St. Camillus College of Manaoag Foundation, Inc.

Research and Community Extension Unit

“Embracing a genuine spirit of service with love,

mercy and compassion”

RESEARCH
MANUAL
 INTRODUCTION

The St. Camillus College of Manaoag Foundation, Inc., through its Research and
Community Extension Unit (RCEU), along with the Academic Heads, monitors the research
program of the students under the Basic and the Higher Education Departments. The
Student Research Program (SRP) is undertaken by the students of the institution as part of
their academic requirements.

The student-researchers shall proceed with their research projects after a series of
classroom lecture presentations and activities designed to equip them with the necessary
theories, methods, and techniques in designing and conducting relevant interdisciplinary
researches. The student-researchers shall be required to undergo the preliminary oral
defense or the proposal stage. They need to pass the final oral defense and submit their
research outputs as prerequisite for their final grade. The research outputs shall be
submitted to the Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU).

The institution promotes interdisciplinary and collaborative research. It encourages

student-researchers to work together with fellow students, experts, and practitioners from
other fields or disciplines in designing and conducting their research projects. In this
manner, they will not only be able to develop their collaborative skills but also be able to
integrate important ideas, methods, and techniques that will improve their research outputs
and contribute better to knowledge production and use.

INSTITUTIONAL PROFILE

VISION

To be the most dynamic and forward-looking education institution in Northern Luzon

that aims to pursue academic excellence for global competitiveness

MISSION

To transform the Filipino youth as model leaders through education of the heart,
mind and soul guided by the Camillian charism of knowledge, love and service

MANTRA/ PHILOSOPHY

“We care for every child’s future by providing quality education.”

GOALS

We care for every child’s future by achieving the “I SERVE” goals:

I - ntellectual growth
S - ocial growth
E - motional growth
R - esilience from adversities
V - alues formation
E - mpathy for service
OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIC PLATFORM

1
To achieve our goals, we adhere to the following objectives:

Establish and sustain shared values, inspire unity of purpose and clarity of
1 UNIFIED VISION OF direction where all stakeholders can become fully involved in achieving SCCM’s
EXCELLENCE vision of excellence
Deliver quality programs and services by cultivating an admirable culture of
2 CONTINUING creativity and innovation that is adaptable to change and aligned to national
INNOVATION development goals
Create a treasured brand of Camillian education that is accessible to all with focus
3 DISTINCTIVE on the core principles of knowledge, love and service
BRANDING
Develop programs and services that promote a shift from informational to
4 TRANSFORMATIONAL transformational teaching and learning by going beyond content delivery to create
TEACHING & meaningful, high impact learning experiences for our learners
LEARNING
Foster effective use of technology-based solutions in knowledge management that
5 DIGITALLY-POWERED leverage resources and technology, core capabilities and expertise of educators
PROCESSES and learners
GLOBAL INTEGRATION Elevate SCCM as an internationally competitive academic institution
6
COMMITMENT TO Ensure the link of institutional goals to the needs and expectations of the various
7 STAKEHOLDERS stakeholders, the local community and the society as a whole
Form sectoral linkages and partnerships to strengthen SCCM’s role as a
8 LINKAGES AND community building resource thro
PARTNERSHIPS ugh the support, cooperation and full involvement of external partners
Provide a sustainable environment in which learning practices, human support and
9 SUSTAINABILITY physical spaces work coherently for the learners and educators to have an
equitable access to quality learning tools, technologies and resources
PERFORMANCE Invest in high-quality career development programs where professional
10 MANAGEMENT AND advancement is regarded as an important force in human capital management
DEVELOPMENT

CORE VALUES

S - ervice-oriented
K - nowledge-driven
I - nnovative
L - ove-centered
L - eading by example
F - orward-looking
U - nwavering loyalty
L - iving for God

RESEARCH AND COMMUNITY EXTENSION SERVICES

2
 ON RESEARCH

Cognizant of the vital role of research in higher education, even in basic education
particularly in the Senior High School (SHS) Division, as it helps to inform the institution’s
policies and practices that can improve the quality of education and the overall student
experience, SCCM’s thrust is now to embark on an extensive scholarly activities and
researches specifically in the area of healthcare as part of its “core elements” in its mission
to educate the youth and the community in general. This initiative is done to reinforce and
strengthen the advancement of knowledge, emphasizing the importance of discovery,
innovation and creation, as this is essential to any community or to any civilization for that
matter.

