CHAPTER - III

METHOD AND PROCEDURE

The research methodology of the study is a vital part of this study itself.
It is important on the part of the researcher to have a clear understanding
about the selection of the sample, data gathering procedure and the different
techniques of analysis so that the results obtained from the study can be
generalized. In the light of the review previous chapter, the investigator
prepared a blue-print of this proposed study. This chapter deals with
methodology of research, description of sample, administration of tools
utilized for data collection and briefing of statistical techniques. The present
research aims at studying educational aspirations of secondary school
students of Punjab in relation to student engagement, academic achievement
and self-confidence. In order to attain the objectives of present study, sample
of 9th class students was taken and according to the selected variables, the
tools were administered on the sample. The details are described hereunder:

3.1 RESEARCH METHOD

Research is viewed as more formal, systematic, intensive process of
carrying on the analysis. It involves more systematic structure of investigation,
usually resulting in some sort of formal record of procedures and their
conclusions. The present study was conducted through the most popular
research method that was descriptive method of research. This is most
common and successful method used in educational research. Descriptive
research was used to describe characteristics of a population or the
phenomenon being studied. It does not answer question about how/when/why
of the characteristics occurred. Descriptive research aims to obtain
information concerning the current status of the phenomena to describe ‘what
exists’ with respect to the variables or the conditions in a situation.

85
3.2 RESEARCH TOOLS
For collecting data for any research problem, one may use various
devices. The devices which the investigator utilized for data collection are
known as research tools. Different tools are suitable for collecting different
kind of information for various purposes. The selection of suitable tools is vital
important for a successful completion of research work. The success of any
research endeavour is largely dependent upon the reliability of the research
tools which are utilized for data collection. In this study the investigator was
used the following tools:
3.2.1 Educational Aspirations Scale by Sharma and Gupta (2015).
3.2.2 Student Engagement Scale by Lam et al. (2014).
3.2.3 Academic Achievement Test of Social Science is constructed by
investigator herself.
3.2.4 Self-confidence Scale by Gupta and Lakhani (2018).

3.2.1 EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS SCALE

Educational aspirations scale by Sharma and Gupta (2015) is a 45-
item scale. This scale has been developed on the rationale that (i) past
experience in terms of marks obtained estimate or goal set, success or failure
experienced, (ii) amount of efforts made in examination, (iii) ability and
capacity to study for the examination have a direct bearing upon setting a
future goal. Thus, Educational aspirations scale gives scores on (i) goal
discrepancy scores, (ii) attainment discrepancy scores, and (iii) feeling and
direction: Goal discrepancy or attainment discrepancy in terms of over/under
estimation would make the individual feel about his level of dissatisfaction or
orientedness from the point of view of level of aspirations in relation with
efforts made or ability possessed.
Sharma and Gupta (2002) felt necessary to develop specific test for
measuring the educational aspirations of pupils at different grades of the
educational cadder. Keeping in view the level of understanding, educational
maturity and growth patterns of pupils, two different scales have been
developed. Form V and Form P, both the forms of the level of aspirations are
different in the content, technique, standardization process and norms.

86
 Form V was developed for college youth, whereas, Form P though
specifically designed for secondary school pupils, could also be used for
universal use. Rather Form P has a wide application in the measurement of
level of aspirations.
Educational aspirations scale, Form P has been designed for
measuring the level of educational aspirations of pupils regardless of their
grade or age: though norms have been primary develop on secondary school
pupil population; it could be widely used over other samples by interpreting
the raw scores obtained in terms of levels of educational aspirations.
Administration:
Educational aspirations scale could be administered individually or in
group-situation. It is a self-explanatory scale; however, the tester should
establish proper rapport before administering it. There is no time limit;
however, it takes about 25 minutes to administer the whole scale.
Reliability:
Reliability of the scale was computed by using Test-Retest method and
Split-half method on a sample of 1050 students after a gap of 6 weeks. The
reliability coefficient of the scale by Test-Retest method is .98. Reliability
coefficient of internal consistency by odd-even technique using S-B formula is
.803. These results are significant at .01 level of significance.
Validity:
The validity of the scale determined against scholastic achievement is
.692 and predictive validity established with educational aspirations scale,
form V is .596. These values are significant at 0.01 level (See Appendix-I).
Norms:
Norms for interpretation of the educational aspirations level have been
presented in table 3.1.

87
 Table 3.1
Norms of Interpretation of the Level of Educational Aspirations
S. Range of Grade Level of Educational
No. z-score Aspirations
1. +2.01 and above A Extremely High
2. +1.26 to +2.00 B High
3. +0.51 to +1.25 C Above Average
4. -0.50 to +0.50 D Average/Moderate
5. -1.25 to -0.51 E Below Average
6. -2.00 to -1.26 F Low
7. -2.01 and below G Extremely Low

3.2.2 STUDENT ENGAGEMENT SCALE

Student engagement scale by Lam et al. (2014) contains 33 items that
measure student engagement. The student engagement scale is comprised of
three dimensions that result in measurement of student engagement. The
three dimensions are affective engagement, behavioral engagement and
cognitive engagement.
 Affective engagement: Students who engage emotionally would
experience affective reactions such as interest, enjoyment or a sense
of belonging.
 Behavioral engagement: Students who are behaviorally engaged
would typically comply with behavioral norms, such as attendance and
involvement and would demonstrate the absence of disruptive or
negative behavior.
 Cognitive engagement: Cognitively engaged students would be
invested in their learning, would seek to go beyond the requirements
and would relish challenge.
Reliability:
Reliability of the scale was computed by using Cronbach’s alpha
formula and Test-Retest method. Coefficient alphas of the item scores of each
subscale and the subscale scores of the full scale are presented in table 3.2.
A high level of internal consistency was demonstrated for all three subscales

88
(0.80-0.89). The full scale also demonstrated acceptable internal consistency
(0.78). Test-Retest reliability has been also calculated (time interval-6
months). Reliability of Test-Retest method is 0.73. Thus, the correlations of
two tests are suggested a satisfactory reliability for the subscales. Reliability
detail of student engagement scale is given in table 3.2.

Table 3.2
Descriptive Statistics, Reliability and Subscale Score Correlations
S.
Mean SD 1 2 3 4
No.

1. Affective 3.40 0.70 -

Engagement
2. Behavioral 3.47 0.60 .63** -
Engagement
3. Cognitive 3.25 0.71 .48** .54** -
Engagement
4. Full-scale 3.37 0.56 .85** .85** .82** -

5. Coefficient (α) .84 .80 .89 .78

Test-retest
6. .74** .73** .60** .73**
Reliability
** p<0.05

Validity:
The validity of student engagement scale was established on the basis
of construct validity and concurrent validity (See Appendix-II).
Construct Validity:
To assess the construct validity one-factor model, three-factor model
and second-order model were used. One-factor model was used with all 33
items as indicators of a single latent construct, student engagement. Three-
factor model was also tested. It was a model with three latent constructs:
affective engagement, behavioral engagement and cognitive engagement.
Second-order model with student engagement as a meta-construct was
tested. In this model, affective engagement, behavioral engagement and
cognitive engagement were specified as the first-order factors whereas
student engagement was specified as the second-order factor.

89
 Of the three models, the one-factor model was first eliminated because
fit indices did not show that it fit the data well. Both the three-factor model and
second-order model’s Non-Normed Fit Index value was .92, Comparative Fit
Index value was .93 and Root mean square error value was .08. The results
showed that both the three-factor model and the second-order model fit the
data reasonably well.
Concurrent Validity:
To test the concurrent validity of the student engagement scale, the
correlations between the scale and the contextual factors, namely
instructional practices, teacher support, peer support and parental support
were examined. All three subscales and the full scale correlated moderately
and positively with these contextual factors. The correlations of the three
subscales and the full scale with the outcome variables were examined. All
three subscales and the full scale correlated positively with positive emotions,
academic performance and school conduct.
Adaptation and Reliability of the Scale:
Before collecting the data from secondary school students, this test
was administered on 100 students of SSD senior secondary school for boys
and Khalsa senior secondary school from Bathinda district which was not the
part of sample of experimental part of study. Reliability of the scale was
computed by using Test-Retest method and Cronbach’s alpha formula. The
same student engagement test was administrated on the same sample after
the gap of fifteen days of administration of the test. The reliability coefficient of
student engagement scale was found to be equal to 0.96, which was on
higher side. Coefficient alpha of three subscales (Affective engagement,
behavioral engagement and cognitive engagement) were respectively 0.85,
0.84 and 0.83. A high level of internal consistency was demonstrated for all
three subscales (0.80-0.89). The full scale also demonstrated acceptable
internal consistency (0.79). So, this test is reliable to use in present situation
also.

90
3.2.3 CONSTRUCTION AND STANDARDIZATION OF ACHIEVEMENT
TEST OF SOCIAL SCIENCE

Social science is one of the branches of science which is developed to

the study of societies and the relationships among individuals within these
societies. Investigator felt that the adolescents must be aware about the
society and the relationships among individuals. So achievement test of
Social Science was constructed and standardization by the investigator. To
evaluate the initial and terminal behavior of the students in the subject of
Social Science, an achievement test of Social Science was constructed by the
investigator. Investigator was not able to find any standardized test in which
latest topics were discussed. So, researcher constructed and standardized
the achievement test of Social Science for 9th class students. First of all, the
behavioral objectives of the test were framed. The major objectives were
categorized in three dimensions i.e. knowledge, understanding and
application. Test consisted of 44 items. Achievement test of Social Science
was constructed while keeping the following steps in mind and detailed
description is given here under:
Planning of the Test:
For the planning of the test, achievement test used from earlier studies
were studied and reviewed. The first step in the planning of achievement test
was the content analysis of the Social Science. In order to evaluate the
academic achievement of Social Science, criterion reference test was
prepared for class 9th from the prescribed syllabus of class 8th. The syllabus
was thoroughly studied; the content was thoroughly analysed by Punjab
School Education Board books of 8th class of Social Science and discussed
with subject as well as language experts from various schools.
While planning of the test, age, mental level and language were kept in
mind by the researcher. After content analysis, all the items were listed in a
sequence. Items in the test were of objective type including multiple choice
questions. Detail of selected topics of Social Science of 8th class is given in
table 3.3.

91
 Table 3.3
Topics of Social Science
S.No. Topics
Geography
1. Resources: Types and Conservation
2. Natural Resources
3. Mineral and Energy Resources
4. Our Agriculture
5. Industrial Development
6. Major Industries
7. Human Resources
8. Disaster Management
History
9. How, When and Where
10. The Establishment of the Power of East India Company
11. Administrative Structure, Growth of Colonial Army and Civilian
Administration
12. Rural Life and Society
13. Colonialism and Tribal Society
14. Handicraft and Industry
15. The Revolt of 1857
16. The Education and British Rule
17. Women and Reforms
18. Challenge to Caste System
19. Colonialism and Urban Change
20. The Changes in Arts, Painting, Literature and Architecture
21. National Movement 1885-1919
22. National Movement 1919-1947
23. India after Independence
Civics
24. Constitution and Law
25. Importance and Principles and Secularism
26. Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles and Fundamental
Duties
27. Parliament: Structure Role and Importance
28. Judiciary and Its Special Jurisdiction
29. Effects of Social Inequalities and Social Justice
30. Efforts of the Government and Its Effects on People

92
Preparation of Preliminary Draft
During preparation of an achievement test, aims and objectives were
kept in mind. While writing items of test, proper attention was paid to the
content of questionnaire, its structure and coverage of whole syllabus. For the
preparation of the test, suggestions and views of subject experts were also
taken. The achievement test was set only in Hindi language. Detail of experts
is given in table 3.4.

Table 3.4
Experts’ Opinion on Preliminary Draft of Achievement Test of Social
Science

Category No. of Experts

School Teacher’s (Social science Teacher) 10

Preliminary Draft and Preliminary Try Out of the Test:

Preliminary draft of the test was comprised of total 110 items. The
preliminary draft of the test was sent to eight subject experts and 2 language
experts from various schools. Opinions of subject experts were sought for the
modification of items of the test. Few items were expelled and some of them
were modified in terms of language. 10 items were expelled and then first
draft of achievement test was consisting of 100 items. Preliminary draft of
achievement test of Social Science is attached in Appendix-III(i).
Second Draft and Proper Try Out of the Test:
After the preliminary draft, test consisting of 100 items administered on
the 50 students of 9th class of SSD senior secondary school for boys,
Bathinda (one private school affiliated to Punjab School Education Board) for
proper try-out of the test. No time limit was given to the students to complete
the test. Students were already informed to pick up the difficulties which they
faced in understanding the test items. After identifying the difficulties,
modifications were done in the test items of the test. After proper try out of the
test, 10 items were eliminated from the test and further 90 items were retained
in the second draft of the Social Science achievement test.

93
Item Analysis:
The second draft of the test included 90 items. Thus modified test was
administered on 120 students of schools affiliated to Punjab School Education
Board. The table 3.5 shows the number of students participated from different
schools.

Table 3.5
Number of Students Participated from different Schools
S. Name of School No. of Students
No. Participated
1. SSD Public Senior Secondary School, Bathinda 40
2. Guru Kashi Senior Secondary School, Bathinda 40
3. Des Raj Senior Secondary School, Bathinda 40
Total 120

Before administering the test, it was important to build rapport with all
the students. They were informed about the objectives of the test and
reassured that their responses will remain confidential and will only be used
for research purposes. Once they understand this, each student receives a
copy of the Social Science achievement test. Students were instructed to read
all the instructions carefully and are told that there was no time limit for their
responses. Each correct answer will earn them 1 mark, while incorrect
answers will receive 0 marks.
An item analysis was conducted, and two types of information were
computed: item difficulty and the discriminating power of the items. For this
achievement test, the item analysis follows Kelley’s (1939) method. The
selection of items takes into account the criteria recommended by Ebel
(1966). To calculate the t-value for estimating the discrimination power of
each item, the collected data was arranged in ascending order based on the
total score on the scale.
According to Kelley’s (1939) formula, the division into higher and lower
groups was applied. The first cut-off was made at the lower 27% of cases,
and similarly, a second cut-off was made at the upper 27% of cases. One

94
group was designated as the lower group, while the other was referred to as
the upper group. The average group was excluded when calculating the t
value for estimating the discrimination power of each item. Based on the
upper and lower groups, the t-value for the mean score difference between
these groups was calculated for each item. If the mean score of the upper
group was higher than that of the lower group and the difference was
significant, it indicates positive discrimination (showing that the items are
effective on the scale). If the mean score difference between the upper and
lower groups was not significant, it suggests that the item does not
discriminate adequately. Conversely, if the mean score of the lower group
was higher than that of the upper group and the difference was significant, the
item was considered to be negatively discriminating.
To standardize a test, both non-discriminatory and negatively
discriminating items were removed after conducting a statistical item analysis.
The same approach was applied to the investigator's academic achievement
test. The t-value results for each item were presented in table 3.6, which
indicates the discrimination power of each item. Based on this discrimination
power, items are either selected or rejected. The academic achievement test
for Social Science consists of items that have right or wrong responses. This
means that if more students answer correctly, the items were considered
easier, and vice versa. Typically, very easy and very difficult items were
excluded from the academic achievement test in Social Science. To
determine the difficulty level of each item, the difficulty values were calculated
using the following formula:
Difficulty value (D.V.) = RU + RL
N
RU = Number of right response in upper group.
RL = Number of right response in lower group.
N = Total number of students in both the groups.
The items which were significant at .01 levels of significance were
selected. The items which were not significant at .01 levels of significance as
well as discriminating negative were rejected. Total 44 items were retained in
the final draft of the test. The items which were accepted and rejected from
the second draft are given in the table 3.6.

