Chapter I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

Introduction

Dropping out is the act of leaving of a student from high school, university or

another group for practical reasons, necessities, or disillusionment before completion.

Dropping out of school is often the result of a long process of disengagement that may

begin in some cases even before a child enters school, and is often described as a process,

with factors arising and compounding overtime (Hammond et al., 2007).

School dropout is a complex, multi-faceted problem and the decision to drop out

of school is a process, not an event. Hence, dropping out is often the result of a

combination of factors across various reasons. This view was reaffirmed in the study by

Hunt (2008), who also found out that dropping out is often a process caused not only by a

single event but also more than one proximate cause. The alterable variables such as

school attendance and identification with school which can usually be influenced by

students, parents, educators, and community members are the school factors leading to

dropout. Also, most students who dropped out in school tend to be older compared to

their grade level peers.

The right to universal education has been under serious threat due to continued

high number of school dropouts making school retention hard to maintain over the past

several years (UNESCO, 2012). For example, one of the schools in Lipa City, Batangas

recorded an alarming increasing number of dropouts. According to the official school

1
record, the percentage of senior high school dropouts for school year 2017-2018 is 2.44%,

while for S.Y. 2018-2019 is 4.11%.

Due to the serious case of dropouts in the schools, the researchers would like to

know the causes and effects of this case to lessen or to reduce its rate through the use of

interaction of the students. This study is expected to give enough information and

solution about the main problem.

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to reduce the increasing dropout rate of senior high school

students of Pinagkawitan Integrated National High School.

Specifically, this study sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the most common reason why students drop out from the school among the

following factors:

1.1 Academic;

1.2 Family;

1.3 Internal; and

1.4 External?

2. How does dropping out in school affect the students?

3. How does interaction of students help reduce the dropout rate of senior high school

students?

4. What are the activities to be proposed to use interaction in reducing the dropout rate of

students?

2
Scope and Limitation

The main purpose of the study was to give information or necessary step to reduce

the dropout rate of senior high school students.

The study focused on the students of Pinagkawitan Integrated National High

School because the researchers observed that there is an increase of dropout rate in their

school.

The researchers narrowed the study in senior high school students of

Pinagkawitan Integrated National High School to limit the respondents who would

answer the questionnaires. The research design that the researchers used was descriptive

survey and was only limited to 28 respondents who were reported from their teachers

with difficulties in studying and were recorded in Student-At-Risk of Dropping Out

(SARDO).

The 25 respondents were those who have problems from different aspects such as

financial, family, emotional, and psychological and others. Each of the respondents from

senior high school was given a questionnaire to answer. The selected students were from

Humanities and Social Sciences (HUMSS) strand with 5 students, Technical-Vocational-

Livelihood Track with 13 students in Information Communication and Technology and 7

students in Home Economics both grade 11 and 12 levels to avoid prejudice of their

perceptions. The other 3 students were the ones who already dropped out in senior high

school. Those respondents were not restricted by gender so as become part of this study-

significant that it was either male or female were probably and possible to be the

respondent. Also, the limitation of time and budget somehow affected the results of the

study. The study covered the data from 2017-2020.

3
 The study is conducted within the whole semester of school year 2019-2020.

Significance of the Study

The study may benefit the following:

To the senior high school students. This study may serve as a guide because

they will be informed about the problem and will be able to help in reducing the dropout

rate of the students.

To the teachers. This study will help the teachers to deal with the students coping

with the tasks and problems the students may encounter in school.

To PINHS. This study may assist the school in improving the SHS students'

performance and avoid bad image due to increasing rate of dropout.

To the community. Through this study, the community may provide fun

educational activities for the students to improve learning.

To the government. This study may help them in providing well-defined

education system that could answer the need for action of increasing dropout rates of the

students.

To the present researchers. This study may give ample information on how to

overcome the problems their fellow students may face.

To the future researchers. This study may give them additional information

which they may use in their own study.

4
 Chapter II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

For better understanding of this study, the researchers conducted a review

regarding the reading and literature that are found relevant to the study. This chapter

presents the discussion of conceptual literature, related study, synthesis, conceptual

paradigm, theoretical framework, hypothesis and the definition of terms to further

understand the main focus of the study.

Conceptual Literature

Within this chapter, definition of dropout, global and local situation of school

dropout, and the policies of Department of Education are presented. This chapter also

provides the factors influencing school dropouts, its effects and the interaction of students

to reduce dropout rates.

School Dropout. School dropout is a long-term process of disengagement by

which students do not persist toward graduation. These are the students who did not

complete and dropout before gaining a high school diploma. This process is often

incremental and may begin as early as elementary years (Bridgeland et al., 2006).

According to UNICEF and UNESCO (2011), school dropouts refer to children

who were enrolled in school but have left before completion. Dropping out of school can

be related to a variety of factors that can be classified in four categories: individual,

family, school, and community factors.

Globally, the number of students who are dropping out of school is of particular

reason to educational systems and society as a whole. According to UNESCO (2012)

5
Global Report on education, there was a clamant need to identify the high numbers of

students who dropped out from the school before completing primary education. The

findings by UNESCO (2011) on the global picture regarding the attainment of Universal

Primary Education (UPE) indicated that about 31.2 million primary students in 2010

dropped out of school and may never return. This means that even in primary education,

there's already a high number of dropout rate.

In addition to this, Colby, O’Neill & Stid (2009) states in their journal entitled,

“Portland Public Schools: From data and decisions to implementations and results on

dropout prevention” that one-third of high school students across the U.S. fail to get a

high school diploma on schedule. The rate falls to 50% for minority students; every day

7,000 students drop out of school.

Locally, based on the report of Department of Education (2010), Cohort Survival

Rates (CSR), for the past 10 years, has fluctuated between 60% and 80% in both

elementary and secondary levels. These statistics mean that about 20 to 40% of

elementary students did not complete schooling until Grade 6, while 60 to 75% of

secondary students has one-third of them did not finish high school.

Moreover, one of the schools in Lipa City, Batangas recorded an alarming

increasing number of dropouts. According to the official school record, the percentage of

senior high school dropouts for school year 2017-2018 is 2.44%, while for S.Y. 2018-

2019 is 4.11%.

In connection with this, an article entitled "Number of elementary, high school

dropout rising—lawmaker" by Porcalla (2017) states that the number of both elementary

6
and high school dropouts has risen. According to a senior administration lawmaker, it has

reached 4.8 million or an 11% increase since 2012.

Due to these cases, Department of Education implemented policies regarding this.

Based on the article of Amoroso & Bajo (2014) entitled "Phl dropout rates rising since

2007," the Department of Education (DepEd) found out that there has been no significant

movement in dropout rates among elementary and high school students in the last five

years. However, dropout rates in both levels have been rising since 2007. From 5.99

percent in school year 2007-2008, the dropout rate went up gradually until it reached 6.81

in school year 2012-2013. The same trend can be observed for the secondary level

dropout rate, which ranged from 7.45 percent in school year 2007-2008 to 7.82 percent in

school year 2011-2012.

The Department of Education (DepEd) will thresh out and stop students in

elementary and secondary schools from dropping out. In the DEPED Order 74, s. 2010

which states the Guidelines on Mainstreaming the Dropout Reduction Program (DORP)

in the Public Secondary Schools. The effectiveness of the Dropout Reduction Program

(DORP) in reducing dropout rate, in the attainment of zero dropout rates, in increasing

participation rate and improving learning outcomes using formal, non-formal and

informal approaches. These approaches utilize the Family, Individual, Community and

School (FICS) Analysis to facilitate the identification of students-at-risk of dropping out

(SARDO) by introducing the appropriate interventions. The FICS Analysis encompasses

the psychological, emotional, economic, cultural and social dimensions of the risk factors

for dropping out affected the students/learners.

7
 In an article entitled “DepEd: Dropouts Start at 1st Grade” by Zaldivar (2010)

states that DORP was designed to address the problems faced by students, which prevent

them from completing their elementary and high school education. Many students cannot

report to class regularly because of various reasons such as work, financial problems

physical handicap, family and health issues, among others. DepEd attributed this to their

intensified efforts to address the occurrence of children dropping out of school.

According to DepEd's Bureau of Secondary Education director Lolita Andrada,

DORP has several programs that rescue students-at-risk of dropping out (SARDO), from

discontinuing their schooling and being considered a school failure. The Open High

School Program (OHSP) is a distance education program that allows working students or

previously out-of-school youth (OSY) to continue studying using a specialized

module. The Effective Alternative Secondary Education (Ease) provides an innovative

learning tool that allows students to pursue lessons outside school using modules. Some

children may have to be temporarily absent from class because of justifiable reasons such

as natural calamity or an illness. The Schools Initiated Interventions (SII) is the most

effective help for SARDO since the school itself fits the kind of help a student needs

according to his unique circumstances. The SII has enabled schools to determine, based

on interview, specific problems of students or the real causes for dropping out. DORP

was first tried out under the Secondary Education Development and Improvement Project

implemented in 2000-2006, which was co-financed by the Asian Development Bank.

