Revisions:

1. No BOLD Letters
2. Left Aligned
3. Paradigm of the Study

1. Profile of the JHS

teachers:
a. age
b. sex
c. highest educational
attainment
d. length of service
e. field of
specialization
Capability
Analysis of Data Enhancement
and Interpretation Program for the
2. Level of teaching Junior High
of data relative to School Teachers
proficiency of the JHS
teachers
sub-problems

3. Level of teaching
proficiency of the JHS
teachers as perceived
by their school heads.

4. Statement of the Problems

Sub-Problems
1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of the
following variables:
a. age; e. field of
b. sex; specialization; and
c. highest educational f. number of hours of
attainment; relevant trainings
d. length of service; attended?
2. What is the level of proficiency of the Junior High School
teachers along the seven Domains of the PPST as perceived by
themselves and their school heads?
a.
content knowledge and pedagogy;
b. learning environment;
 c. diversity of learners;
d. curriculum and planning;
e. assessment and reporting;
f. community linkages and professional encouragement; and
g. personal growth and professional development?

3. Is a there significant difference between the level of

proficiency of the JHS teachers in the seven domains of the
PPST when they are group according to profile variable?
4. Is a there significant difference between the level of
proficiency perceive by the JHS teachers and by their school
heads?
5. What indicators do the teachers perceive by themselves to be
weak at?
6. Based on the results of the study, what capability
enhancement program can be proposed to enhance the
proficiency level of the Junior High School Teachers?
7. How acceptable is the Proposed Capability Enhancement
Program as assessed by the teachers and their school head?

(Note: Sub problem 4 was suggested by the panels since there were data gathered already.)

5. Hypothesis of the Study

The study tested the following hypotheses:
1. There is no significant difference between the level of
proficiency of the JHS Teachers in the seven domains of the
PPST along their profile variables.
2. There is no significant difference between the perception of
the teachers and school heads.
6. Basic Assumptions
The Study is guided by the following assumptions:
1. The JHS teachers would welcome a capability enhancement program.
2. The data supplied by the teachers and the school heads are valid and reliable.

7. Definition of terms.
Please define the following:
a. Weak
b. Low Definitions correspond to the sub-problem 5.
c. Acceptability
8. Chapter 3 Definition corresponds to the sub-problem 7
For the new sub-problem 4, using ANOVA.
9. Chapter 4
Divide into 7 corresponding to the 7 sub problems.
The title should be: “Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data (SAMPLE BELOW)

10. Each item in the profile should have its own table.
11. Format will be
1.Introduction of the table,
2.the table
3. the discussions of the result.

Introduction of the table

 The Table

The discussion of results

12. For table 18: ( Significant difference between the level of proficiency
of the JHS teachers in the seven domains of the PPST when they are
group according to profile variable)include in the discussion that
teachers with masteral and doctoral degree would not need to join
or include in the capability enhancement program because of the
result. (There has to be a discussion on how to address the
result. Please put after table 4.18)
13. For the Proposed Capability Enhancement Program, it should have
the following parts.

a. Title i. Methodology
b. Duration j. Training Matrix
c. Venue *Theme,
d. Source of Fund *Objectives,
e. Participants *Activities,
f. Rationale *Duraton,
g. Program Goals *Timeliness
h. Program Objectives in k. Monitoring and Evaluation
General l. References
14. Chapter 5 Summary Conclusions and Recommendations
Sample

15. Include the Major problem and the sub problems.

16. For the Findings :Findings will have 7 corresponds to the 7 sub-problems
17. Finding 1 corresponds to sub problem 1
18. Finding 2 corresponds to sub problem 2, and so on.
19. :(sample)
The salient findings of the study are as follows:
1. As regards to the demographic profile of the respondents:

20. Conclusions are implications based on the findings. be

21. Recommendation: one paragraph only
 22. The corrections on Mam Flor’s papers also applied to sir Pol’s.

What Do We Need to Know About Culturally Diverse Learners?

Student as diverse learners

TOOLS FOR ASSESSING Diverse Learners

The Millennial Student: A New Generation of Learners

The Learning Style of the Millennial

How to Motivate a Millennial Learner

Specific Teaching Strategies for the Millennial Learners.

The learning Styles of the Millennial

https://www.erasmustrainingcourses.com/integrating-ict-into-teaching-and-training.html

 Community-based activities play a huge role in the learning and skills development of students at
Focus Beyond.  These activities include work-based learning, travel instruction, recreation/leisure
activities, community awareness, and independent living activities.
 References:
Guidelines for Community-Based Instruction (2005). Baltimore County Public Schools
 Perin, D. (2011). Facilitating Student Learning Through Contextualization.
Community College Research Center, Working Paper No. 29: New York, NY Columbia
University.

Mario Guerrero is an assistant professor at the University of Nariño in Colombia and
former adjunct professor at Fordham University.

https://www.signupgenius.com/school/team-building-activities-teachers.cfm