Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

Introduction

Brian Tracy (2020), a famous author and a motivational speaker once

said, “Communication is a skill that you can learn; it is like riding a bicycle or

typing. If you are willing to work at it, then you can rapidly improve the quality of

every part of your life.” The history of man governing man I s a history of some

men bearing influence on others through the means of communication. Those

who possessed the power of in fluence were psychologically licensed to lead

(Malone,1970). It has been suggested that leadership is enacted through

communication (Johansson, Miller, & Hamrin, 2011, 2014; Tengblad, 2006). As

such, communication is not only a central issue for leaders, but may also provide

new theoretical knowledge for leadership development.

One of the important vectors of communication is public speaking.

Learning about public speaking will allow one to participate in democracy at its

most basic level. Public speaking is important in creating and sustaining a

society, which includes informed, active participants (Adiwinata, 2017). Being

able to speak clearly to effectively inform and persuade others, and to move

people to action are necessary for professionals in a wide array of fields including

law, banking and finance, counseling, teaching, public relations, politics, and

sales. These abilities are also essential assets for all professionals in all fields

who aspire to leadership, as the ability to influence others is a crucial part of

leadership (Docan-Morgan, et al., 2015).

 2

Because public speaking skills have been shown to be so important, it is

especially troubling that public speaking is also a major fear of many people

(Baccarani & Bonfanti, 2015). Some researchers estimate that as many as 85%

of the general population have some level of anxiety about public speaking

(Burnley, Cross, & Spanos, 1992). Anxiety about being in social evaluative

situations is common, and people often avoid these types of situations as a

result. For example, numerous studies have linked social anxiety and fear of

negative evaluation (Carleton, Collimore, McCabe, & Antony, 2011). Further to

formal oral assessments, the concern of ‘being judged’ may limit active learning

with respect to asking questions and interacting with peers during seminars and

other learning opportunities (Grieve, 2021). Findings from a qualitative survey by

Grieve (2021) have clearly indicated that for those respondents with a fear of

public speaking and oral presentations, public speaking tasks have an overall

negative effect on learning and the student experience. Specifically, the findings

have indicated that fears are associated with being judged, uncertainty about the

topic and physical symptoms. This phenomenon is what is referred to as Public

Speaking Anxiety (PSA) and it involves social and psychological manifestations

to the speaker in which affects the overall performance (Daly, 1997). Results

suggest that relationships between public speaking anxiety and perceived

leadership do exist, and at significant levels (Arnold, 2018).

The development of the skills in leadership and public speaking focused

on the earlier part of the development years. This led to various programs

dedicated to the youth. When adults enable youth to be a part of the decision-
 3

making and planning processes, youth voice, empowerment, and participation

become important tools for facilitating engagement (Maynard, 2008). Honing the

youth's ability to become relevant and engage in society is a vital element in

developing a balanced environment in a community. The youth must play a role

by instilling in them responsibilities, independence, leadership, and camaraderie.

Positive youth development programs not only give youth the opportunity

to gain needed skills but these programs enable youth to practice these

developmental attributes (Pittman & Wright, 1991). Voice is important to youth

development because it enables youth to formulate and articulate their ideas to

others. These opportunities are instrumental for youth in developing autonomy

and identity (Ellis & Caldwell, 2005).

The Sangguniang Kabataan is the finest example of this type of exposure.

By its definition, the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK), or youth council, is the

governing body of each barangay's youth assembly, or Katipunan ng Kabataan.

They are elected by Katipunan ng Kabataan members in elections conducted by

the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). Republic Act 7160 instituted the

Sangguniang Kabataan and was reformed in 2015 designed to Initiate and

implement programs and projects designed to promote the general welfare,

development and empowerment of the youth. Training programs are mandated

to train the leaders with capabilities on leadership (RA 10742).

Because of its status and impact at the youth level, the SK Election is a

big deal in the Municipality of La Paz. But being a leader entails more than just

holding a position; it is also setting a positive example for their community

 4

members. It is also an honor and a source of pride for the municipality to develop

high-quality and well-rounded youth leaders because they act as ambassadors

and the face of the municipality at the various youth events, such as the Annual

IP Youth Summit.

The Municipal Tourism Office, through the Municipal Tourism Officer of

LGU-La Paz, in partnership with the Local Youth Development Council (LYDC),

celebrates the vital role of SK Officials in the Municipality of La Paz. Therefore, it

recognizes such a challenge in Public Speaking and intends to work with the

youth leaders to level up their training for their own welfare considering that they

could be the leaders in higher position in the future by assessing their anxieties

to Public Speaking.

As SK Officials in La Paz begin to increase their involvement with the

municipal projects for tourism and development, it is imperative for the Local

Youth Development Council and Municipal Tourism Office to support these

young leaders with skills necessary to be effective in the realm of public service.

Communication and public speaking skills are two of the most important aspects

identified.

Finally, the researcher, being the Municipal Tourism Officer, wants to

identify what social and psychological challenges of public speaking that these

SK Officials are most challenged. These are then set to be the foundations of

communication and public speaking programs for the municipality.

 5

Review of Literature and Studies

This section presents the related literature and studies for both local and

international successful types of research that are related to the present study.

Riegel (2013) explained that public speaking is serious business, it is how

a speaker makes an impression and convey information, and even though

making quality, high impact presentation can make us positively memorable in

the eyes of a speaker’s colleagues. Public speaking does not have to feel as

overwhelming, nerve-racking, or daunting as many of speaker make it out to be,

most people agree that everyone gets nervous one time or another, even the

most experienced speakers, whether it is presenting a new topic, presenting to a

new audience, or presenting to an audience who knows you well and will see you

again, all speakers have scenarios that make us feel more or less comfortable

and confident.

Boyd (2016) states that in order to identify leadership in individuals, one

must understand the variability of skills. The development of leadership skills

allows people to cope with their environment by making responsible decisions,

having a better understanding of their values, and being better able to

communicate and get along with others (Nowell, B., Izod, A. M., Ngaruiya,

K. M., & Boyd, N. M. 2016).

In the study of Lagerwerf et.al (2015) entitled Immediate Attention for

Public Speech: Differential Effects of Rhetorical Schemes and Valence Framing

in Political Radio Speeches, they mentioned that Political campaign speeches

 6

are deemed influential in winning people’s minds and votes. While the language

used in such speeches has often been credited with their impact, empirical

research in this area is scarce. We report on two experiments investigating how

language variables such as rhetorical schemes (e.g., contrast, list of three) and

valence framing (using positive vs. negative words) affect immediate attention

and consecutive information processing of political radio speeches.

Baccarani (2015) highlights the importance of public speaking as a means

of communication yet have been related to challenges in its development by

challenges such as the anxiety related to public speaking.

Public Speaking Anxiety (PSA) is a type of communication anxiety where

people experience physiological arousal or negative self-doubts and/or negative

behavior as a response to an anticipated or actual presentation and can be

manifested physiologically (e.g., increased heart rate), cognitively (e.g., negative

cognitions), and/or behaviorally (e.g., trembling) (Daly, McCroskey, Ayres, Hopf,

& Aryes 1997).

This has been anchored on the study of Cuncic (2021) on the social

anxiety and mental health disorders of speakers that gives an impact to their

public speaking skills. She mentioned that these social and psychological

challenges could even turn into a phobia if not being aided as young as possible.

Symptoms of Public Speaking Anxiety are the same as those that occur for

Social Anxiety Disorders, but they only happen in the context of speaking in

public.
 7

In the viewpoint of Hayaramae (2016) in her thesis entitled A Study on

Public Speaking Anxiety among Thai Postgraduate Students, the factors

contributing to public speaking anxiety included getting anxious when someone

asked about the topic. However, students could deal with feeling anxious in

moderate level. In addition, the physiological factors contributing to public

speaking anxiety, was that they feel uncomfortable before giving the speech.

They, however, could manage and control the stress in an appropriate level. For

strategies, the preparation strategy in public speaking among postgrad students

was selecting the topic from their interests.

In the study of Hunt (2021) entitled Students Fears of Oral Presentations

and Public Speaking in Higher Education, he mentioned some insights into

students’ fears about public speaking, including oral presentations, and the

strategies they used to overcome them. It was stated that some students are

conscious on the technicalities of English that it gives them certain fear because

the audience might have negative take and feedback about their presentation.

In the study of Sinambela (2021) entitled Self-Efficacy, Emotional

Regulation, Communication Competence and Public Speaking Anxiety towards

Students, he mentioned that emotional regulation is an individual's ability to

regulate the emotions experienced, and communication competence is a skill

that individuals have in terms of speaking. Emotion plays a big impact on how

speakers portray themselves in the audience. There are internal factors that

could bother someone and it might affect the quality of their performances.
 8

Based on the study of Marinho et al. (2017) entitled Fear of Public

Speaking: Perception of Students and Correlates, they determined the

prevalence of fear of public speaking among students and to assess its

association with sociodemographic variables and those related to the voice and

oral communication. In all, 63.9% of the respondents reported fear of public

speaking. As many as 89.3% of the respondents would like their undergraduate

program to include classes to improve public speaking. Being female, having

infrequent participation as speakers in groups, and perceiving their voice as high-

pitched or too soft increase the odds of exhibiting fear of public speaking

compared with students without those features. A great number of

undergraduates report fear of public speaking.

According to Wati (2021) Public speaking is very important for students

because they are expected to become good health promotors in the future, such

skills are therefore extremely helpful for career development prospects, though

the act of public speaking can be daunting. Public speaking has commonly been

perceived by many as a horrible experience especially for those who are

introverts. The one of the major stressors that learners experience in language

learning is performing in front of the class. Public speaking anxiety, in its most

severe form, is a distinct subtype of social anxiety disorder, with a 12-month

prevalence rate of approximately 7%.

According to LeFebvre et al. (2019) in their study entitled Metamorphosis

of Public Speaking Anxiety: Student Fear Transformation throughout the

Introductory Communication Course, results indicated that students’ fears and

 9

anxieties regarding public speaking change before the first speech (Time 1) and

after the last speech (Time 2) in the course such that almost half who reported

the same fears at Time 1 and Time 2 indicated that the fear had decreased or

diminished in intensity. Memory glitches were the most often cited fear at both

Time 1 and Time 2. Confirming previous research, student PSA decreased over

time. These findings extend previous investigations by highlighting the intensity

of change experienced about specific fears identified and establishing a

connection between fears and PSA.

The primary measures of the tests are presumed to be trait-like measures

which means that it is assumed that scores for an individual on any one of these

measures will be highly similar across an extended period, barring a program

designed to alter the relevant communication apprehension (CA) level.

McCroskey, J. C. (1984)

The first measure to receive wide acceptance by researchers, the

Personal Report of Confidence as a Speaker (PRCS) developed by Gilkinson

(1942), is illustrative of an instrument designed to tap this type of CA.

Subsequent instruments for measuring public speaking anxiety reported by Paul

(1966) and McCroskey (Personal Report of Public Speaking Apprehension,

PRPSA, 1970) also fall within this area. McCroskey, J. C. (1984)

In the study of Sawyer and Behnke (2009) on the Behavioral Inhibition and

the Communication of the Public Speaking State Anxiety public speaking anxiety

have reported that audiences consistently underestimate the state anxiety of

public speakers and that speaker behavior, rather than audience decoding skills,
 10

are primarily responsible for the discrepancy. In the present study, behavioral

inhibition is advanced as explanation of this phenomenon. Analyses of variance

for trends revealed an inverse linear relationship between state anxiety level and

audience decoding efficiency. Behavioral assessments of speaker inhibition and

rigidity, however, were positively related to state anxiety levels. These findings

are consistent with the operation of behavioral inhibition within Buck's readout

theory of emotion. Implications are advanced for future research and pedagogy.

According to Brown (2012) there are seven types of Public Speaking Skills

that everyone must possess, namely (1) imitative. At one end of the continuum of

type speaking performance is the ability to simply parrot back (imitate) a word of

phrase or possibly a sentence. (2) intensive. A second type of speaking is the

production of short stretches of oral language designed to demonstrate

competence in a narrow band of grammatical, phrasal, lexical, or phonological

relationship (such as prosodic element intonation, stress, rhythm, juncture). (3)

responsive. Include interaction and comprehension at the limited level of very

short conversation standard. Greeting simple request and comments. (4)

interactive. Interactive speaking is the length and complexity of the interaction

including multiple exchanges or multiple participles. (5) extensive. Extensive oral

production included speeches, oral presentation, and storytelling. During the

opportunity for oral interaction from listener is either highly limited (perhaps

nonverbal responses) or ruled out together. (6) transactional. Transactional

language is carried out for the purpose of conveying or exchanging specific

information in extended from of responsive language. (7) interpersonal. The other

 11

form of conversation mentioned in the previous chapter was interpersonal

dialogue, the purpose is to maintain social relationship than for the transmission

of facts and information.

Forms of response, audience behavior, and response rates were analyzed

in three speech contexts: acceptance speeches to nomination as political parties’

candidates for presidential election, presidential election campaign speeches,

and presidential inauguration speeches in the Korean presidential election of

2012. We found that audience response forms and behavior were distinctive

according to the three speech contexts: in-group partisan leadership,

competitive, and formal contexts. However, there was no relationship between

the affiliative response rate and electoral success in the election. The function of

the audience response is popularity and support of a speaker in acceptance and

election campaign speeches, while it is conformity to social norms in inauguration

speeches.

Bandura (1997) suggests that the development of self-efficacy stems from

four different sources including mastery experiences, vicarious experiences,

social persuasions, and physiological and affective states.

Mastery experiences occur when people personally engage in the task at

hand. In general, self-efficacy is enhanced when people experience success

from their experiences. It follows that this relationship might hold true for public

speaking students. For example, public speaking students acquire mastery

experiences in their public speaking courses when they deliver speeches in their
 12

classes, or even when they practice their speeches in front of a mirror or for

friends or family.

Vicarious experiences can also provide people with self-efficacy relevant

information. People compare their own attainments with the attainments of others

and make a judgment about their own abilities. Because beginning public

speakers often experience public speaking anxiety, students who observe their

classmates delivering successful public speeches may experience increased

self-efficacy for public speaking.

Social persuasions can also increase self-efficacy. Usher and Pajares

(2008) suggest that, “Encouragement from parents, teachers, and peers whom

students trust can boost students’ confidence in their academic capabilities”. In a

public speaking course, social persuasion comes in the form of feedback from

instructors and classmates. Students may also receive encouragement from

friends or family when they practice their speech prior to delivering it in class.

Finally, physiological and affective states can influence self-efficacy, as

well. Stress reactions such as anxiety, mood states, and bodily states can

influence people’s self-efficacy. Usher and Pajares (2008) explain that, “Those

who lack confidence in their abilities may falsely interpret their anxiety as a sign

of incompetence” and that “such an interpretation can lead to the very failure that

students fear”.

Because beginning public speakers often experience high public speaking

anxiety, they might interpret their anxiety as incompetence and perform poorly on

their speech assignments.

 13

According to McCroskey (1970), high communication apprehension is

highly associated with ineffective communication. As such, communication

apprehension must be considered a central concern of any instructional program

concerned with more effective communication as targeted outcome.

In the study of Ammann (2017) entitled Developing Youth Leadership and

its Importance in Youth Organizations, it was stated that leadership is also part of

experiential learning. Experiential learning takes place when a person is involved

in an activity, looks back at it critically, determines what was useful or important

to remember, and uses that information to perform another activity). Providing an

experience alone does not create "experiential learning." The learning comes

from the thoughts and ideas created as a result of the experience. This is a "learn

by doing" or experiential process.

Moreover, based on the thesis of Adinatha (2017) entitled The Students’

Perception Toward the Effectiveness of Public Speaking Subject to Support their

Public Speaking Skill, he concluded that the respondents of this study gave their

positive perception toward the effectiveness of public speaking subject. The

positive judgement from the respondents comes not only from the students’

statement agreement and the aspects in the research interview but also from the

advantages which they got while the implementation of public speaking subject to

improve their speaking skill. They claimed that they have got many benefits in

public speaking subject to improve their speaking skill in practicing speaking.

Nevertheless, students still need their lecturer during the process. Lecturer was
 14

needed by the students in order to get some instruction, correction, motivation

etc.

The research of Fitriana (2019) entitled Public Speaking Programs in

Bilingual Class showed that the purpose of the public speaking program was to

improve students’ speaking skill which involved improving students' vocabulary,

students' confidence and familiarize students to speak English. In order to reach

the goal, public speaking was including some activities to support the students'

development. This study also suggested that in order to get the advantages of

the public speaking program students should attend the program on time so the

program can be conducted on time.

According to Hulu (2018) The hands shake and the voice trembles are

problems which were faced by mostly students during the presentation in the

class. The hands shake got by the students are more than the number of

students who did not hands shake at the presentation. among the 50 students

who involved in the class presentation showed that, there were 33 students who

got hands shake during the class presentation and the 17 students showed

nothing about shaking hands in the presentation.

According to Ali and Saberg (2017) on their study entitled Fostering

Students’ Oral Communication Skills in the Second Language Environment, the

first step towards fostering students’ oral skills is to create a comfortable

environment where students do not fear their peers or teacher, a space where

they feel free to make mistakes and thus develop their speaking skills.
 15

Furthermore, the teachers emphasized the importance of expanding

students’ vocabulary, since it allows students to develop their confidence in

speaking activities so that they can properly express the thoughts and ideas on

their minds. Speaking is one of the most important findings from this study since

it is an activity that shows the benefits of taking the students’ interests into

account and letting them independently carry out speeches where they speak

about topics they really care about. Keeping students’ interests in mind and

creating an open environment in which the students feel motivated and not

limited by a fear of making mistakes can lead to a successful outcome.

Theoretical / Conceptual Framework

This study anchored its framework on James McCroskey’s Theory of

Communication Apprehension and Ronald Rapee’s Cognitive-Behavioral Model

of Anxiety. Both theories present social and psychological challenges in the in

scenarios of social evaluation. McCroskey, though, developed a more

comprehensive set of self-evaluations in communication and public speaking

apprehensions.

Theory of Communication Apprehension by James McCroskey

In evaluating public speaking anxiety, most existing scales focus on

cognitive aspects of fear of public speaking, e.g., the Speech Anxiety Thoughts

Inventory (Cho et al. 2004) and the Self-Statements During Public Speaking
 16

(Hofmann and Dibartolo 2000), whereas the Public Speaking Anxiety Scale or

PSAS (Bartholomay and Houlihan 2016; Gilkinson 1942) and the Personal

Report of Public Speaking Anxiety or PRPSA (McCroskey 1970) also cover

behavioral and physiological aspects of social anxiety. A recent study of the

PSAS reported satisfactory psychometric properties of the scale (Bartholomay

and Houlihan 2016). The salient social and psychological factor list of PRPSA will

be the main reference of this study.

The PRPSA would potentially benefit research and clinical settings by

providing a psychometrically sound instrument that can be used in cross-

sectional and experimental research, in diagnosing fear of public speaking, and

in evaluating the treatment of this fear in respondents’ populations (Mörtberg,

2018).

Many researchers have identified three ways in which Public Speaking

Anxiety is experienced by both speakers and audience members. Firstly, the

physiological manifestation of Public Speaking Anxiety, cognitive responses, or

psychological anxiety and the last is behavioral manifestation of PSA. (Kamridah,

2015)

Results from a study suggested that self-reported public speaking anxiety

predicts speech duration, as well as speech quality, as rated by the participants

themselves and observers. However, the physiological measures were not

associated with self-reported anxiety during the speech task. Additionally, we

observed that socially anxious participants underrate their speech performance in

comparison to their observers’ evaluations. (Gallego, 2022)

 17

Physiological measures have also commonly been used to assess

physiological reactivity while giving a public speech (Sawyer & Behnke, 1999).

Subsequently, previous studies have explored the interrelationships among

public speaking anxiety components to evaluate the validity of using different

systems to assess public speaking anxiety (Bodie, 2010). In contrast, in a review

of the public speaking anxiety literature, Clevenger (1959) suggests that even

when different measures (e.g., cognitive, physiological, and behavioral) report

high reliability, these measures are not meaningfully correlated. After

approximately 30 years of research, McCroskey (1984) states that self-reports,

physiological arousal indicants, and observer ratings of public speaking anxiety

do not measure the same thing.

More recently, in the theory of constructed emotions, Barrett

(2006) postulates that purely physical sensations in the body do not have

objective meaning. For instance, a change in heart rate is not objectively or

necessarily an emotion. As a result, the effectiveness of using solely

physiological reactivity measures to detect indexes of public speaking anxiety is

called into question. Our study, as well as others, have been unable to identify

clear unique physiological correlates to self-reported public speaking anxiety

(Gallego, 2022).

Some scales that do assess the three-component model include the

Personal Report of Confidence as a Speaker or PRCS (Gilkinson, H., 1942, Paul,

G. L., 1966) and the Personal Report of Public Speaking Anxiety or PRPSA

(McCroskey, 1970). However, these scales have serious limitations. The PRCS
 18

utilizes a true–false format. A major drawback of the longer versions of this scale

is that they require extensive time to complete. Although the PRPSA does offer

more choice in responding than the PRCS, this scale requires extensive time to

complete, with the scale including over 30 items.

In addition, many of the items on these scales are worded either positively

or negatively (e.g., PRCS-12; SATI). Although this can result in clean factor

loadings and increased internal consistency, acquiescence can be a side effect

and its impact can be insidious (Miller, Lovler, & McIntire, 2013). By having both

positively and negatively worded items, researchers are able to determine if

participants are taking the study seriously and reduce response bias.

Public speaking anxiety (PSA) is one of the most prevalent forms of

anxiety and effects approximately one in five people. There are a handful of

scales used to measure PSA, but these scales have limited psychometric data,

bringing their validity into question. In addition, few of these scales include both

positively and negatively worded items, making them susceptible to

acquiescence. Many are limited to measuring a single aspect of anxiety (e.g.,

cognitive) and do not address the three components of anxiety (i.e., cognitive,

behavioral, and physiological). The model highlights certain difference in

anxieties from anticipation of the event and the actual experience itself

(Bartholomay, 2016). This led the researcher to categorize the psychological

aspects into three distinct groups: mental, anticipatory, and experiential.

A Cognitive-Behavioral Model of Anxiety by Ronald M. Rapee

 19

As per Rapee’s Cognitive-Behavioral Model of anxiety, on encountering a

social situation, an individual forms a mental representation of his/her external

appearance and behavior as presumably seen by the audience and

simultaneously focuses his/her attentional resources onto both this internal

representation and onto any perceived threat in the social environment.

According to the cognitive-behavioral model, an individual’s early

experiences cause an individual to develop cognitive schema, or internalized

thought patterns and or beliefs (Sharf, 2008). Certain situations, or critical

incidents, trigger these schemas and as a result an individual experiences

automatic thought in response to these situations. The content of these thoughts

whether they are neutral, positive, or self-defeating, impact the emotional,

behavioral, and physiological responses of an individual and future mental health

outcomes.

Applying a cognitive-behavioral framework can help account for how these

youth leaders are affected by challenging public-speaking situations in ways that

lead them to experience negative emotions and physiological distress and

practice ineffective coping behaviors.

To that end, speaking in public is a common requirement in different

situation such as in the Academe and Politics that encourages someone to

present their work and ideas to increase competency and credibility. For

individuals who experience public speaking social and psychological challenges,

speaking in public can have a negative impact on both their physical and

emotional wellbeing. Furthermore, this research has demonstrated the

 20

effectiveness of psychological interventions in the reduction of social and public

speaking anxiety. As a result, the researcher intends to determine the impact of

various social and psychological components in terms of Public Speaking Skill of

the SK Officials of the Municipality of La Paz as the Municipal Tourism Office's

strategy in developing intervention programs to help them improve as speakers

and leaders.

To summarize this concept, not only is it essential in today's culture and

standards, but rather the youth are also taught leadership abilities to bring out

their full potential including the skill to communicate well with its people

especially the younger generation, and adults could rely on youth to have those

talents when they work together. Therefore, it is an avenue for young people to

boost their self-esteem and showcase their talents while also becoming an

important part of today's society for us to eradicate the negative stereotype of the

youth today.

Kachru and Smith (2016) states that in the era of globalization and rapid

diffusion of knowledge, all the nations are aware of the need to prepare their

citizens to perform in ways that would ensure their prosperity and eminence in

the world. In order to be competitive, they must be able to function well in

communication, multinational industrial enterprises, international trade,

diplomacy, and scientific technological areas of expertise.

This study aimed to refine the categorization of social and psychological

factors or challenges that influence both self-perceived and audience-perceived

public speaking skills assessment.

 21

Figure 1: Research Paradigm

 22

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of Social and

Psychological Challenges of Public Speaking and their significant effect on the

evaluated public speaking skills of the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) Officials of

La Paz. Specifically, this study sought to answer the following questions:

1. What psychological challenges of public speaking stand out as the top

factor for the sangguniang kabataan officials?

1.1 Mental

1.2 Anticipatory

1.3 Experiential

2. What social challenges of public speaking stand out as the top factor for

the sangguniang kabataan officials?

2.1 Physiological

3. What is the performance of the respondents based on the actual speaking

test?

4. Is there a significant relationship between the psychological and social

challenges and their public speaking skills?

5. What recommendation to the youth development council can be proposed

based on the results of this study?

 23

Hypothesis

In problem statement (4) we set the Null Hypothesis as No Significant

Relationship of the factors to the assessed Public Speaking Performance of the

respondents.

1. H0 – There is no significant relationship between the Psychological

Challenges (Mental, Anticipatory, and Experiential) of the respondents and

their Public Speaking Skills.

2. H0 – There is no significant relationship between the Social Challenges of

the respondents (Physiological) and their Public Speaking Skills.

Significance of the study

The result of this research is intended to make a positive contribution to

the existing body of knowledge and will benefit the following:

The Sangguniang Kabataan Federation and Officials of LGU-La Paz.

This will assist the organization in developing yearly activities that are not just

focused on sports and leisure but rather take a comprehensive and holistic

approach to catering to all youth in the municipality.

Individuals who experience social and psychological issues in Public

Speaking. This research may assist them in identifying their own fears, which

will educate in lessening their anxieties, as well as letting them know that they

are not alone.

Someone who knows an individual who has a speaking anxiety. This

study may create awareness among those who know someone who is afraid of
 24

public speaking, and it will educate them on how to respond to and advise

someone who is afraid of such an activity.

The readers. This research may be of interest to readers of all ages.

Public Speaking Anxiety (PSA) is a widespread problem that everyone should be

aware of.

The La Paznons. This will empower municipality's younger generation

through the Sangguniang Kabataan as an epitome of youth with a purpose,

particularly for their indigenous or "Lumad" brothers and sisters and those who

plan to study outside the municipality, to become more aware and competent,

particularly in the field of Public Speaking.

The Local Government Unit of La Paz. This portrays a positive picture of

the current administration since it actively supports the youth sector, which is led

by the Municipal Tourism Officer. The LGU is also responsible for aiding them in

ensuring that future leaders and New Generation La Paznons are empowered in

all aspects.

The Future Researchers. This study will acquaint them and function as a

potential baseline information provider that will enable them to conclude their

future study successfully and efficiently if they desire the same subject matter

with different variables. In the future, they may include this study in their Review

of Related Literature.

Definition of Terms

To ensure a clearer understanding and clarification of the terms used in

this study, the following terms were operationally defined:

 25

Exposure. Refers to the consistency and experiences to public speaking

of the respondents.

LGU- La Paz. It stands for the Local Government Unit of La Paz. A first-

class municipality in the Province of Agusan del Sur located on the riverside.

PSA. Stands for Public Speaking Anxieties, this term refers to the tension

a speaker feels before, during, and after the speaker’s oral performance. This

includes being jittery and nervy even just thinking the upcoming oral

performance.

Psychological Dimension. This refers to the psychological elements

that influence a speaker’s speaking performance in his/her way of thinking and

how they perceive a situation.

Public Speaking. It refers to an active process by which a speaker is

performing in front of the viewing public.

SK. It stands for the Sangguniang Kabataan. SK was created through the

Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act 7160) that provides opportunity

for young people to directly participate in local governance; Composed of all

youth aged 15 to 21-year-olds.

Social Dimension. This refers to the social elements that influence a

speaker's speaking performance. This adds to their anxiety, which may hinder

their proper of delivery of speech. Social dimensions are the characteristics of

the context that affect how language is used and a speaker could behave while

delivering the language.

 26

Chapter 2

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This study used the mixed method research design in gathering the data.

The researcher used a survey questionnaire (Quantitative) filled out by the

chosen respondents who are the SK Officials along with open-ended questions

(Qualitative). It is Correlation because the researcher wants to know the

significant relationship between and among the variables.

The survey used a Self-Reported Questionnaire used to examine

psychological and social factors contributing to the challenges in public speaking

relating to anxiety. The questionnaire will be adopted from the Personal Report of

Public Speaking Anxiety or PRPSA and Personal Report on Communication

Apprehension or PRCA (McCroskey, 2023). The researchers are then set to do a

3-minute public speaking session in front of a panel where each respondent will

be rated in their public speaking skills.

The data gathered had verbal descriptions based on the statistical result

will be provided by a statistician. The researchers will choose this path because it

will be an accurate representation of the status of the respondents’ Public

Speaking skills and its inputs to the Youth Development Program of the

Municipal Tourism Office and the Local Youth Development Council.

 27

Research Respondents/Participants

The chosen respondents of this study are the incumbent Sangguniang

Kabataan Officials of LGU- La Paz.

Table 1

The Respondents of the Study

Barangay Position
Poblacion Chairman
Kagawad
Villapaz Chairman
Kagawad
Osmeña Chairman
Valentina Chairman
Kagawad
Panagangan Chairman
Kagawad
Langasian Chairman
Angeles Chairman
Kagawad
Kasapa II Chairman
Kagawad
Sabang Adgawan Chairman
San Patricio Chairman
Kagawad
Comota Chairman
Kagawad
Halapitan Chairman
Bataan Chairman
Kagawad
Lydia Chairman
Kagawad
Sagunto Chairman
15 Barangays 25 SK Officials
 28

Research Locale

The researcher carried out this research in the Municipality of La Paz in

the province of Agusan del Sur, Philippines. La Paz is a first-class municipality

with 15 barangays and over thirty thousand residents (2020 census). The

surveys and interviews will be held at the Office of the Municipal Tourism Officer,

which is located on the ground floor of the Municipal Evacuation Building in Brgy.

Poblacion, La Paz, Agusan del Sur. The Tourism Office staff will help to facilitate

the survey and interview of the respondents to ensure a smooth flow in the

conduct of the said study. The office is beside the Municipal Risk Reduction

Management Office (MDRRMO) with its official signboard “Turismo Tu La Paz.”

The office is ideal for research because of its amenities and the capacity to hold

and accommodate guests and visitors. The Tourism Office serves as the face of

the municipality which can be seen according to its modern theme with the touch

of Manobo culture.

Research Instrument

The survey utilized a modified version of the Personal Report of Public

Speaking Anxiety or PRPSA and Personal Report on Communication

Apprehension or PRCA from James McCroskey (McCroskey 1970). The chosen

instrument is also based on the indicators reflected in the studies of Cuncic

(2021), Sinambela (2021), and Behnke (2009) that resulted to the creation and

interpretation of this research and instrument.

The part one (1) of the survey dwells with the psychological challenges of

the respondents in public speaking featuring the three identified indicators

 29

namely: Mental, Anticipatory, and Experiential and some symptoms they

experience before, during, and after a speaking performance. Mental indicator

consists of 4 (1-4) items, anticipatory indicator has 9 (5-13) items, and

experiential indicator has 11 (14-24) items. This part of the questionnaire

answers the problem number one (1) of this paper.

The part two (2) which has 7 (25-31) items highlights the social/behavioral

challenges in public speaking which are interpreted physiological manifestations

of anxieties. Finally, the researcher will do an actual Public Speaking Test and

interview to the selected Sanggunian Kabataan Officials following a set interview

question and scored based on the toastmaster’s international speech scorecard

in order to find out their level skill in public speaking. This part of the

questionnaire answers the problem number two (2) of this paper.

The part three (3) did an actual Public Speaking Test and interview to the

selected Sanggunian Kabataan Officials following a set interview question and

scored based on the toastmaster’s international speech scorecard in order to find

out their level skill in public speaking.

The part four (4) contains some open-ended questions to assess the

students’ feelings after their presentation. This self-reflection will help the panel

assess the level of anxiety of the speaker. These parts answer the problem

number three (3) to five (5) of this paper.

Data Gathering Procedure

 30

Systematic Procedure will be observed in this study to ensure a smooth

flow in the conduct of the data gathering. Hence, the researcher will follow the

steps hereunder:

First, the researcher did a courtesy call to the Secretary to the

Sanggunian, Rosemarie J. Pastor, M.A.Ed., Vice Mayor, Hon. Rabella Ramona

Isabel C. Justo, LPT and SK Federation President, Hon. Renz Adrianne C. Justo,

together with the Communication Letters for the conduct of the study on March

02, 2023, in the SB Session Hall during the Plenary Session, Municipal Hall, La

Paz, Agusan del Sur.

Second, with the authority to conduct the survey and interview, the

researcher invited the SK Officials to the Municipal Tourism Office on March 15,

2023. To ensure a high-quality output, the researcher limited the participants who

attended the survey.

Third, the researcher provided the forms of the Personal Report on

Communication Apprehension (PRCA) by James McCroskey filled out by the SK

Officials as the Quantitative Part of the Data Gathering.

Fourth, the researcher, together with the selected members of the panel,

conducted an actual speaking evaluation/assessment to the respondents using

the Toastmaster International Scorecard (TIS) to test the correlation of their self-

evaluation to their actual performance. This is the Qualitative Part of the Survey

and each participant was given at least 2-3 minutes to speak and impress the

panel.
 31

Finally, the researcher retrieved the answered questionnaires from the

respondents. This is time that the researcher and statistician tallied, analyzed,

and interpreted the results using the appropriate statistical treatment. The results

were finalized on May 02, 2023.

Ethical Considerations

This study followed the ethical standards to protect the researcher as well

as the respondents of this study. Plagiarism is punishable by law, and the

researchers assured that all used statements were carefully cited to

acknowledge the authors and how it will contribute to this study. Since this topic

is considered sensitive in some way or another, the researchers gave the

participants the freedom whether to reveal their identity or to stay anonymous for

privacy purposes. During the documentation, only selected students were

captured and, in this paper, their faces were covered to preserve their anonymity.

Before this study was conducted, a letter of approval will be sent to Office

of the Secretary to the Sanggunian, SK Federation President, and the Vice

Mayor’s Office. The respondents were then informed on what was the study is all

about before answering the survey questionnaires and the gathered responses

will be kept to ensure privacy of the data. This study was fully-observed and

guided by the staff of the Municipal Tourism Office. Finally, the researcher

respected and celebrated the empowerment of Youth Leaders and the sacred
 32

Manobo culture of La Paz. Therefore, it followed the ethical standards throughout

the duration of this study and the people who will be involved will be cited and

protected.

Statistical Treatment

As the researcher got a grip on the data gathered, the next step was the

compilation, tabulation, sortation, and organization through statistical manner.

The data underwent statistical treatment and arrived at a sound conclusion and

to answer the questions proposed in this study that can be found in the

Statement of the Problem.

Pearson’s Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient

This was used to determine if there is a significant relationship between

the SK Official’s Public Speaking Skill and the Social and Psychological

Challenges of the speakers and for us to draw statistical hypothesis. This result

could give inputs to the Municipal Tourism Office in terms of its priorities on the

Youth Development Program in 2023 and in the years to come.

 33

Chapter 3

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter consists of report of the researcher’s findings and analysis of

the data that had been collected during the conduct of the research. As stated in

the previous chapter, it is suspected that the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK)

Officials of La Paz might have Public Speaking Anxieties (PSAs) and it is the

goal of the Local Government Unit through the Municipal Youth Development

Council to aid their needs and assist the youth in their quest of facing bigger

challenges in the Public Service.

Problem 1 What Psychological Challenges of Public Speaking stand

out as the Top Factor for the SK Officials?

Table 2

Psychological-Mental Factor Result on Public Speaking

The Level of Mental (Psychological) Indicator of the SK Officials to the Public

Speaking Anxieties
 34

PSYCHOLOGICAL
Verbal
DIMENSION Mean SD
Description
Mental Verbal Interpretation
Item 1: I get anxious when I
think about a speech coming High Anxiety
4 0.91 Agree
up.
Item 4: I get anxious if
someone asks me something High Anxiety
about my topic that I do not 3.96 0.68 Agree
know.
Item 2: My thoughts become
High Anxiety
confused and jumbled when I
3.68 0.90 Agree
speak before an audience.
Item 3: I am in constant fear
High Anxiety
of forgetting what I prepared
3.64 0.57 Agree
to say.
Overall Mean High Anxiety
3.82 0.61 Agree

Legend:

Mean Range Description Interpretation

01.00 – 01.80 Strongly Disagree Very Low Anxiety
01.81 – 02.60 Disagree Low Anxiety
02.61 – 03.40 Neutral Average Anxiety
03.41 – 04.20 Agree High Anxiety
04.21 – 05.00 Strongly Agree Very High Anxiety

Table (2) presents the “Mental” indicator contributing to the public

speaking anxiety. Mental indicator is an important factor because the effect of

public speaking anxiety starts from internal to external.

The result shows that the highest proportion from the respondents was

“item 1” “I get anxious when I think about a speech coming up” (mean = 4, SD =

0.91) while the least proportion of the respondents agreed with “item 3” (mean =

3.64, SD = 0.57) “I am in constant fear of forgetting what I prepared to say.”

This is consistent with Howe’s assessment that individuals with high fear

of negative evaluation are fearful of people forming an unfavorable impression of

them or noticing their shortcomings (Howe, 2014). Mental aspects such as

 35

expectations and over-thinking are highlighted during the interview. With the

speakers being afraid of committing mistakes because of their initial impression

of the audience, their anxiety rises and could possibly affect the quality of their

performance.

Table 3

Psychological-Anticipatory Factor Result on Public Speaking

PSYCHOLOGICAL DIMENSION Verbal Verbal Interpretation

Mean SD
Anticipatory Description
Item 13: I always avoid speaking Very High Anxiety
in public if possible. 4.36 0.49 Strongly
Agree
Item 12: I prefer not to talk with High Anxiety
4.2 0.96
people unless I know them well. Agree
Item 10: I have trouble falling High Anxiety
3.96 0.45
asleep the night before a speech. Agree
Item 11: I feel tense when I see High Anxiety
the words "speech" and "public
3.92 0.64
speech" on a course outline when
Agree
studying.
Item 9: I feel anxious while High Anxiety
3.92 0.40
waiting to give my speech. Agree
Item 7: While preparing for giving High Anxiety
a speech I feel tense and 3.92 0.28
Agree
nervous.
Item 5: When the instructor High Anxiety
announces a speaking
3.92 0.28
assignment, I can feel myself
Agree
getting tense.
Item 8: I feel anxious when the Average Anxiety
teacher announces the date of a 3.4 0.82
speaking assignment. Neutral
Item 6: I experience considerable Average Anxiety
anxiety while sitting in the room 2.88 0.33
just before my speech starts. Neutral
3.83 0.34 Agree
High Anxiety
OVERALL MEAN

Legend:
 36

Mean Range Description Interpretation

01.00 – 01.80 Strongly Disagree Very Low Anxiety
01.81 – 02.60 Disagree Low Anxiety
02.61 – 03.40 Neutral Average Anxiety
03.41 – 04.20 Agree High Anxiety
04.21 – 05.00 Strongly Agree Very High Anxiety

Table (3) shows the anticipatory aspects contributing to the public

speaking anxiety. The schema is believed to be one of the causes of anxieties to

public speaking because it might involve past experiences of the speakers that

trigger it.

The highest proportion from the respondents was “item 13” (mean = 4.36,

SD = 0.49) “I always avoid speaking in public if possible” followed by “item 12”

(mean = 4.2, SD = .96) “I prefer not to talk with people unless I know them well.”

The least proportion of the respondents agreed with “item 6” (mean = 2.88, SD =

0.33).

“Item 13: I always avoid speaking in public if possible” and “Item 12: I

prefer not to talk with people unless I know them well.” These results are

consistent with the findings from Gallego (2022) where respondents with high

public speaking anxiety levels indicate avoidance strategies. In essence, people

with high PSA levels tend to avoid the situation where they can be evaluated.

Table 4

Psychological-Experiential Factor Result on Public Speaking

PSYCHOLOGICAL Verbal
Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
DIMENSION: Experiential Description
Item 21: When I make a 4.24 0.60 Strongly Very High Anxiety
mistake while giving a speech. Agree
 37

I find it hard to concentrate on

the parts that follow.
Item 20: I do poorer on High Anxiety
speeches because I am 4.12 0.78
Agree
anxious.
Item 16: While giving a speech High Anxiety
I get so nervous I forget facts I 3.92 0.40
really know. Agree
Item 19: I am fearful and tense High Anxiety
all the while I am speaking 3.8 0.58
before a group of people. Agree
Item 23: When I talk with a Average Anxiety
member of the opposite sex
3.32 0.75
who is near my own age. I feel
Neutral
quite nervous.
Item 14: Realizing that only a Average Anxiety
little time remains in a speech
3.28 0.68
makes me very tense and
Neutral
anxious.
Item 24: Conversing with Average Anxiety
people who hold positions of
3.28 0.68
authority causes me to be
Neutral
fearful and tense.
Item 22: Although I talk fluently Average Anxiety
with friends I am at a loss for 3.24 0.66
words on the platform. Neutral
Item 15: During an important Average Anxiety
speech I experience a feeling
3.08 0.28
of helplessness building up
Neutral
inside me.
Item 17: While participating in Average Anxiety
a conversation with a new
3.04 0.20
acquaintance I feel very
Neutral
nervous.
Item 18: I am tense and Low Anxiety
nervous while participating in 2.4 0.58
group discussions. Disagree
OVERALL MEAN 3.43 0.36 Agree High Anxiety

Legend:

Mean Range Description Interpretation

01.00 – 01.80 Strongly Disagree Very Low Anxiety
01.81 – 02.60 Disagree Low Anxiety
02.61 – 03.40 Neutral Average Anxiety
03.41 – 04.20 Agree High Anxiety
04.21 – 05.00 Strongly Agree Very High Anxiety
 38

Table (4) shows the experiential aspects contributing to the public

speaking anxiety. Experiences contribute a lot to our performance as speakers

and it may happen before, during, and after the performance of the speaker.

The highest proportion from the respondents was “item 21” (mean = 4.24,

SD = 0.60) followed by “item 20” (mean = 4.12, SD = 0.78). The least proportion

of the respondents agreed with “item 18” (mean = 2.4, SD = 0.58).

Item (21) and (20) relates with the anxiety experienced by the respondents

as they deal with mistakes and negative performances. Item (16), the third

highest, also deals with the anxieties brought by forgetting the details of his/her

speech due to being anxious.

The top three experiential factors (items 21, 20 and 16) deal with

knowledge and losing the trail of thought due to being anxious while speaking.

Anxiety heightens when respondents find it hard to organize their thoughts or

lose the flow of the speech due to mistakes made while giving a speech.

The results showed that respondents with higher levels of experiential

anxiety fared lower in the public speaking assessment. This is related to the

study of Warren (2011) where respondent’s assessment of their self-efficacy in

public speaking is consistent with their public speaking performance. This

relationship was consistent with studies of Kamridah (2015) and R. Grieve

(2021). Linked to self-perceived competence are excessive perfectionist

tendencies which may also contribute to public speaking fear and negativity.
 39

Problem 2 What Social Challenges of Public Speaking stand out as

the Top Factor for the Sangguniang Kabataan Officials?

Table 5

Social-Physiological Factor Result on Public Speaking

SOCIAL DIMENSION/ Verbal

Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
Physiological Description
Very High Anxiety
Item 25: My hands tremble when I Strongly
am giving a speech. Agree
4.36 0.57
Very High Anxiety
Item 26: Certain parts of my body
feel very tense and rigid while
Strongly
giving a speech.
4.28 0.89 Agree
Item 31: My hands tremble when I High Anxiety
try to handle objects on the
platform. 4.04 0.20 Agree
Item 29: I breathe faster just High Anxiety
before starting a speech. 3.92 0.28 Agree
Item 27: My heart beats very fast High Anxiety
just as I start a speech. 3.64 0.57 Agree
Item 30: My heart beats very fast High Anxiety
while I present a speech. 3.48 0.82 Agree
Item 28: I perspire just before Average Anxiety
starting a speech. 3.4 0.58 Neutral
Agree High Anxiety
OVERALL MEAN
3.87 0.32

Legend:

Mean Range Description Interpretation

01.00 – 01.80 Strongly Disagree Very Low Anxiety
01.81 – 02.60 Disagree Low Anxiety
02.61 – 03.40 Neutral Average Anxiety
03.41 – 04.20 Agree High Anxiety
04.21 – 05.00 Strongly Agree Very High Anxiety

Table (5) shows the Social/behavioral aspects contributing to the public

speaking anxiety. Aside from the internal factors of PSA, their physiological

aspect is also vital because it could tell if the speaker is nervous which the

audience could feel and see.

 40

The highest proportion of agreement from the respondents was “item 25”

(mean = 4.36, SD = 0.57) “My hands tremble when I am giving a speech”

followed by “item 26” (mean = 4.28, SD = 0.89). The least proportion of the

respondents agreed with “item 28” (mean = 3.4, SD = 0.58) “I perspire just before

starting a speech”.

In the study of Hulu (2018), he stated that the most common hand

symptom of public speaking anxiety is a restless shaking. This shaking has an

obvious caused. That causes hands and legs to shake, often visibly. Tingling,

burning, numbness another symptom of anxiety that is more common with panic

disorder is a tingling sensation in the hands and fingers.

Problem 3 What is the Performance of the Respondents Based on

the Actual Public Speaking Test?

Table 6

Public Speaking Performance Scores of the SK Officials

Public Speaking Scores of the 25 Participants (1 -

25)
55
Panel Score ( Min 0 - Max 100)

45

35

25

15

5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Score Card 51 49 27 49 51 41 25 26 46 24 24 46 24 51 27 27 24 19 21 22 18 19 20 17 20

Legend:

Mean Range Description Interpretation

 41

01.00 – 01.80 Strongly Disagree Very Low Anxiety

01.81 – 02.60 Disagree Low Anxiety
02.61 – 03.40 Neutral Average Anxiety
03.41 – 04.20 Agree High Anxiety
04.21 – 05.00 Strongly Agree Very High Anxiety

Table (6) shows the scores of the participants in their public speaking

activity of which scored by a panel. This is done to see the variations of scores

according to their actual performance rated by the selected panel/committee.

The scoring standard of Toastmasters International speech scoresheet

was used and tested the participant’s skills in terms of content, delivery, and

language (Appendix E). From a perfect score of 100, Eight (8) had scores higher

than 40. Eleven (11) scored in the 20s and four (4) scored below 20. The scores

are used as reference in terms of relative public speaking skills among the

respondents. These scores are then compared with the means of the self-

assessment scores of the Psychological and Social factors for correlation test.

Good competence is accompanied by good performance, as Rizka (2018)

defines that performance is the overtly observable and concrete manifestation or

realization of competence. This term describes that performance can be

observed by actual doing something. Bad or good someone’s competence can

be measured by his or her real performance. In conclusion, speaking

performance is how to speakers deliver their idea to be audience through words

and sentences where their performance in speaking will show their competence

automatically. The competence is similar with knowledge that speaker has when

do speaking performance, such as grammar, fluency, accuracy, size, interaction,

and coherence category.

Table 7
 42

General Result and Interpretation

Weighted Descriptio
Anxiety Factors Indicator Mean n Interpretation
1. Psychological Mental 3.82 High Anxiety Agree
Factors

- Anticipatory 3.83 High Anxiety Agree

- Experiential 3.43 High Anxiety Agree
2. Social/behavioral Physiological 3.87 High Anxiety Agree
Factors

Table (7) shows the summary of the self-assessment scores of anxiety

factors from the respondents. The mean scores in the assessment were

analyzed according to the principle of McCroskey and demonstrated as follows:

Mean Range Description Interpretation

01.00 – 01.80 Strongly Disagree Very Low Anxiety
01.81 – 02.60 Disagree Low Anxiety
02.61 – 03.40 Neutral Average Anxiety
03.41 – 04.20 Agree High Anxiety
04.21 – 05.00 Strongly Agree Very High Anxiety

Both Psychological and Social anxiety factors were rated at 3.41 and

higher indicating high levels of anxiety among the respondents when it comes to

public speaking. This is supported by findings of Burnley, Cross & Spanos (1992)

that the general population have some level of anxiety on public speaking. This is

also consistent with the study Marinho (2017) of which 63% of the respondents

reported fear of public speaking.

Problem 4 Is there a significant relationship between the

Psychological and Social Challenges and their Public Speaking Skills?

Table 8

Pearson’s Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient Results

 43

Anxiety Factor – Public Speaking Pearson Coefficient (r) Verbal Interpretation

Score
Very low Correlation
Mental Factor - PS Score -0.1647

Moderate Negative Correlation

Anticipatory Factor - PS Score -0.6815

Moderate Negative Correlation

Experiential Factor - PS Score -0.6818

Social/Behavioral Factor - PS Score -0.3352 Very Low Correlation

The Pearson correlation coefficient is used to measure the strength of a

linear association between two variables, where the value r = 1 means a perfect

positive correlation and the value r = -1 means a perfect negative correlation.

The Psychological (mental, anticipatory, and experiential) and

Social/Behavioral factor assessments of each participant were then compared

against their public speaking scores. The Social/Behavioral Factor produced the

very low negative correlation at (-0.3352). Both Anticipatory and Experiential

factors produced moderate negative correlation at (-0.6815) and ( -0.6818)

respectively. The Mental factor got the a very low correlation category at (-

0.1647). Once the Pearson coefficient was identified (r), P-value was derived

from degree of confidence at 95% (a = .05) and (n=25). Table (6) shows the

results and interpretation of the P-values derived from correlation analysis of the

Psychological/Social Assessment factors against the Public Speaking Skill

scores.
 44

This study shed light into the what aspects of the various psychological

and social anxiety factors were (negatively) correlated to public speaking

performance and which were not. Both mental anxiety and social/behavioral

anxiety factors have low to no correlation with how the respondents perform in

the actual assessment. This is consistent with the studies previously referenced

that heightened physiological state such as increased heart rate and breathing as

well as mental stress produced prior or during the public speaking performance

may

be adrenaline or excitement to perform.

Also, insights on the anticipatory and experiential factors that strongly

correlates with public speaking performance enable program or academic

planners to design their training with aspects in focus.

Anxiety in viewpoint of Robert M. Arkin and Lana Rucks in Wegner (2001)

is generally regarded as having a set of component parts that include cognitive

functioning, physiological, emotional, and behavioral facets. One cognitive

component is the expectation of uncertain danger, of course. In summary,

anxiety is often distinguished in terms of its state or trait nature. State anxiety is a

transitory unpleasant emotional arousal stemming from a cognitive appraisal of a

threat of some type. Therefore, it is acceptable that everybody’s anxieties are

different even in the context of the Youth Leaders in La Paz. Hence, formal

training focusing on the areas/indicators that are they are most weak at is

beneficial to make them more confident and relevant.

Table 9
 45

P-Values and Interpretation

Anxiety Factor (r) P – Value (a = 0.05) Interpretation

Mental Factor -0.1647 0.431511 The result is not

significant at p > .05

Anticipatory Factor -0.6815 0.00017610 The result is

significant at p < .05

Experiential Factor -0.6818 0.0001747 The result is

significant at p < .05

Social/Behavioral -0.7706 0.10138922 The result is not

Factor significant at p > .05

Calculating the p-values at degree of confidence of 95% (alpha = 0.05)

between each of the categories of Psychological (mental, anticipatory, and

experiential) and Social/behavioral factors vis-à-vis the scores of the respondents

in their public speaking skills scores, the results were as follows:

Under the Psychological factors, both Anticipatory and Experiential factors

resulted in significant correlation of which (p-value 0.00017610) and (p-value

0001747) were less than 0.05. However, the Mental factor yielded (p-value

0.431511) which is higher than 0.05 thus resulting in non-significant correlation.

The Social/Behavioral factor yielded (p-value 0.10138922) which resulted

in non-significant correlation being higher than 0.05. Therefore, it has been

confirmed that the SK Officials of La Paz thus have Public Speaking Anxieties

and it is very important to address such issue. This has been anchored on the

study of Cuncic (2021) on the social anxiety and mental health disorders of

speakers that gives an impact to their public speaking skills. She mentioned that

these social and psychological challenges could even turn into a phobia if not
 46

being aided as young as possible. Symptoms of Public Speaking Anxiety are the

same as those that occur for Social Anxiety Disorders, but they only happen in

the context of speaking in public.

H1: The result rejects the Null Hypothesis. There is a Significant

Relationship between the Psychological Factors under Anticipatory and

Experiential indicators and the Public Speaking Skills of Sangguniang Kabataan

Officials. Only the Mental Indicator failed to be significant.