Factors Influencing School Dropouts. High school dropout was commonly seen

as the result of a long-term process of failure and disengagement of the students.

However, Bowers & Sprott (2012) revealed in their journal, “Why tenth graders fail to

8
finish high school?” that there was a record of as many as 40% of dropouts do not show

or give any clear signs of disengagement or major academic or behavioral problems that

may be the reasons in the years before dropping out.

Regardless, many studies have been done to identify predictors and variables

associated with dropout. One of the studies related to this is the book, “Dropping out

from school,” by Hunt (2008) who categorized the variables associated with school

dropout according to the extent to which they can be influenced to change the situations

leading to dropout. According to the study, most school factors leading to dropout fall in

the alterable variables such as school attendance and identification with school which can

usually be influenced by students, parents, educators, and community members.

Furthermore, he also found that there are often precursors to dropping out, where students

could be seen to be at risk or vulnerable to early withdrawal. The study also found that

students who repeated grades, those who consistently performed poorly and those who

were over age for the grade, were attending more likely to drop out of school. Students

who dropped out tend to be older compared to their grade level peers.

According to the book of Lewin (2008) entitled “Access, Age and Grade,” there

were effects in the relationship between age and grade. It affirmed that the relationship

between age and grade attended were consistent with dropping out. The study found that

other students who were too old for the grade they attended were more likely to drop out

of school.

An article, “Mapping the incidence of school dropouts,” done by Ampiah and

Adu-Yeboah (2009) identified some school factors that contributed to students dropping

out of school. These included grade repetition, over age enrolment, low achievement and

9
regular absenteeism or previous temporary withdrawals from school. It was not clear

whether the repetition helped in increasing the chances of completion. However,

according to this study, grade repetition extended the age range in a particular grade.

Thus, it increased the possibility of repeaters dropping out. The study found that students

who were made to repeat grades with a view of improving their performance ended up

dropping out of school.

Furthermore, Nava (2009) found on his journal, “Factors in School Leaving:

Variations Across Gender Groups, School Levels and Locations1,” that even if dropouts

re-enter school, at some point, many repeaters eventually dropout at a later time.

Readmission on schools seemed to have little to no positive effect on achievement. The

study also indicated that students in various gender groups, school levels and locations

were at risk of dropping for various reasons. Some of these factors were common to all

dropouts.

In addition, the book, “Dropout prevention fieldbook: Best practices from the

field,” by Schargel (2012) revealed that there were four major causes of students

dropping out of school: the student himself/herself, family problem, school environment

and the community they live in. This study also suggested that in order to prevent the

increasing dropout rate of students, the causes listed above must be defeated.

An analysis of the Dropout Reduction Plan of the Department of Education (2007)

found out the factors that lead the students to dropout. First, it was related to family

situation, low family income, unemployed parents, and parents engaging in seasonal jobs

are included. Some parents tended to neglect their parental responsibilities towards their

children's education because they are busy with other activities associated to increasing

10
the family income. Some are working as Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs), other

parents have poor educational background, and others are just irresponsible parents who

are indulging in vices such as gambling and alcoholism. Broken family and family

conflicts also affected the students’ school performance.

Then, the student herself/himself is a problem already. Internal factors which

occur within oneself and having social disengagement where students have little to no

relationships with peers, lacking social skills, or their group of friends, early marriage and

pregnancy that can lead in dropping out of school. Health troubles such as malnutrition

and illnesses were involved. Some were doing poor in their academic performances

which are brought about by being slow learners, having low self-esteem, having poor

study habit, being not ready academically for secondary school, and non-compliance of

subject requirements. Associated to this, under the external factors, which happen outside

or in the environment and thus influence a student to dropout are peer

pressure/barkadahan, school environment or facilities, playing amusement games during

classes and even indulging in various vices were identified among students.

Third, some students have no access to regular transportation because of the

distance and difficult geographic allocation of the school. Fourth, these were the school

factors. A good number of schools have been insufficient instructional equipment and

facilities. Many teachers still resort to the traditional methods of teaching, inappropriate

teaching styles and utilization of traditional assessment of learning outcomes. Also, some

schools provide inadequate guidance program or some do not have full-time guidance

counselors. Lastly, it is community related problem. The presence of amusement and

recreation centers such as internet cafe, video games, billiard halls, and video houses,

11
operating in the locality of the school and community during class hours entice students

not to attend classes.

However, Hupfield (2011) stated on his book entitled “Resiliency Skills and

Dropout Prevention” that there is no single risk factor that can be used to accurately

predict who is at risk of dropping out.

Effects of Dropping Out. Not completing high school negatively impacts not

only the lives of those who drop out but also society as a whole. Based on an article

entitled “Effects of Dropping Out of the Students in School” done by Robertson (2018),

there are several consequences of dropping out. These include greater chance of being

unemployed; lower income, incarceration such as a jail or a juvenile, missing all the

different opportunities, affecting more public financial resources, and being single

motherhood.

According to Campbell (2017), the most significant disadvantage that high school

dropouts were facing was the low amount of income they gained from the economy

compared to high school graduates. Also, dropouts may not have access to wealth-

producing assets such as retirement, pension and employers often offer as a benefit. Other

than these, some of the disadvantages brought by being a dropout are lack of access to

higher education, reducing the tax revenue, poor health outcomes and increasing the

likelihood of legal trouble.

In addition, the rate of engagement in high-risk behavior such as early pregnancy,

delinquency, crime, violence, premature sexual activity, alcohol and drug abuse and

suicide has found to be the significantly higher among dropouts (Consequences of

Dropping out of School, 2012).

12
 A study done by Crain- Dorough (2003) states that dropping out has negative

impact on adult psychological functioning. First, dropping out may cause individual’s

self –worth to be lowered due to the negative stigma from the society and losing

opportunities the individual faces. Second, dropping out may disrupt the coping

mechanisms of the individual that he/she is using in his/her adolescent years. Finally,

dropping out forces an individual to face new expectations as the responsibilities of an

adult.

Interaction of Students to Reduce Dropout Rates. According to a study,

“Education for All, the Quality Imperative and the Problem of Pedagogy” by Alexander

(2008), school factors leading to pupils dropping out from school were classified under

alterable variables because they are easier to change and can usually be influenced by

pupils, parents, educators, and community members. These school factors could be dealt

with by making changes involving the students, school staff and members of the local

community. This study recommended the school by developing strategies which include

supporting the students at risk and hereby reducing the dropout rate of students and will

also help them in having a clearer understanding on how they will solve the problems of

dropouts in school. This study also observed that reducing dropout rates require a change

on how the school operate. They had observed that there is a lack of interaction occurring

between teachers and students. It also recommended the school to engage parents by

establishing relationships between the school and the community.

One of the top six reasons for dropping out was receiving poor grades (Liu 2004).

A survey performed by Ministry of Education (2008) implicates that students who

perform poorly overtime were exposed to a greater risk of dropping out. Therefore, to

13
prevent the students from dropping out, they should get good grades. So, for students to

be able to learn, they should be readers, writers, speakers, listeners, and thinkers at the

same time through the active engagement in social interaction with other students, peers

and teachers in the classroom (Vacca, Vacca, & Mraz, 2011). Interaction in the school

setting is usually referred to as the framework of cooperative learning, pair work, group

work, project-methods and other models used in teaching.

Interactive learning for Nenad Suzic (2005) is a process that results in relatively

permanent changes in thinking, emotions and behavior that arise from the experience,

traditions and practices achieved in social interaction. Interactive learning, according to

Krneta (2006), cannot be viewed as learning at school, nor as an interaction or a simple

collection of learning and interaction. The key notion in the phrase interactive learning is

the concept of learning. The term interaction is a factor which precisely shows how

indicated learning takes place according to “Interactive Learning and Students’

Competences in Teaching Literature” (Kneževic and Kovacevic 2011). This way of

learning puts students in a position to work at their own pace (for as long time as they

need to, at a time when it suits them, to choose collaborators who to cooperate with, and

that all students have the chance to learn the planned curriculum to the level that best

suits them) and that they receive the satisfaction (praise for the success or reproach for

the failure). Interactive learning provides unflinching support and cooperation of students

with their teachers and other students in the process of acquiring new knowledge or

learning new things.

14
 In the process of learning, cooperation is practically manifested through the

willingness to work with others (working in a collective, group or pair), the willingness to

establish equal and reciprocal relations with others, and the great trust and tolerance

towards those they learn with. Therefore, socially interactive learners are engaged

learners (Vacca et al., 2011).

This was also proven by the findings of a study performed by Hurst, Wallace, and

Nixon (2013) entitled “The Impact of Social Interaction on Student Learning,” wherein

students believe that social interaction: (a) helps students learn from others (23%), (b)

makes learning fun (16%), (c) gets students interested and engaged (10%), and (d) allows

students a chance to talk in the classroom (8%). Other students also answered that “social

interaction encourages students to think, read, conclude, summarize, question, etc.” In

short, social interaction is vital to the learning process.

