Ethical Consideration There

is major ethical consideration that has distinct implications for this quantitative research.

These issues and concerns might come out basically from the methodology that was

involved in this study. The ethical challenges that were applicable in this research

concern were the issues of the proper operation on the study, confidentiality and

anonymity. This study followed the standards of the RMMC Ethics and Review

Committee for the guidelines of ethical consideration particularly in addressing the

population and data such as, but not limited to:

Voluntary Participation. The participants were granted the option to participate

without any plan of repercussion or reparations or loss of benefits. Therefore, after the

purpose and the benefits of the study were shown to the participating person, the rights

of the participant to provide the body of knowledge were carefully measured and

foresighted upon. In this study, the participants were not forced to be part of the study.

They are free to withdraw their participation when they feel uncomfortable during the

conduct of the study.

Privacy and confidentiality. Participants have the right to privacy that should

not be violated without informed consent to conform to the existing Data Privacy Act

2012, an act protecting the fundamental human right of privacy. . One way of observing

privacy and confidentiality in this quantitative research is to give options to the

respondents of not indicating their name on the survey questionnaire. Besides,

confidentiality and privacy were attained by not publishing the demographic data of the

informants such as the age, gender, occupation, employment, disease if there is any.
Hence, their identity was kept as confidential for safety purposes. Even their responses

to the items in the survey questionnaire were held and considered as confidential.

Informed consent process. The prospective research respondents were fully

informed about the objectives, methods and benefits of the research as

comprehensively as possible within the framework of the study. The consent of the

respondents was obtained indicating that their participation was asked on a voluntary

basis. This was done in written form stating all the important details to be disclosed to

the participants and the manner that the survey was conducted. The respondents were

asked to affix their signature on the inform consent form confirming that the respondents

voluntarily agree to participate in the survey. Since the respondents were consenting

adults, there was no need to ask for parent’s consent. The names of the respondents

did not appear in the survey questionnaire and their answers were held confidentially

and that the participants were fully aware that they can withdraw at any time from

participating in the study.

Furthermore, any data that the researcher gathered were protected and the

release of any information would follow through a strict informed consent process. The

participants would have a sense of control over their personal information to lessen their

fear that the data or information would be used in any other unintended manner.

Recruitment. The respondents were informed of the reasons of why they had

become part of the study. In order for the respondents to understand what the study

was all about, the researcher explained the purpose of the study so that they could

further infer to the researcher and they could also view the essence of the study. Apart

from the letter, the researcher gave the rationale of the study and its significance.
 Risks. Research shall be conducted only if there is an acceptable positive

benefit-risk ratio. In this study, the need to protect the participants from significant harm

is equally important. The study prioritized the welfare of the respondents. Furthermore,

the respondents were not put into harm since their identity was held confidentially. Their

security and safety were the utmost concern. As the researcher, there was a need to

ensure that the respondents were physically, emotionally, and socially ready. In

answering the survey questionnaire, the researcher made a way that the respondents

did not feel discomfort or awkward.

Benefits. This study would be beneficial to the respondents since the results

would serve as an eye-opener for the DepEd officials, school administrators, and even

elementary teachers on creating programs and ways on how to improve the work well-

being of the Senior High School teachers in the school community in order to increase

work engagement which would lead to job satisfaction. This study has been conducted

for a purpose: to serve its internal and external stakeholders, most especially the

students. Furthermore, to achieve beneficence in research, the researcher did all the

aspects that would not harm the lives of the respondents, thus, would benefit on the

further undertakings with regards to the related studies. The most essential to all in

achieving benefits is the rise of important learning.

Plagiarism. The study had no trace or evidence of misinterpretation of someone

else’s work. The study was subjected to plagiarism detectors like Grammarly or Turnitin

software. As a researcher, there is a need to have that positive character and integrity,

which are associated with moral virtues and values. The researcher must have better

knowledge about the paradigm of plagiarism to have a credible research paper.

what had been done. There was no making up of data and results or purposefully

putting forward conclusions that were not accurate. The researcher employed and

integrated theories that were related to the information and other inferential concepts.

Falsification. The study had no trace of purposefully misrepresenting the work to

fit a model or theoretical expectation and had no evidence of over claiming or

exaggeration. Added to that, this study was not adhering to manipulating the data,

which involved formulating statements or disregarding important details, maneuvering

materials, tools or methodologies that would mislead others.

Conflict of Interest (COI). The study had no trace of conflict of interest like for

example, the disclosure of COI, which is a set of conditions in which professional

judgment concerning primary interest such as participants’ welfare or the validity of the

research tends to be influenced by a secondary interest such as financial or academic

gains or recognitions. Furthermore, the researcher had no control or influence over the

respondents, forcing them to be part of the study.

Deceit. The study had no trace of misleading the respondents to any possible

danger. There must be humongous protection on the rights of the participants in any

study, especially that they have attained higher education, so balanced and appropriate

principles shall have adhered to.

Permission from Organization/Location. The researcher of this study followed

protocols. Upon receiving the signal from the panelists, the adviser, and the committee

of the RMMCERC, the researcher sought approval from the Schools Division

Superintendents of the selected Senior High School in Region XII for the conduct of the
study through a formal letter. After this, the researcher made a formal letter addressed

to the School Principal of the schools involved in the study, attaching the school's

endorsed letter from the Schools Division Superintendent. The Senior High School

teachers who were part of the study were oriented before administering the survey

questionnaire.

Authorship. The researcher of the study is currently enrolled in the RMMC

Graduate School. He had undergone series of revisions for his thesis based on the

suggestions and recommendations made by his adviser who had guided the researcher

all throughout for the completion of this paper. The refinement of the paper had been

made possible through the guidance of his researcher. The researcher also followed the

standards of the RMMC Ethics Review Committee for the guidelines of ethical

consideration.