Chapter 4

DATA ANALYSIS

Table 1. Profile of the Respondents

Profile Frequency Percentage

Male 14 26.42

Sex Female 39 73.58

TOTAL 53 100%

2nd Year 18 33.96%

3rd Year 19 35.85%

Year Level
4th Year 16 30.19%

TOTAL 53 100%

Age Mean: 20 years old

Table 1 shows the profile of the respondents of the student nurses of the Ateneo de Da-

vao University in terms of age, gender, and year level. Nursing students who were Males com-

prised of 26.42% out of the total respondents while female student nurses comprised of 73.58%

of the total population. The result goes to show that females dominate the nursing population in
terms of gender, and third year nursing students were the ones that dominate in terms of year

level with 35.85% of the total population followed by the second year with 33.96%, and lastly the

fourth year level with 30.19% of the total population. And from the respondents, the computed

mean is 20 years old.

Table 2 shows the level of motivation of the AdDU nursing students. This is based on the

questionnaire survey that was given to each respondent. Each question was computed as to its

mean or average and was interpreted accordingly basing from the interpretation scale provided

by Chapter 3. Questions number 1 to 6 were the intrinsic motivation factors, while questions 7

to 12 describe the extrinsic motivation factors.

Table 2. Level of Motivation

Motivation SD Mean Interpretation

1. Wants to learn everything that needs to be learned. 1.32 5.87 Quite well

2. Tries to learn even if it is against own liking of the

1.43 4.93 Well
class.

3. Feels that challenging assignments can be great

1.42 4.98 Well
learning experiences.

4. Do all that he can to make his assignments per-

1.50 4.77 Well
fectly.
5. Do extra effort to an assignment for better under-
1.35 4.53 Well
standing.

6. Sets goals higher than himself. 1.41 5.11 Well

7. Wants to be one of the most recognized students in

1.68 3.77 Slightly Well
the classroom.

8. Proves that being in college is an opportunity that

1.64 5.32 Well
he can achieve something to his family.

9. Ashamed upon receiving a low grade. 1.84 4.79 Well

10. Goes to parents for advice regarding academic

1.80 4.06 Slightly Well
choice.

11. Lives up to what the professor expects out of the

1.57 4.15 Slightly Well
student in the classroom.

12. Feels that the smarter that he is, the more that he
1.83 3.66 Slightly Well
will be accepted by other students.

TOTAL 1.57 4.66 Well

Out of the 12 questions in the questionnaire, only question number 1 revealed the highest

scale and was interpreted as quite well with a mean of 5.87. This is then followed by questions

number 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 that reveals a well interpretation. This entails that those questions
substantially describe the motivational level of the nursing students, and last in rank are ques-

tions number 7, 10, 11.and 12 which were scaled as well. This entails that the latter questions

just modestly describe the motivational level of the students which also encapsulate the level of

motivation of the respondents as a whole since it was written above that the total interpretation

based from the survey questionnaire given was interpreted as well with a mean of 4.66 in total.

The also result goes to show that majority of the nursing students are intrinsically motivated

since questions number 1-6 had a higher interpretation level according to the respondents as

compared to questions 7-12 which were the external factors.

According to Hitt (2005), motivation is a set of forces that energize, direct, and sustain behav-
ior. These forces can come from the person, so-called "push" of internal forces, or they can
come from the environment that surrounds the person, so-called "pull" of external forces. Fur-
thermore. Williams and Burden (2000) also added that motivation is a state of cognitive and
emotional arousal, which leads to a conscious decision to act, and which gives rise to a period
of sustained intellectual and physical effort in order to attain a previously set goal. Furthermore
Wendy (2008) defines motivation as to give reason, incentive, enthusiasm, or interest that
causes a specific action or certain behavior. With the explanation that motivated students will
always have a drive in everything they do as long as they have a positive perspective. Without
motivation, students would easily give up at the first sign of challenge along with it; they simply
do not care about anything such as grades, assignments, projects, and etc. In the case of a nurs-
ing student, when he is motivated, he can do and pass his requirements on time, go to his du-
ties, and perform well during their clinical exposure. When he is unmotivated, he does not pass
requirements on time or does not pass it all, is always late or absent during his duties, and does
not have the energy to perform well during their clinical exposure. There are two main types of
motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic. Edward Deci (1975) defined Intrinsic Motivation where stu-
dents satisfy their needs by setting goals and choosing behaviours that they believe will allow
them to achieve these goals. Extrinsic motivation, on the other hand, is the motivation is the
motivation to perform and succeed for the sake of complying to finish a certain work, role, or
assignment (Hoyenga & Hoyenga 1984). Students who do tasks to develop a particular skill dur-
ing their clinical practice or exposure and finds pleasure in doing so are intrinsically motivated,
while students who do tasks during their clinical exposure for the sake of having good grades
are extrinsically motivated. Student can be intrinsically motivated or extrinsically motivated, or
they can be both.

Table 3 shows the mean of the Level of Academic Performance among the nursing stu-

dents of Ateneo de Davao University. The respondents on the level of academic performance

presented a mean of 3.72. In terms of the presentation, it shows that the academic performance

of the respondents are within the average of C+ which describes to be satisfactory and presents

an acceptable level of achievement based on our study.

Table 3. Level of Academic Performance

Frequency Mean Standard Deviation Interpretation

TOTAL 53 3.72 1.099 Satisfactory

Table 4. Significant Difference Between Motivation and Profile

Motivation Profile t-value p-value Decision

Gender 0.94 0.36 Not Significant

F-value p-value Decision

Motivation Age
0.86 0.36 Not Significant

Year Level 0.92 0.41 Not Significant

As presented in the table above, the computed p-value between the academic perfor-
mance and gender is 0.36 which is higher than the 0.05 level of significance thus, the null hypoth-
esis is accepted. Therefore, there is no significant difference between the academic performance
and gender of the student nurses of Ateneo de Davao University.

For academic performance and age, the computed p-value is 0.36, which is higher than
the 0.05 level of significance thus, the null hypothesis is accepted. Furthermore, there is no sig-
nificant difference between the academic performance and age of the student nurses of Ateneo
de Davao University.

As presented in the table above, the computed p-value between the academic perfor-
mance and year level is 0.41, which is higher than the 0.05 level of significance thus, the null
hypothesis is accepted. Therefore, there is no significant difference between the academic per-
formance and gender of the student nurses of Ateneo de Davao University.
 This result was coherent with Yukselturk and Bulut (2009) who mentioned that there were
no statistically significant gender differences in terms of motivation, self-regulation, and achieve-
ment and also with Balam et al who also stated that there were no statistically significant differ-
ences was found between male and female students in their motivation or learning strategies.
Momanyi, Too and Dimiyu investigated how students age influences academic motivation and
academic performance among Form two and four students in Nakuru municipality.It was found
that age had no significant effect on the academic motivation. The higher score for motivation
scored by students aged between 12 to 15 years did not differ significantly as compared to the
other age brackets. All the students could be said to have the same level of academic motivation.

(Yukselturk E, Bulut S. Gender differences in self-regulated online learning envi-

ronment. Educational Technology & Society. 2009; 12(3): 12-22.)

(Balam E, Platt T. 2014 an Examination of Self-Regulation and Motivation in College

Students: A Comparison Study. Institute for Learning Styles Journal. 2014; 1: 11-
18. )

(Momanyi J, Too J and Simiyu C.Effect of Students Age on Academic Motivation

and Academic Performance among High School Students in Kenya Asian Journal
of Education and e-Learning (ISSN: 2321 2454) Volume 03 Issue 05, October
2015)

(Balam E. Learning Strategies and Motivation of Graduate Students: Is Gender a

Factor? Institute for Learning Styles Journal. 2015; 1: 1-9.)

Table 5. Significant Difference Between Academic Performance and Profile

Profile t-value p-value Decision

Academic Perfor- Gender -1.28 0.22 Not Significant
mance
F-value p-value Decision
Age
2.46 0.12 Not Significant

Year Level 8.25 0.000799* Significant

Year Level Diff Lower Upper P adj

3rd Year - 2nd Year -0.39 -1.17 0.39 0.46

4th Year - 2nd Year 0.92 0.12 1.71 0.02

4th Year - 3rd Year 1.30 0.51 2.10 0.00

Legend: Significant at 0.05

As presented in the table above, the computed p-value between the academic perfor-
mance and gender is 0.22 which is higher than the 0.05 level of significance thus, the null hypoth-
esis is accepted. Therefore, there is no significant difference between the academic performance
and gender of the student nurses of Ateneo de Davao University.
 For academic performance and age, the computed p-value is, 0.12 which is higher than
the 0.05 level of significance thus, the null hypothesis is accepted. Furthermore, there is no sig-
nificant difference between the academic performance and age of the student nurses of Ateneo
de Davao University.

For the academic performance and year level, the computed p-value is 0.00 which is lower
than the0.05 level of significance, thus rejecting the null hypothesis and presents a significant
difference. Specifically for academic performance and year levels, 4th and 2nd year, the com-
puted p-value is 0.02 which is lower than the 0.05 level of significance. For 4th and 3rd year, the
computed p-value is 0.00, which is lower than the 0.05 significance level. And between 3rd and
2nd year, the computed p-value is 0.46 which is higher than the 0.05 level of significance. There-
fore, between the 4th and 2nd year, 4th and 3rd year, the null hypothesis is rejected and there
is a significant difference between them. But according to 3rd and 2nd year, the null hypothesis
is accepted and there is no significant difference.

Ryckman et al. (1988) result revealed no significant gender differences in academic achievement
of the students.Another study by Clark and Ramsay (1990) detected a negative relationship be-
tween age and academic performance

REF: Clark, E. E., & Ramsay, W. (1990). Problems of retention in tertiary education. Education
Research and Perspectives, 17, 47-57.

(Insert supportive RRL about academic performance doesnt relate to age and gender.

Also academic performance has a relation to year level)

Variables r-value p-value Decision

Level of Motivation and Academic Per- -0.12 0.40 Not Significant

formance
Table 6. Significant Relationship Between Motivation and Academic Performance

As presented in the table above, the computed p-value is 0.40 which is higher than the
0.05 level of significance thus, the null hypothesis is accepted. Therefore, there is no significant
difference between the motivation and academic performance of the student nurses of Ateneo
de Davao University.

(Insert supportive RRL)

A study by Niebuhr (1995) included an investigation of the relationship of individual motivation

and its effect on academic performance. The findings of this study indicated that student motiva-
tion showed no significant effect on the relationship with academic performance