INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 830
Research and Development Project Review and Information
Dissemination (RDPRID) Report Format for Completed Project
Matamorosa, Maria Liwayway P., Rey A. Anonuevo., San Agustin, Maria Joycee C., Aureus, Mary
Grace A., Dick Harence Dela Vega
Central Bicol State University of Agriculture, Naga City, Camarines SUR, Philippines
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000072
Received: 12 October 2025; Accepted: 20 October 2025; Published: 04 November 2025
ABSTRACT
This descriptive-correlational study utilizes the standardized Research and Development Framework (RDF) to
assess the personal profiles of the 48 regular faculty of CBSUA-Sipocot alongside their knowledge and
intellectual abilities, and personal effectiveness. This data is analyzed utilizing the Statistical Package for the
Social Sciences (SPSS) version 27; frequency count and percentage for personal profiling, mean and ranking
for assessing research competence, and Kendall's Tau-b in determining the relationship between personal
profiles and research competence because the gathered data is not normally distributed and has several ties
rank (Lee, 2025). Out of the 34 non-mandated faculty (instructors and assistant professors), 13 research paper
have been completed: seven are collaborative efforts, and five have been published, with two of the published
works having been cited. On the other hand, 7 research papers - three collaborative and four published with
one citation - have been completed by the 16 faculty members mandated (associate professor) to conduct
research. Moreover, the 48 faculty members at CBSUA-Sipocot exhibit moderate level of Knowledge and
Intellectual Capacity - Knowledge Base: 3.11, Cognitive Abilities: 3.20, and Creativity: 3.21 - and Personal
Effectiveness - Personal Qualities: 3.19, Self-management: 3.17, and Professional and Career Development:
3.11. Finally, the positive significant correlation between the faculty’s profile and research competence –
knowledge, creativity, and personal qualities - suggests provision of necessary training, activities, and
programs that shall articulate research productivity while maintaining balance between work and leisure.
Keywords: Research Culture Faculty Research Competency Research and Development Perspective (RDF)
Rationale
Research is one of the main functions of a faculty in a higher academic institution to improve the quality of
education. The Central Bicol State University of Agriculture, as an “agricultural research university with
global standards,” encourages its faculty to conduct research that is relevant and aligned with its agenda on
climate change adaptation measures, food and nutrition security/livelihood security/organic agriculture,
curriculum reform, environmental management, and Bicol development and policy studies. CBSUA-Sipocot,
as a satellite campus, is also required to do the same. The campus has a total of 59 permanent teaching staff,
consisting of 17 associate professors, 21 assistant professors and 21 instructors. Essentially, in terms of its
performance over the period 2018-2022, the existing research ecosystem of the campus has shown that the
campus meets the targets in terms of the number of research outputs used by the prospect beneficiaries in the
last three years and the number of published research in internationally peer-reviewed or CHED-recognized
journals. However, compared to the number of research results completed within the year, the campus only
achieved 10% in 2022 as only one (1) of its 10 targets has been completed (Research and Development Unit
PREXC Report, 2023). This troubling data needs to be addressed not only in terms of PREXC performance,
but also for the re-cultivation of research culture among faculty and a review of campus research management.
No studies have been conducted on this matter.
Research culture matters. Iqbal (2018) articulated that this speaks about a researcher's dominant ideas and
values, the weaknesses, and the cause of low participation in research. Therefore, this is the substructure that
shows all the intertwined factors from conceptualization to dissemination. A positive research culture
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 831
promotes, among other things, innovation, collaboration and a healthy work balance, while a negative research
culture says something different. Not to mention that Callaghan, et al. (2024) pointed out the narrow concepts
of “research excellence and excellent research at all costs”. These and more have direct impact on the quality
of research. However, on the bright side, this can be remedied with the concerted effort of the institution itself,
the funding agency, the publisher, etc. Therefore, there is no reason for an institution, such as an academic
institution, not to implement measures such as “policies, advice, communications, training and related
initiatives that support the success of researchers at all stages of their careers”. This will promote a positive
research culture characterized by valuing contributions to a research activity and supporting each other to
produce research that meets the highest standards of academic quality.
CBSUA-Sipocot's research landscape is explained in this article using the Research Development Framework
(RDF) as the main tool. RDF is a new research and development approach that represents the research culture
and management of an organization such as an academic institution. This is created based on empirical data
designed to “help understand the knowledge, behaviors and attitudes expected of effective and highly skilled
researchers” (Institute for Academic Development, 2017). It covers four main domains, namely, Knowledge
and Intellectual Abilities (Domain A) with sub-domains Knowledge Base (A1), Cognitive Abilities (A2), and
Creativity (A3); Personal Effectiveness (Domain B) with sub-domains Personal Qualities (B1), Self-
management (B2), and Professional and Career Development (B3); Research Governance and Organization
(Domain C) with sub-domains Professional Conduct (C1), Research Management (C2), and Finance, Funding,
and Resources (C3); and Engagement, Influence, and Impact (Domain D) with sub-domains Working with
Others (D1), Communication and Dissemination (D2), and Engagement and Impact (D3). Aside from
providing an overview of the strengths and areas of focus of CBSUA-Sipocot's faculty researchers, as well as
the research landscape and resource capabilities, this framework is intended to essentially guide an intervention
plan for identified areas in need of further improvement.
Objectives
In general, this study mapped the prevailing research culture in CBSUA-Sipocot campus. The same will be the
inputs for the intervention plan that the campus may implement to address the areas that need further
enhancement.
Specifically, this intends to:
1. Profile the faculty-researchers of the campus along academic rank, field of specialization, number of
completed research, number of completed research relevant to specialization, number of research
published, number of research citations received, number of research-related training attended, and
number of research-related collaborative undertakings.
