Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 4 – uploaded by mark joseph lu

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Height. It can be gleaned from the table on the previous page, that the level of physical growth of the SBFP beneficiaries in terms of height, 34 or 45.3 percent of the respondents increased height between 0.21 to 0.30 m, 26 or 34.7 percent got an increase of .011 to .020 m, 11 or 14.7 percent had an increase of 0.10 and below, while both increases of 0.31 to 0.40 m, and 0.41 and above were well received by 2 or 2.7 percent respondents. Meanwhile, the mean of the physical growth rate of the respondents was at 0.02, with a standard deviation of 0.008 and a coefficient variation of 40 percent. TLaroelv. most of the resnondents augmented (21 - 030 meter in terms of hejcht. Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies Vol. 3, No. 2, (2020) ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) ICCA] DRAE1_GINE (Kalina\

Table 4 Height. It can be gleaned from the table on the previous page, that the level of physical growth of the SBFP beneficiaries in terms of height, 34 or 45.3 percent of the respondents increased height between 0.21 to 0.30 m, 26 or 34.7 percent got an increase of .011 to .020 m, 11 or 14.7 percent had an increase of 0.10 and below, while both increases of 0.31 to 0.40 m, and 0.41 and above were well received by 2 or 2.7 percent respondents. Meanwhile, the mean of the physical growth rate of the respondents was at 0.02, with a standard deviation of 0.008 and a coefficient variation of 40 percent. TLaroelv. most of the resnondents augmented (21 - 030 meter in terms of hejcht. Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies Vol. 3, No. 2, (2020) ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) ICCA] DRAE1_GINE (Kalina\

Related Figures (8)

Table 1. Profile of the School-Based Feeding Program Beneficiaries ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) | ISSN 2651-6705 (Online) | asianjournal.org Ladlsery, UMlOst OL UIC SLUGCIIts WEIE Tale DELWCEI OU All OF OL OdllisldaClOly Level. General Weighted Average (After). Table 2 also clearly states that after the implementation of school-based feeding program, 35 or 46.7 percent of the students have grade between 80 and 84 Satisfactory), 22 or 29.3 percent of the students obtained grade between 85 to 89 (Very Satisfactory), 12 or 16.0 percent attained an average ranging from 75 to 79 (Fairly Satisfactory), while 6 or 8.0 percent of he respondents had an average extending from 90 and above (Outstanding). Yverall. received crades hetween &(1) and 84 or Satisfactory T evel Largely, most of the students were rated between 80 and 84 or Satisfactory Level. General Weighted Average (Before). The table on the preceding page also shows that 90 and above (Oustanding) have 1 or 1.3 percent student in each grading scale, 14 or 18.7 percent attained an average ranging from 85 to 89 (Very Satisfactory), 30 or 40.0 percent of the students have grade between 80 and 84 (Satisfactory), 29 or 38.7 percent of the students obtained grade between 75 to 79 (Fairly Satisfactory), while both Below 75 (Did Not Meet Expectations).
Table 1. Profile of the School-Based Feeding Program Beneficiaries ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) | ISSN 2651-6705 (Online) | asianjournal.org Ladlsery, UMlOst OL UIC SLUGCIIts WEIE Tale DELWCEI OU All OF OL OdllisldaClOly Level. General Weighted Average (After). Table 2 also clearly states that after the implementation of school-based feeding program, 35 or 46.7 percent of the students have grade between 80 and 84 Satisfactory), 22 or 29.3 percent of the students obtained grade between 85 to 89 (Very Satisfactory), 12 or 16.0 percent attained an average ranging from 75 to 79 (Fairly Satisfactory), while 6 or 8.0 percent of he respondents had an average extending from 90 and above (Outstanding). Yverall. received crades hetween &(1) and 84 or Satisfactory T evel Largely, most of the students were rated between 80 and 84 or Satisfactory Level. General Weighted Average (Before). The table on the preceding page also shows that 90 and above (Oustanding) have 1 or 1.3 percent student in each grading scale, 14 or 18.7 percent attained an average ranging from 85 to 89 (Very Satisfactory), 30 or 40.0 percent of the students have grade between 80 and 84 (Satisfactory), 29 or 38.7 percent of the students obtained grade between 75 to 79 (Fairly Satisfactory), while both Below 75 (Did Not Meet Expectations).
Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies Vol. 3, No. 2, (2020) ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) ICCA O401_GINE (Naling\ LEVELS OF PHYSICAL GROWTH RATE AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF THE SCHOOL-BASED FEEDING PROGRAM BENEFICIARIES
Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies Vol. 3, No. 2, (2020) ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) ICCA O401_GINE (Naling\ LEVELS OF PHYSICAL GROWTH RATE AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF THE SCHOOL-BASED FEEDING PROGRAM BENEFICIARIES
ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) | ISSN 2651-6705 (Online) | asianjournal.org Table 2 reports the level of physical growth of the school-based feeding program beneficiaries.
ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) | ISSN 2651-6705 (Online) | asianjournal.org Table 2 reports the level of physical growth of the school-based feeding program beneficiaries.
Figure 1. Graph of the Body Mass Index of the Beneficiaries
Figure 1. Graph of the Body Mass Index of the Beneficiaries
ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) | ISSN 2651-6705 (Online) | asianjournal.org
ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) | ISSN 2651-6705 (Online) | asianjournal.org
ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) | ISSN 2651-6705 (Online) | asianjournal.org Table 4
ISSN 2651-6691 (Print) | ISSN 2651-6705 (Online) | asianjournal.org Table 4
In terms of test of difference in the physical growth and academic performance of the beneficiaries when group according to the respondents’ sex. In terms of physical grown, specifically height, males projected a mean of .0210 while females anticipated a mean of .0188, the mean difference for this indicator was at .002, t- value of 1.716 and a significance of .243, which is not significant at all. On the other hand, still under physical growth, males showed a mean of .1801, females at .1708 mean for weight, with a mean difference of .009, 73 degree of freedom, .501 t- value and a significance of tnd the Table 5
In terms of test of difference in the physical growth and academic performance of the beneficiaries when group according to the respondents’ sex. In terms of physical grown, specifically height, males projected a mean of .0210 while females anticipated a mean of .0188, the mean difference for this indicator was at .002, t- value of 1.716 and a significance of .243, which is not significant at all. On the other hand, still under physical growth, males showed a mean of .1801, females at .1708 mean for weight, with a mean difference of .009, 73 degree of freedom, .501 t- value and a significance of tnd the Table 5
Test of Difference in the Physical Growth and Academic Performance of the Beneficiaries when Group according to their Age It can be observed in table 8 that the significant values on the physical growth along weight and BMI is 0.000. This implies that the respondents weight and BMI are significant by different from each other when they are grouped according to their age. Table 9 reveals the age bracket which shows significantly higher in terms of physical growth along weight and BMI. However, the computed significant value along the Height is .553 which is obviously greater than 0.05. This implies that there is no significant difference on the Physical Growth along height when they are grouped according to their q0e. Table 8
Test of Difference in the Physical Growth and Academic Performance of the Beneficiaries when Group according to their Age It can be observed in table 8 that the significant values on the physical growth along weight and BMI is 0.000. This implies that the respondents weight and BMI are significant by different from each other when they are grouped according to their age. Table 9 reveals the age bracket which shows significantly higher in terms of physical growth along weight and BMI. However, the computed significant value along the Height is .553 which is obviously greater than 0.05. This implies that there is no significant difference on the Physical Growth along height when they are grouped according to their q0e. Table 8
Related topics:
Psychology
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved