ISSN 1989 – 9572

DOI: 10.47750/jett.2023.14.02.034

Higher Education Institutions’ Security Capability the

Leads to the Creation of Standardized Campus Security
System
Januaryn Jose B. Aydinan

Journal for Educators,Teachers and Trainers, Vol. 14 (2)

https://jett.labosfor.com/
Date of reception: 11 Jan 2023

Date of revision: 05 Mar 2023

Date of acceptance: 06 Mar 2023

Januaryn Jose B. Aydinan (2023). Higher Education Institutions’ Security Capability the Leads to the
Creation of Standardized Campus Security System.Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers,Vol.
14(2). 356-369.

1
Faculty member, Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 356
 Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers, Vol. 14 (2)
ISSN 1989 – 9572
https://jett.labosfor.com/
Higher Education Institutions’ Security Capability the Leads to the
Creation of Standardized Campus Security System
Januaryn Jose B. Aydinan
Faculty member, Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology
Email: jennilynmina011@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
This study aimed to assess the current state of campus security in selected HEIs in Nueva Ecija. It
utilizes the descriptive-quantitative method of research. This study was conducted at the selected
HEIs in Nueva Ecija. The administrators, faculty and students, and security personnel are the
respondents of the study, and a questionnaire was used to gather pertinent data. Weighted mean was
used to determine the current state of campus security, the satisfaction of respondents with the
security services and the function of security personnel. Findings revealed that the five selected HEIs
adhere to security practices and procedures in terms of physical security, personnel security, and
document security as rated by respondents to be very much implemented. Among the fifteen
problems encountered, the top three are: “There are limited CCTV cameras installed in strategic
locations”. “Sprinkler systems and smoke detectors are not installed in offices and laboratories” and
“There are inconsistent in the implementation of the NO-ID NO Entry Policy, Visitor's ID and
logbook, and Gate Pass policy”. The findings show that the five selected HEIs have no difference in
their current state of campus security. The very much satisfaction rating in the area of the chief
security officer and much satisfaction along security guards by the group of respondents signify that
they are pleased with the function and services rendered by security personnel. It is recommended
that selected HEIs shall continue and maintain the security practices and procedures that were
already put into operation. Installation of Security cameras in strategic locations should be considered
including sprinkler systems. Security guards should continue and consistently implement the security
policies, rules, and regulations of the school. Future studies should be conducted focusing on safety
measures against a natural or manmade disaster that would happen inside the campus and creating a
Safety manual for the college and Adoption of the proposed security manual for the improvement of
the implementation of campus security.
Keywords: HEIs, NEUST, Sprinkler, State

INTRODUCTION
Security needs were simple, but as civilization became more complex, so did man’s security requirements.
Throughout the ages, men started practicing the efficient utilization of workers and equipment in order to protect
their well-being and property. Thus, civilized man adopts security measures to have adequate protection against
unsecured and unsafe conditions. Security measures are inevitable or necessary for the attainment of goals and
objectives of a certain individual, group, or organization. It follows that when an individual or organization is
exposed to hazards, their productivity is adversely affected (Manwong and Delizo, 2005).
A safe and secure environment is a prerequisite for effective teaching and learning. Threats to the safety and
security of people and property can arise from natural hazards, for example, earthquakes, floods, and storms, or
from human actions such as vandalism, arson, and violent crime. While catastrophic events and human tragedies
cannot be eliminated entirely, there is a role for facility designers, institutional managers, emergency response
teams, and post-crisis intervention in mitigating their negative impact (Lupos, 2017).
Non-violent events such as alcohol-related deaths, date rape, dormitory fires, and drug-related deaths are also
further affecting the overall perception of campus safety. These tragic events which have been occurring on the
nation’s higher education campuses in recent years have influenced the decision-making process for many
prospective students and their parents.
Today’s colleges and universities are faced with many challenges in their attempt to provide a campus that is
safe and secure. The college campus has traditionally been known as a safe haven for students, but recent tragic
events have left the leaders of higher education with the challenges of preparing for tragedies that could happen
on their campuses (Carrico, 2016).
In the Philippines, Schools at the university belt near Malacañang that received bomb threats include the College
of the Holy Spirit Manila, Centro Escolar University, San Beda College, Eulogio “Amang” Rodriguez Institute

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 357
of Science and Technology, Emilio Aguinaldo College, as well as the University of the Philippines in Diliman,
Quezon City (Sunstar, 2017).
Security of Higher Educational Institutions is mandated under Section 28. Safety and Security Services of the
Commission on Higher Education Memorandum No. 09, series of 2013. It states under Section 28.1 that,
“There should be a safe, accessible, and secure environment, buildings and facilities shall comply with
government standards."
In addition, Section 28.5 of the Commission on Higher Education Memorandum No. 09, series of 2013, states
that,
“There shall be an established mechanism for the students to help a crime prevention, safety, and security of the
concerned higher education Institution (CMO 09, s2013)”.
Schools face a wide range of threats. Criminal activities, such as illegal drugs, kidnappings, physical injuries,
extortion, and theft are some of them. Fraternity hazing can sometimes lead to tragic consequences. Terrorism is
shown in the form of bomb threats and detonation of improvised explosive devices. Attacks on cybernetic
security disable computer networks and communication facilities. This requires all educational institutions to
come-up with a modern strategy in securing there school premises.

