Of a total of 53 Grade 12 students of Pasaleng National High School who had undergone a 10-day Work Immersion

Program, only 1 of them were not able to answer the survey questionnaire due to sickness. Therefore, 52
questionnaires were used to interpret the results.
Data gathered through the questionnaires was subjected to frequency counts. In other words, the responses for each
individual question were added together to find the highest frequency of occurrence. These responses to the questions,
which are quantified, are then presented in percentage forms. This analysis is presented in tabular form.
The first section of the questionnaire as presented in Table 1 sought to evaluate the performance of the facilitators/work
immersion supervisors on the conduct of the work immersion program. It enabled the researcher to identify the
facilitators’ / supervisors’ strong and weak points.

Question # Excellent Good Regular Poor Very Poor Total

1.1 50 2 0 0 0 52
1.2 43 9 0 0 0 52
1.3 41 7 4 0 0 52
1.4 38 14 0 0 0 52
Total 172 32 4 0 0 208
Percentage 83% 15% 2% 0% 0%
Table 1: FACILITATORS / IMMERSION SUPERVISORS
It can be noted in Table 1 that only 2% of the respondents found their facilitators/supervisors performed at “regular”
rate. The rest (83% - excellent, 15% - good) of the population believed that their facilitators/supervisors gave their
best shot during the conduct of the work immersion program.
The second section of the questionnaire as presented in Table 2 sought to evaluate the content and usefulness of
the training to the work immersion students.

Question # Excellent Good Regular Poor Very Poor Total

2.1 41 10 0 1 0 52
2.2 36 15 0 1 0 52
Total 77 25 0 2 0 104
Percentage 74% 24% 0% 2% 0%
Yes No Maybe
2.3 32 19 1 52
Percentage 62% 37% 2%
Somewhat Not
Very Relevant Relevant
Relevant Relevant
2.4 37 13 1 1 52
Percentage 71% 25% 2% 2%
Yes No
2.5 45 7 52
Percentage 87% 13%
 Somewhat
Very Useful Useful Not Useful 0
Useful
2.6 46 6 52
Percentage 88% 12% 0% 0% 0%
Table 2: SUBSTANTIVE CONTENT AND USEFULNESS OF THE TRAINING
Table 2 shows that work immersion students’ overall impression on the program is excellent (74%) but it is very
important to note although it is a minimal percentage for the “poor” impression (2%) because it’s a sign that there is
still a portion of the program that needs further improvement or contents to be added. 62% of the respondents found
the program had lived up to their initial expectation, 71% found it relevant, 87% found it useful as a trainee and 88%
found it useful for strengthening skills, habits and attitudes as a student.
The last portion of the questionnaire as presented in Table 3 sought to evaluate the organization of the training on the
construction of core environmental indicators.

Question # Excellent Good Regular Poor Very Poor Total

3.1 43 9 0 0 0 52
3.2 27 23 2 0 0 52
3.3 20 17 6 9 0 52
3.4 38 12 1 1 0 52
3.5 43 9 0 0 0 52
Total 171 70 9 10 0 260
Percentage 66% 27% 3% 4% 0%
Table 3: ORGANIZATION OF THE TRAINING ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF CORE ENVIRONMENTAL
INDICATORS
From the table above (Table 3), majority (43 out of 52) of the respondents believed that the program has an excellent
objective. The quality of the information and materials provided during the training were “excellent” and “good”. Only
2 of them found it “regular’. For question # 3.3 (Duration of the program and time for hands on training), 29% of the
respondent said its “regular” and “poor” maybe because they were only given 10 days on their training. On that note,
it is recommended to have a training duration longer than 10 days. For the training venue and workshop, 96% of them
commend it “excellent” and “good” which means the school had chosen the right venue so far. It is also transpired in
the result for question #3.5 that there is an “excellent” and “good” support from the staff and employees.
As an overall evaluation, 66% of the respondents found the organization of the training on the construction of core
environmental indicators “excellent”.