Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Thesis submitted to the University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
By
SUJATA K.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COLLEGE OF RURAL HOME SCIENCE, DHARWAD UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, DHARWAD - 580 005
JANUARY, 2005
(PUSHPA B. KHADI) MAJOR ADVISOR Approved by: Chairman: ____________________________ (PUSHPA B. KHADI) Members: 1) __________________________ (V. GAONKAR) 2) __________________________ (K. SAROJA) 3) _________________________ (ASHALATHA K. V.)
C ON T E N T S
Chapter No.
I INTRODUCTION
Title
II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
III
IV
RESULTS
V.
DISCUSSION
VI
SUMMARY
VII
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
LIST OF TABLES
Table No.
1. 2. 3.
Title
Personal characteristics of undergraduate students Familial characteristics of the undergraduate students Reasons for choice of undergraduate students undergraduate programme by the
4. 5. 6.
Personality factors of undergraduate students Personality factors undergraduate students by faculty Comparison of mean scores of personality factors of students by faculty Association of levels of personality factors and faculty Comparison of personality factors of girls of home science and agriculture students Association of levels of personality factors and faculty Comparison of mean scores of personality factors of boys of agriculture and marketing Association of levels of personality factors and gender among agriculture students Comparison of mean scores of personality factors between gender among agriculture students Frequency distribution of aptitude of undergraduate students Frequency distribution of levels of aptitude of undergraduate students by faculty Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of undergraduate students by faculty Association of level of aptitude of students and faculty Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of girls of home science and agriculture
7. 8.
9. 10.
11.
12.
13. 14.
15.
16. 17.
Contd..
Table No.
18. 19.
Title
Association of level of aptitude of boys and faculty Comparison of mean scores of aptitude between boys of agriculture and marketing Association of level of aptitude and gender among agriculture students Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of boys and girls of agriculture Academic achievement of undergraduate students Frequency distribution of academic achievement of undergraduate students by faculty Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of students by faculty Association of levels of academic achievement of girls by faculty
20.
21.
22. 23.
24.
25.
26.
Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of girls of home science and agriculture Association of levels of academic achievement of boys and faculty
27.
28.
Comparison of academic achievement between boys of agriculture and marketing Association of levels of academic achievement and gender Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of boys and girls of agriculture Relation between personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate students Relation between aptitude undergraduate students and academic achievement of
29. 30.
31.
32.
33.
Relation between aptitude and personality factors of undergraduate students Relation between aptitude and personality factors among boys of agriculture
33a.
Contd..
Table No.
33b.
Title
Relation between aptitude and personality factors among girls of agriculture Relation between aptitude and personality factors among home science students Relation between aptitude and personality factors among students of marketing Relation between socio-demographic characters and personality factors of undergraduate students Relation between socio-demographic character and aptitude of undergraduate students Relation between socio-demographic characters and academic achievement of undergraduate students Career choice of undergraduate students of agriculture Influence of personality factors on career choice of students of agriculture Influence of aptitude on career choice of agriculture students Influence of academic achievement on career choice of agriculture students Career choice of students of home science Influence of personality factors on career choice of students of home science Influence of aptitude on career choice of students of home science
33c.
33d.
34.
35.
36.
37. 38.
39. 40.
41. 42.
43.
44.
Influence of academic achievement on career choice of students of home science Career choice of students of marketing Influence of personality factor on career choice of students of marketing Influence of aptitude on career choice of students of marketing
45. 46.
47.
48.
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix No. Title
II
Schedule
INTRODUCTION
Aptitude is a person's ability acquired or innate, to learn or develop knowledge or a skill in some specific area (Singh, 1987). Often we find the people who have some special abilities or potentialities which enable them to do well in certain fields of activity. Such people have special types of aptitude and therefore, they are able to learn and acquire the necessary skills in a specialised field. They are also interested in such activities as are of their liking, further success or achievement in a given field of knowledge or activity depends to a great extent upon attitude and interests. Aptitude is inferred for relative levels of achievement. If individuals given comparable opportunities to acquire a skill differ in the case of acquiring it or in the level of proficiency attained, then it is inferred that differ in their aptitude for a particular work. Aptitude is more or less specific. An individual may have a high degree of aptitude for one line of work and not for certain others. There are of course people having a wide range of aptitudes. Some good scholars are also versatile in other direction. A farmer may not only be good at farming but also a successful person in business, music, athletics etc. There are people with a very narrow range of aptitudes. These can do only a few things well. Those with high aptitudes for particular type of work and those with low aptitude are relatively few in number. Most people have an intermediate degree of aptitude and in a large unselective group.
Characteristics of aptitude
Aptitude can be both innate or acquired. Aptitudes generally remain constant. Aptitude are not usually unitary but are also pluralistic. Rapid learning is positively correlated with high ultimate capacity. High aptitude leads to ease in terms of low energy cost per unit of output. Interest and satisfaction in the exercise of potential ability are easily developed. Aptitudes are relatively specific or at most are related only within small groups.
The term personality comes from the latin word persona meaning mask (Hurlock, 1978). Allport (1937) defines personality as the dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his/her unique adjustments to the environment. Personality is a criterion reference for knowing, understanding or evaluating any person. Personality depends on the psychophysical development of a person. It includes a persons nature, character, intelligence, interest, attitude, aptitude, expectation, ideals etc. Personality of an individual is strongly determined by the genetics factors. But the environmental factors cannot be ignored. The early experience in home, neighbourhood school and lay foundations for the personality. The personality pattern is the specific traits or a group of related or consistent reactions which characterize the individuals typical manner of personal and social adjustment. Each cultural group has established behavioural patterns appropriate for the members of two sexes. Within these culturally approved confine each individual is expected to develop a basic confirming personality pattern. Since personality is a product of cultural influences and is shaped by pressures from the social group. The individual normally comes to think of himself as a member of a particular group and his confirming behaviour becomes habitual.
Characteristics of personality
The personality is something unique and specific. Every one of us has an unique pattern in ourselves. No two individuals not even identical twins, behave in precisely the same way over any period of time. Every one of us has specific characteristics for making adjustments. Personality exhibits self-consciousness as one of its main characteristics. Man is described as a person or to have a personality when the idea of self enters in to his consciousness. Personality includes everything about a person. It is all that a person has about him. It includes all the behaviour patterns i.e., conative, cognitive and affective and covers not only the conscious activities but goes deeper to semi conscious and unconscious also. It is not just a collection of so many traits or characteristics which is known as personality. It is organisation of some psycho-physical systems or some behaviour characteristics and functions as a unified whole. Personality is not static. It is dynamic and ever in process of change and modification. The process of making adjustment to environment is continuous. One has to struggle against the environmental as well as the inner forces throughout the span of his life. Every personality is the product of heredity and environment.
The institutions of learning especially the schools are principal means of socialization to develop children in to useful citizen so that they fit into adult roles and also different occupational roles. It is only students who are high in their scholastic achievement are the ones who can be moulded to occupy strategic position in society and thereby determine the destiny of society. Hence scholastic achievement occupies a very important place in education as well as in the learning process. High achievement in school creates self esteem and self confidence in the child. Grade placement whether in a slow or fast section promotion and marks are the criteria by which children assess their academic achievement. Success is ego inflating, failure is ego deflating. Failure not only damages the self concept but it encourages the development of patterns of behaviour that are harmful to personal and social adjustments. By contrast, success leads to favourable self concept which inturn leads to good personal adjustments and favourable social evaluations. These contribute heavily to good future adjustments. Society and parents emphasize effective education because it forms the main basis for admission to professional courses and for career development. Thus the academic achievement that has the highest prestige in the eyes of the members of the group with which the child is identified has the greatest influence on the personality development. It is interesting to know whether aptitude makes a noticeable mark on academic achievement. Research has revealed that personality factors such as persistence in completion task, procrastination and other factors have a mark on the accomplishment of an individual. In this contest it is imperative to know whether aptitude or personality or none of the two, but hard work decides the academic achievement of the students. University of Agricultural Science is an educational center with multi faculties offering undergraduate, post graduates programmes in various fields viz., Agriculture, Marketing, Home science, Veterinary and Agricultural Engineering. The study was therefore designed to know the influence of personality profile and aptitude of students of various faculties on academic achievement and also to know whether the differences exist between faculties. The present study was conducted with the following objectives
1. To study the aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate students 2. To know the difference in aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate students by faculty 3. To study the inter-relation between aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduates 4. To study the influence of socio-demographic factors such as age, gender, ordinal position, family size, family type educational and occupational levels of parents on aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate students
2.1 APTITUDE
2.1.1 Concepts and definitions
Aptitude is defined in Warrens Dictionary as "A condition or set of characteristics regarded as symptomatic of an individuals ability to acquire with training some (usually specified) knowledge, skill or set of responses such as the ability to speak a language, to produce music etc. Bingham (1937) defines "Aptitude is a condition symptomatic of a persons general fitness of which one aspect is his readiness to acquire proficiency, his general ability and another is his readiness to develop an interest in exercising the ability". Mursell (1949) defines "Aptitude is the dynamic trend of the whole personality with mental organisation that makes one good in learning and in performing a specialised type of work.
Deb (1965) conducted a study on 300 engineering students seeking admission in college of engineering and techonology Jadavpur. The test standardised in western countries were consulted. The test consisted of 75 items, 20 minutes had been fixed as the time limit to complete the test. After application of Spearman-brown formula the reliability of the test becomes 89 which proves that the test is reliable. The correlation between engineering aptitude test and different engineering subjects shows definite relationship. Most of which having substantial relationship which proves that the test is valid one. Agarwal (1977) conducted a study on sample of 1073 boys and 354 girls drawn from 23 institutions representing all the educational regions of UP. The sample was purposive. Tools used in this study were (1) verbal group test of intelligence (BPT-14) (2) Revised Minnesota paper form board (3) Reasoning test (4) Science information test (5) Science vocabulary test (6) Numerical ability test. The study concludes that, the battery is effective and can safely be used for predicting success in science courses. The battery can be employed for the relution of students for science courses in Class XI those, who desire to opt for mathematics in class XI can be screened with the help of the battery of tests.
Dabir and Pandit (1988) the sample for the study was selected form schools in and around Nagapur. The sample consisted of 1080 students for standards 9, 10 and 11. The occupational aspiration scale (OAS) and differential aptitude test were administered to the sample. The result did not show that aptitudes have positive association with the vocational aspirations of the school going youth. Schneider et al. (1989) studied in experiment 1 a total of 576 middle-class children from 3rd, 5th and 7th graders from rural and urban schools. Tools used were a-13 item questionnaire was used to assess children's knowledge about soccer children's scores on the verbal aptitude component of a German cognitive ability test fieller. Gadicks and Weinlader rd th th (1985) in experiment 2 a tool of 185 middle class children from 3 , 5 and 7 graders. Two studies compared memory performance and text comprehension of groups that were equivalent on domain-specific knowledge but differed in overall aptitude, to investigate whether prior knowledge about a particular domain or overall aptitude level was more important when the task was to acquire and use new information in the domain of interest. Results shows that levels of soccer knowledge and of overall aptitude were varied in a factorial design. Neither study detected significant differences between high aptitude and low aptitude experts, regardless of their ages. Low aptitude expert outperformed high aptitude novices on all memory and comprehension measures. The results indicates that domain specific knowledge can compensate for low overall aptitude on domain related cognitive tasks. Pillai (1990) conducted a study on the sample of 800 students studying in standard IX of 20 secondary schools in Kerala. The tools used were (1) Achievement test in biology developed by Ayishabi and Sulatha (2) Kerala university science aptitude test std. by Nair and Ramanandan (3) Scale of attitude towards science developed by Anand and Pillai, F value for factor science aptitude is significant at 0.01 level indicating that the pupils of three different levels of science aptitude performed differently in biology achievement test. Similarly for factor attitude towards science also the F value is significant. The study reveals that biology achievement of secondary pupils may differ according to the differences in science aptitude or attitude towards science as the present study shows no interaction effect of science aptitude and attitude towards science. It may be possible that these two variables are contributing independently on biology achievement. In the same year Swanson (1990) conducted a study children from 4 to 5 whose cores were selected from 4 elementary schools additional information related to school aptitude was observed from the comprehension test of Basic Skills (CTBS 1978). A sample of 25 high aptitude and 25 low aptitude children were taken. A questionnaire modified from Krcutzer et al. (1978) was used to assess metacognition in the general domain of problem solving. The important findings were that high metacognitive individuals outperformed lower metacognitive individuals problem solving regardless of their overall aptitude test. In fact high metacognitive knowledge/low aptitude children preformed significantly better than low metacognitive knowledge children with higher overall aptitude scores. Gallagher and Lisi (1994) conducted a study on participants who were junior and seniors from one public and three private high schools in central New Jersey. The sample consisted of 25 male and 22 female students who scored at or above 670 on a recent SAT-M. The tool used for the study was, the problem set which consisted of 27 items from 5 different forms of the SAT-M. This study revealed that gender differences on SAT-M problems among high ability students in which female students outperformed male students on conventional problems and male students outperformed female students on unconventional problems. Rothstein et al. (1994) conducted a study on totally 450 students of 2 year MBA programme (357 men, 93 women). The sample comprised two Ist year classes (1989 and 1990) of 225 students each. Al students with in a section remain cohorts throughout their first year and take 9 compulsory courses taught by 9 different instructors. Tools used were personality form E of Jacksons (1984) PRF a-352 item questionnaire. Aptitude, verbal ability, quantitative ability and total GMAT percentile scores were available for each student. The result reported was (1) verbal and quantitative aptitudes make important contributions to student success in a variety of academic programs. (2) Personality variables also make
important contributions to scholastic success. (3) The relative contributions of congnitive abilities and personality factors to academic success depend on the criterion of performance. Burns (1980) examined one possible reason for the lack of consistent findings in aptitude. Treatment interaction research namely the instability of aptitude. Learning relations overtime. Four classes of predominantly 10th grade students were taught an imaginary science over a 4 day period. Achievement measures were obtained each day. Students completed 14 aptitude measures prior to instruction and 5 additional aptitude scores were obtained from student records. Component scores from a derived principal. Components solution to the inter correlations of the aptitude scores were then correlated with each of the achievement scores. The results indicated that some aptitude achievement relations were not stable over time and that this instability was exhibited in different aptitudes being required at different points in time during instruction. Rao (1995) conducted a study on A comparative study of scientific attitude, scientiifc aptitude and achievement in biology at secondary school level. The total sample of 600 students studying in 10th class in secondary schools of Guntur district. Andhra Pradesh were included age level of the students was 14 or 15 years. The tools used were scientific attitude scale of JK Sood and R.P. Sandhya and Kerala University science aptitude test of Nair et al. The marks in biology scored in the pre-public examiantion of the tenth class of the district were taken in to consideration to assess the achievement of pupils in biology. The study revealed that the association among scientific attitude, scientific aptitude and biology achievement was highly significant and positive. Brody and Benbow (1990) conducted two studies to determine (a) whether differential educational experiences contribute to differential growth on scholastic aptitude test (SAT) scores of (b) Whether such experiences must occur over a long rather than a short duration to have impact. Specific content knowledge in mathematics/science and verbal areas taught during a short time interval did not increase SAT-M and SAT-V scores even when t he content was of the type required to selves SAT problems. Exposure to academically rigorous educational experiences over a long time period (5 yrs) did relate to the development of abilities measured by SAT. In addition students who experienced very large gains on SAT over this 5 year period, in comparison with students with small gains, were achieving better in a more rigorous program of high school courses in mathematics and science for the SAT-M and in verbal areas for the SAT-V. Results support the position that educational experiences over time influence SAT scores.
2.2 PERSONALITY
2.2.1 Concepts and definitions
The personality comes from the Latin word "Persona" meaning mask (Hurlock, 1978). Allport (1937) defines personality as the dynamic organization within the individual of those psycho-physical system that determine his/her unique adjustments to the environment. McGill (1949) defines personality as the organization of needs, abilities and potentialities of an individual. Cattell (1950) defines personality as the sum total of the psychological characters of the individuals. Eysenk (1952) states personality is more or less stable and enduring organization of a person's character, temperament, intellect and physique that determines one's unique adjustment to the environment. Cattell has grouped personality into a battery of 16 factors AReserved-outgoing, BDull-bright, CEmotionally stable-mature, EMildAggressive, FSober-enthusiastic, GDisregards rules-moralistic, HShy-Socially bold, I Self reliant-sensitive, L - Accepting condition-Suspicious, M Practical-imaginative, N Socially clumsy- socially aware, O-Secure-insecure, Q1 Conservative-liberal, Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient, Q3 Self conflict-controlled undisciplined , Q4 - Tense-Relaxed.
From these 16 personality factors four can be derived mathematically. Second order personality factors Ext - Introversion-extroversion Anx - Low anxiety-high anxiety T.P. - Tender minded-tough poise Independent - Subduedness-independence (1) Outgoing: Affertothymia, warm hearted, easy going, participating, good natured, emotionally expressive, ready to co-operate, attentive to people, kindly, adaptable. The person likes occupations dealing with people and socially impressive situations. He readily forms active groups is generous in personal relations, less afraid of criticism, better able to remember names of people. (2) Bright: More intelligent, abstract thinking, quick to grasp ideas, a fast learner. (3) Mature: Higher ego strength, emotionally stable, faces reality, calm better able to maintain solid group morale. (4) Aggressive: Dominance, assertive, independent, competitiveness, stubborn. Tends to be austere, a law to himself. Hostile or extrapunitive, authoritarian (managing others) and disregards authority. (5) Enthusiastic: Surgency, happy-go lucky, impulsive, lively, cheerful, active, talkative, frank, expressive, effervescent, carefree. Is frequently chosen as an elected leader impulsive and mercurial. (6) Moralistic: Stronger superego strength, conscientious, persevering, staid, rulebound, dominated by sense of duty, responsible, planful. Conscientious and moralistic and prefers hardworking people to witty companions. (7) Socially bold: Parmia, venturesome, uninhibited, spontaneous, ready to try new things and abundent in emotional responses, thick-skinnedness enables to face wear and tear in dealing with people and grueling emotional situations, without fatigue. Careless of detail, ignore, danger, signals and consume much time talking. Tends to be pushy and actively interested in the opposite sex. (8) Sensitive: Premsia, tenderminded, dependent, overprotected, day dreaming, artistic, fastidious, feminine. Demand attention and help, impatient, impractical, dislikes crude people and rough occupations. Tends to slow up group performance and upsets group morale by unrealistic fussiness. (9) Suspicious: Pretension, self opinionated, hard to fool, mistrusting and doubtful. often involved in own ego, is self opinionated and interested in internal, mental life. Usually deliberate in actions, unconcerned about other people, a poor team member. (10) Imaginative: Autia, wrapped up in inner urgencies, careless of practical matters, absent minded, unconventional, unconcerned over everyday matters. Bohemian, self-motivated Imaginatively creative, concerned with essentials and obvious of particular people and physical realities. Inner directed interests some times lead to unrealistic situations accompanied by expressive outbursts. Individuality tends to cause to be rejected in group activities. (11) Socially aware: Shrewdness, calculating, wordly penetrating, polished, experienced, hard headed and analytical, intellectual unsentimental approach to situations. (12) Insecure: Guilt pronenes, apprehensive, worrying, depressive, troubled, moody full of foreboding and brooding. childlike tendency to anxiety in difficulties, not fully accepted in groups or free to participate.
(13) Liberal: Radicalism, experimenting, critical, analytical, free thinking, interested in intellectual matters and has doubts on fundamental issues. Skeptical and inquiring regarding ideas, either old or new. Tends to be more well informed, less inclined to moralize, more inclined to experiment in life generally and more tolerant of inconvenience and change. (14) Self sufficient: Self sufficiency prefers own decisions, resourceful, temperamentally independent, accustomed to going own way. Making decisions, taking actions on own, discounts public opinion, but is not necessarily dominant in relations with others. Does not dislike people but simply does not need their agreement or support. (15) Controlled: High self concept control, socially precise, following, self image, strong control of emotions and general behaviour, is inclined to be socially aware and careful, sometimes tends, to be obstinate effective leader. (16) Tense: High ergic tension, frustrated, driven, over wrought, excitable, restless, fretful, impatient. Is often fatigued, but unable to remain inactive. In groups takes a poor view of the degree of unity, orderliness and leadership. Frustration represents an excess of stimulated, but undischarged drive. The second order personality factors are defined as : (1) Extroversion: Socially outgoing, uninhibited person, good at making and maintaining interpersonal contacts. This can be very favourable in situations that call for this type of temperament ex: salesman, but should not be considered necessarily favourable as a general predictor ex: of scholastic achievement. (2) High anxiety: Need not be neurotic, since anxiety could be situational but it is probable that some maladjustment i.e., dissatisfaction with the degree to which one is able to meet the demands of life and to achieve what one desires. Very high anxiety is generally disruptive of performance and productive of physical disturbances. (3) Tough poise: Likely to be an enterprising, decisive and resilient personality. However one is likely to miss the subtle relationships of life and to orient their behaviour too much toward the obvious. If there are difficulties, they are likely to involve rapid action with insufficient consideration and thought. (4) Independence: The factor tends to be an aggressive, independent, daring, incisive, person. Seeks those situations where such behaviour is at least tolerated and possibly rewarded and is likely to exhibit considerable initiative.
XI class drawn from two higher secondary schools of Behror district, Alwar. Risk taking behaviour of the subjects was measured by administering risk-taking questionnaire of Sinha and Arora. The results of the study revealed that the male students exhibited significantly higher level of risk taking than the female students. Daftuar et al. (2000) conducted a study to examine the relationship of risk taking with academic achievement in students coming from different habitational background. A total of 384 students were selected for the study. Mohsins (1968) test of general intelligence was used to assess the intelligence level of students. A measure following Kogar and Wallaclis (1964) measure of risk taking behaviour was developed by the author. The marks of students in the two previous school examinations were obtained for academic achievement. Students having average levels of achievement in school examinations completed a measure of risk taking behaviour. It was found that nontribal urban high achievers had greater risk taking tendency than their counterparts low achievers. Also rural students showed greater risk taking than urban students. Competitive Miserandino (1996) conducted a study on "Children who do well in school. Individual differences in perceived competence and autonomy in above average children". Self determination theory and a motivational model of engagement were used to determine the impact of perceived competence and autonomy on engagement and performance in school of 77 third and seventh grade students from New York city identified as above average in ability by scoring above the median on the stanford achievement test. Despite this high ability, results showed that children who reported experiencing a lack of completeness (those less certain of their abilities) or a lack of autonomy (being extremely motivated) reported more negative effect and withdrawal behaviours than did children who perceived themselves as having or who perceived themselves to be autonomous. Bhadra and Girija (1984) reported that high achievers show dominant characters in competition than low achievers. T he sample consisted of 120 scheduled caste/tribe students admitted to the under graduate programmes of the University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Standard progressive matrices (Reven, 1949) and general mental ability test (Tandon, 1950) were used to measure non-verbal and verbal ability respectively. Twelve related personality scales from Edward personality inventory (Edward, 1967) and personal and interpersonal values (Gordon, 1960, 1967) were administered to assess personality characteristics and value patterns respectively. Guilt proneness Bharati Devi (1982) conducted a study on certain psychological factors of adjustment influencing achievement among school children. A sample of 35 high achievers (those with 80% and above marks) 40 low achievers (those with 50% and below) studying in class VIII were administered the psychological adjustment inventory developed by Reddy (1966). The results found that high achievers were low on neuroticism, guilt and inferiority feeling. Similarly, Sontakey (1988) reported that high achievers were self assured, confident and severe whereas the low achieving students were apprehensive, worrying and depressive i.e., they had guilt proneness stodgy in comparison to their low achieving counterparts. Self sufficiency Norwich (1987) investigated the relation between self efficacy and mathematics achievement. Self efficacy was measured over 4 trials in a repeated measures design with 72 children aged 9 to 10 years. Regression analysis indicated small or no predictive relation between self efficacy and task performance. Results of the study lend one to doubt about a simple relation between self efficacy and task performance in the field of mathematics learning. Mature Tiwari and Poornachand (1995) conducted a study to findout emotional adjustment among high and low achieving adolescents. The sample consisted of 50, 10th and 11th class students of Pantnagar and Rudrapur. The questionnaire of adjustment developed by Kumar was administered to the students. For measure of academic achievement, results in the PU board examination of 1991 was considered. Results showed that high achievers were significantly high in emotional adjustment than low achievers.
However, the study conducted by Vashishtha (1991) on sample of 140 pupils both boys and girls, studying in the final year of the high secondary level (class 11) from Delhi revealed that high achieving girls demonstrated poor emotional adjustment as compared to low achieving girls. High and low achieving boys were observed to be alike in emotional adjustment. On the basis of the annual examination results of the precoding year, academic achievement was measured. Data were collected by administering the adjustment inventory for college students (AICS) constructed and standardized by Sinha and Sinha.
respectively. The difference between the two groups of sample was also large on Q1 (Liberalconservative) dimension but it failed to reach the significance level. Srivastava (1989) conducted study on decision making and personality traits. The two public sectors industrial organizations, the Bhilai steel plant and the HSCL situated in the Durg district of Madhya Pradesh constituted the universe of the study and the sample was drawn out from the managers category. The total sample comprised of 110 managers selected randomly from both the organizations. The tools used were decision making scale developed by Blankeship and Mles (1968) and 16 PF questionnaire by Cattell and Eber (1962). Among 16 factors, 2 personality factors. Factor I, tough minded and factor M practical (counterparts) showed significant relationship with decision making. Jain and Chouhan (1989) conducted a study on development of personality and vocational preference of students at various stages of adolescence. The sample consisted of 900 students studying in VI and XI grade of both urban and rural areas of Udaipur district. The age of the subjects varied between 12 to 18 years. The Hindi version of Cattell's higher secondary personality questionnaire (HSPQ) developed by Kapoor and Srivastava (1985) was used to measure personality of students. Results indicated that personality factors less intelligent vs more intelligent (B), phlegmatic temperament vs excitability (D) submissiveness vs dominance (E), expedient vs conscientious (G) tough minded Vs tender minded (I). Group dependent vs self sufficient (Q2) and uncontrolled vs controlled respectively changed with age. The vocational preferences of students also changed during adolescence period of life. Singh (1990) conducted a study on affiliation motive as related to personality ergs and sentiments. The subjects were 200 undergraduate students whose mean age was 18.5 years. Subjects were administered an adapted version of Mcclelland's TAT developed by Mcclelland, Atkinson Clark and Lowell (1953), 16 personality questionnaire (16PF Cattell and Eber 1962). Motivation analysis test developed by MAT Cattell and Horn (1964). The results showed significant correlations of nAffiliation with factor A (warm hearted participating), Factor N (forthright), Factor M (venturesome), Factor I (sensitive) drive for self assertion and chronological age. These correlations suggest that high scores on the projective measure of affiliation motive tended to be participating, warm hearted, forthright, venturesome, sensitive and assertive. Roy (1992) conducted a study on personality traits of Antarctica expertitioners. Data th were collected from 8 Antarctica expeditioners who started for Antartica on 27 November, th 1991 and returned to India on 24 March, 1992, safely. Their age ranged from 25.9 to 44 years. Tools used was 16 PF test developed by Cattell (1987). The results suggests that expeditioners were aloof, objective, intelligent, independent, problem solver, optimistic, cheerful, self sufficient, resourceful, careless of social rules and had little inhibition to environmental threat. In the same year Ashraf (1992) conducted a study on personality characteristics of heavy and mild cigarette smokers. The sample comprised of 300 male postgraduates drawn equally from three groups of heavy smokers, mild smokers and non-smokers. The three groups of the subjects were matched in terms of their age (range 20-30) and socio-economic status (middle class). Tools used were (1) Personal Data Schedule (PDS) for assessing personal characteristics and family background of the respondents and antecedents of cigarette smoking (2) Smoking problem check list (SPC) developed and used to assess the underlying problems of smoking behavior (3) Hindi version (Kapoor, 1972) of Cattell 16 personality factor questionnaire (16 PF) for assessing personality characteristics of the subjects. The findings of this study was against one way analysis of variance. It was found that heavy smokers, mild smokers and non smokers differed significantly in terms of their scores on each factor of personality as measured through Cattell 16 PF. Barnes and Srinivas (1993) conducted a study on personality traits of self actualised women. This study included the sample of 64 females age ranging from 35 to 55 years with a minimum of XII std. Education, with income above Rs. 1500 per month, consisting of varied marital and occupational categories was selected for the study. Tools used were 16 PF questionnaire (Cattell, 1966) and the personal orientation inventory (Schostrom, 1980). The
results showed that the factors that facilitated womens self actualization have been reflected by time, competency and inner directedness and show significant personality traits of being reserved, cool, good ego strength and emotional stability, independence, adventurousness, assertiveness, imaginative and cordial interpersonal relationships. Shukla et al. (1994) conducted a study on personality characteristics of Indian sports women of individual and team sports. The sample comprised 150 college sports women, further divided into two categories individual sports athletes (27) and team sports. This included 4 sports specialists, Hockey (33), Foot ball (30), Volley ball (30) and cricket (30) who have represented in state of UP, Bihar, Bengal and Punjab provencies. Equal number of subjects (150) were randomly selected as the control who never participated in the extramwar sports from women college Hossal, BHV Cattles (1967) 16 PF questionnaire was used as a tool. The results revealed that significant difference was observed through 'F' ratio (ANOVA Test) on four factor A (outgoing), H (venture some), Q (controlled) and Q4 (tense) when compared with team and individual sports. The highest value Q2 (self sufficient) while lowest in F (sober). There were significant differences among athletes and non athletes on 14 traits out of 16 traits analysed in this study. Roy (1995) conducted a study on differences in personality factors of experienced teachers, physicians, bank managers and fine artists. Data were collected from 95 teachers of well known private and public schools 68 physicians of major govt. hospitals, 72 bank managers of different branches, 51 fine artists of renowned govt. colleges of the 4 metropolitan cities of Calcutta, Delhi, Bombay and Madras. The mean age of the sample was 43-69 years. Cattell's 16 PF questionnaire was used for collection of data. Results showed that teachers were significantly more extroverted and anxious, physicians were more intelligent, introverted and anxious. Bank managers were more extroverted, relaxed, tough minded and intelligent artists were introverted and tender minded. Singh (1996) conducted a study on some personality characteristics of school adolescents in relation to their mothers employment. The sample of the study consisted of 200 students reading in degree classes in the colleges located in Ara (Bihar). Out of these 100 of them belonged to both mothers and father as earning members and 100 of them whose mothers, were housewives and father was earning member. Both male and female sample of age group 18-21 years were taken for study. Tool used in this study was Hindi adaption of 16 personality factor questionnaire (Cattell's 16 PF 1967-68 edition Hindi version). The results revealed that the two groups of adolescents differed significantly on personality factors measured. The results indicated that sample of working group of mothers generally seemed to be outgoing, open minded, emotionally more stable, bold, venturesome, adaptive to change, independent in taking decisions and actions. While students of non-working groups of mothers were found more reserved, less outgoing, easily moved by emotions and feelings, shy, conservative, with drawing, tradition oriented and depending on others to take decisions and actions. Sridevi and Rao (1998) conducted a study on temporal effects of meditation and personality. This study included the subjects who participated in the study and were drawn from the female employees of two pharmaceutical companies located in Andhra Pradesh. The age of the subjects ranged from 20-28 years. The tool used in this study was 16 personality factors questionnaire (Cattell, 1968) as a measure of personality. The sample size was 140 female employers. The results revealed a significant increase in the positive personality growth as a function of length of meditation practice, across groups. The long term meditator group seems to have acquired more positive personality characteristics compared to any other group. The increase appears to be linear even though the amount of meditation practice was not continuously spread out across the groups. Roy (2002) conducted a study on personality differences across four metropolitan cities of India. Data were collected from Calcutta (N=93), Madras (N=78), Bombay (N=64) and Delhi (N=51). The mean age of the sample was 43.69. They were employed in different govt. schools. govt. hospitals, Nationalised banks and art colleges. The Cattells 16 PF (Form A) was used for assessment of personality patterns. A large number of people in Calcutta and Madras prefer academic and cultural activities. They were high on factors B. I and Q2, i.e.,
intelligent, tough minded and group dependent respectively comparing with Calcutta and Madras. Samples of Delhi and Bombay were less intelligent (B-) conventional (E-) tough minded (I-) and group dependent (Q2). So these places were viable for establishments of conventional.
year degree class students from 14 colleges affiliated to University of Madras. 291 were from the colleges located in the urban areas and 199 were from the colleges located in the rural areas. Tools used for the study were final university examination marks obtained by the students were used as the criteria of academic achievement. Self concept was measured by using Mahsins self concept scale. Taylors manifest anxiety scale was used to measure the manifest anxiety. Ravens progressive matrices test was used to measure the intelligence. Adjustment problem was measured by using Reddys adjustment problem check list. Mehrabians achieving tendency scale was used to measure the achievement motivation. The study revealed that high achieving rural students were having higher achievement motivation than the urban students. Low achieving rural students were positive self concept and higher manifest anxiety low achieving urban students were higher intelligence and higher adjustment problems. Sharma and Bansal (1991-92) conducted a study on Academic achievement and intelligence of extrovert and introvert adolescent girls. The study was taken up during the period 1989-90 with a view of compare their academic achievement and level of intelligence. XI class students of G.G.I.C (Pantnagar) and Sanatan Knaya Inter College (Rudrapur). The total number of students was 426 extroversion and introversion questionnaire were distributed among 426 girl students. On the basis of their answers 66 girls were extrovert, 41 were introvert and remaining were ambivert. A random sample of 30, 30 each form extrovert and introvert group was selected by chit lottery method. The result revealed that an extrovert adolescent girls differ significantly in their attitudes towards level of intelligence. However, they were almost similar in their academic achievements on the whole the extrovert adolescents girls were more intelligent than introverts. Goel (2003) conducted a study on feeling and security and educational achievement of the college students. The aim of the present study is to assess the relationship between security, insecurity and academic achievement. Security-insecurity inventory was administered to a sample of 500 girls of graduate and post graduate classes from different colleges in Agra. For measuring the educational achievement aggregate of marks obtained in the public examination by the students were taken into consideration. Results revealed hat the feeling of insecurity had adverse effect on the students educational achievement. Low achievement has a positive relationship with the feeling of insecurity whereas the students who had average and high achievements had positive relationship with the feeling of security. The results indicated that students who had the feeling of security made high educational achievement and students who had the feeling insecurity have made low educational achievement. Intelligence Pandey and Singh (1978) conducted a study on correlational study of school examination marks intelligence and achievement scores on a sample of 120 male students selected randomly from high schools of Chapra (Bihar) studying in class 8th with the mean age of 12.5 years where in the half yearly examination marks represented the achievement and intelligence was measured by verbal intelligence test developed by Mahsin. The results revealed a significant positive correlation between school examination marks and verbal intelligence. Stipek and Gralinkis (1996) conducted a study to know the associations among the children's belief about intelligence and effort goal orientations, self reported learning strategies and academic achievement. Assessment of all variables were conducted twice over one school year on 319 children in grades 3rd to 6th. Results indicated that the belief that intelligence is global in its effects on performance. This set of belief was differentiated from the belief that effort has positive effects on intelligence and performance children's belief to intelligence as fixed and affecting performance were negatively associated with academic achievement. Begum and Phukan (2001) conducted a study to know the relation between academic achievement and intelligence in both boys and girls separately. Studying in English medium schools at Jorhat district, Assam. The sample consisted of 180 students of class IX out of 7 which 118 were male and 62 were female. Group test of intelligence (13+17 ) developed by
Ahuja (1976) was administered to obtain their intelligence scores. Differences in correlation between academic achievement and intelligence with respect to boys and girls were observed separately. Results revealed that the correlation was greater (r=0.78) in case of girls than that of boys (r=0.63). Anxiety Upamanyu et al. (1980) administered Cattell's anxiety scale to 100 male post graduate students of the faculty social sciences. The mean percentage of marks in the MA part I and II was obtained to measure academic achievement. The results showed that anxiety was associated negatively with academic achievement and intelligence. Similar results were found by Srivastava et al. (1980) in the same year they studied on 100 male undergraduate students of age 16 to 19 years form rural area of Varanasi. Examination anxiety questionnaire (EAS) developed by author was used for ascertaining degree of anxiety. Marks obtained at the high school examination anxiety and academic achievement were negatively correlated to the extent of 0.66 which was significant at 0.01 level. Singh and Asha (1984) study on neuroticism anxiety and academic achievement. It showed that more numbers of high achievers were high on anxiety in comparison to low achievers. It was found to be highly significant where in high achievers. It was found to be highly significant where in high achievers had high anxiety. The sample consisted of 70 male and 70 female undergraduate students and were administered Kapoor's anxiety scale (1966). Marks obtained in the previous examination were considered for academic achievement. Sudhir's (1989) study on a sample of 440 students of classes IX and X selected from a high schools. It showed that students with high test anxiety were found to have higher mean score on achievement motivation than those having low test anxiety. The mean difference was statistically significant at 0.05 level indicating that test anxiety was positively related to achievement motivation Rao's achievement motivation scale and test anxiety scale (1989) developed by author was used similarly Mishra (1992) found that academic achievement was associated with test anxiety. The sample consisted of 88 boys selected from three different schools and were administered test anxiety scale. The results showed that 80-85 per cent of academic achievement was due to test anxiety, self concept and study habits. Shanmuga (1995) conducted a study on "The effect of anxiety on academic achievement". The sample for this study consisted of 170 final year Arts and Science post graduate students, studying in various courses at Annamalai University. Out of 170 there were about 129 male and 41 female students. The average age of final year post graduate student was 22 years. Taylor's manifest anxiety scale was used to measure the level of anxiety. The final semester marks of the students were obtained from the university records and treated as the achievement scores of the students. Personal data sheet was used to elicit personal information of the respondents. The results were found that there was negative relationship between anxiety and academic achievement of students. Low anxiety students were high academic achievers and high anxiety students were low academic achievers. Sud and Prabha (2003) conducted study on "Academic performance in relation to perfectionism test procrastination and test anxiety of high school children. This study examined the relationship of academic performance with perfectionism, test procrastination and test anxiety (and its worry and emotionality) components among high school boys and girls. Total sample was 200 aggregate of annual academic scores were taken from the school records of previous year. Correlational analysis revealed that academic performance was significantly and negatively related to self oriented perfectionism, procrastination, test anxiety worry and emotionality. Test procrastination and test anxiety turned out to be most effective variables in this regard.
were used to measure personality and vocational preferences and students. Results indicated that personality factors less intelligent vs more intelligent (B), phlegmatic temperament vs Excitability (D). Submissiveness vs dominance (E), expedient vs conscientious (G) tough minded vs tender minded (I). Group dependent vs self sufficient (Q2) and uncontrolled vs controlled (Q3) changed with age and vocational preferences of students also changed during adolescence period of life. Mehta and Sewani (1995) conducted a study to see the effect and interactive effect of vocational maturity and need for achievement upon the personality pattern of adolescent girls of X std. A sample of 230 girls of Kendriya Vidyalaya, Jaipur were administered vocational attitude maturity scale. Murray's 20 need for achievement and need for abasement, items and HSPQ. Results were found that (1) High vocationally mature girls were significantly more warm hearted, outgoing, emotionally stable, individualistic, internally restrained. Self sufficient, resourceful decisive, relaxed, tranquil, unfrustrated less excitable in comparison to low vocationally mature girls (2) Subjects having high need for achievement were significantly more emotionally stable, excitable, assertive, independent, happy go lucky, impulsive, lively, self-sufficient, resourceful and decisive (3) High vocational maturity along with high need for achievement found to be leading to more warm heartedness, emotional stability, individualistic tendencies, self control, less tension and frustration in comparison to other groups.
level of educational attainment of both the parents were assessed. The result revealed that parental education was positively correlated with the academic achievement of their sons and daughter. Similarly Bhatnagar and Sharma (1992) carriedout a research to investigate the relationship between education of parents and academic achievement of students in a semirural setting. A total of 85 students of Rajasthan city were related. The results revealed that, the children whose parents attended school performed higher academic performance than the children whose parents not attended the school indicates parental education was significantly related to the academic achievement of students. Panda and Jena (2000) conducted a study on "effect of some paternal characteristics of class IX students achievement motivation". The study was designed to findout the effect of place of residence. Occupation and educational qualification of fathers on the achievement motivation of 200 IX class students selected from 6 secondary schools located in the headquarters of Jaipur and Kalahandi districts. Critical ratios (t-values) were computed to compare students scores on Rao achievement motivation test. The students belonging to fathers of Jaipur district, service group and high educational qualification category were found to have significantly better achievement motivation as compared to their counterparts.
Cherian (1990) conducted a study on family size and academic achievement of children. The sample consisted of 369 boys and 652 girls in the age range of 13 to 17 years who represented total 7 standard population in Transkei. The marks obtained by the pupils at the standard 7 external examination conducted by the Department of Education of the Government of Transkei was taken. The results revealed a negative relationship between family size of children and their academic achievement.
2) Dependent variables
Academic achievement of the students
Selection plan Agriculture Marketing Home Science Degree Strengt Strengt Strengt Strengt Strengt programm h of Selecte h of Selecte h of Selecte h of Selecte h of Selecte e in years class d boys class d girls class d boys class d girls class d girls boys girls boys girls girls I years 80 15 20 10 23 12 7 25 12 II years III years IV years Total 86 83 91 340 15 15 15 60 17 25 23 85 10 10 10 40 21 7 19 70 11 7 10 40 7 2 4 20 26 10 17 78 13 10 10 45
Sample selected Class I years II years III years IV years Total Agriculture Boys 10 12 11 10 43 Girls 10 10 10 7 37 Marketing Boys 10 10 7 10 37 Home Science Girls 12 11 10 10 43 Total 42 43 38 37 160
7.
There are separate answer sheets which can be scored either by hand or by an IBM test scoring machine. If the test papers are to be scored by an IBM test scoring machine the pupils must use special electrographic pencils. The scoring procedure is described below Sl. No Test . 1. Verbal reasoning 2. Numerical ability 3. Abstract reasoning 4. Space relations Max. scor Formula e 50 R 40 50 100 Hand keys Rights only Machine keys
Notes
R-1/4 W Rights & Rights & One mark for each wrongs elimination item number R-1/4 W Rights & Rights & One mark for each wrongs elimination item number R-W Rights & Rights & Multiple marks are wrongs elimination permitted for each item number
68 100
R-1/2 W Rights & Rights & One mark for each wrongs elimination item number R Rights only Rights only One mark for each item number only Part II scored same key for forms A&B
7. Language usage Part I Part II 100 95 R-W R-W Rights & Rights and One mark for each wrongs elimination item number Rights & Rights and wrongs elimination Multiple marks are permitted for each item number
After obtaining the raw scores, these raw scores are converted in to percentiles by using standard norms. This is separate for boys and girls based on their age. Based on these percentile scores the students are categorized in to Category High Above average Average Below average Low Score 80-99 55-75 50 25-45 1-20 Code 1 2 3 4 5
For general scholastic aptitude index the sum of scores on verbal reasoning VR + on numerical ability NA and VR+NA gives a composite score which is transferred in to the percentile rank, which gives an index of general scholastic aptitude or index of mental ability.
2) 16 personality factors
The 16 PF scale developed by Cattell RB and IPAT (1982) is an objectively scorable test derived by basic research in psychology to give the most complete coverage of personality possible in a brief time. The test was designed for use with individuals aged
sixteen and above. This tool is most appropriate for literate individuals whose education level is roughly equivalent to that of the normal high school students. The test can be scored by hand or by machine. The 16 personality factors that are assessed using this tool are given below (primary factors). The primary source traits covered by the 16 PF test Sl. No. Factor 1. 2. 3. A B C Low sten score description (1-3) Reserved, detached, critical, aloof, stiff, Sizothymia Dull, low intelligence Affected by feelings, emotionally less stable, easily upset, changeable, lower ego strength High sten score description (8-10) Outgoing, warmhearted, easygoing, participating, Affatothymia Bright, High intelligence Emotionally stable, mature, faces reality, calm, higher ego strength
E F G H I L M N O
Hatnable, mild, easily led, docile Assertive, aggressive, competitive, accommodating, submissiveness stubborn, dominance Sober, taciturn, serivous, desurgency Happy go lucky, enthusiastic, surgency Expedient, disregards rules, weaker Conscientions, persistent, moralistic superego strength staid, stronger superego strength Shy, timid, threat, sensitive, threctia Venturesome, uninhibited, socially bold parmia Toughminded, selfretiant, realistic, Tenderminded, sensitive, clinging, harria, over protected, premsia Trusting, accepting conditions alaxia Suspicious, hard to fool protention Practical, down-to-earth concerns, Imaginative, bohemian, praxernia absentminded, autia Forthright, unpretentious, gemine but Astute, polished, socially aware socially clumsy, artlessness shrowdness Self-assured, placid, secured, Apprehensive, self reproaching complacent, serene, untroubled insecure worrying troubled, guilt adequacy proneness Conservative, respecting traditional ideal, conservativism of temporament Group dependent a joiner and sound follower group adherence Undisciplined self conflict low follows own urges careless of social rules, low self sentiment integration Experimenting, liberal, free humbing radicalism Self sufficient, resourceful, prefers own decisions, self sufficiency Controlled, excting will power, socially precise, compulsive, following self image, high strength of self sentiment Relaxed, tranquil, torpid, unfrustrated Tense frusted, drived over wrought, composed, low ergic tension high ergic tension
Q1 Q2 Q3
16.
Q4
From the 16 factors further four secondary order factors can be derived viz., using a mathematical formula (Appendix I). 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Introversion vs extraversion Low anxiety vs high anxiety Tender minded, emotional vs Tough poise Subduedness vs independence
This tool consists of 187 statements which covers 16 personality dimensions. Each of the statement has 3 choices from which the subject has to select one answer.
Each answer scores 0, 1 or 2 points except the factor B for intelligence, where in answers are scored 0 for incorrect or 1 for correct. The score of each item contributes to one factor total. The standardization tables convert raw scores to sten scores (the term comes from standard ten) that are distributed over ten equal interval, standard score points from 1 through 10. Based on sten scores students are categorized in to two levels as Category Low High Score 1-3 8-10
By using sten scores of 16 primary factors. Second order factors could be further calculated. The formula is different for male and female (Appendix I). The second order scores are categorized into Category Above average Below average Score >5.5 <5.5
4) Academic achievement
The level of academic achievement was determined by taking cumulative grade point average (CGPA) of the students and categorised as follows. Category Fail Pass Fair Average High Score <6.00 >6.00 >7.00 >8.00 >9.00
(2) Gender
The students were classified as males and females.
6 5 4 3 2 1
t=
Where
X=
Oi = Observed frequency Ei = expected frequency The chi-square value was compared with the table values for (r-1) (c-1) degrees of freedom (d.f.) 'r' denoting the number of rows, 'c' denoting number of columns in the contingency table. (3) Factor analysis was done to compare the aptitude, personality profile and academic achievement between gender and faculty. (4) Karl Pearson's product moment correlation coefficient analysis was used to measure the relationship between dependent and independent variables using the formula. nxy-xy {nx - (x)} {ny - y)}
r=
Where, r = Simple correlation coefficient x = Independent variable y = Dependent variable x = sum of x values y = sum of y values x = sum of square x values y = sum of square y values xy = sum of xy To test the significance of the correlation values, 't' test was used with the help of following formula. r n-2 1-r
t=
t n-2
IV. RESULTS
The results of the present study are presented under the following headings. 4.1 Personal and socio-demographic characteristics of undergraduate students 4.2 Reasons for choice of undergraduate program by the undergraduate students 4.3 Personality factors of the undergraduate students 4.4 Aptitude of undergraduate students 4.5 Academic achievement of the undergraduate students 4.6 Interrelation of aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate students 4.7 Influence of socio-demographic factors on aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate students 4.8 Influence of aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement on choice of post graduate courses
Table 1. Personal characteristics of undergraduate students Sl. No. 1. Agriculture Boys Gender Male Female Total 2. Age 17-18 yrs 19-20 yrs 21 & above 3. Ordinal position First Second Last 4. No. of siblings 0 1 2 3 4 5 5. Education background in rural/urban Rural Urban 43 (26.88) 43 (26.88) 19 (44.19) 24 (55.81) 21 (48.83) 13 (30.23) 9 (20.94) 3 (6.98) 10 (23.26) 15 (34.88) 12 (27.90) 3 (6.98) 28 (65.10) 15 (34.90) Girls 37 (23.12) 37 (23.12) 20 (54.05) 17 (45.95) 19 (51.40) 10 (27.00) 8 (21.60) 1 (2.70) 9 (24.32) 13 (35.14) 11 (29.72) 1 (2.70) 2 (5.41) 19 (51.40) 18 (48.60) Home Science 43 (26.88) 43 (26.88) 4 (9.30) 13 (30.23) 26 (60.47) 29 (67.40) 8 (18.60) 6 (14.00) 2 (4.70) 15 (34.90) 16 (37.20) 8 (18.60) 1 (2.30) 1 (2.30) 11 (25.60) 32 (74.40)
Character
Category
Marketing 37 (23.12) 37 (23.12) 13 (35.13) 24 (64.87) 17 (45.94) 15 (40.54) 5 (13.52) 12 (32.43) 16 (43.25) 8 (21.62) 1 (2.70) 22 (59.50) 15 (40.50)
Total 80 (50.00) 80 (50.00) 160 (100.00) 4 (2.50) 65 (40.62) 91 (56.88) 86 (53.75) 46 (28.75) 28 (17.50) 6 (3.75) 46 (28.75) 60 (37.50) 39 (24.37) 6 (3.75) 3 (1.88) 80 (50.00) 80 (50.00)
Table 2. Familial characteristics of the undergraduate students Sl. No. 1. Agriculture Boys Family size Small Medium Large 2. Type of family Nuclear Joint 3a. Education of father Illiterate 5 7
th
Character
Category
Girls 10 (27.00) 25 (67.60) 2 (5.40) 35 (94.60) 2 (5.40) 1 (2.70) 8 (21.62) 10 (27.02) 14 (37.85) 4 (10.81) 1 (2.70) 3 (8.10) 11 (29.70) 11 (29.70) 7 (18.90) 4 (10.90) -
Home Science 17 (39.54) 25 (58.14) 1 (2.32) 42 (97.70) 1 (2.30) 1 (2.30) 1 (2.30) 4 (9.30) 5 (11.62) 23 (54.58) 8 (18.60) 1 (2.30) 3 (7.00) 1 (2.30) 8 (18.60) 16 (37.20) 9 (20.90) 4 (9.30) 2 (4.70) -
Marketing 13 (35.10) 23 (62.20) 1 (2.70) 35 (94.60) 2 (5.40) 1 (2.70) 1 (2.70) 3 (8.12) 9 (24.32) 5 (13.51) 13 (35.14) 5 (13.51) 7 (18.90) 2 (5.40) 7 (18.90) 13 (35.20) 4 (10.80) 4 (10.80) -
Total 53 (33.12) 102 (63.75) 5 (3.13) 150 (93.75) 10 (6.25) 4 (2.50) 2 (1.25) 4 (2.50) 29 (18.12) 28 (17.50) 71 (44.38) 20 (12.50) 2 (1.25) 13 (8.12) 8 (5.00) 32 (20.00) 58 (36.25) 32 (20.00) 15 (9.38) 2 (1.25) -
13 (30.24) 29 (67.44) 1 (2.32) 38 (88.40) 5 (11.60) 2 (4.70) 8 (18.60) 8 (18.60) 21 (48.80) 3 (7.00) 1 (2.30) 2 (4.70) 2 (4.70) 6 (14.00) 18 (41.80) 12 (27.80) 3 (7.00) -
th
High school PUC Graduate Post graduate Ph. D 3b. Education of mother Illiterate 5
th
Character
Category
Marketing
Total
4a Occupation of father
2 (4.70) -
1 (2.30) -
4b Occupation of mother
Unemploye 40 35 36 37 148 d (93.00 (94.60) (83.80) (100.00) (92.50) ) Labourer Caste occupation Small business Business, clerks High school teachers Land lords 3 (7.00) 2 (5.40) 1 (2.30) 5 (11.60) 1 (2.30) 1 (0.60) 10 (6.30) 1 (0.60) -
1 (2.30)
2 (5.40)
2 (4.70)
2 (5.40)
7 (4.37)
Out of compulsion
2 (4.70)
2 (5.40)
1 (2.30)
1 (2.70)
6 (3.75)
Less expenditure
1 (2.30)
1 (2.30)
2 (5.40)
4 (2.50)
Job opportunities
7 (16.30)
6 (16.20)
8 (18.60)
6 (16.20)
27 (16.87)
6 (14.0)
3 (8.10)
2 (5.40)
11 (6.87)
Good course
10 (2.30)
6 (16.20)
20 (46.50)
6 (16.20)
42 (26.26)
Interest
16 (37.10)
18 (48.70)
11 (25.60)
18 (48.70)
63 (39.38)
Table 4. Personality factors of undergraduate students Sl. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Mean sten scores Low Medium High (1-3) (4-7) (8-10) 42 114 4 (26.25) (71.25) (2.50) 40 116 4 (25.0) (72.50) (2.50) 35 117 8 (22.00) (73.12) (5.00) 38 119 3 (23.75) (74.37) (1.87) 58 92 10 (36.25) (57.50) (6.25) 10 130 20 (6.25) (81.25) (12.50) 20 133 7 (12.50) (83.12) (4.37) 14 117 29 (8.75) (73.12) (18.12) 9 128 23 (5.62) (80.00) (14.37) 14 128 18 (8.75) (80.00) (11.25) 13 92 55 (8.12) (57.50) (34.37) 12 107 41 (7.50) (66.87) (25.62) 10 138 12 (6.25) (86.25) (7.50) 16 128 16 (10.00) (80.00) (10.00) 29 123 8 (8.12) (76.87) (5.00) 33 121 6 (20.62) (75.62) (3.75) Mean and S.D. 4.571.52 4.631.73 4.761.62 5.231.39 3.681.39 5.961.69 5.371.27 5.321.82 6.211.56 5.071.34 6.511.92 6.562.00 5.881.51 5.491.63 5.731.60 4.831.67
Personality factors A - Reserved-outgoing B - Dull-bright C - Emotionally less stable-mature E - Mild-Aggressive F - Sober-enthusiastic G - Disregards rules-moralistic H - Shy-Socially bold I - Self reliant-sensitive L - Accepting condition-Suspicious M - Practical-imaginative N - Socially clumsy- socially aware O - Secure-insecure Q1 - Conservative-liberal Q2 - Group dependent-self sufficient Q3 - Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled Q4 Tense-Relaxed
Second order personality factors 1. 2. 3. 4. Introversion-Extroversion Low anxiety- High anxiety Tender minded-Tough poise Subduedness-Independent 18 (11.25) 5 (3.12) 23 (14.37) 21 (13.12) 130 (81.25) 127 (79.37) 135 (84.37) 139 (86.87) 12 (7.50) 28 (17.50) 2 (1.25) 0 (0.00) 4.361.18 5.741.30 5.051.79 4.981.04
21 (48.80) 22 (51.20) 2 (4.70) 3 (6.90) 2 (4.70) 3 (6.90) 3 (6.90) 35 (81.40) 35 (81.50) 31 (72.10) 35 (81.50) 36 (83.80)
30 (69.80) 10 (23.30) 10 (27.00) 27 (73.00) 41 (95.30) 2 (4.70) 0 (0.00) 4 (10.80) 27 (73.00) 1 (2.70) 0 (0.00) 1 (2.70) 34 (91.00) 28 (75.70) 30 (81.10)
4 (10.80) 32 (86.50) 2 (5.40) 2 (5.40) 1 (2.70) 3 (8.10) 0 (0.00) 26 (70.30) 15 (40.50) 36 (97.30) 29 (78.40) 31 (83.80)
30 (69.80) 13 (30.20) 20 (46.55) 20 (46.55) 35 (81.40) 38 (88.40) 34 (79.10) 8 (18.60) 3 (6.90) 9 (20.90) 1 (2.30) 0 (0.00)
12 (27.90) 26 (60.50)
7 (18.90) 29 (78.40)
16 (37.20) 27 (62.80)
Incase of Marketing students, most of the students were in average category in all the 16 personality factors, ranging from 51 to 91 per cent. When the means score of personality factors were compared (Table 6) between the faculties using one way ANOVA it was observed that significant differences were found in the factors A, B, F, I, O and Q3. Boys of agriculture students were significantly higher than the girls of agriculture and Home Science students, in the factor 'F' and 'I' which indicated they were more enthusiastic and sensitive compared to girls of agriculture and Home Science students. Girls of agriculture students were significantly higher than the Home Science and Marketing students in the factor 'B' which indicated they were more intelligent. They were also significantly higher than boys of agriculture and Marketing students in the factor 'O' indicates they were feeling more insecure. Home Science students were significantly higher than the boys of agriculture and Marketing students in the factor 'O' indicating more insecurity. They were also significantly higher than all the faculties in the factor 'Q3' which indicated they were high on self control than the others. Marketing students were significantly higher than all the faculties in the factor 'A' and 'F' which indicated they were more outgoing and enthusiastic. They were also significantly higher than girls of agriculture and Home Science students in the factor 'I' indicating they were more sensitive. However these students were significantly lower compared to others in the factors 'B' and 'Q3' indicates they were less intelligent and undisciplined self conflict compared to others. In the remaining factors C, E, G, H, L, M, N Q1, Q2, and Q4 i.e., there was no significant differences between students of different faculties. In case of second order personality factors (Table 5) a higher percentage of boys of agriculture (79-100%), girls of agriculture (70-97%), Home Science (63-93%) and Marketing (68-92%) students were in average category in all the four second order personality factors. When the means score of second order personality factors were compared (Table 6) between the faculties, it was observed that significant difference was found in factors I, III and IV. Boys of agriculture students were significantly higher compared to Home Science and Marketing students, in the factors I and IV respectively. which indicated that they were extroverts and independent. Girls of agriculture students and Home Science students were significantly higher compared to boys of agriculture and Marketing students in the factor III which indicated they were tough minded. Marketing students were significantly higher than the girls of agriculture and Home Science students in the factor I which indicated they were extrovert while their counterparts girls of agriculture and Home Science students were introverts. There was no significant difference in factor II (anxiety) between the students of different faculties.
Table 6. Comparison of mean scores of personality factors of students by faculty Sl. No. Boys of agriculture Mean 1. AReserved-outgoing 2. BDull-bright 3. CEmotionally stable-mature 4. EMild-Aggressive 5. FSober-enthusiastic 6. GDisregards rules-moralistic 7. HShy-Socially bold8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 10. M Practical-imaginative 11. N Socially clumsy- socially aware 12. O-Secure-insecure 13. Q1 Conservative-liberal 14. Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient 15. Q3 Undisciplined self conflict-controlled 16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed Second order personality factors 1. Introversion-Extroversion 2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 3. Tender minded-Tough poise 4. Subduedness-Independent 4.62 5.45 4.42 5.44 1.11 1.04 1.47 0.83 4.05 5.95 5.89 4.93 1.14 1.44 1.51 1.07 3.97 5.63 5.94 4.91 1.17 1.64 1.58 1.08 4.80 5.96 3.89 4.58 1.09 0.85 1.69 1.00 5.18* 1.48 17.31* 5.07* 0.254 0.290 0.351 0.224 0.68 0.78NS 0.94 0.60 4.98 4.95 4.67 5.56 3.81 5.93 5.44 6.33 5.74 5.63 6.09 5.72 5.67 5.47 5.47 4.84 S.D. 1.39 1.53 1.54 1.26 1.28 1.62 1.62 1.74 1.62 1.45 2.01 1.92 1.39 1.68 1.22 1.86 Girls of agriculture Mean 3.95 5.08 4.86 5.27 3.35 6.11 5.03 4.35 6.57 4.84 6.35 7.24 6.03 5.76 6.24 4.95 S.D. 1.31 1.83 1.69 1.30 1.11 1.65 1.01 1.30 1.42 1.17 1.72 2.15 1.44 1.64 1.32 1.78 Home Science (only females) Mean 3.95 4.81 4.98 5.14 3.23 6.33 5.26 4.09 6.33 4.93 6.93 7.00 6.12 5.77 6.60 4.58 S.D. 1.25 1.69 1.54 1.58 1.27 1.67 1.24 1.34 1.64 1.28 1.67 2.13 1.37 1.41 1.33 1.72 Marketing (only males) Mean 5.43 3.57 4.51 4.92 4.38 5.41 5.76 6.54 6.27 4.81 6.65 6.35 5.68 4.95 4.51 5.00 S.D. 1.59 1.48 1.74 1.34 1.62 1.74 0.98 1.32 1.47 1.29 2.23 1.36 1.83 1.70 1.74 1.22 11.34 6.87 0.63 1.51 5.94 2.15 2.25 31.52 2.05 3.66 1.52 5.17 0.96 2.18 16.90 0.50 0.12 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.10 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.15 0.16 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.24* 0.27* NS NS 0.22* NS NS 0.27* NS NS NS 0.31* NS NS 0.26* NS
Category
S.Em
CD
Table 7. Association of levels of personality factors and faculty Sl. No. Category Home Science (N=43) Low 16 (37.20) 7 (16.20) 7 (16.20) 29 (67.40) 3 (6.90) 0 (0.00) 15 (34.40) 3 (6.90) 5 (11.60) 0 (0.00) 3 (6.90) 0 (0.0) 2 (4.70) 0 (0.00) 13 (30.23) 8 (18.60) Medium 27 (62.80) 34 (79.10) 34 (79.10) 14 (32.50) 30 (69.80) 41 (95.30) 28 (65.10) 30 (69.80) 38 (88.40) 30 (69.80) 20 (46.55) 35 (81.40) 38 (88.40) 34 (79.10) 29 (67.47) 35 (81.40) High 0 (0.0) 2 (4.70) 2 (4.70) 0 (0.00) 10 (23.30) 2 (4.70) 0 (0.0) 10 (23.30) 0 (0.00) 13 (30.20) 20 (46.55) 8 (18.60) 3 (6.90) 9 (20.90) 1 (2.30) 0 (0.00) Girls of agriculture (N=37) Low 13 (35.00) 7 (18.90) 8 (21.60) 3 (8.10) 24 (65.00) 4 (10.80) 1 (2.70) 9 (24.30) 0 (0.00) 4 (10.80) 2 (5.40) 2 (5.40) 1 (2.70) 3 (8.10) 0 (0.00) 7 (18.90) Medium 24 (65.00) 29 (78.40) 27 (73.00) 32 (86.50) 13 (35.00) 27 (73.00) 36 (97.30) 28 (75.70) 25 (67.50) 32 (86.50) 26 (70.30) 15 (40.50) 36 (97.30) 29 (78.40) 31 (83.80) 29 (78.40) High 0 (0.00) 1 (2.70) 2 (5.40) 2 (5.40) 0 (0.00) 6 (16.20) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 12 (32.40) 1 (2.70) 9 (24.30) 20 (54.10) 0 (0.00) 5 (13.50) 6 (16.20) 1 (2.70) 0.04 0.29 0.41 29.86** 32.75** 8.47* 12.86** 12.67** 19.34** 13.96** 4.73 14.76** 2.96 4.10 16.27** 1.19
1. AReserved-outgoing 2. BDull-bright 3. CEmotionally stable-mature 4. EMild-Aggressive 5. FSober-enthusiastic 6. GDisregards rules-moralistic 7. HShy-Socially bold8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 10. M Practical-imaginative 11. N Socially clumsy- socially aware 12. O-Secure-insecure 13. Q1 Conservative-liberal 14. Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient 15. Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled 16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed Second order personality factors 1. Introversion-Extroversion 2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 3. Tender minded-Tough poise 4. Subduedness-Independent
Table 8. Comparison of personality factors of girls of home science and agriculture students Girls of agriculture (N=37) Mean 3.95 5.08 4.86 5.27 3.35 6.11 5.03 4.35 6.57 4.84 6.35 7.24 6.03 5.76 6.24 S.D. 1.31 1.83 1.69 1.30 1.11 1.65 1.01 1.30 1.42 1.17 1.72 2.15 1.44 1.64 1.32 0.04 1.04 -0.40 0.72 0.75 -0.80 -1.45 1.36 1.18 -0.46 -2.14* 0.85 -0.36 0.01 -1.74
Sl. No.
Personality factors
Home Science (N=43) Mean S.D. 1.25 1.69 1.54 1.58 1.27 1.67 1.24 1.34 1.64 1.28 1.67 2.13 1.37 1.41 1.33
't' value
AReserved-outgoing BDull-bright CEmotionally stable-mature EMild-Aggressive FSober-enthusiastic GDisregards rules-moralistic HShy-Socially boldI - Self reliant-sensitive L - Accepting condition-Suspicious M Practical-imaginative N Socially clumsy- socially aware O-Secure-insecure Q1 Conservative-liberal Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled Q4 - Tense-Relaxed
3.95 4.81 4.98 5.14 3.23 6.33 5.26 4.09 6.33 4.93 6.93 7.00 6.12 5.77 6.60
16.
4.58
1.72
4.95
1.78
1.44
Second order personality factors 1. 2. 3. 4. Introversion-Extroversion Low anxiety- High anxiety Tender minded-Tough poise Subduedness-Independent 3.97 5.63 5.94 4.91 1.17 1.64 1.58 1.08 4.05 5.95 5.89 4.93 1.14 1.44 1.51 1.07 0.50 1.53 -0.15 0.15
that, number of students falling in low, medium and high category differed significantly between the two groups. A higher percentage of Home Science students were in low level in the factors E, H and Q3. Average level in the factor G and high level in the factors I and M compared to Agriculture students, indicating that they were mild, shy, undisciplined self conflict, neither moralistic nor disregards rules, sensitive and imaginative. A higher per cent of girls of agriculture students were in low level in the factor 'F' and high level in the factors 'L' and 'O' indicating that they were sober, suspicious and insecure compared to Home Science students. When the mean scores of personality factors (Table 8) of students were compared between these two faculties the 't' value showed significant difference between these two faculties only in factor 'N', where in Home Science students were higher indicating they were more socially aware than the Agriculture students. Incase of second order personality factors (Table 7) comparison of students of these two faculties by their level of personality factors showed that there was a significant association with the levels of the factors I, IV, indicating that, number of students falling in various category differed significantly between the two groups. A higher percent of Home Science students were in the low level in the factor IV and high level in the factor I indicating that Home Science students were extrovert and independent compared to Agriculture students. When the mean scores of second order personality factors (Table 8) of students were compared between these two faculties, there was no significant difference in any of the four factors. (b) Boys of agriculture and Marketing students The Table 9 shows the comparison of levels of personality factors of male students between Agriculture and Marketing faculty. The chi-square () test of association revealed that there was a significant association between the levels of the factors B, Q1, Q3 and Q4 with faculty indicating that number of students falling in low, medium and high category differed significantly between two groups. Agriculture students were in higher percentages in low level in the factor Q4 indicating they were relaxed. Marketing students were in higher percentage in low level in the factors B and Q3, high level in the factor Q1 indicating that they were dull or less intelligent, undisciplined self conflict and liberal compared to agriculture students. In the remaining factors A, C, E, F, G, H, I, L, M, N O and Q2, there were no significant differences between students of the two faculty. When the mean scores of personality factors (Table 10) of students were compared the 't' value showed significant difference between these two faculties, in the factors A, B, E, F, G, L, M, O, Q2 and Q3 wherein Agriculture students had higher mean scores in the factors. B, E, G, M and Q2 indicating that they were brighter or more intelligent, Aggressive, Moralistic, Imaginative and self sufficient compared to Marketing students. Marketing students had high mean scores in the factors A, F, L, O and Q3 indicating that they were outgoing, enthusiastic, suspicious, insecure and controlled compared to Agriculture students. In the remaining factors C, H, I, N, Q1 and Q4 there was no significant difference between the two faculty. Incase of second order personality factors there was no significant association was found.
Table 9. Association of levels of personality factors and faculty Sl. No. Category Boys of agriculture (N=43) Low 8 (18.60) 8 (18.60) 10 (23.20) 1 (2.30) 21 (48.80) 2 (4.70) 3 (6.90) 2 (4.70) 3 (6.90) 3 (6.90) 5 (11.60) 8 (18.60) 2 (4.70) 5 (11.60) 3 (6.90) 12 (27.90) Medium 34 (79.10) 34 (79.10) 31 (72.20) 41 (95.40) 22 (51.20) 35 (81.40) 35 (81.50) 31 (72.10) 35 (81.50) 36 (83.80) 26 (60.50) 29 (67.50) 39 (90.60) 36 (83.70) 39 (90.80) 26 (60.50) High 1 (2.30) 1 (2.30) 2 (4.70) 1 (2.30) 0 (0.00) 6 (13.70) 5 (11.60) 10 (23.20) 5 (11.60) 4 (9.30) 12 (27.90) 6 (13.90) 2 (4.70) 2 (4.70) 1 (2.30) 5 (11.60) Low 5 (13.50) 18 (48.60) 10 (27.00) 5 (13.50) 10 (27.00) 4 (10.80) 1 (2.70) 0 (0.00) 1 (2.70) 7 (19.00) 3 (8.10) 2 (5.0) 5 (13.50) 8 (21.60) 13 (35.20) 6 (16.20) Marketing (N=37) Medium 29 (78.40) 19 (51.40) 25 (67.60) 32 (86.50) 27 (73.00) 27 (73.00) 34 (91.00) 28 (75.70) 30 (81.10) 30 (81.00) 20 (54.10) 28 (75.70) 25 (67.50) 29 (78.40) 24 (64.80) 31 (83.80) High 3 (8.10) 0 (0.00) 2 (5.40) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 6 (16.20) 2 (5.40) 9 (24.30) 6 (16.20) 0 (0.00) 14 (37.80) 7 (18.90) 7 (19.00) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 1.65 8.66* 0.19 4.79 3.99 1.25 1.87 1.76 1.03 5.78 0.99 3.26 6.72* 3.01 10.37** 7.02*
1. AReserved-outgoing 2. BDull-bright 3. CEmotionally stable-mature 4. EMild-Aggressive 5. FSober-enthusiastic 6. GDisregards rules-moralistic 7. HShy-Socially bold8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 10. M Practical-imaginative 11. N Socially clumsy- socially aware 12. O-Secure-insecure 13. Q1 Conservative-liberal 14. Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient 15. Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled 16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed Second order personality factors 1. Introversion-Extroversion 2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 3. Tender minded-Tough poise 4. Subduedness-Independent
Table 10. Comparison of mean scores of personality factors of boys of agriculture and marketing Sl. No. Boys of agriculture (N=43) Mean 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. AReserved-outgoing BDull-bright CEmotionally stable-mature EMild-Aggressive FSober-enthusiastic GDisregards rules-moralistic HShy-Socially boldI - Self reliant-sensitive L - Accepting condition-Suspicious M Practical-imaginative N Socially clumsy- socially aware O-Secure-insecure Q1 Conservative-liberal Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 4.98 4.95 4.67 5.56 3.81 5.93 5.44 6.33 5.74 5.63 6.09 5.72 5.67 5.47 5.47 S.D. 1.39 1.53 1.54 1.26 1.28 1.62 1.62 1.74 1.62 1.45 2.01 1.92 1.39 1.68 1.22 Marketing (N=37) Mean 5.43 3.57 4.51 4.92 4.38 5.41 5.76 6.54 6.27 4.81 6.65 6.35 5.68 4.95 4.51 S.D. 1.59 1.48 1.74 1.34 1.62 1.74 0.98 1.32 1.47 1.29 2.23 1.36 1.83 1.70 1.74 -2.05* 5.970.76 3.38* -2.85* 2.19* -1.27 -0.74 -2.09* 3.75* -1.69 -2.10* 0.04 2.11* 5.24*
Personality factors
't' value
16.
4.84
1.86
5.00
1.22
-0.52
1. 2. 3. 4.
When the second order mean scores of personality factors (Table 10) of students were compared the 't' value showed significant difference between in factor III and IV indicating Agriculture students had high means scores in the factors III and IV indicating they had toughpoise and were independent in comparison with Marketing students. In the remaining factors I and II there was no significant difference between the two faculties.
4.4
OF
APTITUDE
OF
An examination of Table 13 and Fig. 3 shows the frequency distribution of aptitude of undergraduate students. Most of the students were in low group (51-100%) in verbal reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, language spelling and sentences. Majority of students were below average (29-43%) in numerical ability and abstract reasoning. In clerical sped and accuracy more number (41%) of students were in high group than the rest of the categories. When the mean scores of aptitude of students were compared, it was observed that there was a wide range in the mean scores ranging from 3.0 to 67.7 with the highest mean score of 67.7 in clerical speed and accuracy and least mean (3.0) in language (sentences). The rest of the areas of aptitudes viz., verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning and language spelling the mean scores were between 9.36 to 49.13 i.e., in average category.
Table 11. Association of levels of personality factors and gender among agriculture students Sl. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Category AReserved-outgoing BDull-bright CEmotionally stable-mature EMild-Aggressive FSober-enthusiastic GDisregards rules-moralistic HShy-Socially boldI - Self reliant-sensitive L - Accepting condition-Suspicious Boys of agriculture (N=43) Low 8 (18.60) 8 (18.60) 10 (23.20) 1 (2.30) 21 (48.80) 2 (4.70) 3 (6.90) 2 (4.70) 3 (6.90) 3 (6.90) 5 (11.60) 8 (18.60) 2 (4.70) 5 (11.60) 3 (6.90) 12 (27.90) Medium 34 (79.10) 34 (79.10) 31 (72.20) 41 (95.40) 22 (51.20) 35 (81.40) 35 (81.50) 31 (72.10) 35 (81.50) 36 (83.80) 26 (60.50) 29 (67.50) 39 (90.60) 36 (83.70) 39 (90.80) 26 (60.50) High 1 (2.30) 1 (2.30) 2 (4.70) 1 (2.30) 0 (0.00) 6 (13.70) 5 (11.60) 10 (23.20) 5 (11.60) 4 (9.30) 12 (27.90) 6 (13.90) 2 (4.70) 2 (4.70) 1 (2.30) 5 (11.60) Girls of agriculture (N=37) Low 13 (35.00) 7 (18.90) 8 (21.60) 3 (8.10) 24 (65.00) 4 (10.80) 1 (2.70) 9 (24.30) 0 (0.00) 4 (10.80) 2 (5.40) 2 (5.40) 1 (2.70) 3 (8.10) 0 (0.00) 7 (18.90) Medium 24 (65.00) 29 (78.40) 27 (73.00) 32 (86.50) 13 (35.00) 27 (73.00) 36 (97.30) 28 (75.70) 25 (67.50) 32 (86.50) 26 (70.30) 15 (40.50) 36 (97.30) 29 (78.40) 31 (83.80) 29 (78.40) High 0 (0.00) 1 (2.70) 2 (5.40) 2 (5.40) 0 (0.00) 6 (16.20) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 12 (32.40) 1 (2.70) 9 (24.30) 20 (54.10) 0 (0.00) 5 (13.50) 6 (16.20) 1 (2.70) 3.48 0.02 0.04 2.00 2.08 1.26 5.58 14.23** 7.14* 1.73 1.27 15.23** 1.83 2.09 7.08* 3.71
10. M Practical-imaginative 11. N Socially clumsy- socially aware 12. O-Secure-insecure 13. Q1 Conservative-liberal 14. Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient 15. Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled 16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed Second order personality factors 1. 2. 3. 4. Introversion-Extroversion Low anxiety- High anxiety Tender minded-Tough poise Subduedness-Independent
Table 12. Comparison of mean scores of personality factors between gender among agriculture students Agriculture Sl. No. Personality factors Boys (N=43) Mean 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. AReserved-outgoing BDull-bright CEmotionally stable-mature EMild-Aggressive FSober-enthusiastic GDisregards rules-moralistic HShy-Socially boldI - Self reliant-sensitive L - Accepting condition-Suspicious M Practical-imaginative N Socially clumsy- socially aware O-Secure-insecure Q1 Conservative-liberal Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 4.98 4.95 4.67 5.56 3.81 5.93 5.44 6.33 5.74 5.63 6.09 5.72 5.67 5.47 5.47 S.D. 1.39 1.53 1.54 1.26 1.28 1.62 1.62 1.74 1.62 1.45 2.01 1.92 1.39 1.68 1.22 Girls (N=37) Mean 3.95 5.08 4.86 5.27 3.35 6.11 5.03 4.35 6.57 4.84 6.35 7.24 6.03 5.76 6.24 S.D. 1.31 1.83 1.69 1.30 1.11 1.65 1.01 1.30 1.42 1.17 1.72 2.15 1.44 1.64 1.32 4.91* -0.47 -0.73 1.55 2.39* -0.66 1.69 7.51* -3.31* 3.61* -0.77 -5.07* -1.64 -1.06 -4.09* 't' value
16.
4.84
1.86
4.95
1.78
-0.30
Boys of agriculture
8 7 6 Mean sten scores 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4
Personality factors Second order personality factors
LEGEND
Personality factors 1. A-Reserved-outgoing 2. B-Dull-bright 3. C-Emotionally less stable-mature 4. E-Mild-Aggressive 5. F-Sober-enthusiastic 6. G-Disregards rules-moralistic 7. H-Shy-Socially bold 8. I-Self reliant-sensitive 9. L-Accepting condition- Suspicious 10. M-Practical-imaginative 11. N-Socially clumsy- socially aware 12. O-Secure-insecure 13. Q1-Conservative-liberal 14. Q2-Group dependent-self sufficient 15. Q3-Undisciplined self conflict-controlled 16. Q4Tense-Relaxed Second order personality factors 1. Introversion-Extroversion 2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 3. Tender minded-Tough poise 4. Subduedness-Independent
Girls of agriculture
Sl. No.
Category
Low (1-20)
Averag e (50)
High (8099)
Mea n
S.D.
1.
Verbal reasoning
147 (91.88)
13 (8.12)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
9.36
8.2
2.
Numerical ability
27 (16.88)
46 (28.75)
29 (18.12)
42 (26.25)
16 46.51 (10.00 )
22.1
3.
Abstract reasoning
17 (10.63)
68 (42.50)
10 (6.25)
38 (23.75)
4.
Space relations
92 (57.50)
59 (36.88)
3 (1.87)
6 (3.75)
0 (0.0)
49.13
24.4
5.
Mechanical reasoning
120 (75.00)
33 (20.62)
1 (0.63)
6 (3.75)
0 (0.0)
22.98
12.9
6.
9 (5.63)
20 (12.49)
4 (2.50)
61 (38.13)
66 14.56 (41.25 )
14.4
7.
Spelling
82 (51.25)
69 (43.13)
6 (3.75)
3 (1.87)
0 (0.0)
67.7
22.0
8.
Sentences
160 (100.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
24.3
13.9
70
60
50
Percentile scores
40
30
20
10
0 Verbal reasoning Numerical ability Abstract reasoning Space relations Mechanical reasoning Clerical speed and accuracy Spelling Sentences
Aptitude
Catego Above Below Below Above High Below Above High Below Above ry Low Low Low Avera avg High Low Averag Avera Averag High avg avg avg (80avg avg (80avg avg (1-20) ge (50) (55- (80-99) (1-20) e (50) (1-20) ge (50) (1-20) e (50) (80-99) (25-45) (25-45) (55-75) 99) (25-45) (55-75) 99) (25-45) (55-75) 75) Ve 5 38 0 (88.37 (11.63) (0.0) ) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 33 4 (89.19) (10.81) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 40 3 (0.0) (93.03) (6.97) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 36 1 (0.0) (97.30) (2.70) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Nu
5 20 8 9 1 3 4 6 17 7 9 10 9 7 8 10 12 6 9 0 (11.63 (46.51) (18.60) (20.94 (2.32) (8.11) (10.81) (16.22) (45.95) (18.91 (20.94) (23.26) (20.94) (16.26) (18.60 (27.03) (32.43) (16.22) (24.32) (0.0) ) ) ) ) 7 24 5 5 2 1 11 1 14 10 6 18 2 7 10 3 15 2 12 5 (16.28 (55.81) (11.63) (11.63 (4.65) (2.70) (29.73) (2.70) (37.84) (27.03 (13.97) (41.86) (4.65) (16.26) (23.26 (8.11) (40.54) (5.41) (32.43) (13.51) ) ) ) ) 35 8 (81.40 (18.6) ) 0 43 (100.0 (0.0) ) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 13 21 (35.14) (56.75) 0 (0.0) 3 (8.11) 0 18 19 3 3 (0.0) (41.87) (44.19) (6.97) (6.97) 0 26 11 (0.0) (70.27) (29.73) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Ab.
Sp
Me
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
2 (5.41)
4 (9.30)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
CSA
0 (0.0)
13 14 5 11 0 16 11 0 (35.14) (37.84 (11.63) (25.58) (0.0) (37.21) (25.58 (0.0) ) ) 0 (0.0) 0 36 5 2 (0.0) (83.72) (11.63) (4.65) 0 (0.0)
1 (2.70)
Spel
2 (5.41)
0 (0.0)
Sente
0 (0.0)
37 (100.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
Table 15. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of undergraduate students by faculty Agriculture Sl. No . Category Boys Girls
Home Science
Marketing
Total
Mea Mea Mea Mea Mea S.D. S.D. S.D. S.D. S.D. n n n n n 11.1 8.23 9.59 8.90 9.60 8.76 6.73 6.21 9.36 6 8.2
1. Verbal reasoning
2. Numerical ability
41.4 16.7 58.1 21.2 48.4 26.2 38.6 18.0 46.5 22.1 0 4 1 9 0 8 5 9 1
3. Abstract reasoning
37.6 19.8 60.4 23.4 50.3 27.2 49.7 21.3 49.1 24.4 5 8 3 2 7 4 3 7 3
4. Space relations
16.8 6.64 30.0 13.8 27.3 15.7 17.9 7.81 22.9 12.9 1 8 7 7 4 5 8
5. Mechanical reasoning
4.28 3.84 19.3 16.1 25.4 15.0 9.08 6.90 14.5 14.4 0 2 9 3 6
72.9 14.8 63.3 25.8 57.7 24.5 77.3 15.6 67.7 22.0 5 8 8 2 0 3 2 4
7. Spelling
31.2 11.2 16.4 7.55 15.9 12.5 33.8 12.8 24.3 13.9 8 9 6 1 5 6 3
8. Sentences
3.0
3.0
ANOVA
Table 16. Association of level of aptitude of students and faculty Home Science (N=43) Sl. No. Category Low 40 (93.03) 9 (20.94) 6 (13.97) 18 (41.87) 19 (44.19) 5 (11.63) 36 (83.72) 43 (102.0) Below avg. 3 (6.97) 10 (23.26) 18 (41.86) 19 (44.19) 20 (46.51) 11 (25.58) 5 (11.63) 0 (0.00) Average 0 (0.00) 9 (20.94) 2 (4.65) 3 (6.97) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 2 (4.65) 0 (0.00) Above avg. 0 (0.00) 7 (16.26) 7 (16.26) 3 (6.97) 4 (9.30) 16 (37.20) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) High 0 (0.00) 8 (18.60) 10 (23.26) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 11 (25.58) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) Low 33 (89.19) 3 (8.11) 1 (2.70) 13 (35.14) 23 (62.16) 4 (10.80) 31 (83.78) 37 (100.00) Girls of agriculture (N=37) Below avg. 4 (10.81) 4 (10.81) 11 (29.73) 21 (56.75) 11 (29.73) 6 (16.22) 6 (16.22) 0 (0.00) Average 0 (0.00) 6 (16.22) 1 (2.70) 0 (0.00) 1 (2.70) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) Above avg. 0 (0.00) 17 (45.95) 14 (37.84) 3 (8.11) 2 (5.41) 13 (35.14) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) High 0 (0.00) 7 (18.91) 10 (27.03) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 14 (37.84) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 0.36
1. Verbal reasoning
2. Numerical ability
10.02**
3. Abstract reasoning
7.52*
4. Space relations
3.58
5. Mechanical reasoning
4.29
1.82
2.01
8. Sentences
0.00
Table 17. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of girls of home science and agriculture Sl. No.
Aptitude tests
't' value
1.
Verbal reasoning
9.60
2.07*
2.
Numerical ability
48.40
26.28
58.11
21.29
21.66*
3.
Abstract reasoning
50.37
27.24
60.43
23.42
22.87*
4.
Space relations
27.37
15.74
30.08
13.87
7.98*
5.
Mechanical reasoning
25.49
15.03
19.30
16.12
3.59*
6.
57.70
24.53
63.38
25.82
17.71*
7.
Spelling
15.91
12.55
16.46
7.55
4.73*
8.
Sentences
1.81
1.80
1.70
1.43
-0.42
(b) Boys of agriculture and Marketing students The Table 18 shows the comparison of levels of aptitude of male students between Agriculture and Marketing faculty. The chi-square () test of association revealed that there was a significant association between the levels of abstract reasoning indicating that, number of students falling in low, below average, average, above average and high category differed significantly between two groups. A higher percentage of agriculture students were in below average level in abstract reasoning. When the mean scores of aptitude (Table 19) of students were compared, the 't' value showed, significant difference between these two faculties, in all aptitude categories except for language sentences and space relations. Agriculture students had higher mean scores in verbal reasoning, numerical ability compared to Marketing. Marketing students had higher mean scores in abstract reasoning, mechanical reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy, language spelling compared to Agriculture.
Table 18. Association of level of aptitude of boys and faculty Boys of agriculture (N=43) Sl. No. Category Low Verbal reasoning 38 (88.37) 5 (11.63) 7 (16.28) 35 (81.40) 43 (100.00) 0 (0.00) 10 (23.26) 43 (100.00) Below avg. 5 (11.63) 20 (46.51) 24 (55.81) 8 (18.6) 0 (0.00) 2 (4.65) 30 (69.77) 0 (0.00) Average 0 (0.00) 8 (18.60) 5 (11.63) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 3 (6.97) 2 (4.65) 0 (0.00) Above avg. 0 (0.00) 9 (20.94) 5 (11.63) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 19 (44.19) 1 (2.32) 0 (0.00) High 0 (0.00) 1 (2.32) 2 (4.65) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 19 (44.19) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) Low 36 (97.30) 10 (27.03) 3 (8.11) 26 (70.27) 35 (94.59) 0 (0.00) 5 (13.51) 37 (100.00) Marketing (N =37) Below avg. 1 (2.70) 12 (32.43) 15 (40.54) 11 (29.73) 2 (5.41) 1 (2.70) 28 (75.67) 0 (0.00) Average 0 (0.00) 6 (16.22) 2 (5.41) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 1 (2.70) 2 (5.41) 0 (0.00) Above avg. 0 (0.00) 9 (24.32) 12 (32.43) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 13 (35.14) 2 (5.41) 0 (0.00) High 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 5 (13.51) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 22 (59.46) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 2.28
1.
2.
Numerical ability
4.56
3.
Abstract reasoning
8.76*
4.
Space relations
1.36
5.
2.37
6.
3.77
7.
1.62
8.
Sentences
Table 19. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude between boys of agriculture and marketing Boys of agriculture (N=43) Mean S.D. Marketing students (N=37) Mean S.D.
Sl. No.
Aptitude tests
't' value
1.
Verbal reasoning
11.16
8.23
6.73
6.21
4.57*
2.
Numerical ability
41.40
16.74
38.65
18.09
9.92*
3.
Abstract reasoning
37.65
19.88
49.73
21.37
8.36*
4.
Space relations
16.81
6.64
17.95
7.81
0.52
5.
4.28
3.84
9.08
6.90
-6.81*
6.
72.95
14.88
77.32
15.64
4.69*
7.
Spelling
31.28
11.29
33.86
12.83
2.95*
8.
Sentences
4.16
4.22
4.19
3.98
0.38
Table 20. Association of level of aptitude and gender among agriculture students Agriculture Sl. No. 1. Category Low Verbal reasoning 38 (88.37) 5 (11.63) 7 (16.28) 35 (81.40) 43 (100.00) 0 (0.00) 10 (23.26) 43 (100.00) Below avg. 5 (11.63) 20 (46.51) 24 (55.81) 8 (18.6) 0 (0.00) 2 (4.65) 30 (69.77) 0 (0.00) Boys (N=43) Average 0 (0.00) 8 (18.60) 5 (11.63) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 3 (6.97) 2 (4.65) 0 (0.00) Above avg. 0 (0.00) 9 (20.94) 5 (11.63) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 19 (44.19) 1 (2.32) 0 (0.00) High 0 (0.00) 1 (2.32) 2 (4.65) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 19 (44.19) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) Low 33 (89.19) 3 (8.11) 1 (2.70) 13 (35.14) 23 (62.16) 4 (10.80) 31 (83.78) 37 (100.00) Below avg. 4 (10.81) 4 (10.81) 11 (29.73) 21 (56.75) 11 (29.73) 6 (16.22) 6 (16.22) 0 (0.00) Girls (N =37) Average 0 (0.00) 6 (16.22) 1 (2.70) 0 (0.00) 1 (2.70) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) Above avg. 0 (0.00) 17 (45.95) 14 (37.84) 3 (8.11) 2 (5.41) 13 (35.14) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) High 0 (0.00) 7 (18.91) 10 (27.03) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 14 (37.84) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 0.02
2.
Numerical ability
18.05**
3.
Abstract reasoning
21.29**
4.
Space relations
18.56**
5.
19.7**
6.
10.5**
7.
29.46**
8.
Sentences
Table 21. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of boys and girls of agriculture
Agriculture Sl. No. Aptitude tests Boys (N=43) Mean 1. Verbal reasoning 11.16 S.D. 8.23 Girls (N=37) Mean 9.59 S.D. 8.90 3.39* 't' value
2.
Numerical ability
41.40
16.74
58.11
21.29
5.70*
3.
Abstract reasoning
37.65
19.88
60.43
23.42
7.31*
4.
Space relations
16.81
6.64
30.08
13.87
-7.91*
5.
Mechanical reasoning
4.28
3.84
19.30
16.12
-18.63*
6.
72.95
14.88
63.38
25.82
22.24*
7.
Spelling
31.28
11.29
16.46
7.55
10.15*
8.
Sentences
4.16
4.22
1.70
1.43
3.88*
70
60
Percentile scores
50
40
30
20
10
0 Verbal reasoning Numerical ability Abstract reasoning Space relations Mechanical reasoning Clerical speed and accuracy Spelling Sentences
Aptitude
Total
13 (8.10)
40 (25.00)
62 (38.80)
43 (26.90)
2 (1.30)
160 (100.00)
Sl. No.
1.
Boys of agriculture
2 (4.70)
13 (30.20)
20 (46.50)
8 (18.60)
43 (100.00)
2.
Girls of agriculture
7 (18.90)
14 (37.80)
16 (43.20)
37 (100.00)
3.
Home Science
3 7.00
8 (18.60)
19 (44.20)
11 (25.60)
2 (4.70)
43 (100.00)
4.
Marketing
8 (21.60)
12 (32.40)
9 (24.30)
8 (21.60)
37 (100.00)
=28.17**
Sl. No.
Faculty
Mean
S.D.
S.Em
1.
Boys of agriculture
43
7.32
0.80
0.12
2.
Girls of agriculture
37
7.67
0.67
0.11
5.90*
3.
Home Science
43
7.44
0.93
0.14
4.
Marketing
37
6.83
1.11
0.18
Total
160
7.32
0.93
7.37E-02
Group
Fail
Pass
Fair
Average
High
Total
Home science
3 (7.00)
8 (18.60)
19 (44.20)
11 (25.60)
2 (4.70)
43
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.2
6.8
6.6
6.4
Boys of agriculture
Home Science
Marketing
Table 26. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of girls of home science and agriculture
Faculty
Mean
S.D.
't' value
1. Home Science
7.44
0.93 2.27*
2. Girls of agriculture
7.68
0.67
Group
Fail
Pass
Fair
Average
High
Total
Boys of agriculture
2 (4.70)
13 (30.20)
20 (46.50)
8 (18.60)
0 (0.00)
43 7.39*
Marketing
8 (21.60)
12 (32.40)
9 (24.30)
8 (21.60)
0 (0.00)
37
Table 28. Comparison of academic achievement between boys of agriculture and marketing
Faculty
Mean
S.D.
't' value
1. Boys of agriculture
7.33
0.80 4.05*
2. Marketing
6.83
1.11
When the mean scores of academic achievement of both the groups (Table 30 and Fig. 6) were compared, significant difference was found, which indicated that girls had higher mean compare to boys.
4.6 INTERRELATION OF PERSONALITY FACTORS, APTITUDE AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
4.6.1 Relation between personality factors and academic achievement
The influence of personality factors on academic achievement was studied through correlation analysis (Table 31) it revealed that when the total group was considered the factors A, B and Q3 were found significantly related. The factor 'A' reserved outgoing was negatively and significantly related, which indicated that as the score of the factor increased reserved to outgoing academic achievement of student decreased and vice versa. The factors 'B' dull-bright and 'Q3' undisciplined self conflict. Controlled were positively and significantly related. Incase of boys of agriculture the factor Q4 relaxed tensed was negatively and significantly related with academic achievement of students which indicates that as the tension of students increased, academic achievement decreased and vice versa. The remaining factors were not significantly related. But in case of boys of agriculture and Marketing students there was no significant relation between personality factors and academic achievement of students. Incase of Home Science students, the factor 'G' disregards rules moralistic was positively and significantly related with academic achievement of students. Second order scores of personality factors When the total group was considered independence was positively and significantly related with academic achievement of the students. Incase of boys of agriculture anxiety was negatively and significantly related, which indicates as the score of anxiety increased academic achievement decreased and vice versa. Incase of girls of agriculture and Home Science students there was no significant relation between personality factors and academic achievement. Incase of Marketing students the factor independence was positively and significantly related, which indicates, as the independence increased academic achievement also increased.
Group
Fail
Pass
Fair
Average
High
Total
Boys of agriculture
2 (4.70)
13 (30.20)
20 (46.50)
8 (18.60)
0 (0.00)
43
Table 30. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of boys and girls of agriculture
Faculty
Mean
SD
t value
Boys of agriculture
7.33
0.80
7.7
Girls of agriculture
Fig. 6. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of boys and girls of agriculture
Fig. 6. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of boys and girls of agriculture
Table 31. Relation between personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate students Agriculture Sl. No. Category Boys N=43 r -0.03 0.10 -0.04 -0.05 0.17 0.12 0.10 0.11 -0.08 -0.14 -0.19 -0.15 0.01 0.01 Girls N=37 r 0.00 0.22 0.04 -0.01 -0.01 0.04 -0.18 0.25 0.14 0.07 0.18 -0.26 -0.25 -0.12
Home Marketing Science N=37 N=43 r r -0.11 0.30 0.22 0.06 0.03 -0.09 0.17 0.26 0.14 0.24 0.18 0.03 0.13 0.16 -0.04 0.21 0.11 0.12 -0.18 0.31* -0.01 0.04 -0.19 0.20 -0.11 0.05 0.21 -0.21
Total N=160 r
AReserved-outgoing BDull-bright CEmotionally stable-mature EMild-Aggressive FSober-enthusiastic GDisregards rules-moralistic HShy-Socially boldISelf reliant-sensitive LAccepting condition-Suspicious MPractical-imaginative NSocially clumsy- socially aware OSecure-insecure Q1Conservative-liberal Q2Group dependent-self sufficient Q3Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled Q4Tense-Relaxed
-0.17* 0.28** 0.12 0.07 -0.09 0.14 -0.03 -0.04 0.00 0.09 0.00 -0.01 0.09 0.08
15.
0.17
0.06
0.30
0.13
0.29**
16.
-0.34*
-0.16
0.07
0.06
-0.10
Second order personality factors 1. 2. 3. 4. Introversion-Extroversion Low anxiety- High anxiety Tender minded-Tough poise Subduedness-Independent 0.06 -0.33* 0.01 0.03 0.00 -0.17 -0.04 0.14 -0.07 -0.14 -0.11 0.36* -0.13 -0.03 -0.16 0.19 -0.12 -0.14 0.07 0.22**
Incase of Home Science students verbal reasoning abstract reasoning, space relation, language spelling were positively and significantly related with academic achievement.
Table 32. Relation between aptitude and academic achievement of undergraduate students
1.
Verbal reasoning
0.16
0.12
0.41*
0.43**
0.33**
2.
Numerical ability
0.00
0.27
0.18
0.23
0.25**
3.
Abstract reasoning
-0.02
-0.03
0.41*
0.36*
0.19*
4.
Space relations
0.32
0.09
0.33*
0.54**
0.34**
5.
Mechanical reasoning
-0.03
0.01
0.30
-0.02
0.15
6.
-0.01
-0.26
-0.07
0.27
-0.11
7.
Spelling
0.25
0.07
0.07
0.44*
-0.02
8.
Sentences
-0.11
0.00
0.00
0.33
0.00
Table 33. Relation between aptitude and personality factors of undergraduate students Sl. No. 2. BDull-bright 3. CEmotionally stable-mature 4. EMild-Aggressive 5. FSober-enthusiastic 6. GDisregards rules-moralistic 7. HShy-Socially bold8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 10. M Practical-imaginative 11. N Socially clumsy- socially aware 12. O-Secure-insecure 13. Q1 Conservative-liberal 14. Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient 15. Q3 Undisciplined self conflict-controlled 16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed Second order personality factors 1. Introversion-Extroversion 2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 3. Tender minded-Tough poise 4. Subduedness-Independent -0.02 -0.17* 0.00 0.15 -0.05 0.00 0.03 0.02 -0.13 0.02 0.05 -0.01 -0.08 0.05 0.24** -0.04 -0.28** -0.01 0.16* -0.02 0.09 0.08 -0.26** 0.05 0.24** -0.08 -0.31** 0.13 0.28** 0.05 -0.19* 0.01 Category P-ve r -0.12 0.25** 0.04 0.05 -0.16* 0.13 0.08 -0.04 -0.03 0.11 0.01 -0.18* 0.05 -0.10 0.25** -0.01 P-Nu r -0.04 0.19* 0.02 -0.06 -0.02 0.14 -0.06 -0.16* -0.06 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.09 0.03 0.19* -0.06 P-Ab r -0.14 0.10 0.04 0.00 -0.20* 0.23** -0.09 -0.12 0.19* 0.10 -0.03 0.07 0.07 -0.07 0.09 0.01 P-Sp r -0.26** 0.27** 0.10 0.03 -0.15 0.26** -0.02 -0.32** 0.11 -0.06 0.00 0.17* 0.11 -0.01 0.22** 0.06 P-Me r -0.26** 0.16* 0.12 0.08 -0.25** 0.16 -0.14 -0.33** 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.14 0.09 0.29** -0.02 PCSA r 0.16* -0.14 0.09 0.01 0.17* 0.00 0.03 0.23** -0.04 0.05 0.01 -0.02 0.10 -0.09 -0.19* 0.04 P-Spel r 0.22** 0.03 -0.03 -0.02 0.24** 0.02 0.18* 0.43** -0.23** 0.11 0.15 -0.24** 0.04 -0.10 -0.14 0.06 P-senle r 0.26** -0.10 -0.11 0.01 0.29** -0.01 0.21** 0.28** -0.16* 0.18** 0.06 -0.11 -0.23** -0.05 -0.10 0.16*
1. AReserved-outgoing
4.6.4 Relationship between aptitude and personality factors of the students faculty wise
(a) Boys of agriculture The correlation coefficient analysis (Table 33a) to know the relation between aptitude and personality factors was made, which revealed that the factors 'F' and 'H' soberenthusiastic and shy-socially bold respectively were negatively and significantly related with abstract reasoning. The factor 'G' disregards rules-moralistic was positively and significantly related with abstract reasoning. The factor 'I' self reliant-sensitive was positively and significantly related with mechanical reasoning. The factor 'H' shy-socially bold was positively and significantly related with language sentences. Incase of second order personality factors. The factor III tender minded-toughpoise was negatively and significantly related with abstract reasoning. (b) Girls of agriculture Incase of girls of agriculture the factors 'G' disregards rules-moralistic was positively and significantly related with verbal reasoning, the factor 'Q2' group dependent-self sufficient was negatively and significantly related with verbal reasoning (Table 33b). The factor 'F' sober-enthusiastic was negatively and significantly related with abstract reasoning and the factor 'N' socially clumsy-socially aware was positively and significantly related with abstract reasoning. The factors 'B' dull-bright and 'C' emotionally less stable-mature were positively and significantly related with space relations. The factors 'E' mild-aggressive was negatively and significantly related with space relations. The factor 'A' reserved-outgoing was negatively and significantly related with mechanical reasoning. The factor 'G' disregards rules-moralistic was positively and significantly related with language sentences. The factor 'O' secure-insecure was negatively and significantly related with language sentences. Incase of second order personality factors the factor subduedness-independence was negatively and significantly related with space relations. (c) Home Science students Incase of Home Science students, the factors 'A' and 'O' reserved-outgoing and secure-insecure respectively were negatively and significantly related with verbal reasoning (Table 33c). The factors 'G' disregards rules-moralistic and 'M' practical- imaginative were positively and significantly related with abstract reasoning. The factor 'A' reserved-outgoing was negatively and significantly related with space relations. The factor 'G' disregards rules-moralistic was positively and significantly related with space relations. The factor 'F' sober-enthusiastic and factor 'M' practical-imaginative were significantly related negatively and positively respectively with mechanical reasoning. Incase of second order personality factors, the III factor tender minded-toughpoise was negatively and significantly related with numerical ability.
Table 33a. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among boys of agriculture Sl. No . PNu r PMe r PCS A r PSpel r 0.24 Psenle r 0.09
Category
P-ve r
P-Ab r 0.04
P-Sp r
1. AOutgoing-reserved
0.01 0.06
178.0 0.16 -0.09 0 -0.09 0.01 0.12 0.09 0.16 0.13 0.10 0.19 0.29
2. BDull-bright 3. CEmotionally stable-mature 4. EMild-Aggressive 5. FSober-enthusiastic 6. GDisregards rules-moralistic 7. HShy-Socially bold8. I - Self reliant-sensitive
0.06 0.01
9. L - Accepting conditionSuspicious 10. M Practical-imaginative 11. N Secure-socially aware 12. O-Secure-insecure 13. Q1 Conservative-liberal 14. Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient 15. Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled 16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed Second order personality factors 1. Introversion-Extroversion 2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 3. Tender minded-Tough poise 4. Subduedness-Independent
0.16 -0.09
0.20
0.08
-0.18
0.04 -0.11
0.00
0.06
-0.23 -0.16
0.18
-0.10 -0.17 -0.07 -0.22 0.06 0.30 0.16 0.13 0.16 0.04 -0.05 0.02 -0.04
0.14 0.02
-0.16
-0.26
-0.15
0.11
0.18
-0.26 0.22
0.12 -0.10
Table 33b. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among girls of agriculture Sl. No . PNu r 0.04 PCS PPA Spel senle r r r 0.08
Category
P-ve r -0.12
P-Ab r -0.03
1. AOutgoing-reserved
2. BDull-bright 3. CEmotionally stable-mature 4. EMild-Aggressive 5. FSober-enthusiastic 6. GDisregards rules-moralistic 7. HShy-Socially bold8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 9. L - Accepting conditionSuspicious 10. M Practical-imaginative 11. N Secure-socially aware 12. O-Secure-insecure 13. Q1 Conservative-liberal 14. Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient 15. Q3 Undisciplined self conflict-controlled 16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed Second order personality factors 1. Introversion-Extroversion 2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 3. Tender minded-Tough poise 4. Subduedness-Independent
0.38* 0.34*
-0.43* -0.11 -0.02 -0.24 0.14 0.11 0.11 -0.15 0.09 -0.05 0.22
0.06 0.04
0.31
0.04
0.17 0.01
0.32 0.37*
-0.07 -0.10 -0.04 -0.38* 0.19 0.11 0.15 -0.04 0.11 0.08 0.04 0.15
0.29
0.05
-0.03
-0.05
0.05
0.20
-0.04 -0.10
0.04
-0.05
0.09
0.05
-0.28 -0.22
0.02 -0.23
0.15
-0.06
-0.06
0.27
-0.38*
0.09
0.03 -0.03
0.25
Table 33c. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among home science students Sl. No . P-Ab P-Sp r r P-Me PCS PPr A senl Spel r e r r 0.10 -0.06 -0.08 0.13
Category
P-ve P-Nu r r
1. AOutgoing-reserved
0.27 -0.25 0.32* 0.39** 0.14 0.20 0.16 0.00 0.10 0.04 0.21 -0.07 0.04 -0.15
-0.14 0.12
0.01
6. GDisregards rules-moralistic 7. HShy-Socially bold8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 9. L - Accepting conditionSuspicious 10. M Practical-imaginative
0.13
0.10
0.01 0.44* *
0.01
0.03
0.04
13. Q1 Conservative-liberal 14. Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient 15. Q3 Undisciplined self conflict-controlled 16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed Second order personality factors 1. Introversion-Extroversion 2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 3. Tender minded-Tough poise
0.14
0.01 0.02
-0.04 0.06
0.29
0.16 -0.02
0.01 -0.22
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.05
-0.28 0.00
0.13
0.04 -0.08
4. Subduedness-Independent
0.05
0.10
0.11
0.10 -0.07
Table 33d. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among students of marketing Sl. No . PCS A r 0.25 0.16 PPSpel senle r r -0.26 0.54* * 0.22 0.12
Category
P-ve P-Nu P-Ab P-Sp P-Me r r r r r 0.05 -0.05 0.01 0.07 -0.02 0.32 0.10 0.14
1. AOutgoing-reserved 2. BDull-bright
0.40* 0.41*
-0.06
0.01
-0.09 -0.02 -0.24 -0.14 -0.12 -0.13 0.17 0.16 0.03 0.16 0.16 0.43* * 0.10 0.15
-0.13 -0.01 -0.10 0.41* -0.03 0.12 0.22 -0.15 0.52* * -0.20 0.01 0.32 0.15
-0.09 0.31
0.06
-0.06 0.18
0.06 0.15
0.30 0.02
-0.01 -0.06
0.21 0.06
0.17
0.03 0.00
0.41* -0.12
0.13
0.23
0.24
0.25
-0.01
0.16 0.26
0.16 0.38*
0.14 0.09
12. O-Secure-insecure 13. Q1 Conservative-liberal 14. Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient 15. Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled 16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed
0.14 0.12
-0.08 -0.06
-0.01 -0.13
0.38*
0.37
0.16
0.42* * 0.56* *
0.22
0.29
0.06
0.01
0.01
0.32
0.35*
Second order personality factors 1. Introversion-Extroversion 0.16 0.31 -0.15 0.59* * 0.16 0.07 0.53* * 0.19 0.12 0.31 0.36*
0.28
0.50* -0.01 *
(d) Marketing students Incase of Marketing students the factors 'B' dull-bright and the factor 'Q3' undisciplined self conflict-controlled were positively and significantly related with verbal reasoning (Table 33d). The factors 'B' dull-bright, 'H' shy-socially bold, and 'Q1' conservative-liberal were positively and significantly related with numerical ability. The factors 'E' mild-aggressive, 'F' sober-enthusiastic, 'Q3' undisciplined self conflictcontrolled, 'Q4' relaxed-tensed were positively and significantly related with space relations. The factors 'L' accepting condition-suspicious, 'O' secure-insecure were positively and significantly related with clerical speed and accuracy. The factors 'B' dull-bright, 'H' shy-socially bold, 'Q1' conservative-liberal, 'Q3' undisciplined self conflict were positively and significantly related with language spelling. The factor 'N' socially clumsy-socially aware was negatively and significantly related with language spelling. The factors 'F' sober enthusiastic, 'O' secure-insecure, 'Q4' relaxed-tensed were positively and significantly related with language sentences. Incase of second order personality factors the factor subduedness-independence was positively and significantly related with numerical ability. The factors introversion-extroversion and subduedness-independence were positively and significantly related with space relations. The factor low anxiety-high anxiety was positively and significantly related with clerical speed and accuracy. The factor subduedness-independence was positively and significantly related with language spelling. The factor introversion-extroversion and low anxiety-high anxiety were positively and significantly related with language sentences.
4.7 INFLUENCE OF SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS ON PERSONALITY FACTORS, APTITUDE AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
4.7.1 Correlation coefficient between socio-demographic characters and personality factors
When the students personal and familial characters were correlated with personality factors (Table 34). It revealed that age of the student was negatively and significantly related with the factor 'F' sober-enthusiastic. Ordinal position of the student was positively and significantly related with the factor 'C' emotionally less stable-mature. Size of the family of students was negatively and significantly related with the factors 'B' dull-bright and 'G' disregards rules-moralistic.
Table 34. Relation between socio-demographic characters and personality factors of undergraduate students Sl. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. BDull-bright CEmotionally less stable-mature EMild-Aggressive FSober-enthusiastic GDisregards rules-moralistic HShy-Socially boldI - Self reliant-sensitive L - Accepting condition-Suspicious M Practical-imaginative N Socially clumsy- socially aware O-Secure-insecure Q1 Conservative-liberal Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient Q3 Undisciplined self conflict-controlled Q4 - Tense-Relaxed Second order personality factors 1. 2. 3. 4. Introversion-Extroversion Low anxiety- High anxiety Tender minded-Tough poise Subduedness-Independent -0.10 0.06 -0.23** 0.03 0.01 -0.04 -0.03 -0.10 -0.08 -0.11 -0.15 -0.04 -0.10 0.03 0.14 0.05 -0.05 -0.04 0.10 0.06 -0.08 -0.04 0.12 0.03 -0.16 -0.06 0.05 0.02 Age r 0.10 0.05 0.03 0.10 -0.18* 0.04 -0.11 0.09 0.10 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.06 -0.07 -0.03 0.06 O-position r 0.02 0.05 0.17* -0.03 -0.09 -0.01 -0.02 0.04 0.06 -0.03 -0.03 -0.01 -0.08 -0.02 0.03 0.07 F size r -0.05 -0.16* -0.14 0.05 -0.08 -0.16* -0.08 0.04 0.07 0.0 0.02 0.13 0.08 -0.14 -0.01 0.09 Edu F r -0.11 0.16* 0.07 -0.11 0.0 0.07 -0.02 -0.13 -0.12 0.10 0.07 -0.02 0.10 0.23** 0.05 0.12 Edu M r -0.05 0.10 0.0 -0.02 0.03 0.06 -0.06 -0.10 -0.21** 0.0 -0.04 -0.10 -0.04 0.13 0.10 0.0 Occu. F r -0.12 0.16* 0.11 -0.13 -0.08 0.08 0.02 -0.07 -0.03 0.10 0.01 -0.04 0.02 0.21** 0.11 0.06 Occu M r -0.07 0.08 0.02 -0.07 -0.05 -0.06 -0.16 -0.11 -0.20* 0.10 -0.02 0.01 -0.17* 0.16* 0.09 -0.03
Education and occupation of the fathers were positively and significantly related with the factor 'B' dull-bright and 'Q2' group dependent-self sufficiency. Education of the mother was negatively and significantly related with the factor 'C' accepting condition-suspicious. While occupation of mother was negatively and significantly related with the factors 'L' and 'Q1'. Accepting condition-suspicious and conservative-liberal respectively. But occupation of mother was positively and significantly related with the factor 'Q2' group dependent-self sufficient. Second order personality factors Age of the student was negatively and significantly related with toughpoise.
4.8
AND OF
Table 35. Relation between socio-demographic character and aptitude of undergraduate students
Sl. No.
Category
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Verbal reasoning Numerical ability Abstract reasoning Space relations Mechanical reasoning Clerical speed and accuracy Spelling Sentences
Table 36. Relation between socio-demographic characters and academic achievement of undergraduate students
Catego ry
Age r
Oposition r
F size r
Edu F r
Edu M r
Occu F r
Occu M r
AA
0.08
-0.04
-0.01
0.08
0.11
0.12
0.07
Category
2.
Horticulture
3.
Biotech-entomology
4.
5.
Crop physiology
6.
Extension + Agronomy
7.
Not interested
Table 38. Influence of personality factors on career choice of students of agriculture Sl. No. Genetics (N=17) Mean 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. AOutgoing-reserved BDull-bright CEmotionally stable-mature EMild-Aggressive FSober-enthusiastic GDisregards rules-moralistic HShy-Socially boldI - Self reliant-sensitive L - Accepting condition-Suspicious M Practical-imaginative N Secure-socially aware O-Secure-insecure Q1 Conservative-liberal Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 4.53 4.35 4.53 5.35 4.00 5.82 4.76 4.59 6.47 5.00 5.76 6.59 6.05 6.05 S.D 1.62 2.08 1.87 1.27 1.17 2.01 1.09 1.37 1.46 1.54 1.82 2.31 1.19 1.08 Horticulture (N=9) Mean 4.78 4.00 4.00 5.78 3.00 6.11 5.33 5.22 6.44 5.89 6.77 5.77 5.56 5.44 S.D 1.56 1.22 1.11 1.20 1.00 2.08 1.41 1.78 1.88 1.54 1.86 1.72 1.59 1.81 -0.68 0.54 0.91 -0.85 2.28* -0.34 -1.06 -0.93 0.04 -1.40 -1.33 1.02 0.81 0.92
Category
't' value
15.
5.88
1.16
5.78
1.99
0.14
16.
4.65
1.80
5.11
1.61
-0.66
Second order personality factors 1. 2. 3. 4. Introversion-Extroversion Low anxiety- High anxiety Tender minded-Tough poise Subduedness-Independent 4.29 5.80 5.82 5.45 1.07 1.36 1.17 0.87 4.32 5.77 5.19 5.56 0.91 0.58 2.06 0.87 -0.08 0.08 0.85 -0.31
Sl. No.
1.
Verbal reasoning
7.06
5.72
17.33
9.5
-2.97*
2.
Numerical ability
54.71
17.54
49.44
15.50
0.79
3.
Abstract reasoning
42.71
24.33
50.56
31.37
-0.65
4.
Space relations
21.65
12.29
22.2
9.39
-0.13
5.
Mechanical reasoning
13.12
17.03
8.67
9.60
0.85
6.
68.76
22.58
72.22
15.43
-0.46
7.
Spelling
21.06
11.17
28.89
15.16
-1.37
8.
Sentences
2.06
1.60
5.89
4.68
-2.38*
A.A
7.64
0.58
7.05
0.99
1.64
Comparison between choice of postgraduate courses of students academic achievement The Table 40 shows there was no significant difference found between Genetics and Horticulture students in their academic achievement.
2.
3.
Extension
4.
Textile
5.
MBA
6.
Not interested
Table 42. Influence of personality factors on career choice of students of home science Sl. No. Category Human Development (N=14) Mean 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. AOutgoing-reserved BDull-bright CEmotionally stable-mature EMild-Aggressive FSober-enthusiastic GDisregards rules-moralistic HShy-Socially boldI - Self reliant-sensitive L - Accepting condition-Suspicious M Practical-imaginative N Secure-socially aware O-Secure-insecure Q1 Conservative-liberal Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 3.86 4.64 4.21 5.21 3.50 6.42 5.07 4.50 7.21 4.50 7.29 7.21 5.71 5.29 S.D 1.40 1.33 1.31 1.81 1.61 1.55 1.07 1.51 0.89 1.34 1.59 1.92 1.20 1.59
Food Science Nutrition (N=12) Mean 4.16 5.25 4.75 5.00 2.83 6.58 5.25 4.25 6.00 5.17 6.67 6.91 6.33 5.83 S.D 1.46 2.09 1.71 1.48 1.03 1.83 1.48 1.21 2.21 1.11 1.87 2.39 1.23 1.33
't' value
-0.53 -0.87 -0.89 0.33 1.28 -0.24 -0.35 0.47 1.78 -1.39 0.90 0.35 -1.30 -0.94
15.
6.50
1.45
6.58
0.90
-0.17
16.
4.93
1.54
4.25
1.76
1.04
Second order personality factors 1. 2. 3. 4. Introversion-Extroversion Low anxiety- High anxiety Tender minded-Tough poise Subduedness-Independent 4.25 6.12 6.56 4.76 1.24 1.27 1.02 1.06 3.71 5.68 5.31 5.09 1.33 1.88 1.79 1.24 1.06 0.69 2.14 -0.72
Mean
S.D
Mean
S.D
1.
Verbal reasoning
11.29
10.30
9.42
10.80
0.45
2.
Numerical ability
48.21
26.14
55.25
26.50
-0.68
3.
Abstract reasoning
50.28
28.66
57.67
23.01
-0.73
4.
Space relations
32.40
13.69
27.08
13.56
0.99
5.
Mechanical reasoning
22.35
15.21
27.50
15.15
-0.86
6.
55.71
19.99
63.25
25.91
-0.82
7.
Spelling
18.64
14.90
18.00
15.63
0.11
8.
Sentences
1.71
1.49
2.58
2.81
-0.96
Table 44. Influence of academic achievement on career choice of students of home science
A.A
7.37
0.76
7.90
0.78
-1.75
Category
2.
MBA
3.
Extension
4.
Statistics
5.
