On OHP, - Shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/6544/14/14_chapter 5.pdf · devices and equipments such as Computer, TV, OHP, Epidiascope, Radio, Tape ... Malayalam:

Chapter V

Ferceytion of secondar level student teachers re8ar&n8 t h e use $ieY-~arninn mri.naL

CPeTformance of seconday level student teachers regarding the use of se f-lerning materials

Chapter V

The present study is concerned with determining the perception and

performance of secondary level student teachers regarding the use of self-

learning materials. Data were collected by the administration of appropriate

tools based on the hypotheses and objectives of the study as described earlier.

The analysis and interpretation of data have been presented under the following

sections.

5.1 ANALYSIS OF B.Ed. CURRICULUM REGARDING SELF-

LEARNING STRATEGIES.

5.2 PERCEPTlON OF SECONDARY LEVEL STUDENT TEACHERS

REGARDING THE USE OF SELF-LEARNING MATERIALS.

5.3 PERFORMANCE OF SECONDARY LEVEL STUDENT

TEACHERS REGARDING THE USE OF SELF-LEARNING

MATERIALS.

The details of analysis carried out under each section is given below.

108 Analysis of Data

5.1 ANALYSIS OF BeEd. CURRICULUM REGARDING SELF-

LEARNING STRATEGIES,

As a preliminary step, the investigator made an attempt to analyse

the present secondary level teacher education curriculum with regard to self-

learning strategies. On analysing the content of core subjects it is observed

that theoretical aspects of self-learning strategies like programmed learning,

instructional modules, personalised system of instruction and computer

assisted instruction are included in the pedagogical theory of educational

technology. More than that student teachers are required to handle the various

devices and equipments such as Computer, TV, OHP, Epidiascope, Radio, Tape

Recorder, Film Projector and Slide Projector.

On analysing the curriculum for methodology of teaching various

optional subjects, almost all optional subjects provide scope for theoretical

as well as practical aspects of self-learning materials. The self-learning

strategies included in the curriculum for various optional subjects are as

follows;

English: Materials, devices and equipments like Slide and Film Projector,

Radio, Tape recorder, Gramaphone,. Radio lessons, programmed instruction,

teaching machines and language laboratory, preparation of slides and

transparencies.


Malayalam: Individualized insruction -programmed learning. Handling of

apparatus and instruments like Radio, Tape recorder, OHP, Film projector, Slide

projector etc. preparation of glass slides.

Mathematics: Use of instructional materials and media like programmed

instructional material, instructional modules, modem devices and equipments

like Television, OHP, Radio, Tape Recorder, Film and Film Projector, preparation

of Slides and Transparencies.

Physical Science: Individualization in teaching, programmed learning material,

projection and non-projection aids, preparation of Slides and transparencies.

Natural Science: New techniques and approaches to teaching, programmed

instruction, materials and media for teaching, Television, Radio and Film.

Social Science:'Enriching instruction - programmed instruction. Equipments

Radio, Television, Phonograph, Film and Film Strips.

Commerce: Instructional materials and media - programmed learning, modular

approach. Use of audio-visual aids and equipments for teaching and learning.

The analysis reveals that the present secondary level teacher education

curriculum covers only a part of theoretical and practical aspects regarding

self-learning strategies. At the same time it leaves scope for the student teachers

to learn more about self-learning strategies and become aware of modem

innovative techniques and strategies in teaching.


It is expected that a student teacher who complete the teacher

education course should practice various teaching strategies and use various

audio-visual equipments and devices for effective teaching purpose. So the

investigator feels there is a need to understand the awareness and opinion of

secondary level student teachers with regard to self-learning strategies.

5.2 PERCEPTION OF SECONDARY LEVEL STUDENT TEACHERS

WGARDING THE USE OF SELF-LEARNING MATERIALS.

To understand the perception of secondary level student teachers

regarding the use of self-learning materials, an awareness test, an opinionnaire

and a questionnaire was given to the student teachers under study and data

were collected. The details of analysis carried out in this context are presented

under the following heads.

5.2.1 Awareness of student teachers regarding the use of self-learning

materials

5.2.2 Opinion of student teachers regarding the use of self-learning

materials

5.2.3 Availability and extent of use, training provided, problems faced and

suggestions proposed for effective use, regarding self-learning

materials.

11 1 Analysis of Data

The details of analysis carried out under each head is given below.

5.2.1 Awareness of student teachers regarding the use of self-learning

materials

As mentioned in Chapter IV, the items in the awareness test were

divided into six categories. It was decided to calculate the mean weighted score

(MWS) of items in each category. If the mean weighted score of the total

sample is above 3.5 it is assumed that the student teachers have very good

awareness. If the mean weighted score is between 2.5 and 3.5 it is assumed

that the student teachers have only good awareness. If the mean weighted

score is between 1.5 and 2.5, the awareness is only average. If the mean

weighted score is between 0.5 and 1.5 the student teachers have only low

awareness and if the mean weighted score is below 0.5 it is assumed the

student teachers have only poor awareness. The details of analysis carried

out under each category are given below:

5.2.1.1 Awareness on different types of self-learning materials

The awareness of secondary level student teachers with regard to the

various self-learning materials such as programmed learning, personalized

systems of instruction, instructional modules, computer assisted instruction,


multimedia instructional package and self-directed learning systems was found

out and is given in the following table.

Table 9

Awareness of student teachers on different self-learning materials - mean scores

* : Significant at 0.05 level ** : Significant at 0.0 1 level

From the above table it is observed that the mean weighted score of

the total sample is 1.5 1, which shows that the student teacher's awareness on

different types of self-learning materials is only average. From the statistical

table the 't' value for significant difference at .05 level is 1.98 and at .O1 level

is 2.56 respectively. The obtained 't' values shows that there is no significant

difference between male and female student teachers (t=1.759), science and

p

0.081

0.445

0.412

0.710

Test-statistics Sub sample Awareness score

t

t

t

F

1

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

Mean

1.56 1.50 1.51 1.53 1.50 1.53 1.50 1.52 l.52

1.51

1.759

0.808

0.887

0.342

Male Female Science Arts Degree PG Unaided

I ?n?",entre

Total Sample

SD

0.52 0.43 0.44 0.47 0.47 0.43 0.42 0.47 0.46

0.45

N

215 985 663 537 547 653 400 400 400

1200


arts student teachers (t = 0.808) and graduate and post graduate student teachers

(t = 0.887) with respect to awareness on different self-learning materials. The

table value of F for significant difference at .05 level is 2.90 and at .0 1 level is

4.60 respectively. The obtained F value (0.342) shows that there is no significant

difference in awareness among student teachers belonging to Unaided Training

Colleges, Aided Training Colleges and University Colleges of Education.

5.2.1.2 Awareness on concepts and theories associated with self-

learning materials

The concepts and theories which are mentioned in the awareness

test are,

- technology and its application in education

- hardware and software in educational technology

- psychological principles of learning.

- individualisation of instruction

- learner centered educational system.

- self instructional materials and techniques.

- skinner's operant conditioning theory

- linear programming

- branching programming

- motivation in learning

- feed back, pre-test, self-test, and post-test

- formativeandsummativeevaluation, and

- reinforcement in learning.


The following table shows the awareness of student teachers on

concepts and theories associated with self-learning materials.

Table 10

Awareness of student teachers on concepts and theories associated with self-learning materials - mean scores

* : Significant at 0.05 level ** : Significant at 0.01 level

It is evident from the table that the mean weighted score of the total

sample is 1.90, which shows that the student teachers have only average

awareness on concepts and theories associated with self-learning materials.

The 't' values shows that there is no significant difference among male and

female student teachers, among student teachers with graduation and post

graduation, with respect to their awareness on concepts and theories associated

with self-learning materials. The obtained F value (4.14) shows that there is

significant difference among student teachers of Unaided Colleges, Aided

p

>.5

0.418

0.052

0.016

Sub sample

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

Awareness Score

Male Female Science Arts Degree PG Unaided Aided Uni. Centre

Total Sample

I Test-statistics

N

215 985 663 537 547 653 400 400. 400

1200

Mean

1.89 1.91 1.92 1.89 1.88 1.93 1.85 1.92 1.95

1.90

, ,

F

SD

0.51 0.46 0.48 0.47 0.43 0.51 0.43 0.51 0.47

0.47

0.577

0.873

1.95

4.14*


College and University Colleges of Education with respect to awareness on

concepts and theories associated with self-learning materials.

5.2.1.3 Awareness of student teachers on facilities associated with self-

learning materials.

The awareness of student teachers with regard to the facilities

associated with self-learning materials such as learning centres, language

laboratory, home experiment kit, laboratory manuals, and reference materials

was found out and presented in the following table.

Table 11

Awareness of student teachers on facilities associated with self-learning materials - mean scores

** : Significant at 0.0 1 level

Sub sample

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

Awareness Score


Total Sample

p

>as

>.5

<.5

0.000

N

215 985 663 537 547 6 5 3 400 400 400

1200

Mean

1.35 1.34 1.33 1.35 1.33 1.35 1.25 1.44 1.34

1.34

Test-statistics

SD

0.72 0.65 0.64 0.70 0.65 0.68 0.64 0.66 0.68

0.66

t

, t

F

0,326

0.32

0.603

8.323**


From the above table it can be observed that the average weighted

score of the total sample regarding awareness about facilities associated with

self-learning materials is 1.34, which shows low awareness of student teachers

regarding facilities associated with self-learning materials. The result also

shows that there is no significant difference among male and female student

teachers, science and arts student teachers, graduate and postgraduate student

teachers with regard to awareness on facilities associated with self-learning

materials. But the obtained F value is 8.3 2 and this shows that there is significant

difference (at 0.01 level) among student teachers of Unaided Colleges, Aided

Colleges and University Colleges regarding awareness on facilities associated

with self-learning.

5.2.1.4 Awareness of student teachers on software materials related to

self-learning.

The awareness of student teachers on software materials such as slides,

film strips, audio-cassettes educational films, video-cassettes, floppy disc and

CD was found out and is given in the following table.


Table 12

Awareness of student teachers on software materials related to self-learning - mean scores

From the table above, it can be understood that the student teachers

have only average awareness on software learning materials (mean weighted

score = 2.34). The data and result of analysis also shows that there is no

significant difference between Arts and Science student teachers (t=0.584)

with regard to awareness on software materials related to self-learning. But in

this respect there is significant difference between male and female student

teachers (t=5.16) and student teachers with graduation and post graduation

(t = 3.3 1). From the mean score value it can be understood that male student

teachers and student teachers with post graduation have more awareness on

software materials associated with self-learning than their counterparts. The

p

0,000

>.5

~ . 0 0 ~

0.000

Total Sample

I Test-statistics Sub sample Awareness Score

t

. t

F

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

5.159**

0.584

3.311**

41.768"


N

215 985 663 537 547 653 400 400 400

1200 1 I I

Mean

2.54 2.30 2.35 2.33 2.28 2.40 2.12 2.44 2.47

2.34

SD

0.60 0.61 0.62 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.58 0.58 0.62

0.62


obtained F- value (4 1.768) shows that the student teachers belonging to Unaided

Colleges, Aided Colleges and University Colleges are significantly different

(at 0.01 level) with regard to their awareness on software materials related to

self-learning.

5.2.1.5 Awareness of student teachers on projection devices and

equipments

The student teacher's awareness on projection devices and equipments

such as slide projector, film strip projector, epidiascope, microprojector,

overhead projector (OHP), sound synchronised slide projector and LCD

projector was found out and is given in the table below.

Table 13

Awareness of student teachrs about projection devices and equipments - mean scores


Sub sample

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

p

>.5

,m5

0.000

0.000


Awareness Score

Total Sample

Mean

1.63 1 . 6 1.64 1.64

1.68 1.39 1.80 1.72

1.64

Test-statistics

, t

F '

SD

0.59 0.56 0.54 0.60 OS7 0.57 0.46 0.52 0.63

0.57

0.16

0.033

2.519*

63.809**

N

215 985 663 537 547 653 400 400 400

1200


The mean weighted score of the total sample (MWS =1.64) shows

that the student teachers have only an average awareness about projection devices

and equipments. The 't' value shows that there is no significant difference in

the awareness of male and female student teachers, science and arts student

teachers. But there is significant difference among degree and post graduate

student teachers in this respect (t=2.519). The F value (63.8) shows that the

student teachers belonging to Unaided Training Colleges, Aided Training

Colleges and University Colleges differ significantly at .0 1 level.

5.2.1.6 Awareness of student teachers about non-projection devices and

equipments.

The awareness of student teachers about non-projection devices and

equipments such as still camera, record player, tape recorder, radio, television,

VCR, VCP and computer was found out and is given in the following table.


Table 14

Awareness of student teachers about non-projection devices and equipments - mean scores


From the above table, it can be inferred that the student teachers have

average awareness about non-projection devices and equipments. (mean

weighted score = 2.50) The 't' values shows that there is significant difference

between male and female student teachers (t=3.23 I), student teachers having

degree and post-graduation (t=3.724), with regard to awareness on non

projection devices and equipments. But in this respect there is no significant

difference among student teachers of science and arts subjects (t=.33 1). The

obtained F value (32.61 1) shows that the student teachers belonging to Aided

Colleges, Unaided Colleges and University Colleges differ significantly with

respect to their awareness about non-projection devices and equipments related

to self-learning.

p

0.045

>.5

0.000

0.000

I Test-statistics Sub sample Awareness Score

t

t

F

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

3.231**

0,331

3.724**

32.61 1**

Male Female Science Arts

Degree PG Unaided Aided Uni. Centre

N

215 985 663 537 547 653 400 anrl I w V

400

1200

Mean

2.64 2.48 2.51 2.50 2.43 2.57 2.29 Y.VV 3 611

2.52

2.50 Total Sample

SD

0.7O 0.66 0.67 0.67 0-68 0.65 0.69 n V . V V hn 0.66

0.67


5.2.1.7 Total awareness of student teachers on self-learning materials.

The following table presents the data and result of analysis of total

awareness of student teachers on various aspects of self learning materials

under study such as different types of self-learning materials, concepts and

theories associated with self-learning materials, facilities associated with self-

learning materials, software materials related to self-learning, projection

devices and equipments associated with self-learning, and non-projection

devices and equipments associated with self-learning.

Table 15

Total awareness of student teachrs on self-learning materials - mean scores

* : Significant at 0.05 level ** : Significant at 0.0 1 level

p

0.045

>.5

0,000

0.000

Sub sample

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Awareness Score


Mean

lmg6 1.90

. Test-statistics

400

1200

Institution

t

, t

t

F

SD

0-42 0.39

2.016*

0.371

3.281**

37.296""

N

215 985

0.34,-

663 - - -

537 547 653 400

1.91 1-87 1.95 1.77

Uni.Centre

Total Sample

0.40 0.38 0.41 0.37

1.97

1.91

0.41

0.40


The average weighted score of total items in the awareness test is

found to be 1.91, which shows that the student teachers have only average

awareness on the various aspects of self-learning materials. There is significant

difference between male and female student teachers (t = 3.23 1) and graduate

and post graduate student teachers (t = 3.724) with respect to the total

awareness. But there is no significant difference among student teachers of

Science and Arts subjects with regard to total awareness on self-learning

materials.

The F value shows that the total awareness of student teachers of

Unaided Colleges, Aided Colleges and University Colleges differ significantly

at . O l level. The student teachers of aided colleges are found to be little

better in their awareness on self-learning materials.

Conclusion

The analysis of the awareness test revealed that the student teachers

have only average awareness on the various aspects of self-learning materials.

The data and results of analysis points out the general lack of awareness among

student teachers about concepts and theories of individualised instruction,

devices and equipments associated with self-learning and software materials

on educational programmes. On considering the sub-sample of student teachers

it can be observed that in many cases, male student teachers have more

awareness than female student teachers. The awareness among Science and Arts

student teachers are found to be equal, while post graduate student teachers


are found to be more aware than graduate student teachers. Considering the

management of training colleges, student teachers of aided colleges are found

to have little more awareness than student teachers of unaided colleges and

university centres.

5.2.2 Opinion of student teachers regarding the use of self-learning

materials.

Inorder to analyse the opinion of student teachers towards self-

learning materials the mean score value of the total sample in each category

of the opinionnaire was calculated. If the mean score value is above 4 it is

assumed that student teachers have high favourable opinion towards the positive

statements and high unfavourable opinion towards the negative statements of

that particular category. If the mean score value is above 3 and upto 4 it is

assumed that student teachers have favourable opinion towards the positive

statements and unfavourable opinion towards negative statements. If the mean

score value is above 2 and upto 3, the student teachers have no opinion towards

positive statements and negative statements. If the mean score value is above

1 and upto 2 it is assumed that student teachers have unfavourable opinion

towards positive statements and have favourable opinion towards negative

statements and if the mean score value is upto 1, it is assumed that student

teachers have high unfavourable opinion towards positive statements and high

favourable opinion towards negative statements. The details of analysis carried

out with regard to opinion about the use of self-learning materials are given

under the following subheads:


5.2.2.1 Opinion of student teachers regarding general characteristics of self-

learning materials.

5.2.2.2 Opinion of student teachers about preparation and implementation

of self-learning materials.

5.2.2.3 Opinion of student teachers about the impact of self-learning

materials on learners.


materails on teachers.

5.2.2.5 Opinion towards development of values among learners by using self-

learning strategies.

5.2.2.6 General opinion of student teachers towards self-learning materials.

The details of analysis carried out under each sub head is given below.

5.2.2.1 Opinion of student teachers regarding general characteristics

of self-learning materials.

The statements 1 to 8 deals with the general characteristics of self-

learning materials. Among these, the statements 1,2, 5,7 and 8 are positive

statements and 3,4 and 6 are negative statements. The data and result of analysis

of student teacher's opinion about general characteristics of self-learning

materials are presented in the following table.


Table 16

Opinion of student teachers about general characteristics of self -learning materials - mean scores


Since the mean score of opinion about general characteristics of self-

learning materials is 3.59, it can be concluded that the student teachers possess

favourable opinion towards the general characteristics of self-learning

materials. The obtained ' t' values shows that there is no significant difference

in opinion among male and female student teachers (t = 1.25). But there is

significant difference among Science and Arts student teachers (t = 3.622),

student teachers with graduation and post graduation (t=2.668) regarding their

opinion. The analysis also reveals that science student teachers and student

teachers with post graduation possess favourable opinion than their counterparts.

p

0.262

0.000

0,000

0.002

The F value shows that the student teachers of aided colleges and university

Sub sample Test-statistics Opinion Score

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

, t

t

F

Mean

3.57 3.60 3*63 3.55 3m56 3.62 3.54

3.62

3.62

3.59

Male Female Sclence Arts Degree PG Unaided Aided

Uni. Centre

1.25

3.622**

2,668**

6 1 5 * *

Total Sample

SD

0.37 0.36 0*36 0.36 Oe37 0.35 0.35

0.37

0.37

0.36

N

215 985 663 537 547 653 400

400

400

1200


colleges possess more favourable opinion than the student teachers of Unaided

Colleges.

5.2.2.2 Opinion of student teachers about preparation and

implementation of self-learning materials.

The opinion of student teachers regarding the preparation and

implementation of self-learning materials is analysed by the statements 9 and

10. The statement number.9 in the opinionnaire is negative and statement no.

10 is positive. The following table presents the student teacher's opinion ,

towards preparation and implementation of self-learning materials.

Table 17

Opinion of student teachrs on preparation and implementation of self-learning materials - mean scores


p

,,5

0.000-

0.000

0.198

Sub sample Test-statistics Opinion Score

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

t

t

F


Degree PG Unaided

Aided

Uni. Centre

0.326

3.561**

4.715**

1.623

N

215 985 663 537 547 653 400

400

400

1200

Mean

3.71 3.69 3.75 3.62 3.60 3.77 3.74

3.68

3.66

3.69 Total Sample

SD

0.68 0.62 0.60 0.67 0.67 0.59 0.60

0.65 0.66

0.63


The table reveals that the student teachers possess a favourable

opinion towards the preparation and implementation of self-learning materials

(mean score = 3.69). Science and Arts student teachers, (3.56 1) degree and

post graduate student teachers (4.7 15) differ significantly in their opinion (.0 1

level) with respect to the preparation and implementation of self-learning

materials.


materials on learners.

The statements 11 to 23 in the opinionnaire are related to the impact

of self-learning materials on learners. The statements 1 1, 13, 14, 1 6, 20, 22

and 23 are positive statements and 12, 15, 17, 18, 19 and 2 1 are negative

statements. The data and result of analysis are presented in the following table.

Table I8

Opinion of student teachers about the impact of self-learning materials on learners - mean scores


Sub sample

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

p

0.000

0.014

0.025

0.310

Ma1 e Female Science Arts Degree PG Unaided Aided

Uni. Centre

Opinion Score

Total Sample

Mean

3.47 3.40 3-44 3.39 3m39 3.43 3.42

3.43 3.40

3.41

. Test-statistics

t

. t

t

F

SD

0.35 0.33 0*32 0.35 0m34 0.33 0.33 0.33

0.34

0.33

2.814**

2.486*

2.265*

1.171

N

215 985 663 537 547 653 400

400 400

1200


From the obtained mean value (3.41) it can be concluded that the

student teachers have favourable opinion about the impact of self-learning

materials on learners. In this respect the opinion of male and female student

teachers (t = 2.81), Science and Arts student teachers (t = 2-49), student

teachers with graduation and post graduation (t = 2.27) differ significantly. The

result of analysis reveals that male student teachers, science student teachers

and student teachers with post graduation possess more favourable opinion.


materials on teachers.

The statements 24 to 27 in the opinionnaire are related to the impact

of selfaearning materials on teachers. The statements 25 and 27 are positive

statements and statements 24 and 26 are negative statements. The data and

result of analysis are presented in the following table.


Table 19

Opinion of student teachers about the impact of self-learning materials on teachers - mean scores


From the obtained mean score value (3.06) it can be concluded that

the student teachers have favourable opinion towards the impact of self-learning

materials on teachers.

p

>.5

-- -

0.366

~ . ~ ~ o

0.685

The table also reve'als that there is significant difference (t = 3.643)

among student teachers having graduation and post graduation in this respect. , - ).

:, 9:; dk 5.2.2.5 Opinion towards development of mlues among learners by usiqg

. Test-statistics Sub sample

self-learning strategies

Opinion Score

t

- .--- -

, t

F

Sex

Subj ect

Qualification

Ins ti l t ion

The opinion of student teachers about the development of values

0.056

. - - . - -- . -

0.998

3.643**

0.378


Degree PG Unaided Aided

Uni. Centre

among learners by using self-learning strategies is sought by giving the

N

215 985 663 537 547 653 400

400

400

1200

Mean

3.06 3.06 3 3.05 3-01 3.11 3.05

3.06 3.08

3.06 Total Sample

statements 28 to 30; All statements under this category are positive.

SD

0.52 0.47 0.46 0.50 0.49 0.46 0.44

0.50 0.49

0.48

130 Analysis ofData

The following table presents the data and result of analysis of opinion

of student teachers towards use of self-learning materials and development of

values among learners.

Table 20

Opinion of student teachers towards the self-learning materials and development of values among learners- mean scores


From the obtained mean score value (3.41) it can be observed that

student teachers have favourable opinion that use of self-learning materials do

not help the learners in developing values among them. Science student

teachers and student teachers with post-graduation shows more favourable

opinion.

p

0.189

0.0 17

0,000

0.459

Sub sample . Test-statistics Opinion Score

Sex

Subj ect

Qualification

Institution

t

t

F

Mean

3*23 3.33 3.25 3.38 3-39 3.25 3.27

3.35

3.31

3.41


Aided

Uni. Centre

1.425

2.4*

2,668**

0.779

Total Sample

SD

Oog8 0.89 0.88 0.93

0.93 0.97

0.86 0.89

0.33

N

215 985 663 537 547 653 400

400

400

1200


5.2.2.6 General opinion of student teachers towards the use of self-

learning materials.

The data and result of analysis of general opinion of student teachers

towards the use of self-learning materials is presented in the following table.

Table 21

General opinion of student teachers towards the use of self-learning materials - mean scores


The table reveals that the student teachers have a favourable opinion

towards the use of self-learning materials (mean score= 3.42). But there is

significant difference among Science and Arts student teachers

(t = 3.052) and student teachers having graduation and post graduation (t=3.3 53)

with respect to their opinion towards the use of self-learning materials. Science

p

0.466

0.000

0,000

0.147

Sub sample Test-statistics Opinionscore

Sex

Subj ect

Qualification

Institution

t

t

t

F

Mean

3*43 3.42 3.44 3.40 3.40 3.44 3.41

3.44 3.42

3.42


Degree PG Unaided Aided Uni. Centre

0.757

3.052**

3.353**

1.919

Total Sample

SD

0m23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.22 0.23

0.22 0.24

0.23

N

985 663 537 547 653 400

400

400

1200


student teachers and student teachers with post-graduation are found to have

more favourable opinion towards the use of self-learning materials. Opinion

of male and female student teachers, student teachers of Unaided Colleges,

Aided Colleges and University centres are more or less the same.

Conclusion

The analysis of opinionnaire with regard to the use of self-learning

materials revealed that the student teachers have favourable opinion towards

the use of self-learning materials. On considering the sub sample of student

teachers it can be observed that in many aspects male student teachers have

more favourable opinion than female student teachers. The favourable opinion

among Arts and Science student teachers are found to be the same. While

post graduate student teachers have more favourable opinion than Graduate

student teachers. On considering the management of training colleges there is

no significant difference among student teachers of Unaided Colleges, Aided

Colleges and University Colleges with respect to their opinion towards the

use of self-learning materials.

5.2.3 Availability and extent of use, training provided, problems faced

and suggestions proposed for effective use regarding self-learning

materials

This part deals with the analysis of data based on the questionnaire.

The details of analysis are given under the following subheads:


5.2.3.1 Availability and extent of use of self-learning materials in teacher

education institutions.

5.2.3.2 Training provided in teacher education institutions in preparing and

using self-learning materials.

5.2.3.3. Problems faced by student teachers in using self-learning materials.

5.2.3.4 Suggestions proposed by student teachers for the effective use of

self-learning materials.

The analysis carried out under each subhead is given below.

5.2.3.1 Availability and extent of use of self-learning materials in

teacher education institutions.

The first part of the questionnaire seeks information about the

availability and extent of use of self-learning materials in various teacher

education institution.

The analysis under this subhead consist of the following three parts.

5.2.3.1 .1 Availability of self-learning materials based on B.Ed. curriculum

and School curriculum.

5.2.3.1.2 Availability and extent of use of devices and equipments associated

with self-learning materials.

5.2.3.1.3 Availability of self-learning materials - comparison with regard to

management of teacher education institutions.

The analysis carried out under each part is given below.


5.2.3.1.1 Availability of self-learning materials based on B.Ed.

Curriculum and Secondary School Curriculum.

The following table presents the percentage distribution of positive

responses of student teachers on the availability of B.Ed. and School cumculurn

related self-learning materials in their institution such as programmed learning

material, instructional modules, computer assisted instructional material,

multimedia package, audio and video cassettes on educational programmes,

educational films and slides.


Table 22

Responses of student teachers with regard to availability of self- learning materials based on B.Ed. and Secondary School curriculum.

Sl. No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

S elf-learning materials

Programmed learning materials

Instructional modules

Computer assisted instructional mat eri a1

Multimedia package

Audio-cassettes on educational programmes

Video cassettes on educational programmes

Educational Films

Slides on Educational programmes

No. of +ve response regarding

School Cuniculum

179 (14.92%)

125 (10.42%)

111 (9.25%)

145 (1 2.08%)

347 (28.92%)

300

(25%)

305 (22.42%)

25 1 (20.9 1%)

No. of +ve response regarding

B.Ed. Curriculum

5 0 5 (42.08%)

341 (28.41%)

3 32 (27.67%)

305 (25.42%)

42 8 (35.66%)

459 (38.25%)

448 (37.33%)

869 (72.42%)

Total N= 1 2 0 0

684 (57%)

466 (38.83%)

443 (36.92%)

450 (37.50%)

775 (64.58%)

759 (63.25%)

753 (62.75%)

1120 (93.33%)


Majority of student teachers under study reported that in their

institution self-learning materials such as programmed learning material (57%),

audio cassettes (64.58%), video cassettes (63.25%), educational films

(62.75%), and slides on educational programmes (93.33 %) are available. But

only a low percentage of the subjects under study reported that they have

instructional modules (3 8.83%), computer assisted instructional material

(36.92%) and multimedia package (37.5%)

The analysis also shows that most of the available self-learning

materials are based on B .Ed. curriculum and are - programmed learning material

(42.08%), instructional modules (2 8.4 1 %), computer assisted instructional

material (27.67%), multimedia package (25.42%), audio cassettes (35.66%),

video cassettes (3 8.25%) films on educational programmes (37.33%) and slides

on educational programmes (72.4 1 %). It shows the need for preparing more

materials and software packages based on school curriculum.

5.1.3.1.2 Availability and extent of use of devices and equipments

associated with self-learning materials.

The percentage distribution of positive responses of student teachers

with regard to the availabiltiy and extent of use of devices and equipments

associated with self-learning materials are presented in the following table.


Table 23

Response of student teachers with regard to the availability and extent of use of devices and equipments associated with self-learning materials

S1. No .

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Devices and Equipments

Still camera

Record player

Tape recorder

Radio

Slide Projector

FilmProjector

Epidiascope

O H P

Television

VCR

VCP

Computer

I

Total N= 1200

732 (61%)

888 (74%)

1053 (87.75%)

99 1 (82.58%)

1100 91.67%)

73 1 60.92%)

675 (56.25%)

1066 (88.83%)

991 (82.58%)

799 (66.58%)

735 (6 1.25%)

844 (70.33%)

I

response o f use

Never

86 (7.16%)

97 (8.08%)

93 (7.75%)

157 (1 3.08%)

130 (10.83%)

115 (9.58%)

140 (1 1.66%)

92 (7.66%)

152 (12.66%)

136 11.33%)

138 (1 1.5%)

96

8%)

Number of on

Frequently

266 (22.16%)

326 (27.1 6%)

447 (37.25%)

321 (27.75%)

362 (31.16%)

174 14.5%)

150 (1 2.5%)

413 (34.41%)

324

(27%)

216 (1 8%)

193 (16.08%)

369 (30.75%)

students with positive availability and extent

Rarely

380 (3 1.67%)

465 (38.75%)

513 (42.75%)

513 42.75%)

608 (50.66%)

442 (36.83%)

385 (32.08%)

561 (46.75%)

515 (42.91%)

447 (37.25%)

404 (33.66%)

379 (3 1.58%)


Majority of the student teachers reported that in their institution the

devices and equipments associated with self-learning materials available are

Still Camera (61%), Record Player (74%), Tape Recorder (87.75%), Radio

(82.58%), Slide Projector (91.67%), Film Projector (60.92%), Epidiascope

(56.25%), OHP (88.83%), Television (82.58%), VCR (66.58%), VCP (61.25%)

and Computer (70.33%). From the obtained values it can be observed that slide

projector is the more available one and Epidiascope is the least available one.

On analysing the extent of use of devices and equipments related to

self-learning materials, the data and result of analysis shows that some student

teachers had never used the devices, still camera (7.16%), Record Player

(8.08%), Tape Recorder (7.75%), Radio (13.08%), Slide Projector (10.83%),

Film Projector (9.58%), Epidiascope (11.66%), OHP (7.66%), Television

(12.66%), VCR (11.33%), VCP (11.5%) and Computer (8%). A small

proportion of the student teachers had rarely used Still Camera (31.67%,)

Record Player (3 8.75%), Tape Recorder (42.75%), Radio (42.75%), Slide

Projector (50.66%), Film Projector (36.83%), Epidiascope (32.08%), OHP

(46.75%), Television (42.9 1 %), VCR (37.25%), VCP (33.66%) and Computer

(3 1.58%). But only a limited number of student teachers had been used the

devices frequently - Still Camera (22.1 6%), Record Player (27.16%), Tape

Recorder (37.25%), Radio (26.75%), Slide Projector (30.16%), Film Projector

(14.5%), Epidiascope (12.5%), OHP (34.41 %), Television (27%), VCR (1 8%),

VCP (16.08%) and Computer (30.75%).


5.2.3.1.3 Availability of self-learning materials - comparison with regard

to the management of teacher education institutions.

The following table presents the data and result of comparison of

positive responses of student teachers regarding the availabiltiy of self-learning

materials among Aided Colleges, Unaided Colleges and University Colleges.

Self-learning materials and Software materials

Programmed learning material

Instructional modules

Computer assisted instructional material

Multimedia packages

Audio cassettes on educational program

Video cassettes on educational program

Film on educational programme

Slides

. * : Significant at 0.05 level ** : Significant at 0.01 level

Table 24

Availability of self-learning materials - comparison among aided colleges, unaided colleges and university colleges

w P 0

Number of students with positive responses proportion Aided

Vs ha ided

3.842""

0.718

0.435

1.683

3.108**

4.414**

2.697""

2.818**

Z test for Uni.

Centre Vs

Aided

0.653

2.473"

1.837

1.177

1.731

0.076

0.817

1.41 1

Unaided University Centre Uni. Centre

Vs Unaided

3.194**

1.757

1.403

0.507

1.383

4.489""

1.883

1.444

N

195

160

152

160

238

212

230

363

N

240

136

133

153

257

274

256

Aided

% Aided

48.75

40

38

40

59.5

53

57.5

90.75

%

60

34

33.25

38.25

64.25

68.5

64

374 .

N

249

170

158

136

280

273

267

%

62.25

42.5

39.5

34.25

70

68.25

66.75

93,5 1 383 95.75


From the Z test for proportion it can be observed that there is no

significant difference in the availability of instructional modules, computer

assisted instructional material and multimedia package among Aided Colleges,

Unaided Colleges and University Centres. But there exist difference in the

availability of programmed learning material (at .0 1 level). The result of analysis

shows that programmed learning material is more available in Aided Colleges

and University Colleges than in Unaided Colleges.

In the case of materials like audio and video cassettes on educational

programmes, educational films and slides, there is significant difference in

availability among Aided Colleges and Unaided colleges. Most of the materials

are more available in Aided Colleges than in Unaided Colleges.

5.2.3.2 Training provided in teacher education institutions with regard

to preparation and use of self-learning materials.

The analysis camed out under this subhead is as follows:

5.2.3.2.1 Preparation of self-learning materials during B.Ed. Course

5 2.3.2.2 Guidance in preparing self-learning materials during B.Ed. Course.

5.2.3.2.3 Self-learning materials used while learning certain topics of B.Ed.

Cumculum.

5.2.3.2.4 Opinion regarding the need for training in the preparation of self-

learning materials.


5.2.3.2.5 Opinion regarding learning of certain topics in B.Ed. Course using


The details of analysis carried out under each part is given below.

5.2.3.2.1 Preparation of self-learning materials during B.Ed. Course

The following table presents the percentage distribution of student

teachers who have been prepared self-learning materials during B.Ed. Course.

Table 25

Responses of student teachers with regard to preparation of self-learning materials

during B.Ed. Course

From the table it can be understand that only a small portion of the

student teachers (34.75%) have prepared self-learning material during their

teacher training course. The obtained Z value shows that there is no significant

difference in response of male and female student teachers, Science and Arts

Z

0.7628

1.029

1.48 1

0.4602 0.67 1 6 0.2232

Subsample P

0.436

0.294

0.139

0.684 0.494 0.8 1 8

%

32.5 5 35.22

33.48 36.3 1

32.54 36.6

33.5 35.76 3 5.76

34.75

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

Sub groups

Male & Female

Science & Arts

Degree&PG

Unaided & Aided Unaided & Uni-Centre Aided & Uni-centre

Male Female

Science Arts

Degree PG

Unaided Aided Uni. Centre

Total sample


student teachers, graduate and post-graduate student teachers with regard to

preparation of self-learning materials during the B.Ed. Course. Also there is

no significant difference in response among student teachers of Aided Colleges,

Unaided Colleges and University Colleges in this respect.

5.2.3.2.2 Guidance in preparing self-learning materials during B.Ed.

Course

The percentage distribution of student teachers who reported that

they have been provided guidance in preparing self-learning materials during

their B.Ed. Course, is presented in the following table.

Table 26

Response of student teachers with regard to guidance in preparing self-learning materials during B.Ed. Course

The result of analysis of data reveals that only a small portion

(38.66%) of the total sample responded positively towards the item "whether

they have provided any guidance in preparing self-learning materials." The

Z

0.9255

0.5375

0.646

0.7994 0.5 797 0.2 192

Sub sample P

0.358

0.592

0.521

0.418 0.568 0.834

%

35.80 39.28

39.2 1 37.98

37.65 3 9.5 0

40.25 37.50 38.25

3 8.66

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

Sub groups

Male & Female

Science & Arts

Degree & PG

Unaided & Aided Unaided & Uni-centre Aided & Uni-centre

Male Female

Science Arts

Degree PG


Total sample


analysis also reveals that there is no significant difference in response among

arts and science student teachers, male and female student teachers and graduate

and post graduate student teachers. Also the difference in response is not

significant among student teachers of Aided Colleges, Unaided Colleges and

University Colleges.

5.2.3.2.3 Self-learning materials used while learning certain topics of

B.Ed. Course.

The percentage distribution of student teachers who have used self-

learning materials during their B.Ed. Course for learning certain topics are given

in the following table.

Table 27

Response of student teachers with regard to use of self-learning materials during B.Ed. Course

The above data and result of analysis shows that only 53.67

percentage of the total sample have been used self-learning materials for

Sub groups

Male&Female

Science & Arts

Degree&PG

Unaided & Aided Unaided & Uni-centre Aided&Uni-centre

%

59.07 52.49 54.6 1 52.70

51.90 55.13 5 5.75 50.00 55.25

53.67

Sub sample

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

Z

1.754

0.6608

1.125

1.629 0.142 1.487


Degree PG Unaided Aided Uni.Centre

P

0.080

0.504

0.236

0.105 0.889 0.139

Total sample


their learning purpose. It can be observed that there is no significant difference

in response among male and female student teachers, Arts and Science student

teachers, graduate and post graduate student teachers. Also there is no

significant difference in response among student teachers of Aided colleges,

Unaided Colleges and University Colleges.

5.2.3.2.4 Opinion regarding the need for training in the preparation of


The following table presents percentage distribution of student

teachers who have the opinion that student teachers should get training in

preparing self-learning materials.

Table 28

Opinion of student teachers about the need for getting training in preparing self-learning materials

* : Significant at 0.05 level

P

0.373

0.280

0.029

0.129 0.834 0.084

Z

0.898

1.088

2.19*

1.524 0.2 1 8 1.73 9

Sub sample %

87.44 89.54

90.05 88.08

87.02 90.96

88.25 9 1.5 0 87.75

89.17

Sex

Subject

Qualification

Institution

Sub groups

Male&Female

Science & Arts

DegreeBrPG


Male Female

Science Arts

Degree PG


Total sample


The result of analysis reveals that 89.17 percentage of student

teachers under study have the opinion that student teachers should get training

in preparing self-learning materials during their course of study. It can be

observed that there is no significant difference among male and female student

teachers, science and arts student teachers, student teachers of Unaided

Colleges, Aided Colleges and University Colleges. But the PG student teachers

responded more positively than the degree student teachers (0.05 level) towards

the need for getting training in the preparation of self-learning materials.

5.2.3.2.5 Opinion regarding the learning of certain B.Ed. topics using

self-learning materials

The following table presents the percentage distribution of student

teachers who have the opinion that certain units in B.Ed. cumculum should be

learned by using self-learning materials.


Table 29

Opinion of student teachers about using self leaning materials in transacting B.Ed. curriculum

* : Significant at 0.05 level

The analysis of data reveals that 87.5% of the total sample of student

teachers have the opinion that certain units in B.Ed Cumculum should be learned

by using self-learning materials. There is no significant difference in the

opinion of male and female student teachers and student teachers of Unaided

Colleges, Aided Colleges and University Centres. The opinion of Science and

Arts student teachers and student teachers with PG degree and without PG

degree differ significantly at 0.05 level.

Sub sample

5.2.3.3 Problems faced by student teachers in using self-learning materials.

%

86.98 87.6 1

89.5 9 84.92

85.37 8 9.2 8

86.75 87.25 88.50

87.50

Sex

Subject

mf i ca t ion

Institution

The report of the student teachers regarding the problems faced in

using self-learning materials effectively are given in the following table.

Male Female

Science Arts

Degree PG


Sub groups

Male&Female

Science & Arts

Degree&PG


Total sample

Z

0.256

2.436 *

2.037"

0.21 0.752 0.542

P

0.803

0.015

0.042

0.834 0.453 0.5 89


Table 30

Response of student teachers about problems faced in using self-learning materials

The analysis of the report of student teachers revealed that lack of

training is the most crucial problem in using sel f-learning materials (80.5%).

According to 69.25 percentage of student teachers lack of facilities is

another problem. 68.83 percentage of student teachers reported on the problem

of lack of finance. Overcrowded syllabus is a problem for 65.33 percentage of

student teachers. For 66.25 percentage of student teachers lack of adequate

time is a problem. 57.83 percent of the student teachers reported that lack of

adequate knowledge is a problem in using self-learning materials. Lack of

motivation (3 5%), lack of interest (28.67%) and lack of discipline (24.67%)

in the class room are other problems.

S1.No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Percentage (N= 1200)

80.50%

69.25%

66.25%

57.83%

28.67%

35.00%

65.33%

24.67%

68.83%

Problems

Lack of training

Lack of facilities

Lack of time

Lack of adequate know ledge

Lack of interest

Lack of motivation

Over crowded syllabus

Lack of discipline

Lack of finance

Number of students with positive response

966

83 1

795

694

344 .

420

784

296

826


5.2.3.4 Suggestions made by student teachers for the effective use of

self-learning materials

The report of the student teachers regarding the suggestions for

effective use of self-learning materials are presented in the following table.

Table 31

Response of student teachers on suggestions for the effective use of self learning materials

The analysis reveals that 84.08 percentage of the total sample

suggested to provide proper training to prepare and use self-learning materials.

78.17 percentage suggested to provide modem self-instructional materials

Percentage (N=1200)

84.08%

78.17%

82.92%

76.33%

72.92%

Sl-No.

1

2

3

4

5

Suggestions

Provide proper training to prepare and use self-learning materials

Provide modem self-instructional materials and devices for each training institutions

Introduce self-instructional materials and devices in teacher training curriculum

Provide self-learning materials for certain topics

Co-operation of authorities in implementing self-instructional materials and devices

Number of students with positive response

1009

938

995

9 16

875


and devices to teacher training institutions. 82.93 percentage of total sample

suggested to introduce the study on self-learning materials and devices in

teacher training curriculum. 76.33 percentage suggested to provide self-

learning materials for certain topics in the B.Ed. Curriculum and some student

teachers (72.92%) suggested that there should be co-operation on the part of

authorities in implementing self-instructional materials in teacher education

institutions.

Conclusion

On analysing the questionnaire on availability, extent of use and

training provided in teacher education institution towards the use of self-learning

materials, majority of student teachers reported that self-learning materials

and software packages are available to some extent in teacher education

institutions; but their extent of use is not satisfactory. The analysis also reveals

that the available materials are based on B.Ed. Curriculum and not on secondary

school curriculum.

On analysing the training provided in preparing self-learning

materials, most of the student teachers reported that the training provided in

preparing and using self-learning materials, is not adequate.

On analysing the problems faced by student teachers in preparing

and using self-learning materials, lack of training (80.50%) is found to be the

main problem. Lack of facilities, (69.25%) over crowded syllabus (65.3 7%)


and lack of finance (68.85%) are the other major problems. According to the

data and result of analysis the important suggestion made by student teachers

for the effective use of self-learning materials is to provide proper training in

preparing and using sel f-learning materials (84.08%).

5.3 PERFORMANCE OF SECONDARY LEVEL STUDENT

TEACHERS REGARDING THE USE OF SELF-LEARNING MATERIALS.

Experimental method was adopted to test the performance of student

teachers who followed the prepared self-learning materials and conventional

method of teaching. The analysis carried out in this section is given under the

following heads.

5.3.1 Comparison of student teachers in the Experimental Groups and

Control Group - based on Initial academic ability.

5.3.2 Comparison of Performance of student teachers in the Experimental

Groups and Control Group - Analysis of Post-test Scores using

t-test

5.3.3 ComparisonofPerfomanceofStudentteachersintheExperimental

Groups and Control. Groups - Analysis using ANCOVA

5.3.4 Comparison of Performance of Student teachers among the

Experimental Groups.

The analysis carried out under each head is given below.


5.3.1. Comparison of student teachers in the Experimental Groups

and Control Group - based on Initial academic ability.

In order to compare the initbl academic ability of student teachers

in the Experimental and Control Groups, mean scores of qualifying examination

and mean pre-test scores were taken and analysis for test of significance was

camed out. The details of analysis carried out are given in the following

sub heads.

5.3.1.1 Comparison of student teachers in the Experimental Groups and

Control Groups - based on previous achievement.

5 -3.1.2 Comparison of pre-test scores of student teachers in the Experimental

Group-I and Control Group.

5.3.1.3 Comparison of pre-test scores of student teachers in the

Experimental Group-I1 and Control Group.

5.3.1.4 Comparison of pre-est scores of student teachers in the Experimental

group-I11 and Control Group.

The details of analysis carried out under each sub-head are given

below.


5.3.1.1 Comparison of student teachers in the Experimental Groups

and Control Groups - based on previous achievement.

The mean percentage scores of qualifying examination of student

teachers in the Experimental Group-I and Control Group, Experimental

Group- I1 and Control Group, Experimental Group-111 and Control Group were

compared. The data and results of analysis are given in the following table.

Table 32

Test of significance of difference Between the Mean Scores of qualifying examination of Experimental Groups and

Control Group - Total sample

The analysis shows that based on mean percentage scores in the

qua1 ifying examination, there is no significant difference among the student

teachers in Experimental Group-1 and Control Group, Experimental Group-I1

Group

Controlgroup

Experimental Group-I

Experimental Group-11

Experimental Group-I11

N

40

40

40

40

t

1.006

0.821

0.496

Test of significance

Control Group Vs


Control Group Vs


Control Group Vs

Experimental Group-111

Mean

66.815

66.4 1

66.50

67.1

P

> 0.5

> 0.5

> 0.5

SD

1.99

2.17

2.04

2.00


and Control Group, Experimental Group-111 and Control Group. It means all

the student teachers in the three Experimental Groups and Control Groups are

having almost same initial academic ability .


Experimental Group-I and Control Group

The mean pre-test scores of student teachers in the Experimental

Group-I and Control group were compared. The data and result of analysis are

presented in the following table.

Table 33

Test of significance of difference Between the Mean Pre-test Scores of Experimental Group-I and Control Group

The above table shows that there is no significant difference among

the mean pre-test scores of Experimental Group-I and Control Group. The

analysis also reveals that there is no significant difference among the total

Subject

English

Maths

Phy. Sc.

Nat. Sc.

SOC. Sc.

Total

t

0.108

0.702

1.49

0.638

0.703

0.565

Control Group P

>.5

0.496

0.201

>.5

0.496

>.5

Mean

8.25

6.75

9.625

6.75

7.625

7.8


Mean

8.375

8

8.125

7.5

.8.75

8.15

SD

2.43

3.01

2.20

2.66

3.38

2.84

No.

8

8

8

8

8

40

SD

2.20

4.04

1.81

2.00

3.01

2.63

No.

8

8

8

8

8

40


sample (t = 0.565) and subject wise sample. (English = 0.108,

Maths = 0.702, Phy. Sc. = 1.49, Nat. Sc. = 0.638, Soc. Sc. = 0.703). Hence it

can be concluded that student teachers in the Experimental Group - I and Control

Group do not differ significantly in their initial academic ability. It means the

two groups are more or less of the same academic ability.


Experimental Group-I1 and Control Group

The data and result of analysis of mean pre-test scores of student

teachers in the Experimental Group-I1 and Control Group is presented in the

following table.

Table 34

Test of significance of difference between the Mean Pre-test Scores of Experimental Group-I1 and Control Group

The result of the test of significance shows that there is no significant

difference among the mean pre-test scores of Experimental Group - II and

Control Group for the total sample (t = 0.071) and the subject wise samples

Subject

English

Maths

Phy. Sc.

Nat. Sc.

Soc.Sc.

Total

Control Group

Mean

8.25

6.75 9.625 6.75

7.625

7.8

Experimental Group-I1 t

1.206 0.676

1.950

1.347 0.478 0.071

SD

2.43

3.01 2.20

2.66

3.38

2.84.

Mean

6.375 8

6.875 8.13 3.375 7.55

P

0.308

>.5 0.074

0.255

>.5 >.5

No.

8

8

8

8 8

40

SD

3.66 4.28 3.31

1.13 2.88 3 .38

No.

8 8

8

8

8

40


(English = 1.206, Maths = .0676, Phy. Sc. = 1.950, Nat. Sc. = 1.347 and Soc.

Sc. = 0.478). Thus it can be concluded that the initial academic ability of student

teachers in the Experimental Group-I1 and Control Group are almost of the

same academic ability.

5.3.1.4 Comparison of pre-test scores of student teachers in

Experimental Group-I11 and Control Group

The following table presents the data and result of analysis of the

mean pre-test scores of student teachers in the Experimental Group-I11 and

Control Group.

Table 35

Test of Significance of Difference Between the Mean Pre-test Scores of Experimental Group-111 and Control Group

The table shows that there is no significant difference among the

mean pre-test scores of Experimental Group-I11 and Control Group for the

Subject

English Maths

Phy.Sc. Nat. Sc.

SOC. Sc. Total

Control Group

Mean

8.25 6.75

9.625

6.75 7.625

7.8

Experiment a1 Group - I11 t

0.749

1.085

0.341

1.452

0.165

1.293

SD

2.43

3.0:l.

2.20

2.66 3.38

2.84,

Mean

9.125

8.25

9.125

8.625

.7.875

8.6

P

0.479

0.353 >.5

0.215

>.5

0.244

No.

8

8

8 8

8

40

SD

2.23

2.49

3.52

2.50 2.64

2.62

No.

8

8

8 8 8

40


total sample (t=1.29) and for each subject (English = 0.749, Maths = 1.085,

Phy.Sc. = 0.341, Nat. Sc. = 1.452, Soc. Sc.= 0.165). Hence it can be concluded

that student teachers of Experimental Group - 111 and Control Group are almost

of the same initial academic ability.

5.3.2 Comparison of Performance of student teachers in the

Experimental Groups and Control Group - Analysis of Post-test scores

using t-test

In order to determine whether there is any significant difference

between the performance of Experimental Groups and the Control Group, the

mean post-test scores of student teachers in Experimental Groups and Control

Group were analysed using t-test. The analysis was carried out for the total

sample and subject-wise sample and is given under the following sub heads.

5.3.2.1 Comparison of Performance of student teachers in the Experimental

Group-I (CAI) and Control Group

5.3.2.2 Comparison of Performance of student teachers in the Experimental

Group- I1 (Instructional Module) and Control Group

5.3 -2.3 Comparison of Performance of student teachers in the Experimental

Group-I11 (Multimedia Package) and Control Group

The details of analysis carried out under each sub head are given

below.


5.3.2.1 Comparison of Performance of student teachers in the

Experimental Group-I (Computer Assisted Instruction) and Control

Group

For comparing the performance of student teachers with regard to

computer assisted instruction, the mean post-test scores of Experimental

Groups - I and the Control Group were analysed. The critical ratio was computed

for the difference between mean post-test scores of the Experimental Group-

I and the Control Group. The analysis was done for the total sample and the

subjectwise sample and is presented in the following table.

Table 36

Test of Significance of Difference Between the Mean Post-test Scores of Experimental Group91 and Control Group

* Significant at 0.05 level ** Significant at 0.0 1 level

Subject

Enash Maths

Phy. Sc. Nat. Sc.

SOC. Sc. Total

The table reveals that there is significant difference between the mean

Post -test scores of Experimental Group-I and Control Group for the total

sample (t=11.58) and subjectwise sample (English - 2.644, Maths = 5.52,

Control Group

Mean

13.13 11.13

11.50

10.13

10.50 11.28

Experimental Group-I t

2.644* 5.52**

5.38 1 ** 5.358**

10.167" 1 4 * *

SD

3.40 2.59

2.56

3.52

2.07 8.56

Mean

18.25 18.00

18.13

18.38

20.25 18.60

P

0.019 0.000

0,000

0.000 0.000 0.000

No.

8 8

8

8

8 40

SD

4.30 2.39

2.36 2.56 1.75 2.79

No.

8 8

8 8

8 40


Phy. Sc = 5.381, Nat. Sc = 5.358, Soc. Sc. = 10.167). Hence it can be concluded

that the student teachers who used computer assisted instruction performed

better than that of the student teachers who followed conventional lecture

method of teaching.


Experimental Group-I1 (Instructional Module) and Control Group

For comparing the performance of student teachers who used

instructional modules, the mean post-test scores of Experimental Group - I1

and the mean post-test scores of Control Group were analysed. The critical

ratio was computed for the difference between mean post-test scores of

Experimental Group-I1 and Control Group. The analysis was done for the total

sample and subjectwise sample and is presented in the following table.

Table 37

Test of Significance of Difference Between the Mean Post-test Scores of Experimental Group-IT and Control Group

* Significant at 0.05 level ** Significant at 0.01 level

Subj ect

En@& Maths

Phy. Sc. Nat. Sc. SOC. Sc.

Total

t

2.64*

4.544**

4.191**

3.532** 3.626**

8.056**

P

0.019

0.000 0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

Control Group

Mean

13.13

11.13

11.50

10.13

10.50

11.28


Mean

17.63

16.38

17.1 3

16.25

15.63

16.60

SD

3.40

2.59

2.56

3.52

2.07

8.56

No.

8

8

8

8

8

40

SD

3.42

2.00

2.80

3.41

3.42

2.99

No.

8

8

8

8

8

40


The data and result of analysis shows that there is significant

difference between the mean post-test scores of Experimental Group-I1 and

the Control group for the total sample (t=8.056) and subjectwise sample

(English =2.64, Maths = 4.544, Phy.Sc. = 4.191, Nat. Sc. = 3.532,

Soc. Sc = 3.626). The mean Post-test scores of the total sample and the

subjectwise sample are much better than the mean post-test scores of the Control

Group. Hence it can be concluded that the student teachers who used

instructional module performed better than that of student teachers who

followed conventional lecture method of teaching.


