7 CHAPTER III - INFLIBNETshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/16874/8/10_chapter 3.pdfChapter III RESEARCH MEHODOLOGY 3.0 OVERVIEW Research in common parlance refers to a search

72

Chapter III

RESEARCH MEHODOLOGY

3.0 OVERVIEW

Research in common parlance refers to a search for new knowledge.

Research could be defined as a scientific and systematic search for pertinent

information on a specific topic. The Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current

English lays down the meaning of research as "A careful investigation or inquiry

especially through search for new facts in any branch of knowledge".

Research is devoted to exploring the conditions under which a certain

phenomenon occurs. It is a process by which a person observes a particular

phenomenon carefully, collects data and draws certain conclusions on the basis of

the data gathered and analysed.

Best summarized the main characteristics of research. He writes that

research is directed towards the identification and solution of a problem. It starts

with postulating a hypothesis which is followed by the collection of primary and

secondary data (observable experience and empirical evidence) in a scientific

manner taking into account validity and reliability. The data collected is analysed

systematically and objectively using advanced statistical tools like SPSS which lead

to the accentuation and verification or falsification of the hypothesis posited. In the

final analysis, the objective of any research is to come up with answers to questions

and problems in a scientific manner.

Print to PDF without this message by purchasing novaPDF (http://www.novapdf.com/)

http://www.novapdf.com/


73

This chapter titled, “Research Methodology,” presents the research design,

the location of the study, the population and sample of the study, the institutional

details, distribution of the sample by school, tools used for the study and the various

hypotheses on which the study hinges.

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

Table 3.1 Nature of

Study Variable Type of Variable Tool Sample

Size Analysis Statistics

Normative Survey Method

Teaching Compe-

tence

Indepen-dent

Teaching Competence

Inventory (Perumalil Thomas-

Dec 2004)

248 PG Teachers

Men (93)

Women (155)

Qualitative and

Quantitative Analysis

Descriptive Inferential

Differential

1. t-test 2.Anova

Associational Chi-Square

test

Self- efficacy

Indepen-dent

Self-Efficacy

Inventory (Dr.V.

Rajeswari & A.Nirmala

Devi–2005)

Relational -Multiple regression

Academic Achieve-

ment

Depen- dent

XII Public Exam Marks (2004)




74

3.2 LOCATION OF THE STUDY

Figure 3. 1




75

The present investigation was conducted in the Dindigul Educational district

which consists of 15 blocks. Out of these 15 blocks, 5 blocks, namely, Dindigul,

Palani, Kodaikanal, Ottanchatram and Vedasandur were chosen for this research

study. There are three significant reasons as to why the researcher chose this

educational district and these five blocks. Firstly, the researcher was a Headmistress

at St. John’s Higher Secondary School, Kodaikanal when the study was launched

and she is quite familiar with the Dindigul Educational district. Secondly, she knows

almost all the post-graduate teachers in these five blocks for they often meet and

interact, both at the District level and at the Block level. Thirdly and most

importantly, no study has been conducted in the Dindigul Educational district so far

with a view to measuring the teaching competence and self-efficacy of Higher

Secondary teachers in relation to the academic achievement of their students.

3.3 POPULATION AND SAMPLE

The population of the present study consisted of 635 trained Higher

Secondary teachers working in these 15 blocks in the Dindigul Educational district

which has a total of 101 Higher Secondary schools.

John E. Conklin (1987) defines a sample as “a representative group of

people chosen from a large population”. In other words, a sample is a small

proportion of the population selected for observation and analysis. The investigator

followed the random sampling method. Out of 635 Higher Secondary teachers

available in these 15 blocks, 5 blocks and 297 teachers serving in 21 Higher

Secondary schools in these 5 blocks were randomly chosen for administering the




76

research tools. Out of these 297 teachers, 248 responded to the questionnaire

positively. These teachers belonged to various categories, namely, Government,

Government Aided and Matriculation Higher Secondary schools. And they were

categorized on the basis of variables such as gender, marital status, educational

qualification, subjects handled, years of experience, nature of job, income and

participation in in-service training programmes.

3.4 INSTITUTIONAL DETAILS

Table 3.2

Area Name of the School Type

of School

Type of Manage-

ment

Gender Subjects Handled Locatio

n of School Std

XII M F L S A V R U

Dindigul

St.Joseph's Girls’

HSSchool,Dindigul Girls Aided .. 23 4 14 4 1 R .. 531

M.V.M.HS School,

Dindigul Co-ed Unaided 3 17 4 13 3 .. .. U 37

Annamalaiar Mills

Girls' HS School,

Dindigul

Girls Aided .. 17 4 10 3 .. .. U 375

N.M.M HS School,

Dindigul Boys Govt 7 6 4 6 2 1 .. U 174

Dudley HS School,

Dindigul Boys Aided 1 9 3 3 4 .. .. U 226

St.Mary's HS

School,Dindigul Boys Aided 11 2 2 5 4 2 .. U 306

Our Lady Girls’ HS

School, Dindigul Girls Aided 1 15 4 8 4 .. .. U 468




77

Source: Live Register Statistic in respect of District Employment Office, Dindigul

as on 30.9.2005. Legend: M-Male; F-Female; L-Language; S-Science; A-Arts; V-Vocational;

R: Rural; and U: Urban.

Palani

Guruvappa HS

School, Naikarapatti,

Palani.

Co-ed Aided 7 2 2 3 4 .. R .. 230

S.M.B.M.P.Matric

HS School, Palani Co-ed Unaided 2 9 6 4 1 .. .. U 177

Swamy Matric

HSSchool,Palani Co-ed Unaided 4 2 2 4 .. .. .. U 24

Municipal HS

School,Palani Boys Govt 2 9 4 5 2 .. .. U 241

Govt.Girls' HS

School, Palani Girls Govt 8 5 5 4 4 .. .. U 486

Kodai-

kanal

Govt.HS School,

Kodaikanal Co-ed Govt 4 5 2 4 3 .. R .. 49

Zion Matric HS

School,Kodaikanal Co-ed Unaided 3 6 1 5 3 .. R .. 56

St.John's HS

School,Kodaikanal Girls Aided .. 10 2 5 3 .. R ..

129

St.Peter'sMatric HS

School, Kodaikanal Co-ed Unaided 6 2 .. 6 2 .. R .. 65

Veda-

sandur

Govt Boys’ HS

School,Vedasandur Boys Aided 13 6 5 8 5 1 R .. 133

Ambi-

likkai

S.N.HS School,

Ambilikkai Co-ed Aided 4 2 2 3 1 .. R .. 198

Ottan-

chatram

KRGovt HSSchool,

Ottanchatram Boys Govt 7 3 2 4 4 .. R .. 196

Chatra-

patti

Srinivasa Girls' HS.

School, Chatrapatti Girls Aided .. 7 3 3 1 .. R .. 90

Aya

kudi

I.T.O.HS School,

Ayakudi Co-ed Aided 4 4 1 5 2 .. .. U 165

Total 87 161 62 122 59 5 10 11 4356




78

Table: 3.3 – School-wise Distribution of the Sample

S. No. Name of the School

No. of Teachers who

received Questionnaires

No. of Respon- dents & % of the

Total Sample 1 Govt. Hr.Sec.School, Kodaikanal 9 9 (4%)

2 Guruvappa Hr.Sec.School, NK Patti, Palani 9 9 (4%)

3 S.M.B.M.P. Matric Hr Sec, Dindigul 10 10 (4.1 %)

4 Swamy Matric Hr.Sec.School, Palani 7 7 (3%)

5 Govt.Boys’Hr.Sec.School,Vedasandur 19 19 (8%)

6 St. Joseph's Girls’ Hr.Sec.School, Dindigul 24 23 (9.4%)

7 S.N. Hr.Sec School, Ambilikkai 16 6 (2.4%)

8 Zion Matric Hr Sec. School, Kodaikanal 9 9 (4%)

9 M.V.M. Girls’ Matric.Hr.Sec.School, Dindigul 20 20 (8.2%)

10 St. John's Hr. Sec.School, Kodaikanal 10 10 (4.1%)

11 I.T.O.Hr. Sec.School, Ayakudi 9 8 (3.2%)

12 Municipal Hr. Sec. School, Palani 17 11 (4.5%)

13 K.R Govt. Hr. Sec. School, Ottanchatram 16 9 (3.7%)

14 Srinivasa Girls’ Hr. Sec. School, Chattrapatti 8 7 (2.8%)

15 Annamalaiar Mills Girls’ Hr.Sec.School,Dindigul 18 18 (7.4%)

16 N.M.M Hr. Sec. School, Dindigul 17 13 (4.9 %)

17 Govt. Girls' Hr.Sec.School, Palani 19 13 (5.3%)

18 Dudley Boys’ Hr. Sec. School, Dindigul 18 10 (2.4%)

19 St. Mary's Hr. Sec. School, Dindigul 16 14 (4.9%)

20 Our Lady Girls’ Hr.Sec.School, Dindigul 18 17 (6.9%)

21 St. Peter's Matric Hr. Sec. School, Kodaikanal 8 8 (2.8%)

Total 297 248 (100 %)




79

3.5 TOOLS USED FOR THE STUDY

The investigator used two tools namely, i) Teaching competence

inventory developed by Perumalil Thomas Varghese (2004) and ii) Self-eefficacy

inventory developed by A. Nirmala Devi (investigator) and V. Rajeswari (Guide).

The description of the tools is presented below.

3.5.1 Teaching Competence Inventory

In order to gauge and assess the teaching competence of the teachers chosen

for the study, the investigator used an inventory constructed by Perumalil Thomas

Varghese (December 2004). The inventory focused on four areas: (a) Professional

information; (b) Interest in profession; (c) Attitude towards children; and

(d) Adaptability. The preliminary version of the inventory had 20 items for each

area and was given to five experts for establishing its content validity. Based on

their opinions, a few modifications were made in the inventory. This was then

administered to 50 teachers of St. Michael's High School, Patna and another 50

teachers of Don Bosco Academy, Patna, and the inter–item correlation co-efficient

was calculated.

In order to meet the requirements of the Hindi–speaking teachers, the

investigator got the inventory translated into Hindi and the translated version was

given to 5 experts in both Hindi and English for the correctness of the translation.

Based on their suggestions, some modifications were made in the translation.

Thus the content validity of the Hindi translation too was established.




80

The reliability of the inventory was established by test and re-test methods.

It was administered twice on a sample of 50 teachers of St. Michael's High School,

Patna with an interval of 15 days and the reliability co–efficient was found. Only

those items which yielded a co-efficient correlation of more than 0.35 were retained

and this established the external validity of the inventory. The present inventory has

67 items in all (Vide Appendix).

The following Table shows that the present inventory is both reliable and

valid and presents the reliability co-efficient.

Table 3.4 - Description of Teaching Competence Inventory

Sl. No. Teaching Competence Items Reliability

1 Professional Information 1 -18 0.61

2 Interest in Profession 19 -34 0.49

3 Attitude towards Children 35 – 50 0.71

4 Adaptability 51 – 67 0.58

Total 0.65

Each item in this inventory was rated on a five-point scale. The options

were: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree and Strongly Disagree.

The respondents were asked to respond to the extent of agreement or disagreement

with the content as per the scoring procedure given in Table 3.5.




81

Table 3.5-Scoring Procedure for Teaching Competence Inventory

Sl. No. Alternatives Response Score

1 Strongly Agree 1 5

2 Agree 2 4

3 Neutral 3 3

4 Disagree 4 2

5 Strongly disagree 5 1

3.5.2 Self-efficacy Inventory (SEI)

As noted earlier, self-efficacy beliefs determine the strength of a person’s

character. Those with high self-efficacy beliefs boldly take up challenges and do not

easily give up even in the face of setbacks. On the contrary, those with a low self-

efficacy lack self-confidence and easily give up. To gauge the higher secondary

teachers’ self-efficacy, an inventory namely Self-efficacy Inventory (SEI)

constructed by A. Nirmala Devi and V. Rajeswari (2005) was used.

Content Validity of SEI

Validity is the quality of a data gathering instrument or procedure that

enables it to measure what it is supposed to measure (Best, 2007). Content validity is

based upon judgment of several subject experts. In order to establish content validity,

the tool consisting of 125 items, covering areas such as Skill Development, Skill of

Effective Transaction of the Curriculum to maximize the target group’s learning, Job

Development, Counselling Skills (coping with job stress) and Skill of Classroom




82

Management, was given to four teacher educators, including an expert in the field of

psychology. Based on the experts’ feedback, some deletions and modifications were

made. Thus the items were reduced to 101 and later to 95 and finally to 60.

Thus the content validity of the tool was established.

Item analysis

Item analysis, according to Ferguson (1952), is "one of the many processes

by which one can find which items differentiate and which items do not differentiate

between contrasting criterion groups".

In the present study, item analysis was done to select suitable items for the

final draft of the inventory. For item analysis, the preliminary version of the

inventory was administered to 30 school teachers in Kodaikanal. The response

sheets of these teachers were arranged in the manner of magnitude of the total

scores. The highest 27% and the lowest 27% were taken out for analysis, since 27%

provides the best compromise between two desirable and inconsistent items: (i) to

make extreme groups as large as possible and (ii) to make extreme groups as

different as possible. Only 35 items which got r value more than 0.68 were retained

for the final study.

The scoring procedure of SEI is tabulated below.

Table 3.6-Scoring Procedure for SEI

S. No. Alternative Response Score 1 Strongly Agree 1 4 2 Agree 2 3 3 Disagree 3 2 4 Strongly Disagree 4 1




83

Reliability

Reliability is the degree of consistency that the instrument or procedure

demonstrate. The reliability of SEI was computed with the help of Cronbach’s

Alpha method. The calculation of Cronbach’s α was used to measure the internal

consistency of the items in the inventory. The items in SEI cover the following five

areas of self–efficacy.

Table 3.7 Five areas of SEI

Sl. No. Self-efficacy Items Reliability

1 Skill Development 1-11 0.895

2 Professional Counselling 12-16 0.862

3 Professional Classroom Management 17-21 0.824

4 Professional Interaction 22-27 0.797

5 Professional Commitment and Accomplishment

28-35 0.860

Total 35 0.956 A commonly accepted rule of thumb is that on α of 0.6 - 0.7 indicates

acceptable reliability, and 0.8 or higher indicates good reliability.

3.6 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF HIGHER SECONDARY STUDENTS

The academic achievement of the Higher Secondary students in the selected

21 schools has been taken into consideration for the study. For this purpose, their

public examination marks in Standard XII were taken into account and their average

marks were computed for analysis. This was done with a view to finding out the




84

association between the teaching competence and self-efficacy of the Higher

Secondary teachers on the one hand and the academic achievement of their students

on the other.

3.7 ADMINISTRATION OF THE TOOLS

The investigator went to each of the schools chosen for the survey

personally. After giving instructions, the tools were distributed to the teachers who

were selected by random sampling. They were given enough time to respond to the

items in the inventories.

3.8 INTERPRETATION OF THE SCORES

The mean and standard deviation of the scores of each cluster of competencies

was worked out. Based on these findings, the norm was established. Scores below –

1 standard deviation were considered low; scores between ±1 standard deviation

were considered average; and scores above +1 standard deviation were considered

high for each dimension.

The total score was worked out taking all the dimensions together. Once again

scores below ±1 standard deviation were considered low teaching competence while

scores between +1 standard deviation were considered high teaching competence.

A similar norm was established for self efficacy. Scores below –1 standard deviation

were considered low self efficacy while scores between ±1 standard deviation were

considered moderate self efficacy. Scores above +1 standard deviation were

considered to represent high self efficacy.




85

3.9 HYPOTHESES

1. There is no significant difference between men and women Higher

Secondary teachers in their teaching competence.

2. There is no significant difference between married and unmarried Higher


3. There is no significant difference between B.Ed. and M.Ed. trained

Higher Secondary teachers in their teaching competence.

4. There is no significant difference between rural and urban Higher


5. There is no significant difference between permanent and temporary

Higher Secondary teachers in their teaching competence.

6. There is no significant difference between Higher Secondary teachers

who have participated and those who have not participated in in-service

training programme in their teaching competence.

7. There is no significant difference among the Higher Secondary teachers

of different age groups in their teaching competence.


drawing different monthly incomes in their teaching competence.


with different educational qualifications in terms of their teaching

competence.

10. There is significant difference among the Higher Secondary teachers

handling different subjects in terms of their teaching competence.




86


working in different types of schools in terms of their teaching

competence.


working in different types of management (Government, Aided and

Unaided) in terms of their teaching competence.


with different years of experience in terms of their teaching competence.


with different types of appointment (Government, Management and

PTA) in terms of their teaching competence.


handling Class XII of different strengths in terms of their teaching

competence.

16. There is no significant difference between men and women Higher

Secondary teachers in terms of their self-efficacy.

17. There is no significant difference between married and unmarried Higher

Secondary teachers in terms of their self-efficacy.

18. There is no significant difference between B.Ed. and M.Ed. qualified

Higher Secondary teachers in terms of their self-efficacy.

19. There is no significant difference between rural and urban Higher

Secondary teachers in their self-efficacy.

20. There is no significant difference between permanent and temporary

Higher Secondary teachers in their self-efficacy.




87

21. There is no significant difference between Higher Secondary teachers

who have attended and those who have not attended in-service training

programmes with regard to their self-efficacy.


of different age groups in their self-efficacy.


belonging to different monthly income groups in their self-efficacy.


with different educational qualifications in terms of their self-efficacy.


handling different subjects in terms of their self-efficacy.


working in different types of schools in terms of their self-efficacy.


working in different types of management (Government, Aided and

Unaided) with regard to their self-efficacy.


with different years of experience with regard to their self-efficacy.


working with different types of appointment (Government, Management

and PTA) with regard to their self-efficacy.


handling Class XII of various strengths with regard to their self-efficacy.




88

31. There is no significant association between the teaching competence and

the gender of the Higher Secondary teachers.


the marital status of the Higher Secondary teachers.


the teacher training degree of the Higher Secondary teachers.


the location of the Higher Secondary teachers.


the nature of appointment of the Higher Secondary teachers.

36. There is no significant association between the teaching competence of

the Higher Secondary teachers and their participation in in-service

training programme.


the age of the Higher Secondary teachers.


the monthly income of the Higher Secondary teachers.

39. There is no significant association between the teachings competence

and the educational qualifications of the Higher Secondary teachers.


the Higher Secondary teachers and the subjects they handle.


the Higher Secondary teachers and the type of school where they teach.




89


the Higher Secondary teachers and the type of management where they

work.

43. There is no significant association between the teaching competence the

Higher Secondary teachers and their years of experience.

44. There is no significant association between teaching competence and the

type of appointment of the Higher Secondary teachers.


Higher Secondary teachers and the strength of Class XII.

46. There is no significant association between self-efficacy and the gender

of the Higher Secondary teachers.

47. There is no significant association between self-efficacy and the marital

status of the Higher Secondary teachers.

48. There is no significant association between self-efficacy and the teacher

training degree of the Higher Secondary teachers.

49. There is no significant association between self-efficacy and the location

of the Higher Secondary teachers.

50. There is no significant association between self-efficacy and the nature

of appointment of the Higher Secondary teachers.

51. There is no significant association between the self-efficacy the Higher

Secondary teachers and their participation in in-service training

programme.

52. There is no significant association between self-efficacy and the age of

the Higher Secondary teachers.




90

53. There is no significant association between self-efficacy of the Higher

Secondary teachers and their monthly income.

54. There is no significant association between the self-efficacy of the

Higher Secondary teachers and their educational qualifications.


Higher Secondary teachers and the subjects they handle.


Higher Secondary teachers and the type of school where they teach.


Higher Secondary teachers and the type of management where they

work.


Higher Secondary teachers and their years of experience.

59. There is no significant association between self-efficacy and the type of

appointment of the Higher Secondary teachers


Higher Secondary teachers and the strength of Class XII.

61. There is no significant correlation between teaching competence and its

various dimensions as a whole.

62. There is no significant correlation between self-efficacy and its various

dimensions as a whole.

The following chapter titled “Analyses and Interpretation” presents the data

that has been collected and analyses them with a view to finding out the teaching




91

competence and self-efficacy of Higher Secondary teachers in Dindigul Educational

District in relation to the academic achievement of their students.

3.10 STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES USED

The Statistical techniques employed in this study were:

1. Mean

2. Standard Deviation

3. Percentage Analysis

4. t-test

5. Analysis of Variance

6. Chi-square test

7. Karl Pearson Correlation Coefficient

8. Multiple Regression

The following chapter is on data analysis and interpretation.




Documents

7 CHAPTER III - INFLIBNETshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/16874/8/10_chapter 3.pdfChapter III RESEARCH MEHODOLOGY 3.0 OVERVIEW Research in common parlance refers to a search