Executive Summary - Uttarakhandscert.uk.gov.in/files/Final_SLAS_report.pdf · Executive Summary Context State Level Achievement Survey (SLAS) of class III in Uttrakhand was conducted

Executive Summary

1

Executive Summary

Context

State Level Achievement Survey (SLAS) of class III in Uttrakhand was conducted in March 2014 to

assess the general health of education at primary level. The purpose of the survey was also to examine

how far the equity aspect has been achieved by assessing the achievement level of students of different

categories, areas and gender in Hindi Language and Mathematics. It was intended that state will plan

intervention for enhancing the learning level of students on the basis of the survey results. Research

questions for the study were as under:

Is there any significant difference in achievement levels of male and female students in Hindi

language and Mathematics?

Is there any significant difference in achievement level of students of social groups in the

context of Area and Gender in Hindi language and Mathematics?

Is there any significant difference in achievement levels of students in the context of home

background, teachers‟ background and student‟s background?

Is there any hard spots perceived by the students in Hindi language and Mathematics?

Methodology

Sample Selection and Sample Size

A sample of 1700 students per district covering all the 13 districts was decided by the State Steering

Committee on SLAS following the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). Overall 19176 students

constituted the sample size. There were great variations across the districts in students enrolment

studying in class III i.e. from 0- 200. It was therefore decided by the Steering Committee to consider all

the student of the class III in schools where enrolment of class III is in between 5 - 30. Sample of student

in schools having enrolment more than 30 students in class III is decided by using simple random

sampling method, using PPS method of sampling. Teachers‟ questionnaire was designed to be

administered on maximum of two teachers from a sample school, teaching Hindi language and

Mathematics.

Tool Development

Development of tools was carried out by SCERT faculty by developing items in Hindi language and

Mathematics as per the guidelines of SOP and syllabi of the state. For the development of items in Hindi

language and Mathematics state participants were oriented by NCERT expert in three days workshop.

The language test covered 3 option MCQs on: listening text and items, reading texts and items along

with error correction, discrete items, language structures, recognition (only two option MCQs) and

writing tasks and scoring criteria. In Mathematics items were developed on the basis of competencies

defined for class III students in the state i.e. addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, geometry,

pattern, number system, fraction, money and data handling.

The tools were piloted twice, first in a small sample and later on larger purposively selected sample,

covering schools of three districts (Haridwar, Tehri and Dehradun) to observe how the items worked for

2

class III students. The difficulty level (ρ- value), discrimination index (DI) and distracters analysis were

computed for each item. The items having difficulty indices (ρ- value) between 0.2 and 0.8 were

selected considering classical item analysis. The items were also scrutinized according skill I, skill II

and skill III before they are selected in Hindi language and mathematics. As the enrolment of students in

class III was not enough in all districts to administer more than one tool as mentioned in SOP, therefore,

Steering committee decided to use only one test booklet for Hindi Language and one test booklet for

Mathematics. Finally 30 items in Hindi Language and 35 items in Mathematics were selected for final

test. Questionnaires for collecting background information about schools, students and teachers were

used as such developed by NCERT for class III.

Test Administration

A detailed guideline- cum- training manual was developed by SCERT at state level. Rigorous

training was given to all district coordinators and field investigators on how to conduct the tests in a fair

manner. Both district coordinators and field investigators were also oriented on how to transfer

responses of students from test booklet to separate response sheet. Each sample school was visited by

two field investigators for two days for data collection. District coordinator collected response sheets,

questionnaires etc. from field investigators and sent it to state nodal officer after checking their number,

coding of schools and whether they have been properly filled by the investigators. Supervision and

monitoring of test administration in about 10-12 schools was done by the district level (DIET) officers

designated for it and SCERT faculty on random basis.Data received from the field was organised school

wise, district wise, and checked and verified for number of response sheets, students, teachers, school

questionnaires and field notes. Data were checked and cleaned at SCERT level before analysis.

Achievement in Language

Large variation in achievement is noticed among districts. The mean achievement in Hindi Language

varies by nearly 20% points across the districts form highest 70.9% in Pithoragarh to lowest 50.25 % in

Nainital. In five districts namely Pithoragarh, Uttarkashi, Bageshwar, Chamoli and Dehradun mean

achievement is above 66% while in 3 districts namely Udham Singh Nagar, Haridwar and Nainital it is

less than 54%. In other districts it is in between 54 -66%. It would be interesting to see what factors have

contributed such a high score in Pithoragarh and such a low score in Nainital district. There is no

significant difference is seen in mean achievement of rural and urban student at state level. However it

shows significant difference in achievement of rural and urban students among the districts. In some

districts (US Nagar,Bageswar, Haridwar,and Rudraprayag) rural students have performed better and in

some districts (Utarkashi, Dehradun, Nainital, Pithoragarh and Tehri) urban students have performed

significantly better. This variation may be due to very small urban sample available in most of the

districts. There was no significant difference in achievement in Hindi language (reading comprehension)

of boys and girls in the state as a whole but in three districts (Dehradun, Haridwar and US Nagar) girls

have performed significantly better than boys. Students of SC, ST and OBC categories have

comparatively performed lower than general category student at state level but there is no significant

difference in achievement within these three groups. There is however significant differences among all

these social categories across the districts and within categories in districts.

3

What Class III Students Know and Can Do in Hindi Language?

About two third (68%) students were able to answer the question based on what they listened. There

are large variations in listening comprehension within districts from 59% in Nainital to 76.4% in

Rudraprayag. Items based on reading comprehension reflect that 66.4% students were able to answer

correctly at state level. However district wise variation in reading comprehension is also very large

within districts from 53.1% in Nainital to 74.6% in Pithoragarh. Most of the students (83%) were able to

recognize words. Student‟s performance in writing skills is very poor. Overall mean score in writing

skills is 1.98 out of 6 for the entire state. This is because almost 80% of the students have scored less

than 3 marks among which 30% scored zero. Only 20% students could achieve more than 3 marks in

writing skill which may be termed as satisfactory. However almost all the districts need to focus on

writing skill of students specially Rudraprayag, Nainital, US Nagar, Haridwar, Almora and Pauri. The

hard spots thus are writing skill among students.

Achievement in Mathematics

The mean achievement of class III students in Mathematics at state level is 61.69%. It varies across

the districts from 51.1% in Nainital to 70.18% in Pauri district by 19 percent points. The overall

achievement of SC, ST and OBC student is significantly less than general by 4.03, 4.04 and 4.4 percent

points respectively. However in two districts i.e. Pauri and Pithoragarh SC category students have

achieved significantly higher than general category students. On an average urban students have

performed better than rural students. But in Bageshwar district the trend is reversed where rural student

significantly outperformed urban student. There is no significant difference in the achievement of girls

and boys in Mathematics except in Chamoli where boys have performed better than girls.

What Class III Students Know and Can Do in Mathematics?

Skill wise average performance at state level varies in between 54.0% for fraction to 75.1% for

measurement. All other skills i.e. multiplication, division, addition, subtraction, geometry, number

system, measurement, data handling and money the performance is between these values. State average

is more than 60% in addition, subtraction, division, measurement, geometry and pattern which reflects

that students have performed somewhat better from most of the districts in these skills. Measurement is

the only skill where state average is more than 75%. Whereas in skills like multiplication, number

system, money, data handling and fraction state average is below 60% with minimum achievement in

fraction skill (54%). These areas need to be focused on priority basis. The hard spots revealed in the

learning of Mathematics on the basis of this survey are: subtraction of fraction, 4-digit addition with

carryover, place value of a digit, conversion of rupees into paise, 3-digit subtraction with borrowing

related to word problems.

School Related Variables

Teaching Aids related to Learning Process:

To enhance learning experiences, teaching aids play significant role. The teaching learning process

gets enriched if suitable teaching aids are available in the school. The availability of teaching aids

indicates that most of the school possess blackboard (98.57%), Charts (96%), Maps (94.9%) and globe

4

(85%). It is important to have a library in the school to strengthen teaching learning process. According

to data nearly 82.45% schools in the state have library. The availability of Science and Mathematics kit

is in only 33.02% and 62.05% schools respectively which reflect that in most of the schools it is lacking.

Monitoring

CRC/BRC/DIET and SCERT faculty is supposed to visit schools for quality monitoring. From the

survey it is recorded that only 18.62 % schools were visited by CRC/BRC/DIET and SCERT 10 or more

than 10 times where as 21.4% were visited only once or twice. At the same time data also reflects that

almost 7% schools were never visited even by a single person. Therefore it needs to focus quality

monitoring of schools on priority basis in the context of frequency as well better rationalized.

School Background

It was found in the survey that only 71.78% schools received the school grant for the academic year

which is important aspect of creating a learning environment in a school. There are 80.8% schools

recorded to have pucca building, 14.83% have semi pucca and remaining schools have kachha building.

Facilities which help in creating a better learning environment in schools are availability of playground,

safe drinking water, toilet facilities, kitchen cum store and other basic facilities like mats and furniture

etc. Most of the facilities are available in almost all schools. Availability of computers in school has

shown significant effect on achievement of students. Results of survey show that availability of

computer is only in 9.8 % schools which is quite low and needs up scaling in massive way for quality

enhancement. Annual medical checkup is done in 93.41% schools.

Student Related Variables

Information on student related variables were collected mainly focusing, student background (BPL,

physically challenged, parental qualification etc. resources available in school (library, computers,

blackboard, play ground, toilets, drinking water etc. and getting support from teachers as well as at

home. It is apparent from the survey data that more than 65% students belong to BPL families. Most of

the students (75%) have responded that they like activities other than reading among them 33% like to

play and 29.72 % like to do drawing and painting. It has been reported by 54.52% students that they get

help in studies at home. 48.8% students have revealed that their home language is different than the

language used in school; however it did not influence achievement significantly. Many student (63%)

borrowed books from the school library. Most of the students (93%) have admitted that they get home

work regularly from the school. More than 94% student reported that they receive Mathematics

problems as a part of home work from the teacher and more than 92% responded that it is also checked

by the teacher. Responses of 67.44% students have shown that they attended pre-primary classes.

Analysis of learning achievement in Hindi language and Mathematics based on

student related variables:

Most of the student related variables have influenced learning achievement of the students. Students

belonging to BPL families have performed significantly better than other Students. Students are getting

help at home in their studies, student borrowing books from the school library, student getting regular

home work and student using computers have significantly better performed in comparison to other

5

student. Students not taking private tuition have performed better than those who are getting private

tuition. Achievement of physically challenged students is significantly low than the other students. Use

of computer in school has shown positive impact on achievement. These results are uniform for both

Hindi language and Mathematics achievement. Language spoken at home and school have no significant

effect on achievement.

Teacher Related Variables

Teacher Background

Teacher questionnaire was framed to get information on some variables related to teachers like:

teacher background, teaching learning process/use of TLM, home work given to students and its

checking, training received, evaluation strategies etc. data of survey reveals that overall 88.8 % teachers

are either with graduate or post graduate degree whereas 10.3% teachers are reported to have

educational qualification either up to secondary or sr. secondary level. Most of the teachers are recruited

on regular full time basis say permanent and nearly 12% are para-teachers. With regard to teaching of

subjects nearly 22% teacher teach Hindi language and 20% teaches Mathematics only where as 55%

teachers teaches both the subjects. Data also reflects that 85% teachers having qualification in Hindi

either up to secondary or above, similarly in Mathematics only 17.86% teachers have studied

Mathematics either up to secondary level or above whereas 27.6% teachers have studied Mathematics

only up to upper primary level. Four out five teachers are reported to maintain teachers‟ diary. In

response to method of assessment/evaluations used by the teacher, almost all teachers responded that

they are practicing unit test, monthly, quarterly, half yearly and annual examination for

assessment/evaluation of students. Oral evaluation is also reported by almost all teachers as a part of

assessment. Regarding job satisfaction more than one third teachers responded to low job satisfaction.

Teaching Learning Process:

Teachers‟ attitude, perception and approaches towards student are one of the most important factors

which influence learning achievement of students. Nearly half of the teachers (47.72%) accept that they

are highly successful and nearly half of the teachers (49.62%) admit that their success is of average level

(medium) in implementing the curriculum. Responses of almost 95% teachers „reflect that they give

home work 1-3 times in a week. There are 38.59% teachers who use regularly books other than text

books in school whereas responses of more than 50% teachers show that they use books other than text

books sometimes only. As a whole almost 89% teachers accept that they uses books other than text

books either regularly or sometimes which is good practice..

Majority of teachers (51%) responded that they use self made Teaching Learning Material (TLM)

regularly where as 26.39% teacher uses readymade TLM regularly. Figures of teachers who use self

made and readymade TLM sometimes are 41.34% and 46.16% respectively. At school level charts and

maps are being used by the teachers during teaching learning process. Data reveals that in more than

60% schools charts are available and used by teachers. In 44.46% schools maps are available and used

by teachers whereas 35.62% teachers are using charts and 48.2% using maps some times. Near about in

3% schools charts are not available and in 4% schools maps are not available.

6

Teacher Training:

To be recruited as a primary school teacher in the state, basic professional qualification needed is

B.T.C/J.B.T/ Diploma in Elementary Education. From the responses of sampled teachers it is evident

that 34.22% teachers are having B.T.C/J.B.T/Diploma in Elementary Education whereas 55.85% are

B.Ed/L.T. More than 7% teachers in sampled schools are still untrained.

During 2013-14 overall 87.1% teachers have attended in-service teachers training organised at

different level whereas almost 10% teachers responded that they did not attend it, which needs to be

taken in account.

In districts most of the in-service training programmes are organized at CRC, BRC and DIET level.

In 2012-13 overall 73.11% teachers attended training imparted at cluster Resource Centre (CRC)

whereas 69.49% teachers attended training given at Block Resource Centre (BRC). 20.32% teachers

were given training at DIET level and 1.25% teachers were trained at SCERT level. As per requirement

very few teachers have received training from other institutions/departments like Integrated Child

Development Scheme (ICDS) (1.35%), Rashtriya Literacy Mission (RLM) (0.85%), SSA (9.68%),

NCERT (0.55%) and others (2.41%).

Teachers Opinion about School Related Factors

Teachers‟ opinion was taken through teachers questionnaire from the sampled schools on some

variables like condition of school building, classrooms, parents involvement and support, students desire

to do well, job satisfaction etc. 22.33% teachers perceive that condition of school building is severe and

37.28% responded that school building has minor problems. Only near about 40% teachers responded

that there is no problem with school building. Teacher‟s perception related to size of class rooms in

school shows that in more than 50% schools it is not a problem and in more than 30% schools there are

minor problems. Only 18.26% teachers responded that class room size related problems are serious.

There are only few teachers (11.64%) who agreed that parental involvement in school is high. Nearly

86% teachers responded that the parental involvement is either average or low which is substantial

number. Only 9.38% teachers perceive that parental support in students‟ achievement is high whereas

almost 89% teachers‟ revealed that either parental support in the student achievement is medium (42.8)

or low (46.16%). Parental involvement in school activities is of great importance for the learning of

students therefore parental involvement needs to be strengthening at school level.

In response to teachers‟ perception on students desire to do well, 43.3% teachers believe that students

desire is high and more than 50% teachers believe that it is average (medium). Only 4.1% teachers

responded that students‟ desire to do well is low. Students need to be motivated and inspired by the

teachers regularly.

Analysis of learning achievement in Hindi language and Mathematics based on

teacher related variables:

Students taught by female teachers have performed significantly higher than the students taught by

male teachers in both Hindi language and Mathematics. Results also highlight that students taught by

teachers educated up to senior secondary level have performed better than students taught by teachers

7

educated up to postgraduate level. Achievement of students taught by the teachers maintaining teachers „

diary is significantly more than the achievement of other students in both subjects, Teachers

oriented/trained on NCF- 2005 and professional qualifications of teachers have not shown any

significant influence on students achievement. Employment status of teachers have shown significant

difference in Mathematics achievement only where students taught by regular teachers have performed

significantly better than the students taught by para-teachers or ad-hoc teachers.

Effect of teachers‟ academic qualification on students achievement is also analysed which reflects

that students taught by teachers who studied Hindi as a subject up to graduation level have performed

better in Hindi language than students taught by teachers who studied Hindi as a subject up to Sr.

secondary level only. Similarly Mathematics as a subject studied by teachers at different levels of

academic qualification has shown impact on achievement of students in Mathematics. Significant

differences are found in case of upper primary and secondary, upper primary and graduation, upper

primary and post graduation and above, secondary and sr. secondary, sr. secondary and graduation and

sr. secondary and post graduation.

Limitation of the Study

Some of the limitations noted during this study are as under:

Survey was planned and designed on the basis of enrolment of Class III student as per DISE

data of 2011-12. However survey has been conducted based on actual school enrolment data of

2013-14. As such the findings are to be interpreted in the light of the data given in the report.

Due to variations in enrolment from school to school and district to district, agreed sampling

procedure for schools as well as for students have been modified.

Sample size of students in three districts (Bageshwar, Rudraprayag and Champawat) was not

enough to administer two or more test booklets. Therefore only one test booklet was

administered.

Enrolment of urban schools was not enough in some of the districts. Therefore representation

of these schools in survey is insignificant and findings of the survey for urban area schools

should be interpreted in the light of this limitation.

Identified teachers (teachers teaching Hindi Language and Mathematics in Class III from each

sample school were asked to fill a questionnaire to analyse teacher related variables and

attainment of students. Therefore findings related to teachers are to be interpreted for teaching

of Hindi language and Mathematics only.

Unavoidable circumstances (panchayat election, general election etc. in state) reduced time for

the survey activities therefore time was a constraint.

Chapter -1

Introduction

9

Chapter-1

Introduction

Since independence, it has been a major policy goal to achieve the equalization of educational

opportunities to all the children between the age group of 6-14 years. The Constitution of India not only

guarantees equal rights to all but also direct the state “to provide free and compulsory education and to

promote with special care to the educational and economic interests of weaker sections, in particular to

scheduled caste, scheduled tribe and other backward classes”. Keeping all these in view, the Education

Commission 1964-66 and New Education Policy 1986 and Programme of action (POA) 1992 taking all

these into account, has been made very imperative social objective of education. They have emphasized

on eight years of quality education to all children of 6-14 age groups. RTE Act- 2009 has made Right to

Free and Compulsory Elementary Education a fundamental right of all children.

Although, Government of India and State Government have taken various initiatives in past years to

reduce the disparity in educational opportunities, but Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) is one of the most

important programme initiated in 2000-2001. Since beginning of SSA there has been a significant

increase in number of schools and infrastructure, increase in enrolment of children from disadvantage

group and decrease in dropouts, increase in TLM. It facilitated in creating conducive learning

environment in schools and made classrooms inclusive. To ensure quality education to all children, it

becomes necessary to study students‟ learning achievement on regular basis at the national and state

level. Therefore, State Learning Achievement Survey (SLAS) is designed to provide information about

the learning level of achievement of the students at the elementary level in Government as well as

Government aided Schools of 13 districts of Uttarakhand. For this purpose a survey has been conducted

in March 2014 by SCERT, Uttarakhand to know about the learning level of class III students in state.

The achievement data of students from all districts was collected by administering the standardized tests

to the students of class III.

The survey gives a general health of education in the state and will be used by policy makers,

curriculum specialists, researchers and other stakeholders as a „Snapshot‟ of what student knows and can

do in Language and Mathematics at a point of time. The findings also serve as a baseline against which

future progress in education may be evaluated.

10

1.1 State Profile

Uttarakhand, the 27th

state of the Republic of India, came into existence on 9th

November 2000

after being separated from Uttar Pradesh. It is situated in the northern part of India. Uttarakhand is

famous for its natural beauty as well as for number of holy Hindu temples and other pilgrimage centers.

Figure:1.1 Map of Uttarakhand State

It is surrounded by, the Tibet on the northward; the Mahakali Zone of the far Western region of

Nepal on the east, Uttar Pradesh to the south and Himachal Pradesh to the northwest. The state is

divided into two divisions- Kumaon and Garhwal, with a total of 13 districts. The capital of Uttarakhand

is Dehradun. Uttarakhand has a total area of 53,566 km², of which 93% is mountainous and 64% is

covered by forest. Most of the northern part of the state is covered by high Himalayan peaks and

glaciers, while, the lower foothills are covered with mild forests.

According to the Census (2011), population of Uttarakhand is 10,116,752 comprising of 5,154,178

males and 4,962,574 females, with 69.45% of the population living in rural areas. The average

population density is 189 persons per sq. Km. Decadal growth (2001–2011) rate is 19.17%. Other data

related to census 2011 are given as:

11

Table 1.1 : Population related data (Census 2011 as compared to 2001)

Description 2011 2001

Total Population 10116752 8489349

Male 5154178 4325924

Female 4962574 4163425

Population Growth 19.17% 19.20%

Percentage of total Population 0.84% 0.83%

Sex Ratio 963 964

Child Sex Ratio 886 967

Area Sq. km. 53483 53483

Total Child Population (0-6 Age) 1328844 1360032

Male Population (0-6 Age) 704769 712949

Female Population (0-6 Age) 624075 647083

Source: Directorate of Economic & Statistics, Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand is one of the fastest growing economy states of India, which has Gross State

Domestic Product (GSDP) (at constant prices) more than doubled from 24,786 crore in Financial Year

2005-06 to 60,898 crore in Financial Year 2012-13. The real GSDP has grown at 13.7% (CAGR) in the

period of Financial Year 2005-06 to 2012-13. The contribution of the service sectors to the GSDP of

Uttarakhand was just over 50% during Financial Year 2012-13. Per capita income in Uttarakhand was

82,193 (Financial Year 2012-13) which is higher than the national average of 60,603 (Financial Year

2012-13). Agriculture is one of the most important sectors of state economy. Industrial growth is still to

flourish.

Uttarakhand has a great diversity of flora and fauna. It has a recorded forest area of 34651 km2,

which constitutes nearly 64% of the total area of the state. Uttarakhand is home to rare species of plants

and animals, many of which are protected by sanctuaries and reserves like- National parks in

Uttarakhand, Jim Corbett National Park (the oldest national park of India), Valley of Flowers National

Park and Nanda Devi National Park (UNESCO World Heritage Site), Rajaji National Park, Govind

Pashu Vihar National Park and Sanctuary, Gangotri National Park etc.

1.2 : State Educational Scenario

In Uttarakhand, nearly 97% habitation has been served by primary school facility and 98% of total

habitation has been served by upper primary school facility (data from SSA Uttarakhand). Vital data

related to this is as following-

12

Table 1.2: Educational Scenario of the State

School level No. of schools Enrolment Sanctioned Post of

Teachers

Working

teachers PTR

Primary 12,510 5,03,546 28,582 24,312 1 : 21

Upper

Primary 2,807 2,89,391 13,774 10,871 1 : 27

Secondary 2,082 3,90,993 20,762 17,032 1 : 23

Senior

Secondary 1,407 3,02,685 11,636 8,448 1 : 36

Total 18,806 14,86,615 74,754 60,663 -

1.3 Context of Achievement Survey

Government of India constituted several committees and launched various schemes for the

qualitative improvement in education but after more than 60 years of independence, its goal could not be

achieved. In the 12th

five year plan, the emphasis has been made on quality of education which has been

interpreted as quality learning with respect to quality teaching learning adjudicated through learning

outcomes. In order to achieve the vision of the 12th

five year plan, knowledge of learning trends among

students is essential for which the large scale assessments have been used to outline achievement trends

overtime so as to hold all stakeholders in the state accountable for their effort towards enhancing the

quality of school education. For this, from time to time a number of surveys have also been conducted

Nation-Wide. In India, the large scale assessment in elementary education could be traced since early

1990s. Later, in 2000, National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) as an

independent project incorporated National Achievement Survey (NAS) for assessing learning

achievement of students across the country at different stages of education under SSA, as a flagship

programme of Govt. of India. At national level, NCERT is playing great role in conducting National

Achievement Surveys (NAS) in all states for class III, V and VII/VIII in acyclic manner. Results of

these surveys are shared with states. The SCERT Uttarakhand took active participation in National

Achievement Survey. However, through NAS states could not get actual picture of student‟s

achievement at district and sub district level. Therefore, like NAS, in 2013-14 MHRD, Government of

India has directed NCERT to share the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) manual with states and

empower the states in conducting State Learning Achievement Survey (SLAS). Uttarakhand state

decided to measure achievement level of students at elementary level and to conduct surveys for three

classes i.e. III, V and VIII in phases as per available resources. As per direction at State level, State

Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT) Uttarakhand has conducted this Survey on class

III students across the state to know the learning achievement of class III students in Hindi language and

Mathematics, district as a reporting unit for making appropriate interventions and to ensure

accountability of the stakeholders. The students are to learn in an environment which is free from stress

and anxiety is not violated.

13

1.4 Purpose of State Level Achievement Survey (SLAS)

SLAS is specially designed to assess the learning achievement at regular intervals and to help in

identifying the challenges and plan interventions for improving children learning outcomes. The purpose

of SLAS is as under-

1. To assess the learning levels of students in different subject areas.

2. To own responsibility and accountability of the results of the survey.

3. To plan and undertake required intervention(s) for enhancing learning outcomes visible in the

next round (State/National Survey).

1.5 Objectives of SLAS

The objectives for conducting SLAS are listed as below-

1. To study the learning achievement levels of students in elementary cycle.

2. To evaluate the effectiveness of inputs and child entitlements on students‟ learning levels.

3. To study the effect of intervening variables (such as school and teacher characteristics etc., or

other such variables as deemed necessary by the concerned State/UT) on achievement of

students.

4. To study the difference in achievement with regard to gender, location, medium of instruction

and social groups (SC, ST and OBC) or the states may have their own research questions.

5. To use the results of SLAS for formulation of the next year AWP&B.

1.6 : Research Questions

Is there any significant difference in achievement levels of male and female students in Hindi

language?

Is there any significant difference in achievement levels of male and female students in

Mathematics?

Is there any significant difference in achievement levels of male and female students in the

context of area?

Is there any significant difference in achievement levels of male and female students in the

context of social groups?

Is there any hard spots perceived by the students and revealed by the study in Mathematics and

Hindi language?

Is there any significant difference of hard spots in Mathematics and Hindi language syllabus in

the achievement of students?

Is there any difficult area (hard spots) in Mathematics and Hindi language syllabus of class-III?

Is there any significant difference in achievement levels of students in the context of Home

Background?

14

Is there any significant difference in achievement levels of students in the context of Teachers

Background?

Is there any significant difference in achievement levels of students in the context of School

Background (Facilities /TLM / etc.)?

1.7 : Development of Tools

For the conduct of SLAS, following tools were developed:

1. Achievement Test for Hindi Language.

2. Achievement Test for Mathematics

3. School Questionnaire

4. Teacher Questionnaire

5. Student Questionnaire

1.7.1 Development of Achievement Tests

The tools i.e. test in Hindi language and Mathematics, questionnaire for pupil, teacher and school

to collect background information, were developed in a workshop mode. A three day workshop was

organized by SCERT Uttarakhand in which state level experts were oriented about the tool construction

for the purpose of survey by NCERT expert. The detail about tool construction is given as under:

1.7.1.1 Development of Hindi Language Test

The language test was prepared by SCERT as per the guidelines given in SOP. The language items

were developed in the supervision of expert of ESD department of NCERT according to the prescribed

competencies by state government for III class students. The test covered was:

Listening text and questions (3-option MCQ)

Reading texts and questions (3 – option MCQ)

Error correction (3 – option MCQ)

Discrete items on „language structures; (3- option MCQ)

Recognition (2- option MCQ)

Writing tasks and scoring criteria

1.7.1.2 Development of Mathematics Test

The working group of mathematics analyzed the State class III Mathematics textbook thoroughly

to pickup an idea about how defined competencies for class III students can be captured with the items .

The working group split the content according to competencies to know about the fact and evidence to

it. According to defined competencies for class III students in Mathematics the questions were

developed according to NCERT taxonomy on addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, geometry,

pattern, number system, fraction, money and data handling. Following activities were carried out to

finalize Mathematic at items.

15

The working group came to a common understanding of the main principles of item writing

and quality control.

The working group drafted more than 100 items.

All these items were peer reviewed.

The working group proposed the use of the following classification system for Mathematics

topics:

1. Number system

2. Computations (operations)

3. Measurement

4. Geometry

1.7.1.3 Piloting of Test Items

After small tryout of all developed items of Hindi and Mathematics, 61 items were selected in

Hindi and 76 items were selected in Mathematics for pilot testing in two test booklets of each subject. In

order to standardize, it was piloted in schools of three districts of Uttarakhand (Haridwar, Tehri &

Dehradun) to observe how the items worked for class III students. The difficulty level (ρ- value),

discrimination index (DI) and distracters analysis were computed for each item. The analysis was done

carefully to select suitable items for the final tests. The items having difficulty indices (ρ- value)

between 0.2 and 0.8 were selected.

1.8 Sampling for Piloting

The sampling procedure for the piloting of items was discussed. Given the time constraints and the

need to gather meaningful data, the following procedure was used:

1. A sampling strategy was developed based on the information provided by district authority.

2. The sample would not be random, but based on expert judgment taking into account the statistical

requirement of having enough records for each item for analysis and at the same time, diversity of

the students/ schools in the education system.

3. Each item had to be answered at least by 150 students for classical item analysis.

4. Each item appeared in only one booklet. There were two sets of booklets each for Hindi and

Mathematics.

5. Schools in the state were selected taking into account the diversity of socio-economic background

variables i.e. some schools were selected from cities, some from small towns, some from rural areas

(since the expected number of students in rural schools is smaller than in some of the urban

schools) etc.

6. In all 610 Students were tested from rural and urban area. The students tested in Hindi booklet „A‟

were 150 and in booklet „B‟ were 151. In Mathematics booklet „A‟ tested 150 students and booklet

„B‟ tested 159 students.

16

7. The medium of testing was only Hindi because the schools covered under survey were Hindi

medium schools only.

1.9 Administration of pilot testing

The pilot testing was carried out by the SCERT‟s academic personnel after they were given one

day training, on how to conduct test in school. The instructions were also given to them to observe all

activities/information during conducting test for improvement in final text. Only one test booklet was

administered at a time in each school. The student responses on test booklet were transferred by field

investigator on response sheet given to them and submitted to educational survey cell of SCERT for

item analysis.

1.10 Data Analysis of pilot testing

Data entries were carried out by a private agency under the supervision of SCERT faculty. The

item analysis for each item of Hindi language and Mathematics was made on the basis of

discrimination of item, difficulty level of item and distracters analysis. Further, efforts were made

to follow Item Response Theory (IRT) in the final selection of items. The fit of the 2-PL model to

the items was examined graphically and using a Chi-square fit index. Items identified as problems

were investigated to see if there were any obvious faults and where possible, these were rectified.

If it proved impossible to remedy the problems of an item, then that item was dropped. Therefore

use of IRT was restricted to the selection of items only. In this way finally 30 items were selected

in Hindi and 35 items in Mathematics for final survey according to competency wise skill-1, skill-

2 and skill-3 level items. Poorly performed and flawed items were rejected.

1.11 Test Booklet Construction for Main Survey

For the construction of booklets for the main survey, the following steps were taken:

Reviewed all items by considering classical item statistics.

Reviewed whole syllabus of Hindi and Mathematics.

Listed whole competencies prescribed by State Government for Class III students and

according to competency wise level of difficulties.

Each item developed on the basis of fact and evidence.

Each competency tested on the level of each skill.

According to SOP for IRT, every item should be tested on 1700 students for getting a sample

data of 1500 students from each district. In three districts of Uttarakhand Champawat, Rudraprayag and

Bageshwar the total number of students in Government and Government aided schools were around

3,200 in class III, so it was not possible for testing more than one booklet in Rudraprayag, Champawat

and Bageshwar districts. Due to this condition steering committee suggested that only one Test booklet

in each subject (Hindi and Maths) will be developed for testing achievement of students. The test time

and number of items in both Hindi and Mathematics single test booklet increases in comparison of NAS

to cover whole competencies prescribed for class III students. The structure of the Language and

Mathematics booklet was as under-

17

In both the subjects, the following domains were identified:

Hindi language Mathematics

Hindi language Elements ,Listening

comprehension

Simple operations, data handling, money, number

system, pattern ,fraction

Reading Comprehension Measurement

Writing Geometry

In each domain, there were a number of sub- domains or topics. These items were again vetted

by subject experts. Each test was reviewed in the light of the content area covered, competency covered,

appropriate language, estimated difficulty level and also the homogeneity of distracters.

Finally, for class III, a single test form for Mathematics consisted of 35 items and Hindi language

consisted of 30 items of multiple choices. Thus, overall unique items were used in each subject to

measure learning achievement. In Hindi language, in addition, a writing task was given in test to

measure writing skill of class III students. Scoring keys were also developed for each test subject. For

the evaluation of writing item separately criteria was framed.

In the cover page of the test booklet, instructions for students and field investigator during the

administration of test were also developed that how to record and change the responses in case of any

mistake on the test booklet .

1.12 Questionnaires

Three questionnaires for school, teacher and pupil, already developed by NCERT for National

Achievement Survey of Class III standard student were adapted to know about the relation of extraneous

variables on the achievement of students. The profiles of these questionnaires are as follows-

1.12.1 School Questionnaire

School questionnaire provided information regarding number of government schools, schools

receiving grants from the government, school facilities like teaching aids, music, annual medical

checkup, first aid, physical facilities and participation of school management committee, parent teacher

association and area education committee etc.

1.12.2 Teacher Questionnaire

Teacher questionnaire provided information regarding number of teachers teaching primary

classes on regular full time basis, ad-hoc/ temporary teachers, para-teachers/shiksha karmi, teaching

experience, in-service trainings, awareness about NCF-2005, view about school building etc.

1.12.3 Student Questionnaire

Students questionnaire provided information regarding gender, age, category, belongs to BPL

category, physically challenged, educational and occupational status of father, mother, guardian, number

of brothers and sisters, attended pre-primary classes, who helps in study at home, language used, home

work is given regularly, homework checked regularly, problems in mathematics are given, problems in

18

mathematics are checked, use of computer in school, borrowing books from school/library, likes to

come to school, subject liked most, activities like to do the most. The analysis for the relation of above

variables with the achievement of students was carried out.

1.13 The Sample of Study

There are 13 districts in Uttarakhand state. All the 13 districts have been covered under the

survey. These districts have both rural and urban areas. Due to irregular distribution of students in

different schools in rural and urban areas, common sample size was not applicable.

According to Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), State Steering Committee of State Learning

Achievement Survey (SLAS) decided that 1700 students will be covered in each district. In three

districts- Rudraprayag, Champawat and Bageshwar, the concept of sample survey deviated. The number

of class III students‟ distribution among schools within district is irregular and vary from zero to 200.

The criterion of administration of tools on school student was 05 to 30. So, for this the PPS method of

sampling considered for the selection of students within district was adopted. In those schools in which

the numbers of students varied from 05 to 30, all students were considered for survey. Where as in

school, having more than 30 students, simple random procedure was used for the selection of students.

1.13.1 Selection of Schools

It was proposed to select only government and government aided schools from each district for

survey. As government aided primary schools are countable in number in few districts, so the quota of

aided and government schools was not applicable. District wise number of schools selected is given

below:

Table 1.3: District wise numbers of Schools selected

District No Schools

Almora 121

Bageshwar 177

Chamoli 141

Champawat 121

Dehradun 57

Haridwar 58

Nainital 63

Pauri 99

Pithoragarh 139

Rudraprayag 142

Tehri 77

U.S.Nagar 61

Uttarkashi 140

Total 1396

19

1.13.2 Selection of Teachers

Maximum of two teachers including Head teacher who taught Hindi language and Mathematics

to class III students were selected for filling teacher questionnaire. District wise number of teachers

selected is given below:

Table 1.4: District wise numbers of Teachers selected

District No. of teachers who teach Hindi/ Mathematics or both.

Almora 161

Bageshwar 216

Chamoli 233

Champawat 173

Dehradun 70

Haridwar 88

Nainital 76

Pauri 138

Pithoragarh 192

Rudraprayag 202

Tehri 129

U.S.Nagar 77

Uttarkashi 238

Total 1993

1.13.3 Selection of Students

A maximum number of 30 students and a minimum number of 5 students were selected from

each sampled school. In schools where the numbers of sections were more than one then at first, random

selection procedure for the selection of section was applied, followed by random sampling of students.

In case, the number of students was 30 or less than 30, all students were selected for the survey. In case,

the number of students was more than 30, then the students selected according to their serial number as

shown in class register with the help of calculated sample interval. The District wise numbers of

students covered under survey are given in table 1.5.

20

Table 1.5: District wise numbers of Students covered under survey

District No Schools Student

Almora 121 1390

Bageshwar 177 1654

Chamoli 141 1663

Champawat 121 1502

Dehradun 57 1167

Haridwar 58 1403

Nainital 63 1427

Pauri 99 1399

Pithoragarh 139 1575

Rudraprayag 142 1484

Tehri 77 1378

U.S.Nagar 61 1566

Uttarkashi 140 1568

Total 1396 19176

1.14 Final Administration of Tools

For final administration of tools, a detailed guideline- cum- training manual was developed by

SCERT. Furthermore, at state level a rigorous training was provided to district coordinators and

associate coordinators, how to conduct survey. In each district, district coordinator appointed field

investigators as per guidelines. Each team comprised of two field investigators. Field investigators were

given rigorous training about selection of section and students in the sampled schools, administration of

tools and transfer of responses from test booklet to separate response sheet. Response sheets were

collected by district coordinators and then sent to state nodal officer after checking their number, coding

of schools and whether they have been properly filled by the investigators. At SCERT level these

response sheets were scored and analyzed.

At state level, the survey was conducted with the participation of every District Institute of

Education and Training within the district with the help of pupil teacher of Diploma in Elementary

Education. At state level, two day rigorous training was organized for District Coordinators and

Assistant Coordinators about the importance of survey and battery of field operation to be carried out to

collect useful and actual data. District Coordinators organized orientation for the field investigators to

explain the procedure of the administration of tools and the collection of data. The tools were

administered at the end of the session of class III in March 2014.

The tentative number of selected field investigators was almost equal to the number of selected

schools to conduct the survey within a week. But due to unequal distribution of pupil teachers in

21

districts, the time period of conducting survey increased in those districts where the number of pupil

teachers was less than the number of selected schools. The number of schools varies from minimum of

57 schools selected from Dehradun district to maximum of 177 schools selected from Bageshwar

district. This is due to applying PPS sampling procedure.

A team of two field investigators visited a school under the supervision of District Coordinator

and completed the task within two days in one school. The collection of data on an average took one and

half weeks time simultaneously in each district. Actual responses given by children on test booklets

were transferred to the response sheets by the field investigators during the field activities and at district

level scrutinized by a group of DIET faculty. Following tools were used in schools:

Test in Hindi language and Mathematics

Questionnaires for school, teacher and student

Response sheet

Field Notes

School information sheet

Random tables

The used-unused materials were collected back by the district coordinators. The response sheets

of tests, three questionnaires, field notes and school information sheets were sent to SCERT by District

Coordinators for analysis.

1.15 Monitoring

A financial provision for monitoring at the state and district levels was made and funds were

provided to district for it's monitoring. At state level SCERT personnel monitored few districts. It was

communicated to the DIET that at least 10-15 schools are to be monitored randomly during the actual

conduct of the survey. Similarly, 5-10 schools in some districts were to be monitored by the SCERT

faculty.

1.16 Data Management

After getting material from the districts, the SCERT team checked and organized materials

school-wise and prepared bunches having details about the school code, district code, number of

response sheets, number of pupils, teachers, school questionnaire and field notes. The codes of

questionnaires and response sheets were matched and needful corrections were made wherever there

was any discrepancy.

Once again checking, cleaning, coding and bunching work was carried out by out sourced

computer agency for transfer of data from paper forms to electronic format. Data entry was provided to

the computer agency for doing the assigned task in a systematic manner.

The computer agency provided soft copy of the entered data. In the department, the SCERT team

checked and verified the quality of the data and resolved problems of mismatching files. Files of clean

data were finalised for further analysis.

22

1.17 Analysis of Data

In SLAS, the learning achievement data was analyzed using CTT (Classical Test Theory) and the

average scores were reported simply in terms of the percentage of correct answers. In addition to this

approach, each item was analyzed competency wise. For this data analysis plan was prepared according

to purpose and research questions framed for SLAS.

In preparation for data analysis, data files and supporting documents were collated, checked and

forwarded to data analyzing agency. The following files were provided:

Data entry manual and coding instructions

Data analysis plan

Copies of final test booklets

Answer keys

Student responses

Corresponding responses for the school, pupil and teacher questionnaires.

The relation of the intervening variables was analyzed by using statistical techniques of

regression analysis.

1.18 Organization of Report

SLAS report consists of nine chapters and appendices. First chapter of the report consist of

introduction and methodology of the study. The remaining chapters are given below:

Student Achievement

Achievement of Class III students in Language (Hindi) and Mathematics is given in chapter 2

and 4. The achievement of student category wise, gender wise and area wise is reported in these chapters

separately for Language (Hindi) and Mathematics. Data of achievement is also compared among all the

surveyed districts.

What Students Know and Can Do?

Chapter 3 and 5 illustrate what Class III students know and can do in Hindi language and

Mathematics. These chapters reflect item wise performance of students in each subject. To comprehend

performance of students in each subject items were listed according to mental process and item

description.

Student, School and Teacher related variables and their impact on student’s

achievement

Student related variables

In Chapter 6 student related variables have been discussed in detail in two parts. The profile of

the students including their background, resources available in schools and the activities being

23

performed outside the school has been discussed in part one. In part two socio-economic status,

language spoken at home and their relationship with the achievement has been discussed.

School related variables

In chapter 7 all the school related variables have been discussed in two parts. In part one profile of

the school including background, interaction with the parents, teaching learning process being adopted

and social climate of the school have been discussed. In part two the school facilities and resources,

school governance and other school related factors have been discussed in relationship of the attainment

of students.

Teacher related variables

In Chapter 8 discusses on Teacher related variables in detail in two parts. First part of this chapter

discusses the teacher‟s background, training received by them, teaching learning process being adopted,

problems being faced in school and their opinion about the school. Part two includes various factors

related to teacher in relation with student achievement.

Major Findings and Recommendations

In Chapter 9 describes major finding and recommendations of the study. In this chapter category

wise, gender wise and area wise findings are given. This chapter also provides recommendations for

different categories of stakeholders like policy makers, teachers and teacher educators, community and

the students.

Besides all these chapters discussed above this report also have references / bibliography and appendices

which provides more information about the various aspects of the study.

1.19 Limitations of the Study

State Learning Achievement Survey was conducted first time in the state. Results of survey are

encouraging and certainly it corresponds to a significant step in the development of SLAS. Some of the

limitations noted during this study are as under:

Survey was planned and designed on the basis of enrolment of Class III student as per DISE

data of 2011-12. However survey has been conducted on the basis of actual school enrolment

data of 2013-14. As such the findings are to be interpreted in the light of the data given in the

report.

Due to variations in enrolment from school to school and district to district, agreed sampling

procedure for schools as well as for students have been modified.

Sample size of students in three districts (Bageshwar, Rudraprayag and Champawat) was not

enough to administer two or more test booklets. Therefore only one test booklet was

administered.

Enrolment of urban schools was not enough in some of the districts. Therefore representation

of these schools in survey is insignificant and findings of the survey for urban area schools

should be interpreted in the light of this limitation.

24

Identified teachers (teachers teaching Hindi language and Mathematics in Class III) from each

sample schools were asked to fill a questionnaire to analyse teacher related variables and

attainment of students. Therefore findings related to teachers are to be interpreted for teaching

of Hindi language and Mathematics only.

Unavoidable circumstances (panchayat election, general election etc. in state) reduced time

for the survey activities therefore time was a constraint.

**********

Chapter -2

Student Achievement in Hindi Language

25

Chapter-2

Student Achievement in Hindi Language

The achievement test of language (Hindi) was administered on 19176 students studying in the

1396 government and government aided schools of 13 districts of Uttarakhand. The test comprised of

29 Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) of one mark each. The first six questions tested listening

comprehension and the remaining 23 MCQ were on reading comprehension. One open ended question

of six marks for the purpose of testing writing skill of the students was given as question number 30.

Therefore, this report focuses on student achievement in the listening, writing and reading

comprehension domain. Student achievement has been discussed district wise in four parts. First part

discusses the overall performance of students, while the remaining three parts discuss about differences

in achievement of students, social category wise, area wise and gender wise.

2.1 How did the Districts perform in Hindi language?

The achievement of students in Hindi language is given below in figure 2.1 for the 13 districts of

Uttarakhand.

Figure 2.1 District-wise Overall Mean Achievements in Hindi language

The average achievement of the students of the Uttarakhand is 61.18% in Hindi language. This

performance varies a lot from district to district, ranging from 50.25% (minimum) in Nainital district to

70.90% (maximum) in Pithoragarh district. There are six districts, namely Almora, Chamoli, Haridwar,

Nainital, Tehri and Udham Singh Nagar performing between 50 to 60%. Another six districts, namely-

Bageshwar, Champawat, Dehradun, Pauri, Rudraprayag and Uttarkashi performed between 60-70%.

Only in Pithoragarh district the performance level is more than 70% i.e. 70.9%.

58.5166.72

57.2466.88

66.3353.7150.25

63.8770.9

63.9158.12 54.1

66.1161.18

01020304050607080

Mean Achievement in Hindi language

26

2.2 How did the SC, ST and OBC students perform in Hindi Language?

Table 2.1 shows the performance of SC, ST, OBC and General students in Hindi Language.

Table 2.1: Category wise Mean of SC, ST, OBC and Genral candidates on their Achievement in

Hindi language

S.N. District SC ST OBC Gen Total

1 Almora

M 54.78 39.48 64.92 61.9 58.51

N 611 21 36 722 1390

2 Bageshwar

M 62.68 68.6 72.63 70.19 66.72

N 797 30 121 706 1654

3 Chamoli

M 53.3 62.26 69.41 58.93 57.24

N 544 23 17 1079 1663

4 Champawat

M 62.96 43.09 60.18 67.53 64.88

N 551 11 162 778 1502

5 Dehradun

M 65.71 55.13 67.66 68.44 66.33

N 333 94 388 352 1167

6 Haridwar

M 49.95 48.75 56.44 52.11 53.71

N 354 4 698 347 1403

7 Nainital

M 47.76 50.7 51.98 50.96 50.25

N 484 20 52.4 399 1427

8 Pauri

M 62.44 74 61.95 64.45 63.87

N 364 19 106 910 1399

9 Pithoragarh

M 70.93 66.22 68.87 71.84 70.9

N 777 50 166 582 1575

10 Rudraprayag

M 61.38 38.86 51.52 66.49 63.91

N 626 7 29 822 1484

11 Tehri

M 54.73 54.5 57.13 60.16 58.12

N 367 2 268 741 1378

12 U.S.Nagar

M 46.68 63.82 57.97 46.31 54.1

N 399 34 982 151 1566

13 Uttarkashi

M 67.14 73.69 60.77 74.31 66.11

N 606 54 626 282 1568

14 Overall

M 59.51 60.79 59.35 63.59 61.18

N 6813 369 4123 7871 19176

M- Stands for Mean Achievement

N- Stands for number of Students

There is not much variation in the performance of SC, ST and OBC Category students in Hindi

language. However it is comparatively lower than the General Category student‟s performance. But if

we look at the performance of SC, ST and OBC Category Students in language in the 13 districts, it

shows a lot of variation, for example the performance varies from 39.48 (ST) to 64.92 (OBC) in Almora,

62.68 (SC) to 72.63 (OBC) in Bageshwar, 53.30 (SC) to 69.41 (OBC) in Chamoli, 43.09 (ST) to 62.96

(SC) in Champawat, 55.13 (ST) to 67.66 (OBC) in Dehradun, 48.75 (ST) to 56.44 (OBC) in Haridwar,

47.76 (SC) to 51.98 (OBC) in Nainital, 61.95 (OBC) to 74.00 (ST) in Pauri, 66.22 (ST) to 70.93 (SC) in

Pithoragarh, 38.86 (ST) to 61.38 (SC) in Rudraprayag, 54.50 (ST) to 57.13 (OBC) in Tehri, 46.68 (SC)

to 63.82 (ST) in Udham Singh Nagar and 60.77 (OBC) to 73.69 (ST) in Uttarkashi. It means there are

four (4) districts where the performance of SC category student is better, three (3) districts where

27

performance of ST category student is better and seven (7) districts where the performance of OBC is

better. Similarly, in four (4) districts the performance of SC category students is lower, in seven (7)

districts performance of ST category students is lower, and in two (2) districts performance of OBC

category student is lower.

Category-wise range of performance in Hindi language is from 46.68 (Udham Singh Nagar) to 70.93

(Pithoragarh) for SC category students, from 38.86 (Rudraprayag) to 74.00 (Pauri) for ST category

students, from 51.52 (Rudraprayag) to 72.63 (Bageshwar) for OBC category students and from 46.31

(Udham Singh Nagar) to 74.31 (Uttarkashi) for General category students.

Looking at the category-wise analysis in Hindi language performance, district Pithoragarh has shown

consistently good performance and Nainital has shown consistently poor performance.

2.3 How did the Rural and Urban Students perform in Hindi Language ?

Table 2.2 gives information regarding the achievement of students of 13 districts for rural and urban

area schools.

Table 2.2 Area wise Mean and‘t’ value of Achievement in Hindi language

S. N. District Rural Urban t

1 Almora M 58.54 56.24

0.44 N 1373 17

2 Bageshwar M 66.81 54.25

2.00* N 1642 12

3 Chamoli M 57.24 -

N 1663 -

4 Champawat M 64.57 76.46

3.07** N 1463 39

5 Dehradun M 63.72 69.94

4.67** N 678 489

6 Haridwar M 54.15 48.72

2.41* N 1288 115

7 Nainital M 49.15 54.08

3.48** N 1108 319

8 Pauri M 64.09 62.56

1.07 N 1194 205

9 Pithoragarh M 70.36 79.01

4.54** N 1477 98

10 Rudraprayag M 64.06 45.75

2.90** N 1472 12

11 Tehri M 57.14 83.98

7.85** N 1324 50

12 U.S.Nagar M 55.16 50.96

3.08** N 1171 395

13 Uttarkashi M 65.63 74.93

3.51** N 1487 81

14 Overall M 61.11 61.77

1.66 N 17344 1832


N- Stand for Number of Students

28

The performance of rural and urban students in Hindi language has been compared in 12 districts

other than Chamoli. In six of the districts namely Champawat, Dehradun, Nainital, Pithoragarh, Tehri

and Uttarkashi the students of urban areas have performed significantly better than the students of rural

areas. However in the remaining six districts namely Almora, Bageshwar, Haridwar, Pauri, Rudraprayag

and Udham Singh Nagar the students of rural areas have performed better than the students of urban

areas. The difference is significant in Bageshwar, Haridwar, Rudraprayag, and Udham Singh Nagar.

This dichotomy has resulted in insignificant difference in the performance of the students of rural and

urban areas.

2.4 How did Boys and Girl Students perform in Hindi Language?

Table 2.3 gives information regarding the achievement of students of 13 districts for boys and

girl students.

Table 2.3: Gender-wise Mean and ‘t’ value of Achievement in Hindi language

S.N. District Boys Girls t

1 Almora M 57.36 59.51

1.87 N 648 742


1.79 N 713 941

3 Chamoli M 57.34 57.15

0.15 N 811 852


0.64 N 671 831

5 Dehradun M 64.02 68.2

3.15** N 523 644

6 Haridwar M 51.21 55.88

3.79** N 653 750

7 Nainital M 50.89 49.71

0.99 N 654 773

8 Pauri M 63.55 64.16

0.6 N 668 731


1.9 N 744 831


0.1 N 681 803

11 Tehri M 58.96 57.37

1.21 N 652 726

12 U.S.Nagar M 52.7 55.26

2.06* N 676 890


1.69 N 682 886

14 Overall M 61.01 61.32

0.92 N 8776 10400



29

The performance of girls is significantly better than the performance of boys in Dehradun,

Haridwar and Udham Singh Nagar districts. In the remaining ten districts the difference in the

performance of boys and girls is not significant. In eight of the ten districts, the boys have performed

better than girls. As a result overall performance of boys and girls does not differ significantly.

SC Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

Figure 2.2: SC Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

There is much variation in the performance of SC boys in Language among districts. (71.1) Pithoragarh

to (45.59) U.K. Nagar districts. In the case of girls it vary maximum, (70.8) Pithoragarh to minimum

(47.59) U.S. Nagar. Looking at SC category wise analysis in language overall Pithoragarh district in SC

Category students perform highest achievement (70.93) while U.S Nagar SC category students perform

lowest (46.68) among districts. The data revealed that there is significant difference in Almora between

girls and boys.

ST Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

Figure 2.3: ST Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

52

.4

63

.89

54

.57 63

.6

64

.25

47

.88

48

.92 6

1.7

9 71

.1

60

.16

55

.18

45

.59

67

.16

56

.93

61

.64

52

.05 6

2.4

4

67

.49

52

.27

46

.74

63

.08 70

.8

62

.52

54

.27

47

.59

67

.13

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

B oys

Girsl

48

.83

71

.06

62

45

.17 5

9.2

1 69

53

.9

73

.78

72

.5 80

89

61

68

.76

27

65

.79

62

.3

40

.6

52

.82

42 4

7.5

74

.2

56

.8

32

20

64

.69 7

7.9

3

0102030405060708090

100

B oys

Girsl

30

There is much variation gender wise performance of ST student in language among districts.

The data revealed that the highest achievement of boys is (73.78) in Pauri district and lowest

achievement in Champawat (45.17). In the case of Girls performance variation among districts is from

(77.93) Pauri to (20.00) Tehri. Looking at ST category wise analysis in language overall Pauri district in

ST Category students perform highest achievement (74.0) while Rudraprayag district ST category

students perform (38.86) among districts. The data revealed that in Pithoragarh, Haridwar and Almora

districts ST category girls and boys students achievement difference is significant.

OBC Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

Figure 2.4: OBC Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

There is much variation in the performance of OBC category boys from (73.49) Bageshwar to

(53.72) Haridwar among districts. In the case of girls performance the variation among districts is from

(73.7) Chamoli to (45.81) Rudraprayag.

Looking at OBC category wise analysis in language overall Bageshwar OBC Category students perform

highest achievement (72.63) while Rudraprayag OBC students perform lowest (51.52) among districts.

The data revealed that in U.S. Nagar, Haridwar and Dehradun districts OBC category girls and boys

students achievement is significant difference.

General Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi Language

Figure 2.5: General Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

69

.76

73

.49

63

.29

60

.69

63

.3

53

.72

53

.08

62

.75

69

.61

58

.54

56

.6

56

.27

63

.11

58

.13

71

.96

73

.7

59

.68

70

.66

58

.77

51

.02 61

.19

68

.2

45

.81 57

.61

59

.26

59

.21

01020304050607080

B oys

Girsl

61

.3

71

.85

58

.64

68

.01

65

.61

49

.77

50

.2

64

.17

73

.26

67

.29

61

.87

48

.36 7

5.8

2

62

.39

69

.15

59

.21

67

.16

70

.49

53

.73

51

.54 64

.7

70

.47

65

.86

58

.74

44

.8

73

.2

01020304050607080

B oys

Girsl

31

There is much variation in the performance of general category boys from (75.82) Uttarkashi to

(48.36) U.S. Nagar among districts. In the case of girls performance the variation among districts is from

(73.2) Uttarkashi to (44.8) U.S. Nagar.

Looking at General category wise analysis in language overall Uttarkashi district students perform

highest achievement (74.31) while U.S Nagar general students perform lowest (46.31) among districts.

The data revealed that only in Dehradun district achievement between General category girls and boys

difference is significant.

SC Category Area wise Achievement in Hindi Language

Figure 2.6: SC Category Area wise Achievement in Hindi language

There is much variation in the performance of SC category rural student from (70.32)

Pithoragarh to (45.94) Nainital district. In the case of urban student performance the variation among

districts is from (78.06) Pithoragarh to (41.12) U.S. Nagar. In Chamoli district urban SC Category

student could not be covered under survey.

Looking at SC Category wise analysis in language over all district, Pithoragarh district have

performed the highest (70.93) while in U.S Nagar SC Category students performed lowest (46.68)

among all districts. The data revealed that in the Champawat, Naninital, Pithoragarh, Rurdraprayag

Tehri and U.S. Nagar districts the difference between rural and urban students achievement difference is

significant.

ST Category Area Achievement in Hindi Language

Figure 2.7: ST Category Area Achievement in Hindi Language

54

.76

62

.81

53

.3 62

.55

64

.25

50

.68

45

.94 62

.2 70

.32

61

.68

53

.52

49

.55 67

.16

61

.5

54

.25 7

5.1

7

67

.49

45

.81

55

.87

64

.11 78

.06

45

.75

75

.75

41

.12

67

.13

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rural

Urban

39

.48

68

.6

62

.26

43

.09 59

.21

50

.7

73

.93

65

.54

38

.86

20

59

.72

68

.76

52

.82

48

.75

74

.25

82

.5 89

75

.22

77

.93

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rural

Urban

32

There is much variation in the performance of ST category rural student from (73.93) Pauri to

(20.00) Tehri district. In the case of urban student performance the variation among districts is from

(89.00) Tehri to (48.75) Haridwar. In some districts like Amlora, Bageshwar, Chamoli, Rudraprayag,

Nainital and Champawat ST Category urban students were could not be covered under survey. While in

rural Haridwar district ST Category student were could not be covered under survey.

Looking over all ST Category wise analysis in language Pauri, district have performed the

highest (74.00) while in Rudraprayag ST Category students performed lowest (38.86) among all

districts. The data revealed that there is only significant difference in rural and urban ST Category

students in U.S. Nagar among all districts.

OBC Category Area wise Achievement in Hindi Language

Figure 2.8: OBC Category Area wise Achievement in Hindi language

There is much variation in the performance of OBC category rural students from (72.63)

Bageshwar to (51.08) Nainital district. In the case of urban students performance the variation among

districts is from (91.00) Tehri to (49.39) Haridwar. In some districts like Almora, Bageshwar, Chamoli,

Rudraprayag OBC Category urban students could not be covered under survey.

Looking over all OBC Category wise analysis in Language Bageshwar, district have performed

the highest (72.63) while in Rudraprayag OBC Category students performed lowest (51.52) among all

districts. The data revealed that Champawat, Dehradun, Haridwar and Pauri have shown significant

difference in the achievement of rural and urban OBC students.

64

.92 72

.63

69

.41

58

.32

63

.30

56

.88

51

.08

70

.25

67

.93

51

.52

57

.00

58

.00

63

.11

0.0

0

0.0

0

0.0

0

77

.13

70

.66

49

.39

54

.92

53

.66

79

.00

0.0

0

91

.00

57

.89

59

.21

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Rural

Urban

33

General Category Area wise Achievement in Hindi Language

Figure 2.9: General Category Area wise Achievement in Hindi language

There is much variation in the performance of General category rural student from (75.82)

Uttarkashi to (47.26) U.S. Nagar district. In the case of urban student performance variation among

districts is from (89.43) Tehri to (44.00) U.S. Nagar. In some districts like, Bageshwar, Chamoli and

Rudraprayag General Category urban students could not be covered under survey.

Looking over all General Category wise analysis in Hindi language Uttarkashi district have

performed the highest (74.31) while in U.S. Nagar General Category students performed lowest (46.31)

among all districts. The data revealed that, Dehradun, Pithoragarh and Tehri have shown significant

difference in the achievement of rural and urban General Category students.

2.5 Conclusion

The average achievement of students in reading comprehension varies greatly in all the districts

across the state. There is a highly significant difference between outcomes in high scoring district such

as Tehri, Pauri , Pithoragarh, Bageshwar, etc.

The district also vary greatly in the range between their lowest and highest achievement students

as revealed by their inter quartile score ranges. Some districts have relatively homogeneous cohort

whilst others have far more diverse outcomes e.g. Tehri , Pauri, Pithoragarh, Bageshwar etc.

Overall, no significance differences were detected in the average achievement of girls and boys;

rural and urban although there were found some exceptions in some districts.

**********

62

.03

70

.19

58

.93 67

.46

65

.61

51

.9

50

.73 6

4.2

5

71

.49

66

.49

59

.01

47

.26

75

.82

55

.53

79

70

.49

56

.18

51

.61 6

6.0

3

81

.6 89

.43

44

73

.2

0102030405060708090

100

Rural

Urban

Chapter -3

What Students Know and Can do in

Hindi language ?

35

Chapter-3

What Students Know and Can do in Hindi language?

3.0 Hindi Language Test: An Overview

As discussed in chapter 2, there were 30 questions framed in the test booklet for the assessment

of three language domains i.e. listening, reading and writing. The items were designed to test different

cognitive processes like „locate information‟, „grasp ideas and interpret‟ and „infer and evaluate‟. The

overall performance of students in Hindi has been discussed in chapter 2 for all the 13 districts. In this

chapter the performance of students is being discussed competency and item wise.

3.1 Skill wise Performance in Language

Language test was designed to assess the basic language skills of students on listening comprehension,

reading comprehension, recognition and writing comprehension. Skill wise achievement of students is

given below:

3.1.1 Performance in Listening

Six multiple choice questions (based on a given separate paragraph) in test booklet were framed to

assess listening skill of students. Field investigators were oriented how to read a paragraph before

students. After that students had to choose a correct option from the three given options. Figure 3.1

shows the performance of students of 13 districts in listening skill. Overall 68.1% of Class III students

were able to answer the given questions on the basis of what they listened with understanding.

Figure 3.1: Performance in Listening above and below State average

59.0

61.3

63.7

64.1

65.5

67.1

67.6

68.1

70.5

71.0

73.7

74.7

74.9

76.4

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

Nainital

Tehri

U.S. Nagar

Chamoli

Haridwar

Champawat

Almora

State level

Dehradun

Bageshwar

Uttarkashi

Pauri

Pithoragarh

Rudraprayag

Dis

tric

ts

36

There were seven districts namely Pithoragarh, Bageshwar, Dehradun, Uttarkashi, Champawat,

Rudraprayag and Pauri performing above state average in overall in Hindi language. In listening skill six

of the above districts except Champawat have performed above state average. Rudraprayag district has

shown the best performance in listening skill as compared to Pithoragarh in overall performance.

Remaining seven districts namely Almora, Champawat, Haridwar, Chamoli, US Nagar, Tehri and

Nainital have shown performance below state average with Nainital at the bottom.

3.1.2 Performance in Word Recognition

For Word Recognition, two multiple choice items with two options were framed in test booklet.

Students had to choose a correct word for a given picture. Overall 83.0% of Class III students were able

to answer the given items correctly on the basis of what they read and understand.

District wise performance of students in word recognition is shown in figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2: Performance in Word Recognition above and below State average

75.8

78.2

79.0

79.5

81.3

81.9

82.4

83.0

85.7

86.2

86.5

86.6

86.9

89.0

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

Nainital

Chamoli

Tehri

Haridwar

U.S. Nagar

Champawat

Almora

State level

Uttarkashi

Bageshwar

Rudraprayag

Dehradun

Pauri

Pithoragarh

Dis

tric

ts

37

In word recognition seven districts have shown performance below state average, but all of these

districts have shown performance above 75%.

3.1.3 Performance in Reading Comprehension

To assess reading comprehension skill of students there were 21 items in the given test booklet.

Figure 3.3 shows the performance of students in reading comprehension. Overall 65.4% of Class III

students were able to answer the given items correctly on the basis of what they understand after reading

questions.

Figure 3.3: Performance in Reading Comprehension above and below State average

In reading comprehension state average is 65.4%. Three districts namely Pithoragargh, Pauri and

Uttarkashi have performed above 70% level whereas as three districts namely US Nagar, Haridwar and

Nainital have performed below 60% level. Remaining seven districts have performed between 60%-

70% levels.

53.1

58.1

59.3

60.0

60.6

63.1

65.4

66.7

68.5

69.1

69.4

73.4

74.3

74.6

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

Nainital

Haridwar

U.S. Nagar

Tehri

Chamoli

Champawat

State level

Almora

Dehradun

Rudraprayag

Bageshwar

Uttarkashi

Pauri

Pithoragarh

Dis

tric

ts

38

3.1.4 Performance in Writing Skill

To assess the competency of writing skill, students were asked to write sentences on a

given picture. On the basis of three sentences written by students, they were given scores out of six

marks taking into consideration the relevance, accuracy and sequence of ideas. After data collection this

item was evaluated and responses transferred at DIET level by the subject experts. To ensure uniform

evaluation certain guidelines were issued for the evaluation of this item.

Figure 3.4 shows district wise performance of students in writing skill.

Figure 3.4: Performance in Writing Comprehension above and below State average

Overall mean score of writing skills is 1.98 out of 6 for the entire state. This is because 30% of the

students have scored zero marks, 21.18% have scored only one mark, 11.85% have scored two marks,

15,65% have scored three marks, 7.95% have scored four marks, 5.99%have scored five marks and

7.38% have scored six marks. It means majority of students (51.18%) have scored zero and one mark

out of six. This needs special attention and the teachers have to focus on the development of writing

with understanding skill amongst primary class students.

Districts of Nainital, US Nagar, Haridwar, Almora and Pauri will have to make special efforts to

improve the writing skills of their students as it is quite low.

0.69

1.00

1.09

1.10

1.24

1.84

1.98

2.19

2.26

2.41

2.62

2.79

2.95

3.36

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0

Pauri

Almora

Haridwar

USNagar

Nainital

Rudraprayag

State Level

Uttarkashi

Chamoli

Tehri

Bageshwar

Dehradun

Pithoragarh

Champawat

Dis

tric

ts

39

3.2 Description of Items

Table 3.1: Items Description of Hindi

Item no. Mental Processes Question description(Infer/Evaluate; Grasp ideas/interpret; locate)

1. Locate Use information of a story to identify the location of frog.

2 Locate Use information of a story to identify phenomena at a time.

3. Infer/evaluation Use information in the text to infer the cause of an event.

4. Locate Use information of a story to identify the location at a particular area.

5. Grasp idea/interpret Identify the relation between an object and its characteristics

6. Grasp idea/interpret Use information of the story to identify the statement

7. Locate Use of information from text to identify the fact

8. Grasp idea/interpret Use information from the notice to drive the duration of an event

9 Locate Identify the correct place name from those given in the notice.

10 Grasp idea/interpret Identification of object and correlate it to content.

11 Grasp idea/interpret Identification of object and correlate it to content.

12 Locate Identify the correct name from the given text.

13 Grasp idea/interpret Use information from a text to correlate the information

14 Grasp idea/interpret Use information from a text to correlate the information

15 Infer/evaluate Use information in the text to make inference about the cause of an act

16 Grasp idea/interpret Use information in the story to determine the cause of an event.

17 Locate Identify the correct spelling from the given text

18 Grasp idea/interpret Use information drawn from a chart about objects

19 Infer/evaluate Use information in the text to make inferences about the cost of objects

20 Infer/evaluate Use information in the text to make inferences about the cost of objects

21 Locate Use information from a chart to identify the value of object

22 Infer evaluate Use information to analyse the price of objects

23 Locate Use information from a text to identify the information

24 Grasp idea/interpret Grasp the relevant idea about the gender from the given text

25 Grasp idea/interpret Use information to draw simple conclusion about the use of noun

26 Infer/evaluate Use information from a sentence to make simple inference about the

correctness of sentence

27 Infer/evaluate Use information from a sentence about the use of preposition

28 Infer/evaluate Use information to identify correct spelling

29 Infer/evaluate Use information to identify correct spelling

30 Grasp / interpret Get an idea from the picture and write down three sentences about it

40

3.3 Sample Items

Sample item based on Reading Passage

In the Hindi test booklet test items 12-17 were framed on a passage given in the test booklet. The

passage is as under:

Sample item: locate information

Item 12:

The item requires students to locate a specific piece of information given in the text. The figural

representation of the students‟ responses for this item is given below:

Figure 3.5:( Item 12) Percentage of students in each response category

8.82 9.84

69.80

4.57 6.93

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

oneRes

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

41

Overall 69.80% students in the sample were able to select the correct response given as option

third whereas 18.66% students selected other two options which were incorrect. Remaining students

either opted more than one option or did not responded.

Sample item: Grasp Idea/Interpret

Item 13:

The item requires students to correlate a specific piece of information given in the text. The

figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is given below:

Figure 3.6: (Item 13) Percentage of students in each response category

For this item 66.41% students were able to select the correct response given as option third.

Whereas 20.72% students selected other two options which were incorrect. Remaining students either

not respond or opted more than one option.

Sample item : Grasp Idea/Interpret

Item 14:

This item requires students to correlate information given in the text to answer the question. The

figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is given below:

9.97 10.75

66.41

7.48 5.36

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

42

Figure 3.7 :( Item 14) Percentage of students in each response category

For this item 66.95% students were able to select the correct alternate given as option Second.

22.08% students responded for other two options which were incorrect. Whereas rest of the students

either not responded or opted more than one options.

Sample item: Infer/Evaluate

Item 15:

This item requires integrating and using the information given in the text to arrive at the solution

of the problem. The figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is given below:


13.95

66.95

8.13 5.83 5.10

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

57.12

15.60 14.95

7.874.45

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

43

Overall 57.12% of students were able to select correct answer given as option first. Whereas

30.55% students opted other two options which are incorrect. Remaining students either not responded

or opted more than one option.

Sample item: Grasp ideas/interpret

Item 16:

This item requires students to grasp ideas and interpret the text to make an inference about casual

relationship among events. The figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is given

below:

Figure 3.9:( Item 16) Percentage of students in response category

For this item 61.05% students were able to select correct alternate given as option second

whereas 25.29% student responded other two options which were incorrect. While remaining students

either not responded or opted more than one option.

Sample item: Locate information

Item 17:

13.53

61.05

11.76 9.234.42

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

44

This item requires students to locate a specific piece of information given explicitly in the text.

The figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is given below:


For this item 57.05% students responded to correct answer given as option third. Almost more

than 30% students could not select correct option and responded to other two options which were

incorrect. Remaining students either did not respond or opted more than one option.

Sample items on listening

11.3318.85

57.05

7.95 4.82

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

45

Sample Item : Locate

Item

In this item the student uses information of a story to identify the location of frog. The figural

representation of the students' for this item is given below:


For this item 69.74% Students were able to select the correct response given as third option. Whereas

18.28 % Students selected other two options which were incorrect. Remaining Students either not

response or opted more than one option.


Item

In this item the student uses information of a story to identify phenomena at a time. The figural

representation of the students' for this item is given below:

9.46 8.82

69.74

2.639.33

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

46


For this item 76.22% Students were able to select the correct response given as second option.

Whereas 12.69 % Students selected other two options which were incorrect. Remaining Students either

not response or opted more than one option.

Sample Item : Infer / Evaluation

Item

In this item the student use requires to use information in the text to infer the cause of an event.

The figural representation of the students' for this item is given below:


6.45

76.22

6.24 3.83 7.26

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

56.59

14.51 13.69 10.15 5.06

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than oneRes

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

47

For this item 56.59% Students were able to select the correct response given as first option.




Item

In this item the student requires use information of a story to identify the location at particular

area. The figural representation of the students' for this item is given below:



Whereas 21.22% Students selected other two options which were incorrect. Remaining Students either


Sample Item : Grasp idea/ interpret

Item

In this item the student requires to identify the relation between on object and its

characteristics. The figural representation of the students' for this item is given below:

65.97

15.415.81 6.52 6.26

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than oneRes

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

48


For this item 70.52% Students were able to select the correct response given as third option.

Whereas 18.71% Students selected other two options which were incorrect. Remaining Students either



Item

In this item the student requires to use information of the story to identify the statement. The

figural representation of the students' for this item is given below:


8.23 10.48

70.52

5.69 5.08

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

11.05

68.89

7.31 8.32 4.43

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

49



not responded or opted more than one option.


Item

In this item the student requires to grasp the relevant idea about the gender from the given text.

The figural representation of the students' for this item is given below:


For this item 58.24% students were able to select the correct response given as third option.

Whereas 28.65 % students selected other two options which were incorrect. Remaining students either



Item

16.53 12.12

58.24

6.08 6.98

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

50

In this item the student requires to use information to draw simple conclusion about the use of

noun. The figural representation of the students' for this item is given below:

Figure 3.18: (Item 25)Percentage of students in each response category




Sample Item : Infer/ Evaluate

Item

In this item the student requires to use information from a sentence to make simple inference

about the correctness of sentence. The figural representation of the students' for this item is given below:


69.03

11.77 7.47 7.84 3.89

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

11.50

69.74

8.48 5.51 4.77

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

51




Sample Item : Infer/ Evaluate

Item

In this item the student requires to use information from a sentence about the use of preposition.

The figural representation of the students' for this item is given below





3.4 Distribution of Students by Performance in Hindi language

(Percentage of Students responded correct responses)

Data of survey shows that about 21.3% students were below 40% where as 21.1% students have

answered more than 80% items correctly. Data of district Nainital and Haridwar reflects that 35.4% and

9.52

70.35

9.43 7.13 3.52

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

52

31.7% students respectively were below 40% whereas only 6.2% and 11.0% respectively could answer

more than 80% questions correctly. District Pithoragarh comparatively shows good results among all the

districts with only 7.2% students below 40% and maximum of 32.4% who have answered more than

80% questions correctly.

Figure 3.21: Percentage of students according to range of correct responses in Hindi language

Table 3.2 : District wise percentage of students according to range of correct responses in Hindi

language

Range of correct responses

District 0-40% 41-50% 51-70% 71-80% 81% and above

Almora 22.4 8.9 30.8 26.5 11.4

Bageshwar 14.6 6.4 26.9 22.3 29.7

Chamoli 28.6 9.4 25.1 17.0 20.0

Champawat 19.1 7.7 25.6 16.4 31.1

Dehradun 13.7 10.5 27.4 16.5 31.8

Haridwar 31.7 11.0 28.9 17.4 11.0

Nanital 35.4 11.1 29.9 17.4 6.2

Pauri 13.1 6.4 34.1 32.0 14.4

Pithoragarh 7.2 4.9 28.4 27.1 32.4

Rudrapryag 17.0 8.0 27.1 24.0 24.0

Tehri 27.2 10.0 25.8 17.8 19.2

U. S Nagar 30.6 9.0 29.1 20.4 10.9

Uttrakashi 16.0 6.8 23.0 23.5 30.7

Over all 21.3 8.4 27.8 21.5 21.1

21.3

8.4

27.8

21.5

21.10-40%

41-50%

51-70%

71-80%

above 81%

53

3.5 Hard Spots in Hindi Language

On the basis of data analyses hard spots revealed by the survey are as under:

1. Writing skill (especially to generate an idea from a given picture and write down few sentences

about it).

2. Use given text to locate particular information in reading comprehension (particularly in a given

poem).

3. Use information of given text to make inference about the cause of an act in listening as well as

reading comprehension.

4. Grasp the relevant idea about the gender from the given text.

5. Correlate words to identify correct word.

* * * * * * * * * *

Chapter -4

Student Achievement in Mathematics

56

having more than 65% achievement level in Mathematics. Other six (6) districts namely- Chamoli,

Champawat, Haridwar, Nainital, Tehri and Udham Singh Nagar are performing between 50 - 60%. Only

Almora district has performed just above 60%.

4.2 How did the SC, ST and OBC students perform in Mathematics?

Table 4.1 shows the achievement level of SC, ST, OBC and General students for the 13 districts of

Uttarakhand in Mathematics.

Table 4.1: Category wise Average Achievement of Students in Mathematics

S.N. District

SC ST OBC GEN Total

1 Almora M 56.08 36.38 63.11 64.48 60.33

N 611 21 36 722 1390

2 Bageshwar M 62.46 72 77.08 70.45 67.11

N 797 30 121 706 1654

3 Chamoli M 53.16 60.04 67.47 60.1 57.9

N 544 23 17 1079 1663

4 Champawat M 54.54 40.91 54.16 59.31 56.87

N 551 11 162 778 1502

5 Dehradun M 66.19 54.87 64.72 67 65.03

N 333 94 388 352 1168

6 Haridwar M 50.21 52.25 55.41 55.22 54.04

N 345 4 698 347 1403

7 Nainital M 50.78 35.2 49.34 54.58 51.1

N 484 20 524 399 1427

8 Pauri M 71.94 69.68 63.77 70.23 70.18

N 364 19 106 910 1399

9 Pithoragarh M 70.92 67.42 66.99 69.1 69.72

N 777 50 166 582 1575

10 Rudraprayag M 65.35 44.57 64.24 68.5 66.97

N 626 7 29 822 1484

11 Tehri M 53.52 73 61.47 59.07 58.08

N 367 2 268 741 1378

12 U.S.Nagar M 48.96 65.76 58.73 54.09 55.08

N 399 34 982 151 1566

13 Uttarkashi M 67.38 73.41 65.92 75.52 69.01

N 606 54 626 282 1568

14 Overall M 60.12 60.11 59.74 64.15 61.69

N 6813 369 4123 7871 19176



57

Overall achievement of SC, ST and OBC students is 60.12%, 60.11% and 59.74% respectively,

that shows little variation in these categories. However, these vary a lot from the achievement of General

category student‟s, i.e. 64.15 %.

Looking at the performance of SC, ST and OBC students, It may be said that the achievement of

the students of these categories is slightly lower than the performance of General category students.

However, the performance of the students SC, ST and OBC category students varies from district to

district. The achievement of the SC category student of Pauri and Pithoragarh is above 70% and is better

than the achievement of students of other categories including General category. On the other hand the

achievement of the students of Almora, Chamoli, Champawat, Haridwar, Nainital, Tehri and Udham

Singh Nagar district is lower than 60%. In Udham Singh Nagar, the achievement level is as below as

48.96%. In the remaining four districts the achievement level of SC students is between 60% - 70%.

In case of ST students, the variation in the achievement level of students in Mathematics is still

larger ranging from 35.20%-73.41%. It is more than 70% for the districts of Bageshwar, Tehri and

Uttarkashi. There are two districts namely- Almora and Nainital, where the achievement level is below

40% and another two districts namely- Champawat and Rudraprayag, where the achievement level is

between 40-50%. Remaining 6 districts have performed between 50-70%. In case of the performance of

OBC category students in Mathematics, the range is from 49.34% in Nainital to 77.08% in Bageshwar.

in 8 districts namely Almora, Chamoli, Dehradun, Pauri, Pithoragarh, Rudraprayag, Tehri and

Uttarkashi, OBC category students have performed between 60 -70%. Another 3 districts namely-

Champawat, Haridwar and Udham Singh Nagar have shown performance between 50% - 60%.

The performance of General category students in Mathematics also varies from 45.09% in Udham Singh

Nagar to 78.52% in Uttarkashi. Four districts namely Champawat, Haridwar, Nainital and Tehri have

performed between 50-60%, 5 districts namely- Almora, Chamoli, Dehradun, Pithoragarh and

Rudraprayag have performed between 60 and 70%, while 3 districts namely Bageshwar, Pauri and

Uttarkashi have shown performance level above 70%.

While, the category-wise performance of student of Pauri district in Mathematics is consistently high, it

is consistently low in case of Haridwar district.

Category-wise variation in different district is also reflected by the fact that SC category students of

Pauri and Pithoragarh have shown good performance in Mathematics, the same is true for ST category

students of Uttarkashi and Tehri districts, OBC category students of Bageshwar district and General

category students of Uttarkashi district. On the other hand, the SC category students of Udham Singh

Nagar, Haridwar and Nainital have shown comparatively poor performance in Mathematics; the same is

true for ST students of Nainital and Almora, OBC students of Nainital and General category students of

Udham Singh Nagar.

58

4.3 How did the Rural and Urban Students perform in Mathematics

Table 4.2 given below shows the achievement level of rural and urban students of 13 districts in

Mathematics.

Table 4.2 : Area wise Mean and ‘t’ Achievement in Mathematics.

S.N. District Rural Urban t

1 Almora M 60.42 52.88 1.31

N 1373 17

2 Bageshwar M 67.21 53.92 2.19*

N 1642 12

3 Chamoli M 57.9

N 1663

4 Champawat M 56.52 69.9 3.11**

N 1463 39

5 Dehradun M 63.27 67.48 3.62**

N 678 489

6 Haridwar M 54.23 51.93 0.93

N 1288 115

7 Nainital M 50.35 53.7 2.36*

N 1108 319

8 Pauri M 70.51 68.24 1.36

N 1194 205

9 Pithoragarh M 68.51 88.05 9.63**

N 1477 98

10 Rudraprayag M 67.06 55.92 1.94

N 1472 12

11 Tehri M 57.16 82.42 7.93**

N 1328 50

12 U.S.Nagar M 55.2 54.7 0.37

N 1171 395

13 Uttarkashi M 68.59 76.73 3.32**

N 1487 81

14 Overall M 61.55 63.1 2.70**

N 17344 1832



The achievements of students of urban areas which is 63.10 %, is significantly higher than the

students of rural areas, which is 61.55. However, the performance of boys and girls does not vary

significantly, which is 62.03 and 61.41 respectively. The higher performance of urban area students can

be attributed to the districts of Champawat, Dehradun, Nainital, Pithoragarh, Tehri and Uttarkashi.

Moreover, in the remaining districts, the performance of rural students is better than the performance of

urban students, though it is not significant, excepting Bageshwar, where the performance of 12 urban

students is significantly lower than the performance of 1642 rural students. It may be mentioned that in

Chamoli district all the 1663 students are from rural areas.

59

Students of urban areas have performed significantly better than the students of rural areas.

However in the remaining six (6) districts namely- Almora, Bageshwar, Haridwar, Pauri, Rudraprayag

and Udham Singh Nagar the students of rural areas have performed better than the students of urban

areas. The difference is Insignificant in Almora, Pauri, Haridwar, Rudraprayag, and Udham Singh

Nagar. This dichotomy has resulted significant difference in the performance of the students of rural and

urban areas.

4.4 How did the Boys and Girls perform in Mathematics?

Table 4.3 given below shows the achievement level of boys and girl students of 13 districts in

Mathematics.

Table 4.3 : Gender wise Mean and ‘t’ Achievement in Mathematics

S.N. District Boys Girls t

1 Almora M 61.14 59.62

1.2 N 648 742


1.69 N 713 941

3 Chamoli M 59.28 56.6

2.27* N 811 852


0,38 N 671 831

5 Dehradun M 65.58 64.59

0.85 N 523 644

6 Haridwar M 53.87 54.19

0.24 N 653 750

7 Nainital M 52.29 50.09

1.85 N 654 773

8 Pauri M 69.28 71

1.45 N 668 731


0.54 N 744 831


1.21 N 681 803

11 Tehri M 57.51 58.59

0.89 N 652 726

12 U.S.Nagar M 54.4 55.59

1 N 676 890


0.89 N 682 886

14 Overall M 62.03 61.41 1.82



The achievement of girls is found better than the performance of boys in Pauri, Haridwar, Tehri

and Udham Singh Nagar districts. In the remaining eight (08) districts the difference in the performance

60

of boys and girls is not significant. In eight (8) of the ten (10) districts, the boys have performed better

than girls. As a result overall performance of boys and girls does not differ significantly. Excepting

Chamoli, the remaining districts the performance of boys and girls does not differ significantly. In

Chamoli, the performance of boys is significantly better than the performance of girls, but it is still less

than the average achievement of the students of the Uttarakhand state.

General category gender wise achievement in Mathematics

Figure 4.2: General category gender wise achievement in Mathematics

There is much variation in the performance of general category boys from (46.88) U. S. Nagar to

(79.49) Uttarakashi among districts. In the case of girls performance, the variation among districts is

from (43.77) U.S. Nagar to (77.8) Uttarakshi.

Looking at general category wise analysis in Mathematics overall Uttarkashi district students perform

highest achievement (78.52) while U.S Nagar general students perform lowest (45.09) among districts.

The data revealed that in Pauri and Almora districts the difference between general category girls and

boys achievement is significantly difference.

SC Category gender wise achievement in Mathematics

Figure 4.3: SC Category gender wise achievement in mathematics

66

.53

72

.03

61

.06

59

.58

65

.43

54

.04

55

.6

68

.65

69

.42

69

.04

58

.35

46

.88

79

.49

62

.8 69

.44

59

.17

59

.1 68

.14

56

.04

53

.82

71

.63

68

.78

68

.06

59

.68

43

.77

77

.8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

B oys

Girsl

55

.46 63

.39

55

.75

54

.36 6

8.5

2

49

.63

52

.19

73

.12

71

.63

65

.79

54

.52

48

.01

68

.43

56

.64

61

.66

50

.61

54

.69 63

.33

50

.86

49

.54

70

.78

70

.34

64

.93

52

.46

49

.76

66

.44

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

B oys

Girsl

61

There is much variation in the performance of SC category boys in Mathematics among districts.

(73.12) Pauri to (48.01) U.S Nagar district. In the case of girls it vary maximum (70.78) Pauri to

minimum (49.54) Nainital. Looking at SC category wise analysis in Mathematics overall Pauri district in

SC Category students perform highest achievement (71.94) when U.S Nagar SC category students

perform lowest (48.96) among districts. The data revealed that in Dehradun and Chamoli districts, the

difference between SC category girls and boys achievement is significantly difference.

ST Category gender wise achievement in Mathematics

Figure 4.4: ST Category gender wise achievement in Mathematics

There is much variation gender wise performance of ST Category students in Mathematics

among districts. The dada revealed that the highest achievement of boys (89.0) in Haridwar district and

lowest achievement in Almora (39.67). In the case of girls it vary (75.6) Pauri to minimum (32.0)

Almora. Looking at ST category wise analysis in Mathematics overall Uttarakashi district in ST

Category students perform highest achievement (73.41) when Nainital district ST category students

perform (35.2) among districts. The data revealed that in Nainital and Rudraprayag districts ST category

girls and boys students achievement significantly differs.

OBC Category gender wise achievement in Mathematics

Figure 4.5: OBC Category gender wise achievement in mathematics

39

.67

75

.13

62

45

.5 57

.91

89

43

.8

63

.11

68

.77

74 8

0

69

.5

71

.4

32

68

.43

59

.75

35

.4

53

.15

40

26

.6

75

.6

65

.4

39

.67

66

64

.62

75

.14

0102030405060708090

100

B oys

Girsl

68

.48

78

.19

58

56

.38

63

.97

56

.14

50

.4

62

.19

65

.44

71

.46

59

.57

58

65

.92

55

.6

76

.22

74

.1

52

65

.24

54

.78

48

.41 6

5.3

68

.39

58

.38

63

.18

59

.27

65

.91

0102030405060708090

B oys

Girsl

62

There is much variation in the performance of OBC category boys from (78.19) Bageshwar to

(50.4) Nainital among other districts. In the case of girls performance the variation among districts is

from (76.22) Bageshwar to (48.41) Nainital.

Looking at OBC category wise analysis in Mathematics overall Bageshwar OBC Category students

perform highest achievement (77.08) while Nanital OBC students perform lowest (49.34) among

districts. The data revealed that there is no any significant different between boys and girls among all

districts.

SC Category area wise Achievement in Mathematics

Figure 4.6: SC Category area wise Achievement in Mathematics

There is much variation in the performance of SC category rural student, from (72.05) Pauri to

(49.26) Nainital district. In the case of urban student's performance the variation among districts is from

(75.87) Uttarkashi to (45.08) U.S. Nagar. In Chamoli district urban SC Category students could not be

covered under survey.

Looking at SC Category wise analysis in mathematics overall student of Pauri district have

performed the highest (71.94) while in U.S Nagar SC Category students performed lowest (48.96)

among all districts. The data revealed that in Dehradun, Champawat, Naninital Pithoragarh, Tehri, U.S.

Nagar and Uttarkashi SC Category Students have shown significant difference between rural and urban.

ST Category area wise Achievement in Mathematics

Figure 4.7: ST Category area wise Achievement in Mathematics

56

.03

62

.59

53

.16

54

.08

62

.38

50

.17

49

.26 7

2.0

5

69

.49

65

.53

52

.49

50

.97

66

.8

70

53

.92

68

.11

68

.72

50

.42

57

.55

71

.15

87

.45

55

.92

71

.35

45

.08

75

.87

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rural

Urban

36

.38

72

60

.04

40

.91

54

.42

35

.2

70

.53

66

.9

44

.57 6

6 68

.52

73

.41

68

.67

52

.25

66

.5 80

80

58

.11

0

20

40

60

80

100

Rural

Urban

63

There is much variation in the performance of ST category rural students from (73.41) Uttarkashi

to (35.20) Nainital district. In the case of urban student performance, the variation among districts is

from (80.0) Tehri, Pithoragarh to (52.25) Haridwar. In some districts like Amlora, Bageshwar, Chamoli,

Uttarkashi, Rudraprayag, Nainital and Champawat ST Category urban students could not be covered

under survey. While in Haridwar district rural ST Category student could not be covered under survey.

Looking overall ST Category wise analysis in mathematics Uttarkashi, district has performed the

highest (73.41) while in Nainital ST Category students performed lowest (35.20) among all districts.

The data revealed that there is no any significant difference between rural and urban ST Category

students with in districts.

OBC Category area wise Achievement in Mathematics

Figure 4.8: OBC Category area wise Achievement in Mathematics

There is much variation in the performance of OBC category rural students from (77.08)

Bageshwar to (50.46) Nainitali district. In the case of urban students performance, the variation among

districts is from (94.00) Tehri to (43.30) Uttarkashi. In some districts like Amlora, Bageshwar, Chamoli,

Rudraprayag OBC Category urban students could not be covered under survey. Looking over all OBC

Category wise analysis in Mathematics Bageshwar, district have performed the highest (77.08) while in

Nainital OBC Category students performed lowest (49.34) among all districts. The data revealed that

Champoawat, Nainital, Pauri, Pithoragarh, U.S. Nagar and Uttarkashi have shown significant difference

in the achievement of rural and urban OBC students.

63

.11

77

.08

67

.47

52

.65

65

.38

55

.51

50

.46

71

.68

65

.16

64

.24

61

.34

57

.55 66

.28

67

.94

63

53

.78

45

.73 5

5.8

7

86

.86 94

63

.17

43

.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Rural

Urban

64

General Category area wise Achievement in Mathematics

Figure 4.9: General Category area wise Achievement in Mathematics

There is much variation in the performance of General category rural student from (77.28)

Uttarkashi to (45.50) U.S. Nagar district. In the case of urban student performance variation among

districts is from (91.55) Pithoragarh to (44.07) U.S. Nagar. In some districts like, Bageshwar, Chamoli

and Rudraprayag general Category urban students could not covered under survey. Looking over all

General Category wise analysis in Mathematics Uttarkashi, district have performed the highest (78.52)

while in U.S. Nagar General Category students performed lowest (45.09) among all districts. The data

revealed that Almora, Champawat, Nainital, Pithoragarh, Tehri and Uttarkashi have shown significant

difference in the achievement of rural and urban General Category Students.

4.5 Conclusion

In Mathematics, test items were framed on addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, number

system, geometry, pattern, measurement, money, data handling and fraction skills. State average is more

than 60% in addition, subtraction, division, measurement, geometry and pattern which reflects that

students have performed somewhat better from most of the districts in these skills. Whereas state

average in multiplication, number system, money, data handling and fraction skills is below 60% lowest

in fraction with 54% state average. These areas need to be focused on priority basis. Measurement is the

only skill where state average is more than 75%.

* * * * * * * * * *

64

.78

70

.45

60

.1

59

.16

65

.2

55

.38

52

.7

69

.83

68

.3

68

.5

57

.86

45

.5

77

.28

50

.6

82

.6

68

.74

52

.12

59

.78 73

.42

91

.55

90

44

.07

88

.22

0102030405060708090

100

Rural

Urban

Chapter -5

What Students Know and Can Do in

Mathematics ?

65

Chapter-5

What Students Know and Can Do in Mathematics?

5.0 Mathematics Test : An Overview

Mathematics achievement survey administered in all the districts with one test booklet only

because population size of Class III in the districts was not good enough to execute more than one test

booklet for the sample size given in SOP. There were 35 items framed in the test booklet for the

assessment of Mathematical domains of class III students as included in curriculum- addition,

subtraction, multiplication, division, number system, geometry, pattern, measurement, money, data

handling and fraction. Besides this, items were also constructed to test following three skills.

Skill 1- Knowledge

Skill 2- Understanding

Skill 3- Application/Reasoning

5.1 Students Performance in Mathematics

Keeping in view of state syllabus for Class III, Mathematics test was designed to assess the

following basic skills of students –

Addition Subtraction Pattern,

Multiplication Division

Number system Geometry

Measurement Money

Data handling Fraction

To assess above Mathematical skills of students, test is administered across the state. For each

district, a sample was drawn which was designed to be representative of the entire target population, i.e.

all class III students studying in government and government aided schools. Overall achievement of

class III students in the state is 61.69%. This information is based on the performance of 19176 students

on a test comprising 35 Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) of one mark each. The performance of

students is varying from district to district and is given below.

66

Figure 5.1: Overall achievement in Mathematics

5.2 Skill wise Performance in Mathematics

5.2.1 Performance in Addition

To assess skill of addition of students in student test booklet, 5 multiple choice items were

framed. Student has to choose one correct option from the given three options against each item. Overall

62.9% of Class III students could answer the given items correctly. District wise achievement is given

as below:

Figure 5.2: District wise Performance of students in Addition

51.1

54.0

55.1

56.9

57.9

58.1

60.3

61.7

65.0

67.0

67.1

69.0

69.7

70.2

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

Nainital

Haridwar

U.S.Nagar

Champawat

Chamoli

Tehri

Almora

State Overall

Dehradun

Rudraprayag

Bageshwar

Uttarkashi

Pithoragarh

Pauri

51.6

56.3

56.6

58.4

59.3

62.4

62.9

63.2

64.0

65.8

67.9

68.9

70.2

71.5

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

Nainital

Haridwar

U.S. Nagar

Chamoli

Tehri

Almora

State level

Champawat

Dehradun

Rudraprayag

Bageshwar

Uttarkashi

Pithoragarh

Pauri

67

Addition is the basic Mathematical operation to be mastered by all the children of Class III.

Above figure shows that only two districts namely Pauri and Pithoragarh have performed above 70%

level. Five districts namely Tehri, Chamoli, US Nagar, Haridwar and Nainital have performed below

60% level, Nainital being the lowest performing district at 51.6% level. The remaining 6 districts have

performed between 60% to 70%.

5.2.2 Performance in Subtraction

To assess skill of subtraction of students, in student test booklet 3 multiple choice items were


60.1% of Class III student could answer the given items correctly. District wise achievement is given as

below:

Figure 5.3: Districtwise Performance of students in Subtraction

For subtraction skill, only one district (Pauri) has shown performance above 70% level where as

five districts namely Pithoragarh, Uttarkashi, Rudraprayag, Dehradun and Bageshwar have shown

performance between 60 and 70%. The performance of Pithoragarh is almost 70% (69.9%). US Nagar

and Ninital district have shown performance level of 48.1% and 43.5% which is quite low. The

remaining five districts have their performance between 50 to 60% level.

5.2.3 Performance in Multiplication

To assess ability of students‟ to multiply, in student test booklet 2 multiple choice items were


57.0% of Class III student could answer the given items correctly. District wise achievement is given

below:

43.5

48.1

56.8

57.1

57.2

57.7

58.4

60.1

63.9

65.3

66.0

66.4

69.9

71.2

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

Nainital

U.S. Nagar

Champawat

Chamoli

Haridwar

Almora

Tehri

State level

Bageshwar

Dehradun

Rudraprayag

Uttarkashi

Pithoragarh

Pauri

68

Figure 5.4: Districtwise Performance of students in Multiplication

For multiplication skill, none of the districts could reach up to 70% level. Pithoragarh district has

shown maximum achievement of 66.8%. There are only five districts which have achieved 60% or

above. Three districts namely Haridwar, US Nagar and Nainital have shown achievement below 50%

level, Nainital again is the lowest performing district with 43.2% achievement level. Remaining five

districts have performed 50% to 60%.

5.2.4 Performance in Division

To assess skill of division of students in student test booklet, 3 multiple choice items were


66.2% of Class III student could answer the given items correctly. District wise achievement is as-

Figure 5.5: District wise Performance of students in Division

43.2

47.3

49.9

53.353.4

53.5

53.8

57.0

57.2

61.6

63.3

64.5

66.0

66.8

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

Nainital

U.S. Nagar

Haridwar

Almora

Champawat

Chamoli

Tehri

State level

Dehradun

Rudraprayag

Uttarkashi

Bageshwar

Pauri

Pithoragarh

57.5

59.2

59.963.163.1

64.4

65.366.2

67.369.871.2

72.3

73.4

73.6

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

Nainital

Haridwar

U.S. Nagar

Chamoli

Tehri

Almora

Champawat

State level

Dehradun

Bageshwar

Uttarkashi

Rudraprayag

Pithoragarh

Pauri

69

Performance in division of four districts namely Pauri, Pithoragarh, Rudraprayag and Uttarkashi

is above 70% level. Three districts namely US Nagar, Haridwar and Nainital have shown below 60%

performance level, Nainital being the lowest is at (57.5)% level. Remaining six districts have performed

between 60% to 70% level.

5.2.5 Performance in Geometry

To assess skill related to geometry, in student test booklet, 3 multiple choice items were framed.

Student has to choose one correct option from the given three options. Overall 60.3% of Class III

student could answer the given items correctly. District wise achievement is given below:

Figure 5.6: District wise Performance of Students in Geometry

In geometry, only Pauri district has achieved above 70% level, while five districts have achieved

between 60 to 70%. Remaining seven districts have achieved between 50% to 60% level.

5.2.6 Performance in Number System

To assess skill related to number system in student test booklet, 6 different multiple choice items were

framed. Student has to choose one correct option from the given three options each item. Overall 57.2%

of Class III students could answer the given items correctly. District wise achievement is given below:

50.2

50.2

51.9

55.0

57.6

58.9

59.0

60.3

63.3

63.9

66.1

67.6

69.0

71.2

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

Nainital

Haridwar

U.S. Nagar

Chamoli

Tehri

Champawat

Almora

State level

Dehradun

Bageshwar

Rudraprayag

Uttarkashi

Pithoragarh

Pauri

70

Figure 5.7: District wise Performance of students in Number System

The performance of students related to number system is comparatively low. The highest

performing district Uttarkashi has achieved only 65.1% level and only six districts in all have their

performance above 60% level. Nainital district has performed only 46.3% level which is the lowest. The

remaining six districts have shown 51.1 to 56.7% performance level.

5.2.7 Performance in Measurement

To assess the ability of student on measurement, in students‟ test booklet, 4 different multiple

choice items were framed. Student has to tick correct option from the given three options. Overall

75.1% of Class III student could answer the given items correctly. District wise achievement is given

below:

Figure 5.8: District wise Performance of Students in Measurement

46.3

51.1

52.0

53.0

54.9

54.9

56.7

57.2

60.1

60.8

61.4

63.0

64.5

65.1

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

Nainital

U.S. Nagar

Haridwar

Tehri

Champawat

Chamoli

Almora

State level

Rudraprayag

Bageshwar

Dehradun

Pithoragarh

Pauri

Uttarkashi

57.8

67.4

69.0

69.4

70.4

72.6

73.5

75.1

77.3

78.6

79.0

80.4

81.7

81.7

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

Champawat

Nainital

Chamoli

Haridwar

U.S. Nagar

Tehri

Almora

State level

Bageshwar

Dehradun

Rudraprayag

Uttarkashi

Pauri

Pithoragarh

71

The performance of students of state is good (75.1% state average) on measurement related skill.

There are three districts having their performance above 80% and another six districts have performed

between 70 to 80% level. District Champawat is the lowest performing district at 57.8% level where as

the three districts have achieved nearly 69% level.

5.2.8 Performance in Pattern

To assess ability of student on pattern (related to number and figure), in student test

booklet, 2 multiple choice items were framed. Student has to choose one correct option from the given

three options against each item. Overall 69.8% of Class III student could answer the given items

correctly. District wise achievement of students in pattern related items is given below:

Figure 5.9: District wise Performance of students in Pattern

Achievement of students in all districts is above 60% except Nainital, which is (58.4)% level.

Pithoragarh has achieved more than 80% level (81.5%) with four districts between 774.5 t0 78.3% and

seven districts performing 60 to 70% level.

5.2.9 Performance in Fraction

To assess ability of student on fraction, in student test booklet, 2 multiple choice items were framed.

Student has to tick one correct option from the given three options against each item. Overall 54.0% of

Class III student could answer the given items correctly. District wise achievement of students in

fraction related items is given below :

58.4

61.0

61.8

63.9

64.9

68.7

69.2

69.5

69.8

74.5

76.8

77.1

78.3

81.5

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

Nainital

Haridwar

U.S. Nagar

Chamoli

Almora

Tehri

Dehradun

Champawat

State level

Uttarkashi

Bageshwar

Rudraprayag

Pauri

Pithoragarh

72

Figure 5.10: District wise Performance of Students in Fraction

Only three districts namely Uttarkashi, Pithoragarh and Pauri have performed above 60% level

and six districts namely Almora, US Nagar, Haridwar, Champawat and Nainital have performed

between 49 to 50% level, Tehri being the lowest performing district with 45.0% level. Remaining four

districts have performed between 56 to 58% level.

5.2.10 Performance on Money

To assess ability of student on money, in student test booklet, multiple choice items were framed.

Student has to tick one correct option from the given three options against each item. Overall 58.9% of

Class III student could answer the given items correctly. District wise achievement of students in money

related items is given below:

Figure 5.11: District wise Performance of Students in Money

45.0

49.1

49.1

49.2

49.8

49.9

51.7

54.0

56.1

57.0

57.8

61.6

61.7

62.6

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0

Tehri

Nainital

Champawat

Haridwar

U.S. Nagar

Almora

Chamoli

State level

Bageshwar

Rudraprayag

Dehradun

Pauri

Pithoragarh

Uttarkashi

46.4

46.4

48.8

53.7

55.5

56.2

57.1

58.9

63.4

64.6

67.3

68.1

68.2

68.7

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

Nainital

U.S. Nagar

Haridwar

Chamoli

Tehri

Almora

Champawat

State level

Dehradun

Rudraprayag

Pithoragarh

Uttarkashi

Bageshwar

Pauri

73

While six districts have performed between 63 to 69% level, at the same time four districts have

performed between 53 to 58% level, there are three districts namely Haridwar, US Nagar and Nainital

performing between 46 to 49% level, Nainital and U.S. Nagar being the lowest at 46.4% level.

5.2.11 Performance in Data Handling

To assess ability of student on money, in student test booklet, 2 multiple choice items were

framed. Student has to tick one correct option from the given three options against each item. Overall

63.5% of Class III student could answer the given items correctly. District wise achievement of students

in data handling related items is given below:

Figure 5.12: District wise Performance of Students in Data handling

Pauri and Pithoragarh districts have performed above 70% level. Out of the remaining 11

districts, five have performed between 63 to 70% and six have performed between 52 to 60% level.

52.2

54.0

56.8

59.2

59.3

59.4

63.5

64.2

66.1

68.0

68.6

69.2

74.0

74.5

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

U.S. Nagar

Nainital

Haridwar

Chamoli

Almora

Tehri

State level

Champawat

Uttarkashi

Dehradun

Bageshwar

Rudraprayag

Pithoragarh

Pauri

Dis

tric

ts

74

5.3 Description of Items

Table 5.1 : Items description of Mathematics

S.No. Mental

Process

Item description

The Student:

Item 1 Knowing Recognizes a given shape

Item 2 Understanding Compares the volume of water in given glasses

Item 3 Knowing Recognizes a number of three digits.

Item 4 Knowing Recognizes a number given in word form.

Item 5 Understanding Adds 2 numbers of two digits with carryover

Item 6 Understanding Subtracts 3 digit numbers without borrowing

Item 7 Understanding Solves a word problem of division

Item 8 Applying Solves a word problem given in pictorial form

Item 9 Applying Arranges the given numbers in ascending order

Item 10 Understanding Adds 2 numbers of three digits without carryover

Item 11 Understanding Subtracts 2 numbers of three digits with borrowing

Item 12 Applying Solves time related problem based on clock

Item 13 Understanding Relates the characteristics of objects of different shapes

Item 14 Applying Uses signs < , =, > between two given numbers.

Item 15 Understanding Reads a Calendar

Item 16 Knowing Recognizes the place value of a digit in a given number.

Item 17 Understanding Correlates the shapes in the given picture

Item 18 Understanding Identifies the part of a given shape

Item 19 Understanding Compares the heights

Item 20 Understanding Multiplies a 2 digit number by a single digit without carryover

Item 21 Understanding Identifies the rupee notes to make price of a given doll

Item 22 Understanding Finds the pattern with the number of sticks given in different boxes

Item 23 Understanding Identifies equal parts of the given figures

Item 24 Understanding Identifies a 4 digit number in expanded form

Item 25 Understanding Solves word problem related to addition of two digit numbers without carryover

Item 26 Understanding Solves word problem related to multiplication of numbers with carryover

Item 27 Understanding Compares the distances of objects in a given picture

Item 28 Understanding Counts the number of triangles in a given figure

Item 29 Understanding Solves word problem related to addition of four digit numbers with carryover

Item 30 Understanding Subtracts fractions of equal denominators

Item 31 Applying Finds the pattern of a given number series

Item 32 Understanding Solves word problem related to division of 2 digit number by 1 digit number

Item 33 Understanding Draws inferences from a given table

Item 34 Understanding Converts rupees into paisa

Item 35 Understanding Divides a 2 digit number by a single digit

75

5.4 Sample Items

The sample items given below reflect students‟ achievement in different areas.

Subtraction

Sample Item ––Subtraction without borrowing

Item no 6 -

6 5 7

- 4 3 5

222

223

322

This item requires student to subtract a three digit number from another three digit number, given in

numeral form without borrowing. The figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is as

under:


For this item 72.46% students responded correctly by choosing first option from the given three

options. 17.61% students could not respond correctly as they choose other two options which were not

correct. Remaining students either not responded or opted more than one option.

72.46

10.07 7.54 6.7 3.23

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 2 3 No Response More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

76

Sample item – Subtraction with borrowing

Item no 11- -

This item requires student to subtract a three digit number from another three digit number;

given in numeral form with borrowing. The figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item

is as under:


Overall 57.71% students could choose correct answer as first option whereas 29.36% students

responded incorrectly by choosing other two options. Remaining students either not responded or opted

more than one options.

57.71

12.6616.7

9.77

3.15

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

77

Sample item – Division

Item32-

This item requires knowing the ability of student to solve word problem related to division. The

figural representation of the students all responses for this item is as under:


In this item 57.54% students choose correct option second, alternate whereas 30.32% Students

responded to other two options which were not correct. Remaining students either not responded or

opted more than one option.

Sample item- Division

Item 35-

57.54

22.318.01 8.74 3.41

0

20

40

60

80

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

78

This item requires division of simple two digit number by a single digit number. The figural

representation of the students all responses for this item is as under


Above data reflects that 69.90% students selected correct answer given as third option whereas

17.27% students prefer to go with other two options which were incorrect. A significant number of

students either did not respond or responded more than one options.

Sample item- Addition of two digit numbers with carryover

Item 5-

This item requires student to add two digit numbers with carryover. The figural representation of

the students‟ responses for this item is as under:

8.64 8.63

69.9

10.08

2.75

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

79

Figure 5.17: (item 5) Percentage of students in each response category

For this item 67.07% students could select correct answer given as first option whereas 23.41%

students chose other two options which were incorrect options. Some of the remaining students did not

respond and others opted more than one options.

Sample item : Word problem related to addition.

Item29:

This item requires judging the ability of student to apply knowledge of addition in their practical

life. The figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is as under:


67.07

12.96 10.45 5.61 3.92

0

20

40

60

80

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

11.35

50.64

23.0011.27

3.75

0

20

40

60

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

80

In this item 50.64% students could select correct answer which is given as second option

whereas 34.35% students responded to other two options which were incorrect. Remaining students

either did not respond or opted more than one options.

Sample item- Number System

Item4 :

This item requires student's ability to identify numbers given in words and convert it into

numbers. The figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is as under:

Figure 5.19: (item 4) Percentage of students in each response category

Overall 67.20% of students could choose correct answer given as third option whereas 22.53%

students prefer to go with other two options which were incorrect.

Sample item : Number System

Item 9: :

12.49 10.4

67.20

5.42 4.49

0

20

40

60

80

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

81

This item requires students to know the given numbers first and then arrange them in the ascending

order. The figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is as under:


For this item 48.80% students could choose correct answer given as third option. Whereas

36.52% students selected other two options which were incorrect.

Sample item: Number system

Item 16

This item requires students to find out place value of a digit in a given number. The figural

representation of the students‟ responses for this item is as under:


21.3615.16

48.80

7.64 7.03

0102030405060

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

oneRes

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

8.8022.89

55.40

9.05 3.85

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

83

This item requires student to judge the ability of multiplication related to word problem without

carryover. The figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is as under:


For this item only 43.48% students could select correct response given as first option whereas

41.54% students selected other two which were incorrect. Remaining students either not responded or


Sample item: Geometry (identification of shapes)

Item 28: :

This item requires student to know the given geometrical shapes. The figural representation of the

students‟ responses for this item is as under:

43.48

16.84

24.70

11.78

3.20

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

84

Figure 5.24 : (Item 28) Percentage of students in each response category

Overall 60.26% students could response this item correctly by choosing third option whereas

26.85% selected other two options which were incorrect. Remaining students either not responded or


Sample item- Number Pattern

Item 31:

This item requires student to understand the pattern given in the number series. The figural



16.11 12.74

60.26

7.68 3.20

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.00

1 2 3 No Response More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

12.15

60.28

15.918.57

3.09

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

85

Overall 60.28% students could choose correct response as second option whereas 28.06% selected

other two incorrect options. Remaining students either not responded or opted more than one option.

Sample item- Measurement of time

Item 12-

This item requires student to calculate the time with the help of watch. The figural representation

of the students‟ responses for this item is as under:

Figure 5.26: (Item 12) Percentage of students in response category

For this item 68.95% students could choose the correct response as second option whereas 21.61%

students selected other two option which were incorrect. Remaining students either not response or


Sample item- Money

Item 34-

7.26

68.95

14.356.11 3.33

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

121

2

3

4

56

7

8

9

10

11

86

This item requires student having the ability of converting the value of rupees into paisa. The figural



According to students responses 51.42% students were able to select the correct response given as

first option. Whereas 37.61% students selected other two options which were incorrect. Remaining

students either not responded or opted more than one option.

Sample item- Data handling

Item 33-

51.42

20.23 17.386.52 4.45

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More

than one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

87

This item requires ability of student to draws inferences from a given label which object is being

repeated maximum number of times. The figural representation of the students‟ responses for this item is

as under:


In this item 63.48% students were able to choose correct response given as second options whereas

24.97 % choose other two options which were incorrect. Remaining students either not responded or

opted more than one options.

Sample item- Subtraction of Fractions

Item 30: 3

4 -

1

4 =

1

4

2

3

2

4

This item requires student to subtract fractions of equal denominators. The figural representation

of the students‟ responses for this item is as under:

11.96

63.48

13.017.66

3.88

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

88


Overall 48.62% students could choose the correct answer given as third option, whereas almost

34% students selected other two options which were incorrect and the remaining either did not respond

or opted more than one option.

5.5 Distribution of Students by Performance

(Percentage of Students on responded correct responses)

Data of survey shows distribution of students according to their responses in Mathematics as

below-

Percentage of Student in Mathematics

In Mathematics data of survey shows that about 20.3% students were below 40% where as

24.2% students have answered more than 80% questions correctly. District Nainital and Udham Singh

Nagar data show that 33.17 and 32.1% respectively students responded below than 40% correct response

a Districts more than 30% students of Bageshwar, Pauri, Pithoragrah and Uttarakashi responded 80%

correct responses. Pauri is a district only where maximum 37.8% students responded correct response

above 80%. District Pithoragarh comparatively shows somewhat better results among all the districts

with only 9.0% students below 40% and district Pauri shows maximum of 37.8% students who have

answered more than 80% item correctly.

14.7919.20

48.62

13.21

4.19

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

1 2 3 No

Response

More than

one

Res

pon

ses

of

Stu

den

ts

Option

89

Figure 5.30: Percentage of Students according to range of correct responses in Mathematics

Table 5.2 : Percentage of Students according to range of correct responses in mathematics

Range of correct responses

District 0-40% 41-50% 51-70% 71-80% above 81%

Almora 22.5 11.1 28.2 14.8 23.4

Bageshwar 13.0 9.8 27.3 18.4 31.4

Chamoli 26.8 12.0 26.5 13.2 21.5

Champawat 26.0 11.2 26.3 16.9 19.6

Dehradun 13.7 9.3 32.6 19.5 24.9

Haridwar 32.1 12.3 24.8 13.5 17.2

Nanital 33.1 15.3 30.1 11.7 9.8

Pauri 10.9 6.1 24.4 20.8 37.8

Pitoragarh 9.0 6.3 28.8 24.8 31.1

Rudrapryag 11.2 10.7 29.4 20.6 28.1

Tehri 24.8 11.0 30.1 17.4 16.6

Udham Singh Nagar 29.2 14.8 27.8 12.5 15.8

Uttrakashi 12.1 6.8 27.4 18.5 35.3

Over all 20.3 10.5 27.9 17.1 24.2

20.3

10.5

27.9

17.1

24.2

0-40%

41-50%

51-70%

71-80%

81% and above

90

5.6 Hard Spots in Mathematics

On the basis of data analyses hard spots revealed by the survey are as under.

1. Addition based on word problem with carry over, subtraction with borrowing, multiplication

and division related problems.

2. Writing numerals in ascending order.

3. Use of symbols >, =, < in comparing numbers.

4. Identification of geometrical shapes.

5. Subtraction of fractions having same denominators.

6. Converting currency note in to paise.

7. Place value of a digit in given number.

8. To relate a given number with its expanded form.

* * * * * * * * * *

Chapter -6

Students Related Variables

91

Chapter-6

Student Related Variables

Healthy learning environment always enhances students‟ learning. In this chapter finding of

SLAS in terms of students variables are reported. A Questionnaire consisting of 21 variables related to

students was designed to collect relevant information from the students. These variables were related to

home background, school background, teaching learning process and self interest etc. Responses of

students for each variable are as following-

6.1 Distribution of students on the basis of Activities they like the most

Figure: 6.1

Data reveals that 30.73% students like to play and 29.72% student like drawing/ painting.

Percentage of students who like to read text books is 25.86%. Only 2.33% students did not respond and

only 0.72% student like to play on computer, which may be due to non availability of computers in the

primary schools.

6.2 Distribution of students on the basis of ‘like come to school’

Figure: 6.2

29.72

30.73

10.65

25.86

0.72 2.33

Drawing /Painting etc

Playing sports

Watching television

Reading text book etc

Playing on computer

None/Can not say

97.33

2.15 0.52

Yes

No

No Response

92

Responses of students on their liking to come to school reveal that more than 97% of students

like to come to school, where as only small fraction (2.15%) of students have shown their unwilling to

come to school. 0.52% did not respond.

6.3 Distribution of students on the basis of ‘like to borrow books from school library’

Figure : 6.3

Library is one of the important resources which enhance the learning of the student. Almost 63%

of students admitted that they borrow books from school library which shows that at least in 63%

schools libraries are functioning. 28.6% of students do not borrow books from library and 8.24%

students did not respond. It is reported under school facilities that 82% primary schools in the state have

library. However usually during school visit it is observed in most of the schools that only on an average

a few books are kept in an almirah.

6.4 Distribution of students on the basis of use of computer in the school

Figure : 6.4

63.16

28.6

8.24

Yes

No

No Response

4.28

63.65

32.08 Yes

No

No Response

93

Data reflects that only 4.28% students in schools use computer whereas 63.65% students do not

use computer in schools which may be due to unavailability of computers in the school. Remaining

32.08% students did not respond to this question.

6.5 Distribution of students on the basis of problems given by the teachers to students in

mathematics.

Figure : 6.5

94.22% students responded that teacher gives problems in Mathematics, 5.04% students admitted

that Mathematics problems are not given to them whereas 0.75% students not responded to this item.

6.6 Distribution of students on the basis of ‘teacher checks problems solved by the students in

Mathematics

Figure : 6.6

94.22

5.04 0.75

Yes

No

No Response

92.66

3.66 3.69

Yes

No

No Response

94

Responses of 92.66% students' shows that teacher assessed problems solved by the students

whereas only 3.66% students responded that teacher do not check problems solved by them. 3.69% did

not respond to this question. It is important to note that 98% teacher admitted that they give home work

to students (data under teacher variables). Which definitely would support students learning.

6.7 Distribution of students on the basis of ‘who take private tuition’

Figure : 6.7

It is evident from the above given figure that only 7.37% of students take private tuition whereas 92.4%

of students responded that they do not take private tuition. A very small fraction (0.23%) of students did

not respond to this question.

6.8 Distribution of students on the basis of getting homework regularly from school

Figure : 6.8

7.37

92.4

0.23

Yes

No

No Response

93.53

6.2

0.23

Yes

No

No Response

95

Data regarding to home work given regularly to student shows that 93.33% of students do get homework

from the school regularly where as 6.2% students responded that home work is not given regularly. This

question is not responded by 0.23% students.

6.9 Distribution of students on the basis of home work checked regularly by the teacher

Figure : 6.9

91.77% students responded that the teacher checks homework regularly whereas only 4.37%

responses of students shows it is not checked regularly by the teacher. Remaining 3.86% of students did

not respond to this question.

6.10 Distribution of students on the basis of home language and language used in school.

Figure : 6.10

91.77

4.373.86

Yes

No

No Response

50.9

48.82

0.27

Yes

No

No Response

96

50.9% of students responded that the language is same whereas 48.82% students responded that

the language used in school is different from home language. 0.28% students did not respond to this

question.

6.11 Distribution of students on the basis of getting helps at home in studies.

Figure : 6.11

54.52% of students responded that they do get help at home in their studies where as 45.14% responded

that they do not get help at home. Only 0.33% of students did not respond to this question.

6.12 Distribution of students on the basis of status of mothers’ occupation

Figure : 6.12

54.5245.14

0.33

Yes

No

No Response

2.11.25

79.71

9.72

5.41

1.4 0.15Mother is not alive

Unemployed

Household / House wife

Labors /Domestic etc

Farmer

Skilled worker / Office worker

Shopkeeper

Teacher etc

Manager/ senior officer

Information not available

97

79.7% of students responded that their mothers are housewives, 9.72% responded that their

mothers are labors etc. whereas only 0.15% student responded that their mothers are either teacher or

manager/senior officer.

6.13 Distribution of students on the basis of status of fathers’ occupation

Figure : 6.13

According to the responses of the students only 0.62% students have their father‟s occupation is either

teacher or manager/senior officer where as 49.85% of students responded that their fathers are

labors/domestic worker etc. 25.88% responded that their fathers are farmer.

6.14 Distribution of students on the basis of physical disability

Figure : 6.14

3.2 3.18

0.68

49.8525.88

12.34

3.96

0.470.15 0.29

Father is not alive

Unemployed

Household / House wife

Labours /Domestic worker etc

Farmer

Skilled worker / Office worker

Shopkeeper

Teacher etc

Manager/ senior officer


1.15

95.37

3.47

Yes

No

No Response

98

Among the surveyed students 1.15% students responded that they are having some kind of

physical disability where as 3.47% students did not respond to this question. Remaining 95.37%

students responded that they are not having any kind of physical disability.

6.15 Distribution of students on the basis of Educational status of Father

Figure : 6.15

Father‟s educational level plays a crucial role in the education and learning of child. Better educated and

aware parents can help children in their studies at home. Data reflects that almost 44% students have

either illiterate fathers or their education is up to primary level. This data jumps up to 68.68% if father

education is extended up to elementary level. Only 2.08% students have responded that education of

their father is up to degree level. 24.68% students responded that education of their father is up to

secondary and senior secondary level. 3.47% students responded that their father is not alive.

6.16 Distribution of students on the basis of Educational status of Mother

Figure : 6.16

3.47

10.98

10.94

21.9724.79

15.78

8.9

2.081.1

Father is not alive

Illiterate

Literate

Up to primary level

Elementary/ middle level

Up to secondary level

Higher/ senior secondary level

Education up to degree


2.32

31.4

21.26

23.48

13.13

4.632.23 0.56 1.01

Mother is not alive

Illiterate

Literate

Up to primary level

Elementary/ middle level

Up to secondary level

Higher/ senior secondary level

Education up to degree


99

Mother‟s education plays an important role in child‟s learning. Data reflects that almost 76%

students have either illiterate mothers or their education is up to primary level. This data jumps up to

89.2% if mother‟s education is extended up to elementary level. Only 0.56% students have responded

that education of their mother is up to degree level. 2.32% students responded that their mother is not

alive.

6.17: Distribution of Students on the basis of pre-primary classes attended by them.

Figure: 6.17

In Uttarakhand state pre-primary classes are not a part of government primary schools however

Aganwadi Kendra run by ICDS are being operated either in primary schools or in its premises in most of

the schools. Data indicates that 67.44% students have attended pre-primary classes. Whereas 31.08%

students are noticed who did not attend pre-primary classes. Remaining 1.48% students did not respond

to this question.

6.18 : Distribution of students on the basis of BPL (Below Poverty Line) card holder

Figure : 6.18

67.44

31.08

1.48

Yes

No

No Response

65.70

32.98

1.32

Yes

No

No Response

100

From the above data it is evident that 65.7% students studying in govt. primary schools belongs

to families below poverty line and only 31.98% belongs to families above poverty line. Remaining

1.32% students did not respond to this question.

6.19 : Distribution of students on the basis of category

Figure : 6.19

Survey data reveals that among the tested students 35.53% students belongs to SC, 1.92% students

belongs to ST, 21.5% students belongs to OBC and 41.05% students belongs to General category.

6.20 : Distribution of students on the basis of age group

Figure : 6.20

Above given figure (6.20) reveals that 65.32% students are of age group below 9 years. 25.29% students

are of 9 years age and 6.79% students were of 10 years and 2.6% are of above 10 years age.

35.53

1.9221.5

41.05

SC

ST

OBC

Gen

65.32

25.29

6.79 2.6

Below 9 years

9 years

10 years

above 10 years

101

6.21 : Distribution of students on the basis of gender

Figure: 6.21

Survey data reflects that among the tested student 45.77% were boys and 54.23% were girls.

6.22 : Student Related Variables Vs. Student Achievement

In the above section of study, responses of students on student related variables have been

presented. In order to perceive the effect of these variables on achievement of students in Hindi

language and Mathematics, data was analyzed using t-test.

Almost all the variables have significant effect on achievement of students. Following major findings

emerged, on the basis of data analysis:

Table 6.1 : Students Belongs to Below Poverty Line (BPL) family and Achievement

Variables

Language Mathematics

N Mean SD t-

value N Mean SD t-value

Belong to

BPL

Yes 12478 62.4 22.1 4.38**

12434 63.2 22.3 4.85**

No 6261 60.9 23.2 6209 61.5 22.6

*Sig. at P< 0.05 level, **Sig. at P< 0.01 level

Students belonging to BPL families have performed significantly better in Hindi Language and

Mathematics as compared to other students.

Physically Challenged:

Table 6.2: Students Belongs to Physical Challenged and Achievement

Variables


N Mean SD t-

value N Mean SD

t-

value

Physically

Challenged

Yes 218 53.4 27.7 -

5.60**

217 58.4 26.9 -

2.85** No 18119 62.0 22.4 18028 62.8 22.3


45.77

54.23 Boys

Girls

102

In both, Hindi language and Mathematics the subjects physically challenged students performed lower

than the rest of the students.

Table 6.3 : Students using Same language in school and at home vs. Achievement

Variables


N Mean SD t-

value N Mean SD

t-

value

Same

language

used in

school

Yes 9709 61.5 23.0

-1.9

9583 62.5 22.5

-0.53 No 9229 62.1 22.1 9261 62.7 22.2


Language used in home is the same Hindi language as the language used at school has no

significant effect on achievement of students in Hindi language and Mathematics.

Table 6.4 : Students like to come to school and Achievement

Variables


N Mean SD t-

value N Mean SD

t-

value

Like to come

to school

Yes 18482 61.9 22.5 7.74**

18389 62.7 22.3 4.99**

No 410 53.2 24.4 407 57.1 24.6


Students who like to come to school have performed significantly high as compared to other

students in Hindi language and Mathematics.

Table 6.5 : Students Getting Help in studies at home and Achievement

Variables


N Mean SD t-value N Mean SD t-

value

Get Help at

Home

Yes 10351 63.4 21.8 10.87**

10308 63.4 21.9 5.61**

No 8577 59.8 23.3 8526 61.6 22.9


Students getting help in their studies at home performed Significantly high as compared to those

who are not getting such help in Hindi language and Mathematics.

103

Table 6.6 : Students Getting Private Tuition and Achievement

Variables Language Mathematics

N Mean SD t-value N Mean SD t-value

Take Private

Tuition

Yes 1408 61.1 23.1 -1.22

1384 59.1 22.0 -6.03**

No 17540 61.8 22.5 17470 62.9 22.4


Only in Mathematics, students who are not taking private tuition performed better than the

students who are taking private tuition.

Table 6.7 : Students Getting Homework Regularly from School and Achievement



Getting

Homework

Yes 17780 62.4 22.3 15.86**

17680 63.2 22.2 15.92**

No 1161 51.7 24.6 1167 52.6 22.4


Students getting homework in Hindi language and Mathematics from the teacher have achieved

significantly high as compared to other students.

Table 6.8 : Students Borrow books from library and Achievement



Borrow books

from school

Yes 12006 63.6 22.2 13.07**

11932 63.8 22.4 7.78**

No 5433 58.8 22.7 5417 60.9 22.0


Students borrowing books from library performed significantly better in Hindi language and

Mathematics than the students who do not borrow books from library.

Table 6.9 : Computer use in the school and Students Achievement



Computer

use

Yes 815 70.2 20.8 11.80**

810 71.7 22.0 12.18**

No 12087 60.5 22.9 12002 61.7 22.6


Use of Computer by students has shown significant positive effect on students‟ achievement in

Mathematics and Hindi language.

104

6.23 Conclusion

Results of the data analysis reveals that almost all the variables related to students have significantly

influenced achievement of the students. Variables and their influences on student achievement in both

Hindi language and Mathematics may be concluded as:

Students belonging to BPL families performed significantly better in both Hindi language and

Mathematics.

In both the subjects physically challenged students performed significantly lower than rest of the

students.

Students who like to come to school have performed significantly better in both the subjects than

the students who do not like to come to school.

Students who get help in studies at home have performed significantly higher than the students

who are not getting help in studies at home.

Private tuition has shown undesirable results as students taking private tuition have performed

low in Hindi language and significantly low in Mathematics than the students who were not

taking private tuition.

Getting homework in Language and Mathematics found to have significant positive effect on

achievement.

Students borrowing books from library have performed significantly better in Language and

Mathematics than the students who do not borrow books.

Use of computer in school has significant positive effect on students‟ scores in Mathematics and

Hindi Language.

* * * * * * * * * *

Chapter -7


105

Chapter-7


In this chapter findings of SLAS in terms of school variables are reported. A Questionnaire

consisting of 18 variables related to school was designed to collect relevant information from the head

teacher/teacher. These variables were related to school background, physical facilities available,

teaching learning process, community participation etc.

7.1 Distribution of Schools on the basis of school grants received for the year 2013-14

Figure : 7.1

Data reflects that during 2013-14 overall 71.78% school got school grants where as 22.85%

schools did not get the grants. Remaining 5.37% schools did not respond to this question.

7.2 Distribution of schools on the basis of available Teaching Aids

Figure: 7.2

71.78

22.85

5.37

yes

No

No Response

94.9185.82

96.85

62.03

33.02

82.45

98.57

00

20

40

60

80

100

120

106

From the above data it is evident that most of the schools are equipped with basic teaching aids.

However still 1.43% schools responded that there is no blackboard which needs to be focused on

priority basis. Only 33.02% schools have responded that science kit is available in school where as

62.03% schools reported availability of Mathematics kit. Science/Mathematics kit be made available in

all schools compulsorily.

7.3 Distribution of schools on the basis of available Physical facilities.

Figure : 7.3

Responses of Head Teacher on various physical requirements available with the school are given

in the above figure. It shows that safe drinking water facility is available in 80.52% schools whereas

19.48% schools are not having safe drinking water facility till the date of survey, similarly 92.48%

schools having toilet facility which shows 7.52% schools are not having toilet facility. Girl‟s toilet is

available in 77.44% schools which again reflect that 22.56% schools are not having separate girls‟ toilet,

it needs to be focused. Games and sports material is also available with only 63.32% schools it means

nearly 37% schools to be provided with sports and games material. Play ground is one of the basic needs

of school, therefore, according to above data nearly 37% schools are without play ground. Mats and

furniture are basic requirement of school for students. Above data reveals that these things are available

in only 66.19% schools which means in 33.81% schools there are no mats and furniture. Each school has

to run mid day meal daily, for it kitchen cum store is one of the priority but still 7.52% schools are

without kitchen cum store.

