GENERAL PROBLEM: On Computer Application

SPECIFIC PROBLEM: An investigator is interested in exploring the most effective

method of interaction in the classroom achievement test score. He decided to try 3
methods of instruction – lecture method, Seminar method, and Discussion method.
He randomly selected 5 subjects for each of 3 groups from a class of 10 th-grade
students. The scores on the achievement tests for these 3 groups are given below
separately.

SL NO LECTURE SEMINAR DISCUSSION

1 8 11 5
2 10 13 5
3 11 13 8
4 11 15 9
5 12 16 10

Test the null hypothesis and find out whether there is a significant effect of methods
of instruction on academic achievement.

BASIC CONCEPT: Statistics allow psychologists to present data in ways that are easier
to comprehend.

According to Bronn (2002),” Statistics are mathematical procedures used to describe

data(singular: datum) and draw inferences from them. Thus, statistics is a science that
provides tools for analysis and interpretation to be used on raw data collected for the
purpose of decision-making in various fields of scientific inquiry. It deals with the
collection, classification, and tabulation of numerical facts as the basis for the
explanation, description, and comparison of phenomena (Mishra & Mohanty,2015).

Inferential statistics is known as “sampling statistics” which isn’t restricted within the
limits of the sample. Inferential or sampling statistics go beyond the sample and help
in generalizing inferences from the sample to the entire population and also finding the
probability of errors in such inferences. These inferential statistics find wide
applications in testing the experimental hypotheses and the significance of the
difference between the statistics of different samples.

In statistics, the generalizations for creating records about the mean of the original
population is given by the parametric test. This test is also a kind of hypothesis test. A
t-test is performed and this depends on the t-test of students, which is regularly used
in this value. This is known as a parametric test.

Also, the non-parametric test is a type of hypothesis test that is not dependent on
any underlying hypothesis. In the non-parametric test, the test depends on the value
of the median. This method of testing is also known as distribution-free testing. Test
values are found based on the ordinal or the nominal level.

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) is an inferential statistical technique, employed to

analyze multi-group experiments in order to determine their statistical influence. It is
leased on analyzing different sources of variance in an experiment. Variance is a
measure of the extent to which scores differ from each other. Further, there are two
sources of variances:-

(a)Within-Group Variance: It rests on the difference among subjects or scores in

each experimental group. It represents only the error variance of all subjects being
treated with an independent variable (IV).

(b)Between-Group Variance: It is the average performance of each experimental

group.

ANOVA utilizes the statistics of the F-test to tell whether the variation is due to the
independent variable being longer than that would be expected due to error variance
alone. It may be stated as:

The ANOVA was developed by Sir Ronald A. Fischer and was named as F-test by
Snedecor in Fisher’s name.

The simplest one-way ANOVA design is a single-factor test that investigates the
effects of a single independent variable on the dependent variable. It is undertaken to
find whether or not the exposure of different groups of subjects or cases to different
levels of a single independent variable has produced significant differences in the
variance between the groups. One-way ANOVA may be either model I or model II
accordingly as the independent variable is a “Fixed” experimental treatment or an
uncontrolled classification variable.

Assumptions of ANOVA

➢ Random assignment:
The experimental design should provide for random sampling so that each individual
of the population has an equal probability of being chosen for a group, and the choice
of each individual is independent of the choice of others.

Randomization of treatment should also be ensured for different levels of the

independent variable(s), wherever possible.

➢ Normal distribution:
The dependent variable should have a normal distribution in the population. Stated
otherwise, it should be reasonable to assume that the error terms, i.e., the deviations
of individual scores from the respective group means, are distributed normally.

➢ Independence of errors:
The error terms, i.e., the deviations of individual scores from the group mean, should
be independent of each other. This is an alternative form of the assumption that the
individual scores occur at random and are independent of each other.

➢ Homoscedasticity:
The assumption of homoscedasticity implies that the groups drawn for an experiment
possess homogeneous variances initially. In other words, they should have been
drawn from the same population (or closely similar populations) so that their initial
variances may be considered as different estimates of the same population variance,
differing only due to their sampling errors. It should thus be reasonable to assume that
the error terms of individuals of different groups have homogeneous dispersions.

➢ Additivity:
Different factors, including the independent variables used, produce separate bits of
variations of the dependent variable and these variations add up to give the total
variation of the latter. This additive property of variations, due to different factors,
enables the analysis of the total variance of the dependent variable into its various
components.

Advantages and Disadvantages

One-way analysis of variance with a single-factor, independent groups design has

advantages and disadvantages. Advantages include the following:

• The design layout is simple - one factor with k factor levels.

• Data analysis is easier with this design than with other designs.
• Computational procedures are identical for fixed-effects and random-effects
models.
• The design does not require equal sample sizes for treatment groups.
• The design requires subjects to participate in only one treatment group.
• Reduce the experimental error to a great extent.

Disadvantages include the following:

• The design does not permit repeated measures.

• The design can test the effect of only one independent variable.
• Design isn’t suitable if experimental units aren’t homogeneous.
• Not suitable for field experiments.
Applications/Uses:

The One-Way ANOVA is often used to analyze data from the following types of
studies:

• Field studies
• Experiments
• Quasi-experiments

The One-Way ANOVA is commonly used to test the following:

• Statistical differences among the means of two or more groups

• Statistical differences among the means of two or more interventions
• Statistical differences among the means of two or more change scores

The aim of the present work is to find out whether there is a significant effect of
methods of instruction on academic achievement.

RATIONALE:

We are using a one-way ANOVA for we have to collect data about one categorical
independent variable and one quantitative dependent variable. The independent
variable should have at least three levels (i.e., at least three different groups or
categories). In this scenario, it’s the method of instructions (with 3 levels-lecture,
seminar, & discussion).

HYPOTHESES:
A. Null Hypothesis: There is no significant effect of methods of instruction
(teaching methods) on academic achievement (achievement test scores).
B. Alternative Hypothesis: There is a significant effect of methods of instruction
(teaching methods) on academic achievement (achievement test scores).

STEPS FOR CALCULATION:

1. Open SPSS
2. Open the Data view sheet.
3. Put all values under the first column.
4. We will assign values for each of the teaching methods.
Here: 1.00 – Lecture Method
2.00 – Seminar Method
3.00 –Discussion Method
5. Now open the variable view sheet.
6. Change the names of the variables
• Variable 1: ACHIEVEMENTTESTSCORES
• Variable 2: TEACHINGMETHOD
7. Variable types will be numeric.
8. Width and decimals will be kept at 8 and 2 respectively, for both variables.
 9. For the variable ‘ACHIEVEMENTTESTSCORES’ the label will be
‘ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES’. For the variable ‘TEACHINGMETHOD’ the
label will be ‘TEACHING METHOD’.
10. For the label ‘ACHIEVEMENTTESTSCORES’, values will be none.
11. For the label ‘TEACHINGMETHOD’, we open the “Value level” dialogue box,
where we assign –
Value: 1
Label: Lecture Method
Then click on ‘Add’.
Similarly, Value: 2 and Label: Seminar Method
Then click on ‘Add’.
Similarly, Value 3: and Label: Discussion Method
Then click on ‘Add’.
Then click on‘OK’.
12. For the variable ‘ACHIEVEMENTTESTSCORES’ measure will be ‘scale’, and
for the variable ‘TEACHINGMETHOD’ measure will be ‘Nominal’.
13. Then click on ‘Analyze’ --> select ‘Compare Means’ --> select ‘One-way
ANOVA’. The ‘One-way ANOVA’ dialogue box will open.
14. ‘ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES’ will be added to the ‘Dependent List’, and
‘TEACHING METHOD’ will be added to ‘Factor’.
15. Then click on ‘Options’ and select under ‘Statistics’: ‘Descriptive’ and
‘Homogeneity of variance test’.
Then click on ‘Continue’.
Then click ‘OK’ on the One-way ANOVA dialogue box.

RESULT TABLES:
Between–Subjects Factors

VALUE LABEL

N
METHODS 1 LECTURE 5
2 SEMINAR 5
3 DISCUSSION 5
Descriptives

ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence

Interval for Mean

Lower Bound

Lecture Method 5 10.4000 1.51658 .67823 8.5169

Seminar Method 5 13.6000 1.94936 .87178 11.1796

Discussion Method 5 7.4000 2.30217 1.02956 4.5415

Total 15 10.4667 3.18179 .82154 8.7046

Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances

Dependent variable:
Achievement

F df1 df2 Sig.

1.027 2 12 .387
 Descriptives
ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES

95% Confidence Minimum Maximum

Interval for Mean

Upper Bound

Lecture Method 12.2831 8.00 12.00

Seminar Method 16.0204 11.00 16.00
Discussion Method 10.2585 5.00 10.00
Total 12.2287 5.00 16.00

Test of Homogeneity of Variances

ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES

Levene df1 df2 Sig.

Statistic

1.027 2 12 .387
 Tests of Between – Subjects Effects
Dependent
Variable:
ACHIEVEMENT

Source
Type III Sum
of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta
Squared
Corrected 96.133a 2 48.067 12.649 .001 .678
Model
Intercept 1643.267 1 1643.267 432.439 .000 .973
METHODS 96.133 2 48.067 12.649 .001 .678
Error 45.600 12 3.800

Total 1785.000 15
Corrected 141.733 14
Total

ANOVA
ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 96.133 2 48.067 12.649 .001

Within Groups 45.600 12 3.800

Total 141.733 14
INTERPRETATION:

The One-Way ANOVA procedure produces a one-way analysis of variance for a

quantitative dependent variable by a single factor (independent) variable.

The aim of the work was to find out whether there was a significant impact on the
Method of Instructions on Achievement Test or not.

The ‘Between – Subjects Factors’ table expressed the number of levels or the methods
of instruction i.e., ‘LECTURE’, ‘SEMINAR’ and ‘DISCUSSION’, and the sample size of
each of the groups or methods, which was 5 for all of them.

The ‘Descriptive Statistics’ table expresses the Mean, Standard Deviation, and sample
size of each of the methods of instruction. For the ‘LECTURE’ method, the Mean,
Standard Deviation, and the Sample Size (N) were 10.4000, 1.51658 and 5
respectively. For the ‘SEMINAR’ method, the Mean, Standard Deviation and the
Sample Size (N) were 13.6000, 1.94936, and 5 respectively. For the ‘DISCUSSION’
method, the Mean, Standard Deviation, and the Sample Size (N) were 7.4000,
2.30217, and 5 respectively.

Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances tests the null hypothesis, to check
whether the error variance of the dependent variable was equal across groups. From
the table, the F value was found to be 1.027 which was significant at the .387 level.
As .387 was greater than the 0.05 level, thus the null hypothesis was accepted, and
therefore, a parametric test i.e., ANOVA was computed.

From the ‘Tests of Between – Subjects Effects’ table, the value of Type III Sum of
Squares for ‘METHODS’ was 96.133, corresponding F value was found to be 12.649,
which was significant at a .001 level. As .001 was lesser than .05, therefore the Null
Hypothesis (Ho) was rejected, and the Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) was accepted.

In sum, the obtained 'F' ratio in the above calculation is 12.649. The critical value of
the 'F'-ratio’ with df (2,12) at 0.05 level is found to be 3.88 which is lower than the
calculated 'F' ratio. So, it can be
interpreted that there is a significant difference in the achievement of the scores of the
three methods of instruction. Hence, the alternative hypothesis(H1) is accepted and
the null hypothesis (Ho)is rejected.

CONCLUSION: Thus it can be concluded that there is a significant effect of method

of instructions on academic achievement .