chapter iv analysis and interpretation of data 4.1...

74

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

___________________________________________________________________________

In order to achieve the objectives of the study, the data so collected were recorded in

tabular form for statistical analyses. Mean, median, mode, standard deviation and correlation

of all the variables were calculated. The T-test and ANOVAs test was employed to find the

statistical significance of the differences between the means of respective groups. Analysis of

data was interpreted under the following headings.

4.1 DESCRIPTION OF ACHIEVEMENT IN MATHEMATICS AMONG

COLLEGE STUDENTS

With the view to interpret the achievement in mathematics of college students,

frequency distributions along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1

Distribution of Scores of the Students on the Basis of their in Mathematics

Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative

Percentage

64-70 69 5.8 100

57-63 121 10 94.2

50-56 196 16.4 84.2

43-49 321 26.8 67.8

36-42 200 16.6 41

29-35 197 16.4 24.4

22-28 96 8 8

Total 1200 100

Mean: 44.5 Median:44 Mode: 45 Skewness:0.11

The Table 4.1 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in

Mathematics is 44.5 with median and mode 44 and 45 respectively it shows the scores lie

nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The Table 4.1

shows that 386 (32%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (44.5)

falls. 321 students with percentage (27%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in which mean

75

falls and 493 (41%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below

the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to

0.11 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.

Fig 4.1 Distributions of Scores of Students on the Basis of Achievement in Mathematics

Fig 4.1 clearly depicts that highest frequency (321) lie in the class interval 43-49,

whereas lowest frequency (69) lies in the class interval 64 -70.

4.1.1 Distribution of Scores of BA (Male) College Students on the Basis of their

Achievement in Mathematics.

With the view to interpret the achievement in mathematics of college students,

frequency distributions along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2

Distribution of Scores of B A (Male) Students on the Basis of their Achievement in Mathematics


Percentage

64-70 7 3.5 100

57-63 18 9 96.5

50-56 29 14.5 87.5

43-49 54 27 73

36-42 43 21.5 46

29-35 35 17.5 24.5

22-28 14 7 7

Total 200 100

Mean:43.6 Median: 43 Mode: 45 Skewness:0.18

76




shows that 54 (27%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (43.6) falls.

54 students with percentage (27%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in which mean falls

and 92 (46%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below the

class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 0.18

means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.

4.1.2 Distribution of Scores of the B A (Female) College Students on the Basis of their

Achievement in Mathematics

With the view to interpret the achievement in mathematics of BA (Female) college

students, frequency distribution along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in

Table 4.3.

Table-4.3

Distribution of Scores of B A (Female) College Students on the

Basis of their Achievement in Mathematics


Percentage

64-70 11 5.5 100

57-63 22 11 94.5

50-56 35 17.5 83.5

43-49 52 26 66

36-42 28 14 40

29-35 40 20 26

22-28 12 6 6

Total 200 100

Mean: 44.9 Median: 45 Mode: 45 Skewness: 0.07




77






Fig.4.2 Distribution of Scores of Male and Female College Students on the Basis

of their Achievement in Mathematics

Fig 4.2 illustrates that 54 male students and 52 female students lie in the class interval

of 43 to 49, 29 male students and 35 female students find places in the class interval of 50 to

56 and 43 male students and 28 female students secure their places between 36 and 42.

Whereas 7 male students and 11 female students lie in the class interval of 64 to 70 and 14

male students and 12 female students find places in the class interval of 22 to 28.

4.1.3 Distribution of Scores of the B.Sc. (Male) College Students on the Basis of their


With the view to interpret the achievement of college students, frequency distribution

along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.4.

78

Table-4.4

Distribution of Scores of B.Sc. (Male) College Students on the



Percentage

64-70 14 7 100

57-63 21 10.5 93

50-56 30 15 82.5

43-49 54 27 67.5

36-42 39 19.5 40.5

29-35 27 13.5 21

22-28 15 7.5 7.5

Total 200 100

Mean: 45.02 Median:44 Mode:45 Skewness:0.17




shows that 65 (32.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (45.02)

falls. 54 students with percentage (27%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in which mean

falls and 81 (40.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below



4.1.4 Distribution of Scores of B.Sc. (Female) the College Students on the Basis of

their Achievement in mathematics



79

Table-4.5

Distribution of Scores of B.Sc (Female) College Students on the



Percentage

64-70 12 6 100

57-63 19 9.5 94

50-56 36 18 84.5

43-49 60 30 66.5

36-42 30 15 36.5

29-35 28 14 21.5

22-28 15 7.5 7.5

Total 200 100

Mean: 45.2 Median:44.5 Mode:43 Skewness: 0.13


Mathematics is 45.2 with median and mode 44.5 and 43 respectively it shows the scores lie

nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The table 4.5


falls. 73 (36.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below the





80






4.1.5 Distribution of Scores of the B.Com (Male) College Students on the Basis of their

Achievement in mathematics



Table-4.6

Distribution of Scores of B.Com (Male) College Students on the



Percentage

64-70 14 7 100

57-63 22 11 93

50-56 28 14 82

43-49 52 26 68

36-42 32 16 42

29-35 29 14.5 26

22-28 23 11.5 11.5

Total 200 100

Mean :44.4 Median: 44 Mode: 44 Skewness:0.14



nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The table 4.6




81



4.1.6 Distribution of Scores of the B.Com (Female) College Students on the Basis of

their Achievement in mathematics


along with descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.7.

Table-4.7

Distribution of Scores of B.Com (Female) College Students on the



Percentage

64-70 11 5.5 100

57-63 19 9.5 94.5

50-56 38 19 85

43-49 49 24.5 66

36-42 28 14 41.5

29-35 38 19 27.5

22-28 17 8.5 8.5

Total 200 100

Mean: 44.4 Median: 45 Mode: 54 Skewness:0.05




shows that 68 students with percentage (34%) college students lie above the class intervals in

which mean (44.4) falls. 49 students with percentage (24.5%) lie in the class interval of 43 to

49 in which mean falls and 83 (41.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to

42 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency

distribution comes out to 0.05 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.

82








4.1.7 Achievement in Mathematics of College Students with respect to BA Stream

To study the difference in achievement in mathematics of male and female college

students of BA Stream, data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value

testing significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.8

Table- 4.8

Achievement in Mathematics of Male and Female College Students of BA

Stream

Achievement

in

Mathematics

N Mean SD df t-value

Male 200 43.6 10.54 398 1.12

Female 200 44.8 11.36

*P<0.01

83

As the Table 4.8 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on

achievement in mathematics showing male and female achievement score are 43.6, 44.8 and

10.54, 11.36 respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 398 that resulted t-value to be

1.12 which is in significant at 0.01 levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no

significant difference in achievement in mathematics of college students showing male and

female achievement of BA students.

4.1.8 Achievement in Mathematics of College Students with respect to B.Sc. Stream


students of B.Sc Stream, data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value


Table- 4.9

Achievement in Mathematics of Male and Female College Students of

B.Sc Stream

Achievement

in

Mathematics


Male 200 45.02 11.19 398

0.15

Female 200 45.14 10.93

*P<0.01


achievement in mathematics showing male and female achievement score are 45.02, 45.14

and 11.19, 10.93 respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 398 that resulted t-value to

be 0.15 which is in significant at 0.01 levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no

significant difference in achievement in mathematics of college students showing male and

female achievement of B.Sc Students.

4.1.9 Achievement in Mathematics of College Students with respect to B.Com Stream


students of B.Com Stream, data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value


84

Table- 4.10

Achievement in Mathematics of Male and Female College Students of B.Com Stream

Achievement

in

Mathematics


Male 200 44.39 11.84 398 .0048

Female 200 44.40 11.58

*P<0.01

Table 4.10 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on

achievement in mathematics showing male and female achievement score. Degree of

freedom came out to be 398 that resulted t-value to be 0.0048 which is in significant at 0.01

levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no significant difference in achievement in

mathematics of college students showing male and female achievement of B.Com Stream.

4.2 DESCRIPTION OF ACHIEVEMENT IN MATHEMATICS AMONG COLLEGE

STUDENTS IN RELATION TO STREAM

4.2.1 Distribution of Scores of College Students of BA Stream on the basis of Achievement in

Mathematics



Table-4.11

Score of B. A Stream students on the basis of Achievement in Mathematics


Percentage

64-70 18 4.5 100

57-63 40 10 95.5

50-56 64 16 85.5

43-49 106 26.5 69.5

36-42 71 17.7 43

29-35 75 18.8 25.3

22-28 26 6.5 6.5

Total 400 100


85



nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The Table

4.11 shows that 122 (30.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean

(44.21) falls. 106 students with percentage (26.5%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in

which mean falls and 172 (43%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42

that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution

comes out to 0.12 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.

4.2.2 Distribution of Scores of College Students of B.Sc Stream on the basis of




Table-4.12

Distribution Score of B. Sc Stream students on the

basis of Achievement in Mathematics


Percentage

64-70 26 6.5 100

57-63 40 10 93.5

50-56 66 16.5 83.5

43-49 114 28.5 67

36-42 69 17.2 38.5

29-35 55 13.8 21.3

22-28 30 7.5 7.5

Total 400 100





4.12 shows that 132 (33%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean

86

(45.07) falls. 114 students with percentage (28.5%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in

which mean falls and 154 (38.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42


comes out to 0.08 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.

4.2.3 Distribution of Scores of College Students of B.Com Stream on the basis of




Table-4.13

Distribution Score of B.Com Stream students on the

basis of Achievement in Mathematics


Percentage

64-70 25 6.2 100

57-63 41 10.3 93.8

50-56 66 16.5 83.5

43-49 101 25.2 67

36-42 60 15 41.8

29-35 67 16.8 26.8

22-28 40 10 10

Total 400 100





4.13 shows that 132 (33%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (44.4)

falls. 101 students with percentage (25.2%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in which mean

falls and 167 (41.8%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below



87

4.2.4 Achievement in Mathematics of College Students with respect to Stream

To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-

way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.14.

Table 4.14

Analysis of Variance for College students of three Streams

Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

df Mean Sum

of Squares

F

Among groups 166.6467 2 83.32333 0.660067

Within groups

151102.9 1197 126.2347

Total 151269.6 1199

** Significant at .01 level

The Table 4.14 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 0.66

which is in significant at 0 .01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant

difference among the college students of three streams.

4.3 DESCRIPTION OF MOTIVATIONAL BELIEFES AMONG COLLEGE

STUDENTS

With the view to interpret the motivational beliefs of college students, frequency

distribution along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.15.

Table 4.15

Distribution of Score of Motivational Belief along with different components

(N=1200)

I G O E G O T V C L B S E T A

Class Int. f p f p f p f p f p F p

5.8-7 493 41.0 472 39.3 386 32.2 431 35.9 472 39.3 29 2.4

4.2-5.7 399 33.3 381 31.8 376 31.3 358 29.8 360 30.0 71 5.9

3.6-4.1 174 14.5 193 16.1 226 18.8 219 18.3 212 17.6 306 25.5

2.3-3.5 107 8.9 114 9.5 162 13.5 165 13.8 147 12.3 552 46

2.2-1 27 2.3 40 3.3 50 4.2 27 2.2 9 0.8 242 20.2

Total 1200 100 1200 100 1200 100 1200 100 1200 100 1200 100

88

It is shown by Table 4.15 that all the components of motivational belief IGO, EGO,

TV, CLB, SE, TA of students differ significantly from one another. Hence, the mean scores

of all the students differ significantly from one another. The statistical data shows that 493

students with percentage (41%) college students lie above the class intervals in which IGO

mean (5.21) falls, 472 students with percentage (39.3%) college students lie above the class

intervals in which EGO mean (5.13) falls, 386 students with percentage (32.2%) college

students lie above the class intervals in which TV mean (4.84) falls, 431 students with

percentage (35.9%) college students lie above the class intervals in which CLB mean (4.98)

falls, 472 students with percentage (39.3%) college students lie above the class intervals in

which SE mean (5.13) falls, 406 students with percentage (33.84%) college students lie

above the class intervals in which TA mean (3.22) falls.

Fig.4.5 Distribution of Mean Scores of Motivational Beliefs components

As shown in Figure 4.5 from the mean score values it is concluded that the Test

Anxiety (3.22) among the college students is less compared to other motivational beliefs

parameters, 552 students’ falls in the range of (2.3-3.5). Intrinsic goal orientation (5.21) is the

major factor by which the college students differ from each others, 399 students’ falls in the

range of (4.2-5.7).

4.3.1 Distribution of Score of Motivational Belief along with different components of

Male students (N=600)

With the view to interpret the motivational belief of college students (Male)

descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.16.

89

Table-4.16

Distribution of Score of Motivational Belief of Male Students (N = 600)

Class Int. I G O E G O T V C L B S E T A

5.8-7 234 240 211 199 224 4

4.2-5.7 194 191 186 181 190 30

3.6-4.1 83 79 93 107 113 163

2.3-3.5 66 58 74 88 68 299

1-2.2 23 32 36 25 5 104

Total

Mean 5.09

Median 5.0

Mode 7.0

Skewness

-0.32

Mean 5.11

Median 5.0

Mode 6.0

Skewness

-0.44

Mean 4.90

Median 5.0

Mode 5.0

Skewness

-0.27

Mean 4.80

Median 5.0

Mode 5.0

Skewness

-0.15

Mean 5.09

Median 5.0

Mode 5.0

Skewness

-0.14

Mean 3.21

Median 5.0

Mode 3.0

Skewness

0.49

4.3.2 Distribution of Score of Motivational Belief along with different components of

Female students (N=600)

With the view to interpret the motivational belief of college student (Female)


Table-4.17

Distribution of Score of Motivational Belief of Female students (N=600)


5.8-7 259 232 175 232 248 25

4.2-5.7 205 190 190 177 170 41

3.6-4.1 91 114 133 112 99 143

2.3-3.5 41 56 88 77 79 253

1-2.2 4 8 14 2 4 138

Total

Mean 5.32

Median 5.0

Mode 5.0

Skewness

-0.24

Mean 5.14

Median 5.0

Mode 5.0

Skewness

-0.18

Mean 4.8

Median 5.0

Mode 5.0

Skewness

-0.09

Mean 5.10

Median 5.0

Mode 5.0

Skewness

-0.07

Mean 5.16

Median 5.0

Mode 6.0

Skewness

-0.15

Mean 3.22

Median 5.0

Mode 3.0

Skewness

0.16

90

The Table 4.17 reveals that mean score of college students in motivational belief

Intrinsic goal orientation (IGO) is 5.32 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it

shows the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be

6.0. The Table 4.16 shows that 259 (43.2%) college students lie above the class intervals in

which mean (5.32) falls. 205 students with percentage (34.2%) lie in the class interval of 4.2

to 5.7 in which mean falls and 136 (22.6%) students find their places in the class interval of 1

to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency

distribution comes out to -0.24 means there are many students in a group with their scores

higher than the average score of the group.

The mean score of college students in motivational belief Extrinsic goal orientation

(EGO) is 5.14 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively showing that the scores lie

nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical


falls. 190 students with percentage (31.6%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which

mean falls and 178 (29.8%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie

below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes

out to -0.18 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the

average score of the group.

The mean score of college students in motivational belief Task Value (TV) is 4.80

with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively. The statistical shows that 175 (29.1%)

college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.80) falls. 190 students with

percentage (31.6%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 235 (39.3%)

students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in

which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.09 means there are

many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of the group.

The mean score of college students in motivational belief Control of Learning beliefs

(CLB) is 5.10 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie





91




The mean score of college students in motivational belief Self-efficacy for learning

and performance (SE) is 5.16 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively. The statistical







The mean score of college students in motivational belief Test Anxiety (TA) is 3.22

with median and mode 5.0 and 3.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal

distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 209

(34.8%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (3.22) falls. 253 students

with percentage (42.2%) lie in the class interval of 2.3 to 3.5 in which mean falls and 138

(23.0%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 2.2 that lie below the class

interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 0.16 means

it is nearly normal distribution of scores.

4.3.3 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Intrinsic Goal Orientation

To study the difference in Motivational Belief (IGO) of male and female college

Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing

significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.18.

Table- 4.18

Motivational Belief (IGO) of Male and Female College Students

Motivational

Belief


Male 600 5.09 1.39 1198 3.067 *

Female 600 5.32 1.22

*P<0.01

92


motivational belief (IGO) showing male and female score are 5.09, 5.32 and 1.39, 1.22

respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198. Hence it is interpreted that there

prevails significant difference in motivational belief (IGO) of college students of Punjab.

4.3.4 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Extrinsic Goal Orientation

To study the difference in Motivational Belief (EGO) of male and female college



Table- 4.19

Motivational Belief (EGO) of Male and Female College Students

Motivational

Belief


Male 600 5.11 1.42 1198 0.380

Female 600 5.14 1.28

*P<0.01


motivational belief (EGO) showing male and female score are 5.11, 5.14 and 1.42, 1.28

respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198 that resulted t-value to be 0.380. Hence

it is interpreted that there prevails no significant difference in motivational belief (EGO) of

college students of Punjab.

4.3.5 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Task Value

To study the difference in Motivational Belief (TV) of male and female college



Table- 4.20

Motivational Belief (TV) of Male and Female College Students

Motivational

Belief


Male 600 4.90 1.42 1198 1.491

Female 600 4.79 1.24

*P<0.01

93


motivational belief (TV) showing male and female score are 4.90, 4.79and 1.42, 1.24

respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198. Hence it is interpreted that there

prevails no significant difference in motivational belief (TV) of college students of Punjab.

4.3.6 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Control of Learning Belief

To study the difference in Motivational Belief (CLB) of male and female college



Table- 4.21

Motivational Belief (CLB) of Male and Female College Students

Motivational

Belief


Male 600 4.86 1.37 1198 3.2*

Female 600 5.10 1.28

*P<0.01


motivational belief (CLB) showing male and female score are 4.86, 5.10 and 1.37, 1.28

respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198 that resulted t-value to be 3.2 which is

Significant at 0.01 levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails significant difference in

motivational belief (CLB) of college students.

4.3.7 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Self Efficacy

To study the difference in Motivational Belief (SE) of male and female college



Table- 4.22

Motivational Belief (SE) of Male and Female College Students

Motivational

Belief


Male 600 5.09 1.26 1198 0.896

Female 600 5.16 1.32

*P<0.01

94


motivational belief (SE) showing male and female score are 5.09, 5.16 and 1.26, 1.32

respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198 that resulted t-value to be 0.896 which

is in Significant at 0.01 levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no significant

difference in motivational belief (SE) of college students of Punjab pursuing the studies in

different streams namely art, commerce, Science.

4.3.8 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Test Anxiety

To study the difference in Motivational Belief (TA) of male and female college



Table- 4.23

Motivational Belief (TA) of Male and Female College Students

Motivational

Belief


Male 600 3.21 0.84 1198 0.263

Female 600 3.22 1.13

*P<0.01


motivational belief (TA) showing male and female score are 3.21, 3.22 and 0.84, 1.13

respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198 that resulted t-value to be 0.263 which

is in Significant at 0.01 levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no significant

difference in motivational belief (TA) of college students of Punjab.

4.4 DESCRIPTION OF MOTIVATIONAL BELIEFES AMONG COLLEGE


4.4.1 Distribution Score of Motivational Belief along with different component of

(B.A) students (N=400)

With the view to interpret the motivational belief of college students (B.A)

descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.24.

95

Table-4.24

Distribution Score of Motivational Belief along with different components

of (BA) students (N=400)


5.8-7.0 183 124 84 121 148 8

4.2-5.7 107 112 124 107 142 25

3.6-4.1 46 67 89 78 61 80

2.3-3.5 45 66 66 70 48 161

1.0-2.2 19 31 37 24 1 126

TOTAL

Mean 5.19

Median

5.0

Mode 7.0

Skewness

-0.47

Mean

4.70

Median

5.0

Mode 5.0

Skewness

-0.12

Mean

4.42

Median

4.5

Mode 5.0

Skewness

-0.02

Mean

4.71

Median

5.0

Mode 4.0

Skewness

-0.02

Mean

5.11

Median

5.0

Mode 6.0

Skewness

-0.04

Mean

2.99

Median

3.0

Mode 3.0

Skewness

0.61


Intrinsic goal orientation (IGO) is 5.19 with median and mode 5.0 and 7.0 respectively it

shows the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be

6.0. The Table 4.24 shows that 183 (45.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in







(EGO) is 4.70 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie



falls. 112 students with percentage (28%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean

96

falls and 164 (41%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below

the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -

0.12 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score

of the group.

The mean score of college students in motivational belief Task Value (TV) is 4.42



(21%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.42) falls. 124 students

with percentage (31%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 192

(48%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class

interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.02

means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of

the group.


(CLB) is 4.71 with median and mode 5.0 and 4.0 respectively showing that the scores lie




mean falls and 172(43%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie





and performance (SE) is 5.11 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively showing that

the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0.

The statistical shows that 148 (37%) college students lie above the class intervals in which

mean (5.11) falls. 142 students with percentage (35.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7

in which mean falls and 110 (27.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1


comes out to -0.04 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the


97




(28.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (2.99) falls. 161

students with percentage (40.25%) lie in the class interval of 2.3 to 3.5 in which mean falls

and 126 (31.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 2.2 that lie below the



Fig.4.6 Distribution of Mean Scores of Motivational Beliefs components


Anxiety (2.99) among the BA college students is less compared to other motivational beliefs

parameters, 161 students’ falls in the range of (2.3-3.5). Intrinsic goal orientation (5.21) is the

major factor by which the BA college students differ from each others, 107 students’ falls in

the range of (4.2-5.7).

4.4.2 Distribution Score of Motivational Belief along with different component of

(B.Sc) students (N=400)

With the view to interpret the motivational belief of college students (B.Sc)


98

Table-4.25


Of (B.Sc) students (N=400)


5.8-7.0 163 164 164 160 145 1

4.2-5.7 132 139 127 131 142 41

3.6-4.1 59 66 60 64 59 106

2.3-3.5 37 28 43 44 49 197

1.0-2.2 9 3 6 1 5 55

TOTAL

Mean 5.19

Median 5

Mode 6

Skewness

-0.40

Mean 5.26

Median 5

Mode 6

Skewness

-0.33

Mean

5.15

Median 5

Mode 6

Skewness

-0.23

Mean

5.18

Median 5

Mode 5

Skewness

-0.10

Mean

5.08

Median 5

Mode 5

Skewness

-0.13

Mean

3.32

Median

3.1

Mode 3

Skewness

0.147


Intrinsic goal orientation (IGO) is 5.19 with median and mode 5 and 6 respectively it shows


The Table 4.25 shows that 163 (40.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in

which mean (5.19) falls. 132 students with percentage (33%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to

5.7 in which mean falls and 105 (26.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1





(EGO) is 5.26 with median and mode 5 and 6 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly

in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows

that 164 (41%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.26) falls. 139


99


class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.33


the group.

The mean score of college students in motivational belief Task Value (TV) is

5.15with median and mode 5 and 6 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal







the group.


(CLB) is 5.18 with median and mode 5 and 5 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly

in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows






the group.


and performance (SE) is 5.08 with median and mode 5 and 5 respectively showing that the

scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The

statistical shows that 145 (36.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which


in which mean falls and 113 (28.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to

4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency



100


with median and mode 3.1 and 3 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal





interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 0.147


Fig.4.7 Distribution of Mean Scores of Motivational Beliefs components of B.Sc

College Students


Anxiety (3.32) among the B.Sc college students is less compared to other motivational

beliefs parameters, 197 students’ falls in the range of (2.3-3.5). Extrinsic goal orientation

(5.26) is the major factor by which the B.Sc college students differ from each others, 139

students’ falls in the range of (4.2-5.7).

4.4.3 Distribution Score of Motivational Belief along with different components of

(B.Com) students (N=400)

With the view to interpret the motivational belief of B.Com college students


101

Table-4.26


of (B.Com) students (N=400)


5.8-7 155 180 151 165 171 21

4.2-5.7 147 139 136 128 126 31

3.6-4.1 68 50 70 71 67 106

2.3-3.5 30 28 40 35 35 190

1.0-2.2 ---- 3 3 1 ------ 52

TOTAL

Mean 5.24

Median 5

Mode 5

Skewness

-0.09

Mean 5.40

Median

5.5

Mode 5

Skewness

-0.39

Mean

5.11

Median 5

Mode 5

Skewness

-0.151

Mean

5.21

Median 5

Mode 5

Skewness

-0.167

Mean

5.27

Median5

Mode 6

Skewness

-0.187

Mean

3.44

Median 3

Mode 3

Skewness

1.01


Intrinsic goal orientation (IGO) is 5.24 with median and mode 5 and 5 respectively. The

Table 4.26 shows that 155 (38.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which


in which mean falls and 98 (24.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1


comes out to -0.09means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the



(EGO) is 5.40 with median and mode 5.5 and 5 respectively. The statistical shows that 180






the group.

102

The mean score of college students in motivational belief Task Value (TV) is

5.11with median and mode 5 and 5 respectively. The statistical shows that 151 (37.75%)


percentage (34%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 113 (28.25%)





(CLB) is 5.21 with median and mode 5 and 5 respectively. The statistical shows that 165


students with percentage (32%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and

107 (26.75%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class



the group.


and performance (SE) is 5.27 with median and mode 5 and 6 respectively. The statistical








with median and mode 3 and 3 respectively. The statistical shows that 158 (39.5%) college

students lie above the class intervals in which mean (3.32) falls. 190 students with percentage

(47.5%) lie in the class interval of 2.3 to 3.5 in which mean falls and 52 (13%) students find

their places in the class interval of 1 to 2.2 that lie below the class interval in which mean

falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 1.01 means it is nearly normal

distribution of scores.

103

Fig.4.8 Distribution of Mean Scores of Motivational Beliefs components of

B.Com College Students


Anxiety (3.44) among the B.Com college students is less compared to other motivational

beliefs parameters, 190 students’ falls in the range of (2.3-3.5). Extrinsic goal orientation

(5.40) is the major factor by which the B.Com college students differ from each others, 139

students’ falls in the range of (4.2-5.7).

4.4.4 Motivational Belief (IGO) of College Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.27

Analysis of Variance of (IGO) for College Students among three Streams

Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

df Mean Sum

of Squares

F

Among groups 0.612163 2 0.306082 0.176103

Within groups 2080.483 1197 1.738081

Total 2081.096 1199


104


which is in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant


4.4.5 Motivational Belief (EGO) of College Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.28

Analysis of Variance of (EGO) for College Students among three Streams

Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

df Mean Sum

of Squares

F

Among groups 107.9364 2 53.96818 31.79631841

Within groups 2031.679 1197 1.697309

Total 2139.615 1199



which are in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant


4.4.6 Motivational Belief (TV) of College Students with respect to Stream


way ANOVA were applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.29.

Table 4.29

Analysis of Variance of (TV) for College Students among three Streams

Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

df Mean Sum

of Squares

F

Among groups 136.5308 2 68.26541 42.0092576

Within groups 1945.136 1197 1.625009

Total 2081.666 1199


which are in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant


105

4.4.7 Motivational Belief (CLB) of College Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.30

Analysis of Variance of (CLB) for College students of three Streams

Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

df Mean Sum

of Squares

F

Among groups 63.10811 2 31.55405625 18.44471239

Within groups 2047.752 1197 1.710737234

Total 2110.861 1199




difference among the college students of three streams

4.4.8 Motivational Belief (SE) of College Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.31

Analysis of Variance of (SE) for College students of three Streams

Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

df Mean Sum

of Squares

F

Among groups 8.048362 2 4.024181083 2.568841323

Within groups 1875.143 1197 1.566535484

Total 1883.191 1199





4.4.9 Motivational Belief (TA) of College Students with respect to Stream



106

Table 4.32

Analysis of Variance of (TA) for College students of three Streams

Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

df Mean Sum

of Squares

F

Among groups 42.43072 2 21.21536 21.06457

Within groups 1205.568 1197 1.007158

Total 1247.999 1199





4.5 DESCRIPTION OF LEARNING STRATEGIES AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS IN

RELATION TO GENDER

4.5.1 Distribution of Score of Learning Strategies along with different components of Male

students (N=600)

With the view to interpret the Learning Strategies of Male college students


Table-4.33

Distribution of Score of Learning Strategies of Male students (N=600)

CLASS

INTERVAL

REH ELA ORG CRI

TH

SELF

REG

STU

HAB

EFF

REG

PEER

LEA

HELP

SEEKING

5.8-7.0 219 211 227 208 225 223 237 233 244

4.2-5.7 233 229 191 200 206 214 209 195 179

3.6-4.1 109 95 108 121 109 115 100 112 122

2.3-3.5 35 58 65 65 58 47 52 56 50

1.0-2.2 4 7 9 6 2 1 2 4 5

TOTAL M5.17

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.168

M5.08

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.165

M5.09

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.138

M5.08

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.03

M5.12

Md 5

Mo 6

SK

-0.06

M 5.17

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

0.007

M5.18

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.133

M5.13

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.111

M5.18

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.147

107

The Table 4.33 reveals that mean (M) score of college students in learning strategies

(REH) is 5.17 with median (Md) and mode (Mo) 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores

lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table


(5.17) falls. 233 students with percentage (39%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which


below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness (SK) of the frequency distribution



The mean score of college students in learning strategies (ELA) is 5.08 with median

and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal distribution

whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 211 (35.1%)






The mean score of college students in learning strategies (ORG) is 5.09 with median








The mean score of college students in learning strategies (CRI THI) is 5.08 with

median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal




(32s%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class

108



the group.

The mean score of college students in learning strategies Self-regulation for learning

and performance (S REG) is 5.25 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing

that the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be

6.0. The statistical shows that 225 (37.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in






The mean score of college students in learning strategies study habit is 5.17 with








The mean score of college students in learning strategies Effort Regulation is 5.18








The mean score of college students in learning strategies Peer Learning is 5.13 with



109






The mean score of college students in learning strategies Help Seeking is 5.18 with








Fig.4.9 Distribution of Mean Scores of Learning Strategies components of Male

College Students

As shown in Figure 4.9 from the mean score values it is concluded that the

Elaboration and Critical Thinking (5.08) among the Male college students is less compared to

other Learning Strategies parameters. Effort Regulation and Help Seeking (5.18) is the major

factor by which the Male college students differ from each others.

110

4.5.2 Distribution of Score of Learning Strategies along with different components of

Female students (N=600)

With the view to interpret the Learning Strategy of Female college students


Table-4.34

Distribution of Score of Learning Strategies along with different components

Of Female students (N=600)

CLASS

INTERVAL

REH ELA ORG CRI

TH

SELF

REG

STU

HAB

EFF

REG

PEER

LEA

HELP

SEEKING

5.8-7.0 213 241 218 226 202 236 226 214 212

4.2-5.7 222 215 200 206 239 213 207 214 198

3.6-4.1 96 81 113 107 109 106 106 111 119

2.3-3.5 62 58 64 56 47 44 60 57 66

1.0-2.2 7 5 5 5 3 1 1 4 5

TOTAL M5.07

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.168

M5.21

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.19

M5.10

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.050

M5.10

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.120

M5.08

Md 5

Mo 6

SK

-0.04

M 5.24

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.11

M5.13

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.060

M5.08

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.08

M5.04

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.04

The Table 4.34 reveals that mean score (M) of college students in learning strategies

( REH) is 5.07 with median (Md) and mode (Mo) 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores

lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table


(5.17) falls. 222 students with percentage (37.2%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in

which mean falls and 165 (27.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1

that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness (SK) of the frequency



The mean score of college students in learning strategies (ELA) is 5.21 with median



111






The mean score of college students in learning strategies (ORG) is 5.10 with median


whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 218 (36%) college

students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.10) falls. 210 students with percentage

(35%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 182 (30%) students find

their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean

falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.05 means there are many

students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of the group.

The mean score of college students in learning strategies (CRI THI) is 5.10 with








the group.

The mean score of college students in learning strategies Self-regulation for learning

and performance (SELF REG) is 5.08 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively

showing that the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came

out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 202 (33.6%) college students lie above the class

intervals in which mean (5.08) falls. 239 students with percentage (40%) lie in the class

interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 159 (26.4%) students find their places in the

class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the

frequency distribution comes out to -0.04 means there are many students in a group with

their scores higher than the average score of the group.

112

The mean score of college students in learning strategies study habit is 5.24 with








The mean score of college students in learning strategies Effort Regulation is 5.13








The mean score of college students in learning strategies Peer Learning is 5.08 with








The mean score of college students in learning strategies Help Seeking is 5.04 with






113



Fig.4.10 Distribution of Mean Scores of Learning Strategies components of

Female College Students

As shown in Figure 4.10 from the mean score values it is concluded that the Help

Seeking (5.04) and Rehearsal (5.07) among the Female college students is less compared to

other Learning Strategies parameters. Study Effort and Elaboration (5.21) is the major factor

by which the Female college students differ from each others.

4.5.3 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Rehearsal

To study the difference in Learning Strategy (REH) of male and female college



Table- 4.35

Learning Strategy (REH) of Male and Female College Students

Learning

Strategy


Male 600 5.17 1.09 1198 1.85

Female 600 5.07 1.23

*P<0.01

114

As the Table 4.35 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students

showing male and female score are 5.17, 5.07 and 1.09, 1.23 respectively. Degree of freedom

came out to be 1198 that resulted t-value to be 1.85. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails

no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (REH) of college students of Punjab.

4.5.4 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Elaboration

To study the difference in Learning Strategy (ELA) of male and female college



Table- 4.36

Learning Strategy (ELA) of Male and Female College Students

Learning

Strategy


Male 600 5.08 1.19 1198 3.53*

Female 600 5.21 1.21

*P<0.01



came out to be 1198 that resulting t-value to be 3.53 which is significant at 0.01 levels.

Hence it is interpreted that there prevails significant gender difference in Learning Strategy

(ELA) of college students of Punjab.

4.5.5 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Organization

To study the difference in Learning Strategy (ORG) of male and female college



Table- 4.37

Learning Strategy (ORG) of Male and Female College Students

Learning

Strategy


Male 600 5.09 1.28 1198 0.158

Female 600 5.10 1.25

*P<0.01

115



came out to be 1198 that resulting t-value to be 0.158. Hence it is interpreted that there

prevails no gender significant difference in Learning Strategy (ORG) of students of Punjab.

4.5.6 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Critical Thinking

To study the difference in Learning Strategy (CT) of male and female college



Table- 4.38

Learning Strategy (CT) of Male and Female College Students

Learning

Strategy


Male 600 5.08 1.23 1198 0.316

Female 600 5.10 1.18

*P<0.01



came out to be 1198 that is resulting t-value to be 0.316. Hence it is interpreted that there

prevails no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (CT) of students of Punjab.

4.5.7 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Self Regulation

To study the difference in Learning Strategy (SR) of male and female college



Table- 4.39

Learning Strategy (SR) of Male and Female College Students

Learning

Strategy


Male 600 5.12 1.19 1198 0.633

Female 600 5.08 1.13

*P<0.01

116




prevails no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (SR) of students of Punjab.

4.5.8 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Study Habit

To study the difference in Learning Strategy (SH) of male and female college



Table- 4.40

Learning Strategy (SH) of Male and Female College Students

Learning

Strategy


Male 600 5.17 1.16 1198 1.046

Female 600 5.24 1.17

*P<0.01




prevails no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (SH) of students of Punjab.

4.5.9 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Effort Regulation

To study the difference in Learning Strategy (ER) of male and female college



Table- 4.41

Learning Strategy (ER) of Male and Female College Students

Learning

Strategy


Male 600 5.18 1.17 1198 0.0771

Female 600 5.13 1.18

*P<0.01

117




prevails no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (ER) of students of Punjab.

4.5.10 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Peer Learning

To study the difference in Learning Strategy (PL) of male and female college



Table- 4.42

Learning Strategy (PL) of Male and Female College Students

Learning

Strategy


Male 600 5.13 1.20 1198 0.746

Female 600 5.08 1.16

*P<0.01



came out to be 1198 that is resulting t-value to be 0.746 . Hence it is interpreted that there

prevails no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (PL) of students of Punjab.

4.5.11 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect Help Seeking

To study the difference in Learning Strategy (HS) of male and female college



Table- 4.43

Learning Strategy (HL) of Male and Female College Students

Learning

Strategy


Male 600 5.18 1.24 1198 1.98

Female 600 5.04 1.21

*P<0.01

118



came out to be 1198 that is resulting t-value to be 1.98 which is in significant at 0.01

levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no gender significant difference in Learning

Strategy (HS) of college students of Punjab.

4.6 DESCRIPTION OF LEARNING STRATEGIES AMONG COLLEGE


4.6.1 Distribution Score of Learning Strategies along with different components of (BA)

students (N=400)

With the view to interpret the learning strategies of college students (BA) descriptive

statistics were derived as given in Table 4.44.

Table-4.44

Distribution Score of Learning Strategies along with different components

Of (BA) students (N=400)

CLASS

INTERVAL

REH ELA ORG CRI

TH

SELF

REG

STU

HAB

EFF

REG

PEER

LEA

HELP

SEEKING

5.8-7.0 129 146 134 129 128 136 158 137 147

4.2-5.7 141 150 128 154 155 151 133 140 108

3.6-4.1 81 63 71 79 72 85 72 80 91

2.3-3.5 42 39 61 37 42 28 37 41 54

1.0-2.2 7 2 6 1 3 ---- ---- 2 ----

TOTAL M4.96

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.160

M5.14

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.09

M4.93

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.08

M5.02

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

0.11

M5.00

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.01

M 5.12

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

0.11

M5.16

Md 5

Mo 6

SK

-0.07

M5.04

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

0.027

M5.00

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

0.09


Rehearsal (REH) is 4.96 with median (Md) and mode (Mo) 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows




119


to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness (SK) of the frequency



The mean score of college students in learning strategies Elaboration (ELA) is 5.14

with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal

distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical data shows that

146 (36.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.14) falls. 150


and 104 (26%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the



the group.

The mean score of college students in learning strategies Organization (ORG) is 4.93



134 (33.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.93) falls. 128





the group.

The mean score of college students in learning strategies Critical Thinking (CRI TH)

is 5.02 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in

normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical data





out to 0.11 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.

120

The mean score of college students in learning strategies Self Regulation (SELF

REG) is 5.00 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in








The mean score of college students in learning strategies Study Habit (STU HAB) is

5.12 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal


136 (34%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.12) falls. 151





the group.

The mean score of college students in learning strategies Effort Regulation (EFF





mean falls and 109 (27S.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that

lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution



The mean score of college students in learning strategies Peer Learning (PEER

LEG) is 5.04 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in



121

falls. 140 students with percentage (35%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean

falls and 122 (30.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below



The mean score of college students in learning strategies Help Seeking (HELP

SEEKING) is 5.00 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie

nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical

data shows that 147 (36.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean

(5.00) falls. 108 students with percentage (27%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which



out to 0.09 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.

Fig.4.11 Distribution of Mean Scores of Learning Strategies components of BA

College Students


Organization (4.93) and Rehearsal (4.96) among the BA college students is less compared to

other Learning Strategies parameters. Effort Regulation (5.16) and Elaboration (5.14) is the

major factor by which the BA college students differ from each others.

122

4.6.2 Distribution Score of Learning Strategies along with different components of

(B.Com) students (N=400)

With the view to interpret the learning strategies of college students (B.Com)


Table-4.45


Of (B.Com) students (N=400)

CLASS

INTERVAL

REH ELA ORG CRI

TH

SELF

REG

STU

HAB

EFF

REG

PEER

LEA

HELP

SEEKING

5.8-7.0 159 180 175 175 147 155 161 170 164

4.2-5.7 152 156 141 136 154 150 149 155 147

3.6-4.1 60 41 62 63 70 66 58 51 69

2.3-3.5 29 23 22 26 29 29 31 24 20

1.0-2.2 ---- ---- ---- ------ ---- --- 1 -- ---

TOTAL M5.23

Md 5

Mo 6

SK

-0.09

M5.43

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.09

M4.93

Md5.5

Mo 6

SK

-0.23

M5.33

Md 5

Mo 6

SK

-0.19

M5.16

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.06

M 5.22

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.08

M5.27

Md 5

Mo 6

SK

-0.11

M5.35

Md5

Mo 5

SK

0.027

M5.00

Md 5.0

Mo 5

SK

-0.06





which mean (5.23) falls. 152 students with percentage (38%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to

5.7 in which mean falls and 89 (22.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to

4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency





distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.45 shows that 180

123


with percentage (39%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 64 (16%)









and 84 (21%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class



the group.



normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.45 shows

that 175 (43.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.33) falls.

136 students with percentage (34%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls




the group.





154 students with percentage (38.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean



124


of the group.









the group.





149 students with percentage (37.25%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean




of the group.

The that mean score of college students in learning strategies Peer Learning (PEER

LER) is 5.35 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in


that 170 (42.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.35) falls. 155



class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -

0.027 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average

score of the group.


SEEKING) is 5.00 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie

125




mean falls and 116 (29%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie


out to - 0.06 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the


Fig.4.12 Distribution of Mean Scores of Learning Strategies components of

B.Com College Students


Organization (4.93) and Help Seeking (4.96) among the B.Com college students is less

compared to other Learning Strategies parameters. Elaboration (5.43) and Peer Learning

(5.35) is the major factor by which the B.Com college students differ from each others.

4.6.3 Distribution Score of Learning Strategies along with different components of

(B.Sc) students (N=400)

With the view to interpret the learning strategies of college students (B.Sc)


126

Table-4.46


of (B.Sc) students (N=400)

CLASS

INTERVAL

REH ELA ORG CRI

TH

SELF

REG

STU

HAB

EFF

REG

PEER

LEA

HELP

SEEKING

5.8-7 137 144 149 152 171 162 158 156 169

4.2-5.7 150 144 123 107 120 129 117 111 115

3.6-4.1 70 60 72 75 62 63 74 82 64

2.3-3.5 38 47 52 58 39 43 47 46 45

1-2.2 5 5 4 8 8 3 4 5 7

TOTAL M5.05

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.15

M5.07

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.18

M5.06

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.06

M4.99

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.11

M5.20

Md 5

Mo 6

SK

-0.31

M 5.19

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.21

M5.10

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.13

M5.07

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.10

M5.16

Md 5

Mo 5

SK

-0.31




The Table 4.46 shows that 137(34.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in


to 5.7 in which mean falls and 113 (28.25%) students find their places in the class interval of

1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency

distribution comes out to -0.15means there are many students in a group with their scores









127


the group.









the group.









the group.


REG) is 5.20 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively. The Table 4.46 shows that 171






the group.




128






the group.




that 158 (39.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.10) falls. 117





the group.

The mean score of college students in learning strategies Peer Learning (PEER

LER) is 5.07 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0. The Table 4.46 shows that 156 (39%)


percentage (27.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 133




the group.


SEEKING) is 5.16 with median and mode 5.0 and 5. The Table 4.46 shows that 169




class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to- 0.31


the group.

129

Fig.4.13 Distribution of Mean Scores of Learning Strategies components of B.Sc

College Students

As shown in Figure 4.13 from the mean score values it is concluded that the Critical

Thinking (4.99) and Rehearsal (5.05) among the B.Sc college students is less compared to

other Learning Strategies parameters. Self Regulation (5.20) and Study Habit (5.19) is the

major factor by which the B.Sc college students differ from each others.

4.6.4 Learning Strategies (REH) of College Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.47

Analysis of Variance for College Students among three Streams

Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Sum

of Squares

F

Among groups 15.32228

2

7.66113958

5.571849214

Within groups 1645.842 1197

1.37497253

Total

1661.164 1199


130



difference among the college students of three streams

4.6.5 Learning Strategies (ELA) of College Students with respect to Stream

To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one


Table 4.48


Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Sum

of Squares

F


2

14.46812

10.31843013


1.402163 Total 1707.326 1199





4.6.6 Learning Strategies (ORG) of College Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.49


Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Sum

of Squares

F


2

21.07779375

13.46257


1.56565849

Total

1916.249 1199

131

The Table 4.49 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is which is

13.46 in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant


4.6.7 Learning Strategies (CRI THI) of College Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.50


Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Sum

of Squares

F


2

14.32493

9.740581

Within groups 1760.362 1197 1.470645

Total 1789.011 1199





4.6.8 Learning Strategies (SELF REG) of College Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.51


Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Sum

of Squares

F


2

4.29491725

2.987015

Within groups 1721.121 1197 1.437862398

Total 1729.711 1199


132


2.98 in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant difference

among the college students of three streams.

4.6.9 Learning Strategies (STUDY HABIT) of College Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.52


Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Sum

of Squares

F


2

0.9621701

0.685806824

Within groups 1679.362 1197 1.4029754

Total 1681.286 1199





4.6.10 Learning Strategies (EFFORT REGULATION) of Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.53


Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Sum

of Squares

F


2

3.061661

2.0880613


1.46627 Total 1761.248 1199


133




4.6.11 Learning Strategies (PEER LEARNING) of Students with respect to Stream


way ANOVA was applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.54.

Table 4.54


Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Sum

of Squares

F


2

11.40021

7.995438278

Within groups 1706.729 1197 1.425839

Total 1729.53 1199




among the college students of three streams

4.6.12 Learning Strategies (HELP SEEKING) of Students with respect to Stream



Table 4.55


Source of

Variance

Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Sum

of Squares

F


2

10.243888

6.736112


1.520741939

Total

1840.816 1199

134

Table 4.55 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is which is 6.73

in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant difference

among the college students of three streams

4.7 CORRELATION AMONG THE ACHIEVEMENT IN MATHEMATICS AND

MOTIVATIONAL BELIEFS COMPONENTS

To explore the relationship among achievement in mathematics with motivational

beliefs namely Goal Orientation, Task Value, Control Beliefs, Self Efficacy and Text

Anxiety correlation was calculated. Correlation matrix is shown in Table 4.56.

Table 4.56

Correlation Matrix: Shows Relationship among Achievement in Mathematics and

Motivational Beliefs Components among college students (N= 1200)

Variables

Ach. In

Math.

IGO EGO TV CLB SE TA

Ach. In

Math.

------- 0.635** 0.579** 0.536** 0.641** 0.592** 0.555**

IGO 0.635** ----- 0.983** 0.955** 0.971** 0.976** 0.883**

EGO 0.579** 0.983** ----- 0.963** 0.976** 0.978** 0.888**

TV 0.536** 0.955** 0.963** ----- 0.964** 0.960** 0.904**

CLB 0.641** 0.971** 0.976** 0.964** ------ 0.977** 0.898**

SE 0.592** 0.976** 0.978** 0.960** 0.977** ----- 0.897**

TA 0.555** 0.883** 0.888** 0.904** 0.898** 0.897** -----

**Significant at 0.01 level

4.7.1 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Intrinsic Goal Orientation

It is clear in Table 4.56 that the correlation value between Intrinsic Goal Orientation

and Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.635) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result

indicates that Intrinsic Goal Orientation is significantly and positively related with

Achievement in Mathematics of college students.

135

4.7.2 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Extrinsic Goal Orientation

From Table 4.56 it shows that the correlation value between Extrinsic Goal

Orientation and Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.579) that is significant at the level

0.01. The result indicates that Intrinsic Goal Orientation is significantly and positively related

with Achievement in Mathematics of college students.

4.7.3 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Task Value

Table 4.56 illustrate that the correlation value between Task Value and Achievement

in Mathematics is (r = 0.536) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result indicates that

Task Value is significantly and positively related with Achievement in Mathematics of

college students.

4.7.4 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Control of Learning Belief

The above Table depicted that the correlation value between Control of Learning

Belief and Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.641) that is significant at the level 0.01. The

result indicates that Control of Learning Belief is significantly and positively related with

Achievement in Mathematics of college students.

4.7.5 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Self Efficacy

It is clear in Table 4.56 that the correlation value between Self efficacy and

Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.592) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result

indicates that Self Efficacy is significantly and positively related with Achievement in

Mathematics of college students

4.7.6 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Test Anxiety

The value of correlation between Test Anxiety and Achievement in Mathematics is

(r = 0.555) that is significant at the level 0.01 as shown in Table. The result indicates that

Test Anxiety is significantly and positively related with Achievement in Mathematics of

college students.

4.8 CORRELATION AMONG THE ACHIEVEMENT IN MATHEMATIC AND

LEARNING STRATEGIES COMPONENTS

To explore the relationship among achievement in mathematics with learning

strategies namely Rehearsal, Elaboration, Organization, Critical Thinking, Self regulation,

Study Habit, Effort Regulation, Peer Learning and Help Seeking of college students was

calculated. Correlation matrix is shown in Table 4.57.

136

Table 4.57

Correlation Matrix: Shows Relationship among Achievement in Mathematic and

Learning Strategies Components among college students (N= 1200)

Variables

Ach.

in Math.

REH ELA ORG CRI

TH

SEL

F

REG

STU

HAB

EFF

REG

PEER

LEA

HELP

SEEKING

Ach.

in Math.

---- 0.534 0.608 0.574 0.593 0.555 0.591 0.554 0.551 0.526

REH 0.534

0.975 0.975 0.977 0.981 0.972 0.985 0.982 0.981

ELA 0.608 0.975 --- 0.985 0.986

0.978 0.983 0.983 0.979 0.971

ORG 0.574 0.977 0.985

---- 0.986 0.986 0.985 0.986 0.988 0.988

CRI TH 0.593 0.977 0.986 0.986 ----- 0.988 0.980 0.985 0.989 0.979

SELF

REG

0.555 0.981 0.978 0.985 0.988 ----- 0.981 0.990 0.986 0.997

STU HAB 0.571 0.982 0.978

0.985 0.980 0.981 ------

-

0.986 0.981 0.975

EFF REG 0.554 0.985 0.983

0.986 0.985 0.990 0.986 ----- 0.992 0.988

PEER

LEA

0.551 0.982 0.979 0.988 0.989 0.986 0.981 0.992 ----- 0.991

HELP

SEEKING

0.526 0.981 0.971 0.988 0.979 0.987 0.975 0.988 0.991 ------

**Significant at 0.01 level

4.8.1 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Rehearsal

The value of correlation between Rehearsal and Achievement in Mathematics is



college students.

137

4.8.2 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Elaboration

The correlation value between Elaboration and Achievement in Mathematics is

(r = 0.608) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result indicates that Elaboration is

significantly and positively related with Achievement in Mathematics of college students.

4.8.3 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Organization

The above Table depicted that the correlation value between Organization and


indicates that Organization is significantly and positively related with Achievement in

Mathematics of college students.

4.8.4 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Critical Thinking

From Table 4.57 it shows that the correlation value between Critical Thinking and


indicates that Critical Thinking is significantly and positively related with Achievement in


4.8.5 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Self Regulation

Table 4.57 illustrate that the correlation value between Self Regulation and


indicates that Self Regulation Value is significantly and positively related with Achievement

in Mathematics of college students.

4.8.6 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Study Habit

The value of correlation between Study Habit and Achievement in Mathematics is



college students.

4.8.7 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Effort Regulation

The correlation value between Effort Regulation and Achievement in Mathematics is

(r = 0.554) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result indicates that Effort Regulation is

significantly and positively related with Achievement in Mathematics of college students.

4.8.8 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Peer Learning

The above Table depicted that the correlation value between Peer Learning and


138

indicates that Peer Learning is significantly and positively related with Achievement in


4.8.9 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Help Seeking

From Table 4.57 it shows that the correlation value between Help Seeking and


indicates that Help Seeking is significantly and positively related with Achievement in


4.9 TESTING OF HYPOTHESES

Taking into count the outcomes after processing the data pertaining to different

variables belonging to the study as reported in preceding section, the hypotheses were tested

and the interpretations are mentioned here under.

Hypotheses -I

The results of the study indicated no significant difference in achievement of

mathematics of male and female students. So the hypothesis “There is no significant gender

difference of achievement in mathematics among the college students of Punjab pursuing the

studies in different streams namely art, commerce and science” stands accepted.

Hypotheses-II

As the results of the study indicated that the no significant stream difference among

college students of Punjab pursuing the studies in different streams namely art, commerce

and science. Hence the hypothesis “There is a significant stream difference of achievement in

mathematics among the college students of Punjab pursuing the studies in different streams

namely art, commerce and science” is rejected.

Hypotheses-III

The hypothesis “There is no significant gender difference in motivational belief

namely Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs, Self efficacy and test anxiety among

the college students of Punjab.” is accepted on the basis of outcomes of the study. The results

of the study indicated that there prevails significant difference in motivational beliefs (IGO)

of college students of Punjab.

Hypotheses-IV

The findings of the study indicated that no significant stream difference in

motivational belief namely Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs ,Self efficacy and

139

test anxiety among college students of Punjab. So, the hypothesis stating “there is significant

stream difference in motivational belief namely Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs,

Self efficacy and test anxiety among college students of Punjab.” is rejected.

Hypotheses-V

As the results of the study revealed that there is no significant gender difference in

learning strategies namely rehearsal, organization, critical thinking, Self regulation, Study

habit, Effort regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking among the college students of Punjab.

So the hypothesis “There is no significant gender difference in learning strategies namely

rehearsal, organization, critical thinking, Self regulation, Study habit, Effort regulation, Peer

learning, Help Seeking among the college students of Punjab” was accepted. The study also

reveals that there is significant gender difference in leaning strategy namely elaboration

among the college students of Punjab.

Hypotheses-VI

The results of the study indicated there is no significant stream difference in learning

strategies namely rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking, Self regulation, Study

habit, Effort regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking among the college students of Punjab.

So the hypothesis “There is no significant stream difference in learning strategies namely

rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking, Self regulation, Study habit, Effort

regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking among the college students of Punjab” is rejected.

Hypotheses-VII

The hypothesis “there is significant relationship of achievement in mathematics with

motivational belief namely Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs ,Self efficacy and

test anxiety was retained, as the results of the study revealed significant and positive

relationship among all the variables. The results showed that achievement in mathematics

was significantly and positively related with Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs,

Self efficacy and test anxiety. The findings also revealed significant and positive

interrelationship among Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs, Self efficacy and test

anxiety.

Hypotheses-VIII

The results of the study indicated there is significant relationship of achievement in

mathematics with learning strategies namely rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical

140

thinking, Self regulation, Study habit, Effort regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking. So the

hypothesis “There is significant relationship of achievement in mathematics with learning

strategies namely rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking, Self regulation, Study

habit, Effort regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking among the college students of Punjab” is

accepted.

Hypotheses-IX

The study reveals that there is significant relationship of achievement in mathematics

with motivational belief namely Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs, Self efficacy

and test anxiety and with learning strategies namely rehearsal, elaboration, organization,

critical thinking, Self regulation, Study habit, Effort regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking.

The study indicates that motivational belief and learning strategies both are significant

predicator of achievement in mathematics. So the hypothesis “There is significant predicator

of achievement in mathematics namely motivational belief and learning strategies” is

accepted.

4.10 DISCUSSION

The results of the present study revealed that there is no significant difference in

achievement of mathematics of the male and female students. This difference in academic

achievement might be due to some personality traits. In earlier studies conducted by

Fennema (1974), Aggarwal (1983), Artzt & Armour (1992), Muller (1998), Joshi (2000) the

female students were generally considered to have submissiveness, stable and controlled

emotions, superior study habits and high verbal ability. Whereas the boys were taken as more

outgoing, have more distractions and are emotionally less matured. Perhaps these differences

in personality traits induced by our culture, parenting style and way of bringing up the girls

in Indian society that leads the girls to concentrate more on studies and success. But the

studies conducted by Slavin (2006), Naderi et al. (2008), Singh & Parveen (2010), Thomas et

al. (2010), Zirima & Nyanga (2012) indicates that the concept of discrimination is acceptable

till primary and secondary education but for undergraduate and graduate students due to

awareness of career opportunities there is no gender difference in academic achievement

among Boys and Girls.

The result of present study goes in line with the findings of Lent & Hackett (1987),

Tuckman & Abry (1998), Zarch and Kadivar (2006), Seo (2009) suggesting that there is no

141

significant stream difference of achievement in mathematics among students. Three streams

namely arts, commerce and science was taken for comparative study among college students.

The questioner of Achievement in Mathematics Tool and Motivational Strategies for learning

Questionnaire was given to students. The results indicate no stream difference among the

college students. Similar studies was performed on MSQL and MAI Tools by Kesici (2009),

Hoffman & Schraw (2009), which shows when students studies in beginner classes there

exists stream difference but when the students starts college studies there exists no stream

difference. The admission criteria in various streams in college classes now days are based

on the entrance test; they can get the admission in any stream based on the high or low

academic achievement.

High school students found that boys and girls did not differ either in their capability

to solve mathematics word problems or in the strength of their self-efficacy beliefs.

Moreover, boys and girls displayed similar overconfidence when they start applying

motivational beliefs, Pajares and Kranzler (1995). The findings are in line with the results

that there is no significant gender difference in motivational belief among college students

Chemers, Hu & Garcia (2001), Kesici (2009), Kim, C et al. (2010). These findings are

generally congruent with the motivational theories and support the position that students of

various streams should be encouraged to adopt task goals and actively involve themselves in

math class activities, which in turn increases the skill level of students.

It is important to help students develop a positive self-image of their academic

capabilities by assigning appropriate task where they can experience success and so

experience less anxiety. This could be achieved by encouraging the students at every step of

the way by helping them view themselves as successful individuals. As the results of

Chaturvedi (2009) Saransi & Ravi (2010), Asthana (2011) indicate that Girls are better than

Boys in some of the Motivational Beliefs Strategies such as Intrinsic Goal Orientation and

Control of learning Beliefs. The results are in order with studies conducted by Ryan & Deci,

2000; Yukselturk & Bulut’s, 2007; Diseth, Age, 2011; Nishitani et al., 2011) and (Pintrich,

2003; Kesici, Sahin & Erdogan Ahmet, 2009) respectively. The findings can be due to

acceptance of challenges, curiosity and hard working by Girls compared to Boys. It is seen

from the different studies that there have been large increases in the percentages of young

women graduating from universities in Punjab and nearby states.

142

Most of the research findings from western countries are obviously different from the

ones from the East like Bruni et al. (2006), Dee (2006). Children in western countries have

unfavorable early exposure to unacceptable social practices compared to their counterparts in

the Eastern countries. The early exposure affects their level of maturity as well their studies.

In western countries, adolescence stage is shorter; during this period student join societal

roles early than it is in eastern societies Thomas et al. (2010), Zirima & Nyanga (2012).

Children in eastern countries have a longer period during their adolescence and at this time

they tend to take responsibility seriously as they become innovative in resolving of social

problems. This is particularly observed in the girl students who perceive the usefulness of

mathematic for better future and career prospects.

In our findings, boys and girls had similar motivational beliefs, these important

similarities in boys and girls may also be caused by numerous aspects of formal schooling

that are generally common across Indian societies and appear to exclude overt gender typing.

For example, boys and girls appear to receive similar messages about what it takes to do well

at school and these communicated contingencies are similar across the contexts under study

by Kim, C et al. (2010), Lynch, Douglas J (2010). Moreover, many aspects of individualized

school-related experiences of children (e.g., feedback regarding effort and luck) are also

similar and not pervaded by gender stereotyping. It is also clear from a wide range of

motivational research that motivational levels and styles are dependent on time and place

Good & Brophy (1994), Cavas (2011). The presence or absence of gender differences in

motivation, and the direction of any such differences, are likely to be dependent on myriad of

local and broad cultural circumstances. Rather than looking to determine in a definitive

manner the nature of motivational difference as a function of gender, the role of research

ought to be the mapping of variation between gender groups.

chapter iv analysis and interpretation of data 4.1...

Documents