000			10396nam a2201225Ia 4500
000			08543ntm a2200229 i 4500
001			70950
003			0
005			20250921111102.0
008			180210n 000 0 eng d
010			_z _z _o _a _b
015			_22 _a
016			_2 _2 _a _z
020			_e _e _a _b _z _c _q _x
022			_y _y _l _a2
024			_2 _2 _d _c _a _q
028			_a _a _b
029			_a _a _b
032			_a _a _b
035			_a _a _b _z _c _q
037			_n _n _c _a _b
040			_e _erda _a _d _b _c
041			_e _e _a _b _g _h _r
043			_a _a _b
045			_b _b _a
050			_a _a _d _b2 _c0
051			_c _c _a _b
055			_a _a _b
060			_a _a _b
070			_a _a _b
072			_2 _2 _d _a _x
082			_a _a _d _b2 _c
084			_2 _2 _a
086			_2 _2 _a
090			_a _a _m _b _q
092			_f _f _a _b
096			_a _a _b
097			_a _a _b
100			_e _e _aMora, Hemmady S. _d _b4 _u _c0 _q16
110			_e _e _a _d _b _n _c _k
111			_a _a _d _b _n _c
130			_s _s _a _p _f _l _k
210			_a _a _b
222			_a _a _b
240			_s _s _a _m _g _n _f _l _o _p _k
245		0	_a _aA status analysis of the PUP College of Communication researches : _d _btowards a proposed framework for College Institutional Research / _n _cHemmady S. Mora. _h6 _p
246			_a _a _b _n _i _f6 _p
249			_i _i _a
250			_6 _6 _a _b
260			_e _e _a _b _f _c _g
264			_3 _3 _a _d _b _c46
300			_e _e _c28 cm. _aix, 153 pages _b
310			_a _a _b
321			_a _a _b
336			_b _atext _2rdacontent
337			_3 _30 _b _aunmediated _2rdamedia
338			_3 _30 _b _avolume _2rdacarrier
340			_2 _20 _g _n
344			_2 _2 _a0 _b
347			_2 _2 _a0
362			_a _a _b
385			_m _m _a2
410			_t _t _b _a _v
440			_p _p _a _x _v
490			_a _a _x _v
500			_a _aThesis (M.A.) -- Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, 2003.;A thesis presented to the faculty of the Graduate School of Arts, Sciences, and Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Communications. _d _b _c56
504			_a _a _x
505			_a _a _b _t _g _r
506			_a _a5
510			_a _a _x
520			_b _b _c _aABSTRACT: STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: The study aims to analyze institution-building researches of the PUP College of Communication and propose a framework for college institutional research. The study answered the following specific problems: (1) What is the profile of the PUP-College of Communication institution-building researches from 1987-2002 in terms of proponent, year research was undertaken, research origin, target areas of AACCUP Accreditation, research design (based method), research approach and medium used for dissemination?; (2) What are the research agenda, thrusts and priorities of the PUP College of Communication?; (3) In what ways are institution-building researches utilized by the College of Communication?; (4) What conditions and situations are faced by the college in the production, dissemination, and utilization of institution-building researches, in terms of strengths and weaknesses for said stages?; (5) What effective framework for college institutional research could be developed to address the problems encountered and to facilitate an improved research agenda? METHODOLOGY Needed data for the study were gathered from research informants in the focus group discussions (FGD) and focus interview (FI). Data were also gathered through a documentary analysis of the institution-building researches done from 1987-2002. The researcher used a descriptive design yielding both qualitative and quantitative data. STATISTICAL TREATMENT: Some of the results were analyzed using descriptive statistics such as frequency distribution. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: On the first problem, based on the results sorted out from the documentary analysis checklist, the findings were as follows: 1. Profile Categories a. In terms of proponents, majority of those who conducted institution-building researches are students. There was only one faculty research and two team researchers. This shows that research is a problematic area on the part of the faculty, resulting to low research productivity. b. In terms of annual production of researches, quantity produced is highly irregular and inconsistent and this is due to leadership and this is due to leadership transitions, the conversion of the department to a college, accreditation schedules and corresponding behavior of the college which was then a department, towards the production of institution-building researches. c. In terms of research origin by program, there are more institution-building researches produced by proponents coming from the program in Broadcast Communication. An explanation behind this is the fact that since most of the studies are student researches, the student population of those who are enrolled in the broadcast program is bigger than those in the Journalism program. d. In terms of target area of AACCUP Accreditation, since majority of the proponents are students, most of the studies cater to Area IV-Students and secondly to Area III- Curriculum and Instruction. e. In terms of research design used, the most prominent is the descriptive method. Quantity of studies which made use of other design are very few compared to the descriptive design. It just shows that both faculty research advisers and students needed more training in other research methods. f. In terms of research approach, researchers have been using qualitative and quantitative approaches. Only few opted for the triangulation approach which makes use of both since it is a lot more complex and is more exhaustive. g. In terms of medium of dissemination, only student researches are stored in the library while university and team researches are kept in the accreditation center. The print media and the Internet has not been utilized as a medium of researches yet for any institution-building research which makes it more isolated. Only university and team researches are discussed in research colloquium and published in research journals which limits opportunities for student researchers to be recognized. On the second problem, it has been revealed in the qualitative data that there are no existing formal research agenda, thrusts and priorities yet. On the third problem, researches are utilized in three ways. First it is utilized when it is used as basis for policy or decision-making by a university official. Second, it is utilized by adoption, when certain faculty members make use of the research results of institution-building researches stored in the college library for purposes of instruction. Third, research is utilized for action planning when it is used as a basis for programs, projects and other activities. On the fourth problem, strengths and weaknesses were revealed in different stages of research- the production, dissemination, and utilization stages. Aspects in which strengths and weaknesses were seen are: 1) Research Culture, Environment or Climate; 2) Research Strategy; 3) Research Training and Capability; Research Agenda, Thrusts and Priorities; and 4) Organizational Structure. On the fifth problem, a framework for college institutional research was proposed to formalize the process of producing, disseminating and utilizing institution-building researches for the College of Communication. CONCLUSIONS An effective framework for college institutional research could facilitate the development of an improved college research agenda. At present the research area of the College of Communication is weak and there is no system at all. The profile of researches point to the end for evaluation and validation to be recognized by the college. The COC community is not aware of its research agenda, thrusts and priorities. 1) Based on the profile, COC institution-building researches are not in tune to the needs of the college since there is no formal research agenda yet and proponents are not aware of the research thrusts and priorities of the college; 2) Although there are certain research needs, the college does not have a properly formulated research agenda, thrusts and priorities; 3) Process by which institution-building researches are utilized are not clearly defined and articulated; 4) The College of Communication is presently facing problems in the production, dissemination and utilization of insitution0building researches; 5) The proposed framework for college research institutional is expected to facilitate the development of an improved college research agenda. RECOMMENDATIONS: The study recommended among others the conduct of more studies on the extent to which institution-building or institutional researches are utilized to determine the complexity of the process and the different ways in which different researches of different kinds could be used directly and indirectly for the specific purposes by their end-users; conduct of studies about the problem in the production of institution-building researches; framing and articulation of research agenda of the university and the Commission on Higher Education. More government budgetary support for academic institutions especially state universities in order to fulfill its research function; and more strategies explored by the PUP administration to generate funding for research activities for its research units in different colleges. _u
521			_a _a _b
533			_e _e _a _d _b _n _c
540			_c _c _a5
542			_g _g _f
546			_a _a _b
583			_5 _5 _k _c _a _b
590			_a _a _b
600			_b _b _v _t _c2 _q _a _x0 _z _d _y
610			_b _b _v _t2 _x _a _k0 _p _z _d6 _y
611			_a _a _d _n2 _c0 _v
630			_x _x _a _d _p20 _v
648			_2 _2 _a
650			_x _x _a _d _b _z _y20 _v
651			_x _x _a _y20 _v _z
655			_0 _0 _a _y2 _z
700			_i _i _t _c _b _s1 _q _f _k40 _p _d _e _a _l _n6
710			_b _b _t _c _e _f _k40 _p _d5 _l _n6 _a
711			_a _a _d _b _n _t _c
730			_s _s _a _d _n _p _f _l _k
740			_e _e _a _d _b _n _c6
753			_c _c _a
767			_t _t _w
770			_t _t _w _x
773			_a _a _d _g _m _t _b _v _i _p
775			_t _t _w _x
776			_s _s _a _d _b _z _i _t _x _h _c _w
780			_x _x _a _g _t _w
785			_t _t _w _a _x
787			_x _x _d _g _i _t _w
800			_a _a _d _l _f _t0 _q _v
810			_a _a _b _f _t _q _v
830			_x _x _a _p _n _l0 _v
942			_a _alcc _cBK
999			_c32090 _d32090