DATA ANALYSIS OF TEACHING AND LEARNING IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS | UNIVERSITIES

CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
Presentation of Data
The presentation of data is based on the responses gotten from the questionnaires distributed and collected from teachers of Onicha Local Government Area.
Research Question 1
Instructional materials in teaching influences cognitive performance of secondary school students?
Table 1: Response on how instructural material influence cognitive performance of secondary school student.
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Strongly agree
40
33.33
Agree
44
36.67
Disagree
10
8.33
Strongly Disagree
26
21.67
Total
120
100
Source: Fieldwork

BUY THE COMPLETE WORK: INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS IN TEACHING AND LEARNING IN CROSS RIVER STATE


  • Instructional materials in teaching Terms
  • importance of instructional materials
  • list of instructional materials in teaching
  • example of instructional materials
  • instructional materials definition
  • types of instructional materials in teaching
  • instructional materials in teaching mathematics
  • instructional materials in teaching pdf
  • instructional materials in teaching english
The table above shows that 40 33.33% of the respondents strongly agreed to the question asked. (36.67%) agreed that instructional materials influence cognitive performance of secondary school students, while (8.33%) disagreed to the above question and 26(21.67%) strongly disagreed.
            From the results above, at shows that the greater percentage of the respondents (36.67%) submitted to the fact that instructional material influences cognitive performance of secondary school students.
Research question 2:
Instructional materials in teaching influence students affective performance.
Table 2: response on how instructional material influence students affective performance
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Strongly agree
35
29.17
Agree
40
33.33
Disagree
25
20.83
Strongly Disagree
20
16.67
Total
120
100
Source: fieldwork
            In response to the question above, 35(29.17%) respondents in teaching influence students affective performance, 40 (33.33%) agreed, 25 (20.83%) disagreed while 20 (16.67%) strongly disagreed that instructional materials in teaching influence students affective performance.
            From the result above, it shows that the greater percentage (33.33%) submitted to the fact that instructional material influences students affective performance.
Research Question 3
            The use of instructional materials in teaching influences students psychomotor performance?
Table 3: response on how instructional material in teaching influences students psychomotor performance.
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Strongly agree
46
38.33
Agree
21
17.50
Disagree
31
25.83
Strongly Disagree
22
18.33
Total   
120
100
Source: fieldwork
The table above shows that 46(38.33%) of the total respondents strongly agreed that instructional material influences students psychomotor performance. 21(17.5%) agreed, 31(25.83%) disagreed and  2 (18.33%) strongly disagreed.
            From the result above, it shows that the greater percentage (38.33%) submitted to the fact that instructional material influences students psychomotor performance.
RESEARCH QUESTION 4
            How does the use of instructional materials in teaching and learning influence teacher classroom performance?
Table 4: Response on how instructional material influence teachers classroom performance.
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Strongly agree
43
35.83
Agree
42
35.00
Disagree
20
16.67
Strongly Disagree
15
12.50
Total
120
100
Source: fieldwork
            The above table shows that 43(35.83%) of the respondents strongly Agree that instructional material influences teachers classroom performance. 42(35.00%) agreed 20 (16.67%) disagree and 15(12.50%) strongly disagreed.
            From the result above, it shows that the greater percentage (35.83%) submitted to the fact that instructional materials influences teachers classroom performance.

Test of Hypotheses
            The hypotheses in this work will be tested with chi-square(X2) which makes use of decision rule. Decision rule states that when degree of freedom or critical value is greater or less than calculated value, then null hypothesis is accepted or rejected respectively.

HYPOTHESIS I
H0:      Instructional materials in secondary schools cognitive performance on students.
H1:      Instructional materials in secondary schools have cognitive performance on students.
            This hypothesis was tested with respect to table I of the questionnaire distribution which states as follows, “How does the use of instructional materials in teaching and leaving influence cognitive performance of secondary school students” the statistical tool used was the chi-square(x2) using the contingency table previously calculated through the use of simple percentage.
The formula for chi-square (X2) is given as
X2        =          ∑(0-E)2
                             E
Where
X2        =          chi-square
         =          Summation
O         =          Observed frequency
E          =          Expected frequency

