This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
The main aim of research is to provide knowledge that will allow the educator to achieve his goal by the most effective methods. The selection of the method depends upon the nature of the problem, the objectives of study and the population to be studied.
In any research endeavour, methodology occupies a crucial position. Methodology is the art of applying the most suitable procedure to a particular activity. By methodology, we mean the philosophy of research process. This includes the assumption and values that serve as a rational for research and the standard criteria the researcher uses for interpretation, data and conclusion. Research design is a logical and systematic plan prepared for directing a research study. It specifies the objectives of the study, the methodology, and techniques to be allotted.
This chapter gives an overall picture of the design of the study, hypotheses, the psychological tools used for study, nature and selection of the sample, a brief description of the procedure adopted for the collection of data, its scoring and classification.
A research design (Bryman, 2001) provides a framework for the collection and analysis of data. A choice of research design reflects decisions about the priority being given to a range of dimensions of the research process. This include the importance attached to
a) Expressing casual connections between variables
b) Generalizing to larger groups of individuals than those actually forming part of the investigation.
c) Understanding behaviour and the meaning of the behaviour in its specific social context.
d) Having a temporal (i.e. overtime) appreciation of social phenomena and their interconnections.
4.02. METHODOLOGY OF STUDY
The topic and objectives of a study and the type of data required in a study determine the methods to be adopted in that study. Based on the topic and objectives of the present study the investigator has adopted the normative survey method for this study.
1) Comparison between the mean scores of dimensions of learning style, teaching style, information processing and SOLAT
2) Comparison between the mean scores sub variables of learning style
3) comparison between the mean scores sub variables of teaching style
a) there is no significant difference in the mean scores of the dimensions of the total learning style with respect to gender and medium of instruction
b) there is no significant difference in the mean of total learning style with respect to the type of management, fathers education and fathers occupation
c) there is no significant difference in the mean of,
dimensions and total teaching style with respect to gender,medium,qualification
d) there is no significant difference in the mean of total teaching style
with respect to type of management,age,experience,major subject
e) there is no significant difference in the mean of information processing
with respect to gender,medium.
f) there is no significant difference in the mean of dimensions of
information processing with respect to management.
g) there is no significant difference in the mean of solat with respect
:h) There is no significant association between the total learning style and achievement score
i) There is no inter relationship between attitude,climate,technique,behaviour and achievement score
j) There is no relationship between total learning style and information processing and achievement
k) There is no relationship between. the teaching style and solat
l) There is no relationship between. the teaching style, learning style and achievement score
4.04. VARIABLES OF THE STUDY
"Variables are the conditions or characteristics that the experimenter manipulates, controls or observes" (Best and Kahn,1999)
a) Independent variables
Information processing style
b). PERSONAL VARIABLES
Parental Educational Qualification
Age of teacher
Years of experience
c). INSTITUTION RELATED VARIABLES
Types of the management of collage.
Medium of Instruction
Location of the Colleges
4.05. TOOLS USED IN THE STUDY
Personal Data Sheet developed by the Investigator. (Appendix i)
Learning style developed and standardized by the investigator(appendix II)
3) Teaching style developed and standardized by the investigator(appendix III)
Informatin processing style questionnaire developed and standardized by Venkatraman 1989
Solat Tool developed and standardized by Venkatraman 1994
4.06 Development of the tool
The questionnaire was chosen as the main tool to collect information about the subjects under study. A questionnaire is a "systematic compilation of questions that are submitted to a sampling of population from which information is desired"(Barr, Davis and Johnson,1953)
As a data gathering tool , the questionnaire has certain distinct advantage. It permits wide coverage for minimum expense both in money and effort. This greater coverage makes it more valid automatically in the results through promoting the selection of samples that is large and more representative. The success of the questionnaire depends on the adequacy of construction of questionnaire through which data is to be obtained. Hence care was taken to construct the questionnaire with as much care as possible bearing in mind The major points to be kept in view while constructiong a questionnaire In the present study learning style questionnaire used to prepared and standarzised by the investigator with the help of the experts
In the first stage (Part A) the tools- learning style, teaching style will be tested on pilot sample of 108 students and 30 teachers and the relevant psychometric properties will be established.
In the second stage (Part B) the tools will be administered on the final sample of 918 students randomly selected from 9th standard and 200 teaches of high schools and higher secondary schools in Chennai, kancheepuram dt.
(i)Selection and Editing of an items:
The items for inventory are drawn from many sources pyramidal model of learning style analysis by Barbara Prashing formed the major source of the items. Personal interviews conducted with students and teachers, discussion with experts in the field and review of literature on the subject provided the idea for needed items.
On the basis of above mentioned sources 5 dimensions of LSI were identified they were 1) Learning potentialities 2) Learning climate 3) Learning technique 4) Cognitive behavior 5) Homework pattern.
Under each hypothesized dimensions items focusing on the theme of the dimension were tentatively composed. These items were subjected to a more careful scrutiny. The items which seemed to overlap with one another critically examined. An items conveying the idea most clearly was retained and language of an item was changed to make it suitable to express the same whenever necessary. This process of scrutiny and evaluation finally yield 80 items. In table(4.01) information about LSI is provided.
(ii) Experts evaluation of items:
In order to establish whether a given item really belongs to the particular dimension all the items were arranged in a random order and presented to three experts. The experts were selected from the field of education.
To facilitate the experts is judging the items they were provided with operational definition of the dimension they were requested.
To indicate which dimension each item belongs.
To point out which ambiguous items and
To suggest necessary modification if any in the item.
An item was included under a dimension only when two exports agreed that the particular item measures the particular dimension. In addition to that some of the items were rephrased, rewritten and some were dropped. At the end of this process 63 items were retained and 4 dimension were retained one dimension homework pattern was dropped. These items were translated by the investigator into Tamil the regional language spoken. Then it was given to a language expert with a request to examine vocabulary level, syntax and meaning. The modification and improvements suggested were carried out wherever necessary in order to ensure the clarity of items in Tamil version. The items on the scale had four categories of response namely always, often, sometimes and never.
Guildford (1954) points out that a pre-try-out is the preliminary administration of the tentative try out units to small sample of examinees for the purpose of discovering gross defines but with no intension of analyzing pre try out data for individual items. The items were arranged in a random order and administered on a sample of 10 students to check their applicability. Students were encouraged to express their doubt freely. This enabled to locate vague items which were ambiguous or difficult to understand. Necessary further modifications were made in the light of experience gained through this preliminary try out. At the end of this process a preliminary version of LSI was ready.
Instructions for administration were finalized. The preliminary form contained one test book let of 54 items and a response sheet. This was administered to a sample of 108 students of 9th standard drawn from three schools situated in kancheepuram. The sample was distributed both sexes equally.
The subjects were asked to answer all items and no time limit was imposed. The subjects were required to mark in the response sheet one of the four categories ( always, often,sometimes, never ) corresponding to the item in the test book let. The response sheets were carefully verified and incomplete answer sheets were discarded. They were eight such sheets the remaining hundred sheets were retained. The remaining sheets were scored using 4,3,2,1 marks. Scores obtained by each individual on various items added up.
(v) Reliability of LSI:
The reliability determination of the instrument was carried our using corn back alpha method with scores obtained from responses of 108 students. The value was found to be 0.71.
(vi) Validity of LSI:
The validity of any measuring instrument depends upon the accuracy with which it measures what it indents to measure.
In the construction of LSI items were selected based on careful analysis of exports. The preliminary forms along with operational definitions were given to exports. They were asked to judge which dimension each item measures. An item was included under a dimension only when two or more exports included in under that dimension.
There is a choice relationship between validity and reliability. This validity is given by the square root of the proportion of its reliability. The intrinsic validity of LSI was 0.714 is equal to 0.84
(vii) The final form of LSI:
The final forms of LSI were ready after scrutinizing with experts opinion. The final form is ready with personal data sheet, tool with 45 items, scoring sheet.
