|dc.description.abstract||This investigation focused on the extent of research practice, and of the utilization and dissemination of research output and the factors associated with research practice among graduate students and faculty. The study used a one-shot survey through questionnaires involving 336 masters and doctoral students, and 84 faculty members from the four universities in Iloilo City. Data were analyzed using frequency and percentage distributions to describe the major variables. For relational analysis, the Pearson product moment coefficient of correlation and partial r were used to determine the nature and degree of relationship of interval variables and research practice. Chi-square was used to determine the relationship between nominal and ordinal variables and research practice. Z-test was used to find out the variations in research practice due to sex, civil status and educational level. To determine which of the factors were significant predictors of research practice, the multiple regression analysis was used.
Most of the student respondents were females with mean age of 32.84 years. Most of the students had already completed about half of the requirements of the degree programs they were pursuing. Majority were employed with more than half having employment workload between 31-40 hours per week.
Two-thirds of the faculty respondents were masters degree holders. More than half were females and married. The mean age of the teachers was 47.50 years; mean teaching load was 10.96 units, while their mean employment workload was 19.29 hours per week. The majority had jobs other than teaching.
One-third of the student respondents had undergone training in research. The students were trained in the preparation of research proposal, data collection, data analysis and report writing under the short-term training which lasted a few days; the long-term training required students to enroll in for a term/semester in classes in methods of research and statistics. Only one-third of the student respondents who had research training had average and high level of research training. This fact indicates that a small part of the graduate students had acquired the necessary skills to enable them to participate in the actual conduct of research. Almost three-fourths of the teachers had received additional research training. The most attended type of training by the teachers was on the preparation of research proposal.
Twelve percent of the student respondents were involved in research from 1995- 1998 There were 57 studies conducted by 40 student researchers; more than half of these had local coverage. Proportionately higher research practice was reported among the doctoral students, the single, male and unemployed student researchers. Time constraint and the lack of research skills were two primary reasons given by student respondents for their failure to practice research. Participation in research was mostly as principal investigator and data gatherer.
The extent of research practice was measured using the scores assigned to the type of participation and coverage. The highest score was 59; the lowest was 5. A great majority of the student researchers scored low (5-19 points) in research practice. On the whole, graduate students in Iloilo City had a low extent of research practice.
Institutional support in the form of funding and incentives received for the conduct of research was looked into. One-third of the student researchers received financial assistance. "Ranking or promotion" points earned, "honorarium" and "travel grant" were the incentives received by the student researchers. The extent of institutional support received by the student researchers was low.
The teachers' extent of research practice was measured using the same procedure in determining the students' extent of research practice. The highest score obtained for research practice was 98 points, while the lowest was 7 points. More than two-thirds of the faculty researchers scored low (7-19 points) in research practice. Like the students, graduate faculty in Iloilo City had a low extent of research practice.
Eighty percent of 107 studies by graduate teachers received funding. The teachers enjoyed incentives such as "ranking/promotion points," "honorarium," "free use of office space," and "free use of office supplies." More than half of the faculty research participants had institutional support. The extent of institutional support for teachers’ research was "average."
The students' had average interest in and favorable attitude towards research practice as revealed by mean interest score of 3.32 and mean attitude score of 3.13. The teachers showed a trend towards "high" interest in and "very favorable" attitude towards research practice as indicated by mean interest score of 3.69 and attitude mean score of 3.94.
Institutional support age and educational level were significantly correlated with the students' research practice. Institutional support and attitude were significantly correlated with the teachers' research practice. Institutional support was also found to be a significant predictor of research practice.
Three-quarters of the student respondents indicated the use of research data in graduate school particularly in writing term papers and in-class discussions. Teachers use research data mostly in their lectures and to a lesser extent in syllabi preparation and in deciding on the course content of the subjects they teach. Both students and teachers claimed they use research information to a moderate extent. Graduate students tended to have "average" interest in and favorable attitude towards the use of research information. Teachers indicated very high interest in and very favorable attitude towards research utilization.
The student researchers disseminated their research findings by sharing with colleagues. The mean dissemination score of 1.24 indicates that students' studies had low level of dissemination. On the other hand, teachers used more varied ways of disseminating the results of their studies such as presentation at symposia and training, referral/sharing with colleagues and publication in institution/office papers. The mean dissemination score of 1.53 is indicative of the low extent of dissemination of teachers' researches.
The extent of disseminating others' research findings was "average" among the students and teachers. Sharing with colleagues what they read is the most popular way the students disseminated others' research findings. Teachers impart research information mostly in their lecture.
1. Based on the findings of the study the following conclusions are drawn: 1. The hypothesis that the extent of research practice among the graduate students and faculty is low is not rejected. The results confirm the common observation that students and teachers in graduate schools in Iloilo City have meager participation in research. The study revealed that both teachers and students do not engage in research as much as they are expected. Few graduate students practice research and the average number of research per student researcher was low. Although proportionately more teachers participated in research, the number of research per faculty researcher was also low. These facts indicate a lack of focus on research in graduate schools.
2. The hypothesis that the extent of research utilization among both students and teachers is low is rejected. The extent of research utilization is moderate among the students and teachers, higher than what was expected. However, utilization of research findings is limited to the traditional uses: in writing term papers in the case of students and in the case of the teachers in the preparation of lectures. The scholarly exchange of research-based information in discussions is not a part of the graduate students’ life. Some students expect teachers to require them to share in their classes research information on assigned topics and unless required, they are not impelled to participate in such intellectual pursuits. Graduate schools are wanting of scholarly students and faculty who have the hunger for new knowledge and information.
3. The hypothesis that the extent of research dissemination among students and teachers is low is not rejected. Both students and teachers have low extent of disseminating their research outputs and others' research output.
4. The factors associated with the student's research practice are age, educational level and institutional support. The factors not associated with the students' research practice are civil status, sex, research training, employment workload, interest in and attitude towards research practice.
5. The factors associated with the teachers' practice of research are institutional support and attitude towards research. The factors that are not associated with the teachers' practice of research are age, civil status, sex, educational attainment, employment workload and interest in research practice.
6. The hypothesis that the practice of research varies according to sex, civil status and educational level is rejected. The practice of research among graduate students and teachers did not vary according to sex, civil status and educational level.
7. Only institutional support was found to be a significant predictor of research participation among graduate students and faculty.
Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations are forwarded:
1. The University administrators, especially those of graduate schools, should review the policies and standards of graduate education (MEC Order No. 7, Series 1982 and CITED Memorandum Order No.36 Series of 1998) and strictly comply with the provisions on research. The Commission on Higher Education through the Quality Assessment Team (QAT) should monitor compliance of the said provisions.
2. That graduate school administrators and faculty should address the problem of low extent of research activity through the following:
a. Identify courses in the master's (both thesis and non-thesis programs) and doctoral levels where the conduct of small research may be required. The experience that students get will help to prepare them for the bigger research they will conduct later.
b. Involve students and faculty in collaborative research projects.
c. Emphasize research activity in graduate work, not just a requirement for term papers and lectures, but more importantly as jumping board for class discussions so students will value the scholarly exchange of information.
d. Raise research consciousness of both students and faculty by holding in-school and inter-school research symposia, colloquia, congress, etc. at least once a semester and require the attendance of both faculty and students, at the same time providing the proper mechanism for the utilization and dissemination of research findings.
e. Create a climate conducive to the conduct of research by providing faculty with institutional support in the form of funding and incentives such as reduced teaching load or reduced office hours, Sabbatical leave, recognition/awards etc. that will motivate teachers to participate in research endeavors. Encourage faculty members to engage in research by making research output a condition for promotion in rank and in salary.
3. Graduate schools should:
a. Require students to enroll in the methods of research and statistics classes early in their graduate work so that with the background and skill in research, they can begin to utilize research early in their graduate work and not just for thesis or dissertation writing.
b. Emphasize to graduate school applicants that research is the focal activity of graduate education; that graduate school is a community of scholars and from its ranks will emerge scientists, scholars and leaders in the various fields of specialization. The prospective graduate student should be informed early of the demands of graduate education, so that only students who are intent in pursuing and finishing advanced studies will enroll in the graduate school. An orientation on the goals and objectives of graduate education will be helpful to the students in understanding the meaning of graduate education.
4. Universities should:
a. Upgrade their library facilities by providing computers with Internet connection to facilitate
access to the more recent studies.
b. Link up with agencies for financial assistance in the conduct of research and present research
findings for possible implementation I utilization, where applicable.
5. Commission on Higher Education and FAPE should:
a. Set up a research clearing house similar to ERIC to address the urgent need for a systematic mechanism in the dissemination of research information. The lack of a clearinghouse for a systematic dissemination of research information identified by a study on the State of Art of Educational Research conducted in 1983 by the Ministry of Education has not been addressed. The low extent of disseminating the research findings of student and faculty researchers underscores the need for a mechanism that will effectively diffuse research findings.
b. Conduct seminars to develop a corps of reviewers of thesis/dissertation / research reports who can rewrite technical research reports and state these in lay language more understandable to lay readers as well as graduate school beginners who may be turned off by highly technical research literature. Such rewriting activities will further promote the dissemination and eventually of the utilization of research data by a wider circle of readers.
c. Identify government priority programs and disseminate such information to graduate
schools. Such information may suggest research topics of students and faculty members.
d. Continue the program of providing financial grants to thesis and dissertation writers.
6. Graduate schools should close ranks with the Commission on Higher Education in implementing program thrusts towards quality graduate education and research. Accreditation of graduate schools should be required as a move towards quality graduate education, especially in regard to research activity.
7. Further studies are recommended to:
a. to ascertain the relationship between research activity and interest in and attitude towards research practice, with the use of instruments that can measure interest in and attitude towards research more accurately.
b. conduct similar investigations on a wider scope — regional and I or national and to include the deans of graduate schools among the respondents.
c. conduct similar investigation in which the following variables are more accurately
assessed/measured by stricter instruments or more complete data: training in research, research utilization, employment workload, institutional support, educational level (number of graduate units), instead of comparing masters versus doctoral students.
d. find out the research capability of students and teachers in graduate schools.||en_US