95
 Table 3.6
Item Analysis of Academic Achievement Test of Social Science

Item Upper Lower t-value Difficulty Item

No. Group Group Value Accepted/
Mean SD Mean SD (D.V.) Rejected
1. 0.78 0.42 0.69 0.47 0.84NS 0.73 Rejected
2. 0.81 0.40 0.44 0.50 3.31** 0.63 Accepted
3. 0.88 0.34 0.63 0.49 2.37NS 0.75 Rejected
4. 0.88 0.34 0.31 0.47 5.50** 0.59 Accepted
5. 0.94 0.25 0.34 0.48 6.20** 0.64 Accepted
6. 0.81 0.40 0.72 0.46 0.88NS 0.77 Rejected
7. 0.88 0.34 0.41 0.50 4.41** 0.64 Accepted
8. 0.75 0.44 0.72 0.46 0.28NS 0.73 Rejected
9. 0.84 0.37 0.28 0.46 5.41** 0.56 Accepted
10. 0.31 0.47 0.28 0.46 0.27NS 0.29 Rejected
11. 0.88 0.34 0.34 0.48 5.11** 0.61 Accepted
12. 0.88 0.34 0.78 0.42 0.99NS 0.83 Rejected
13. 0.81 0.40 0.44 0.50 3.31** 0.63 Accepted
14. 0.87 0.34 0.75 0.44 1.28NS 0.81 Rejected
15. 0.87 0.34 0.31 0.47 5.50** 0.59 Accepted
16. 0.87 0.34 0.59 0.50 2.64NS 0.73 Rejected
17. 0.87 0.34 0.12 0.34 8.93** 0.50 Accepted
18. 0.34 0.48 0.25 0.44 0.81NS 0.29 Rejected
19. 0.81 0.40 0.31 0.47 4.59** 0.56 Accepted
20. 0.88 0.34 0.31 0.47 5.50** 0.59 Accepted
21. 0.38 0.49 0.22 0.42 1.37NS 0.29 Rejected
22. 0.88 0.34 0.41 0.50 4.41** 0.64 Accepted
23. 0.88 0.34 0.38 0.49 4.75** 0.63 Accepted
24. 0.88 0.34 0.66 0.48 2.10NS 0.77 Rejected
25. 0.88 0.34 0.81 0.40 0.68NS 0.84 Rejected
26. 0.75 0.44 0.41 0.50 2.92** 0.58 Accepted
27. 0.94 0.25 0.38 0.49 5.79** 0.66 Accepted
28. 0.81 0.40 0.66 0.48 1.41NS 0.73 Rejected
29. 0.88 0.34 0.38 0.49 4.75** 0.63 Accepted
Contd…

96
Item Upper Lower t-value Difficulty Item
No. Group Group Value Accepted/
Mean SD Mean SD (D.V.) Rejected
30. 0.81 0.40 0.63 0.49 1.68NS 0.72 Rejected
31. 0.94 0.25 0.44 0.50 5.04** 0.69 Accepted
32. 0.88 0.34 0.63 0.49 2.37NS 0.75 Rejected
33. 0.88 0.34 0.31 0.47 5.50** 0.59 Accepted
34. 0.81 0.40 0.31 0.47 4.59** 0.56 Accepted
35. 0.78 0.42 0.69 0.47 0.84NS 0.73 Rejected
36. 0.88 0.34 0.50 0.51 3.48** 0.69 Accepted
37. 0.88 0.34 0.63 0.49 2.37NS 0.75 Rejected
38. 0.75 0.44 0.69 0.47 0.55NS 0.72 Rejected
39. 0.81 0.40 0.16 0.37 6.85** 0.48 Accepted
40. 0.88 0.34 0.63 0.49 2.37NS 0.75 Rejected
41. 0.88 0.34 0.34 0.48 5.11** 0.61 Accepted
42. 0.88 0.34 0.69 0.47 1.83NS 0.78 Rejected
43. 0.88 0.34 0.38 0.49 4.75** 0.63 Accepted
44. 0.88 0.34 0.31 0.47 5.50** 0.59 Accepted
45. 0.88 0.34 0.63 0.49 2.37NS 0.75 Rejected
46. 0.34 0.48 0.25 0.44 0.81NS 0.29 Rejected
47. 0.78 0.42 0.66 0.48 1.11NS 0.72 Rejected
48. 0.88 0.34 0.28 0.46 5.92** 0.58 Accepted
49. 0.88 0.34 0.66 0.48 2.10NS 0.77 Rejected
50. 0.94 0.25 0.34 0.48 6.20** 0.64 Accepted
51. 0.78 0.42 0.66 0.48 1.10NS 0.72 Rejected
52. 0.88 0.34 0.41 0.50 4.40** 0.64 Accepted
53. 0.78 0.42 0.66 0.48 1.11NS 0.72 Rejected
54. 0.88 0.34 0.28 0.46 5.92** 0.58 Accepted
55. 0.81 0.40 0.63 0.49 1.68NS 0.72 Rejected
56. 0.88 0.34 0.34 0.48 5.11** 0.61 Accepted
57. 0.81 0.40 0.63 0.49 1.68NS 0.72 Rejected
58. 0.81 0.40 0.44 0.50 3.30** 0.63 Accepted
59. 0.81 0.40 0.63 0.49 1.68NS 0.72 Rejected
Contd…

97
 Item Upper Lower t-value Difficulty Item
No. Group Group Value Accepted/
Mean SD Mean SD (D.V.) Rejected
60. 0.88 0.34 0.31 0.41 5.50** 0.59 Accepted
61. 0.88 0.34 0.66 0.48 2.10NS 0.77 Rejected
62. 0.88 0.34 0.19 0.40 7.48** 0.53 Accepted
63. 0.31 0.47 0.28 0.46 0.27NS 0.29 Rejected
64. 0.81 0.40 0.31 0.47 4.59** 0.56 Accepted
65. 0.81 0.40 0.63 0.49 1.68NS 0.72 Rejected
66. 0.81 0.40 0.69 0.47 1.15NS 0.75 Rejected
67. 0.88 0.34 0.41 0.50 4.41** 0.64 Accepted
68. 0.84 0.37 0.59 0.50 2.28NS 0.72 Rejected
69. 0.88 0.34 0.66 0.48 2.10NS 0.77 Rejected
70. 0.88 0.34 0.44 0.50 4.09** 0.66 Accepted
71. 0.81 0.40 0.63 0.49 1.68NS 0.72 Rejected
72. 0.94 0.25 0.38 0.49 5.79** 0.66 Accepted
73. 0.81 0.40 0.66 0.48 1.42NS 0.73 Rejected
74. 0.88 0.34 0.38 0.49 4.75** 0.63 Accepted
75. 0.88 0.34 0.66 0.48 2.10NS 0.77 Rejected
76. 0.78 0.42 0.66 0.48 1.11NS 0.72 Rejected
77. 0.97 0.18 0.25 0.44 8.58** 0.61 Accepted
78. 0.88 0.34 0.66 0.48 2.10NS 0.77 Rejected
79. 0.81 0.40 0.31 0.47 4.59** 0.56 Accepted
80. 0.81 0.40 0.63 0.49 1.68NS 0.72 Rejected
81. 0.81 0.40 0.63 0.49 1.68NS 0.72 Rejected
82. 0.88 0.34 0.44 0.50 4.09** 0.66 Accepted
83. 0.94 0.25 0.72 0.47 2.39NS 0.83 Rejected
84. 0.81 0.40 0.16 0.37 6.85** 0.48 Accepted
85. 0.84 0.37 0.66 0.48 1.75NS 0.75 Rejected
86. 0.88 0.34 0.34 0.48 5.11** 0.61 Accepted
87. 0.81 0.40 0.63 0.49 1.68NS 0.72 Rejected
88. 0.88 0.34 0.38 0.49 4.75** 0.63 Accepted
89. 0.88 0.34 0.31 0.47 5.50** 0.59 Accepted
90. 0.81 0.40 0.63 0.49 1.68NS 0.72 Rejected
** p<0.01; * p<0.05

98
 The items having difficulty value above 0.70 and below 0.30 were
rejected. On the basis of selection criteria based on t-value (discriminating
power) and difficulty value, out of 90 items, 44 were accepted as such, and 46
items were rejected. On the basis of difficulty value and discriminating power,
44 items were selected for the final draft of the academic achievement test of
Social Science. Final draft of achievement test of Social Science (See
Appendix-III(ii)).
Final Draft:
The final draft of the academic achievement test of Social Science
contains 44 items after calculating the t-value (discriminating power) and
difficulty value.
Administration and Scoring of Achievement Test:
The final draft of achievement test of Social Science consisted of
multiple choice test items. There were 44 items in the achievement test.
Before administering the test, instructions were given to the students.
Instructions were printed on the first page of achievement test of Social
Science also. After collecting the response of students for achievement test,
their scoring was done by the researcher. ‘1’ mark was given for each correct
response and ‘0’ mark for each incorrect response. Thus total scores of
achievement test were ranged from 0 to 44. There was no time limit; however,
it took 30 minutes to administer the whole test. Scoring key of achievement
test of Social Science (Appendix-III(iii)).
Reliability:
Reliability refers to the consistency of scores obtained by the same
persons when they are re-examined with the same test on different occasions,
or with different sets of equivalent items, or under other examining conditions
(Anastasi & Urbina, 2002). According to Anastasi & Urbina (1997), since all
types of reliability are concerned with the degree of consistency or agreement
between two independently derived sets of scores, these can be expressed in
terms of correlation coefficient. In order to establish the reliability of academic
achievement test of Social Science, sample of 100 students studying in 9th
class was drawn on random basis from Khalsa National Senior Secondary

99
School and SSD Moti Ram Kanya Maha Vidayalya School from Bathinda
district both the schools were affiliated to Punjab School Education Board. In
the present study the reliability of the academic achievement test of Social
Science was calculated by Test-Retest method and KR-20 Method.
Test-Retest Reliability
Reliability of achievement test was computed by using Test-Retest
method. The same achievement test was administrated on the same sample
after the gap of fifteen days of administration of the test. The achievement test
was administered on 100 students of Khalsa National Senior Secondary
School and SSD Moti Ram Kanya Maha Vidayalya School from Bathinda
district. The scores of the two intervals test were collected. Reliability of the
test was computed by Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient
method. The reliability coefficient of achievement test of Social Science was
found to be equal to 0.97, which was on higher side. The results obtained
have been depicted in the table 3.7.

Table 3.7
Test-Retest Reliability of Academic Achievement Test in Social Science
S. No. Administration N Mean SD r
1. 1st 100 38.34 7.48
0.97
2. 2nd 100 38.44 7.67

The correlation between test and re-test scores for academic

achievement test of Social Science is 0.97, which is considered as high,
indicating a strong relationship between two measurements over period of
time reflecting on stability of scores obtained on the academic achievement
test of Social Science.
KR-20 Method:
Reliability of achievement test was computed by using KR-20 method.
The achievement test was administered on 100 students of Khalsa National
Senior Secondary School and SSD Moti Ram Kanya Maha Vidayalya School
from Bathinda. The results obtained have been given in the table 3.8.