Selection & Editing of items:
Teaching style inventory developed by Barbara prashing formed the major source of the items or the tool. The personal interview conducted with teachers and students, discussion with experts in the field and review of literature on the subject provided a base for further development of items.
The scale developed by the investigator has 5 dimensions. They are (a) Teaching potentials (b) Teaching climate (c) Teaching technique (d) Teaching behaviors (e) Homework pattern.
The most suitable items were selected for each dimension. Each of these items were read and evaluated carefully for language, clarity and logical validity.
Items which were considered poor were removed and new items were added. This process of scrutiny and evaluation finally yield 78 items. In table (4.02) information about teaching style inventory is provided
Experts evaluation of items:
In order to establish whether a given item really belongs to that particular dimension. The items were arranged in a random order and were subjected to expert scrutiny. The experts were drawn from the field of education including high school teachers. To facilitate the experts in judging the items. They were presented with operational definition of dimensions they were requested to indicate.
To which dimension each item belongs.
Whether the items were clearly stated and easily understood by the student of 9th standard.
To suggest necessary modification
Some of the items were modified as suggested by the experts. An item was including under admonition. Only when two experts agreed upon that and arranged it that dimension. These items were translated into Tamil, the regional vernacular language. The vocabulary level and meaning were again checked y language experts.
Pre try out:
The preliminary form so prepared was administered on a sample of 10 teachers in order to get feedback regarding understandability of instruction and item by the students. This experience was helpful in effecting modifications to the language in the statements.
The inventory thus prepared was administered to 42 teachers handling IX std in 3 schools located in kancheepuram. The details of pre test samples are already given in table 4.03. A separate response sheet with four responses_always,often,sometimes,never were prepared. The subjects were required to mark one of four responses categories corresponding to the item in the test book let. Subjects were asked to mark every item without omitting any no time limit was imposed. The response sheets were carefully scrutinized and improperly filled sheets were remaining 30 answer sheets were scored using 4,3,2,1 marks scores obtained by each individual on various items were added up. By using these scores reliability and validity of the tool were found out.
The final form TSI:
The final form is ready with personal data sheet, tool with 45 items, scoring sheet.
(v) Reliability of TSI:
"This reliability of a measure is commonly defined as the degree to which it measures consistently or accurately, whenever it does measure" (Travers 1959)
The reliability determination of the instrument was carried our using cron Bach alpha method with scores obtained from the responses of 50 teaches. The value was found to be 0.82. This consents that the tool process validity to a sufficient level.
(vi) Validity of TSI:
The validity of any measuring instrument depends upon the accuracy with which it measures what it indents to measure.
In the construction of TSI items were selected based on careful analysis of experts. The preliminary forms along with operational definitions were given to experts. They were asked to judge which dimension each items measures. An item was included under a dimension only when two or more experts included it under that dimension learning attitude, learning etc.
There is a choice relationship between validity and reliability. The validity is given by the square root of the proportion of true variance i.e. Square root of its reliability. The intrinsic validity of TSI was root of 0.821 is equal to 0.90
4.10 SOLAT tool
The SOLAT tool was constructed and standardized by Venkatraman (1989) were applied in this study.
The hemisphere functioning in two different areas such as learning and thinking style was considered for identification of dominance and items and concepts were written.
The SOLAT is constructed with simple sentences and can be easily administered. It can be administered from eight standard and up to post graduation level.
Good testing conditions should be arranged and maintained throughout testing. The following directions are given.
"Please read the following statements carefully. Each statement has two parts 'a' and 'b'. Encircle whichever statement is true for you. You may encircle both the statements in a pair if both are true for you or you may leave both the statement if none of them are not true for you". (Note: Leave both the statements blank only if it is impossible for you to decide).
First, count the number of items encircled for both statements for an item and write that number in box 'W'
Second, count the number of items encircled for the statement 'a' for an item and write that number in box 'R'.
Third, count the number of item encircled for the statement 'b' for an item and write that number in box 'L'.
The W, R & L indicates that for integrated (whole), Right and Left Brain dominance. The hemisphericity dominance is determined on the basis of the highest score in three categories of dominance.
