CHAPTER III METHOD AND PROCEDURE

As per objectives of the study the investigator has to plan the entire process of research work in terms of research design suited to the present study. The design is systematically presented under four heads : 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. Sample Tools and techniques used Collection of data Statistical procedure Sample Any layman may think that taking the sample from the total population may not get valid result but in actual fact sampling does provide the basic for proper and adequate i.e. not only sufficiently representative but also of sufficient large size in order to ensure stability of generalization made a results of the study. This study is confined to various women degree colleges of Ludhiana (Punjab). The investigator has selected the seven colleges of Ludhiana. DISTRIBUTION SHOWING THE AREA OF THE SUBJECTS Sr. No. 1. Name of College K.C.W. Civil Lines, Ludhiana No. of Students 24

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Ramgharia College, Ludhiana S.D.P. for Women, Ludhiana Guru Nanak Khalsa College, Ludhiana Arya College for Women, Ludhiana Govt. College for Women, Ludhiana Master Tara Singh College, Ludhiana

12 12 14 12 12 14

TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES USED The investigator has applied following physical fitness test for collection of data : (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (i) 50m Dash test Standing broad jump test 600m run test Shuttle run (4 x 10m) test Forwarded bend and reach test 50m Dash Test: Purpose: To measure the speed. Equipment: A minimum of two stop watches properly synchronized, whistle and other starting. A flag, starting and finishing lines on the ground properly measured. Procedure:

The starting line and finishing line should be marked for 50m distance. Two or more competitors should be started simultaneously. Each competitors time should be recorded by a separate time keeper and the recorders will be at finish line. The starter will start the runners after giving the usual commands on your masks 'set' and 'go'. The starter will signal with a flag or a handkerchief by bringing it down vigorously simultaneously with the command 'go' the time keepers will watch the signal and then start the top watch at this signal, so as not to lose even the fraction of a second and a separate time keeper will time each runner and he will stop the watch as the runner finishes the line. Time should be recorded to nearest tenth of a second. SCORING The time recorded was the final score. ii) Standing broad jump test Purpose To measure the explosive strength of legs. Equipment A measuring tape, long jump pit, a starting line. Procedure The subject should stand at the stating line close to the pit, toeing the starting line and spring forward and land in the pit. Knees may be bend for the jump. The jump should be measured in accordance with the usual procedure. The subject should be cautioned against failing

back. The jump should be counted as a foul, if in jumping the subject falls back when lading. The best of three trails should be recorded fouls counting a trail prior training may help to avoid fouls. SCORING The best jump recorded was the final score. iii) 600m Run test Purpose To measure the endurance. Equipment A minimum of two stop watches properly synchronized, whistle and other starting device. A flag, starting and finishing line on the ground properly measured. Procedure The starting line and finishing line should be marked 3 or more competitors should be started simultaneously. Each competitor's time should be recorded by separate time keeper. The time keeper and

recorders will be at finish line. The starter will start the running after giving the usual commands 'on your marks' and 'go'. The starter will signal with a flag or a handkerchief by bringing it down vigorously, simultaneously with the command of 'go'. The time keeper will watch the signal and then start the stop watch at the signal, so as not to lose even a fraction of a second and a separate time keeper will time each runner, and he will stop the watch as the runner cross the finish line.

SCORING The time recorded was the final score. (iv) Shuttle run (4 x 10m) test Purpose This test measures the ability to accelerate and to change direction on in other words, the agility of the subject. Equipment For this test two lines were marked ten meters apart on a flat ground. The start and the finish lines were the same, two stop watches. Procedure The subject stood behind the starting line and the starter stood behind the subjects and gave the command 'ready' and the subjects assumed a starting position behind the line with one foot forward. The starter clapped his hands to give the signal 'go' and the subjects ran to the line ten meters away, crossed it with both feet turned around quickly and dashed back to the starting line, crossed it again with both feet turned around quickly and dashed again to the other line. In this manner the subjects shuttled twice to complete forty meters. The time keepers, one for each subject, took the time taken for completing the shuttle run with their respective stop watches to an accuracy of one tenth of a second two attempts were given with at least a five minutes pause. SCORING The time of the best two attempts was taken as score.

(v)

Forward bend and reach test Purpose To measure the flexibility. Equipment Measuring tape, box 15 centimeters high with a scale marked on. Procedure The subject was told to stand barefoot on the box with both feet together and the toes in line with an axis of the box. From this position the subject bent the body forward extending both her hand downwards of her toes. She was told not to bend the knees and hands were to kept parallel. At the maximum reach position she was to hold herself for two seconds.

SCORING The maximum reach was recorded on a scale as her score if the subject was unable to reach below the axis of the box the distance between her figures and the axis was measured. This type of score was recorded as a negative score. Two attempts were given and the best was recorded as the score. Test-retest reliability co-efficient analysis The test-retest scores on various physical fitness of the subjects were tabulated 8 statistically analysed for finding out the reliability of these test items. Reliability may be thought of as the repeatability of a test. A test

is reliable if it is dependable and similar results occur when the test is repeated by same group under similar condition reliability is related to the test performance itself. There were different ways to establish reliability. The test re-test method was often performed in physical education performance tasks. A test retest could be given on same day or on different days. The reliability of the fitness test for the present study was established by test-retest method because all the concerned with physical performance of the subjects. Table 3.2 Retest scores and co-efficient of correlation between the scores 600m run and walk test of non-sports person. S. No. Test Retest scores in scores in min. (X1) min. (X2) 4.31 4.28 4.25 4.13 4.05 4.49 4.08 3.98 3.77 3.88 3.60 4.33 4.30 4.29 4.16 4.09 4.52 4.11 3.96 3.80 3.93 3.63 Rank Test R1 28 26 24 22 17 30 18 14 7 12 2 Retest R2 28 26 25 22 17 30 18 14 7 13 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Difference D Different square (D2) 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

4.10 3.80 3.74 4.04 3.16 3.18 3.76 3.89 3.62 4.11 3.82 3.79 4.09 3.61 4.17 4.27 4.30 4.34 3.99

4.13 3.83 3.77 4.07 3.19 3.81 3.79 3.92 3.65 4.14 3.85 3.82 4.12 3.64 4.21 4.28 4.32 4.37 4.02

20 10 5 16 1 8 6 13 4 21 11 9 19 3 23 25 27 29 15

20 10 5 16 1 8 6 12 4 21 11 9 19 3 23 24 27 29 15

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 D2 4

Co-efficient of correlation = 0.99 Significant at 0.05 level

Table 3.3 Retest scores and co-efficient of correlation between the scores 600m run and walk test of sports person. S. No. Test Retest scores in scores in min. (X1) min. (X2) 1.50 1.55 1.49 1.35 1.35 2.01 1.56 2.08 2.10 2.20 2.15 1.53 1.57 2.53 1.54 2.09 1.58 2.38 1.53 2.33 1.53 1.40 1.58 1.59 1.55 1.49 1.36 2.12 2.05 2.10 2.15 2.14 2.19 1.57 1.60 2.54 2.00 2.21 2.01 3.40 1.53 2.35 1.56 1.43 Rank Test R1 8 13.5 7 5 1 19 15 21 23 25 24 10 16 29 12 22 17 28 10 27 10 2.5 Retest R2 12 13 8 6 1 20 18 19 23 22 24 10.5 14 29 16 25 17 30 7 27 9 2 -4 .5 -1 -1 0 -1 -3 2 0 3 0 -.5 2 0 -4 -3 0 -2 3 0 1 .5 Difference (D) Different square (D2) 16 .25 1 1 0 1 9 4 0 9 0 .25 4 0 16 9 0 4 9 0 1 .25

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

2.59 1.40 1.42 1.45 1.59 1.55 2.05 2.30

2.49 1.48 1.46 1.44 1.57 1.61 2.13 2.25

30 2.5 4 6 18 13.5 20 26

28 5 4 3 10.5 15 21 26

2 -2.5 0 3 7.5 1.5 -1 0

4 6.25 0 9 56.25 2.25 1 0 D2 163.5

Co-efficient of correlation = 0.99 Significant at 0.05 level

Table 3.4 Retest scores and co-efficient of correlation between the scores on 4 x 10m Run Test of Non-sports Person. S. No. Test Retest scores in scores in min. (X1) min. (X2) 12.12 13.24 12.04 12.07 12.70 13.30 14.02 14.35 12.09 12.40 14.24 13.11 12.85 13.35 12.83 12.34 13.97 13.42 12.37 12.14 12.08 14.01 12.08 13.13 12.07 12.06 12.78 13.24 14.05 14.32 12.09 12.44 14.20 13.17 12.81 13.43 12.76 12.30 13.93 13.46 12.42 12.12 12.04 13.99 Rank Test R1 7 21 2 4 14 23 28 30 6 11 29 18 16 24 15 9 26 25 10 8 5 27 Retest R2 6 18 5 4 15 21 28 30 7 12 29 19 16 23 14 10 26 24 11 9 3 27 1 3 -3 0 -1 2 0 0 -1 -1 0 -1 0 1 1 -1 0 1 -1 -1 2 0 Difference (D) Different square (D2) 1 9 9 0 1 4 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 4 0

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

13.09 12.06 13.15 12.56 13.12 11.14 13.27 12.47

13.07 12.10 13.26 12.63 13.50 11.27 13.22 11.49

17 3 20 13 19 1 22 12

17 8 22 13 25 1 20 2

0 -5 -2 0 -6 0 2 10

0 25 4 0 36 1 4 100 D2 207

Co-efficient of correlation = 0.96 Significant at 0.05 level

Table 3.5 Retest scores and co-efficient of correlation between the scores on 4 x 10m Run Test of sports person. S. No. Test Retest scores in scores in min. (X1) min. (X2) 12.05 10.95 9.09 11.01 9.53 10.00 11.30 10.10 10.00 10.01 10.99 11.59 10.09 11.00 12.50 10.3 11.2 11.6 12.52 11.26 10.04 10.8 13.01 11.00 9.10 11.10 10.01 10.15 11.12 10.12 9.95 10.00 10.92 11.59 10.16 10.98 11.99 10.06 11.09 11.13 12.55 11.30 10.09 10.14 Rank Test R1 27 14 1 18 4 5.5 24 12 5.5 7 16 26 11 17 29 8 19 21 30 23 9 10 Retest R2 30 16 1 20 6 10 21 9 4 5 14 26 12 15 27 7 19 22 29 24 8 10 -3 -2 0 -2 -2 -4.5 3 3 1.5 2 2 0 -1 2 2 1 0 -1 1 -1 1 0 Difference (D-2) Different square (D2) 9 4 0 4 4 20.25 9 9 2.25 4 4 0 1 4 4 1 0 1 1 1 1 0

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

9.10 11.03 10.97 12.10 11.24 11.40 9.47 10.53

9.13 11.08 11.01 12.12 11.27 11.46 9.4 10.58

2 20 15 28 22 25 3 13

2 18 17 28 23 25 3 13

0 2 -2 0 -1 0 0 0

0 4 4 0 1 0 0 0 D2 100.5

Co-efficient of correlation = 0.98 Significant at 0.05 level

Table 3.6 Retest scores and co-efficient of correlation between the scores bend and Reach Test of sports person. S. No. Test Retest scores in scores in min. (X1) min. (X2) 4.8 4.2 7.5 1 1.1 10 0.5 4.5 2.3 0.3 3 0.9 4 1.2 2.2 4.4 4.1 1.5 2.6 9 1.3 2.4 5 4.4 7 1.3 1.4 9 0.9 4.8 3 0.8 3.2 1.5 4.7 1.2 2.4 4.6 4.3 1.6 2.9 9.6 1.8 Rank Test R1 5 11 4 26 25 1 28 8 18 30 15 27 13 24 19 9 12 21 16 2 23 17 Retest R2 5 11 4 26 25 2 29 7 16 30 15 24 8 27 19 9 12 23 17 1 21 18 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -1 1 2 0 0 3 5 -3 0 0 0 -2 -1 1 2 -1 Difference (D-2) Different square (D2) 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 4 0 0 9 25 9 0 0 0 4 1 1 4 1

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

0.4 3.1 1.4 4.3 4.6 4.7 7.6 1.6

2.8 1 3.6 1.7 4.9 4.00 4.5 7.11

29 14 22 10 7 6 3 20

28 14 22 6 13 10 3 20

1 0 0 4 -6 -4 0 0

1 0 0 16 36 16 0 0 D2 130

Co-efficient of correlation = 0.98 Significant at 0.05 level

Table 3.7 Retest scores and co-efficient of correlation between the scores bend and Reach Test of sports person. S. No. Test Retest scores in scores in min. (X1) min. (X2) 20 18.7 19.7 20 22 18.8 19.9 17.9 18 16 19 19.7 18.9 15 18.6 17.7 18.2 13.20 21 15.7 12 13 20.1 18.8 19.6 19.8 21.9 18.9 20.00 17.6 17.9 16.1 19.5 19.17 18.30 15.65 19.00 17.73 18.80 13.25 21.10 15.19 12.3 13.1 Rank Test R1 3.5 11 6.5 3.5 1 10 5 15 14 17 8 6.5 9 19 12 16 13 21 2 18 25 23 Retest R2 3 13 7 6 2 12 4 16 15 17 8 5 11 18 9 14 10 20 1 19 25 22 .5 -2 -5 -2.5 -1 -2 1 -1 -1 0 0 1.5 -2 1 -7 2 3 1 1 -1 0 1 Difference (D-2) Different square (D2) .25 4 .25 6.25 1 4 1 1 1 0 0 2.25 4 1 49 4 9 1 1 1 0 1

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

10 11 14 13.5 11.5 12.5 10.8 10.6

10.9 12 13.5 12.5 10.8 13 10 11

30 27 20 22 26 24 28 29

28 26 21 24 29 23 30 27

2 1 -1 -2 -3 1 -2 2

4 1 1 4 9 1 4 4 D2 120

Co-efficient of correlation = 0.98 Significant at 0.05 level

Table 3.8 Retest scores and co-efficient of correlation between the scores on 50Mtr. Dash Reach Test of non-sports person. S. No. Test Retest scores in scores in min. (X1) min. (X2) 10.21 1.48 11.00 10.23 11.60 11.80 9.44 9.75 10.00 10.75 13.09 13.10 9.45 9.87 10.57 10.58 10.94 11.71 10.01 9.76 9.47 13.11 10.50 10.23 11.10 10.10 11.80 11.65 9.60 9.90 9.80 10.80 13.02 13.01 9.06 9.92 10.65 10.53 10.86 11.60 10.01 9.69 9.50 13.09 Rank Test R1 12 14 20 13 22 24 1 5 9 18 28 29 2 7 15 16 19 23 10 6 4 30 Retest R2 14 13 20 12 25 23 3 8 6 18 29 28 4 9 16 15 19 22 11 5 2 30 -2 1 0 1 -3 1 -2 -3 3 0 -1 1 -2 -2 -1 1 0 1 -1 1 2 0 Difference (D-2) Different square (D2) 4 1 0 1 9 1 4 9 9 0 1 1 4 4 1 1 0 1 1 1 4 0

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

9.46 9.88 10.59 10.04 11.90 12.90 12.10 11.40

9.40 9.86 10.70 10.00 11.76 13.00 12.15 11.32

3 8 17 11 25 27 26 21

1 7 17 10 24 27 26 21

2 1 0 1 1 0 0 0

4 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 D2 64

Co-efficient of correlation = 0.99 Significant at 0.05 level

Table 3.9 Retest scores and co-efficient of correlation between the scores on 50Mtr. Dash Reach Test of non-sports person. S. No. Test Retest scores in scores in min. (X1) min. (X2) 7.30 7.45 7.35 7.05 7.02 7.51 7.25 8.50 8.10 9.20 7.37 7.85 7.53 9.52 7.20 8.55 7.29 9.75 7.15 9.43 7.80 6.50 7.35 7.50 7.40 7.11 7.05 7.45 7.30 8.40 8.00 9.25 7.32 7.70 7.55 9.30 7.13 8.60 7.33 9.70 7.20 9.45 7.73 6.53 Rank Test R1 11 15 13 6 5 18 9 25 24 28 14 22 19 26 8 27 10 30 7 29 21 2 Retest R2 12 19 13 6 4 17 9 25 23 27 10 21 20 28 7 26 11 30 8 29 22 3 1 -4 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 4 1 -1 -2 1 1 -1 0 -1 0 -1 -1 Difference (D-2) Different square (D2) 1 16 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 16 1 1 4 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

7.46 6.57 6.05 8.00 7.33 7.59 7.50 7.00

7.44 6.44 6.15 8.15 7.43 7.41 7.51 7.10

16 3 1 23 12 20 17 4

16 2 1 24 15 14 18 5

0 1 0 -1 -3 6 -1 1

0 1 0 1 9 36 1 1 D2 0.98

Co-efficient of correlation = 0.98 Significant at 0.05 level

Table 3.9 Retest scores and co-efficient of correlation between the scores on Standing Broad Jump Test of non-sports person. S. No. Test Retest scores in scores in min. (X1) min. (X2) 1.58 1.31 1.61 1.56 1.34 1.62 1.46 1.70 1.27 1.24 1.28 1.35 1.41 1.55 1.26 1.40 1.25 1.76 1.3 1.33 1.23 1.00 1.52 1.24 1.53 1.44 1.46 1.55 1.51 1.61 1.28 1.21 1.25 1.31 1.43 1.58 1.30 1.35 1.29 1.89 1.20 1.37 1.26 1.16 Rank Test R1 5 18 4 7 16 3 10 2 21 24 20 15 11 8 22 12 23 1 13 17 25 30 Retest R2 7 23 6 10 9 5 8 2 20 25 22 17 11 4 18 14 19 1 26 12 21 30 -2 -5 -2 -3 7 -2 2 0 1 -1 -2 -2 0 4 4 -2 4 0 -13 5 4 0 4 25 9 49 4 4 0 1 1 4 4 0 16 16 4 16 0 169 25 16 0 Difference (D-2) Different square (D2)

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

1.36 1.21 1.13 1.09 1.16 1.29 1.47 1.57

1.23 1.17 1.19 1.81 1.32 1.34 1.36 1.60

14 26 28 29 27 19 9 6

24 29 27 28 16 15 13 3

-10 -3 1 1 11 4 -4 3

100 9 1 1 12 16 16 9 D2 645

Co-efficient of correlation = 0.86 Significant at 0.05 level

Table 3.11 Retest scores and co-efficient of correlation between the scores on Standing Broad Jump Test of sports person. S. No. Test Retest scores in scores in min. (X1) min. (X2) 2.42 2.30 2.32 2.53 2.62 2.37 2.20 2.31 2.35 2.04 2.33 2.50 2.36 1.42 2.18 2.14 2.34 1.72 2.45 1.85 2.80 2.46 2.30 2.15 2.16 2.35 2.40 2.10 2.05 2.11 2.13 1.90 2.07 2.25 2.20 1.15 2.00 1.99 2.09 1.35 2.17 1.55 2.75 2.26 Rank Test R1 11 20 18 6 5 13 23 19 15 27 17 8 14 30 25 26 16 29 10 28 1 9 Retest R2 9 17 16 7 6 21 25 20 19 28 24 11 13 18 26 27 22 30 15 29 1 10 2 3 2 -1 -1 -8 2 -1 -4 -1 -3 1 12 -1 -1 -6 -1 -5 -1 0 -1 Difference (D-2) Different square (D2) 4 9 4 1 1 64 2 1 16 1 49 9 1 144 1 1 36 1 25 1 0 1

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

2.24 2.40 2.60 2.76 2.51 2.19 2.23 2.75

2.23 2.31 2.56 2.74 2.49 2.8 2.19 2.73

21 12 4 2 7 24 22 3

12 8 4 2 5 23 14 3

9 4 0 0 2 1 8 0

81 16 0 0 4 1 64 0 D2 540

Co-efficient of correlation = 0.98 Significant at 0.05 level

Table 3.12 Comparative tabulation of co-efficient of reliability of the various tests of Physical Fitness Test Batteries Sr. no. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Test 50m Dash Test Standing Broad Jump 600m Run Test Shuttle run (4 x 10m) Test Forward Bend and Reach Test Co-efficient of correlation of sports women 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98

Table shows the reliability of the test items varied in the range of 0.98 to 0.99 that was the highly correlated so the present test items were accepted by the investigator.

Table 3.13 Comparative tabulation of co-efficient of reliability of the various tests of Physical Fitness Test Batteries of Non-sports Woman. Sr. no. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Test 50m Dash Test Standing Broad Jump 600m Run Test Shuttle run (4 x 10m) Test Forward Bend and Reach Test Co-efficient of correlation of sports women 0.99 0.86 0.99 0.96 0.98

Table shows the reliability of the test items varied in the range of 0.86 to 0.99 that was the highly correlated so the present test items were accepted by the investigator.

3.

