Journal of Educational and Human Resource Development 4:119-132 (2016)

Southern Leyte State University, Sogod, Southern Leyte, Philippines

Licensure Examination Performance of

BSEd-Biological and Physical Science Graduates in a
State University in Northern Philippines
Solita Evangeline S. Bañez* & Corazon G. Pardo
University of Northern Philippines, Vigan City, Ilocos Sur, Philippines

Abstract
This study analyzed the licensure examination for teachers (LET) performance of the
Bachelor of Secondary Education (BSEd)-Biological and Physical Science Graduates in the
University of Northern Philippines. Utilizing the descriptive-correlational method, it involved
the BSEd graduates major in Physical and Biological Sciences, School Years 2012-2013 to
2014-2015. The study employed documentary analysis of records of the graduates. Mean,
analysis of variance, and multiple regression were used to analyze the data. Results showed
that most of the respondents had graduated in public high schools and a great majority
of them attended LET review. Their performance in the College Admission Test (CAT) is
almost equally distributed from very good, good and passing, and nearly all of them obtained
a passing mark in the Teaching Aptitude Test (TAT). The overall LET performance of the
respondents is above the National Passing Percentage in general education, professional
and major subjects. Respondents’ LET performance in 2015 is significantly higher than their
performance in 2014. The performance of the LET takers in general education is higher
in 2015 than in 2014. The respondents with high achievement in professional education
subjects attended LET review and with high College Admission Test have better overall
LET performance along general education and professional education components. The
respondents with higher achievement in general education subjects have better performance
in the specialization aspects. The institution may implement higher cut-off score in the College
Admission Test. The college may conduct activities related to the licensure examination to
prepare thoroughly the LET takers.

Keywords: College admission test; Teaching aptitude test; Attendance in LET review; Academic
achievement

Introduction country. Quality education for the students

In the world, education plays an important
part of nation’s development. It is the vehicle
through which development on the different
aspects of society is carried out. Providing
good education is a fundamental responsibility
of any institution of learning whether it is run
by the government or by private individuals.
These institutions are the ones that will
build the foundation of a strongly developed
is needed in a nation to solve or alleviate
poverty. Literacy is considered one of the
greatest assets in a nation. Nowadays, one
must identify new formulae, new techniques
and strategies that will meet the demand of the
changing norms of the society. Accustomed
ways and traditional practices cannot solve
problems. There must be a search for
new assumptions in restructuring some
deteriorating schools/universities. The

*Correspondence: solitabanez@yahoo.com ISSN (Print): 2545-9740; (Online): 2545-9759

Bañez & Pardo
critical need for quality education becomes
even more pronounced in the context of
growing complexity of the roles of educational
institutions as they operate in response to
the evolving shift like social systems and
structure.
In order to accelerate the transformation
process to “world-class” universities, a few
governments – China, France, Germany,
Japan, Russia and Spain, for example –
have launched the so-called “excellence
initiatives”, consisting of additional funding
to boost the performance of their university
sector (Salmi,2016). Likewise, the Philippine
government provided initiatives such as:
additional budget was given to education
sector. The aforementioned country
implemented the K-12 program which
required that only qualified teachers will teach
to attain quality education. Attaining quality
education has been the long obsession
of all agencies concerned as well as the
individual teachers, parents and school
administrators. Numerous programs that
have been instituted in the 1980s like
Program for Decentralization of Elementary
Education (PRODED) and Secondary
Education Development Program (SEDP)
were implemented to improve the instructional
skills of teachers in the elementary and
secondary levels, respectively. Others,
included the BEC, RBEC and then, the K-12
Basic Education Curriculum that took effect in
School Year 2011-2012 for the Kindergarten
and 2012-2013 in the Secondary. Excellence,
as the target of educational institutions
requires high educational standards which
include outcomes of expected learners.
However, to achieve quality and excellence,
certain elements must be considered. Quality
education is the fruit of quality teaching and
quality supervision (Brusoni, 2014)
Licensure Examination for Teachers is one
way of improving the educational system of
a country. This act of professionalizing the
teacher profession was implemented in the
Philippines through the enactment of Republic
Act 7836 or otherwise known as the “Philippine
120
JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016
Teachers Professionalization Act of 1994” on
December 16, 1994. The enactment of the
law did not mean that the teachers in the
Philippines were not “professional”. Rather it
is a means to strengthen and improve not just
the teachers, but also the quality of education
and the whole educational system in general.
By improving the teachers, results will be
optimized because the students will naturally
follow the steps of those who lead those
(Teaching principles, 2013).
Studies were conducted to evaluate the
performance pre-service teachers’ and
follow-up graduates, enable the institutions
to appraise the curricular offerings and come
up with plans that will certainly equip the
students with the best possible training suited
to maximise their contributions to the society.
In evaluating teacher’s competence and
performance of students, there is a need to
measure the outcomes.
Rabanal (2016) found out that teacher
education graduate respondents failed to
achieve the passing rate in the Licensure
Examination for Teachers. The respondents
performed above the national percentage of
passing. LET performance was significantly
related to fourth year high school average
grades, high school graduated from, residence
while studying, and field of specialization
and only parents’ occupation did not yield
significant relationship. On the other hand,
academic achievement of the respondents
in general Education, professional education,
and major courses significantly correlates with
the LET performance.
James and Dan (2015) studied the
effectiveness of teachers certified by the
National (U.S.A) Board for Professional
Teaching Standards (NBPTS) in Washington
State, which has one of the largest populations
of National Board Certified Teachers (NBCTs)
in the nation. Based on value-added models
in math and reading, they found out that
NBPTS certified teachers are about 0.01-0.05
student standard deviations more effective
than non-NBCTS with similar levels of
experience. Certification effects vary by
Bañez & Pardo
subject, grade level, and certification type,
with greater effects for middle school math
certificates. They claimed that teachers
who pass the assessment are more
effective than those who fail, but that the
underlying NBPTS assessment score predicts
student achievement. Esmeralda and
Espinosa (2015) determined the extent of
implementation of the Teacher Education
Performance of Carlos Hilado Memorial State
College (CHMSC) in relation to the academic
achievement and performance of graduates
in the LET. Their findings revealed that the
Teacher Education Program of CHMSC
was well implemented. The Bachelor in
Elementary Education (BEED) group showed
greater confidence in academics, indicating
the need to enhance the level of academic
preparation of the BSED group underscoring
general education and major subjects during
pre-service years. It further revealed that
a significant relationship existed between
the LET performance and the academic
achievement of the BEED graduates. This
means that the teacher graduates’ academic
performance is a significant predictor in the
LET.
The Bachelor of Secondary Education
(BSEd) is a four-year program consisting of
general education, professional education,
and seven major fields of specialization.
Professional courses as well as major field
of specialization courses start in the second
year and thread through the development of
competencies up to the fourth year level. The
Bachelor of Secondary Education program
provides an intensive field study program
and practicum that will develop and improve
teaching skills from the first year level to
ensure basic competencies required of a
future teacher. Thus, the program is structured
to meet the needs of professional educators
for secondary schools in the Philippines.
Its objective is to produce competent and
effective teachers in the secondary level. The
program also integrates theories and practices
in order to provide the students not only with
the necessary pedagogical skills but also with
121
JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016
updated and adequate knowledge in their field
of specialization. Students under this program
are trained to develop the right attitude towards
teaching. The program also provides students
with the knowledge and basic skills necessary
to conduct action research works.
This study is anchored to recognize that
education plays a critical role in producing
the experts needed to revitalize research in
the country as well as the bulk of research
outputs needed for development, education
and policy formulation. Hence, there is a need
to strengthen programs in priority disciplines.
Promising HEIs with the capacity or reputation
to undertake research on these disciplines
shall be targeted for technical and financial
assistance. (Angeles, 2009)
The researchers observed that not all
the Science majors pass the Licensure
Examination for Teachers, since they are
both faculty members of CTE and teach the
major subjects though limited because of their
administrative functions they both decided to
study deeper the LET results of the Science
majors so that they could recommend better
ways of improving LET performance of the
students.
The success and prestige of a university lie
in its ability to produce quality graduates who
are able to pass the Licensure Examination
for Teachers (LET). The Accrediting Agency
of Chartered Colleges and Universities in
the Philippines (AACCUP) suggested that
analysis of Licensure performance of a
specific course be done to trace the weak and
strong points of the students so that teachers
and administrators may be able to help the
students improve for greater results and better
quality of graduates.
It is on this matter that the quality
of Education is reflected, although the
performance of an examinee depends
more on his intellectual ability, all other
factors should be considered. Therefore, an
evaluation of the LET performance of the
BSED Physical and Biological Science majors
is indeed significant.
Bañez & Pardo JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016

Figure 1. The Conceptual Paradigm shows the relationship between the profile of the respondents and
their LET performance.