Reliability of the tool
This tool was already standardized. The reliability was established by test rightist method. The reliability co-efficient of correlation for the right hemisphere function was found to be 0.89. For the left hemisphere function the co-efficient of correlation for the integrated score was 0.71. These co-efficient suggest that the SOLAT possesses reliability to a significant level.
Validity of the tool
The content and construct validity was established by the author Venkataraman (1989). The concurrent validity was found to be 0.842 for right hemisphere part, 0.621 for the left hemisphere part and 0.678 for the integrated part. This reveals that the SOLAT tool possesses reasonable level of concurrent validity.
4.11. PERSONAL DATA SHEET
The personal data sheet for students was prepared to collect information on personal and institutional related details, such as gender, educational qualification, and medium of instruction, types of management, locality, parental annual income, parental educational qualification and parental occupation.
The personal data sheet for teachers was prepared to collect information on personal and institutional related details, such as gender, educational qualification, and medium of instruction, types of management, locality, experience, age, major subject.
4.12 Sample selected for the study:
According to Best & Kahn (1999) "a sample is a small proportion of a population selected for observation & analysis. By observing the characteristics of the sample one can make certain inferences about the characterizes of the population fro which it is drawn". "The validity of the results obtained with any psychological test will depend in part upon the adequacy & representativeness of standardization sample" (Free man, 1960)
Size of the sample:
In fixing the sample size, the investigator took into consideration the following factors.
The major consideration in decoding the size of the sample was the type of statistical procedures to be used in the study.
The sample size should be small enough to permit a close study. Since there is a series of tests to be administered to pupils together with other forms of objective information about them, it was estimated that nearly 3 hours of testing time will be required for completing the administration of the tests. Hence the size will have to be small enough to be effectively covered.
The sample size is calculated by using the formula.
N = ZS/E
N is approximately 917.65. So sample size is 918 from IX standard students and 200 teachers handling IX standard.
Technique of sampling:
In the various techniques, stratified random sampling is found to be the best suited for the present study. Stratified random sampling is "a technique designed to ensure representativeness and avoid betas. This scheme is applicable when the population is composed of subgroups or strata of different sizes. So that the representative sample must contain individuals drawn from each category or stratum in accordance with the size of the subgroups". (Garrett 1970)
The stratified random sampling technique is widely accepted as the best procedure when heterogeneous samples have to be brought under study as in the present case.
The initial sample for the analysis:
On the basis of characteristics of population, an initial break up of a tentative sample was worked out and it was decided to collect sample of 1000 students and teachers. The breaks up was estimated as given in the table (4.04)
The number of class diversion to be tested for each category was worked out assuming that the minimum sample form a school will not be less that 20 and IX handling teachers from that school.
The investigator administered the test with help of class teachers about 1 hour session in each school. The investigator gave a short explanation of aim and scope of the study to the subjects and appealed to their continuous participation and co operation. The detailed instruction for answering each test was given before giving each test. An internal of 5 to 10 minutes was given in between two tests.
Same procedures were observed in administering the test in different school. The following steps were strictly followed in administering each test.
Distributing of test booklet and score sheets to the subjects.
Explaining the instructions given in the test booklet.
Giving instruction for filling up the necessary information in the answer sheet before starting the test.
Making the students familiar with the score sheets and mode of entering responses.
Clearing the doubt of subjects giving instruction regarding time limit, method of dealing with eventualities ete.
Giving intervals between the tests.
Collecting back the test booklets and response sheets.
The final sample available for analysis:
Though the based sample was fixed as 1000 students and 250 teachers. The investigator could collect the data from a sample of 975 students and 245 teachers.
The responses sheets were carefully scrutinized and improperly filled sheets were removed. These were 50 sheets from students and 45 sheets from the teachers were removed. The remaining sheets out of 935 sheets 918 were selected for analysis and 200 were selected from the teachers. The details of the actual sample covered and final sample were given in table (4.06)
4.13 Procedure for data collection:
After finalizing the sample and tools to be used the programme of testing were arranged. The investigator contacted the heads of the selected schools and the class teachers and had discussions with them in order to fix a schedule for administering the test.
Scoring and consolidation of data:
The score sheets were scored in accordance with the scoring scheme of each test. The relevant data about each subject. The test score in the case of dependent variable and independent variables. The demographic details like name, sex, location of the school, management of the school were entered in the personal data sheet. A number of subjects failed to attend all the tests and some students did not attempt all the items in certain tests. Only those subjects who completed the test in all respects were selected for the analysis. Thus the final sample for the students was reduced to 918 and the teacher sample was 200.
4.14 Statistical technique used
Suitable descriptive and inferential statistical techniques were used in the interpretation of the data to draw out a meaningful picture of results from collected Data.. The data have been analysed with help of the following statistical technique by using SPSS software
Mean, X = A + ________ x i
Where, A = Assumed mean
f = Frequency
d = Deviation from the assumed mean
i = Class interval
II. STANDARD DEVIATION
âˆ‘fd2 âˆ‘fd 2
SD, Ïƒ = _____ - _____ x i
Where, f = Frequency
d = Deviation from arithmetic mean
i = Class interval
N = total frequency
III. STANDARD ERROR DEVIATION
SED = _____ + ______
Ïƒ1, Ïƒ2 = Standard deviations
N1, N2 = Total number of sample
1. Differential analysis
In the aspect of variabls studied differential analysis like t test F test and multiple comparison were calculated for the total sample and sub samples.
a. 't' TEST
To complete the significance of difference between means of various measures, `t' test is used `t' ratio is calculated from the relation.
M1 ~ M2 M1 ~ M2
t ratio = = _______
Ïƒ12 + Ïƒ22 SED
M1,M2 = Means of groups
SED = Standard Error Deviation
b. 'F' - TEST
C = (âˆ‘x1 + âˆ‘x2 + âˆ‘x3)2
TSS = âˆ‘x12 + âˆ‘x22 + âˆ‘x32 - C
(âˆ‘x1)2 (âˆ‘x2)2 (âˆ‘x3)2
BSS = ______ + ______ + ______ - C
n1 n2 n3
WSS = TSS - BSS
t1 = ____ t2 = _______
f = ____
Where, C = Correction term
âˆ‘x1, âˆ‘x2, âˆ‘x3 = Sum of the scores of each group
N = Total number of the samples
n1, n2, n3 = Number of sample of each group
TSS = Total number of squares
BSS = Sum of squares between the group means.
WSS = Sum of squares within the group
dfB = Degrees of freedom for the between group means
dfw = Degrees of freedom for the within group means
t1 = Mean sum of squares between the group
t2 = Mean sum of squares within the group
C.Multiple comparison (post hoc test)
The significant variables are allowed for multiple comparison using Games howell test in SPSS
Games-Howell.test This test is used with variances are unequal (see Unequal Variances below) and also takes into account unequal group sizes. Severely unequal variances can lead to increased Type I error, and, with smaller sample sizes, more moderate differences in group variance can lead to increases in Type I error. The Games-Howell test, which is designed for unequal variances, is based on Welch's correction to df with the t-test and uses the studentized range statistic. This test appears to do better than the Tukey HSD if variances are very unequal (or moderately so in combination with small sample size) or can be used if the sample size per cell is very small (e.g., <6).
2. Assosiation analysis
CHI - SQUARE DISTRIBUTION
âˆ‘ (fo - fe)2
ï£2 = _________
fo = Observed frequency
fe = Expected frequency
Pearson`s Product -Moment coefficient of correlation(r) Best and Khan 1995
For estimating the extent of relationship between dependent and independent variable the technique of Pearson's product moment coefficient of correlation method was used.
3. Correlational Analysis
Pearsons Product Moment Coeffieient of Correlation (r) (Best and Khan 1995)
For estimating the extent of relationship between dependent and independent variable the technique of Pearsons Product Moment Coeffieient of Correlation method was used.
Pearsons Product Moment Coeffieient of Correlation formaula for calculating 'r' is
N âˆ‘XY - ( âˆ‘X ) ( âˆ‘Y )
âˆš Nâˆ‘X2-( âˆ‘X)2 âˆšNâˆ‘Y2-( âˆ‘Y)2
Where r = Pearsons Product Moment Coeffieient of Correlation
âˆ‘X = Sum of the X Scores
âˆ‘Y = Sum of the Y Scores
âˆ‘X2 = Sum of the Squared X Scores
âˆ‘Y2 = Sum of the Squared Y Scores
âˆ‘XY = Sum of the products of paired X and Y Scores.
The obtained Correlation Coefficient were interpreted by means of following approaches,
(a) verbal interpretation of Pearsons Product Moment Coeffieient of Correlation 'r' (Garret 1981)
The verbal interpretation of the significance of the correlation coefficient 'r' is given below
r from 0.00 to Â± 0.20 denotes indifferent or negligible relationship
r from Â± 0.20 to Â± 0.40 denotes low correlation present but slightly
r from Â± 0.40 to Â± 0.70 denotes substantial or marked relationship
r from Â± 0.70 to Â± 1.00 denotes high to very high relationship
This chapter outlines the design of the present study, the procedures followed and nature of the sample. It describes the hypotheses to be tested, the tools used and the methods of administration and scoring. The collected data were analysed, using appropriate statistical techniques described above to study the compatibility between teaching style and learning style with respect to hemisphericity.
Table 4.06 Showing The Composition Of The Sample Selected For The Study
Medium of instruction
Type of management
Figure teaching style with respect to management
Figure teaching style with respect to medium
Figure teaching style with respect to Gender
Figure teaching style with respect to Age
Figure teaching style with respect to major subject
Govt Girls Hr. Sec. School Uthiramerur
Govt. high. School Thirupulivanam
Govt. Hr. Sec. School Manampathy
Govt Hr. Sec. Shool Velachery
C.M.S Hr. Sec. School Kanchipuram
C.S.M Hr. Sec. School Kanchipuram
B.M.S Girls Hr. Sec.School Kanchipuram.
A.K.T High Schools Kanchipuram
Govt Girls Hr.Sec.School,Big Kanchipuram
Govt. Hr. Sec. School Arpakkam
Govt. Hr. Sec. School Iyyanpettai
Govt. Hr. Sec. School Nayakkanpeattai
Govt. Hr. Sec. School Perunagar
Chennai. Hr. Sec School,Chennai
Aided school Name
P.T.V.S High School, Kanchipuram
S.S.K.V Girls Hr.Sec.School, Kanchipuram.
Madras Seva Sadan Hr,Sec, School Tambaram
Pachaiyappas Hr.Sec.School, Kanchipuram
Don Bosco Hr.Sec.School, Chennai
Jai Gopal Garodia National Hr.Sec.School, Tambaram
Ramakrishnan Mission Hr.Sec.School, Chengalpet.
Ramakrishnan Mission High.School, Maliankaranai.
St.Columbus Hr.Sec.School, Chengalpet.
Thiyagi High School,Kanchipiram
Valluvar Gurugulam Hr.Sec. School, Tambaram.
Dandapani Hr.Sec.School, Kanchipiram
St.Marys Hr.Sec.School, Chengalpet.
Private School Name
S.S.K.V Matric Hr.Sec.School, Kanchipuram.
Don Bosco Matric Hr.Sec.School, Chennai
St.Joseph Hr.Sec.School, Maraimalai Nagar.
SDA Matric School, Chengalpet Ramakrishnan Mission Matric Hr.Sec.School, Chengalpet.
Mamallan Matric Hr.Sec.School Kanchipuram.
Jai Gopal Garodia Matric Hr.Sec.School, West Mambalam
Menakshi Ammal Matric Hr. School,Uthiramerur
Sita Devi Garodia Hr.Sec.School, Tambaram
NSN Matric School,Chrompet.
Thiveni Academy, Vadkkupattu.
Annebesant Matric School Kanchipuram.
Madras Seva Sadan Matric HR.Sec.School,Tambaram
Valluvar Gurugulam Matric Hr.Sec School Tambaram.
Vivekananda Matric Hr. Sec. School, Kanchipuram.