ABSTRACT Title : PREDICTIVE ABILITY OF RADIOLOGIC TECHNOLOGY GRADUATES ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE Ma.

Glenda Ang Mondiguing, RRT Master of Arts in Education Major in Health Science Education University of Perpetual Help System Laguna 2009-2010 Ernesto F. Ramirez, RMT, EdD. 123

Author Degree School Academic Year Adviser Number of Pages

: : : : : :

One indicator of quality education is the graduates performance in the licensure examination. Undeniably, most education experts believe that academic performance of graduates in high school and college could determine their board examination performance. The Commission on Higher education and the Professional Regulation Commission are now reviewing the different universities and colleges looking into and equating instructional standards and the capacity of schools to provide quality education based on the board performance of their graduates. The college of Radiologic Technology of the University of Perpetual Help- Dr Jose G. Tamayo Medical University endeavors to produce quality graduates through effective delivery of instruction coupled with better quality support services and facilities. It is for this purpose that the researcher conducted this study in order to measure how effective the delivery of instruction is in the professional subjects in comparison with the result of the board examination of the graduates per subject. This study was conducted to determine the predictive ability of the Radiologic Technology Graduates Academic Performance in the board Examination. The study covered 59 respondents who graduated from the College of Radiologic Technology and had taken the board licensure examination from year 2005 2009. The general weighted average of each graduates from the

different professional subjects in the academic and board examination was the major data-gathering instrument used in the study. To provide reliable interpretation of the data gathered, descriptive statistics were employed: Weighted Mean, Frequency and Percentage distribution, Pearson Product Moment of Correlation; and Inferential statistics: t-test was also used. Specifically, the researcher sought answers to the problems: (1)The respondents academic performance in the professional subjects from 2005 to 2009 as to: Physics of Diagnostic Radiation, Image Production and Evaluation, Radiographic procedure and technique, Patient care and management and Radiological Sciences; (2) The respondents performance in the board examination on the following professional subjects from 2005 to 2009: Subject 1 Physics of Diagnostic Radiation, Subject 2 Image Production and Evaluation, Subject 3 Radiographic procedure and Technique, Subject 4 Patient Care and Management, Subject 5 Radiological Sciences; (3) The combined general weighted average of the respondents in professional subjects from year 2005 to 2009; (4) The combined general weighted average of the respondents in the board examination from year 2005 to 2009; (5) to what extent can the academic performance of respondents in the professional subjects predict the performance in the Board examination subjects; and (6) does combined academic performance relate with the performance in the Board examination subjects? As to respondents academic performance. In general the respondents performance in the academic subjects was considered satisfactory in passing the different academic professional subjects: The performance of the respondents on Physics of Diagnostic Radiation was satisfactory in which the largest percentage of 64 percent or 38 out 59 respondents obtained a grade of 75-79 percent; Image Production and Evaluation was satisfactory in which the largest percentage of 49.15 percent or 29 out of 59 respondents obtained a grade of 75-79 percent; Radiographic Procedures and technique were satisfactory, in which 57.63 percent or 34 out of 59 obtained a grade of 75-79 percent; Patient Care and management was mostly satisfactory in which 52.54 percent or 31 out of 59 graduates obtained an average grade of 75-79 percent; Radiological Sciences were good in which 50.85 percent or 30 out of the 59 graduates obtained a grade of 80-84 percent. As to respondents board examination performance. The results of the Licensure Board Examination ratings were not as heterogeneous as the Academic professional subject problem, though their scores were found to be much lower. The performance of the graduates in Subject 1 was mostly unsatisfactorily or failed in which the largest percentage of 54.24 percent was

obtained or 32 out of 59 respondents obtained a grade below 75 percent. It had one of the lowest grades among the ratings and probably the most difficult among the subjects; subject 2 was good or passed in which the largest percentage of 40.68 percent was obtained or 24 out of 59 graduates obtained a grade of 80-84 percent. The graduates find this subject a little easier than the subject 1; subject 3 was mostly unsatisfactorily or failed in which the largest percentage of 45.76 percent was obtained or 27 out of 59 graduates obtained grades below 75 percent; subject 4 was mostly unsatisfactorily or failed in which a large percentage of 35.59 percent was obtained or 21 out of 59 respondents obtained grades below 75 percent; Subject 5 was mostly unsatisfactorily or failed in which a large percentage of 45.76 percent was obtained or 27 out of 59 respondents obtained a grade below 75 percent; With regard to respondents combined general weighted in all professional subjects. The respondents combined general weighted average from year 2005 to 2009 in all professional subjects made a good academic performance in most of their professional subjects from year 2005 to 2009 obtaining a general weighted average mean of 80.18 except for Physics of diagnostic radiation and patient care and management which got a satisfactory rating of 79.84 and 79.81. With regard to respondents combined general weighted in the board examination. The combined general weighted average of graduates in the Board exam from year 2005 to 2009 revealed that the Radiologic Technology Graduates failed in the Board examination from 2005 to 2008 in which the subject 1 Physics of Diagnostic Radiation got the lowest average mean of 70.05% result indicated a poor performance with the board exam though graduates had shown satisfactory academic performance in undergraduate level. With regard to respondents predictive ability of the academic performance in their board examination. The predictive ability of the academic performance was based on the relationship between the academic performance in professional subjects as the independent variable and the respondents performance in board examination as dependent variable. Amount of variations noted in the board examination ratings determined the predictive ability of the academic subject. The relationship between board examination subject 1 Physics of Diagnostic radiation and academic subject Physics of Diagnostic Radiation was described by a computed correlation coefficient of 0.498, as positive and marked substantial or moderate relationship. The relationship was significant beyond the 0.05 level and labeled the academic subject as significant correlate. With 24.80 percent variance, it was likewise reckoned a predictor; the relationship between board examination subject 2 and academic subject Image Production and