Moreover, the focus of higher education is to educate, train and otherwise prepare
the students for successful careers, therefore it is imperative that SCCM in particular should
develop in them the breadth and depth of knowledge not only in foundational but even in
advanced subjects, where the skills for knowledge acquisition and understanding (including
contextualization, interpretation and inference) are harnessed to the fullest. Part of this
training and preparation is derived from actual exposure to faculty who are engaged at the
leading-edge of their fields, through their research and scholarly work.

For this purpose, we have devised and adopted the following research agenda in the
Institute of Nursing Education (INE) to set forth the strategic direction on how efforts and
resources will be focused thereby ensuring their alignment with the mission, vision, goals
and core values of the Institute in particular and to the Institution in general:

RESEARCH AGENDA

Purpose

a. Provides focus and direction on health research, interdisciplinary research, and

development efforts;
b. Basis is to maximize resources utilization and minimize duplication of resource
efforts;
c. Serves as a guide in the conduct of health and other researches;
d. To enhance the research capabilities of faculty and students;
e. Helps in the provision of evidence-based solutions to identified health and other
problems;
f. Provides the basis for the development of a detailed research plan

Area Activities/ concepts

1. Basic skills, Health technological -update faculty skills in research
development -update students’ skill in writing a research
-research proposals
2. Responsive health system towards -research to enhance and extend healthy
efficient, quality, safe and affordable lives
health care -holistic approaches to health and wellness
-innovations in health and global
competitiveness
-research in equity and health
3. Research in equity and health -Geriatric care
3
 -substance abuse
-HIV/AIDS and other STIs
-violence
-disability
-others
4. Grant development for Faculty -provision of research budget for Faculty
-grant assessment and evaluation
5. Strategic planning -analysis of college wide learning outcomes
from student surveys
-administrative support
-measures progress on strategic plan goals
6. Socio-environmental concerns -health hazards from nursing activities in
the clinical areas
-environmental sanitation
-environment and climate change
7. Health services delivery -health services assessment on vulnerable
groups

-health promotion along;

- Maternal and child health
-family health program
-responsible parenthood
-reproductive health
-malnutrition
-community-based health service delivery
system
-assessment of service delivery and referral
during disaster or calamity
-communicable diseases
-non-communicable diseases
-lifestyle related diseases
-cardiovascular diseases
- diabetes mellitus
-mental health
-reduce and prevent cancer cases
-control dengue outbreaks
-reduce diarrhea outbreaks
-respiratory diseases including COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

The Research and Community Extension has the following objectives:

4
1. Research

1.1 To formulate a research development program to equip the students and faculty
with the knowledge, skills, and competence to do research and publish their research
outputs

1.2 To improve research productivity of students and the quality of students

researches

1.3 To encourage the faculty to engage in various types of research activities

1.4 To encourage students to engage in various types research activities

1.5 To produce through the research team refereed researches for publication in
different research journals

2. Publications

2.1 To publish research-related articles in the quarterly newsletter.

2.2 To public abstracts of theses and institutional researches in the research journal

3. Curriculum

3.1 To study areas for improvement so as to enhance the effectiveness, efficiency,

and excellence of:

a. on-ground teaching
b. on-line education
3.2 To study desirable courses to be offered eventually by St. Camillus College of
Manaoag

4. Extension Services

4.1 To identify needs of potential patients and company clients at the St. Camillus
Maternity and Polyclinic through monthly medical missions in the different barangays

4.2 To provide research services support to the various outreach activities of the
different Institutes.

5. Others

5.1 To provide statistical services to researchers, educational institutions, and

government agencies

5.2 To provide consultancy services to researchers, business, educational

institutional, and government agencies

5.3 To conduct commissioned researches

5.4 To generate funds for research from national and foreign funding agencies

5.5 To network with institutions that provide research grants

5
Definition of Terms

1. Final Oral Defense is the presentation of final research outputs before a panel of
evaluators.

2. Mock Defense is a preparatory activity for the oral defense. This may be conducted prior
to the preliminary oral defense and final oral defense under the supervision of the research
adviser.

3. Monitoring System is a mechanism of the Department to supervise the implementation of

the Student Research Program.

4. Project / Software Demonstration is an activity wherein selected student researchers

demonstrate their research prototypes while other students present the softwares as their
research outputs.