Theoretical Framework
Under social control theory, most people would commit crimes if not for the controls that society places on
individuals through institutions such as schools, workplaces, churches, and families. Strict implementation of
security policies in the university campus such as regular monitoring of ID at entrances, regular monitoring of
car entering and going out the campus is a deterrent to crime (Alviola,2014.)
There are three components to consider in understanding social control theory the first one refers to attachment;
this component refers to the implementation of policies. If the policies are regularly and equally implemented,
there is a bigger possibility that the clients will conform to the policies regularly. The second component is
commitment; safety around the school campus is second to nothing if the security personnel are dedicated to his
job and is committed in implementing the policies of the school, the third component is involvement; this
component pertains to interaction between clients and the security personnel. As a security personnel one of the
best ways to maintain security in your area is gain the trust and confidence of your clients (Alviola,2014).
Likewise, in social disorganization theory, the seasonal implementation of policy or even the non-
implementation of policy will trigger the possible occurrence of crime considering persons entering the premises
think that since policies, rules, and regulations are not properly implemented, it is right to violate them (Alviola,
2014).

School Security
US Department of Education's (2017) Handbook for Campus Safety and Security Reporting states that campus
security and safety are important feature of postsecondary education. The Department of Education is
committed to assisting schools in providing students nationwide a safe environment in which to learn and to
keeping students, parents, and employees well informed about campus security. These goals were advanced by
the Crime Awareness and Campus Security Act of 1990. The Department is committed to ensuring that
postsecondary institutions are in full compliance with that Act, and enforcement of the Act is a priority of the
Department.
In 2016, Schafer et al., in their study College Student Perceptions of Campus Safety Initiatives, cited that in the
aftermath of tragic campus-based incidents causing injury and death, it has become common to see discussions
concerning the safety measures institutions should be taking to prevent or mitigate the harm of such events. The
recommended approaches reflect a degree of face validity but largely lack empirical grounding or clear evidence
of support from the largest population they seek to protect—college students. Using survey data from six Illinois
colleges, this study examines the level of student support for campus safety practices. Applying a framework
derived from literature on fear of crime and other salient concepts, multivariate modeling is used to explain
variation in the observed level of student support. The explanatory models offer limited insight into the factors
shaping why students do or do not support campus safety practices. The findings demonstrate the importance of
considering the views of students when institutions make decisions about campus safety policies.
Presado, J.E. 2016 on her study of the Level of Security Management in the University of Eastern Philippines,
she found that security is one of the prime concerns of institutions as it is considered one of the important
components of student services. The study traced the security personnel’s profile, as well as the perceptions of
the respondents on the level of security management, and the problems encountered by the respondents. Thirty-
seven security personnel and one hundred and six other respondents composed of administrators, heads of
offices, employees, and students, were the respondents of the study. The descriptive-correlational research
method was used using a survey questionnaire in gathering data, statistically treated using frequency counts,
percentages, ranking, mean, and chi-square test. Majority of the security personnel respondents were young,
married, college graduates. Most had few years in service and have not attended trainings. Security management
level was rated very satisfactory. Civil status and attendance to trainings significantly related to security

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 358
management level. Majority of the security personnel respondents encountered problems on the lack of
monetary allowance and security equipment. There is a need to exert improvement in the security management
in the University.

Physical Security
Physical security is the protection of personnel, hardware, software, networks, and data from physical actions
and events that could cause serious loss or damage to an enterprise, agency, or institution. This includes
protection from fire, flood, natural disasters, burglary, theft, vandalism, and terrorism.
Physical security has three important components: access control, surveillance, and testing. Obstacles should be
placed in the way of potential attackers, and physical sites should be hardened against accidents, attacks, or
environmental disasters. Such hardening measures include fencing, locks, access control cards, biometric access
control systems, and fire suppression systems. Second, physical locations should be monitored using
surveillance cameras and notification systems, such as intrusion detection sensors, heat sensors, and smoke
detectors. Third, disaster recovery policies and procedures should be tested on a regular basis to ensure safety
and reduce the time it takes to recover from disruptive man-made or natural disasters (Techtarget, 2017).
Despite the known degrading impact of high nuisance and false alarm rates (NAR/FAR) on operator
performance, analyses of security systems often ignores operator performance. We developed a model to
analyze the impact of nuisance alarm rates on operator performance and on overall system performance. The
model demonstrates that current methods that do not account for operator performance produce optimistic
estimates of system performance. As shown in our model, even low NAR/FAR levels and the associated alarm
queueing effect can increase operator detection and response times, which in turn reduces the amount of time
the response force, has to interrupt the intruder. An illustrative analysis shows that alarm processing times can
be higher than the assessment time due to queue wait times and that systems with only one or two operators can
become overwhelmed as NAR increases, decreasing system performance.

Document Security
Almost every individual, government agency, and business owner has documents that are processed on a daily
basis, regardless of whether they have a paperless office system. During any given day, we process a great deal
of transactions without ever having to print copies, however, items such as contracts, invoices, receipts,
purchase orders, and all legal documents require paper backup for filing purposes.
Document security is defined as the means by which important documents are filed, stored, processed, backed
up, delivered, and eventually disposed of. Storage and backup of your documents involve a great deal more
planning than simply deciding which type of filing cabinet or lock you will purchase. It involves understanding
the space and means in which to store documents for safekeeping and easy retrieval.
In an attempt to save space, many companies hire document storage facilities like Kenwood Moving and
Storage to store the documents instead of paying to lease more space. This is a cost effective method of
document storage, however, there is an even more important reason to consider storing your documents than
saving space. It is called document security.
Document security is a highly sophisticated document storage service that requires a facility to be safe, secure
and have trained individuals who handle, retrieve and store documents on behalf of other companies. If
documents are not properly packaged and labeled, it can be difficult to locate the file (Kenwood Moving &
Storage, 2017).

Personnel Security
Personnel security is a system of policies and procedures which seek to mitigate the risk of workers (insiders)
exploiting their legitimate access to an organization’s assets for unauthorized purposes. People security is about
shaping and controlling the environment to promote vigilance and an effective security culture, and to influence
and deter those seeking to cause harm (Center for Protection of National Infrastructure, 2017).
Personnel security is important in the protection of an agency’s people, information, and assets because: it
identifies an agency’s vulnerability to a range of insider threats, which can be harmful, costly, embarrassing, and
disruptive, it delivers a level of assurance about the credentials and integrity of the agency’s workforce, an
agency’s protection against threats is only as good as the weakest element of its protective security. The
personnel security risk assessment may impact and should complement, information and physical security
controls (New Zealand Security Intelligence Service, 2017).

Problem on School Security

In the old days, smoking in the boy’s room was the infraction of the day. Today, school officials must deal with
violence, sexual harassment, statutory rape, drugs, weapons, gangs, bombs, shootings, murders, computer
hacking, theft, irate parents, and violence in students’ homes. One of the biggest obstacles keeping schools from
achieving a secure environment is “the big D” a.k.a. Denial. The “It can’t happen here” syndrome prevents

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 359
officials from being proactive in their security efforts. Furthermore, concerns about “image,” low reports of
incidents, fear of disrupting daily routines, or reluctance to be “alarmist” stalls any security efforts.
Be proactive in reducing the threat of school violence. Train teachers to use reasonable methods of defusing
escalating situations. Involve teachers and students in an ongoing safety and security strategy. Make them part
of the solution by giving them the tools they need to gain control during crises and identify hazards (Siciliano,
R,2006).
The recent stabbing and shooting incidents, including hazing and bullying activities that occurred inside school
premises in different parts of the country, have put the spotlight on campus security. Likewise, the resurgence of
illegal drugs has not spared schools. These alarming events have pushed schools to submit their security systems
under deeper and more thorough scrutiny to avoid criticism from public and private stakeholders.
Schools are very different from other public institutions in terms of control. Management over the campus
environment is mainly placed on the shoulders of the school administrators. School administrators dictate the
access policies to the campus. They formulate and schedule classes and have the power to require all students to
be present during school hours. The school administrators also dictate the level of supervision over the
campuses, as they have the authority to implement or establish strict rules of conduct and behavior. They can
also implement policies such as bag inspections, locker searches and the use of metal detectors, if necessary.
The administrators can also implement controls on vehicle access and, in some cases, conduct searches on
vehicles parked inside the campus area.
They are also empowered to discipline students or any member of the school community and even suspend,
dismiss, or expel anyone from the school.
At a more practical level, school security is negatively affected when administrators are inconsistent in
enforcing school rules and regulations. For example, when the bell rings for the first period in the morning,
students and teachers are required to be inside the classroom for their lessons. It becomes easy for the school to
determine the non-students or unauthorized persons. If a student opts to be absent or performs any action in
violation of existing school policy on conduct and behavior, the school must apply the prescribed penalty, with
respect to the principle of justice, fairness and respect for the rights of all other students (Deguzman, E, 2013).
While schools are thriving to meet the educational needs of the pupils and of the community as a whole, they
themselves, as open systems, are open to every kind of security threat coming from inside and outside of the
school environment. Due to the social, economic, and cultural conditions of our time, various individual or
group threats may be consciously or unconsciously exerted on schools. Schools may also be exposed to
pandemic diseases, fires, and many natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods, landslides, and so on. And the
school management, together with the school community, has to be prepared for all of these kinds of threads,
and have to develop strategies to deal adequately with them. Since the threads to school security may stem from
various sources in society, school safety issues should involve a wide range of bodies, such as educators,
students, managers, parents, law enforcement agencies, health institutions, businesses, and the like. And,
schools, which accommodate so many students, teachers, managers, and other supportive individuals, are
compelled to provide safe working conditions for staff and for the students. The schools can ensure a safe
environment by focusing on prevention, intervention, and response phases in their safety efforts.
To deal effectively with the antisocial and crime behavior, schools should promote positive school climate and
school-wide effective prevention and intervention strategies (Ozmen,et.al. 2010).

Synthesis
The Handbook for Campus Safety and Security Reporting is related with the study since it discusses how
campus security and safety are important feature of postsecondary education wherein the present study
determined the current state of campus security. Further, the study conducted by Schafer, et. al. has variance
with the present study since the present study deals with the level of satisfaction of respondents on security
services while the previous study deals with level of student support for campus safety practices. Nevertheless
both studies allocate on campus security.
The perceptions of the respondents on the level of security management, and the problems encountered by the
respondents studied by Presado have a direct bearing on the current study, for it also tries to determine the level
of implementation of campus security and the satisfaction of respondents with the security services. The
difference is that Presado’s study includes the profile of security personnel in which the current study did not
take into account.
Physical security is the protection of personnel, hardware, software, networks, and data from physical actions
and events that could cause serious loss or damage to an enterprise, agency, or institution. This statement has a
direct bearing with the study since the present study finds out the current state of campus security in terms of
physical security. Document security is defined as the means by which important documents are filed, stored,
processed, backed up, delivered, and eventually disposed of. This description is related to the study because one
of the aspects of the present study was to ascertain the current state of campus security in terms of document
security. Personnel security is a system of policies and procedures which seek to mitigate the risk of workers
(insiders) exploiting their legitimate access to an organization’s assets for unauthorized purposes. This phrase is

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 360
related to the study because one of the aspects of the present study determined the current state of campus
security in terms of personnel security.
The statement of Siciliano regarding problems with school security is directly related to the study since the
present study established some problems regarding school security, however, the statement is more on man-
made and natural disasters and the present study is on problems regarding the implementation of school security.
Finally, anomie theory, crime is rampant to a place where there is a poor implementation of law or worst, no
policies are being implemented. Therefore, rules and regulations should be created and implemented without
fear or favor.

Paradigm of the Study

The paradigm of the study is composed of independent and dependent variables. Independent variables are;
the current state of school security in terms of physical security, personnel security, and document security, the
problems encountered by the respondents regarding school security, the difference in the implementation of
campus security in selected HEIs in Nueva Ecija, the level of satisfaction of the respondents with security
services and functions of security personnel in the implementation of campus security; and the reference to a
security manual. The dependent variable is the Standardized Security Manual.

METHODS
This study utilizes the descriptive-quantitative method of research using questionnaires as the main instrument
for gathering pertinent data. Descriptive-survey is suitable wherever the subjects vary among themselves and
one is interested to know the extent to which different conditions and situations are obtained among subjects.
The word "survey" signifies the gathering of data regarding the present condition. A survey is useful in
providing the value of facts and focusing attention on the most important things to be reported (L. Calmorin
and M. Calmorin, 2007). Furthermore, this study utilizes descriptive since it describes the extent of
implementation of campus security: satisfaction with security services and functions of security personnel; the
problems encountered in the implementation of campus security in the selected HEIs in Nueva Ecija; and the
level of difference in the implementation of campus security among the selected HEI’s.

Sampling Technique
The schools are selected through a purposive sampling technique. The purposive sampling technique is based
on selecting individuals as samples according to the purposes of the researcher as his control. An individual is
selected as part of the sample due to good evidence that he is representative of the total population (L.
Calmorin, M. Calmorin, 2007). There were five Higher Educational Institutions that was selected as
respondents namely: Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology, Eduardo L. Joson Memorial College,
Wesleyan University-Philippines, Araullo University, College of Immaculate Concepcion. They were selected
as the subjects since the five selected HEIs are composed of one state university, one state college, one private
college, and two private universities that are to balance the population of private and public schools. Further,
they represent the total population by being the largest schools and earliest institutions of learning.

The Respondents
Among the five HEIs selected, there are three groups of respondents utilized in this study, namely:
administrators, faculty and students, and security personnel. The two groups of respondents (Administrator
and Security Personnel) are represented by ten individuals, faculty and students are represented by twenty
individuals, 10 for faculty and 10 for students. A total of 40 respondents per school and a total of 200
respondents from the five selected HEIs.
The selected schools are Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology, Cabanatuan City with 40 or 20
percent Administrator, Faculty and Students, and Security personnel, are included as a sample; Wesleyan
University – Philippines, Cabanatuan City with 40 0r 20 percent Administrator, Faculty and Students, and
Security personnel, are included as subjects; Eduardo L. Joson Memorial College, Palayan City with 40 0r 20
percent Administrator, Faculty and Students, and Security personnel are included as samples; College of
Immaculate Concepcion, Cabanatuan City with 40 0r 20 percent
Administrators, faculty, students, and security personnel are included; Araullo University, Cabanatuan City
with 40 0r 20 percent administrators, faculty, students, and Security personnel are included as samples. Table
1 shows the distribution of subjects.

Research Locale
This study was conducted at the selected HEIs in Nueva Ecija, namely: Nueva Ecija University of Science and
Technology (Sumacab Campus), Eduardo L. Joson Memorial College, Wesleyan University – Philippines
(Cabanatuan), College of Immaculate Concepcion and Araullo University.

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 361
Instrumentation
A questionnaire was used as a research instrument in gathering pertinent data from the respondents. As a
preliminary preparation, the researcher review some related literature as the bases for the formulation of the
questionnaire. It is composed of three sets of questionnaires, the first set is for administrators wherein the
particular questions attempt to elicit the current state of campus security in the selected HEIs in Nueva Ecija; the
second set is for security guards wherein it tries to determine the level of satisfaction of the security services and
functions of the chief security; and the third set is for students and faculty, it tries to determine the level of
satisfaction of the security services and functions of security guards and the problems encountered in the
implementation of campus security in the selected HEI’s.

Test for Reliability

For reliability, the researcher used the test-retest method. The questionnaires were administered twice to the
students of PLT College Inc., Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya. The second administration was after ten days after
the first administration. The internal consistency between the first and second administration of the
questionnaires was computed with the use of Cronbach’s Alpha.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher construct a communication letter to the Presidents of the selected HEIs to be signed by the
Adviser asking permission to conduct the study in their schools. After that, the researcher proceeded to the
selected HEIs to distribute the questionnaires. The researcher gave the respondents ten days to answer the
questionnaire. After ten days the researcher retrieved the questionnaires. The questionnaires were also aided by
an interview. The respondents were advised that the results of the study were utilized in improving campus
security services. In the construction of the security manual, some documentary sources were utilized in
constructing the proposed security manual aside from the data gathered.

Statistical Treatment of Data

Weighted mean was used to determine the current state of campus security; satisfaction of respondents on the
security services and function of security personnel.
Weighted mean was computed using the formula
X=∑X/N
Where: X = mean
∑ X = sum of scores
N = total of respondents
Categorization of data. The descriptive equivalent rating and ways of values are presented below using 4-point
Likert Scale.

Table 1. Basis of Interpretation of Data

A. Current state of campus security.
Mean Range Descriptive Equivalent
3.26-4.00 Very Much Implemented/VMI
2.51-3.25 Much Implemented/MI
1.76-2.50 Moderately Implemented/ModI
1.00-1.75 Not Implemented/NI
B. Level of satisfaction of campus security services and functions.
Mean Range Descriptive Equivalent
3.26-4.00 Very Much Satisfied/VMS
2.51-3.25 Much Satisfied/MS
1.76-2.50 Moderately Satisfied/ModS
1.00-1.75 Not Satisfied/NS
C. Problems encountered in the selected HEI’s in Nueva Ecija in the implementation of campus security were
computed by frequency counts.
D. The level of difference in the current state of School Security among the selected HEI’s in Nueva Ecijawas
computed using the Chi Square test.

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 362
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
A. Current State of Campus Security
The first group of respondents which is the administrators rated the currents state of campus security in terms of
physical security, document security and personnel security.

Physical Security

Table 2. Current state of Campus Security in terms of physical security

Particulars Total WM DE
A. Physical Security
A.1 Perimeter Barrier
1. The boundaries of the perimeter are well defined and are 156 3.4 Very Much Implemented
protected by perimeter barriers.
2. Perimeter barriers have a standard height with at least 7 154 3.4 Very Much Implemented
feet.
3. The perimeter barriers have top guard with at least 1 foot. 141 3.1 Much Implemented

4. The gates are closely monitored by security guards. 165 3.6 Very Much Implemented
Mean 3.4 Very Much Implemented
A.2 Protective Lighting
1. Lightings are provided at main entrances/exits. 157 3.4 Very Much Implemented
2. Parking areas are well illuminated. 137 3 Much Implemented
3. Alleys, hallways, sidewalks or any passages are well 144 3.1 Much Implemented
illuminated.
4. Emergency lightings are readily available when needed. 146 3.2 Much Implemented
5. The boundaries are well illuminated. 140 3 Much Implemented
Mean 3.2 Much Implemented
A.3 Electronic Devices
1. CCTV cameras are located in strategic areas of the 132 2.9 Much Implemented
campus.
2. Fire alarm is installed to warn every body of any when 141 3.1 Much Implemented
incident arises.
3. Two way radios are available among security personnel. 143 3.1 Much Implemented
Mean 3 Much Implemented
A.4 Protective locks and key control
1. Gates are secured with padlocks when the campus is 156 3.4 Very Much Implemented
closed.
2. High risk areas are secured by high security locks. 148 3.2 Much Implemented
3. Keys are regularly inspected to ensure they have not been 142 3.1 Much Implemented
damaged or lost.
4. A key depositor is centrally available. 145 3.2 Much Implemented
5. Issuance of key/s is well monitored and logged. 144 3.1 Much Implemented
Mean 3.2 Much Implemented
A.5 Security Cabinet
1. Appropriate container is available for safekeeping of 148 3.2 Much Implemented
important document on all offices.
2. Vault is available at cashier's office for security. 156 3.4 Very Much Implemented
3. Documents at registrar's office are placed in a file room 160 3.5 Very Much Implemented
for deeper security.
Mean 3.4 Very Much Implemented
A.6 Personnel identification and movement control
1. Checking of identification document is implemented to 159 3.5 Very Much Implemented
monitor persons entering the premises (pass system).
2. Packages brought inside and outside is inspected and 148 3.2 Much Implemented
cleared by security personnel.
3. Privately owned vehicles complies with the gate pass 153 3.3 Very Much Implemented
policy of the institution.
4. Traffic sign are available to guide everybody in their 137 3 Much Implemented
destination.

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 363
5. Appropriate warning signs are available to all restricted 139 3 Much Implemented
and danger zone areas.
6. Access to restricted areas is limited to authorize personnel 149 3.2 Much Implemented
only.
Mean 3.2 Much Implemented
A.7 Protective Alarms/Fire Alarm System
1. Fire alarms are installed in every building. 149 3.2 Much Implemented
Mean 3.2 Much Implemented
A.8 Security Guard Forces
1. The security guards are equipped with basic security 157 3.4 Very Much Implemented
equipment like whistle, two-way radio and prescribed
weapon.
2. The security personnel are constantly available. 164 3.6 Very Much Implemented
3. Approachable attitude for security personnel. 158 3.4 Very Much Implemented
4. The security personnel regularly implements the no id no 156 3.4 Very Much Implemented
entry policy of the university.
Mean 3.5 Very Much Implemented
Overall Mean 3.3 Very Much Implemented

Table 2 represents the current state of campus security in terms of physical security. The data shows that the
first group of respondents perceived the current state of campus security in terms of physical security to be very
well implemented. Considering the table below shows that the perimeter barrier is very much implemented,
with a weighted mean of 3.35. This is true since, in actual observation, most of the selected HEIs have perimeter
barriers. Item A.5 Security Cabinet, garnered the highest mean of 3.36 or very much implemented since storage
facilities are obvious during the distribution of questionnaires. In an interview conducted by the researcher,
some students, faculty, and staff are great concern about the importance of perimeter barriers, that according to
them, security personnel and the administration shall see to it that since perimeter barrier is the first line of
defense from intrusion; it must at least possess the minimum standard. The height of the perimeter barrier of the
school denies easy access to intruders to the school. Further, students, faculty, and staff said that CCTV is very
helpful in the sense that it secures their belongings, especially at the offices where valuable documents and
valuable properties are located. Moreover, in an interview with some security personnel, they said that they were
having problems with the offices that were not being locked by the respected occupant of that office. They said
that some offices were not locked after office hours, that may be, the occupant of that office forget to lock the
said office. According to them, one key should be under the supervision of the security unit and the other key
should be under the supervision of the head of the respected office for them to lock offices that were left open
after office hours.

