sample analysis of data

cosmo, embog

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
Respondent’s Profile
Our sample population of 10 respondents have yielded a 100% response with no male respondents but 10 females completing the sample population (see Table 1). The graduates from the class of 2009-2010 consisted of twenty-seven females and two males, hence the dominance of females in our sample population. Moreover, the Psychology degree have always been seen as a female-oriented one, because of the nature of the field as sensitive and nurturing which are qualities generally attributed to women.

The respondents were predominantly aged 21-23 by the time they had responded to the researchers, shown in Table 1.1 in the next page, while 10% of the sample population (f=1) is from the age range of 18-20 years old.
This age range of the work force predominantly comprises fresh graduates, i.e. those who are new to the employment market and are in their first-year of employment, stemming from the fact that graduates from four-year courses graduate within this age range and land a job within their first year off the university. The same goes for the UP graduates who choose to seek for a job immediately after graduation, as Arcelo and Sanyal (1987) pointed out in their study that UP graduates enjoy a shorter waiting period for obtaining employment, therefore explaining the dominance of the 21-23 age range. On the other hand, the minority that was the younger age range is more of a matter of personal advancement of a graduate; the graduate may have been accelerated as a child, began school early or was born in the early months of the year and was considered to be within the age range of the class that should have been ahead of her.
Furthermore, among the total respondents, all of them (100%) were non-recipients of Latin honours or awards upon their graduation as indicated by Table 2 on the next page.
The awarding of Latin honours (Cum Laude, Magna Cum Laude or Summa Cum Laude) and/or special awards allows the researchers of this study to partially determine the intellectual capacity of the graduates— partially, in the sense that honours do not completely determine or define one’s intellectuality. Majority of the UP graduates in Arcelo and Sanyal’s (1987) study evaluated themselves as above-average in intelligence, with no reference to receiving Latin honours or special awards. Nevertheless, the Latin honours are still taken into consideration by employers and graduate schools alike to determine one’s competence and intellectual standard in terms of skills, abilities and/or knowledge— Sternberg & Williams (1997) said in their study that graduate schools weed out the best and determine eligibility based on their Graduate Record Examination (GRE) that can be compared to the honours received upon graduation, and employers that accept Psychology graduate applicants who see skills and abilities, and knowledge as two of the top variables important to an applicant (Cannon 2005).
With this data to be compared with the percentage of employed graduates and those pursuing further studies, we are able to determine if there is a relevant correlation
between the awards or honours received and the employment and/or pursuance of further studies of the UP graduates. The data shown in Table 3, where majority of the graduates are employed and in Table 7 where those who are unemployed are currently pursuing further studies (which is also correspondent to the findings from Arcelo and Sanyal’s (1987) study that unemployment UP graduates are voluntary choices to figure out their respective career paths), we are able to say that there is definitely no correlation between the said data in our sample population, i.e. the acquisition of Latin honors and/or awards do not play a role in the employment or further studies of the graduates in our sample population.
Employment Percentage
The results showed a dominant number of employed graduates, constituting 70% of the sample population (n=10), while 30% (f=3) constitutes the unemployed among the total respondents as shown in Table 3.
The high rate of employed graduates in our sample population is correspondent to the high rate of employment of UP graduates compared to other universities in Arcelo and Sanyal’s (1987) study. This also shows that the respondents were quickly hired by their employers since they are working within one year from their graduation, a fact that was pointed out by Arcelo and Sanyal (1987) in the same study where UP graduates had a shorter waiting period for employment.
Although the data appears very favourable considering the number of employed graduates, this study further evaluates the reasons for the unemployed status of some of the respondents shown in Table 7, where it is indicated that all of the unemployed graduates are pursuing further studies and therefore are in voluntary employment hiatus. The results therefore indicate that our respondents indeed are in productive tracks— either they are on the career lane or are still pursing further studies.
Employment Profile
From the previous data (Table 3), there are 70% (n=7) who are currently employed, and further results from the employed respondents show that majority of them at 57% (n=4) are working in private companies, while tied at 14% (n=1) are call center, non-government organization (NGO) and self-employed categories (see Table 3.1).
Table 3.2 shows the job positions of the employed respondents. This part of the survey is an open-ended question so the researchers of this study tabulated the responses. The job position in Human Resource (HR) may it be an executive, associate 6