An event that can also be connected to a high rate of dropout students is not

getting along with teachers or poor pupil-teacher relationship. A negative relationship

between 90 teacher and student, marked by chronic conflict, is on the other hand

associated with underachievement (Spilt et al., 2012). When a student doesn’t have a

good relationship with his/her teacher, he/she is more likely not interested in learning,

will show unethical behaviors towards the teacher, a high risk of absenteeism that will

currently lead to dropping out.

In Cornelius-White’s study, “Learner-Centered Teacher-Student Relationships

Are Effective: A Meta-Analysis” (2007), found that learner-centered education, which

emphasizes the role of teacher-student relationships, has significant association with

learning achievement, as well as reducing disruptive behavior, absences, and dropout.

15
Roorda et al., (2011) reconfirm this strong association between good teacher-student

relationships and student engagement and achievement in their study, “Teacher Well-

being: The importance of teacher-student relationships. Educational Psychology Review”.

Hattie (2009) concluded that Cornelius-White’s meta-analysis illustrates that in

classrooms with teachers focused on developing good relationships with students, there

was more engagement, more respect of self and others, fewer resistant behaviors, greater

student-initiated activities, and higher learning outcomes.

There were numerous reasons why students lose interest in learning and get

unmotivated in pursuing school completion according to “The Effect of Teacher-Student

Relationships on the Academic Engagement of Students,” a study by Varga (2017). One

of these is the fact that students spend about fifty percent of their waking hours (8 hours)

in a classroom and it is essential that students are bored or they will not be willing to

learn. This creates a problem for both the teacher and the student. Throughout an average

school day, teachers frequently overhear students complaining about an assignment, a

class, or even a teacher. If students have positive relationships with their teachers, they

will be more engaged and thus more motivated throughout each of their classes. When

students feel that their teachers are more supportive, they can have better achievement

outcomes (Gehlbach et al., 2012). Therefore, the first step to helping a student become

more motivated and engaged, and thus academically successful, is building and

maintaining positive teacher-student relationships.

Thus, in a motivational research conducted by Deci and Ryan (2000), the

importance of good teacher-student relationships is explained by self-determination

theory, which argues that all individuals have three basic psychological needs: the need

16
for relatedness, autonomy, and competence. The need for relatedness, or belonging, refers

to a human being’s tendency towards wanting ‘to feel connected to others; to love and

care’. However, Osterman (2000) noted the concept of belonging is broad and is also

referred to as a sense of community, support, or acceptance.

Positive teacher-student relationships were associated with students’ intrinsic

motivation as a genuine interest in learning, as opposed to extrinsic motivation that is

driven by pressures from others or desire for rewards (Deci and Ryan, 2000). Teachers'

warmth and attention can contribute to students liking school and feeling a sense of

belonging. Such positive emotions drive student motivation (Skinner et al., 2008), and

can therefore lead to behavioral engagement, which is when students cooperate by

following rules and participating in learning activities (Fredricks et al., 2004).

In another study conducted in Ghana by Ananga entitled “Understanding the push

and pull factors in school dropout: A Case Study of Southern Ghana” (2010), found that

when a teacher becomes more approachable to the problem of dropout, the situation can

still be able to improve. An example is when the Consortium for Research on Educational

Access, Transitions and Equity (CREATE) works in Southern Ghana has revealed that

few teachers who are sensitive of the problem of dropouts started to intervene to prevent

dropouts and encourage 'drop-ins'. This was achieved through identifying the children at

risk of dropping out and later on visit these children and their parents and encouraging

the students to continue attending classes. These measures are indicative of what schools

can do if sensitized about their role in reducing drop out.

17
Related Study

According to the study of Moore (2007) entitled as "Dropped Out: Factors that

Cause Students to Leave Before Graduation," there were factors that cause students to

leave before graduation, and seeks information about preventative methods to keep

students from quitting. The study utilized a qualitative research methodology which

consisted of 15 respondents from an adult high school and used a one-on-one interview

guide, follow-up phone call interview and observations. The research showed significant

outcomes: (a) lack of credits and falling behind was the most common reason why

students quit; (b) moving, being bullied, language barriers, and a combination of the

factors were also listed as recurrent reasons students dropped out; (c) respondents felt like

monitoring progress, providing academic support, and creating a safe and inviting

learning environment could prevent students from leaving prior to graduation.

Additionally, the study of Miller (2006), entitled as "Dropped Out or Pushed Out:

A Case Study on why students Drop Out," explored the factors involved in why students

drop out of school. It concentrated on the difficulties of adolescent youth in middle

school which was where the researcher believed the drop out process is likely to begin.

The study was a quantitative research that used an interview which involved four

participants. The study found out the potential causes such as family issues, negative

interactions with teachers and other school staff, and the feeling students have of not

being connected to school. It provided accounts of personal experiences and literature on

these issues and combined this information in an attempt to identify what happens in the

educational experiences of students to cause them to drop out of school. After looking at

the possible causes of why students decide to drop out of school, this study offered

18
recommendations for educators to assist in alleviating these causes. It offered ideas to

identify the "at risk" students and possibilities to stop the process while in its early stages

or to prevent it from starting.

Likewise, the study of Dimas (2013) which was "School Factors Contributing to

Learners Dropping Out of Schools in Solwezi District" focused on investigating the

school factors that contributed to dropping out of school among the students in Solwezi

district of Zambia. Both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection and

analysis were used. The study used descriptive survey design and involved 250

participants purposively selected who included teachers, pupils and school dropouts

drawn from five schools. The study found that school factors contributing to pupils

dropping out of school were prevalent in schools under study such as: poor teacher-pupil

relationship, manual work, lack of readiness to learn, lack of functioning pupil support

structures, unstimulating school environment and punishments. The study further found

that five components of the school environment (place, people, policies, programs,

processes) to a certain degree transmitted negative signals to pupils resulting in negative

attitude formation, which to some extent influenced pupils’ decisions and behavior

leading to dropping out.

Similarly, Rumberger (2001) attempted to explain on his study, "Why Students

Drop Out of School and What Can Be Done," the reasons why students drop out of

school based on two different conceptual frameworks and recommended to solve it. The

study used qualitative research through examining the records of dropouts in various

schools of United States. The study found that dropping out was not simply a result of

19
academic failure, but rather often results from both social and academic problems in

school.

In connection with this, the study of Chugh (2011) named as “Dropout in

Secondary Education: A Study of Children Living in Slums of Delhi” examined the

factors that contributed to dropping out by children at secondary level. The analysis used

qualitative research through conducting surveys undertaken on the marginalized group of

children living in slum areas of Delhi who dropped out from the Government schools.

The findings revealed that both the family and school related factors were responsible

and appeared to be highly correlated with each other. It was also found that adolescents’

dropout not merely due to poverty and financial constraints, but also because the schools

did not respond appropriately to their special educational needs forcing them to dropout.

Meanwhile, based on the study of Robinson (2014) entitled "The Lived

Experiences of Students at risk of Dropping out: An Interpretative Phenomenological

Analysis," there was a need to explore the engagement experiences of students who were

formally at risk of dropping out before enrolling in a credit-recovery high school. This

study sought to enrich the research base for engagement and to identify factors that can

be implemented in future dropout prevention initiatives. The study used qualitative

phenomenological methods that analyzed interviews from five students. Interview data

collected from the participants was analyzed using the framework of student engagement

as a psychological experience, with a focus on the affective and cognitive dimensions.

The results revealed the extent to which important contextual elements may interfere or

contribute to student psychological experiences at school”, a gap in current engagement.

It showed that each of the five students experienced a dramatic shift in motivation to

20
complete high school after experiencing success at the alternative, credit-recovery school.

The combined factors led one to believe that for this study the change in engagement that

the students experienced was connected to the following contextual and structural factors:

(1) The roles played by effective learning facilitators; (2) An atmosphere of tolerance and

acceptance; (3) School and class size; (4) The curriculum dissemination method; and (5)

The curriculum itself. These results indicated the potential replicability of such an

alternative learning environment.

Moreover, the journal of Witte et al (2013) which is "A Critical Review of the

Literature on School Dropout" focused on early school leaving in all its complexity, and

on the interplay of relevant factors such as in students, schools or families. The journal

was an empirical-analytical or quantitative research which predominates case study and

ethnographic method through interviews and participant observation. The findings stated

that the role of the economy, politics and society in general is often left out of the picture.

School systems' organization and its effect on early school leaving are also still

underexplored.

On the other hand, the study of Torres & Saromines (2016) entitled as "Students

at risk of Dropping Out of School: Children's Voices" explored the truth behind the

experiences of students at risk of dropping out from public schools. This study used a

qualitative and twenty secondary students were selected through a purposive sampling.