Personnel Security
Table 3 exemplifies the current state of campus security in terms of personnel security. The data represents that
the first group of respondents perceived the current state of campus security in terms of personnel security to be
very much implemented. This suggests that the selected Higher Educational Institutions adhere to the practices
and procedures of recruiting security personnel for the school. In an interview with some of the security
personnel, they said that their security agency asks them for documentary requirements before applying like
security licenses, and clearances. They also mention that they were interviewed by the Chief Security of the
school before they are deployed.

Table 3. Current state of Campus Security in terms of Personnel Security

Particulars Total WM DE
1. Conduct bidding for security agencies to choose 160 3.5 Very Much Implemented
better provider of security services.
2. Submission of Licensed to Operate from the 159 3.5 Very Much Implemented
Security Agency
3. Submission of Security Licensed 157 3.4 Very Much Implemented
4. Submission of Good Moral Character 159 3.5 Very Much Implemented
5. Submission of Certificate of Trainings 156 3.4 Very Much Implemented
6. Submission of School Records (Diploma, Transcript 158 3.4 Very Much Implemented
of Records)
7. Submission of Duty Detailed Order 165 3.6 Very Much Implemented
8. Submission of Clearance (PNP, Court, NBI,) 160 3.5 Very Much Implemented

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 364
 9. Conduct of Personal Interview 156 3.4 Very Much Implemented
10. Conduct of Background Investigation 155 3.4 Very Much Implemented
Mean 3.5 Very Much Implemented

Document Security
Table 4 presents the current state of campus security in terms of document security. The first group of
respondents rated document security as "very much implemented," with a total weighted mean of 3.43. Table
Item 5 stating that sensitive data are entrusted to authorized representatives gained the highest weighted mean of
3.50 or very much implemented. It implies that sensitive information is kept by the person with authority.
Concerning one of the phrases about document security state that Storage and backup of documents involve a
great deal, more planning than simply deciding which type of filing cabinet or lock will be will purchase. It
involves understanding the space and means in which to store documents for safekeeping and easy retrieval.

Table 4. Current state of Campus Security in terms of Document Security

Particulars Total WM DE
1. Storing sensitive documents in secured 154 3.35 Very Much Implemented
containers.
2. Written communication or any classified matter 157 3.41 Very Much Implemented
are not disclose to unauthorized person.
3. Classified matter shall be released for public 160 3.48 Very Much Implemented
consumption only upon the consent of the
department head or his authorized representative.
4. Normally all information are released through 160 3.48 Very Much Implemented
public information officers.
5. Sensitive data are entrusted to authorized 161 3.5 Very Much Implemented
persons.
6. Employees are aware of sensitive data in the 157 3.41 Very Much Implemented
company and their responsibility in protecting it.
7. Classified document are logged in showing all 159 3.46 Very Much Implemented
received and to whom it was transmitted.
8. Dissemination of classified matter shall be 157 3.41 Very Much Implemented
restricted to persons whose duties required
knowledge or possession thereof.
9. Classified Documents are dispose of properly 157 3.41 Very Much Implemented
Mean 3.43 Very Much Implemented

Analyzing the three parameters, Physical security obtains an overall mean of 3.25 and is interpreted as very
much implemented, Personnel security attains a mean of 3.45 and is interpreted to be very much implemented,
and Information security gains a mean of 3.43 and is interpreted to be very much implemented. Specifically,
along with Physical security item A.3 Electronic devices obtains the lowest mean rating of 3.01 or much
implemented. It was rated the lowest since in actual observation there were limited electronic devices like
security cameras, two-way radios for security guards, and fire alarms and sprinkler systems. In Personnel
security all items were interpreted as very much implemented and likewise information security was rated as
very much implemented. In connection to Presado, J.E. 2016 in her study Level of Security Management at the
University of Eastern Philippines, founds that Security is one of the prime concerns of institutions as it is
considered one of the important components of student services.

B. Problems encountered by respondents regarding implementation of Campus Security

Table 5. Problems encountered by the respondents

Problems Encountered Total Rank
Limited CCTV cameras are installed in strategic locations. 54 1
Sprinkler system and smoke detector is not installed in offices and laboratories. 53 2
Inconsistent in the implementation of NO-ID NO Entry Policy, Visitor’s ID and
logbook, and Gate Pass policy. 51 3
Inadequate security trainings, professional and doctrine development among
security guards. 46 4
Visual surveillance of the parking area is not possible in the guard post. 45 5.5
Insufficient funds in the construction, installation, purchase and improvement of 45 5.5

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 365
security facilities and equipment.
There is no security manual of the college/university. 43 7
Poor lighting in the main entrances/exits and areas for possible intrusion. 41 8
Lacking numbers of security guards. 38 9
Destruction of fence or sections is not repaired immediately. 36 10
Absence of emergency lighting in offices and laboratories. 35 11.5
High risk security areas like offices and laboratories are not secured with high
security doors and locks. 35 11.5
Fire alarm and fire extinguisher is inadequate. 33 13.5
Classified matters are released for public consumption without the consent of
authorized personnel. 33 13.5
There is no policy in recruitment and selection of security guards. 17 15