Evaluation was described by a computed correlation coefficient of 0.578, as positive and marked substantial or moderate relationship. It indicated a direct relationship or the higher the academic performance, the better the ratings in the board examination. The relationship was significant beyond the 0.05 level and identified the Image Production and Evaluation, a corresponding correlate of the board examination subject. Amount of variations noted in the board examination subject reached 33.40 percent, which indicated high predictive ability; the relationship between subject 3, a board examination subject and academic subject Radiographic Procedures was described by a computed correlation coefficient of 0.748, as positive and very high or strong relationship. In other words, it was indicative of direct relationship. It was also significant beyond the 0.05 level and identified Radiographic Procedures and Technique a significant correlate of the board examination subject. Amount of variations noted in the academic and board examination subjects reached 55.95 percent, which was very large and more than half of the total variance indicative of high predictive ability; The relationship between subject 4, a board examination subject and academic subject Patient Care and Management was described by a computed correlation coefficient of 0.886, as positive and very high or very strong relationship. In other words, it was indicative of direct relationship. It was also significant beyond the 0.05 level and identified Patient Care and Management a significant correlate of the board examination subject. Amount of variations noted in the academic and board examination subjects reached 78.49 percent, which was very large and more than half of the total variance indicative of high predictive ability; the relationship between the academic grades Radiological Sciences and the corresponding board examination subject were described by a computed correlation coefficient of 0.334, as low but positive and weak relationship and indicative of direct relationship. It was also significant beyond the 0.05 level and identified a Radiological Sciences significant correlate of the board examination subject. With a 11.15 percent variance, was a significant correlate of subject 5 Radiological Sciences. With regard to relationship of combined academic performance with the board examination. The relationship between the academic performance of graduates in all professional subjects and their board performance was described by computed correlation coefficient of 0.52 was obtained which is interpreted as moderate relationship. It was also significant beyond the 0.05 level and identified a significant correlate of the board examination subject. Amount of variations noted in the academic and board examination subjects reached 27.04 percent, the total variance indicative of significance relationship between the academic performance of the graduates in their professional subjects and their board performance. This means that the performance of the graduates in their Board Examination is dependent on

their performance on academic professional subjects. This further means that the better is the academic performance of graduates; the higher is their chance to pass the board examination. Based on the aforementioned summary of findings, the following conclusions were drawn: The respondents academic performance in the four different professional subjects such as Physics of Diagnostic Radiation, Radiographic Procedure and Technique, Image production and Evaluation and Patient Care and Management was mostly satisfactory rating from 2005 to 2009 but with good rating in Radiological Sciences. The Respondents Board examination performance of the respondents in the different four professional subjects such as Physics of Diagnostic Radiation, Radiographic Procedure and Technique, Patient Care and Management and Radiological Sciences was mostly unsatisfactory or failed from 2005 to 2009 except in the subject 2 Image Productions and Evaluation which obtained a satisfactory or passed rating. The respondents combined general weighted in all professional subjects obtained good academic ratings of 80.18% which indicated that graduates had passed the subject with an obtained grade of 80-84%.The respondents combined general weighted average in the different professional subjects in the board examination from year 2005 -2008 got an unsatisfactory rating of 71.56 which was below passing rate of the board examination. There were strong relationships between academic performance of the respondents and their licensure board examination ratings. The best correspondence was noted between academic subject Patient Care and management and the corresponding board examination subject, where the academic performance accounted for 78.49 percent variance, which was more than one third of the total variance. The combined general weighted average of the academic performances had a significant relationship to the combined weighted average in the board examination of the same graduates from year 2005 -2009. Based on the aforementioned summary of findings and conclusions drawn, the following recommendations are hereby endorsed: Since the respondents academic performance was mostly satisfactory; faculty members handling these professional subjects should focus more on the weaknesses of the student to strengthen and enhance their knowledge to improve their academic performance in preparation for their board examination. Since the respondents board examination performance was mostly unsatisfactorily; the College of Radiologic Technology should improve their program of reviewing the graduates before they are allowed to take their board examination. They should see to it that the students are well-prepared and properly monitored in order to minimize failure. Since the respondents

combined general weighted average in all the professional subjects were satisfactory; more faculty development programs, high quality and advance instructional materials for professional subjects should be given so that they could be well oriented on the latest information and advances of the profession to improve the academic performance of student in preparation for board licensure examination. Since the respondents combined general weighted averages in all professional subjects in the board examination were mostly unsatisfactory or failed; continuous improvement should be undertaken, corrective measures be made on the identified weaknesses of the graduates so that students eligible for graduation have a better chances in passing the licensure board examination. Since the respondents academic performance had a predictive ability in the board examination; the faculty member should be partners of the administration in decision making on the quality of educational program that will improve and enhance the academic performance of the students in preparation for their board examination since they are in direct contact with the future professionals. Since the respondents academic performance had a significant relationship on the board examination; the academic performance of students should be given focus to adhere to the student-centered program of the school, thereby assuring of a more positive result in the Board examination.