chapter v - shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/71102/13/13...chapter - v analysis...

f l

CHAPTER - V

THE DATA

CHAPTER - V

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA

This,chapter deals with analysis and interpretation of the data. The analysis is

presented in the following form:

> Frequency Distribution Tables

> Factorial Designs

k 't' values and 'F' Ratios with respect to the influence of the independent variables

(Psychological variables) on the dependent variable

> 't' values and 'F' Ratios with respect to the influence of the independent variables

(Socio - demographic variables) on the dependent variable

> Regression Analysis

5.1 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION TABLES

The frequency distribution tables for the academic achievemeat scores of D.M.

students are presented in the following pages.

5.1.1 Frequency distribution of academic achievement scores for the whole group

Frequency distribution of academic achievement scores of D.Ed. students for the

whole group is presented in the Table - 5.

To measure thc academic achievement of D.Ed. students, the D.Ed. annual

examinations theory marks of both first and second year were taken as the indices of the

academic achievement from the records of the colleges and converted in to percentages.

The data is collected on 1200 students studying under different managements. It is clear

from the Table - 5 that the mean value is 63.92. The median and mode values are 64.00

and 60.00. The values of skewness is -0.189 and kurtosis is 0.589. For normal

distribution the value of skewness is 0.00 and kurtosis is 3.00. Hence the frequency

distribution is negatively skewed and lepto kurtic. (The values skewness and kurtosis are

computed based on moments; Aggarwal, 1990). It implies that the scores are massed at

high 1 right end of the scale and are spread out gradually towards the low / left end of the

scale. The distribution is high peaked than the normal distribution. On the whole the

performance of the D,Ed. students is good, because mean achievement is greater than 50

percent.

Table - 5

Frequency distribution table for academic achievement scores for the whole group

N = 1200, M = 63.92, Mdn = 59.00, Mo = 60.00, R = 60.00, SD = 8.49, SI,= -0.189,

& = 0.589, SEM = 0.245

The Distribution characteristics namely Mean, (M), Median (Md), Mode (MO),

Range (R), Quartile Deviation (QD), Standard Deviation (SD), Skewness (Sk), Kurtosis

(KU) and standard error of Mean(SEM) are also presented in Table - 5.

The Bar diagram for the distribution of academic achievement scores of D.Ed.

students for the whole group is presented in Figure - 1.

Limits

40.5 -45.5

45.5 - 50.5

50.5-55.5

55.5 - 60.5

60.5 -65.5

65 5 - 70.5

70.5 - 75.5

75.5 -80.5

80.5 - 85.5

85.5 - 90.5

Midpoint

43

48

53

5 8

63

68

73

78

83

88

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9,

10.

The Erequency polygon for the distribution of academic achievement scores of

D.Ed. students is shown in Figure - 2.

CI

41 -45

46- 50

51-55

56- 60

61 - 65

66- 70

71 -75

76 - 80

81 -85

86 -90

f

3 6

56

87

206

337

245

137

74

14

8

c f

36

92

179

385

722

967

1104

1178

1192

1200

cpf

3.00

7.67

14.92

32.08

60.1 7

80.58

92.00

98.17

99.33

100.00

The Ogive for the distribution of'academic achievement scores of D.M. students

is pseseflted in Figure - 3.

Figure - 1

Bar diagram for the distribution of academic achievement scores of D.Ed. students

for the whole group

o w I

40.5 45.5 50.5 55.5 60.5 65.5 70.5 75.5 80.5 $5.5

. Class interval

Figure - 2

Frequency polygon for the distribution of academic achievement scores of D.Ed.

students -

400 - 350 - 337

300 -

3 200-

38 43 48 53 58 63 68 73 78 83 8% 93

Mid value

Figure - 3

Ogive for the distribution of academic achievement scores of D.Ed, students

120 - h 98.17 9933 100 B l o o - S

A v *

8' 80-

& a u El 8 60- I,

d 8

$ 40-

1 8 1

40.5 45.5 50.5 55.5 60.5 65.5 70.5 75.5 80.5 855 905

Upper Urnits

5.1.2 Frequency distribution of academic achievement scores for the variable

'region'

There are three divisions in the variable' 'region' namely Telangana, Coastal

Andhra and Rayaliseema. The frequency distributions and distribution chaiacteristics on

achievement scores of D.Ed. students for the students studying in the above 3 regions

were analysed.

Frequency distribution of academic achievement scores of D.Ed. students for

Telangana students is presented in Table - 6.


Coastal Andhra students is presented in Table - 7,


Rayalaseema students is presented in Table - 8.

The bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the different groups of the

variable 'region' is shown in Figure - 4.

Table - 6

Frequency distribution table for academic achievement scores of Telangana

students '

N = 400, M = 62.21, Mdn = 63.00, Mo = 65.00, R = 60.00, SD = 10.09, Sk = -0.123,

L= -0.089, SEM = 0.505

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6 .

7.

8.

9.

10.

CI

41-45

46- 50

51 -55

56 - 60

61 -65

66 -70

71 - 75

76 - 80

81 - 85

86 - 90

Limits

40.5-45.5

45.5 -50.5

50.5 - 55.5

55.5 - 60.5

60.5 -65.5

65.5 - 70.5

70.5 -75.5

75.5 - 80.5

80.5 - 85.5

85.5 - 90.5

Midpoint

, 43

48

53

58

63

68

73

78

83

88

f

26

38

44

53

95

67

43

24

6

4

cf

26

64

108

161

256

323

366

390

396

400

cpf

6.50

16.00

27.00

40.25

64.00

80.75

91.50

97.50

99.00

100.00

Table - 7

Frequency distribution table for academic achievement scores of Coastal Andhra

students '

N = 400, M = 65.68, Mdn = 65.00, Mo = 60.00, R = 50.00, SD = 8.590, Sk= -0.120,

K,, = 0.026, SEM = 0.429

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

From the above tables, it is observed that there are 400 Telangana students, 400

Coasta) Andhra students and 400 Rayalaseema students (Total sample N =1200). It is

observed from the above tables that the mean performance of Coastal Andhra (65.68) and

Telangana (62.21) students is almost equal where as the performance of Rayalaseema

(63.85) students is less than Coastal Andhra and Telangana students. The standard

deviation of the achievement scores of Coastal Andhra (8.59) and Rayalaseema (5.93)

students is almost equal where as the Telangana (10.09) students is less than Coastal

Andhra and Telangana students, The value of skewness is negative for all dstributions. It

implies that the scores are massed at high / right end of the scale and are spread out

gradually towards the low 1 left end of the scale.

CI

41-45

46 - 50

51 -55

56 -60

61 -65

66 - 70

71 -75

76 -80

81 -85

86 - 90

Limits

40.5-45.5

45.5 - 50.5

50.5 - 55.5

55.5 - 60.5

60.5 - 65.5

65.5 - 70.5

70.5- 75.5

75.5 - 80.5

80.5 - 85.5

85.5 -90.5

Midpoint

. 43

48

5 3

58

63

68

73

78

83

88

f

8

10

27

77

80

88

57

45

5

3

c f

8

18

45

122

202

290

347

392

397

400

cpf

2.00

4.50

1 1.25

30.50

50.50

72.50

86.75

98.00

99.25

100.00 J

The values of kurtosis for Telangana, Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema students

are -0.089, 0.026 and 2.042 respectively. Hence all the distributions of achievement

scores for Telangana, Coastai Andhra and Rayalasma students are slightly lepto kurtic.

The distributions are high peaked than the normal distribution.

Table - 8

Frequency distribution table for academic achievement scores of Rayalaseema

students

N = 400, M = 63.85, Mdn = 64.00, Mo = 62.00, R = 46.00, SD = 5.93, Sk= -0.052,

&= 2.042, $EM = 0.297

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5 .

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

CI

41 - 45

46- 50

51 - 55

56- 60

61 -65

66- 70

71 -75

76-80

81 - 85

86 - 90

c f

2

10

26

102

264

354

39 1

396

399

400

Limits

40.5 - 45.5

45.5 - 50.5

50.5 -55.5

55.5 -60.5

60.5 -65.5

65.5 - 70.5

70.5 -75.5

75.5 - 80.5

80.5 - 85.5

85.5 -90.5

cpf

0.50

2.50

6.50

25.50

66.00

88.50

97.75

99.00

99.75

100.00

Midpoint

43

48

53

5 8

63

68

73

78

83

88

f

2

8

16

76

162

90

3 7

5

3

1

Bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the different group of the

variable 'region9

Coastal Andbra Ray laseema

Region

5.13 Frequency distribution of academic achievement scores for the variable

"managementn

There are two divisions in the variable 'management' namely Government

colleges and Private colleges. The frequency distributions and distribution characteristics

on achievement scores of D.Ed. students for the students studying in the above 2 types of

colleges.


Government colleges is presented in Table - 9. Frequency distribution of academic

achievement scores of D.Ed. students for Private colleges is presented in Table - 10.

Table - 9

Frequency distribution table for academic achievement scores of Government

students

N = 600, M = 65.71, Mdn = 65.00, Mo = 65.00, R = 49.00, SD = 7.65, S k = 0.243,

K,= 0.286, SEM = 0.312

cpf

0.50

2.50

8.83

25.50

53.50

77.00

88.50

97.33

99.17

100.00 1

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

f

3

12

3 8

1 00

168

141

69

53

11

5

c f

3

15

5 3

153

32 1

462

53 1

584

595

600

Midpoint

43

48

53

5 8

63

68

73

78

83

88

CI

41-45

46 - 50

51 -55

56- 60

61 -65

66 - 70

71 - 75

76 - 80

81 - 85

86 - 90

Limits

40.5-45.5

45.5 - 50.5

50.5 -55.5

55.5 - 60.5

60.5 -65.5

65.5 - 70.5

70.5 - 75.5

75.5 - 80.5

80.5- 85.5

85.5 -90.5

Table - 10

Frequency distribution table for academic achievement scores of Private students

N = 600, M = 62.13, Mdn = 62.00, Mo = 60.00, R = 60.00, SD = 8.92, Sk= -0.319,

K" = 0.345, SEM = 0.364

It is observed from the above tables that the students studying in Government

colleges have better achievement than the students of Private colleges. The standard

deviation of the achievement scores in Private colleges is more than Government

colleges. The value of skewness is negative for Private colleges and the value of

skewness is positive for Govemment colleges. It implies that the Private colleges students

scores are massed at high / right end of the scale and are spread out gradually towards the

low I left end of the scale and Government colleges students scores are mzsed at low/left

end of the scale and are spread out gradually towards the high 1 right end of the scale. All

the distributions of achievemeat scores are lepto kurtic.

Midpoint

43

48

53

58

63

68

73

78

83

88

f

33

44

49

106

169

104

68

2 1

3

3

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

c f

33

77

126

232

40 1

505

573

594

597

600

. CI

41-45

46 - 50

51 - 55

56 -60

61 - 65

66 - 70

71 -75

76 - 80

81 - 85

86 - 90 --

cpf

5.50

12.83

2 1 .OO

38.67

66.83

84.17

95.50

99.00

99.50

100.00 -

Limits

40.5-45.5

45.5 - 50.5

50.5 - 55.5

55.5 - 60.5

60.5 - 65.5

65.5 - 70.5

70.5 - 75.5

75.5 - 80.5

80.5 - 85.5

85.5 -90.5


variable 'management' is shown in Figure - 5.

Figure - 5

Bar di~grsrn for the mean achievement scores for the different groups of the

variabIe 'Management'

Government Private Management

5.1.4 Frequency Distribution Table for the academic achievement scores for the

variable 'gender'

There are two divisions in the variable 'gender' namely Males and

Females. The frequency distributions and distribution characteristics on academic

achievement scores of D.Ed. students for both the groups.

Frequency distribution table for academic achievement scores of D.Ed. students

for male students is presented in Table - 11.

Frequency distribution table for academic achievement scores of D.Ed. students

for female students is presented in Table - 12.

Table - 11

Frequency distribution table for academic achievement scores of male students

N = 600, M = 63.08, Mdn = 63.00, Mo = 65.00, R = 54.00, SD = 7.54, Sk = -0.382,

& = 0.9 1 1, SEM = 0.308

cf

15

43

87

201

398

513

574

597

600

S, No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

cpf

2.50

7.17

14.50

33.50

66.33

85.50

95.67

99.50

100.00

Limits

40.5 -45.5

45.5 - 50.5

50.5 - 55.5

55.5 -60.5

60.5 -65.5

65.5 - 70.5

70.5 -75.5

75.5 -80.5

80.5 -85.5

CI

41 - 45

46 - 50

51 -55

56 - 60

61 -65

66 -70

71 -75

76 - 80

81 -85

Midpoint

43

48

53

58

63 '

68

73

78

83

f

15

28

44

114

197

115

6 1

23

3

Table - 12

Frequency distribution table for academic achievement scores of female students

N = 600, M = 64.75, Mdn = 65.00, Mo = 60.00, R = 51.00, SD = 9.29, Sk = -0.178,

L= 0.257, SEM = 0.379

It is observed horn the table - 1 1, 12 that there are 600 male students and 600

female students. The mean of male students is 63.08 and that of female students is 64.75.

Hence the female students' performance is slightly better than male students. The

standard deviations of achievement scores of both female and inale students are almost

equal (7.543 and 9.29 respectively), The values of skewness are negative for male and

female distributions. It implies that the male scores are massed at highlright end of the

scale and are spread out gradually towards the low/ left end of the scale.

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

The values of kurtosis for female and male students are 0.257 and 0.91 1

respectively. Hence the distributions of achievement scores are slightly lepto kurtic for

both the groups.

Limits

40.5-45.5

45.5 - 50.5

50.5 - 55.5

55.5 - 60.5

60.5 - 65.5

65.5 - 70.5

70.5 - 75.5

75.5 - 80.5

80.5 - 85.5

85.5 - 90.5

CI

41-45

46-50

51 -55

56-60

61 - 65

66- 70

71 - 75

76- 80

81 -85

86- 90

Midpoint

43

48

53

58

63

68

73

78

83

88

f

2 1

28

43

92

140

130

76

5 1

11

8

c f

2 1

49

92

184

324

454

530

58 1

592

600

cpf

3.50

8.17

15.33

30.67

54.00

75.67

88.33

96.83

98.67

100.00 - -


variable ' gender3s shown in figure - 6.

Figure - 6

Bar di~gram for the mean achievement scores for the different gronps of the

variable Lgeaders

4

I

I I

Mde Female Gender

5.1.5 The values of N, M, SD, Sk, &, R and SEM for the distribution of academic achievement scores of D,Ed. students for the total sample and for the sub groups of the total sample

. The values of N, M, S.D, Sk, K,,, R and SEM for the distribution of academic

achievement scores of D.Ed. students for the different groups of the sample are presented

in Table - 13.

The values of N, M, S.D, Sk, K,,, R and SEM for the distribution of academic achievement scores of D.Ed. students for the total sample and for the sub groups of

the total sample

It is clear from the Table - 13 that the mean academic achievement for the

students of Government colleges is the highest (65.71) among all the groups and the

lowest (62.13) for the students of Private colleges. The standard deviation of achievement

scores for the students of Telangana is the highest (10.09) among all the p u p s and the

lowest (5.93) for the students of Rayalaseema region. The values of skewness for the

students of Government students are positively skewed and remaming groups are

negatively skewed, it implies that the scores are massed at low/ left end of the scale and

are spread out gradually towards the high/ right end of the scale and it imp!ies that scores

are massed at highlright end of the scale and are spread out gradually towards the low/

left end of the scale. The value of kurtosis for all the distributions of achievement scores

are lepto kurtic.

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Group

Whole group

Telangana

Coastal Andhra

Rayalaseema

Government

Private

Male

Female

M

63.92

62.21

65.68

63.85

65.71

62.13

63.08

64.75

Sk

-0.189

-0.123

-0.120

-0.052

0.243

-0.319

-0.382

-0.178

N

1200

400

400

400

600

600

600

600

SD

8.49

10.09

8.59

5.93

7.65

8.92

7.54

9.29

K,,

0.589

-0.089

0.026

2,042

0.286

0.345

0.911

0.257

R

60.00

60.00

50.00

46.00

49.00

60.00

54.00

51.00

$EM

0.245

0.505

0.429

0.297

0.312

0.364

0.308

0.379

5.2 FACTORIAL DESIGN

The influence of the variables region, management and gender and their

interaction effects on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students is studied with the help

of factorial ,design.

5.2.1 Factorial design for region, management and gender

The influence of region, management and gender on academic achievement of

D.Ed. students is investigated by employing 3 x 2 x 2 factorial design,

The following hypotheses are formulated.

Hypothesis - 1

There would be no significant influence of main effects namely region,

management and gender on the academic achievement of D.M. students.

Hypothesis - 2

There would be no significant impact of interaction effect of region, management

and gender on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

The above hypotheses are tested through 3 x 2 x 2 factorial design.

The results of Analysis of v&ance (ANOVA) of 3 x 2 x 2 factorial design for

academic achievement scores of D.Ed. students q e presented in Table - 14.

The computed value of 'F' for the main effect 'region' is 19.752. It is far greater

than the table / critical value of 'F' (4.63) for 2 and 1 188 df PA 0.01 level of significance.

Therefore Hypothesis - 1 for the main effect region is rejected at 0.01 level of

significance. Hence it is concluded that region has significant influence on the academic

achievement of D.Ed. students. Similar results reported by Sujatha (201 1).

Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed, students with varied region

presented in Table - 15.

A result of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with region is

given in Table - 16.

Table - 14

Results of ANOVA of 3 x 2 x 2 factorial design for academic achievement scores of

D.Ed. students

Factor A: Region (3 levels)

Factor B: Management (2 levels)

Factor C: Gender (2 levels)

rc * Indicates significant at 0.01 level '

* Inhcates significant at 0.05 level

@ Indicates not significant at 0.05 level

Table - 15

Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied regions

Mean squares

1220.230

3802.1 52

83 1.943

206 1.494

27.982

749.115

570.119

61.777

S. No,

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Sum of Squares

2440.460

3802.152

83 1.943

4 122.988

55.963

749.1 15

1 140.239

73390.586

F - value

19.752**

61.547**

13.467**

33.370**

0.453@

12.126**

9.229**

Source of Variance

A

B

C

A V s B

A V s C

B Vs C

A V s B V s C

Error

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

df

2

1

1

2

2

1

2

1 188

Mean

62.2 1

65.68

63.85

S.D.

10.08

8.59

5.93

Region

Telangana

Coastal Andhra

Ra yalaseema

N

400

400

400

It could be seen from the Table '- 15 that all the means of the three groups were

above the neutral point (50). This indicates that all the D.Ed students irrespective of their

region had high level of academic achievement. Further, the mean scores of the three

groups slightly differ from each other. The trend of the mean scores indicates that the

D.Ed. students with region had the least academic achievement.

To test whether there was any significant difference among these three groups,

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique was applied. The summary of the results is

given below,

Table - 16

Results of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied region

** Inhcates significant at 0.01 level

It is clear &om the Table - 16 that the computed value of 'F' (1 9.752) is greater

than the critical value of 'F' (3.78) for 2 and 1197 df at 0.01 level. Hence the Hypothesis

- 1 is rejected for the variable 'region' at 0.01 level of significance. It is concluded that

'region' has significan: influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

Source

Between Groups

Within Groups

Total

To find out which of the three groups of D.Ed. students differed significantly

from the others in their academic achievement, the mean scores of the three gmups of

D.Ed. students ware further analyzed by employing the 't' test.

d f

2

1197

1199

SS

2410.50

84146.00

86556.50

Mean achievement scores of different subgroups of D.Ed. students classified

according to their region and the results of 't' test is given in Table - 17.

MS

1205.25

70.30

1275.55

'F'

19.752**

Table - 17


according to their region and the results of 't' test

Note:

1. The means are arranged in ascending order h m left to right.

Coastal Andhra

2. Any two means not underscored by the same line are significantly different at or

above 0.05 level.

Raydaseema Source

3. Any two means underscored by the same line are not significantly different at

0.05 level.

Telangana

Academic achievement

Results presented in the Table - 17, indicate that 'region' of Telangana Vs

Coastal Andhra, Telangana Vs Rayalaseema and Coastal Andhra Vs Rayalaseema have

significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students. Hence the

Hypothesis - 1 is rejected for the variable 'region'. It is concluded that 'region' has

significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

62.2 1 63.85 65.68

The computed value of 'F' for the main effect 'management' is 61.547. It is far

greater than the table I critical value of 'F' (6.66) for 1 and 1188 df at 0.01 level of

significance. Therefore Hypothesis - 1 for the main effect management is rejected at 0.01

level of significance. Hence it is concluded that management has significant influence on

the academic achievement of D.Ed students.

Similar results were reported by Jagannadhan (1983)' Jyoti Ralhore (2000),

Manoranjan Panda (2002), Arockia Doss and Muthaiah (2002), Lakshmidhar Behera and

Sushanta Kumar Koul(2004) and Srinivas and Arivudayappan (2004), Manchala (2007)

and Krishna Reddy (2009), Padmimi (2010) and Sujatha (201 1).

Contradictory results were reported by Manjuvani and Mohan (2002) and Anice

James and Marice (2004) and Sankaraiah (2009).

It is observed from Table - 14 that the computed value of 'F' for the main effect

'gender' is 13.467. The table / ci-itical value of 'F' for 1 and 1 188 degrees of freedom (do

at 0.05 level is 3.85 and at 0.01 level is 6.66. The computed value is far greater than the

critical value at 0.01 level of significance. Hence the Hypothesis - 1 is rejected for the

main effect gender. Hence it is concluded that the gender has significant influence on the

achievement of D.Ed. students.

Similar results were reported by Padrnanabhan Nayar and Visveswaran (1966)'

Har Govinda Gupta (1968)' Vasantha Rama Kumar (1969), Roach (1 979), Gupta (1983)'

Watkins, Hattie and Astilla (1984), Suneetha and Mayun (2002), Mohamad Khayyer,

Philip R. De Lacey (2005), Padmini (2010)' Siddi Raju (2010) and Sujatha (201 1).

Contradictory results were reported by Farquhar (1963), Gupta (1%8),

Rangaswamy and Visveswaran (1977)' Dalakia (1980), Asud Ulla Khan et al., (1982)'

Jagannadhan (1 983), Rangaswamy (1 990), Govinda Redd y, (2002)' Panda (2002)'

Gakhar and Aseerna (2004), S.N. Ponday Md Faiz Ahmad (2008), Pavola Sapiyonia

(2008), Krishna Reddy (2009) and Sankaraiah (2009).

However, these results based upon the 'F' ratios for the main effects should be

interpreted cautiously, in view of the significant-'F' ratios for the interaction between

region, management and gender.

The computed value of 'F' for the two factor interaction effect namely region and

management on the achievement of the D.Ed. students is 33.370. It is far greater than

table / critical value of 'F' (4.63) for 2 and 1188 df at 0.01 level of significance,

Therefore Hypothesis - 2 is rejected at 0.01 level of significance. Hence it is concluded

that there is significant interaction effect of region and management on the academic

achievement of DM. students.

To make a deep probe into this, the mean scores of Telangana, Coastal Andhra

and Rayalaseema belonging to Government and Private colleges were calculated and

analysed further. The results of this analysis were presented in Table - 18.

Table - 18

Mean academic achievement scores of the Ss classified according to their region and

management, to explain A Vs B interaction, and the results of the 't' and F-tests

t* Indicates significant at 0.01 level

Variable

Telangana

Coastal Andhra

Rayalaseema

* Indicates significant at 0.05 level .

An examination of the mean scores of the Ss classified according to the two

variables region and management, shows that in the case of Government, the mean score

of Coastal Andhra students was 67.99, where as Telangana and Rayalaseema were 65.98

and 63.16. This shows that Coastal Andhra students scored somewhat better than

Telangana and Rayalaseema However, when 'F' test was applied to see whether the

difference between the three means was significant, it was found that the 'F' value

(6.895) was significant. In the case of Private students the mean score of Rayalaseema

students was 64.55, where as Telangana and Coastal Andhra were 58.45 and 63.38. This

shows that Rayalaseema students scored somewhat better than Telangana and Coastal

N

M

SD

N

M

SD

N

M

SD

F - Value

Government

200

65.98

9.06

200

67.99

7.66

200

63.16

4.75

6.895**

Private

200

58.45

9.63

200

63.38

8.83

200

64.55

6.84

5.638**

't' - value

8.045**

5.572**

2.370'

Andhra. However, when 'F' test was ayplied to see whether the difference between the

three means was significant, it was found that the 'F' value (5.638) was significant.

An examination of the mean scores of $e Ss classified according to the two

variables region and management, shows that in the case of Telangana, the mean score of

Government students was 65.98 where as Private students were 58.45. This shows that

Government students scored somewhat better than Private students. However, when't"

test was applied to see whether the difference between the two means was significant, it

was found that the 't' value (8.045) was significant. In the case of Coastal Andhra, the

mean score of Government students was 67.99 where as Private students were 63.38.

This shows that Government students scored somewhat better than Private students.

However, when 't' test was applied to see whether the difference between the two means

was significant, it was found that the 't' value (5.572) was significant. In the case of

Rayalaseema, the mean score of Government students was 63.16 where as Private

students were 64.55. This shows that Private students scored somewhat better than

Government students. However, when 't' test was applied to see whether the difference

between the two means was significant, it was found that the 't' value (2.370) was

significant. It is clear from the table Coastal Andhra Government students performed well

than the other groups and Telangana Private students performed least than the other

groups.


variables 'region and management' is shown in Figure - 7.

The computed value of 'F' for the two factor interaction effect namely region and

gender on the achievement of the D.E~. students is 0.453. It is far lessr than table I

critical value of 'F' (3.00) for 2 and 1188 df at 0.01 level of significance. Therefore

Hypothesis. - 2 is accepted at 0.05 level of significance. Hence it is concluded that there

is no significant interaction effect of region and gender on the academic achievement of

D.Ed. students.

To make a deep probe into k s , the mean scores of Telangana, Coastal Andhra

and Rayalaseema belonging to male and female students were calculated and analysed

further. The results of this analysis were presented in Table - 19.

Table - 19

Mean academic achievement scores of the Ss classified according to their region and

gender, to explain A Vs C interaction, and the results of the 't' and F-tests

** Indicates significant at 0.0 1 level

Variable

Telangma

Coastal Andhra

Ray alaseema

N

M

SD

N

M

SD

N

M

SD

F - Value

Male

200

65.22

8.96

200

66.23

8.54

200

64.23

7.85

4.326**

Female

200

61.35

8.47

200

63.18

8.41

200

62.53

7.56

5.238**

't' - ~mlue

3.562**

4.256**

3.845**

An examination of the mean &ores of the Ss classified according to the two

variables region and gender, shows that in the case of male students, the mean score of

Coastal Andhra students was 66.23, where as Telangana and Rayalaseema were 65.22

and 64.23. -This shows that Coastal Andhra students scored somewhat better than

Telangana and Rayalaseema However, when 'F' test was applied to see whether the


(4.326) was significant. In the case of female students the mean score of Coastal Andhra

students was 63.18, where as Telangana and Rayalaseema were 61.35 and 62.53. This

shows that Coastal Andhra students scored somewhat better than Telangana and

Rayalaseema. However, when 'F' test was applied to see whether the difference between

the three means was significant, it was found that tlae 'F' value (5.238) was significant.


variables region and management, shows that in the case of Telangana, the mean score of

male students was 65.22 where as female students were 61.35. This shows that male

students scored somewhat better than female students. However, when 't' test was

applied to see whether the difference between the two means was significant, it was

found that the 't' value (3.562) was significant. En the case of Coastal Andhra, the mean

score of male students was 66.23 where as female students were 63.18. This shows that

male students scored somewhat better than female students. However, when 't' test was


found that the 't' value (4.256) was significant. In the case of Rayalaseema, the mean

score of male students was 64.23 where as female students were 62.53. This shows that

male students scored somewhat better than female students. However, when 't7 test was


found that the 't' value (3.845) was significant. It is clear from the table Coastal Andha

male students performed well than the other groups and Telangana female students

performed least than the other groups.


variables 'region and gender' is shown in Figure - 8.

2 s 2 - A % $ 8 ura

The computed value of 'F' for the two factor interaction effect namely

management and gender on the achievement of the D.Ed. students is 12.126. It is far

greater than table 1 critical value of 'F' (6.66) for 1 and 1188 df at 0.01 level of

significance. Therefore Hypothesis - 2 is rejected at 0.01 level of significance. Hence it is

concluded that there is significant interaction effect of management and gender on the

academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

To make a deep probe into this, the mean scores of Government and Private

belonging to male and female students were calculated and analysed further. The results

of this analysis were presented in Table - 20.

Table - 20

Mean academic achievement scores of the Ss classified according to their

management and gender, to explain B Vs C interaction, and the results of the 't'

tests

** Indicates significant at 0.01 level

Variable

Government

Private


variables management and gender, shows that in the case of male students, the mean

score of Private students was 67.34, where as Government students were 64.06. This

shows that Private students scored somewhat better than Government students. However,

N

M

SD

N

M

SD

t - Value

't' - value

3.201**

7.107**

Male

300

64.06

6.28

300

67.34

8.48

6.524**

Female

300

62.10

8.50

300

62.1 7 -

9.32

5.231**

when 't' test was applied to see whether the difference between the two means was

significant, it was found that the 't' value (6.524) was significant. In the case of female

students the mean score of Private students was 62.17, where as Government students

were 62.10; This shows that Private students scored somewhat better than Government

students. However, when 't' test was applied to see whether the difference between the

three means was significant, it was found that the 't' value (5.231) was significant.


variables management and gender, shows that in the case of Government, the mean score

of male students was 64.06 where as female students were 62.10. This shows that male



found that the 't' value (3.201) was significant. In the case of Private, the mean score of

male students was 67.34 where as female students were 62.17. This shows that male



found that the 't' value (7.107) was significant. It is clear from the table Private male

students performed well than the other groups and Government female students

performed least than the other groups.


variables 'management and gender' is shown in Figure - 9.

The computed value of 'F' for the three factor interaction effect namely region,

management and gender on the achievement of the D.Ed. students is 9.229. It is far

greater than table / critical value of 'F' (4.63) for 2 and 1188 df at 0.01 level of

significance. Therefore Hypothesis - 2 is rejected at 0.01 level of significance. Hence it is

concluded that there is significant interaction effect of region, management and gender on

the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

To make a deep probe into this, the mean scores of Telangana, Coastal Andhra

and Rayalaseema belonging to Government and Private belonging to male and female

students were calculated and analysed further. The results of this analysis were presented

in Table - 21.

An examination of the mean scores of the Ss classified according to the three

variables region, management and gender, shows that in the case of male students, the

mean score of Coastal Andhra Government students was 65.58, where as Telangana

Government students and Rayalaseema Government students were 63.60 and 63.05. This

shows that Coastal Andhra Government students scored somewhat better than Telangana

Government students and Rayalaseema Government students. However, when 'F' test

was applied to see whether the difference between the three means was significant, it was

found that the 'F' value (4.320) was significant. In the case of male students, the mean

score of Coastal Andhra Private students was 64.42, where as Telangana Private students

and Rayalaseema Private students were 58.53 and 63.34. This shows that Coastal Andhra

Private students sccred somewhat better than Telangana Private students and

Rayalaseema Private students. However, when TF' test was applied to see whether the


(3.256) was significant.

Table - 21

Mean academic achievement scores of the Ss ciassified according to their region,

management and gender, to explain A Vs B Vs.C interaction, and the results of the

't' and 'F' -tests


In the case of female students, the mean score of Coastal Andhra Government

students was 70.39, where as Telangana Government students and Rayalaseema

Government students were 68.54 and 63.27. This shows that Coastal Andhra Government

students scored somewhat better than Telangana Government students and Rayalaseema

Government students. However, when 'F' test was applied to see whether the difference

between the three means was significant, it was found that the 'F' value (3.598) was

significant. In the case of female students, the mean score of Rayalaseema Private

students was 65.79, where as Telangqa Private students and Coastal Andhra Private

Variable

Telangana

Coastal Andhra

Rayalaseema

- - -

N

M

SD

N

M

SD

N

M

SD --

'F' - value

Male

Govt.

100

63.60

6.08

100

65.58

6.98

100

63.05

5.37 --

4.320**

Female

Govt.

100

68.54

10.54

100

70.39

7.54

100

63.27

3.98

3.598**

Private

100

58.53

9.00

100

64.42

8.54

100

63.34

6.64

3.256**

't' - value

4.655**

1.047@

0.339@

Private

100

58.37

10.23

100

62.27

9.02

100

65.79

6.82 ~p

4.526**

't' - value

6.925**

6.905**

-

3.174**

students were 58.37 and 62.27. This shows that Rayalaseema Private students scored

somewhat better than Telangana Private students and Coastal Andhra Private students.

However, when 'F' test was applied to see whether the difference between the three

means was significant, it was found that the 'F' value (4.526) was significant.

An examination of the mean scores of the Ss classified according to the three

variables region, management and gender, shows that in the case of Telangana, the mean

score of Government male students was 63.60 where as Private male students were 58.53.

This shows that Government male students scored somewhat better than Private male

students. However, when 't' test was applied to see whether the difference between the

two means was significant, it was found that the 't' value (4.655) was significant. In the

case of Telangana, the mean score of Government female students was 68.54 where as

Private female students were 58.37. This shows that Government female students scored

somewhat better than Private female students. However, when 't' test was applied to see

whether the difference between the two means was significant, it was found that the 't'

value (6.925) was significant.

In the case of Coastal Andhra, the mean score of Government male: students was

65.58 where as Private: male students were 64.42. This shows that Government male

students scored somewhat better than Private male students. However, when 't' test was


found that the 't' value (1.047) was not significant. In the case of Coastal Andhra, the

mean score of Government female students was 70.39 where as Private female students

were 62.27. This shows that Cmvermnent female students scored somewhat better than

Private female students. However, when 't' test was applied to see whether the difference


significant.

In the case of Rayalaseema, the mean score of Government male students was

63.05 where as Private male students were 63.34, This shows that Private male students

scored somewhat better than Government male students. However, when 't' test was


found that the 't' value (0.339) was not significant. In the case of Rayalaseema, the mean

179

score of Government female students w'c)s 63.27 where as Private female students were

65.79. This shows that Private female students scored somewhat better than Government

female students. However, when 't' test was applied to see whether the difference


significant. It is clear from the table Coastal Andhra Government female students

performed well than the other groups and Telangana Private female students performed

least than the other groups.

The influence of psychological variables on the academic achievement of D.Ed.

students is studied. The following psychological variables are considered for the analysis,

1. Self-efficacy,

2. Emotional intelligence,

3. Achievement motivation

5.3.1 Self-efficacy

In the present investigation, the students are divided into three groups, on the

basis of self-efficacy; the students are divided into three groups using quartile values.

The student whose self-efficacy scores is up to Qlvalue form the Group - I, Group - I1

form as above Q1 and up to Q3 value and Group - 111 form as above Q3 value. The

influence of 'self-efficacy' on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students is

investigated. The corresponding academic achievement scores of three groups are

analysed accordingly. The influence of self-efficacy on academic achievement is

investigated through one - way ANOVA technique. The following hypothesis is framed.

Hypothesis - 3

There would be no significant impact of 'self-efficacy' on the academic


Means and SDr of the academic achievement of D.Ed students with varied self-

efficacy levels presented in Table - 22.

It could be s e a from the Tabie - 22 that all the means of the three groups were

above the neutral point (50). This indicates that all the D.Ed. students irrespective of their

level of self - efficacy had high level of academic achievement. Further, the mean scores

of the three groups slightly differ from each other. The trend of the mean scores indicates

that the D.Ed students with low self - efficacy had the least academic achievement.

� able - 22

Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied self-

efficacy levels


Analysis of variance (ANOVA) techmque was applied. The summary of the results is

given below.

A result of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied self-

efficacy levels is given in Table - 23.

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

Results of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.EL students with varied self-

efficacy levels

Mean

63.02

63.82

64.57

Self-efficacy

Group - I

Group - I1

Group - 111

S.D.

7.54

9.59

8.29

* Indicates significant at 0.05 level

N

341

527

332

It is clear from the Table - 23 that the computed value of 'F' (3.463) is greater


- 3 is rejected for the variable 'self-efficacy' at 0.05 level of significance. It is concluded

that 'self-efficacy' has significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed.

students.

Source

Between Groups

Within Groups

Total '

MS

249.000

71.895

320.895

'F'

3.463'

SS

498.000

86058.500

86556.50

d f.

2

1197

1199

Similar results reported by Band&a (1986), Beny (1987), Lent & Hackett (1987),

Bandura, (1989), Hackett &Bet2 (1989), Shell, Colvin, &Brunung (1989), Bouffard-

Bouchard (1990), Harter, (1990), Hong, Traci (1990), Meece, Wig Field & Eccles,

(1990), Bouffard-Bouchard, Parent and Larivee (1991), Marsh et al. (1991), 2' irnrnerman

(1991), Marsh, (1992)' Lent et al. (1 993), Pajares and Miller (1994), Chapmen and

Tunrner (1995), Graham and Weiner (1995); Mone, Baker, and Jeffries (1995), Schunk

(1996). Skaalvik and Rankin (1996), Bandura (1997), Zeldin &Pajares, (1997), Kang,

Jeonghee (1998), Valley, Hayashi, Garner-Holman, and Giacobbi (1998), Lent Brown &

Hackett's (1999), G.V. Caprara, (1999), Nancy E. Betz & Karla L Klein the Ohio

university Karen M Taylor (2000)' Kristine Haertl (2002), Tricia Prodaniuk, Ronald C

Plotnikoff, John C Spence, Phillip M Wilson (2006), Susan D. Phillips and Anne R

.Inhofe (2007), Akthar Perveen (2008) and Samba Shiva (20 10).


from the others in their academic achievement, the mean scores of the three groups of

D.Ed. students ware W e r analyzed by employing the 't' test.


accordmg to their self-efficacy and the results of 't' test is given in Table - 24.

Results presented in the ~ab1e'- 24, indicate that 'self-efficacy' of Group - I Vs

Group - I11 has significant influence on the acdemic achievement of D.Ed. students.

'self-efficacy' of Group - I Vs Group - I1 and Group - I1 Vs Group - 111 has not


Hypothesis - 3 is rejected for the variable 'self-efficacy'. It is concluded that 'self-

efficacy' has significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

Table - 24


according to their self-efficacy asd the results of 't' test

Note:

Source


1. The means are arranged in ascending order from left to right.


above 0.05 level.

Group - I


0.05 level.

The bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the self-efficacy is shown in

Figure - 10.

63.02 63.82 64.57

Group - I1 Group - 111

Figure - 10

Bar diagram for the mean achiwement scores for the selfefficacy

Croup - I Group - H Group - J l I

Selfefficacy

5.3.2 Emotional intelligence


basis of emotional intelligence, the students are divided into three groups using quartile

values. The student whose emotional intelligence scores is up to Qlvalue form the Group

- I, Group - II form as above Q1 and up to Q3 value and Group - 111 form as above Q3

value. The influence of 'emotional intelligence' on the academic achievement of D.Ed.

students is investigated. The corresponding academic achievement scores of three groups

are analysed accordingly. The influence of emotional intelligence on academic

achievement is investigated through one - way ANOVA technique. The following

hypothesis is framed.

Hypothesis - 4

There would be no significant impact of 'emotional intelligence' on the academic


Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.E.. students with varied

emotional intelligence levels presented in Table - 25.

Table - 25

Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied

emotional intelligence levels

It could be seen from the Table - 25 that all the means of the three groups were


level of emotional intelligence had high level of academic achievement. Further, the

mean scores of the three groups slightly differ fiom each other. The trend of the mean

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

Mean

62.99

63.82

65.01

S.D.

7.95

8.56

8.71

Emotional intelligence

Group - I

Group - I1

Group - HI

N

270

63 5

295 .

scores indicates that the D.Ed. studen'ts with low emotional intelligence had the least

academic achievement.

Similar results are reported by Reuven Paron (1996), Pool (1997)' Bharadwaj

(1997), Firinegan (1998), Coovm & Muphy (2000), Sharma (2000), Ciarrochi, Chan, and

Bajgar (2001), Perkins, Mayer, Caruso and Salovey (2001), Karen Vander Zee (2002),

Saroj (2003), Mayer, Salovey and Caruso (2004), Landy (2005), Mount (2005), Katyal

(2005), Kadhiravan, S. and Amritha, M. (2006), Smita Singh and Balakoteswari, V.

(2006), Biswal, R. K. (2006) Subramanyam, K. (2007), Sreedhar, Y. N. and Hamid Reza

Badiel (2007), Under (2009), Shaik Jaffer Hussain (2009), Samba Shiva (2010) and

Sivasri (201 0).



given below.

A result of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied

emotional intelligence levels is given in Table - 26.

Table - 26

Results of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied

emotional intelligence levels

r(: Indicates significant at 0.05 level

Source

Between Groups

Within Groups .

Total

It is clear from the Table - 26 that the computed value of 'F' (4.: 11) is greater


- 4 is rejected for the variable 'emotional intelligence' at 0.05 level of significance. It is

SS

590.500

85966.000

86556.500

df

2

1197

1 199

MS

295.250

71.818

367.068

'F'

4.111*

concluded that 'emotional intelligende' has significant influence on the academic



from the oihers ii~ their academic achievement, the mean scores of the three groups of


Mean achievement scores of .different subgroups of D.Ed. students classified

according to their emotional intelligence and the results of 't' test is given in Table - 27.

Table - 27

Mean achievement scores of different subgroups of &Ed. students classified

according to their emotional intelligence and the results of ' 2 t a t

Note:

Source


1. The means are arranged in ascending order fiom left to right.


above 0.05 level.

Group - I


0.05 level.

Results presented in the Table - 27, indicate that 'emotional intelligence' of

Group - I Vs Group - I11 and Group - I1 Vs Group - I11 has significant influence on the

academic achievement of D.Ed. students. 'emotional intelligence' of Group - I Vs Group

- I1 has not significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students. Hence

the Hypothesis - 4 is rejected for the variable 'emotional intelligence'. It is concluded

that 'emotional intelligence' has significant influence on the academic achievement of

D.Ed. students

62.99 63.82 65.01

Group - Il Group - III -

5.3.3 Achievement motivation


basis of achievement motivation, the students are divided into three groups using quartile

values. The student whose achievemint motivation scores is up to Qlvalue form the

Group - I, Group - I1 form as above QI and up to QJ value and Group - I11 fonn as above

Q3 value. The influence of 'achievement motivation' on the academic achievement of

D.Ed. studehts is investigated. The corresponding academic achievement scores of three

groups are analysed accordingly. The influence of achievement motivation on academic



Hypothesis - 5

There would be no significant impact of 'achievement motivation' on the


Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed students with varied

achievement motivation levels presented in Table - 28.

Table - 28


achievement motivation levels



level of achievement motivation had high level of academic achievement. Further, the

mean scores of the three groups slightly differ from each other. The trend of the mean

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

N

265

727

207

Achievement motivation

Group - I

Group - I1

Group - I11

Mean

62.52

63.59

64.49

S.D.

8.88

8.14

8.87

scores indicates that the D.Ed. students with low achievement motivation had the least

academic achievement.

Similar results reported by Harlley, H and Hogarath, J.H. (1971), Ramoji rao

(1 977), Singh (198 l), Reddy, Sudhakar (1 983), Eyo, Isidore (1 984), Powers, 'Stephen;

Douglas, Peggy; Cool, Brent; Gose, Kenneth (1 985)' Sauer, Jochen; Gattringer, Heinz

(1985), Mehta, Prabha; Kumar, Dalip (1985), Ali (1988), Liu, Xiaoming, Guo, Zhanji,

Wang, Lirohg (1991), Sui, Guangyuan (1991), Koizumi, Reizo (1992), Krishnamurthy,

(2000), Mahesh Kumar (2009), Raja Sekar (20 10) and Samba Shiva (20 10)



given below.


achievement motivation levels is given in Table - 29.

Table - 29

Results of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied

achievement motivation levels


It is clear from the Table - 29 that the computed value of 'F' (5.4493 is greater

Source

Between Groups

Within Groups

Total


- 5 is rejected for the variable 'achievement motivation' at 0.01 level of significance. It is

concluded that 'achievement motivation' has significant influence on the academic

achievement of D.M. students.

S S

778.000

85374.500

86152.500

'F'

5.449**

-

d f

2

1197

1199

MS

389.000

7 1.383

460.383





according to their achievement motivation and the results of 't' test is given in Table -

30.

Table - 30


according to their achievement motivation and the results of 't' test

Ncte:


1. The means are arranged in ascendmg order fiom left to right.

62.52 63.59 64.49


above 0.05 level.

3. Any two means undascored by the same line are 11ot significantly different at

0.05 level.

Results presented in the Table - 30, indicate that 'achievement motivation' of

Group - I Vs Group - 111 has significant influence on the academic achievement of D.M.

students. 'achievement motivation' of Group - I Vs Group - I1 and Group - I1 Vs Group

- I11 has not significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students. Hence

the Hypothesis - 5 is rejected for the variable 'achievement motivation'. It is concluded

that 'achievement motivation' has significant influence on the academic achievement of

D.Ed. students

The bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the achievement motivation

is shown in Figure - 12. ,

Figure - 12

Bar diagram for the mean achievement A r e s for the achievement motivation

I

Group - I ~ o u p - n Group - III Achievement motivation

5.4 THE IMPACT OF SOCIOq- DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES ON THE

ACADEMIC ACHIEWMENT

The influence of socio - demographic variables on the academic achievement of

D.Ed. students studied. The following socio-demographic variables are considered for the '

analysis.

1. Mother Education

2. Mother Occupation

3. Residence

4. Locality

5. Medium of the study

6. Type of family

7. Father Occupation

8. Religion

9. Economic Position of the Family

1 0. Student educational qualification

11. Age

12. Annual Income of the family

1 3. Father Education

1 4. Birth Order

1 5. Size of the Family

16. Caste

5.4.1 Mother Education

In the present investigation, the students are divided into two groups; on the basis

of mother education the 695 Illiterate mothers students form as Group - I and 505

Literate mothers students form as Group - 11. The influence of 'mother education' on the

academic achievement of D.Ed. students is investigated. The corresponding academic

achievement scores of two groups are analysed accordingly. The influence of mother

education on academic achievement is investigated through 't' - technique. The

following hypothesis is framed.

Hypothesis - 6

There would be no significant impact of 'mother education' on the academic


The above hypothesis is tested by employing 't' - technique. The results are


Table - 31

Influence of mother education on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students

** Indicates significant at 0.0 1 level '

It is clear from the Table - 31 that the computed value of 't' (2.906) is greater

than the critical value of 't' (2.58) for 1 and 1 198 df at 0.01 level. Hence the Hypothesis - 6 is rejected for the variable "other education' at 0.01 level. It is concluded that 'mother

education' has significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

S. No.

1 .

2.

Sarma (1984), Jagannadhan (1986)' Vijaya Kumar Sethi (1 990), Bhujendranath

Panda (1 99 I) , Krishna Moorthy (1 999), Govindha Reddy (2002), Manchala (2007);

NCERT (2008)' Krishna Reddy (2008) and Sankaraiah (2009) reported similar results.

M

63.31

64.75

Har Govinda Guptha (1 968), Rangaswarn y and Visweswara (1 977)' Padmini

(20 10) and Siddi Raju (20 10) reported contradictory results.

Mother Education

Group-I

Group - I1

N

695

505

SD

8.47

8.45

't' - value

2.906**

The bar diagram for the mean'achievement scores for the mother education is .. shown in Figure - 13.

Figure - 13

Bai diagram for the mean achievement scores for the mother education

Fa

Group - I Group - ll Mother eductttion

J

5.4.2 Mother Occupation


of mother occupation the 1146 unemployed mothers students form as Group - I and 54

employed mothers students form as %roup - 11. The influence of 'mother occupation' on

the academic'achievemmt of D.Ed. students is investigated. The corresponding academic

achievement scores of two groups are analysed accordingly. The influence of mother

occupation on academic achievement is investigated through 't' - technique. The

following hypothesis is kamed.

Hypothesis - 7

There would be no significant impact of 'mother occupation' on the academic




Table - 32

Influence of mother occupation on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students


It is clear &om the Table - 32 that the computed value of 't' (0.458) is less than

the critical value of 't' (1 -96) for 1 and 1 198 df at 0.05 level. Hence the Hypothesis - 7 is

accepted for the variable 'mother occupation' at 0.05 level. It is concluded that 'mother

occupation' has not significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

Ha. Govinda Gupta (1 968), Ford Dawson (1 970), Rangaswamy and Visveswara (1 977),

Ayishabi and Moly Kuruvilla (1 998), Panda (2002), Manchala (20073, Padrnini (201 0)

and Siddi Raju (2010) reported similar results. Pavithran and Feroze (1965), Bhujendra

Nath Panda (1 99 I), Goswamy, Minakshi (2002), Govinda Reddy (2002), NCERT Report

(2008), Krishna Reddy (2008), Sankaraiah (2009) and Sujatha (20 1 1) reported

contradictory results.

S. No.

1.

2. L

't' - value

0.458@

Mother Occupation

Group-I

Group-I1

M

63.89

64-52

N

1146

54

SD

8.42 -

9.96

5.43 Residence

In the present investigation, the stlldents are divided into two groups; on the basis

of residence the 487 hostlers form as Group - I and 71 3 day scholars form as Group - II.

The influence of 'residence' on the academic achievement of D.Ed, students is

investigated.'~he corresponding academic achievement scores of two groups are analysed

accordingly. The influence of residence on academic achievement is investigated through

't' - technique. The following hypothesi~ is framed.

Hypothesis - 8

There would be no significant impact of 'residence' on the academic achievement

of D.Ed. students.



Table - 33

Influence of residence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students

* * Indicates significant at 0.0 1 level

S. No.

1.

2.

It is clear fiom the Table - 33 that the computed value of 't' (5.209) is greater

than the critical value of 't' (2.58) for 1 and 1198 df at 0.01 level. Hence the Hypothesis -

8 is rejected for the variable 'residence' at 0.01 level. It is concluded that 'residence' has

significant influence on the &ademic achievement of D.Ed. students.

The bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the mother education is

Residence

Group - I

Group - I1

shown in Figure - 14.

N

487

713

M

65.39

62.91

SD

7.37

9.05

't' - value

5.209**

Figure - 14

Bar diagram for the mean achievement scores far the residence

65.5 I I I I I U I I I I I , ' , 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' # 4 1 t,','llll,',illlll','

65 ~ 1 0 ' 4 ' 1 1 1 1 1 ' " ' 1 1 1 1 1 ( I ( " ' l o ' l l l ' l " ~ l ' l l l ' " t l l l~ l ' l l l l l l ' l i ' l l l l~" l l l l , B 1 l l l l l ' * O " l l ' l "

64.5 l ' l ' * ' l ' l ' 1 1 1 ' * i 4 ' 1 1 1 1 l ' ~ ~ , ' l ' l ' l ' l ' l ~ , ' l ' , ~ 1 ' 1 ' # ' * ' 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 4 ' 1 ' , ' l l l l " ' a O l l ' l ' l ' l ' l ' l ' , 1 1 1 , ' , 1 , ' 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 ' 4 ' , ' ,

64 l ~ l ~ " r " ~ l ~ l ~ l ~ r * o ~ ~ ' l , l l l , l , t * ~ l l l l l ' , i # l l l l l l l l l l ' [ * ' 1 l l l l 1 r * i l l 1 1 9 I ~ I ~ I ' I ' * ' N ~ I ~ I ' ~ ~ * ~ A I ~ I ~ I ~ I ' I ~ I ~ I ~ I ~ ~ * o ' ~ ' I 63.5 l l ~ l ~ ' ~ l r n l l ~ l ~ l r r a * n l n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 " 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' , ' , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' 4 ' ,

63 l'l'l1l'lbl'l1lll','*',

62.5

62

61.5 Group - 1 Group - II

Residence

5.4.4 Locality


of locality the 647 rural students form as Group - I and 553 urban students fonn as Group

- 11, The influence of 'locality' on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students is

investigated:The corresponding academic achievement scores of two groups are analysed

accordingly. The influence of locality on academic achievement is investigated through

't' -technique. The following hypothesis is framed.

Hypothesis - 9

There would be no significant impact of 'locality' on the academic achievement

of D.Ed. students.



Table - 34

Influence of locality on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students


It is clear from the Table - 34 that the computed value of 't' (0.192) is less than

the critical value of 't' (1.96) for 1 and 1 198 df at 0.05 level. Hence the Hypothesis - 9 is

't' -value

0.192@

S. No.

1.

2.

accepted for the variable 'locality' at 0.05 level of significance. It is concluded that

'locality' has no significant .influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

Locality

Rural

Urban

Krishnmoorthy (1999), h c e James and Marice (2004) and Panchalingappa

(2004), Sankaraiah (2009), Padmini (2010) and Siddi Raju (2010) reported similar

results. Jagannadhan (1 983), Narayana Kotewara and Rarnachandra Redd y (1 998),

Kumar (1998), Prakash (2000), Gupta (2002), Panda (2002), Singh, Sunil Kumar Singh

and Saheem Malik (2003), Galchar and Aseema (2004), Dwivedi (2005)' Manchala

(2007) and Krishna Reddy (2008) reported contradictory results.

N

647

553

M

63.87

63.97

SD

7.75

9.29

5.4.5 Medium of the study

In the present investigation, the mdents are divided into two groups; on the basis

of medium of the study the 1138 rural students form as Group - I and 62 urban students

form as Group - 11. The influence of 'medium of the study' on the academic achievement

of D.M. students is investigated. The corresponding academic achievement scores of two

groups are analysed accordingly. The influence of medium of the study on academic

achievement is investigated through 't' - technique. The following hypothesis is f-ed.

Hypothesis - 10

There would be no significant impact of 'medium of the study' on the academic



presented in Table -35.

Table - 35

Influence of medium of the study on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students

@ Indicates not sipficant at 0.05 level


the critical value of 't' (1.96) for 1 and 1198 df at 0.05 level. Hence the Hypothesis - 10

is accepted for the variable 'medium of the study' at 0.05 level of significance. It is

concluded that 'medium of the study' has no significant influence on the academic


't' -value

0.2020

S. No.

1.

2.

Medium of the study

Telugu

English

N

1138

62

M

63.91

64.1 1

SD

8.53

7.85

5.4.6 Type of the family

In the present investigation, the shdents are divided into two groups; on the basis

of type of the family the 799 nuclear family students form as Group - I and 401 joint

family students form as Group - 11. The influence'of 'type of the family' on the academic

achievement of D.Ed. students is investigated. The corresponding academic achievement

scores of two groups are analysed accordingly. The influence of type of the family on

academic achievement is investigated through 't' - techmque. The following hypothesis

is fkamed.

Hypothesis - 11

There would be no significant impact of 'type of the family' on the academic




Table - 36

Influence of type of the family on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students



the critical value of 't' (1.96) for 1 and 1 198 df at 0.05 level. Hence the Hypothesis - 1 1

is accepted for the variable 'type of the family' at 0.05 level. It is concluded that 'type of

the family' has not significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Fd. students.

't' - value

0.689@

S. No.

1.

2.

Type of the family

Nuclear

Joint

N

799

401'

M

64.03

63.68

SD

8.69

8.08

5.4.7 Father Occupation

On the basis of father occupation, the smdents are divided into three groups.

Group - I is formed with students of unemployed and labour fathers, Group - I1 formed

with fathers of caste occupation / small business /.cultivation / clerk I elementary teacher

and Group I 111 is formed with fathers of high school teacher / technician 1 equal cadre

employees and fathers of high Government official / land lord 1 professor. The influence

of 'father occupation' on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students is investigated.

The corresponding academic achievement scores of three groups are analysed

accordingly. The influence of 'father occupation' on academic achievement is


Hypothesis - 12

There would be no significant finpact of 'father occupation' on the academic


The above hypothesis is tested by employing one - way ANOVA technique. The

results are presented in Table - 37.

Table - 37

Influence of father occupation on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students


S. No.

1.

2.

3.

It is clear from the Table - 37 that the computed value of 'F' (1 303) is less than

the critical value of 'F' (2.99) for 2 and 1197 df at 0.05 level. Hence the Hypothesis - 12

is accepted for the variable 'father occupation' at 0.05 level of significance. It is

concluded that 'father occupation' has not significant influence on the academic


Father Occupation

Group-I

Group-I1

Group - 111

N

730

373

97

Mean

63.65

64.60

63.30

S.D.

8.37

8.23

9.95

F - Ratio

1.803@

Pavithran and Feroze (1965), Bhujendra Nath Panda (1991), Govinda Reddy

(2002), Manchala (2007), Krishna Reddy (2008) and Sujatha (2011) reported

contradictory results.

Har Govinda Gupta (1968), Rangaswaniy and Visveswara (1977) and Parida

(2002), Sankaraiah (2009), Padmini (20 10) and Siddi Raju (20 10) found similar results.

5.4.8 Religion

On the basis of religion, the studkts are divided into three groups. Group - I is

formed with Hindu students, Gmup - I1 formed with Muslim students and Group - I11 is

formed with Christian students. The influence of '.religion' on the academic achievement

of D.Ed. students is investigated. The corresponding academic achievement scores of

three groups are analysed accordingly. The influence of 'religion' on academic



Hypothesis - 13

There would be no significant impact of 'religion' on the academic achievement

of D.Ed. students.



Table - 38

Influence of religion om the academic achievement of D.Ed. students


S. No.

1.

2.

3.

It is clear from the Table - 38 that the computed value of 'F' (1.410) is less than

the critical value of 'F' (1.96) for 2 and 1 197 df at 0.05 level. Hence the Hypothesis - 13

is accepted for the variable 'religion' at 0.05 level of significance. It is concluded that

'religion' has not significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

Similar results reported by Asud Ulla Khan et al., (1982), Krishnamurthy (1999)

and Manchala (2007). Contradictory results reported by Radha Mohan (1998) and Kobal-

Palcic et al., (1999).

Religion

Group-I

Group- I1

Group - I11

S.D.

8.60

7.97

7.53

F - Ratio

1.410@

I

N

1026

100

74

Mean

63.77

65.24

64.19

5.4.9 Economic position of the family

In the present investigation, the &dents are divided into three groups, on the

basis of economic position of the family, the students are divided into three groups using

quartile values. The student whose economic position of the family is poor form the

Group - I, Group - I1 form as economic position of the family is medium and Group - I11

form as economic position of the family is rich. The influence of 'economic position of

the family' on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students is investigated. The

corresponding academic achievement scores of three groups are analysed accordingly.

The influence of economic position of the family on academic achievement is


Hypothesis - 14

There would be no significant impact of 'economic position of the family' on the



economic position of the family levels presented in Table - 39.

Table - 39


Economic position of the family levels -



level of Economic position of the family had high level of academic achievement.

Further, the mean scores of the three groups slightly differ from each other. The trend of

S.D.

8.09

8.58

8.40

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

Economic position of the family

Group - I

Group - I1

Group - I11

N

45

887

268

Mean

62.63

64.25

65.04

the mean scores indicates that the D.Ed. students with low Economic position of the

family had the least academic achievement.


Analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique was +plied. The summary of the results is

given below.


Economic position of the family levels is' given in Table - 40.

Table - 40

Results of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed, students with varied

Economic position of the family levels

* Indicates significant at 0.05 level

It is clear from the Table - 40 that the computed value of 'F' (4.1 57) is greater


Source

Between Groups

Within Groups

Total

- 14 is rejected for the variable 'Economic position of the family' at 0.05 level of

significance. It is concluded that 'Economic position of the family' has significant

influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

MS

298.500

71.812

370.3 12

Jagannadhan (1 986); Vijay Kumar Sethi (1 990), Bhujendra Nath Panda (1 99 1 ),

Govinda Reddy (2002), Selvarn and Soundaravalli (2002) and Manchala (2007) observed

similar results. Wiseman (1964), Krishna Murthy (1999) and Chakarbarti, Sharmista

(2002) reported contradictory results.

' F '

4.157*

SS

597.000

85959.500

86556.500



D.Ed. students ware fi.uther analyzed by employing the 't' test.

d f

2

1197

1199


according to their Economic position of the family and the results of 't' test is given in

Table - 41.

Table - 41


according to their Economic position of the family and the results of 't' test

Note:



above 0.05 level.

Group - I11 Source


0.05 level.

Results presented in the Table - 41, indicate that 'Economic position of the

family' of Group - I Vs Group - I11 and Group - I Vs Group - I1 has significant

influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students. 'Economic position of the

family' of Group - I1 Vs 'Group - III has not significant influence on the academic

achievement of D.Ed. students. Hence the Hypothesis - 14 is rejected for the variable

'Economic position of the family'. It is concluded that 'Economic position of the family'

has significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students


Group - I

The bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the economic position of

the family is shown in Figure - 15.

62.63 64.25 65.04

Group - I1

Figure - 15 . .

Bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the economic position of the famiry

Group - I Group - lI ~ m u p - m Economic position of the f a d y

5.4.10 Student educational qualification

In the present investigation, the students are divided into three groups; on the

basis of student educational qualification the 955 intermediate students form as Group - 1,203 under graduate students fonn as Group - I1 h d 42 post graduate students form as

Group - 111. The influence of 'student educational qualification' on the academic

achievement of D.Ed. students is investigated. The corresponding academic achievement

scores of three groups are analysed accordingly. The influence of student educational

qualification on academic achievement is investigated through 't' - techque. The

following hypothesis is framed.

Hypothesis - 15

There would be no significant impact of 'student educational qualification' on the


Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.W. students with varied

student educational qualification levels presented in Table - 42.

Table - 42

Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied student

educational qualification levels



level of student educational qualification had high level of academic achievement.

Further, the mean scores of the three groups slightly differ from each other. The trend of

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

Mean

62-28

62.48

64.33

S.D.

6.5 1

7.13

8.86

Student educational qualification

Group - I

Group - II

Group - I11

N

955

203

42

the mean scores indicates that the D,Ed. students with low student educational

qualification had the least academic achievknent.

Similar results reported by Dhalakia (1980), Patil (1984), Manchala (2007),

Sankaraiah (2009) and Sujatha (20 1 1).



given below.


student educational qualification levels is given in Table - 43.

Table - 43

Results of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied student

educational qualification levels


Source

Between Groups

Within Groups

Total



- 15 is rejected for the variable 'student educational qualification' at 0.01 level of

significance. It is concluded that 'student educational qualification' has significant

influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

To find out which of the three p u p s of D.M. students differed significantly



SS

791 .OOO

85765.500

86556.500

'F'

5.520**

d f

2

1197

1199

MS

395.500

71.650

467.150


according to their student educational and the results of 't' test is given in

Table - 44.

Table - 44 '


according to their student educational qualification and the results of 't' test

Note:

1. The means are arranged in ascending order from I& to right.

Source


above 0.05 level.

Group - I1 Group - I


0.05 level.

Group - 111


Results presented in the Table - 44, indicate that 'student educational

qualification' of Group - I Vs Group - I11 has significant influence on the academic

achievement of DM. students. 'Student educational qualification' of Group - I1 Vs

Group - I11 and Group - I'Vs Group - I1 has not significant influence on the academic

achievement of D.Ed. students, Hence the Hypothesis - 15 is rejected for the variable

'student educational qualification'. It is concluded that 'student educational qualification'

has significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

62.28 62.48 64.33

The bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the student educational

qualification is shown in Figure - 16.

Figure - 16

Bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the student educational

Cmup - I Group - IH Student edu*td~nd qualification

5.4.11 Age

In the present investigation, on the basis of age, the students are divided into four

groups. The student whose age is up to 18 years form the Group - I, Group - I1 form as

19 years, Group - 111 form as 2V years and Group - N form as above 20 years . The

influence of 'age' on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students is investigated. The

corresponding academic achievement scores of four groups are analysed accordingly.

The influence of 'age' on academic achievement is investigated through one - way

ANOVA technique. The following hypothesis is framed.

Hypothesis - 17

There would be no significant impact of 'age' on the academic achievement of

D.Ed. students.

Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied age

levels presented in Table - 45.

Table - 45

Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied age

levels

It could be seen fiom the Table - 45 that a11 the means of the four groups were


level of age had high level of academic achievement. Further, the mean scores of the four

groups slightly differ fiom each other. The trend of the mean scores indicates that the

D.Ed. students with low age had the least academic achievement.

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Age

Group - I

Group - I1

Group .- III

Group - N

Mean

61.57

62.58

63.55

66.68

N

298

514

273

115

S.D.

7.27

7.54

8.14

9.60

To test whether there was any significant difference among these four groups,


given below.

A result of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed students with varied age

levels is given in Table - 46.

Table - 46

Results of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied age levels


It is clear horn the Table - 46 that the computed value of 'F' (16.630) is greater


- 17 is rejected for the variable 'age' at 0.01 level of significance. It is concluded that

'age' has significant influence on the ahiemic achievement of D.Ed students.

Source

Between Groups

Within Groups

Total

Similar results were reported by Srivastava (1967), Vyas (1982), Dowson et al.

(1999) and Sunetha and Mayuri (2002), Yasoda (2003)' Sankaraiah (2009) and Sujatha

(201 1).

S S

3466.000

83090.500

86556.500

Contradictory results reported by Har Govinda Gupta (1%8), Asudulla (1982),

'F'

16.630**

d f

3

11%

1199

Prakashan et al. (1986) Quraishi and Bhat (1986), Biswas (2001), Govinda Reddy (2002)

and Krishna Reddy (2009) and Siddi Raju (2010).

To find out which of the four groups of D.Ed. students differed significantly from

the others in their academic achievement, the mean scores of the four groaps of D.Ed.

students ware further analyzed by employing the 't' test.

MS

1 155.333

69.474

1224.807


according to their age and the results of 't' test is given in Table - 47.

Table - 47

Mean achievement scores of different subgroups of D.Ed. students dassified

according to their age and the results of 't' test

Note:

1. The means are arranged in ascending order fi-om left to right.

Source


above 0.05 level.



0.05 level.


Results presented in the Table - 47, indicate that 'age' of Group - I Vs Group -

61.57 62.58 63.55 66.68

Group - I11

111, Group - I Vs Group - IV, Group - I1 Vs Group - IV and Group - I11 Vs Group - N

has significant influence on the a c a d d c achievement of D.Ed. students. 'age' of Group

- I Vs Group - I1 and Group - I1 Vs Group - 111 has not significant influence on the

academic achievement of D.Ed. students. Hence the Hypothesis - 17 is rejected for the

Group - IV

variable 'age'. It is concluded that 'age' has significant influence on the academic

achievement of D.Ed. students

The bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the age is shown in Figure - 17.

Bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the age

67

66

65

6 4

g 63 62

61

60

I 59 Gmup - I Group - IX Group - 111 Group - IV

Age

>

5.4.12 Annual income

In the present investigation, on the basis of annual income, the students are

divided into four groups. The student whose anntid income is up to rupees 36,0001- form

the Group I, Group - I1 fom as rupees 36,0011- to rupees 72,0001-, Group - III form as

rupees 720011- to one lakh and Group - IV form as above rupees one lakh. The influence

of 'annual income' on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students is investigated. The


The influence of 'annual income' on academic achievement is investigated through one - way ANOVA technique. The following hypothesis is h e d .

Hypothesis - 18

There would be no significant impact of 'annual income' on the academic

achievement of D.Ed, students.



Table - 48

Influence of annual income on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students


S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Annual income

Group - I

Group-I1

Group- I11

Group- IV

N

522

238

205

235

F - Ratio

2.232@

Mean

63.71

63.00

64.89

64.44

S.D.

7.67

9.62 -

8.65

8.75

It is clear from the Table - 48 thit the computed value of 'F' (2.232) is less than


is accepted for the variable 'annual income' at 0.05 level of significance. It is concluded

that 'annual. income' has not significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed.

students.

Similar results were revealed by Wiseman Stephans (1964), Jayachandrama

Naidu (1998) and Krishna Moorthy (1999) and Padmini (2010).

Contradictory results were revealed by Fraser (1959), Gopal Rao (1965)' Har

Govinda Gupta (1968), Jagannadhan (1986)' Vijayakumar Seth (1990), Bujendranatha

Panda (1 99 I), Govinda Reddy (2002), Selvarn and Sundaravalli (2002)' Manchala

(2007), Krishna Reddy (2008), Siddi Raju (2010) and Sujatha (201 1).

5.4.13 Father education

On the basis of father education, the students are divided into four groups. Group

- I is formed with illiterate fathers Group - II formed with up to high educational fathers.

Group - 111 'is formed as graduate fathers and Group - IV is formed with post graduation

and above and professional educational fathers. The influence of 'father education' on the

academic achievement of D.Ed. students is investigated. The corresponding academic

achievement scores of three groups are analysed accordingly. The influence of 'father

education' on academic achievement is investigated through one - way ANOVA

technique. The following hypothesis is framed.

Hypothesis - 19

There* would be no significant impact of 'father education' on the academic

achievement of D.Ed. students,

Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied father

education levels presented in Table - 49.

Table - 49

Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied father

education levels

It could be seen from the Table - 43 that all the means of the four groups were

above the neutral point (SO). This indicates that all the D.Ed. students irrespective of their

level of father education had high level of academic achievement. Further, the mean

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Mean

62.33

64.33

64.90

66.37

S.D.

8.23

8.37

8.6 1

10.32

Father education

Group - I

Group - II

Group - UI

Group - IV

N

327

682

156

35

scores of the four groups slightly differ'.fiom each other. The trend of the mean scores

indicates that the D.Ed. students with low age had the least academic achievement.

To test whether there was any sigtllficant difference among these four groups,


given below.


father education levels is given in Table - 50.

Table - 50

Results of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied father

education levels


r

Source

Between Groups

Within Groups

Total



- 19 is rejected for the variable 'father education' at 0.01 level of significance. It is

concluded that 'father education' has significant influence on the academic achievement

of D.Ed. students.

To fmd out which of the four groups of D.Ed. students differed significantly from

the others in their academic achievement, the mean scores of the four groups of D.Ed.

students ware further analyzed by employing the 't' test.

S S

1303.000

85253.500

86556.500


according to their father education and the results of 't' test is given in Table - 51.

d f

3

1196

1199

MS

434.333

71.282

505.6 16

'F'

6.093 **


according to their father education and the results of 't' test


Source

Note:


Group - I

2, Any two means not undernored by the same line are significantly different at or

above 0.05 level.

3. Any two means underscored by the same lie are not significantly different at

0.05 level.

Group - I1

Results presented in the Table - 51, indicate that 'father education' of Group - I

Vs Group - 11, Group - I Vs Group - 111 and Group - I Vs Group - N have significant

influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students. 'father education' of Group - 11 Vs Group - 111, Group - I1 Vs Group - IV and Group - I11 Vs Group - IV have not


Hypothesis - 19 is rejected for the variable 'father education'. It is concluded that 'father

education' has significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

Contradictory results were reported Har Gownda Gupta (1968)' Rangaswamy and

Visveswaran (1977), NCERT Report (2008) and Siddi Raju (2010).

Group - 111

Similar results were reported by Sarma (1984), Jagannadhan (1986),

Vijayakurnar Sethi (1 990); Bhujendra Nath Panda (1 99 I), Krishna Moorthy (1 999),

Chakrabarthi and Sarmistha (2002), Govinda Reddy and Panda (2002a), Manchda (2007)

and Krishna Reddy (2008), Sankaraiah (2009) and Padmini (20 10).

Group - IV

The bar diagram for the meaa *achievement scores for the fathex- education is

shown in Figure - 18.

~ar'diagrnrn for the'rnestn nchiwement scores for the fatha education

Group - I G m p -IT Group - If1 Group - IV Father education

5.4.14 Birth order

On the basis of birth order, the students are divided into four groups. Group - I is

formed with birth order is one, Group - I1 formed with birth order is two, Group - III formed with birth order is three and Group - N formed with birth order is four and

above. The influence of 'birth order' on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students is

investigated. The corresponding ac@emic achievement scores of three groups are

analysed accordingly. The influence of 'birth order' on academic achievement is


Hypothesis - 20

There would be no significant impact of 'birth order' on the acadanic


Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied birth

order levels presented in Table - 52.

Table - 52

Means and SDs of the academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied birth

order levels

It could be seen h m the Table - 52 that a11 the means of the four groups were

above the neutral point (50). This indicates that all the D.Ed. students irresptive of their

level of birth order had high level of academic achevement. Further, the mean scores of

the four groups slightly differ from each other. The trend of the mean scores indicates

that the D.Ed. studeats with low age had the least academic achievement.

S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Birth order

Group - I

Group - I1

Group 1 111

Group - IV

N .

449

370

202

179

Mean

62.77

63.13

64.58

64.73

S.D.

7.76

8.23

8.79

8.84

To test whether there was any-significant d i f fmce among these four groups,


given below.

A result of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied birth

order levels is given in Table - 53.

Results of ANOVA of academic achievement of D.Ed. students with varied birth

order levels . .

* * Indicates significant at 0.01 level

Source

Between Groups

Within Groups

Total



- 20 is rejected for the variable 'birth order' at 0.01 level of significance. It is concluded

that 'birth order' has significant influence on. the academic achievement of D.Ed,

students.

Similar results reported by Govinda Reddy (2002). Contradictory results reported

by Jagannadhan (1983), Bhujendranath Panda (1 99 1) and Manchala (2007)

SS

85 1.00

85705.500

86556.500

To find out which of the four groups of D.E.. students differed significantly from

the others in their academic achievement, the mean scores of the four groups of D.Ed.

students ware further analyzed by employing the 't' test,

Mean achievement scores of different subgroups of DM. students classified

according to their birth order and the results of 't' test is given in Table - 54.

'F'

3.959**

d f

3

1196

1199

MS

283.667

7 1.660

355.327

Table - 54


according to their birth order alid the results of 't' test

Note:

1. The means are ananged in ascending order from left to right.

Source


above 0.05 level.



0.05 level.


Results presented in the Table - 54, indicate that 'birth order' of Group - I Vs

Group - 111, Group - 1 Vs Group - IV and Group - I1 Vs Group - IV have significant

influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students. 'birth order' of Group - I Vs

Group - 11, Group - 11 Vs Group - 111 and Group - I1 Vs Group - IV have not significant

influence on the academic achievement of D.M. students. Hence the Hypothesis - 20 is

rejected for the variable 'birth order'. It is conciuded that 'birth order' has significant

influence on the academic achievement of D.M. students.

Group - III

62.77 63.13 64.58 64.73

The bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for the b i order is shown in

Figure - 19,

Group - IV

Bar diagram for the mean achievement scores for thebirth order

Group - I Group - II Group - Ill Group - W Birth order

5.4.15 Size of the family

In the present investigation, on the basis of size of the family, the students are

divided into four groups. The student whose size of the family is three form the Group -

I, Group - I1 form size of the family is four, Group - I11 form'as size of the family is five

and Group - N form as size of the family is six and above. The influence of 'size of the

family' on the academic achevement of D.Ed. students is investigated. The


The influence of 'size of the family' on academic achievement is investigated through

one - way ANOVA technique. The following hypothesis is framed.

Hypothesis - 21

There would be no significant impact of 'size of the family' on the academic




Table - 55

Influence of size of the family on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students


S. No.

1.

2,

3.

4.

Size of the family

Group - I

Group - I1

&up - I11

Group - IV

S.D.

9.99

8.69

8.19

8.30

F - Ratio

0.662@

N

80

288

346

486

Mean

62.96

64.01

63.65

64.21



is accepted for the variable 'size of the family' at 0.05 level of significance. It is

concluded that 'size of the Smily' has not significant influence on the academic


Contradictory results reported by Bhujendranath panda (1 99 I), Padrnini (20 10)

and Sujatha (201 1).

Similar results were reported by Jayachandrama Naidu (1998) and Manchala

(2007), Krishna Reddy (2009), Sankaraiah (2009) and Siddi Raju (2010).

5.4.16 Caste

In the present investigation, the students are divided into four groups; on the basis

of caste the 173 OC students f om as Group - I, '8 W students of BC caste form as Group

- 11, 183 students of SC c&te form as Group - I11 and 40 students of ST caste form of

Group - IV. The influence of 'caste' on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students is

investigated. The corresponding academic achievement scores of four groups are

analysed accordingly. The influence of caste on academic achievement is investigated

through one - way ANOVA technique. The following hypothesis is framed.

Hypothesis - 22

There would be no significant impact of 'caste' on the academic achievement of

D.Ed. students.



Table - 56

Influence of caste on the academic achievement of D.Ed students


S. No.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Mean

64.34

64.31

63.08

63.18

Caste

Group-I

Group - I1

Group- I11

Group- IV

N

218

583

31 1

88

S.D.

8.61

8.66

8.01

8.47

F- Ratio

1.821@



is accepted for the variable 'caste' at 0.05 ley1 of significance. It is concluded that

'caste' has-not significant influence on the academic achievement of D.Ed. students.

Contradictory results are reported by Dubey and Mishra (1977), Jagannadhan

(1983), Gopalacharyulu (1984); Sing (1993), Mehara (1992) and Dash (2002), Krishna

Reddy (2009), Padrnini (2010), Siddi Raju (2010) and Sujatha (201 1).

Similar results were revealed by Kumara Swamy (1 992), Jayachandrama Naidu

(1 998), Dubey and Mishra (1 999), Govinda Reddy (2002) and Sankaraiah (2009).

5.5 STEP WISE MULTIPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS

This section deals with the analysis of the relative contribution or magnitude of

the effect of each of the different independent variables to the dependent variable, The

academic achievement of D.Ed. students is. predicted with the help of independent

variables.

It is appropriate to know the meaning and nature of regression analysis.

Regression means to estimate or predict one variable with the help of other

variable 1 variables. According to dictionary the term 'regression' means act of returning

or 'going back'. In 19' century, Francis Galton for the first time used the word

'regression' while studying the relationship between the height of father and sons.

Galton found that the off spring of abnormally tall or short parents tend to 'regress' or

'step back' to the average population height. But the term 'regression' as now used in

statistics is only a convenient tenn without having any reference to biometry. In

regression analysis there are two types of variables. The variable whose value is

influenced or is to be predicted is called dependent variable and the variable which

influences values or is used for prediction, is called independent variables. The

independent variable is also called regressor or predictor.

Now - a - days regression analysis is employed widely in all scientific disciplines,

such as physical, natural and social sciences.

Correlation is a tool of ascertaining the degree of relationship between two

variables. The objective of regression analysis is to study nature of relationship, between

the variables the cause and effect relation is clearly indicated through regression analysis

than by correlation. The step-wise multiple regression analysis is employed in the

present investigation to predict the dependent variables with the help of independent

variables. Nowadays regression analysis is used widely in all the scientific disciplines,

such as physical and social sciences.

As already mentioned, there are 48 variables in this investigation for the purpose

of step - wise multiple regression analysis the variable number, description of the

variable and symbol used are presented'in Table - 57.

Table - 57

Variables used for Regression Analysis

Variable Number (VN)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

Description of the variable

Age

Annual Income of the family

Father's Education

Mother's Education

Father's Occupation

Mother's Occupation

Birth Order

Size of the Family

Residence

Gender

Religion

Caste

Lmality

Economic Position of the Family

Medium of the study

Type of family

Region

Management

Qualification

Self-efficacy

Emotional intelligence

Symbol used

A

A1

FE

ME

FO

MO

BO

SOF

RE

G

REL

CA

L

EPF

MOS

TOF

R

M

Q

SE

EI

Variable number 23 is the dependent variable in the present investigation.

Academic achievement (AA) (i.e.) variable number 23 in the Table - 57 is the

dependent variable in the present investigation. Academic achievement of students is

very important and is related to a number of psycho - sociological and demographic

variables.

Symbol used

AM

AA

Variable Number (VN)

22.

23.

5.5.1 Prediction of academic achievement

Description of the variable

Achievement motivation .


The prediction of Academic achievement (AA) and the relative contribution of

various variables namely Socio - demographic variables, psychological variables and

All independent variables on the dependent variable (AA) is studied, with the help of step

- wise multiple regression analysis.

5.5.2 Prediction of academic achievement with the help of socio - demographic

variables (1 - 19)

The academic achievement (AA) variable number 23 is predicted wilh the help of

socio - demographic variables (1 - 19) using step - wise multiple regression analysis.

The results of the regression analysis are reported in Table - 58.

It is seen fiom the Table - 58 that the first variable entered into the step - wise

regression analysis is management (M). The multiple correlation (R) obtained is 0.21 1. It

implies that the strength of the relationship between the two variables (AA and M) is

about 21.10 percent. It could be seen that R is significant (F = 55.636) beyond 0.01 level

of significance for 1 and 1198 df. The critical value of 'F' is 3.85 at 0.05 level and 6.66 at

0.01 level for 1 and 1 198 df. The coefficient of multiple R* is 0.044. This shows that 4.40

percent of the variance in AA is accounted by M.

The standard error of Multiple R (SER) is 8.182, From this it may be inferred that

nearly 68 per cent of actual AA value would lie with in M 8.182 of AA value predicted

with the help of this variable (M).

The partial regression coefficient (b) presented in the column '7' is -3.578. This

value indicates that AA value would change by -3.578 units for every one unit of change

in M. The 't' value for b is 7.46 which-is highly significant at 0.01 level. The value of the

constant that could be written to predict AA at this stage is 69.283.

The general form of multiple regression equation may be written as;

Where Y is predicted score on the dependent variable, bl, b, b3 . . . bn are partial

regression coefficients XI, X2, Xj . . ... Xn are scores on different independent variables

and A is constant.

Thus the multiple regression equation at the end of this step, could be written as

Age (A) is entered into the step - wise regression analysis as the second most

significant variable. The multiple correlation (R) between AA on one side and M and A

on other side is 0.272. Thus the strength of the relationship between AA and the two

independent variables put together is 27.20 peient. R is significant at 0.01 level (F =

47.961, df 2, 1 197)

The value of R* is 0.074. This shows that the two variables put together could

explain 7.40 per cent of variance in the dependent variable (AA). Out of this 4.201 per

cent of variance is explained by M. The remaining 3.2 18 percent of variance is accounted

for by A (Table - 58, Col. 12).

The regression equation to predict AA with these two variables (M and A) as

predictor variables is:

AA = 72.499 + (-3.387) (M) + (-1.613) (A)

Where 72.499 is the constant to be considered at this step and -3.387 and -1.613

are the partial regression coefficients of management and age. The 'b' values for the

variables are significant at 0.01 level.

There would not be much increase in R~ after the 46 step.

The regression quation at the end of 4' step could be written as

AA = 71.428 + (-3.424) (M) + (-1.454) (A) + (1.175) VE) + (-0.736) (R)

It is observed fiom the Table - 36 that it could be possible to explain 8.92 percent

of variance in the dependent variable AA, with the above four variables.

There are 6 steps in this regression analysis. The summaries of the last step (6) of

step - wise multiple regression analysis with academic achievement as dependent variable

and nineteen (1 - 19) socio - demographic variables as independent variables is the value

of R~ is 0.093. This shows that these six variables put together could explain 9.30 perccnt

of variance in the dependent variable (AA). The regression equation at the end of 6 step

could be written as;

AA = 74393 + (-3.122) (M) + (-1.298) (A) + (1.157) (FE) + (-0.698) (R) + (-1.102) (RE) + (-0.934) (EPF).

From the above discussion, it is clear that the multiple regression equation at the

end of 6 step would be to predict AA. Hence it is concluded that academic achievement

could best be predicted with the help of Management, Age, Father education, Region,

Residence and Economic position of the family among the 19 (1 - 19) socio - demographic variables.

The pie diagram for the percent of variance of academic achievement for the step

- wise multiple regression analysis of socio - demographic variables is shown in Figure

- 20.

Pie diagram for the percent of variance of achievement scores for the step - wise

multiple regression analysis of sofio - demographic variables

0.613 0.436

2589

1 Management

1 Age

l Father education

[I Region

1 Residence

l Economic position ofbhmily 1

Table - 58

Prediction of academic achievement with the help of socio -demographic variables (1 - 19)

1'0 R R' SER %

No, variance

w

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1 2

M(18)

A(l)

FE(3)

R(17)

RE(9)

0.211

0172

0.290

0.299

0.304

3 4 5

0,044

0074

0.084

0.089

0.093

8309

8,182

8.141

8.122

8,110

6

5 5 . 6 3 t (1,1198)

47.961"

(2,1197)

36.658"

(3,1196)

29.247'

(4,1195)

24.311"

(5,1194)

7

*3.518(18)

-3.3!7(1!)

-1.613(1)

-3.417(18)

-1.511(1) 1.195(3)

-3424(18)

-1454(1) 1,175[3)

n0.736(17)

-3.148(18) .1.335(1) 1.237(3)

-0.693(17) -l.084(9)

I

7.4C

7.16' 6.21'

7.25'

5.81*' 3 . 6 f

7.281'

5.58"

33.56" 2.551

6.47' 502" 3.14' 2.4f 2.1f

9

69,283

72,499

70.034

7 1,428

72.281

10

-0,211

-0.199 -0,173

-0.201,

-0.162 0,101

-0,202 -0.156 0,099 -08071

-0,185 -0,143 0.104 -0,067 -0,063

11

-0,211

12

4438

1 4.201 -0,186

0.116

-0,088

-0.143

3218

4,238

3.015 '

1,167

' 4,246

2,900 1,148 0,622

3,904

2,664 1.208 OS86 0,898

F value Step N o R R' SER for, ~ o n r t a n t B It'

forb %

No, variance

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

6. EPF(14) 0.309 0.095 8.101 20.944" -3.122(18) 6.41" -0,184 3.871 (6,1193) -1.298jl) 4.8? -0,139 2,589

1,157(3) 3.48" 0,098 1,130 74,393 -0,083

o.698(1?) 2.41 -0,067 0,591

*l.l02(9) 2.1( -0,064 0,613

-0.934(14) 1 . 8 8 ~ -0,053 ' 0,436

5.53 Prediction of academic achievement with the help of psychological variables

(20 - 22)

The academic achievement (AA) variable number 23 is predicted with the help of

psychological 'variables (20 - 22) using step - wise multiple regression analysis. The

results of the regression analysis are reported in Table - 59.

It is seen fiom the Table - 59 that the first and last variable entered into the step -

wise regression analysis is emotional intelligence @I). The multiple conelation (R)

obtained is 0.082. It implies that the strength of the relationship between the two

variables (AA and EI) is about 8.20 percent. It could be seen that R is significant (F =

8.051) beyond 0.01 level of significance for 1 and 1198 df. The critical value of 'F' is

3.85 at 0.05 level and 6.66 at 0.01 level for 1 and 1198 df. The coefficient of multiple R'

is 0.007. This shows that 0.70 percent of the variance in AA is accounted by El.

The standard error of Multiple R (SER) is 8.472. From this it may be inferred that

nearly 68 per cent of actual AA value would lie with in M st 8.472 of AA value predicted

with the help of this variable (EI).

The partial regression coefficient (b) presented in the column '7' is 1.012. This

value indicates that AA value would change by 1.012 units for every one unit of change

in EI. The 't' value for b is 2.84 which is highly significant at 0.01 level. The value of the

constant that could be written to predict AA at this stage is 61.871.

The general form of multiple regression equation may be written as.

Where Y is predicted score on the dependent variable, bl, b, b3 . . . b,, are partial

regression coefficients XI, X2, X3 ..... Xn are scores on different independent variables

and A is constant.


AA = 61.871 + (1.012) (EI)

It is observed ftom the Table - 59 that it could be possible to explain 0.70 p e n t

of variance in the dependent variable AA, with the above (EI) variable.

There is one step in this regression analysis. The summaries of the last step (Ist) of

step - wise multiple regression analysis with academic pchievement as dependent variable

and three (20 -.22) psychological vaxiables as independent variables is the value of R~ is

0.007. This shows that these one variable put together could explain 0.700 percent of

variance in the dependent variable (AA). The regression equation at the end of 1"' step

could be written as;

Thus the multiple regression equation at the end of this step, could be written as;

AA = 61.871 + (1.012) (EI)

From the above discussion, it is clear that the multiple regression equation at the

first and end of 1"' step would be to predict AA. Hence it is concluded that academic

achievement could best be predicted with the help of emotional intelligence among the

three (20 - 22) psychological variables.

Table - 59

Prediction of academic achievement 1 the help of psychologiea1 variables (20 - 22)

Q No,

1.

1 2

EI(22)

R

0.082

R'

3 4 5

0.007

SIR

9477

F value

6

8.051" (1,1198)

(YN)

7

1.012(22)

It'

far b

8

2 . 8 c

constant

9

61,871

B

10

0,082

r

11

0,422

% variance

12

0,668

-

55.4 Prediction of academic achievement with the help of all independent

variables (1 - 22)

The ackevement score (AA) variable number 23 is predicted with the help of all

independent vaiiables (1 - 22) using step - wise multiple regression analysis. The results

of the regression analysis are reported in Table - 60.

It is seen from the Table - 60 that the first variable entered into the step - wise

regression analysis is management (M). The multiple correlation (R) obtained is 0.2 1 1. It

implies that the strength of the relationship between the two variables (AA and M) is

about 21.10 percent. It could be seen that R is significant (F = 55.636) beyond 0.01 level

of significance for 1 and 1198 df. The critical value of 'F' is 3.85 at 0.05 level and 6.66 at

0.01 level for 1 and 1198 df. The coefficient of multiple R* is 0.044. This shows that 4.40

percent of the variance in AA is accounted by M.

The standard enor of Multiple R (SER) is 8.309. From this it may be inferred that

nearly 68 per cent of actual AA value would lie with in M * 8.309 of AA value predicted

with the help of this variable (M).

The partial regression coeflicient (b) presented in the column '7' is -3.578. This

value indicates that AA value would change by -3.578 units for every one unit of change

in M. The 't' value forb is 7.46 which is highly significant at 0.01 level. The value of the

constant that could be written to predict AA at h s stage is 69.283.

The general form of multiple regression equation may be written as.

Where Y is predicted score on the dependent variable, bl, b, b3 . . . b, are partial

regression coefficients XI, Xz, X3 . .... X, are scores on different independent variables

and A is constant.


Age (A) is entered into the step - wise regression analysis as the second most

significant variable. The multiple correlation (R) between AA on one side and M and ,Q

on other side is 0.272. Thus the strength of the relationship between AA and the two

independent variables put together is 27.20 percent. .R is significant at 0.01 level (F =

47.961, df 2, 1 197)

The value of R~ is 0.074. This shows that the two variables put together could

explain 7.40 per cent of variance in the dependent variable (AA). Out of this 4.201 per

cent of variance is explained by M. The remaining 3.2 18 percent of variance is accounted

for by A (Table - 60, Col. 1 2).

The regression equation to predict AA with these two variables (M and A) as

predictor variables is:

AA = 72.499 + (-3.387) (M) + (-1.613) (A)

Where 72.499 is the constant to be considered at this step and -3.387 and -1.613

are the partial regression coefficients of management and age. The 'b' values for the

variables are significant at 0.01 level.

There would not be much increase in R~ after the 4~ step.

The regression equation at the end of 4' step could be mitten as

AA = 68.079 + (-3.470) (M) + (-1.443) (A) + (1.206) (FE) + (0.923) (EI)

It is observed fhm the Table - 60 that it could be possible to explain 8.97 percent

of variance in the dependent variable AA, with the above four variables.

There are 6 steps in th~s regression analysis. The summaries of the last step (6) of

step - wise multiple regression analysis with academic achievement as dependent variable

and twenty two (1 - 22) independent variables is the value of R~ is 0.098. This shows that

these six variables put together could explain 9.80 percent of variance in the dependent

variable (AA). The regression equation at the end of 6' step could be written as;

AA = 70343 + (-3.202) (M) + (-1.273) (A) + (1.247) (FE) + (0.889) (El) + (-0.712) (R) + (-1,070) (RE).

From the above discussion, it is clek that the multiple regression equation at the

end of d' step would be to pradict Ak Hence it is concluded that academic achievement

could best be predicted with the help of ManagemmIt, Age, Father education, Emotional

. intelligence, Region and Residence among the 22 (1 - 22) all independent variables.

The pie diagram for the percent of variance of achievemeat scores for the step - wise multiple regression analysis of all inwendent variables is shown in Figure - 2 I.

Figure - 21

Pie diagram for the percent of variance of achievement scores for the step - wise

multiple regression analysis of all independent vsrriabltes

0.887

- - - - - - - - - O Management

E l Father education

1 Emotional intelligence

O Residence

2.54

chapter v - shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/71102/13/13...chapter - v analysis...

Documents