Determinants of Productivity among Senior Citizens...

Determinants of Productivity among Senior Citizens in Marikina City
Ines Alcantara-de Guzman, PhD

ABSTRACT

This exploratory study was conducted to identify the variables that are
possible determinants of productivity among senior citizens in Marikina City and to
develop a productivity-scoring instrument. The respondents were 354 male and
female senior citizens aged 60-79 from Barangka and Concepcion Uno/Tumana,
Marikina City. Data gathering was done using a researcher-made survey
questionnaire, which consisted of three parts of combined checklist and fill-in type
questions. Results show that only life activities such as walking, managing money,
shopping for own groceries/personal items, using public transportation, cooking,
home decorating, ironing, caring for infants/children, washing clothes using washing
machine, washing clothes by hand, and washing the dishes are the only specific
indicators based on Havighurst’s paradigm that predict productivity among senior
citizens. Two models of productivity were developed based on the results. The first
model is a 14-Predictor Productivity Model which includes 14 variables such as
employment status, preparation for old age, walking, managing own money, shopping
for groceries/ personal items, riding public transport, washing clothes using washing
machine, washing clothes by hand, washing the dishes, and volunteer work. The
second model is an 11-Predictor Productivity Model, which includes all the variables
in the 14-Predictor Productivity Model except employment status, preparation for old
age, and volunteer work. Productivity-scoring instruments were formulated for these
two models using the questions on the research questionnaire. The focus group
discussion composed of 20 participants validated the findings of the study.

INTRODUCTION

In the face of changing times and greater emphasis on high productivity, there
seems to be a tendency to regard senior citizens as unproductive and generally as
burden to others. Although it is not obligatory for those under 60 or 65 years old to
leave the work force because of mandatory requirements, they are usually seen as
ineffective or unprepared to handle new tasks brought about by modernization and
technology. They are also victims of outright discrimination when seeking work
because employers prefer younger persons.
The most serious difficulties from which the senior citizens suffer are
economic in nature. Because of reduced income or lack of it, a high percentage of
senior citizens are living near or below the poverty level. Retirement plans are
generally inadequate and inflation becomes their serious problem. Many of them do
not have access to adequate health services (Ogena, 2006) and once they enter the
retirement age, it is hard for them to get health insurance because of age limit and
prevailing costs (Weller, Wenger, and Gould, 2004).
This concern over the plight of the senior citizens is an aftermath of the
increasing number of older persons 60 years old and above. Although still a young
population compared with other age groups, the National Statistics Office (NSO) has
reported a notable increase in their number. Based on its March 18, 2005 Special
Release, the total number of senior citizens 60 years old and above has reached 4.6
million, accounting for 5.97 percent of the country’s population of 76.5 million. It
means a 22.18 percent increase from 1995 (3.7 million persons) and an average

1

annual population growth rate of 4.39 percent during the 1995 to 2000 period. If this
growth rate continues, the number of senior citizens is expected to reach seven million
in 2010 and to double in approximately 16 years (NSO, 2005). Such scenario may
result to having the “young old” (60-69 years old) taking care of the “old-old” (70-79
years old).
Many of the retired senior citizens continue to work in both formal and
informal labor sectors according to their capacities and preferences. Studies
conducted show retirees who are employed fulltime with an average of 40 hours per
week (Cabigon, 1996 and NSO, 2005). These are indications that the senior citizens
are still capable of productive endeavors. Hence, this study focused on accomplishing
the following objectives:
1. to describe the socio-demographic and health profile of senior citizens in
Marikina City;
2. to identify the variables that are possible determinants of productivity
among senior citizens in Marikina City; and
3. to develop a productivity scorecard for senior citizens.

METHODOLOGY

This study is an exploratory research, which made use of a researcher-made
questionnaire as the survey technique combined with face-to-face interview. A
qualitative element in the form of a focus group discussion (FGD) was also used to
complement the quantitative analysis performed on the survey responses.
The respondents were male and female 60-79 years old senior citizens from
two barangays representing the two districts of Marikina City: Barangka of District 1
and ConcepcionUno/Tumana of District II. These two barangays were the most
populous among the barangays in the two districts and they have the highest number
of senior citizens. Barangka is the first of nine barangays in District 1 with 1,277
registered senior citizens while Concepcion Uno/Tumana is the third of five
barangays in District II, with 2,917 registered senior citizens (Sira, 2006). A Focus
Group Discussion (FGD) was conducted among 20 participants, who were not among
the respondents, to validate the data gathered from the research respondents.
The data gathered was encoded in MSExcel, processed and analyzed using the
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Graphical, tabular representations
as well as summary statistics were used in the presentation of the sociographic,
demographic, and health profile of the respondents. Cluster analysis was utilized to
determine the number used to classify the senior citizens into groups such that none in
the same cluster have similar characteristics. The particular criterion used for
clustering was the Ward method. In this method, the clusters that were fused at each
stage in the agglomeration process were such that their merger gave the minimum
possible increase in the within-cluster variation, which was an assurance of
homogeneity within the newly formed cluster. The Dendogram is a graphical
illustration of the groupings. It was used to generate two groups of respondents based
on 25 variables - the “productive” and “non-productive” senior citizens.
Logistic regression analysis was also used to determine which among the 25
variables were predictors of productivity among the respondents. It was used to
generate the productivity scoring for senior citizens. The score was actually a
probability of being “productive” based on the estimated model as follows:
1
P (" Pr oductive" ) =
ˆ + β X + β X + ... + β X )}
1 + exp{−( β0 ˆ ˆ ˆ
1 1 2 2 25 25

2

The estimated quantities β , β ,..., β were the coefficients of regression. The
ˆ
0
ˆ
1
ˆ
25

variables X1, X2,..,X25 were the dichotomous characteristics (1=present, 0=absent)
listed below.
X1 = Head of the Family
X2 = Employed
X3 = Income
X4 = Prepared for old age
X5 = Dressing
X6 = Eating
X7 = Bathing
X8 = Walking
X9 = Light Chores
X10 = Managing Own Money
X11 = Preparing Own Meal
X12 = Shopping for Groceries
X13 = Riding a Public Transport
X14 = Cleaning the House
X15 = Cooking
X16 = Home Decorating
X17 = Ironing Clothes
X18 = Caring for Children
X19 = Washing Clothes (by washing machine)
X20 = Washing Clothes (by hand)
X21 = Washing the Dishes
X22 = Health Status (Perceived)
X23 = Organization (Membership)
X24 = Volunteer Work
X25 = Productive (Perceived)

After all 25 variables were fitted, backward deletion of non-significant
variables was performed to arrive at the best subset of characteristics that would most
likely separate “productive” and “non-productive” individuals. Cluster analysis was
used to determine the number used to classify the senior citizens into groups such that
none in the same cluster have similar characteristics. Each cluster thus described, in
terms of the data collected, the class to which its members belonged; and this
description may be abstracted through use from the particular to the general class or
type. The particular criterion used for clustering was the Ward method. Here, the
clusters that were fused at each stage in the agglomeration process were such that
their merger gave the minimum possible increase in the within-cluster variation,
which was an assurance of homogeneity within the newly formed cluster.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Profile of Respondents

Majority of the respondents were 60-69 years old, females, married,
elementary level or elementary graduates, laborers, living with spouses and their
children, and heads of families (Table 1).

3

Table 1. Demo-Sociographic Profile of Respondents (N=354)

Variable Category Frequency Percentage
60-69 193 54.50
Age
70 and above 161 46.00
Female 249 70.30
Gender
Male 105 29.70
Married 184 52.00
Widow/Widower 147 41.50
Civil Status
Single 17 4.80
Separated 6 1.70
Elementary level/Graduate 173 48.90
High School Level/Graduate 77 21.80
College Units/Graduate 53 15.00
Educational Attainment
Voc Tech/College Level 37 10.50
No Formal Schooling 11 3.10
Graduate Degree 3 0.80
Living with spouse/children 128 36.20
Living with child/children 127 35.90
Living Arrangement Living with spouse 43 12.10
Living alone 28 7.90
Living with other relatives 28 7.90
Laborer 46 19.66
Shoemaker 41 17.52
Professional 32 13.68
Service Worker 26 11.11
Manager/Supervisor 21 8.97
Clerk 12 5.13
Sales Worker 11 4.70
Machine Operator 7 2.99
Vendor 6 2.56
Technician 4 1.71
Occupation Upon Retirement Store Owner/Operator 4 1.71
Farmer 4 1.71
Underwriter 3 1.28
Unskilled Worker 1 0.43
Shop Worker 1 0.43
Fisherman 1 0.43
Corporate Executive 1 0.43
Carinderia 1 0.43
Corporate Executive 1 0.43
Unskilled Worker 6 2.56
No Data 5 14.71
Living with Spouse/Children 128 36.20
Living with Child/Children 127 35.90
Living Arrangement Living with Spouse 43 12.10
Living alone 28 7.90
Living with Other Relatives 28 7.90
Yes, Head of the Family 190 53.70
Head of the Family
No, Not Head of the Family 164 46.30
Health Status and Physical Well-Being

4

Majority of the respondents were non-smokers and non-drinkers of alcoholic
beverages; have poor vision; went to the city’s government hospital for medical
attention; assessed their health condition as good to excellent; and spent their leisure
time watching television and listening to music (Table 2).

Table 2. Health Status and Physical Well-Being of Respondents (N=354)

No, I don't smoke 313 88.40
Smoking Patterns
Yes, I smoke 41 11.60
No, I don't drink alcoholic beverages 317 89.50
Drinking Patterns
Yes, I drink alcoholic beverages 37 10.50
Poor Vision 199 56.21
Poor Hearing 51 43.80
Arthritis 106 30.00
Hypertension 84 23.90
Cataract 51 14.41
Heart Disease 37 10.45
Health Status* Asthma 20 5.65
Kidney Problem 18 5.08
Osteoporosis 17 4.80
Pulmonary Disease 11 3.11
Ulcer 10 2.82
Emphysema 3 0.85
Glaucoma 2 0.56
Government Hospital 141 39.80
Health Center 130 36.70
Medical Facility Used* Private Clinic 65 18.40
Private Hospital 41 11.60
Home 41 11.60
Good to Excellent 264 74.60
Perceived Health Assessment
Poor to Fair 90 25.40
Watching Television 300 84.70
Listening to Music 224 63.30
Needlework 53 15.00
Ballroom Dancing 23 6.50
Leisure Activities* Playing Board Games 14 4.00
Fishing 9 2.50
Handicrafts 8 2.30
Painting 4 1.10
Collecting items 1 0.30
*Multiple Responses

Economic Activities

Most of the respondents were retirees and were receiving a monthly pension of
Php 4,000.00 and below. A small percentage of the respondents were employed and
were working in private companies and receiving an income of Php 4,000.00 and
below. Majority of them claimed that the monthly income they received was
insufficient for their daily needs. Most of the unemployed and non-retirees have plans
of looking for a fulltime but home-based jobs. The unemployed and non-retirees
identified several sources of income such as children, other relatives, friends, and
colleagues; rentals; farmland; financial investment; spouse’s pension; and spouse’s

5

income. Most of the respondents also claimed that they prepared for their old age by
sending their children to school, a typical Filipino family value giving importance to
education as a poverty-liberating factor. Those who claimed they did not prepare for
old age pointed out some reasons such as: no extra income; it was not seen as a need;
and they were too busy to think of saving for their old age (Table 3).

Table 3. Economic Activities of Respondents (N=354)

Retired 174 49.20
Employment Status Otherwise (Unemployed/Non-retiree) 120 33.90
Employed 60 16.90
Private 144 62.30
Type of Employment Self-employed 55 23.80
Government 32 13.90
Below P4, 000 38 63.33
4,001-8,000 13 21.67
8,001-15,000 4 6.67
Monthly Income of Employed 15,001-30,000 1 1.67
30,001-50,000 1 1.67
50,001 and above 1 1.67
No data 2 3.33
Below P4, 000 97 55.75
4,001-8,000 21 12.00
8,001-15,000 10 5.75
Monthly Pension of Retirees 15,001-30,000 2 1.15
30,001-50,000 1 0.57
50,001 and above 0 0
No pension 43 29.71
Have plans to look for work 136 46.25
Fulltime 136 46.25
Part-time 106 36.05
Work Plans and Preferences of
Undecided 52 17.69
Unemployed and Retirees
Home-based 88 29.93
Out-of-home 43 14.68
Undecided 163 55.44

Life Activities

Most of the respondents could perform activities of daily life (ADLs) without
any help from other people such as: dressing up or putting on clothes, eating, taking a
bath, and walking around the house. Among the respondents, 1.4 percent expressed
difficulty in walking around the house, 13.1 percent have difficulty dressing up and
eating, while 2.5 percent have difficulty taking a bath. This could be attributed to the
fact that there are more 60 to 69 years old (young old) than the 70 years old and above
(old-old), thus younger and stronger respondents. Majority can also perform
instrumental activities of daily life (IADLs) such as doing light household chores,
managing own money, preparing own meal, shopping for own groceries/personal
items, and using public transportation.
Results also show that majority of the respondents were involved in household chores
in their own homes. In fact, they considered these household chores as their
contributions in their families (Figure 1).

6

Figure 1. Engagement in Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Instrumental
Activities in Daily Living (IADL), and Household Chores.

ENGAGEMENT IN ADLs ENGAGEMENT IN IADLs HOUSEHOLD ACTIVITIES

Doing light Cleaning the
Walking 80.5
household 92.1 house
around 98.6
w ork
the house Cooking 78.0

Managing Washing the
73.2
ow n money 68.6
Taking a dishes
97.5
bath
Ironing clothes 54.8
Preparing
92.9
ow n meal Washing
54.8
clothes by hand
Eating 96.9 Shopping for
ow n Taking care of
76.3 46.6
groceries or infants/children
personal item
Home
Dressing 37.0
decorating
up/Putting 96.9 Using public
81.6
on clothes transportation Washing
36.7
clothes by

Volunteer Work

Volunteer work is a valuable and productive way for older people to stay
engaged in society, to use their expertise, maintain, and nourish their sense of
purpose, their innate value and their self-respect, which results in greater
independence, health and well-being for older people (WHO, 2002). The results of
this study show that most of the respondents (55.9%) were not involved in volunteer
work due to poor health (28.8%). Other reasons given were lack of time (18.1%); they
did not know how and where (12.1%); and they lacked funds to do volunteer work
(1.4%). Those who were involved in volunteer work joined barangay activities;
Homeowners’ Association activities; parish activities (church choir, lector, acolyte,
catechist, lay minister, and mother butler); feeding programs; Gawad Kalinga
projects; livelihood programs; family counseling; and traffic enforcer volunteer
(Figure 2).

Figure 2. Involvement in Volunteer Work

7

VOLUNTEER WORK PARTICIPATED IN REASONS FOR NO VOLUNTEER WORK

Barangay
28.2
Activities
Homeowners' Health
10.2 28.8
Association reasons
Church choir 5.6

Lay Minister 4.8 Lack of
18.1
time
Lector 3.7
Feeding
2.3
programs
Don't
Catechist 1.7 know how 12.1
Livelihood and where
1.7
programs
Family
1.7 Lack of
counseling
Mother necessary 2.8
1.1
Butler skills
Gawad
0.8
Kalinga
Traffic
0.8 Lack of
Enforcer 1.4
funds
Acolyte 0.6

Membership in Organizations

Havighurst (1964) noted that establishing an explicit affiliation with one’s age
group is one task of the elderly. It involves accepting one’s status in the community
and becoming an active participant in one’s age group. Ageing slows down a person,
such that it is now quite impossible for senior citizens to keep up with activities done
in their younger years, thus they resort to giving up these activities. In this study, most
of the respondents (63.3%) were members of organizations such as: church
organizations, Homeowners/Neighborhood Association, Kababaihan, Civic Clubs,
Samahang Caretakers, Senior Choir, Marikina Riverpark Runners, Loyola Civic
Organizations, Senior Citizens’ Association, and Women’s Clubs. The senior citizens
looked at membership in organizations as their chance to relate with other people
especially those of their own age.

Community Involvement

Havighurst (1964) also added that one task of later maturity is meeting social
and civic obligations. He said that older people are involved in the conduct of civic
and political affairs both as citizens and office holders. In this study, the senior
citizens were asked to identify top five problems in their respective communities. The
results show that majority (66.6%) of the respondents considered unemployment
problems as the number one problem followed by security (41.4%), substance abuse
(33.1%), pollution (30.6%) and illiteracy (21.5%). They also identified some personal

8

contributions to lessen these problems such as reporting incidents to authorities
(63.2%), participating actively in community affairs (49.9%), becoming a more
vigilant community member (34.3%), and conducting skills development programs
(23.7%). Their knowledge about societal problems and what they could do to help
solve these problems were clear indications of their desire to take part in community
affairs (Table 4).

Table 4. Community Involvement of the Respondents (N=354)

Unemployment 235 66.6
Security 146 41.4
Substance abuse 117 33.1
Pollution 100 30.6
Community Problems* Crime and Violence 76 21.5
Illiteracy 76 21.5
Juvenile delinquency 57 16.1
Child Abuse 36 10.2
Immorality 35 9.9
Report incidents immediately to authorities 223 63.2
Possible Contributions Participate actively in community affairs 176 49.9
of Respondents* Become a more vigilant community member 121 34.3
Conduct skills development program 73 23.7
Multiple Responses*

Perceived Productivity

Majority of the respondents (85.9%) claimed that they are productive. This
personal assessment supports the argument that senior citizens are still at the height of
their productivity and their desire to continue being a resource for their families and in
the community where they belong.

“Productive” and “Non-Productive” Respondents

Using Cluster Analysis, 25 variables were chosen from the questionnaire and
were tested using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). The objective
was to group the respondents into “productive” and “non-productive” based on the
chosen variables. The Dendogram showed two major clusters of respondents: the
“productive” and the “non-productive” clusters. Results also show that almost an
equal number of respondents were labeled as “productive” and “non-productive”
(Figure 3), which did not cohere to the respondents’ actual perception of themselves.
Thus, the results of the Cluster Analysis was only one way of classifying the senior
citizens based on the variables chosen. However, the perceived productivity of the
respondents based on their own personal assessment, which includes their capabilities
cannot be ignored as another way of grouping them.

Figure 3. “Productive” and “Non-Productive” Respondents Based
on the 25 Variables

9

Variables PRODUCTIVE VS NON-PRODUCTIVE

Head of the family 46% 62%
Employed 21% 13%
Income 38% 38%
Prepared for old age 78% 65%
Dressing 100% 94%
Eating 100% 94%
Bathing 99% 95%
Walking 99% 98%
Light Chores 98% 86%
Managing Own Money 89% 57%
Preparing Own Meal 99% 86%
Shopping for Groceries 94% 57%
Riding a Public Transport 94% 68%
Cleaning the House 98% 62%
Cooking 96% 59%
Home Decorating 60% 13%
Ironing Clothes 89% 19%
Caring for Children 66% 26%
Washing Clothes (by machine) 50% 23%
Washing Clothes (by hand) 73% 36%
Washing the Dishes 93% 43%
Healthy (Perceived) 76% 73%
Organization (Membership) 71% 56%
Volunteer 50% 38%
Productive (Perceived) 91% 81%

The groupings generated by the Cluster Analysis may lead to stereotyping the
senior citizens so that other people may see them as “non-productive”. This
stereotyping could be one of the reasons why after retirement the average senior
citizen could hardly get a second employment or if unemployed, such stereotype
makes it harder for him or her to participate in paid labor as evidenced by the
respondent’s disclosure below.

“Dapat pantay-pantay ang pagtingin ng mga employers sa mga naghahanap ng
trabaho matanda man o bata. Sa mga panahong ito, para bang wala nang kuwenta ang tao
pag matanda na kasi ayaw ng tanggapin sa trabaho.”

(Employers should give equal chances to people looking for jobs, young or old. At
present, it seems like senior citizens are useless because employers do not want to hire them
anymore.)

The results could also be supported in terms of what the Johari Window by
Joseph Luft and Harry Ingham (Yen, 1999) posits. It is one of the most useful models
describing the process of human interaction. The four-paned window divides personal
awareness into four different types represented by its four quadrants: open, hidden,
blind, and unknown. The lines dividing the four are like window shades, which can
move as an interaction progresses. The open quadrant is known to self and to others;
the blind quadrant is not known to self but known to others; the hidden quadrant is
known to self but not known to others; the unknown quadrant is not known to self and
not known to others. Hence, the perceived productivity of the respondents could be
compared to the hidden quadrant where information is known only to the self, while
the result of the Cluster Analysis could be compared to the blind quadrant where
information is unknown to the self but known to others. The Johari Window (Figure

10

4) aims at increasing the open area while reducing the blind, the hidden, and the
unknown areas through feedback, disclosure, and self-discovery and mutual
enlightenment respectively. Similarly, feedback, disclosure, self-discovery, and
mutual enlightenment can be beneficial for the senior citizens and those working for
their welfare.

Figure 4. Productivity and the Johari Window

KNOWN TO UNKNOWN
SELF TO SELF

OPEN BLIND
Cluster
KNOWN TO OTHERS Analysis’
Result on
Productivity

HIDDEN UNKNOWN
Perceived
UNKNOWN TO OTHERS Productivity
of
Respondents

Predictors of Productivity

Logistic regression analysis was used to determine which among the 25
variables were predictors of productivity among the respondents. It was also used to
generate the productivity scorecard for senior citizens. The Full Model (Table 5)
shows all 25 clustering variables entering the model. Though some variables were not
significant on their own, logistic regression combined their predictive powers. From
the Full Model, deletion was done starting with health, as most geriatric studies seem
to point that this bears the least significance to the senior citizen’s productivity
followed by eating with .999 significance. From here on, deletion continued
beginning with the least significant predictor. The Full Model shows that 93.1 percent
of “non-productive” are concordantly classified by the Logistic Model and 95 percent
of “productive” are concordantly classified by the same model. The overall
classification efficiency is 94.1 percent. Thus, 94.1 percent of the respondents were
correctly identified into their respective clusters. The Classification Table a (Table 6)
with 14 variables has an effective p-value of alpha = 0.20, with 94 percent accuracy

11

and a good mixture of predictors such as: employment status, preparation for old age,
walking, managing own money, shopping for own groceries, using public
transportation, cooking family meals, home decorating, ironing clothes, caring for
infants/children, washing clothes using washing machine, washing clothes by hand,
dishwashing, and doing volunteer work. The Classification Table b (Table 7) with 11
predictors was a result of further deletion of the least significant variable. As a result,
three other variables were deleted: employment status, preparation for old age, and
volunteer work, leaving only life activities as predictors of productivity.

Table 5. Full Model Showing the 25 Clustering Variables

Classification Table Logistic-Predicted
Percentage
Productivity Group Correct
NonProductive Productive
Productivity Cluster NonProductive 161 12 93.0636
Productive 9 172 95.0276
Overall
Percentage 94.0678

The cut value is .500
Variables in the
Equation
B S.E. Wald df Sig. Exp(B)
Head of family -0.07360 0.55719 0.01745 1.00000 0.89491 0.92904
Employment status 1.63568 0.81396 4.03823 1.00000 0.04448 5.13293
Income 0.56825 0.60100 0.89399 1.00000 0.34440 1.76517
Preparation for old age 1.20478 0.59663 4.07757 1.00000 0.04346 3.33604
Dressing-up 19.85974 7202.85698 0.00001 1.00000 0.99780 421673546.89229
Eating 9.32784 7202.85853 0.00000 1.00000 0.99897 11246.82413
Bathing -2.03175 41.71401 0.00237 1.00000 0.96115 0.13111
Walking 0.98608 41.69646 0.00056 1.00000 0.98113 2.68072
Light household chores 0.22836 1.86287 0.01503 1.00000 0.90243 1.25654
Managing 1.87337 0.72819 6.61851 1.00000 0.01009 6.51020
Preparing for old age -3.21565 1.56648 4.21391 1.00000 0.04009 0.04013
Shopping groceries 3.08804 0.87897 12.34281 1.00000 0.00044 21.93399
Using public
transportation 1.65616 0.84654 3.82744 1.00000 0.05042 5.23916
Cleaning the house 0.72461 1.19682 0.36656 1.00000 0.54488 2.06392
Cooking meals 3.20908 0.94830 11.45183 1.00000 0.00071 24.75642
Home Decorating 1.11888 0.64857 2.97615 1.00000 0.08450 3.06142
Ironing 4.27764 0.73252 34.10116 1.00000 0.00000 72.06987
Caring for infants/children 2.26907 0.57065 15.81079 1.00000 0.00007 9.67039
Washing Clothes-washing
machine 1.51751 0.60944 6.20012 1.00000 0.01277 4.56087
Washing clothes by hand 1.63393 0.60584 7.27355 1.00000 0.00700 5.12397
Washing the dishes 1.83901 0.74201 6.14251 1.00000 0.01320 6.29030
Perceived Health -2.09528 0.73078 8.22071 1.00000 0.00414 0.12304
Membership in
organization 0.66267 0.56741 1.36396 1.00000 0.24285 1.93997
Volunteer work 0.94411 0.58968 2.56341 1.00000 0.10936 2.57052
Perceived Productivity 0.11467 0.81185 0.01995 1.00000 0.88767 1.12150

12

Constant -42.25201 10158.07219 0.00002 1.00000 0.99668 0.00000

Table 6. Classification Table with 14 Variables

Classification Table Logistic-Predicted
Percentage
Productivity Group Correct
Overall Percentage 93.8
Variables in the Equation
Employment Status 1.4243 0.6753 4.4486 1.0000 0.0349 4.1549
Prepared for Old Age 0.7588 0.5313 2.0396 1.0000 0.1532 2.1358
Walking 4.5917 1.8519 6.1479 1.0000 0.0132 98.6625
Managing own Money 1.9924 0.6743 8.7317 1.0000 0.0031 7.3331
Shopping for Groceries 2.4659 0.8014 9.4679 1.0000 0.0021 11.7740
Using Public
Transportation 1.7397 0.7491 5.3938 1.0000 0.0202 5.6956
Cooking family meals 2.4571 0.7743 10.0704 1.0000 0.0015 11.6707
Home Decorating 1.0608 0.5535 3.6738 1.0000 0.0553 2.8888
Ironing Clothes 3.6348 0.5710 40.5192 1.0000 0.0000 37.8941
Caring for
Infant/Children 1.9034 0.5034 14.2962 1.0000 0.0002 6.7090
Washing Clothes by
Washing Machine 1.2632 0.5375 5.5227 1.0000 0.0188 3.5366
Washing Clothes by
Hand 1.5427 0.5202 8.7955 1.0000 0.0030 4.6773
Washing the Dishes 1.9588 0.6619 8.7569 1.0000 0.0031 7.0906
Healthy-Perceived 0.6943 0.5054 1.8869 1.0000 0.1696 2.0022
Constant -19.5457 3.2775 35.5637 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000

13

Table 7. Classification Table with 11 Variables

Classification Table
Observed Predicted
Productivity Percentage
Group Correct
Overall Percentage 92.9

Variables in the Equation
Walking 4.1218 1.7404 5.6088 1.0000 0.0179 61.6693
Managing Own Money 2.0202 0.6503 9.6514 1.0000 0.0019 7.5401
Shopping for Groceries 2.2135 0.7406 8.9321 1.0000 0.0028 9.1481
Using Public Transportation 1.8509 0.7410 6.2391 1.0000 0.0125 6.3659
Cooking Family Meals 2.2796 0.7473 9.3051 1.0000 0.0023 9.7730
Home Decorating 1.0704 0.5386 3.9493 1.0000 0.0469 2.9165
Ironing Clothes 3.4044 0.5350 40.4943 1.0000 0.0000 30.0950
Caring for Infant/Children 1.9376 0.4875 15.7968 1.0000 0.0001 6.9422
Washing Clothes Using
Washing Machine 1.1254 0.5167 4.7440 1.0000 0.0294 3.0814
Washing Clothes by Hand 1.5623 0.5111 9.3439 1.0000 0.0022 4.7696
Washing the Dishes 1.5934 0.5923 7.2377 1.0000 0.0071 4.9204
Constant -16.5552 2.6274 39.7021 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Based on the results of the study, two productivity-scoring instruments for
senior citizens in Marikina City were proposed.

1. A 14-Predictor Productivity Model Scoring Instrument. This productivity-
scoring instrument contains 14 variables. These are:

1. Employment status
2. Preparation for old age
3. Walking around the house
4. Managing own money
5. Shopping for own groceries
6. Using public transportation
7. Cooking family meals
8. Home decorating
9. Ironing clothes
10. Caring for infant/children
11. Washing clothes using washing machine
12. Washing clothes by hand
13. Washing the dishes
14. Volunteer work.

14

This Productivity Model could be used if there is a need for more data to
determine the productivity among senior citizens. Though it still contains
three least significant predictors, it has a good mixture of various
predictors that could give a more comprehensive productivity assessment.
Moreover, the variables encompassed various contexts in which the elderly
may find themselves engaged in. It consists of 14 questions based on the
14 variables with 94 percent accuracy level (Figure 5).

2. The 11-Predictor Productivity Model Scoring Instrument. This scoring
instrument contains 11 significant predictors, which are all life activities.
It is recommended for Marikina senior citizens with similar profile as the
respondents of this study. These are:

1. Walking around the house
2. Managing own money
3. Shopping for own groceries
4. Using public transportation
5. Cooking
6. Home decorating
7. Ironing clothes
8. Caring for infant/children
9. Washing clothes using washing machine
10. Washing clothes by hand
11. Washing the dishes

This productivity-scoring instrument has 93 percent accuracy. This is more
preferred especially for the respondents of this study because it has only 11
questions representing the 11 highly significant variables that could be easily
answered by the senior citizens. It is also easier when computing for the scores
or results (Figure 6).

15

Figure 5. Scoring instrument for the 14-Predictor Productivity Model

PRODUCTIVITY SCORING INSTRUMENT
For Marikina City Senior Citizens

A. NAME: _________________________

Below are questions related to your ability to perform basic life and household
activities. Read the questions carefully then put an x on the column that
corresponds to your answer.

B. SCORECARD

Questions Yes No Score (1 if
yes, 0 if
no)
1. Are you employed? x 1
2. Did you prepare for your old age when you were younger? x 0
3. Do you walk around the house everyday? x 1
4. Do you manage your own money? x 1
5. Do you shop for your own groceries or personal items? x 1
6. Do you use public transportation without help from others? x 1
7. Do you cook meals for the family? x 1
8. Do you like decorating your home? x 0
9. Do you iron clothes for the family? x 1
10. Do you take care of infants or children/grandchildren? x 0
11. Do you wash your clothes using a washing machine? x 1
12. Do you wash clothes by hand? x 0
13. Do you wash the dishes? x 0
14. Are you currently involved in volunteer work? x 1

Equation:
1
P (" Pr oductive" ) = = 0.6721 = 67.21%
1 + exp{−(−19.5457 +1.4243(1) + 0.7588(0) + 4.5917(1) +1.9924(1) + 2.4659(1) +.. + 0.6943(1)}

C. SCORE:

PRODUCTIVE NON-PRODUCTIVE
(If score is >.50) (If score <.50)

Figure 6. Scoring instrument for the 11-Predictor Productivity Model

16

PRODUCTIVITY SCORING INSTRUMENT
For Marikina City Senior Citizens

A. NAME: _________________________

Below are questions related to your ability to perform basic life and household
activities. Read the questions carefully then put an x the column that corresponds
to your answer.

B. SCORECARD

Questions Yes No Score (1 if
yes, 0 if
not)
1. Do you walk around the house everyday? x 1
2. Do you manage your own money? x 0
3. Do you shop for your own groceries or personal items? x 1
4. Do you use public transportation without help from others? x 1
5. Do you cook meals for the family? x 1
6. Do you like decorating your home? x 1
7. Do you iron clothes for the family? x 1
8. Do you take care of infants or children/grandchildren? x 0
9. Do you wash your clothes using a washing machine? x 1
10. Do you wash clothes by hand? x 0
11. Do you wash the dishes? x 1

Equation:

1
P (" Pr oductive" ) =
1 + exp{−( −16.552 + 4.1218(1) + 2.0202(1) + 2.2135(1) +1.8509(1) + 2.2796(0) +

C. SCORE

PRODUCTIVE NON PRODUCTIVE
(If score is >.50) (If score <.50)

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

At this age and time when senior citizens are increasing in number, plans on
how to effectively address their needs are also underway. These plans include varied
opportunities to sustain and improve further their productivity and maintain their
contributions for their own welfare and those of others. They are aimed at
encouraging them to strengthen their independence, prolong their spirit of
productivity as they enjoy life to the fullest. The need for these programs has become

17

more urgent because of the dramatic changes in family structures, roles and labor
patterns, and migration, especially in the rapidly changing global environment.
The movement of young people to urban areas, the shift from extended to
nuclear families, and the increasing number of women joining the workforce are all
developments that brought about new adjustments especially on the senior citizens
caring for themselves. Globally, the senior citizens are now regarded as beneficiaries
and active participants and contributors of developments (WHO, 2002). In fact, they
are authentic sources of information, tested family values, beautiful traditions, and
actual experiences.
The senior citizens have fulfilled their part in creating the kind of life we are
now enjoying. It is but just and fair to make them feel that we appreciate them for
their own contributions through the programs designed to empower them even in their
old age. No less than Pope John Paul II (Martino, 1999) in one of his celebrated
prayers on July 25, 1999, calls us to always remember that:

“By their very presence, older people remind everyone, especially the young that life
on earth is a ‘parable’ with its own beginning and end: to find its fulfillment, life must be
based on values that are not transient and superficial, but solid and profound. The so called
‘third age’ is …a value in itself by the very fact that life is prolonged and life itself is a
gift of God.”

Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are
presented:

1. Using the results of this study, the Office of the Senior Citizens’ Affairs
(OSCA) that works for the welfare of Marikina City senior citizens, could plan
and conduct skills and personality development programs (healthy lifestyle, art
appreciation, and creative leisure activities) to increase the senior citizens’
capabilities, empower, and build-up further their self-confidence. The senior
citizens in their desire to participate in economic and other worthwhile
activities can also utilize such skills.
2. Through the findings and analyses being offered in this research, the Marikina
City government and its private institutions could put their acts together to
formulate public policy, maintenance, monitoring, and evaluation for the sake
of sustaining the democratic and productive participation of the senior citizens
in community and nation building.
3. The study aimed at providing continued avenues where the senior citizens
could remain as productive members of society. Therefore, the results of this
study could be used as bases for developing better working conditions, health,
and retirement benefits or schemes. Also, by recognizing the potential
contributions of senior citizens, labor and business sectors in the city could
look into the possibility of adjusting existing labor practices and policies that
apply to ageing workers like adopting a much later retirement age or making
retirement optional at age 65, so that they continue to actively participate in
community development as they prepare themselves for a more economically
sound retirement.
4. To sustain a beautiful Filipino tradition of respect for old age and increase
appreciation for their contributions, topics on the elderly or later maturity
should be incorporated in the basic and tertiary education Home Economics
curriculum. Hopefully, such inclusion of topics will enable the young to
develop a better consciousness for the welfare of the senior citizens. In

18

addition, this will enable them to adopt a more informed consciousness about
ageing.
5. Using the productivity-scoring instrument, being the major contribution of this
research, a pilot test could be conducted among Marikina senior citizens to
ensure its validity and reliability for self-assessment or self-evaluation.
6. The Marikina City government may utilize the Productivity-Scoring
Instruments to assess the senior citizens’ capabilities and preparedness to
undergo programs designed to provide them with sustained stimulating
external environment in which they may function at high levels of
attentiveness and productivity. By using these for profiling purposes, policies,
practices, and provisions for the elderly may better be designed and
implemented.
7. Considering the limitations of this research, a more in-depth study using a
larger and more varied sample should be conducted to get a better picture of
possible predictors of productivity among senior citizens not only in Marikina
City but also all over the Philippines. This may become the basis of further
transnational and cross-cultural analysis of productivity among the elderly.
8. The 14-Predictor Productivity Model maybe studied further in terms of its
applicability and comprehensiveness because it covers not just the daily life
activities but also economic activities and community work of the senior citizens.

REFERENCES

Cabigon, Josefina V. (1999). Idle, tired, and retired elderly– A myth the Filipino elderly: Towards a
society for all ages. Rapid demographic change and the welfare of the elderly project, the
1996 Philippine elderly and near elderly survey. Demographic Research and Development
Foundation (DRDF), Quezon City. Philippines.
Havighurst, Robert J. (1964). Developmental tasks and education. New York: David McKay Company,
Inc. pp. 92-100.
Martino, Archbishop Renato R., Apostolic Nuncio (1999). Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the
United Nations Before the Plenary of the General Assembly in its 54th session on the
“Follow-Up to the international year of older persons.” New York, (October 5).
http:/www.vatican.va/romancuria secretariatstate/documents/ rc seg-st doc 05101999 older-
person en.html.
National Statistics Office (2005). Senior citizens comprised six percent of the population: A special
release based on the results of census 2000. Special Release No. 151, Date Released: March
18, 2005. http://www.census.gov.ph/data press release/2006/pr0620tx.html
Ogena, Nimfa B. ( 2006). The low and slow ageing in the Philippines: Auspicious or challenging?.
University of the Philippines Population Institute (UPPI).
Sira, Warren (2006). Data on the registered senior citizens per barangay. Office for Senior Citizens
Affairs, Marikina City Hall, Marikina City.

Weller, Christian E., Wenger, Jeffrey, and Elise Gould (2004). Health insurance
coverage in
retirement: The erosion of retiree income security.
http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/books_health_ins_ret
World Health Organization Brasilia (2002). Older people new power for development. UN 2002
http://www.who.int/hpr/ageing/international_day_en.html
Yen, Duen His (1999). Johari Window.
http:www.noogenesis.com/game_theory/johari/johari_window.html

19

About the Author

Ines Alcantara-de Guzman is the current Assistant Principal for Student Affairs of
MCHS, where she has been serving in the last 29 years. She obtained her bachelor’s,
master’s, and doctoral degrees in Home Economics from the College of Home
Economics of the University of the Philippines. She has written several textbooks in
Home Economics and Livelihood Education (HELE) Grades 4-6, Technology and
Home Economics (THE) Years I-IV, and Technology and Livelihood Education
(TLE) Years I-II. She writes a quarterly journal for TLE Years I-IV entitled Vitality
Journal published by Innovative Educational Materials, Inc., She has conducted
various seminars and workshops for HELE, THE/TLE teachers.

20

Determinants of Productivity among Senior Citizens...

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Determinants of Productivity among Senior Citizens...

Semelhante a Determinants of Productivity among Senior Citizens... (20)

Último

Último (20)

Determinants of Productivity among Senior Citizens...