Don Honorio Ventura State University

DON HONORIO VENTURA STATE UNIVERSITY
Introduction
Student Feedback Analysis Towards Teachers Performance using Latent Dirichlet Allocation
(LDA) has become a term used for a variety of activities through which an academic institution seek to
assess faculty members in order to develop their competence, improve performance, and allocate
rewards (Cadez, Dimovski, &Groff, 2017). Evaluation is gathered and collecting information and data and
analysis. This formation collected can be used (1) to identify whether one organization or program is
effectively delivering activities in which it achieves its state main objectives and having results and
feedbacks. In general, evaluation is used (2) to identity one’s strength and weakness. This study focuses
on the teacher’s performance evaluation. Thus, teacher evaluation also refer to the formal process in
which a school are using this result (3) to review and rate the performance of their teacher in the
teaching and learning process. These obtained results from the evaluation form will be used (4) to
provide feedbacks to teachers and guide for their development and progress as professionals.
Don Honorio Ventura State University (DHVSU) is one of the old established universities in
Pampanga. The main campus is located in Bacolor, Pampanga and it has four campus branches also in
the said province. Namely, Porac Campus, Mexico Campus, Sto. Tomas Campus and the new established
Lubao Campus. The main campus is known for being famous and big university in Pampanga, the
bacolor campus has seven departments. And these are the College of Business Studies, College of
Computing Studies, College of Education, College of Engineering and Architecture, College of Hospitality
management, College of Industrial Technology and College of Social Sciences and Philosophy. DHVSU is a
successful institution in Pampanga because of the reward that students received with the help of proper
guidance of their teachers.
At present, Schools used this teacher-evaluation to evaluate teachers’ performance and

effectiveness in teaching. The process of evaluating faculty performance articulates individual goals and
achievements in the context of the overall mission of the institution. The roles of each faculty member
vary substantially across any university. Moreover, expectations for excellence vary with faculty roles
and with any given academic discipline (Moya, Prior & Rodriguez-Perez, 2015). This is true in the case of
most colleges and universities. In the case of Don Honorio Ventura University (DHVSU) in Bacolor,
Pampanga, one dean or department head may set the highest priorities for awarding performance merit
on receiving competitive grants or teaching formal undergraduate courses. Meanwhile, another dean or
department head may place the highest priorities on publishing researches and book or mentoring
students (Krenkel, & Vasudevan, 2012). Since different departments may have different priorities for
awarding merits, priorities may also differ within departments across faculty ranks. For instance, some
departments expect senior members of the faculty to play a leadership role in curriculum development
or in graduate mentoring. Priorities are expected to vary across disciplines. The faculty members of
DHVSU are evaluated using four tools namely: Dean or Program Head and Students. The percentage or
priorities for each evaluation is assigned according to the college handled by the dean in each of the said
unit.
The Don Honorio Ventura State University (DHVSU) uses this method. DHVSU have seven
Colleges with more than 450 teaching staff. Every semester the college department secretary provides
COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES
MAIN CAMPUS
evaluation forms to the students to evaluate the teacher in their subject area. After the evaluation, the
college secretary computes all the evaluation forms and get the average of it and rank them from
highest to lowest. Also the secretary type the students’ comments either good or bad. Some college
departments encode all the comments and give it to the teacher. But if the teacher gets a lot of negative
comments the secretary will give it to the college dean. All comments either positive or negative,
definitely at the end of the semester the dean of each college talk one on one every faculty member
also the college dean will approach the teacher and ask them why these comments have been obtained.
The purpose of this is to know if the teacher will do something for him/her to improve. In the said
university there are cases that some teachers received a low score/grade because of neglecting their
classes but it doesn’t mean that they will be terminated in teaching. It is just to see the performance of
the teacher.
The problems encountered in the present system are; (1) Distraction of classes, giving an
evaluation form during class hour is disturbing especially when students have exam. (2) tedious of some
secretaries, because they need to write it down first in a yellow paper after that they will type it and
print it out and give a copy to the college dean voluminous reproduction and storing of printed
materials, According to Ms. Geraldine Galang secretary of the College of Computing Studies, it is time
consumed to print out a lot of evaluation form and they need to store them and it may need space or
cabinet to stored them.(3) preparation of the reports and forms for such process is time consuming.(4)
Another problem as mentioned on problem number 2 , lack of storage for accomplished evaluation
form, It is hard to search the previous evaluation forms and results of evaluation. The need in changing
the evaluation tool is costly for the organization as it will involve printing pages of the tolls for its
stakeholders who are usually in hundreds and thousands. "Student Feedback Analysis Towards Teachers
Performance using Latent Dirichlet Allocation for DHVSU" is a great help to embody the features that
will solve the problems in the present system. Based on the interview of the proponents, all university
are conducting evaluation process to all the professor and teachers. It is done manually through the
participation of number of students in certain campus and university. This process cause huge
consumption of time both for the management and students as well. The checking, monitoring, and
counting by the management is also one of the factors that affect the process because it is manually
done causing the time frame of the process to increase. Every department secretaries have different
strategy on how they disseminate the evaluation form in appropriate way. Each department secretary
encountered problem such as students are laziness in giving comments in the evaluation form of
teacher, Classes distraction, insufficient time in inputting the evaluation results and manual computing
all the points on evaluation form. The study was conducted in DHVSU, seven (7) respondents for the
proposed system questionnaires were chosen conveniently available and one hundred (100)
respondents in the manual evaluation. The proponents also conducted interviews to the users, the
VPAA personnel and the secretaries of each departments in the said university.
Every stage of the evaluation process involves availability timely and accurate information.
When information reveals that aspect of performance is less than desirable, problems can be lessened
or corrected to avoid the potentially undesirable or costly consequences to the organization. The
academic is a dynamic industry that always thrusts towards excellence. Evaluation are often burdened
MAIN CAMPUS
with the process of deciding for the advancement of the organization. Timely and accurate information
in the hands of the evaluation will make a difference between desirable or costly consequences to the
academic thrust towards excellence.
The importance of statistics in assessment and evaluation of performance in academic

environments is noted various studies presented and analyzed in the paper. Based on the results and
findings of the study, the existing manual evaluation is less effective and must be enhanced. It is hard for
the user to get the accurate scores and feedback given by the students that they need to put on the
printed materials that they will give to the college dean. The proponents had found out that the
proposed system is more helpful for the user in conducting and administering the evaluation process, it
has features to improve the manual evaluation. The proposed system is greatly helpful for the users
especially for the students in DHVSU when there is evaluation for teacher’s performance in the teaching
and learning process.
Studies looked at for this paper involved trading a paper survey system for an online system in
an academic environment. But perceived benefits of online surveys cited were always similar, if not
exactly the same, as the perceived benefits generally associated with general survey administration.
Reduced costs for materials, distribution and administration were frequently cited as major
inducements for looking to an online system. Online evaluations free up time for instruction that may
have previously been allocated to the evaluation process, (Cummings and Ballantyne, 2015)
Allowing students flexibility to complete evaluations on their own schedule, when they want to,
also contributes to potentially richer, more considered responses. Students have been shown to write
longer responses, as well, (Cummings, 2015) In instances where “bubble” sheets are used to record
responses the potential for students to lose their place and “double bubble” items, rendering the
responses unusable, are completely eradicated. As the problem of indecipherable open ended
responses because of poor handwriting. Also, there is no chance that a respondent can be identified
because of their handwriting. Several of the studies looked at in this literature review found
substantially lower response rates for online evaluation methods as opposed to paper administration,
(Cumming and Ballantyne, 2015).
In his review of the literature about online survey methods, Couper (2015) cites three major
reasons that online surveys suffer from a non-response bias. First, analogs to tried and true motivational
tools used in standard mail (reader paper, in this context) surveys have not been discovered. The second
reason deals with technical difficulties. These arise from either a user’s lack of familiarity and/or comfort
with the Internet and computers in general. They may also arise from problems that users experience in
the network transmission of survey materials, though these can also include hardware and software
failures. Finally, Couper notes that some users see a potential for compromised confidentiality.
These reasons and more were found in studies of non-response in an academic environment
for. Students that were more comfortable with technology and use of the Internet invariably responded
in greater number to web forms when given the choice between the web and paper formats (Tomsic,
2000; Handwerk, 2015). In general, access to working technology was found to be a fundamental
MAIN CAMPUS
prerequisite for online responses. In Cummings and Ballantyne’s (2015) work faculty reported, in post
survey interviews, being unprepared to explain and prepare students for the online survey.
The literatures above associate to the proponents study in a way that the Online Faculty
Evaluation System will be beneficial for all users most especially to the students because it will
help them to reduce the time cost in answering in a manual way the evaluation form given by
the secretaries of each department in DHVSU. And the materials used in manual evaluation will
be also reduced because students will only be having their accounts to assess the performance
of their teachers by providing feedbacks and comments based on what they had known on the
teaching and learning process. It was also cited above that the administration and distribution
on the online evaluation will be induced. Online evaluation system will also be beneficial for the
secretary of each department in DHVSU to record the comments and feedbacks of the students
more clearly because there are some cases in manual evaluation that the handwriting of the
students cannot be easily understood, some students have poor penmanship that affects the
manual evaluation. Through conducting this study, the proponents aims to help the university to
lessen the stress in administering the evaluation procedure. Also, the proponents provide a
website that can be used as the reliable and more efficient and effective way of faculty
evaluation. In order to achieve the university’s mission of teaching, research, and community
service, each of the faculty member’s contribution is important (KallioandKallio, 2014).
According to Malcom (2014) faculty performance evaluation has the potential to assist faculty
members, deans and program heads in goals setting, professional development engagements,
and success measurements and awarding.
According to Rodman, Biloslavo, &Bratoz (2013), good performance evaluations require that
merits and priorities at any given department, college or organizational units are clearly communicated.
This ensures that all faculty members and their respective heads and deans have a good understanding
of what is expected of the former and of how their accomplishments will be evaluated. Colleges or in
some cases departments, should inform faculty members and clearly state the relative importance of
various activities for merit or demerits in performance (Rejc, and Zaman, 2015).
The literatures above associate to the proponents study in a way that the Student Feedback
Analysis towards Teachers Performance using Latent Dirichlet Allocation will be beneficial for all users.
Most of universities are conducting manual evaluation for teachers. The purpose of manual faculty
evaluation is to let the faculty know the effectiveness of the class in teaching the intended material and
their effectiveness in facilitating the learning of every student. It is both an opportunity for the teacher
to let them know what worked well, and what can be improved upon. The disadvantages of manual
faculty evaluation for teachers are the time consumed on manual computing of scores obtained by the
teachers on the evaluation form given to every students, the accuracy on the comments of the students
where there are some instances that the students are lazy to answer each form based on what they are
intended to answer and also, distraction on the classes when students needs to answer the evaluation
form. The class will be interrupted and may cause disturbance on the lesson.