The second group of respondents which was the Students and Faculty ascertain the following problems
regarding school security. Table 5 shows the ranking of possible situations that was encountered by the
respondents regarding school security. The table also shows that item 7 which states that Limited CCTV
cameras are installed in strategic location was ranked as number one followed by item 8 stating that sprinkler
system and smoke detector is not installed in offices and laboratories and item 10 stating that Inconsistent in the
implementation of NO-ID NO Entry Policy, Visitor's ID and logbook, and Gate Pass policy was ranked as
number three. In addition to the statement of Sciliano, R. 2006, in the old days, smoking in the boy’s room was
the infraction of the day. Today, school officials must deal with violence, sexual harassment, statutory rape,
drugs, weapons, gangs, bombs, shootings, murders, computer hacking, theft, irate parents, and violence in
students’ homes. In an interview with some of the students they mentioned that they only notice CCTV cameras
on entrance and exits of the school. They also said that CCTV camera should also be installed on parking areas
and hallways to help security guards in case of intrusion. They also made mention the absence of sprinkler
system and smoke detector; this is maybe because the building was old or outmoded

C. Difference in the current state of school security among the selected HEI’s

Table 6. Result of the Significant Difference of the Selected HEI’s

Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 611.5804 85 7.195064 75.78823 2.6 1.309231
Columns 38.60628 4 9.65157 101.6635 7.8 2.398211
Error 32.27839 340 0.094936

Total 682.4651 429

Table 6 represents the overall result of chi-square test for the five HEI’s. The p-value obtain was 2.6 which is
greater than 0.05 and interpreted that the five selected HEI’s has no difference in the current state of campus
security. This indicates that the five selected HEI’s are similarly implementing campus security practices.

D. Level of Satisfaction of the respondents on Security Services

Table 7. Level of satisfaction of security services and function in the implementation of campus
security in terms of Chief Security
A. Security services and function of chief security Total WM DE
1. Presides over all meetings and forums of the security services office. 158 3.43 VMS
2. Discusses matters and issues with the security guards concerning college policies 168 3.65 VMS
and related concerns and solicits suggestions and recommendations to solve problems
encountered.
3. Prepares and implement weekly schedule of duties of the security guards. 172 3.74 VMS
4. Prepares and submits to the Director for Administrative and Finance Services 168 3.65 VMS
reports of accomplished duties monthly and annually.
5. Keeps a record of all events concerning security matters whether such occurrence 169 3.67 VMS
happens to a student, personnel or a visitor/guest.
6. Coordinates with the City Police for support of security to all grand events that may 162 3.52 VMS

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 366
be conducted inside the college.
7. Represents the School Safety Officer in the Administrative Council 161 3.5 VMS
8. Prepare a contingency plan for flood, fire and earthquake, bombing and any other 170 3.7 VMS
form of disaster.
9. Supervises effectiveness of security programs implemented by the unit. 172 3.74 VMS
10. Supervise the performance of security personnel, appearance, competence and the 174 3.78 VMS
condition of security equipment.
11. Conducts Security Education and develop security training for security personnel 158 3.43 VMS
Mean 3.62 VMS

The third group of respondents which were the security guards rated the level of satisfaction of security services
and function in the implementation of campus security in terms of Chief Security. The second group of
respondents which was the Students and Faculty rated the level of satisfaction of security services and function
in the implantation of campus security in terms of security guards. It can be observe in table 7 that the
satisfaction of respondents on security services and function of Chief security attained an overall weighted mean
of 3.62 or very much satisfied. Table also shows that item 10; supervise the performance of security personnel,
appearance, competence and the condition of security equipment gained the highest mean rating of 3.78,
described as very much satisfied. The finding showed the satisfaction of respondents to the Chief Security
officer as head of Campus Security was very much satisfied. In an interview with some of the staff they said
that the chief security made rounds on the facilities of the school to monitor weather the security guards are on
their post or monitoring their area of jurisdiction. Some of the Security guards that were interviewed said that
the Chief security conducts meetings after flag ceremony and remind them of their duty and check their
uniforms and equipment.

Table 8. Level of satisfaction of security services and function in the implementation of campus
security in terms of Security Guards
A. Security services and function of security guard Total WM DE
1. Record daily events concerning security matters whether such occurrence happens to a
student, a personnel or visitor/guest. 318 3.18 MS
2. Maintain a logbook in-and-out entry of personnel. 333 3.33 VMS
3. Work with the City Police during grand events that may happen inside the school. 277 2.77 MS
4. Keep the post manned and attended all the time. 307 3.07 MS
5. Implement the No-ID, No Entry Policy for all entering the school premises. 319 3.19 MS
6. Assist visitors and guest for offices to be visited. 309 3.09 MS
7. Interrogate outsiders who are entering the school for suspicious acts and motives. 294 2.94 MS
8. Check students and visitors for unlawful possessions of firearms, ammunitions, and
sharp pointed - deadly materials or illegal drugs. 295 2.95 MS
9. Maintain a regular foot patrol around campus and its vicinity. 302 3.02 MS
10. Maintain a regulated flow of traffic 271 2.71 MS
11. Observes proper courtesy in dealing with clients. 283 2.83 MS
12. Carries complete equipment like first aid kit, flashlight, and two way radio while on
duty. 274 2.74 MS
Mean 2.99 MS

Table 8 shows that the level of satisfaction of respondents in terms of security guards was high with an overall
weighted mean of 2.99. Vividly shown in Table, item two Maintain a logbook in-and-out entry of personnel
obtained the highest mean rating of 3.33 or very much satisfied. It shows that the security guards have records
personnel coming in-and-out of the campus. This is followed by item one record daily event concerning
security matters whether such occurrence happens to a student, a personnel or visitor/guest with a mean rating
of 3.18 much satisfied. In an interview conducted by the researcher with some of the staff, they said that
security guards roam around campus. They also mentioned that the security guards sometimes accompany
visitors on the offices they are going to visit. Moreover, in the Researchers personal encounter during the
distribution of questionnaires the security guards let him log in on the log book before entering the premises.
Some security guards also escorted the researcher to the office he was going to visit.

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 367
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
Based from the findings, the researcher came out with the following conclusion:
1. The five selected HEI’s adheres to security practices and procedures in terms of physical security, personnel
security, and document security as rated by respondents to be very much implemented. This shows that the
schools implement school security excellently.
2. Among the fifteen problems encountered, the top three are: there is Limited CCTV cameras installed in
strategic locations; sprinkler system and smoke detector is not installed in offices and laboratories; and
inconsistent in the implementation of NO-ID NO Entry Policy, Visitor's ID and logbook, and Gate Pass policy.
With these problems it can be said that there is no impeccable security.
3. The findings shows that the five selected HEI’s have no difference in their current state of campus security.
Based on actual observation security practices and procedures are carried out.
4. The very much satisfaction rating along the area of chief security officer and much satisfaction along security
guards by the group of respondents signify that they are pleased with the function and services rendered by
security personnel.

Recommendations
The researcher made the following recommendations based from the conclusions:
1. The selected HEI’s shall continue and maintain the security practices and procedures that were already put
into operation.
2. Installation of Security cameras on strategic locations should be considered including sprinkler systems and
strict implementation of No ID No entry policy, visitors logbook and gate pass policy.
3. Security guards should continue and consistently implement the security policies, rules and regulations of the
school.
4. Security personnel shall continue performing their duties and function and maintain good relationship with
their clients.
5. Creation of security manual based on the findings of this study for the improvement of implementation of
campus security.

REFERENCES
1. Alasaas, JP. R. (2016). Campus Security of North Luzon Philippines State College, Candon City,
Ilocos Sur. Unpublished Thesis, CICOSAT Colleges,Lingsat, City of San Fernando, La Union
2. Alviola, A. A. (2014). Introduction to Criminology and Psychology of Crimes. Philippines:
Wiseman’s Book Trading, Inc.
3. Brian Andrew Carrico (2016). The Effects of Students' Perceptions of Campus Safety and Security
on Student Enrollment. Retrieved on (6:10pm, 10/14/17) from
http://mds.marshall.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2010&context=etd
4. Calmorin, L. P. and Calmorin, M. A. (2007).Research Methods and Thesis Writing (Second
Edition). Philippines: Rex Book Store
5. Engish oxford living dictionary.(2017). Security. Retrieved on (11:55am , 10/13/2017) from
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/security
6. Gilford, J. (2017). Clery Act. Retrieved on (6:18, 10/14/17) from http://uwpd.wisc.edu/crime-
data/clery-act/
7. Lupos, J. S. (2017. Physical Security at Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology,
Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija. Unpublished thesis, CICOSAT Colleges,Lingsat, City of San
Fernando, La Union
8. Manwong, R. K. and Delizo, B. (2005).Industrial Security Management. Philippines: Wiseman’s
Book Trading, Inc.
9. Official Gazzette (2017).The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, Article III.
Retrieved on October 17, 2017 from http://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/the-1987-
constitution-of-the-republic-of-the-philippines/the-1987-constitution-of-the-republic-of-the-
philippines-article-iii/
10. Presado, J.E. (2016). The Level of Security Management in the University of Eastern Philippines.
Retrieved on October 17, 2017 from http://uruae.org/siteadmin/upload/5695UH0516138.pdf
11. Schafer, J.A. (2016). College Student Perceptions of Campus Safety Initiatives. Retrieved on (9:16,
10/14/17) from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0887403416631804
12. St. Scholastica’s College (2017).Safety and Security Office. Retrieved on (12:30, 10/13/17) from
http://ssc.edu.ph/ssc-community/offices/safety-and-security-office/

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 368
13. Sunstar Manila (2016). Senators urge tighter security in schools amid bomb scares. Retrieved on
(2:54, 10/13/17) from http://www.sunstar.com.ph/manila/local-news/2016/09/09/senators-
urge-tighter-security-schools-amid-bomb-scares-496685
14. Tamagawa (2017).Campus Security. Retrieved on October 17, 2017 from
http://www.tamagawa.jp/en/about/challenge/security.html
15. United Nations (2017). Chapter VII Action with respect to threats to the peace breaches to the
peace and acts of aggression. Retrieved on (2:55, 10/14/2017) from
http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/chapter-vii/index.html
16. US Department of Education (2017).The Handbook for Campus Safety and Security Reporting.
Retrieved on October 17, 2017 from https://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/safety/campus.html
17. Zulig, K. J. (2015).Preliminary Development of the Student Perceptions of School Safety Officers
Scale. Retrieved on (9:04, 10/14/17) from
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15388220.2015.1116994

Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, Vol. 14 (2); ISSN: 1989-9572 369