance on items addressing quantitative research methods. Specifically, they had difficulty with
the research procedure, identifying a population and selecting a sample, detecting sampling bias, doing
statistical analysis, and interpreting the data in a form of a chart. These difficulties were used to
formulate questions for further investigation. The results are discussed in a later section.

374
Gender-Related Differences in the Research Capabilities of the Students
Table 3 shows that there were no significant differences between the male and female students
in all the four research components, as well as in the overall research capability as measured by the
RAT.
Table 3. Independent t-test on Research Capabilities of Male and Female SHS Students
(Male=15, Female = 31)

Research Aspects Group Mean SD t-test Sig. (2-tailed)

Male 5.33 1.77

Nature of Inquiry 1.01 .32
Female 6.06 1.48
Knowledge of Male 3.27 1.23
0.15 .88
Literature
Female 3.22 1.17
Male 8.86 3.91
Research Method 0.14 .89
Female 8.71 2.48
Male 6.33 2.35
Interpreting results 1.09 .29
Female 7.09 1.92

The Students’ Perception of Their Research Capability

The students’ interview responses validated the results of theRAT. Table 4 shows the comparison
between the quantitative (RAT) and qualitative (interview responses) data gathered, categorized
according to the four major research components.

Table 4. Summary of Quantitative and Qualitative Data Gathered

Quantitative (RAT Results) Qualitative (One-on-One Interviews)
Nature of Research
Basis for Scope and Delimitation are the
Cannot identify the scope and
following: Personal Resources and
delimitation
Availability, Context, and Design of Research
Review of Related Literature
No clear idea of how to formulate
Difficulty in formulating hypothesis
hypothesis
Difficulty in giving credits to primary
Acknowledgment, Citation Styles, Time-
sources
consuming (if done manually)
Research Methods
Low in qualitative research skills Research Methods is based on personal
specifically on the following: constraints
Procedure, Data analysis, and Data Knowledge of Doing Market Research
presentation only
No mastery in quantitative research Confident in doing research (Chapters 1 to
design 5 as steps in Doing Qualitative Research)
Not familiar with the difference Generally low knowledge of Sampling
between sample and population Designs
Cannot detect bias in sampling
Research Results
Data Representation (Charts and Graphs)
Personal Insights
Cannot interpret frequency distribution
Creating Patterns
Reference to Research (RRL)

375
 For the nature of research, review of related literature, and research results, the six students who
were interviewed claimed that they did not have difficulties in these areas. However, their inaccurate
responses to the questions posed during the interviews showed that the students were not adept in these
areas as supported by the results of RAT. For the question “What are the considerations in identifying
the scope and delimitation of a study?” the participants ‘answers referred to their personal limitations
and capabilities (i.e., time, resources), rather than to the study or research itself. With regard to citing
sources, all six students said that they did not have difficulty in this task, giving the reason that online
resources that check citations are available. However, the RAT results show otherwise. Three out of the
six interviewees said that they did not know how to formulate hypotheses. The other three just described
the characteristics of a hypothesis but not the actual steps in formulating it. Hence, the interview results
showed that they did not have a clear idea of how to formulate hypotheses. Sampling was another topic
in which the students had difficulty, as indicated by the RAT results. This was validated during the
interviews when the students found it difficult to answer the question “How do you avoid biases in
sampling?” The interviews corroborated the results of the RAT.
At the same time, the students interviewed admitted that they lacked the knowledge and skills in
conducting quantitative research. Only two out of the six interviewees demonstrated some knowledge
about quantitative research designs. Moreover, the two attributed their knowledge to their having
studied in science high schools and not to their learning about it in their SHS research course. The other
interviewees explicitly said that they were not familiar with conducting quantitative studies. The
students described themselves as more confident in and more capable of conducting qualitative than
quantitative research. This description validated the results of the RAT and the interviews, which
indicated that the students’ lack of knowledge and skills in quantitative research made them prefer doing
qualitative studies.

The Dean’s Perception of the Students’ Research Capability

The RAT results were shown to the college Dean to find out the possible reasons for the students
‘low scores in some areas and topics. The Dean cited these reasons cited :
1. The areas or topics where the students scored low were not covered in the current research course
(i.e., qualitative research designs, sampling methods, collection and analysis of qualitative data).
2. The main objective of the research course that the Grade 12 students were taking (at the time of the
study) is the development of basic research skills only (i.e., choosing a research topic, planning and
managing a research project, finding and evaluating sources, and using the MLA and APA styles of
citation and documentation).
3. The college prioritizes quality over quantity—i.e., cover a few topics but with mastery, rather than
cover a lot of content without learning.
4. A more specialized research course will be offered when the students take their college courses. It
would be best if the students would stay in the program after completing SHS because the
curriculum, together with the schedule of courses, had been designed as formative.
5. The assumption that guided the college in the design of the research course syllabus was that the
students did not have any background on research. Hence, the course started with the basics of doing
research. Since the RAT was based on the research course syllabus prescribed by the Department of
Education, the test items did not correspond to what was discussed in the research course.
To complete the research knowledge and skills that the college hopes to develop among the Grade
12 students, a course titled Applied Integrated Studies (AIS) will be the next research subject that the
students will take. According to the Dean, the course will teach the students how to do action research
in the schools adopted by ABC University. Hence, AIS will serve two purposes: academic learning and,
at the same time, social outreach for the students.
As regards the qualifications of the research course instructor, it was observed that the college
prefers to hire instructors who hold master’s degrees. There is no prescription for either the area of
specialization or the number of years of teaching experience. The priority given to hiring master’s
degree holders is based on the CHED policy that instructors who teach at higher education institutions
should have at least a master’s degree. Since the SHS is lodged in a University program, it has become
a practice that even those who handle subjects in Grades 11 and 12 should at least be master’s degree
holders. In the case of the classes where the RAT was administered, the course instructor is a master’s
degree holder in Humanities, with a year of teaching experience.

376
 CONCLUSION

Our study looked into the SHS students’ research capabilities, as well as the perceptions of both
the SHS students and the college Dean regarding the students’ research experiences. Given the unique
features of theSHS program of ABC University, it was worthwhile to examine if the research course
that the University delivers prepare its SHS students for the next phases of the integrated program.
Our findingsindicate that overall, the SHS students had average capability in the conduct of
research. We found no significant difference between the male and female students in relation to their
capability to deal with the four aspects of research (nature of research, review of related literature,
research methods, and research results). Furthermore, the students see themselves as being more capable
of undertaking qualitative, rather than, quantitative research. The college Dean emphasized that the
research subjects that the students take in SHS do not cover some of the areas and topics that comprise
the RAT. The focus of the SHS research subjects is to teach the basics of research, based on the
assumption that the students have zero research knowledge and skills (which is why they are taught
basic research). Based on the findings, the following are recommended:
1. A balance of quantitative and qualitative instruction in the research program is suggested to
enable the students to acquire skills in these two types of research.
2. Benchmarking the school’s research curricula with those of other SHSs is recommended to
ensure that the basic concepts and skills are on a parwith those of students in other schools.

Limitations of the Study

In conducting our study, our research team acknowledges the shortcomings, influences, and
conditions that we were not able to control and that might have had an impact on the research processes
that we followed and the results that we obtained.
The first limitation of our study was the fact that only one track was sampled to describe the
research capabilities of the students. The results would have been more representative and rigorous if
all the tracks were sampled. We also acknowledge the issue of sample inadequacy that might have had
an impact on the generalizability of the results. Moreover, the study would have been more defensible
if the participants included students from both public and private schools.
We likewise acknowledge another omission: our not having gathered the teachers’ perceptions
of the research capabilities of the students. These perceptions could have helped us draw a fuller
description of the research capabilities of the SHS students who participated in our study.

REFERENCES

Barranoik, L. (2001). Research Success with Senior High School Students. School libraries Worldwide
California Common Core Standards. (2013). English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social
Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects
K12 Philippines. (2015a). How DepEd prepares for the K to 12 program (infographic). Retrieved from
http://k12philippines.com/how-deped-prepares-for-the-k-to-12-program-infographic/.
K12 Philippines. (2015b). Philippines’ K12 program: Four senior high career tracks. Retrieved from
http://k12philippines.com/philippines-k12-program-four-senior-high-career-tracks/.
McKee, B. (2003).Why do we need research? CILIP Umbrella 2003 Conference. Retrieved from
https://lirgjournal.org.uk/index.php/lir/article/viewFile/160/207.
Powell, L. R. (2016). Conceptualizing, understanding, and assessing research literacy in a diverse
population: A dissertation. University of Massachusetts Medical School. Retrieved from
https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1821&context=gsbs_diss.

377

View publication stats