The schools used in the present study are situated wide apart, so no possible interaction of the subjects took place.
Method of Data Collection
The instruments for data collection in this study (EAT and TAI) were administered to the students in experimental group and control group. The EAT in PPT mode and TAI were administered as pre-test to the experimental and control groups. Data obtained from this served as pre-test scores. After six weeks, EAT in CBT mode was administered to experimental group as post-test while EAT in PPT mode was also administered to the control group as post-tests. After the achievement test, the TAI was also administered to the two groups as post-test to determine the students‘
test anxiety.
Method of Data Analysis
The data collected were analyzed using mean to answer the research questions. The Hypotheses were tested at .05 level of significance using Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA). The analyses were done using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).
CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA
This chapter presents the analysis of data collected and the results. The analyses of the research questions and hypotheses are presented one after the other using tables. A summary of the major findings of the study is also presented.
Research Question 1: What are the mean achievement scores of students exposed to CBT and that of those exposed to PPT in Economics?
Table 2:
Mean Achievement Scores of Students Exposed to CBT and that of those Exposed to PPT in Economics (N=107)
Group N Pre-test Post-test Mean
x x Difference
Experimental (CBT) 56 21.71 20.68 -1.03
Control (PPT) 51 21.33 22.06 0.73
The analysis on Table 2 shows the pre-test and post-test mean achievement scores of students exposed to CBT and PPT in Economics. The analyses further revealed that mean achievement score of students exposed to PPT is higher than that of the students exposed to CBT. However, it is a surprise that the pre-test score is higher than the post-test score in CBT which has a mean difference of -1.03.
Research Question 2: What are the mean achievement scores of male and female students exposed to CBT in Economics?
Table 3:
Mean Achievement Scores of Male and Female Students Exposed to CBT in Economics (N=56)
Experimental Group (CBT)
N Pre-test x
Post-test x
Mean Difference
Male 26 22.23 20.85 -1.38
Female 30 21.27 20.53 -0.74
Table 3 shows the pre-test and post-test mean achievement scores of male and female students exposed to CBT in Economics. Furthermore, the analyses revealed that mean achievement score of male students exposed to CBT is slightly higher than that of female students exposed to CBT. Then again, it is surprise that there is a reduction in the post-test scores when compared to pre-test scores which resulted in negative mean difference.
Research Question 3: What are the mean achievement scores of male and female students exposed to PPT in Economics?
Table 4:
Mean Achievement Scores of Male and Female Students Exposed to PPT in Economics (N=51)
Control Group (PPT)
N Pre-test x
Post-test x
Mean Difference
Male 23 24.17 23.39 -0.78
Female 28 19.00 20.96 1.96
The information on Table 4 shows the pre-test and post-test mean achievement scores of male and female students exposed to PPT in Economics. In addition, the analyses revealed that mean achievement scores of male students exposed to PPT is higher than that of their female counterparts exposed to PPT. However, it is
unexpected that the pre-test score is higher than the post-test score for male students in PPT which has a mean difference of -0.78.
Research Question 4: What are the mean test anxiety scores of students exposed to CBT and that of those exposed to PPT in Economics?
Table 5:
Mean Test Anxiety Scores of Students Exposed to CBT and that of those Exposed to PPT in Economics (N=107)
Group N Pre-test
x
Post-test x
Mean Difference
Experimental (CBT) 56 39.80 40.68 0.88
Control (PPT) 51 42.86 41.75 -1.11
The data analyzed on Table 5 show the pre-test and post-test mean test anxiety scores of students exposed to CBT and PPT in Economics. Also, the analyses revealed that mean test anxiety scores of students exposed to PPT is higher than that of their counterparts exposed to CBT.
Research Question 5: What are the mean test anxiety scores of male and female students exposed to CBT in Economics?
Table 6:
Mean Test Anxiety Scores of Male and Female Students Exposed to CBT in Economics (N=56)
Experimental Group (CBT)
N Pre-test x
Post-test x
Mean Difference
Male 26 38.15 37.50 -0.65
Female 30 41.23 43.43 2.20
Analysis on Table 6 shows the pre-test and post-test mean test anxiety scores of male and female students exposed to CBT in Economics. The analyses reveals
further that mean test anxiety scores of female students exposed to CBT is higher than the male students exposed to same test mode in Economics.
Research Question 6:
What are the mean test anxiety scores of male and female students exposed to PPT in Economics?
Table 7:
Mean Test Anxiety Scores of Male and Female Students Exposed to PPT in Economics (N=51)
Control Group (PPT)
N Pre-test
x
Post-test x
Mean Difference
Male 23 44.00 39.83 -4.17
Female 28 41.93 43.32 1.39
Information presented on Table 7 shows the pre-test and post-test mean test anxiety scores of male and female students exposed to PPT in Economics. In addition, the analyses reveal that mean test anxiety scores of female students exposed to PPT is higher than their male counterparts exposed to same test mode in Economics.
Hypothesis 1: The difference in the mean achievement scores of students exposed