100
 Table 3.8
KR-20 Formula Reliability of Achievement Test of Social Science

Method Sample Coefficient of Correlation

KR-20 100 0.84

Reliability coefficient of internal consistency by using KR-20 formula is

0.84, thus obtained coefficient of correlation also on higher side. Thus, the
achievement test of Social Science is reliable scale for the present study.
Validity:
Validity of test means whether it is able to achieve its said objectives or
not. Content validity and concurrent validity of the achievement test was
calculated.
Content Validity:
The content of the test items was taken from prescribed text books of
Social Science for 8th class according to their syllabus. The final draft of
achievement test of Social Science was again sent to a panel of ten expert
teachers of social science to elicit their views regarding content validity of
achievement test. Test items used in the form of assessment sheet that
contains a column of essentiality statements (with three options i. e. essential,
useful but not essential and not useful) and score for each item accompanied
by a column for giving advice. This assessment sheet filled out by the experts.
Score for each item was used for the analysis of the validity of the content
using the formula Lawshe’s CVR (content validity ratio).
The results of the content validity with Lawshe’s CVR formula are
presented in table 3.9.

101
 Table 3.9
Results of Content Validity Ratio
Item Content Validity Ratio Result
No. (CVR)
1. 0.6 Valid
2. 0.6 Valid
3. 1 Valid
4. 0.6 Valid
5. 1 Valid
6. 0.6 Valid
7. 0.2 Valid
8. 0.6 Valid
9. 1 Valid
10. 0.6 Valid
11. 0.6 Valid
12. 1 Valid
13. 0.6 Valid
14. 0.2 Valid
15. 1 Valid
16. 0.6 Valid
17. 0.6 Valid
18. 1 Valid
19. 1 Valid
20. 0.6 Valid
21. 0.6 Valid
22. 1 Valid
23. 1 Valid
24. 1 Valid
25. 1 Valid
26. 0.6 Valid
27. 0.6 Valid
Contd…

102
 Item Content Validity Ratio Result
No. (CVR)
28. 1 Valid
29. 0.6 Valid
30. 1 Valid
31. 0.6 Valid
32. 1 Valid
33. 0.6 Valid
34. 1 Valid
35. 0.6 Valid
36. 0.6 Valid
37. 1 Valid
38. 1 Valid
39. 0.6 Valid
40. 0.6 Valid
41. 1 Valid
42. 0.6 Valid
43. 0.6 Valid
44. 1 Valid

Concurrent Validity:
Concurrent validity of the test was computed by Pearson’s method of
coefficient of correlation. For this, score of achievement test and score of
previous class board exam of social science subject of same sample was
collected. Concurrent validity of achievement test of Social Science was found
to be 0.91, which is on higher side.
Thus, this achievement test is considered as reliable and valid tool to
be administered on the sample to assess their academic achievement of
Social Science for the present study.
Norms and Interpretation:
The academic achievement test of Social Science was administered on
a sample of 180 students of 9th class from M. H. R. Senior Secondary School,
Arya Girls’ Senior Secondary School and Govt. Girls’ Senior Secondary

103
School Bathinda city affiliated to Punjab School Education Board. Statistical
results for academic achievement test of Social Science was calculated and
presented in table 3.10.

Table 3.10
Mean and SD Scores of Academic Achievement Test of Social Science
Total No. of Students Mean Standard Deviation
(N) (M) (SD)
180 27.09 6.52

On the basis of above statistical results, z-score norms have been

developed for the full scale. Distribution of scores and the level of
achievement of students are shown in table 3.11.

Table 3.11
Norms for Interpretation of the level of Academic Achievement Test
S. Range of Raw Range of Level of Academic
No. Score z-score Achievement
1. 41 and above +2.01 & above Extremely High
2. 36 to 40 +1.26 to +2.00 High
3. 31 to 35 +0.51 to +1.25 Above Average
4. 24 to 30 -0.50 to +0.50 Average
5. 20 to 23 -1.25 to -0.51 Below Average
6. 16 to 19 -2.00 to -1.26 Low
7. 18 and below -2.01 & below Extremely Low

3.2.4 SELF-CONFIDENCE SCALE

Self-confidence Scale by Gupta and Lakhani (2018) contains 48 items
that measure an individual’s self-confidence. The self-confidence scale is
comprised of five different dimensions that result in measurement of an
individual’s self-confidence. The five dimensions are Decisiveness, Self-
concept, Self-control, Inter-personal relation and Parental support.

104
  Decisiveness: is the ability to make quick and effective decision. It is
characterized by definite, determined and unhesitate state of mind.
 Self-concept: is the image of the individual which one perceives of
their own self. It is the self-made profile of a person as one comes to
adjudge oneself.
 Self-control: is the ability or flexible capacity for personal and moral
self-regulations to monitor one’s own conduct and constantly adjusting
as per circumstances.
 Inter-personal relation: is strong, deep and close association or
acquaintance between two or more people that may range in duration
from brief to enduring.
 Parental support: refers to the participation of parents in child’s
development. It is child’s life time passport of self-confidence, mental
health and social happiness.
The distribution of 48 items in dimensions of the scale is given below in
the table 3.12.

Table 3.12
Distribution of Items in the Self-Confidence Scale
S. Dimensions Nature No. of Items Total No. Total
No. of Items of Items
Positive 1, 4, 10, 21, 33, 43, 44 7
1. Decisiveness 9
Negative 3, 22 2
Positive 2, 9, 12, 18, 25, 30, 31, 10
2. Self-concept 38, 41, 47 17
Negative 8, 11, 13, 23, 34, 37, 45 7
Positive 14, 26, 27, 35, 36, 40 6
3. Self-control 11
Negative 17, 24, 39, 42, 46 5
Inter-personal Positive 16, 32 2
4. 6
relation Negative 5, 19, 20, 29 4
Parental Positive 6, 7, 15 3
5. 5
support Negative 28, 48 2
Positive Items = 28 Total 48
Negative Items = 20 Items

105
Reliability:
Reliability of the scale was computed by using Test-Retest method on
a sample of 150 students after a gap of 6 weeks. The reliability coefficient of
the scale is 0.728 which is significant at 0.01 level of significant. Dimensions
wise reliability coefficient was also found through Test-Retest method which
varied from 0.603 to 0.824. Results indicate that the scale is highly reliable.
Results of reliability of self-confidence scale have given in table 3.13.

Table 3.13
Dimension-wise Reliability Coefficient of Self-Confidence Scale
S. Dimensions N Reliability
No. Coefficient
1. Decisiveness 150 0.603**
2. Self-concept 150 0.741**
3. Self-control 150 0.657**
4. Inter-personal relation 150 0.824**
5. Parental support 150 0.816**
Overall reliability for full scale 150 0.728**
**p<0.01

Validity:
The validity of the Self-Confidence Scale was established on the basis
of face validity, content validity and construct validity. To assess the face
validity, Self-Confidence Scale was presented to 15 experts for their opinions.
Content validity was of primary importance for this scale where the issues of
overlap between items were addressed by experts and also assess the
relevancy of the items to the category to which they belong. Construct validity
of the scale was found through Pearson Product Moment Correlation. The
obtained ‘r’ values indicate high construct validity of the scale. The correlation
coefficients between the dimensions of self-confidence ranging from 0.264 to
0.439 are given in table 3.14 (See Appendix-IV).

106
 Table 3.14
Inter-correlations among the Dimensions of Self-Confidence Scale
S. Dimensions Decisiveness Self- Self- Inter- Parental
No. concept control personal Support
Relation
1. Decisiveness - - - - -

2. Self-concept 0.309* - - - -

3. Self-control 0.417* 0.416* - -

4. Inter-personal 0.264* 0.357* 0.315* - -

Relation
5. Parental 0.416* 0.439* 0.387* 0.423* -
Support
*p<0.05

Norms:
Norms for interpretation of the Self-confidence have been presented in
table 3.15.

Table 3.15
Norms for Interpretation of the Level of Self-confidence
S. Range of Raw Range of Level of
No. Score z-score Self-confidence
1. 238 and above +2.01 & above Extremely High
2. 220 to 237 +1.26 to +2.00 High
3. 201 to 219 +0.51 to +1.25 Above Average
4. 177 to 200 -0.50 to +0.50 Average
5. 158 to 176 -1.25 to -0.51 Below Average
6. 140 to 157 -2.00 to -1.26 Low
7. 139 and below -2.01 & below Extremely Low

3.2 POPULATION OF THE STUDY AND SAMPLING

A population refers to a clearly defined group of individuals or objects
that share similar characteristics. Typically, all members of a specific
population possess common traits or features. A sample, on the other hand, is
simply a smaller subset of that population. It serves as a miniature

107
representation of the larger group from which it is drawn. The need for
sampling arises from the impracticality of testing every individual within a
given population. It was crucial that the sample accurately reflects the
population it represents sufficient size to support statistical analysis. The
primary purpose of sampling was to enable researchers to study individuals
from the population, allowing them to draw conclusions that can be
generalized to the entire group. In this investigation, a stratified random
sampling technique was employed giving due weightage to gender and locale
of secondary school students. The sample consisted of 800 9th-grade
students from the Punjab School Education Board in Mohali. Based on
varying literacy rates, three districts were selected from the 23 in Punjab:
Hoshiarpur (high literacy rate), Patiala (average literacy rate), and Mansa (low
literacy rate). Next, six schools were randomly chosen from each district, with
three from rural areas and three from urban areas. Additionally, 367 male and
433 female students from both rural and urban backgrounds were randomly
selected.

Table 3.16
List of Schools Selected from Three Districts
S. Name of School Area Male Female Total
No.
Hoshiarpur
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Jhajji,
1. Rural 18 25 43
Hoshiarpur
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Chohal,
2. Rural 20 22 42
Hoshiarpur
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Januri,
3. Rural 19 20 39
Hoshiarpur
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Railway
4. Urban 24 29 53
Mandi, Hoshiarpur
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Bombeli,
5. Urban 29 31 60
Hoshiarpur
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Dasuya,
6. Urban 21 26 47
Hoshiarpur
Contd…

108
 S. Name of School Area Male Female Total
No.
Patiala
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Shermajra,
7. Rural 15 19 34
Patiala
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Kularam,
8. Rural 19 22 41
Patiala
Govt. Sen. Sec. School,
9. Rural 18 23 41
Bahadurgarh, Patiala
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Lachkani,
10. Urban 22 27 49
Patiala
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Tripuri,
11. Urban 24 26 50
Patiala
Govt. Model Pheel Khana Sen. Sec.
12. Urban 29 24 53
School, Patiala
Mansa
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Bareh,
13. Rural 17 22 39
Mansa
Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Jhanduke,
14. Rural 16 20 36
Mansa
Govt. Sen. Sec. Smart School,
15. Rural 14 21 35
Fatta Maloka, Mansa
Govt. Sen. Sec. School,
16. Urban 22 24 46
Sardulgarh, Mansa
Govt. Sen. Sec. School,
17. Urban 19 25 44
Sardulewala, Mansa
Govt. Co-ed. Sen. Sec. School,
18. Urban 21 27 48
Mansa
Total 367 433 800

The distribution of the total sample of secondary school students in

term of gender and locale is shown below the figure 3.1.

109
 Total Students
(800)

Male Female
(367) (433)

Urban Rural Urban Rural

(177) (190) (273) (160)

Figure 3.1: Distribution of the Sample

3.4 COLLECTION OF DATA

After selecting the school from three districts of Punjab namely
Hoshiarpur, Patiala and Mansa, the researcher personally contacted their
principals and sought permission for data collection. The purpose of testing
was explained to the principals, teachers and students. A congenial
environment was made and proper rapport was established with the teachers
and students, separately. The researcher personally administered tools, viz.
Educational Aspirations Scale (Sharma and Gupta, 2015); Student
Engagement Scale (Lam et al., 2014); Academic Achievement Test in Social
Science (Constructed by researcher herself) and Self-Confidence Scale
(Gupta and Lakhani, 2018) to students. Respondents were instructed to read
the items given in research tools very carefully before responding. They were
suggested to be biasfree and sincere in their responses. All the students
covered under data collection procedure were assured that the responses
provided by them would be utilized for research purpose only and the
information provided will be kept totally confidential to all counts.

3.5 SCORING OF RESEARCH TOOLS

The scoring of the various research tools used in the present study was
done as per the instructions given in their respective manuals. The details are
given as:

110
3.5.1 EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS SCALE
There is no right or wrong answer. The subject has to compare
between a pair of statement given in each of the items, and weight one of this
two by putting a right tick mark against it. Scoring key has been prepared for
EAS by the help of 5 judges. Two category responses have been admitted.
Either the response would be scored as 1 or as 0. The maximum score is 45
whereas the minimum is 0. Raw scores have been converted into z-scores.

3.5.2 STUDENT ENGAGEMENT SCALE

Student engagement scale contains 33 items that measure an
individual’s student engagement. This scale is comprised of three dimensions
that result in measurement of the current state of an individual’s student
engagement. The three dimensions are affective engagement, behavioral
engagement and cognitive engagement. There are five options against every
item of the scale. Each option indicates the frequency of occurrence of a
particular behavior. This is a likert scale. The five options of affective
engagement and behavioral engagement belong to five different responses
namely, strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree. Then
options carries the marks (Strongly disagree) 1 score, (Disagree) 2 scores,
(Neutral) 3 scores, (Agree) 4 scores, (Strongly agree) 5 scores. Five options
of cognitive engagement belong to five different responses namely, never,
rarely, sometimes, often and always. Then options carries the marks (Never)
1 score, (Rarely) 2 scores, (Sometimes) 3 scores, (Often) 4 scores and
(Always), 5 scores. (R) showed in the scale reversed items and the highest
score in scale 165 and the lowest is 5. Table 3.17 shows the response pattern
of the student engagement scale items as follows:

111
 Table 3.17
Scoring System of Student Engagement Scale
Dimension Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
Affective Engagement
and Behavioral 1 2 3 4 5
Engagement

Dimension Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

Cognitive
1 2 3 4 5
Engagement

3.5.3 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT TEST

Social Science achievement test has 44 items. Each item is scored by
assigning ‘1’ marks for right answer and ‘0’ marks for wrong answer. Total
right responses of the test are counted to have achievement score of each
student in social science subject. Thus each student’s scores ranging from 0-
44 are obtained for achievement of secondary school students of Social
Science.

3.5.4 SELF-CONFIDENCE SCALE

Self-confidence scale contains 48 items that measure an individual’s
self-confidence. This scale is comprised of five dimensions that result in
measurement of the current state of an individual’s self-confidence. The five
dimensions are Decisiveness, Self-concept, Self-control, Inter-personal
relation and Parental support. This is a likert scale. There are five options
against every item of the scale. Each option indicates the frequency of
occurrence of a particular behavior. The five options belong to five different
responses namely, Always, Often, Sometimes, Rarely and Never. Then
options carries the marks (Always) 5 scores, (Often) 4 scores, (Sometimes) 3
scores, (Rarely) 2 scores, (Never) 1 score. Dot (·) showed in the scale
negative items and the highest score in scale 240 and the lowest is 5. Raw
scores have been converted into z-scores. Table 3.18 shows the response
pattern of the self-confidence scale items as follows:

112
 Table 3.18
Scoring System of Self-confidence Scale
Types of Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
Items

Positive 5 4 3 2 1

Negative 1 2 3 4 5

3.6 STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES USED

The position of statistics within the study is to serve as a means of
planning studies, analysing and drawing conclusions from raw data. Without
the use of statistical techniques, the raw scores have no meaning and
relevance for themselves. Therefore, statistical techniques were used
extensively for educational research purposes. Descriptive and inferential
statistics was used for data interpretation, taking into account both research
objectives as well as study design. The investigator was used statistical
techniques such as:
1. Mean, median, mode, skewness and kurtosis of the scores of
secondary school students of Punjab were calculated on the variables
of educational aspirations, student engagement, academic
achievement and self-confidence to ascertain the nature of score
distribution.
2. t-test was employed to compare the differences in educational
aspirations, student engagement, academic achievement and self-
confidence of secondary school students of Punjab across gender and
locale.
3. Coefficient of correlation was calculated using Pearson’s Product
Moment Correlation to find out the relationship of educational
aspirations of secondary school students of Punjab with their student
engagement, academic achievement and self-confidence in relation to
gender and locale.

113
 4. Step up regression analysis was used to ascertain the predictive
efficiency of student engagement, academic achievement and self-
confidence on educational aspirations of secondary school students of
Punjab.
The investigator was therefore explaining the analysis, interpretation
and inference of the results based on these methods, procedures and
statistical techniques in the next chapter of the report.

114