MAIN CAMPUS
The proposed study entitled “Student Feedback Analysis towards Teachers Performance using
Latent Dirichlet Allocation in Don Honorio Ventura State University (DHVSU)” will serve as a helpful tool
for the HR, Students, Teachers, Dean and Secretary of each department in the proposed locale. It is a
tool in which it reduces the struggle encountered of each person’s stated above that somehow affects
their progress in workplace.
Methods and Materials
In this study, the proponents used Descriptive Method of Research that is also known as
statistical research. This method is conducted to describe and demonstrate the relationship between
two things in the world around individuals. The proponents used this method to understand and gain
valuable information about the proponents study. The proponents collected data by conducting formal
and informal interviews, giving questionnaires to identify if the problems really exist. Also the
proponents distributed survey questionnaires to the respondents to find out if there is a need for the
proposed project and whether the study is really feasible and achievable. The proponents also visited
and reviewed different related research to find more useful references to gather information and to
help the proponents in the creation and design of the proposed online system website and focused on
the development of the system that is being developed.
The proponents use two sets of questionnaire the first one is for the current system and the
second one is for the proposed system so that the effectiveness of the system can be assess and can
gain information which can help the study and evaluate the results of gathered data from the interview
and used them as sources to clearly understand the criteria for developing the system. These
questionnaires undergo in-depth thinking and validation process before distributed into the
respondents. These two (2) sets of questionnaire help them analyze and support the proposed study if it
is appropriate and necessary to conduct.
After distributing the questionnaire for current system was done the second set of the
questionnaire will be distributed. While conducting the survey the proponents had made informal
interviews to the respondents to know their feedbacks and opinions regarding the proposed study. The
proponents formally interviewed Ms. Joan Sicat Secretary of College of Engineering and architecture,
Ms. Geraldine Galang Secretary of College of Computing Studies, Mr. John Paguio secretary of College of
Business Studies, Ms. Shairmaine Apolonio Secretary College of Industrial Technology, Ms.Rona Encinas
Secretary College of Hospitality management, Ms. April Macaraeg Secretary of College of Social Sciences
and Philosophy, Ms. Wilma Barbieto Secretary of College of education and Mr. Reden Hernandez the
VPAA of the university. First is the manual evaluation analysis, in which one hundred (100) respondents
randomly picked 20 students per college department to rate the manual process of evaluation and what
are their feedbacks regarding proposed system by the proponents. were purposively selected, the
questionnaire composed of questions that identify if the respondent can comfortably evaluate teachers
using the manual evaluation or if they can be more comfortable and upgrade the manual or traditional
evaluation to online evaluation process. Second is the online evaluation system analysis wherein the
MAIN CAMPUS
proponents prepared a questionnaire that measure the ten (7) respondent’s knowledge in which the
process is more effective than the manual evaluation. The selection of the respondents was conducted
to those convenient and available to participate in this study. The Proponents had used a formal and
informal interview – a verbatim of two or more people where there are questions to be asked by the
researchers and will be given factual and knowledgeable answer by the respondents. The proponents
also did library research to learn and gather more information about the topic. And also to develop the
proponent’s own thoughts based on library research materials and used Internet research in their study
to know some techniques of creating their system. It is focused and purposeful, and they also use
Internet information or Internet-based resources.
In achieving the important information needed in the proposed study, certain criteria were
imposed that surely help in developing the study. The proponents use Purposive Sampling Technique
and Simple Random Sampling Technique. A non-probability sample that is selected based on
characteristics of a population and the objective of the study. Purposive sampling is also known as
judgmental, selective, or subjective sampling. While Simple Random Sampling Technique where we
select a group of subjects for study from a larger group (a population). Each individual is chosen entirely
by chance and each member of the population has an equal chance of being included in the sample.
Research Instrument is used in this study to gather information and data: instructs how this instruments
be answered by the respondents. In this study, survey-questionnaire is used to measure and to achieve
the main objective of the study. Proponents had constructed a self-administered questionnaire for data
gathering process to get the quantitative and qualitative data. The main goal of the questionnaire is to
identify the strategy and technique to give answer to the problems.
The proponents had done and designed the survey instruments, wherein they talk to the
authority that can probably will help them to solve the problems in the study. They float the survey
questions to the seven secretary of each department in DHVSU. They ask for the attention of Ms. Joan
Sicat the secretary for the College of Engineering and Architecture, Ms. Geraldine Galang, secretary for
College of Computing Studies, Mr. John Paguio, the secretary for College of Business Studies, Ms.
SharmaineApolonio, secretary for College of Industrial Technology, Ms Rona Encinas secretary for
College of Hospitality Management, Ms. April Macaraeg, secretary of College of Social Sciences and
Philosophy and Ms. Wilma Barbieto, secretary for College of Education and Mr. Reden Hernandez the
VPAA of the university.

MAIN CAMPUS
According to college secretaries that the researcher conducted interview shows this perceive
problem. (See Figure 1: Conceptual Framework)
Conceptual Framework of the Proposed System
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
Perceived Problem Data Gathering

 Enormous amount of  Survey
time allotted for  Interview
evaluation  Research
works/thesis of
 Voluminous reproduction related studies
and storing of printed
materials
Agile methods
 Results of evaluation
may not be accurate  Requirements
brought by manual  Planning
calculation.  Analyzing and
design
 Not properly observed of  Developing
results to the respective  Releasing
offices/authority for
intervention. Results
were not utilized for their Student Feedback Analysis
intended proposed such
as faculty intervention
Towards Teacher Performance
programs (training,
seminars, etc.)
Requirements using Latent Dirichlet Allocation
 Students can evaluate
teacher (LDA) in Don Honorio Ventura
 Teacher can view their
MAIN CAMPUS
results State University (DHVSU)

 Secretary can manage
the evaluation results and
print results
 Dean can access results
 All the users have own
account
 Registrar can input
students.
Hardware
 Laptop/PC
 Internet : speed at least
1mbps
 Printer
Software
 Chrome
Evaluation Process
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework of the Study
Figure 1.Shows the process of the study on how visualized and made into reality by following the Input-
Process-Output format. The proponents gathered all appropriate data and information through the
administration of survey and by interviewing selected personnel in every department of the university.
Objective of the Study
The proponents presents the following objectives which divided into general objective and
specific objective.
General Objectives
The objective of this study is to create a system that aims to create an innovation of the
teacher’s evaluation process in Don Honorio Ventura State University. The System aims to Reduce or
minimize the time consumption of implementing the old process of evaluation, produce a reliable and
honest result of the evaluation process, enable the students the privilege to evaluate, and inform the
professors how effective their teaching strategy and to replace the manual process of faculty evaluation
into Student Feedback Analysis Towards Teachers Performance using Latent Dirichlet Allocation.
Specific Objectives

MAIN CAMPUS
As the proponents conducted a research at this matter, specific objectives are proposed to
address the problems and to develop an efficient and fast Student Feedback Analysis Towards Teachers
Performance using Latent Dirichlet Allocation that embodies the features that will value the problem in
the manual process.
1. To minimize time spent in administering of questionnaire to students.
2. To make the evaluation available on time.
3. To secure the results of Faculty evaluation and generate accurate results.
4. To automatically furnished the copy of the evaluation result to the proper authority for intervention.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
1. Students – Students can evaluate their subject teachers. The system provides the students with
freedom of expressing their appreciation and recognition of good faculty members and a means to
convey their sentiments and concerns about their non-performing faculty members without the
restrictions of time and space. The comments of the students can only be available to the dean and HR.
2. Instructor/Professor – Teachers also have their own account and employee number. They can see for
the summary results on their evaluation. The system will provide a score for every category of the
evaluation and displays the strong and weak points of the faculty.
3. HR – Intervention program such as (seminar, training etc.).
4. Secretary – The manager of all evaluation procedure, can view the list of profiles of teachers, prints
the result of evaluation. The secretary of the institution can now focus on studying the performance of
individual teachers to identify their strengths, potentials, and weaknesses that are based on a valid and
reliable faculty performance record and effectively use the data in merit pay and promotion decisions.
This system will help the person will in-charge to lessen their time spent in processing, encoding, and
computing the evaluation.
5. Dean – Evaluator on the instructor/professor performance, can access the result of the evaluation
using his/her account. The result of the evaluation cam be used by the dean for faculty intervention
within the college.
MAIN CAMPUS
6. Future Researcher – The researcher may find it helpful to increase knowledge and enhance the
studies conducted by them and the study may serve as reference for future researchers similar to this
study.
Scope and Delimitation
Scope
Automatically compute the performance ratings, came from the students and deans. Generate
summary result and reports. Only the admin(MIS) and the concerned faculty members can see the
result. It Can post comment. Computes the total average score gets from the evaluators. Students can
only evaluate their subject teachers. The Secretary can print the summary result and reports.
Delimitation
Students can only be accessed online. System will be use once, every semester. Evaluators is not
required to create an account. The Students cannot see the result of the evaluation. System can’t be
used without internet success. User interface changes on the other browsers. Students ID number as
username for those who graduated may / can access the evaluation system.
Definition of Terms
This section contains the operational definition of terms that have been used in this study.
Evaluation form – is a documents supervisors use to measure an employee’s workplace performance.

Evaluation forms encompass all aspects of an employee’s duties, such as his productivity and ability to
meet goals.
Printer – is a device that accept text and graphic output from a computer and transfer the information
to paper, usually to standard size sheet of paper.
Internet – is a globally connected network system that uses PCP/IR to transmit data via various types of
media.
DHVSU – is a state university in Bacolor, Pampanga. Philippines. It has four satellite campuses in Porac,
Mexico, Santo tomas and Lubao in the province of Pampanga. It is considered the oldest vocational
school in East Asia.
Users – who will used and benefits the study.
Chrome - chromium plate as a decorative or protective finish on motor-vehicle fittings and other
objects.

MAIN CAMPUS
Laptop – is a computer designed for portability, laptop are usually less than 3 inches thick, weigh less
than 5 pounds and can be powered by a battery, as such laptops are designed for low power
consumption and are most often used when space is limited, such as on an airplane.
Requirements Phase
The proponents ask for the requirements to be needed in this study wherein they seek for
information and collected data that can help them to create and make the system more effective. They
ask for the assistance of authorities and personnel that can give them better information in planning the
system using the agile method.
Planning Phase
The proponents planned a strategic way for the benefits of DHVSU in manual Faculty Evaluation.
First, the proponents gathered information and conducted an interview to seek permission for
implementation of the system. Through that, they got the process of the evaluation and existing
problem of each department of DHVSU.
Analyzing and Design Phase
In this phase of Agile Method, this involves analysis and understanding of the main objective
and main problem of the study. To determine the main problem proponents had conducted survey and
interviews to the related persons who are intended to give answer on how the study could help them.
The proponents had gathered all the data’s and information needed to conduct the interview and also
they distributed the questionnaires to the respondents to determine whether this case of problem really
exist.
Developing Phase
This phase covers the conceptualization of the design of the proposed system with all its
features and documented detailed system of operation. The proponents used different graphical
representation like Data Flow Diagram (DFD)to help them in developing the system model.
The principle goal of the system is to establish a design approach that provides the functions
described in the system requirement document. System designs the technical risks, explores trade-offs,
and determines the performance and estimates the cost to completion.
Releasing Phase

MAIN CAMPUS
In this phase, the system is uploaded and made operational in the production environment after
the system and staff acceptance testing. Activities in this phase include efforts required for
implementation including answer the evaluation form, view the results of evaluation form, and add new
employees and system monitoring. This phase continues until the production system is operating in
accordance with the defined requirements and planning for sustainment has begun.
Methods Used for System Evaluation
This part is the process of assessing the performance of a complete system to discover how it is
likely to perform in economic and operational stage.
Economic Feasibility
The proposed system has been built to lessen the struggle encountered by the people
who manage the manual evaluation system more particularly the secretary of each department
and even the students who actively participated in giving feedbacks and comments on their
teachers performance in the teaching and learning process. This will be very efficient for all
users that this Student Feedback Analysis Towards Teachers Performance using Latent
Dirichlet Allocation can be a big help towards achieving the main goal of each institutions,
teachers and students. It will be a time friendly evaluation process and procedure.
Operational Feasibility
The proponents had developed the online evaluation system to help every users to drive down
the hassle experienced. To be able to accomplish this system, the proponents had undergone deep
research and uses all the gathered information and data to develop the methods used in this system.
The proposed system will provide a less time in doing the evaluation procedure based on its features
that will surely be a big answer to keep the hindrance away by the users most especially the students
and the people who has expertise in the evaluation process.
Statistical Treatment of Data
The treatment of gathered data was use as collection of any statistical analysis of numerical
information. One must be knowledgeable to fully understand the things which are needed for effective
writing in a particular study. Writings of all the gathered information is more helpful and precise. This
data from the survey questionnaires were collected and were applied for valid and reliable
implementation of data.
Statistical Procedure
After retrieving the questionnaires, the proponents performed statistical analysis to come up
with the best interpretation. Weighted mean was used to determine the degree of importance of the
items being analyzed the formula, as follows:

MAIN CAMPUS
Weighted Mean
Where:
VM = Weighted Mean
∑𝐖𝐕
VM = 𝐍
VW = Weighted Value
∑ = Symbol for the summation process
N = Number of Respondents
This formula shows how to get the weighted mean ∑WV means the total sum of the weighted
value which can get by multiplying value of the respondents to the corresponding point values of the
rating scale then divide it by the number of respondents (N) to get the weighted mean and rate it
according to its descriptive rating.
Frequency Distribution – is a representation, either a graphical or tabular format that displays a list of
values that a variable takes in sample usually list ordered by quantity, showing the number of times each
values appears.
𝐟 𝐗 𝟏𝟎𝟎
P= 𝐧
Where:
P = computed percentage
n = total number of respondents
f = frequency of respondents
System Architecture
A System Architecture is a set of conventions, rules and standards employed in a mobile
system’s technical framework, plus customer requirements and specifications that the system’s
manufacturer (or a system integrator) follows in designing the system’s various components.
All users need to connect to the internet to use this online faculty evaluation system.
System administrator is the one who manage the whole system even the criteria for evaluation.
The HR and Registrar has/have access on the said system to manage or temporary input the
information of the students and employees. When students have enrolled, they will have an
account on the system automatically then they can now evaluate, after evaluating the teacher
the evaluated record will automatically put on the database all the instructor and professors can

MAIN CAMPUS
now access and see the summary of the results of the students evaluation but they cannot see
who evaluated them.
Figure 2 System Architecture of the Proposed System
Cost and Benefit Analysis

The cost and benefits analysis estimated totals up to the equivalent money value used in
the development and implementation of the proposed system. Analysis is used to determine
whether the cost of the project is affordable or transcend with the needed or targeted benefits of
the proponents. Through the help of this, the proposed system can easily determine whether it
is feasible or not.
Table 6 Development Cost of the Proposed System

Development Cost
Development Cost
Hardware Cost
Printer ₱
Laptop ₱ 23,000.00
Internet ₱
Total ₱
Software Cost
Sublime Open Source
Laragon Open Source
Google Chrome Open Source
Microsoft Word Open Source
Total ₱0
Miscellaneous Cost
Food ₱

MAIN CAMPUS
Transportation ₱
Print ₱
Total ₱
Total Development Cost ₱
*Note: The hardware such as printer and laptop were owned by the proponents during
development of the study.
Table 6 shows the development cost of the proposed system, which consists of the
hardware, software, and miscellaneous cost.In staying with four (4)months the total cost is ₱
which is stated above. The internet also paid by the proponents ₱ per month. Total of ₱ in
four(4) months. The total cost of the development is Php ₱ .

MAIN CAMPUS
RESULTS
This chapter shows the analysis and interpretation of the gathered data. The data were
collected by distributing questionnaires to the respondents.
The respondents of the study are composed of one hundred (100) students from whom the
proponents administered and gathered their survey and opinions about the proposed system and ten
(7) knowledgeable staff of Department.
Interviews Results
The proponents conducted interviews to describe the capability of current Student Feedback
Analysis Towards Teachers Performance using Latent Dirichlet Allocation for DHVSU. Out of the seven
(7) respondents interviewed were the current VPAA.Ms. Joan Sicat Secretary of College of Engineering
and architecture, Ms. Geraldine Galang Secretary of College of Computing Studies, Mr. John Paguio
secretary of College of Business Studies, Ms. ShairmaineApolonio Secretary College of Industrial
Technology, Ms.RonaEncinas Secretary College of Hospitality management, Ms. April Macaraeg
Secretary of College of Social Sciences and Philosophy, Ms. Wilma Barbieto Secretary of College of
education and Mr.Reden Hernandez the VPAA of the university.
All of the respondents stated that they are utilizing different methods and techniques in
providing relevant information with regards to faculty performance evaluation. Respondents are using
forms and information, answer sheets and documents particularly by disseminating evaluation sheets to
every students before the semester ends. However, some of the respondents use telephones, satellite
technology in the form of internet mails and personal visit or face to face in order to accomplish all the
needed tasks and information on Student Feedback Analysis Towards Teachers Performance using
Latent Dirichlet Allocation.
Schools used this teacher-evaluation to evaluate teachers’ performance and effectiveness in

teaching. The Don Honorio Ventura State University (DHVSU) uses this method. DHVSU have seven
Colleges with more than 450 teaching staff. Every semester the college department secretary provides
evaluation forms to the students to evaluate the teacher in their subject area. After the evaluation, the
college secretary computes all the evaluation forms and get the average of it and rank them from
highest to lowest. Also the secretary type the students’ comments either good or bad. Some college
departments encode all the comments and give it to the teacher. But if the teacher gets a lot of negative
comments the secretary will give it to the college dean. All comments either positive or negative,
definitely at the end of the semester the dean of each college talk one on one every faculty member
also the college dean will approach the teacher and ask them why these comments have been obtained.
The purpose of this is to know if the teacher will do something for him/her to improve. In the said
university there are cases that some teachers received a low score/grade because of neglecting their
classes but it doesn’t mean that they will be terminated in teaching. It is just to see the performance of
the teacher.