Conceptual Framework 3. determine the significant difference in the

LET performance of the respondents in
This study revolved around a framework as the past three years.
illustrated above:
4. determine the significant influence of
Objectives the respondents’ profile on their LET
performance.
This study aimed to analyse the Licensure
Examination Performance of BSE-Biological
and Physical Science Graduates in a State Methodology
University in Northern Philippines from School
Year 2012-2013 to 2014-2015. This study made use of the descriptive -
Specifically, it sought to: correlational method of research. It involved
the BSEd graduates major in Physical and
1. determine the profile of the respondents Biological Sciences of the University of
along: HS average grade, College Northern Philippines -CTE during the School
Admission Test, Teaching aptitude test, Years 2012-2013 to 2014-2015 who took the
attendance in LET review and their LET. The study also employed documentary
level of academic achievement of the analysis of the records of graduates from the
respondents for the past three years taken UNP Registrar, CTE, UNP Testing Center
singly and as a whole in terms of : and PRC. Likewise, the UNP CAT ratings
of the respondents were interpreted using
a) General Education subjects;
the following norms of the UNP Testing Center:
b) Professional Subjects; and
c) Major subjects. 75 & above - Passed

2. determine the level of LET performance of Below 75 - Failed

the respondents for the past three years
taken singly and as a whole in terms of: The grades of the graduates in their general
a) General Education subjects; education, professional and major subjects
were interpreted using the UNP grading
b) Professional Subjects; and
system as follows:
c) Major subjects.

122
Bañez & Pardo JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016

Table 1. Respondent’s Profile on HS Graduated from, LET Review, CAT] & TAT.
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 As A Whole
Profile PS BS PS BS PS BS
f % f % f % f % f % f % % f
Type of High School Graduated from
Public 7 77.78 12 85.71 5 100 11 84.62 10 90.91 13 100 58 89.23
Private 2 22.22 2 14.29 - - 2 15.38 1 9.09 - - 7 10.77
Total 9 100 14 100 5 100 13 100 11 100 13 100 65 100
Attendance in LET Review
Yes 9 100 6 42.86 3 60 11 84.62 10 90.91 12 92.31 51 78.46
No - - 8 57.14 2 40 2 15.38 1 9.09 1 7.69 14 21.54
Total 9 100 14 100 5 100 13 100 11 100 13 100 65 100
College Admission Test
Passed 9 100 14 100 5 100 13 100 11 100 13 100 65 100
Average 82.22
Teaching Aptitude Test
33 and
9 100 14 100 5 100 13 100 10 90.91 13 100 64 98.46
above/Passed
30-32/Low
- - - - - - - - 1 9.09 - - 1 1.54
Passed
Total 9 100 14 100 5 100 13 100 11 100 13 100 65 100
Average 49.02

Point Score Numerical Average Respondents were not subjected to harm

1.00 97-100 in any way. Full consent was obtained
1.25 94-96 from the participants prior to the study and
1.5 91-93 the adequate level of confidentiality of the
1.75 88-90 research data was ensured.
2.0 85-87
2.25 82-84
2.5 79-81
2.75 76-78
Results and Discussion
3.00 75
4.0 72-74 Table 1 shows the profile of the respondents
5.0 71 & below along HS average grade, CAT, TAT,
attendance in LET review and their level
of academic achievement from School Year
The LET rating was interpreted as above 2012-2013 to 2014-2015 in terms of General
and below the National Passing Rate. The TAT Education subjects, Professional Subjects
was interpreted using the following norms of and Major subjects.
the UNP Testing Center:
Table 1 exhibits that in general, most (58
Numerical Average Descriptive Rating or 89.23%) of the respondents had graduated
33 and above -Passed in public high school and a great majority of
30-32 -Low Passed them attended LET review (51 or 78.46%). All
Below 30 -Failed of them passed the College Admission Test
(CAT) with an overall mean of 82.22, and
Frequency and percentages, Mean, almost all of them (64 or 98.46) obtained a
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), and Multiple passing Teaching Aptitude Test (TAT) with a
Regression were used to analyze the data. mean of 49.02.

123
Bañez & Pardo JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016

Table 2. Level of Academic Achievement of the Respondents for the Past Three Years
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Subjects PS BS PS BS PS BS Overall
X̄ X̄ X̄ X̄ X̄
General Education Subjects 1.98 2.08 2.05 2.18 1.91 2.06 2.04
Professional Subjects 1.95 2.04 2.03 2.17 1.85 1.94 2
Major Subjects 1.59 1.84 1.78 2.03 1.82 1.95 1.84
As a Whole 1.84 1.99 1.95 2.13 1.86 1.98 1.96
Norms:
Point Score Numerical Average
1.00 97-100
1.25 94-96
1.5 91-93
1.75 88-90
2.0 85-87
2.25 82-84

Level of Academic Achievement of academic achievement than the Biological

the Respondents Science respondents.

Table 2 reveals that on the overall, the
respondents obtained 1.96 academic
achievements for the past three years.
Taken singly the subjects, their academic
achievement is highest along major subjects
( =1.84) followed by professional subjects
( =2.00), and lowest in general education
subjects ( =2.04).
The above findings conform to Bañez (2002)
who found that BSE graduates of CTE from
SY 1995-1996 to 1999-2000 have very good
academic performances in major subjects (
=1.97) and professional subjects ( =2.00) but
good only in general education subjects (
=2.19). On the other hand, it slightly opposes
the findings of Rabanal (2011) who found that
in both UNP campuses, teacher education
graduate respondents achieved “Good” level
of academic performance and Galapon, et
al. (2012) who found that the academic
performance of BSIE graduates is only at
satisfactory level (2.15).
It is worth noting that, the Physical Science
majors consistently obtained a higher
academic achievement than the Biological
Science majors in the past three years as
manifested by the overall mean ratings of
1.84 vs. 1.99 in 2012-2013, 1.95 vs. 2.13 in
2013-2014, and 1.86 vs. 1.98 in 2014-2015.
This suggests that the Physical Science major
respondents consistently obtained a better
Level of LET Performance of the
Respondents from SY 2012-2013 to
2014-2015
As to the LET performance, the respondents
obtained an Above the National Passing
Percentage (NPP) of 77.83 from 2013 to 2015.
They attained an average of 79.95 percent
performance in general education subjects,
77.51 percent in professional subjects and
77.09 percent along major subjects which
are all above the NPP. This means that the
respondents performed highest in general
education subjects, followed by professional
subjects and lowest in major subjects and
consistently higher than the NPP.
The Physical Science major respondents
tend to have higher LET performance along
GE subjects than the Biological Science major
in the past three years (79.33 vs 79.07; 89.40
vs 74; 85.64 vs. 82.04). The low performance
of the respondents in 2014 is accounted for
having 30.77Similar trend is manifested in the
LET performance of the respondents along
Professional Education Subjects with mean
ratings of 79.42, 78.26 and 73.69 in 2015,
2013 and 2014 respectively, with a slight edge
of the Physical Science majors compared to
the Biological Science majors.
On the contrary, along the Specialization
components of the LET, the Physical Science

124
 Bañez & Pardo
Table 3. Level of LET Performance of the Respondents for the Past Three Years
General Education Professional Education Major As a Descriptive
Year/Major N Subjects Subjects Subjects Whole Rating DR
% % % % % % % %
X̄ X̄ X̄ X̄
Passer Failure Passer Failure Passer Failure Passer Failure
2013
PS 9 79.33 77.78 22.22 78.33 77.78 22.22 75.44 66.67 33.33 77.38 77.78 22.22 Above NPP
BS 14 79.07 50 14.29 77.21 78.57 21.43 78.79 71.43 28.57 78.21 85.71 14.29 Above NPP
As a Whole 23 79.17 30.43 82.61 77.65 78.26 21.74 77.48 69.57 30.43 77.89 82.61 17.39 Above NPP
2014
125

PS 5 79.4 80 20 77.6 80 20 74.6 60 40 76.76 80 20 Above NPP

BS 13 74 69.23 30.77 73.69 61.54 38.46 75 61.54 38.46 74.28 69.23 30.77 Below NPP
As a Whole 18 76.7 72.22 27.78 76.65 66.67 33.33 74.8 61.11 38.89 75.52 72.22 27.78 Above NPP
2015
PS 11 85.64 100 - 80.45 100 - 75.09 72.73 27.27 79.35 90.91 9.09 Above NPP
BS 13 82.69 92.31 7.69 78.54 76.92 23.08 81.15 100 - 80.42 92.31 7.69 Above NPP
As a Whole 24 84.04 95.83 4.17 79.42 87.5 12.5 79.93 87.5 12.5 79.89 91.67 8.33 Above NPP
Overall 65 79.95 84.62 15.38 77.51 78.46 21.54 77.09 73.85 26.15 77.83 83.08 16.92 Above NPP
Norm: September National Passing Percentage (NPP)
2013 -39.75
2014 -34.40
2015 -41.75
Mean -38.63

JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016

Bañez & Pardo
respondents have lower performance than the
Biological Science majors (75.44 vs. 78.79;
74.60 vs 75; 75.09 vs 81.15) in the past
three years, but the mean ratings in each
year remained highest in 2015 and lowest
in 2014. This means that the respondents
met the greatest difficulty in the major subject
components of the LET. As a whole, the
LET performance of the respondents in the
past three years is highest along General
Education subjects (79.95), followed by major
subjects (77.51), and lowest in the major
subjects (77.09). Likewise, the respondents
who took the LET in 2015 performed highest
(79.89), followed by 2013 takers (77.89),
and lowest in 2014 (75.52). The above
LET performance of the respondents are all
above the national passing percentage (except
that of Biological Science in 2014) released
by the PRC and the Board for Professional
Teachers (BPT) on November 23, 2013
which showed that only 25,755 secondary
teachers out of 64,792 examinees (39.75
percent) successfully passed, while 26,767
secondary teachers out of 77,803 examinees
(34.40%) successfully passed the Licensure
Examination for Teachers (L.E.T.) given last
August 17, 2014, and in September 2015,
34,010 secondary teachers out of 81,463
examinees (41.75%) successfully passed the
Licensure Examination for Teachers (L.E.T.)
given last September 27, 2015. The results
are similar with that of Figuerres (2013)
The above finding conforms to Rabanal
(2016) who found out that teacher education
graduate respondents performed above the
national percentage of passing.
Comparing the LET performance of
the respondents from 2013 to 2015
As seen in Table 4, along General Education
subjects, the F-ratio of 12.435 is significant
at .05 level. This result implies that the
LET performances in General Education of
the respondents during the three periods
tested are varied. This result is supported
from the previous finding of this study that
126
JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016
the respondents obtained highest LET
performance in General Education (84.04) in
2015, followed by 79.17 in 2013, and lowest
in 2014 (76.70). In the professional education
subject component of the LET, the F-ratio
of 2.892 shows that the performances of
the respondents in the past three years are
not significant at .05 level. This means that
the LET performances of the respondents in
professional education subjects for the past
three years are almost the same as supported
by the overall passing mean ratings of 77.65
in 2013, 76.65 in 2014 and 79.42 in 2015.
Likewise, in the major subjects’ component
of the LET, the F-ratio of 1.523, indicates that
the performances of the respondents are not
significant at .05 level or are almost the same
as backed up by the overall passing mean
ratings of 77.48 in 2013, 74.80 in 2014 and
79.93 in 2015
On the contrary, in Table 4, the overall
LET performance of the respondents in the
past three years is significant at .05 level
as manifested by the F-ratio of 4.210. This
means that the overall LET performances of
the respondents in the past three years are
varied as supported by the mean ratings of
77.89 in 2013, 75.52 in 2014 and 79.89 in
2015.
Since the ANOVA on LET performance in
terms of general subjects and overall yielded
significant result, the data was further tested
to Scheffe Multiple Comparison Procedure
Test to determine which pair of means is
significantly different.
There is a significant difference in the LET
performance of the respondents in General
Education subjects between 2013 and 2015,
and 2014 and 2015 as manifested from the
mean differences of 4.86775 and 8.54167.
This means that the LET performance of
the respondents along general education is
better in 2015 than the performance of the
respondents in 2013, and in 2014. This is
supported by the previous findings of the study
that the performance of the respondents is
highest along general education subjects in
2015 followed by 2013 and lowest in 2014.
Bañez & Pardo JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016

Table 4. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for Significant Differences in LET Performance of the
Respondents from 2013 to 2015
Sum of Mean
Source of Variations df F Sig.
Squares Square
General Between Groups 772.099 2 386.049 12.435 p<.05
Education Within Groups 1924.763 62 31.045
Subjects Total 2696.862 64
Professional Between Groups 222.084 2 111.042 2.892 p>.05
Education Within Groups 2380.162 62 38.39
Subjects Total 2602.246 64
Major Subjects Between Groups 130.304 2 65.152 1.523 p>.05
Within Groups 2653.142 62 42.793
Total 2783.446 64
Overall Between Groups 252.987 2 126.494 4.21 p<.05
Within Groups 1862.791 62 30.045
Total 2115.778 64

Table 5. Scheffe Test for Significant Difference between Group Means in LET Performance of
the Respondents in the Past Three Years.
Multiple Mean Difference
Subjects Sig.
Comparisons (I-J)
I J
2013 2014 3.67391 p¿.05
2015 -4.86775* p<.05
2014 2013 -3.6739 p>.05
General Education Subjects
2015 -8.54167* p<.05
2015 2013 4.86775* p<.05
2014 8.54167* p<.05
2013 2014 2.8744 p¿.05
2015 -1.7645 p>.05
2014 2013 -2.8744 p>.05
Professional Education Subjects
2015 -4.6389 p>.05
2015 2013 1.76449 p>.05
2014 4.63889 p>.05
2013 2014 2.58937 p¿.05
2015 -0.8967 p>.05
2014 2013 -2.5894 p>.05
Major Subjects
2015 -3.4861 p>.05
2015 2013 0.89674 p>.05
2014 3.48611 p>.05
2013 2014 2.92029 p>.05
2015 -2.038 p> .05
2014 2013 -2.9203 p>.05
Overall
2015 -4.95833* p<.05
2015 2013 2.03804 p>.05
2014 4.95833* p<.05
Legend: *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

On the overall LET performance of the of -4.95833. This means that the overall LET
respondents, there is a significant difference performance of the respondents in 2015 is
between 2014 and 2015 with mean difference significantly different from the performance of

127
Bañez & Pardo
Table 6. Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting LET Performance along General
Education Subjects.
Model Variables Beta
1 0.748
Achievement in Professional
-0.748
Education subjects
2 0.774
Achievement in Professional
-0.713
Education subjects
Attendance in LET review 0.201
3 0.796
Achievement in Professional
-0.648
Education subjects
Attendance in LET review 0.224
College Admission Test 0.195
respondents who took the LET in 2014. This
conforms to the previous finding of the study
that the respondents who took the 2015 LET
performed better than the respondents who
took it in 2014.
On the other hand, there is no significant
difference between the performance of
the respondents in professional education
subjects and major subjects in 2013 and 2014,
2013 and 2015, and 2014 and 2015. This
implies that more or less, the performances of
the respondents in the year mentioned have
the same level.
The above findings is supported by Pardo
and Tactay (2013) who found that as a
whole, the respondents have almost equal
performance in General Education (X=76.35)
and Professional Education (X=76.69)
components of the LET.
Significant influence of the
respondents’ profile on their LET
performance
Multiple regression analysis was conducted
with LET performance along general
education, professional education and
major subjects as the dependent variables
and profile as the independent variables.
Results as presented in Tables 6-9.
In model 1, the LET Performance of
the respondents in General Education
128
JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016
t Sig. t Sig. R2 4 D R2
0.56 0.56
-8.957 0
599 0.039
-8.723 0
2.456 0.017
0.633 0.034
-7.762 0
2.825 0.006
2.368 0.021
is significantly influenced by their profile
(R=.748, Sig F=.000) along achievement in
professional education subjects (β= -.748,
sig t = .000). This means that the higher
the achievement in professional education
subjects, the higher is the performance in the
general education component of the LET. The
corresponding linear equation for predicting
the Y, therefore, Y=124.77-.748 (Profed).
The R2 value of .560 implies that 56 percent
of the variance of the dependent variable
is explained by the independent variables
considered in the analysis, and 44 percent is
attributed to other factors not included in the
study.
Model 2 shows that when achievement in
professional education subjects (β=-.713) and
attendance in LET review (β=.201) are taken
as a whole, tend to significantly influence
the LET performance of the respondents
along General Education (R=.774, F sig
=.000). This entails that the respondents
with higher achievement in professional
education subjects and attended the LET
review performed better in the General
Education component of the LET.
It is also evident that 59.9 percent of the
variance of the GE component of LET is
explained by the achievement in professional
education subjects and attendance in the LET
review. Model 3 shows that when achievement
in professional education subjects (β=-.648),
Bañez & Pardo JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016

Table 7. Multiple Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting LET Performance along Major
Subjects.
Model Variables Beta t Sig. t R R2 4D R2
1 0.649 0.422 0.422
Achievement in Professional
-0.649 -6.775 0
Education subjects
2 0.694 0.481 0.06
Achievement in Professional
-0.605 -6.509 0
Education subjects
Attendance in LET review 0.248 2.667 0.01
3 0.726 0.527 0.046
Achievement in Professional
-0.53 -5.588 0
Education subjects
Attendance in LET review 0.276 3.055 0.003
College Admission Test 0.227 2.43 0.018

Table 8. Multiple Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting LET Performance along
Professional Education Subjects .
Model Variables Beta t Sig. t R R2 4D R2
.484 .234 .234
Achievement in General
1 -.649 -6.775 .000
Education subjects

attendance in LET review (β=.224), and
CAT (β=.195) are taken as a whole, tend to
significantly influence the LET performance
of the respondents along General Education
(R=.776, F sig =.000). This implies that
the respondents with higher achievement in
professional education subjects, attended
the LET review, and obtained higher CAT
tend to have higher performance in the
General Education component of the LET.
It is also evident that 63.3 percent of the
variance of the GE component of LET
is explained by these three independent
variables. This observation could be
explained by the equation Y = 87.015-19.384
(Professional Education)+3.517 (LET
attendance)+.352(CAT).
Table 7 shows that the profile of the
respondents (R= .649, Sig F=.000) on
achievement in professional education
subjects (β= -.649) significantly influenced
their LET performance in Professional
Education. This suggests that the higher is
the grade in professional education subjects
the higher is the LET performance in the same
component. The R2 value of .422 this variable
account for 42.2percent of the variance.
Model 2 presents that achievement in
professional education subjects (β= -.605)
and attendance in LET review (β= .248)
significantly influenced the LET performance
of the respondents along Professional
Education (R=.694, F sig =.000). This means
that the respondents with higher achievement
in professional education subjects and
attended the LET review performed better
in the professional Education component of
the LET. The R2 value of .481 implies that
48 percent of the variance of the dependent
variable is explained by the independent
variables considered in the analysis, and
52 percent is attributed to other factors not
included in the study.
Model 3 shows that when achievement in
professional education subjects (β=-.530),
attendance in LET review (β=.276), and CAT
(β=.227) are taken as a whole, most likely to
significantly influence the LET performance of
the respondents along Professional Education
(R=.726, F sig =.000). This implies that the

129
Bañez & Pardo
Table 9. Multiple Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting the Overall LET Performance.
Model Variables Beta
1 0.669
Achievement in Professional
-0.669
Education subjects
2 0.696
Achievement in Professional
-0.606
Education subjects
College Admission Test 0.202
3 0.728
Achievement in Professional
-0.558
Education subjects
College Admission Test 0.23
Attendance in LET review 0.218
respondents with higher achievement in
professional education subjects, attended the
LET review, and obtained higher CAT tend to
have higher performance in the Professional
Education component of the LET. It is also
evident that 52.7 percent of the variance
of the GE component of LET is explained
by these three independent variables. This
observation could be explained by the
equation Y = 72.180-15.564 (Profed)+4.242
(LET attendance)+.403(CAT). Table 8 shows
that the profile of the respondents (R= .484,
Sig F=.000) on achievement in general
education subjects (β= -.649) significantly
influenced their LET performance in the major
subjects. This suggests that the higher the
grade in general education subjects the higher
is the LET performance in the major subjects.
The R2 value of .234 of this variable account
for 42.2percent of the variance.
This observation could be explained by
the equation Y = 109.260-15.670 (General
Education).
The overall LET Performance (R=.669, Sig
F =000) of the respondents is significantly
influenced by their achievement in General
Education (β= -.669, sig t = .000). This means
that the respondents with high achievement in
professional education subjects, tend to have
higher performance in the general education
component of the LET. The R2 value of
.447 implies that 44.7 percent of the variance
of the dependent variable is explained by
130
JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016
t Sig. t R R2 4D R2
0.447 0.447
-7.142 0
0.484 0.037
-6.314 0
2.102 0.04
0.53 0.045
-5.909 0
2.473 0.016
2.429 0.018
the independent variables considered in the
analysis, and 45.3 percent is attributed to other
factors not included in the study.
When achievement in professional
education subjects (β=-.606) and attendance
in College Admission Test (β=.202) are
taken as a whole, it tends to significantly
influence the overall LET performance of
the respondents (R=.696, F sig =.000). This
entails that the respondents with higher
achievement in professional education
subjects and CAT performed better in the
Professional Education component of the
LET.
It is also evident that 69.6 percent of
the variance of the component of LET is
explained by the achievement in professional
education subjects and attendance in the
LET review. Model 3 shows that when
achievement in professional education
subjects (β= -.558), CAT (β=.230), and
attendance in LET review (β=.218) taken as
a whole, tend to significantly influence the
overall LET performance of the respondents
(R=.728, F sig =.000). This implies that
the respondents with higher achievement in
professional education subjects, obtained
higher CAT and attended the LET review
tend to have higher performance the LET
performance. It is also evident that 53 percent
of the variance of the LET is explained by
these three independent variables. This
observation could be explained by the
Bañez & Pardo
equation Y = 87.015-19.384 (Profed)+3.517
(LET attendance)+.352(CAT).
The above observation is supported by
Pardo and Tactay (2013) who found that all
the components of the LET have high positive
correlation with the pre-board performances
of the respondents as supported by the
computed r value ranges from .69 to .80.
They concluded that the respondents who
obtained high performance in the two preboard
examination components tend to have higher
performance in the LET.
Bañez (2002) found that the CTE
LET takers’ overall mean rating in their
LET performance in general education,
professional and major subjects was “Below
Passing Mark”. Accordingly, the non-passers
had low scores which pulled down the general
averages of the passers. She also found that
in the Main Campus when the six variables:
average grade in senior high school, score
in the UNP College Admission Test, average
grade in general education, professional and
major subjects when taken singly were not
significantly related to their LET performance.
However, the combined effects of the variables
on LET performance showed significance at
.05 level.
Conclusion and
Recommendation
Most of the respondents graduated in public
high schools and a great majority of them
attended LET review. Their performance in
the College Admission Test (TAT) is almost
equally distributed from very good, good and
passing, and almost all of them obtained a
passing Teaching Aptitude Test (TAT). The
overall LET performance of the respondents
is above the National Passing Percentage References
from 2013 to 2015 along general education
subjects, professional education subjects and Angeles, E. (2009) National higher education
major subjects. The LET performance of
the respondents in 2015 is significantly higher 25, 2016 from http:// www. tua. edu. ph/
than the performance of the respondents
in 2014, and the performance of the LET
131
JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016
takers in general education is better in
2015 than in 2014. The respondents with
high achievement in professional education
subjects, attended LET review and with high
College Admission Test have better overall
LET performance and along general education
and professional education components, while
those respondents with higher achievement
in general education subjects have better
performance in the specialization aspects.
Based on the findings and conclusions,
the following recommendations are hereby
offered:
A higher College Admission Test and
stricter retention policy may be implemented
by the College of Teacher Education in
selecting students who will be specializing in
Biological and Physical Science. This could
be done by increasing the result of the College
Admission Test from 78% to 82% or higher
and maintaining a serious retention policy on
who can stay in the program. The Physical
and Biological Science majors should be
encouraged to attend a formal LET review and
more time should be focused on the field of
specializations. There is a need to conduct a
review of the Biological and Physical Science
curriculum to align it with the framework set
not only by the CHED but also by the PRC.
Activities related to the licensure examination
for teachers may be institutionalized like the
conduct of qualifying exams, pre-board exams
and mock examinations. Refresher courses
must be integrated in special topics which
will be handled through team teaching. A
similar study may be conducted to revalidate
the findings of the present study. Other
researches may also be performed which will
include variables not employed in this study.
research agenda. Retrieved on January
downloads/ nehra.pdf
Bañez & Pardo JEHRD Vol. 4, 2016

Bañez, S.E.S., (2002) Analysis of the James C. and Dan G. (2015) National board
UNP-CTE graduates’ performance in certification and teacher effectiveness:
the licensure examination for teachers. Evidence from Washington. Retrieved
University of Northern Philippines, Vigan, on December 9, 2016 from http:// www.
Ilocos Sur. cedr. us/ papers / working/ CEDR %20WP
%202015-3 NBPTS %20 Cert.pdf
Brusoni,M. et al. (2014) The concept
of excellence in higher education. Pardo, C. G., Tactay, A.R. (2013).
Retrieved on March 18, 2016 from http:// Performance of examinees in the preboard
www. enqa. eu/ indirme/ papers -and- examinations and 2013 Licensure
reports/ occasional - papers/ ENQA %20 Examination for Teachers
Excellence %20 WG %20Report The
%20 Concept %20 of %20 Excellence Rabanal ,G.C. (2016) Academic achievement
%20in %20 Higher %20 Education. pdf and LET performance of the bachelor
of elementary education graduates,
Esmeralda and Espinos (2015) in their University of Northern Philippines
study, “Teacher education graduates’ Retrieved on December 13,2016 from
performance as predictor of Licensure http:// www. ijsrp. org/ research- paper-
Examination for Teachers’ results . 0616/ ijsrp- p5465.pdf
Retrieved on December 10,2016 from
http:// philair. ph/ publication/ index. php/ Rabanal, G.C. (2012). Performance of
jpair/ article/ view/ 330 the Bachelor of Elementary Education
2012 Graduates, University of Northern
Figuerres,O. (2013) An analysis of the Philippines
performance of the University of Northern
Philippnes in the Licensure Examination Salmi J. (2016). Excellence initiatives to
for Teachers .Retrieved on December create world-class universities: Do they
13,2016 from http:// iamure. com/ work?Teaching principles (2013), History
publication/ index. php/ ije/ article /view/ of Licensure Examination for Teachers:
500 A Short Review .Retrieved on December
13, 2016 from http:// teaching- principles.
Galapon, E.U., Batin, J.B., and Naval, N.F., blogspot. com /2013/ 07/history -of-
(2013), The Performance of the Bachelor licensure- examination- for.html.
of Science in Industrial Education in the
2013 Licensure Examination for Teachers

132