15091-Article Text-22509-2-10-20200710

International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology
Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
A Study on Communication Skills in English among the Higher Secondary

Level Students at Sivaganga Educational District
A. Punitha1, D. Baskaran2
Research Scholar, Department of Education (DDE),Alagappa University, Karaikudi
Assistant Professor, Department of Education (DDE),Alagappa University,
Karaikudi E-mail: piopunitha2010@gmail.com
Abstract
English today inhabits a significant place in our educational structure but learned
unnaturally. Civilization and culture could not be widespread and transmitted to succeeding
generations until there was a printed language. Though Information Technology has
revolutionized the field of education especially English language learning, there is no substitute
for a good teacher. The investigatortakesimplemented the normative survey method to the
research work. The populace for the current study is the higher secondary school scholars
studying in schools in Sivagangaeducational districts in the State of Tamil Nadu. The
investigator hand-me-down simple random sampling technique. The sample consisted of 200
higher secondary school students. The investigator has used a standardized tool for
Communication Skills.There is no major difference among Urban, Semi-Urban, Rural school
learners in their Communication Skills in English at the higher secondary level.
Keywords: Communication skills, English, etc.
Introduction
English today lodges animportant place in our educational coordination but learned
unnaturally. As belongings are at current the student at the finish of adifficult and luxurious
scholastic transporter has neither knowledge on the foreign linguisticprod on him, or on his own
mother patois, the result is that he never originates to have any real medium for creativity and
there is no character where there is no creativity.The study of English has opened to us a massive
literature. English is accountable for arousing in us nationwide feeling. As there is no shared
Indian linguistic, English has taken the place of a shared Indian linguistic and has been obliging
ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC 5855
Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
in bringing together the persons of India. It has endorsed science and skill. The Indian tongues
have been prejudiced by English.
Review of Literature
Skinner Robert Eugene. (2018),conducted a study on the effect of second language

instruction upon the English verbal performance of secondary students as measure by the texas
assessment of academic skills.Public schools in the state of Texas assess English language verbal
performance of students with an instrument called the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills.
Undoubtedly, English language verbal skills can be developed in all academic subjects where
English is used; however, there is considerable research that supports the position that the study
of the second language (a foreign language) can also enhance English language verbal skills.The
English verbal performance scores, as measure by the texas assessment of academic skill's of
3105 students in attendance at Mary Carroll High School in the Corpus Christi Independent
Schools district during the fall and summer sessions, inclusive of transfer students, of the 1995-
1996 school year were used to compare performance by students who studied a foreign language
(Spanish, French, German or Latin) to the performance by students who did not study a foreign
language. A comparison of the academic in English courses by the two comparison groups was
also made. In addition, questionnaires were provided to students and teachers to determine how
they felt the study of a foreign language influenced English language skills.
Oliver. (2019),accompanied a study on the effect of pre-reading strategies on

comprehension abilities of fourth and fifth-grade students.The concern about reading
comprehension has intensified over the years. Reading educators have been encouraged to focus
on comprehension as a complex process that is essential to better understanding. Researchers
have recommended a number of suggestions to improve children's comprehension. One of these
emphasizes more teacher-directed, comprehension strategy instruction.
Need for the study
Language, in some form, is the heritage of every individual. Language lubricates

mankind‟s progress – it lets us share our opinion and ideas with others. It frees us to travel
toplaces we cannot afford to visit. It helps us to meet men and women who lived many years ago

Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
through their writings. In short, it permits us to share in a myriad of human activities so that we
are never dependent on just our own limited personal experiences for information. Charlton
Laird says about the importance of language to people. “In short, man, as we know him, could
not exist without language and until there was language. Civilization and culture could not be
wide spread and transmitted to succeeding generations until there was a printed language.”
Role of Teacher in Teaching English
As far as the language development of a child is concerned, the teacher exerts a greater
influence on him. If the teacher is ineffective, his students‟ state with respect to second language
learning is miserable. Though Information Technology has revolutionized the field of education
especially English language learning, there is no substitute for a good teacher. Therefore, the
teacher has to know the situation and learning experiences in which students can develop their
language skills. In this regard, Andrew Wilkinson (1970) rightly maintains that “the task of any
teacher of English is the creation of situations in which language is the natural outcome”.
Significance of the study
The study shouldseem that English is the portion of the student‟s evocative and
positivelife in the biosphere today. There has been a cumulativerequirement and mandate for
English. The expanding growth of “Institutions for spoken English” universally in our state
accentuates the above – declared fact. This also clearly signposts that our scholars are not self-
possessed enough to use the English Philologicalaccurately even after outlay more than schools.
In-state of Tamilnadu, English is a subsequentlinguistic in schools and colleges. A

language is for communiqué. A person has knowledgeable a language means, he
necessityconnect with others effortlessly in linguistic. Most of the scholars in colleges are able to
write English but a few scholars are able to interconnect orally. Since the aural – oral method and
certain other outgoing tasks at the higher subordinate level, it is said that here is also a bordering
rise in the values of spoken English. Some scholars, it is experiential are able to connect in
speech and writing. So, in instruction to know the current status of the scholar‟s competence in
English Philological – Spoken Ability and written ability the Sleuth has taken up this
contemporary study. This study will surely help the investigator to comprehend the difficulties of

Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
the scholars in their Verbal and Printed English besides allowing him to adopt groundbreaking
methods in education English. This wills also assistance the other educatorsin English linguistics.
The English textbook authors also will advantage from this, Above all, it will accentuate the
need for approving varied devices in teaching English Philological.
General Objectives
To discover the Communication Skills in English among the higher secondary level
students.
Specific Objectives
1. To find the Communication Skills in English among the higher secondary level students
with regard to age.
2. To find the Communication Skills in English among the higher secondary level
studentsregard to sex.
studentswith regard toType of School.
studentswith regard to Location.
Null Hypothesis
1. There is any significant between Communication Skills in English among the higher
secondary level students with regard to age.
2. There is any significant betweenCommunication Skills in English among the higher

secondary level students with regard to sex.
3. There is any significant between theCommunication Skills in English among the higher
secondary level students with regard to Type of School.
4. There is any significant between theCommunication Skills in English among the higher
secondary level studentswith regard toLocation.

Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
METHOD OF THE STUDY
The researcher has implemented the normative survey method of research to study the
Communication skills of higher secondary school students.
POPULATION OF THE STUDY
The populace of the present study is the higher secondary school students studying in
schools in Sivaganga districts in Tamil Nadu.
SAMPLE FOR THE STUDY
The researcher used a simple random sampling method. The sample consisted of 200
higher secondary school students. The sample was stratified on the basis of sex, age, School
Type, and Location of School.
TOOL USED IN THE STUDY
For the collection of data, the investigator has used a Questionnaire. The investigator has used a
standardized tool for Communication Skills.
TESTING THE HYPOTHESIS
Null Hypothesis – 1
There is any significant between the Communication Skills in English among the Higher
Secondary level students with regard to age.
TABLE 1
Communication Skills in English among the Higher Secondary level students with regard
to age.
Calculated
Dimensions Age N Mean SD Remark
‘t’ Value
Personal-Psychological Parental Fourteen 151 25.66 2.36 0.54 NS

Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
Communication Fifteen 49 25.90 2.85
Fourteen 151 23.35 2.74

Peer Level Communication 0.31 NS
Fifteen 49 23.49 2.70
Fourteen 151 27.35 2.58

Teacher Level Communication 0.67 NS
Fifteen 49 27.08 2.39
It is concluded from the overhead table that the calculated„t‟ value for the dimensions
such as personal-psychological parental, peerLevel Communication, teacher characteristics is
low than the table value (1.96) at a 5% level of consequence. So the unacceptable hypothesis is
established. So there is no significant difference between 14 years old and 15 years old learners
in their Communication Skills in English at the higher secondary level.
Secondary level students with regard to sex.
TABLE 2
Communication Skills in English among the Higher Secondary Level Students with
Regard To Sex.
Calculated
Dimensions Sex N Mean SD Remark
‘t’ Value
Personal-Psychological Male 94 25.70 2.53

0.07 NS
Parental Communication Female 106 25.73 2.46
Male 94 23.22 2.74

Peer Level Communication 0.79 NS
Female 106 23.53 2.72
Teacher Level Male 94 26.62 2.72

3.58 S
Communication Female 106 27.88 2.20

Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
It is conditional from the overhead table that the calculated„t‟ value for the magnitudes
like personal-psychological and peer are fewer than 5% level of significance. Henceforth the
insignificant hypothesis is established. It expressions that there is no momentous difference
between male and female students in their Communication Skills in English at the
highersecondary level.A dimension like Teacher Level Communication issuperiorto the board
value (1.96) at a 5% level of implication. Henceforward the insignificant hypothesis is rejected.
It demos that there is an importantdifference among male and female students in their
Communication Skills in English at the higher secondary level.
Secondary school level with regard to Type of School.
TABLE 3
Communication Skills in English among the Higher Secondary School Level with Regard
to Type of School
Calculated
Dimensions Religion Mean SSb SSw df Remark
‘F’ Value
personal-psychological Government 25.77

Parental
Communication Aided 25.15 4.84 1225.92 2, 197 0.39 NS
Private 25.63
Government 26.13
Peer Level
Communication Aided 20.43 29.47 1652.37 2, 197 3.97 S
Private 23.38
Government 27.37
Teacher Level
Aided 27.46 11.99 1262.77 2, 197 0.93 NS
Communication
Private 26.63

Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
It is concluded from the overhead table that the intended ‟F‟ value for the magnitudes like
personal-psychological and Teacher Level Communicationis less than the table value (3.04) 197
degrees of freedom at 5% level. Hence the null hypothesis is accepted. It shows that there is no
significant change among Government, private, aidedschool learners in their Communication
Skills in Englishat a higher subordinate level.
The intended ‟F‟ value for the aspectPeer Level Communicationis improved than the
tabletop value (3.04) for 2, 197 degrees of freedom at 5% level of meaning. Hence the null
hypothesis is rejected. It shows that there is a significant difference among Government, private,
aidedschool students in their Communication Skills in Englishat a higher subordinate level.
Secondary school level with regard to Location.
TABLE 4
Communication Skills in English among the Higher Secondary School Level with Regard
to Location.
Cal
Dimensions Community Mean SSb SSw df culated Remark
‘F’ Value
personal- Urban 25.75

psychological
Parental Semi-Urban 26.08
39.67 1297.08 3, 196 2.71 S
Communication
Rural 25.76
Urban 23.25
Peer Level
Communication Semi-Urban 23.29 23.21 1476.14 3, 196 0.14 NS
Rural 23.35
Teacher Level Urban 28.50 28.86 1245.90 3, 196 1.51 NS

Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
Communication Semi-Urban 27.60
Rural 26.80
It is inferred from the above table that the calculated ‟F‟ value for the dimensions like
peer achievement, teacher characteristics, and teaching methods and in total is less than the table
value (3.04) for 3, 196 degrees of freedom at 5% level of significance. Hence the null hypothesis
is acknowledged. It shows that there is no significant difference among Urban, Semi-Urban,
Ruralschool students in their Communication Skills in Englishat the higher secondary level.
The intended ‟F‟ value for the measurement personal-psychological peer and parental is
better than the table value (3.04) for 3, 196 degrees of liberty at a 5% level of significance.
Hence the null theory is forbidden. It demonstrates that there is an important difference among
Urban, Semi-Urban, Ruralschool students in their Communication Skills in Englishat the
advanced secondary level.
Finding and Results
It is concluded from the overhead table that the calculated„t‟ value for the dimensions
such as personal-psychological parental, peerLevel Communication, teacher characteristics is
low than the table value (1.96) at a 5% level of consequence. So the unacceptable hypothesis is
established. So there is no significant difference between 14 years old and 15 years old learners
in their Communication Skills in English at the higher secondary level.
It is conditional from the overhead table that the calculated„t‟ value for the magnitudes
like personal-psychological and peer are fewer than 5% level of significance. Henceforth the
insignificant hypothesis is established. It expressions that there is no momentous difference
between male and female students in their Communication Skills in English at the
highersecondary level.A dimension like Teacher Level Communication is superior to the board
value (1.96) at a 5% level of implication. Henceforward the insignificant hypothesis is rejected.
It demos that there is an important difference among male and female students in their
Communication Skills in English at the higher secondary level.

Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
It is concluded from the overhead table that the intended ‟F‟ value for the magnitudes like
personal-psychological and Teacher Level Communicationis less than the table value (3.04) 197
degrees of freedom at 5% level. Hence the null hypothesis is accepted. It shows that there is no
significant change among Government, private, aidedschool learners in their Communication
Skills in Englishat a higher subordinate level.
The intended ‟F‟ value for the aspect Peer Level Communicationis improved than the
tabletop value (3.04) for 2, 197 degrees of freedom at 5% level of meaning. Hence the null
hypothesis is rejected. It shows that there is a significant difference among Government, private,
aidedschool students in their Communication Skills in Englishat a higher subordinate level.
It is inferred from the above table that the calculated ‟F‟ value for the dimensions like
peer achievement, teacher characteristics, and teaching methods and in total is less than the table
value (3.04) for 3, 196 degrees of freedom at 5% level of significance. Hence the null hypothesis
is acknowledged. It shows that there is no significant difference among Urban, Semi-Urban,
Ruralschool students in their Communication Skills in Englishat the higher secondary level.
The intended ‟F‟ value for the measurement personal-psychological peer and parental is
better than the table value (3.04) for 3, 196 degrees of liberty at a 5% level of significance.
Hence the null theory is forbidden. It demonstrates that there is an important difference among
Urban, Semi-Urban, Ruralschool students in their Communication Skills in Englishat the
advanced secondary level.
Conclusion
It has afrighteninginvolvement for the researcher in responsibilityfor the research. The

findings of the investigationdeterminedthe way in assessing and preparationplans for the
continuance of English teaching and knowledge in the schools. With theimprovedlocation and
method to the education of English as a second linguistic, especially the skills the scholars will
surely and surely become proficient in interactive and chief in English.

Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865
Acknowledgment:
This article has been written with the financial support of RUSA- Phase 2.0 grant sanctioned vide
Letter No. F. 24-51 / 2014-U, Policy (TNMulti-Gen), Dept. of Edn. Govt. of India, Dt.
09.10.2018.
References
[1] Aggarwal, J.C. (1997). Theory and Principles of Education, Vikas Publishing
House Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.
[2] Ahuja, R.L. (1961). Teaching of English as a Foreign Language. (1 st Ed.),
Allahabad : Indian Press (Pubs.) Pvt. Ltd.
[3] Best, John W. (1977). Research in Educational Prentice Hall of Indian RT Ltd.,
New Delhi.
[4] Bright, J.A and MC George, G.P. (1970). Teaching English as a second language.
Longman Group Ltd., London.
[5] Chandra Kumar, P.S. (1995). Technology of Teaching English, PAS Publications,
Tirunelveli.
[6] French, F.G. (1955). Teaching of modern language, Oxford University Press,
UNESCO, 1957.
[7] Gurrey P. (1970). Teaching English as an Foreign language, ELBS Longman
group Ltd., London.
[8] Hornby, A.S. (1968). The teaching of Structural words and sentence patterns,
London, Oxford University Press.
[9] Jeremy, Harmer (1983). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Longman
Group Ltd., England.
[10] Jesa, M. (2005). Efficient English Teaching, APH Publishing House, New
Delhi.
[11] Kohli, A.L. (1998). Techniques of teaching English. DhanpatRai Publishing
Company (P) Ltd., New Delhi – 2.
[12] Oxford Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary (1989). Published by Oxford University
Press, Great Britain.


15091-Article Text-22509-2-10-20200710

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

15091-Article Text-22509-2-10-20200710

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology

Vol. 29, No. 5, (2020), pp. 5855 - 5865

A Study on Communication Skills in English among the Higher Secondary

Keywords: Communication skills, English, etc.

Skinner Robert Eugene. (2018),conducted a study on the effect of second language

Oliver. (2019),accompanied a study on the effect of pre-reading strategies on

Need for the study

Language, in some form, is the heritage of every individual. Language lubricates

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST

Role of Teacher in Teaching English

Significance of the study

In-state of Tamilnadu, English is a subsequentlinguistic in schools and colleges. A

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST

2. There is any significant betweenCommunication Skills in English among the higher

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST

METHOD OF THE STUDY

POPULATION OF THE STUDY

SAMPLE FOR THE STUDY

TOOL USED IN THE STUDY

Personal-Psychological Parental Fourteen 151 25.66 2.36 0.54 NS

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST

Communication Fifteen 49 25.90 2.85

Fourteen 151 23.35 2.74

Fourteen 151 27.35 2.58

Personal-Psychological Male 94 25.70 2.53

Male 94 23.22 2.74

Teacher Level Male 94 26.62 2.72

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST

personal-psychological Government 25.77

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST

personal- Urban 25.75

Teacher Level Urban 28.50 28.86 1245.90 3, 196 1.51 NS

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST

Communication Semi-Urban 27.60

Finding and Results

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST

It has afrighteninginvolvement for the researcher in responsibilityfor the research. The

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST

You might also like