Availability of computers in Government Primary Schools is nominal, only 9.81% schools are

reported to have computers. Nearly one-third of schools are without electricity connection. Similarly

25.21% schools are without Head-Teacher's room and 80.3% schools are without staff room for

Teachers.

63.32

80.52

92.48

77.44

92.6

69.13

63.18

66.19

3.51

9.81

1.29

74.79

19.7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Sports and games material

Safe drinking water

Toilet facility

Separate toiled facility for girls

Kitchen cum store

Electricity connection for the school

Play ground

Mats and furniture for school

Television

Computer

Telephone connection

Headmaster room

Staff room teacher room

107

7.4 Distribution of schools on the basis of other facilities available in school

Figure: 7.4

Some other physical facilities like availability of musical instrument, annual medical checkup

and first aid kit were also surveyed. Above given figure reveals that in 34.53% schools some kinds of

musical instruments are available. According to state policy Health department has to ensure medical

checkup of students studying in primary schools. Data of survey shows in 93.41% schools it is in

practice. Similarly 67.34 % schools have responded that there is first aid kit available in school.

7.5 Distribution of schools on the basis of type of school building

Figure : 7.5

In this survey schools were surveyed in the context of status of school building. From the above

data it is evident that 80.8% schools have pakka building whereas 14.83% schools are running in

partially pakka and 2.58% schools are running in kachcha building. Which need to be solved on priority

basis. 1.79% schools did not respond to this question.

34.53

93.41

67.34

0102030405060708090

100

Musical

Instrument

Annual

medical

checkup

First aid kit

80.8

14.832.58 1.79

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pakka Partial

Pakka

Kachcha No

response

108

7.6 Distribution of schools on the basis of visits made by BRC/ CRC/ DIET/ SCERT personnel

in 2012-13

Figure : 7.6

BRC/CRC/DIET/SCERT faculty is expected to visit schools for the purpose of monitoring and

academic support. Information gathered on the visits of different personnel to schools indicates 18.62%

schools were visited 10 or more than 10 times by BRC/ CRC/ DIET/SCERT personnel during 2012-13,

which is substantial but at the same time 6.95% schools were not visited by any one and 7.8% schools

were visited only once. Therefore it needs to be focused on priority basis. Percentage of schools visited

only 2-3 times in an academic year 2012-13 is 28.08% which is substantially high. 20.20% Schools were

visited 4-5 times where as 11.53% schools visited 6-7 times and 6.73% schools visited 8-9 times.

7.7 Distribution of schools according to classes taught

Figure : 7.7

Data of survey reveals that 98.07% schools covered under survey runs classes I to V and 0.93%

runs classes I-VIII. Very few schools (only 0.50%) runs classes I-X and I-XII. Remaining 0.5% schools

did not respond to this question.

6.95 7.88

13.54 14.54

10.679.53

11.53

6.73

18.62

0

5

10

15

20

None 1 2 3 4 5 6-7 8-9 10 or

more

% o

f sc

ho

ols

Frequency of visits

98.07

0.93 0.43 0.07 0.50

102030405060708090

100

Class 1-5 Class 1-8 Class 1-10 Class 1-12 No

Response

109

7.8 Distribution of schools on the basis of important role of VEC/SMC/PTA in School

Figure: 7.8

As per RTE provisions in the state all elementary level schools have to constitute SMC and role

of SMC is well defined. Data of surveyed schools reflects that in 96.20% schools SMC is playing

important role where as in 1.07% schools it is VEC and in 1.15% school‟s PTA is in important role.

1.58% schools did not respond to this question.

7.9 School Related Variables vs. Students Achievement

School is the place where student should get more learning opportunities. There are different

variables at school level which may influence learning of student. Therefore school related variables are

also analysed to see their influence on student's achievement in Hindi language and Mathematics.

Results on the basis of t-test regarding effect of different school related variables on students

achievement is discussed as below:

Table 7.1 : School Location and Achievement of students

Area Language Mathematics


Rural 1307 62.3 17.0 0.68

1307 62.3 19.3 -0.29

Urban 89 61.0 18.4 89 62.9 19.6

Table7.1 shows no significant effect of location or area of school on achievement of students in Hindi

Language and Mathematics.

1.07

96.2

1.15 1.58

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

VEC SMC PTA No Response

110

Table 7.2 : School Type and achievement of students

School

Type


N Mean SD t-value

N Mean SD t-value

Boys Girls Boys Girls

Boys 8 59.7 21.5 - - 8 61.0 21.7 -

Girls 14 64.3 14.6 -.600 - 14 65.2 21.7 -.439 -

Co. Ed 1370 62.2 17.0 -.416 .458 1370 62.4 19.3 -.194 .555

In table 7.2 impacts of boys, girls and co-education schools was seen on achievement of students.

Different school types have no significant effect on performance of students on Language and

Mathematics.

Table 7.3 : Student attended Pre-Primary section and achievement of students

Pre

primary

section



Yes 638 63.2 17.6 2.10*

638 62.4 19.8 0.16

No 712 61.3 16.5 712 62.2 19.2

*Sig. at P< 0.05 level

Students of schools having pre primary section attached performed better in Language in

comparison to schools which do not have such section attached. In Mathematics, no difference was

detected on the basis of pre primary section.

111

Table7.4 : Teaching Aid availability in school and achievement of student

Teaching aids Language Mathematics


Maps Yes 1325 62.6 16.8

2.88** 1325 62.6 19.4

2.79** No 59 56.1 18.6 59 55.5 17.8

Globe Yes 1198 62.9 16.8

3.94** 1198 62.8 19.3

2.76** No 181 57.6 17.3 181 58.6 19.3

Charts Yes 1352 62.4 17.0

1.73 1352 62.4 19.4

1.19 No 30 57.0 15.2 30 58.2 16.4

Maths kit Yes

866 63.4 19.0 2.75**

No 508 60.4 19.7

Library Yes 1151 62.9 16.8

3.05** 1151 62.8 19.4

2.28* No 226 59.2 17.0 226 59.6 18.8


Use of various teaching aids such as maps, globe, charts, mathematics kit, etc. in the classroom

and their effect on students‟ achievement was also analyzed as given in table 7.4. Maps, globe and

mathematics kit have significant positive impact on Language and Mathematics achievement. Library

facility in the school also improves performance of students. However, use of charts has not shown

significant effect on achievement of students in any of the subjects.

Table7.5 : Ancillary facilities availability in school and achievement of student

Ancillary facilities


N

Mea

n SD

t-

value N

Mea

n SD

t-

value

Musical Instruments Yes 482 63.8 17.2

2.35* 482 63.5 19.8

1.69 No 883 61.5 16.6 883 61.7 19.0

Annual Medical check up for children Yes

1304 62.2 16.9

0.09

130

4

62.4 19.1

1.67

No 72 62.0 17.5 72 58.5 21.4

First aid kit Yes 940 62.9 16.7

1.98* 940 62.8 19.5

1.40 No 434 60.9 17.4 434 61.2 18.8


112

Out of all the ancillary facilities given in table 7.5, only availability of musical instruments and

first aid kit have shown significant positive effect on performance of students in Language. Facility of

annual medical checkup for children in school has not shown influence on performance of students.

Table 7.6 : Physical facilities availability in school and achievement of students

Physical facilities


N Mean SD

t-

value N Mean SD t-value

Sports and games material Yes 884 63.5 16.7

3.54** 884 63.7 19.3

3.56** No 491 60.2 17.0 491 59.8 19.2

Safe drinking water Yes 1124 62.1 17.2

-0.83 1124 62.3 19.2

-0.45 No 251 63.1 15.8 251 62.9 20.1

Separate toilet facilities for girls Yes 1081 61.9 17.3

-1.60 1081 61.8 19.7

-1.81 No 295 63.7 15.6 295 64.1 18.0

Playground Yes 882 62.7 16.7

1.20 882 62.5 19.2

0.28 No 493 61.6 17.4 493 62.2 19.6

Television Yes 49 65.0 17.3

1.16 49 63.1 23.4

0.30 No 1329 62.1 16.9 1329 62.3 19.2

Computer Yes 137 67.7 16.0

4.00** 137 67.0 18.9

3.01** No 1244 61.7 17.0 1244 61.8 19.4

Telephone connection Yes 18 67.3 19.9

1.27 18 67.5 22.4

1.15 No 1358 62.2 16.9 1358 62.2 19.3

Headmaster room Yes 1044 62.1 17.0

-0.48 1044 62.0 19.4

-0.96 No 326 62.6 16.2 326 63.2 19.0

Staff room/Teacher room Yes 275 61.4 16.5

-1.01 275 60.7 19.3

-1.56 No 1098 62.6 17.0 1098 62.7 19.3


In table 7.6, impact of availability of games, sports material and computer have shown positive

influence on achievement of students in Hindi language and Mathematics. Students of schools having

facility of kitchen- cum- store have performed lower in Mathematics than the students of schools not

having such facility. Facility of safe drinking water, toilets, separate toilets for girls, electric connection,

playground, television, telephone connection, headmaster room and staff room/teacher room have not

shown any significant effect on students‟ achievement.

113

7.10 Conclusion

On the basis of results of school variables studied in sample schools it is observed that:

There are nearly 34% schools still not having mats and furniture.

There are nearly 8% schools without toilet facility and almost 23% schools are without girls‟

toilet.

Sports/games material and play ground is not available in almost 37% schools.

Overall 20% schools are observed not have drinking water facility.

No significance difference is observed in the achievement of rural and urban students.

schools having pre primary section attached performed better in Language in comparison to

schools.

Maps, globe and mathematics kit have significant positive impact on Language and Mathematics

achievement.

Library facility in the school also improves performance of students significantly.

Sports and games material available in schools also shown significant positive impact on

achievement of students.

* * * * * * * * * *

Chapter -8


115

Chapter-8


Teachers are very important part of the school education system and have great influence on learning of

the students. Therefore teachers‟ attitude, perception and approaches towards school, student and

community are taken into consideration. In this section of report, influence of various teacher related

factors on performance of students.

8.1 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of subject taught by them

Figure :8.1

At primary level teachers have not been deployed for language and mathematics separately,

therefore most of the teachers have to teach more than one subject in different classes. Above given

figure shows that overall 54.9% teachers have taught language (Hindi) as well as Mathematics in class

III in 2012-13. Only language (Hindi) is taught by 22.18% teachers and 20.47% teachers taught only

Mathematics in Class III.

8.2 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of their qualification

Figure : 8.2

22.18

20.4754.94

Language (Hindi) only

Maths only

Language and Maths both

0.75 2.068.23

25.74

62.77

0.450

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Upper

primary

Secondary Sr.

Secondary

Graduation Post

Graduation

and above

No response

116

Overall 88.8 % teachers are either with graduate or post graduate degree. Only 0.75% teachers

are having qualification up to upper primary level. 10.3% teachers are reported to have educational

qualification either up to secondary or sr. secondary level.

Data of survey in t-test reflects that students who were taught by teachers having educational

qualification up to sr. secondary level performed better than the students who were taught by the

teachers having educational qualification up to graduation level.

8.3 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of Hindi language as a subject studied

Figure : 8.3

Data collected related to subject studied by the teacher reflects that 0.95% teachers studied Hindi up to

upper primary level, almost 63% teachers studied it up to secondary or sr. secondary level and 33.4%

studied Hindi as subject up to graduation or post graduation level.

8.4 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of Mathematics as a subject studied

Figure : 8.4

0.95

3.91

59.11

22.93

11.49

1.61

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Upper primary

Secondary

Sr. Secondary

Graduation

Post Graduation and above

No response

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Upper primary

Secondary

Sr. Secondary

Graduation

Post Graduation and above

No response

27.6

52.99

9.58

4.37

3.91

1.56

117

Teachers working in primary schools have studied Mathematics up to different level. Data

collected for getting information to what level teachers have studied Mathematics reflects that 27.6%

teachers studied it up to upper primary level only, which is considerably high. Similarly almost 62.5%

teachers studied it up to secondary or sr. secondary level and only 8.4% studied Mathematics as a

subject up to graduation or post graduation level.

8.5 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of status of employment

Figure : 8.5

From the given above figure it is evident that 87% teachers are on regular basis which is substantially

high, 11.19% are para techers and 1.2% are on adhoc or temporary basis.

8.6 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of in-service teachers training attended in 2013-14

Figure : 8.6

87

1.2

11.19

0.60

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Regular full time

Adhoc / Temporary

Para Teacher No response

87.1

9.98

2.91

Yes

No

No response

118

Teachers‟ training plays an important role in enhancing class room teaching. Keeping it in view

every year in-service teachers training is being imparted to teachers. Data of survey related to in-service

teachers training shows that 87.1% teachers have attended training in 2013-14 where as 9.98% teachers

did not attend it which needs to be taken in account. Remaining 2.9% teachers did not respond to this

question.

8.7 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of use of teachers’ handbook

Figure : 8.7

58.3% teachers responded that they use teachers' „hand book regularly, 22.58% teachers responded that

they use it sometimes whereas 14.8% teachers responded that it is not available at school level.

Only1.15% teachers did not respond to this question.

8.8 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of use of Charts and Maps during teaching process

Figure : 8.8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2.56

60.91

35.62

0.25 0.653.86

44.8648.22

1.81 1.25

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Not

available

Regularly Some time Never No

response

% use of charts by

teacher

% use of maps by

teacher

119

Teaching learning material undoubtedly improves learning. At school level charts and maps are

being used by the teachers frequently during teaching learning. Data reveals that regular use of charts

(60.9%) is significantly better than the use of maps (44.46). 35.62% teachers are using charts and 48.2%

using maps some times. Only 0.25% teachers responded that they never use charts and 1.81% never

uses maps. Remaining 2.56% and 3.86% responded that charts and maps respectively are not available

in the school.

Result shows that students taught by using maps have performed significantly higher than the others in

both subject and students taught by using charts have also performed better than the others in both

subjects. Therefore teachers need to be motivated to use these items more regularly.

8.9 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of use of globe during teaching process

Figure : 8.9

Globe is one of the teaching aids used during class room teaching. As per given figure 35.12% teachers

uses globe regularly, 49.77% teachers uses it sometimes and only 3.0% never uses globe. 10.5%

responded that globe is not available, which is a considerable number.

8.10 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of availability and use of Mathematics Kit during

teaching process

Figure : 8.10

10.49

35.12

49.77

3.01 1.610

10

20

30

40

50

60

Not available

Regularly Some time

Never No response

30.06 32.4629.7

5.272.51

0

10

20

30

40

Not available

Regularly Some time Never No response

120

Overall 32.46% teachers responded that they use Mathematics kit regularly where as by 29.7% teachers

it is used sometimes. 35.27% teachers responded that either it is not available or they never used it.

8.11 Distribution of Teachers on the basis of use of self made TLM and TLM from other sources

during teaching process

Figure : 8.11

Majority of teachers (51%) responded that they use self made teaching learning material (TLM)

regularly where as 26.39% teachers use readymade TLM regularly. These figures for teachers who use

TLM sometimes only are 41.34% and 46.16% respectively for self made and readymade. Even after this

the number of teachers not using TLM or responded that TLM is not available, is significant.

8.12 Distribution of teachers on the basis of use of books other than text books

Figure : 8.12

5.62

51.03

41.34

0.75 1.25

20.8726.39

46.16

4.52 2.06

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Not

available

Regularly Some time Never No

response

Uses Self made TLM

TLM from other sources

6.52

38.59

50.53

2.71 1.66

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Not available

Regularly Some time Never No response

121

Using books other than text books enhances learning. There are (38.59)% teachers who use regularly

books other than text books. Responses of more than 50% teachers show that they use books other than

text books sometimes only. These two figures related to use of books other than text books make it

almost 89% which is quite substantial. However data also reveals that (9.23)% teachers either never use

such books or these books are not available. (1.66)% teachers did not respond to this question.

8.13 Distribution of teachers on the basis of homework given to students by them in a week

Figure : 8.13

Homework to children at primary level has been disapproved by NCF 2005 and other policy

documents on education like „Learning without Burden‟. However there is practice of giving homework

to children is going on. Responses of teachers „reflect that 76.17% teachers give homework more than 2-

3 times, whereas 18.36% teachers give homework 2-3 times in a week. Only 3.31 % teachers give

homework only once in a week and 1.2% teachers never give homework. Remaining 0.95% teachers did

not respond to this question. Regarding homework part of this study (student related variables) shown

that students getting homework have performed significantly better in both the subjects than other

students who don‟t get homework.

8.14 Distribution of teachers on the basis of maintaining teacher’s diary

Figure : 8.14

1.2 3.31

18.36

76.17

0.950

1020304050607080

Never Once 2-3 times More than 2 to 3 times

No response

81.94

16.56

1.51

yes

No

No Response

122

Maintaining teacher‟s diary is an important activity. Each and every teacher is supposed to

maintain it. Almost 82% teachers admitted that they maintain teacher‟s diary and only 16.56% teachers

do not maintain it.

8.15 Distribution of teachers on the basis of training programme attended related to NCF 2005

Figure : 8.15

The paradigm shift advocated by NCF 2005 provides a new vision to teachers and teacher

educators about the teaching learning process and inclusiveness of class rooms. It is important for

teachers to understand salient features of NCF 2005 in order to practice child centered pedagogy and use

of text books in teaching learning developed on the basis of NCF 2005. It is revealed that only 60.16 %

teachers got orientation on NCF-2005 while remaining 38.23% teachers have not been oriented and 1.61

% teachers did not respond. This may have implications for child centered pedagogy.

8.16 Distribution of teachers on the basis of method of assessment/evaluations used by them in

school

Figure : 8.16

60.16

38.23

1.61

yes

No

No Response

90 92 94 96 98 100

Observation

Activity based

Oral

Unit / Monthly test

Half yearly test

Annual examination

93.53

93.63

97.89

98.49

99.1

98.95

123

Continuous Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) has been advocated in NCF 2005 and it is also a

part of Curriculum and evaluation procedure as envisaged in RTE Act 2009. The responses recurred

from almost all teachers almost (98%-99%) indicates that they practice the old methods of assessment

/evaluation like unit test, monthly test, half yearly and annual exam. Oral test is part of it and used by

almost 98% teachers. There are also many teachers (93%-94%) who have agreed to use observation and

activity based methods in assessment besides above.

8.17 Distribution of teachers on the basis of job satisfaction.

Figure : 8.17

Job satisfaction of teacher is an important factor to improve the quality of teaching learning processes.

As per teachers responses 61.62% are satisfied with their job. However substantial number of teachers

(almost 36%) either has average or low satisfaction. Remaining 1.15% teachers did not respond to this

question.

8.18 Distribution of teachers on the basis of their degree of success in implementing the

curriculum

Figure : 8.18

2.56

33.72

61.62

0.95 1.150

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Low Medium High Not sure No response

2.56

47.06 47.72

0.6 2.06

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


124

Curriculum based on NCF 2005 since 2008. Nearly half of the teachers (47.72%) acknowledge

that they are highly successful in implementing the curriculum and nearly half of the teachers (49.62%)

admit that either their success is of average level (medium) or low in implementing the curriculum.

8.19 Distribution of teachers on the basis of their perception on parental involvement in school

activities

Figure : 8.19

Parents involvement in school activities improves school functioning. It also provides parents to

understand teaching learning so that they can help their student at home in their studies. There are only

few teachers (11.64%) who agreed that parental involvement in school is high. Nearly 86% teachers

responded that the parental involvement is either average or low which is significant. Rest of the

teachers either not sure or did not respond.

8.20 Distribution of teachers on the basis of their perception on parental support in student’s

achievement

Figure : 8.20

46.1642.8

9.38

0.5 1.150

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


40.7445.36

11.64

0.75 1.51

0

10

20

30

40

50


125

Parental support in students learning plays an important role. It is also reflected from the chapter-7

„Student Related Variables‟ that students getting help at home in studies have performed significantly

better than the students who are not getting help. From the perception of almost 89% teachers it is

observed that parental support in students' achievement is either low or medium. Only (9.38%) teachers

responded that it is high.

8.21 Distribution of teachers on the basis of their professional qualification

Figure :8.21

According to responses of the teachers‟ overall 7.33% teachers are still untrained and 1.15% of

teachers did not respond to this question whereas 55.85% are B.Ed/L.T etc., 34.22% having

B.T.C/J.B.T/Diploma and 1.46% are with M.Ed degree.

8.22 Distribution of teachers on the basis of their teaching experience

Figure: 8.22

7.33

55.85

34.22

1.46 1.150

10

20

30

40

50

60

6.72 6.37

12.49

25.39

16.31

31.01

1.1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

126

Data of Survey reveals that 6.72% teachers have up to one year teaching experience, 6.37%

teachers have 1-3 years teaching experience, 37.88% of teachers have teaching experience of 4-10 years

and rest of the teachers (47.32%) are with more than 10 years experience. 1.1% teachers again did not

responded.

8.23 Distribution of teachers on the basis of training received from different levels/ institutions

Figure :8.23

Data of survey reveals that during academic year 2012-13 teachers have received training from

different levels and institutions. Overall 73.11% teachers got training at cluster Resource Centre (CRC),

69.49% teachers got training at Block Resource Centre (BRC), 20.32% teachers were given training at

DIET and 1.25% teachers were trained at SCERT level. However very few teachers have received

training from other institutions/departments like Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS)

(1.35%),Rashtiya Literacy Mission (RLM) (0.85%), SSA (9.68%), NCERT (0.55%) and others (2.41%).

8.24 Distribution of teachers on the basis of their perception related to severity of the school

building.

Figure: 8.24

73.1169.49

20.32

1.25 1.35 0.859.68

0.55 2.41

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

39.79

37.28

22.33

0.6

Not a Problem

Minor Problem

Serious Problem

No Response

127

Teacher‟s perception related to severity of the school building reveals that 22.33% teachers have

responded that school buildings are with serious problem and 37.28% responded school buildings are

with minor problem whereas teachers from 39.79% schools have responded that there is not a problem

at all. 0.60% teachers have not responded to this question.

8.25 Distribution of teachers on the basis of their perception related to severity of Class rooms

Figure: 8.25

Above figure 8.25, reflects perception of teachers' on severity of class rooms in school. 50.58%

teacher responded that class room is not a problem whereas 30.16% teacher responded that there is

minor problem with the class rooms. However 18.26% teacher responded that there is serious problem

with class rooms.

8.26 Distribution of teachers on the basis of their perception related to students achievement

.

Figure :8.26

50.58

30.16

18.26

1.00

Not a Problem

Minor Problem

Serious Problem

No Response

2.86

46.5649.07

0.2 1.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Low Medium High Not Sure No

Response

128

The perception of teachers' on students' achievement is given above (figure 8.26). 49.07%

teachers‟ perception is high about students' achievement whereas 46.56% teacher responded that their

perception is medium (average). Only 2.86% teachers responded that their perception is low about

students‟ achievement.

8.27 Distribution of teachers on the basis of their perception related to students desire to do well

Figure: 8.27

Teachers' perception related to students desire to do well is given above (figure 8.27). 43.3%

teachers responded that student's desire to do well in school is high whereas 50.43% teacher responded

that students desire to do well is medium (average). However 4.11% teachers responded it is low.

8.28 Distribution of teachers on the basis of their perception related to Parental involvement in

school activities.

Figure: 8.28

Teachers' perception on parents involvement in school activities reveals that only 11.64%

teachers responded that parents involvement is high, 45.36% teacher responded that parental

involvement is medium (average) in schools' activities. 40.74 % teacher responded that parents'

involvement in school activities is low which is quite substantial.

4.11

50.4343.3

0.55 1.610

10

20

30

40

50

60

Low Medium High Not Sure No

Response

40.7445.36

11.64

0.75 1.510

10

20

30

40

50

low medium High Not sure No rsponse

129

8.29 Teacher Related Variables Vs. Students Achievement

In this part of report teachers‟ attitude, perception and approaches towards school, student and

community are taken into consideration. In this section of report, influence of various teacher related

factors on performance of students taught by them is analysed by using t-test. Results of the some

teacher related variables are given below:

Table 8.1 : Gender of Teacher and students achievement

Teachers Gender Language Mathematics


Male 1014 42.3 31.8

-2.98**

1014 42.6 32.5

-2.64** Female 979 46.5 31.5 979 46.5 32.8

**Sig. at P< 0.01 level

Results in table 8.1 shows that in language and Mathematics, students taught by female teachers

performed better in comparison to students taught by male teachers.

Table 8.2 : Teachers’ Educational Qualification and Students Achievement

Edu

Qualifi

cation


N Mean SD

t-value

N Mean SD

t-value

U.

pri.

Sec

.

Sr.

Sec.

Gra

d

U.

pri. Sec.

Sr.

Sec. Grad

U pri. 15 37.5 32.9 - - - - 15 42.8 38.0 - - - -

Sec. 41 46.7 31.7 -.95 - - - 41 44.5 31.5 -.17 - - -

Sr.

Sec. 164 49.1 31.4 -1.36 -.44 - - 164 49.2 31.8 -.74 -.85 - -

Grad. 513 44.6 31.5 -.86 .39 1.57 - 513 45.0 32.8 -.25 -.09 1.45 -

P.Grad. 1251 43.6 31.8 -.74 .60 2.07

* .60 1251 43.7 32.7 -.11 .15 2.04* .74


Table 8.2 presents the effect of teachers‟ educational qualification on students achievement in

Hindi language and Mathematics. It was observed that students taught by teachers educated up to senior

secondary level performed better than students taught by teachers educated up to postgraduate level.

130

Table 8.3 : Teachers’ Professional Qualification and Students Achievement

Prof

Qualification


N Mean SD

t-value

N Mean SD

t-value

Untrai

ned

Cer/

Dip Grad

Untrai

ned

Cer/

Dip. Grad.

Untrained 146 43.7 31.5 - - - 146 42.6 32.6 - - -

Cert/Dip. 682 45.0 31.1 -.48 - - 682 46.1 32.0 -1.17 - -

Grad. 1113 44.4 32.2 -.25 -.42 - 111

3 44.0 33.2 -0.47 -1.28 -

P. Grad. 29 36.6 30.7 1.11 1.43 1.28 29 40.0 32.0 0.40 1.00 0.65

Table 8.3 shows that students taught by teachers holding different professional qualifications do

not have significant effect on their achievement levels.

Table 8.4 : Teachers’ Diary and Students Achievement

Teacher's

diary



Yes 1633 45.5 32.0

2.92**

1633 45.6 33.1

3.02**

No 330 39.9 29.7 330 39.7 30.0

**Sig. at P< 0.01 level

In table 8.4 use of teacher‟s diary by teachers have shown positive influence on students‟

achievement in Hindi language and Mathematics.

Table 8.5 : Teachers Orientation on NCF 2005 and Students Achievement

Oriented/

Trained on

NCF



Yes 1199 44.1 32.0

-0.61

1199 44.4 32.9

-0.28

No 762 45.0 31.3 762 44.8 32.4

The teachers oriented/trained on NCF- 2005 have not shown any significant influence on

students' achievement in Hindi language and Mathematics.

131

Table 8.6 : Teachers employment status and Achievement of Students on

Hindi language and Mathematics

School Type


N Mean SD

t-value

N Mean SD

t-value

Regular Adhoc Regular Adhoc

Regular/Full

time 1734 44.9 31.8 1734 45.2 32.8

Adhoc/

Temporary 24 35.8 32.0 1.38 24 38.2 37.0 1.02

Para

teacher/Shik

sha karmi

223 41.3 30.9 1.58 -0.82 223 40.0 31.3 2.22* -0.26


Employment status of teachers does not show any effect on achievement of students, except in case of

Mathematics achievement of students taught by regular/full time and para /shiksha karmi teachers. In

Mathematics, students taught by regular/full time teachers performed better than students taught by para

teacher/shiksha karmis.

Table 8.7 : Student Language Achievement on the basis of level up to

Which level teacher studied Hindi as a subject?

Hindi

studied N Mean SD

t-value

U

primary Sec. Sr. Sec Graduation

U. primary 19 40.4 30.5 - - - -

Sec. 78 43.4 32.7 -.36 - - -

Sr. Sec 1178 43.4 32.1 -.40 .01 - -

Graduation 457 47.3 30.7 -.96 -1.02 -2.23* -

Post

Graduation

and above

229 45.1 30.7 -.64 -.42 -.75 .88


132

Table 8.7 shows that students taught by teachers who studied Hindi language as a subject up to

graduation level performed better in Language (Hindi) than students taught by teachers who studied

Hindi language as a subject up to sr. secondary level.

Table 8.8 : Student Mathematics Achievement on the basis of level up to Which

teacher studied Mathematics as a subject

Mathematics

studied N Mean SD

t-value

U

primary Sec. Sr. Sec Graduation

U. primary 550 46.9 32.2 - - - -

Sec. 1056 43.5 32.8 1.97* - - -

Sr. Sec 191 49.4 31.3 -0.92 -2.28* - -

Graduation 87 37.0 32.5 2.68** 1.79 3.03** -

Post

Graduation

and above

78 39.2 33.8 1.98* 1.14 2.38* -0.42


Mathematics as a subject studied by teachers at different levels of academic qualification has

impact on achievement of students in Mathematics as shown in table 8.8. Significant differences were

found in case of upper primary and secondary, upper primary and graduation, upper primary and post

graduation and above, secondary and sr.secondary, sr.secondary and graduation, and also in case of

sr.secondary and post graduation and above.

8.30 Conclusion

Information collected on teachers from Sample schools reflects how teacher variables influenced

performance of the student. Impact of some of the variables is given as under:

Students taught by female teachers have performed significantly better than the students taught

by male teachers..

Almost one-third teachers have not attended any training programme related to NCF 2005.

Teachers maintaining teachers‟ diary have shown positive impact on achievement of students.

Teaching aids have significant impact on achievement of students in Hindi Language and

Mathematics.

Professional qualifications of teachers have no significant effect on achievement levels.

Teachers' academic qualifications have also influenced achievement of student.

* * * * * * * * * *

Chapter -9

Findings and Recommendations

133

Chapter-9

Findings and Recommendations

This chapter of Survey reflects to what extent efforts made at different level succeeded in providing

quality education to all students irrespective of their background. Equality and equity issues are also

addressed in this chapter as the findings of survey. Besides findings this chapter also provides some

recommendations for different categories of stakeholders like policy makers, teachers and teacher

educators, parents and community.

Findings of the Survey

Overall achievement of students at state level in Hindi language is 61.18% and in Mathematics

is 61.69%.

No significant difference is observed in the achievement of rural and urban students at state level

in Hindi language and Mathematics.

No significant difference is observed in the achievement of boys and girls at state level in Hindi

language and Mathematics. However significant difference is observed among boys and girls

within caste category.

No Significant difference is observed in the achievement of students among SC, ST and OBC in

Hindi language and Mathematic.

Significant variations are observed in the achievement of General Category students vs. SC, ST

and OBC students in Hindi language and Mathematics.

No significant difference is observed in the achievement of students among SC, ST and OBC in

Hindi language and Mathematics.

The Performance of physically challenged students is significantly low as compared to other

students in both subjects.

Students taught by female teachers have performed significantly better than the students taught

by male teachers in Hindi language and Mathematics.

Students attended pre-primary classes have performed better than other students in Hindi

language and Mathematics, which is observed significant in Hindi language.

Students borrowed books from the school library have performed significantly better in Hindi

language and Mathematics as compared to those who did not borrow books from school library.

134

Students getting help at home in their studies have performed significantly better than others the

subjects.

Students belonging to BPL families have performed significantly better in both the subjects as

compared to other students.

Students liking to come to school have performed significantly better in Hindi language and

Mathematics.

Students getting home work have performed significantly high in Hindi language and

Mathematics.

Almost one-third teachers have not attended any training programme related to NCF 2005.

Teachers maintaining teachers‟ diary have shown positive impact on achievement of students.

Teaching aids have significant impact on achievement of students in Hindi Language and

Mathematics.

Almost in all schools traditional methods of evaluation are in practice for the assessment of

student i.e. unit test, monthly test, half yearly and yearly examination.

Schools having Mathematics kit show significant positive impact on students‟ achievement as

compared to students of those schools where Mathematics kit is not available.

Schools having computers are observed to enhance learning significantly.

Students of such schools where sports and games material is available have performed

significantly better than the other students.

Students of such schools where play ground facility is available have performed better than other

students.

School monitoring is insufficient and not rationalized.

Involvement of parents in school activities is not satisfactory.

SMC are in important role in 96.20% schools.

There are nearly 34% schools still not having mats and furniture.

There are nearly 8% schools without toilet facility and almost 23% schools are without girls‟

toilet.

Sports/games material and play ground is not available in almost 37% schools.

Overall 20% schools are observed not have drinking water facility.

Survey revealed some hard spots in both the subjects given as under:

1) In Hindi Language - Writing skill (specially to write some sentences on a given

picture), To locate desired information from a text (specially poem), to make inference

about the cause of act in listening and reading comprehension, to grasp an idea of gender,

correlate words to choose correct word.

135

2) In Mathematics - Addition based on word problem with carry over, subtraction with

borrowing, multiplication and division (specially related to word problem), writing

numerals in ascending order, use of >, =, < symbols, identification of geometrical shapes,

subtraction of fraction having same denominators, converting currency note in to paise,

place value, expanded form of a given number.

Recommendations

Based on the survey reports following recommendations are forwarded:

In Uttarakhand state books revised on the basis of NCF 2005 are being used since 2008-09,

therefore teacher needs to be oriented on NCF 2005.

School monitoring system needs to be focused on priority basis in the context of academic

support, frequency of visits and better rationalization of visits.

Teacher needs to be motivated to use teaching learning material in the class room process

regularly.

In-service teachers training needs to be focused on subject specific hard spots.

Uniform assessment system needs to be developed.

Library and Supplementary reading materials needs to be provided to schools to strengthen

libraries.

Teachers and school authorities‟ needs to persuade parents and community, to participate in

school activities and help students in their studies at home regularly.

Efforts need to be made to strengthen inclusive education system in the state and provide

necessary infrastructural facilities to schools.

Sports and games material needs to be made available to all primary schools.

Teachers need to be motivated to maintain teachers‟ diary regularly.

Essential physical infrastructure needs to be provided to all schools on priority basis.

* * * * * * * * * *

References / Bibliography

137

REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY

Avtar Singh et al.,(2006),Learning Achievement of class V Children –A Baseline Study NCERT.

Avtar Singh et al.,(2007),Learning Achievement of class III Children –A Baseline Study NCERT.

Avtar Singh et al.,(2008),Learning Achievement of class V Children –A Mid Term Study NCERT.

Avtar Singh et al.,(2008),Learning Achievement of class III Children – A Mid Term Study NCERT.

Santosh Kumar et al.,(2012),Learning Achievement of class V Children –A Terminal study NCERT.

Guilford , J.P. Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education, IVth ed.; New York: McGraw Hill

Book Co.,1865.

Garrett , Henry E., Statistics in Psychology and Education., Third Indian reprint 2013, Surjit Publication

Kolhapur Road Kamlanagar Delhi India.

Andrich, D. (1988). Rasch models for measurement. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.

Gronlund, N. (1993). How to make achievement tests and assessment (Vth edn.) Massachussets: Allyn and

Bacan.

Best, John W. (1970). Research in education. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.

* * * * * * * * * * *

Appendices

139

Appendices

Table-1: Area wise and Gender wise Achievement in Hindi Language Area/Gender Rural Urban t Total

N Mean % SD N Mean % SD N Mean % SD

Boys 7917 61.03 23.12 859 60.89 25.11 0.17 8776 61.01 23.32

Girls 9427 61.19 23.03 973 62.55 24.39 1.74 10400 61.32 23.17

Mean Diff. -0.16 -1.66 -0.31

Total 17344 61.11 23.07 1832 61.77 24.74 1.16 19176 61.18 23.24

T 0.46 1.43 0.92

* Significant at .05 level

** Significant at 0.01 level

Table-2: Gender wise and Category wise Achievement in Hindi Language

Gender/

Category Boys Girls Mean

Diff

t Total

N Mean % SD N

Mean

% SD N Mean % SD

SC 3260 59.21 24.00 3553 59.79 23.73 -0.58 1.00 6813 59.51 23.86

ST 156 64.21 20.62 213 58.29 22.49 5.92 2.59** 369 60.79 21.89

OBC 1831 58.61 22.90 2292 59.95 23.47 -1.34 1.84 4123 59.35 23.23

General 3529 63.78 22.71 4342 63.43 22.39 0.35 0.69 7871 63.59 22.53

Total 8776 61.01 23.32 10400 61.32 23.17 -0.31 0.92 19176 61.18 23.24

Table -3: Gender wise and Category wise comparision of achievement in Hindi Language

Group Boys Girls Total

Mean Diff t-value Mean Diff t-value Mean Diff t-value

SC vs ST -5.00 2.56* 1.50 0.90 -1.28 1.01

SC vs OBC 0.60 0.87 -0.16 0.25 0.16 0.34

SC vs General -4.57 8.06** -3.64 6.99** -4.08 10.64**

ST vs OBC 5.60 2.95** -1.66 0.99 1.44 1.15

ST vs General 0.43 0.23 -5.14 3.27** -2.80 2.34*

OBC vs General -5.17 7.88** -3.48 5.92** -4.24 9.68**

* Significant at .05 level ** Significant at 0.01 level

Table-4: Area wise and Category wise Achievement in Hindi Language

Area/

Category Rural Urban Mean

Diff

t Total


SC 6124 59.42 23.71 689 60.32 25.21 -0.90 0.94 6813 59.51 23.86

ST 346 60.19 21.81 23 69.83 21.55 -9.64 2.05* 369 60.79 21.89

OBC 3551 59.31 23.17 572 59.61 23.63 -0.30 0.29 4123 59.35 23.23

General 7323 63.45 22.34 548 65.50 24.96 -2.05 2.05* 7871 63.59 22.53

Total 17344 61.11 23.07 1832 61.77 24.74 -0.66 1.16 19176 61.18 23.24

Table-5: Area wise and Category wise comparision of achievement in Hindi Language

Group Rural Urban Total


SC vs ST -0.77 0.59 -9.51 1.79 -1.28 1.01

SC vs OBC 0.11 0.22 0.71 0.51 0.16 0.34

SC vs General -4.03 10.13** -5.18 3.61** -4.08 10.64**

ST vs OBC 0.88 0.68 10.22 2.04* 1.44 1.15

ST vs General -3.26 2.66** 4.33 0.82 -2.80 2.34*

OBC vs General -4.14 8.96** -5.89 4.06** -4.24 9.68**



140

Table-6: Gender wise and Area wise Achievement in Mathematics

Area/Gender Rural Urban t Total


Boys 7917 61.81 23.54 859 64.11 24.25 2.70** 8776 62.03 23.62

Girls 9427 61.33 23.38 973 62.21 22.69 1.14 10400 61.41 23.32

Mean Diff. 0.48 1.90 0.62

Total 17344 61.55 23.45 1832 63.10 23.45 2.70** 19176 61.69 23.46

t 1.34 1.73 1.82



Table-7: Gender wise and Category wise Achievement in Mathematics

Gender/

Category Boys Girls Mean

Diff

t Total


SC 3260 60.81 23.80 3553 59.49 23.60 1.32 2.30* 6813 60.12 23.70

ST 156 62.56 23.44 213 58.31 22.23 4.25 1.77 369 60.11 22.82

OBC 1831 59.53 23.68 2292 59.91 23.00 -0.38 0.52 4123 59.74 23.31

General 3529 64.44 23.21 4342 63.93 23.08 0.51 0.97 7871 64.15 23.14

Total 8776 62.03 23.62 10400 61.41 23.32 0.62 1.82 19176 61.69 23.46

Table-8: Gender wise and Category wise comparision of achievement in Mathematics

Group Boys Girls Total


SC vs ST -1.75 0.90 1.18 0.71 0.01 0.01

SC vs OBC 1.28 1.84 -0.42 0.67 0.38 0.82

SC vs General -3.63 6.36** -4.44 8.42** -4.03 10.41**

ST vs OBC 3.03 1.54 -1.60 0.97 0.37 0.29

ST vs General -1.88 0.99 -5.62 3.48** -4.04 3.28**

OBC vs General -4.91 7.29** -4.02 6.75** -4.41 9.88**



Table-9: Area wise and Category wise Achievement in Mathematics

Area/

Category Rural Urban Mean

Diff

t Total


SC 6124 59.79 23.80 689 63.04 22.56 -3.25 3.41** 6813 60.12 23.70

ST 346 59.93 22.81 23 62.78 23.30 -2.85 0.58 369 60.11 22.82

OBC 3551 59.95 23.31 572 58.43 23.26 1.52 1.45 4123 59.74 23.31

General 7323 63.86 23.06 548 68.07 23.78 -4.21 4.11** 7871 64.15 23.14

Total 17344 61.55 23.45 1832 63.10 23.45 -1.55 2.69** 19176 61.69 23.46

Table-10: Area wise and Category wise comparision of achievement in Mathematics

Group Rural Urban Total


SC vs ST -0.14 0.11 0.26 0.05 0.01 0.01

SC vs OBC -0.16 0.32 4.61 3.56** 0.38 0.82

SC vs General -4.07 10.04** -5.03 3.80** -4.03 10.41**

ST vs OBC -0.02 0.02 4.35 0.88 0.37 0.29

ST vs General -3.93 3.10** -5.29 1.05 -4.04 3.28**

OBC vs General -3.91 8.26** -9.64 6.86** -4.41 9.88**



141

Table-11: Area wise ,Gender wise and Category wise Distribution of Students over all

Category Rural Urban Total

Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total

SC N 2906 3218 6124 354 335 689 3260 3553 6813

% 36.71 34.14 35.31 41.21 34.43 37.61 37.15 34.16 35.53

ST N 148 198 346 8 15 23 156 213 369

% 1.87 2.10 1.99 0.93 1.54 1.26 1.78 2.05 1.92

OBC N 1569 1982 3551 262 310 572 1831 2292 4123

% 19.82 21.02 20.47 30.50 31.86 31.22 20.86 22.04 21.50

General N 3294 4029 7323 235 313 548 3529 4342 7871

% 41.61 42.74 42.22 27.36 32.17 29.91 40.21 41.75 41.05

Total N 7917 9427 17344 859 973 1832 8776 10400 19176

% 45.65 54.35 90.45 46.89 53.11 9.55 45.77 54.23 100.00

Table-12:Item wise responses of Boys,Girls and Rural ,Urban areas students in Hindi language

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

Boy 70.46 76.60 57.19 66.12 70.24 69.58 59.81 56.72 74.65 83.99 81.83 70.01 66.41 66.89 57.16

Girls 69.31 76.07 56.18 65.95 70.88 68.44 60.04 55.14 74.35 84.48 81.76 69.79 66.41 67.09 57.08

Rural 69.87 76.19 56.63 66.16 70.34 69.05 59.21 55.36 74.37 84.15 81.66 70.17 66.59 67.01 57.43

Urban 69.50 77.40 56.77 64.73 72.90 68.13 66.70 60.56 75.59 85.24 83.00 67.25 64.67 66.87 54.14

Over

All 69.83 76.31 56.64 66.03 70.59 68.96 59.93 55.86 74.49 84.26 81.79 69.89 66.41 67.00 57.12

Total 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991

Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29

Boy 60.95 57.05 75.24 72.97 70.03 74.33 65.76 56.65 54.73 69.34 70.46 69.61 67.74 72.01

Girls 61.23 57.05 74.29 70.55 69.90 73.24 64.95 56.98 61.40 68.94 69.28 71.15 68.14 72.55

Rural 60.97 56.70 74.78 71.84 69.87 73.65 64.98 57.12 58.44 69.27 69.63 70.32 68.14 72.26

Urban 62.31 60.34 74.22 69.94 70.82 74.60 68.57 54.03 57.49 67.75 71.59 71.64 66.26 72.68

Over All

61.10 57.05 74.72 71.65 69.96 73.74 65.32 56.83 58.35 69.12 69.82 70.44 67.96 72.30

Total 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991 18991

Table-13: Item wise responses of Boys, Girls and Rural, Urban areas students in Mathematics


Boy 70.81 81.19 60.72 68.23 67.26 72.81 71.17 54.88 48.48 72.72 58.06 69.73 62.05 55.24 75.41

Girls 71.43 80.83 59.80 66.31 66.91 72.16 71.29 53.89 49.06 71.06 57.41 68.28 62.86 54.46 76.06

Rural 71.08 80.84 60.24 67.20 67.01 72.44 71.12 54.16 48.84 71.83 57.86 68.78 62.53 54.42 75.62

Urban 71.80 82.46 59.98 67.07 67.62 72.62 72.35 56.07 48.43 71.74 56.24 70.53 62.12 58.55 77.08

Over All

71.15 81.00 60.22 67.19 67.07 72.46 71.24 54.34 48.80 71.82 57.71 68.95 62.49 54.82 75.76

Total 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896


Boy 55.19 57.99 58.43 60.68 70.32 67.66 79.58 49.99 57.88 71.22 45.35 74.94 60.64 51.54 48.95

Girls 55.57 57.85 60.07 59.60 70.72 65.20 79.07 49.88 56.32 69.69 41.91 74.33 59.93 49.86 48.34

Rural 54.62 57.68 58.60 60.06 70.43 65.81 79.19 49.94 57.23 70.01 43.50 74.48 60.30 50.89 48.32

Urban 62.67 60.09 66.08 60.42 71.58 71.19 80.37 49.81 55.14 73.89 43.27 75.81 59.81 48.21 51.40

Over

All 55.39 57.91 59.32 60.10 70.54 66.33 79.30 49.93 57.03 70.39 43.48 74.61 60.25 50.63 48.62

Total 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896

Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35

Boy 60.30 58.92 63.23 52.64 71.26

Girls 60.26 56.37 63.70 50.40 68.76

Rural 60.70 57.75 63.44 51.41 69.57

Urban 56.29 55.53 63.94 51.57 73.06

Over

All 60.28 57.54 63.48 51.42 69.90

Total 18896 18896 18896 18896 18896

142

Table-14: Hindi Language - Writing Skill Response Table

Marks

Number and % of Student Rural Urban Total

0 N 5011 679 5690

% 29.22 37.25 29.99

1 N 3744 274 4018

% 21.83 15.03 21.18

2 N 2071 178 2249

% 12.08 9.76 11.85

3 N 2747 223 2970

% 16.02 12.23 15.65

4 N 1327 182 1509

% 7.74 9.98 7.95

5 N 986 150 1136

% 5.75 8.23 5.99

6 N 1263 137 1400

% 7.36 7.52 7.38

Table-15 : Items description of Mathematics and responses

S.No. Mental

Process

Item description of Items

Item 1 Knowing The Student recognises a given shape 71.1

Item 2 Understanding The Student compares the volume of water in given glasses 81.0

Item 3 Knowing The Student recognises a number of three digits. 60.2

Item 4 Knowing The Student recognises a number given in word form. 67.2

Item 5 Understanding The Student adds 2 numbers of two digits with carryover 67.1

Item 6 Understanding The Student subtracts 3 digit numbers without borrowing 72.5

Item 7 Understanding The Student solves a word problem of division 71.2

Item 8 Applying The Student solves a word problem given in pictorial form 54.3

Item 9 Applying The Student arranges the given numbers in ascending order 48.8

Item 10 Understanding The Student adds 2 numbers of three digits without carryover 71.8

Item 11 Understanding The Student subtracts 2 numbers of three digits with borrowing 57.7

Item 12 Applying The Student solves time related problem based on clock 68.9

Item 13 Understanding The Student relates the characteristics of objects of different shapes 62.5

Item 14 Applying The Student uses signs < , =, > between two given numbers. 54.8

Item 15 Understanding The Student reads a Calendar 75.8

Item 16 Knowing The Student recognises the place value of a digit in a given gumber. 55.4

Item 17 Understanding The Student correlates the shapes in the given picture 57.9

Item 18 Understanding The Student identifies the part of a given shape 59.3

Item 19 Understanding The Student compares the heights 60.1

Item 20 Understanding The Student multiplies a 2 digit number by a single digit without carryover 70.5

Item 21 Understanding The Student identifies the rupee notes to make price of a given doll 66.3

Item 22 Understanding The Student finds the pattern with the number of sticks given in different boxes 79.3

Item 23 Understanding The Student identifies equal parts of the given figures 49.9

Item 24 Understanding The Student identifies a 4 digit number in expanded form 57.0

Item 25 Understanding The Student solves word problem related to addition of two digit numbers without carryover 70.4

Item 26 Understanding The Student solves word problem related to multiplication of numbers with carryover 43.5

Item 27 Understanding The Student compares the distances of objects in a given picture 74.6

Item 28 Understanding The Student counts the number of triangles in a given figure 60.3

Item 29 Understanding The Student solves word problem related to addition of four digit numbers with carryover 50.6

Item 30 Understanding The Student subtracts fractions of equal denominators 48.6

Item 31 Applying The Student finds the pattern of a given number series 60.3

Item 32 Understanding The Student solves word problem related to division of 2 digit number by 1 digit number 57.5

Item 33 Understanding The Student draws inferences from a given table 63.5

Item 34 Understanding The Student converts rupees into paisa 51.4

Item 35 Understanding The Student divides a 2 digit number by a single digit 69.9

143

Table-16: General gender wise achievement in Mathematics

dist. Boys Girls

Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 325 66.53 22.47 397 62.8 22.49 3.73 2.22* 722 64.48 22.54

Bageshwar 274 72.03 18.74 432 69.44 20.88 2.59 1.67 706 70.45 20.1

Chamoli 532 61.06 23.3 547 59.17 23.5 1.89 1.33 1079 60.1 23.41

Champawat 340 59.58 25.52 438 59.1 27.04 0.48 0.25 778 59.31 26.37

Dehradun 148 65.43 18.3 204 68.14 18.21 -2.71 1.38 352 67 18.27

Haridwar 142 54.04 26.25 205 56.04 24.82 -2 0.72 347 55.22 25.4

Nainital 172 55.6 22.73 227 53.82 24.55 1.78 0.74 399 54.58 23.77

Pauri 427 68.65 24.49 483 71.63 20.64 -2.98 1.99* 910 70.23 22.56

Pithoragarh 285 69.42 18.96 297 68.78 19.64 0.64 0.4 582 69.1 19.29

Rudraprayag 364 69.04 19.79 458 68.06 19.5 0.98 0.71 822 68.5 19.62

Tehri 336 58.35 23.91 405 59.68 22.9 -1.33 0.77 741 59.07 23.36

US Nagar 64 46.88 22.7 87 43.77 21.02 3.11 0.87 151 45.09 21.73

Uttarkashi 120 79.49 16.05 162 77.8 15.14 1.69 0.9 282 78.52 15.53

Table-17: SC gender wise achievement in Mathematics

dist. Boys Girls

Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 290 55.46 23.35 321 56.64 23.42 -1.18 0.62 611 56.08 23.38

Bageshwar 370 63.39 20.97 427 61.66 21.46 1.73 1.15 797 62.46 21.24

Chamoli 269 55.75 24.33 275 50.61 25.16 5.14 2.42* 544 53.16 24.86

Champawat 245 54.36 26.99 306 54.69 28.39 -0.33 0.14 551 54.54 27.75

Dehradun 183 68.52 19.43 150 63.33 20.03 5.19 2.39* 333 66.19 19.84

Haridwar 187 49.63 26.02 167 50.86 24.7 -1.23 0.45 354 50.21 25.38

Nainital 227 52.19 24.31 257 49.54 21.7 2.65 1.27 484 50.78 22.97

Pauri 180 73.12 19.79 184 70.78 19.8 2.34 1.13 364 71.94 19.8

Pithoragarh 350 71.63 18.85 427 70.34 19.81 1.29 0.92 777 70.92 19.38

Rudraprayag 303 65.79 20.4 323 64.93 19.3 0.86 0.54 626 65.35 19.83

Tehri 188 54.52 22.88 179 52.46 21.22 2.06 0.89 367 53.52 22.08

US Nagar 182 48.01 23.06 217 49.76 21.73 -1.75 0.78 399 48.96 22.34

Uttarkashi 286 68.43 22.03 320 66.44 22.56 1.99 1.1 606 67.38 22.32

144

Table-18: ST gender wise achievement in Mathematics

dist. Boys Girls

Mean Diff t Total


Almora 12 39.67 22.51 9 32 3.99 7.67 1 21 36.38 17.33

Bageshwar 16 75.13 19.79 14 68.43 18.7 6.7 0.95 30 72 19.27

Chamoli 3 62 15.74 20 59.75 20.5 2.25 0.18 23 60.04 19.64

Champawat 6 45.5 30.15 5 35.4 10.42 10.1 0.71 11 40.91 22.9

Dehradun 34 57.91 22.95 60 53.15 14.72 4.76 1.22 94 54.87 18.15

Haridwar 1 89 3 40 38.65 49 1.1 4 52.25 39.82

Nainital 10 43.8 16.18 10 26.6 20.96 17.2 2.05* 20 35.2 20.29

Pauri 9 63.11 20.87 10 75.6 11.53 -12.49 1.64 19 69.68 17.36

Pithoragarh 30 68.77 21.03 20 65.4 21.52 3.37 0.55 50 67.42 21.07

Rudraprayag 1 74 6 39.67 12.7 34.33 2.50* 7 44.57 17.53

Tehri 1 80 1 66 14 0 2 73 10.11

US Nagar 8 69.5 17.61 26 64.62 19.33 4.88 0.64 34 65.76 18.8

Uttarkashi 25 71.4 21.46 29 75.14 21.89 -3.74 0.63 54 73.41 21.57

Table-19: OBC gender wise achievement in Mathematics

dist. Boys Girls

Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 21 68.48 26.17 15 55.6 30.1 12.88 1.37 36 63.11 28.23

Bageshwar 53 78.19 16.82 68 76.22 18.1 1.97 0.61 121 77.08 17.51

Chamoli 7 58 19.43 10 74.1 19.77 -16.1 1.66 17 67.47 20.68

Champawat 80 56.38 21.12 82 52 24.04 4.38 1.23 162 54.16 22.69

Dehradun 158 63.97 19.52 230 65.24 21.33 -1.27 0.6 388 64.72 20.59

Haridwar 323 56.14 24.37 375 54.78 25.52 1.36 0.72 698 55.41 24.99

Nainital 245 50.4 22.37 279 48.41 18.64 1.99 1.11 524 49.34 20.47

Pauri 52 62.19 28.97 54 65.3 22.61 -3.11 0.62 106 63.77 25.85

Pithoragarh 79 65.44 27.14 87 68.39 21.41 -2.95 0.78 166 66.99 24.28

Rudraprayag 13 71.46 22.01 16 58.38 17.33 13.08 1.79 29 64.24 20.3

Tehri 127 59.57 20.93 141 63.18 19.17 -3.61 1.47 268 61.47 20.07

US Nagar 422 58 23.6 560 59.27 22.46 -1.27 0.86 982 58.73 22.96

Uttarkashi 251 65.92 22.53 375 65.91 21.7 0.01 0.01 626 65.92 22.02

145

Table-20: Items Description of Hindi Language and responses

Item

no.

Mental Processes Question description(Infer/Evaluate; Grasp ideas/interpret; locate)

1. Locate The Student use information of a story to identify the location of frog. 69.8

2 Locate The Student use information of a story to identify phenomena at a time. 76.3

3. Infer/evaluation The Student use information in the text to infer the cause of an event. 56.3

4. Locate The Student use information of a story to identify the location at a particular area. 66.0

5. Grasp idea/interpret The Student identify the relation between an object and its characteristics 70.6

6. Grasp idea/interpret The Student use information of the story to identify the statement 69.0

7. Locate The Student use of information from text to identify the fact 59.9

8. Grasp idea/interpret The Student use information from the notice to drive the duration of an event 59.9

9 Locate The Student identify the correct place name from those given in the notice. 74.5

10 Grasp idea/interpret The Student identification of object and correlate it to content. 84.3

11 Grasp idea/interpret The Student identification of object and correlate it to content. 81.8

12 Locate The Student identify the correct name from the given text. 69.9

13 Grasp idea/interpret The Student use information from a text to correlate the information 66.4

14 Grasp idea/interpret The Student use information from a text to correlate the information 67.0

15 Infer/evaluate The Student use information in the text to make inference about the cause of an act 57.1

16 Grasp idea/interpret The Student use information in the story to determine the cause of an event. 61.1

17 Locate The Student identify the correct spelling from the given text 57.1

18 Grasp idea/interpret The Student use information drawn from a chart about objects 74.7

19 Infer/evaluate The Student use information in the text to make inferences about the cost of objects 71.7

20 Infer/evaluate -do- 70.0

21 Locate The Student use information from a chart to identify the value of object 73.7

22 Infer evaluate The Student use information to analyse the price of objects 65.3

23 Locate The Student use information from a text to identify the information 56.8

24 Grasp idea/interpret The Student grasp the relevant idea about the gender from the given text 58.3

25 Grasp idea/interpret The Student use information to draw simple conclusion about the use of noun 69.1

26 Infer/evaluate The Student use information from a sentence to make simple inference about the

correctness of sentence 69.8

27 Infer/evaluate The Student use information from a sentence about the use of preposition 70.4

28 Infer/evaluate The Student use information to identify correct spelling 60.0

29 Infer/evaluate The Student use information to identify correct spelling 72.3

30 Grasp / interpret The Student get an idea from the picture and write down three sentences about it 33.0

146

Table-21: SC Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

dist. Boys Girls

Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 290 52.4 23.14 321 56.93 20.36 -4.53 2.57** 611 54.78 21.82

Bageshwar 370 63.89 22.38 427 61.64 23.16 2.25 1.39 797 62.68 22.82

Chamoli 269 54.57 26.14 275 52.05 25.55 2.52 1.14 544 53.3 25.85

Champawat 245 63.6 23.37 306 62.44 25.32 1.16 0.55 551 62.96 24.46

Dehradun 183 64.25 23.48 150 67.49 21.96 -3.24 1.29 333 65.71 22.83

Haridwar 187 47.88 22.7 167 52.27 23.06 -4.39 1.8 354 49.95 22.94

Nainital 227 48.92 23.31 257 46.74 22.27 2.18 1.05 484 47.76 22.76

Pauri 180 61.79 19.69 184 63.08 21.58 -1.29 0.6 364 62.44 20.65

Pithoragarh 350 71.1 16.99 427 70.8 18.33 0.3 0.23 777 70.93 17.73

Rudraprayag 303 60.16 23.39 323 62.52 21.17 -2.36 1.33 626 61.38 22.28

Tehri 188 55.18 23.63 179 54.27 22.91 0.91 0.37 367 54.73 23.26

US Nagar 182 45.59 26.48 217 47.59 25.21 -2 0.77 399 46.68 25.78

Uttarkashi 286 67.16 22.5 320 67.13 23.71 0.03 0.02 606 67.14 23.13

Table-22: ST Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

dist.

Boys Girls Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 12 48.83 23.32 9 27 10.89 21.83 2.59** 21 39.48 21.66

Bageshwar 16 71.06 17.23 14 65.79 18.79 5.27 0.8 30 68.6 17.87

Chamoli 3 62 20.07 20 62.3 19.92 -0.3 0.02 23 62.26 19.47

Champawat 6 45.17 24.14 5 40.6 15.04 4.57 0.37 11 43.09 19.69

Dehradun 34 59.21 22.16 60 52.82 19.61 6.39 1.45 94 55.13 20.68

Haridwar 1 69 3 42 4.37 27 5.34** 4 48.75 13.8

Nainital 10 53.9 24.15 10 47.5 14.46 6.4 0.72 20 50.7 19.66

Pauri 9 73.78 12.84 10 74.2 7.38 -0.42 0.09 19 74 10.03

Pithoragarh 30 72.5 16.17 20 56.8 25.62 15.7 2.66** 50 66.22 21.66

Rudraprayag 1 80 6 32 11.05 48 0 7 38.86 20.79

Tehri 1 89 1 20 69 0 2 54.5 48.49

US Nagar 8 61 19.61 26 64.69 19.73 -3.69 0.46 34 63.82 19.47

Uttarkashi 25 68.76 16.81 29 77.93 18.41 -9.17 1.9 54 73.69 18.14

147

Table-23: OBC Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

dist.

Boys Girls Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 21 69.76 16.6 15 58.13 22.67 11.63 1.78 36 64.92 19.93

Bageshwar 53 73.49 17.62 68 71.96 21.85 1.53 0.42 121 72.63 20.05

Chamoli 7 63.29 21.41 10 73.7 14.93 -10.41 1.19 17 69.41 18.04

Champawat 80 60.69 23.7 82 59.68 23.78 1.01 0.27 162 60.18 23.67

Dehradun 158 63.3 21.97 230 70.66 22.41 -7.36 3.20** 388 67.66 22.5

Haridwar 323 53.72 22.68 375 58.77 23.02 -5.05 2.91** 698 56.44 22.99

Nainital 245 53.08 22.46 279 51.02 21.67 2.06 1.07 524 51.98 22.05

Pauri 52 62.75 22.69 54 61.19 22.25 1.56 0.36 106 61.95 22.37

Pithoragarh 79 69.61 18.44 87 68.2 22.91 1.41 0.43 166 68.87 20.86

Rudraprayag 13 58.54 28.25 16 45.81 21.15 12.73 1.39 29 51.52 24.97

Tehri 127 56.6 26 141 57.61 23.06 -1.01 0.34 268 57.13 24.46

US Nagar 422 56.27 21.8 560 59.26 21.3 -2.99 2.16* 982 57.97 21.56

Uttarkashi 251 63.11 22.54 375 59.21 26.07 3.9 1.94 626 60.77 24.77

Table-24: General Category Gender wise achievement in Hindi language

dist.

Boys Girls Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 325 61.3 20.95 397 62.39 19.57 -1.09 0.72 722 61.9 20.2

Bageshwar 274 71.85 19.21 432 69.15 20.29 2.7 1.76 706 70.19 19.91

Chamoli 532 58.64 25.95 547 59.21 24.2 -0.57 0.37 1079 58.93 25.07

Champawat 340 68.01 22.69 438 67.16 23.81 0.85 0.5 778 67.53 23.32

Dehradun 148 65.61 22.78 204 70.49 21.83 -4.88 2.03* 352 68.44 22.34

Haridwar 142 49.77 22.73 205 53.73 23.31 -3.96 1.57 347 52.11 23.13

Nainital 172 50.2 22.14 227 51.54 22.28 -1.34 0.6 399 50.96 22.21

Pauri 427 64.17 18.53 483 64.7 16.95 -0.53 0.45 910 64.45 17.7

Pithoragarh 285 73.26 16.82 297 70.47 19.16 2.79 1.86 582 71.84 18.09

Rudraprayag 364 67.29 20.62 458 65.86 21.2 1.43 0.97 822 66.49 20.94

Tehri 336 61.87 24.01 405 58.74 24.79 3.13 1.74 741 60.16 24.47

US Nagar 64 48.36 24.44 87 44.8 22.34 3.56 0.93 151 46.31 23.24

Uttarkashi 120 75.82 17.53 162 73.2 17.82 2.62 1.23 282 74.31 17.72

148

Table-25: SC Category area wise Achievement in Mathematics

dist.

Rural Urban Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 609 56.03 23.37 2 70.00 30.31 -13.97 0.84 611 56.08 23.38

Bageshwar 785 62.59 21.25 12 53.92 19.60 8.67 1.40 797 62.46 21.24

Chamoli 544 53.16 24.86 53.16 0.00 544 53.16 24.86

Champawat 533 54.08 27.95 18 68.11 16.26 -14.03 2.12* 551 54.54 27.75

Dehradun 133 62.38 22.47 200 68.72 17.49 -6.34 2.89** 333 66.19 19.84

Haridwar 301 50.17 26.59 53 50.42 17.13 -0.25 0.07 354 50.21 25.38

Nainital 395 49.26 22.62 89 57.55 23.42 -8.29 3.10** 484 50.78 22.97

Pauri 318 72.05 19.33 46 71.15 22.99 0.90 0.29 364 71.94 19.80

Pithoragarh 715 69.49 19.23 62 87.45 12.07 -17.96 7.23** 777 70.92 19.38

Rudraprayag 614 65.53 19.93 12 55.92 11.13 9.61 1.66 626 65.35 19.83

Tehri 347 52.49 21.97 20 71.35 15.91 -18.86 3.78** 367 53.52 22.08

US Nagar 263 50.97 24.19 136 45.08 17.66 5.89 2.51* 399 48.96 22.34

Uttarkashi 567 66.80 22.04 39 75.87 24.73 -9.07 2.47* 606 67.38 22.32

Table-26: SC Category Area wise Achievement in Hindi language

dist. Rural Urban

Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 609 54.76 21.81 2 61.50 34.34 -6.74 0.44 611 54.78 21.82

Bageshwar 785 62.81 22.87 12 54.25 17.44 8.56 1.29 797 62.68 22.82

Chamoli 544 53.30 25.85 53.30 0.00 544 53.30 25.85

Champawat 533 62.55 24.58 18 75.17 17.22 -12.62 2.16* 551 62.96 24.46

Dehradun 183 64.25 23.48 150 67.49 21.96 -3.24 1.29 333 65.71 22.83

Haridwar 301 50.68 22.75 53 45.81 23.78 4.87 1.43 354 49.95 22.94

Nainital 395 45.94 22.43 89 55.87 22.58 -9.93 3.77** 484 47.76 22.76

Pauri 318 62.20 20.75 46 64.11 20.06 -1.91 0.59 364 62.44 20.65

Pithoragarh 715 70.32 17.81 62 78.06 15.22 -7.74 3.32** 777 70.93 17.73

Rudraprayag 614 61.68 22.29 12 45.75 16.30 15.93 2.46* 626 61.38 22.28

Tehri 347 53.52 23.21 20 75.75 10.59 -22.23 4.25** 367 54.73 23.26

US Nagar 263 49.55 25.23 136 41.12 26.02 8.43 3.13** 399 46.68 25.78

Uttarkashi 286 67.16 22.50 320 67.13 23.71 0.03 0.02 606 67.14 23.13

149

Table-27: ST Category Area wise Achievement in Mathematics

dist. Rural Urban

Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 21 36.38 17.33 36.38 0.00 21 36.38 17.33

Bageshwar 30 72.00 19.27 72.00 0.00 30 72.00 19.27

Chamoli 23 60.04 19.64 60.04 0.00 23 60.04 19.64

Champawat 11 40.91 22.90 40.91 0.00 11 40.91 22.90

Dehradun 91 54.42 17.90 3 68.67 24.91 -14.25 1.34 94 54.87 18.15

Haridwar 4 52.25 39.82 -52.25 0.00 4 52.25 39.82

Nainital 20 35.20 20.29 35.20 0.00 20 35.20 20.29

Pauri 15 70.53 12.43 4 66.50 32.69 4.03 0.40 19 69.68 17.36

Pithoragarh 48 66.90 20.95 2 80.00 28.28 -13.10 0.86 50 67.42 21.07

Rudraprayag 7 44.57 17.53 44.57 0.00 7 44.57 17.53

Tehri 1 66.00 1 80.00 -14.00 0.00 2 73.00 10.11

US Nagar 25 68.52 21.11 9 58.11 5.53 10.41 1.45 34 65.76 18.80

Uttarkashi 54 73.41 21.57 73.41 0.00 54 73.41 21.57

Table-28: ST Category Area wise Achievement in Hindi language

dist. Rural Urban

Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 21 39.48 21.66 39.48 0.00 21 39.48 21.66

Bageshwar 30 68.60 17.87 68.60 0.00 30 68.60 17.87

Chamoli 23 62.26 19.47 62.26 0.00 23 62.26 19.47

Champawat 11 43.09 19.69 43.09 0.00 11 43.09 19.69

Dehradun 34 59.21 22.16 60 52.82 19.61 6.39 1.45 94 55.13 20.68

Haridwar 4 48.75 13.80 -48.75 0.00 4 48.75 13.80

Nainital 20 50.70 19.66 50.70 0.00 20 50.70 19.66

Pauri 15 73.93 10.12 4 74.25 11.19 -0.32 0.06 19 74.00 10.03

Pithoragarh 48 65.54 21.76 2 82.50 12.13 -16.96 1.09 50 66.22 21.66

Rudraprayag 7 38.86 20.79 38.86 0.00 7 38.86 20.79

Tehri 1 20.00 1 89.00 -69.00 0.00 2 54.50 48.49

US Nagar 25 59.72 20.93 9 75.22 7.14 -15.50 2.16* 34 63.82 19.47

Uttarkashi 25 68.76 16.81 29 77.93 18.41 -9.17 1.90 54 73.69 18.14

150

Table-29: OBC Category Area wise Achievement in Mathematics

dist.

Rural Urban Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 36 63.11 28.23 63.11 0.00 36 63.11 28.23

Bageshwar 121 77.08 17.51 77.08 0.00 121 77.08 17.51

Chamoli 17 67.47 20.68 67.47 0.00 17 67.47 20.68

Champawat 146 52.65 23.07 16 67.94 12.35 -15.29 2.61** 162 54.16 22.69

Dehradun 281 65.38 21.10 107 63.00 19.19 2.38 1.02 388 64.72 20.59

Haridwar 657 55.51 25.36 41 53.78 18.05 1.73 0.43 698 55.41 24.99

Nainital 400 50.46 20.06 124 45.73 21.44 4.73 2.26* 524 49.34 20.47

Pauri 53 71.68 19.19 53 55.87 29.22 15.81 3.29** 106 63.77 25.85

Pithoragarh 152 65.16 24.46 14 86.86 8.14 -21.70 3.30** 166 66.99 24.28

Rudraprayag 29 64.24 20.30 64.24 0.00 29 64.24 20.30

Tehri 267 61.34 20.00 1 94.00 -32.66 1.63 268 61.47 20.07

US Nagar 776 57.55 22.98 206 63.17 22.35 -5.62 3.14** 982 58.73 22.96

Uttarkashi 616 66.28 21.79 10 43.30 25.07 22.98 3.30** 626 65.92 22.02

Table-30: OBC Category Area wise Achievement in Hindi language

dist. Rural Urban

Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 36 64.92 19.93 64.92 0.00 36 64.92 19.93

Bageshwar 121 72.63 20.05 72.63 0.00 121 72.63 20.05

Chamoli 17 69.41 18.04 69.41 0.00 17 69.41 18.04

Champawat 146 58.32 24.00 16 77.13 10.22 -18.81 3.10** 162 60.18 23.67

Dehradun 158 63.30 21.97 230 70.66 22.41 -7.36 3.20** 388 67.66 22.50

Haridwar 657 56.88 23.10 41 49.39 20.02 7.49 2.03* 698 56.44 22.99

Nainital 400 51.08 22.07 124 54.92 21.78 -3.84 1.70 524 51.98 22.05

Pauri 53 70.25 10.97 53 53.66 27.40 16.59 4.09** 106 61.95 22.37

Pithoragarh 152 67.93 21.18 14 79.00 13.80 -11.07 1.92 166 68.87 20.86

Rudraprayag 29 51.52 24.97 51.52 0.00 29 51.52 24.97

Tehri 267 57.00 24.41 1 91.00 -34.00 1.39 268 57.13 24.46

US Nagar 776 58.00 21.12 206 57.89 23.19 0.11 0.07 982 57.97 21.56

Uttarkashi 251 63.11 22.54 375 59.21 26.07 3.90 1.94 626 60.77 24.77

151

Table-31: General Category Area wise Achievement in Mathematics

dist.

Rural Urban Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 707 64.78 22.43 15 50.60 24.43 14.18 2.42* 722 64.48 22.54

Bageshwar 706 70.45 20.10 70.45 0.00 706 70.45 20.10

Chamoli 1079 60.10 23.41 60.10 0.00 1079 60.10 23.41

Champawat 773 59.16 26.38 5 82.60 8.81 -23.44 1.99* 778 59.31 26.37

Dehradun 173 65.20 17.68 179 68.74 18.70 -3.54 1.82 352 67.00 18.27

Haridwar 330 55.38 25.59 17 52.12 21.63 3.26 0.52 347 55.22 25.40

Nainital 293 52.70 22.42 106 59.78 26.59 -7.08 2.65** 399 54.58 23.77

Pauri 808 69.83 22.79 102 73.42 20.46 -3.59 1.52 910 70.23 22.56

Pithoragarh 562 68.30 19.10 20 91.55 7.67 -23.25 5.42** 582 69.10 19.29

Rudraprayag 822 68.50 19.62 68.50 0.00 822 68.50 19.62

Tehri 713 57.86 22.91 28 90.00 8.47 -32.14 7.40** 741 59.07 23.36

US Nagar 107 45.50 21.42 44 44.07 22.68 1.43 0.37 151 45.09 21.73

Uttarkashi 250 77.28 15.33 32 88.22 13.76 -10.94 3.84** 282 78.52 15.53

Table-32: General Category Area wise Achievement in Hindi language

dist.

Rural Urban Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 707 62.03 20.24 15 55.53 17.77 6.50 1.23 722 61.90 20.20

Bageshwar 706 70.19 19.91 70.19 0.00 706 70.19 19.91

Chamoli 1079 58.93 25.07 58.93 0.00 1079 58.93 25.07

Champawat 773 67.46 23.34 5 79.00 18.14 -11.54 1.10 778 67.53 23.32

Dehradun 148 65.61 22.78 204 70.49 21.83 -4.88 2.03* 352 68.44 22.34

Haridwar 330 51.90 23.03 17 56.18 25.31 -4.28 0.74 347 52.11 23.13

Nainital 293 50.73 22.02 106 51.61 22.79 -0.88 0.35 399 50.96 22.21

Pauri 808 64.25 17.40 102 66.03 19.91 -1.78 0.96 910 64.45 17.70

Pithoragarh 562 71.49 18.12 20 81.60 14.46 -10.11 2.47* 582 71.84 18.09

Rudraprayag 822 66.49 20.94 66.49 0.00 822 66.49 20.94

Tehri 713 59.01 24.12 28 89.43 11.74 -30.42 6.64** 741 60.16 24.47

US Nagar 107 47.26 23.13 44 44.00 23.60 3.26 0.78 151 46.31 23.24

Uttarkashi 120 75.82 17.53 162 73.20 17.82 2.62 1.23 282 74.31 17.72

152

Table-33: Total Area wise Achievement in Mathematics

dist. Rural Urban

Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 1373 60.42 23.51 17 52.88 24.93 7.54 1.31 1390 60.33 23.54

Bageshwar 1642 67.21 20.99 12 53.92 19.60 13.29 2.19* 1654 67.11 21.01

Chamoli 1663 57.90 24.04 57.90 0.00 1663 57.90 24.04

Champawat 1463 56.52 26.78 39 69.90 14.55 -13.38 3.11** 1502 56.87 26.62

Dehradun 678 63.27 20.45 489 67.48 18.45 -4.21 3.61** 1167 65.03 19.74

Haridwar 1288 54.23 25.79 115 51.93 18.92 2.30 0.93 1403 54.04 25.30

Nainital 1108 50.35 21.75 319 53.70 24.58 -3.35 2.35* 1427 51.10 22.45

Pauri 1194 70.51 21.67 205 68.24 24.75 2.27 1.36 1399 70.18 22.15

Pithoragarh 1477 68.51 19.86 98 88.05 11.16 -19.54 9.64** 1575 69.72 20.00

Rudraprayag 1472 67.06 19.85 12 55.92 11.13 11.14 1.94 1484 66.97 19.82

Tehri 1328 57.16 22.30 50 82.42 15.00 -25.26 7.94** 1378 58.08 22.57

US Nagar 1171 55.20 23.48 395 54.70 22.50 0.50 0.37 1566 55.08 23.23

Uttarkashi 1487 68.59 21.33 81 76.73 25.09 -8.14 3.31** 1568 69.01 21.60

Table-34: Total Area wise Achievement in Hindi language

dist. Rural Urban

Mean

Diff

t Total


Almora 1373 58.54 21.40 17 56.24 18.81 2.30 0.44 1390 58.51 21.36

Bageshwar 1642 66.81 21.69 12 54.25 17.44 12.56 2.00* 1654 66.72 21.68

Chamoli 1663 57.24 25.36 57.24 0.00 1663 57.24 25.36

Champawat 1463 64.57 24.09 39 76.46 14.51 -11.89 3.07** 1502 64.88 23.96

Dehradun 523 64.02 22.74 644 68.20 22.42 -4.18 3.15** 1167 66.33 22.65

Haridwar 1288 54.15 23.16 115 48.72 22.50 5.43 2.41* 1403 53.71 23.14

Nainital 1108 49.15 22.25 319 54.08 22.35 -4.93 3.48** 1427 50.25 22.36

Pauri 1194 64.09 18.16 205 62.56 22.53 1.53 1.07 1399 63.87 18.86

Pithoragarh 1477 70.36 18.47 98 79.01 14.70 -8.65 4.54** 1575 70.90 18.37

Rudraprayag 1472 64.06 21.84 12 45.75 16.30 18.31 2.90** 1484 63.91 21.86

Tehri 1328 57.14 24.05 50 83.98 12.86 -26.84 7.85** 1378 58.12 24.26

US Nagar 1171 55.16 22.67 395 50.96 25.52 4.20 3.08** 1566 54.10 23.49

Uttarkashi 682 67.25 21.94 886 65.24 24.33 2.01 1.69 1568 66.11 23.33

* * * * * * * * * *

Executive Summary - Uttarakhandscert.uk.gov.in/files/Final_SLAS_report.pdf · Executive Summary Context State Level Achievement Survey (SLAS) of class III in Uttrakhand was conducted

Documents