INTRODUCTION

In June 1996, four programs were offered under the Institute of Engineering and Technology of
the then Romblon State College. Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering, Bachelor of Science in
Electrical Engineering, Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering and the Bachelor of Information
Technology were included in the sole agricultural engineering program of the College. Curricula were
formulated for the different programs adhering to the minimum requirements issued by the Commission
on Higher Education incorporating other courses as suggested by the Professional Regulations
Commission, different Engineering Boards, and accredited Professional Organizations.
In March 2001, the College was able to produce graduates from the mentioned new engineering
programs where seven pioneering graduates came from the mechanical engineering. From then on,
roosters of graduates of the ME program continued.
To assess the competitiveness of the ME curriculum and the status of its graduates, a study was
conducted.
OBJECTIVES
The study was conducted to determine the status of ME graduates in four areas:
1. Personal information which includes the socio-demographic profile of the respondents.
2. Studies at RSCU in the College of Engineering and Technology.
a. Year of graduation
b. Reasons for taking the course
c. Scholarships received
3. Eligibility
a. Civil Service Eligibility
b. ME Board Examination performance
c. TESDA
d. Other Eligibilities
4. Professional Career
a. Employment
b. Status of employment
c. Relevance of curriculum
d. Competencies
e. Usefulness of curriculum in present work
f. Prospect of RSC graduates in the job market
g. Further studies and advance training

METHODOLOGY
The descriptive method was used in this study because this study describes the socio-
demographic profiles of graduates and the status in terms of professional eligibility and status of
employment.

Respondents of the Study
The respondents to this study were the BS Mechanical Engineering graduates of Romblon State
University from year 2001-2009. Eighty one (81) graduates out of the one hundred fifty three (153) were
the respondents of the study.

Research Instrument
The Graduate Tracer Study (GTS) that the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) introduced
was used in this study.

Data Gathering Procedure
The researchers asked the help of the Office of the Registrar and the Office of the College of
Engineering and Technology to provide the list of graduates and their home addresses. Much to the
desire of the proponent to trace all the ME graduates but to reach out them was the biggest problem. With
this the proponent used cellular phones and internet to trace out the respondents. Research instruments
were uploaded in the internet and sent to the respondents. Some respondents who were contacted
through cellular phones visited RSU and filled up the instrument. Other instruments were sent through
RSU students residing near the vicinity of the respondents.

Method of Data Analysis
The data were tallied, tabulated and statistically analyzed. Tables were used to illustrate the data
gathering.
Percentage. This was employed to determine the socio-demographic profile and the employment
status and professional eligibility of the respondents.
The formula for percentage is as follows;

Where:
P = percentage T = total number of respondents
N = number of respondents 100 = constant

RESULTS ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1 shows that graduates in school year 2007-2008 has the highest number of graduates
representing 16.34% and batch 2000-2001 has the least number of graduates representing 4.58%.
Table 1. Nunmber of ME Graduates per School Year
Number of Graduates Total
School Year Percentage
(%)
2000-2001 7 4.58
2001-2002 20 13.07
2002-2003 21 13.73
2003-2004 14 9.15
2004-2005 18 11.76
2005-2006 21 13.73
2006-2007 17 11.11
2007-2008 25 16.34
2008-2009 10 6.54
Total 153 100

Table 2 shows that only 81 respondents representing 52.94% out of 153 graduates were traced
out. Graduates from 2000-2001 has the highest percentage of being traced out with 85.72% while
graduates from 2005-2006 has the least having 28.57% only.



Table 2. Number ME Graduates traced out per School Year

School Year
Population Sample
Percentage
(%)
Total Population Traced Out
2000-2001 7 6 85.72
2001-2002 20 8 40.00
2002-2003 21 12 57.14
2003-2004 14 7 50.00
2004-2005 18 11 61.11
2005-2006 21 6 28.57
2006-2007 17 10 58.82
2007-2008 25 13 52.00
2008-2009 10 8 80.00
Total 153 81 52.94

Table 3 shows that prospect for immediate employment ranked 1 as the reason for choosing the
BSME course. Rank 2 is shared by influence of parents and strong passion for the profession.
Table 3. REASONS FOR TAKING THE COURSE
Reasons Frequency Rank
1. Good grades in high school subjects related to the course 12
2. Influence of parents and relatives 35 2
3. Peer influence 12 4
4. Scholarship offer 12 4
5. Inspired by a role model 6 5
6. Strong passion for the profession 35 2
7. Prospect for immediate employment 41 1
8. Status or prestige of the profession 12 4
9. Availability of course offering in the chosen institution 23 3
10. Prospect of career advancement 12 4
11. Affordable for the family 23 3
12. Prospect of attractive compensation 23 3
13. Opportunity for employment abroad 23 3
14. No particular choice or no idea 6 5
15. Others, 0 6


Civil Status
Table 4 presents the demographic profile of the BSME graduates.
Table 4A showed that 44 of the respondents are still single, 36 are married and 1 is a widower. This only
shows that most of the respondents are still preparing for future family hood.
Table 4. Demographic Profile of the Respondent
Profile Frequency Percentage (%) Rank
A. Civil Status
Single 44 54.32 1
Married 36 44.44 2
Widow/Widower 1 1.23 3
Separated 0 0 4
Total 81 100
B. Gender
Male 80 98.77 1
Female 1 1.23 2
Total 81 100
C. Age
Below 21 years old 0 0 5
21 to 25 years old 21 25.93 2
26 to 30 years old 41 50.62 1
31 to 36 years old 16 19.75 3
Above 35 years old 3 3.70 4
Total 81 100

Gender
Table 4B showed that Mechanical Engineering is not an attractive course for female since 80 of
the respondents are male and only 1 is female.
Age
Table 4C showed that 41 of the respondents are at the age of 26 30 years of age, 21 are at the
age ranging from 21 25 years old, while 16 are in the age 31 36 years old with only 3 with age above
35 years of age. This only indicates that most of the respondents are young professionals.
Table 5 showed that Registered Mechanical Engineers topped the rank of eligibility of the
respondents. In rank 2 are respondents that have no eligibility at all. Ranked third are respondents both
TESDA certified and RME, followed by respondents with TESDA eligibility only. In fifth place are
respondents that are both CS eligible and TESDA certified. In sixth place are respondents with CS Sub-
professional only, in seventh place are respondents with both PRC and CS eligible, and none of the
respondents have CS eligibility only.
Table 5. Eligibility of the Respondents
Eligibility
Frequency Rank
1. Civil Service Professional only 0 8
2. Civil Service Sub Professional only 5 6
3. PRC Board Examination(RME) only 29 1
4. Both PRC and TESDA 15 3
5. Both PRC and CS Eligible 4 7
6. Both CS Eligible and TESDA 6 5
7. Other(TESDA Certified only) 10 4
8. None 24 2

Table 6. Employment Status of Employed Respondents
Employment Status
Frequency Percentage (%) Rank
1. Regular/Permanent 35 43.21 1
2. Casual 6 7.41 4
3. Contractual 29 35.80 2
4. Self Employed 0 0 5
5. Unemployed 11 13.58 3
6. No Response 0 0 5
Total 81 100

The employment status of employed respondents is reflected in Table 6 shows that 43.21 percent
of the respondents are permanent employees, 35.8 percent are contractual and 7.41 percent are casual.
The unemployed indicates 13.58 percent. The self-employed and no response have zero indications.
In Table 7 presented the reasons of unemployment from 11 unemployed respondents. 3 or 27.27
percent reasoned out that there has no job opportunity, 5 or 45.45 percent says that lack of work
experience are there reason for unemployment, while the remaining 3 did not respond.
Table 7. Reasons of Unemployment
Reasons Frequency Percentage (%)
1. Advance or further study 0 0
2. No job opportunity 3 27.27
3. Family concern, decided not to find job 0 0
4. Did not look for job 0 0
5. Health-related reasons 0 0
6. Lack of work experience 5 45.45
7. Other reasons, please specify 0 0
8. No response 3 27.27
Total respondents: 11
The distributions of respondents according to their present occupation are presented in Table 8.
Of the 70 respondents, 30 are technicians, 29 are engineers while 20 are supervisors. Six respondents
are estimators while 5 are in office work and 5 also are in managerial position. Three are designer and 3
marketing or in sales. One instructor and 1 policeman are included in the list.
Table 8. Distribution of Respondents According to their Present Occupation
Present Occupation
Frequency Percentage (%)
1. Engineer 29 28.15
2. Technician 30 29.13
3. Police officer/Military 1 0.97
4. Designer 3 2.91
5. Lecturer/Instructor 1 0.97
6. Supervisor 20 19.42
7. Office Worker 5 1.94
8. Draftsman 0 0
9. Managerial Position 5 4.85
10. Estimator 6 5.82
11. Collector/Delivery 0 0
12. Marketing/Sales 3 2.91
13. No response 0 0

In Table 9 the employed respondents are distributed according to the type of employment
company/organization. It shows that 35 or 50% are engaged in private company, 30 or 42.86% are in
manufacturing firm. Two are in LGU and 2 are in CHED/ HEIs while 1 is in government agency.
Table 9. Type of Employment Company/Organization of the Employed Respondents
Type of Employment Company
Frequency Percentage (%)
1. Private Company 35 50
2. Manufacturing Firm 30 42.86
3. Local Government Office 2 2.86
4. CHED/ HEIs 2 2.86
5. Government Agency 1 1.43
6. No response 0 0
Total 70 100

Table 10 presented the period of time before the landing a job. Top most of the respondents or
42.85% landed a job between 7 to 12 months. This was followed by 24.29% indicating that they landed a
job more than a year after graduation. Only 17.14 percent indicated that they land a job below one month
and 8.57% states that they landed the job between 1 to 6 months. The remaining 7.14% did not respond.
Table 10. Period of Time before Landing a Job after Graduation in College
Period of Time
Frequency Percentage (%) Rank
1. Below 1 month 12 17.14 3
2. 1 to 6 months 6 8.57 4
3. 7 to 12 months 30 42.85 1
4. More than 1 year 17 24.29 2
5. No response 5 7.14 5
Total 70 100

The length of employment service of the presently employed respondents was presented in Table
11. As shown in the table, 38 of the respondents stayed in their first job for 1-3 years, while 16 stayed for
3- 5 years. Eleven stayed only for less than 6 months and 5 stayed in more than 6 months but less than 1
year. In their second job, 17 stayed for 6 months but not more than 1 year, while 5 stayed for 1-5 years.
In their present job, 38 are staying for 1-3 years and 16 are in the company for more than 3 years now.
Table 11. Length of Employment Service of the Presently Employed Respondents
Length of Service Frequency Percentage (%)
A. First Job
1. Less than 6 months 11 15.38
2. More than 6 months but less than 1 year 5 7.69
3. 1 3 years 38 53.85
4. 3 5 years 16 23.08
5. More than 5 years 0 0
6. No response 0 0
Total respondents 70 100
B. Second Job
1. Less than 6 months 0 0
2. More than 6 months but less than 1 year 17 75
3. 1 3 years 5 25
4. 3 5 years 0 0
5. More than 5 years 0 0
6. No response 0 0
Total respondents 22 100
C. Present Job
1. Less than 6 months 11 15.38
2. More than 6 months but less than 1 year 5 7.69
3. 1 3 years 38 53.85
4. 3 5 years 16 23.08
5. More than 5 years 0 0
6. No response 0 0
Total respondents 70 100

Table 12 presented the perception of the respondents towards the prospect of RSU graduates for
further studies. The 46 respondents or 57.14% perceived it high, while the 23 perceived it medium and 12
perceived it low.
Table 12. Prospect of RSU Graduates for Further Studies as Perceived by the respondents
Perception Frequency Percentage (%) Rank
1. High 46 57.14 1
2. Medium 23 28.57 2
3. Low 12 14.29 3
4. Not at all 0 0 4
Total 81 100

Table 13 presented the rate given by the respondents to the usefulness of the overall BSME
curriculum of RSU for professional work. Being 1 as the highest and 3 as the lowest, almost all aspects
are Very Useful except for the undergraduate thesis/ special problems that are rated as Useful.
Table 13. Rate Given by the Respondents to the Usefulness of the Overall Course Curriculum of RSU
for Professional Work
Aspect (VU) 1 (U) 2 (NU) 3 TWS WM DR
General Education 30 40 0 110 1.6 VU
Core Courses 30 35 5 115 1.6 VU
Professional Courses 45 25 0 95 1.4 VU
Elective courses 30 40 0 110 1.6 VU
Undergraduate Thesis/ Special problem 10 50 10 140 2.0 U
Seminar 50 10 10 100 1.4 VU
Total 32.5 33 4 112 1.6 VU

Legend:
Total Weighted Score = (TWS)
Weighted Mean = (WM)
Descriptive = (DR)
Scale Weight Interpretation
1.0 1.6 (1) Very Useful (VU)
1.7 2.3 (2) Useful (U)
2.4 3.0 (3) Not Useful (NU)

Table 14 presented the perception of respondents to the prospect of RSU graduates in the job
market. The prospect according to the 40 respondents or 50% say it is medium, to the 29 or 35.7% says
High and the remaining 12 or 14.3% says Low.
Table 14. Prospect of RSU Graduates in the Job Market as Perceived by the Respondents
Perception Frequency Percentage (%) Rank
1. High 29 35.7 2
2. Medium 40 50 1
3. Low 12 14.3 3
4. Not at all 0 0 4

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION
Summary of Findings
Based on the analysis of the data gathered, the researcher found the following:
1. Out of the total 153 populations it showed that seven (7) have graduated for the 1
st
batch, twenty
(20) for the 2
nd
batch, twenty one (21) for the 3
rd
batch, fourteen (14) for the 4
th
batch, eighteen
(18) for the 5
th
batch, twenty one (21) for the 6
th
batch, seventeen (17) for the batch seven, twenty
five (25) graduates in the 8
th
batch and ten (10) in batch nine. Graduates in school year 2007-
2008 has the highest number of graduates representing 16.34% and batch 2000-2001 has the
least number of graduates representing 4.58%.
2. Eighty one respondents representing 52.94% out of 153 graduates were traced out. Graduates
from 2000-2001 has the highest percentage of being traced out with 85.72% while graduates
from 2005-2006 has the least having 28.57% only. Forty four of the respondents are still single,
36 are married and 1 is a widower. It was also shown that Mechanical Engineering is not an
attractive course for female since 80 of the respondents are male and only 1 is female. Forty one
of the respondents are at the age of 26 30 years of age, 21 are at the age ranging from 21 25
years old, while 16 are in the age 31 36 years old with only 3 with age above 35 years of age.
3. It was also shown that prospect for immediate employment ranked 1 as the reason for choosing
the BSME course. Rank 2 is shared by influence of parents and strong passion for the profession.
4. It was also shown that Registered Mechanical Engineers topped the rank of eligibility of the
respondents. In rank 2 are respondents that have no eligibility at all. Ranked third are
respondents both TESDA certified and RME, followed by respondents with TESDA eligibility only.
In fifth place are respondents that are both CS eligible and TESDA certified. In sixth place are
respondents with CS Sub-professional only, in seventh place are respondents with both PRC and
CS eligible, and none of the respondents have CS eligibility only.
5. The employment status of employed respondents showed that 43.21 percent of the respondents
are permanent employees, 35.8 percent are contractual and 7.41 percent are casual. The
unemployed indicates 13.58 percent. The self-employed and no response have zero indications.
6. The reasons of unemployment from 11 unemployed respondents stated that 3 or 27.27 percent
reasoned out that there has no job opportunity, 5 or 45.45 percent says that lack of work
experience are there reason for unemployment, while the remaining 3 did not respond.
7. The distribution of respondents according to their present occupation also showed that of the 70
respondents, 30 are technicians, 29 are engineers while 20 are supervisors. Six respondents are
estimators while 5 are in office work and 5 also are in managerial position. Three are designer
and 3 marketing or in sales. One instructor and 1 policeman are included in the list. Employed
respondents are distributed according to the type of employment company/organization. It shows
that 35 or 50% are engaged in private company, 30 or 42.86% are in manufacturing firm. Two are
in LGU and 2 are in CHED/ HEIs while 1 is in government agency.
8. The period of time before the landing a job, most of the respondents or 42.85% landed a job
between 7 to 12 months. This was followed by 24.29% indicating that they landed a job more
than a year after graduation. Only 17.14 percent indicated that they land a job below one month
and 8.57% states that they landed the job between 1 to 6 months. The remaining 7.14% did not
respond. The length of employment service of the presently employed respondents was shown
as 38 of the respondents stayed in their first job for 1-3 years, while 16 stayed for 3- 5 years.
Eleven stayed only for less than 6 months and 5 stayed in more than 6 months but less than 1
year. In their second job, 17 stayed for 6 months but not more than 1 year, while 5 stayed for 1-5
years. In their present job, 38 are staying for 1-3 years and 16 are in the company for more than 3
years now.
9. The study also showed that 28.4% of the respondents attended trainings in different areas. Most
of the trainings were sponsored by the company they are working. The remaining 71.6 percent
have not attended any advance training. No one from the respondents indicated further studies
and reasoned out that their current job indicating 64.29 percent hinders them for further studies.
Funding is the next reason indicating 28.57 percent and 7.14% indicated that previous academic
performance hinders them to pursue further study
10. The rate given by the respondents to the usefulness of the overall BSME curriculum of RSU for
professional work was rated Very Useful except for the undergraduate thesis/ special problems
that is rated as Useful.
11. As to the perception of respondents to the prospect of RSU graduates in the job market,
accordingly 40 respondents or 50% say it is medium, to the 29 or 35.7% says High and the
remaining 12 or 14.3% says Low.


Conclusions

Based on the findings of this study the researcher had drawn the following conclusions:
1. Majority of the BSME graduates of RSU are single, male and on the age bracket of 26 to 30 years
old. The main reason for choosing the career is the prospect for immediate employment.
2. Most of the respondents are eligible and top most to it is the Registered Mechanical Engineering
licensure examination. It also showed that aside from RME eligibility, some are TESDA certified.
3. Majority of the graduates are employed and most of them are permanent with few are contractual or
casual. Most of the employed are working as technicians, engineers and supervisors in private and
manufacturing companies. It is also noted that most of the graduates consider their present job as
their first job. Most of them landed their job between 7 months to 1 year.
4. As perceived by the graduates, the curriculum is very useful to their professional work.
The perception of the respondents to the prospect of RSU graduates in the job market is rated medium.