2. Determine the research competency of the faculty along with their knowledge and intellectual abilities
in terms of knowledge base, cognitive ability and creativity.
3. Determine the research competency of the faculty along with their personal effectiveness in terms of
personal qualities, self-management, and professional and career development.
4. Determine if there is a significant relationship between the personal profile and the research
competencies of the faculty researchers
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Literature shows the significance of research skills. It is expected that faculty-researchers possess such.
Pedrajas and Bito-onon (2022) found out that faculty in State Universities and Colleges in Iloilo are competent
along basic research skills, problem solving and other critical thinking skills, dissemination of research results,
however, have difficulty in terms of actual conduct of research which could probably be challenged by time
management. It was further found out that faculty rank is not a significant factor to one’s research competency.
On the other hand, Perez-Penup's study (2024) analyzed the research skills that enable one to conduct critical,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 832
reflective and high-quality research which are effective and functional methodological, cognitive,
communicative and social skills, and digital knowledge. Using as foundations the available literature from
2008–2003 and the studies of Dipp’s (2013) and Buendia-Arias’, et al. (2018). Likewise, Liwanag, et.al.
(2023) found that a faculty-researcher’s functional research competencies, project and team management
skills, and personal aptitudes have positive impacts on them as researchers. Hence, recommended continued
enhancement through attendance to field-specific seminars, conference, or training. This is supported by
Esturas (2023) who laid down the importance of developing research culture in the academes with emphasis on
evidence-based practice and research productivity, research culture, and the influencing factors that improve
research performance. Data revealed significant correlation between research skills, research productivity, and
personal satisfaction. Teachers are more engaged when the research endeavor is aligned to their skills and
when administrative support is present, especially, on paper presentation. However, despite the significant
indirect impact of the teachers’ research abilities, enhancement of motivational factors and research skills is
recommended.
Nevertheless, truth be told that not all possess the necessary research competency. Oestar and Marzo (2024)
showed the of competency of teacher-researchers and the factors that affect their competency in making action
research. Data revealed less competency in choosing the necessary tools for data analysis and interpretation
and publication of completed research. Factors identified to such less competency are knowledge, attitude, and
resources. This data served as baseline for actions to be taken which top in mind is capability building.
Likewise, the paper of Rogayan (2022) showed the research productivity of faculty in terms of production,
presentation, and publication: only 26% of the faculty engaged in research production while the remaining
75% did not participate in any research endeavors. Hence, an intervention plan on “capability programs and
research culture development” is recommended, particularly, on research collaborations and linkages, and
policy creation. Furthermore, Roman (2021) worked on determining the research competencies and
performance of faculty in higher education institutions (HEIs) along the number of researches completed,
presentations, publications, and citations. Data showed that the faculty members’ research performance
decreases as the analysis moves from one research parameter to another higher parameter. Showing that
research competency is a major predictor of research productivity, especially, in terms of the number of
completed studies. Hence, the HEIs’ provision of research trainings and mentoring programs to faculty to
increase research performance.
Conceptually, this research followed the Input, Process and Output (IPO) model: The input includes the profile
of the campus's faculty researchers: academic rank, area of specialization, number of completed research
papers, number of completed research papers relevant to the specialization, number of published research
papers, number of research citations received, number of research-related research papers attended, and
number of research-related collaborations. This also includes the research competence of the campus faculty as
well as their knowledge and intellectual abilities in terms of knowledge base, cognitive skills and creativity, as
well as their personal effectiveness in terms of personal qualities, self-management and professional and
professional development. The process represents the type of data collection. This includes the preparation,
validation, administration and retrieval of the survey questionnaires as well as the documentation analysis and
interpretation. The output of this study will be a database on the profile of the campus's faculty researchers, a
chronicle of its research culture, and input to the intervention plan following the RDF perspective with the aim
of improving its research productivity.
The following theories served as bases for this research: Constructivism Theory, Competence Motivation
Theory, and Cognitive Ability Theory. Construction of Knowledge serves as a means to achieve learning,
competence and room for growth, as mentioned in the study by Magnaye (2020). This has its roots in John
Dewey's Constructivism Theory, which states that people derive meaning from their personal knowledge and
understanding of the universe through experience and contemplation. In addition, social constructivism posits
recognition of one’s ability and complexity to perform and acquisition of new learning (Brau, 2018).
Competence is defined as the “knowledge, skills, attitudes, values, and judgment needed to perform the work
of a particular profession”. The perception of competence is imperative for without it no one will take one’s
work as something effective. Hence, Competence Motivation Theory (White) is a “framework designed to
explain individuals’ motivation to participate, persist, and work hard in any particular achievement context.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 833
The central thesis of the theory is that individuals are attracted to participation in activities at which they feel
competent or capable”. Competence serves as a driving force in the performance of a task. Theory of Cognitive
Abilities explains cognitive ability as “aptitude for carrying out mental processes, such as problem solving,
adaptation, comprehension, reasoning, knowledge acquisition, abstract thought, and making connections
(Flavell, 1998). Essentially, this theory shows that one’s cognitive ability has a great role and impact to his/her
performance.
METHODOLOGY
This study utilized descriptive-correlation method of research. Descriptive method described the personal
profile and the research competency of the faculty researchers while the correlational method determined the
strength and direction of relationship between the profile and the research competency of the respondents.
The respondents in this study were the regular faculty of CBSUA-Sipocot comprised of 34 non-mandated
faculty, 14 faculty mandated to conduct research, and the last group composed of the College Dean, the
Research and Development Coordinator, and the Campus Administrator. This study employed a survey
questionnaire that consisted of two major parts: the personal profile of the faculty researchers and the research
competency of the faculty, which was based on the Research Development Framework. (RDF). The second
part of the questionnaire was divided into 6 domains, which are Knowledge, Cognitive, Creativity, Personal
Qualities, Self-Management, Professional and Carrer Development that underwent a reliability test using
Cronbach’s Alpha with the value of 0.984, 0.985, 0.990, 0.974, 0.984, 0.989, respectively which interpreted as
excellent internal consistency.
