Sunteți pe pagina 1din 39

Running Head: Level of Awareness on Disaster Preparedness i

A Comparative Study on the Level of Awareness on Earthquake Preparedness of the

Teachers and Grade 11 Students of the Sisters of Mary School-Boystown Inc.

Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu

School Year 2018-2019

A Research Submitted in Partial Fulfillment the for the

requirement of Practical Research 2 Subject

Researchers:

Mr. Russel Ike Cabrido Commented [WU1]:

Mr. Joshua Kim Allen Catedral

Mr. Eumer Nuevo

Mr. Mark Philip Ramos

Mr. Jasper Sarda

Mr. Fel Sinogaya Jr.

Mr. John Vincent C. Valenzona

Sisters of Mary School-Boystown Inc.

March 2019
ii

ABSTRACT

(no indention)
iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This research could not be accomplished without the help of other people. The researchers

now wanted to show their deepest gratitude and appreciation to these special people:

 Sr. Eva R. Aringo, SM, the school principal, for letting the researchers to conduct to the

Grade 11 students and teachers and giving us permit to excuse them during their study time

for students and vacant time for teachers.

 Grade 11 Students, one of the respondents, for giving their time answering the given

questionnaires and cooperating with the researchers in fulfilling the needed data for their

study.

 Teachers, one of the respondents, for also spending their time answering the questionnaire

given and cooperating to the researchers in accomplishing the needed data for their study.

 Ms. Clarissa Escasinas, the Practical Research II adviser for guiding us on how to have

valid research and share her peculiar ideas in making the research.

 Library Personnel, for allowing the researchers to use the computers or internet as an

instrument to finish their research.

 Grade 11 Mother Sisters, for allowing the researcher to conduct their research to the

chosen respondents, Grade 11 students.

 Almighty God, for giving the researchers the wisdom and understanding in order for them

to make a valid research.


iv

APPROVAL SHEET

This research entitled “A Comparative Study on the Level of Awareness on Earthquake

Preparedness of the Teachers and Grade 11 Students of the Sisters of Mary School-Boystown Inc.,

Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu during the school year 2018-2019” in the Sisters of Mary School-

Boystown, Inc. School Year 2018-2019, prepared and submitted by Mr.Russel Ike Cabrido,

Mr.Joshua Kim Allen Catedral, Mr.Eumer Nuevo, Mr.Mark Philip Ramos, Mr.Jasper Sarda,

Mr.Fel Sinogaya Jr., and Mr.John Vincent JV C. Valenzona, has been examined and accepted for

the fulfillment of the requirement of the subject Practical Research 2.

Ms. Clarissa Escasinas

Adviser

Approved by the committee on oral examination with the grade of eleven.

PANEL OF EXAMINEES

SR.EVA R. ARINGO SM. MS.ANALYN CAVAN

Chairman Vice-chairman

MS. CLARISSA ESCASINAS

Panel member
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE: Problem and its Settings

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………01

Statement of the Problem…………………………………………………...…………………02

Hypotheses………………………………………………………………………………...…..03

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework…………………………………………………….....03

Scope and Delimitation………………………………………………………………………..04

Significance of the Study ……………………………………………………………….……..05

CHAPTER TWO: Review of Related Literatures and Studies

Review of Related Literature…………………………………………………….………….…06

Review of Related Studies……………………………………………………………….….....07

CHAPTER THREE: Research Methodology

Research Method and Design…………………………………………………………….……08

Population and Sampling………………………………………………………………………08

Respondents of the Study……………………………………………………………………...09

Research Instrument…………………………………………………………………………...09

Validation of the Instruments………………………………………………………………….09

Data Gathering Procedure……………………………………………………………………..10

Statistical Treatment……………………………………...……………………………………10

CHAPTER FOUR: Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of the Data…………….…14

CHAPTER FIVE: Summary of Findings, Conclusion and Recommendations

Summary of Findings…………………………………………………………………………

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………….
vi

Recommendation……………………………………………………………………………..

REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………

APPENDICES………………………………………………………………………………….
1

CHAPTER ONE

Problem and its Setting

Introduction

For many years that had been pass, disaster preparedness on earthquake is one of the

essential way to be able to survive in an earthquake. The chance of surviving in an earthquake are

getting low because of lack of awareness on earthquake preparedness most especially in schools.

The Sisters of Mary School-Boystown students somehow change their behavior and attitudes

towards their awareness on earthquake preparedness. Awareness and preparedness are one of the

crucial element in surviving earthquake most especially on students and teachers in schools.

The level of awareness on earthquake preparedness of students and teachers on Sisters of

Mary School-Boystown Inc., Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu are very important in that certain

institution. Last 2018, the said school experience 4.8 magnitude of earthquake and luckily there is

no further destructions or damages in the earthquake disaster. The earthquake disaster is an inverse

to the typhoons because the PAG-ASA can monitor the movement of the typhoon while the

earthquake can’t be predicted when to come and what time to occur (PHIVOLCS, 2009). Many

countries nowadays are experiencing earthquakes and they experience worst things unlike

Philippines. In some countries after a massive earthquake there is tsunami.

The safety of people around us is more important than the wealth we have of what is the

use of our wealth if one of your member would be gone. Life is sacred and we need to protect it

(Christian Morality, page 65, 2017).


2

Statement of The Problem

This study aimed to identify and compare the level of awareness on Earthquake

preparedness of Teachers and Grade 11 Students in the Sisters of Mary School-Boystown Inc.,

Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu during the school year 2018-2019.

The researchers wanted to address and seek answers to the following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of the Teachers in terms of age and years of teaching

experience in the Sisters of Mary School-Boystown Inc.?

2. What is the demographic profile of the Grade 11 students in terms of age?

3. What is the level of awareness on earthquake preparedness of the Grade 11 students?

Teachers?

4. Is there significant relationship between the age of the teachers and the level of

awareness on earthquake preparedness?

5. Is there significant relationship between the age of the students and the level of

awareness on earthquake preparedness?

6. Is there a significant relationship between the years of teaching experience in the Sisters

of Mary School-Boystown Inc. of the teachers and their level of awareness on

earthquake preparedness?

7. Is there a significant difference on level of awareness between the Grade 11 students

and the teachers?


3

Hypotheses

The following hypotheses of the study were put into test:

1. There is no significant difference between the level of awareness in earthquake

preparedness of the students and teachers.

2. There is no significant relationship between the demographic profile of teachers and

their level of awareness on earthquake preparedness.

3. There is no significant relationship between the demographic profile of students and

their level of awareness on earthquake preparedness.

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework

System Theory

Teachers Students

LEVEL OF AWARENESS ON
EARTHQUAKE PREPAREDNESS

JARGON OF TRAUMA THEORY


4

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

There are various theories that suggest the way a person deal with certain disaster such as

earthquake. System theory is the interdisciplinary study of systems. A system is a cohesive

conglomeration of interrelated and interdependent parts that is either natural or man-made (System

Theory. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/). This theory is mostly pertaining to the

systems of the earth when one system is destroyed, most of the system will be affected. Earthquake

is one of the result when a certain system will be destroyed it can cause destruction to many lives.

Scope and Delimitation

The purpose of the study is to determine the difference between the level of awareness on

Earthquake preparedness of the students and the teachers in the Sisters of Mary School –Boystown,

Inc. Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu covering about 194 randomly selected grade 11 students and 53

teachers of the Sisters of Mary School-Boystown, Inc. School Year 2018-2020. The researcher’s

main focus was to determine the level of awareness on Earthquake preparedness of the Grade 11

Students and the Teachers and the sampling technique use is simple random sampling in choosing

the respondents that represent the whole population of the Grade 11 students and Faculty members.

The data needed for the study were gathered utilizing the level of awareness on Earthquake

preparedness using 5-point Likert Scale as the research instrument. 5-point Likert Scale is an

instrument that measure the respondent’s response in the given awareness on Earthquake

preparedness test.
5

Significance of the Study

This study will significantly help to the following beneficiaries:

1.Administrative Research and Development Center (ARDC)

-this will really help them again clearer knowledge on what is the differentiate on the level

of awareness on earthquake preparedness between the students and the teachers of the Sisters of

Mary School-Boystown Inc., Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu.

2.School Administration

-this will help them know on what will be the difference on the level of awareness on

earthquake preparedness between their students and teachers so that they could give instructions

on what to do when that certain earthquake occur.

3.Teachers

-this will help them to know on what will be their level of awareness on earthquake and

help them gain more knowledge in order for them to be prepared if that disaster occur.

4.Students

-this will help them to know on what will be their level of awareness on earthquake and

help them gain more knowledge in order for them to be prepared if that disaster occur.

5.Sisters

-this will help them in order to guide more the student on how to prepare themselves if that

earthquake occur.
6

CHAPTER TWO

Review of Related Literatures and Studies

This section provides the related literatures and related studies that are used.

Review of Related Literatures

Disaster preparedness provides for the key strategic actions that are used in determining

the level of awareness and earthquake preparedness of the students and the teachers. Disaster

preparedness provides for the key strategic actions that give importance to activities revolving

around community awareness and understanding; contingency planning; conduct of local drills,

and the development of national disaster response plan.

Behavioral change created by the preparedness aspect is eventually measured by how well

people responds to the disasters especially earthquake. Disaster response gives importance to

activities during the actual disaster response operation from needs assessments to search and rescue

to relief operations to early recovery activities emphasized. The rehabilitation and recovery priority

area covers areas like employment and livelihoods, infrastructures and lifeline facilities, housing

and resettlement, among others. It is exposed to disasters and hazards due to its geography and

geology as well as the presence of internal disputes in some areas.

In addition, the Philippines is situated along a highly seismic area lying along the pacific

ring of fire and is highly prone to earthquakes. According to the Philippine Institute of volcanology

and seismology(PHIVOLCS), the country experiences an average of five earthquakes a

day(department of internal and local government of the Philippines, 2012)


7

Review of Related Studies

Major disasters include earthquake, landslides, volcanic eruptions, floods, hurricanes,

tornadoes, blizzards, tsunamis, cyclones, man-made disasters have been in the form of fires,

stampedes, traffic accidents, industrial mishaps. Once a disaster hits an immediate response

involving various agencies and communities is pivotal, which can control emergencies and

respond or even minimize the aftershocks and help people recover from the effects of disaster in

the past like in Spitak Earthquake (Armenia,1988).

Parker and Handmer (1998) note the importance and role of unofficial or informal

communication of every people which exist within the communities. Tapping new ideas into these

informal information mechanisms is a perpetual challenge for risk communicators and it is

anticipated that utilizing the communicating abilities and young adults will greatly affect the

efficacy of this process.


8

CHAPTER THREE

Research Methodology

Research Method and Design

In this study, the researchers used comparative research. Comparative research is the act

of comparing two or more things with a view to discovering something about one or all of the

things being compared (Wikipedia, 2018). This quantitative research focused on the level of

awareness on earthquake preparedness of the students and teachers. Quantitative research focused

on gathering numerical data and generalizing at across groups or to explain particular phenomenon

(Bobbie, 2018). On this study the researchers were tasked to differentiate the level of awareness

on earthquake preparedness between the Grade 11 students and the teachers.

Population and Sampling

In the Sisters of Mary School-Boystown where the study is to be held and conducted to

determine and evaluate the level of awareness on earthquake preparedness. The researchers chose

194 Grade 11 students out of 374 Grade 11 Students and 53 teachers out of 60 teachers to determine

the difference on the level of awareness on earthquake preparedness of the teachers and the Grade

11 students. The researchers used the simple random sampling technique in order to get the

required respondents. Simple random sampling technique is a technique where every member of

the population has an equal chance of being chosen as the respondents of the study.
9

Respondents of the Study

In this study, the respondents were the teachers and the Grade 11 students of the Sisters of

Mary School-Boystown, Inc., Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu. First step is to conduct a research on

the 53 teachers using evaluative questionnaire where only 36 questionnaires are being return and

then to the 194 students where 191 questionnaires surpass. The researchers choose the teachers

because they are dealing with the students during class and their family at home. The researchers

also choose the Grade 11 students because they have already this many experiences in

encountering a lot of phenomenon such as earthquake here inside the school, and the researchers

used simple random sampling in choosing the Grade 11 students as a respondents of the study.

Research Instrument

The questionnaire contains the questions on what are the possible thing to do and on what

to do if then earthquake occurs before, during, and after.

Validation of the Instruments

In this research, the researchers adopted and revised a questionnaire which is called

“awareness on earthquake preparedness questionnaire” and was checked by the research adviser

and validated it. It was also submitted to Ms. Genevieve Sacarez, our former research teacher in

PPITTP (Pananaliksik) and also Ms. Crystal Mae Salazar and Ms. Riza Mae Nuñez, our former

Practical Research 1 instructors who validated our instrument.


