CHAPTER III

DATA ANALYSIS & INTREPRETATIONS

This chapter presents the analysis and interpretations of the data collected in
relation to the grading system that has been introduced in Kerala to assess the
performance of Xth standard students. The Researcher has attempted to find out the
different aspects of the grading system from the perception of the teachers who have
evaluated children under both the schemes.

For a better understanding the chapter has been subdivided into 5 subsections:
Section 1 Profile of the respondents
Section 2 describes the grading and ranking system
Section 3 analyses the attainment of the objectives of grading system
Section 4 highlights teachers’ preference and
Section 5 spells out the advantages of the grading system.

2.1 Profile of the respondents.

The profile of the respondents has a vital relation to the views expressed
regarding the ranking and grading system. Subsequently, the study analyzed the
profile of the respondents by using the variables such as age, sex and qualification.

Age of the respondents

Age has a direct link to the responses of the respondents. The elder/senior
teachers in the schools will be able to give a more authentic picture regarding the
grading/ranking system. The age wise distribution of the respondents under study
showed that majority (50%) of them belonged to the age category of 41-50 years. The
rest were distributed among the age categories of 31-40, 20-30, and 41-50 years with
28.3%, 13.3% and 8.3% respectively ( Refer to table no.3.1& Figure No.1)

The mean age of the teachers under study was 40 years respectively. The
mean ages show that all the teachers had several years of teaching experience and
were able to note the changes in the approach of the students to exams and learning
under both the systems of evaluation. ( Refer Table no.3.2)

106
 Table No. 3.1
Age wise distribution of the respondents
Age in years Frequency Percent
20-30 8 13.3
31-40 17 28.3
41-50 30 50.0
Above 50 5 8.3
Total 60 100.0

Figure No. 3. 1
Age wise distribution of the respondents

Above 50 20-30
8% 13%

31-40
28%

41-50 20-30
51% 31-40
41-50
Above 50

Table No. 3.2

M e an Age of the Respondents unde r study

N
Valid Missing Mean
AGE 60 0 40.7000

107
Sex wise distribution of the respondents
The sex wise distribution of the respondents portrayed that 66.7% of the
teachers of them fell in the female category followed by male with 33.3 %. It
indicated that in most of the schools under study the female teachers outnumbered
males. The fact that the male teachers evaded the participation in the survey might be
also a reason for this low percentage of males. (Refer Table No. 3.3 & Figure No. 3.2)
Table No. 3. 3
Sex wise distribution of the respondents

Sl. No Sex Frequency Percent

1 Male 20 33.3
2 Female 40 66.7
Total 60 100.0

Figure No. 3. 2
Sex wise distribution of the respondents

F em
al e
40

Male
20

0 10 20 30 40 50

The age sex co-relation showed that in all the age categories females out
numbered males. 70% of female teachers under study were in the age group of 41-50
years. As against this only 30% of the males were in this category. Similarly, in the
20-30-age category, the female teachers were 62.5% to 37.5% of the males. In the 31-

108
40 & above 50 age categories too the females were comparatively higher than male
teachers. Probably the higher representation of the female teachers in the survey due
to lack of the number of male teachers or due to the indifference of the male teachers
to participate in the survey that has resulted in this variation in the percentages.
(Refer Table No. 3.4& Figure no3.3)
Table No. 3. 4
Age Vs Sex of the respondents

Sex of the respondents

Age of the Respondents Total
Male Female
3 5 8
20-30
37.5% 62.5% 100.0%
8 9 17
31-40
47.1% 52.9% 100.0%
9 21 30
41-50
30.0% 70.0% 100.0%
5 5
Above 50
100.0% 100.0%
Total 20 40 60

33.3% 66.7% 100.0%

109
 Table No. 3. 3
Age Vs Sex of the respondents

25 Male
Female
20
sex of the respondents

15

10

0
20-30 31-40 41-50 Above 50
Age of the respondents

Educational Qualification of the Respondents

The qualification of the teachers showed that irrespective of school or sex
differentiation all of them were with the required qualification. 70% were with
graduation and B. Ed qualification. Off this 55% were with BSc Bed and 15% with
BA Bed. Only 26.6% of the teachers were with post graduation. Among this 18.3%
were with MA Bed and 8.3% with MSc Bed. The rest, 3.3% were Vidwan
qualification. All the teachers thus were with the prescribed qualification. (Refer
Table No. 3.5 & Figure No. 3.4)
Table No. 3. 5
Educational Qualification of the respondents

Sl.No. Qualification Frequency Percent

1 MA BEd 11 18.3
2 BSc BEd 33 55.0
3 BA BEd 9 15.0
4 MSc BEd 5 8.3
5 Vidwan 2 3.3
Total 60 100.0

110
 Figure No. 3. 3
Educational Qualification of the respondents
35
33

30

25

20

15

11
10
9

5 5

2
0
MA BEd BSc BEd BA BEd MSc BEd Vidw an

Section 2 Grading and Ranking System

This sub section of the study attempts to give various facets of the grading and
ranking system introduced.

Grading System
Grading system introduced is a new approach to learning and its evaluation.
Social changes in Kerala their nature the speed with which they happen are reflected
in our educational system. Keeping in line with the drastic changes taking place there
is a need to alter the approach and methods of education. Grading system is an
aftermath of that which looks into the learner centered approach.

This approach differentiating from the earlier approaches focus on the pupils’
nature of the learning process, favourable learning atmosphere, the role of the teacher
in the teaching-learning process and to the process of evaluation.

It also develops new concepts regarding learning. Learning is explained as the

process of construction of knowledge.
 A learner produces knowledge by constantly applying his own thinking
abilities

111
  By analyzing the life experiences and by interacting with others
 By volunteering for experiments and by analyzing failures
 Along with learning evaluation also takes place in the child

Error and method is followed in the learning process. In each of the situation
the children/pupils are made to use their thinking abilities specific to human nature.
The application of these capabilities leads the child to learning abilities such as:
 Ability to identify the similarities and dissimilarities.
 Ability to establish relationship between cause and effect in a particular
problem/situation
 Ability to formulate concepts based on the relationships already established.
 Ability to classify different items on the basis of concepts gained.
 Ability to logically analyze experiences/contexts and form conclusions
 Ability to apply the acquired knowledge in new situations
 Ability to classify store and retrieve information contexts etc. in memory
and to recall and compare them with new ones.
 Ability to visualize them and to experience them in different ways in terms
of sounds, pictures etc.
Thus Grading system visualizes a curriculum which at a comprehensive
development of the learner demands.

Evaluation under grading

Grading system has also a comprehensive evaluation mechanism. It adopts
continuous and comprehensive evaluation strategies using a variety of measures. The
major tools used to evaluate the multi dimensional competencies of the learners under
grading are:
 Projects
 Seminars
 Practical
 Assignments
 Collection
 Records

112
  Class tests
Project
A project is an investigative problems, which arise while the learner passes through
various learning experiences.
Major steps of the project are:
 Selection of topic and formulation of hypothesis
 Planning the project
 Data collection
 Analysis of data and formulation of conclusions
 Preparation of the report
 Presentation
 Review
Continuous evaluation is carried out by the teacher at each of the project. The
indicators for evaluating the projects include:
 Planning skills
 Ability to collect data
 Ability to analyze and arrive at conclusions
 Excellence of the project report and
 Awareness of the contents and methodology

Seminars
Seminars and practical are provided to the children/pupils to develop his skill
for planning and organizing the programmes.
The indicators for the seminar/practical are:
 Ability to plan and organize
 Ability for data collection
 Awareness of the contents (presentation of papers, participation in discussion
etc.)
 Ability to prepare papers (evaluation of observation/clarity, arrangement of
ideas
 Excellence in presentation

113
Practicals
 Systematic procedure (understanding about scientific principles. Order of
working etc.)
 Skill to handle tools
 Accuracy/precision in the activities (controlling variables, Measurement,
recording, display)
 Analysis of data
 Excellence of the record

Assignments
The assignments are learning activities undertaken as a continuation of
classroom activities t realize the curriculum objectives. They help the learner to
higher level of learning from the present one. Assignments are usually given for the
construction of models, writing, drawing on the projects given.

The assignments are evaluated on the following indicators

 Awareness of the content
 Comprehensiveness of the content
 Excellence in creatively, language
 One’s own observations, evaluations etc.
 Time bound completion

Collections/Records
Class tests
Class tests are meant for identifying and solving learning problems. More than
written test what is advisable in the grading system is performance tests.

Recording Evaluation Results

Along with the completion of each stage of the projects, seminars, etc. their
evaluation and recording also have been completed simultaneously. Using the
indicators already given recording on the prescribed formats is done. The results of
continuous evaluation are shared in the classroom. The teacher for each subject
should show the pupil the record.

114
Section 3 Grading system – Attainment of its objectives
Grading system envisages a holistic development of the students in terms of
developing their power to think creatively and to make every effort to face the
challenges confronted by them and to solve each of them in matured manner. In the
grading system he/she is the center and not the teacher/school. It also envisions a
favourable learning atmosphere where he/she learns by doing rather than by sitting
and listening passively.

To attain the objectives of the evaluation under grading the elementary or the
preliminary act to be taken is giving due training or awareness regarding the system
highlighting its objects. The inquiry in this regard showed that excluding 3.3% of the
teachers all the others i.e., 96.7% had received training for evaluating children under
the grading system. There is an urgent need to impart this training to all the teachers
in order to bring forth the maximum output from the evaluation under the system.
(Refer Table No. 3.6 &Figure No. 3.4)
Table No. 3. 6
Whether Training has Been Received

Training Received
Sex Total
Yes No

20 20
Male 100.0% 100.0%
34.5% 33.3%
38 2 40
Female 95.0% 5.0% 100.0%
65.5% 100.0% 66.7%
58 2 60

Total 96.7% 3.3% 100.0%

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Figure No. 3. 4
Whether Training has Been Received

115
 Yes
3%
No

97%

Regarding the duration and venue of the training it was found that half of the
teachers (50%) had received a training of 5 days. Among the rest, 43% had received a
training of less than 5 days and 6.6% above 5 Days. Of the 43%, 18.3% and 13.3% of
the teachers had received 2 &3 days training each. Maximum days of training
received was 10 days by 3.3% of the teachers. The venue for the training in all the
cases was there own school campus. (Refer Table No. 3.7)

Table No. 3.7

Duration of Training

Sl.No Days of Training Frequency Percent

1 1.00 3 5.0
2 2.00 11 18.3
3 3.00 8 13.3
4 4.00 4 6.7
5 5.00 30 50.0
6 7.00 2 3.3
7 10.00 2 3.3
Total 60 100.0

116
 No teacher will be able to respond to the queries regarding both the systems
unless and until he/she has gone for evaluation under both the systems. Hence, a
probe was undertaken to see whether the teachers under study had gone for the
evaluation under the ranking and grading system. The results showed that cent
percent of the teachers under study had gone evaluation under both the systems. This
showed that they are the right persons to give a clear view regarding the prospects as
well as the problems of both the systems and also to give suggestions for further
improvement of the system.