The gathered data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 27 along
with frequency count and percentage for the personal profile, mean and ranking for research competency, and
Kendal tau-b for the relationship of profile and research competency because the gathered data is not normally
distributed and has several ties rank (Lee, 2025).
This study does not employ regression analysis because of the limited number of respondents which does meet
the rule of thumb of Green’s (1991) as cited in the study of Memon et.al 2020 for the minimum number of
sample size in ordinal logistic regression.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This section discusses the personal profile and research competencies of the faculty of CBSUA-Sipocot.
Table 1. Personal Profile of the Respondents
Profile
Not Mandated
Mandated
Academic
Rank
Count
Instructor
Assistant Professor
Subtotal
Associate Professor
18(38%)
16(33%)
34(71%)
14(29%)
Number of
Research
Completed
0
11(61%)
10(63%)
21(62%)
8(57%)
1
4(22%)
3(19%)
7(21%)
3(21%)
2
2(11%)
1(6%)
3(9%)
2(14%)
4
0(0%)
0(0%)
0(0%)
1(7%)
5
0(0%)
1(6%)
1(3%)
0(0%)
13
0(0%)
1(6%)
1(3%)
0(0%)
28
1(6%)
0(0%)
1(3%)
0(0%)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 834
Number of
Research
Published
0
14(78%)
15(94%)
29(85%)
11(79%)
1
3(17%)
0(0%)
3(9%)
1(7%)
2
0(0%)
0(0%)
0(0%)
1(7%)
4
0(0%)
0(0%)
0(0%)
1(7%)
13
0(0%)
1(6%)
1(3%)
0(0%)
17
1(6%)
0(%)
1(3%)
0(%)
Number of
Research
Citations
Received
0
17(94%
15(94%)
32(94%)
13(93%)
4
0(0%)
0(0%)
0(0%)
1(7%)
33
1(6%)
0(0%)
1(3%)
0(0%)
36
0(0%)
1(6%)
1(3%)
0(0%)
Number of
Research -
related
Training
Attended
0
6(33%)
8(94%)
14(40%)
1(7%)
1-2
5(28%)
2(12%)
7(21%)
5(36%)
3-4
3(17%)
2(12%)
5(15%)
(29%)
5-6
3(17%)
2(12%)
5(15%)
3(21%)
10
1(6%)
0(0%)
1(3%)
1(7%)
15
0(0%)
1(6%)
1(3%)
0(0%)
30
0(0%)
1(6%)
1(3%)
0(0%)
Number of
Research -
related
Collaborative
Undertakings
0
15(83%)
12(75%)
27(79%)
11(79%)
1
0(0%)
2(13%)
2(6%)
2(14%)
2
3(17%)
0(0%)
3(9%)
0(0%)
3
0(0%)
1(6%)
1(3%)
0(0%)
4
0(0%)
1(6%)
1(3%)
0(0%)
As to the number of completed research, publication, citation, research training, and collaborative research
undertakings, among the 34 not mandated faculty members (instructors and assistant professors) there have
been 13 completed researches where 5 are published and 2 of the 5 have been cited; and there have been 7
collaborative research endeavors.
On the other hand, of the 16 mandated faculty comprised (associate professors) 15 have relevant research
training, but only 7 have completed researches where 4 are published and only 1 is cited, and only 3 are
collaborative research undertakings.
Table 2. Knowledge and Intellectual Abilities of CBSUA-Sipocot Faculty
Area
Sub-Area
Not Mandated
Mandated
Unit Heads
Overall
Mean
Interp.
Mean
Interp.
Mean
Interp.
Mean
Interp.
Knowledge
Subject Knowledge
3.28
HC
3.10
MC
3.43
HC
3.27
MC
Theoretical
3.31
HC
3.18
MC
3.07
MC
3.19
MC
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 835
Knowledge
Practical Application
3.13
MC
3.07
MC
3.03
MC
3.08
MC
Information Seeking
3.24
MC
3.20
MC
3.20
MC
3.21
MC
Information Literacy
and Management
3.18
MC
3.15
MC
2.93
MC
3.09
MC
Language
3.06
MC
3.00
MC
2.67
MC
2.91
MC
Academic Literacy
and Numeracy
3.16
MC
3.10
MC
2.98
MC
3.08
MC
Sub-Area Mean
3.19
MC
3.11
MC
3.04
MC
3.11
MC
Cognitive
Abilities
Analyzing
3.14
MC
3.25
MC
3.13
MC
3.17
MC
Synthesizing
3.16
MC
3.20
MC
3.33
HC
3.23
MC
Critical Thinking
3.27
HC
3.18
MC
3.19
MC
3.21
MC
Evaluating
3.26
HC
3.22
MC
3.22
MC
3.23
MC
Problem Solving
3.17
MC
3.02
MC
3.14
MC
3.11
MC
Sub-Area Mean
3.21
MC
3.18
MC
3.20
MC
3.20
MC
Creativity
Inquiring Mind
3.44
HC
3.46
HC
3.29
HC
3.40
HC
Intellectual Insight
3.26
HC
3.20
MC
3.13
MC
3.20
MC
Innovation
3.23
MC
3.20
MC
3.19
MC
3.21
MC
Argument
Construction
3.23
MC
3.14
MC
3.07
MC
3.15
MC
Intellectual Risk
3.07
MC
3.10
MC
3.06
MC
3.08
MC
Sub-Area Mean
3.25
HC
3.22
MC
3.15
MC
3.21
MC
Legend: 3.25 - 4.00 - High Competence (HC) 1.75 - 2.49 - Partial Competence (PC) 2.50 - 3.24 - Moderate
Competence (MC) 1.00 - 1.74 - Not Competent (NC)
Table 2 presents the Knowledge and Intellectual Abilities of the faculty and unit heads of CBSUA-Sipocot
along “Knowledge”, “Cognitive Skills” and “Creativity”.
Among the seven (7) sub-parameters under “Knowledge”, non-mandated faculty demonstrated a high level of
competence in “Subject Matter” (3.28) and “Theoretical Knowledge” (3.31) indicative of their clear and in-
depth understanding of the basic principles, theories, and framework of a particular research project. Similarly,
the unit heads shared such high level of competence with the non-mandated faculty when it comes to “subject
matter” (3.43) indicating their sagacity and prudence in endorsing research proposals vis-à-vis the guidelines
and the targets of the University and the specialization of the faculty. On the other hand, the faculty mandated
to conduct research showed no high level of competence in any of the seven sub-parameters which probably is
one of the possible reasons of the limited number of finished research.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 836
Across the five (5) sub-parameters under Cognitive Abilities, non-mandated teachers demonstrated high
competence in “Critical Thinking” (3.27) and “Assessment” (3.26) indicating their understanding of the
limitations and complexities any subject under investigation. The unit heads, on the other hand, showed high
level of competence in “Synthesizing” (3.33) signifying their arriving at unified solution/decision in relation to
any concerns pertaining to research processes. In contrast, mandated faculty only showed moderate
competencies in all five sub-parameters suggesting possible struggle in terms of complex research endeavors.
Regarding the five (5) sub-parameters under “Creativity,” all faculty members (non-mandated, unit heads,
mandated) demonstrated high competence in “Inquiring Mind” (3.44), (3.46), and (3.29), respectively,
suggesting that every faculty of the Campus possess intellectual curiosity.
Generally, the manifested moderate competence of the faculty in relation to Knowledge and Intellectual
Abilities - “Knowledge” (3.11), “Cognitive Abilities” (3.20), and “Creativity” (3.21) - proposes that further
training be included in the plans/targets of the Research Division of the Campus every year.
Table 3. Personal Effectiveness of CBSUA-Sipocot Faculty
Area
Sub-Area
Not Mandated
Mandated
Unit Heads
Overall
Mean
Interp.
Mean
Interp.
Mean
Interp.
Mean
Interp.
Personal
Qualities
Enthusiasm
3.22
MC
3.23
MC
3.03
MC
3.16
MC
Perseverance
3.27
HC
3.20
MC
2.90
MC
3.12
MC
Integrity
3.30
HC
3.20
MC
3.15
MC
3.22
MC
Self Confidence
3.26
HC
3.21
MC
3.23
MC
3.23
MC
Self-Reflection
3.35
HC
3.24
MC
3.11
MC
3.23
HC
Responsibility
3.24
MC
3.18
MC
3.15
MC
3.19
MC
Sub-Area Mean
3.27
MC
3.21
MC
3.10
MC
3.19
MC
Self-
Management
Preparation and
Prioritization
3.25
MC
3.23
MC
3.15
MC
3.21
MC
Commitment to
Research
3.15
MC
3.08
MC
3.17
MC
3.13
MC
Time Management
3.09
MC
2.97
MC
3.04
MC
3.03
MC
Responsiveness to
Change
3.24
MC
3.21
MC
3.23
MC
3.23
MC
Work-life Balance
3.28
HC
3.22
MC
3.28
HC
3.26
MC
Sub-Area Mean
3.20
MC
3.14
MC
3.17
MC
3.17
MC
Professional and
Career
Development
Career
Management
3.25
MC
3.11
MC
3.11
MC
3.16
MC
Continuing
Professional
3.24
MC
3.24
MC
3.21
MC
3.23
MC
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 837
Development
Responsive to
Opportunities
3.30
HC
2.99
MC
3.19
MC
3.16
MC
Networking
3.18
MC
2.98
MC
3.13
MC
3.10
MC
Reputation and
Esteem
2.96
MC
2.78
MC
3.00
MC
2.91
MC
Sub-Area Mean
3.19
MC
3.02
MC
3.13
MC
3.11
MC
Legend: 3.25 - 4.00 - High Competence (HC) 1.75 - 2.49 - Partial Competence (PC) 2.50 - 3.24 - Moderate
Competence (MC) 1.00 - 1.74 - Not Competent (NC)
Table 3 shows the Personal Effectiveness of the faculty and unit heads of CBSUA-Sipocot, particularly, in
relation to their “Personal Qualities”, “Self-Management”, and “Professional and Career Development”.
Along “Personal Qualities”, non-mandated faculty demonstrated high competence in terms of “Self-reflection”
(3.35), “Integrity” (3.30), “Perseverance” (3.27), and “Self-confidence” (3.26) all reflective of the essential
qualities and characteristics expected of a faculty researcher. On the other hand, both the mandated faculty and
the unit heads did not demonstrate high competence with respect to any of the six (6) sub-parameters implying
that probably due to their academic or administrative stature may have interpersonal relationship issues that
have impact on their output and effectiveness, respectively.
In terms of the five (5) sub-parameters of “Self-management,” non-mandated faculty displayed high
competence in terms of “Preparation and Prioritization” (3.25) while in terms of “Work-life Balance” both the
non-mandated faculty and unit heads demonstrated high competence (3.28). This suggests that both understand
the compelling basis upon which the completion of research and the achievement of goals rest. On the other
hand, the moderate competence of the mandated faculty along self-management means the need for re-
cultivation of desire to conduct research and time and emotional management.
Regarding “Professional and Career Development,” of the five (5) sub-parameters, only the non-mandated
faculty demonstrated high competence in the areas of “Opportunity Responsiveness” (3.30) and “Career
Management” (3.25) indicating passionate desire to achieve greater heights in both personal and professional
spheres. The moderate competence of the unit heads and mandated faculty suggests the need to revitalize their
career to full extent.
The sub-area means of 3.19 (Personal Qualities), 3.17 (Self-management), and 3.11 (Professional and Career
Development) propounds that added skills, knowledge, and experience exposure and enhancement are
imperative for further personal and professional advancement.
This section discusses the relationship between the profile of the CBSUA-Sipocot faculty members and their
Knowledge and Intellectual Abilities, particularly Knowledge Base, Cognitive Abilities, and Creativity
Table 4 reveals that the faculty members’ academic rank (p>0.05), number of research completed (p>0.05),
number of research published (p>0.05), number of research citations received (p>0.05), and number of
research-related collaborative undertakings (p>0.05) did not exhibit significant correlations with any of the
seven sub-domains related to knowledge base demonstrating the importance of a thorough understanding of
existing relevant literature in crafting and conducting significant and impactful research as these form strong
foundation for any research endeavor. Table 4 also highlighted that only the academic rank of the faculty
researchers has a negative correlation with their research competencies in 7 areas, indicating that holding
higher academic ranks tends to have lower levels of research knowledge. This concurs with the results of the
study of Abella et al. (2024) that younger faculty members with lower academic rank were more research-
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 838
oriented, more personally interested in research, and more perceptive of the usefulness of research in the
profession and life.
Table 4. Relationship between the Profile and the Knowledge Base Competencies of the CBSUA-Sipocot
Faculty
Knowledge
Base
Profile
AR
NCR
NRP
NRCR
NRRTA
NRCU
Subject
Knowledge
Pearson Correlation
.029
.163
.181
.012
.432**
.221
Sig. (2-tailed)
.802
.214
.170
.929
.001
.091
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Theoretical
Knowledge
Pearson Correlation
-.019
.124
.182
-.084
.414**
.116
Sig. (2-tailed)
.875
.346
.169
.535
.001
.377
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Practical
Application
Pearson Correlation
-.088
.137
.239
.012
.407**
.182
Sig. (2-tailed)
.456
.299
.071
.929
.001
.167
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Information
Seeking
Pearson Correlation
-.012
.082
.202
-.003
.404**
.185
Sig. (2-tailed)
.919
.532
.124
.982
.001
.156
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Information
Literacy and
Management
Pearson Correlation
-.013
.173
.231
-.076
.408**
.184
Sig. (2-tailed)
.911
.191
.081
.576
.001
.161
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Language
Pearson Correlation
-.003
.062
.149
-.141
.400**
.164
Sig. (2-tailed)
.977
.641
.263
.299
.001
.213
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Academic
Literacy and
Numeracy
Pearson Correlation
.024
.110
.099
-.171
.461**
.169
Sig. (2-tailed)
.838
.401
.454
.206
.000
.197
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Note:
AR
-
Academic rank
NRCR
-
Number of Research Citations
Received
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 839
NCR
-
Number of Completed research
NRRTA
-
Number of Research-related
Training Attended
NRP
-
Number of Research Published
NRCU
-
Number of Research-related
Collaborative Undertakings
*** Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-
tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
On the other hand, attendance to research-related training exhibits a significant positive correlation with
research competency across the seven sub-areas of knowledge base (p < 0.05) suggesting that a faculty's
research expertise is heavily reliant on the type of exposure and relevant training provided, particularly, on
topics relevant to specialization, research methodologies and framework, motivation and environment, and
publication (Comon & Corpuz, 2024)
Table 5 shows that the faculty's academic rank, number of published research, and number of research citations
received do not significantly correlate with their research cognitive abilities (p>0.05). It was also highlighted
that only the academic rank of the faculty researchers has a negative correlation with their research
competencies in 3 areas, such as synthesizing, critical thinking, and problem solving, indicating that holding
higher academic ranks tends to have lower levels of cognitive abilities in research (Maravilla, 2020).
On the other hand, number of research published by the faculty is found significantly correlated with analyzing
and critical thinking abilities; the number of research-related collaborations correlates significantly with
problem-solving skills in relation to research; and the number of research-related training attended by faculty is
significantly correlated with research cognitive abilities such as analyzing, synthesizing, critical thinking,
evaluating, and problem solving all with p<0.01 value. This data suggests that as intellectual abilities are
imperative in research there may be other relevant factors like quality, relevance, and influence of the research,
hence,
Table 5. Relationship between the Profile and the Cognitive Abilities of the CBSUA-Sipocot Faculty
Cognitive
Abilities
Profile
AR
NCR
NRP
NRCR
NRRTA
NRCU
Analyzing
Pearson Correlation
.083
.219
.317
*
.033
.470
**
.245
Sig. (2-tailed)
.476
.095
.016
.808
.000
.061
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Synthesizing
Pearson Correlation
-.103
.090
.129
-.139
.365
**
.132
Sig. (2-tailed)
.380
.494
.330
.305
.004
.316
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Critical
Thinking
Pearson Correlation
-.076
.206
.298
*
.021
.422
**
.213
Sig. (2-tailed)
.512
.115
.023
.877
.001
.103
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Evaluating
Pearson Correlation
.013
.143
.235
-.003
.364
**
.154
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 840
Sig. (2-tailed)
.911
.276
.074
.982
.004
.240
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Problem
Solving
Pearson Correlation
-.041
.208
.253
.145
.458
**
.295
*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.730
.114
.056
.285
.000
.025
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Note:
AR
-
Academic rank
NRCR
-
Number of Research Citations Received
NCR
-
Number of
Completed research
NRRTA
-
Number of Research-related Training Attended
NRP
-
Number of
Research Published
NRCU
-
Number of Research-related Collaborative
Undertakings
*** Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-
tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
advancement of knowledge along with designing, collecting, analyzing, and communicating the data are
likewise paramount (Caingcoy, 2020).
Table 6. Relationship between the Profile and the Creativity of the CBSUA-Sipocot Faculty
Creativity
Profile
AR
NRC
NRP
NRCR
NRRTA
NRCU
Inquiring Mind
Pearson Correlation
-.012
.160
.280
*
.081
.462
**
.303
*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.918
.222
.033
.548
.000
.021
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Intellectual Insight
Pearson Correlation
-.080
.196
.300
*
.203
.505
**
.274
*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.493
.137
.023
.133
.000
.037
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Innovation
Pearson Correlation
-.069
.238
.283
*
.000
.413
**
.212
Sig. (2-tailed)
.561
.072
.033
1.000
.001
.108
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Argument
Construction
Pearson Correlation
-.053
.269
*
.325
*
.185
.421
**
.296
*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.650
.040
.013
.170
.001
.023
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Intellectual Risk
Pearson Correlation
-.061
.305
*
.270
*
.231
.429
**
.349
**
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 841
Sig. (2-tailed)
.606
.021
.042
.089
.001
.008
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Note:
AR
-
Academic rank
NRCR
-
Number of Research Citations Received
NCR
-
Number of Completed
research
NRRTA
-
Number of Research-related Training Attended
NRP
-
Number of Research
Published
NRCU
-
Number of Research-related Collaborative
Undertakings
*** Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-
tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Table 6 displays that the academic rank and the number of research citations received by faculty members do
not exhibit a significant correlation with their research competencies related to creativity (p > 0.05), implying
that academic rank and citation, though vital, do not exclusively speak research competency of the faculty in
terms of creativity (Maravilla, 2020).
On the other hand, the number of completed research undertaken by faculty members exhibits significant
correlations with their ability in argument construction (p < 0.05) and their willingness to take intellectual risks
(p < 0.05) while the number of research published (p<.0.5), number of research-related training attended
(p<0.01), and number of research-related collaborative undertakings (p<0.05) were found significantly
correlated with their research creativity across the five sub-domains imply that engaging in research activities
such as publication, training, and collaboration have positive impact on research competency and stimulates
the generation of valuable new ideas for various fields. Hence, building strong network and new research
framework may add or advance any existing body of knowledge.
This section discusses the relationship between the faculty's profile and their Personal Effectiveness,
specifically, their Personal Qualities, Self-management, and Professional and Career Development.
Table 7. Relationship between the Profile and the Personal Qualities of CBSUA-Sipocot Faculty
Personal Qualities
Profile
AR
NCR
NRP
NRCR
NRRTA
NRCU
Enthusiasm
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.026
.277
*
.338
*
.161
.493
**
.324
*
.824
.034
.010
.233
.000
.013
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Perseverance
Pearson Correlation
-.037
.097
.056
-.081
.364
**
.190
Sig. (2-tailed)
.751
.462
.674
.548
.004
.149
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Integrity
Pearson Correlation
-.097
.114
.073
-.072
.341
**
.121
Sig. (2-tailed)
.407
.386
.581
.594
.006
.356
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 842
Self Confidence
Pearson Correlation
-.049
.163
.220
.009
.459
**
.250
Sig. (2-tailed)
.671
.212
.093
.947
.000
.055
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Self-Reflection
Pearson Correlation
-.127
.200
.260
*
.063
.518
**
.274
*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.281
.128
.049
.641
.000
.037
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Responsibility
Pearson Correlation
-.014
.263
*
.269
*
.181
.472
**
.334
*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.903
.046
.041
.181
.000
.011
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Note:
AR
-
Academic rank
NRCR
-
Number of Research Citations Received
NCR
-
Number of Completed
research
NRRTA
-
Number of Research-related Training Attended
NRP
-
Number of Research
Published
NRCU
-
Number of Research-related Collaborative
Undertakings
*** Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-
tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Table 7 shows that the academic rank and the number of research citations received by faculty members do not
exhibit a significant correlation with their research competencies related to personal qualities (p > 0.05)
indicating that apart from needed personal qualities there may be other factors that impact research
productivity like institutional support and field of specialization.
Nevertheless, the number of completed research projects by faculty members exhibits a significant correlation
with their enthusiasm (p < 0.05) and self-reflection (p < 0.05); the number of published research and the extent
of collaborative research endeavors among faculty members exhibit significant correlations with their
enthusiasm (p < 0.05), self-reflection (p < 0.05), and responsibility (p < 0.05); and the faculty members’
participation in research-related training demonstrated significant correlations with their enthusiasm (p <
0.001), perseverance (p < 0.01), integrity (p < 0.01), self-confidence (p < 0.001), self-reflection (p < 0.001),
and responsibility (p < 0.001).” This data indicates the influence of attendance to training to faculty
researchers’ personal qualities which is articulated to research productivity. Hence, provision of sustained
training that will fully equip the faculty so they be driven to conduct and complete research endeavors, indulge
in collaborative undertakings, and find ways to publish is paramount.
Table 8. Relationship between the Profile and the Self-Management Competency of CBSUA-Sipocot Faculty
Self-
Management
Profile
AR
NRC
NRP
NRCR
NRRTA
NRCU
Preparation and
Prioritization
Pearson
Correlation Sig.
(2-tailed)
-0.004
0.023
0.066
-0.185
.340
**
0.169
0.97
0.864
0.616
0.173
0.007
0.199
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 843
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Commitment to
Research
Pearson
Correlation
-.095
.148
.249
.018
.298
*
.193
Sig. (2-tailed)
.421
.262
.061
.893
.018
.143
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Time
Management
Pearson
Correlation
-.072
.111
.212
.024
.442
**
.161
Sig. (2-tailed)
.539
.401
.109
.859
.000
.220
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Responsiveness
to Change
Pearson
Correlation
-.028
.182
.141
-.012
.377
**
.230
Sig. (2-tailed)
.809
.168
.287
.929
.003
.081
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Work-life
Balance
Pearson
Correlation
-.125
.184
.143
.081
.485
**
.280
*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.288
.164
.281
.548
.000
.033
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Note:
AR
-
Academic rank
NRCR
-
Number of Research Citations Received
NCR
-
Number of Completed
research
NRRTA
-
Number of Research-related Training Attended
NRP
-
Number of Research
Published
NRCU
-
Number of Research-related Collaborative
Undertakings
*** Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-
tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Table 8 displays the no significant correlation between the faculty's self-management and their academic rank,
number of completed research, number of research publications, and number of research citations received
(p>0.05). This implies that more than self-management what is necessary to ensure research productivity may
include mentoring and coaching, management of workloads and personal concerns, more supportive
environment, and adequate research funding among others.
On the other hand, the significant correlation between research collaborative undertakings and self-
management attribute related to work-life balance (p < 0.05) suggests that it is so essential for a faculty to gain
that level of confidence and know the bounds of prior to involve in any collaborative research endeavors.
Additionally, the number of research-related training attended by faculty significantly correlates with their self-
management competence, particularly, in the six domains (p < 0.01): preparation and prioritization,
commitment to research, time management, responsiveness to change, work-life balance. This data emphasizes
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 844
again the relevance of trainings in shaping the faculty-researchers’ self-management competence, however,
must not be taken as predictor for faculty to indulge into publication and collaboration as there are other
factors to consider.
Table 9. Relationship between the Profile and the Professional and Career Development of CBSUA-Sipocot
Faculty
Professional And
Career
Development
Profile
AR
NRC
NRP
NRCR
NRRTA
NRCU
Career
Management
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) N
.041
.048
.046
-.164
.451
**
.165
.725
.714
.724
.223
.000
.207
48
48
48
48
48
48
Continuing
Professional
Development
Pearson Correlation
-.027
.116
.166
-.199
.379
**
.112
Sig. (2-tailed)
.817
.375
.205
.139
.002
.392
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Responsive to
Opportunities
Pearson Correlation
.061
.036
.144
-.168
.393
**
.144
Sig. (2-tailed)
.603
.783
.277
.214
.002
.272
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Networking
Pearson Correlation
.048
.036
.083
-.138
.457
**
.201
Sig. (2-tailed)
.681
.782
.527
.305
.000
.124
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Reputation and
Esteem
Pearson Correlation
.127
.270
*
.265
*
.077
.432
**
.214
Sig. (2-tailed)
.278
.040
.045
.570
.001
.103
N
48
48
48
48
48
48
Note:
AR
-
Academic rank
NRCR
-
Number of Research Citations Received
NCR
-
Number of Completed research
NRRTA
-
Number of Research-related Training
Attended
NRP
-
Number of Research Published
NRCU
-
Number of Research-related
Collaborative Undertakings
*** Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-
tailed)* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed
Table 9 presents that there is no significant correlation between the professional and career development of
faculty and their academic rank, number of research citations, and research-related collaborative undertakings
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 845
(p>0.05) indicating no significant relationship between the sub-domains of this parameter and the personal
profile. On the other hand, the number of completed research and publications significantly correlates with
their reputation, and esteem (p < 0.05). Additionally, the attendance to research-related training by faculty is
significantly correlated with their research competency across five areas of self-management (p < 0.01). This
implies that as professional and career development is integral there are other integral interplaying factors from
research inception to citation like institutional policies and support, publication opportunities and norms, and
self-esteem and self-worth.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The moderate competence of the faculty regarding their knowledge and intellectual skills alongside their
personal effectiveness suggests that the CBSUA-Sipocot faculty have the reasonable and functional skills in
applying the basic principles, theories, and framework of research but requires further assistance to do more
complex research endeavors and gain proficiency, confidence, and authority. Hence, implementing enriched
research programs and activities like continued training and coaching may improve the research competence of
the faculty and the research culture of the Campus, in general.
The non-significant relationship between the faculty members’ cognitive abilities, creativity, personal qualities,
and self-management and their academic rank and number of completed research, publication, and citation
suggest inverse relationship. Therefore, other underlying factors like more equitable and favorable
environment, access to more advance research resources, and mentorship by experts may be considered. On
the other hand, the positive correlation of the faculty members’ knowledge, creativity, and personal qualities
and their academic rank and number of completed research, publication, citation, and training attended
suggests strong relationship, therefore, these valuable competencies must be consistently and continuously
enhanced for further personal advancement and persistent research productivity. Meanwhile, the consistent
positive relationship between the faculty’s personal qualities and training attended suggests that the latter
boosts skills, competence, and knowledge. Thus, is vital in shaping a pool of productive researchers in pursuit
of advancing knowledge. Lastly, the positive correlation between the faculty’s work-life balance and
collaboration suggests that an established professional-personal harmony leads to meaningful teaming up with
other researchers. Therefore, a favorable working environment is essential as this helps increase focus, healthy
mental health, and strong social and professional rapport.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The RDF team would like to extend its heartfelt gratitude to CBSUA-Sipocot Faculty and Research and
Development Unit and to Central Bicol State University of Agriculture, in general.
LITERATURE CITED
1. M Iqbal, S Jalal, MK Mahmood (2018). Factors Influencing Research Culture in Public Universities of
Punjab: Faculty Members' Perspective.Bulletin of Education and Research, v40 n3 p187-200, Source:
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1209775
2. Callaghan, S., Casci, T., Dally, K., Fortunato, L., Fernández, M. P., Sansone, S. A., & Thompson, J.
(2024). Developing Fundamental Research Practice Training at the University of Oxford. Exchanges:
The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 11(3), 66-79.
3. Researcher Development Framework (2024). Vitae 2024 Careers Research and Advisory Centre
(CRAC) Limited.
4. Pedrajas, R., & Bito-onon, J. (2022). Research competence of Faculty in State Universities and
Colleges. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Analysis, Education and Development,
2(1), 10-22.
5. Pérez-Penup, Lorena, et.al. (2024). Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Human Rights & Science
(JMSHRS), Volume 6, Issue 2, April 2024 | SDGs: 4 | 10 | 16 | 17 | #RethinkProcess, ORIGINAL
SOURCE ON: https://knowmadinstitut.org/journal/ DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.11083664
“The Research Competencies of University Professors: A Literature Review”
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 846
6. Liwanag, B. A., Padohinog, E. C., & Balsicas, N. W. (2023). Training Needs Assessment on the
Teachers' Functional and Research Competencies: Basis for Competency Training Plan. Online
Submission, 5(1), 18-26.
7. Esturas, M. D. (2023). Cultivating The Research Culture Mediated by Motivation Factors in Enhancing
Teachers’ Performance in Conducting Action Research. International Journal of Multidisciplinary:
Applied Business and Education Research, 4(12), 4337-4349.
8. Oestar, J., & Marzo, C. (2022). Teachers as researchers: Skills and challenges in action research
making. International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School
Education, 4(2), 95-104.
9. Rogayan Jr, D. V., & Corpuz, L. N. (2022). Evaluating the Research Productivity of a State University
in Central Luzon, Philippines: Basis for Policy Recommendations. International Journal of Evaluation
and Research in Education, 11(1), 128-135.
10. Roman, A. (2021). Research competencies and performance of higher education institutions (HEI)
faculty. International Journal of research publications, 78(1), 37-44.
11. Magnaye, Louiesito Jr. (2022). Research Skills and Competence of Secondary School Teachers in One
City Schools Division in the Central Philippines. Retrieved on November 14, 2024:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363127770_Research_Skills_and_Competence_of_Secondar
y_School_Teachers_in_One_City_Schools_Division_in_the_Central_Philippines
12. Brau, B. https://open.byu.edu/education_research/constructivismy
13. White, RW.
https://www.google.com/search?q=competence+motivation+theory+by+white&sca_esv=ac5f901f3cf5
cfe3&sxsrf=ADLYWII8twFmCJh02Suh_LBOK4QIg_ej_A%3A1731635276805&ei=TKg2Z7LmMK
Ti2roP5ZTJwQE&oq=Competence+Motivation+Theory++by+White&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnA
iJkNvbXBldGVuY2UgTW90aXZhdGlvbiBUaGVvcnkgIGJ5IFdoaXRlKgIIADIGEAAYFhgeMgsQA
BiABBiGAxiKBTILEAAYgAQYhgMYigUyCxAAGIAEGIYDGIoFMggQABiABBiiBDIIEAAYgA
QYogQyCBAAGIAEGKIEMggQABiABBiiBDIIEAAYogQYiQVI2GFQ0BNYh01wAXgAkAEAmA
G5AaAB_AqqAQM0Lje4AQHIAQD4AQL4AQGYAgugAvYJwgIKEAAYsAMY1gQYR8ICBhAAG
AcYHsICBBAAGB6YAwCIBgGQBgiSBwM1LjagB5pG&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
14. Flavell, J. https://www.google.com/search?q=Theory+of+Cognitive+Abilities+-
+Flavell&sca_esv=ac5f901f3cf5cfe3&sxsrf=ADLYWIKj2TsCtTkUm-
B3nQt00o_ISUjYtA%3A1731635626002&ei=qak2Z43qPPv51e8P8vDC4QQ&ved=0ahUKEwjN4viy
nd2JAxX7fPUHHXK4MEwQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=Theory+of+Cognitive+Abilities+-
+Flavell&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiJ1RoZW9yeSBvZiBDb2duaXRpdmUgQWJpbGl0aWVzIC
0gRmxhdmVsbDIFECEYoAEyBRAhGKABSLgjUIEHWKMfcAF4AZABAJgB4wGgAf8NqgEFMC
42LjS4AQPIAQD4AQGYAgugAqYOwgIKEAAYsAMY1gQYR8ICBhAAGBYYHsICCBAAGBYY
ChgewgILEAAYgAQYhgMYigXCAggQABiABBiiBMICBxAhGKABGAqYAwCIBgGQBgiSBwUx
LjYuNKAHoDw&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
15. Abella, J. Y., Cadorna, E. A., Taban, J. G., & Ramirez, L. V. (2024). An Assessment of Filipino Public
School Teachers’ Research Competence: A Basis for an Enhancement Professional Development
Programme. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(12), 258–278.
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.12.14
16. Comon, J., & Corpuz, G. (2024). Teachers’ Research Competence and Engagement: Basis for Research
Development Plan. American Journal of Arts and Human Science, 3(1), 24–44.
https://doi.org/10.54536/ajahs.v3i1.2340
17. D. Maravilla, M. A. (2020).Teachers’ Attitudes towards Research at Palawan State University – Puerto
Princesa. International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 2(1), 45–54.
https://doi.org/10.54476/iimrj380
18. Caingcoy, M. E. (2020). Journal of World Englishes and Educational Practices (JWEEP) Research
Capability of Teachers: Its Correlates, Determinants and Implications for Continuing Professional
Development. c, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.32996/jweep