Through in-depth interview and focus group discussion, the study found that hostility in

the family, adversities at home, peer influence, learning difficulty, low self-esteem and

poor disposition, and negative social interaction were barriers of students to

enthusiastically focus on their studies resulting to higher risk of dropping out. As to their

21
insights, they could share to other students who were also at risk of dropping out and to

the school in general: have faith, reform and transform, hold on and be positive. This

study has significance in education as to how to address the problem and find ways to

prevent it.

In relation with this, Crain-Dorough (2003) conducted "A Study of Dropout

Characteristics and School-Level Effects on Dropout Prevention" which examined the

characteristics of students’ dropouts and the characteristics of schools successful and

unsuccessful in mediating dropouts. The study used quantitative analyses through the

formation of narrative profiles and mixed data analysis strategies which made it to have

mixed method design. This study was conducted using public high schools and students

in Louisiana, United States. The cluster analysis resulted for the non-dropouts and

dropouts yielded three clusters: “high achievers,” “average achievers,” and “low

achievers.” The cluster analysis for the dropouts also resulted in three clusters: “quiet

dropouts,” “typical dropouts," and “high-achieving pushouts.” It also found that

consistently low dropouts’ schools had significantly higher student achievement than the

less effective schools, while the more effective schools had significantly higher

attendance rates and student achievement than the consistently high dropouts’ schools.

As indicated in the journal of Dupere et al (2014) entitled as "Stressors and

Turning Points in High School and Dropout: A Stress Process, Life Course Framework,"

to integrate long-term and immediate determinants of dropout, proposing a stress process,

life course model of dropout is needed. In a qualitative analysis, reviewing the documents

about dropout was used. The journal found that some students leave school not as a result

22
of protracted difficulties, but in response to situations that emerge late in their schooling

careers, such as health problems or severe peer victimization.

However, Pollack (2010) conducted a study, " Examining the Effectiveness of

Dropout Prevention Practices and their Implications for intervention with Public School

Students," which focused on determining the effectiveness of the ongoing efforts of the

federal and state government, as well as those of the local school districts, to prevent the

continued problem about dropping out. The study used qualitative research through

conducting a survey among the previous dropout students who had elected to enroll in a

General Education Development (GED) program in a community college in a mid-south

state. The results indicated that the sample population generally agreed that dropout

prevention practices are effective for dropout prevention; however, some practices were

weakly supported.

An article of Hurst, Wallace, & Nixon (2013) entitled as "The Impact of Social

Interaction on Student Learning" examined how students perceived the value of social

interaction in learning by reflecting the classroom experiences at the end of each class

period. Qualitative analysis was used to gather data with the help of survey among the

students and observation to the three literacy teacher preparation courses. The findings

revealed that the students in all three courses perceived that social interaction improved

the learning by enhancing the knowledge of literacy and teaching and critical-thinking

and problem-solving skills.

The study of Fighetti (2017) entitled "An Effective Social Interaction in the

Classroom," was designed to understand the motives that could cause students to choose

to work alone during the lessons. The study used a qualitative methodology with surveys,

23
focus group and artifact analysis used to develop data. The research was conducted in a

small seventh-grade class in which peer interaction was identified an issue of concern.

Although there were only seven students, social interaction during lesson was minimum.

In this context, interest in the factors that limited students’ communication arose,

particularly considering that perspectives such as that of Vygotsky’s socio-cultural

approach foregrounds social interaction as a cornerstone of learning. The primary

outcomes were: participants’ perception of learning contrasted with the expectations of

the school, there was recognition of psychological factors that limited interaction, and the

need to scaffold opportunities to engage socially with the appropriate conditions for a

meaningful dialogue during class time.

Knezevic and Kovacevic (2011) conducted a study, "Interactive Learning and

Students' Competencies in Teaching Literature" which aimed to identify and analyze the

impact of interactive learning on the development of students' competences. The study

used experimental method, empirical-nonexperimental research and methods of

theoretical analysis and synthesis through survey instrument which is a scale of

assessment. The respondents comprised 250 students, of which 125 experimental and 125

students in the control group. The findings reported that interactive learning in the class

has quite a few advantages over the traditional learning in the classroom. The effects of

interactive learning were expressed through a higher degree of development of cognitive,

emotional, social and working competences of students.

The study of Moore, Warner & Jones (2016) entitled as “Student-to-Student

Interaction in Distance Education Classes: What Do Graduate Students Want?”

determined if graduate students taking distance education classes desire student-to-

24
student interaction. The study used a descriptive qualitative research through a field test

or a likert-type statement. Over 200 graduate students who completed one or more

distance education graduate classes in agricultural and extension education during the

past three years were surveyed. Based on the findings, some students desired student-to-

student interaction, the majority of the respondents did not particularly like or want

student-to-student interaction. When various sub-groups of the population (disaggregated

by gender, personality type, age, work status, and student status) were examined, the

results were the same.

According to the study of Altinay (2017) entitled as “Examining the Role of

Social Interaction in Online Learning Process," there was a role of social interaction in

online learning process in higher education. The study was a quantitative research design

that used a survey-questionnaire with 715 participants. The questionnaire provided to

evaluate perceptions of learners on social interaction role, interaction behavior, barriers,

capacity for interaction and group interaction. As research was conducted in a

quantitative nature by using inferential statistics, the research was taken place at the

higher online education system through the application of adobe connect within the

framework of Social Learning Theory and Cognitive Absorption Theory, knowledge

construction of learners was perceived as facilitating students’ engagement in activities

shaped by interactions and involvement. The findings of the study shed a light on the

evaluation on the integration of social interaction within online learning contexts and the

role of transparency in open learning practices.

25
Synthesis

The study of Moore is similar to the current study of the researchers because it

also sought for the factors that caused students to dropout and also found for preventative

methods to keep students from leaving the school. However, this study consisted of only

15 respondents and it is different from the researchers’ study which is limited to 20 ICT

students.

Likewise, Rumberger’s study also attempted to explain and gave different reasons

of dropouts and what could be the possible solutions. He provided two different

conceptual frameworks wherein in finding information, he used records of various

schools in the United States which made it different from the researchers’ current study.

A study conducted by Robinson also aimed to identify factors that could be

implemented in future dropout prevention initiatives. However, this study is different

from Robinson’s research because his study was a phenomenological analysis that

analyzed interviews of five students only. His study also focused on the engagement of

students as a psychological experience. He also provided contextual and structural factors

to explain better and prove his stand.

Another study conducted by Torres and Saromines showed similarity to the

current study. In their research, they explored truth behind the experiences of students at

risk of dropping out. They also used twenty secondary students selected through

purposive sampling. However, their study only focused on the factors of dropping out of

school. They had left the possible solutions to other educators to study.

A quantitative research of Miller also showed similarities in some ways to the

researchers’ current study because it also explored factors involved in why students

26
dropped out of school. It also provided different recommendations to assist in alleviating

these causes. Despite the similarities, they are also different in many ways. Some of these

are that Miller’s study gave some recommendations in preventing the problem while the

researchers’ study only gave a specific solution which was interaction. Moreover, in

Miller’s study, he concentrated on the difficulties of adolescent youth in middle school

and also offered ideas to identify the “at risk” students.

In another study of Dimas, he also sought to know the school factors contributing

Learners Dropping Out of School. Only that this study focused on Solwezi District of

Zambia. However, his study involved 250 participants who included teachers, pupils and

school dropouts drawn from five schools in the district.

Similarly, in a study of Chugh which also examined the factors that contribute to

dropping out of children at secondary level. However, this study focused on children

living in slums of Delhi who dropped out from the Government Schools. It conducted

surveys in finding information.

A journal of Witte et al. which focused on early school leaving in all its

complexity, and on the role of different factors, also showed similarities to the current

study. It explained the different factors of dropping out. However, this study was an

empirical-analytical quantitative research and used interviews and participant observation

in gathering information. Also, in their findings, they had included politics, economy and

society to the factors or reasons of dropping out.

In another journal of Dupere et al, some similarities are also seen. In this study, it

proposed stress and stressors as factors of dropping out wherein documents about

dropouts was used. However, in this study’s findings, it was found out that some students

27
leave school in response to situations that emerged such as health problems and severe

peer victimization.

On the other hand, on the aspect of interaction, the researchers also discovered

books that have similarities and differences to the current study. One of these was a study

by Fighetti. It was qualitative methodology with surveys, focus groups and artifact

analysis used to develop data. In this study, peer interaction was identified as a primary

cause of learning. It was also designed to understand the motives that could cause

students to choose to work alone. However, this study was only limited to seven students

in seventh-grade. This study also gave primary outcomes of social interaction inside the

classroom.

A study conducted by Pollack examined the effectiveness of dropout prevention

and practices and its implications, which is also similar to the study. Pollack’s research

also included dropout students as his respondents only that his respondents should be

enrolled in a General Education Development Program. However, they are also different

because Pollacks study focuses on determining the effectiveness of the government’s

efforts in solving the problem on dropouts.