10

Data Gathering Procedure

In this comparative research on the level of awareness on earthquake preparedness of Grade

11 students and the teachers of the Sisters of Mary School-Boystown, Inc., the following phases

and stages shown below were pursued by the researchers in gathering the data:

PHASE 1: Preparation stage

After the researchers developed the instrument, the researchers asked permission from the

school principal to conduct the research to the Grade 11 students and teachers.

PHASE 2: Data Gathering Stage

After the approval of the letter by the school principal, the researchers administered the

questionnaire to the randomly selected Grade 11 students and all the teachers, and retrieved it

afterwards.

PHASE 3: Data Analysis Stage

After retrieving the answered questionnaires from the respondents, the researchers

analyzed the data by using the appropriate statistical tools and interpret the data gathered.

Statistical Treatment

In analyzing the data gathered during the data analysis stage. The following statistical tools

were used by the researchers.

 Mean
11

– is the average results, can be obtain by dividing the total of all values by the number of

values. It was used to generally obtain the average results of the summation of all the

respondents rating on the given scores for Awareness on Earthquake Preparedness

questionnaire and demographic profile. Retrieved from www.businesssdictionary.com

(March 2019)

 Standard Deviation

- is a statistic that measures the dispersion of a data set relative to its mean (Hargrave,2019).

It was used to measure how the scores are centered on the mean score of awareness on

earthquake preparedness and demographic profile.

 Pearson product-moment correlation(PPMC)

-is one of the measures of correlation which quantifies the strength as well as the direction

of such relationship. It was used to determine the significant relationship between the age

of the students and the level of awareness on earthquake preparedness, the significant

relationship between the age of the teachers and the level of awareness on earthquake

preparedness and the significant relationship between the years of teaching experience of

the teachers and their level of awareness on earthquake preparedness. Retrieved from

https://explorable.com (March 2019)

 Likert Scale

- is a scale used to measure the attitude wherein the respondents are asked to indicate the

level of agreement or disagreement with the statements related to the stimulus objects.

Likert scale was utilized as a method of measuring the respondents response in the given

awareness on earthquake preparedness test. Retrieved from https://businessjargons.com

(March 2019)
12

Table 3.1: Likert scale of level of awareness on earthquake preparedness test.

Scale Interpretation

1 Strongly Disagree

2 Disagree

3 Undecided

4 Agree

5 Strongly Agree

To interpret the level of awareness on Earthquake preparedness of the students and

teachers, the following rating scale was used:

Table 3.2: Level of awareness on Earthquake Preparedness Scale.

40-71 Not at all aware about earthquake preparedness

72-103 Slightly aware about earthquake preparedness

104-135 Somewhat aware about earthquake preparedness

136-167 Moderately aware about earthquake preparedness

168-200 Extremely aware about earthquake preparedness


13

 Frequency Count

- is the measure of the number of times that an event occur. It was used to determine the

number of respondents who belong to a particular score from the awareness on earthquake

preparedness questionnaire appeared and demographic profile. Retrieved from

https://stattrek.com (March 2019)

 Percentages

- is a measure of a portion in relation to a whole, often expressed in relation to how many

of something there are per 100. Was used to determine the number of ratio of the

respondents who belong to a particular score from the awareness on earthquake

preparedness questionnaire. Retrieved from: https://www.yourdictionary.com/percentage

(2014 Fifth Edition).


14

CHAPTER FOUR

Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data

This chapter presents the quantitative data analysis and the interpretation of the analysis of

data that answer the research problems and objectives.

Problem 1: What is the demographic profile of the Teachers in terms of age and years of teaching

experience in the Sisters of Mary School-Boystown Inc.?

Age Profile of the Teachers

3%
8% Ages 21-27

6% Ages 28-33
3% Ages 34-39

Ages 40-45
17% 63% Ages 46-51

Ages 52 and above

Figure 4.1: Age Profile of the Teachers

Figure 4.1 shows the age profile of the teachers where 63% of the respondents are in the

ages 21-27; 17% of the respondents are in the ages 28-33; 3% of the respondents are in the ages

34-39; 6% of the respondents are in the ages 40-45; 8% of the respondents are in the ages 46-51;

and 3% of the respondents are in the ages 52 and above. This indicates that majority of the

respondents (teachers) are having the ages 21-27.