MAIN CAMPUS
Coding and Design
Analysis was completed by creating diagrams defining the interaction between processes and
data. In the data flow diagram (See Appendix F Data Flow diagram)which shows briefly logical
relationship among entities and visualization of processing and how the existing and proposed system
flows. The diagram were used to show what and how the systems work, connect and deals with the
users.
Data Flow Diagram (DFD) illustrates how the system process the data in terms of inputs and
outputs as its name indicates its flows is on the flow of information where data comes from, where it
goes, and how it gets stored. Often they are basic step used to create an overview of the system which
can later be elaborated. DFDs can also be used for the visualization of data processing.
Testing and Evaluation
Existing System Test Results
For the evaluation of the existing system, first the proponents conducted survey questions. In
existing system, 100 respondents were ask to evaluate the existing system. All of the respondents are
the students who knows about evaluation in DHVSU.
All of the respondents were provided results that are observed during the interaction and
administration of questionnaires. Based on the ISO product quality model, there are three (3) quality
characteristics use in this study and these are effectiveness, efficiency and reliability.
Based on the ISO product quality model, the effectiveness characteristic represents the
frequency distribution, weighted mean and the distributive rating of the assessment of the respondents
on the Effectiveness of the current system. With the computed average weighted mean of 2. 17, the
respondents found the assessment of the current system as INEFFECTIVE. Concluding from the results
obtained, the respondents found that the existing evaluation system INEFFECTIVE. The information and
data that can be gathered through the manual evaluation system will not be that effective.
Based on the ISO product quality model, the efficiency characteristic represents the frequency
distribution, weighted mean and the distributive rating of the assessment of the respondents on the
Efficiency of the current system. With the computed average weighted mean of 2. 21, the respondents
found the assessment of the current system as INEFFICIENT. As can be concluded from the results the
respondents found the existing evaluation system as INEFFICIENT. That on gathering information the
users cannot clearly get these.
Based on the ISO product quality model, the reliability characteristic represents the frequency
distribution, weighted mean and the distributive rating of the assessment of the respondents on the
MAIN CAMPUS
Reliability of the current system. With the computed average weighted mean of 2. 14, the respondents
found the assessment of the current system as UNRELIABLE. As the results obtained, the respondents
found that the existing evaluation system unreliable in gathering information from the results when
evaluation process was administered.
Proposed System Test Results
For the evaluation of the proposed system, first the proponents conducted survey
questions. In proposed system, 7 respondents were ask to evaluate the proposed system. All of the
respondents are the knowledgeable staff who knows about evaluation in DHVSU.
All of the respondents were provided results that are observed during the interaction and
administration of questionnaires. Based on the ISO product quality model, there are three (3) quality
characteristics use in this study and these are effectiveness, efficiency and reliability.
frequency distribution, weighted mean and the descriptive rating of the assessment of the respondents
on the proposed system with computed average weighted mean of 3.92, the respondents found the
assessment of the proposed system as Effective. As the result, we conclude that the respondents found
the proposed system to be Effective in getting information faster and information are accurate and also
the process of online evaluation is not time consuming.
assessment of the proposed system as Efficient. As can be conclude on that results obtained the
respondents found that the proposed system is efficient in getting the information, the time in
disseminating them and efficient in way that the results are accurate. It is also time bound.
assessment of the proposed system as Reliable. As can be conclude from the results, the respondents
found that the proposed system is Reliable in allowing the users to get information very fast and these
information are accurate and is not time consuming.
Analysis and Interpretation of Data
The table presented below shows the result of survey and opinions of the respondents on how
effective; efficient and reliable the existing system and proposed system in terms of its information
dissemination.

MAIN CAMPUS
Table 1 Shows the frequency distribution, weighted mean and the distributive rating of the assessment
of the respondents on the Effectiveness of the current system. With the computed average weighted
mean of 2. 17, the respondents found the assessment of the current system as INEFFECTIVE. Concluding
from the results obtained, the respondents found that the existing evaluation system INEFFECTIVE.
While on the proposed system, the frequency distribution, weighted mean and the descriptive rating of
the assessment of the respondents on the proposed system with computed average weighted mean of
3.92, the respondents found the assessment of the proposed system as EFFECTIVE. As the result, we
conclude that the respondents found the proposed system to be Effective in getting information faster
and information are accurate and also the process of online evaluation is not time consuming. The
information and data that can be gathered through the manual evaluation system will not be that
effective, while on the proposed system is effective.
Table 1 Assessment on the Effectiveness of the Current and Proposed System
Current System Proposed System
Aspects WV WM DR WV WM DR
1. Availability of 100 INEFFECTI 7

reports when (215) 2. 15 VE (27) 3.8 EFFECTIVE
needed.
2. Achieving the 100 INEFFECTI 7

results of desired (230) 2.3 VE (24) 3.4 EFFECTIVE
quantity and
quality.
3. Supplying past 100 INEFFECTI 7

records. (208) 2.08 VE (29) 4. 1 EFFECTIVE
4. Being able to 100 INEFFECTI 7

track the progress (225) 2.25 VE (32) 4.5 EFECTIVE
of the faculty
evaluation.
5. Records
maintenances. 100 INEFFECTI 7
(209) 2.09 VE (27) 3.8 EFECTIVE
Average
Weighted Mean = 2.17 Average Weighted Mean = 3.92
of the respondents on the Efficiency of the current system. With the computed average weighted mean
of 2. 21, the respondents found the assessment of the current system as INEFFICIENT. As can be

MAIN CAMPUS
concluded from the results the respondents found the existing evaluation system as INEFFICIENT. That
on gathering information the users cannot clearly get these. While on the proposed system, the
assessment of the proposed system as EFFICIENT. As can be conclude on that results obtained the
respondents found that the proposed system is efficient in getting the information, the time in
disseminating them and efficient in way that the results are accurate. It is also time bound. The
information and data that can be gathered through the manual evaluation system will not be that
efficient, while on the proposed system is efficient.
Table 2 Assessment on the Efficiency of the Current and Proposed System
1. Searching faculty 100 INEFFICIEN 7

teacher results. (230) 2.3 T (24) 3.4 EFFICIENT
2. Validating the 100 INEFFICIEN 7

evaluation of the (221) 2.21 T (28) 4 EFFICIENT
students.
3. Producing 100 INEFFICIEN 7

needed evaluation. (223) 2.23 T (22) 3. 1 EFFICIENT
4. Recording the 100 INEFFICIEN 7

needed data. (217) 2. 17 T (24) 3.4 EFFICIENT
5. Searching
evaluation. 100 INEFFICIEN 7
(213) 2. 13 T (29) 4.1 EFFICIENT
Average
of the respondents on the Reliability of the current system. With the computed average weighted mean
of 2. 14, the respondents found the assessment of the current system as UNRELIABLE. As the results