5. Preliminary Oral Defense is an activity wherein the student-researchers present their

proposed research outputs before a panel of evaluators.

6. Prototype Exhibit is an activity wherein student-researchers showcase the research

prototypes.

7. Research Adviser is a faculty member, employee of the institution, or practitioner who, by

reason of his/her specialization or expertise, contributes to the conceptualization and
implementation of student research. Advisers shall guide and mentor the students all
throughout the conduct of the research.

8. Research Editor is an English or Language faculty member of the school who assists
student-researchers by means of thorough editing of manuscript in terms of grammar,
structure, and coherence;

9. Research Output is the output required under the curriculum of the degree program of
the student-researchers. It may either be in the form of a thesis, paper in publishable
format, capstone project, case study, project study, innovative business project, design
project, or feasibility study.

10. Research Teacher is a full/part-time faculty member who is given the research teaching
load and serves as the overall coordinator for the whole research class.

11. Sanction refers to penalty imposed to student-researchers for any act or omission in
violation of the quality procedures set by their respective Departments.

12. Student Research forms part of the degree program of the students.

13. Student-Researcher is any student of the institution who is enrolled in a research course
and is conducting a research project.

14. Student Research Colloquium is an activity wherein selected student-researchers present

their research outputs publicly for a wider dissemination of significant research findings.
6
15. Interdisciplinary Research pertains to a research effort carried out by a group composed
of researchers and experts or practitioners coming from different disciplines.

General Quality Procedures

1. A timetable of activities shall be drawn prior to the start of the academic year. This is to
ensure that students will be able to complete the requirements of the research course within
a year.

2. The students shall enrol in a research course. They shall be given a series of classroom
lecture presentations and activities designed to equip them with the necessary theories,
methods, and techniques in conducting research and in producing their research outputs.
The seminar-type lecture presentations may be provided by selected faculty members,
experts, practitioners, or by the research teacher.

3. For degree programs that require research papers as their outputs, the Department shall
determine the format and contents.

4. The research teacher shall constantly monitor the research outputs of the students. Each
research teacher shall handle a research course that requires a specific type of research
output.

5. The student-researchers shall select their research adviser from a list provided by the
Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU) based on the suggestions forwarded by the
respective Departments. The adviser shall help the students in designing and conducting the
research projects based on the set timetable of activities. The research adviser shall provide
at least one (1) hour for consultation per week.

6. The student-researchers shall select their research editor from a list provided by the
Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU) based on the suggestions forwarded by the
respective Departments. The editor shall assist the students in correcting the research
manuscripts in so far as the grammar, structure, and coherence are concerned.

7. The research teacher shall arrange the proposal defense based on the timetable of
activities. Only students who have complied with the set requirements shall be allowed. A
panel of three (3) evaluators shall examine the proposals submitted by the students. The
students must successfully defend their research proposals before they can be allowed to
proceed with their research projects. The research teacher shall facilitate, monitor, and
evaluate the conduct of the proposal defense.

8. The research teacher shall organize the panel of evaluators for the final oral defense. The
panel during the final oral defense shall be composed of the same evaluators present during
the proposal defense. In the absence of one panelist, the research teacher shall sit in lieu
and complete the panel.

9. The student-researchers must successfully defend their research outputs. They shall
submit their research outputs as a prerequisite for their final grade.
7
10. Selected student-researchers shall present their research outputs in research colloquia,
software and project demonstrations, and prototype exhibits.
11. Sanctions may be imposed to student-researchers should they fail to abide by the
quality procedures set by their respective departments and the Research Office.

12. Interdisciplinary research is encouraged among all student-researchers enrolled in a

research course across different curricular programs.

Research Groupings

1. Research projects may be undertaken individually or by group. Student researchers shall

be allowed to choose their groupmates, provided that the composition of the group shall not
exceed five (5) members. Should the number of members exceeds five (5), a letter must be
submitted to the Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU), signed by the research
teacher, Chairperson and the Dean, stating the reason/s for such occurrence.

2. Each group shall select a leader.

3. Re-grouping of the students may be allowed during the Prelim period. If re-grouping is
inevitable after the proposal defense, the request shall undergo scrutiny by the research
teacher.

4. Problems or conflicts arising within the group (i.e., non-participation or non-cooperation

of group member(s) in the preparation of the research outputs) shall be settled in the
presence and guidance of the research adviser or the research teacher. If such are not
resolved, the Research Head must be notified in writing, noted by the research adviser and
the research teacher. In this case, the Research Head shall decide on the matter in
accordance with pertinent rules and regulations of the institution.

Topic Approval

1. The students shall submit at least three topics or titles to the research teacher for
approval.

2. Approved topics or titles shall be checked if:

a. they adhere to the institution's research agenda;

b. they are researchable, addressing a gap in knowledge or method; and

c. they are not a duplication or replication of existing topics or titles.

Table 1.

Fees for Research Advisers, Panel Members, Research Editor, and Statistician

Panel Member Proposal Defense

8 Final Oral Defense
(Preliminary Oral
 Defense)
Research Adviser P 1,000 P 1,000
Internal Panel Member 700 800
External Panel Member 700 + 300 transportation 800 + 300 transportation
Editor 10 per page 10 per page
Statistician 500 1,000
Adviser’s Acceptance Fee 1,000 per semester
Table 2.

Fees for Panel Members in Feasibility Studies

Panel Member Initial Hearing Final Hearing

Marketing, Technical P 800 N/A
Expert (preferably CPA)4 800 800
Adviser 1,000 1,000
Editor 10 per page 10 per page
Transportation Allowance 300 (For External Panelist) 300 (For External Panelist)

As presented in Tables 1 and 2, panel members shall be entitled to different rates

during the preliminary oral defense and the final oral defense. This is because it would take
a longer time to review the final paper compared to a proposal paper, but nevertheless, the
same quality review is expected.

There are at least three (3) panelists required during each stage of defense
composed preferably of two (2) internal panelists and one (1) external expert or industry
practitioner. Each of them will receive the same amount of honorarium, but an external
expert is provided with a transportation allowance. Advisers, research editors, and
statisticians are also given appropriate amount of honoraria for the extended service/s
given.

An adviser’s acceptance fee is given to the research adviser for accepting the task of
guiding the group throughout the research project. Once the adviser accepts the
responsibility, he/she shall sign a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the students
stating the responsibilities of the adviser and advisees. This fee is a one-time payment given
to the adviser for journeying with the students from start to finish of the research paper.

Process of Payment for Panel Members and Research Advisers

1. Upon enrolment in a research course and after the formation of research groups, the
students shall pay to the Finance Office the preliminary oral defense fee or final oral defense
fee. The amount shall be divided among the group members accordingly.

2. After payment to the Finance Office, the group will provide a copy of the official receipt to
the research teacher.

3. Before the schedule of any oral defense (at least a month ahead), the research teacher
shall file a request for fund release of the honorarium for panel members for the whole
class. For internal panel members, their honoraria shall be credited to their payroll account
while for the external panelist, it shall be given9 either in cash or in cheque during the oral
defense. Therefore, only the external panel member’s honorarium plus transportation
allowance will be reflected in the cheque (payee: external panelist).

Qualification Standards and Functions for Research Advisers

Qualification Standards

1. Preferably a full-time faculty member or employee of the institution;

2. At least with a Master’s degree of thesis track or with research experience (evidenced by
research outputs or publications) in lieu of a thesis; and

3. Must be an expert in the field of study conducted by the student-researchers.

Functions

1. Assist the students in the selection of research topics/titles;

2. Help the students in the proper conduct (through regular and close monitoring) of
research work according to set timetable so as to ensure integrity and high quality output;

3. Review/check submitted proposals, questionnaires, chapters, and other parts, as the case
may be, of the research output;

4. Provide not only technical expertise but also moral guidance to students;

5. Conduct mock defense prior to the actual defense;

6. Monitor participation or involvement of group members by accomplishing the consultation

matrix form;

7. Attend the defense of their advisee/s. However, they shall refrain from participating in the
oral defense; and

8. Attend orientation set by the Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU).

Qualification Standards and Functions of Panelists

Qualification Standards

1. Full-time or part-time faculty member or employee of the institution or industry

practitioner; and

2. At least with a Master's degree of thesis track or with research experience (evidenced by
research outputs or publications) in lieu of a thesis. On the other hand, an industry
practitioner should have at least three years of supervisory experience in a related industry
or direct client of company-based research.

Functions

1. Evaluate the proposal and final research outputs of the student-researchers. The
comment sheet shall serve as a reference material of student-researchers. Only written
comments or suggestions shall be considered 10
as bases for the final approval of the paper.
Panelists are requested to be specific in their comments (i.e. identify what and how to
revise).

2. May be assigned as Chair during the defense. The specific functions of the Chair shall be:

a. to lead or direct the group during the defense;

b. to moderate the deliberation of critical issues or questions; and
c. to explain or discuss with the students the reasons for revisions.
3. Rate the research output of the student-researchers based on the criteria set by the
Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU);
4. Give the student-researchers their individual grades based on the criteria specified by the
Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU) for the proposal (or preliminary oral)
defense and final oral defense. The grading sheets shall be accomplished immediately after
the presentation of each group and submitted to the research teacher; and

5. Sign the approval sheet after the student-researchers shall have complied with the
comments, suggestions, and recommendations of the panelists detailed and written in the
comment sheet.

Qualification Standards and Functions of Research Editors

Qualification Standards

1. Preferably full-time English or Language faculty member or employee of the institution (or
of other reputable institutions); and

2. With relevant professional experience

Functions

1. Edit the paper of the student-researchers thoroughly within a maximum of five (5)
working days for editing and proofreading from receipt of the manuscript;

2. Discuss the comments, suggestions, and recommendations made on the paper with the
student-researchers;

3. Assist the student-researchers in maintaining a high standard of research output by

closely monitoring the corrections and revisions made by the students; and

4. Sign the endorsement after reviewing the edited manuscript for proposal defense or final
oral defense.

Guidelines for Editing

1. The student-researchers shall select their research editor from a list provided by the
Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU) based on the suggestions forwarded by the
respective Departments. 11
2. The prerogative of the students to choose their research editors is subject to the approval
of the Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU). The editor's acceptance form must
be accomplished by the student-researchers. An editor may accommodate a maximum of
ten (10) research papers.

Guidelines for the Preliminary Oral Defense

1. The research teacher shall set the schedule for the preliminary oral defense based on the
timetable of activities. All groups must defend their research proposals on the scheduled
dates.

2. The proposal defense (or preliminary oral defense) is done through panel evaluation.

3. The research teacher shall convene a panel of three members [composed of two (2)
internal panelists and one (1) external expert or industry practitioner) to evaluate the
proposals submitted by the student-researchers. One of the internal panelists shall be
assigned as the Chair of the panel.

4. The research teacher may sit as a panel member, provided, he/she is not the adviser of
the proponent group of student-researchers.

5. In the absence of one panelist, the research teacher shall sit in lieu and complete the
panel. In ordinary cases, however, the research teacher shall not sit as a panelist to any
group of student-researchers enrolled in his/her class. The academic head may sit as an
observer during the defense.

6. The statistician and research editor of the student-researchers shall not be allowed to sit
as panelists. The research adviser shall attend the proposal (or preliminary oral) defense but
shall refrain from participating in the oral defense. He/she shall observe the hearing and
may take note of the suggestions of the panel members.

7. The student-researchers must successfully defend their proposals before they shall be
allowed to continue their research project. The research teacher shall facilitate, monitor, and
evaluate the conduct of the proposal defense.

8. The members of the panel shall be given a copy of the research output at least three (3)
days before the proposal defense. They shall critique and give their comments, suggestions,
and recommendations on the comment sheet provided by Research and Community
Extension Unit (RCEU).

9. Only groups that submit completed research proposal requirements will be scheduled for
the proposal defense. Below are the proposal defense requirements:

a. Three (3) copies of complete and edited research proposal with line numbers
located at the left margin of the manuscript;

b. Endorsement from the research adviser and research teacher to proceed;

c. Clearance from Ethics Review Board;12

 d. Official receipts of proposal defense fee, adviser’s fee, and editor’s fee (if
necessary); and

e. Topic approval reply slip from the company (for company- or communitybased
research).

10. Any group that fails to submit a research proposal shall be given another chance within
a week upon presentation of valid reasons through formal letter noted by the research
adviser and the research teacher, and approved by the Research Head.

11. The adviser's approval sheet is a prerequisite for acceptance and inclusion in the
proposal defense list.

12. The student-researchers are expected to be in their business/corporate attire during the
proposal defense.

13. Each group shall be given one (1) hour to present the proposal. The time schedule shall
be divided into three parts:

a. Presentation 15 minutes

b. Question and Answer 40 minutes

c. Panel Deliberation 5 minutes

14. The panel members shall give the student-researchers their individual grades based on
the criteria specified by the Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU).

The following numerical system of grading shall be followed:

a. 96% - 100% = Excellent

b. 90% - 95% = Very Good

c. 85% - 89% = Good

d. 80% - 84% = Fair

e. 75% - 79% = Passed

f. Below 75% = Failed

15. The group must have a passing grade of at least 75% in the proposal (or preliminary
oral) defense.

16. The student-researchers shall submit a revised copy of their research proposal and
accomplished approval sheet duly signed by the panel members a week after their proposal
defense schedule. Failure to do so until the encoding of grades would mean a “No Grade”
(NG) for their final grade in their first research course.
13
17. All the comments, suggestions, and recommendations of the panel members must be
detailed and written on the comment sheet provided by the Research and Community
Extension Unit (RCEU). The comment sheet will serve as a reference material and may be
photocopied by the student-researchers a day after the defense.

18. In cases where conflict of ideas between or among the panelists and student
researchers occurs, the Chair of the panel shall decide on the issue or problem.

19. The student-presenters shall prepare the visual equipment and materials needed in the
presentation. They shall also prepare individual nameplates for identification.

20. The student-presenters must come on time. Late comers shall not be accommodated in
the defense, thus, will be re-scheduled with a re-defense status. Waiting time is only 5
minutes.

21. Any group or any group member who fails to come on the scheduled date of proposal
defense shall be given another chance upon presentation of valid reasons noted by the
research adviser and the research teacher. However, the student-researcher will be
rescheduled to another defense session.

22. The defense session is re-scheduled if two (2) guest panel members fail to come on the
set date. However, the research teacher has the prerogative to replace the absentee on the
re-scheduled date of defense.

23. The proposal re-defense requirements must be accomplished within a week after the
defense. Otherwise, the students concerned shall be given a failing grade.

Below are the proposal re-defense requirements:

a. Three (3) copies of completed and edited research proposal;

b. Official receipts of proposal re-defense fee; and

c. Approval sheet with the signature of the research teacher and the research adviser

24. The student-researchers shall not be allowed to bring token or any form of gifts for the
panel members.

Guidelines for the Final Oral Defense

1. The research teacher shall arrange the schedule for the final oral defense based on the
timetable of activities. No defense shall be made three (3) weeks before graduation.

2. All groups shall submit the following final oral defense requirements at least three (3)
days before the final oral defense:

 Three (3) copies of complete and edited research output;

 Official receipts of final oral defense fees;
 Endorsement from the research editor, adviser, and research teacher;
 Research Consultation Matrix o Adviser's Grading Sheet for Final Research Paper;
14
 Video Presentation of Business or Industry Operation (for IBP) in CD;
 Student Research Mock Defense Schedule Form (if necessary).
3. Submission of requirements will be up to 5 P.M. only of the designated due date. Late
submission or non-compliance will mean a “Re-defense”' status. On the one hand, students
with a "Re-defense status” will obtain the highest grade of 75% in oral defense grade and
will be disqualified for Best Research Paper Award. On the other hand, failure of this group
to successfully pass the defense process will mean another final chance for a re-defense.

4. The research teacher shall facilitate, monitor, and evaluate the conduct of the defense.

5. The research teacher shall organize the panel for the final oral defense. The panel during
the final oral defense shall be composed of the same evaluators present during the proposal
(or preliminary oral) defense. In the absence of one guest panelist, the research teacher
shall sit in lieu and complete the panel. In ordinary cases, however, the research teacher
shall not sit as a panelist to any group of student researchers enrolled in his/her class. The
academic head may sit as an observer during the defense; however, he/she is not allowed
to participate unless he/she is invited as a member of the panel.

6. The research teacher shall assign and identify the Chair of the panel of evaluators. The
specific functions of the chair shall be:

a. to lead or direct the final oral defense;

b. to moderate the deliberation of critical issues or questions; and

c. to explain or discuss with the student-researchers the reasons for revisions or re-
defense (if applicable).

7. The members of the panel shall be given an individual copy of the research output at
least three (3) days before the final oral defense. They shall critique and give their
comments, suggestions, and recommendations on the comment sheet. They shall also grade
the research output and the student-researchers individually using the scoring rubrics for
final oral defense and the scoring rubrics for individual student-researcher respectively.