Experimental Group-IT1 (Multimedia Package) and Control Group.

For comparing the performance of student teachers who used

multimedia package, the mean post test scores of the Experimental Group-I11

and the Control Group were analysed. The critical ratio was computed for the

difference between mean post test scores of Experimental Group-111 and

Control Group. The analysis was done for the total sample and subject-wise

sample and is presented in the following table.

16 1 Analysis of Data

Table 38

Test of Significance of Difference Between the Mean Post-test Scores of Experimental Group-I11 and Control Group

** Significant at 0.0 1 level

Subject

En&& Maths

Phy.Sc.

Nat. Sc. Soc.Sc . Total

The above table shows that there is significant difference between

the mean post-test scores of Experimental Group-III and the Control Group

for the total sample (t=11.242) and subjectwise sample (English - 4.007,

Maths - 4.254, Phy. Sc. - 5.014, Nat. Sc. - 5.749, Soc. Sc. - 6.295). Hence it

can be understood that the student teachers who used multimedia package

performed better than that of the student teachers who used conventional lecture

method of teaching.

Genuiness of the difference in performance of student teachers in using


The analysis of the pretest scores of Experimental Groups and

Control Group showed no significant difference in their initial academic

P

0.000 0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

t

4.007** 4.254**

5.014**

5.749**

6.295** 11.242**

Control Group

Mean

13.13 11.13

11.50

10.13

10.50

11.28


Mean

18.75 17.63

18.25

17.88

17.88

18.08

SD

3.40 2.59 2.56 3.52 2.07

8.56

No.

8 8

8 8

8 40

SD

2.05 3.46

2.82

1.46

2.59 2.46

No.

8 8

8

8

8 40


abilities. After the experimental study it was found that the student teachers

who used self-learning materials performed better in their achievement than

the Control Group who followed conventional lecture method of teaching. So

it can be concluded tentatively that the performance of student teachers using

self-learning materials is better than that of the student teachers who followed

conventional lecture method in teaching. But it can not be conclusively say that

these groups differ significantly by merely comparing the post-test scores.

Since the sample selected for the present study were having a slight

difference in the means of pre-test scores, it is difficult to ascertain whether

the difference between the pre-test and post-test scores resulted from the

experimental factors or other variables. So it become necessary that the scores

be analysed using the technique of Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) for

comparison.

Analysis of Covariance is a method of analysis that enables the

researcher to equate the pre-experimental status of the group items of non

variables. Difference in the initial status of the groups can be removed

statistically so that they can be compared as though their initial status had been

equated.

Analysis of covariance uses the principles of partial correlation with

Analysis of Variance. It is particularly appropriate when the subjects in two or

more groups are found to differ on a pre-test or other initial variables. In this,

the effects of pre-test and other relevant variables are partialled out and the


resulting adjusted means of the pre-test scores were compared. The use of the

statistical technique ANCOVA is thus justified for the analysis of the present

study.

5.3.3 Comparison of Performance of Student teachers in the

Experimental Groups and Control Group - Analysis using ANCOVA

The statistical procedure of ANCOVA as given by Garret (1 98 1) is

as follows.

1. Summary of Analysis of Variance

2. SurnmaryofAnalysis ofcovariance

3. Calculation of Adjusted means

According to the given procedure the analysis was carried out for

the total sample and subjectwise sample and is given under the following

subheads.

5.3.3.1 Performance of student teachers with regard to computer assisted

instruction.

5.3.3.2 Performance of student teachers with regard to instructional modules

5.3.3.3 Performance of student teachers with regard to multimedia package

The details of analysis under each sub head are given below.


5.3.3.1 Performance of student teachers with regard to computer

assisted instruction.

The following table presents the summary of analysis of variance of

the pre-test and post-test scores of student teachers in the Experimental

Group-I and Control Group.

Table 39

Summary of analysis of variance of the pre-test and post-test scores in the Experimental Group-I (CAI) and Control Group

Subsample

English

Soures of variation

Among means

Within groups

Total

Maths Within groups 86.873 12.679 6.205 Fy =30.468

df

1

14

15

Phy. Sc.

Nat. Sc.

Soc. Sc

Ssx

0.063

75.375

75.438

Total

Among means

Within groups

Total

Among means

Within groups

Total

Among means

Within groups

Total

Ssy

105 -063

210.375

315.438

15

1

14

15

1

14

15

1

14

15

Total

1073.1 13

637.573

1710.688

Msx

0.063

5.384

183.750

9.000

56.750

65.750

2.250

77.500

79.750

5.063

143.375

148.438

Among means

Within groups

Total

2.450

7.481

Msy

105 -063

15.027

275.938

175.563

84.875

260.438

272.250

132.750

405.000

380.250

5 1.50G

431.750

1

78

79

Fx =0.012

Fy = 6.992

1073.1 13

8.174

2.450

583.500

585.950

9.000

4.054

2.250

5.536

5.063

10.241

----- Fx =0.328

Fy=13 1.283

175.563

6.063

272.250

9.482

380.250

3.679

Fx =2.220

Fy =28.959

Fx = 0.406

Fy = 28.712

Fx= 0.494

Fy=103.369


On analysing the total sample of student teachers in the experimental

study, the obtained value of Fx is 0.328 and Fy is 13 1.253. The table value of F

for df 1/78 is 3.96 at 0.05 level and 6.97 at 0.01 level. Since the Fx value is not

significant, there is no significant difference between the mean pre-test scores

of student teachers in the Experimental Group-I and Control Group. While the

Fy value is significant indicating that the groups differ significantly in the mean

post-test scores.

On considering the subjectwise sample, the obtained values of Fx

for various subsample are English (Fx =0.012), Maths (Fx = 0.493),

Phy. Sc.= (Fx = 2.220), Nat. Sc. (Fx = 0.406) and Soc. Sc. (Fx = 0.494). From

the table, F for df 1/14 is 4.60 at 0.05 level and 8.86 at 0.01 level. The data

reveals that there is no significant difference between the mean pre-test scores

of Experimental Group-I and the students teachers in the Control Group for all

subjects.

The obtained Fy values are English (Fy=6.992), Maths (Fy=36.468),

Phy. Sc. (Fy = 28.959), Nat. Sc. (Fy=28.712) and Sco. Sc. (Fy = 103.369).

This shows that the difference is significant among the subjectwise mean post-

test scores of Experimental Groups and Control Group.

For the purpose of correcting post-test scores (y) for the difference

in the Pre-test Scores (X), Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was adopted.

The result of analysis are shown in the following table .


Table 40

Summary of analysis of co-variance for the pretest and post-test b scores of student teachers in the Experimental Group-I (CAI)

and Control Group

Sub sample

Fy.x

Source of

variation df MSy.x Ssx SDy.x SSxy S ~ Y SSyx


The table value of F for df 1 I77 is 3.96 at 0.05 level and 6.98 at 0.0 1

level. F for df 111 3 is 4.67 at .05 level and 9.07 at .O1 levels respectively. In

the analysis of co-variance the Fy.x value is found to be greater than the table

value for total sample (Fyx = 155.194) and subject-wise sample English (Fy.x

= 7.065), Maths (Fy.x = 40.83 I), Phy. Sc. (Fy.x = 33.8 18), Nat. Sc. (Fy.x =

42.43 1) and Soc. Sc. (Fyx = 96.709). These values are found to be significant I-

at 0.01 level. The significant value for the adjusted post-test scores shows

that the final mean scores of student teachers in the Experimental group-I and

in the Control Group differ significantly for the total sample and subjectwise

sample. The significant F values necessitates proceeding to test the difference

separately by using 't' test.

The adjusted means for the post-test scores of student teachers in

the Experimental Group-I and Control Groups were calculated using regression

coefficients. The data and results are shown in the table below.


Table 41

Data for adjusted means of post-test scores of student teachers in the Experimental Group -I (CAI) and Control Group

The difference in adjusted means of the post-test score of the

Experimental and Control Group was tested for significance for df

1/77 (total sample) and for df 1/14 (subjectwsie sample). The 't' value from

table D is 1.99 and 2.64 at 0.05 level and at .0 1 level for df 1/77 and 2.16 at .05

level and 3.0 1 at .O 1 level for df 11 13 respectively. Thus the obtained t values

t

2.65 9

6.501

6.259

6.608

10.066

12.484

Subsample

English

Maths

Phy. Sc.

Nat. Sc.

Soc. Sc.

Total

MY

13.125

18.250

15.688

11.125

18.006

14.563

11 SO0

18.125

14.813

10.125

18.375

14.250

10.500

20.250

15.375

11.275

18.600

14.938

My .x (adjusted)

13.159

18.216

15.688

11.415

17.7 10

14.563

11.138

18.487

14.813

10.467

18.033

14.250

10.594

20.156

15.375

11.358

18.517

14.93 8

Group

Control group

Exp.Group-I

Control group

Exp. Group-I

Control group

Exp. Group-I

Control group

Exp. Group-I

Control group

Exp. Group-I

Control group

Exp. Group-I

N

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

40

40

Mx

8.250

8.375

8.313

6.750

8.000

7.375

9.625

8.125

8.875

6.750

7.500

7.125

7.625

8.750

8.180

7.800

8.150

7.975


for the total sample (t = 12.484) and subjectwise samples English (t = 2.659),

Maths (t= 6.501), Phy. Sc. (t=6.259), Nat. Sc. (t=6.608), Sco. Sc. (t=10.006)

are found to be significant at .O1 level. It shows that there is significant

difference among the adjusted means of the post test scores of Experimental

Group-I and Control Group. Hence it can be concluded that student teachers

who used computer assisted instructional material performed more better in

the achievement test than the Control Group who followed conventional lecture

method of teaching.

5.3.3.2 Performance of student teacher with regard to Instructional

Modules

The summary of analysis of variance of the pre-test and post-test

scores of student teachers in the Experimental Group-I1 and Control Group are

presented in the following table.


Table 42

Summary of Analysis of Variance of the Pre-test and Post-test scores in the Experimental Group-IT (Module) and Control Group

The table value of F for df 1/78 is 3.96 at .05 level and 6.97 at .01

level. The obtained value of Fx for the total sample is 0.103, and Fy is 64.901.

Since the Fx value is not significant, it shows that there is no significant

difference between the mean pre-test scores of student teachers in the

Fx = 1.454

Fy =6.968

Fx =0.457

Fy =20.649

Fx =3.824

Fy =17.565

Fx = 1.288

Fy 42 .477

Fx=0.229

Fy=12.477

Fx =O. 103

Fy =64.901

Subsample

English

Maths

Phy. Sc.

Nat. Sc.