Further probe regarding the difference between the evaluation under grading
and ranking systems 31.7% of the teachers were of the view that there is no difference
between the two. While the rest, .e., 68.3% stated that a difference could be viewed in
the evaluation of students under both t he systems. Among those who mentioned the
absence of difference the females out numbers males. While 84.2% of the females
stated the absence only 15.8% agreed to this. It is seen from this that there is a
marked variation in the perception of males and females regarding the evaluation
itself. (Refer Table No. 3.8& Figure No.3.5 )
Table No. 3.8
Whether Any Difference between Grading & Ranking

Difference between
Sl. No Sex of the Respondents Grading & Ranking Total
Yes No
17 3 20

1 Male 85.0% 15.0% 100.0%

41.5% 15.8% 33.3%
24 16 40

2 Female 60.0% 40.0% 100.0%

58.5% 84.2% 66.7%
41 19 60
Total 68.3% 31.7% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

117
 Figure No. 3.5
Whether Any Difference between Grading & Ranking

Male
24
25 Female

20
17 16

15

10

5 3

0
Yes No

Moreover, the study also inquired to the teachers about the perception of
children on the grading system. As per the opinion of teachers most of the children
preferred grading system to ranking due one or the other reasons cited below.

Majority of the teachers i.e. 50% stated that the children favoured the grading
system as it provided them with ample opportunity for the free expression of their
ideas through group activity & that it encourages active participation. 30% mentioned
that it reduced the tension level and were able to approach the examinations with
more confidence. 10% said that the grading system is more of child/pupil centered
and hence often doubles the thinking power of the pupil. For the remaining 10% it
was the destroyal of inferiority & superiority complexes that prompted for opting for
the grading system.
Table No 3.9
Perception of the children regarding grading system

Sl.No Opinion Frequency Percent

Grading gives opportunity for free 30 50
1 expression of ideas
2 Reduces the tension level of children 18 30
3 Child centred & increases the thinking 6 10

118
 power
4 Destroys inferiority & superiority 6 10
complexes
Total 60 100

Although all the teachers expressed the positive side of the grading system,
they were not totally against the ranking system. Several of them stated that ranking
system is also equivalent to grading in evaluating the children because it motivates
them to achieve higher marks and that it is a competitive learning. However, all had
the impression that ranking system promotes mechanic way of recalling.
Undoubtedly, all these responses point out that grading system is the most suitable
method for evaluating children.
Grading system is more scientific
With regard to the query whether grading is more scientific or not than
ranking the data revealed that three fourth of the teachers were favourable stating that
grading is more scientific when compared to ranking. 25% however were on the
negative. The sex wise distribution showed that comparatively the males were
favourable than females. While 80% of the males had agreed to the statement that
grading is more scientific, the corresponding figures for the females were only 72.5%.
Table No. 3.10
Whether Grading is more Scientific

Sex of the Whether Grading is more Scientific

Total
respondents Yes No
16 4 20
Male 80.0% 20.0% 100.0%
35.6% 26.7% 33.3%
29 11 40
Female 72.5% 27.5% 100.0%
64.4% 73.3% 66.7%
45 15 60
Total 75.0% 25.0% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

119
 Figure No. 3.6
Whether Grading is more Scientific

29

30 Male
Female
25

20
16

15
11

10

0
Yes No

Concerning the reasons for their agreement to the statement the teachers
highlighted the following for their favouring grading system: they were a) it avoids
unhealthy competitions b) it avoids biased discussions c) students get more chance
for expressing their abilities d) it is more innovative e) it is much more apt for the
accurate assessment f) pupils get a clear idea regarding the various concepts g) gives
room for wider thinking h) it helps much more for the overall development and i) it
doubles the abilities of children. (Refer Table No. 3.11 & Figure No. 3.7)

Table No. 3.11

Reasons Cited for Grading System

Sl.No Reasons for the above statement Frequency Percentage

1 Avoids unhealthy competitions 5 8.3
2 Avoids Biased Discussions 3 5
3 Students get more chance for 15 25
expressing their abilities
4 More innovative 8 13.3
5 Apt for the accurate assessment 6 10
6 Pupils get a clear idea regarding the 4 6.6
various concepts
7 Gives room for wider thinking 5 8.3

120
8 Helps for the overall development 6 10
9 Doubles the abilities of children. 8 13.3
Total 60 100

121
 Figure No. 3.7
Reasons Cited for Grading System

Healthy competitions
8%
13% Unbiased Discussions
Ample opportunities
5%
Innovative
Accurate assessment
10% Clear idea on concepts
Develops w ider thinking
Promotes overall development
Doubles the abilities

8%
26%

7%

10% 13%

Advantages in evaluating under Grading

Regarding the evaluation under grading and ranking systems the teachers
opined that grading system has more advantages than ranking. The data from the
teachers portrayed that 75% of the teachers under study had agreed saying that
grading system has more advantages when compared to ranking. Only 13.3%
percentage were doubtful regarding the advantages. (Refer Table No. 3.12 & Figure
No. 3.8)

Table No. 3.12

Whether Grading has advantage over Ranking
Whether Grading has
Sex of the respondents advantage over Ranking Total
Yes No
15 5 20
Male 75.0% 25.0% 100.0%
28.8% 62.5% 33.3%

122
 37 3 40
Female 92.5% 7.5% 100.0%
71.2% 37.5% 66.7%
52 8 60
Total 86.7% 13.3% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Figure No. 3.8

Whether Grading has advantage over Ranking

Female
Whether grading has advantage over ranking

Male

No

Yes

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Attainment of objectives
Although the time is not fully ripe to state on the attainment of the objectives
of the grading system, the study ventured to see what the teachers perceive regarding
the attainment of the goals set while introducing the system. The figures in this regard
highlighted that only 33.2% of the teachers mentioned that grading system has
attained it objectives. The majority i.e., 63.3% stated that the system is yet to travel a
long distance to attain the set objectives. Negation in this regard does not mean that
grading system has fully failed in its attainment but rather it only refers that the
attainment of the objectives was only to a certain extent and not to the fullest

123
measure. It is therefore warranted that serious efforts need to be taken to direct the
flow of system in the right direction facilitating its attainment in cent percent. A great
deal is still to be accomplished. (Refer Table No. 3.13 & Figure No. 3.9)

Table No. 3.13

Whether Grading has achieved its objectives

Grading has achieved its objectives

Sex of the respondents Total
Yes No
5 15 20
Male 25.0% 75.0% 100.0%
22.7% 39.5% 33.3%
17 23 40
Female 42.5% 57.5% 100.0%
77.3% 60.5% 66.7%
22 38 60
Total 36.7% 63.3% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Figure No. 3.9

Whether Grading has achieved its objectives

Female
Male
23

No 15

17

Yes 5

0 5 10 15 20 25

124
 Concerning the reasons for lagging in the attainment of the objectives the
teachers opined lack of awareness on the grading system as the major reason. In-
depth and training need to be imparted to all the teachers on the various aspects of the
grading system. Only then they will be able to carry out the evaluation in an effective
manner. The training they received was insufficient in many cases as it was merely
for the sake of it. Common training programmes preferably in certain other location
rather than in their own schools will provide better result from the training. (Refer
Table No. 3.14 & Figure No. 3.10)

The other reasons cited included: High teacher student ratio and magnitude of
the syllabus. Probably, better training and reduction of the number of students in each
class could bring forth better output that is enshrined in the grading system when it
was introduced.
Table No. 3.14
Reasons for the lag in the attainment of the objectives
Sl.No Reasons Frequency Percentage
1 Lack of awareness 45 75
2 High teacher student ratio 10 16.6
3 Magnitude of the syllabus 5 8.3
Total 100

Figure No. 3.10

Reasons for the lag in the attainment of the objectives
Lack of aw areness

High teacher student ratio

8%
Magnitude of the syllabus
17%

75%

125
Rating of Grading
The figures of table no.3.15 depicts that 80% of male teachers and 35% of the
female teachers opined that grading is superior to ranking. 20% and 40% of males
and females expressed the grading as equivalent to ranking. Inferior to ranking was
mentioned by only 25% of the females. The overall figures thus portray the
perception of teachers that grading is comparatively superior or better than ranking.
( Refer table no. 3.15& Figure no. 3.11)

Table No. 3.15

Evaluation under Grading

Evaluation under Grading

Sex of the
Total
respondents Superior to Equivalent to Inferior to
ranking ranking ranking

16 4 0 20

Male 80.0% 20.0% 0.0% 100.0%

30.2% 57.1% 0.0% 33.3%

14 16 10 40

Female 35.0% 40.0% 25.0% 100.0%

58.3% 64.0% 90.9% 66.7%

24 25 11 60

Total 40.0% 41.7% 18.3% 100.0%

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Figure No. 3.11

Evaluation under Grading

126
 40 Male
37 Female
35

30

25

20
16
15

10

5 4
2
0 1
0
Superior to ranking Equivalent to ranking Inferior to Ranking

The Co-relation between the rating of evaluation under grading and the
perception of the scientific nature of grading the figures show that among those who
stated that grading is more scientific 82.2% had rated grading as superior to ranking.
Of the rest, 15.6% and 2.2% each had ranked as equivalent to ranking and inferior to
ranking respectively. Off those who negated 80% had stated that grading is superior
in evaluating the students when compared to ranking. 13.3% and 6.7% each
mentioned that it is equivalent to ranking or that it is inferior to ranking respectively.
(Refer Table No. 3.16)

The chi-square scores and the co-relation results between the two variables
indicated that the scientific nature of the grading system might have contributed in
rating the evaluation under grading as superior to ranking. The results show that the
scores are significant at .05 level. The results also is verifying and testing the first
hypothesis which states that there is significant improvement in assessing through
grading system.

Table No. 3.16

Cross tabulation Between Whether Grading is more scientific

127
 & Evaluation under Grading

Evaluation under Grading

Whether Grading
Superior to Equivalent to Inferior to Total
is more Scientific
ranking ranking ranking
37 7 1 45
Yes 82.2% 15.6% 2.2% 100.0%
75.5% 77.8% 50.0% 75.0%
12 2 1 15
No 80.0% 13.3% 6.7% 100.0%
24.5% 22.2% 50.0% 25.0%
49 9 2 60
Total 81.7% 15.0% 3.3% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Evaluation under Grading

A rating was also carried out to see how far the teachers accept the grading
system for evaluating the children. The questions were purely on the various elements
of grading and ranking system. The questions were rated on a 5 five point scale.

Rating of the teachers on the grading system indicated that grading system is
superior to ranking in evaluating children (students). The mean scores secured by the
questions related to the grading system clearly point to the positive bend of teachers
to the grading system. The high mean scores of the first 7 questions excluding the
second one indicated the holistic nature of the assessment of children under the
grading system.. The mean scored secured by the questions related to ranking is
comparatively low.
Table No. 3.17
Evaluation under Grading

Sex
Male Female Total

128
Grading system has brought down the tension level 3.8500 3.8500 3.8500
of children 20 40 60
3.1500 3.2750 3.2333
Grading is more biased than Ranking
20 40 60

Project preparation contributes greatly to student 3.3500 3.9000 3.7167

learning 20 40 60

Seminars/practicals develop the organizational and 3.6500 4.0000 3.8833

leadership qualities of the student 20 40 60

Project preparation inculcates the ability to the 3.1000 3.6500 3.4667

problems themselves 20 40 60
3.4500 3.5250 3.5000
Evaluation by Grading is more holistic
20 40 60
3.5000 3.6250 3.5833
Grading is superior to ranking
20 40 60

Ranking system was scientific/systematic in 2.7500 3.4750 3.2333

evaluating 20 40 60
3.3000 3.3750 3.3500
Ranking system was prejudiced
20 40 60

Assignments burden the students & spares no time 3.1000 3.1750 3.1500
for learning 20 40 60
2.8000 3.0000 2.9333
Collection/records hinders the flow of learning
20 40 60

Project preparation/practicals limit the time for 3.4000 3.5500 3.5000

classes 20 40 60
2.7000 3.0250 2.9167
Project preparation is a burden for the students
20 40 60
3.3000 3.3750 3.3500
Ranking system depends purely on by hearting
20 40 60

129
 2.7000 2.8000 2.7667
Grading & ranking are equivalent
20 40 60

The holistic nature of evaluation through grading has prompted the teachers to
prefer grading to ranking. The data in this regard revealed that of those who preferred
grading excluding 9.8% all the others had either agreed (60.8%) or moderately agreed
(29.4% ) that grading is more holistic than ranking agreed. Off those who preferred
ranking 22.2% strongly agreed to the statement that grading is more holistic than
ranking. 11.1% and 55.6% each had agreed and moderately agreed to the statement.
The chi square score is significant at .05 level. (Refer Table No. 3.18 & Figure No.
3.12)
Table No. 3.18
Cross tabulation of Evaluation by grading is more holistic than Ranking &
Preference between the two

Evaluation by grading is more holistic than

Preference Ranking
Total
between the two Strongly Moderately
Agree Disagree
Agree Agree
31 15 5 51
Grading 60.8% 29.4% 9.8% 100.0%
96.9% 75.0% 83.3% 85.0%
2 1 5 1 9
Ranking 22.2% 11.1% 55.6% 11.1% 100.0%
100.0% 3.1% 25.0% 16.7% 15.0%
2 32 20 6 60
Total 3.3% 53.3% 33.3% 10.0% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Figure No.3.12
Cross tabulation of Evaluation by grading is more holistic than Ranking &
Preference between the two

130
 35
Grading
30 Ranking
Preference between grading and ranking

25

20

15

10

0
Strongly Agree Agree Moderately Agree Disagree
Evaluation by grading is holistic than grading

Lacunae
Most of the teachers under study had no doubt on the limitations of the
grading system. 88.3% of them stated that grading system several lacunae and they
have to be rectified to make the system more efficient and effective. Only 11.7%
opined that the system is devoid of limitations.

Sex wise distribution showed that compared to the 92.5% of the females who
reported lacunae, the corresponding figures for males in this regard was only 80%. If
we look into the preceding pages too we can see that the females comparatively had a
higher apprehension regarding the grading system. ( Refer Table No. 3.19)
Table No. 3.19
Whether any lacunae in Grading

Whether any lacunae in

Grading
Sex of the Respondents Total
Yes No

16 4 20

Male 80.0% 20.0% 100.0%

30.2% 57.1% 33.3%

131
 37 3 40

Female 92.5% 7.5% 100.0%

69.8% 42.9% 66.7%

53 7 60

Total 88.3% 11.7% 100.0%

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Preference for ranking

Substitution of ranking system by grading system has taken place Three years
back. Differentiating the approach of students over the past three years while grading
system was in vogue and prior to the three years while ranking system was in force,
the teachers were very positive to the grading system. A considerable change in the
attitude and approach to exams could noticed among the students.
The analysis of the teachers’ preference to grading or ranking system, the data
showed that an overwhelming majority of the teachers i.e., 85% preferred the
application of grading system for the evaluation of students. Only 15 per cent of the
teachers opted for ranking system. ( Refer Table No. 3.20 & Figure No. 3.13))
It is also to be noted here that although the teachers were overloaded with
many an activities stipulated or prescribed by the grading system, they had opted for
this type of evaluation. No doubt, it is because of the positive facets of the system.

Table No. 3.20

Preference between the two

Preference between the two

Sex of the respondents Total
Grading Ranking
14 6 20
Male 70.0% 30.0% 100.0%
27.5% 66.7% 33.3%

132
 37 3 40
Female 92.5% 7.5% 100.0%
72.5% 33.3% 66.7%
51 9 60
Total 85.0% 15.0% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Figure No. 3.13

Preference between Grading & Ranking

40
37

35

30

25

20
Male

14
Female
15

10
6

5 3

0
Grading Ranking

Preference betw een Grading & Ranking

The Positive effect of the grading system is prime reason for their preference
for grading system. The other supportive reasons could be summarized as:

Grading systems makes learning more enjoyable through various activities

It also brings down the tension level of students and develops a healthy
competition( Refer Table No. 3.21)

Table No. 3.21

Reasons for the Preference

Sl.No Reasons Frequency Percentage

1 Positive aspects of the grading system 30 50
2 Makes learning enjoyable 5 8.3
3 Brings down the tension level 20 33.3
4 Develops healthy competition 5 8.3
Total 60 100

133
 The ability of all children are given due consideration
It increases the confidence of children
Envisages the all round development of children
And Reduces the unhealthy competition

If we look to the preceding pages we can find the students too has preferred
the grading system for one reason or other. Moreover, the ranking of grading system
by teachers indicated that more than 80% of them had rated it as superior to ranking
system. In addition, the depiction of the advantages and disadvantages show that
compared to the ranking system, the lacunae of grading system are low. All these are
re emphasizing the preference of the teachers and students for the grading system.
( Refer Table No. 3.22)

134
 Table No. 3.22
Cross tabulation between the scientific nature of grading and the preference
between the two

Preference between Grading &

Whether Grading is more Ranking Total
Scientific
Grading Ranking
39 6 45
Yes 86.7% 13.3% 100.0%
76.5% 66.7% 75.0%
12 3 15
No 80.0% 20.0% 100.0%
23.5% 33.3% 25.0%
51 9 60
Total 85.0% 15.0% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

The table below portray that off the total respondents under study 76.5% of
the teachers who preferred grading to ranking stated that it is more scientific than
ranking. Only 23.5% claimed otherwise. Probably, lack of proper understanding and
bias might have been the reasons for stating that it is not scientific. Among those who
preferred ranking too 66.7% opined that grading is more scientific. The remaining
however was not in favour of ascribing more scientific nature to Grading.
Indifference to change and low awareness on the evaluation under grading might have
contributed to this response. ( Refer Table No. 3.23)

135
 Table No. 3.23
Priorities among the different factors of Grading

Project Class
Sex Seminars Practicals Assignments Collection Records
Preparation tests
3.05000 2.60000 3.45000 3.35000 3.85000 4.45000 4.40000
Male 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
2.06410 1.39170 1.73129 1.56525 1.42441 1.43178 1.14248
2.30000 3.07500 3.77500 2.90000 4.42500 3.60000 4.42500
Female 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
1.50555 1.59144 1.27073 1.53255 1.15220 1.12774 1.17424
2.55000 2.91667 3.66667 3.05000 4.23333 3.88333 4.41667
Total 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
1.73132 1.53260 1.43405 1.54509 1.26714 1.29001 1.15409

Advantages and Disadvantages

The study also ventured into analyzing the various factors that
hinders/obstructs or promotes/encourages proper evaluation under grading and
ranking system. As the respondents of the study had the experience of evaluating
under both the systems they could clearly spell out the advantages and disadvantages
of both the systems for evaluating the students. The major advantages and
disadvantages of both has been spelt out below separately under the titles grading and
ranking.

Advantages
Grading
 It promotes only reasonable competition
 Reduces the tension level of children
 Makes learning an enjoyable business
 Envisages continuours monitoring
 Ensures active participation of all children
 Inculcates within the pupil the need to study

136
  Provides extra chances to express their views
 Increases their thinking and creative power
 Promotes group activity & sociability
 Aims at the overall development of children
 Decreases the tension level

Ranking
 Motivates them to achieve high marks
 Promotes competitive learning
 Comparatively lesser work burden for the teachers

Disadvantages
The major disadvantages are found in the system itself but in its implementation part.
The major limitations in this regard are:

Grading
 The teachers are not given due awareness regarding the grading system
 Passiveness of teachers often curtains the attainment of the objectives
 Lack of proper training to teachers in evaluating the students
 Increased number of students
 Exorbitant syllabus for the classes
 Increased teacher student ratio

Ranking
 Develops unhealthy competition
 Reduces learning into mere by hearting/recalling
 Avoids group activity/active participation
 Lacks proper and continuous monitoring of students
 Weak students are not given the due attention/care
 Doubles the tension level of children

137
 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTREPRETATION
Part -II
STATISTICAL TESTS AND THE INTREPRETATIONS

This part of the data analysis and interpretation chapter deals with the use of
statistical measures like correlation co-efficient. Relationship between the variables
and their degree of association is studied by means of correlation co-efficient.

Chi-square test
The Hypothesis is tested by means of the chi-square method and the validity
of the same is analyzed.

Correlation
Correlation is the relationship between two or more paired variables or two or
more sets of data. The degree of relationship is measured and represented by the co-
efficient of correlation. Thus correlation is an analysis of the co-variation between
two or more variables.

There are two types of correlation positive and negative. A Positive

correlation implies that a change in one variable will result in a corresponding change
in the other variable in the same direction. A negative correlation implies that a
change in the other variable in the opposite direction. There are different measures of
correlation.

1.Karl Pearson’s co-efficient of correlation

2. Spearman’s rank correlation

Of this the correlation measure, which is used in this study, is Karl Pearson co
efficient correlation.

Karl Pearson’s coefficient of correlation

According to this method the co-efficient of correlation between any two
series is computed by dividing the product of deviation from arithmetic average by
the product of two standard deviations to the number of pairs in it.

138
 Γ= Σ dx – Σdy
Σdx² - Σdy²
Where dx + deviation of item values of x series from eh arithmetic average.
Where dy + deviation of item values of y series from the arithmetic average
Where Σdx² = Sum of the squares of the deviation of x values
Where Σdy² = Sum of the squares of the deviation of y values

The Karl Pearson’s co-efficient of correlation lies between –1 and +1

Value Interpretation
0 No correlation
-1 Perfect negative correlation
+1 Perfect Positive correlation
0.7-0.9 High Correlation
0.5-0.699 Moderate degree of correlation
Less than 0.5 Low degree of correlation

Hypothesis
Hypothesis 1
The table value at .05% significant level is .372
Df= 1
Chi squre value= .392

1. There is a significant association between the scientific nature of grading and

the preference for the same.

The chi square value calculated is higher than the table value whereby rejecting
the null hypothesis and accepting the alternative

Asymp. Sig. (2- Exact Sig.

Value df
sided) (2-sided)
Chi-Square .392(b) 1 .531
Probability of chance .372 1 .542

Co-relation

Asymp.
Approx. Approx.
Value Std.
T(b) Sig.
Error(a)

139
Interval by
Pearson's R .081 .139 .618 .539(c)
Interval
Ordinal by Spearman
.081 .139 .618 .539(c)
Ordinal Correlation

Correlation value Interpretation

.539 Positive and moderate degree of
correlation

The co-efficient co-relation of Karl Pearson show that the assumption of the
teachers on the scientific nature of grading system in evaluating the students and the
preference for the same is positive and that there is a moderate degree of correlation
between the two. The correlation indicate that the scientific nature of the grading
system contributes in opting for the same by the teachers. This verifies the first
hypothesis that grading brings improvement in the assessment of the students.
2. Hypothesis 2
The talbe value at .05% significant level is 13.925
Df = 3
Chi squre value= 16.454

2. There is a relationship between the Holistic nature of the evaluation under

grading and the teachers’ preference for the grading system.

The chi square value calculated is higher than the table value whereby rejecting
the null hypothesis and accepting the alternative

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Chi-Square 16.454(a) 3 .001
Probability of chance 13.925 3 .003

Co-relation

Evaluation by grading is more Preference between

holistic than Ranking the two

140
 1.000 .032
Pearson Correlation
.032 1.000
. .805
Sig. (2-tailed)
.805 .

Correlation value Interpretation

.805 Positive and High degree of
correlation

The holistic nature of evaluation through grading has prompted the teachers to
prefer grading to ranking. The Correlation value i.e. .805 indicate positive and high
correlation between the two variables. This means that the holistic nature of
evaluating children under the grading system has contributed to the option for grading
by teachers.

3. Hypothesis 3

The talbe value at .05% significant level is 6.3

Df = 3
Chi squre value- 8.310

3. There is a relationship between the Reduction of the tension level of children and
the preference of teachers for the grading system.

The chi square value calculated is higher than the table value whereby rejcting the
null hypothesis and accepting the alternative

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Chi-Square 8.310(a) 3 .040
Probability of chance 6.311 3 .097
Co-relation

Preference between Grading has brought

Grading & Ranking down the tension level

141
 1.000 .037
Pearson Correlation
.037 1.000
. .777
Sig. (2-tailed)
.777 .

Correlation value Interpretation

.777 Positive and High degree of correlation

Teachers during the interview cited advantage of grading system in relation to

the reduction of the tension level among children in facing examination or
assessment. The co-relation value of .777 indicated that these two has a high co-
relation.

4. Hypothesis 4
The talbe value at .05% significant level is 28.024
Df = 3
Chi squre value- 31.895

4. There is significant association between the advantages of grading system and the
preference for grading system indirectly indicating the improvement in the
assessment of children.

The chi square value calculated is higher than the table value whereby rejcting
the null hypothesis and accepting the alternative

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Chi-Square 31.895(a) 15 .007
Likelihood Ratio 28.024 15 .021
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.747 1 .097

Co-relation

Overall Preference
advantages of between
grading Grading &

142
 system Ranking
Overall advantages of grading
Pearson 1.000 .087
system
Correlation
Preference between the two .087 1.000
Overall effectiveness . .510
Sig. (2-tailed)
Preference between the two .510 .

Correlation value Interpretation

.510 Positive and moderate degree of
correlation

The correlation value.510 indicates a moderate relation between the two. The
overall advantages is comparatively higher than ranking and that has resulted in
preferring for the grading system by the teachers. This also point to the improvement
that is made in assessing the children through the grading system.

The results of the hypothesis show that scientific and holistic nature of
evaluation has been the major reason for their preference for grading system. The
association between various grading related variables and the preference show
positive correlation with either moderate of high degree of relationship which only
reveals that assessment under grading is more preferred due to the advantages and
accuracy it has in assessing the children. Moreover, these positive aspects of the
system vindicate to the significant improvement in the assessment using grading than
ranking system.

143
 CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS & SUGGESTIONS

The present study titled “An analysis of the Grading and ranking system in
the evaluation of SSLC students with special reference to teachers’ perception” was
formulated with the purpose of analysing the grading and ranking system objectively
according to the perception of the teachers. Moreover, the study also made an attempt
to unearth the factors that promote/hinder both the in achieving its envisioned
objectives and suggest measures for improving the same. The findings of this study
would also help the research scholars to idn3etiy related areas of study and further
probe in this regard.

Major Objectives of the study were:

1. To profile the grading and ranking system
2. To study the demographic profile of the respondents
3. To assess the fulfillment of the objectives of the grading system
4. To find out the vulnerabilities of the system
5. To identify the advantages and disadvantages of the grading and ranking
system
6. To understand the preference of teachers among the two
7. To suggest measures for improving the implementation of the grading system

The Universe of the study comprised all the teachers in the Govt.
Aided high schools functioning with the administrative area of Thrissur
district of the State of Kerala.
As a preliminary step all the Govt. aided high schools within the area of
Thrissur were enlisted. Thereafter, from the list using a lottery method 6 schools were
selected randomly. From each selected schools 10 teachers each were selected
randomly for obtaining the relevant data pertaining to the study. Care was taken to
include only those teachers who a minimum of 5 years teaching experience and those
who have gone for evaluating the students under ranking and grading system. Thus a

144
total of 60 teachers were contacted and relevant information was collected using the
pre-tested interview schedules and informal discussions

This chapter highlights the findings as well as the suggestions of the study,
which probed into the various factors of the grading and ranking system, which was
used for evaluating the children of Xth standard.

3.1 MAJOR FINDINGS

The findings of the study has been scripted under four heads viz., Profile of
the respondents, Grading/Ranking systems & attainment of objectives, and
Advantages / disadvantages and Preference between the two

Profile of the respondents

 Majority (50%) of the teachers under study belonged to the age category of
41-50 years
 The rest were distributed among the age categories of 31-40, 20-30, and 41-
50 years with 28.3%, 13.3% and 8.3% respectively
 The mean age of the teachers under study was 40 years
 66.7% of the teachers fell in the female category followed by male with 33.3
%.
 The age sex co-relation showed that in all the age categories females out
numbered males
 70% of female teachers under study were in the age group of 41-50 years
 in the 20-30-age category, the female teachers were 62.5% to 37.5% of the
males
 70% were with graduation and B. Ed qualification
 Only 26.6% of the teachers were with post graduation
 irrespective of school or sex differentiation all of them were with the required
qualification

145
Grading system – Attainment of its objectives
 Excluding 3.3% of the teachers all the others i.e., 96.7% had received training
for evaluating children under the grading system
 duration and venue of the training
 half of the teachers (50%) had received a training of 5 days
 43% had received a training of less than 5 days and 6.6% above 5 Days
 Maximum days of training received were 10 days by 3.3% of the teachers.
 The venue for the training in all the cases was there own school campus.
 cent percent of the teachers under study had gone evaluation under both the
systems
 31.7% of the teachers were of the view that there is no difference between the
grading and ranking system
 68.3% stated that a difference could be viewed in the evaluation of students
under both t he systems
 Among those who mentioned the absence of difference the females out
numbers males
 84.2% of the females & 15.8% of males stated the absence of any difference
 As per the opinion of teachers most of the children preferred grading system
to ranking
 50% stated that the children favoured the grading system as it provided them
with ample opportunity for the free expression of their ideas through group
activity
 30% mentioned that it reduced the tension level and were able to approach the
examinations with more confidence
 10% said that the grading system is more of child/pupil centered and hence
often doubles the thinking power
 For the remaining 10% it was the destroyal of inferiority & superiority
complexes
 Several of them stated that ranking system is also equivalent to grading in
evaluating the children because it motivates them to achieve higher marks and
that it is a competitive learning

146
Grading system is more scientific
 Three fourth of the teachers were favourable stating that grading is more
scientific when compared to ranking
 25% however were on the negative
 While 80% of the males had agreed to the statement that grading is more
scientific
 , the corresponding figures for the females were only 72.5%
 the reasons for their agreement included: a) it avoids unhealthy competitions
& biased discussions c) students get more chance for expressing their abilities
e) it is much more apt for the accurate assessment f) pupils get a clear idea
regarding the various concepts g) gives room for wider thinking h) it helps
much more for the overall development and i) it doubles the abilities of
children
 75% of the teachers under study had agreed saying that grading system has
more advantages
 Only 13.3% were doubtful regarding the advantages

Attainment of objectives
 Only 33.2% of the teachers mentioned that grading system has attained it
objectives
 The majority i.e., 63.3% stated that the system is yet to travel a long distance
to attain the set objectives
 Lack of proper awareness and training on the grading system were cited as the
prominent reasons for the above
 The mean scores of the overall rating showed that the questions related to the
grading system had obtained higher scores than those related to the ranking
system.
 The least mean score was for the statement that grading and ranking are
equivalent.
 The mean scores of all the first six statements viz., grading has brought down
the tension level, Grading is more biased than Ranking, Project preparation
contributes greatly to student learning, Seminars/practicals develop the

147
 organizational and leadership qualities of the student, Project preparation
inculcates the ability to the problems themselves, Evaluation by Grading is
more holistic, and Grading is superior to ranking are higher than three or
between 3 & 4 indicating the agreement of the teachers to the statement..
 88.3% of them stated that grading system several lacunae and they have to be
rectified
 11.7% opined that the system is devoid of limitations
 the limitations are mostly at the implementation stage.
 92.5% of the females & 80% of males reported lacunae in the system

Preference Between the two

 85% preferred the application of grading system for the evaluation of students
 Only 15 per cent of the teachers opted for ranking system
 prime reason for their preference for grading system is the positive effect of
the grading system
 Other factors
 It brings down the tension level of students and develops a healthy
competition
 The ability of all children are given due consideration
 It increases the confidence of children
 Envisages the all round development of children
 And Reduces the unhealthy competition

Advantages and Disadvantages

Advantages
Grading
 It promotes only reasonable competition
 Reduces the tension level of children & Makes learning an enjoyable business
 Envisages continuous monitoring & active participation of all children
 Provides extra chances to express their views
 Increases their thinking and creative power
 Promotes group activity & sociability

148
  Aims at the overall development of children

Ranking
 Motivates them to achieve high marks
 Promotes competitive learning
 Comparatively lesser work burden for the teachers

Disadvantages
Grading
 The teachers are not given due awareness regarding the grading system
 Passiveness of teachers often curtails the attainment of the objectives
 Lack of proper training to teachers in evaluating the students
 Increased number of students & Exorbitant syllabus for the classes
 Increased teacher student ratio

Ranking
 Develops unhealthy competition
 Reduces learning into mere by hearting/recalling
 Avoids group activity/active participation
 Lacks proper and continuous monitoring of students
 Weak students are not given the due attention/care
 Doubles the tension level of children

SUGGESTIONS

The suggestions to make the grading system more systematic and thereby
fulfill the objectives the teachers highlighted the following suggestions:
 Reduce the teacher student ratio into 1: 25
 Decrease the syllabus for the classes
 Give proper in-depth and detailed training to the teachers
 Sensitize the students and parents on the grading system
 Improve the school facilities

149
  Continued evaluation should be valued uniformly by nominated group of
teachers by examination board.

Conclusion:
The study which delved into the perception of the teachers on various aspects
of the grading system and ranking system unearthed the preference of teachers for
grading system than ranking system, The holistic development of the students,
accurate assessment, reducing the tension level of children, promoting healthy
competition and overall development of the students were the major reasons for the
preference. According to them the project preparation, seminars, practical, class tests,
assignment, collection, and records consumes a great deal of the time of children by
way of preparation and of teachers by way of correction. However, they were
unanimous in speaking out the positive part of these in the overall development of the
students. Assessment of students through grading hence is considered to be much
more effective and efficient than ranking by most of the teachers. Nevertheless,
certain lacunae exist in the implementation process especially due to the lack of
proper training to the teachers. Hence timely direction and training could bring
maximum or cent percent accuracy in the evaluation of students under the grading
system.

Limitations of the study

The study was mainly intended to get a perception of the teachers on the
grading and ranking system. The real assessment of the system required to be done
with the overall performance level of the children. Non incorporation of the children’s
performance was a major limitation of the study. The sample size of the study too was
small. Many of the teachers were unaware of the various facets of the grading system
and hence the answers at times looked very vague and unclear. Lack of time was yet
another constraint of the study.

150