MAIN CAMPUS
obtained, the respondents found that the existing evaluation system unreliable in gathering information
from the results when evaluation process was administered. While on the proposed system, the
assessment of the proposed system as RELIABLE. As can be conclude from the results, the respondents
found that the proposed system is Reliable in allowing the users to get information very fast and these
information are accurate and is not time consuming. The information and data that can be gathered
through the manual evaluation system will not be that reliable, while on the proposed system is reliable.
Table 3Assessment on the reliability of the Current and Proposed System
1. Securing the 100 UNRELIABL 7

records from (221) 2.21 E (32) 4.5 RELIABLE
unauthorized
person.
2. Usefulness and 100 UNRELIABL 7

correctness of (217) 2. 17 E (31) 4.4 RELIABLE
information.
3. Reading of 100 UNRELIABL 7

evaluation at any (210) 2. 10 E (34) 4.8 RELIABLE
time.
4. Backing- Up 100 UNRELIABL 7

files/records at any (207) 2. 07 E (28) 4 RELIABLE
time.
5. Maintaining
current and past 100 UNRELIABL 7
records or (215) 2. 15 E (32) 4.5 RELIABLE
information.
Average
Hardware and Software Specification
Hardware is the physical part of a computer and mobile including the digital circuitry
while software is a general term used to describe a collection of computer programs,

MAIN CAMPUS
procedures. Hardware and Software always work together choosing the right specification to
maximize the performance of the system.
Hardware specification it is an important requirements of the system while the software
specification is a comprehensive description of intended purpose and environment under
development. If hardware and software specification do not meet the system requirements then
the website will not work correctly. The proposed system must be consistent, complete and free
from inconvenience such as confusions that may result from poor specifications.
Category Specification Minimum Requirements

As long as you connected to the internet.(Loading of the page
1. Internet
may vary to your internet connection.)
2. Printer
3. Laptop Any kind of laptops/desktop as long it has a browser on it.
Table 5 Software Specification requirements
1. Browser Any browser is applicable to open the website.
Discussion
Student Feedback Analysis Towards Teachers Performance using Latent Dirichlet Allocation
(LDA) is used by schools, universities and institutions as a tool to review and rate the performance of
the teacher in doing their job. It is also one of the essential ways for all the teachers to identify their
strength and weakness in teaching. With this, teacher and student can express their thoughts and
feedbacks on their teacher’s performance. Whether the strategy and techniques of their teacher helps
them improve and excel on their study. As the proponents conceptualized the needs in this study, the
proponents developed a most effective and less time consuming strategy in which they proposed the
Student Feedback Analysis Towards Teachers Performance using Latent Dirichlet Allocation which can
help the DHVSU in performing the activity of evaluation, a tool that helps the Hr, teachers, and students,
dean of the university and secretaries of each department.
The proponents conducted and designed a survey to prove if the proposed system is capable to
established, each of the questionnaires were validated by the experts and personnel who has
knowledge in the proposed system: Ms. Joan Sicat the secretary for the college of engineering and
architecture, Ms. Geraldine Galang secretary for college of computing studies, Mr. John Paguio the
secretary for college of business studies, Ms. Sharmaine Apolonio secretary for college of industrial
technology, Ms Rona Encinas secretary for college of hospitality management, Ms. April Macaraeg
secretary of college of social sciences and philosophy and Ms. Wilma Barbieto secretary for college of
education.

MAIN CAMPUS
. Each of the stated name above played a vital part in conducting the study. The proponents made two
(2) questionnaire to gather the needed data for writing the study and developing the system as the
output.
Based on the results and findings of the study, the existing manual evaluation is less effective
and must be enhanced. It is hard for the user to get the accurate scores and feedback given by the
students that they need to put on the printed materials that they will give to the college dean. The
proponents had found out that the proposed system is more helpful for the user in conducting and
administering the evaluation process, it has features to improve the manual evaluation. The proposed
system is greatly helpful for the users especially for the students in DHVSU when there is evaluation for
teacher’s performance in the teaching and learning process.
The study was conducted in DHVSU, seven (7) respondents for the proposed system
questionnaires were chosen conveniently available and one hundred (100) respondents in the manual
evaluation. The proponents also conducted interviews to the users, the VPAA personnel and the
secretaries of each departments in the said university.
The following are the summary of the survey conducted.
 Assessment of the respondents on the Effectiveness of the current system. With the computed
average weighted mean of 2. 17, the respondents found the assessment of the current system
as ineffective. Concluding from the results obtained, the respondents found that the existing
evaluation system ineffective. The information and data that can be gathered through the
manual evaluation system will not be that effective.
 Assessment of the respondents on the Efficiency of the current system. With the computed
as inefficient. As can be concluded from the results the respondents found the existing
evaluation system as inefficient. That on gathering information the users cannot clearly get
these.
 Assessment of the respondents on the Reliability of the current system. With the computed
as unreliable. As the results obtained, the respondents found that the existing evaluation system
unreliable in gathering information from the results when evaluation process was administered.
 Assessment of the respondents on the proposed system with computed average weighted mean
of 3.92, the respondents found the assessment of the proposed system as Effective. As the
result, we conclude that the respondents found the proposed system to be Effective in getting
information faster and information are accurate and also the process of online evaluation is not
time consuming.

MAIN CAMPUS
of 3.6, the respondents found the assessment of the proposed system as Efficient. As can be
conclude on that results obtained the respondents found that the proposed system is efficient
in getting the information, the time in disseminating them and efficient in way that the results
are accurate. It is also time bound.
of 4.44, the respondents found the assessment of the proposed system as Reliable. As can be
conclude from the results, the respondents found that the proposed system is Reliable in
allowing the users to get information very fast and these information are accurate and is not
time consuming.
Benefits of the Proposed System

The benefits of the proponents might get either the following:
 It has the possibility that an association, group and even the DHVSU that is related in
study can take an interest to adopt the system to be enhance or upgraded. Any
association might get to purchase it from the proponents.
 An IT company might hire the proponents when company saw the potential in the
system they made.
 The proponents might enhance their work.
Recommendations
The following recommendations are offered based on the conclusions of the study:
1. All academic departments should be able to have an internet connection with at least a speed of
10MBPS to be able to fully utilize the developed system.
2. User trainings in how to use the system must be conducted prior to the implementation of the
proposed system.
3. User trainings pertaining to protecting online information like passwords and username must be
conducted among all the stakeholders in the locale.
4. The system will provide printer, so that after every evaluation the result will be automatically be
printed.
Conclusions
Due to the problem encountered by the local, school and other universities in evaluating the
performance of the teacher in a manual or traditional way that brings stress and hassle for the people
who are administering, distributing, answering and keeping the records or results of the evaluation
system. The proponents conclude that these problems may now overcome through the proposed

MAIN CAMPUS
system with features that can impact the result of evaluation process to more accurate and beneficial
way.
The difficulties of the local in administering an evaluation process to the students may now
become a beneficial way to them. This proposed system can and will surely help the local to answer and
solve the problem that they experienced every time they are conducting the traditional or much known
as the manual evaluation system. Students can now answer the evaluation form in online system
wherein they can freely say what they want to express and for the students with poor penmanship,
since the proposed system will be used through online they can now write whatever they want to write
without hesitating that the VPAA might be confused and be furious to the way they wrote their
comments and feedbacks. For the teachers who will be evaluated they can now view their results
through signing with their accounts which will help them to disregard the negative comments and
change the strategy in their teaching. For the secretaries of each department, this proposed system is
the key to lessen their time in working the evaluation process. The proposed system answers their
struggle in administering the evaluation process, from the manual way of conducting this evaluation
process now they can just check for the students who are also the beneficiaries who are using the
system. This proposed system will be the cure to end this problems that the respondents are
experiencing every time that there is evaluation in teacher’s performance.
References
Adriana RejcBuhovac and MajaZaman Groff, Journal of East European Management Studies
Contemporary performance measurement systems in Central and Eastern Europe: a synthesis of the
empirical literature
https://www.jstor.org/stable/23281744?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents .Retrieved August 16,

2018
Cadez, Simon; Dimovski, Vlado; Zaman Groff, Maja

Studies in Higher Education, v42 n8 p1455-1473 2017
Research, Teaching and Performance Evaluation in Academia: The Salience of Quality
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1144059 .Retrieved August 13, 2018
Cummings, J. A., Ballantyne, E. C., & Scallion, L. M. (2015). Essential processes for cognitive behavioral
clinical supervision: Agenda setting, problem-solving, and formative feedback. Psychotherapy, 52(2),
158-163.
http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-17275-001 . Retrieved August 13, 2018

MAIN CAMPUS
Ethos at stake: Performance management and academic work in universities

Kirsi-Mari Kallio, Tomi J Kallio, JanneTienari
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0018726715596802?journalCode=huma . Retrieved
August 14, 2018
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2015 Oct;34(10):1993-2024. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2014.2377694. Epub 2014 Dec 4
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25494501 .Retrieved August 14, 2018
Krenkel&Krenkel, LLCATTORNEYS AT LAW

Established in 1995, the Krenkel Law Firm has been representing Corporations and Individuals for 20
years.
http://www.krenkellaw.com/index.html .Retrieved August 16, 2018
Lessons Learned from Online vs. Paper-based Computer Information Students’ Evaluation System Jens
O. Liegle David S. McDonald Georgia State University Georgia State University Atlanta, GA 30303, USA
Atlanta, GA 30303, and USA
http://isedj.org/3/37/ISEDJ.3 (37).Liegle.pdf .Retrieved August 13, 2018
Mohammed FarghalA Review of “Cummings, Louise. (2005). Pragmatics: A Multidisciplinary Perspective”
Pages 192-197 | published online: 18 Sep 2008
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15427580802286314 .Retrieved August 13, 2018
Moya, Soledad; Prior, Diego; Rodríguez-Pérez, Gonzalo
Accounting Education, v24 n3 p208-232 2015
Performance-Based Incentives and the Behavior of Accounting Academics: Responding to Changes
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1107393 .Retrieved August 14, 2018
Posted on November 12, 2013 by Philip Cook
http://picsl.upenn.edu/tustison-et-al-win-the-brats-challenge/ .Retrieved August 16, 2018
Wiley Interdiscip Rev RNA. 2012 May-Jun; 3(3):311-30. doi: 10.1002/wrna.121. Epub 2011 Nov 9.
Posttranscriptional upregulation by microRNAs.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22072587 .Retrieved August 16, 2018

MAIN CAMPUS

MAIN CAMPUS

Don Honorio Ventura State University

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Don Honorio Ventura State University

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

DON HONORIO VENTURA STATE UNIVERSITY

At present, Schools used this teacher-evaluation to evaluate teachers’ performance and

The importance of statistics in assessment and evaluation of performance in academic

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

Methods and Materials

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

Conceptual Framework of the Proposed System

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

Perceived Problem Data Gathering

results State University (DHVSU)

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework of the Study

Objective of the Study

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

1. To minimize time spent in administering of questionnaire to students.

2. To make the evaluation available on time.

3. To secure the results of Faculty evaluation and generate accurate results.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

3. HR – Intervention program such as (seminar, training etc.).

Scope and Delimitation

Evaluation form – is a documents supervisors use to measure an employee’s workplace performance.

Users – who will used and benefits the study.

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

Analyzing and Design Phase

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

Methods Used for System Evaluation

Statistical Treatment of Data

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

∑ = Symbol for the summation process

n = total number of respondents

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

Figure 2 System Architecture of the Proposed System

Cost and Benefit Analysis

Table 6 Development Cost of the Proposed System

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

Schools used this teacher-evaluation to evaluate teachers’ performance and effectiveness in

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

Coding and Design

Testing and Evaluation

Existing System Test Results

Proposed System Test Results

Analysis and Interpretation of Data

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

Table 1 Assessment on the Effectiveness of the Current and Proposed System

Current System Proposed System

1. Availability of 100 INEFFECTI 7

2. Achieving the 100 INEFFECTI 7

3. Supplying past 100 INEFFECTI 7

4. Being able to 100 INEFFECTI 7

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

Table 2 Assessment on the Efficiency of the Current and Proposed System

Current System Proposed System

1. Searching faculty 100 INEFFICIEN 7

2. Validating the 100 INEFFICIEN 7

3. Producing 100 INEFFICIEN 7

4. Recording the 100 INEFFICIEN 7

COLLEGE OF COMPUTING STUDIES

Table 3Assessment on the reliability of the Current and Proposed System

Current System Proposed System

1. Securing the 100 UNRELIABL 7

2. Usefulness and 100 UNRELIABL 7

3. Reading of 100 UNRELIABL 7

4. Backing- Up 100 UNRELIABL 7