Response
Frequency
Percentage
Strongly agree
40
33.33
Agree
44
36.67
Disagree
10
8.33
Strongly Disagree
26
21.67
Total
120
100
To re-state the hypothesis:
H0:      Instructional materials in secondary schools does not have cognitive performance on students.
H1:      Instructional materials in secondary schools have cognitive performance on students.
Expected frequency =          120/ 4             =          30.0
                                                           
Chi-square computation
Option(0)
Expected freq(E)
O-E
(O-E)2
(O-E)2
    E
40
30.00
10
100
3.33
44
30.00
-4
196
6.53
10
30.00
-20
400
13.33
26
30.00
-4
10
0.53
TOTAL
120


23.72

Therefore, calculated chi-square value = 23.72
To compute the degree of freedom (DF) or critical value Df    =          (R-1)   (C-1)
Where            R         =          Number of rows which is 4
                        C         =          Number of columns which is 2.
:. DF                            =          (4-1)  (2-1)
                                                   (3)    (1)      
=          3  x  1             =          3
Degree of freedom   =          3
The researcher assumed 95% level of confidence and 5% level of significance. At 95% level of confidence and 5% level of significance, the degree of freedom of at 3 = 7.815 which is 7.82 approximately.
Decision Rule
Of the calculated chi-square(x2) value is greater than the critical value, that is , degree of freedom at 3, the null hypothesis is rejected while the alternative hypothesis is accepted and vice-versa.

 Conclusion
            From the above computation, source the calculated chi-square(X2) value 23.72 is greater than the chi-square tabulated, the null hypothesis is hereby rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted since the calculated frequency value (X223.72) is greater than the critical or tabulated value of 7.82.
            The researcher conclude that instructional materials in secondary schools have cognitive performance on students.
HYPOTHESIS II:
H0:      Instructional materials on secondary schools does not have effect on teacher’s classroom performance.
H1:      Instructional materials on secondary schools have effect on teacher’s classroom performance.
This hypothesis was tested with respect to table  of the questionnaire distribution which states, How does the use of instructional materials in teaching and learning influence teacher’s classroom performance. The statistical tool used was the chi-square(X2) using the contingency table previously calculated through the use of simple percentage.
            The formula for chi-square(x2) is given as
X2          =              ∑(0-E)2
                                    E
Where
X2          =           chi-square
         =          summation
O         =          Observed frequency
E          =          Expected frequency
Congruency  table
Response
frequency
Percentage
Strongly agree
43
35.83
Agree
42
35.00
Disagree
20
16.67
Strongly disagree
15
12.50
Total
120
100

To restate the hypothesis
Ho: Instructional materials on secondary schools does not have effect on teachers classroom performance
Hl: Instructional materials on secondary schools have effect on teachers classroom performance.
Expected frequency             =          120
                                                  4        =         30
Chi-square computation
Option (o)
Expected freq (E)
O-E
(O-E)2
(O-E)2/E
43
30
13
169
5. 63
42
30
12
144
4, 80
20
30
-10
100
3. 33
15
30
-15
225
7. 50
Total



21. 26

Therefore, the calculated chi-square value = 21.26, to compute the degree of freedom (DF) or critical value,
Df        =          (R-1) (c-1)
Where,
R         =          Number of rows which is 4,
C         =          Number of columns which is 2

:. DF    =          (4-1)  (2-1)
                         (3)          (1)
=          3  x  1  =  3,  df  =  3.
The researcher assumed 95% level of confidence and 5% level of significance. At 95% level of confidence, and 5% level of significance, the degree of freedom (DF) at 3 = 7.815 which is equal to 7.82 approximately.


BUY THE COMPLETE WORK: INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS IN TEACHING AND LEARNING IN BENUE STATE

Decision Rule
If the calculated chi-square (x2) value is greater then the critical value, that is, degree of freedom at 3, the null hypothesis is rejected while the alternative hypothesis is accepted and vice versa.
Conclusion
From the above computation, since the calculated chi-square(x2) value 21.26 is greater than the tabulated 7.82, the hull hypothesis is hereby rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted, therefore, instructional materials on secondary school students have effect on teachers classroom performance.
Share on Google Plus

Declaimer - MARTINS LIBRARY

NB: Join our Social Media Network on Google Plus | Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin