chapter iv analysis and interpretation of data 4.1...
TRANSCRIPT
74
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
___________________________________________________________________________
In order to achieve the objectives of the study, the data so collected were recorded in
tabular form for statistical analyses. Mean, median, mode, standard deviation and correlation
of all the variables were calculated. The T-test and ANOVAs test was employed to find the
statistical significance of the differences between the means of respective groups. Analysis of
data was interpreted under the following headings.
4.1 DESCRIPTION OF ACHIEVEMENT IN MATHEMATICS AMONG
COLLEGE STUDENTS
With the view to interpret the achievement in mathematics of college students,
frequency distributions along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1
Distribution of Scores of the Students on the Basis of their in Mathematics
Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative
Percentage
64-70 69 5.8 100
57-63 121 10 94.2
50-56 196 16.4 84.2
43-49 321 26.8 67.8
36-42 200 16.6 41
29-35 197 16.4 24.4
22-28 96 8 8
Total 1200 100
Mean: 44.5 Median:44 Mode: 45 Skewness:0.11
The Table 4.1 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in
Mathematics is 44.5 with median and mode 44 and 45 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The Table 4.1
shows that 386 (32%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (44.5)
falls. 321 students with percentage (27%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in which mean
75
falls and 493 (41%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below
the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to
0.11 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
Fig 4.1 Distributions of Scores of Students on the Basis of Achievement in Mathematics
Fig 4.1 clearly depicts that highest frequency (321) lie in the class interval 43-49,
whereas lowest frequency (69) lies in the class interval 64 -70.
4.1.1 Distribution of Scores of BA (Male) College Students on the Basis of their
Achievement in Mathematics.
With the view to interpret the achievement in mathematics of college students,
frequency distributions along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2
Distribution of Scores of B A (Male) Students on the Basis of their Achievement in Mathematics
Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative
Percentage
64-70 7 3.5 100
57-63 18 9 96.5
50-56 29 14.5 87.5
43-49 54 27 73
36-42 43 21.5 46
29-35 35 17.5 24.5
22-28 14 7 7
Total 200 100
Mean:43.6 Median: 43 Mode: 45 Skewness:0.18
76
The Table 4.2 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in
Mathematics is 43.6 with median and mode 43 and 45 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The Table 4.2
shows that 54 (27%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (43.6) falls.
54 students with percentage (27%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in which mean falls
and 92 (46%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 0.18
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
4.1.2 Distribution of Scores of the B A (Female) College Students on the Basis of their
Achievement in Mathematics
With the view to interpret the achievement in mathematics of BA (Female) college
students, frequency distribution along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in
Table 4.3.
Table-4.3
Distribution of Scores of B A (Female) College Students on the
Basis of their Achievement in Mathematics
Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative
Percentage
64-70 11 5.5 100
57-63 22 11 94.5
50-56 35 17.5 83.5
43-49 52 26 66
36-42 28 14 40
29-35 40 20 26
22-28 12 6 6
Total 200 100
Mean: 44.9 Median: 45 Mode: 45 Skewness: 0.07
The Table 4.3 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in
Mathematics is 44.9 with median and mode 45 and 45 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The Table 4.3
77
shows that 68 (34%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (44.9) falls.
52 students with percentage (26%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in which mean falls
and 80 (40%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 0.07
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
Fig.4.2 Distribution of Scores of Male and Female College Students on the Basis
of their Achievement in Mathematics
Fig 4.2 illustrates that 54 male students and 52 female students lie in the class interval
of 43 to 49, 29 male students and 35 female students find places in the class interval of 50 to
56 and 43 male students and 28 female students secure their places between 36 and 42.
Whereas 7 male students and 11 female students lie in the class interval of 64 to 70 and 14
male students and 12 female students find places in the class interval of 22 to 28.
4.1.3 Distribution of Scores of the B.Sc. (Male) College Students on the Basis of their
Achievement in Mathematics
With the view to interpret the achievement of college students, frequency distribution
along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.4.
78
Table-4.4
Distribution of Scores of B.Sc. (Male) College Students on the
Basis of their Achievement in Mathematics
Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative
Percentage
64-70 14 7 100
57-63 21 10.5 93
50-56 30 15 82.5
43-49 54 27 67.5
36-42 39 19.5 40.5
29-35 27 13.5 21
22-28 15 7.5 7.5
Total 200 100
Mean: 45.02 Median:44 Mode:45 Skewness:0.17
The Table 4.4 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in
Mathematics is 45.02 with median and mode 44 and 45 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The Table 4.4
shows that 65 (32.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (45.02)
falls. 54 students with percentage (27%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in which mean
falls and 81 (40.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below
the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to
0.17 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
4.1.4 Distribution of Scores of B.Sc. (Female) the College Students on the Basis of
their Achievement in mathematics
With the view to interpret the achievement of college students, frequency distribution
along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.5.
79
Table-4.5
Distribution of Scores of B.Sc (Female) College Students on the
Basis of their Achievement in Mathematics
Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative
Percentage
64-70 12 6 100
57-63 19 9.5 94
50-56 36 18 84.5
43-49 60 30 66.5
36-42 30 15 36.5
29-35 28 14 21.5
22-28 15 7.5 7.5
Total 200 100
Mean: 45.2 Median:44.5 Mode:43 Skewness: 0.13
The Table 4.5 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in
Mathematics is 45.2 with median and mode 44.5 and 43 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The table 4.5
shows that 67 (33.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (45.2)
falls. 73 (36.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 0.13
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
Fig.4.3 Distribution of Scores of Male and Female College Students on the Basis
of their Achievement in Mathematics
80
Fig 4.3 illustrates that 54 male students and 60 female students lie in the class interval
of 43 to 49, 30 male students and 36 female students find places in the class interval of 50 to
56 and 39 male students and 30 female students secure their places between 36 and 42.
Whereas 14 male students and 12 female students lie in the class interval of 64 to 70 and 15
male students and 15 female students find places in the class interval of 22 to 28.
4.1.5 Distribution of Scores of the B.Com (Male) College Students on the Basis of their
Achievement in mathematics
With the view to interpret the achievement of college students, frequency distribution
along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.6.
Table-4.6
Distribution of Scores of B.Com (Male) College Students on the
Basis of their Achievement in Mathematics
Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative
Percentage
64-70 14 7 100
57-63 22 11 93
50-56 28 14 82
43-49 52 26 68
36-42 32 16 42
29-35 29 14.5 26
22-28 23 11.5 11.5
Total 200 100
Mean :44.4 Median: 44 Mode: 44 Skewness:0.14
The Table 4.6 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in
Mathematics is 44.4 with median and mode 44 and 44 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The table 4.6
shows that 64 (32%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (44.4) falls.
52 students with percentage (26%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in which mean falls
and 84 (42%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below the
81
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 0.14
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
4.1.6 Distribution of Scores of the B.Com (Female) College Students on the Basis of
their Achievement in mathematics
With the view to interpret the achievement of college students, frequency distribution
along with descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.7.
Table-4.7
Distribution of Scores of B.Com (Female) College Students on the
Basis of their Achievement in Mathematics
Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative
Percentage
64-70 11 5.5 100
57-63 19 9.5 94.5
50-56 38 19 85
43-49 49 24.5 66
36-42 28 14 41.5
29-35 38 19 27.5
22-28 17 8.5 8.5
Total 200 100
Mean: 44.4 Median: 45 Mode: 54 Skewness:0.05
The Table 4.7 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in
Mathematics is 44.4 with median and mode 45 and 54 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The Table 4.7
shows that 68 students with percentage (34%) college students lie above the class intervals in
which mean (44.4) falls. 49 students with percentage (24.5%) lie in the class interval of 43 to
49 in which mean falls and 83 (41.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to
42 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency
distribution comes out to 0.05 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
82
Fig.4.4 Distribution of Scores of Male and Female College Students on the Basis
of their Achievement in Mathematics
Fig 4.4 illustrates that 52 male students and 49 female students lie in the class interval
of 43 to 49, 28 male students and 38 female students find places in the class interval of 50 to
56 and 32 male students and 28 female students secure their places between 36 and 42.
Whereas 14 male students and 11 female students lie in the class interval of 64 to 70 and 23
male students and 17 female students find places in the class interval of 22 to 28.
4.1.7 Achievement in Mathematics of College Students with respect to BA Stream
To study the difference in achievement in mathematics of male and female college
students of BA Stream, data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value
testing significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.8
Table- 4.8
Achievement in Mathematics of Male and Female College Students of BA
Stream
Achievement
in
Mathematics
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 200 43.6 10.54 398 1.12
Female 200 44.8 11.36
*P<0.01
83
As the Table 4.8 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on
achievement in mathematics showing male and female achievement score are 43.6, 44.8 and
10.54, 11.36 respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 398 that resulted t-value to be
1.12 which is in significant at 0.01 levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no
significant difference in achievement in mathematics of college students showing male and
female achievement of BA students.
4.1.8 Achievement in Mathematics of College Students with respect to B.Sc. Stream
To study the difference in achievement in mathematics of male and female college
students of B.Sc Stream, data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value
testing significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.9
Table- 4.9
Achievement in Mathematics of Male and Female College Students of
B.Sc Stream
Achievement
in
Mathematics
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 200 45.02 11.19 398
0.15
Female 200 45.14 10.93
*P<0.01
As the Table 4.9 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on
achievement in mathematics showing male and female achievement score are 45.02, 45.14
and 11.19, 10.93 respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 398 that resulted t-value to
be 0.15 which is in significant at 0.01 levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no
significant difference in achievement in mathematics of college students showing male and
female achievement of B.Sc Students.
4.1.9 Achievement in Mathematics of College Students with respect to B.Com Stream
To study the difference in achievement in mathematics of male and female college
students of B.Com Stream, data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value
testing significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.10
84
Table- 4.10
Achievement in Mathematics of Male and Female College Students of B.Com Stream
Achievement
in
Mathematics
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 200 44.39 11.84 398 .0048
Female 200 44.40 11.58
*P<0.01
Table 4.10 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on
achievement in mathematics showing male and female achievement score. Degree of
freedom came out to be 398 that resulted t-value to be 0.0048 which is in significant at 0.01
levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no significant difference in achievement in
mathematics of college students showing male and female achievement of B.Com Stream.
4.2 DESCRIPTION OF ACHIEVEMENT IN MATHEMATICS AMONG COLLEGE
STUDENTS IN RELATION TO STREAM
4.2.1 Distribution of Scores of College Students of BA Stream on the basis of Achievement in
Mathematics
With the view to interpret the achievement of college students, frequency distribution
along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.11.
Table-4.11
Score of B. A Stream students on the basis of Achievement in Mathematics
Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative
Percentage
64-70 18 4.5 100
57-63 40 10 95.5
50-56 64 16 85.5
43-49 106 26.5 69.5
36-42 71 17.7 43
29-35 75 18.8 25.3
22-28 26 6.5 6.5
Total 400 100
Mean: 44.21 Median: 44 Mode: 45 Skewness: 0.12
85
The Table 4.11 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in
Mathematics is 44.21 with median and mode 44 and 45 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The Table
4.11 shows that 122 (30.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean
(44.21) falls. 106 students with percentage (26.5%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in
which mean falls and 172 (43%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42
that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution
comes out to 0.12 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
4.2.2 Distribution of Scores of College Students of B.Sc Stream on the basis of
Achievement in Mathematics
With the view to interpret the achievement of college students, frequency distribution
along with descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.12.
Table-4.12
Distribution Score of B. Sc Stream students on the
basis of Achievement in Mathematics
Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative
Percentage
64-70 26 6.5 100
57-63 40 10 93.5
50-56 66 16.5 83.5
43-49 114 28.5 67
36-42 69 17.2 38.5
29-35 55 13.8 21.3
22-28 30 7.5 7.5
Total 400 100
Mean: 45.07 Median: 44 Mode: 43 Skewness: 0.08
The Table 4.12 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in
Mathematics is 45.07 with median and mode 44 and 43 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The Table
4.12 shows that 132 (33%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean
86
(45.07) falls. 114 students with percentage (28.5%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in
which mean falls and 154 (38.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42
that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution
comes out to 0.08 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
4.2.3 Distribution of Scores of College Students of B.Com Stream on the basis of
Achievement in Mathematics
With the view to interpret the achievement of college students, frequency distribution
along with descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.13.
Table-4.13
Distribution Score of B.Com Stream students on the
basis of Achievement in Mathematics
Class Interval Frequency Percentage Cumulative
Percentage
64-70 25 6.2 100
57-63 41 10.3 93.8
50-56 66 16.5 83.5
43-49 101 25.2 67
36-42 60 15 41.8
29-35 67 16.8 26.8
22-28 40 10 10
Total 400 100
Mean: 44.4 Median: 44 Mode: 44 Skewness: 0.09
The Table 4.13 reveals that mean score of college students in achievement in
Mathematics is 44.4 with median and mode 44 and 44 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 48.00. The Table
4.13 shows that 132 (33%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (44.4)
falls. 101 students with percentage (25.2%) lie in the class interval of 43 to 49 in which mean
falls and 167 (41.8%) students find their places in the class interval of 22 to 42 that lie below
the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to
0.09 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
87
4.2.4 Achievement in Mathematics of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.14.
Table 4.14
Analysis of Variance for College students of three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 166.6467 2 83.32333 0.660067
Within groups
151102.9 1197 126.2347
Total 151269.6 1199
** Significant at .01 level
The Table 4.14 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 0.66
which is in significant at 0 .01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams.
4.3 DESCRIPTION OF MOTIVATIONAL BELIEFES AMONG COLLEGE
STUDENTS
With the view to interpret the motivational beliefs of college students, frequency
distribution along with descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.15.
Table 4.15
Distribution of Score of Motivational Belief along with different components
(N=1200)
I G O E G O T V C L B S E T A
Class Int. f p f p f p f p f p F p
5.8-7 493 41.0 472 39.3 386 32.2 431 35.9 472 39.3 29 2.4
4.2-5.7 399 33.3 381 31.8 376 31.3 358 29.8 360 30.0 71 5.9
3.6-4.1 174 14.5 193 16.1 226 18.8 219 18.3 212 17.6 306 25.5
2.3-3.5 107 8.9 114 9.5 162 13.5 165 13.8 147 12.3 552 46
2.2-1 27 2.3 40 3.3 50 4.2 27 2.2 9 0.8 242 20.2
Total 1200 100 1200 100 1200 100 1200 100 1200 100 1200 100
88
It is shown by Table 4.15 that all the components of motivational belief IGO, EGO,
TV, CLB, SE, TA of students differ significantly from one another. Hence, the mean scores
of all the students differ significantly from one another. The statistical data shows that 493
students with percentage (41%) college students lie above the class intervals in which IGO
mean (5.21) falls, 472 students with percentage (39.3%) college students lie above the class
intervals in which EGO mean (5.13) falls, 386 students with percentage (32.2%) college
students lie above the class intervals in which TV mean (4.84) falls, 431 students with
percentage (35.9%) college students lie above the class intervals in which CLB mean (4.98)
falls, 472 students with percentage (39.3%) college students lie above the class intervals in
which SE mean (5.13) falls, 406 students with percentage (33.84%) college students lie
above the class intervals in which TA mean (3.22) falls.
Fig.4.5 Distribution of Mean Scores of Motivational Beliefs components
As shown in Figure 4.5 from the mean score values it is concluded that the Test
Anxiety (3.22) among the college students is less compared to other motivational beliefs
parameters, 552 students’ falls in the range of (2.3-3.5). Intrinsic goal orientation (5.21) is the
major factor by which the college students differ from each others, 399 students’ falls in the
range of (4.2-5.7).
4.3.1 Distribution of Score of Motivational Belief along with different components of
Male students (N=600)
With the view to interpret the motivational belief of college students (Male)
descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.16.
89
Table-4.16
Distribution of Score of Motivational Belief of Male Students (N = 600)
Class Int. I G O E G O T V C L B S E T A
5.8-7 234 240 211 199 224 4
4.2-5.7 194 191 186 181 190 30
3.6-4.1 83 79 93 107 113 163
2.3-3.5 66 58 74 88 68 299
1-2.2 23 32 36 25 5 104
Total
Mean 5.09
Median 5.0
Mode 7.0
Skewness
-0.32
Mean 5.11
Median 5.0
Mode 6.0
Skewness
-0.44
Mean 4.90
Median 5.0
Mode 5.0
Skewness
-0.27
Mean 4.80
Median 5.0
Mode 5.0
Skewness
-0.15
Mean 5.09
Median 5.0
Mode 5.0
Skewness
-0.14
Mean 3.21
Median 5.0
Mode 3.0
Skewness
0.49
4.3.2 Distribution of Score of Motivational Belief along with different components of
Female students (N=600)
With the view to interpret the motivational belief of college student (Female)
descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.17.
Table-4.17
Distribution of Score of Motivational Belief of Female students (N=600)
Class Int. I G O E G O T V C L B S E T A
5.8-7 259 232 175 232 248 25
4.2-5.7 205 190 190 177 170 41
3.6-4.1 91 114 133 112 99 143
2.3-3.5 41 56 88 77 79 253
1-2.2 4 8 14 2 4 138
Total
Mean 5.32
Median 5.0
Mode 5.0
Skewness
-0.24
Mean 5.14
Median 5.0
Mode 5.0
Skewness
-0.18
Mean 4.8
Median 5.0
Mode 5.0
Skewness
-0.09
Mean 5.10
Median 5.0
Mode 5.0
Skewness
-0.07
Mean 5.16
Median 5.0
Mode 6.0
Skewness
-0.15
Mean 3.22
Median 5.0
Mode 3.0
Skewness
0.16
90
The Table 4.17 reveals that mean score of college students in motivational belief
Intrinsic goal orientation (IGO) is 5.32 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it
shows the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be
6.0. The Table 4.16 shows that 259 (43.2%) college students lie above the class intervals in
which mean (5.32) falls. 205 students with percentage (34.2%) lie in the class interval of 4.2
to 5.7 in which mean falls and 136 (22.6%) students find their places in the class interval of 1
to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency
distribution comes out to -0.24 means there are many students in a group with their scores
higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Extrinsic goal orientation
(EGO) is 5.14 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively showing that the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical
shows that 232 (38.6%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.14)
falls. 190 students with percentage (31.6%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 178 (29.8%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie
below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes
out to -0.18 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Task Value (TV) is 4.80
with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively. The statistical shows that 175 (29.1%)
college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.80) falls. 190 students with
percentage (31.6%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 235 (39.3%)
students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in
which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.09 means there are
many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Control of Learning beliefs
(CLB) is 5.10 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical
shows that 232 (38.6%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.10)
falls. 177 students with percentage (29.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 191 (31.9%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie
91
below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes
out to -0.07 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Self-efficacy for learning
and performance (SE) is 5.16 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively. The statistical
shows that 248 (41.3%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.16)
falls. 170 students with percentage (28.3%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 182 (30.4%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie
below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes
out to -0.15 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Test Anxiety (TA) is 3.22
with median and mode 5.0 and 3.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 209
(34.8%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (3.22) falls. 253 students
with percentage (42.2%) lie in the class interval of 2.3 to 3.5 in which mean falls and 138
(23.0%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 2.2 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 0.16 means
it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
4.3.3 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Intrinsic Goal Orientation
To study the difference in Motivational Belief (IGO) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.18.
