Chapter 4 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

54EULOGIO “AMANG” RODRIGUEZ INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

COLLEGE OF HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT

CHAPTER 4

Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data

This chapter presents the findings, analysis and

interpretation of data gathered whose main objective is to

found out the expectations and perceptions of tourist towards

Filipino tour Guides.

More specifically, the researchers sought to answer the

following questions:

Sub problem No.1. How do the Local Tourists perceive the

Filipino Tour Guides in terms of:



1.1 Personality

Table 4

Respondents’ Assessments as to Personality

Respondents Tour Guide Tourist Total

Criteria WM VI WM VI WM VI

Grooming 4.71 O 4.05 O 4.38 O

Personal Hygiene 4.29 O 4.19 O 4.24 O

Professional Appearance 4.71 O 4.19 O 4.45 O

Personal Integrity 4.71 O 4.28 O 4.05 O

Flexibility 4.86 O 4.37 O 4.62 O

Composite Mean 4.67 O 4.21 O 4.44 O

Table 4 presents the respondents’ assessment as to

personality.

It can be gleaned from the data that all the criteria

were interpreted by the two groups of respondents as high

extent. These are grooming (WM=4.38); personal hygiene

(WM=4.24); professional appearance (WM=4.50) and flexibility.

Legend



Scale Rate Interpretation Symbol

5 4.20 – 5.00 Outstanding O4 3.40 - 4.19 Very Good VG3 2.60 - 3.39 Good G2 1.80 – 2.59 Fair F1 1.00 - 1.79 Poor P

The overall computed weighted mean of 4.44 were

interpreted the respondents as high extent as to personality.

1.2 Communication Skills

Table 5 shows the respondents assessment as to

communication skills.

As shown in the data, two (2) out of five (5) criteria

were interpreted as high extent: language proficiency

(WM=4.52) and speak audibly (not too soft not too loud)

(WM=4.22) while, the other two (2) were interpreted as

moderate extent. These are not using highfalutin words

(WM=2.89) and use non-verbal communication (WM=2.77). Only

one (1) criterion was interpreted as great extent: try to get

rid of regional extent (WM=3.04).

Table 5



Respondents’ Assessment as to Communication Skills

Respondents Tour Guide Tourist Total


Language proficiency4.71 O 4.33 O 4.52 O

Not using highfalutin words

2.43 G 3.35 VG 2.89 G

Try to get rid of regional accent

2.57 G 3.31 VG 3.04 VG

Use non-verbal communication 2.14 G 3.51 VG 2.77 G

Speak audibly (not too soft, not too

loud )4.43 O 4 O 4.22 O

COMPOSITE MEAN 3.26 VG 3.72 VG 3.49 VG

In general, the computed value of weighted mean is 3.49

interpreted by the two groups of respondents as great extent

as to communication skills.

1.3 Technical Skills

Table 6 reveals the respondents’ assessment as to

technical skills.

Table 6

Respondents’ Assessment as to Technical Skills



Respondents

Tour Guide Tourists Total


Punctuality 5 O 4.21 O 4.61 O

Resourcefulness

4.86 O 4.33 O 4.06 O

Sense of humor 4.57 O 4.33 O 4.45 O

Tactfulness 4.57 O 4.05 O 4.31 O

Composite Mean 4.75 O 4.23 O 4.49 O

As revealed in the data; all the criteria under

technical skills were interpreted by the respondents as high

extent. These are: punctuality (WM=4.61); resourcefulness

(WM=4.60); sense of humor (WM=4.45) and tactfulness

(WM=4.31).

The computed weighted mean of 4.49 were verbally

interpreted by the respondents as high extent as to technical

skills.

1.4 Summary



Table 7 presents the summary on the respondents’

assessment on the Filipino Tour Guides.

Table 7

Summary on Respondents’ Assessment on the Filipino Tour

Guides

Respondents Tour Guide Tourists Composite Mean


Personality 4.67 O 4.21 O 4.44 O

Communication Skills

3.26 VG 3.72 VG 3.49 VG

Techbical Skills 4.75 O 4.23 O 4.49 O

Composite Mean 4.23 O 4.05 VG 4.14 VG

As present in the data, two (2) out of three (3)

criteria were interpreted as high extent. These are

personality (WM=4.44) and technical skills (WM=4.49) while,

only were interpreted as great extent: communication skills

(WM=3.49).



Generally, the overall computed weighted mean of 4.14

were interpreted by the two groups of respondents as great

extent.

Sub-Problem No.2 Is there significant difference on

perception of the local tourists to the Filipino Tour Guides

using the above mentioned variables?

2.1 Personality

Table 8 depicts the comparison on the assessment on

their personality.

