Research and Design
This study utilized the descriptive and developmental research design.
According to Dr. Y.P. Aggarwal (2008) descriptive research is devoted to the gathering of information around prevailing premises or situations for the intention of description and interpretation. This kind of research method is not simply accumulating and tabulating facts but involves proper analyses, interpretation, comparisons, identification of trends and relationships. Descriptive research is highly structured and strict in its approach to data collection.
As such descriptive research presupposes much prior knowledge on the part of the researcher concerning about who will be targeted as a respondent, what issues are of highest priority to be addressed in the study, how the questions are to be phrased to reflect the vocabulary and experience of the respondents, when to ask the questions, where to find the respondents, and why these specific questions need to be answered in order to make decisions (Silver, Stevens, Wrenn, and Loudon 2013).
This research design was used to determine the extent of awareness of residents on the projects of Bauang and to determine the level of usability of the system.
On the other hand, developmental research as specified by Richey (2009) defines how a research will be done and how the study come up with an answer to a problem and suggests as systematic and organized method of finding information with regards to a study. It is performed to profit sound basis to develop a product or generate methodological directions for design and evaluation of products. In its simplest form, developmental research can be either the study of the process and impact of speci?c instructional design and development efforts; or a situation in which someone is performing instructional design, development, or evaluation activities and studying the process at the same time; or the study of the instructional design, development, and evaluation process as a whole or of specific process components. This research design will be used in developing the system.
Scrum was used as the software methodology for the study.
Materials and Procedures
For objective 1, a survey checklist in a form of an interview was administered to 5 residents per barangay (39 barangay) of Bauang with the total of 195 residents to determine the extent of awareness of the residents on the different projects of Bauang. Respondents are chosen by Purposive Sampling. The material to be used for the survey is seen in Appendix C.
Purposive inspecting as indicated by Crossman (2018), is a non-probability test that is picked dependent on attributes of a populace and the target of the examination. Purposive testing is otherwise called judgmental, particular, or abstract inspecting. Purposive testing incorporates distinguishing proof and choice of people or gatherings of people that are capable and all around educated with a wonder of intrigue (Cresswell and Plano Clark, 2011).
For objective 2, the researchers used Scrum methodology in the development of the system. As stated by A. I. Khan, Qurashi and U. I. Khan (2011), the scrum methodology is based on the Rugby term for individual gatherings working together to shape a great entirety. In Scrum, projects are partitioned into brief work cadences, known as sprints.
Figure 1 shows the distinctive phases of Scrum. This life cycle filled in as a guide for the developers to guarantee that the framework addressed the issues of the user.
Figure 1. Scrum Methodology
According to Gorakavi (2009), the Scrum methodology is implemented in three phases: Planning Phase, Development Phase and Closure Phase.
Planning Phase. In this phase, the project is planned and high-level design decisions are made. The researchers will conduct study and interviews to determine what are needed in classification of requirements for the system. The main deliverables under this phase are the functional and non-functional requirements.
Development Phase. In this phase, the system will be built in sprint. A Sprint is a set of development activities conducted over a pre-defined period. These sprints are iterative cycles, and allow the system to provide functionality for upcoming increments. In the Sprint, features will be implemented and it will develop the product further – implement, test and document. Architecture and design will be developed or change in Sprint. The researchers will collaborate with the Planning and Development officers on the requirements needed on the development of the system. In this phase, the main deliverable is the construction and planning of the environment and user interface of the system.
Activities that may be performed inside a cycle until its product is ready are the following: Develop alludes to the characterizing changes required for the achievement of build-up prerequisites into packets, opening the packets, performing domain analysis, designing, developing, implementing, testing, and documenting the changes. Wrap alludes to closing the packets, making an executable rendition of changes and how they accomplish backlog requirements. Review alludes to all groups meeting to introduce work and survey advancement, raising and resolving issues and problems, adding new backlog items in which risk is reviewed and appropriate responses defined. Adjust alludes to merging the data assembled from the survey meeting into influenced bundles, including distinctive look and feel and new properties.
Closure Phase. This phase will close out all the design phases and the team can now prepare for the release example of integration and testing. Closure tasks include system test, and user documentation, and training material preparation. This phase focuses on how the operation became more effective and accurate whether the e-Pakaammo: A Multi-Platform Project Transparency Board of Bauang Using Geotagging will be settled. The main deliverable in this phase is to test the level of usability of the system. Iterative improvements can still be applied under this phase.
For objective 2, five (5) Information Technology professionals and experts who graduated with masters or doctorate degree in computer-related course, such as Master in Information Technology or Doctor in Information Technology or allied courses will be the independent testers for the system testing.
For objective 3, purposive sampling was also used in selecting respondents in addition to the same group of respondents in objective 1. As presented in Table 1, one (1) MPDO Head, one (1) MIS Officer of Bauang, one (1) Municipal Admin Officer, one (1) Municipal Tourism Officer, and one (1) DILG Officer are the respondents for identifying the level of usability of the system. The study utilized various tools in gathering data and requirements needed in the development of the system.
Table 1. Distribution of Respondents
IT Experts 5
MPDO Head Officer 1
MIS Officer 1
Municipal Admin Officer 1
Municipal Tourism Officer 1
DILG Officer 1
A survey questionnaire using FURPS (Appendix D) which decomposes functionality, usability, reliability, performance, and supportability adapted from Hewlett Packard was administered to the identified respondents in determining the level of usability of the system.
Conforming to Wagner (2013), FURPS is a various leveled de?nition model. The ?rst four quality factors (FURP) are more gone for the client and administrator of the software, while the last quality factor (S) is more focused at the engineers, testers and maintainers. FURPS gives an elective decay to the standard ISO/IEC 25010 which is the new standard for assessing a software that de?nes surely understood quality factors and fills in as the reason for some, quality administration approaches. The principle point of FURPS is a disintegration and agenda for quality prerequisites.FURPS model, classify attributes into two unique requirements. Functional Requirements (F) which is characterized by predictable input and output and Non Functional Requirements in which U represents Usability, R represents Reliability, P represents Performance (incorporates practical prerequisites) and S represents Supportability (incorporates reinforcement, essential of plan, execution, interface). (Tabassum, et al, 2017). It will be used as product requirements and in determining the level of usability of the system.
To emphasize the various attributes of FURPS, according to Chung and do Pardo Leite (2009), the following are its sub-characteristics; In Functionality: Feature set, Capabilities, Generality, Security. In Usability: Human elements, Aesthetics, Consistency, Documentation. In Reliability: Frequency/severity of failure, Recoverability, Predictability, Accuracy, Mean time to failure. In Performance, Speed, Efficiency, Resource utilization, Throughput, Response time. In Supportability: Testability, Extensibility, Adaptability, Maintainability, Compatibility, Configurability, Serviceability, Installability, Localizability, Portability.
The data gathered was analyzed and interpreted using frequency count and mean.
In determining the extent of awareness of residents of the projects of Bauang, focused group interview was conducted as cited in Appendix C.
In determining the level of usability of the system, 5-point Likert Scale will be the respondent’s rating measure of every items in the questionnaire.
Variables with a mean range from 2.60 to 5.00 implies that the system is usable. Mean ranges from 1.00 – 2.59 means that the system is not usable.
Point Mean Range Descriptive Equivalent Rating Descriptive Equivalent
5 4.20 – 5.00 Very Strongly Agree Very Highly Usable
4 3.40 – 4.19 Strongly Agree Highly Usable
3 2.60 – 3.39 Agree Usable
2 1.80 – 2.59 Moderately Agree Moderately Usable
1 1.00 – 1.79 Strongly Disagree Not Usable