ARELLANO UNIVERSITY- JOSE ABAD SANTOS CAMPUS

HIGH SCHOOL STANDPOINT ON REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH EDUCATION

COLLEGE OF NURSING

Introduction: Reproductive Health Education reproduction rights is the right to life The Roman Catholic Church expresses its opposition against Reproductive Health Education The essence of reproductive health on nursing students

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of: 1.a. Age 1.b. Gender 1.c. Year level 2. Which of the following variables have provided information about RH? 2.a. Media (TV, Radio, Electronic Media) 2.b. Magazines/ reading materials (newspapers, journals, books) 2.c. School (peers, teachers, school nurse) 2.d. Parents

3. What is the extent of respondents level of understanding on reproductive health education?

4. Is there any significant relationship between the respondents profile and his/ her level of understanding on Reproductive Health Education?

Hypothesis
There is no significant relationship between the respondents profile and his/ her level of understanding on reproductive health education.

Significance of the Study

To the researchers To the respondents To the parents of the respondents To the community To the future researchers To the health care workers To the present administration

Scope and Limitations

Focused on the understanding of high school student on reproductive health -First year to fourth year high school students -Male and female -Aged 12 to 16 years old

Conducted within the period of January to February 2011 Conducted within the vicinity of AU Pasay JASC located at Taft Ave., Pasay City The respondents Stratified random sampling and convenient sampling of non probability Ten (10) percent of the total population of high school students in AU JASC One hundred respondents with 25 respondents for each year level

Locale of the Study

Arellano University Jose Abad Santos campus 1,111 high school students

SAMPLE:

first year to fourth year level high school students of AU JASC aged 12 to 16 years male and female 100 respondents

Research Instrument and Techniques

self structured questionnaire with a Five Point Likert scale structure TOOL - Profile of respondent: Age, Gender, and Year level - Variables that serve as sources of information - Respondents view and understanding on reproductive health - Significant relationship between respondents profile and level of understanding - do respondents agree or not in the inclusion of reproductive health education in high school curriculum

The Respondents
first year to fourth year level high school students of AU JASC aged 12 to 16 years 100 respondents

Data Gathering distributed a total of 100 survey questionnaires to different levels in high school, 25 survey questionnaires for 25 respondents for each year level Sampling Techniques stratified random sampling of probability sampling and convenient type or the quota sampling type of non- probability due to limited time, only the ten percent (10%) of the total population which was 111 respondents then reduced the numbers to a hundred (100) respondents
Statistical Treatment of Data relative frequency percentage and weighted mean was weighed Chi- square formula

Percentage Formula:
%= Whereas: f = frequency N = population f x 100 N

The Chi- Square Formula: Wm = f (w) f = (o E) E

Where: Wm = weighted mean w = weight f = frequency = chi square o = observed frequency E = expected frequency

Problem 1 a. Age
35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

Table 1 Respondents Profile in Reference to Age

32%

28% 23% 13%

4%

16 15 14 13 12

TABLE 1
AGE 12 13 NUMBER OF

RESPONDENTS
4 32

PERCENTAGE 4% 32%

14
15 16

28
23 13

28%
23% 13%

TOTAL

100

100%

1. b. Gender
Table 2 Respondents Profile in Reference to Gender

29%

71%

Female Male

TABLE 2
NUMBER OF GENDER RESPONDENT S FEMALE MALE 71 29 71% 29% PERCENTGE

TOTAL

100

100%

1.c. Year Level

Table 3 Respondents Profile in Reference to Year Level
30% 25% 20% 15% 25% 10% 5% 0% 25% 25% 25%

Year Level 4 Year Level 3 Year Level 2 Year Level 1

TABLE 3
YEAR LEVEL 1 2 NUMBER OF

RESPONDENTS
25 25

PERCENTAGE 25% 25%

3
4 TOTAL

25
25 100

25%
25% 100%

Table 2.3.1.1: Mean Results on How They Get an Idea of Information Regarding Reproductive Health Education on Age, Gender and Year Level by Television
AGE 12 13 14 15 16
GENDER Female Male

COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.75 4 3.46 3.61 3.31 COMPUTED MEAN

VALUE 3.38 3.66

INTERPRETATION Very Informative Very Informative Very Informative Very Informative Very Informative
INTERPRETATION Very Informative Very Informative

YEAR LEVEL 1 2 3 4

COMPUTED MEAN

VALUE
3.48 3.56 3.44 3.64

INTERPRETATION Very Informative Very Informative Very Informative Very Informative

RATE 4 3

SCALE 3.25-4.00 2.50-3.24

INTERPRETATION VERY INFORMATIVE MODERATE INFORMATIVE

2 1

1.75-2.49 1.00-1.74

LEAST INFORMATIVE NOT INFORMATIVE

Table 2.a.2: Mean Results on How They Get an Idea of Information Regarding Reproductive Health Education on Age, Gender and Year Level by Radio
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER Female Male YEAR LEVEL 1 2 3 4 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 2.5 3.06 2.89 2.52 2.23 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 2.85 2.86 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 2.8 2.48 2.8 2.68 INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Least Informative INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Moderate Informative INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Least Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative

Table 2.a.3: Mean Results on How They Get an Idea of Information Regarding Reproductive Health Education on Age, Gender and Year Level by Electronic Media
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.5 3.38 3.32 3.17 3.54 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.28 3.38 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.16 3.4 3.04 3.52 INTERPRETATION Very Informative Very Informative Very Informative Moderate Informative Very Informative

GENDER Female Male YEAR LEVEL 1 2 3 4

INTERPRETATION Very Informative Very Informative INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Very Informative Moderate Informative Very Informative

Table 2.3: Mean Results on How They Get an Idea of Information Regarding Reproductive Health Education on Age, Gender and Year Level by Newspapers
AGE 12 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 2.75 INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative

13
14 15 16 GENDER Female

3.13
3.5 3.17 3.31 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.10

Moderate Informative
Very Informative Moderate Informative Very Informative INTERPRETATION Moderate informative

Male

3.48

Very informative

YEAR LEVEL 1 2 3 4

COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3 3.08 3.48 3.36

INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Least Informative Very Informative Very Informative

Table 2.3: Mean Results on How They Get an Idea of Information Regarding Reproductive Health Education on Age, Gender and Year Level by Journals
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER Female Male COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3 2.84 2.86 2.65 3.23 COMPUTED INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Moderate Informative

MEAN VALUE
2.92 2.69 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 2.92 2.8 2.64 3.08

YEAR LEVEL 1 2 3 4

INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative

Table 2.3: Mean Results on How They Get an Idea of Information Regarding Reproductive Health Education on Age, Gender and Year Level by Books
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER Female Male COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.75 3.09 3.14 3.09 3.46 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.15 3.14 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.32 3 INTERPRETATION Very Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Very Informative INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Moderate Informative

YEAR LEVEL 1 2

INTERPRETATION Very Informative Moderate Informative

3
4

3.16
3.28

Moderate Informative
Very Informative

Table 2.3: Mean Results on How They Get an Idea of Information Regarding Reproductive Health Education on Age, Gender and Year Level by Peers
AGE 12 13 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 2.75 3.09 INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Moderate Informative

14
15 16

3.04
3.35 2.92 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.04 3.34 COMPUTED

Moderate Informative
Very Informative Moderate Informative

GENDER
Female Male YEAR LEVEL 1 2 3 4

INTERPRETATION
Moderate Informative Very Informative INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Very Informative Moderate formative

MEAN VALUE
3.08 3.2 3.32 3.08

Table 2.3: Mean Results on How They Get an Idea of Information Regarding Reproductive Health Education on Age, Gender and Year Level by Teachers
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.74 2.91 3.32 3.04 3.23 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.07 2.93 INTERPRETATION Very Informative Moderate Informative Very Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative

GENDER
Female Male

INTERPRETATION
Moderate Informative Moderate Informative

YEAR LEVEL
1 2 3 4

COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.32 2.96 3.16 3.16

INTERPRETATION
Very Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative

Table 2.3: Mean Results on How They Get an Idea of Information Regarding Reproductive Health Education on Age, Gender and Year Level by School Nurse
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER Female Male YEAR LEVEL 1 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.79 2.81 2.96 2.35 2.77 COMPUTED INTERPRETATION Very Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Moderate Informative INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative

MEAN VALUE
2.70 2.72 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.2

2
3 4

2.68
2.6 2.56

Moderate Informative
Moderate Informative Moderate Informative

Table 2.3: Mean Results on How They Get an Idea of Information Regarding Reproductive Health Education on Age, Gender and Year Level by Parents
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER Female Male COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.27 3.44 3.39 2.96 3.23 COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.31 3.07 INTERPRETATION Moderate Informative Very Informative Very Informative Moderate Informative Moderate Informative INTERPRETATION Very Informative Moderate Informative

YEAR LEVEL 1 2

COMPUTED MEAN VALUE 3.48 3.36

INTERPRETATION Very Informative Moderate Informative

3
4

2.96
2.8

Moderate Informative
Moderate Informative

Mean Result on How Important is Reproductive Health Education Regarding on their Age, Gender and Year Level

AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER Female Male YEAR LEVEL 1 2 3 4

MEAN VALUE 5 4.22 4 4.17 4.69 MEAN VALUE 4.31 4.14 MEAN VALUE 4.4 4.04 4.12 4.36

INTERPRETATION Extremely Important Extremely Important Very Important Very Important Extremely Important INTERPRETATION Extremely Important Very Important INTERPRETATION Extremely Important Very Important Very Important Extremely Important

The presented tables were made for a more in depth understanding and assessment of the relationship between the respondents profile and his/ her level of understanding on reproductive health education.

Chi Square value regarding the significant relationship of the respondents profile and his/ her level of understanding on reproductive health education in relation to Age, Gender, and Year level
METHODS CHISQUARE VALUE 125.08 218.47 182 231.69 187.04
TABLE 4.1

AGE

TABULAR

INTERPRE

VALUE
2.7 3.03 2.73 3.18 3.35

VALUE
50.964 50.964 50.964 50.964 50.964

TATION
Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant

12 13 14 15 15

COMPUTED Gender METHODS VALUE Female 3.00

COMPUTED CHI-SQUARE VALUE 126.47

TABULAR

INTERPRETATI

VALUE
40.113

ON
Significant

Male

3.43

114.27

40.113

Significant

TABLE 4.2
YEAR LEVEL
1 2 3 4 METHODS VALUE 3.06 3.25 2.58 3.57 CHI-SQUARE VALUE 126.47 114.27 291.16 285.75 TABULAR VALUE 40.113 40.113 40.113 40.113 INTERPRETAT ION Significant Significant Significant Significant

TABLE 4.3

Chi-square Results on the Significant Relationship between Level of Knowledge on Calendar Method and Age, Gender and Year Level
AGE 12 13 14 15 METHODS VALUE 23.33 20.74 13.68 5.68 TABULAR VALUE 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

16
GENDER Female Male YEAR 1 2 3 4

8.82
METHODS VALUE 30.66 48.97 METHODS VALUE 6.23 16.61 17.37 6.63

26.296
TABULAR VALUE 11.070 11.070 TABULAR VALUE 21.026 21.026 21.026 21.026

Not Significant
INTERPRETATION Significant Significant INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Chi-square Results on the Significant Relationship between Level of Knowledge on Sympto-Thermal Method and Age, Gender, and Year Level
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER Female Male YEAR 1 2 3 4 COMPUTED METHODS VALUE 51.8 26.56 2.33 22.83 21.04 TABULAR VALUE 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 TABULAR VALUE 11.070 11.070 TABULAR VALUE 21.026 21.026 21.026 21.026 INTERPRETATION Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant INTERPRETATION Not Significant Significant Significant Significant

COMPUTED METHODS
VALUE 075 2.44 COMPUTED METHODS VALUE 13.39 64.81 23.64 34.04

Chi-square Results on the Significant Relationship between Level of Knowledge on Natural Birth Control Method and Age, Gender, and Year Level
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER METHODS VALUE 51.93 11.04 10.82 23.14 10.15 METHODS VALUE TABULAR VALUE 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 TABULAR VALUE INTERPRETATION Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant INTERPRETATION

Female
Male YEAR 1 2 3 4

6.89
14.2 METHODS VALUE 18.66 12.95 14.56 4.75

11.070
11.070 TABULAR VALUE 21.026 21.026 21.026 21.026

Not Significant
Significant INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Chi-square Results on the Significant Relationship between Level of Knowledge on Rhythm Method and Age, Gender, and Year Level
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER METHODS VALUE 39.4 10.01 5.16 12.91 13.65 METHODS VALUE TABULAR VALUE 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 TABULAR VALUE INTERPRETATION Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant INTERPRETATION

Female
Male YEAR 1 2 3 4

3.06
6.78 METHODS VALUE 5.76 23.76 5.15 3.42

11.070
11.070 TABULAR VALUE 21.026 21.026 21.026 21.026

Not Significant
Not Significant INTERPRETATION Not Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Chi-square Results on the Significant Relationship between Level of Knowledge on Condom Method and Age, Gender, Year Level
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 METHODS VALUE 15.49 12.34 32.85 28.18 3.56 TABULAR VALUE 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Significant Significant Not Significant

GENDER
Female Male YEAR 1 2 3 4

METHODS VALUE
9.58 17.3 METHODS VALUE 11.92 11.1 19.36 23.43

TABULAR VALUE
11.070 11.070 TABULAR VALUE 21.026 21.026 21.026 21.026

INTERPRETATION
Not Significant Significant INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Significant

Chi-square Results on the Significant Relationship between Level of Knowledge on Intra Uterine Device and Age, Gender, Year Level
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER METHODS VALUE 6.75 3.86 17.21 11 12.93 METHODS VALUE TABULAR VALUE 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 TABULAR VALUE INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant INTERPRETATION

Female Male
YEAR 1 2 3 4

4.52 8.81
METHODS VALUE 16.7 1.06 30.14 20

11.070 11.070
TABULAR VALUE 21.026 21.026 21.026 21.026

Not Significant Not Significant

INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Significant Not Significant

Chi-square Results on the Significant Relationship between Level of Knowledge on Pills Method and Age, Gender, Year Level
AGE 12 13 14 15 16 GENDER METHODS VALUE 23.39 1.81 36.1 11.15 19.03 METHODS VALUE TABULAR VALUE 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 TABULAR VALUE INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant INTERPRETATION

Female Male
YEAR 1 2 3 4

0.94 2.15
METHODS VALUE 20.12 10.45 53.91 35.81

11.070 11.070
TABULAR VALUE 21.026 21.026 21.026 21.026

Not Significant Not Significant

INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Significant Significant

Chi-square Results on the Significant Relationship between Level of Knowledge on Injections Method and Age, Gender, Year Level
AGE 12 13 14 15 METHODS VALUE 7.88 4.35 30.96 9.92 TABULAR VALUE 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Significant Not Significant

16
GENDER

13.48
METHODS VALUE

26.296
TABULAR VALUE

Not Significant
INTERPRETATION

Female
Male YEAR 1 2 3 4

14.01
25.19 METHODS VALUE 16.23 5.81 54.87 35.8

11.070
11.070 TABULAR VALUE 21.026 21.026 21.026 21.026

Significant
Significant INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Significant Significant

Chi-square Results on the Significant Relationship between Level of Knowledge on Bilateral Tubal Ligation Method and Age, Gender, Year Level
AGE 12 13 14 15 METHODS VALUE 33.17 30.84 7.42 4.96 TABULAR VALUE 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 INTERPRETATION Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant

16
GENDER Female Male YEAR 1 2 3 4

28.78
METHODS VALUE 1.74 4.31 METHODS VALUE 52.28 14.02 18.03 52.12

26.296
TABULAR VALUE 11.070 11.070 TABULAR VALUE 21.026 21.026 21.026 21.026

Significant
INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant INTERPRETATION Significant Not Significant Not Significant Significant

Chi-square Results on the Significant Relationship between Level of Knowledge on Vasectomy Method and Age, Gender, Year Level
AGE 12 13 14 15 METHODS VALUE 21.82 15.67 0.52 4.22 TABULAR VALUE 26.296 26.296 26.296 26.296 INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

16
GENDER

22.52
METHODS VALUE

26.296
TABULAR VALUE

Not Significant
INTERPRETATION

Female
Male YEAR 1 2 3 4

1.9
5.22 METHODS VALUE 12.98 6.52 21.52 33.09

11.070
11.070 TABULAR VALUE 21.026 21.026 21.026 21.026

Not Significant
Not Significant INTERPRETATION Not Significant Not Significant Significant Significant

Percentage Results if High school students are Agree in the inclusion of Reproductive Health Education with their Curriculum

Table 5.1: Yes!

YEAR LEVEL 1 2 3 4 FREQUEN CY 22 20 22 22 PERCENT AGE 22% 20% 22% 22%

Table 5.1: No!

YEAR LEVEL 1 2 3 4 FREQUEN CY 3 5 3 3 PERCENT AGE 3% 5% 3% 3%

Summary, Conclusion and Recommendation

SUMMARY
4% of the respondents included in the age group of 12 13 years old having 32% 14 having 28% 15 have an equivalent of 23% 16 with 13% Female respondents have a total number of 71 which is equal to 71% male respondents have a total number of 29 which is equal to 29% 25 students per year level

 With regards to variables that provide information regarding RHE, Media specifically TV seems to be the most informative source Regardless of age, gender, and year level they said that reproductive health education is extremely important All of the Tabular and Chi Square values are greater than the Computed values which makes the Null hypothesis accepted which results in Not Siginificant Most of the respondents agree in the inclusion of reproductive health with 86% while the other 14% do not agree.

CONCLUSION
Based on the findings obtained and presented by this study, the following conclusions were drawn: Majority of the respondents were on the age group of 13 to 14 years old More than half of the respondents were Female and the Male sex having 29% of the total number of respondents respectively.

 Each year level in high school actively participated in the study having an equal percentage of respondents. Media is considered to be the most known and effective source of information, specifically the television among high school students. All of them considered television as a Very Informative source regardless of the respondents age, gender, and year level.
High school students regardless of age, gender, and year level considered reproductive health education to be essential as a part of their well being.

 The null hypothesis that was proposed in the study was accepted. There is no significant relationship between the respondents profile and his/ her level of understanding on reproductive health education. Majority of the high school respondents agree in the inclusion of Reproductive Health Education in their curriculum.

RECOMMENDATION
Based on the results presented, the researchers would strongly suggest the following: I. Provide a health care program intended for high school students II. Support a school- based reproductive health education III. Adaptation of school- based activities that are related to reproductive health. IV. Inclusion of Reproductive Health Education to high schools curriculum