Robbins, students -a survey. Paripex – Indian

 

 

Robbins, S. P., (2005). Organizational Behaviour (11th Ed.). New Delhi: Prentice
Hall of India.

Subhashini, T., and Kalaimathi, H. D., (2013).
Relationship between altruism and personality type among higher secondary
school students -a survey. Paripex – Indian Journal of Research, 2(7), 55-56.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

 

Santrock, J.W.(2006). Educational Psychology (2nd Ed.). New Delhi: Tata
McGraw-Hill.

Mangal.S.K., (2012). Advanced Educational Psychology
(2nd Ed.). PHI Learning Private Limited, New Delhi.

Lawrence, Arul. A. S., and Deepa, T., (2013).
Emotional intelligence and academic achievement of high school students in Kanyakumari
district. International Journal
of
Physical and Social Sciences, 3(2),
101-107.

DR.
A. S. Arul Lawrence and A. John Lawrence “Personality Type and Academic    Achievement 
of Secondary school Students ” Indian e-journal on teacher education
, Vol 2, Issue 3, July 2014. Dutt, S.
(2007). Educational Psychology. Kolkata: New Central Book Agency.

Dandapani, S., (2006). Advanced Educational Psychology.
New Delhi: Anmol Publications.

Colman, M. A., (2009). Dictionary
of Psychology. New York: Oxford
University Press.

Chowdhury, M., (2006). Students’ personality traits
and academic performance: a five factor model perspective. College
Quarterly, 9(3). Retrieved
from http://www.collegequarterly.ca/2006-vol09-num03-summer/chowdhury.html

Crow, R. S. (2004). Academic
Achievement. In Dandapani (Ed.)- A Text Book of Advanced Educational Psychology (2nd Edition), New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers pp. 434.

Best J.W. and Kahn, J.V., (2001). Research in Education (7th
Ed.). New Delhi:Prentice Hall of India.

Baron, R. A., (2006). Psychology. New
Delhi: Prentice Hall of India.

References:

7.     
Urban secondary school
students were found to have better academic achievement than rural secondary
school students.

6.      It
was found that urban secondary school students have well balance on personality
style than rural urban secondary school students.

5.      It
was also found that 19.3% rural and 20% 
urban secondary school students have high level of academic achievement
and 13.5% rural and 6% urban secondary school students were found to have low
level of academic achievement.

4.      It
was found that most of secondary school students have average academic
achievement. A high level of percentage i.e.71.5% urban and 70% rural were
found to have average academic achievement.

3.      It
was also found that only 11% rural and 12 % urban secondary school students
have extrovert personality which means that very less percentage of young
adolescent are more social, expressive and are more flexible to adapt in any
environment.

2.      It was also found that only 31% rural students and 28.5% urban secondary school students
having introvert personality which means great number of young adolescent are
highly reserved, quiet and shy. They show least participation in social
activities,

1.      It was found that most of the secondary school
students have ambivert personality type. A high
level of percentage i.e. 59.5% in urban and 57.5% in rural Secondary school
students were found to have ambivert personality which means that majority of
secondary school students have very well balanced personality. Neither they
were too introvert nor extrovert.

The following
findings have been concluded from the study:

MAJOR FINDINGS:

Secondary
Students differ significantly on Academic Achievement.” stands
accepted.

In the light of
the above evidences, the hypothesis which reads as, “Rural and Urban
higher

A quick look at
the above table shows the mean comparison between rural and urban secondary
school students on Academic Achievement.
The above table reveals there is significant difference between rural
and urban secondary school students on academic achievement and the difference
was found to be significant at 0.01 level. The observed difference
favours the urban higher secondary school students
which confirm that urban higher secondary school students have better academic achievement than the
rural higher secondary school
students.

 

   Group

         N
      (400)

     Mean

       S.D

  t-value

Level of
Significance

   Rural

    
      200

   
    56.01

  
     8.03

 
 
    6.1

 
significant at 0.01 level

   Urban

     
      200

   
    62.02

   
     11.53

           

Table 1.5:
Showing the mean comparison between rural and urban secondary school students
on Academic achievement (N=300).

 

The above table
reveals that out of 200 Rural secondary students 13.5% have low academic
achievement, 70% have average academic achievement and 16.5% have high academic
achievement. The table also reveals that out of 200 urban secondary school
students 6% have low academic achievement, 71% have average academic
achievement and 22.5% have high academic achievement.

 

Levels

    Rural

     %age

     Urban

    %age

Low

       27

     13.5%

         12

    6%

Average

      140

      70%

         143

   71.5%

High

       33

     16.5%

         45

   22.5%

Total

      200

     100%

         200

  100%

 

Table 1.4:
Showing the Academic Achievement of rural and urban Secondary School   Students.

The
perusal of the above table shows that out of 400 secondary school students
19.5% have high academic achievement, 70.75% have average academic achievement
and 9.75% have low academic achievement.

 

Levels

         N

           %age

Low

           39

           9.75

Average

           283

          70.75

High

           78

19.5

Total

            400

          100%

Table 1.3: Showing the
overall levels of Academic Achievement of Secondary School Students.

 

In the light of
above evidences, the hypothesis which reads as “Rural
and Urban Secondary School Students differ significantly on personality styles”
Stands accepted.

A quick look at
the above table shows the mean comparison between rural and urban secondary sschool
students on Personality Styles. The
above table reveals there is significant difference between rural and
urban secondary school students on personality styles and the difference was
found to be significant at 0.01 level. As the mean difference favours urban
secondary school students have balanced personality styles than rural secondary
school students.

 

   Group

         N
      (300)

     Mean

       S.D

  t-value

Level of
Significance

   Rural

    
    200

   
    50.04

  
    5.41

 
 
    3.7

 
significant at 0.01 level

   Urban

    
     200

   
    51.92

   
     5.04

           

Table 1.2:
Showing the mean comparison between rural and urban secondary school students
on Personality Styles (N=400).

 

 

Fig. 1.1: Showing
the levels of Personality styles of rural and urban secondary school students.

 

 

                       

 

The perusal of above table shows that out of 200 Rural secondary school
students 31.5% have introvert personality type, 57.5% have ambivert personality
type and 11% have extrovert personality type. Out of 200 urban secondary school
students 28.5% have introvert personality type, 59.5% have ambivert personality
type and 12% have Extrovert personality type.

 

   Personality
       Styles

     Rural
  (N)

     %age

     Urban
   (N)

      %age

   Introvert

     63

  31.5%

    57

  28.5%

    Ambivert

    115

  57.5%

    119

  59.5%

    Extrovert

     22

   11%

    24

   12%

      Total

     200

   100

   200

  100

 

Table 1.1:
Showing the levels of Personality styles of rural and urban Secondary School
students

 

 

Fig. 1.0:
Showing the overall levels of Personality styles among Secondary School
Students

 

                       

 

 

The perusal
of above table shows that out of 400 secondary school students 18.75% have
introvert personality style, 73.75% have ambivert personality style and 7.5%
have extrovert personality style.

 

Personality    Styles

     N

%age

Introvert

       75

     18.75%

Ambivert

      295

     73.75%

Extrovert

      30

     7.5%

Total

     400

     100%

           

Table 1.0: Showing the
overall levels of Personality styles of Secondary School Students

 

Personality
styles: Multidimensional Personality Inventory was employed to measure
personality styles of children in educational activities. The
scale is valid and reliable measuring the variable at optimum level of
confidence.

ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA

3.      T-test

2.      Standard
Deviation

1.      Mean

The data collected
was subjected to following statistical treatment:

STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES USED:

2.      Academic
Achievement of the sample subjects were assessed by checking the previous two
year academic performance record of the sample subjects.

1.     
Multidimensional
Personality Inventory developed by Manjurani Aggarwal (1985).

The tools for the present study
were selected in an approach to attain an optimum level of assurance by the
investigator for the objectives of the study. Since the study principally
contained two variables namely Personality Style and Academic Achievement.
Therefore, such tools were decided to be chosen as could validly and reliably
measure these variables. The investigator after screening a number of available
tests finally selected the following tools to collect the data.

SELECTION AND
DESCRIPTION OF TOOLS

 

 

Group

Rural
Students

Urban
students

  Total

 

Secondary
school students

 
           200

 
            200

      400

 

The breakup of
the sample shall is as under:

 

The sample for the study consisted
of 400 secondary school students in which 200 were rural secondary school
students 200 were urban higher secondary school students. The sample for the
present study was selected from district Srinagar (Urban) and district Budgam
(Rural), which were selected randomly from ten districts of Kashmir. The sample
for the study was selected randomly to ensure that every unit of the population
gets equal chance of being selected. The researcher ensured that prudence of
the researcher should not get involved in the choice of the sample from the
population.

Sample

 

 

2.
Rural and urban Secondary School Students differ significantly on academic
achievement.

1.     
Rural and Urban Secondary
School Students differ significantly on personality styles.

The following hypotheses were
formulated for the present study:

Hypothesis

 

2.     
To study and compare
rural and urban secondary school students on academic achievement.

1.     
To study and compare rural
and urban secondary school students on personality styles.

Objectives

 

Personality is a
dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that
determine his unique adjustment to his environment (Allport). It refers to individuals unique and
relatively stable patterns of behavior, thoughts and feelings (Robert A. Baron,
2006, p.450). Personality of a person changes because of his changing nature
and this changing nature makes person able to makes adjustments in changing
environment.  Personality style is a
combination of both genetic and environmental factors so the personality style
of a person varies changes with his changing experiences and this is the law of
nature and this changing nature has remarkable influence on making the life of
success or failure including that of students. Personality is acquired by the person as an end result of his
participation in social or group life. As a member of the society or group he
learns definite behavior systems and symbolic skills which determine his ideas,
attitudes and social values. These ideas, attitudes and values which a person holds
comprise his personality. So every personality is ultimately the outcome of
learning and experiences of person. Thus we can say personality is multiplex
synthesis of continuously changing and emerging pattern of one’s rare behavior,
developing as a result of interaction with environment and directed towards
some specific ends. Academic achievement or Scholastic
performance is the extent to which a student, teacher or
institution has achieved their short or long-term educational goals. The
Scholastic or academic achievement has been explained by the Good et al (1954)
by the level of knowledge attained or developed by student in school subject. Academic
achievement is commonly measured through examinations or continuous assessments conducted by the institution but
there is no general agreement on how it is best evaluated or which aspects are
most important — procedural knowledge such as skills or declarative knowledge such as facts. Academic achievement measures student’s comprehension and
abilities within the core subjects of education in curriculum. It measures the
overall competency of students in specific subject. Academic achievement of students refers to
the knowledge attained and skills developed in the school subjects. Crow (1956)
defined academic achievement as : knowledge attaining ability or degree of
competence in school tasks usually measured by standardized tests and expressed
in grade or units based of pupils performance.” Good (1959) refers to academic
achievement as: “the knowledge attained or skills developed in the school
subjects usually designed by test scores or marks assigned by the teacher”.
According to Sinha (1970) Academic achievement means: “students whose academic
performance is superior character in the form of high percentage of marks are
taken as successful candidates. On the other hand, students who fail in the
previous examination, and obtain low division in their examination are
considered as individuals who have failed in their attainment”. 

Intoduction

Keywords:
Personality
traits, Academic achievement, Rural/Urban Secondary school Students

The
present study explored the effect of personality types on the academic
achievement of rural and urban secondary school students. The sample comprised
of 400 secondary school students (200 rural and 200 urban). The sample for the
study was selected randomly from the different schools of Srinagar (as urban
district) and Budgam (as rural district). The sample was selected in such a way
to ensure that every unit of population could get equal chances to be selected
in the sample. Multidimensional Personality Inventory developed by Manjurani
Aggarwal (1985) as the tool of the study for the present sample and academic
achievement was obtained by observing previous two years performance records of
the sample subjects. Result findings suggest significant difference between
rural and urban secondary school students on personality type test. Result findings also suggested urban secondary
school students have better academic achievement than rural secondary school
students.

                                                              Abstract