Not interested
Table 46. Influence of personality factor on career choice of students of marketing Agri marketing (N=13) Mean 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. AOutgoing-reserved BDull-bright CEmotionally stable-mature EMild-Aggressive FSober-enthusiastic GDisregards rules-moralistic HShy-Socially boldI - Self reliant-sensitive L - Accepting condition-Suspicious M Practical-imaginative N Secure-socially aware O-Secure-insecure Q1 Conservative-liberal Q2 Group dependent-self sufficient Q3 Undisciplined self conflictcontrolled Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 5.23 3.62 4.53 5.15 4.15 6.38 5.76 7.00 6.77 4.53 6.92 6.54 6.31 5.70 S.D 1.88 1.50 1.45 1.28 1.86 1.80 0.72 1.41 1.48 1.19 2.25 1.20 1.54 1.65
Sl. No.
MBA (N=9) Mean 5.15 3.45 3.81 5.27 3.39 5.80 5.72 7.25 7.10 4.69 7.61 6.70 6.54 5.71 S.D 1.55 0.91 0.93 1.49 1.61 1.68 0.70 1.04 1.46 1.16 1.85 0.70 1.76 1.58
Category
't' value
0.11 0.33 1.42 -0.20 1.02 0.77 0.13 -0.48 -0.52 -0.31 -0.79 -0.39 -0.32 -0.01
15.
4.46
1.66
4.43
1.17
0.05
16.
4.92
1.25
4.74
1.03
0.37
Second order personality factors 1. 2. 3. 4. Introversion-Extroversion Low anxiety- High anxiety Tender minded-Tough poise Subduedness-Independent 4.60 6.16 3.60 4.78 1.25 0.82 2.08 0.87 4.11 6.25 2.97 4.98 1.05 0.80 1.41 0.60 0.99 -0.26 0.85 -0.64
Mean
S.D
Mean
S.D
1.
Verbal reasoning
4.76
3.34
5.22
3.24
-0.32
2.
Numerical ability
34.61
17.97
35.57
16.14
-0.13
3.
Abstract reasoning
43.85
17.10
48.61
19.45
-0.59
4.
Space relations
15.85
8.72
15.86
8.80
0.00
5.
Mechanical reasoning
5.85
4.10
5.98
4.50
-0.07
6.
76.85
16.40
74.61
15.25
0.33
7.
Spelling
29.85
13.40
32.48
6.56
-0.61
8.
Sentences
3.54
2.40
2.82
1.31
0.90
A.A
6.69
1.05
6.86
0.64
-0.47
V. DISCUSSION
The results of the present study are discussed in this chapter under the following headings. 5.1 Aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of professional students 5.2 Interrelation of aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of students 5.3 Influence of socio-demographic factors on aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement
number of students were below average group (57-59%) in space relation. More number of students were above average (38-46%) in abstract reasoning and numerical ability and more number of students were high (38%) in clerical speed and accuracy.
and sensitive. In second order personality factors they were significantly higher compared to Home Science and Marketing students in the factors I and IV respectively which indicated they were extroverts and independent. Girls of agriculture students were significantly higher than the Home Science and Marketing students in the factor 'B' which indicated they were more intelligent. They were also significantly higher than boys of agriculture and Marketing students in the factor 'O' and factor III indicates they were feeling more insecure and tough minded. Home Science students were significantly higher than the boys of agriculture and Marketing students in the factor 'O' and III indicating more insecurity and tough minded. They were also significantly higher than all the faculties in the factor 'Q3' which indicated they were high on self control than the others. Marketing students were significantly higher than all the faculties in the factor 'A' and 'F' which indicated they were more outgoing and enthusiastic. They were also significantly higher than girls of agriculture and Home Science students in the factor I and Ist they were more sensitive and extrovert. Which instills respects for elders, submissiveness, dependence. The emotional stability was low which may be due to the developmental stage which would improve with increase in age and experience and as they step in to adulthood.
from early adolescence to late adolescence. Studies of Jogwar (1983) and Pal and Karim (1984) also indicated similar results. Jain and Chouhan (1989) found that during adolescence phase of life, the personality factors less intelligence vs more intelligent (B), phlegmatic temperament vs excitability (D), submissiveness vs dominance (E), expedient vs conscientious (G), tough minded vs tender minded (I), group dependent vs self sufficient (Q2) and uncontrolled vs controlled (Q3) significantly changed between the age of 12 to 18 years. The intelligence increased. It may be because of the fact that as knowledge and awareness gradually increases intelligence score also increased. This result is similar to Sharma (1973), Braback (1980) and Sandhu (1984). The mean values with regards to factor 'D' of students show that preadolescents were mid and late adolescents. The reason of it can be that with increase in age during adolescence an individual grows physically and socially which facilitates him to be patient, less excitable, less demanding and mature. This finding is similar with Schaie (1966) study. The mean scores on factor 'E' indicates that mid and late adolescents were comparatively submissive, obedient, accommodating expressive conventional and humble than preadolescents. It may be due to the fact that at age of mid and late adolescent a student recognizes his responsibilities becomes sincere so they are more submissive than preadolescents who experience of emotion and with transition they adjust to the social demands and responsibilities to the society However Schaie (1966) reported that there was an increase in dominance with age. Mid adolescents were comparatively conscientious, persistent, moralistic, responsible, consistently, ordered and emotionally disciplined. This can be attributed to the fact that individuals of 14 years and above are more mature, sober, sincere and take care of their responsibilities. Therefore they are more conscientious and conventional. Schaie (1966) found no difference with age on this factor. Students of age 16-18 years were comparatively tender minded, sensitive, dependent, insecure, expect affection and attention. Seek help and sympathy and were kind and gentle. The increasing trend in the mean values from pre to late adolescence implies that score on factor 'I' increased as age increased. This result is in contradiction with Schaie (1966) who reported that score on factor 'I' decreased as age increased. The contrary result may be due to the cultural difference of the sample. Where in more of dependence, cohesiveness, respect for elders and collectivist nature is imbibed and transferred to the young in the eastern countries unlike autonomy in western cultures. An increasing trend of scores on factor 'Q2' (group dependent- self sufficient) was observed with increase in age of adolescent students. The late adolescents were found to be comparatively self sufficient, resourceful than preadolescents. The probable cause for this trend can be attributed to the fact that with maturity of a person one tends to be resourceful and self sufficient. However, Schaie (1966) found no change in this factor with age. The mean values on factor Q3 (undisciplined self conflict controlled) indicated that late adolescents were comparatively more controlled than pre-adolescents. This result may be because of societys expectations more refinement behaviour at the later adolescence and efforts to confirm to the norms of the society, so more of controlled behaviour to seek social recognition.
Architecture at the University of Florida. Aptitude, G-intelligence, V-verbal aptitude, Nnumerical aptitude had significant correlation with the criterion.
The results of the study indicated that verbal reasoning was positively related with personality factors, intelligent and self control but negatively related with enthusiastic, insecurity and anxiety. Numerical ability was related with intelligence and control positively but negatively related with sensitivity. Abstract reasoning was positively related with morality suspiciousness and negatively related with enthusiasm. Space relation was positively related with intelligence, morality, insecurity, self control and tough poise but negatively related with outgoing, sensitivity. Mechanical reasoning was positively related with intelligence, self control and tough poise but negatively related with outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive and extraversion. Clerical speed and accuracy was positively related with outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive but negatively related with self control and tough poise. Language spelling was positively related with outgoing enthusiastic, sensitive and extroversion, but negatively related with suspicious, insecure and tough poise. Language sentences was positively related with outgoing, enthusiastic, socially bold, sensitive, imaginative, tensed, extroversion but negatively related with liberal and tough poise. This is mainly because of heredity factors and environmental factors such as parental education, occupation, school and home environment may also affect the aptitude and personality factors of students.
5.3
However, Sudhir (1989) and Singh et al. (1989) also reported that emotional maturity was found to be independent of education of economic status of family. Occupation of the mother was negatively related with factors suspicious and liberal but positively related with self sufficient. This was a blessing in disguise which trained the adolescence to be self sufficient because of working of mother. Kothari (1982) and Pattnaik (1993) reported that mothers academic qualification and maternal employment influenced the moral concepts and academic competence of the child.
5.3.3
factors
and
academic
The present study revealed that there was no significant relation between sociodemographic factors and academic achievement of students. The result is in contradiction with the result of Hunter (1972), Hemakumari (1977), Saini (1977), Singhal (1983), Sharma (1984), Bhatnagar and Sharma (1992), Panda and Jena (2000) who reported that parents educational level had a significant effect on the academic achievement of children. Krishnan (1977), Geogrewill (1987), Gill and Sidhu (1988), Budhdev (1999), Singh (1996) reported that parental occupation had a significant effect on the school performance of the child. This trend may be because of a strong influence of parental support in child's education and academic achievement. Educated mothers and fathers tend to watch and lay foundations for proper learning when young. As children grow the involvement of parents may not be needed as much as when children are young and tender. However, these students being in hostel and grown up such influence of parental involvement may not had greater impact on learning. But the aptitude and personality factors may have had stronger influence on their academic performance.
VI. SUMMARY
The study on "Influence of personality and aptitude on academic achievement of professional students of University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad" was undertaken during 2002-03 with the following objectives. Firstly to know the personality profile, aptitude and academic achievement of students. Secondly to know the difference in personality profile, aptitude and academic achievement of students by faculty. Thirdly to know the interrelation between aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of students and finally to find out the influence of socio-demographic factors such as age, gender, ordinal position, family size, family type, educational and occupational level of parents on aptitude, personality and academic achievement of the students. The present study was conducted by drawing the sample of undergraduate students of University of Agricultural Sciences, studying in I, II, III and IV year of Agriculture, Marketing and Home Science degree programmes. College of Agriculture and Marketing are coeducational colleges but Home Science is only for girls. Initially 185 students were considered for the study but after deleting incomplete questionnaire and incomplete participation, finally 160 samples were recruited for the study. Stratified random sampling method was used for the sample selection. The aptitude scale developed by Bennett et al. (1993) consisting of 7 subtests viz., verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy, language (spelling and sentences) was employed. Personality factors of students was measured by the 16 personality factors questionnaire (16 PF) developed by Cattell (1982) which measures 16 primary personality factors and 4-second order personality factors, viz., A-reserved-outgoing, B-dull-bright, C-emotionally less stablemature, E-mild-aggressive, F-sober-enthusiastic, G-disregards rules-moralistic, H-shy-socially bold, I-self reliant-sensitive, L-accepting condition-suspicious, M-practical-imaginative, Nsocially clumsy-socially aware, O-secure-insecure, Q1-conservative-liberal, Q2-group dependent-self sufficient, Q3-undisciplined self conflict-controlled, Q4-relaxed-tensed, introversion-extroversion, low anxiety-high anxiety, tender minded-tough poise, subduednessindependence. The marks secured in the previous semester which represented the academic achievement of students was obtained from the academic office. Socioeconomic inventory developed by Khadi et al. (2002), Venkataramaih (1983), Aaron (1969) were used to collect the information regarding age, gender, ordinal position, size and type of family, occupation and education of parents, income of family. The educational background of students, reasons for choice of course, choice of post graduate programme was elicited. The data were quantified, categorised, tabulated and analysed using the statistical measures (chisquare), 't' test, correlation r and analysis of variance. The results of the present study are as follows. Majority of students were in the average category in all 16 personality factors. Few students (13-36%) were in reserved, less intelligent, emotionally less stable, mild, sober, shy, undisciplined self conflict and relaxed and same proportion (13-34%) of them were moralistic, sensitive, socially aware, suspicious and insecure. As per second order personality factors, most of the students were also in average category in all four-second order personality factors i.e., introversion-extraversion, low anxiety-high anxiety, tender minded-tough poise, subduedness-independence. The mean scores of personality factors of student was highest in insecurity and lowest in sober. In the second order personality factor, students were highest in anxiety and lowest in introversion. Home Science and Girls of agriculture students differed significantly in only one personality factor, N-socially clumsy-socially aware, where in Home Science students were higher indicating they were more socially aware than the Girls of agriculture students. In the second order personality factors there was no significant difference between the two groups.
Boys of agriculture students were significantly higher than Marketing students in intelligence, aggressive, moralistic, imaginative and self sufficient, Marketing students were significantly more outgoing, enthusiastic, suspicious, insecure and controlled. Majority of the students were in the lower level of aptitude in all seven areas. They were low in verbal reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, language (spelling and sentences). In numerical ability and abstract reasoning higher percentage (46.68) of students were in below average group. Higher percentage (41.25%) of students had high aptitude in clerical speed and accuracy. However there was a wide range of mean scores of aptitude in all areas with the highest mean score in clerical speed and accuracy and lowest in language (sentences). Home Science and girls students of agriculture differed significantly in all aptitude categories except for language (sentences). Home Science students had significantly higher mean scores in verbal reasoning and mechanical reasoning compared to girls students of agriculture. These students had significantly higher mean scores in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations, clerical speed and accuracy and language (spelling) compared to Home Science students. Boys of agriculture and Marketing students differed significantly in all aptitude categories except for space relations and language (sentences) Agriculture students had higher mean scores in verbal reasoning, numerical ability compared to Marketing students. Marketing students had higher mean scores in abstract reasoning, mechanical reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy, language (spelling) compared to Agriculture students. Majority of students were in fair category of academic achievement followed by average and pass and least marks were in high category. Home Science and girls students of agriculture differed significantly in academic achievement wherein girls students of agriculture were better than Home Science students. Boys of Agriculture and Marketing students differed significantly in academic achievement wherein boys of agriculture students had better academic performance than Marketing students. Boys and girls of Agriculture students differed significantly in personality factors. Boys were more outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive and imaginative compared to girls. While girls were more suspicious, insecure and controlled compared to boys. In second order personality factors, boys and girls differed significantly in all factors. Boys were extrovert and independent and girls had higher anxiety and tough poise. Boys and girls students of Agriculture differed significantly in all aptitude categories. Boys had higher approach in verbal reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy, language (spelling and sentences), girls were with an aptitude in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations and mechanical reasoning compared to boys. Boys and girls students of Agriculture differed significantly in academic achievement, where in girls were higher academic achievement compared to boys. The personality factors outgoing, bright, self controlled were influencing factors for academic achievement of students. Among the second order personality factors independence was an influencing factor on academic achievement of students. The aptitude in the area of verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning and space relations were significant factors influencing the academic achievement.
The personality factors bright, enthusiastic, insecure, self controlled anxiety were factors influencing the verbal reasoning. The factors bright, sensitive, self controlled were factors influencing the numerical ability. The factors enthusiastic, moralistic, suspicious were influencing abstract reasoning. The personality factors outgoing, bright, moralistic, sensitive, insecure, self controlled and independence influenced space relations. The personality factors outgoing, bright, enthusiastic, sensitive, controlled, extraversion, tough poise influenced mechanical reasoning. The factors outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive, controlled, tough poise influenced clerical speed and accuracy. The factors outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive, suspicious, insecure extraversion, tough poise influenced language (spelling). The factors outgoing, enthusiastic, socially bold, sensitive, suspicious, imaginative, liberal tensed, extraversion and tough poise influenced language (sentences). Young students were more enthusiastic and tender minded than the older students. Later borns were more mature than the first borns. Children from small family were more bright and moralistic than the children from large family. Students of nuclear family were more mature compared to students of joint family. The factors bright and self sufficient were related with education and occupation of father. The factor suspicious was related with education of mother. The factors suspicious, liberal, self sufficient were related with occupation of mother. Younger students were good in numerical ability and older students were better in clerical speed and accuracy. Students of nuclear family were better in space relation compared to students of joint family. Verbal reasoning was related with education of father and mother. Mechanical reasoning was related with occupation of mother. There was no significant relation between socio-demographic factors and academic achievement of students. The students who opted for Genetics and Horticulture, differed significantly in only one factor indicating that students of Genetics were more enthusiastic than the students of Horticulture. Genetics and Horticulture students differed significantly in verbal reasoning, language (sentences), where in students of horticulture had higher mean scores in verbal reasoning and language (sentences).
There was no significant difference between students who opted for Human Development and Food Science and Nutrition students in personality factors, aptitude and academic achievement. There was no significant difference between students who opted for Agricultural, Marketing and MBA students in personality factors, aptitude and academic achievement.
VII. REFERENCES
AARON, P.G., MATIHAL, V.G. AND MALTESH, R.N., 1969, A common socio-economic status for rural and urban areas monograph No.3. The Pshychometric Lab, Department of Pf. Ed., Karnatak University, Dharwad. AGARWAL, K.K., 1977, Prediction of scholastic success in science subjects. A battery of psychological tests. Indian Journal of Psychology, 52(1): 95-97. AJWANY, J.K. AND UPADHYAY, S.N., 1982, Personality as a determinant of problem solving behaviour. Psychological Studies, 27(2): 44-46. ALLPORT, G.W., 1937, Pattern and Growth in Personality Halt, Windston, New York. ANASTASIA, 1968, Psychological Testing. The MacMillan Company Collier MacMillan Ltd. rd London, 3 Edition, pp.319-370. ASHRAF, S.H., 1992, Personality characteristics of heavy and mild cigarette smokers. Indian Psychological Review, 38(6-7): 31-33. BARNES, B. AND SRINIVAS, R., 1993, Personality traits of self actualised women. Psychological Studies, 38(1): 7-9. BAYLEY, N., 1954, Some increasing parent child similarities during the growth of children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 45: 1-21. BEGUM AND AHMED, E., 1986, Individual risk taking and risky shift as a function of cooperation competition proneness and subjects. Psychological Studies, 31(1): 2125. BEGUM, T.S. AND PHUKAN, M., 2001, Academic achievement and intelligence : A correlational study in boys and girls. Indian Psychological Review, 56(2): 103-106. BENETT, G.K., SEASHORE, H.G. AND WESMAN, A.G., 1993, Differential aptitude test form A. Manasayan S-524 school block Shakarpur, Delhi. BHADRA, B.R. AND GIRIJA, P.R., 1984, A study of ability, study habits and skills, values and personality characteristics of high and low achieving scheduled caste and tribe students. Psychological Studies, 29(1): 13-17. BHARATIDEVI, 1982, Certain psychological factors of adjustment influencing achievement among school children. Indian Journal of Psychology, 57: 143-153. BHATNAGAR, J.K. AND SHARMA, M., 1992, A study of the relationship between parental education and academic achievement in a semi rural setting. Psychological Studies, 37(2-3): 126-129. BIGGS, I.B., 1962, The relation of neuroticism and extraversion to intelligence and educational attainment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 32(2): 188-195. BINGHAM, W.V.D., 1937, Aptitudes and Aptitude Testing. Harper and Brothers, New York. BLYTH, D.A. AND TRAEGAR, C.M., 1983, The self concept and self esteem of early adolescents. Theory in to Practice, 22(2): 91-97. BONNEY, M.E., 1955, The study of constancy of socio-economic ranks among college students over a two year old period. Sociometry, 8: 531-542.
BRABECK, M.M., 1984, Longitudinal studies of intellectual development during adulthood: Theoretical and research models. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 17(3): 12-27. BRADSHAW, G.D. AND GAUDRY, E., 1968, The effect of a single experience of successorfailure on test anxiety. Australian Journal of Psychology, 20: 219-223. BRODY, L.E. AND BENBOW, C.P., 1990, Effects of high school course work and time on SAT scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4): 866-875. BUDHDEV, P.V., 1999, Impact of medium of instruction on the achievement of high intelligent and low intelligent students. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 32(2): 195-201. CATTELL, R.B., 1950, Handbook for the Culture Fair Intelligence Test. Scale 3 Forms A and B Champaign, Illinois 1 PAT. CATTELL, R.B., 1982, Sixteen Personality Factors. The Psycho-centre New Delhi Press. CHAKRABARTI, P.K. AND KUNDU, 1984, Personality profiles of management personnel. Psychological Studies, 29(2): 143-146. CHANDRAKANDAN, K., VENKATAPIRABU, J., SEKAR, V. AND ANANDAKUMAR, 2001, Tests and Measurements in Social Research. APH Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, pp.241-263. CHATTERJEE, S., MUKHERJEE, M. AND MITRA, S.K., 1978, Higher secondary science achievement as related to scientific interest and aptitude. Indian Journal of Psychology, 53(3): 125-129. CHATURVEDI, S.C. AND PRAKASH, B., 1989, Risk-taking and academic achievements. 25(3): 131-135. CHERIAN, V.I., 1990, Family size and academic achievement of children. Journal of Family Welfare, 36(4): 56-59. CHILD, D., 1964, The relationship between introversion-extroversion, neuroticism and performance in school examinations. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 34: 187-197. CROW, L.P. AND CROW, A., 1964, Human development and learning, Eurasia Publishing House Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, p.46. DABIR, D. AND PANDIT, K.L., 1988, A study of vocational aspirations and aptitudes among the school going youth. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 25(2): 78-84. DAFTUAR, C.N., SINHA, C. AND DAFTUAR, L.C., 2000, Academic achievement and risk taking among tribal and non-tribal students of rural and urban areas. Psychological Studies, 45(1-2): 103-105. DEB, M., 1965, An Indian engineering aptitude test. Indian Journal of Psychology, 40(4): 161165. DERSIER, E.M., KUPERSMIDT AND PATTERSON, J., 1994, Children's academic and behavioural adjustment of a function of the chronicity and proximity and peer rejection. Child Development, 64: 1799-1813. DEY, B. AND SINHA, P.C., 1968, Psychological tests as predictors tools for school pupils achievement in science. Indian Journal of Psychology, 43(1-4): 74-80.
DHILLON, P.K. AND BERI, B., 1983, Academic achievement and emotional security in relation to choice of academic course: A comparative study. Indian Journal of Psychology, 58: 95-104. DOLKE, A.M. AND SHARMA, R.S., 1975, General aptitude test battery (GATB) as a predictor of academic success in architectural courses. Indian Journal of Psychology, 50(2): 163-173. EYSENK, H.J., 1947, Dimension of personality. Routledged and Kegan Poul. London. FREUD, S., 1941, Introductory lectures on psychoanalysis, London, George Allen and Unwin Ltd. GALLAGHER, A.M. AND LISI, R.D., 1994, Gender differences in scholastic aptitude test mathematics problem solving among high ability students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2): 204-211. GEORGEWILL, J.W., 1987, Nigerian parental influence on the academic performance of children. Child Development, 58(5): 1244-1257. GILL, T.K. AND SIDHU, H.S., 1988, Intelligence and academic achievement in the children belonging to different socio-economic groups in rural Punjab. Indian Psychological Review, 33(4-5): 50-54. GOEL, S.P., 2003, Feeling of security and educational achievement of the college students. Journal of Community Guidance and Research, 20(1): 49-55. GOYAL, R.P., 1984, Personality correlates of creativity in secondary school teachers under training. Psychological Studies, 29(1): 1-3. GREWAL, H.P. AND SINGH, H.B., 1987, Relationship of achievement motivation and academic performance of rural and urban high school students. Indian Psychological Review, 32: 1-5. GUPTA, S.C., 1973, Relative importance of some correlates of academic achievement. Indian Journal of Psychology, 48(1): 75-80. HARRIS, L.I. 1978, Sex differences in spatial ability: Possible environmental, genetic and neurological factors. In: M. Kinsbourne (Ed.) Asymmetrical functions of the brain. London: Oxford University Press. HEMAKUMARI, T.A., 1977, Role of mother and educational achievement of the child. Manual of Education, 5: 16-21. HUNTER, C.F, 1972, Mothers education and working effect on the school child. Journal of Psychology, 82: 27-37. HURLOCK, B.E., 1978, Personality development. Child Development Mc. Graw Hill, KOGA, KUSHA Ltd, New Delhi, pp.524. JAIN, K. AND CHOUHAN, V.L., 1989, A study of development of personality and vocational preference of students at various stages of adolescents. Indian Psychological Review, 34(1&2): 16-22. JAMUAR, K.K., 1961, Personality and achievement. Psychological Studies, 6: 59-65. JARIAL, G.S., 1981, Creativity, intelligence and academic achievement their relationship and differences with references on sex and academic subjects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 39: 91-96.
JAWA, M.S., 1973, Birth order and age related changes in anxiety among adolescents. Indian Journal of applied Psychology, 10(1): 6-11. JOGWAR, V.V., 1983, Development of self concept during adolescence. Asian Journal of Psychology and Education, 9(1): 3-7. JOSE, K.M., 1987, A comparative study of the Biology achievement of high average and low science aptitude of secondary school pupils. Master of Education Thesis, University of Calicut. JOSEPH, T.T., 1979, A study of some predictors of achievement in chemistry at the predegree level. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Kerala. KAKKAR, A., 1964, Adjustment problems of adolescents, Doctoral Dissertation in Education. Allahabad University. KAPOOR, S.D., 1964, The personality differences between the sexes (VKKJ). Proceedings st Indian Science Congress, 51 Session, Part III. KARPLUS, R., KARPLUS, E., FORMISANO, M. AND PAULSEN, A., 1977, A survey of proportional reasoning and control of variables in seven countries. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14: 411-417. KHADI, P.B., NANDWANA, S., SHUBANGNA, MAYURI, K., JURI, B., BANGALE, J., VIG, D., MANOCHA, A., AHUJA, A. AND ASHALATHA, K.V., 2002, Socio-economic status inventory. Technical Report, All India Co-ordinated Research Project (CD), Dharwad. KLINE, P.W., 1966, Extroversion neuroticism and academic performance among Ghanaian University students, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 36(1): 92-94. KOGAR, N. AND WALLACLIS, M.A., 1964, Risk-taking : A study in Cognition and Personality, New York, Holt. KOTHARI, S., 1982, Mother's academic qualifications (MAS) and the development of the moral concepts of her child. Indian Journal of Psychology, 57: 135-139. KRISHAN, A.P., 1977, Non-intellectual factors and their influences on academic achievement. Psychological Studies, 22(1-7): 25-31. KRISHNA, K.P., 1981, Risk taking and adolescent personality. Psychological Studies, 26(2): 110-112. LAWSON, A.E., 1978, The development and validation of a classroom test of formal reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15: 11-24. LIN, M.C. AND PULOS, S., 1981, Male-female differences in predicting displaced volume strategy usage. Aptitude relationships and experience influences. Journal of Education Psychology, 75(1): 87-95. MAHAMOOD, M., 1981, Personality profiles of sportsmen and non-sports men. Psychological Studies, 26(1): 5-7. MASLOW, A.H., 1954, Motivation and Personality, New York, Harper. MAUOBY, E.E. AND JACKLIN, C.N., 1974, The psychology of gender differences, Palo Alto, Calif: Stanford University Press. MAYURI, K. AND DEVI, L.U., 2001, Personality development of rural adolescents of Andhra Pradesh. Indian Psychological Review, 56(1): 25-37.
MEHTA, M. AND SEWANI, G., 1995, The effect of vocational maturity and need for achievement upon the personality pattern of adolescent girls. Indian Psychological Review, 44(3-4): 18-33. MEHTA, P., 1977, Level of achievement in high school boys. Indian Educational Review, 2: 36-70. MISERANDINO, M., 1996, Children who do well in school: individual differences in perceived competence and autonomy in above average children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(2): 203-214. MISHRA, K.N., 1992, Adjustment, self concept, test anxiety and desirable study habits as predictors of academic achievement. The Asian Journal of Psychological Education, 25(7-8): 21-26.
MOHSINS, S. M. 1968, Manual of General Intelligent Test. Patna : Aerovoice. MORRIS, L.W. AND LIEBERT, R.M., 1970, Relationship of cognitive and emotional components of test anxiety to physiological arousal and academic performance. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35: 332-337. MUNDARAGI, G., 1999, Personality traits and academic achievement among rural and urban adolescents. M.H.Sc. Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. MURSELL, J.L., 1949, Psychological Testing, Longmans Green and Company, 2
nd
Edition.
NAIR, A.S. AND JOSEPH, 1978, An experimental study of the overlap of intelligence and science aptitude with educational outcomes in Biology measured using Host's Taxonomy. Department of Education, University of Kerala. NORWICH, B., 1987, Self efficacy and achievement motivation: A study of their relaiton. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4): 384-387. PAL, R.L. AND KARIM, S., 1984, Developmental changes in self concept during middle school childhood. Indian Psychological Review, 26(4): 1-4. PANDA, M. AND JENA, A.K., 2000, Effect of some parental characteristics on class IX students achievement motivation. Indian Psychological Review, 54(3): 129-133. PANDEY, R.P., 1981, Academic achievement as a function of neuroticism and extroversion. Indian Psychological Review, 20: 1-4. PANDEY, R.P. AND SINGH, R.A., 1978, A correlational study of school examination marks intelligence and achievement scores. Asian Journal of Psychology and Education, 3(2): 6-8. PARAMESH, C.R., 1976, Dimensions of personality and achievement in scholastic subjects. Indian Journal of Psychology, 51(4): 302-306. PATTANAIK, S., 1993, Maternal employment and children's behavioural and academic competence. Research Highlights, 3(4): 232-238. PILLAI, K.S., 1986, The relative efficiency of science aptitude and intelligence of predict biology achievement. Experiments in Education, 14: 171-175. PILLAI, K.S., 1990, Interactive effect of science aptitude and attitude towards science and biology achievement. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 26(4): 206210.
PRADHAN, G.C., 1994, A comparative study of differential aptitudes of higher secondary school students studying in vocational and different general education (academic) streams. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 31(1): 39-49. PRAKASH, V., 1993, Effect of negative marketing on the scores of the scholastic aptitude tests. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 30(1): 8-15. RAO, D.B., 1995, A comparative study of scientific attitude. Scientific aptitude and achievement in biology at secondary school level. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 31(4): 221-238. REVEN, J.C., 1949, Guide to Standard Progressive Matrices, Loars and Co, London. ROTHSTEIN, M.G., PAUNONEN, S.V., RUSH, J.C. AND KING, G.A., 1994, Personality and cognitive ability predictors of performance in graduate business. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4): 516-530. ROY, D.D., 1992, Personality traits of Antartica expenditioners. Psychological Studies, 37(23): 95-98. ROY, D.D., 1995, Differences in personality factors of experienced teachers, physicians. Bank managers and fine artists. Psychological Studies, 40(1): 51-56. ROY, D.D., 2002, Personality differences across four metropolitan cities of India. Indian Psychological Review, 58(2): 71-78. SAARNI, C.I., 1973, Piagetion operations and field indepences as factors in childrens problem solving performance. Child Development, 44: 338-342. SAINI, B.K., 1977, Academic achievement as a function of economic status and educational standard of parents. Psychological Studies, 22(2): 24-26. SANDHU, T.S., 1984, An investigation of sex differences in the development of formal operational thought. Asian Journal of Psychology and Education, 8(1): 39-44. SCHAIE, K.W., 1966, Year by year changes in personality from eight to sixteen years. Multivariate Behavioural Research, 1: 293-305. SCHNEIDER, W., KORKEL, J. AND WEINERT, F.E., 1989, Domain specific knowledge and memory performance : A comparison of high and low aptitude children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3): 306-312. SHAH, D.B. AND PATEL, K.M., 2001, A study of personality of graduate and post-graduate students of south Gujarat University Surat. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 38(1): 51-55. SHANMUGA, G.V., 1995, The effect of anxiety on academic achievement. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 31(3): 154-167. SHANMUGA, S.R., 1989, "Urban-rural difference in academic achievement and achievement related factors". Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 25(3): 121-129. SHARMA, A., 1973, Stabilization of abilities during adolescence II (cross sectional study). Indian Education Review, 8(2): 97-163. SHARMA, M.K., 1984, Academic achievement of school students vis--vis their parents education. Indian Journal of Psychology, 59(1): 33-40. SHARMA, R. AND BANSAL, I., 1991-92, A study of academic achievement and intelligence of extrovert and introvert adolescent girls. Indian Psychological Review, 37: 11-14.
SHARMA, R.K., 1987, Intelligence and achievement of destral; mixed destral and mixed shistral students. Indian Education Review, 2: 32-37. SHUKLA, A. AND CHAUHAN, M., 1987, Personality characteristics and motives of young women pursuing traditional and non-traditional career courses. Psychological Studies, 32(2): 71-76. SHUKLA, N.B., SHARMA, S.S., PANDEY, S., BHUSHAN, S., 1994, Personality characteristics of Indian sports women of individual and team sports. Indian Psychological Review, 42(9-10): 10-14.
SINGH, A.K., 1987, Test Measurements and Research Methods in Behavioural Sciences. Tabe McGraw Hill Publishing Company Ltd., London. SINGH AND ASHA, 1984, Neuroticism, anxiety and academic achievement. Indian Psychological Review, 26(3): 15-19. SINGH, BEAR AND KUMAL, 1950, A study of relationship between anxiety and achievement. Journal of Psychological Studies, 36: 350-355. SINGH, M.P. GILL, S. AND CHARMA, H., 1989, Emotional maturity and rural and urban adolescent in Ludhiana district. Indian Psychological Review, 34(5,6,7): 23-29. SINGH, S., 1990, Affiliation motive as related to personality ergs and sentiments. Psychological Studies, 35(3): 151-156. SINGH, S., 1996, A study of some personality characteristics of school adolescents in relation to their mothers employment. Indian Psychological Review, 46(9-10): 173-176. SINGHAL, S., 1983, Environmental variants and intellectual performance of young children. Asian Journal of Psychology, 22(19): 73-80. SINHA, D. AND VERMA, M., 1972, Knowledge of moral values in children. Psychological Studies, 17(1&2): 1-6. SINHA, N.C.P., 1973, Extraversion and neuroticism in relation to academic achievement. Indian Journal of Psychology, 48(1): 28-32. SONTAKEY, V.V., 1988, Personality factors of high achievers and low achievers in biological sciences. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 25(1): 12-23. SRIDEVI, K. AND RAO, P.V.K., 1998, Temporal effects of meditation and personality. Psychological Studies, 43(3): 95-105. SRIVASTAVA, P., 1989, Decision-making and personality traits. Indian Psychological Review, 34(11&12): 17-29. SRIVASTAVA, S.N., SINGH AND THAKUR, 1980, Examination anxiety and academic achievement as a function of socio-economic status. Psychological Studies, 25(2): 108-112. STIPEK, D. AND GRALINKIS, J.H., 1996, Childrens beliefs about intelligence and school performance. Indian Journal of Psychology, 88(3): 397-407. SUD, A. AND PRABHA, C., 2003, Academic performance in relation to perfectionism, test procrastination and test anxiety of high school children. Physiological Studies, 48(3): 76-81. SUDHA, V., 1981, Intelligence and science aptitude as predictors of achievement in natural science. M.Ed. Dissertation, University of Calicut.
SUDHIR, M.A., 1989, A study of achievement motivation in relation to select personality and socio-educational factors. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 25(4): 198-208. SUJATHA, B., 1987, The relative efficiency of science aptitude, science interest and attitude towards science in predicting Biology achievement of secondary school pupils. Master of Education Thesis, University of Calicut. SUNANDARAJ, S.H., KRISHNAN, R., 1980, Intelligence socio-economic status and family size as correlated achievement. Journal of the Institute of Educational Research, 4(3): 1-5. SUNDARAGAN, S., 1989, Extroversion-introversion and academic achievement. Experiment in Education, 17: 131-133. SWANSON, H.L., 1990, Influence of metacognitive knowledge and aptitude solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 52(2): 306-314. on problem
THAMPY, M.P., 1986, A study of the interaction of science aptitude and attitude towards science on Biology achievement of secondary school pupil. Master of Education Thesis, University of Calicut. THOMPSON, J.W., Jr, 1950, An evaluation of the General aptitude test battery as an aid in selecting architectural students. Unpublished Masters Thesis, University of Florida. TIWARI, S. AND POORANCHAND, L.J., 1995, A study of adjustment amgo high and low achieving adolescents. Indian Psychological Review, 144(1-2): 37-40. UPAMANYU, V.V., SUSHMA AND VASUDEV, P.N., 1980, Factor analytical study of measures of anxiety, neuroticism. Psychotism intelligence and academic achievement. Indian Psychological Review, 25(2): 90-97. VASHISHTHA, K.K., 1991, A comparative study of the adjustment of high and low achieving Indian pupils at higher secondary level. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 27(3): 181-191. VERMA, B.P., 1990, A study of the relationship of cognitive style with anxiety and academic achievement. The Journal of Education and Psychology, 48(3-4): 156-161. VERMA, B.P., 1991, An investigation into the risk taking and behaviour of male and female adolescents. Indian Psychological Review, 36(3-4): 1-4. VIJAYALAXMI, O. AND NATESAN, H., 1992, Factors influencing academic achievement. Research Highlights, 2: 62. WRAY, S.R. AND ALEXAKOS, C.E., 1969, Overlap between achievement and aptitude scores. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 2(3): 157-167.
APPENDIX I
Secondary order personality factors
APPENDIX II
SCHEDULE
General information 1. Name of the respondent 2. Class : : Section : Batch Age : : :
Ordinal position :
5. Native place/ Locality : 6. Type of family 7. Family composition Sl. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8. Other sources of income : : Year of pass Rural Urban Name Relation with respondent Age Sex Education Occupation Income/m onth : Nuclear / Joint
9. Details about education of the respondent Sl. No. 1. 2. a. b. c. d. 3. e. f. g. 4. h. i. j. 5. 6. Standard Nursery school Primary school 1st 2nd rd 3 4th Middle school th 5 6th 7th High school 8th 9th th 10 PUC I PUC II B.Sc. III
Class obtained
10. Why did you select this course Out of interest Out of compulsion Better score Better job opportunities Less expenditure Good course Any other 11. What do you want to take up for postgraduate programme
INFLUENCE OF APTITUDE AND PERSONALITY PROFILE ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS OF UAS, DHARWAD
SUJATA K. 2005
ABSTRACT
UAS Dharwad students Aptitude and personality factors and its relation on academic performance revealed that, the personality factor viz., outgoing, bright, self controlled and independence significantly influence academic achievement of students. Verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning and space relations significantly influenced academic achievement of students. Most of the personality factors had a significant influence on aptitude of the students. Majority of students were in the lower range of all seven areas of aptitude. Home Science students were significantly higher in verbal reasoning and mechanical reasoning, while girl students of agriculture were significantly higher in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy and language. Majority of students were in moderate range of all 16 personality factors Home science students were more socially aware than the rest of the students. Agriculture boys were significantly higher in the factors viz., aggression, moralistic, imagination self sufficient and intelligence. Marketing students were significantly more outgoing enthusiastic, suspicious, insecure and self controlled than the other two groups. Majority of students were in fair category of academic achievement. Girls and boys of agriculture were better in academic achievement compared to the other two faculties. Young students were more enthusiastic tender minded and better in numerical ability than older students, while older students were better in clerical speed and accuracy. Later borns were more mature than first borns. Students from small than large families were more bright and moralistic. Students of nuclear than joint families were more mature and significantly better in space relation. The aptitude scale developed by Bennett et al. (1993), 16 personality factors questionnaire developed by Cattell (1982), socio-economic inventory developed by AICRP(CD) (2002) were used. The marks secured in the previous semester represented the academic achievement of the students. Studentt test, chi-square test, factor analysis, Karl pearsons correlation coefficient analysis were used to analyse the data.