H2: The result accepts the Null Hypothesis. There is No Significant

Relationship Relationship between the Social Factor under the Physiological

Indicator and the Public Speaking Skills of the Sangguniang Kabataan Officials.

Problem 5 What recommendation to the Youth Development Council

can be proposed based on the results of this study.

Table 10

The Local Youth Development Plan for F.Y. 2023-2025

47
48
 49

According to Rule III Section 24 of Republic Act No. 10742,

otherwise known as Sangguniang Kabataan Reform Act of 2015,

to ensure wide and multi-sectoral youth participation in local

governance, there shall be in every province, city, and

municipality an LYDC which shall be called, Provincial Youth

Development Council (PYDC), City Youth Development Council

(CYDC) and Municipal Youth Development Council (MYDC),

respectively. The LYDC shall be headed by the concerned SK

Pederasyon President and composed of representatives of youth

and youth-serving organizations in the provincial, city, and

municipal level. The LYDC shall assist the planning and

execution of projects and programs of the SK, and the

Pederasyons in all levels.

In the Municipality of La Paz, a standardized annual budget

of Php 1,200,000.00 is allocated by the administration through

the Local Chief Executive in support to their Project, Program,

and Activities (PPAs) every year.

With this, the SK Federation can enroll different activities that

are essential, timely, and relevant to the Youth Leaders of La

Paz. The researcher believes that the results of this study

 50

became an avenue to enroll another concern such as Public

Speaking Anxieties and Effective Communication. Since this

concern is enrolled in the Youth Development Plan, it will be

given an utmost priority by the council and shall be executed by

the responsible offices and personnel.

Boyd (2016) states that in order to identify leadership in individuals, one

must understand the variability of skills. The development of leadership skills

allows people to cope with their environment by making responsible decisions,

having a better understanding of their values, and being better able to

communicate and get along with others (Nowell, B., Izod, A. M., Ngaruiya,

K. M., & Boyd, N. M. 2016).

In line with these results from the study, several Inputs to

the Youth Development Program were drawn by the researcher:

1. Planning of public speaking workshops/programs that focus on organizing

and structuring the message and retaining the essential information.

2. Integrate the Spiral Method of Teaching from Simple to Complex in order

to not give threats and negative impression to the learners.

3. Increase exposure and build a positive feedback loop that lowers

anticipation and experiential anxiety in public speaking for SK officials.

4. Research with this scale should extend beyond the scope of the youth

officials (SK) but can also be adopted to both public and private

professionals responsible for delivering important messages to the public.

 51

5. Inject to SK Programs the academic touch including training/workshop for

public speaking development, public speaking anxiety management, and

other educational programs that are beneficial and advantageous to the

youth of La Paz especially to those who aspire for higher positions in the

future.

6. Give them the necessary exposure that they need such as initiating

debate contest, broadcasting, speech festival, observation to the Plenary

Session of the councilors of La Paz, and many effective strategies that will

boost and stimulate their ability to learn and grow as students and future

leaders of society.

7. The administration should see the value of the youth by letting them

handle bigger responsibilities to test their communicative, managerial,

problem-solving skill, and collaborative abilities.

8. Examining the personal characteristics of the youth leaders is an effective

way to align certain solutions that are compatible to their needs.

9. Finally, the Youth Development Council could support the program by

creating a Strategic Plan on how to conduct the Public Speaking Training

for the SK Officials and the Youth in General, for example:

Step 1: Introduction to Public Speaking

Discussion on the Importance of Public Speaking

Discussion on the Types of Communication

Models of Communication

Barriers to Effective Communication

 52

Elements of Public Speaking

Ethical Principles of Public Speaking

Step 2: Introduction to the Public Speaking Anxiety (PSAs)

Discussion on the Different Challenges to Public Speaking

Presentation of the Indicators to PSA

Sample and Observation

Open Forum and Sharing of Personal Experiences

Step 3: Dealing with Public Speaking Anxieties (PSAs)

Anxiety Management Techniques

Presentation of the Tips and Strategies

Sample and Observation

Gestures and Mannerisms

Audience Analysis and Intimidation

Giving powerful statements

Step 4: Actual Experiences using Spiral Method

Script Writing Technique

Prepared/Memorized Speech

Story Telling Activity/Monologue

Extemporaneous Speech

Impromptu

Debate

Open Forum and Sharing of Personal Experiences

 53

Other effective activities

Step 5: Refinement and Polishing

Peer Evaluation

Panel Evaluation

Culmination Activity

According to Wati (2021) on his survey on common phobias, fear of public

speaking was found to be a more pressing concern than death. Everyone can

perform well by practicing and rehearsing quite rigorously with learn to increase

their public speaking skills and remedies of their anxiety. The instructors play a

vital role in giving support and confidence to the students and can help them

overcome public speaking anxiety. Public speaking class had positive impact on

lowering the anxiety of the students to speak. This is in line with research

conducted by Neelam (2018) which proves that public speaking training has a

significant effect on anxiety. Training is an educational process that can help

students to gain insight, skills, and experience so they can increase their abilities

and self-confidence. Public speaking is very important for students because they

are expected to become good promotors in the future, such skills are therefore

extremely helpful for career development prospects, though the act of public

speaking can be daunting. This ability and self-confidence are expected to

improve their performance in public speaking and overcome their anxiety.

 54

Chapter 4

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter offers a summary of the findings and conclusions based

on the results of this study as they extend existing literature, theory, and

practice. In addition, this chapter outlines the potential implications of these

results for faculty and instructors, SK and Youth Development Officers, and

the Public Speaking Practitioners. Finally, this chapter provides directions for

future research.

Findings

1. The psychological dimension were divided into mental, anticipatory,

and experiential indicators. The results showed higher anxiety scores on their

“Level of Preparation of the Message” and “Mastery of the Topic.”

 55

2. The social dimension with physiological indicator resulted to a

greater proportion of respondents agreed with being “Tense Physiologically”

and “Trembling Before and During Speaking in Front of an Audience.”

3. Many speakers failed to deliver their messages based on their

performance on the actual and on-the-spot speaking test, due to various

challenges and issues that they experienced throughout their performance.

This is evident in the panel's results and scores using the Toastmasters

International Scorecard.

4. Data indicated significant relationship of psychological dimension on

anticipatory and experiential indicators while there is no significant

relationship on psychological dimension on mental indicator and physiological

indicator.

5. Based on the results of the study, there is a need to update the

Youth Development Program of the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) Federation

in La Paz in order to cater the existing problem on Public Speaking Anxiety.

Conclusions

1. With limited confidence for preparation, a greater proportion of the

respondents preferred not to engage with unfamiliar audience or avoid

speaking in public altogether. Therefore, most youth leaders would prefer a

prepared speech rather than impromptu speech. Being informed ahead of

time for the speaking engagement would mean higher success rate in terms

of their performance.
 56

2. One of the most common and visible symptoms of public speaking

anxiety (PSA) is “Trembling or Shaking of Hands” because the speaker is

mentally stressed thus creates a negative impression to the judging

audiences and the effect becomes external. However, experiencing this does

not necessarily mean that the performance will automatically fail. Other

speakers might consider this as an adjusting period and eventually decreases

in the middle of the performance.

3. Most youth leaders of the municipality are struggling to deliver a

comprehensive speaking performance due to their anxieties. Therefore, a

well-planned public speaking training/program could be beneficial in order to

at least lessen their anxieties. It is also important to create and establish a

friendly atmosphere during the training to avoid certain threats that might

occur in the process of letting them face their fears.

4. In the context of public speaking training of La Paz, the anticipatory

and experiential indicators from the psychological factor must be considered

in order not to neglect the major anxieties that the youth of La Paz are

experiencing. These indicators could be the foundation of integrating effective

strategies that might help the speakers lessen their anxieties.

5. In order to strengthen the public speaking training for the youth, a

budget allocation for such program must be considered by the council in order

to facilitate a comprehensive, competitive, and effective training that includes

coordination and partnership with different experts, agencies, offices, and

organizations. Results from this study indicate that mastery experiences are
 57

most influential in developing public speaking self-efficacy and lowering

psychological anxiety. Lastly, it is important to note that effective

communication and public speaking skills training is a necessary component

in developing the future leaders. Government officials must deliver

messages to the public regarding policy initiatives or changes. Several

Implications emerge from this study. More specifically, these implications

focus on instructors and youth program officials and those in a position to

train SK officials to become better public speakers.

Recommendations

Although this study provided the researcher with insightful information

regarding self-assessed public speaking anxiety factors and their influence to

public speaking skills, more work needs to be done.

Academe. First, the modified version of McCroskey’s Personal Report of

Communication Apprehension (PRCA) and Personal Report of Public Speaking

Anxiety (PRPSA), while effectively highlighted anticipatory and experiential

factors, should continue to test, and refine the scale to ensure validity and

reliability. Research with this scale should extend beyond the scope of the Youth

Officials (SK) but can also be adopted to both public and private
 58

professionals/institutions responsible for delivering important messages to the

public.

LGU-La Paz. It is essential for the local government unit of La Paz to

finally create the plantilla position of the Local Youth Development Officer

(LYDO) in order to appoint someone who can focus on programs for youth. The

position is considered mandatory by the Department of Interior and Local

Government (DILG) in order to qualify for the Seal of Good Local Governance

Award (SGLG). Moreover, the administration should see the importance of

having competitive youth leaders in the municipality by supporting their Program,

Project, and Activities (PPAs) and Annual Youth Development Plan every year

including the increase of the Budget Allocation for the different youth

development programs such as the Annual La Paz Youth Summit and Public

Speaking Training/Course.

SK-Officials. Aside from the sports and leisure that the Sangguniang

Kabataan (SK) officials facilitate as part of their major activity every year, the

researcher recommends that it is time to balance it with the academic aspect

including training/workshop for public speaking development and other

educational programs that are beneficial and advantageous to the youth of La

Paz.

Youth leaders through the SK Federation president must collaborate with

the academe such as La Paz National High School and Panagangan National

High School in order to influence the students in Public Speaking and give them

the necessary exposure that they need such as initiating debate contest,
 59

broadcasting, speech festival, observation to the Plenary Session of the

councilors of La Paz, and many effective strategies that will boost and stimulate

their ability to learn and grow as students and future leaders of society.

Youth Development Program. Enrolling different areas in the Youth

Development Plan should be universal and shall have needs analysis before

finalizing and approving it. For instance, Public Speaking is indeed a problem for

most youth leaders in La Paz and there must be a proper training for them to be

able to manage their fears and anxieties. For instance, it is essential to carefully

select the service provider for the public speaking training making sure to the

facilitators are highly trained and well-rounded individuals.

Future Researchers. They should continue to refine what other

challenges aside from Psychological and Social aspects can be identified that

would influence Public Speaking Skills. Researchers and future proponents

should continue to develop and test strategies for improving public speaking self-

assessment and lowering anxiety factors.

 60

REFERENCES

Krashen, S.D. (1992). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York:

Longman.

North, R. & Rives, P. (2001). The effectiveness of a skilled-based program in

reducing public speaking anxiety. Japanese psychological research, 148-

155.

Abbaspour, F. (2016). Speaking Competence and Its Components: A Review of

Literature, International Journal of Research in Linguistic, Language

Teaching and Testing, 01, (04), 144-152.

Abbaspour, F. (2016). Speaking Competence and Its Components: A Review of

 61

Literature, International Journal of Research in Linguistic, Language

Teaching and Testing, 01, (04), 144-152.

Adiwinata, Adrian (2017). The students’ perception towards the effectiveness of

public speaking subject to support their speaking skill. English education

department faculty of teacher training and education Makassar

Muhammadiyah University.

Arnold, James K. (2018) "Stress to Success: Public Speaking Anxiety and its

Relationship to Perceived Leadership". Education Doctoral Dissertations

in Leadership. 110.

Aying, H. et al. (2017). Thesis. The level of exposure and the anxieties to public

speaking. Unpublished. Father Saturnino Urios University.

Baccarani, C., & Bonfanti, A. (2015). Effective public speaking: A conceptual

framework in the corporate-communication field. Corporate

Communications: An International Journal, 20(3), 375-390.

Barrett L. F. (2006). Solving the emotion paradox: Categorization and the

experience of emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(1),

20–46. 10.1207/s15327957pspr1001_2.

Bartholomay EM, Houlihan DD. (2016). Public speaking anxiety scale:

preliminary psychometric data and scale validation. Personality and

Individual Differences. 2016;94:211–215.

doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.01.026.
 62

Bodie G. D. (2010). A racing heart, rattling knees, and ruminative thoughts:

Defining, explaining, and treating public speaking anxiety. Communication

Education, 59(1), 70–105. 10.1080/03634520903443849

Burnley, M., Cross, P. A., & Spanos, N. P. (1992). The effects of stress

inoculation training and skills training on the treatment of speech anxiety.

Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 12(4), 355-366.

Campbell, S. & Larsson, J. (2013). Public Speaking Anxiety: Comparing Face-

to-Face and Web-Based Speeches. Retrieved

https://eric.ed.gov/id=EJ1097130.

Carleton, R., Collimore, K. C., McCabe, R. E., & Antony, M. M. (2011).

Addressing revisions to the brief fear of negative evaluation scale:

Measuring fear of negative valuation across anxiety and mood disorders.

Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 25(6), 822-828. doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.201

1.04.002

Cho Y, Smits J, Telch MJ. (2004). The speech anxiety thoughts inventory: scale

development and preliminary psychometric data. Behaviour Research and

Therapy; 42:13–25. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7967(03)00067-6.

Clevenger T. (1959). A synthesis of experimental research in stage

 63

fright. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 45, 134–145.

10.1080/00335635909385732

Cuncic, A. (2021) Beat Social Phobia with Andrew Johnson Review.

https://www.verywellmind.com/beat-social-phobia-with-andrew-johnson.

Daly, J. A., McCroskey, J. C., Ayres, J., Hopf, T., & Ayres, D. M. (1997).

Avoiding communication: Shyness, reticence, and communication

apprehension (2nd ed.). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press

Docan-Morgan, Tony & Nelson, Laura. (2015). The Benefits and Necessity of

Public Speaking Education.

Ellis, J.M., & Caldwell, L.L. (2005). Increasing Youth Voice. In P.A. Witt & L.L.

Caldwell (Eds.), Recreation and youth development (pp. 281-300). State

College, Pennsylvania: Venture Publishing, Inc.

Emily M. Bartholomay, Daniel D. Houlihan (2016). Public Speaking Anxiety

Scale: Preliminary psychometric data and scale validation, Personality and

Individual Differences, Volume 94, Pages 211-215, ISSN 0191-8869,

Fitriana, W. (2019). Thesis. Public speaking program in Bilingual class.

Unpublished. State Islamic University of Walisongo. Downloaded from

http://eprints.walisongo.ac.id/id/eprint/10543/1/skripsi%20full.pdf.

Gallego, A., McHugh, L., Penttonen, M., & Lappalainen, R. (2022). Measuring
 64

Public-Speaking-Anxiety: -Self-report-behavioral-and

physiological. Behavior-modification, 46(4)-782–798.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445521994308

Gilkinson H. (1942). Social fears as reported by students in college speech

classes. Speech Monography. 1942;9:141–160.

doi: 10.1080/03637754209390068.

Grieve, R., J. Woodley, S. E. Hunt & A. McKay (2021). Student fears of oral

presentations and public speaking in higher education: a qualitative

survey, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45:9, 1281-1293.

Harutunian, E.R. (2017). Thesis. Overcoming speech anxiety in the classroom.

Unpublished. Malmo University.

Hayaramae, S. (2016). Thesis. A study on public speaking anxiety among Thai

postgraduate students. (Published master’s thesis). Unpublished.

Thammasat University.

Hofmann SG, DiBartolo PM. (2000). An instrument to assess self-statements

during public speaking: scale development and preliminary psychometric

properties. Behavior Therapy; 31:499–515. doi: 10.1016/S0005-

7894(00)80027-1

Hook N. J., Valentiner D. & Connelly J. (2013). Performance and Interaction

Anxiety: Specific relationships with other- and self-evaluation concerns.

Retrieved at http://www- tandfonlinecom.proxy.mah.se/doi/abs

/10.1080/10615806.2012.654777.
 65

Howe, Jarvis (2014). "Fear of Negative and Positive Evaluation across Social

Evaluative Situations". Masters Theses. 1265.

https://thekeep.eiu.edu/theses/1265

Hulu, Fasaaro (2018). “The description of hand shake and voice trembles

conducting class presentation by the 4th Semester Students at Putera

Batam University.” Universitas Putera Batam.

Johansson, C., Miller, V. D., & Hamrin, S. (2011). Communicative leadership:

theories, concepts, and central communication behaviors. Sundsvall:

DEMICOM, Mittuniversitetet.

Johansson, C., Miller, V. D., & Hamrin, S. (2014). Conceptualizing

communicative leadership. Corporate Communications: An International

Journal, 19(2), 147–165. doi:10.1108/CCIJ-02-2013-0007

Lagerwerf, L., Boeynaems, A., van Egmond-Brussee, C., & Burgers, C.

(2015). Immediate Attention for Public Speech: Differential Effects of

Rhetorical Schemes and Valence Framing in Political Radio

Speeches. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34(3), 273–299.

LeFebvre L. ,LeFebvre L. , Allen, M. (2021). “Imagine All the People”: Imagine:

Interactions in Virtual Reality When Public Speaking. Imagination,

Cognition and Personality 40:3, pages 189-222.

 66

LeFebvre L., LeFebvre L., Allen M., Buckner, M. & Griffin

D. (2020). Metamorphosis of Public Speaking Anxiety: Student Fear

Transformation Throughout the Introductory Communication

Course, Communication Studies, 71:1, 98-111.

Malone, Arnold John, (1970). "Analysis of the correlations among excellence in

public speaking excellence in group discussion and specified concepts of

leadership" Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional

Papers. 5612.

Marinho, A.C.F. et al. (2017). Thesis. Fear of Public Speaking: Perception of

college students and correlates, volume 31, issue 1, 127.e7-127.e11.

Unpublished. Downloaded from sciencedirect.com.

Maynard, K. (2008). Fostering Youth Engagement: A Model of Youth Voice,

Empowerment, and Participation. University of South Alabama

McCroskey, J. C. (1984). Self-report measurement. In Daly J. A., McCroskey J.

C. (Eds.), Avoiding communication: Shyness, reticence, and

communication apprehension (pp. 81–94). Sage.

McCroskey, J. C. (1970). Measures of communication-bound anxiety. Speech

Monographs; 37:269–277. doi: 10.1080/03637757009375677.

Mörtberg, E., Jansson-Fröjmark, M., Pettersson, A., Hennlid-Oredsson, T.

 67

(2018) Psychometric Properties of the Personal Report of Public Speaking

Anxiety (PRPSA) in a Sample of University Students in Sweden. Int J

Cogn Ther. ;11(4):421-433. doi: 10.1007/s41811-018-0022-0. Epub 2018

Sep 27. PMID: 30595793; PMCID: PMC6280786.

Nowell, B., Izod, A. M., Ngaruiya, K. M., & Boyd, N. M. (2016). Public Service

Motivation and Sense of Community Responsibility: Comparing Two

Motivational Constructs in Understanding Leadership Within Community

Collaboratives. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-

PART, 26(4), 663–676. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44165141

Pittman, K. J., Wright, M. (1991). Bridging the gap: A rationale for enhancing

the

role of community organizations in promoting youth development.

Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Council on Youth Development.

Pratiwi, Y.A. (2018). Thesis. Students’ Perception on Impromptu Speech to

Improve Speaking Fluency in Speaking Class. Unpublished. Faculty of

Teacher Training and Education. Yogyakarta: Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Riegel, D. G. (2013). 3 Strategies for managing public speaking anxiety: In

creative brain trust. Retrieved from http://

www.fastcompany.com/3004857/3-strategies-managing-public- speaking-

anxiety

Rizka, A. (2018). An analysis of students’ speaking performance in presentation

 68

at proposal seminar of English education department Iain Bukkitinggi.

English Education Department.

Saberg, M. (2017). Thesis. Fostering students’ oral communication skills in the

second language classroom. Unpublished. Linköping University.

Downloaded from

http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1128442/FULLTEXT01.pdf.

Sawyer C. R., Behnke R. R. (1999). State anxiety patterns for public speaking

and the behavior inhibition system. International Journal of

Phytoremediation, 21(1), 33–41. 10.1080/08934219909367706

Sharf, R.S. (2008). Theories of psychotherapy and counseling: Concepts and

cases. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning.

Tambunan, J.A.T. (2018). Thesis. Students’ anxiety in public speaking.

Unpublished. Sanata Dharma University. Downloaded from

https://repository.usd.ac.id/32179/2/131214068_full.pdf.

Tengblad, S. (2006). Is there a ”New Managerial Work”? A Comparison with

Henry

Mintzberg’s Classic Study 30 Years Later. Journal of Management

Studies,

Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: Critical

review of the literature and future directions. Review of Educational

Research, 78, 751-796.

 69

Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy in mathematics: A

validation study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 89-101.

Warren, J (2011). "THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SERVICE LEARNING AND

PUBLIC SPEAKING SELF- EFFICACY: TOWARD ENGAGING TODAY’S

UNDERGRADUATES". Theses and Dissertations-- Communication.

1.https://uknowledge.uky.edu/comm_etds/1

Wati, N.L. (2021). The influences of “Public Speaking -Attractive Training” to the

Public Speaking Anxiety. Retrieved from https://knepublishing.com/

Yaikhong, K. & Usaha, S. (2012). A Measure of EFL Public Speaking Class

Anxiety: Scale Development and Preliminary Validation and Reliability.

Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1080110.

 70

APPENDIX D

Participant Mental Anticipator Experiential Social Score Card (Y)

1 2.750 3.222 3.182 3.857 51.000

2 4.000 3.111 2.727 4.000 49.000

3 4.000 3.778 3.273 3.857 27.000

4 3.500 3.111 2.818 3.714 49.000

5 4.000 3.778 2.909 3.714 51.000

6 4.000 3.778 3.273 3.857 41.000

7 4.000 3.778 3.273 3.857 25.000

8 4.750 4.222 3.909 4.429 26.000

9 3.750 3.778 3.455 3.857 46.000

10 4.500 3.889 3.455 3.857 24.000

11 4.000 3.778 3.364 4.000 24.000

12 4.000 3.778 3.273 3.714 46.000

13 4.500 4.222 4.273 4.000 24.000

14 3.750 3.778 3.273 3.429 51.000

15 2.500 3.667 3.273 3.429 27.000

16 3.750 3.778 3.273 3.429 27.000

17 3.000 3.778 3.364 3.571 24.000

18 4.500 4.000 3.545 3.714 19.000

19 4.250 4.000 3.455 3.714 21.000

20 2.250 3.444 3.364 3.286 22.000

21 3.750 4.222 3.727 4.429 18.000

22 4.000 4.222 3.909 4.286 19.000

23 4.000 4.222 3.818 4.286 20.000

24 4.000 4.222 4.286 17.000
 71

3.636

25 4.000 4.222 3.909 4.286 20.000

Questionnaire Scores and Public Speaking Scorecard Results

APPENDIX E

Survey Questionnaire

Directions: This questionnaire is designed to explore factors contributing to public speaking

anxiety by Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) Officials of La, Paz, Agusan del Sur. Please answer all

questions truthfully related to your real feelings of your own experiences. Your answers will be

kept strictly confidential and will be used for academic purpose only. This questionnaire consists

of 4 parts as follow:

1. Information about the respondent

2. Personal report of public speaking anxiety

3. Public Speaking Segment guideline

4. Open-ended questions

When answering part 2, please take note of the rating and classification as you

answer the items.

Rating Classification
5 Strongly Agree
4 Agree
3 Neutral
2 Disagree
1 Strongly Disagree

Part I
 72

Information about the respondents

Name: ________________________________________________________________

Age: ________________ Sex: ___________________

Designation: _________________________________

Barangay: ___________________________________
Part II: Factors Contributing to public speaking anxiety

Directions: Imagine how you feel when you are supposed to give a public speech

The following statements are thoughts and feelings might have experienced while giving a public

speech. Please indicate the degree to which statement applies to you by marking (X) in the boxes

the degree to which each statement applies to you.

PSYCHOLOGICAL: Mental 1 2 3 4 5
Item 1: I get anxious when I think about a speech coming
up.
Item 2: My thoughts become confused and jumbled when
I speak before an audience.
Item 3: I am in constant fear of forgetting what I prepared
to say.
Item 4: I get anxious if someone asks me something about
my topic that I do not know.

Adapted questionnaire by McCroskey (1970)

PSYCHOLOGICAL: Anticipatory 1 2 3 4 5
Item 5: When the instructor announces a speaking
assignment, I can feel myself getting tense.
Item 6: I experience considerable anxiety while sitting in
the room just before my speech starts.
Item 7: While preparing for giving a speech I feel tense
and nervous.
Item 8: I feel anxious when the teacher announces the
date of a speaking assignment.
Item 9: I feel anxious while waiting to give my speech.
Item 10: I have trouble falling asleep the night before a
speech.
Item 11: I feel tense when I see the words "speech" and
"public speech" on a course outline when studying.
Item 12: I prefer not to talk with people unless I know them
well.
 73

Item 13: I always avoid speaking in public if possible.

Adapted questionnaire by McCroskey (1970)

PSYCHOLOGICAL: Experiential 1 2 3 4 5
Item 14: Realizing that only a little time remains in a
speech makes me very tense and anxious.
Item 15: During an important speech I experience a
feeling of helplessness building up inside me.
Item 16: While giving a speech I get so nervous I forget
facts I really know.
Item 17: While participating in a conversation with a new
acquaintance I feel very nervous.
Item 18: I am tense and nervous while participating in
group discussions.
Item 19: I am fearful and tense all the while I am speaking
before a group of people.
Item 20: I do poorer on speeches because I am anxious.
Item 21: When I make a mistake while giving a speech. I
find it hard to concentrate on the parts that follow.
Item 22: Although I talk fluently with friends I am at a loss
for words on the platform.
Item 23: When I talk with a member of the opposite sex
who is near my own age. I feel quite nervous.
Item 24: Conversing with people who hold positions of
authority causes me to be fearful and tense.

Adapted questionnaire by McCroskey (1970)

SOCIAL/BEHAVIORAL: Physiological 1 2 3 4 5
Item 25: My hands tremble when I am giving a speech.
Item 26: Certain parts of my body feel very tense and rigid
while giving a speech.
Item 27: My heart beats very fast just as I start a speech.
Item 28: I perspire just before starting a speech.
Item 29: I breathe faster just before starting a speech.
Item 30: My heart beats very fast while I present a speech.
Item 31: My hands tremble when I try to handle objects on
the platform.
 74

Adapted questionnaire by McCroskey (1970)

Part III

Public Speaking Segment Guidelines

(Schedule of panel assessment and interview to be provided by researcher. )

You will be asked to stand in front of a panel where you will be tasked in under 3

minutes to present the following:

1. Introduce yourself

2. Why is the SK program important for the municipality

3. What are the challenges you encounter as an SK Official

Part IV

Open-ended questions:

1. How does it feel to give a speech or speak in front of an audience?

2. What are your difficulties in giving a public speech?

3. How do you prepare for an incoming public speech?

 75

4. Do you think you need training to improve your public speaking skill as an SK

Official? Why?

VERY
JUDGING ITEMS EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR
GOOD
Speech Development
20 14-19 9-13 0-8
(Structure, Organization)

Effectiveness

(Achievement of Purpose,
15 11-14 6-10 0-5
Content
Interest, Reception) 50

Speech Value

(Ideas, Logic, Original

15 11-14 6-10 0-5
Thought)

Physical

(Appearance, Body
10 7-9 4-6 0-3
Language, Speaking Area)

Voice Delivery
30
10 7-9 4-6 0-3
(Flexibility, Volume)

Manner
10 7-9 4-6 0-3
(Directness, Enthusiasm)

Appropriateness Language 10 7-9 4-6 0-3

 76

(Purpose and Audience)

Correctness
20
(Grammar, Pronunciation,
10 7-9 4-6 0-3
Word Selection)

Total Score: 100 Points

Adapted from Toastmaster International Judging Criteria (2020)

APPENDIX F

Documentation: Courtesy Call to the Vice Mayor, SB Secretary, and

SK Federation President

Rosemarie J. Pastor, SB Secretary Hon. Rabella C. Justo, Vice Mayor

 77

APPENDIX G

Documentation: Survey Questionnaire (PRCA)

Hon. Renz C. Justo, SK Fed
 78

APPENDIX H

Documentation: Interview
 79

APPENDIX I

Map and Location of the Study

 80

APPENDIX J

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

Parties:

This memorandum of understanding (hereinafter referred to as

“Agreement” is entered into on March 11, 2023 (The effective date), by and
between Hermogenes B. Aying of the Municipal Tourism Office
(hereinafter referred to as first party), and the Sangguniang Bayan Office
represented by the SB Secretary, Rosemarie J. Pastor, M.A.Ed.
(hereinafter referred to as second party) (Collectively referred to as the “Parties.”

Purpose:
- This agreement is entered into the following reasons:
1. Conduct a survey on Public Speaking Anxieties (PSAs) to the Sangguniang
Kabataan (SK) Officials.
2. Review the Local Youth Development Plan of the SK Federation.
3. Allow the SK Officials of La Paz to participate on the survey/study.
4. Allow the researcher to recommend and enroll some programs and activities on
the YDP that will enhance the speaking abilities of the youth in La Paz.
5. Allow the researcher to conduct the survey in the premises of the Municipal
Hall/Municipal Ground.
Responsibilities of the Parties:
1. Only selected participants should be documented.
2. Cover their faces during documentations.
3. Thoroughly explain the study to the respondents before conducting it.
4. Courtesy call must be done to the Vice Mayor as the head of the legislative
department.
 81

5. The secretary to the Sanggunian shall assist the researcher and monitor the
study.
6. The SK Fed. President must help in identifying the respondents.

Hermogenes B. Aying
1st Party
Researcher

Rosemarie J. Pastor, MAEd.

2nd Party
Secretary to the Sanggunian
CURRICULUM VITAE

I. Personal Data

Name : Hermogenes Barrios Aying

Nickname : Herms

Sex : Male

Civil Status : Single

Date of Birth : March 24, 1998

Age : 25 Years old

Father : Gregorio Mercado Aying

Occupation : Retired Police Investigator (Spo4)

Mother : Gemma Perez Barrios

Occupation : Businesswoman

Religion : Roman Catholic

Present Address : P-6 A Furia Subdivision, Barangay

Libertad, Butuan City, Agusan del Norte.

Permanent Address : P-3 Poblacion, La Paz, Agusan del Sur

Email Address : [email protected]

 82

II. Educational Background

Elementary : La Paz Central Elementary School,

2010

Secondary : La Paz National High School, 2014

Tertiary : Father Saturnino Urios University, 2018

III. Work Experience and Qualifications

Degree : Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in

English

Awards : Magna Cum Laude

The Outstanding Student-Teacher of 2018

8TH Time Dean’s Lister

Qualifications : Licensed Professional Teacher

: Civil Service Eligible (Honor Graduate

(Eligibility)

: Teaching English for Speakers of Other

Language

Certificate (TESOL) and Teaching English for

Young Learners Certificate (TEYL)- Teach

International

Relevant Trainings : Tricky American English Pronunciation-

University
 83

California, Irvine via Coursera.

English for Teaching Purposes- Universität

Autonoma de Barcelona via Coursera.

3 Day Seminar on Thesis Writing at Philippine

Normal University.

Seminar on Tourism Guidebook, DOT

Philippine League of Secretaries to the

Sanggunian

Government Records Officers’ Association

Seminar

Bureau of Local Government and Finance

Seminar

Work Experience : College Instructor at Father Saturnino Urios

University

Online English Teacher at 51talk Philippines

Local Legislative Staff Officer II, LGU La Paz

Acting Municipal Tourism Officer, LGU La Paz