In an article of Hurst, Wallace, and Nixon, it also shows the value of social

interaction on the learning of the students. Surveys and observation were used to gather

data. However, the study involved three literacy teacher preparation courses in gathering

data, wherein the students in these courses reveal that social interaction improved the

learning by enhancing the knowledge of literacy and teaching and critical thinking and

problem-solving skills.

28
 In a study conducted by Knezevic and Kovacevic, it aims to identify and analyze

the impact of Interactive Learning on the development of student’s competences.

However, this study used experimental method, empirical-non experimental research and

methods of theoretical analysis and synthesis through survey which is a scale of

assessment. The study involved 250 students in the control group. The findings revealed

the Interactive Learning in the class has a few advantages which includes a higher degree

of development.

Another study by Moore, Warner, and Jones also tackles social interaction of

students. This study aims to know if graduate students desire student-to-student

interaction. However, the respondents of this study are graduate students. It has a

respondent of 200 students and used field test to gather information. Its respondents

should be a graduate of one or more distance education classes in agriculture and

extension education.

Another study by Altinay also tackles about social interaction. It aims to evaluate

perceptions of learners on social interaction role, interaction behavior and group

interaction. However, this study focuses on the role of social interaction in online

learning process in higher education. It used survey-questionnaire in 715 participants. It

also used inferential statistics through the application of adobe connect within the

framework of social learning theory and cognitive absorption theory.

Theoretical Framework

This study was guided by William Watson Purkey who first introduced

Invitational Education theory in 1978. It was developed as a method of creating

29
environments in which self-concept could be enhanced and human potential more fully

developed.

The choice of school completion is an example of a positive choice fostered by an

environment of acceptance from likeminded social groups, which include not only peers

but teachers and administrators. Invitational Education theory, believes that every person

and everything in and around the school adds to, or subtracts from, the process of being a

beneficial presence in the lives of human beings (pupils) depending on the type of

messages they transmit to the pupil. The five factors should be so intentionally inviting in

order to create an environment in which each pupil is cordially summoned to develop

intellectually, socially, physically, psychologically and spiritually. Invitational education

suggests some practical strategies for making schools the most inviting place. The theory

helped to examine how people (school staff and pupils), places (physical environment of

the school), policies (school rules and regulations), programmes (school curricula) and

processes (methods used to come up with a better school) sends messages that influence

pupils’ decision leading to dropping out of school. Teachers are in a helping profession

and good teachers feel good about themselves, and they feel good about others. Therefore,

an intentionally inviting school environment impacts pupils positively and most likely to

prevent pupils from dropping out (Purkey & Novak 2015).

The researcher had chosen Invitational Education Theory for this study because it

is helpful in the sense that it creates a school environment, which sends caring signals or

messages to pupils that they are liked. It promotes creation of an intentionally inviting

school environments in which pupils feel liked, welcome, given the opportunity to work

and free to express themselves, as they feel working among friends, which in turn helps

30
them perceive school in much more positive ways that are helpful in preventing them

from dropping out.

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual paradigm of the students shows the input, process, and output that

the researchers will perform.

The first box shows the input. It also includes the most common reason why

students drop out of school in terms of: academic factors, family factors, internal factors

and external factors, the effects of dropping out of school to the students and also how

interaction help reduce the dropout rate of the senior high school students.

The second box shows the process that the researchers will use to gather data.

They will use survey- questionnaire in collecting information wherein they will conduct a

survey through the use of the questionnaire that they will give to the respondents.

The third box shows the output of the study. At the end of the study, the

researchers will conduct a colloquium or a seminar about interaction. The attendants will

be the senior high school students from Pinagkawitan Integrated National High School

31
 INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
1. Most common reason
why students drop out
from the school among
the following factors: Proposed Activities
1.1 Academic Factors;
1.2 Family Factors; “Colloquium”
1.3 Internal Factors; and
(seminar) about the
1.4 External Factors
Survey-
use of Interaction of
2. Effects of Dropping Questionnaire
Out in School to the Students
students

3. How interaction help “leaflet”

reduces the dropout rate
of senior high school “Facebook page”
students

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of Senior High School students

Hypothesis

The given null and alternative hypotheses were tested in this study:

Ho: Interaction does not reduce the dropout rate of Senior Grades.

Hı: Interaction reduces the dropout rate of Senior Grades.

32
Definition of Terms

Dropout Rate. According to the National Center for Education Statistics,

dropout rate represents the percentage of students who are not enrolled in school and

have not earned a high school diploma. In this study, the term is defined to mean the

number of students who did not receive a traditional high school diploma at the end of

their senior year in high school.

Dropouts. Based on Collins English Dictionary, are someone who has left school

or college before they have finished their studies. In this study, the term means students

who did not complete and did not receive a high school diploma.

Dropping Out. According to Google Dictionary, it is an act of abandoning a

course of study. In this study, it is a “process of disengagement” by which students do not

persist toward graduation.

Interaction. Cambridge Dictionary states that it is an occasion when two or more

people or things communicate with or react with each other. In this study, it is a way on

how to reduce the dropout rate of the students.

Interactive Learning. According to the “The Classroom”, it is a pedagogical

technique that engages student by having them actively participate with peers in lessons.

In this study, it is defined as a ‘method of organization of learning with others. Interactive

learning provides unflinching support and cooperation of students with their teachers and

other students in the process of acquiring new knowledge or learning new things.

33
 Chapter III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES

This chapter presents the research design of the study, the respondents, data

gathering procedures, data gathering instrument and statistical treatment of the data.

Research Design

The researchers used a descriptive survey research design in conducting the study

which focused on the factors and effects of dropping out and the impact of interaction in

reducing dropout rates of senior high school students.

According to Calderon (2008) as cited by Alberto et al (2011), descriptive method

is also known as statistical research. It describes data and characteristics about the

population or phenomenon being studied. This research method is used for frequencies,

averages and other statistical calculations. Often the best approach prior to writing,

descriptive research is conducting a survey investigation. This method is used to gather

information in order to test hypothesis or to answer questions concerning the current

status of the subject of the study.

The researchers used this type of research design because the study focused on

describing a phenomenon which was the increasing rate of dropout students. It also

focused on describing the effect of dropping out and the impact of interaction in reducing

dropout rates. However, this study was only centered in senior high school students. The

researchers conducted a survey in a form of questionnaire in gathering information which

tested the hypothesis and answered the questions regarding the study.

34
Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study were 28 senior high school students of Pinagkawitan

Integrated National High School who were at risk of dropping out based on the pre-

survey given to them. The researchers used snowball sampling and selected students from

Humanities and Social Sciences (HUMSS) strand with five (5) students, Technical-

Vocational-Livelihood Track with 13 students in Information Communication and

Technology and seven (7) students in Home Economics because they were recorded in

Student-At-Risk of Dropping Out (SARDO). The other three (3) students were the ones

who already dropped out from the school and served as sources of information because of

the ability to answer the questions that the researchers asked since the other three (3)

students were experiencing different problems that could lead in dropping out of school.

Only those who were willing and available were involved in the study.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researchers gathered data based on existing documents from the school

personnel. After this, they conducted an interview with the teachers who showed the

records of those students who have the probability of dropping out in school. The

researchers conducted a survey in a form of questionnaire to those chosen students to

gather data and information on their research questions. The next step was explaining the

instructions on how the respondents would be answering the survey and assuring that all

items were clear and understandable. The questionnaires were collected after the

participants had answered all the items in the tool. After transcribing the responses, the

researchers interpreted and made a generalization of the gathered data.

35
Data Gathering Instrument

The researchers conducted a survey in a form of questionnaire. This was prepared

in a Likert scale question that used to measure the collected data and information. It was

divided into two parts: the first part was the demographic profile of the respondents

which includes the age, sex and grade level while the second part contained the Likert

questions with 27 statements. The questionnaire included 27 statements wherein the first

17 statements determined the causes of dropping out and was divided into 4 factors:

academic, family, internal and external factors. Then, items 18 to 22 determined the

effects of dropping out to the students and items 23 to 27 determined how interaction of

students helps to reduce the increasing dropout rate.

Statistical Treatment of Data

To interpret the gathered data, the following statistical tools were utilized by the

researchers:

1. Ranking. This was used to know the level from the most effective to the less

effective, wherein the most effective ranked 1.

2. Weighted Mean. It was used to determine the assessment of the respondents

with regards to their personal profiles and to compute the effectiveness of interaction of

students to reduce the dropout rate of senior high school.

𝐹1 −𝑊1 ∑𝑊𝐹
𝑊𝐹 = 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 =
𝑁 𝑁

Where WF is the weighted mean, F1 is the frequency, W1 is the summation of

weighted frequencies and N is the total.

36
 Chapter IV
PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION, AND ANALYSIS

This chapter presents the data gathered in a tabular form, supported with

corresponding analysis, interpretation, implication and theoretical bases.

The statement of the problem consists of 27 statements wherein the first 17

statements determine the causes of dropping out and is divided into 4 factors: academic,

family, internal and external factors then items 18 to 22 determine the effects of dropping

out to the students and items 23 to 27 determine how interaction of students helps to

reduce the increasing dropout rate.

Table 1. Academic factors of dropping out.

Academic Factors Weighted Verbal Ranking

Mean Interpretation

1. I have a poor study habit. 2.64 Agree 3

2. I don’t have the confidence to 2.80 Agree 1

express my own ideas.

3. I can’t understand the lessons 2.52 Agree 4.5

being discussed.

4. I can’t comply with the requirements 2.76 Agree 2

that should be submitted in each
subject.

5. I feel that I am still not ready 2.44 Disagree 6

academically.

6. I perform poorly in class. 2.52 Agree 4.5

Composite Mean 2.61 Agree

37
 The table shows that most of the respondents agreed to the listed reasons under

academic factors of dropping out of students in school with a composite mean of 2.61 and

verbally interpreted as Agree.

Based on United Way website, “Academic performance is another key factor that

was consistently cited as a factor that influences a student staying in school and

graduating. Several research articles cite that the road to academic success starts early in

the education system” (3 Reasons Students, 2013). Academic performance is one of the

most influencing factors that causes students to quit school.

In connection to this, the respondents do not have the confidence to express their

ideas which got the highest weighted mean of 2.80. This shows that most if not all the

respondents claim that having no enough confidence causes students to have failures in

their academic performance.

The website of Accredited Schools Online (2019) states that a recent survey by

America’s Promise Alliance of high school students who were left before the completion

or graduation stated that failing too many classes was the answer given by nearly 28

percent of the respondents. Falling behind in classes can feel demoralizing and make

students question the point of school. According to Jason Patel, “ students lack

confidence to keep up with the work in school.”

This factor was supported through the study of Klepfer (2015) entitled as “Self-

Esteem and Motivation Effects on Predicted High School Graduation Outcomes”. The

study argues that motivation and self-esteem have been to be influential on a students’

decision to drop out of high school.

38
 However, being not yet ready academically got the lowest rank with a weighted

mean of 2.44 and verbally interpreted as Disagree. In contrast to the result in the table,

the study “Seven Reasons Why Students Drop Out” by Suvin (2019) found out that the

lack of readiness academically is a major culprit in high school graduation rates and first-

year students are the first prey.

Students quit higher education because they are simply not ready for it. Moreover,

Education Trust (2016) produced a report which shows that about 50% of high school

graduates from US drop-out of high school without completing college and career-ready

courses of study.

With the overall composite mean of 2.61 in weighted mean, the respondents

agreed to the academic factors of dropping out of students in school written in the table.

Therefore, it can be concluded that the most of the respondents agreed that having poor

study habit, lack of confidence, lack of knowledge to the lessons, failure to comply with

requirements, and poor performance are the factors affecting the students from dropping

out of school.

39
Table 2. Family factors of dropping out.

Family Factors Weighted Verbal Ranking

Mean Interpretation

1. I have an ongoing stressful life 2.48 Disagree 3

event that affects my school life.

2. I belong to a family with low 2.64 Agree 2

income to support our local needs.

3. I can’t open up with my parents 2.80 Agree 1

regarding school concerns because
of their busy schedule.

4. I have poor treatment from my 2.40 Disagree 4

parents.

Composite Mean 2.58 Agree

Table 2 shows that most of the respondents agreed that family is one of the main

causes why students drop out of school or why they perform poorly in class with a

composite mean of 2.58 and is verbally interpreted as Agree.

An analysis of the Dropout Reduction Plan of the Department of Education (2007)

found out that one factors that lead the students to dropout was related to family situation,

low family income, unemployed parents, and parents engaging in seasonal jobs. Some

parents tended to neglect their parental responsibilities towards their children's education.

Based on the table, the respondents cannot open up to their parents because of

their busy schedule. Also, they belong to a family with low income and was not able to

support all the respondent’s school needs. Despite these, they are not experiencing a

stressful life event that affects their school life and are not receiving poor treatment from

parents.

40
 This is supported by Rumberger and Lim (2008) who state that students living

with both parents have lower dropout rates and higher graduation rates, compared to

students living in other family arrangements. More importantly, changes in family

structure, along with other potentially stressful events (such as a family move, illness,

death, adults entering and leaving the households, and marital disruptions) increase the

odds of dropping out. Since the respondents are experiencing family problem, then family

is one of the causes why students drop out of school.

Table 3. Internal factors of dropping out.

Internal Factors Weighted Verbal Ranking

Mean Interpretation

1. I can’t communicate with other 2.28 Disagree 3

students.

2. I am not socially active that’s why 2.60 Agree 1

I get pressured when there are
activities that require group work.

3. I have difficulties in interacting 2.56 Agree 2

with my teacher.

4. I can’t cope up in the lessons 1.16 Strongly 5

because I am/I got pregnant. Disagree

5. I can’t continue my studying 1.32 Strongly 4

because of the responsibilities Disagree
of being married.

Composite Mean 1.98 Disagree

Table 3 shows the internal factors affecting the students to dropout in school. It

has a composite mean of 1.98 and is verbally interpreted as Disagree. The main internal

41
factors of dropping out is ‘I am not socially active that’s why I get pressured when there

are activities that require group work’.

This is supported by Hammond (2007) who states that social disengagement

occurs when students have little to no relationships with peers, lacking social skills, or

their group of friends that can lead in dropping out of school.

While, the internal factors that are not too much affected by the respondents is ‘I

can't cope up in the lessons because I am/I got pregnant’. Although early marriage and

pregnancy are often anecdotally linked to school dropout, evidence proving a direct and

causal link is limited. This is because early marriage and pregnancy can be both the cause

and consequence of dropping out of school (UNESCO, 2017). There is a body of

evidence to suggest that girls who become pregnant or are married early may already

have been performing poorly at school, have started school late or have experienced

barriers to academic achievement which increase the likelihood of an early marriage or

pregnancy (Grant and Hallman, 2006). This further explains that internal factors of

dropping out are lowly causes on why students drop out from school. It means that there

are other causes of dropping out.

42
Table 4. External factors of dropping out.

External Factors Weighted Verbal Ranking

Mean Interpretation

1. I am being influenced by my 2.48 Disagree 1

friends to play games than
focus on my studies.

2. I am being affected by the 2.24 Disagree 2

insufficient instructional facilities
and equipment of the school.

Composite Mean 2.36 Disagree

Table 4 shows the external factors that affect the students to dropout in school. It

has a composite mean of 2.36 and is verbally interpreted as disagree. The main external

factors of dropping out that are not too much affected by the respondents is‘I am being

affected by the insufficient instructional facilities and equipment of the school. The

condition, adequacy and management of a school building are directly under the control

of the school district and state, hence improving school facilities offers opportunity for

improving academic performance. That is why the provision of necessary facilities in

schools provide a challenging environment for students to learn and for effective teaching

by the teachers (Alobi, 2008). The awareness of improving and evaluating educational

settings are very important; therefore, as efforts are made to build or renovate schools and

educational facilities, as urgency is created with regards in understanding situations that

represent the most effective learning environment (Schneider, 2002). This further

explains that external factors of dropping out does not affect the students from dropping

out in school.

43
Table 5. Effects of dropping out.

Statements Weighted Verbal Ranking

Mean Interpretation

1. I have a hard time nurturing 2.56 Agree 5

myself.

2. I have difficulties in making 2.80 Agree 3

decision with regard to life purpose.

3. I am worried that I might not meet 2.96 Agree 1

other people’s expectation.

4. I certainly feel useless at times. 2.76 Agree 4

5. I have greater chance of missing 2.84 Agree 2

all the different opportunities.

Composite Mean 2.78 Agree

Table 5 shows that most of the respondents agreed to the listed effects of dropping

out in school to the students with a composite mean of 2.78 and verbally interpreted as

Agree.

The consequences of not graduating from high school are clearly stated in

Northeastern University Center for Labor Market Studies' 2007 report, “State and Local

Fiscal Consequences of High School Dropout Problems in Massachusetts. Dropping out

of school impacts student's self-esteem and psychological well-being, faced with the

reality that they lack skills and knowledge to fulfill their desires. Students who decided to

drop out of school face social stigma, fewer job or other opportunities, and higher

probability of having internal problems in regards to making decisions for their lives.

44
 Moreover, the respondents might not meet other people's expectation. This

statement got the highest weighted mean of 2.96 and verbally interpreted as Agree. In

accordance to the survey, this is the greatest effect of dropping out in school to the

students.

A study done by Crain- Dorough (2003) argues that dropping out has negative

impact on adult psychological functioning. First, dropping out may cause individual’s

self-worth to be lowered due to the negative stigma from the society and losing

opportunities the individual faces. Second, dropping out may disrupt the coping

mechanisms of the individual that he/she is using in his/her adolescent years. Finally,

dropping out forces an individual to face new responsibilities of an adult which is being a

problem because of being worried that they might not meet other people’s expectations

from them.

Meanwhile, the statement of having a hard time nurturing themselves for the

lowest weighted mean of 2.56. However, it's verbal interpretation still passes to Agree

condition.

With the overall total of 2.78 in weighted mean, the respondents agreed to the

effects of dropping out in school to the students. Consequently, most of the respondents

agreed that having a hard time nurturing themselves, having difficulties in making

decision with regard to life purpose, worrying that they might not meet other people's

expectation, certainly feeling useless at times, and having a greater chance of missing all

the different opportunities are the effects which are being experienced.

45
Table 6. Interaction of students.

Statements Weighted Verbal Ranking

Mean Interpretation

1. Classroom interaction helps me 3.28 Agree 2

understand the lesson.

2. Interaction with other students 2.96 Agree 5

helps me to express myself more.

3. Interaction helps me feel 3.32 Agree 1

appreciated and loved.

4. Interaction with students helps me 3.12 Agree 4

in doing the activities more
accurately.

5. Classroom interaction helps me 3.20 Agree 3

boost my confidence.

Composite Mean 3.18 Agree

Table 6 above shows that most of the respondents agreed that interaction is an

effective way in reducing the dropout rate of students. It has achieved a composite mean

of 3.18 and is verbally interpreted as Agree.

Most of the students claim that interaction helps them feel appreciated and loved

with weighted mean of 3.32. This is proven by William Watson Purkey in his theory

“Invitational Education Theory” which states that creating a school environment which

sends caring signals or messages to pupils that they are liked, promotes creation of an

intentionally inviting school environments in which pupils feel liked, welcome, given the

opportunity to work and free to express themselves, as they feel working among friends,

which in turn helps them perceive school in much more positive ways that are helpful in

preventing them from dropping out.

46
 Also, according to the above statements, interaction is effective in making them

understand the lessons and performing well in class. This is supported by the study of

Hurst, Wallace and Nixon (2013) wherein students believe that social interaction: (a)

helps students learn from others, (b) makes learning fun, (c) gets students interested and

engaged, and (d) allows students a chance to talk in the classroom. Other students also

answered that “social interaction encourages students to think, read, conclude, summarize,

question, etc.” In short, social interaction is vital to the learning process.

This only indicates that interaction is an effective way in reducing the dropout

rates of students because it helps them understand the lesson, express themselves more,

feel appreciated and loved, doing the activities more accurately, and also helps them

boost their confidence.

47
 Chapter V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of this study with the findings from the

statistically analyzed data, the conclusion derived from the findings and the

recommendations based on the gathered data.

Summary

This study is entitled “A Study on Dropout Rate among Senior High School

Students of Pinagkawitan Integrated National High School S.Y. 2019-2020” which

aimed to know the causes and effects of dropping out and to reduce the increasing

dropout rate of the school through the use of interaction.

Specifically, it sought to answer the causes of students’ dropout from the school

among the following factors: academic, family, internal and external; the effects of

dropping out in school to the students; the importance of interaction of students to help

reduce the dropout rate of senior high school students; and the activity to be proposed

which may be used to help further reduced the dropout rate of senior high school students.

To gather answers for the given questions, the researchers utilized the descriptive

method of research using a survey in a form of questionnaire as the primary data

gathering instrument. This was validated by experts such as the research adviser and

other teachers and upon finalization, this was administered to twenty-five (25) senior

high school students of Pinagkawitan Integrated National High School and three (3)

students who already dropped out from the school. The data gathered were analyzed and

interpreted through weighted mean, composite mean, and statistical treatments.

48
The major findings of the study were:

As shown in Table 1, the researchers found out that academic factors with the

composite mean of 2.61 and was verbally interpreted as Agree affect the students from

dropping out in school because they don’t have the confidence to express their own ideas.

It has the highest weighted mean of 2.80 while the students who feel like they are not

ready academically got the lowest weighted mean of 2.44 and was verbally interpreted as

Disagree.

In addition to this, as shown in Table 2, family factors affect the students from

dropping out. It had a composite mean of 2.58 and was verbally interpreted as Agree.

One factor that influences the students to dropout is that they can’t open up with their

parents regarding school concerns because of their busy schedule which was the highest

weighted mean of 2.80 and was verbally interpreted as Agree. While the students who

have poor treatment form their parents has the lowest weighted mean of 2.40 and is

interpreted as Disagree.

Moreover, it can be seen in Table 3 that internal factors with the composite mean

of 1.98 and was verbally interpreted as Disagree did not affect the students from dropping

out. Although, the students who are not socially active that’s why they get pressured

when there are activities that require group work got the highest weighted mean of 2.60

and was verbally interpreted as Agree. Whereas, the lowest weighted mean got 1.16 and

is verbally interpreted as Strongly Disagree which is, they can’t cope up with the lessons

because they got pregnant.

Likewise, as shown in Table 4, the researchers found out that external factors with

the composite mean of 2.36 and was verbally interpreted as Disagree do not affect the

49
students from dropping out of school because they are not being influenced by their

friends to play games than focus on their studies. Also, insufficient instructional facilities

and equipment of the school do not affect them from studying.

While, it can be seen in Table 5 that dropping out of school affect the students

with the composite mean of 2.78 and verbally interpreted as Agree. The respondents

might not meet other people’s expectation that is why it has the highest weighted mean of

2.96 while the lowest weighted mean got 2.56 which is, they are having a hard time

nurturing their selves. They are both verbally interpreted as Agree.

The researcher found out that students’ interaction helps them feel appreciated

and loved with the weighted mean of 3.32 which is the highest among five variables as

shown on table 6. Furthermore, interaction among students with the composite mean of

3.18 and interpreted as Agree shows that it can be a way to lessen the rate of dropouts.

Based on the findings, the researchers proposed that interaction is one of the ways

to reduce the dropout rate of the students.

Conclusion

Through careful analysis of the findings, the researchers concluded that most of

the respondents had agreed that academic and family factors are the causes why students

drop out from the school. It is supported by the analysis of the Dropout Reduction Plan of

the Department of Education (2007) that academic and family factors can lead the

students to dropout. The student herself/himself is a problem already because some were

doing poor in their academic performances which are brought about by being slow

learners, having low self-esteem, having poor study habit, being not ready academically

50
for secondary school, and non-compliance of subject requirements. It is also found out

that students’ dropout related to family situation, low family income, unemployed parents,

and parents engaging in seasonal jobs and can affect their school performance. Some

parents tended to neglect their parental responsibilities towards their children's education

because they are busy with other activities associated to increasing the family income.

In addition, the researchers concluded that some of the students had disagreed that

internal and external factors contribute to the reason of dropping out of the students.

According to Grant and Hallman (2006), there is a body of evidence to suggest that girls

who become pregnant or are married early may already have been performing poorly at

school, have started school late or have experienced barriers to academic achievement

which increase the likelihood of an early marriage or pregnancy. These are included on

the academic factors of dropping out of students. While, on the other hand, improving

school facilities offers opportunity for improving academic performance and that is why

the provision of necessary facilities in schools provide a challenging environment for

students to learn and for effective teaching by the teachers (Alobi, 2008). It means that

internal and external factors are lowly causes of why students drop out from the school.

Moreover, the findings also revealed that dropping out of school affects the

students. According to Robertson (2018), there are several consequences of dropping out.

These include greater chance of being unemployed, lower income, incarceration such as a

jail or a juvenile, missing all the different opportunities, affecting more public financial

resources, and being single motherhood.

Additionally, it is also found out that interaction helps in reducing the dropout rate

of the students. Interaction in the school setting is usually referred to as the framework of

51
cooperative learning, pair work, group work, project-methods and other models used in

teaching. So, for students to be able to learn, they should be readers, writers, speakers,

listeners, and thinkers at the same time through the active engagement in social

interaction with other students, peers and teachers in the classroom (Vacca, Vacca, &

Mraz, 2011).

Based on the findings gathered, the researchers conducted a colloquium to

enlighten and to inform the students about the increasing dropout rate of the senior high

school. Additionally, they decided to make a leaflet and Facebook confession page. The

leaflets were distributed to the attendees of the colloquium which contains the

information about dropout and how it will be reduced through interaction.

Recommendations

From the drawn conclusion, the researchers recommend to the following:

To the senior high school students. Open forum should be given value for it may

enhance their expression within the class.

To the Senior High School Department of PINHS. Open forum should also be

proposed as an activity of the students to strengthen the social interaction of the students

in each class.

To Pinagkawitan Integrated National High School. Open forum of the students

should also be given an emphasis as an annual school activity to improve their interaction

with one another.

52
 To the future researchers. They should consider colloquium as an output for this

study for it may be a great help to inform the students about the factors and effects of

dropout rate and reducing its rate through interaction.

53
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexander, R. (2008). Education for All, the quality imperative and the problem of
pedagogy. CREATE Pathways to Access No 20. Consortium for Research on
Educational Access, Transitions and Equity: University of Sussex.