Table- 4.18
Motivational Belief (IGO) of Male and Female College Students
Motivational
Belief
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.09 1.39 1198 3.067 *
Female 600 5.32 1.22
*P<0.01
92
As the Table 4.18 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on
motivational belief (IGO) showing male and female score are 5.09, 5.32 and 1.39, 1.22
respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198. Hence it is interpreted that there
prevails significant difference in motivational belief (IGO) of college students of Punjab.
4.3.4 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Extrinsic Goal Orientation
To study the difference in Motivational Belief (EGO) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.19.
Table- 4.19
Motivational Belief (EGO) of Male and Female College Students
Motivational
Belief
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.11 1.42 1198 0.380
Female 600 5.14 1.28
*P<0.01
As the Table 4.19 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on
motivational belief (EGO) showing male and female score are 5.11, 5.14 and 1.42, 1.28
respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198 that resulted t-value to be 0.380. Hence
it is interpreted that there prevails no significant difference in motivational belief (EGO) of
college students of Punjab.
4.3.5 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Task Value
To study the difference in Motivational Belief (TV) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.20.
Table- 4.20
Motivational Belief (TV) of Male and Female College Students
Motivational
Belief
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 4.90 1.42 1198 1.491
Female 600 4.79 1.24
*P<0.01
93
As the Table 4.20 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on
motivational belief (TV) showing male and female score are 4.90, 4.79and 1.42, 1.24
respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198. Hence it is interpreted that there
prevails no significant difference in motivational belief (TV) of college students of Punjab.
4.3.6 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Control of Learning Belief
To study the difference in Motivational Belief (CLB) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.21.
Table- 4.21
Motivational Belief (CLB) of Male and Female College Students
Motivational
Belief
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 4.86 1.37 1198 3.2*
Female 600 5.10 1.28
*P<0.01
As the Table 4.21 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on
motivational belief (CLB) showing male and female score are 4.86, 5.10 and 1.37, 1.28
respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198 that resulted t-value to be 3.2 which is
Significant at 0.01 levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails significant difference in
motivational belief (CLB) of college students.
4.3.7 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Self Efficacy
To study the difference in Motivational Belief (SE) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.22.
Table- 4.22
Motivational Belief (SE) of Male and Female College Students
Motivational
Belief
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.09 1.26 1198 0.896
Female 600 5.16 1.32
*P<0.01
94
As the Table 4.22 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on
motivational belief (SE) showing male and female score are 5.09, 5.16 and 1.26, 1.32
respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198 that resulted t-value to be 0.896 which
is in Significant at 0.01 levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no significant
difference in motivational belief (SE) of college students of Punjab pursuing the studies in
different streams namely art, commerce, Science.
4.3.8 Motivational Belief of College Students with respect to Test Anxiety
To study the difference in Motivational Belief (TA) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.23.
Table- 4.23
Motivational Belief (TA) of Male and Female College Students
Motivational
Belief
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 3.21 0.84 1198 0.263
Female 600 3.22 1.13
*P<0.01
As the Table 4.23 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students on
motivational belief (TA) showing male and female score are 3.21, 3.22 and 0.84, 1.13
respectively. Degree of freedom came out to be 1198 that resulted t-value to be 0.263 which
is in Significant at 0.01 levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no significant
difference in motivational belief (TA) of college students of Punjab.
4.4 DESCRIPTION OF MOTIVATIONAL BELIEFES AMONG COLLEGE
STUDENTS IN RELATION TO STREAM
4.4.1 Distribution Score of Motivational Belief along with different component of
(B.A) students (N=400)
With the view to interpret the motivational belief of college students (B.A)
descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.24.
95
Table-4.24
Distribution Score of Motivational Belief along with different components
of (BA) students (N=400)
Class Int. I G O E G O T V C L B S E T A
5.8-7.0 183 124 84 121 148 8
4.2-5.7 107 112 124 107 142 25
3.6-4.1 46 67 89 78 61 80
2.3-3.5 45 66 66 70 48 161
1.0-2.2 19 31 37 24 1 126
TOTAL
Mean 5.19
Median
5.0
Mode 7.0
Skewness
-0.47
Mean
4.70
Median
5.0
Mode 5.0
Skewness
-0.12
Mean
4.42
Median
4.5
Mode 5.0
Skewness
-0.02
Mean
4.71
Median
5.0
Mode 4.0
Skewness
-0.02
Mean
5.11
Median
5.0
Mode 6.0
Skewness
-0.04
Mean
2.99
Median
3.0
Mode 3.0
Skewness
0.61
The Table 4.24 reveals that mean score of college students in motivational belief
Intrinsic goal orientation (IGO) is 5.19 with median and mode 5.0 and 7.0 respectively it
shows the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be
6.0. The Table 4.24 shows that 183 (45.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in
which mean (5.19) falls. 107 students with percentage (26.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2
to 5.7 in which mean falls and 110 (27.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1
to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency
distribution comes out to -0.47 means there are many students in a group with their scores
higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Extrinsic goal orientation
(EGO) is 4.70 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical
shows that 124 (31%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.70)
falls. 112 students with percentage (28%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean
96
falls and 164 (41%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below
the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -
0.12 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score
of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Task Value (TV) is 4.42
with median and mode 4.5 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 84
(21%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.42) falls. 124 students
with percentage (31%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 192
(48%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.02
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Control of Learning beliefs
(CLB) is 4.71 with median and mode 5.0 and 4.0 respectively showing that the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical
shows that 121 (30.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.71)
falls. 107 students with percentage (26.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 172(43%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie
below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes
out to -0.02 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Self-efficacy for learning
and performance (SE) is 5.11 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively showing that
the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0.
The statistical shows that 148 (37%) college students lie above the class intervals in which
mean (5.11) falls. 142 students with percentage (35.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7
in which mean falls and 110 (27.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1
that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution
comes out to -0.04 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
97
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Test Anxiety (TA) is 2.99
with median and mode 3.0 and 3.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 113
(28.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (2.99) falls. 161
students with percentage (40.25%) lie in the class interval of 2.3 to 3.5 in which mean falls
and 126 (31.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 2.2 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 0.61
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
Fig.4.6 Distribution of Mean Scores of Motivational Beliefs components
As shown in Figure 4.6 from the mean score values it is concluded that the Test
Anxiety (2.99) among the BA college students is less compared to other motivational beliefs
parameters, 161 students’ falls in the range of (2.3-3.5). Intrinsic goal orientation (5.21) is the
major factor by which the BA college students differ from each others, 107 students’ falls in
the range of (4.2-5.7).
4.4.2 Distribution Score of Motivational Belief along with different component of
(B.Sc) students (N=400)
With the view to interpret the motivational belief of college students (B.Sc)
descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.25.
98
Table-4.25
Distribution Score of Motivational Belief along with different components
Of (B.Sc) students (N=400)
Class Int. I G O E G O T V C L B S E T A
5.8-7.0 163 164 164 160 145 1
4.2-5.7 132 139 127 131 142 41
3.6-4.1 59 66 60 64 59 106
2.3-3.5 37 28 43 44 49 197
1.0-2.2 9 3 6 1 5 55
TOTAL
Mean 5.19
Median 5
Mode 6
Skewness
-0.40
Mean 5.26
Median 5
Mode 6
Skewness
-0.33
Mean
5.15
Median 5
Mode 6
Skewness
-0.23
Mean
5.18
Median 5
Mode 5
Skewness
-0.10
Mean
5.08
Median 5
Mode 5
Skewness
-0.13
Mean
3.32
Median
3.1
Mode 3
Skewness
0.147
The Table 4.25 reveals that mean score of college students in motivational belief
Intrinsic goal orientation (IGO) is 5.19 with median and mode 5 and 6 respectively it shows
the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0.
The Table 4.25 shows that 163 (40.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in
which mean (5.19) falls. 132 students with percentage (33%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to
5.7 in which mean falls and 105 (26.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1
to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency
distribution comes out to -0.40 means there are many students in a group with their scores
higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Extrinsic goal orientation
(EGO) is 5.26 with median and mode 5 and 6 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly
in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows
that 164 (41%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.26) falls. 139
students with percentage (34.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
99
and 97 (24.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.33
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Task Value (TV) is
5.15with median and mode 5 and 6 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 164
(41%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.15) falls. 127 students
with percentage (31.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 109
(27.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.23
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Control of Learning beliefs
(CLB) is 5.18 with median and mode 5 and 5 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly
in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows
that 160 (40%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.18) falls. 131
students with percentage (32.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 109 (27.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.10
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Self-efficacy for learning
and performance (SE) is 5.08 with median and mode 5 and 5 respectively showing that the
scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The
statistical shows that 145 (36.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which
mean (5.11) falls. 142 students with percentage (35.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7
in which mean falls and 113 (28.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to
4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency
distribution comes out to -0.13 means there are many students in a group with their scores
higher than the average score of the group.
100
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Test Anxiety (TA) is 3.32
with median and mode 3.1 and 3 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 148
(37%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (3.32) falls. 197 students
with percentage (49.25%) lie in the class interval of 2.3 to 3.5 in which mean falls and 55
(13.75%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 2.2 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 0.147
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
Fig.4.7 Distribution of Mean Scores of Motivational Beliefs components of B.Sc
College Students
As shown in Figure 4.7 from the mean score values it is concluded that the Test
Anxiety (3.32) among the B.Sc college students is less compared to other motivational
beliefs parameters, 197 students’ falls in the range of (2.3-3.5). Extrinsic goal orientation
(5.26) is the major factor by which the B.Sc college students differ from each others, 139
students’ falls in the range of (4.2-5.7).
4.4.3 Distribution Score of Motivational Belief along with different components of
(B.Com) students (N=400)
With the view to interpret the motivational belief of B.Com college students
descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.26.
101
Table-4.26
Distribution Score of Motivational Belief along with different components
of (B.Com) students (N=400)
Class Int. I G O E G O T V C L B S E T A
5.8-7 155 180 151 165 171 21
4.2-5.7 147 139 136 128 126 31
3.6-4.1 68 50 70 71 67 106
2.3-3.5 30 28 40 35 35 190
1.0-2.2 ---- 3 3 1 ------ 52
TOTAL
Mean 5.24
Median 5
Mode 5
Skewness
-0.09
Mean 5.40
Median
5.5
Mode 5
Skewness
-0.39
Mean
5.11
Median 5
Mode 5
Skewness
-0.151
Mean
5.21
Median 5
Mode 5
Skewness
-0.167
Mean
5.27
Median5
Mode 6
Skewness
-0.187
Mean
3.44
Median 3
Mode 3
Skewness
1.01
The Table 4.26 reveals that mean score of college students in motivational belief
Intrinsic goal orientation (IGO) is 5.24 with median and mode 5 and 5 respectively. The
Table 4.26 shows that 155 (38.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which
mean (5.24) falls. 147 students with percentage (36.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7
in which mean falls and 98 (24.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1
that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution
comes out to -0.09means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Extrinsic goal orientation
(EGO) is 5.40 with median and mode 5.5 and 5 respectively. The statistical shows that 180
(45%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.40) falls. 139 students
with percentage (34.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 81
(20.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.39
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
102
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Task Value (TV) is
5.11with median and mode 5 and 5 respectively. The statistical shows that 151 (37.75%)
college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.15) falls. 136 students with
percentage (34%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 113 (28.25%)
students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in
which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.15 means there are
many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Control of Learning beliefs
(CLB) is 5.21 with median and mode 5 and 5 respectively. The statistical shows that 165
(41.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.18) falls. 128
students with percentage (32%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and
107 (26.75%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.16
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Self-efficacy for learning
and performance (SE) is 5.27 with median and mode 5 and 6 respectively. The statistical
shows that 171 (42.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.27)
falls. 126 students with percentage (31.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 102 (25.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie
below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes
out to -0.18 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in motivational belief Test Anxiety (TA) is 3.44
with median and mode 3 and 3 respectively. The statistical shows that 158 (39.5%) college
students lie above the class intervals in which mean (3.32) falls. 190 students with percentage
(47.5%) lie in the class interval of 2.3 to 3.5 in which mean falls and 52 (13%) students find
their places in the class interval of 1 to 2.2 that lie below the class interval in which mean
falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to 1.01 means it is nearly normal
distribution of scores.
103
Fig.4.8 Distribution of Mean Scores of Motivational Beliefs components of
B.Com College Students
As shown in Figure 4.8 from the mean score values it is concluded that the Test
Anxiety (3.44) among the B.Com college students is less compared to other motivational
beliefs parameters, 190 students’ falls in the range of (2.3-3.5). Extrinsic goal orientation
(5.40) is the major factor by which the B.Com college students differ from each others, 139
students’ falls in the range of (4.2-5.7).
4.4.4 Motivational Belief (IGO) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.27.
Table 4.27
Analysis of Variance of (IGO) for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 0.612163 2 0.306082 0.176103
Within groups 2080.483 1197 1.738081
Total 2081.096 1199
** Significant at .01 level
104
The Table 4.27 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 0.17
which is in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams.
4.4.5 Motivational Belief (EGO) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.28.
Table 4.28
Analysis of Variance of (EGO) for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 107.9364 2 53.96818 31.79631841
Within groups 2031.679 1197 1.697309
Total 2139.615 1199
** Significant at .01 level
The Table 4.28 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 31.78
which are in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams.
4.4.6 Motivational Belief (TV) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA were applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.29.
Table 4.29
Analysis of Variance of (TV) for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 136.5308 2 68.26541 42.0092576
Within groups 1945.136 1197 1.625009
Total 2081.666 1199
The Table 4.29 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 42.01
which are in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams.
105
4.4.7 Motivational Belief (CLB) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.26.
Table 4.30
Analysis of Variance of (CLB) for College students of three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 63.10811 2 31.55405625 18.44471239
Within groups 2047.752 1197 1.710737234
Total 2110.861 1199
** Significant at .01 level
The Table 4.30 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 18.45
which is in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams
4.4.8 Motivational Belief (SE) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.31.
Table 4.31
Analysis of Variance of (SE) for College students of three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 8.048362 2 4.024181083 2.568841323
Within groups 1875.143 1197 1.566535484
Total 1883.191 1199
** Significant at .01 level
The Table 4.31 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 2.57
which is in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams.
4.4.9 Motivational Belief (TA) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.32.
106
Table 4.32
Analysis of Variance of (TA) for College students of three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 42.43072 2 21.21536 21.06457
Within groups 1205.568 1197 1.007158
Total 1247.999 1199
** Significant at .01 level
The Table 4.32 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 21.06
which is in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams.
4.5 DESCRIPTION OF LEARNING STRATEGIES AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS IN
RELATION TO GENDER
4.5.1 Distribution of Score of Learning Strategies along with different components of Male
students (N=600)
With the view to interpret the Learning Strategies of Male college students
descriptive statistics were derived as given in Table 4.33.
Table-4.33
Distribution of Score of Learning Strategies of Male students (N=600)
CLASS
INTERVAL
REH ELA ORG CRI
TH
SELF
REG
STU
HAB
EFF
REG
PEER
LEA
HELP
SEEKING
5.8-7.0 219 211 227 208 225 223 237 233 244
4.2-5.7 233 229 191 200 206 214 209 195 179
3.6-4.1 109 95 108 121 109 115 100 112 122
2.3-3.5 35 58 65 65 58 47 52 56 50
1.0-2.2 4 7 9 6 2 1 2 4 5
TOTAL M5.17
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.168
M5.08
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.165
M5.09
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.138
M5.08
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.03
M5.12
Md 5
Mo 6
SK
-0.06
M 5.17
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
0.007
M5.18
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.133
M5.13
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.111
M5.18
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.147
107
The Table 4.33 reveals that mean (M) score of college students in learning strategies
(REH) is 5.17 with median (Md) and mode (Mo) 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores
lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table
4.33 shows that 219 (36.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean
(5.17) falls. 233 students with percentage (39%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 148 (24.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie
below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness (SK) of the frequency distribution
comes out to -0.16 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies (ELA) is 5.08 with median
and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal distribution
whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 211 (35.1%)
college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.11) falls. 229 students with
percentage (38.1%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 160 (26.6%)
students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in
which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.16 means there are
many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies (ORG) is 5.09 with median
and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal distribution
whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 227 (37.8%)
college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.90) falls. 191 students with
percentage (31.8%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 182 (30.3%)
students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in
which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.01 means there are
many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies (CRI THI) is 5.08 with
median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 208
(34.6%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.08) falls. 200 students
with percentage (33.3%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 192
(32s%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
108
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.03
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Self-regulation for learning
and performance (S REG) is 5.25 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing
that the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be
6.0. The statistical shows that 225 (37.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in
which mean (5.09) falls. 206 students with percentage (34.3%) lie in the class interval of 4.2
to 5.7 in which mean falls and 169 (28.1%) students find their places in the class interval of 1
to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency
distribution comes out to -0.06 means there are many students in a group with their scores
higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies study habit is 5.17 with
median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 223
(37%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.17) falls. 214 students
with percentage (36%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 163
(27%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.007
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Effort Regulation is 5.18
with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 237
(39.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.18) falls. 209 students
with percentage (35%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 154
(25.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.13
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Peer Learning is 5.13 with
median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 233
109
(39%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.13) falls. 195 students
with percentage (32.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 172
(28.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.11
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Help Seeking is 5.18 with
median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 244
(40.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.18) falls. 179 students
with percentage (30%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 177
(29.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.14
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
Fig.4.9 Distribution of Mean Scores of Learning Strategies components of Male
College Students
As shown in Figure 4.9 from the mean score values it is concluded that the
Elaboration and Critical Thinking (5.08) among the Male college students is less compared to
other Learning Strategies parameters. Effort Regulation and Help Seeking (5.18) is the major
factor by which the Male college students differ from each others.
110
4.5.2 Distribution of Score of Learning Strategies along with different components of
Female students (N=600)
With the view to interpret the Learning Strategy of Female college students
descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.34.
Table-4.34
Distribution of Score of Learning Strategies along with different components
Of Female students (N=600)
CLASS
INTERVAL
REH ELA ORG CRI
TH
SELF
REG
STU
HAB
EFF
REG
PEER
LEA
HELP
SEEKING
5.8-7.0 213 241 218 226 202 236 226 214 212
4.2-5.7 222 215 200 206 239 213 207 214 198
3.6-4.1 96 81 113 107 109 106 106 111 119
2.3-3.5 62 58 64 56 47 44 60 57 66
1.0-2.2 7 5 5 5 3 1 1 4 5
TOTAL M5.07
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.168
M5.21
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.19
M5.10
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.050
M5.10
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.120
M5.08
Md 5
Mo 6
SK
-0.04
M 5.24
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.11
M5.13
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.060
M5.08
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.08
M5.04
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.04
The Table 4.34 reveals that mean score (M) of college students in learning strategies
( REH) is 5.07 with median (Md) and mode (Mo) 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores
lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table
4.34 shows that 212 (35.3%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean
(5.17) falls. 222 students with percentage (37.2%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in
which mean falls and 165 (27.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1
that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness (SK) of the frequency
distribution comes out to -0.16 means there are many students in a group with their scores
higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies (ELA) is 5.21 with median
and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal distribution
whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 241 (40.1%)
111
college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.21) falls. 215 students with
percentage (35.8%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 144 (24.1%)
students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in
which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.19 means there are
many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies (ORG) is 5.10 with median
and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal distribution
whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 218 (36%) college
students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.10) falls. 210 students with percentage
(35%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 182 (30%) students find
their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean
falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.05 means there are many
students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies (CRI THI) is 5.10 with
median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 226
(37.6%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.08) falls. 206 students
with percentage (34.4%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 168
(28%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.12
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Self-regulation for learning
and performance (SELF REG) is 5.08 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively
showing that the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came
out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 202 (33.6%) college students lie above the class
intervals in which mean (5.08) falls. 239 students with percentage (40%) lie in the class
interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 159 (26.4%) students find their places in the
class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the
frequency distribution comes out to -0.04 means there are many students in a group with
their scores higher than the average score of the group.
112
The mean score of college students in learning strategies study habit is 5.24 with
median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 236
(39.3%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.24) falls. 213 students
with percentage (35.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 151
(25.2%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.11
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Effort Regulation is 5.13
with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 226
(37.6%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.13) falls. 207 students
with percentage (34.6%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 167
(27.8%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.06
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Peer Learning is 5.08 with
median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 214
(36%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.08) falls. 214 students
with percentage (36%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 172
(28%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.08
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Help Seeking is 5.04 with
median and mode 3.0 and 5.0 respectively showing that the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The statistical shows that 212
(35.4%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.04) falls. 198 students
with percentage (33%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 190
(31.6%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
113
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.08
means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
Fig.4.10 Distribution of Mean Scores of Learning Strategies components of
Female College Students
As shown in Figure 4.10 from the mean score values it is concluded that the Help
Seeking (5.04) and Rehearsal (5.07) among the Female college students is less compared to
other Learning Strategies parameters. Study Effort and Elaboration (5.21) is the major factor
by which the Female college students differ from each others.
4.5.3 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Rehearsal
To study the difference in Learning Strategy (REH) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.35.
Table- 4.35
Learning Strategy (REH) of Male and Female College Students
Learning
Strategy
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.17 1.09 1198 1.85
Female 600 5.07 1.23
*P<0.01
114
As the Table 4.35 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students
showing male and female score are 5.17, 5.07 and 1.09, 1.23 respectively. Degree of freedom
came out to be 1198 that resulted t-value to be 1.85. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails
no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (REH) of college students of Punjab.
4.5.4 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Elaboration
To study the difference in Learning Strategy (ELA) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.36.
Table- 4.36
Learning Strategy (ELA) of Male and Female College Students
Learning
Strategy
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.08 1.19 1198 3.53*
Female 600 5.21 1.21
*P<0.01
As the Table 4.36 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students
showing male and female score are 5.08, 5.21 and 1.19, 1.21 respectively. Degree of freedom
came out to be 1198 that resulting t-value to be 3.53 which is significant at 0.01 levels.
Hence it is interpreted that there prevails significant gender difference in Learning Strategy
(ELA) of college students of Punjab.
4.5.5 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Organization
To study the difference in Learning Strategy (ORG) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.37.
Table- 4.37
Learning Strategy (ORG) of Male and Female College Students
Learning
Strategy
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.09 1.28 1198 0.158
Female 600 5.10 1.25
*P<0.01
115
As the Table 4.37 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students
showing male and female score are 5.09, 5.10 and 1.28, 1.25 respectively. Degree of freedom
came out to be 1198 that resulting t-value to be 0.158. Hence it is interpreted that there
prevails no gender significant difference in Learning Strategy (ORG) of students of Punjab.
4.5.6 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Critical Thinking
To study the difference in Learning Strategy (CT) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.38.
Table- 4.38
Learning Strategy (CT) of Male and Female College Students
Learning
Strategy
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.08 1.23 1198 0.316
Female 600 5.10 1.18
*P<0.01
As the Table 4.38 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students
showing male and female score are 5.08, 5.10 and 1.23, 1.18 respectively. Degree of freedom
came out to be 1198 that is resulting t-value to be 0.316. Hence it is interpreted that there
prevails no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (CT) of students of Punjab.
4.5.7 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Self Regulation
To study the difference in Learning Strategy (SR) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.39.
Table- 4.39
Learning Strategy (SR) of Male and Female College Students
Learning
Strategy
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.12 1.19 1198 0.633
Female 600 5.08 1.13
*P<0.01
116
As the Table 4.39 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students
showing male and female score are 5.12, 5.08 and 1.19, 1.13 respectively. Degree of freedom
came out to be 1198 that is resulting t-value to be 0.633. Hence it is interpreted that there
prevails no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (SR) of students of Punjab.
4.5.8 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Study Habit
To study the difference in Learning Strategy (SH) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.40.
Table- 4.40
Learning Strategy (SH) of Male and Female College Students
Learning
Strategy
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.17 1.16 1198 1.046
Female 600 5.24 1.17
*P<0.01
As the Table 4.40 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students
showing male and female score are 5.17, 5.24 and 1.16, 1.17 respectively. Degree of freedom
came out to be 1198 that is resulting t-value to be 1.046. Hence it is interpreted that there
prevails no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (SH) of students of Punjab.
4.5.9 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Effort Regulation
To study the difference in Learning Strategy (ER) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.41.
Table- 4.41
Learning Strategy (ER) of Male and Female College Students
Learning
Strategy
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.18 1.17 1198 0.0771
Female 600 5.13 1.18
*P<0.01
117
As the Table 4.41 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students
showing male and female score are 5.18, 5.13 and 1.17, 1.18 respectively. Degree of freedom
came out to be 1198 that is resulting t-value to be 0.0771. Hence it is interpreted that there
prevails no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (ER) of students of Punjab.
4.5.10 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect to Peer Learning
To study the difference in Learning Strategy (PL) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.42.
Table- 4.42
Learning Strategy (PL) of Male and Female College Students
Learning
Strategy
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.13 1.20 1198 0.746
Female 600 5.08 1.16
*P<0.01
As the Table 4.42 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students
showing male and female score are 5.13, 5.08 and 1.20, 1.16 respectively. Degree of freedom
came out to be 1198 that is resulting t-value to be 0.746 . Hence it is interpreted that there
prevails no significant gender difference in Learning Strategy (PL) of students of Punjab.
4.5.11 Learning Strategy of College Students with respect Help Seeking
To study the difference in Learning Strategy (HS) of male and female college
Students data were compared. The mean scores and SDs along with t-value testing
significance of mean difference is given in Table 4.43.
Table- 4.43
Learning Strategy (HL) of Male and Female College Students
Learning
Strategy
N Mean SD df t-value
Male 600 5.18 1.24 1198 1.98
Female 600 5.04 1.21
*P<0.01
118
As the Table 4.43 demonstrates the mean values and SDs of the college students
showing male and female score are 5.18, 5.04 and 1.24, 1.21 respectively. Degree of freedom
came out to be 1198 that is resulting t-value to be 1.98 which is in significant at 0.01
levels. Hence it is interpreted that there prevails no gender significant difference in Learning
Strategy (HS) of college students of Punjab.
4.6 DESCRIPTION OF LEARNING STRATEGIES AMONG COLLEGE
STUDENTS IN RELATION TO STREAM
4.6.1 Distribution Score of Learning Strategies along with different components of (BA)
students (N=400)
With the view to interpret the learning strategies of college students (BA) descriptive
statistics were derived as given in Table 4.44.
Table-4.44
Distribution Score of Learning Strategies along with different components
Of (BA) students (N=400)
CLASS
INTERVAL
REH ELA ORG CRI
TH
SELF
REG
STU
HAB
EFF
REG
PEER
LEA
HELP
SEEKING
5.8-7.0 129 146 134 129 128 136 158 137 147
4.2-5.7 141 150 128 154 155 151 133 140 108
3.6-4.1 81 63 71 79 72 85 72 80 91
2.3-3.5 42 39 61 37 42 28 37 41 54
1.0-2.2 7 2 6 1 3 ---- ---- 2 ----
TOTAL M4.96
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.160
M5.14
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.09
M4.93
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.08
M5.02
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
0.11
M5.00
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.01
M 5.12
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
0.11
M5.16
Md 5
Mo 6
SK
-0.07
M5.04
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
0.027
M5.00
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
0.09
The Table 4.44 reveals that mean (M) score of college students in learning strategies
Rehearsal (REH) is 4.96 with median (Md) and mode (Mo) 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows
the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0.
The Table 4.44 shows that 129 (32.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in
which mean (4.96) falls. 141 students with percentage (35.25%) lie in the class interval of 4.2
119
to 5.7 in which mean falls and 130 (32.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1
to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness (SK) of the frequency
distribution comes out to -0.16 means there are many students in a group with their scores
higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Elaboration (ELA) is 5.14
with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical data shows that
146 (36.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.14) falls. 150
students with percentage (37.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 104 (26%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.09
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Organization (ORG) is 4.93
with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical data shows that
134 (33.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.93) falls. 128
students with percentage (32%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and
138 (34.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.08
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Critical Thinking (CRI TH)
is 5.02 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in
normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical data
shows that 129 (32.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.02)
falls. 154 students with percentage (38.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 117 (29.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie
below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes
out to 0.11 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
120
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Self Regulation (SELF
REG) is 5.00 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in
normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical data
shows that 128 (32%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.00)
falls. 155 students with percentage (38.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 117 (34.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie
below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes
out to -0.01 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Study Habit (STU HAB) is
5.12 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical data shows that
136 (34%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.12) falls. 151
students with percentage (37.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 113 (28.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.11
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Effort Regulation (EFF
REG) is 5.16 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in
normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical data
shows that 158 (39.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.16)
falls. 133 students with percentage (33.25%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 109 (27S.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that
lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution
comes out to -0.07 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Peer Learning (PEER
LEG) is 5.04 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in
normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical data
shows that 137 (34.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.04)
121
falls. 140 students with percentage (35%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean
falls and 122 (30.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below
the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to
0.027 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Help Seeking (HELP
SEEKING) is 5.00 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Statistical
data shows that 147 (36.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean
(5.00) falls. 108 students with percentage (27%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 145 (36.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie
below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes
out to 0.09 means it is nearly normal distribution of scores.
Fig.4.11 Distribution of Mean Scores of Learning Strategies components of BA
College Students
As shown in Figure 4.11 from the mean score values it is concluded that the
Organization (4.93) and Rehearsal (4.96) among the BA college students is less compared to
other Learning Strategies parameters. Effort Regulation (5.16) and Elaboration (5.14) is the
major factor by which the BA college students differ from each others.
122
4.6.2 Distribution Score of Learning Strategies along with different components of
(B.Com) students (N=400)
With the view to interpret the learning strategies of college students (B.Com)
descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.45.
Table-4.45
Distribution Score of Learning Strategies along with different components
Of (B.Com) students (N=400)
CLASS
INTERVAL
REH ELA ORG CRI
TH
SELF
REG
STU
HAB
EFF
REG
PEER
LEA
HELP
SEEKING
5.8-7.0 159 180 175 175 147 155 161 170 164
4.2-5.7 152 156 141 136 154 150 149 155 147
3.6-4.1 60 41 62 63 70 66 58 51 69
2.3-3.5 29 23 22 26 29 29 31 24 20
1.0-2.2 ---- ---- ---- ------ ---- --- 1 -- ---
TOTAL M5.23
Md 5
Mo 6
SK
-0.09
M5.43
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.09
M4.93
Md5.5
Mo 6
SK
-0.23
M5.33
Md 5
Mo 6
SK
-0.19
M5.16
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.06
M 5.22
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.08
M5.27
Md 5
Mo 6
SK
-0.11
M5.35
Md5
Mo 5
SK
0.027
M5.00
Md 5.0
Mo 5
SK
-0.06
The Table 4.45 reveals that mean (M) score of college students in learning strategies
Rehearsal (REH) is 5.23 with median (Md) and mode (Mo) 5.0 and 6.0 respectively it shows
the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0.
The Table 4.45 shows that 159 (39.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in
which mean (5.23) falls. 152 students with percentage (38%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to
5.7 in which mean falls and 89 (22.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to
4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency
distribution comes out to -0.09 means there are many students in a group with their scores
higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Elaboration (ELA) is 5.43
with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.45 shows that 180
123
(45%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.43) falls. 156 students
with percentage (39%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 64 (16%)
students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in
which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.23 means there are
many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Organization (ORG) is 4.93
with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.45 shows that 175
(43.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.93) falls. 141
students with percentage (35.25%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 84 (21%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.11
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Critical Thinking (CRI TH)
is 5.33 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in
normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.45 shows
that 175 (43.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.33) falls.
136 students with percentage (34%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 89 (22.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.19
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Self Regulation (SELF
REG) is 5.16 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in
normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.45 shows
that 147 (36.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.16) falls.
154 students with percentage (38.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean
falls and 99 (24.75%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below
the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -
124
0.06 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score
of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Study Habit (STU HAB) is
5.22 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.45 shows that 155
(38.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.22) falls. 150
students with percentage (37.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 95 (23.75%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.08
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Effort Regulation (EFF
REG) is 5.27 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in
normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.45 shows
that 161 (40.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.27) falls.
149 students with percentage (37.25%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean
falls and 90 (22.5%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below
the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -
0.11 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score
of the group.
The that mean score of college students in learning strategies Peer Learning (PEER
LER) is 5.35 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in
normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.45 shows
that 170 (42.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.35) falls. 155
students with percentage (38.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 75 (18.75%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -
0.027 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average
score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Help Seeking (HELP
SEEKING) is 5.00 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie
125
nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.45
shows that 164 (41%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.00)
falls. 147 students with percentage (36.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which
mean falls and 116 (29%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie
below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes
out to - 0.06 means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the
average score of the group.
Fig.4.12 Distribution of Mean Scores of Learning Strategies components of
B.Com College Students
As shown in Figure 4.12 from the mean score values it is concluded that the
Organization (4.93) and Help Seeking (4.96) among the B.Com college students is less
compared to other Learning Strategies parameters. Elaboration (5.43) and Peer Learning
(5.35) is the major factor by which the B.Com college students differ from each others.
4.6.3 Distribution Score of Learning Strategies along with different components of
(B.Sc) students (N=400)
With the view to interpret the learning strategies of college students (B.Sc)
descriptive statistics are derived as given in Table 4.46.
126
Table-4.46
Distribution Score of Learning Strategies along with different components
of (B.Sc) students (N=400)
CLASS
INTERVAL
REH ELA ORG CRI
TH
SELF
REG
STU
HAB
EFF
REG
PEER
LEA
HELP
SEEKING
5.8-7 137 144 149 152 171 162 158 156 169
4.2-5.7 150 144 123 107 120 129 117 111 115
3.6-4.1 70 60 72 75 62 63 74 82 64
2.3-3.5 38 47 52 58 39 43 47 46 45
1-2.2 5 5 4 8 8 3 4 5 7
TOTAL M5.05
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.15
M5.07
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.18
M5.06
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.06
M4.99
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.11
M5.20
Md 5
Mo 6
SK
-0.31
M 5.19
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.21
M5.10
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.13
M5.07
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.10
M5.16
Md 5
Mo 5
SK
-0.31
The Table 4.46 reveals that mean (M) score of college students in learning strategies
Rehearsal (REH) is 5.05 with median (Md) and mode (Mo) 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows
the scores lie nearly in normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0.
The Table 4.46 shows that 137(34.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in
which mean (5.05) falls. 150 students with percentage (37.5%) lie in the class interval of 4.2
to 5.7 in which mean falls and 113 (28.25%) students find their places in the class interval of
1 to 4.1 that lie below the class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency
distribution comes out to -0.15means there are many students in a group with their scores
higher than the average score of the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Elaboration (ELA) is 5.07
with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.46 shows that 144
(36%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.07) falls. 144 students
with percentage (36%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 112
(28%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.18
127
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Organization (ORG) is 5.06
with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.46 shows that 149
(37.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.06) falls. 123
students with percentage (30.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 128 (32%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.06
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Critical Thinking (CRI TH)
is 4.99 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in
normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.46 shows
that 152 (38%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (4.99) falls. 107
students with percentage (26.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 141 (35.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.11
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Self Regulation (SELF
REG) is 5.20 with median and mode 5.0 and 6.0 respectively. The Table 4.46 shows that 171
(42.75%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.20) falls. 120
students with percentage (30%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and
109 (27.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.31
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Study Habit (STU HAB) is
5.19 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in normal
distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.46 shows that 162
128
(40.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.19) falls. 129 students
with percentage (32.25%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 109
(27.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.21
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Effort Regulation (EFF
REG) is 5.10 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0 respectively it shows the scores lie nearly in
normal distribution whereas range of the scores came out to be 6.0. The Table 4.46 shows
that 158 (39.5%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.10) falls. 117
students with percentage (29.25%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 125 (31.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.13
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Peer Learning (PEER
LER) is 5.07 with median and mode 5.0 and 5.0. The Table 4.46 shows that 156 (39%)
college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.07) falls. 111 students with
percentage (27.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls and 133
(33.25%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the class
interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to -0.10
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
The mean score of college students in learning strategies Help Seeking (HELP
SEEKING) is 5.16 with median and mode 5.0 and 5. The Table 4.46 shows that 169
(42.25%) college students lie above the class intervals in which mean (5.16) falls. 115
students with percentage (28.75%) lie in the class interval of 4.2 to 5.7 in which mean falls
and 116 (29%) students find their places in the class interval of 1 to 4.1 that lie below the
class interval in which mean falls. Skewness of the frequency distribution comes out to- 0.31
means there are many students in a group with their scores higher than the average score of
the group.
129
Fig.4.13 Distribution of Mean Scores of Learning Strategies components of B.Sc
College Students
As shown in Figure 4.13 from the mean score values it is concluded that the Critical
Thinking (4.99) and Rehearsal (5.05) among the B.Sc college students is less compared to
other Learning Strategies parameters. Self Regulation (5.20) and Study Habit (5.19) is the
major factor by which the B.Sc college students differ from each others.
4.6.4 Learning Strategies (REH) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.47.
Table 4.47
Analysis of Variance for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 15.32228
2
7.66113958
5.571849214
Within groups 1645.842 1197
1.37497253
Total
1661.164 1199
** Significant at .01 level
130
The Table 4.47 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 5.57
which is in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams
4.6.5 Learning Strategies (ELA) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.48.
Table 4.48
Analysis of Variance for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 28.93625
2
14.46812
10.31843013
Within groups 1678.39 1197
1.402163 Total 1707.326 1199
** Significant at .01 level
The Table 4.48 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 10.31
which is in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams.
4.6.6 Learning Strategies (ORG) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.49.
Table 4.49
Analysis of Variance for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 42.15559
2
21.07779375
13.46257
Within groups 1874.093 1197
1.56565849
Total
1916.249 1199
131
The Table 4.49 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is which is
13.46 in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams.
4.6.7 Learning Strategies (CRI THI) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.50.
Table 4.50
Analysis of Variance for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 28.64987
2
14.32493
9.740581
Within groups 1760.362 1197 1.470645
Total 1789.011 1199
** Significant at .01 level
The Table 4.50 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is 9.74
which is in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant
difference among the college students of three streams.
4.6.8 Learning Strategies (SELF REG) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.51.
Table 4.51
Analysis of Variance for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 8.589834
2
4.29491725
2.987015
Within groups 1721.121 1197 1.437862398
Total 1729.711 1199
** Significant at .01 level
132
The Table 4.51 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is which is
2.98 in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant difference
among the college students of three streams.
4.6.9 Learning Strategies (STUDY HABIT) of College Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.52.
Table 4.52
Analysis of Variance for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 1.92434
2
0.9621701
0.685806824
Within groups 1679.362 1197 1.4029754
Total 1681.286 1199
** Significant at .01 level
The Table 4.52 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is which is
0.68 in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant difference
among the college students of three streams.
4.6.10 Learning Strategies (EFFORT REGULATION) of Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.53.
Table 4.53
Analysis of Variance for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 6.123322
2
3.061661
2.0880613
Within groups 1755.125 1197
1.46627 Total 1761.248 1199
** Significant at .01 level
133
The Table 4.53 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is which is
2.08 in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant difference
among the college students of three streams.
4.6.11 Learning Strategies (PEER LEARNING) of Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA was applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.54.
Table 4.54
Analysis of Variance for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 22.80042
2
11.40021
7.995438278
Within groups 1706.729 1197 1.425839
Total 1729.53 1199
** Significant at .01 level
The Table 4.54 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is which is
7.99 in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant difference
among the college students of three streams
4.6.12 Learning Strategies (HELP SEEKING) of Students with respect to Stream
To ascertain the significance of the difference among means of the three streams, one-
way ANOVA is applied. The summary of the ANOVA is shown in Table 4.55.
Table 4.55
Analysis of Variance for College Students among three Streams
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Sum
of Squares
F
Among groups 20.48778
2
10.243888
6.736112
Within groups 1820.328 1197
1.520741939
Total
1840.816 1199
134
Table 4.55 indicates that the F-value obtained by applying ANOVA is which is 6.73
in significant at 0.01 level of significance. It shows that there is in significant difference
among the college students of three streams
4.7 CORRELATION AMONG THE ACHIEVEMENT IN MATHEMATICS AND
MOTIVATIONAL BELIEFS COMPONENTS
To explore the relationship among achievement in mathematics with motivational
beliefs namely Goal Orientation, Task Value, Control Beliefs, Self Efficacy and Text
Anxiety correlation was calculated. Correlation matrix is shown in Table 4.56.
Table 4.56
Correlation Matrix: Shows Relationship among Achievement in Mathematics and
Motivational Beliefs Components among college students (N= 1200)
Variables
Ach. In
Math.
IGO EGO TV CLB SE TA
Ach. In
Math.
------- 0.635** 0.579** 0.536** 0.641** 0.592** 0.555**
IGO 0.635** ----- 0.983** 0.955** 0.971** 0.976** 0.883**
EGO 0.579** 0.983** ----- 0.963** 0.976** 0.978** 0.888**
TV 0.536** 0.955** 0.963** ----- 0.964** 0.960** 0.904**
CLB 0.641** 0.971** 0.976** 0.964** ------ 0.977** 0.898**
SE 0.592** 0.976** 0.978** 0.960** 0.977** ----- 0.897**
TA 0.555** 0.883** 0.888** 0.904** 0.898** 0.897** -----
**Significant at 0.01 level
4.7.1 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Intrinsic Goal Orientation
It is clear in Table 4.56 that the correlation value between Intrinsic Goal Orientation
and Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.635) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result
indicates that Intrinsic Goal Orientation is significantly and positively related with
Achievement in Mathematics of college students.
135
4.7.2 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Extrinsic Goal Orientation
From Table 4.56 it shows that the correlation value between Extrinsic Goal
Orientation and Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.579) that is significant at the level
0.01. The result indicates that Intrinsic Goal Orientation is significantly and positively related
with Achievement in Mathematics of college students.
4.7.3 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Task Value
Table 4.56 illustrate that the correlation value between Task Value and Achievement
in Mathematics is (r = 0.536) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result indicates that
Task Value is significantly and positively related with Achievement in Mathematics of
college students.
4.7.4 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Control of Learning Belief
The above Table depicted that the correlation value between Control of Learning
Belief and Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.641) that is significant at the level 0.01. The
result indicates that Control of Learning Belief is significantly and positively related with
Achievement in Mathematics of college students.
4.7.5 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Self Efficacy
It is clear in Table 4.56 that the correlation value between Self efficacy and
Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.592) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result
indicates that Self Efficacy is significantly and positively related with Achievement in
Mathematics of college students
4.7.6 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Test Anxiety
The value of correlation between Test Anxiety and Achievement in Mathematics is
(r = 0.555) that is significant at the level 0.01 as shown in Table. The result indicates that
Test Anxiety is significantly and positively related with Achievement in Mathematics of
college students.
4.8 CORRELATION AMONG THE ACHIEVEMENT IN MATHEMATIC AND
LEARNING STRATEGIES COMPONENTS
To explore the relationship among achievement in mathematics with learning
strategies namely Rehearsal, Elaboration, Organization, Critical Thinking, Self regulation,
Study Habit, Effort Regulation, Peer Learning and Help Seeking of college students was
calculated. Correlation matrix is shown in Table 4.57.
136
Table 4.57
Correlation Matrix: Shows Relationship among Achievement in Mathematic and
Learning Strategies Components among college students (N= 1200)
Variables
Ach.
in Math.
REH ELA ORG CRI
TH
SEL
F
REG
STU
HAB
EFF
REG
PEER
LEA
HELP
SEEKING
Ach.
in Math.
---- 0.534 0.608 0.574 0.593 0.555 0.591 0.554 0.551 0.526
REH 0.534
0.975 0.975 0.977 0.981 0.972 0.985 0.982 0.981
ELA 0.608 0.975 --- 0.985 0.986
0.978 0.983 0.983 0.979 0.971
ORG 0.574 0.977 0.985
---- 0.986 0.986 0.985 0.986 0.988 0.988
CRI TH 0.593 0.977 0.986 0.986 ----- 0.988 0.980 0.985 0.989 0.979
SELF
REG
0.555 0.981 0.978 0.985 0.988 ----- 0.981 0.990 0.986 0.997
STU HAB 0.571 0.982 0.978
0.985 0.980 0.981 ------
-
0.986 0.981 0.975
EFF REG 0.554 0.985 0.983
0.986 0.985 0.990 0.986 ----- 0.992 0.988
PEER
LEA
0.551 0.982 0.979 0.988 0.989 0.986 0.981 0.992 ----- 0.991
HELP
SEEKING
0.526 0.981 0.971 0.988 0.979 0.987 0.975 0.988 0.991 ------
**Significant at 0.01 level
4.8.1 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Rehearsal
The value of correlation between Rehearsal and Achievement in Mathematics is
(r = 0.534) that is significant at the level 0.01 as shown in Table. The result indicates that
Test Anxiety is significantly and positively related with Achievement in Mathematics of
college students.
137
4.8.2 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Elaboration
The correlation value between Elaboration and Achievement in Mathematics is
(r = 0.608) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result indicates that Elaboration is
significantly and positively related with Achievement in Mathematics of college students.
4.8.3 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Organization
The above Table depicted that the correlation value between Organization and
Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.574) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result
indicates that Organization is significantly and positively related with Achievement in
Mathematics of college students.
4.8.4 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Critical Thinking
From Table 4.57 it shows that the correlation value between Critical Thinking and
Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.593) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result
indicates that Critical Thinking is significantly and positively related with Achievement in
Mathematics of college students.
4.8.5 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Self Regulation
Table 4.57 illustrate that the correlation value between Self Regulation and
Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.555) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result
indicates that Self Regulation Value is significantly and positively related with Achievement
in Mathematics of college students.
4.8.6 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Study Habit
The value of correlation between Study Habit and Achievement in Mathematics is
(r = 0.591) that is significant at the level 0.01 as shown in Table. The result indicates that
Test Anxiety is significantly and positively related with Achievement in Mathematics of
college students.
4.8.7 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Effort Regulation
The correlation value between Effort Regulation and Achievement in Mathematics is
(r = 0.554) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result indicates that Effort Regulation is
significantly and positively related with Achievement in Mathematics of college students.
4.8.8 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Peer Learning
The above Table depicted that the correlation value between Peer Learning and
Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.551) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result
138
indicates that Peer Learning is significantly and positively related with Achievement in
Mathematics of college students.
4.8.9 Relationship of Achievement in Mathematic with Help Seeking
From Table 4.57 it shows that the correlation value between Help Seeking and
Achievement in Mathematics is (r = 0.526) that is significant at the level 0.01. The result
indicates that Help Seeking is significantly and positively related with Achievement in
Mathematics of college students.
4.9 TESTING OF HYPOTHESES
Taking into count the outcomes after processing the data pertaining to different
variables belonging to the study as reported in preceding section, the hypotheses were tested
and the interpretations are mentioned here under.
Hypotheses -I
The results of the study indicated no significant difference in achievement of
mathematics of male and female students. So the hypothesis “There is no significant gender
difference of achievement in mathematics among the college students of Punjab pursuing the
studies in different streams namely art, commerce and science” stands accepted.
Hypotheses-II
As the results of the study indicated that the no significant stream difference among
college students of Punjab pursuing the studies in different streams namely art, commerce
and science. Hence the hypothesis “There is a significant stream difference of achievement in
mathematics among the college students of Punjab pursuing the studies in different streams
namely art, commerce and science” is rejected.
Hypotheses-III
The hypothesis “There is no significant gender difference in motivational belief
namely Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs, Self efficacy and test anxiety among
the college students of Punjab.” is accepted on the basis of outcomes of the study. The results
of the study indicated that there prevails significant difference in motivational beliefs (IGO)
of college students of Punjab.
Hypotheses-IV
The findings of the study indicated that no significant stream difference in
motivational belief namely Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs ,Self efficacy and
139
test anxiety among college students of Punjab. So, the hypothesis stating “there is significant
stream difference in motivational belief namely Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs,
Self efficacy and test anxiety among college students of Punjab.” is rejected.
Hypotheses-V
As the results of the study revealed that there is no significant gender difference in
learning strategies namely rehearsal, organization, critical thinking, Self regulation, Study
habit, Effort regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking among the college students of Punjab.
So the hypothesis “There is no significant gender difference in learning strategies namely
rehearsal, organization, critical thinking, Self regulation, Study habit, Effort regulation, Peer
learning, Help Seeking among the college students of Punjab” was accepted. The study also
reveals that there is significant gender difference in leaning strategy namely elaboration
among the college students of Punjab.
Hypotheses-VI
The results of the study indicated there is no significant stream difference in learning
strategies namely rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking, Self regulation, Study
habit, Effort regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking among the college students of Punjab.
So the hypothesis “There is no significant stream difference in learning strategies namely
rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking, Self regulation, Study habit, Effort
regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking among the college students of Punjab” is rejected.
Hypotheses-VII
The hypothesis “there is significant relationship of achievement in mathematics with
motivational belief namely Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs ,Self efficacy and
test anxiety was retained, as the results of the study revealed significant and positive
relationship among all the variables. The results showed that achievement in mathematics
was significantly and positively related with Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs,
Self efficacy and test anxiety. The findings also revealed significant and positive
interrelationship among Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs, Self efficacy and test
anxiety.
Hypotheses-VIII
The results of the study indicated there is significant relationship of achievement in
mathematics with learning strategies namely rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical
140
thinking, Self regulation, Study habit, Effort regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking. So the
hypothesis “There is significant relationship of achievement in mathematics with learning
strategies namely rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking, Self regulation, Study
habit, Effort regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking among the college students of Punjab” is
accepted.
Hypotheses-IX
The study reveals that there is significant relationship of achievement in mathematics
with motivational belief namely Goal orientation, Task value, Control beliefs, Self efficacy
and test anxiety and with learning strategies namely rehearsal, elaboration, organization,
critical thinking, Self regulation, Study habit, Effort regulation, Peer learning, Help Seeking.
The study indicates that motivational belief and learning strategies both are significant
predicator of achievement in mathematics. So the hypothesis “There is significant predicator
of achievement in mathematics namely motivational belief and learning strategies” is
accepted.
4.10 DISCUSSION
The results of the present study revealed that there is no significant difference in
achievement of mathematics of the male and female students. This difference in academic
achievement might be due to some personality traits. In earlier studies conducted by
Fennema (1974), Aggarwal (1983), Artzt & Armour (1992), Muller (1998), Joshi (2000) the
female students were generally considered to have submissiveness, stable and controlled
emotions, superior study habits and high verbal ability. Whereas the boys were taken as more
outgoing, have more distractions and are emotionally less matured. Perhaps these differences
in personality traits induced by our culture, parenting style and way of bringing up the girls
in Indian society that leads the girls to concentrate more on studies and success. But the
studies conducted by Slavin (2006), Naderi et al. (2008), Singh & Parveen (2010), Thomas et
al. (2010), Zirima & Nyanga (2012) indicates that the concept of discrimination is acceptable
till primary and secondary education but for undergraduate and graduate students due to
awareness of career opportunities there is no gender difference in academic achievement
among Boys and Girls.
The result of present study goes in line with the findings of Lent & Hackett (1987),
Tuckman & Abry (1998), Zarch and Kadivar (2006), Seo (2009) suggesting that there is no
141
significant stream difference of achievement in mathematics among students. Three streams
namely arts, commerce and science was taken for comparative study among college students.
The questioner of Achievement in Mathematics Tool and Motivational Strategies for learning
Questionnaire was given to students. The results indicate no stream difference among the
college students. Similar studies was performed on MSQL and MAI Tools by Kesici (2009),
Hoffman & Schraw (2009), which shows when students studies in beginner classes there
exists stream difference but when the students starts college studies there exists no stream
difference. The admission criteria in various streams in college classes now days are based
on the entrance test; they can get the admission in any stream based on the high or low
academic achievement.
High school students found that boys and girls did not differ either in their capability
to solve mathematics word problems or in the strength of their self-efficacy beliefs.
Moreover, boys and girls displayed similar overconfidence when they start applying
motivational beliefs, Pajares and Kranzler (1995). The findings are in line with the results
that there is no significant gender difference in motivational belief among college students
Chemers, Hu & Garcia (2001), Kesici (2009), Kim, C et al. (2010). These findings are
generally congruent with the motivational theories and support the position that students of
various streams should be encouraged to adopt task goals and actively involve themselves in
math class activities, which in turn increases the skill level of students.
It is important to help students develop a positive self-image of their academic
capabilities by assigning appropriate task where they can experience success and so
experience less anxiety. This could be achieved by encouraging the students at every step of
the way by helping them view themselves as successful individuals. As the results of
Chaturvedi (2009) Saransi & Ravi (2010), Asthana (2011) indicate that Girls are better than
Boys in some of the Motivational Beliefs Strategies such as Intrinsic Goal Orientation and
Control of learning Beliefs. The results are in order with studies conducted by Ryan & Deci,
2000; Yukselturk & Bulut’s, 2007; Diseth, Age, 2011; Nishitani et al., 2011) and (Pintrich,
2003; Kesici, Sahin & Erdogan Ahmet, 2009) respectively. The findings can be due to
acceptance of challenges, curiosity and hard working by Girls compared to Boys. It is seen
from the different studies that there have been large increases in the percentages of young
women graduating from universities in Punjab and nearby states.
142
Most of the research findings from western countries are obviously different from the
ones from the East like Bruni et al. (2006), Dee (2006). Children in western countries have
unfavorable early exposure to unacceptable social practices compared to their counterparts in
the Eastern countries. The early exposure affects their level of maturity as well their studies.
In western countries, adolescence stage is shorter; during this period student join societal
roles early than it is in eastern societies Thomas et al. (2010), Zirima & Nyanga (2012).
Children in eastern countries have a longer period during their adolescence and at this time
they tend to take responsibility seriously as they become innovative in resolving of social
problems. This is particularly observed in the girl students who perceive the usefulness of
mathematic for better future and career prospects.
In our findings, boys and girls had similar motivational beliefs, these important
similarities in boys and girls may also be caused by numerous aspects of formal schooling
that are generally common across Indian societies and appear to exclude overt gender typing.
For example, boys and girls appear to receive similar messages about what it takes to do well
at school and these communicated contingencies are similar across the contexts under study
by Kim, C et al. (2010), Lynch, Douglas J (2010). Moreover, many aspects of individualized
school-related experiences of children (e.g., feedback regarding effort and luck) are also
similar and not pervaded by gender stereotyping. It is also clear from a wide range of
motivational research that motivational levels and styles are dependent on time and place
Good & Brophy (1994), Cavas (2011). The presence or absence of gender differences in
motivation, and the direction of any such differences, are likely to be dependent on myriad of
local and broad cultural circumstances. Rather than looking to determine in a definitive
manner the nature of motivational difference as a function of gender, the role of research
ought to be the mapping of variation between gender groups.