8. All the comments, suggestions, and recommendations of the panel members must be
detailed and written on the comment sheet provided by the Research and Community
Extension Unit (RCEU). The comment sheet will serve as a reference material and may be
photocopied by the student-researchers a day after the defense.

9. Only written comments, suggestions, and recommendations shall be considered as bases

for the final approval of the paper.

10. Panelists are requested to be specific in their comments (i.e. identify what and how to
revise).

11. When conflict of ideas arises between or among the panelists, advisers, and students,
the Chair of the panel shall decide on the issue or problem.

12. The student-researchers shall be given preferably up to one hour and a half (1½) to
15
present and defend their output.
13. The panel members shall accomplish the grading sheets immediately after the
presentation of and submit them to the research teacher.

14. The panel members shall grade the student-researchers based on the rubrics provided.
The numerical system of grading must be followed:

a. 96% - 100% = Excellent

b. 90% - 95% = Very Good
c. 85% - 89% = Good
d. 80% - 84% = Fair
e. 75% - 78% = Passed
f. Below 75% = Failed

15. The research teacher shall compute the grades during the final oral defense.
16. The student-presenters shall prepare the visual equipment and materials needed in the
presentation. They shall also prepare individual nameplates for identification.

17. All groups who successfully defended their research outputs shall finalize their work
within two (2) weeks after the final oral defense.

18. Any group that fails to submit the terminal requirements on the specified date will be
given a grade of 75%. The grades obtained from the final oral defense and the adviser's
evaluation shall be disregarded.

19. Any group or any group member who fails to come on the scheduled date of final oral
defense shall be given another chance upon presentation of valid reasons noted by the
research adviser and the research teacher. However, the student-researcher will be
rescheduled to another defense session and, in effect, must pay a re-defense fee.

20. The re-defense must be accomplished within two weeks. Failure to do so shall mean a
failing grade of 65%. Concerned students shall submit re-defense requirements two weeks
after the scheduled defense. Below are the final oral defense requirements:

a. Three (3) copies of completed and edited research proposal;

b. Official receipts of proposal re-defense fee; and
c. Approval sheet with the signature of the research teacher and the research
adviser.
21. The members of the group who have failed to defend their work within the academic
year forfeit their rights over the said research work.
22. The advisers are required to attend the defense of their advisees. They are, however,
not allowed to participate in the defense.

23. The student-researchers shall not be allowed to bring token or any form of gifts for the
panel members.

Submission of Final Research Outputs

16
1. Two (2) printed and hard-bound copies of the final research paper for the Institute;
2. Two (2) soft copies in PDF format saved in CD of the final research paper [one (1) copy
for the Research and Community Extension Unit (RCEU) and another one (1) for the
Library); another copy shall be furnished for company- or community-based research to the
company or community concerned;

3. Two (2) hard copies (for the Department) and two (2) soft copies (for the Research and
Community Extension Unit (RCEU) and Library) of the Abstract;

4. Approval sheet signed by the Adviser, Research Editor, the Panel Members, and the
Dean;

5. Two (2) sets of program including source codes and user's manual saved in CD for the
institute;

6. Prototype project for the institute, if any;

7. Final copy of video presentation of business or industry operations saved in CD for the
institute;

8. Student Research Software and User's Manual Acknowledgement Form (for all Programs);

9. Accomplished acknowledgment receipt form (tor company- and communitybased

researches);

10. Accomplished acknowledgement receipt form (for research adviser);

11. Turnitin and Grammarly Test Results with passing grades;

12. Waiver of Confidentiality or Nondisclosure; and

13. Student Research Transmittal form.

Policy on Co-Authorship

The research adviser is acknowledged for his/her intellectual contribution in the

conduct and production of student research. In order to be formally considered as a co-
author of the research paper, the research adviser and the student-researchers must sign
the Declaration of Co-Authorship which certifies the substantial contribution of the adviser
who, therefore, shall be given the credit as a co-author of the research paper. The research
adviser may present the paper in local or international conferences, and publish it in local or
international journals, subject to the following:

1. When published as a research work in a journal, the research adviser gets the credit of
being a co-author of the student-researchers;

2. The principal authors are the student-researchers and the research adviser the secondary
author; and

3. The research adviser may credit the published work to his/her name, meaning, he/she
17
could declare it as his/her publication, provided, through close scrutiny, he/she has invested
sufficient amount of time and technical support for the preparation of the said student
research as evidenced by the evaluation of the students.

18