As depicted in the table, only one (1) criteria were

interpreted t-value is lower that the critical value of 1.645

at 0.05 percent level of significance. While, the other four

(4) criteria were interpreted as significant. These are:

grooming (t-value=3.01); personal hygiene (t-value=0.34);

professional appearance (t-value=2.53); personal integrity

(t-value=2.24); flexibility (t-value=2.87). Professional

Appearance (t-value=2.53); Personal Integrity (t-value=2.24)

and Flexibility (t-value=2.87)



Table 8

Comparison on the Assessment on their Personality

Respondents TOUR GUIDE TOURIST T-test

Criteria WM SD WM SDt-computed

valueInterpretation DECISION



GROOMING 4.71 0.45 4.05 0.91 3.01 S Reject Ho

PERSONAL Hygiene 4.29 0.70 4.19 0.87 0.34 NS Accept Ho

PROFESSIONAL

APPEARANCE4.71 0.45 4.19 0.76 2.53 S Reject Ho

PERSONAL INTEGRITY 4.71 0.45 4.28 0.58 2.24 S Reject Ho

FLEXIBILITY 4.86 0.35 4.37 0.71 2.87 S Reject Ho

COMPOSITE MEAN 4.67 0.48 4.21 0.77 2.13 S Reject Ho

Legend: CV at 5% = 1.645 NS – Not Significant S-Significant

The computed t-value of 2.13 is higher than the critical

value of 1.64

5 at 0.05 percent level of significance, interpreted as

significant hence, rejecting the hypothesis.

2.2 Communication Skills

Table 9 reflects the comparison on the assessment on

their communication skills.

Table 9

Comparison on the assessment on their Communication Skills



RESPONDENTS TOUR GUIDE TOURIST t-test

Criteria WM SD WM SD t-computed

value

Interpretation DECISION

PUNCTUALTY 5 0 4.31 0.82 6.32 S Reject Ho

RESOURCEFULNESS 4.86 0.35 4.33 0.67 3.17 S Reject Ho

SENSE OF HUMOR 4.57 0.49 4.33 0.8 1.08 NS Accept Ho

TACTFULNESS 4.57 0.49 4.05 0.86 2.29 S Reject Ho

COMPOSITE MEAN 4.75 0.33 4.23 0.79 3 S Reject Ho

As reflected on the data; only one criterion was

interpreted as not significant: sense of humor (t-value=1.08)

while the other three criteria were interpreted as

significant. These are: punctuality (t-value-6.32);

resourcefulness (t-value=3.17) and tactfulness (t-

value=2.29).

Generally the computed t-value of 3 is higher than the

critical value of 1.645 at 0.05 percent level of



significance; it was interpreted as significant therefore the

hypothesis is rejected.

2.3 Technical Skills.

Table 10 present the comparison on the assessment on

their technical skills.

As presented in the data; four (4) out of (5) criteria

were interpreted as significant. These are: language

proficiency (t-value=1.88); not using highfalutin words (t-

value=1.88); try to get rid of regional accent (t-value=1.94)

and use non-verbal communication (t-value=3.00) while, only

one (1) were interpreted as not significant: speak audibly

(not too soft, not too loud) (t-value=1.34)

Table 10

Comparison on the assessment on their Technical Skills

RESPONDENTS TOUR GUIDE TOURIST t-test


value

Interpretation DECISION



Language proficiency4.71 0.45 4.33 0.71 1.85 S Reject Ho

Not using

highfalutin words2.43 1.18 3.35 1.31 1.88 S Reject Ho

Try to get rid of

regional accent2.57 1.18 3.51 1.23 1.94 S Reject Ho

Use non-verbal

communication2.14 0.99 3.40 1.26 3.00 S Reject Ho

Speak audibly 4.43 0.73 4.00 1.08 1.34 NS Accept Ho

Composite Mean 3.26 0.91 3.72 1.12 1.20 NS Accept Ho

Generally, the computed t-value of 1.20 is lower than

the critical value of 1.645 at 0.05 percent level of

significant. It was the interpreted as not significant hence,

the null hypothesis is accepted.

2.4 Summary

Table 11 shows the summary on the comparison on

respondents’ assessment the local tourist to the Filipino

Tour Guides.

Table 11



Summary on the Comparison on Responds Assessment of the Local

Tourist to the Filipino Tour Guides

Respondents Tour Guides Tourist t-test


value

Interpretation Decision

Personality 4.67 0.48 4.21 0.77 2.13 S Reject Ho

Communication

Skills

4.75 0.33 4.23 0.79 3 S Reject Ho

Technical

Skills

3.26 0.91 3.72 1.12 1.20 NS Accept Ho

Composite Mean 4.23 0.57 4.05 0.89 0.71 NS Accept Ho

It can be gleaned from the data that two (2) criteria

were interpreted as significant. These are: personality (t-

value=2.13) and communication skills (t-value=3.00) while

technical skills (t-value=1.20) were interpreted as not

significant.

Generally, the overall computed t-value of 0.71 is lower

than the critical value of 1.645 at 0.05 percent level of

significance with 48 degrees of the freedom. It was



interpreted as not significant therefore, the hypothesis is

accepted.

Education

Chapter 4 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION