1 / 35

Presented by G. UMA Assistant Professor Department of Mathematics ANNA UNIVERSITY

A STUDY ON DIFFICULT ON MATHEMATICS SUBJECT AMONG THE STUDENTS OF ENGINEERING COLLEGE IN DINDIGUL DISTRICT. Presented by G. UMA Assistant Professor Department of Mathematics ANNA UNIVERSITY University College of Engineering Dindigul. Co-Author Dr. B. V. GOPAL Vice Principal

varian
Download Presentation

Presented by G. UMA Assistant Professor Department of Mathematics ANNA UNIVERSITY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A STUDY ON DIFFICULT ON MATHEMATICS SUBJECT AMONG THE STUDENTS OF ENGINEERING COLLEGE IN DINDIGUL DISTRICT Presented by G. UMA Assistant Professor Department of Mathematics ANNA UNIVERSITY University College of Engineering Dindigul.

  2. Co-Author Dr. B. V. GOPAL Vice Principal K. Nanjappa Gounder College of Education Akyshaya Nagar Dindigul, Tamilnadu gopaletbdu@gmail.com

  3. CONTEXTUAL PROLOGUE • Mathematics subject is indispensable part in Engineering studies. If our students are to function effectively in this era of rapid technological advancement and globalization, they must be Mathematically Literate. • But nowadays in our Engineering stream, Mathematics is considered as one of the main obstacle to get through their degree.

  4. Cont… • The Kothari Commission (1964-66)emphasizes the significance of mathematics in by stating that “The advent of automation and cybernetics, in this century, marks the beginning of the scientific industrial revolution and makes it all the more imperative to devote special attention to the study of mathematics. Proper foundation to the knowledge of the subject should be laid in the school”. • Sazhin, 1997has correctly pointed out that “mathematics is an essential for engineering area to be understanding as a language for describing physical, chemical, and other formulation in term of mathematical enquiry”

  5. RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY • The aims of teaching mathematics and sciences will be distinct from those of teaching languages and social sciences. • Mathematics with its special features has wider applications in daily life and other fields of study. This facilitates the correlation of mathematics with other fields and disciplines. • As the teaching of Mathematics subject should be visualized as the vehicle to train an engineering student to think, reason, analyze and to articulate logically, the “Investigators sorted out the level of the Difficulties on Achievement in Mathematics among the Engineering Students”.

  6. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY Major objective of the study was To find out the level of Difficult on Mathematics Subject among the Students of Engineering College. Specific objective of the study were • To find out Significant Difference on Mean Values of Difficult on Mathematics subject among Male and Female students of engineering college. • To find out the Significant Difference on Mean Values of Difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to their Locality of Residence.Cont….

  7. Cont… • To find out the Significant Difference on Mean Values of Difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to their Type of Management. • To find out the Significant Difference on Mean Values of Difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to their Parental Education. • To find out the Significant Difference on Mean Values of Difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to their Parental Income.

  8. HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY The hypotheses of the study were framed according to the objectives of the study and were stated below. • There is no Significant Difference on Mean Values of Difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to their Gender. • There is no Significant Difference on Mean Values of Difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to theirLocality of Residence. • There is no Significant Difference on Mean Values of Difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to their Type of Management. Cont….

  9. Cont…. • There is no Significant Difference On Mean Values Of Difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to their Parental Education. • There is no Significant Difference on Mean Values of Difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to their Parental Income.

  10. METHODOLOGY The design of the present research study belongs to theSurvey Method. (i)Selection and Size of the Sample • Random Sampling Technique was used to select the sample. • Sample consisted of 150 Engineering studentsfrom different Colleges of Engineering. Cont..

  11. (ii) Variables of the Study • The Dependent Variable involved in this study was Difficult on Achievement in Mathematics. • The Demographic variables used in this study were Gender, Locality of residence, Type of Management, Parental Education and Parental Income. Cont..

  12. (iii) Tool Development • The investigators themselves developed the tool namely, “Difficult on Achievement in Mathematics (DAM)”. • The tool comprises 55 items in four point rating scale such as Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree and Strongly Disagree. • To conduct pilot study preliminary draft was neatly typed which includes 75 items in four point rating scale and administered to 30 engineering students • Ultimately the total number of 75 items was reduced to 55 items for the final draft. • The modification of the final draft was done as per the opinion and suggestions given by three educational experts so as to find out the validity of the tool. Cont….

  13. Cont…. The value of co-efficient of the reliability of the tool through Split-Half Method is found to be 0.87 which is found to be highly reliable to administer it. (iv) Administering the Tool The final draft of the standardised tool was administered to 150 engineering students from various colleges of engineering. After collecting the data from the sample, the master table was prepared.

  14. DATA ANALYSIS • The data was analyzed with appropriate statistical measures. The data have been analyzed by SPSS Package (16th version). • The investigators followed Mean, Standard deviation and ‘t’ test for the analysis of the data. • The results and interpretation of data are presented in the following tables.

  15. TABLE 1MEAN AND STANDARD DEVIATION SCORES ON DIFFICULT ON MATHEMATICS SUBJECT AMONG THE STUDENTS OF ENGINEERING COLLEGE IN TOTAL

  16. Table 1 reveals that the obtained Maximum and Minimum Mean Scores of level of difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college are 62.05 and 61.19 and with respect to SD are 4.25and3.46. It is also understood that Mean and SD scores on the level of difficult on Mathematics subject in Total are 61.67 and 3.80. It shows that the level of Mean scores (61.67) of Difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college is found to be Moderate.

  17. TABLE 2 ‘t’ VALUES BETWEEN THE MEAN VALUES ON THE LEVEL OF DIFFICULT ON MATHEMATICS SUBJECT AMONG THE STUDENTS OF ENGINEERING COLLEGE WITH REPECT TO THEIR GENDER

  18. Table 2 shows that the ‘t’ value 0.18 is not significant at 0.05 level. The results show that there is no significant difference among the Male and Female students of engineering college towards their level of difficult on Mathematics subject. Hence, the framed null hypothesis is found to be accepted.

  19. TABLE 3 ‘t’ VALUES BETWEEN THE MEAN VALUES ON THE LEVEL OF DIFFICULT ON MATHEMATICS SUBJECT AMONG THE STUDENTS OF ENGINEERING COLLEGE WITH REPECT TO THEIR LOCALITY OF RESIDENCE

  20. It is understood from the Table 3 that the ‘t’ value 0.89 is not significant at 0.5 level. It is inferred that the Mean values on the level of difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to locality of residence is found to be similar. Hence the framed null hypothesis is found to be accepted.

  21. TABLE 4 ‘t’ VALUES BETWEEN THE MEAN VALUES ON THE LEVEL OF DIFFICULT ON MATHEMATICS SUBJECT AMONG THE STUDENTS OF ENGINEERING COLLEGE WITH REPECT TO THEIR TYPE OF MANAGEMENT

  22. It is obviously seen from the Table 4 that the ‘t’ value 1.37 is not significant at 0.5 levels. It is understood from the results that there is no significant difference between the Mean values on the level of difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to type of management. Hence the framed null hypothesis is found to be accepted.

  23. TABLE 5 ‘t’ VALUES BETWEEN THE MEAN VALUES ON THE LEVEL OF DIFFICULT ON MATHEMATICS SUBJECT AMONG THE STUDENTS OF ENGINEERING COLLEGE WITH REPECT TO THEIR PARENTAL EDUCATION

  24. The above Table 5 shows that the computed ‘t’ value 0.26 is less than the critical value 1.96at 0.05 level and hence it is not significant. The result revealed that the level of difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to their parental education is found to be similar. Hence the framed null hypothesis is found to be accepted.

  25. TABLE 6 ‘t’ VALUES BETWEEN THE MEAN VALUES ON THE LEVEL OF DIFFICULT ON MATHEMATICS SUBJECT AMONG THE STUDENTS OF ENGINEERING COLLEGE WITH REPECT TO THEIR PARENTAL MONTHLY INCOME

  26. It is seen from the Table 6 that the ‘t’ value 1.16 is not significant at 0.05 level. The result shows that there is no significant difference between the mean values of the students of engineering college whose parental monthly income below Rs. 20,000 and the students whose parental monthly income above Rs. 20,000 towards the Difficult on the Mathematics subject. Hence the framed null hypothesis is found to be accepted.

  27. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY • Difficulties on Achievement in Mathematics among the engineering students are found to be moderate (Mean Scores = 61.67). • Both Male and Female students of engineering college in Dindigul district are having similar levels of difficulties on achievement in mathematics. • It is inferred that the Mean values on the level of difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to locality of residence is found to be similar. Cont….

  28. Cont…. • It is inferred from the findings that Government and Private engineering students are having similar levels of difficulties on achievement in Mathematics. • The result revealed that there is similarity towards the level of difficult on Mathematics subject among the students of engineering college with respect to their Parental Education. • There is no significant difference between the mean values of the students of engineering college whose parental monthly income below Rs. 20,000 and the students whose parental monthly income above Rs. 20,000towards the Difficult on the Mathematics subject.

  29. DISCUSSION • From the Descriptive Analysis, it is understood that level of difficulty in Mathematics subject is found to be moderate. • It is contradictory to the results investigated by Mrinal Sarma and Majidul Ahmed (2013) . • On analysis of the data through the ‘t’ test, there is no significant difference in the Mean values on the level of difficult on Mathematics subject with reference to their demographic variables such as the Gender, Locality of residence, Type of Management, Parental Education and Parental Income . Cont….

  30. Cont…. • But in the case of study conducted by Catherine (2012) entitled ‘Female interest in Mathematics’ revealed that there is gender bias i.e. the Female students shows less interest in mathematics subject than male students. • Nicole (2003) stated that the Female students will perform at the similar level as the male students when they are adopted the right educational tools Cont….

  31. Cont…. • Difficult on Mathematics subject among the engineering students with respect to selected demographic variables are found to be similar.This may be due to the interrelated factors like attitude, intellectual skills, self-concept and problem solving ability which do not have any effect in the selected demographic variables for the present study. • Foong (1987)reported that the students who dislike mathematics view their former teachers as intolerant and their performance is due to the negative attitude of the teachers.

  32. CONCLUSION • Findings of this study would definitely help the engineering students and teachers to bridge the gap among various levels of education which involves mathematics as the subject. • The teaching methodology may be modified with integration of technology based teaching in the classroom and more comprehensive the blended learning to be followed so that the teaching-learning process can be enhanced. Cont….

  33. Cont…. • For the engineering students Mathematics is a prime factor for their academic career development. This study shows that engineering students should require more relevant knowledge and be able to apply appropriate skills to solve mathematical problems. • Also the significance of results of the present study highlighted the teachers have to take extra effort to reduce the difficulty level on achievement in mathematics by insisting the repository nature of Mathematics. • To adopt Technology Oriented Method of Instruction in the classroom to achieve high academic standards in Mathematics subject.

  34. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This study was conducted with co-operation and support of engineering students and faculty of the concerned institution to collect the relevant data for research work.

  35. THANK YOU

More Related