COLLECTION OF DATA The data was collected on the subjects cited above by the

investigator by personally approaching the students at their colleges / training centers. The test battery selected was used to collect the data. The investigator took help of physical education teachers of these colleges, sports coaches and the students of Ludhiana Women Colleges to collect data. Clear instructions were imparted to subjects before the implementation of tests. A trial chances was also given to each and every subject before the start of every event. The subjects were also motivated to do the proper warming up before the start of these test. After the implementation of the test the data was recorded in a tabulated form.

4.

STATISTICAL TECHNIQUE For the present study 't' test for differences of mean is used which

is given below :t = m1 m2 SED

m1 m2 SED Where, SED

= = =

Mean of first group Mean of second group Standard error of the difference

Sd21 -----n1

Sd22 -----n2

Where, Sd1 Sd2 n1 and n2 = = = Standard deviation of first group Standard deviation of second group Total number of observation of first and second group respectively.

Assumption of 't' Test 1. 2. 3. The present population from, which the sample is drawn, is normal. The sample observation are independent i.e. the sample is random. The population standard deviation is unknown.

CHAPTER V DISCUSSION, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
The present chapter gives the findings of study based on the interpretation of results. The implication of the findings gives the suggestion for the further research under the following heads : DISCUSSION ON HYPOTHESIS : 1. The first hypothesis i.e. there exists a significant difference between the speed of Sports and Non-Sports Woman as it is clear from results that a significant difference exists between speed of Sports and Non-Sports Women. So our first hypothesis is accepted. 2. The second hypothesis i.e. there exists a significant difference between the explosive strength of Sports and Non-Sports Woman, it is clear from the results that a significant difference exist between leg strength between Sports and Non-Sports Woman. So our second hypothesis is accepted. 3. The third hypothesis i.e. there exists a significant difference between the endurance of Sports and Non-Sports Woman, as it is clear from results that a significant difference have better endurance as compared to the Non-Sports Woman. 4. There was a significant difference between the agility of Sports Woman

and Non-Sports Woman. Sports woman have better agility as compared to Non-Sports Woman. 5. It was found that there was a significant difference in flexibility of Sports Woman and Non-Sports Woman and Sports Woman have better flexibility as compared to the Non-Sports Woman. CONCLUSION It is finally concluded that the Sports Woman have better physical fitness in comparison to Non-Sports Woman. Sports Woman have performed better than the Non-Sports Woman. IMPLICATIONS The findings of the study will act as guideline to select to good athletes. The finding of the study will be a tool for sports coaches, physical education teachers and sports trainers to make their training programs for these athletes in which development of physical fitness components will be an important component. The finding of the present study and the procedure and opted in present study will act as a guideline for the future researches in the area of athletics for physical fitness. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 1. 2. 3. 4. The researcher suggests the following area for further researcher. The same study can be examined on a large sample. The same study conducted on male sample. Such type of study can be done on the athletes who had belonged to different Distt. and State.

APPENDIX A SCORES OF SPORTS WOMAN FOR PHYSICAL FITNESS TEST Sr. no. 50m Dash Test (in sec.) 7.30 7.45 7.35 7.05 7.02 7.25 8.50 8.10 9.20 7.37 7.85 7.53 9.52 7.20 8.55 7.29 9.75 7.15 9.43 7.80 7.50 7.46 6.57 6.05 Standing 600mt. Broad Jump Run Test Test (in min.) (in mts.) 2.42 1.50 2.30 2.32 2.53 2.62 2.20 2.31 2.35 2.04 2.33 2.50 2.36 1.42 2.18 2.14 2.34 1.72 2.45 1.85 2.80 2.46 2.24 2.40 2.60 1.55 1.49 1.44 1.35 1.56 2.08 2.10 2.20 2.15 1.53 1.57 2.53 1.54 2.09 1.58 2.38 1.53 2.33 1.53 1.40 2.59 1.40 1.42 Forward Bend and Reach Test (in cm.) 20 18.7 19.7 20 18.8 19.7 17.9 18 16 19 19.7 18.7 15 18.6 17.7 18.2 13.20 21 15.7 12 13 10 11 14 Shuttle Run (4 x 10m) Test (in sec.) 12.05 10.95 9.09 11.01 10.00 11.30 10.10 10.00 10.01 10.99 11.59 10.09 11.00 12.50 10.3 11.2 11.6 12.52 11.29 10.04 10.8 9.10 11.03 10.97

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49.

8.00 7.33 7.59 7.50 7.00 7.90 7.00 7.25 6.80 6.50 8.25 7.57 7.80 8.50 7.47 7.30 7.45 6.98 7.38 9.00 7.95 7.26 7.86 7.90 7.96

2.76 2.51 2.19 2.23 2.75 2.50 2.37 1.50 2.60 2.58 2.10 2.35 1.95 2.12 2.47 2.00 2.18 2.33 2.51 2.14 2.43 2.15 2.46 1.90 2.65

1.45 1.59 1.55 2.05 2.30 1.59 1.49 1.55 1.45 1.40 2.12 2.19 2.56 1.58 1.53 2.10 1.56 2.40 2.48 1.58 2.20 2.23 2.25 2.35 1.52

13.5 11.5 12.5 10.8 10.6 7 9 12.7 7.00 7.00 10.00 3.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 11.00 13.00 11.00 10.00 12.00 10.50 13.00 13.00 10.00 9.50

12.10 11.24 11.40 9.47 10.53 11.01 11.92 11.95 11.60 11.85 10.95 10.00 10.95 11.00 10.90 9.90 10.94 9.09 10.09 9.53 9.09 10.01 11.00 9.54 9.45

APPENDIX B SCORES OF NON-SPORTS WOMAN FOR PHYSICAL FITNESS TEST Sr. no. 50m Dash Test (in sec.) 10.21 10.48 11.00 10.23 11.60 11.80 9.44 9.75 10.00 10.75 13.09 13.10 9.87 9.87 10.57 10.58 10.94 11.71 10.01 9.76 9.47 13.11 9.46 9.88 Standing 600mt. Broad Jump Run Test Test (in min.) (in mts.) 1.58 4.31 1.31 1.61 1.56 1.34 1.62 1.46 1.70 1.27 1.24 1.28 1.35 1.41 1.55 1.26 1.40 1.25 1.76 1.39 1.33 1.23 1.00 1.36 1.21 4.28 4.25 4.13 4.05 4.49 4.08 3.98 3.77 3.88 3.60 4.10 3.80 3.74 4.04 3.16 3.78 3.76 3.89 3.62 4.11 3.82 3.79 4.09 Forward Bend and Reach Test (in cm.) 0.4 3.1 1.4 4.3 4.6 4.6 7.6 1.6 1.7 8 0.6 4.7 2.8 0.9 39 3.8 1.9 4.6 0.7 1.9 2.6 5.7 7.7 5.4 Shuttle Run (4 x 10m) Test (in sec.) 12.12 13.24 12.04 12.07 12.70 12.70 13.30 14.02 12.09 12.09 14.24 13.11 12.85 13.35 12.85 12.34 13.97 13.42 12.37 12.14 12.08 14.01 13.09 11.06

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49.

10.59 10.04 11.90 12.90 12.10 11.40 11.66 10.77 11.07 10.50 10.56 10.24 9.78 11.20 10.48 10.21 10.04 9.40 10.11 11.20 12.10 9.76 9.87 9.49 10.50

1.13 1.09 1.16 1.29 1.47 1.57 1.47 1.53 1.47 1.58 1.59 1.23 1.43 1.34 1.63 1.18 1.09 1.22 1.35 1.48 1.56 1.36 1.54 1.07 1.36

3.61 4.17 4.27 4.30 4.34 3.99 4.37 4.33 3.93 3.63 4.12 3.86 3.65 4.01 3.19 2.79 3.72 3.95 4.14 3.98 4.1 3.64 4.15 3.83 3.73

9.9 4.8 4.2 7.5 1 1.1 10 0.5 4.5 2.3 0.3 3 1 4 1 0.5 0.7 1.2 4.4 4.1 1.5 2.6 9 1.3 2.4

13.15 12.56 13.12 11.14 13.27 12.47 11.20 11.23 14.03 12.07 12.14 13.07 12.01 12.08 14.25 13.10 12.86 12.07 12.19 12.93 12.81 12.07 12.86 12.86 12.01

APPENDIX C
Name Father's Name College / Univ. Date of Birth Event Level of Participation : : : : : : ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________

RAW SCORES
50m Dash Standing Broad Jump 600m Run Test Forward Bent and Reach Test Shuttle Run (4 x 10mt.) : : : : ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________

____________________________________

CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION OF THE DATA

The present chapter deals with the analysis interpretation and discussion of the collected data which are given under : The analysis, interpretation and discussion of a physical fitness test. TABLE 4.1

THE

MEAN,

STANDARD

DEVIATION,

STANDARD

ERROR

DEVIATION, AND T-RATIO OF SPORTS AND NON-SPORTS WOMEN ON STANDING BROAD JUMP TEST OF LUDHIANA WOMEN COLLEGES. Sports and nonsports women N Mean (M) Standard Deviation (S.D.) 0.28 0.17 1.20 1.88 Standard Error of Difference (SED) 't' ratio

Sports Women Non-sports Women

50 50

2.29 0.03

Significant at 0.05 level of significance on 98 difference i.e. t 0.05 = 1.98 Table 4.1 illustrates the 't' ratio of mean score on standing broad jump test of sports and non-sports women. The t-ratio (1.88) was significant at 0.05 level of significance. It is implied that there was a significant difference between the mean scores (M=2.29) for sports women and (M=0.03) or non-

sports women. The mean score of sports women were higher than that of nonsports women. It further implied the sports women have better by strength as compared to their counterparts i.e. non-sports women. FIGURE 1 Graphic representation of legs strength test of Sports Women and NonSports Women.
Graphic Representation of legs strength Test of Sports Women and non-sports women
2.5

1.5

0.5

0 Non-sports women Sports Women

TABLE 4.2

THE

MEAN,

STANDARD

DEVIATION,

STANDARD

ERROR

DEVIATION, AND T-RATIO OF SPORTS AND NON-SPORTS WOMEN ON STANDING BROAD JUMP TEST OF LUDHIANA WOMEN COLLEGES. Sports and nonsports women N Mean (M) Standard Deviation (S.D.) 5.38 1.02 Standard Error of Difference (SED) 0.76 't' ratio

Sports Women Non-sports Women

50 50

2.23 10.66

10.96

Significant at 0.05 level of significance on 98 difference i.e. t 0.05 = 1.98

Table 4.2 illustrates the 't' ratio of mean scores on 50m dash test of sports women and non-sports women of Ludhiana Colleges. The t-ratio (10.96) was significant at 0.05 level of significance. It is implied that there was a significant difference between the mean scores (M-2.33) for sports women and (M-10.66) for non-sports women. The mean scores of sports person were lower than that of non-sports women. It is cleared that lesser the time taken higher is the speed possessed by the player and vice-versa. It further implied that sports women have better speed as compared to their counterpart i.e. nonsports women.

FIGURE 2

Graphic representation of speed test of sports women and non-sports women of Ludhiana Colleges.

Graphic Representation of legs strength Test of Sports Women and non-sports women
12

10

0 Non sports women Sports women

50m DASH TEST

TABLE 4.3 THE MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION, STANDARD ERROR

DEVIATION, AND T-RATIO OF SPORTS AND NON-SPORTS WOMEN OF LUDHIANA WOMEN COLLEGES ON (4 X 10m) SHUTTLE RUN TEST. Sports and nonsports women N Mean (M) Standard Deviation (S.D.) 0.91 0.35 0.13 15.46 Standard Error of Difference (SED) 't' ratio

Sports Women Non-sports Women

50 50

10.69 12.70

Significant at 0.05 level of significance on 98 difference i.e. t 0.05 = 1.98 Table 4.3 illustrated the 't' ratio of mean scores on shuttle run (4 x 10m) test of sports women and non-sports women. The t-ratio (15.46) was significant at 0.05 level of significance. It is implied that there was a

significant difference between the mean scores (10.69) for sports women and (12.70) for non-sports women. The mean scores of sports women were lower than that of non-sports women. It is cleared that lesser the time taken higher is the co-ordination possessed by the player and vice-versa. It further implied that the sports women have better coordination as compared to their counterpart i.e. non-sports women.

FIGURE 3 Graphic representation of coordination test of sports women and nonsports women.
Graphic Representation of legs strength Test of Sports Women and non-sports women
13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 Non sports women Sports women

TABLE 4.4 THE MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION, STANDARD ERROR

DEVIATION, AND T-RATIO OF SPORTS AND NON-SPORTS WOMEN OF LUDHIANA WOMEN COLLEGES ON (600m) RUN AND WALK TEST. Sports and nonsports women N Mean (M) Standard Deviation (S.D.) 0.39 0.07 Non-sports Women 50 3.92 0.33 29.8 Standard Error of Difference (SED) 't' ratio

Sports Women

50

1.83

Significant at 0.05 level of significance on 98 difference i.e. t 0.05 = 1.98 Table 4.4 illustrates the ratio of mean scores on 600m run and walk test of sports women and non-sports women of Ludhiana Women Colleges. The t-ratio (29.8) was significant at 0.05 level of significance. It is implied that there was a significant difference between the mean scores (1.83) for sports women and (3.92) for non-sports women. The mean scores of sports women were lower than that of non-sports women. It is cleared that lesser the time taken higher is the endurance possessed by the player and vice-versa. It further implied that sports women have better endurance as compared to their counterparts i.e. non-sports women.

Graphic Representation of legs strength Test of Sports Women and non-sports women
4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Non sports women Sports women

699m RUN AND WALK TEST

TABLE 4.5 THE MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION, STANDARD ERROR

DEVIATION, AND T-RATIO OF SPORTS AND NON-SPORTS WOMEN OF LUDHIANA WOMEN COLLEGES ON FORWARD BEND AND REACH TEST. Sports and nonsports women N Mean (M) Standard Deviation (S.D.) 0.08 0.36 Non-sports Women 50 3.3 2.58 28.8 Standard Error of Difference (SED) 't' ratio

Sports Women

50

13.7

Significant at 0.05 level of significance on 98 difference i.e. t 0.05 = 1.98 Table 4.5 illustrates the ratio of mean scores on forward and bend reach test of sports women and non-sports women of Ludhiana Women Colleges. The t-ratio (28.8) was significant at 0.05 level of significance. It is implied that there was a significant difference between the mean scores (M13.7) for sports women and (3.3) non-sports women. The mean scores of sports women were higher than non-sports women. It further implied the sports women have better flexibility as compared to their counterparts i.e. nonsports women.

FIGURE- 5 Graphic representation of flexibility test of sports women and non-sports women.
Graphic Representation of legs strength Test of Sports Women and non-sports women
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Non sports women Sports women

FORWARD BEND AND REACH TEST Where, Sd1 Sd2 n1 and n2 = = = Standard deviation of first group Standard deviation of second group Standard deviation of first group

Assumptions of 't' Test 1. 2. The present population from which the sample is drawn, is normal. The sample observation are independent i.e. the sample is random.

3.

The population standard deviation is unknown.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I acknowledge with deep sense of gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Sukhpal Kaur, Department of Physical Education, Khalsa College for Women, Ludhiana, whose inspiring guidance, stimulating encouragement and valuable help throughout the entire course of this investigation enabled me to accomplish this study. I extend my hearty thanks to my teachers to Mrs. Amarjit Kaur, Head, Department of Physical Education, Khalsa College for Women, Ludhiana, and Amandeep Kaur also lecturer of Physical Education, Khalsa College for Women, Ludhiana, for their help and encouragement. I am equally thankful to the subjects, physical education teachers and principals of various colleges who ungrudgingly rendered all help and cooperation in the collection of date for study. I express my sincere thanks to S. Charanjit Singh Saini, D.S.O., Moga for his help and encouragement. I am very much grateful to my family and friend Gurdev who have encouraged and inspired me for this study.

Date..

(Anuradha)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

AAPHPER (American Alliance for Health Physical Education and Recreation) (1996) Youth Fitness Test Manual. Revised Addition National Education Association, Washington. AAPHER (American Alliance for Health Physical Education and Recreation) (1976). Youth Fitness Test Manual. Revised Addition National Education Association, Washington. Anand, P. (1982) Comparative Study of the skills Performed by the Senior Players in a Match and Their Impact on the Performance. Unpublished Masters Thesis N.S.N.I.S. Patiala. Bhanot, J.L. and Sidhu, L.S. (1980) Comparative Study of Reaction Time in Indian Sportsmen Specializing in Hockey, Volleyball, Weight Lifting and Gymnastics. Journal of Sports Medicine Fitness, 20:113. Buchaman, K.A. (1969), Comparison of Motor Ability and Skill in Selected Basic Activities of 12 and 15 years old girls Participating in Physical Education in England and United States. Research Abstract, Boston: AAPHER. Clarke, H. Harison (1987) Application of measurement to Physical Education. P.370. Conger, Patricia, R. and Macnab, Ross, B.J. (1967) Strength, Body Composition, and work capacity of Participants and Non-participants in women Inter-Collegiate Sports, Research Quarterly, 38: May, 1967: 184-192. Dey, S.K. Sinha, S.K. and Dabray, P. (1997), A Comparative Study of Selected Anthropometric and Motor Quality Profiles of Girls 8-14 years of Eastern and North Eastern Region of India, SAI Scientific Journal, 20: 5. Dutt, S. (2002) A Study of Health Related Physical and Motor Fitness in Boys aged 8-18 years P.170, 23-30. Fredricks, S.D. (1978) Performance of Selected Motor Tasks by Three Four year old Children. Dissertation Abstracts International 39: 148A.

Gahlawat, O.P. (1993) Analysis of Physical Fitness Components and SocioEconomic Status of the Wrestlers in Haryana, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, K.U.K. Gill, R. (1983) Relationship Between Grip Strength, Arm Strength, Hand, Foot and Stepping Reaction Times to Playing Ability in Badminton. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Jiwaji University, Gwaliar. Gothi Ekta (1997) Teaching and Coaching Athletics, P.3. Harre, D. (1979) Training Slehre, Sports Verlag, Berlin, p.112. Hontley, C.T. (1974) Effect of Selected Activities upon Physical Fitness and Motor Ability on Second and Third Grade. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34: 5689 A. Johnson, Joseph Benjamin (1971) A Comparison of Physical Fitness and Self Concept Between Junior High Negro and White Male Students. Dissertation Abstracts International, vol.31, no.10, p.518. Huntley, C.T. (1974) Effect of Selected Activities upon Physical Fitness and Motor Ability on Second and Third Grade. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34: 5689A. Johnson, Joseph Benjamin (1971) A Comparison of Physical Fitness and Selfconcept Between Junior High Negro and White Male Students. Dissertation Abstracts International, vol.31, no.10, p.518. Kalidson, R. and Sivaram Krishnan, S. (1999) Comparison of Fitness Level of Tamil Nadu Cricketers with the selected International Norms. Indian Journal of Sports Studies, 4 (2): 8-10. Kaur Jasbir (1999) Assessment of Motor Fitness of Rural and Urban Senior Secondary School Girls of Punjab State (T 371-T 323), p.48, 52. Kaur, N. (1999) Motor Abilities as a Predictor of Performance in Secondary School Female Volleyball Player. Ph.D. Thesis, Punjabi University, Patiala. Kaur Sukhpal (1990) A Cross-Sectional Study of Motor Abilities of Girls in the Age Group of 7 to 11 year. P.27, 35. Kulwinder (1989) A Test Construction Study of Motor Fitness for College Females in Volleyball. P.217.

Kumar Dinesh (1998) A Normative Study of Physical Fitness of Himachal Pradesh High and Higher Secondary School Boys, p.371. Kundu Sandeep (2006) Comparative study of Physical Fitness of Swimmers Belonging to Rural and Urban Area Colleges of Kurukshetra Uni, p.25. Lee, R.G. (1962) Motor Fitness Level of Senior High School Boys and Girls in Rural Wirconsin High School. Completed Research, p.81. Loyd, Balph (1982) Comparative Study of Physical and Physiological Variables of Swimmers, Badminton Players and Gymnasts. A Thesis Submitted to Netaji Subhash N.I.S. Patiala. McGarry, C.A. (1978) A Comparison of Motor Abilities and Physical characteristics of college soccer player by position of play. Dissertation Abstracts International, 31: 4527-A. Mukerjee (1993) A Study of Physical Fitness of Boys 13 year of Age. SNIPES Journal, 1st April, 1993. Nazma (2006) A Comparative Study of Physical Fitness Variables of Punjabi University and Punjab University Male Badminton Players. p.1 to 7. Nirmala (2005) A Comparative Study of Coordinative Ability of Judo and Wrestling Female Players of College Level, T.20. Nischint (1998) A Study of Physical Growth and Fitness of Punjabi Females Ranging in Age from 9-19 years. Ph.D. Thesis (unpublished)