15

Years of Teaching experience of the Teachers


3%
11% 0-6 years

6% 7-12 years

13-18 years
8%
19-24 years
72%
25 and above

Figure 4.2: Years of Teaching experience of the Teachers

4.2 shows the years of teaching experience of the teachers where 72% of the respondents

are in the years of 0-6; 8% of the respondents are in the years of 7-12; 6% of the respondents are

in the years of 13-18; 11% of the respondents are in the years of 19-24; and 3% of the respondents

are in the years of 25 and above. This indicates that majority of the teachers’ years of teaching

experience in the Sisters of Mary School-Boystown Inc. are having 0-6 years.

Problem 2: What is the demographic profile of the Grade 11 students in terms of age?

Age Profile of the Students


50% 46%

40%
Percentage

30% 27%

20% 16%
9%
10%
2% 1%
0%
Age 15 Age 16 Age 17 Age 18 Age 19 Age 20
Age

Figure 4.3: Age profile of the Students


16

Figure 4.3 show the demographic profile of the students in terms of age where 16% of the

respondents are in the age 15; 46% of the respondents are in the age of 16; 27% of the respondents

are in the age of 17; 9% of the respondents are in the age of 18; 2% of the respondents are in the

age of 19; and 1% of the respondents are in the age of 20. This indicates that majority of

respondents (student) are in the age of 16.

Problem 3: What is the level of awareness on earthquake preparedness of the Grade 11 students?

Teachers?

Level of Awareness on Earthquake preparedness of Grade 11


students
60%
55%
50%
Percentage

40%
31%
30%
20%
13%
10%
1% 1%
0%
not at all aware slightly aware about somewhat aware moderately aware extremely aware
about earthquake earthquake about earthquake about earthquake about earthquake
preparedness preparedness preparedness preparedness preparedness
Categories

Figure 4.4: Level of Awareness on Earthquake preparedness of the Grade 11 students

Figure 4.4 shows the level of awareness on earthquake preparedness of the Grade 11

students wherein 1% of the respondents are not all aware about earthquake preparedness; 1% of

the respondents are slightly aware about earthquake preparedness; 13% of the respondents are

somewhat aware about earthquake preparedness; 55% of the respondents are moderately aware

about earthquake preparedness; and 31% of the respondents are extremely aware about earthquake
17

preparedness. It indicates that most of the Grade 11 students are moderately aware about

earthquake preparedness.

Level of Awareness of the Teachers


60%
53%
50%
Percentage

44%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% 0% 3%
0%
not at all aware about slightly aware about somewhat aware moderately aware extremely aware
earthquake earthquake about earthquake about earthquake about earthquake
preparedness preparedness preparedness preparedness preparedness
Categories

Figure 4.5: Level of Awareness of the Teachers

Figure 4.5 shows the level of awareness of the teachers wherein 0% of the respondents are

not and slightly aware about earthquake preparedness; 3% of the respondents are somewhat aware

about earthquake preparedness; 53% of the respondents are moderately aware about earthquake

preparedness; and 44% of the respondents are extremely aware about earthquake preparedness.

Problem 4: Is there significant relationship between the age of the teachers and the level of

awareness on earthquake preparedness?

Variables Pearson r n Alpha P-value

Age of the Teachers and their

Level of Awareness 0.014 36 0.05 0.935

Figure 4.6:

Note: Reject Ho if P-value is less than or equal to Alpha, otherwise Accept Ho


18

There is no relationship between the age of the teachers and the level of awareness on

earthquake preparedness. Age of the teachers does not really affect the level of awareness on

earthquake preparedness rather teachers’ life in everyday and their status or some other factors

would probably affect their level of awareness.

Problem 5: Is there significant relationship between the age of the students and the level of

awareness on earthquake preparedness?

Variables Pearson r n Alpha P-value

Age and Level of Awareness of the

Students -0.043 191 0.05 0.091

Figure 4.7:

Note: Reject Ho if P-value is less than or equal to Alpha, otherwise Accept Ho

There is no relationship between the age of the grade 11 students and the level of awareness

on earthquake preparedness. Grade 11 students’ ages does not imply their level of awareness

because some factors affects their level of awareness are their everyday living and what they use

to do.

Problem 6: Is there a significant relationship between the years of teaching experience in the

Sisters of Mary School-Boystown Inc. of the teachers and their level of awareness on earthquake

preparedness?

Variables Pearson r n Alpha P-value

Years of teaching experience and the

level of awareness of the teacher -0.0114 36 0.05 0.508


19

Figure 4.8:

Note: Reject Ho if P-value is less than or equal to Alpha, otherwise Accept Ho

There is no significant relationship between the years of teaching experience in the Sisters

of Mary School-Boystown Inc. of the teachers and their level of awareness on earthquake

preparedness. The level of awareness of the teachers does not based on the number of years if

teaching experience of the teachers though we know “Experience is the best Teacher” and also

there are other aspects affect the level of awareness of the teacher not only experience.

Problem 7: Is there a significant difference on level of awareness between the Grade 11 students

and the teachers?

T- Degree of Standard

Variables value Freedom n Mean Devation Alpha P-value

Teachers' Level of

Awareness 36 168.78 20.71

Students' Level of

Awareness -3.29 53 191 156.85 21.09 0.05 0.002

Figure 4.9:

Note: Reject Ho if P-value is less than or equal to Alpha, otherwise Accept Ho

There is significant difference on the level of awareness between the Grade 11 students

and the teachers. Teachers’ level of awareness has significant difference on the Grade 11 students’

level of awareness on earthquake preparedness since teacher are older enough than students and

teachers has this ability to response quicker than students in every circumstances occur.
20

CHAPTER FIVE

Summary of Findings, Conclusion and Recommendation

Summary of the Findings

In chapter four of this study the demographic profile of the teachers in terms of age, most

of the teacher ages between 21-27 and the least of the respondents are the teachers ages 39-41while

in the student’s demographic profile in terms of age 27% of the respondents are in the age of 17.

Majority of the respondents are in ages 17 years old. In the demographic profile of the teacher in

terms of years of teaching, the years of teaching experience of the teachers where 72% of the

respondents are in the years of 0-6 and 11% are in the years 19-24 years. Grade 11 students’ ages

does not imply their level of awareness because some factors affects their level of awareness are

their everyday living and what they use to do. Age of the teachers does not really affect the level

of awareness on earthquake preparedness rather teachers’ life in everyday and their status or some

other factors would probably affect their level of awareness. The level of awareness of the teachers

does not based on the number of years if teaching experience of the teachers though we know

“Experience is the best Teacher” and also there are other aspects affect the level of awareness of

the teacher not only experience. Teachers’ level of awareness has significant difference on the

Grade 11 students’ level of awareness on earthquake preparedness since teacher are older enough

than students and teachers has this ability to response quicker than students in every circumstances

occur.
21

Conclusion

Therefore, the level of awareness of the students and the teachers have this big difference.

Teachers has this higher knowledge about earthquake preparedness because they spend their time

mostly on the students where they taught some basic knowledge, they also learn from their past

life. Teachers are old enough to undergo such level of awareness than students who have a many

limitations like adults have that teens don’t have.

Recommendation

1.Administrative Research and Development Center (ARDC)

-must produce some modules related to earthquake preparedness, so that the teachers can

teach the module to the student and the they can be also guided on what they need to do before,

during and after the earthquake disaster.

2.School Administration

-must update the evacuation site where student can stay and can be safe after the

earthquake. The school administrator must also inform the teachers on the things they need to do

before, during and after earthquake disaster.

3.Teachers

-this will help them to know on what will be their level of awareness on earthquake and

help them gain more knowledge in order for them to be prepared if that disaster occur.

4.Students
22

-must apply what they learn from the teachers so that there will be no accident that will

happen in that certain period of time.

5.Sisters

-must be aware on the proper saving procedure if incase there will be earthquake disaster

that will happen during night time or if the students are in the supervision of the sisters.

6. Future Researchers

- somehow may use this research in enhancement to their study in relation to earthquake

disaster. They can also use this as their bases on the said topic.
23

REFERENCES

• AMA (American Medical Association). The State-Level Economic Impact of Office Based

Physicians. 2011. [September 8, 2013]. http://www .ama assn.org /ama/pub/advocacy

/state-advocacy-arc/economic-impact-study. Page .

• ASPR (Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response). National Guidance for

Healthcare System Preparedness. 2012. [September 8, 2013]. (Healthcare Preparedness

Capabilities). http://www .phe.gov/preparedness /planning

/http/reports/documents/capabilisties.pdf .

• Burke RV, Berg BM, Vee P, Morton I, Nager A, Neches R, Wetzel R, Upperman JS. Using

robotic telecommunications to triage pediatric disaster victims. Journal of Pediatric

Surgery. 2012;47(1):221–224.[ PubMed ]

• Devereaux A.V., Dichter J.R., Christian M.D., Dubler N.N., Sandrock C.E., Hick J.L.,

Powell T., Geiling J.A., Amundson D.E., Baudendistel T.E., Braner D.A., Klein M.A.,

Berkowitz K.A., Curtis J.R., Rubinson L. Task Force for Mass Critical Care. Definitive

care for the critically ill during a disaster: A framework for allocation of scarce resources

in mass critical care: From a Task Force for Mass Critical Care summit meeting, January

26-27, 2007, Chicago, IL. Chest. 2008;133(5 Supplement):51S–66S. [ PubMed ]

• Forman-Hoffman VL, Zolotor AJ, McKeeman JL, Blanco R, Knauer SR, Lloyd SW, Fraser

JG, Viswanathan M. Comparative effectiveness of interventions for children exposed to

nonrelational traumatic events. Pediatrics. 2013;131(3):526–539. [ PubMed ]


24

• GAO (Government Accountability Office). National Preparedness: Efforts to Address the

Medical Needs of Children in a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, or Nuclear Incident.

2013. [September 8, 2013]. (GAO-13-438). http://www .gao.gov/products/GAO 13-438

• Garrett AL, Grant R, Madrid P, Brito A, Abramson D, Redlener I. Children and

megadisasters: Lessons learned in the new millennium. Advances in Pediatrics. 2007;

54:189–214. [ PubMed ]

• Goodhue CJ, Burke RV, Chambers S, Ferrer RR, Upperman JS. Disaster Olympix: A

unique nursing emergency preparedness exercise. Journal of Trauma Nursing.

2010;17(1):5–10. [ PubMed ]

• IOM. Crisis Standards of Care: A Systems Framework for Catastrophic Disaster Response.

Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2012.

• IOM (Institute of Medicine) and NRC (National Research Council). From Neurons to

Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development. Washington, DC: National

Academy Press; 2000.

• Kissoon N. Deliberations and recommendations of the Pediatric Emergency Mass Critical

Care Task Force: Executive summary. Pediatric Critical Care

Medicine. 2011;12(Suppl.): S103–S108. [ PubMed ]

• Lasker RD. Redefining Readiness: Terrorism Planning Through the Eyes of the Public.

New York: The New York Academy of Medicine; 2004.


25

• Masten AS. Resilience in children threatened by extreme adversity: Frameworks for

research, practice, and translational synergy. Development and Psychopathology.

2011;23:141–154. [ PubMed ]

• Merton RK. The unanticipated consequences of purposive social action. American

Sociological Review. 1936;1(6):894–904. [September 8, 2013]; http://www

.jstor.org/stable/2084615 .

• NCCD (National Commission on Children and Disasters). Report to the President and

Congress. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010. [September

8, 2013]. (AHRQ Publication No. 10-M037, October 2010). http://www

.ahrq.gov/prep/nccdreport .

• Neches R, Ryutov T, Kichkaylo T, Burke RV, Claudius IA, Upperman JS. Design and

evaluation of a disaster preparedness logistics tool. American Journal of Disaster Medicine.

2009;4(6):309–320. [ PubMed ]

• NLCHP (The National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty). Alone Without a Home:

A State-By-State Review of Laws Affecting Unaccompanied Homeless Youth. 2012.

[September 8, 2013]. http://www .nlchp.org /content/pubs/Alone%20Without %20a

%20Home,%20FINAL1.pdf .

• Olympia RP, Rivera R, Heverley S, Anyanwu U, Gregorits M. Natural disasters and

masscasualty events affecting children and families: A description of emergency

preparedness and the role of the primary care physician. Clinical

Pediatrics.2010;49(7):686–698. [ PubMed ]
26

• Peek L, Sutton J, Gump J. Caring for children in the aftermath of disaster: The Church of

the Brethren Children's Disaster Services Program. Children, Youth and Environments.

2008;18(1):408–421.

• Peltonen K, Palosaari E. In Handbook of Resilience in Children and War. Fernando C,

Ferrari M, editors. New York: Springer; 2013. pp. 267–284. (Evidence-based resilience

enhancing intervention methods for children affected by armed conflict).

• Phillips RL, Dodoo MS, McCann JL, Bazemore A, Fryer GE, Klein LS, Weitzman M,

Green LA. Report to the Task Force on the Care of Children by Family Physicians.

Washington, DC: Robert Graham Center; 2005.

• Sapienza JK, Masten AS. Understanding and promoting resilience in children and youth.

Current Opinion in Psychiatry. 2011; 24:267–273. [ PubMed ]

• Schreiber M. National Children's Disaster Mental Health Concept of Operations. Oklahoma

City, OK: Terrorism and Disaster Center at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences

Center; 2011. [September 8, 2013].Retrieved from http://community .fema

.gov/gf2.ti/aw/280514 / 32490/PDF/-/CONOPS_FINAL_12 0511b.pdf .

• Wright MO, Masten AS, Narayan AJ. In Handbook of Resilience in Children. Goldstein S,

Brooks RB, editors. New York: Springer; 2013. pp. 15–38. (Resilience processes in

development: Four waves of research on positive adaptation in the context of adversity).


27

APPENDICES

Research Proposal
28

APPROVAL SHEET

This research proposal entitled “A Comparative Study on the Level of Awareness on

Earthquake preparedness of the Teachers and the Grade 11 students of the Sisters of Mary School-

Boystown Inc., Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu during the School Year 2018-2019” in the Sisters of

Mary School – Boystown, Inc. Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu S.Y. 2017-2018, second semester -

final, prepared and submitted by Mr.Russel Ike Cabrido, Mr.Joshua Kim Allen Catedral,

Mr.Eumer Nuevo, Mr.Mark Philip Ramos, Mr.Jasper Sarda, Mr.Fel Sinogaya Jr., and Mr.John

Vincent JV C. Valenzona,, has been examined and hereby recommended for approval and

acceptance and shall be recommended to proceed to the second and the third phase of the research

process.

The following are few suggestions for the revision of the proposal for appropriateness and

correctness of the research process:

• Remove in the significance the future researchers

• Problems in Chapter 4 must correspond to problems in Chapter 1

• Add the variables in the Table (Chapter 4)

• Explain further probems in number 4, 5 and 6. Why there is no significant relationship or

difference

SR. EVA R. ARINGO, SM.

Chairman, Research Council

MRS. ANALYN N. CAVAN

Assistant 1st Vice Chairman, Research Council


29

Approved and seconded by the member of the Research Council this May 2, 2019.

MS. CLARISA ESCASINAS

Research Council Member

PERMISSION LETTER

Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu

February 26, 2019


30

Sr. Eva R. Aringo SM

School Principal

Sisters of Mary School – Boystown Inc.

Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu

Dear Sister,

The Group 3 researcher of Grade 11-C The Sisters of Mary School-Boystown Inc. will conduct

a study entitled “The level of awareness on Earthquake preparedness of Grade 11students and the

teachers of The Sisters of Mary School- Boystown Inc. Tungkop, Minglanilla, Cebu during the

School Year 2018-2019.” This is in partial fulfillment of the Practical Research II. In the

connection of this, we would like to ask your permission to your good office to have data gathering

to 194 Grade 11 students and 53 teachers in the Sisters of Mary School-Boystown Inc.,Tungkop,

Minglanilla, Cebu, during the study period of the students and vacant time for the teachers.

The researchers are hoping for your positive response. Thank you.

Respectfully yours,

Grade 11C Students Group 3

Cabrido, Russell Ike

Cathedral, Joshua Kim Allen

Nuevo, Eumer

Ramos, Mark Philip


31

Sarda, Jasper

Sinogaya, Fel

Valenzona, John Vincent

Noted by:

Ms. Clarissa Escasinas

Pr2 Teacher

Approved by:

Sister Eva R. Aringo SM,

School Principal

Observation and Interview Guide Questionnaire


32

Permission Letter

(for survey)
33

Survey Instrument