Chapter II

Review of Related Literature and Studies

This chapter presents the written literature and studies various educational

journals, internet site (Google scholar and Socio Scientific Issue) books, foreign

literature and reading materials. The information and data presented are of prime

importance in identifying the level of students’ satisfaction on the activities during

2017 foundation celebration.

Activity Design

In every aspect of life the greatest thing that a person had is problem in

which only the strategic plan can solve. Ericson (2007) further define activity

design as problem solving in real life, the methods become the key of the solving

problem process, and method depends on the perspective of problem analysis,

this perspective is called cognitive style in cognitive psychology. Therefore

design process is essentially a process of re-examining and sorting out the

cognitive style. From the design development process and design practice of

different schools in different periods, design is a kind of thinking and cognitive

style in the society, different design schools represent the different design

thinking.

Activity design is the process by which USAID further defines how it will

implement an activity that contributes achieving the intended results of a project.

An activity funds an intervention or set of interventions, typically through an

implementing mechanism such as a contract, assistance program, or partnership

with another Government Agency, the partner country government, other donors

and development assistance agencies, NGOs, and the private sector. It may also

be an intervention undertaken directly by USAID staff that contributes to

achieving a Project Purpose such as policy dialogue, capacity building services,

or coordination with stakeholders. The step-wise linkages from programs,

through projects, to activities are also prominent in the way in which activity

designs are prepared and in activity M&E Plans. For every program-level

Development Objective (DO) USAID approves, there must be both a Results

Framework and a Performance Management Plan (PMP). At the project level,

the tools USAID uses shift, and for each project USAID requires a Logical

Framework and an associated MEL Plan.

According to SERC Carleton (2010) Activity Design are define as: (a)

emphasizes broad scope of what is being designed (b)establishes and maintains

usage context, and (c) referred to as conceptual design or task-level design.

According to Simon (2007) the empirical research methods for the

analysis of design activity, protocol analysis is the one that has received the most

use and attention in recent years (Ericsson and Simon,93). It has become

regarded as the most likely method (perhaps the only method) to bring out into

the open the somewhat mysterious cognitive abilities of designers. It was given a

significant boost by the Delft Design Protocols Workshop of 1994 (Cross et al.,

96). It does, though, have some severe limitations, to be noted later. Although

the amount of research in design activity has grown substantially since the mid-
1980s, the total amount still is not particularly great, and the results of that

research are varied, often based on single or small numbers of subjects, and

usually untested by repeat studies.

In contrary Abad (2008) define activity design as the matter of common

sense that did not need an strategic analysis on the other hand it deal with a

complex strategic thinking.

In that case the researchers’ concluded that activity design is the process

of planning an activity to ensure and avoid the failure of school activity. In

connection herewith it further explained that if there is a good activity design

there is no problem in conducting any activities. It is partly supported by the study

Simon (2007) and Ericson (2007).

As resulted to the findings of Lacanilao (2007) activity design need the

following strategies:

Goal analysis

Designers appear to be ‘ill-behaved’ problem solvers, in that they do not

spend much time and attention on defining the problem. However, this seems to

be appropriate behavior, since some studies have suggested that over-

concentration on problem definition does lead to successful design outcomes

Solution focusing
 Designers are solution-focused, not problem-focused. This appears to be

a feature of design cognition which comes with education and experience in

designing.

Problem/solution co-evolution

The designer’s attention oscillates between the two, forming partial

structuring’s of the two ‘spaces’ of problem and solution. Designing appears to be

an ‘appositional’ search for a matching problem-solution pair, rather than a

propositional argument from problem to solution.

Problem framing

Processes of structuring and formulating the problem are frequently

identified as key features of design activity.

Fixation

‘Fixation’ seems to be double-edged feature of design activity, in that it

can lead to conservative, routine design or - perhaps only when exercised by

outstanding designers – to creative, innovative design.

Attachment to concepts

Designers become readily attached to single, early solution concepts and

are reluctant to abandon them in the face of difficulties in developing these

concepts into satisfactory solutions.

Generation of alternatives

Generating a wide range of alternative solution concepts is another aspect

of design behavior which is recommended by theorists and educationists but

appears not to be normal design practice.

Creativity

Creative thinking has tended to be regarded as mysterious, but new

explanatory descriptions of creativity in design are beginning to emerge from

empirical studies.

Sketching

The key ‘tool’ to assist design cognition remains the traditional sketch. It

seems to support and facilitate the uncertain, ambiguous and exploratory nature

of conceptual design activity.

Opportunism

‘Opportunistic’ behavior sounds like another feature of the

characteristically ‘unprincipled’, ‘ill-behaved’ activity of designers. The ‘cognitive

cost’ of apparently more principled, structured behavior may actually be higher

than can be reasonably sustained, or can be justified by quality of outcome.

Modal shifts

There is no clear \explanation for this observation, but it may be related to

the need to make rapid explorations of problem and solution in tandem.

Experts and novices

Conventional wisdom about the nature of problem-solving expertise

seems often to be contradicted by the behavior of expert designers. In design

education we must therefore be very wary about importing models of behavior

from other fields.

This study is related to the study of SERC Carleton (2010), USAID, Simon

(2007), Lacanilao (2007), and Ericson (2007) in which they define activity design

as a conflict process that use strategical analysis or method to fulfill what is

needed for the improvement of an activity. In addition those goals can be

attained thru the use of process such as solution focusing, problem co- evolution,

goal analysis, problem framing fixation, attachment to concepts, generation

alternatives, creativity, sketching, opportunism, modal shifts and expert and

novices. However, Abad (2008) define activity design as the matter of common

sense. In that case the researchers’ concluded that activity design is the process

of planning an activity to ensure and avoid the failure of school activity.

Level of Students Satisfaction

Level of students’ satisfaction is an appreciation or may either be a

judgement in one specific activity, however it partly explain that it is based upon

the event on how it can complete its pleasurable desire. According to Oliver

(1997), he stated that satisfaction is a pleasurable fulfillment which in general

consumers are familiar that consumption completes some goal, desire and

consequently this completion creates a pleasurable feeling.

As for Halstead et. al. (1994), satisfaction refers to an alternate response

that is centered on matching the result of the product with some standard set

prior to the purchase and measured during or after consumption. In connection

with that, students’ satisfaction is based on the set of standard in specific

community where they belong.

On the contrary, Fornell (1992) describes satisfaction as a common

evaluation based on the result of the product perceived after the purchase and

compared with prospects prior to the purchase. Additionally, the term satisfaction

has been researched thoroughly in many empirical studies through massive

personal interviews and meetings with consumer groups.

Satisfaction according to Giese and Cote (2000) comprises of three crucial

elements which are first, a general affective response that varies in its intensity,

secondly a focus on the choice of product, purchase or consumption and lastly,

the moment of determination that varies according to different situations and

duration in time. The term satisfaction itself creates a vast diversity within

industry and societal perspectives and varies with regard to the object focus and

level of specificity.

According to Yi(1991), satisfaction consists of levels of satisfaction with a

product or service, purchase decision experience, performance attribute,

consumption-use experience, department or store of the business organization,

lastly with a pre-purchasing experience.

According to Beelick (2007) the interview responses of high school

students were content analyzed to identify sources and effects of student

satisfaction and dissatisfaction with school. It was found that the sources of

satisfaction were achievement, recognition, school activities, and interesting

school work; and the sources of dissatisfaction were the teacher’s behavior,

interpersonal relations with peers, and school policy and administration.

Satisfaction was found to have had a positive effect on students’ school

performances, personalities, and attitudes toward school, and dissatisfaction to

have had a negative effect on students’ personalities and attitudes toward

school. The sources and effects of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with school

were not found to be significantly different for "satisfied" and "dissatisfied"

students’.

According to Corazon (2007) some of the students’ satisfaction included

199 students from Alexandria and 146 students from Dammam, with response

rates of 99.5% and 73%, respectively. The percentages of those reporting ECA

participation were 27.1% and 43.8%, respectively, mostly in community service,

sports, and social activities. About 60% of students did not think that ECAs

affected their studies, although the perceived difficulty of balancing ECAs and

academics was associated with lower odds of participation (odds ratio = 0.51).

Most students participated in ECAs to socialize and make friends, and the

majority was dissatisfied with school-organized ECAs (52% and 59%,

respectively). Gender and/or perceived relation between ECAs and academic

studies affected actual participation in ECAs in one school but not the other.

This study is partly related to the study of Oliver (1997), Halstead et.al.

(1994), since determining the level of students’ satisfaction deal with the set of

standard to achieve the primary goal that is needed for the betterness and

achievement of pleasurable desire. In addition Beelick (2007) find out in his study

that the sources of satisfaction were achievement, recognition, school activities,

and interesting school work. On the contrary, Fornell (1992) describes

satisfaction as a common evaluation based on the result of the product perceived

after the purchase and compared with prospects prior to the purchase. In that

case, the researchers’ concluded that level of students’ satisfaction can be done

thru analyzation.
Research Paradigm

Input Process Output

The Demographic
profile of the
Gathering an Result of the study
respondents:
information by regarding on the
 Gender conducting a survey survey that was
 Affiliation using questionnaire. conducted
-participants (Propose Activity
-Non-participants Plan).
-Facilitator
 Grade- Level

This study employs an input, process and output diagram (IPO diagram)

that enable the researchers’ to describe the structure of an information on how to

generate a propose activity design by means of the factors that make up a

process. In a graphical representation of input it further show the demographic

profile of the respondents’ in which they are classified by means of their gender,

affiliation, and grade-level that greatly help the researchers’ for them to know

that this part will serve as their basis to know what they are going to process.

While, in a graphical representation of process it shows on how to generate a

survey by means of questionnaire in which it enable the respondents’ to have a

check list related to the respondents’ status in the level of their satisfaction by

means of parade/opening program, musical contest, literary contest as well as

the search for Mr. and Ms. BPAHS. While in the graphical representation of

output it further shows that after the said process the result of the intended

questionnaire will be in tabulated form to get the result that serve as an

underlying instrument to formulate a propose activity design for the betterness of

school activities.