Altinay F. (2017). Examining the Role of Social Interaction in Online Learning Process.
Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/187b/
7c3f650bc4ce11229bebe815b5021d62706d.pdf?_ga=2.142134901.654332813.15
81468676-500708951.1581468676.

Amoroso, V. & Bajo, A. (2014). Phl dropout rates rising since 2007. The Philippine Star.
Retrieved from https://www.philstar.com/campus/2014/06/12/1333995/phl-
dropout-rates-rising-2007.

Ampiah, G.J. & Adu-Yeboah, C. (2009). Mapping the incidence of school dropout: a
casestudy of communities in Northern Ghana. Comparative Education, vol. 45
Issue 2, pp 219-232.

Ananga, E. (2010). Understanding the push and pull factors in school dropout: A case
study of Southern Ghana. CREATE Monograph Series (forthcoming) Brighton:
University of Sussex, UK.

Bowers, A.J. & Sprott, R. (2012). Why tenth graders fail to finish high school: A dropout
typology latent class analysis. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk
(JESPAR), 17(3), 129-148. doi: 10.1080/10824669.2012.692071.

Bridgeland, J.M., Dijulio, J.J., & Morison, K. B. (2006). The silent epidemic:
Perspectives of high school dropouts. Seattle, WA: Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation.

Campbell, S.L. (2017). What Are the Disadvantages of Dropping Out of High School?
Classroom Synonym. Retrieved from
https://classroom.synonym.com/disadvantages-dropping-out-high-school-
9599.html.

Chugh, S. (2011). Dropout in Secondary Education: A Study of Children Living in Slums

of Delhi. Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a9d5/6d29abf79f1d400aec1fa82790d956cbbd15.
pdf?_ga=2.200646318.1672809634.1581381422-1781093483.1581381422.

54
Civic Action Project. (2012). Consequences of dropping out of school. Retrieved from
https://www.crfcap.org/images/pdf/7B%20DocPack.pdf.

Colby S.J., O’Neill K. & Stid D. (2009). Portland public schools: From data and
decisions to implementation and results on dropout prevention. San Francisco:
The Bridgespan Group.

Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-Centered Teacher-Student Relationships Are

Effective: A Meta-Analysis. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ782445.

Crain- Dorough M.L. (2003). A Study of Dropout Characteristics and School-Level

Effects on Dropout Prevention. Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.c
om/&httpsredir=1&article=1776&context=gradschool_dissertations.

De Witte, K. (2013). A Critical Review of the Literature on School Dropout. Retrieved

from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262637429.

Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (2000). Self Determination Theory and the Facilitation of
Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. University of
Rochester: American Psychological Association, Inc. 0003-066X/00/$5.00.

Dimas, K.A. (2013). School factors contributing to learners dropping out of school in
selected primary schools in Solwezi District. University of Zambia. Retrieved
from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5099/472ace6d09b6a04073e052a095c1c280beb0
.pdf.

Dupere V. et al. (2014). Stressors and Turning Points in High School and Dropout: A
Stress Process, Life Course Framework. Retrieved from
http://www.oregonyouthdevelopmentcouncil.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/06/2014-Stressors-and-Turning-Points-in-High-School-and-
Dropout-A-Stress-Process-Life-Course-Framework.pdf.

Fighetti, F.P. (2017). An effective social interaction in the classroom. Alberto Hurtado
University.

Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of
the concept: State of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74 , 59–119.
doi: 10.3102/00346543074001059.

Gehlbach, H., Brinkworth, M., & Harris, A. (2012). Changes in teacher-student

relationships. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 690-704. doi:
10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02058.x.

55
Hammond, C. et al. (2007). Dropout Risk Factors and Exemplary Programs. Clemson,
SC: National Dropout Prevention Center, Communities In Schools, Inc.

Hattie, J.C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to
achievement. London: Rutledge.

Hunt, F. (2008). Dropping out from school: A cross-country review of literature.

CREATE Pathways to Access No 16. Consortium for Research on Educational
Access, Transitions and Equity: University of Sussex.

Hurst, B., Wallace, R., & Nixon, S. (2013). The Impact of Social Interaction on Student
Learning. Retrieved from
https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3105&context=readi
ng_horizons.

Knezevic, S. and Kovacevic, B. (2011). Interactive Learning and Students' Competencies

in Teaching Literature. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329881985_INTERACTIVE_LEARNI
NG_AND_STUDENTS'_COMPETENCES_IN_TEACHING_LITERATURE.

Krneta, D. (2006): Interaktivno učenje i nastava. Banja Luka: FPDN.

Lewin, K.M. (2008). Access, Age and Grade. CREATE Policy Brief No 2.Consortium
for Research on Educational Access, Transitions and Equity: University of Sussex.

Liu, F. (2004). Basic education in China’s rural areas: a legal obligation or an

individual choice. International Journal of Educational Development, 24: 5-21.

Miller C. (2006). Dropped out or Pushed out: A case study on why students drop out.
Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.390.8149&rep=rep1&t
ype=pdf.

Ministry of Education. (2008). Learning achievement at Middle Basic Level: Zambia’s

National Assessment Survey Report 2008. Lusaka: Examinations Council of
Zambia.

Ministry of Education. (2009). Education Sector Performance Report, Accra. Ghana:

Ministry of Education.

Moore, A.K. (2017). Dropped out: Factors that cause students to leave before
graduation. Retrieved from
https://www.cn.edu/libraries/tiny_mce/tiny_mce/plugins/filemanager/files/Dissert
ations/Dissertations2017/Andrea_K_Parton_Moore.pdf.

56
Moore G.E., Warner W.J., & Jones D.W. (2016). Student-to-Student Interaction in
Distance Education Classes: What Do Graduate Students Want? Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1122974.pdf.

Osterman, K.F. (2000). Student’s need for belonging in the school community. Review of
educational research, 70(3), 323-367.

Pollack, L. (2010). Examining the Effectiveness of Dropout Prevention Practices and

their Implications for intervention with Public School Students. Retrieved from
https://aquila.usm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1430&context=dissertations.

Purkey, W.W. & Novak, J. (2015). An Introduction to Invitational Theory. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
.
Robertson, S. (2018). The Effects of Dropping Out of School. Classroom Synonym.
Retrieved from https://classroom.synonym.com/effects-dropping-out-school-
4924.html.

Robinson K.D. (2014). The Lived Experiences of Students at risk of Dropping out: An
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Retrieved from
https://repository.library.northeastern.edu/files/neu:336514/fulltext.pdf.

Roorda, D. (2011). Teacher Well-being: The importance of teacher-student relationships.

Educational Psychology Review. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232920107_The_Influence_of_Affectiv
e_Teacher-
Student_Relationships_on_Students'_School_Engagement_and_Achievement_A_
Meta-Analytic_Approach.

Rumberger R.W. (2001). Why Students Drop Out of School and What Can Be Done.
Retrieved from
https://escholarship.org/content/qt58p2c3wp/qt58p2c3wp.pdf?t=msne14&v=lg.

Saromines, L.C. & Torres L. (2016). Students at risk of Dropping Out of School:
Children's Voices. Retrieved from http://www.ijoart.org/docs/STUDENTS-AT-
RISK-OF-DROPPING-OUT-OF-SCHOOL-CHILDRENS-VOICES.pdf.

Schargel, F.P. (2012). Dropout prevention fieldbook: Best practices from the field.
Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

Skinner, E. & Greene, T. (2008). Perceived control, coping, and engagement. In T. L.

Good 21st Century Education: A Reference Handbook (Vol. 2, pp. I-121-I-130).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781412964012.n13.

57
Skinner, E. A. et al. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a
larger motivational dynamic. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765–
781. doi:10.1037/a0012840.

Spilt J.L., et al. (2012). Supporting teachers’ relationships with disruptive children: The
potential of relationship-focused reflection. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224853881_Supporting_teachers'_relati
onships_with_disruptive_children_The_potential_of_relationship-
focused_reflection.

Suzić, N. (2005). Pedagogija za XXI vijek. Banja Luka: Teacher Training Centre.

United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organisation. (2011). Institute for
Statistics Fact Sheet. June 2011, No. 12.

United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2011). Comparing

education statistics across the world: focus on secondary education. Montreal:
UIS.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2011). The hidden
crisis: Armed Conflict and education. Montreal: UIS.

United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2012). Stumbling

blocks to universal primary education: Repetition rates decline but dropout rates
remain high. Global Education Digest 2012, 22.11.2012 issue UNESCO press.

Vacca, R.T., Vacca, J.L., & Mraz, M. (2011). Content area reading: Literacy and
learning across the curriculum, (10th ed). Boston: Pearson.

Varga, M. (2017). The Effect of Teacher-Student Relationships on the Academic

Engagement of Students. Masteral diss., Goucher College.

Zaldivar, J. C. (2010). DepEd: Dropouts start at 1st grade. SunStar Philippines.

Retrieved from https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/199809.

58