TITLE: IDENTIFY YEAR PERFORMANCE OF PRIMARY TEACHERS BY SELF APPRAISAL Ms. KALPANA CHAVAN 1, DR.SANJEEV SONAWANE 2, Mrs.NISHA VALVI 3 1.Assistant professor,

TITLE: IDENTIFY YEAR PERFORMANCE OF PRIMARY TEACHERS BY SELF APPRAISAL

Ms. KALPANA CHAVAN1, DR.SANJEEV SONAWANE2,Mrs.NISHA VALVI3

1.Assistant professor, Pad.D.Y.Patil College of Education, University ofPune, India (+91 9730559289, Email: [email protected])

2. DEAN& H.O.D., Department of Education &Extension, University ofPune, India(+91 9890178190, Email: [email protected])

3.Assistant professor, Department of Education &Extension, University of

Pune, India (+919850831267, Email : [email protected])1self appraisal of primary teacher

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

• ABSTRACT• The modern concepts of management particularly in the area of quality assurance, performance appraisal systems has become more wide spread & intensive .Employee performance not only fair to the individual , institute but it can also help the management in making the optimal use of the latest form within the institute for the development & quality .This study was focusing on year performance of primary teacher by self appraisal.The purpose of this study was to identify the year performance of primary teacher by self appraisal.

2self appraisal of primary teacher

The responses were randomly gathered from 50 primary teachers by using self appraisal rating scales.5 point rating scale was developed by researcher based on self appraisal format of UNIVERSITY GRANT COMMISSION. This rating scale contain 4 parts,1) Academic performance, 2) Co-curricular performance, 3) Innovation/Creativity performance, 4) Extension performance. Five point rating scale was credit based. For analysis of data x2 test was used.


• Result showed that there was a significant result that means year performance of primary teacher about 1) Academic performance, 2) Co-curricular performance, 3) Innovation/Creativity performance was significant at 0.05 level but extension performance was not significant.

• Keywords: Self appraisal, 5 point rating scale, Academic performance, Co-curricular performance, Innovation/Creativity performance, Extension performance.


• BACKGROUND: Performance Appraisal is a powerful tool of Human Resource Development. The modern concepts of management particularly in the area of quality assurance, performance appraisal systems has become more wide spread & intensive .Employee performance not only fair to the individual , institute but it can also help the management in making the optimal use of the latest form within the institute for the development & quality. It is the process which helps identify those who perform their assigned tasks as well & also pinpoints those whose productivity is low.


– FACTORS AFFECTING PERFORMANCE:• 1] Cooperative relationships are very supportive & facilitative in nature are more productive & qualitative

• 2] Innovation in practice & support for growth • 3] Fixed, dynamic goals & Clarity of goals• 4] High degree of awareness• 5] Counseling for improvement.

This study was focusing on performance of primary teachers. The purpose of this study was to identify the year performance of primary teacher by self appraisal.


2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:• 1] To access the year performance of primary teachers.

• 2] To access the 1] Academic performance 2]co curricular performance 3]Innovation & creativity performance 4]Extension performance of primary teachers by self appraisal

3 METHODOLOGIES:

1 ] METHOD: Survey method was used.

2] SAMPLE: 50 primary teachers were randomly selected


• 3] TOOL: Researcher made Performa rating scale, which is BASED on THE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS DEVELOPED BY UNIVERSITY GRANT COMMISSION (INDIA).

Microsoft Office Word 97 - 2003 Document

self appraisal of primary teacher

• This Performa contain 4 categories, 1] category I is Academic Performance 2] category II is Co curricular Performance 3] category III is Creative and Innovative Performance.4] category IV is Extension Performance. It is score based. Total scores are 360 in that, category I=140 scores, category II=40scores, category III=135 scores, category IV=45 scores. Total performance and all categories are rated in 5 point rating & grades are

• 1: POOR, 2: SATISFACTORY, 3: GOOD,• 4: VERY GOOD, 5: OUT STANDING.


1] YEAR PERFORMANCE: RATING SCALE=total score=360

RATE GRADE• 1] 0-72 POOR• 2] ABOVE 72-144 SATISFACTORY• 3] ABOVE144-216 GOOD• 4] ABOVE 216-288 VERY GOOD• 5] ABOVE 288-360 OUT STANDING


2] ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE: SCORE=140

RATE GRADE• 1] 0-28 POOR• 2] ABOVE 28-56 SATISFACTORY• 3] ABOVE56-84 GOOD• 4] ABOVE 84-112 VERY GOOD• 5] ABOVE 112-140 OUT STANDING


3] CO CURRICULAR PERFORMANCE: SCORE=40 RATE GRADE• 1] 0-8 POOR• 2] ABOVE 8-16 SATISFACTORY• 3] ABOVE16-24 GOOD• 4] ABOVE 24-32 VERY GOOD• 5] ABOVE 32-40 OUT STANDING


4] CREATIVE & INNOVATIVE PERFORMANCE: SCORE=135

RATE GRADE• 1] 0-27 POOR• 2] ABOVE 27-54 SATISFACTORY• 3] ABOVE 54-81 GOOD• 4] ABOVE 81-108 VERY GOOD• 5] ABOVE 108-135 OUT STANDING


5] EXTENSION PERFORMANCE: SCORE=45 RATE GRADE• 1] 0-9 POOR• 2] ABOVE 9-18 SATISFACTORY• 3] ABOVE18-27 GOOD• 4] ABOVE 27-36 VERY GOOD• 5] ABOVE 36-45 OUT STANDING


6] ACADEMIC & CO CURRICULAR PERFORMANCE: SCORE=180

RATE GRADE• 1] 0-36 POOR• 2] ABOVE 36-72 SATISFACTORY• 3] ABOVE 72-108 GOOD• 4] ABOVE 108-144 VERY GOOD• 5] ABOVE 144-180 OUT STANDING

This rating scale was made by researcher using Likert scaling technique.


4] STASTICAL TOOL: X2 Test5] ANALYSIS OF DATA:• TABLE1: CATEGORY I: ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

• OBSERVATION: Table shows that Academic performance grade was Outstanding

• DECISION: Academic performance of primary teachers was Significant.

POOR SATISFACTORY GOOD VERY GOOD OUT STANDING

- - - - 50


• TABLE 2: CATEGORY II: CO-CURRICULAR PERFORMANCE

• X2 Test was used to decide co-curricular performance of primary teacher was Significant or Not.


8 20 11 11 00


• TABLE 3: TO DECIDE CO-CURRICULAR PERFORMANCE WERE SIGNIFICANT OR NOT. (IT IS ON THE BASIS OF EQUAL PROBABILITY).

• Calculated X2 =20.6, df=4, significant level =0.01, Table value of X2 =13.277 Calculated X2 » Table value

• DECISION: Co-curricular performance of primary teachers was Significant.


Fe8 20 11 11 00

Fe10 10 10 10 10

Fo-Fe-2 10 1 1 -10

( Fo-Fe)2

4 100 1 1 100

(Fo-Fe) 2/Fe 0.4 10 0.1 0.1 10


• TABLE 4: CATEGORY III: CREATIVE &INNOVATIVE PERFORMANCE

• OBSERVATION: Table shows that Creative & innovative performance grade was NIL

• DECISION: Creative & innovative performance of primary teachers

was Not-Significant.


- - - - -


• TABLE 5: CATEGORY IV: EXTENSION PERFORMANCE

• OBSERVATION: Table shows that extension performance grade was NIL

• DECISION: Extension performance of primary teachers was Not-

Significant.


- - - - -


• TABLE 6: CATEGORY I & CATEGORY II: ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE & CO-CURRICULAR PERFORMANCE

• OBSERVATION: Table shows that Academic with Co-curricular performance grade was OUT STANDING & VERY GOOD.

• DECISION: Academic with Co-curricular performance of primary

teachers was Significant.


- - - 26 24


TABLE 7: YEAR PERFORMANCE OF PRIMARY TEACHERS:

• X2 Test was used to decide YEAR performance were significant or not.


00 25 25 00 00


• TABLE 8: TO DECIDE YEAR PERFORMANCE WERE SIGNIFICANT OR NOT. (IT IS ON THE BASIS OF EQUAL PROBABILITY).

• Calculated X2 =75, df=4, significant level =0.01, Table value of X2 =13.277 Calculated X2 »Table value

• DECISION: Year performance of primary teachers was significant.


Fe00 25 25 00 00

Fe10 10 10 10 10

Fo-Fe -10 15 15 -10 -10

( Fo-Fe)2

100 225 225 100 100

(Fo-Fe) 2/Fe 10 10 22.5 22.5 10


4 CONCLUSIONS:

• 1] Year performance of primary teachers was Significant, Grade was Satisfactory & Good.

• 2] Academic Year performance of primary teachers was Significant & grade was Outstanding.

• 3] Co-curricular Year performance of primary teachers was Significant & grades were Satisfactory, Good & very good.


4 CONCLUSIONS:

• 4] Creative & Innovative Year performance of primary teachers was Not-Significant.

• 5] Extension performance of primary teachers was Not-Significant.


5 DISCUSSIONS ABOUT CONCLUSIONS:

• Year performance of primary teachers was significant, Grade was Satisfactory & Good but it was not an outstanding, it is because of Creative, innovative & extension performance. In innovative & creative performance activities are related to research. Actually in practice it was excluded by teachers. But in Maharashtra State D.Ed (Primary teacher training) syllabus already included theory & project related to action research.



• So Schools should motivate the teachers to conduct action research, research based publications, paper presentations etc.Because of this they know new trends of educations, new techniques, new Teaching-learning strategies etc.Extension performance included leadership & administrative related activities. Extension performance of primary teachers was Not-Significant.



• So Schools should gives opportunities related to decision making, leadership and participation in administrations. This practice makes outstanding Creative, Innovative & Extension performance. The conclusions of the present study came due to its characteristics as well as its differentials so; the conclusions should be accepted at experimental level.


SELECTED REFERENCES

• Ahmed, Shakeel (2007).Human Resource Development in Universities, New Age International Publishers.

• Kothari, C, R. (2009). Research Methodology: Methods & Techniques, Delhi: New Age International Publishers

• Performa for University /College Teachers Based On The Academic Performance Indicators (API)Developed by UGC(INDIA).


Documents

TITLE: IDENTIFY YEAR PERFORMANCE OF PRIMARY TEACHERS BY SELF APPRAISAL Ms. KALPANA CHAVAN 1, DR.SANJEEV SONAWANE 2, Mrs.NISHA VALVI 3 1.Assistant professor,