Maths

Total

MSx

114.063

9.670

6.250

13.679

30.250

7.91 1

18.063

14.027

2.250

9.839

1.250

12.106

MSy

8 1.000

1 1.625

110.250

5.339

126.563

:. 7.205

150.063

12.027

105.063

7.99 1

567.1 12

8.738

Soures of variation

Among means

Within groups

Total

Among means

Within groups

Total

Among means

Within groups

Total

Among means

Within groups

Total

Among means

Within groups

Total

Among means

Within groups

Total

SSy

8 1.000

162.750

243.750

1 10.250

74.750

185.000

126.563

106.875

227.438

150.063

168.375

318.438

105.063

11 1.875

216.938

567.1 12

68 1.575

1248.688

df

1

14

15

I

14

15

1

14

15

1

14

15

1

14

15

1

78

79

SSx

14.063

135.375

149.438

6.250

19 1.500

197.750

30.250

1 10.750

141.000

18.063

196.375

214.438

2.250

137.750

140.000

1 -250

944.300

945.550


Experimental Group- I1 and Control Group. But the Fy value is significant and

it indicates that the groups differ significantly in the mean post-test scores.

On analysing the subjectwise sample, the obtained value of Fx for

various sub sample are, English (Fx = 1.454), Maths (Fx = 0.457), Phy. Sc.

(Fx = 3.824) Nat. Sc. (Fx = 1.288) and Soc. Sc. (Fx = 0.229). From the table, F

for df 1/14 is 4.60 at 0.05 level and 8.86 at 0.01 level. The data reveals the Fx

values are not significant and thus there is no significant difference between

the subjectwise mean pre-test scores of Experimental Group I1 and Control

Group.

The obtained Fy values are English (Fy = 6.968), Maths

(Fy = 20.649), Phy. Sc. (Fy = 17.565) Nat. Sc. (Fy = 12.477) and Soc. Sc.

(Fy = 13.147). This shows that there is significant different among the mean

post-test scores of Experimental Group- I1 and the Control Group.


in the pre-test scores (x), Analysis of Co-variance (ANCOVA) was adopted.

The results of analysis are shown in the following table.


Table 43

Summary of Analysis of Co-variance for the Pre-test and Post-test scores of student teachers in the Experimental Group-I1

(Module) and Control Group

Sub sample

English

Maths

Phy..Sc.

Nat. Sc.

Soc. Sci.

Total

Source of

variation

Among means Within groups

Total


Total


Total


Total


Total


Total

Fy.x

9.276

21.672

109.583

60.346

13.808

124.339

df

1

13

14

1

13

14

1

13

14

1

13

14

1

13

14

1

?7

78

SSxy

-33.750

54.875

21.125

26.250

62.250

88.500

-61.875

92.625

30.750

52.063

174.000

226.063

15.375

60.625

76.000

-26.625

542.500

967.235

SSx

14.063

135.375

149.438

6.250

191.500

197.750

30.250

110.750

141.000

18.063

196.375

214.438

2.250

137.750

140.000

1.250

944.300

1248.688

SSyx

100.258

140.506

240.764

90.878

54.515

145.393

197.323

23.409

220.731

65.919

14.201

80.120

90.487

85.193

175.680

597.326

369.909

12.400

SSY

81.000

162.750

243.750

110.250

74.750

185.000

126.563

100.875

227.438

150.063

168.375

318.438

105.063

111.875

216.938

567.1 12

681.575

515.875

MSy.x

100.258

10.808

17.197

90.878

4.193

10.385

197.323

1.801

15.767

65.919

1.092

5.723

90.487

6.553

12.549

597.326

4.804

SI3y.x

3.208

2.048

1.342

1.045

2.560

2.192


The table value of F for df 1/77 is 3.96 at 0.05 level and 6.98 at

0.01 level. F for df 1/13 is 4.67 at 0.05 level and9.07 at 0.01 level respectively.

In the analysis of Co-variance the Fy.x value is found to be greater than the

table value for total sample (Fyx =124.339) and for subjectwise sample, English

(Fy.x = 9.276), Maths (Fy.x=2 1.672), Phy.Sc. (Fy.x= 109.583), Nat.Sc.

(Fy.x=60.346) and Soc.Sc. (Fy.x=l3.808). The significant values for the adjusted

post-test scores shows that the mean post-test scores of student teachers in

the Experimental group-I1 and in the Control group differ significantly for the

total sample and the subjectwise sample. The significant F values necessitates

proceeding to test the difference separately by using 't' test.


the Experimental Group-I1 and Control Group were calculated using regression

coefficients. The data and results are shown in the table below.


Table 44

Data for Adjusted means of Post-test Scores of Student Teachers in Experimental Group -11 (Module) and Control Group

The difference in adjusted means for the post-test scores of

Experimental Group-I1 and Control Group was tested for significance for

df 1 /77 (total sample) and for df 1/13 (subsamples). The 't' value from table D

for df 1/77 is 1.99 at 0.05 level and 2.64 at .O1 level and for df 1/13, t value is

2.16 at .05 level and 3.01 at .O1 levels. The obtained t values for total sample

Subsample

English

Maths

Group

Control group

Exp. Group-I1

Control group

Exp. Group-I1

My .x (adjusted)

12.745

18.005

15.375

11.328

16.172

13.750

MY

13.125

17.625

15.375

11.125

16.375

13.750 -----

N

8

8

8

8

t

3 -200

4.73 1

10.350

18.275

14.313

10.467

18.033

14.250

10.665

1 5 -460

13.063

1 1.203

16.672

13.938

11.500

17.125

14.313

10.125

18.375

14.250

10.500

15.625

13.063

1 1.275

16.600

13.938

Mx

8.250

6.375

7.313

6.750

8 .OOO

7.375

11.812

6.608

3.746

11.158

9.625

6.875

8.250

6.750

7.500

7.125

7.625

8.375

8.000

7.800

7.550

7.675

Phy. Sc.

Nat. Sc.

Soc. Sc.

Total

Control group

Exp. Group-I1

Control group

Exp. Group-I1

Control group

Exp. Group-II

Control group

Exp. Group-11

8

8

8

8

8

8

40

40


(t41.158) and subjectwise samples, English (t=3.200), Maths (t=4.73 I),

Phy.Sc. (t=11.8 12), Nat. Sc. (t=8.118) and Sco. Sc. (t=3.746) are found to be

significant at 0.01 level. This shows that there is significant difference among

the adjusted means of the post-test scores of Experimental Group-II and Control

Group. Hence it can be concluded that student teachers who used instructional

modules performed more better in their achievement test than the Control

Group who followed conventional lecture method in teaching.

5.3.3.3 Performance of Student Teachers with regard to Multimedia

Package.

The summary of Analysis of Variance of the pre-test and post-test

scores of student teachers in the Experimental Group-I11 and Control Group

are given in the following table.


Table 45

Summary of Analysis of Variance of the Pre-test and Post-test scores in the Experimental Group-111 (Multimedia)

and Control Group

The table value of F for df 1/78 is 3.96 at -05 level and 6.97 at .01

levels. The obtained value of Fx for the total sample is 1.71 5 and Fy is 126.385.

Since the Fx value is not significant, it shows that there is no significant

difference between the mean pre-test scores of student teachers in the

Experimental Group-111 and Control Group. But the Fy value is significant and

Subsample

English

Maths

Phy. Sc.

Nat. Sc.

Sot-Sc.

Total

Soures of variation

Among means

Within groups

Total

Among means

Within groups

Total

Among means

Within groups

Total

Among means

Withingroups

Total

Among means

Withingroups

Total

Amongmeans

Within groups

Total

SSx

3.063

76.375

79.438

9.000

107.000

116.000

1.000

120.750

121.750

14.063

93.375

107.438

0.250

128.750

129.000

12.800

582.000

594.800

df

1

14

15

1

14

15

1

14

15

1

14

15

1

14

15

1

78

79

MSy

126.563

7.884

169.000

9.339

182.250

7.250

240.250

7.268

21 7.563

5.491

924.800

7.3 17

Fx=0.561

Fy = 16.053

Fx=1.178

Fy =18.096

Fx=0.116

Fy =25.138

Fx =2.108

Fy =33.057

Fx = 0.027

Fy=39.621

Fx=1.715

Fy=126.385

SSy

126.563

1 10.375

236.938

169.000

130.750

299.750

182.250

10 1.500

283.750

240.250

101.750

342.000

217.563

76.875

294.438

924.800

570.750

1495.550

MSx

3.063

5.455

9.000

7.643

1.000

8.625

14.063

6.670

0.250

9.196

12.800

7.462


it indicates that the two groups differ significantly in their mean post-test

scores.

On analysing the subjectwise sample, the obtained value of Fx for

various sub sample are English (Fx = 0.561), Maths (Fx=1.178), Phy.Sc. (Fx =

0.1 16), Nat. Sc. (Fx = 2.108) and Soc. Sc. (Fx = 0.027). From the table, F for df

1/14 is 4.60 at 0.05 level and 8.86 at 0.01 level. Since Fx values are not

significant, it reveals that there is no significant difference between the

subjectwise mean pre-test scores of the Experimental Group-111 and Control

Group.

The obtained Fy values are English (Fy=126.388), Maths

(Fy = 16.053), Phy. Sc. (Fy = 25.138) Nat. Sc. (Fy = 33.057) and Soc. Sc.

(Fy =39.62 1). This shows that there is significant difference between the

mean post-test scores of the Experimental Group-I11 and the Control Group.


in the pre-test scores, (x) Analysis of covariance was adopted. The result of

analysis are shown in the following table.


Table 46

Summary of Analysis of Co-variance for the Pre-test and Post-test scores of Student Teachers in the Experimental Group-I11

(Multimedia) and Control Group

Sub sample

English

Maths

Phy.Sc.

Nat. Sc.

Soc. Sci.

Total

Source of

variation


Total


Total


Total


Total


Total


Total

df

1

13

14

1

13

14

1

13

14

1

13

14

1

13

14

1

77

78

Fy.x

14.172

14.701

94.127

26.359

37.650

132.162

SSx

3.063

76.375

79.438

9.000

107.000

116.000

1.000

120.750

121.750

14.063

93.375

107.438

0.250

128.750

129.000

12.800

582.000

594.800

SSy

126.563

110.375

236.938

169.000

130.750

299.750

182.250

101.500

283.750

240.250

101.750

342.000

217.563

76.875

294.438

924.800

570.750

1495.550

SSxy

19.688

3.000

22.688

39.000

43.000

82.000

-1 3.500

94.250

80.750

58.125

44.375

102.500

7.375

18.375

25.750

108.800

230.900

339.700

SSyx

120.201

110.257

230.458

128.315

113.470

241.784

202.259

27.934

230.193

163.549

80.661

244.211

215.045

74.253

289.297

822.398

479.144

1301.542

MSy.x

120.201

8.481

16.461

128.315

8.728

17.270

202.259

2.149

16.442

6.205

17.444

215.045

5.712

20.664

822.398

6.233

16.686

SDy.x

2.912

2.954

1.466

2.491

2.390

2.495


F for df 1/77 is 3.96 at 0.05 level and 6.98 at 0.01 level. F for df

1/13 is4.67 at 0.05 level and9.07 at 0.01 level. Inthe analysisofco-variance

the Fy.x value is found to be greater than the table value for total sample

(Fy.x = 132.162) and for subject-wise sample - English (Fy.x = 14.172), Maths

(Fy.x=14.701), Phy. Sc. (Fy.x =94.127), Nat. Sc. (Fy.x.= 26.359) and Soc. Sc.

(Fy.x = 37.650). The significant values for the adjusted post-test scores shows

that the mean post-test scores of student teachers in the Experimental

Group-I11 and in the Control Group differ significantly for the total sample and

the subjectwise sample. The significant F value necessitates proceeding to

test the difference separately by using 't' test.


the Experimental Group-I11 and Control Group were calculated using regression

coefficient. The data and results are shown in the table below


Table 47

Data for Adjusted Means of Post-test Scores of Student Teachers in Experimental Group -111 (Multimedia) and Control Group

The difference in adjusted means for the post-test scores of

Experimental Group-111 and Control Group was tested for significance for

df 1 177 (total sample) and for df 11 1 3 (sub samples). The 't' value from table D

for df 1/77 is 1.99 at .05 level and 2.64 at .O1 level and for df 1/13, t value is

2.16 at 0.05 level and 3.01 at .O 1 level. The obtained 't' values for total sample

Subsample

English

Maths

Phy. Sc.

Nat. Sc.

Soc. Sc.

Total

Group

Controlgroup

Exp. Group-TI1

Control group

Exp. Group-111

Control group

Exp. Group-111

Control group

Exp. Group-111

Control group

Exp. Group-I11

Control group

Exp. Group-III

N

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

40

40

Mx

8.250

9.125

8.688

6.750

8.250

7.500

9.625

9.125

9.375

6.750

8.625

7.688

7.625

7.875

7.750

7.800

8.600

8 -200

My .x (adjusted)

13.142

18.733

15.938

1 1.426

17.324

14.375

11 -305

1 8 -445

14.875

10.571

17.429

14.000

10.518

17.857

14.188

1 1.434

17.916

14.675

MY

13.125

18.750

15.938

11 .I25

17.625

14.375

1 1.500

18.250

14.875

10.125

17.875

14.000

10.500

17.875

14.188

1 1.275

18.075

14.675

t

3.839

3.992

9.742

5.507

6.142

1 1.622


(t=11.622) and sub samples English (t=3.839), Maths (t=3.992), Phy. Sc.

(te9.742), Nat. Sc. (t=5.507) and Soc. Sc. (t=6.142) are found to be significant

at -0 1 level. This reveals that there is significant difference among the adjusted

means of the post-test scores of Experimental Group-111 and Control Group.

Hence it can be concluded that student teachers who followed Multimedia

Package performed better in their achievement test than the control group who

followed conventional method of teaching.

5.3.4 Comparison of performance of student teachers among the

experimental groups (Experimental Group-I, Experimental Group-I1 and

Experimental Group-111)

The performance of student teachers in the Experimental groups were

compared and the analysis done in this regard is given under the following

subheads.

5.3.4.1 Comparison of performance of student teachers among the

Experimental groups - Analysis using t-test

5.3.4.2 Comparison of performance of student teachers among Experimental

groups - Analysis using ANCOVA

The details of analysis carried out under each subhead are given

below.


5.3.4.1 Comparison of performance of student teachers among the

Experimental groups - Analysis using t-test

Inorder to compare the performance of student teachers in the

Experimental Groups who used computer assisted instruction (Experimental

Group-I), instructional module (Experimental Group-11) and Multimedia

Package (Experimental Group-111), the mean post-test scores of student

teachers in Experimental Group-I was compared with the mean post-test scores

of Experimental Group-11, student teachers of Experimetnal Group-I1 with that

of Experimental Group-I11 and student teachers of Experimental Group-I with

that of Experimental Group- 111. The analysis was done only for the total sample

and is presented in the following table.

Table 48

Test of significance of difference between the mean post-test scores of Experimetnal Group-I, Experimental Group-I1 and


* : Significant at .05 level ** : Significant at .O1 level

P

<0..5

N . 5

c0.5

S.D

2.79

2.99

2.46

Group

Computer Assisted Instruction (Exp. Group-I)

Instructional Module (Exp. Group-11)

Multimedia Package (Exp . Group-111)

Test-statistics-t

Exp.Group-I Vs

Exp. Group-I1

Exp.Group-I Vs

Exp. Group-I11

Exp.Group-11 Vs

Exp. Group-111

N

40

40

40

3.054""

0.873

2.3 87*

Mean

1 8.60

16.60

18.08


The table shows that the mean post-test scores of Experimental

Group - I is significantly different at .Ol level (t = 3.054) from the mean post-

test scores of Experimental Group-11. There is no significant difference among

the mean post test scores of Experimental Group-I and Experimental Group-I11

(t = 0.873) and the mean post-test scores of Experimental Group-I1 is

significantly different at .05 level from mean post-test scores of Experimental

Group-111 (t = 2.3 87). The mean scores help us to state that the student teachers

who followed CAI material and multimedia package achieved better than those

who followed instructional module. Hence the performance of student teachers

who used CAI and MMP is little better than the student teachers who used

instructional module.

5.3.4.2 Comparison of performance of student teachers in the

Experimental Groups - Analysis using ANCOVA

Inorder to check the genuineness of the difference in performance

of student teachers among Experimental Group-I, Experimenal Group-I1 and

Experimenal Group-111. Analysis of co-variance was adopted and the details

of analysis are given below.

The summary of analysis of variance of the pre-test and post-test

scores of student teachers in the Experimental Group-I, Experimental

Group-I1 and Experimental Group-I11 are given in the following table.


Table 49

Summary of Analysis of variance of the pre-test and post-test scores of student teachers in Experimental Group-I, Experimental Group-I1

and Experimental Group-111

From table, F for df 211 17 is 3.09 at .05 level and 4.82 at .O 1 levels

respectively. The obtained value of Fx is 1.1 13 and it is not significant. The

obtained value of Fy is 5.666 and which is significant at .01 level. The data

reveals that there is no significant difference in pre-test scores of student

teachers in Experimental Group-I, Experimental Group-I1 and Experimental

Group-111. The obtained value of Fy is 5.666 which is significant at . O l level.

It reveals that there is significant difference in the mean post-test scores of

Experimental Group-I, Experimental Group-I1 and Experimental Group-111.

Source of variation

Among Means

Within groups

Total

For the purpose of correcting post-test scores (Y) for the difference

in the pre-test scores (X) ANCOVA was adopted. The details of analysis are

shown in the following table.

df

2

117

119

SSx

22.2

1166.6

1188.8

s s Y

86.015

887.975

973.99

MSx (vx)

11.1

9.9709

MSy WY)

43.0075

7.5895

Fx=l. 11323

Fy=5.666


Table 50

Summary of Analysis of Co-variance of the pre-test and post-test scores of student teachers in Experimental Group-I, Experimental Group-I1

and Experimental Group-111

The obtained value of F ratio is 6.054, which is found to be significant

at 0.0 1 level, since the table values are 3.09 and 4.82 at .05 and .0 1 levels

respectively. This significant F ratio for the adjusted post-test scores of

Experimental Group-I, Experimental Group-I1 and Experimental Group-I11 differ

significantly after they have been adjusted for differences in pre-test scores.

The adjusted means of post-test scores of student teachers of Experimental

Group-I, Experimental Group-I1 and Experimental Group-111 were computed

using regression coefficient. The data and results are shown in table below.

Source of variance

Among Means

W l h groups

Total

df

2

116

I 1 8

Fy.x =

6.0547

SDy.x

2.137

SSx

22.2

1166.6

1188.8

SSy

86.015

887.975

973.99

SSxy (Vfi

55.34

530.37

585.71

s XY (VX)

33.5

645.9

679.4

MSy.x (VY-x)

27.67

4.57


Table 51

Data for adjusted means of post-test scores of student teachers in Experimental Group-I, Experimental Group-I1

and Experimental Group-I11

The adjusted means of the post-test scores of student teachers of

Experimental Group-I is 18.57, Experimental Group-I1 is 16.9 and Experimental

Group-111 is 17.8. The difference in adjusted means of the post-test scores of

student teachers in Experimental Group-I and Experimental Group-I1 is 1.67,

Experimental Group-I and Experimental Group-111 is 0.77 and between

Experimental Group-I1 and Experimental Group-I11 is 0.9. This difference in

adjusted means of the post-test scores was tested for significance of difference

at 0.05 level and at 0.01 levels and is given in the table below.

My.x

18.57

16.9

17.8

17.76

Group

Computer Assisted Instruction (Exp. Group-I)

Instructional Module (Exp. Group-11)

Multimedia Package (Exp. Group-111)

General Mean

MY

18.6

16.6

18.075

17.76

N

40

40

40

Mx

8.15

7.55

8.6

8.1


Table 52

Data for difference in adjusted means of post-test scores of student teachers in Experimental Group-I, Experimental Group-11, Experimental Group-I11 and data for significant difference

(Post Analysis of Co-variance)

The difference in adjusted means of post test scores of student

teachers in Experimental Group-I and Experimental Group-I1 (1.67) is found

to be significantly different at .0 1 level (higher than 1.23 8). The result also

reveals that there is no significant difference in adjusted means of post test

Value of significant difference

at 1%

1.238

1.238

1.238

scores among student teachers of Experimental Group-I and Experimental

Group-I11 and among Experimental Group-I1 and Experimental Group-I11 (lower

Groups

Exp. Group-I Vs

Exp. Group-I1

Exp. Group-I Vs

Exp. Group-I11

Exp. Group-I1 Vs

Exp. Group-111

than 0.937) since the difference in adjusted mean of post-test scores is lower

than the value of significant difference at 0.05 and 0.01 levels respectively. So

it can be concluded that the performance in achievement test of student teachers

Difference in adjusted

mean

1.67

0.77

0.9

SE.,

0.478

0.478

0.478

who followed computer assisted instqctional material is better than the student ' . ... .

Value of significant difference

at 5%

0.937

0.937

0.937

teachers who followed instructionahodule. But there is no significant ' 3 .yt


difference in performance of student teachers who followed computer assisted

instructional material and multimedia package. Also the difference in

performance is not significant among the student teachers who followed

instructional module and multimedia package.

Conclusion

From the analysis it is observed that the performance of student

teachers in achievement test regarding the use of self-learning materials such

as computer assisted instruction, instructional module and multimedia package

are much better than the student teachers who followed conventional method

of teaching. The analysis also reveals that there is no significant difference in

mean post-test scores among student teachers of different optional subjects.

On comparing the performance among student teachers who followed

CAI, Instructional Module and Multimedia Packages, the student teachers who

used computer assisted instructional material performed better than the student

teachers who used instructional mod,ule and multimedia package. The difference

in performance is not significant among student teachers who used computer

assisted instructional material and multimedia package and also among student

teachers who used instructional module and multimedia package.

Documents

On OHP, - Shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/6544/14/14_chapter 5.pdf · devices and equipments such as Computer, TV, OHP, Epidiascope, Radio, Tape ... Malayalam: