PROBLEMS FACED BY TEACHERS IN TEACHING MATHEMATICS IN LOWER SECONDARY LEVEL
For PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MASTER DEGREE OF EDUCATION
A Thesis By
MR. DILLI RAM TIWARI
SUBMITTED TO
TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF EDUCATION PRITHVI NARAYAN CAMPUS DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS POKHARA, NEPAL April 2013 TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF EDUCATION PRITHVI NARAYAN CAMPUS DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS POKHARA
LETTER OF CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that Mr. Dilli Ram Tiwari, student of academic year with Exam Roll No. 480640/066 and TU registration No. 37511-92 has completed his thesis under my supervision during the period prescribed by the rules and regulation of Tribhuvan University. The thesis entitled “Problems Faced by Mathematics Teachers in Teaching Mathematics in Lower Secondary Level". Embodies the result of his investigation conducted during the period of 2012 at department of mathematics, Prithvi Narayan Campus, Pokhara. I recommend and forward his thesis to submit for the final evaluation as the partial requirement to award the degree of Master of Education.
………………………………….. ………………………… Mr. Bibhab Neupane Mr. Narendra Narayan Jha Supervisor Head
Date: 2069/12/30
ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I am very much indebted to Mr. Bibhab Neupane, lecturer of Department of Mathematics Education, Prithvi Narayan Campus, Pokhara, my supervisor, whose painstaking effort in providing me with scholarly guidance and constant encouragement made this research possible to complete in time. I am extremely grateful to Mr. Narendra Narayan Jha, the Head of Department of Mathematics Education, Prithvi Narayan Campus, Pokhara for his professional expertise and moral support in completing the study. Similarly, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my teachers Mr. Maheshwor Pokharel, Mr. Man Bahadur Bhujel, Mr. Gangadhar Poudel for guiding me whenever it was needed. Accordingly, I would like to express thanks for Research Committee of M.Ed Program. Further more, I am very much grateful to my friends Mr. Nabaraj Sharma, Mr. Khadak Raj Adhikari for their inspiration and assistance to complete this study. I would like to thank Mr. Madanmani Sapkota, Mr. Dipendraraj Adhikari, Mr. Purushotam Sapkota and Mr. Shivalal Rimal for their support to do this study. My heartily words go to all principals of sampled schools and mathematics teachers of Kaski district who filled up the questionnaire and provided me the opportunity for class observation during the research. I would like to express the deepest gratitude to my father, mother, brothers and my lovely wife Mrs. Chandra Sharma and my dear son and daughter who provided the inspirational motivation to complete this study in proper time. Finally, I obligate to all other friends who assisted me directly or indirectly in completing this study. I would like to give thanks to Deepak Saru Magar Director of Lotus Graphics Pokhara-4, Girapatan, for arranging the format of this study. Similarly, I would like to thank Mrs. Sirjana Ale who helped me to type this thesis even in formatting difficult tables relevant to the study.
…………………….. Dilli Ram Tiwari
iii 0ABSTRACT
1The purpose of this study was to identify the "Problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics in lower secondary level" This study tried to determine and analyze the problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics in lower secondary level. The objectives of the study were as follows.
• To identify the problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics in lower secondary level of Kaski district. • To compare the problem faced by teachers in teaching mathematics at community based schools and Institutional based schools.
The nature of research design was quantitative and descriptive in nature. To find out the result of this study a set of questionnaire and class observation form were developed to collect the data. The questionnaire consist 24 statements. The statements were designed on the basis of making teaching plan, used instructional material, motivation, supervision and teaching method. Each was categorized Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree by using Likert's five scales. Similarly, a set of classroom observation form were used to observe the class of sampled teachers of sample schools. The class observation form consisted 21 statements, categories them in three parts, they were infrastructure, instruction and conclusion of the lesson.
The data were collected by using random sampling method. For this thirty schools were chosen for the study from Community based and Institutional based. Then, 15/15 teachers were selected from each of sampled schools. They were analyzed and interpreted by using percentage, weightage mean standard deviation and t-test at 5% of level of significance. At last conclusion of this study was drawn, which is as follows:
iv • Majority of the teachers from both based schools seemed to be more conscious in making daily lesson plan, unit plan, yearly plan, proper use of instructional materials, but did not encourage to make instructional materials, fund not required, motivation of students, trained teachers, supervisor help with problems areas and teaching methods are mean problems. • Different problems faced by CBS teachers but not IBS teachers are without making plan certain chapter will be difficult to teach, instructional materials and funds are not available to get, students are not interested in study and regular homework kill the times. • Problems faced by IBS teachers but not CBS teachers are use of instructional materials take more time and only inductive-deductive method are not teaching method. • Mathematics lab, teacher's plan, use of instructional materials, summarization of lesson and evaluation as per objectives are also problems faced by the teachers. • Textbook of Institutional based schools are more complex then community based schools even if they are designed in same curriculum. • Many problems faced by community based schools and Institutional based schools teachers are same.
v 2TABLE OF CONTENTS
Content Page No. Headings Letter of Approval i Letter of Certificate ii Acknowledgement iii Abstract iv Table of Content vi-vii List of Tables viii Abbreviation used in the Study ix Chapter-I: INTRODUCTION 1-9 Background of the Study 1 Statement of the Problems 7 Significance of the Study 7 Objectives of the Study 8 Research Hypothesis 8 Definition of Terms 9 Limitation of the Study 9 Chapter- II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 10-15 Chapter - III: METHOD AND PROCEDURE 16-21 Research Design 16 Population of the Study 16 Sample of the Study 17 Tools of the Study 18 Validity and Reliability of the Study 18 Data Collection Procedure 19 Scoring Procedure 19 Data Analysis Procedure 20 Chapter -IV: ANALYSIS OF DATA AND NTERPRETATION OF THE RUSELT 22-35 The Problems Faced by Teachers in Teaching Mathematics in Lower Secondary Level. 22
vi Respondents Related To Making Teaching Plan 22 Respondents Related to use of Instruction Materials 24 Respondents Related to Motivation 26 Respondents Related to Supervision 27 Respondents Related to Teaching Method 29 To identify dissimilarity on Problems Faced by Teachers of CBS & IBS Schools 30 Analysis of Classroom Observation 32 Comparison of Problems of Mathematics Teachers in Community Schools and Institutional School 35 Chapter-V: SUMMARY, FINDING, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 36-39 Summary 36 Findings 37 Conclusion 38 Recommendations 39 Recommendations for further Study 39
Bibliography 40-42
APPENDICES (A to M) 43-57
vii LIST OF TABLES
CONTENTS PAGE NO. Table 1: Detailed Sample Characteristics 17 Table 2: Table of Mean Weightage and Percentage Problems Related to Making plan 23 Table 3: Table of Mean Weightage and Percentage Problems Related to Use of Instructional Materials 25 Table 4: Table of Mean Weightage and Percentage Problem Related to Motivation 26 Table 5: Table of Mean Weightage and Percentage Problems Related to supervision 28 Table 6: Table of Mean Weightage and Percentage Problem Related to Teaching Method 29 Table 7: Statement Wise Distribution of Mean Response of Teacher of the CBS and IBS 30 Table 8: Analysis of Classroom Observation from 33 Table 9: Mean and standard Deviation of CBS and IBS 35
viii ABBREVIATION USED IN THE STUDY
A.D :- Anno Domini B.S : - Bikram Sambat NESP :- National Educational Planning Commission NEC :- National Education Commission CDC :- Curriculum Development Centre CBS :- Community Based School IBS :- Institutional Based School S.N :- Statement Number T.U :- Tribhuvan University T :- Trained
UT :- Untrained
ix Chapter – I
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study:
The term Mathematics has been derived from the ancient Greek word “Mathematician” which means to learn whereas in Nepali, it is called “Ganit” which means “the science of calculation”. Now a day it is defined as the science of numbers, quantity, space and change. Arithmetic, algebra, trigonometry, geometry etc. have been initiated its development since ancient human civilization. At the primitive time, mathematics was originated from counting stones and cutting notches in a piece of stick or by tying knots in string. In course of solving the social problems, ancient people gradually built the mathematical structures and rules. It is also originated with practical experiences and various phenomena in space and spatial.
The word 'Mathematics' has been described in various ways. According to Locke "Mathematics is a way settle in the mind a habit of reasoning" According to Oxford Dictionary "Mathematics is the science of number and space." Hilbert illustrates that "Mathematics is nothing more than a game played according to certain rules with meaningless marks on paper" Now, new Mathematics states that "Mathematics is trained as in the acquisition of skill, computation ability, capability to produce, proves and knowledge of principle "Nowadays Mathematics is compulsory for all. Without it, it is difficult to conduct our daily life. So it is necessary to make it easy interesting and favorite subject to all. To make it interesting and favorite the teacher plays the vital role so the teacher needs more information, idea and knowledge about teaching of mathematics.
Mathematics is a highly intellectual discipline, without it we cannot imagine any other field or sector. Mathematics has faced the present
1 challenging problems which are shown by the different civilization in course of solving problems and needs. Various problems of society are concerning poverty, educational planning, public administration, health education, industrial growth, technology, etc. In all these fields, mathematics has an important role to play. Without mathematics, we cannot prepare young people to think innovatively and creatively on new problems. Development in Mathematics has always been considerable influence by development in biological science, management, science, and in industries. Still more recently these have been influenced by developments of computer and computer sciences.
Mathematics as a discipline has played a vital role in the development of all human civilizations. It is essential for day to day life as well as for higher students and for the success in the field of science and technology. The needs and importances of mathematics have been increasing by leaps and bounds in every day human life. Mathematics and its studies seem to be more important in our day to day practice. Our each and every tasks are some how related to mathematics.
According to Sidhu (1990), “Mathematics is the numerical calculation related to human life and knowledge. It enables us to solve mathematical problems in our daily life, developmental discipline through cultivates the habits of concentration and self-reliance, prepare for technical job such as accounts, math teaching, auditing, engineering etc. and develop the power of thinking and reasoning. So we take mathematics as a way of thinking, means of communications and tools of reflexive thinking.”
Goff and Futterman (1982) stated, “Knowledge of mathematics is indispensable to our daily life. Counting objects, reading and writing numerals, performing arithmetic calculation as well as reasoning with numbers are tasks most people perform in their daily life. A strong background in mathematics is necessary for almost all technical careers in society
2 competence in mathematics have been identified as a critical skill directly related to educational and occupational choices.” Locke said that Mathematics is the way to settle in mind a habit of reasoning.
“Mathematics is nothing but a system of conclusions drawn from definitions and postulates that must be consistent but otherwise may be created by the free will of the mathematicians” Courant and Robbins (1996). Benjamin Pierce, one of the best of the American trained mathematician said that mathematics is the science that draws necessary conclusions.
Importance of mathematics is perceived in different ways. For many it is seen in terms of arithmetic skills that are needed for the use at home or in the office or workshop. As the basis of scientific development and modern technology some emphasize the increasing use of mathematical techniques as a management tool in the area of commerce and industry. Mathematics is a vital part of the basic learning needs of both children and adults. Mathematics has a great potential value. So that it is most welcome part of education and as essential part of school curriculum as well. Developed and developing countries alike should provide mathematics education for people of all ages, in school and out of school, including adult literacy programs. Mathematics can provide pupils with powerful ways of exploring, investigation and understanding the world. Mathematics is vital in everyday life as it encourages logical reasoning and the ability to think in abstract way.
Supporting the importance of mathematics, the school mathematics study Group published a progressive report in 1959 A.D. stating the role of mathematics:
"The world of today demands more mathematics knowledge on the part of mort people than the world of yesterday and the world of tomorrow will make still greater demands. Our society learns more and more on science and technology. The number of our citizens skilled in mathematics must be greatly
3 increased and understanding of the role of mathematics in our society is a prerequisite for intelligent citizenship. Since no one can predict with certainty his future profession. It is important that mathematics be so taught that students will be able in later life to loran the new mathematical skills which the future will surely demand of many of them".
The aim of mathematics education should not be limited to the study of mathematical facts and their direct application to some particular fields. Traverse and others (1977) suggested that the students need to know how mathematics helps directly in daily life. Day to day life involves a series of problems, possess challenges in every walk of life to which mathematics provides a sound logical background to over-come the hindrances. In a mathematics club report Upadhyaya (1986) clearly stated the aim of education is to provide basic knowledge in students to study the world in the pattern of mathematics and to develop skills in them to adopt in the modern developing scientific and technological society. Clarifying the concept cock croft (1983) adds:
"The usefulness of mathematics is perceived in different ways for many it is seen in terms of arithmetic skill which are needs for the used at home or in the office or workshop as the basis of scientific development and modern technology. Some emphasize the increasing use of commerce and industry".
Mathematics has a close and friendly relation with every phase of human life mathematics helps individual understand and interpret quantitative aspect of concept and nature phenomena. Mathematics has been developed for fulfilling the daily life problems of men like counting, calculating and remembering.
Nowadays mathematics is considered as an important subject called the queen of all science and key and gateway of all sciences. It is directly related to the cultural, political, social and geographical condition of the society.
4 Mathematics is a body of knowledge on the area of science with its own symbols, terminologies, contents, theories and technique. It is the way thinking organizing, analyzing and synthesizing.
Mathematics is taken as an important component of education in the modern word. This fact is well recognized also in Nepal and mathematics, therefore it introduced as a compulsory subject at all level of school education. Of the total weight allotted in school level curriculum, 30 percent is allotted to mathematics at the primary level. (Primary education curriculum, 2009), 20 percent at lower secondary level, (lower secondary education curriculum 2006). It indicates that mathematics is indispensable for every day life as well as for higher studies in the different fields of science and technology as well as in social sciences. Students apply mathematical concepts, skills, and logical reasoning to solve different kind of problems. The ability to solve problems is the ultimate aim of the study of mathematics (NCE-2005).
The National Education System Plan (NESP-2028), mathematics curriculum stores the importance of mathematics in the following words:
Mathematics like language is a basic tool of communication, Daily translation and communication involves the frequent use of mathematical concept. Thus it is quite natural that mathematics must be given a very important place second to language in school education.
In Nepal mathematics was not taught systematically before 2007 B.S. The country realized that well ground understanding on mathematics is essential for everyday life as for higher study in the field of science and technology. For instance different education commissions were found in 2010, 2018, 2028 and 2049 B.S. National education system plan 2028 gave a new model to the education system for the country. This plan determines the national level wise, grade wise and subject wise objectives in order to achieve the goal, contents of teaching in each grade, teaching material, etc.
5 Implementation plan 2038 improves the curriculum of 2028 B.S. and textbook. National education commission (NEC 2029) has given some significant suggestions about how to improve the standard of education. When we go through the development of education in Nepal before beginning of education plan 2028 B.S. Certain textbooks have been used as major tools to achieve the requirements.
According to Ministry of Education Curriculum Development Centre developed new curriculum and implemented in schools level education since the academic session of 1993 A.D.
The teaching and learning in Nepalese schools is totally based on textbook. Since the textbooks have been written informal Nepali language, it is difficult for those students who have other languages speaking background than Nepali. On the other hand the teachers use the textbooks as an ultimate means of teaching materials that does not provide the opportunity of relating their learning with local contest. Because of financial problem, Nepalese schools could not offer money to spend in materials and equipments. Some schools don't have class rooms. A large number of students are packed in a small class room. Thus the crowded classroom is one of the major problems of implementing interactive teaching and learning process. Classroom is not well lighted and well-ventilated, physical facilities, such as teacher's job, teaching materials, teachers guidebooks training for core teachers, mathematics laboratory, computer and collection of low cost materials that are essential for teaching and learning activities are not organized properly by concerned agencies. A teacher is facing many such types of problems in Nepalese schools.
All the researchers have done many studies on different field of mathematics. Also most of the teachers have faced problems while teaching mathematics in lower secondary level. So this study was done on "problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics in lower secondary level in Kaski district.
6 Statement of the Problem:
Since lower secondary level is the main base or root of secondary and higher secondary education, it will be appropriate to discuss the problems faced by teachers of mathematics. The study tries to explore and analyze the problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics in lower secondary level. The study intends to answer the following research questions. a) What are the problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics at lower secondary level? b) Are problems faced by mathematics teacher in community base school different from institutional base school?
Significance of the Study:
Mathematics is an essential part of school curriculum. So, it is taught as compulsory subject at all level of school education of Nepal. Mathematics teachers, who are teaching in school of all level, can not get appropriate teaching materials. In this level proper usable teaching materials and other tools related to mathematics can not get easily. So the teachers who are teaching in lower secondary level are facing many problems in teaching mathematics. Problems may arise because of confusion about subject matter and about optimal procedures to present to the students. Problems also rise because of the lack of knowledge about the classroom management. This is an appropriate topic for research that concerns about the problems of teachers of Kaski districts. The study will attempt to identify the problems as they are feeling. It is further hoped that the study will be helpful to concerned person of this level. Thus the study is significant for the reason that it will help to provide information to the concerned agencies to reform and improve the mathematics teaching. Also it will help to improve mathematics teaching especially for core teachers. The main grate challenge for policy maker and planners in Nepal is how to supply trained teachers in the schools. This study intends to provide insights in to the formulations of appropriate policies in favor of lower secondary level. The finding of the study may raise awareness'
7 among policymakers, school administrators and serving and prospective teachers about remedial measures in difficulties of teaching. Like wise, the research study has some of significance as follows
The study would find the problems what comes to teach mathematics in lower secondary level. The study would help to minimize the problems face by teachers at the teaching time. The study would try to identify the problems which are in community base schools and Institutional base schools. The study would be helpful for the people working in the field of education like policy makers, curriculum designer, students, parents, social workers and teachers for creating fruitful teaching
Objectives of the Study:
The objective of the study is to identify the problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics in Lower Secondary Level.
To identify the problems face by teachers in teaching mathematics in lower secondary level of Kaski district. To compare the problem faced by teacher in teaching mathematics at community based schools and Institutional based schools.
Research Hypothesis: The research hypothesis formulated for this study is as follow: There is significant mean difference between the problems faced by teachers in community and Institutional based schools. The corresponding research hypothesis is as follow:
H1 : 1 2
Where 1 and 2 are corresponding parameter means of problems of teachers in community and Institutional based schools in lower secondary level.
8 Definitions of the Term:
The propose of the study researcher used the following terms with their operational meaning as follows:
Community Based School: School is established and funded by the government of Nepal. Institutional Based School: School that is permitted by the government to run and funded by the non-governmental agents. Teachers: Teachers mean those who are teaching the mathematics in lower secondary at research time. Class: Class room means the room where the teachers and students do the teaching learning activities. Problem: Problem means which are faced by the teacher in teaching mathematics inside and outside of a classroom in lower secondary level.
Limitation of the Study:
The study is limited only in Kaski district. The study is made among the community and institutional based schools. With total of 30 teachers were taken to fell up the questionnaire from sample schools. 15/15 schools were taken as sample of the study. Researcher observed the class in one period. The study in concerned only with class room teaching problems.
9 Chapter – II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Reviewing and studying process help in taking adequate feedback to broad the information base inputs to this work. A summary of the writing of recognized authorities and previous researcher provide many opportunities to the researcher to be familiar with what is already known and untested. Reviews of previous studies save the researcher to eliminate the duplication of what has been done and provide useful hypothesis and helpful suggestion for the study. Therefore, the review section of the research report will play vital role for the study. Therefore various books, journals, articles unpublished document were studied to find out the problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics in lower secondary level. The reviewed literatures are as follows.
Dhital (1985) conducted his thesis entitled “A study of the problems falling the teaching English at lower secondary level of Dhankuta district". He concluded that there were number of problems in activates on instructional materials, classroom, condition, teachers training, and physical facilities etc. Pathak (1986) conducted a thesis entitled "The problem faced by the teacher in Kathmandu district in the implementation of mathematics curriculum for lower secondary level". He concluded that most of teachers of Kathmandu district have been, facing problems in the selection and used of instructional materials but they are facing proper in selecting evaluation devices.
Pandit (1999) mentioned on an article problem faced by mathematics teacher educator in the implementation of three years B.Ed. level mathematics curriculum in Nepal. He concluded that mathematics teacher education program in Nepal is disturbed by so many factors such as lack of lectures', involvement in curriculum planning, lack of efficiency to conduct teaching facilities and aids, students weak background in the subject matter, lack of opportunity given to upgrade their knowledge, huge number of personnel problems of lectures.
10 About the problems in teaching mathematics Pandit (1999) writes in his one article, teaching mathematics as the mathematics teacher may face different kinds of problem while teaching further, and their may be problems related with mathematics education program, which directly or indirectly affect to mathematics such problems as a whole can be divided in two parts.
a. Problem in mathematics education and
b. Problem faced by them while teaching mathematics in real classroom situation and some remedial suggestions has also been given in his article.
Baral (2000) conducted a thesis entitled "A study of the problems faced by mathematics teachers in implantation of compulsory mathematics curriculum in class 9". He concluded that the objective of the curriculum seems to be highly idealistic; hence they cannot be fulfilled in present context of mathematics teaching earning situations. He found that is inadequate for this level textbook. He came up to conclusion that only paper pencil test was in use. He also that he had difficulty to evaluate student achievement fairly.
Pokhrel (2000) conducted his thesis entitled "A study of present states and current problems in new curriculum of grade VII mathematics in Gorkha district". He concluded that some lessons were difficult to understand and some lessons being longer that necessary, no proper use of teaching materials for new topics, course could not be finished within assigned time. Teacher guide was not found available in sampled school.
Sharma (2000) conducted his thesis on “A study on the availability and use of instructional materials in teaching mathematics at the primary school of Purbat district of Nepal” He concluded that the availability of materials was not found very useful in most of schools expect the case of some materials such as meter, scale, compass, cock models and abacus etc.
Pokharal (2000) conducted his thesis entitled “A study of present status and carrel- problems in new curriculum of grade vii mathematics in Gorkha district”. He found that same lessons were ditties to understand and some
11 lessons being longer than necessary. No proper of teaching materials for new topic could be done with in assigned time teacher guide available in sampled schools. Lamichhane (2001) has done his thesis on "A study of problems faced by the secondary level mathematics in teaching materials." He concluded that several problems purpose up in the eyes of teacher and problems faced to the significantly differently from those of rural teachers.
Mitra (2001) on the topic "A study of teaching materials and subject wise classroom observation took the research in public primary school. This study found that, trained and experienced teacher have inadequate in the classroom environment.
Basnet (2003) had done his thesis entitled "Teaching problems feed by mathematics teachers in existing curriculum of grade eight". He concluded that mathematics teaching and learning is not satisfactory at grade eight in Jhapa district. The teachers and students are facing many problems due to lack of training, orientations, opportunity for mathematics teachers in existing curriculum, inadequacy of textbooks, lack of teacher guide and reference book, lack of instructional materials lack of physical facilities, large class size, defective evaluation system and soon.
Thapa (2005) conducted her thesis on "Problems faced by the teachers in teaching mathematics at primary level" She concluded that most of the problems are raised because of large class size, irrelevancy of teachers guide book in the séance of teachers needs, lack of instructional materials, adequacy of teachers training, lack of supervisory help, lack of physical facilities etc. preparedness and the level of motivation to learn mathematics as poor on the part of students.
Chaulagain (2005) in his study "A study on problems faced by secondary mathematics teaching geometry" He concluded that the teachers are facing many problems due to various background characteristics of students:
12 geometry, curriculum and textbook, evaluation technique, professional development of teachers, school administration and so on.
Bhattarai (2005) has studies a research study entitled "A study problem faced by the mathematics students in existing curriculum". He concluded that learning mathematics in secondary level was distributed by so many factors such as lack of teachers involvement in curriculum planning, Lack of referential and instrumental facilities and aids, students with week background in the subject matter, students deductive promotion policy, lack of opportunity given to up grade their knowledge and huge numbers of personal problems of the students and teachers.
. Subedi (2008) conducted his thesis entitled "A study on problems faced by female mathematics teacher belonging to ethnic in teaching mathematics at primary level." The purpose of this study was to identify the level and intends of problems faced by female mathematics teachers belonging to ethnic groups in teaching mathematics at primary level in Kaski district and to compare the problems between the female teachers of ruler and urban school. He concluded that the female teachers have been facing following problems.
Subedi Tribikram Chui (2008) conducted his thesis entitle "Problem faced by female teacher in teaching mathematics at primary level in Chitwan district" He concluded that there is no significance difference between the problems felt by urban and rural female teachers but the pattern of the problems were different, The different problems felt by urban and rural female teachers are given below.
The mathematics classrooms of urban schools are more crowed than rural school.
The mathematics classroom of urban schools are more ventilated and well lighted than rural schools.
13 The urban school female teachers do not practices individual teaching because of large class size.
The urban school fem ale teachers do not practice individual teaching because of large class size.
Library facility is available in urban schools than rural school.
Negative attitudes held by people about and menstruation is more in rural than urban.
Nepal N.S. (2008) had done his thesis entitled “Problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics in primary level of Syangja district”. He concluded that most of the problems are created because of lock of instructional materials, unavailability of funds and resources time restriction in course coverage, teachers‟ guide books are not found easily, lack of physical facilities on the low motivation of the students to learn mathematics. Institutional base schools teachers commented that the school gives emphasizes the higher classes for academic promotion. This shows less interest of school administration for primary level and hence the teachers are facing with more problems than community based schools. Those they are designed according to the same curriculum. Textbook contains more complex items regardless of students‟ capacity. Teacher‟s guide books are not available in most of the schools. Making daily lesson plans in time restricted. Student‟s evaluation is hardly preformed. Teachers themselves should take initiatives for administrative support.
a) Problems related to physical facility. b) Problems related to teaching learning activities, teaching materials methods lesson plan, and techniques. c) Problems related to students evaluation method. d) Problems related to curriculum, textbook and teacher's guidebook. e) Problems related to school administration.
14 K.C. (2009) has done a research study entitled "Problem faced by students in compulsory mathematics at secondary level". Researcher conclude that learning compulsory mathematics in secondary level is affected by so many factors such as illiterate parents, low economical status, poverty of parents and lack of encouragement for study, the gap between low achiever and high portion of mathematics. The main cause of students is the bad feeling towards geometry, that: it is hard subject and we should by heart the terms of geometry. Koirala (2009) conducted his thesis entitled "Major unit causing higher failure rate in mathematics in the district level examination". The purpose of the study was to identify the units in the grade eight, mathematics content, which have the significant role in making the students fail in the district level mathematics examination of class eight. He concluded his study that the different units, prescribed in class eight mathematics curriculum, are not all equally responsible for the failure of the students. Thus from the prospective of the students it can be concluded that curriculum comprised of some different units for mathematical learning and performance is badly affected.
Sharma. (2012) had done his thesis "A study on students and teachers in teaching learning activities on vector at secondary level in Parbat district". He concluded that only lecture method, using chalk and board only may not help average and below average student to understand fact of vector, Teachers promote traditional teaching strategies in vectors. They did not use modern teaching technique methods and materials at vectors teaching most of the students have less interest tower vectors learning vector being abstract subject matter and also, it is a new concept, so it is difficult to create interest on students.
The researcher found that no research has been done to find out the problems on teaching learning activities regarding in mathematics in lower secondary level. Therefore this study was focused on the “problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics at lower secondary level of Kaski districts.
15 Chapter-III
METHOD AND PROCEDURE
Research methodology presents the logistics of study because it determines how the research became complete and systematic. This study was concerned with the study of problem faced by the teachers in teaching mathematics in lower secondary level of Kaski district. The major procedures of this study are as follows.
Research Design: Research design is the conceptual structure, strategy of the logical and systematic planning. It gives the direction to the research. It is the way to follow by a researcher to reach at the goal. Research design gives the frame work for the research. Its main importance is to help researcher to collect data and interpreted as well as analyze it. The nature of research design is quantitative, descriptive nature and random sampling method from 30 schools.
Population of the Study: Population is the group of interest of the researcher on which the result of the study can be generalized. In any research the interest generally lies in studying the various characteristics relating to the individual believing to the population
The population of the study consists of all the teachers of mathematics in lower secondary level belonging to Community and Institutional based schools of Kaski district. There are 49 lower secondary schools in community based and 32 are institutional based schools in Kaski district. Out of the above, there were 6017 teachers are teaching in lower secondary level, among them 2792 teacher are working in Community based schools and 3285 teachers are working in Institutional based schools (Kaski educational forum-2069). There were 1336 teachers in lower secondary level schools of Kaski district.
16
Sample of the Study: The samples of the study were determined by probability sampling method. Researcher prepared a list of schools, and then the sample schools were selected by random sampling method. 30 mathematics teachers of each sampled schools on the basis of teaching mathematics in lower secondary level were selected for sampled. If more than one teacher were there in sample schools, then one teacher was selected according to the seniority of work experienced. 15/15 teachers were selected from community based schools and Institutional base schools (Name of sample school, address, sample teachers are given in Appendix-A and B)
Table 1 Detailed Sample Characteristics S. N. Sample Characteristics Number 1. Sample schools: Community schools 15 Institutional school 15 2. Community schools teachers 15 Institutional schools teachers 15 3. Trained teachers 24 Untrained teachers 6 4. Teachers' qualification: Intermediate 3 Bachelor 14 Master Degree 13 5. Years of experience: a) 1-5 years 4 b) 6-10 years 8 c) 11-15 years 10 d) 16-20 years 6 e) 21 above 2
17 Tools of Study:
Two tools were used in this research. They are a set of questionnaire and classroom observation from were used in this study. A set of closed questionnaire of 24 items relating to many problems which are being faced by lower secondary level mathematics teachers of Kaski district. The areas of problems were making teaching planning; instructional materials, motivation, supervision and teaching methods. Similarly, others problem were curriculum, textbook, teacher guide books, student's evaluation and school admonitions. Out of 24 statements, 12 statements are positive and 12 statements are negative in sense some open questions also included with closed questionnaire related to problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics.
Similarly, a set of classroom observation form also used in this study. In which all altogether 21 statements were there in the form. Among them 10 statements are related with Infrastructure, 8 statements are related with Instruction and last three are related to conclusion of the lesson.
Validity and Reliability of the Study:
Validity and reliability are the essential aspect of the tools. To test the validity of tools researcher has studied the various texts, articles, books and related thesis. After this, the researcher reached in conclusion to use the statements of questionnaire which were used by Lamichhane (2001) and Sharma N.S. (2008) in their unpublished thesis. For the class observation form the validity of the tools was assured by thesis supervisor, subject exports and teachers who are teaching in lower secondary level. By collecting such view researcher prepared the proper shape of the observation form. So it became easy to control from unnecessary questions and also helped to add some of the important questions which had lacked in the form. The final sets of questionnaire and class observation form are shown in appendices C and D.
18 Data Collection Procedure:
To collect the data, the researcher visited each of the sample schools with the questionnaire and class observation form. The researcher explained about the questionnaire and class observation form. The researcher explained that why the researcher came to collect the data of the teachers of sample schools and requested each teacher to fill the questionnaire honestly and to give theirs' view. The researcher tried to clear the confusion that arose in understanding the statements. The researcher also observed the classes when actual class is running of the sampled teachers and observations were filled with the help of observation form. (See appendix-E)
The statistical technique will be applied to analyze the data. Mean sore will be used to locale the control position of the responses to the statements of teachers as a whole in the rating scale. The t-test will be used to investigate the significant difference if it exists between mean rank scores of teacher of community and institutional schools towards the responses to the statements.
Scoring Procedure:
For the analysis of the items, weight age of 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 were assigned to strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree and strongly disagree respectively for the positive statement. For the statement opposing to this point of view, the items were scored in the opposite order. Mean weightage was calculated, total score of five point Likert Scale was 15 its average score was 3. Likewise, the researcher made the certain norms to score the items. Teachers who have made their qualifications through education faculties or the teachers especially community based schools, if they have at least three months‟ training from government policy are supposed to be trained teachers and other were untrained teachers.
19
For analysts of classroom observation form the weigthtage of 1, 2, 3, 4, are assigned to the statement excellent, good, average and below average, respectively. The detail score of CBS and IBS was given in appendix-F.
Data Analysis Procedure:
This is quantitative research as well as descriptive analysis was for suggestive opinions. For the purpose to mathematics of both type schools, the collected information from the observation and questionnaire were categorized different group mean score, percentage and weightage mean of the statements in every sense were calculated. The data were analyzed and interpret with the help of following statistical techniques: i) Mean score was used to locate the central position of the responses to the statements of teachers as a score in the rating scale. The waightage mean score is calculated as following.
Total rank score of statements Weightage mean = Number of teachers
Number of response of teachers Percentage = 100% Total number of teachers
Each statement was studied in terms of whether the teachers perceived it as a problem or not by analyzing the position of the average response index in the rating scale. If the calculated index was greater than or equal to 3, then it was concluded that the statement was problematic. If the index measure was less than 3, then it was not a problem. In class observation form the mean wightage were calculated. If the calculated value is greater than 2.5 then it is
20 concluded that the statement implies a problem and less than or equal to 2.5 then it is not problem.
i) The t-test was used to compare mean of the significant difference between mean scores of community based school teachers were
denoted by x1 and the mean scores of intuitional based school
2 teachers were denoted by x2 . Similarly s1 is the variance of
2 community based school teachers of size n1 and s2 was the variance
of Intuitional school teachers of size n2 .
X X t 1 2 1 1 s p n1 n2
With v n1 n2 2 , at 5% level of significance.
2 2 2 (n1 1)s1 (n2 1)s2 Where S p n1 n2 2
The statistical formulae are given in appendix-G
21 Chapter-IV
ANALYSIS OF DATA AND INTERPRETATION OF THE RESULT
This chapter deals with the analysis and interpretation of the data. Questionnaire for mathematics teachers and class observation form for the researcher were prepared to collect the information's. Questionnaires were categorized in making teaching plans, use of Instructional materials, motivation, supervision and teaching method. Similarly a set of open questionnaire try to cover the problems areas curriculum, textbooks, teachers guide books, making plan, student's evaluation and administration etc.
The Researcher were collected the data for the study from thirty schools. (15 community based and 15 institutional based) in Kaski district. The collected data were tabulated, analyzed and interpreted according to the objectives of the study. The obtained data were statistically analyzed and interpreted by using percentage, weightage mean score and t-test.
The Problems Faced by Teachers in Teaching Mathematics in Lower Secondary Level: Every school has problem in various fields, which are faced by the teachers in theirs' teaching learning time. Problem may be the field to make plan, used and manage instructional materials, students' motivation, supervision and school administration. Related problems are as follows:
Respondents Related To Making Teaching Plan: By studying the 1 st , 2 nd and 3 rd statements related to plan conclusion which was found given below:
22 Table 2
Table of Mean Weightage and Percentage Problems Related to Making plan Mean S. N. Statements Agree Neutral Disagree Problem weightage 1 a. Daily lesson plan should 80% 70% 3% 4 Yes be made b. Unit plan should be made 94% 3% 3% 4.1 Yes c. Yearly plan is helpful to achieve the objective of 94% 6% 4.3 Yes curriculum d. Preparing lesson plan 37% 20% 43% 3.8 Yes leads to heavy teaching load 2 Lack of planning makes the Yes certain chapters difficult to 87% 3% 10% 4.3
teach 3 Reflective teaching is 37% 40% 23% 3.0 Yes interfering
1. Studying the first statement, it is concluded that the mathematics teachers are not in favor of making daily lesson plans. About 80% of teachers agreed that to make the daily lesson plan. Where as 3% was disagreed and 17 remained neutral. In total an average measure of the order of 4 in rating scale of the response indicated that making daily lesson plan is indeed a signification problem.
Similarly, about making unit plan 94% of the teachers agreed and 3% teachers were neutral and 3% were disagree. The mean response is 4.1 in rating scale of the response indicated that making unit plans is indicate a problems.
23 Next, 94% of the teachers under study are agreeing to make yearly plans which helps to achieve the objective of curriculum. Only 6% of the teachers remained disagreed. The mean weight age of 4.3 in rating scale, so it indicated the problems.
Furthermore 37% of he teachers agreed that preparing lesson plan leads to heavy teaching load 20% of them were undecided and 43% were disagreed. The mean weight age of this statement is 3.8. It means it shows problems in study.
2. In the second statements, 87% teachers have agreed on that there is difficultly in teaching certain chapters without any planning. 10 % were disagree and that of only 3% were neutral. The mean weight age of 4.33 indicates that it is really a problem to teach certain chapters without plan.
3. In response of 3rd statement, 37% of them were agreed that there is interfere in reflective teaching where as 40% remained undecided and 23% of the teachers were disagreed. The mean weight age of the order of 3 in the rating scale, prove that is a significant problem.
Respondents Related to use of Instructional Materials: By studying the 4 th statements related to use of instructional matrices the responds which was given by the sample teachers given as below.
24 Table 3
Table of Mean Weightage and Percentage Problems Related to Use of Instructional Materials
Mean S. N. Statements Agree Neutral Disagree Problem weightage 4 a. Frequent use of instructional 100% 4.5 Yes materials motivates students to have them understand the problem more easily b. The school does not 27% 20% 53% 3.5 Yes encourage to make and use instructional materials c. The materials are not 40% 13% 47% 3.0 Yes available and funds required are not easy to get. d. Use of instructional materials 27% 17% 56% 3.3 Yes consumes more time and course can not be completed in time.
4. In answer to the fourth statement, 100% of teachers were agreeing that instructional materials motivate the students to understand the mathematical problems more easily. The mean weight age of this statement is 4.5. By the same way looking at the school administration it was found that 27% teacher were agreed school does not encourage them to make instructional materials 20% remained neutral Where as 53% teachers were disagreed. 3.5 is the mean weightage of the statements it is a major problem.
At the same time looking to the third point about the funds and availability of materials 40% of them agreed, 13% cannot gives any decision and that of 47% disagreed that it was not easy to get. The mean weightage of 3 in the rating scale exposed that it is a problem for mathematics teachers in community school as well as Institutional schools.
25 Looking on the fourth statement, use of instructional materials consumes more time and course can not be completed in time. 27% of the teachers were agreed, 17% were undecided and 56% they were disagreed about the statement. This makes the mean weightage of 3.3 indicating in rating scale as a problem to complete mathematic course in time.
Respondents Related to Motivation: At same time by studying the 5 th and 6 th statements the conclusion which was drawn given below:
Table 4 Table of Mean Weightage and Percentage Problems Related to Motivation Mean S. N. Statements Agree Neutral Disagree Problem weightage 5 a. Motivation to learn 3% 23% 74% 2.4 No mathematics is gender based b. Students do not have 20% 50% 30% 3.1 Yes competent background c. Students are not disciplined 17% 10% 73% 3.6 Yes
d. Students are not hardworking 37% 23% 40% 2.9 No
e. Students are not interested 17% 23% 60% 3.5 Yes
6 a. The teacher is trained. 75% 20% 5% 4.1 Yes
b. Training helps in overall 93% 3% 4% 3.9 Yes teaching and learning
5. Moving a head on the statement, 74% of the teachers disagreed about gender based motivation, 23% undecided and 3% of them agreed. The mean weightage of 2.4 shows it is not problem. Similarly 20% of them were agree on students are not competent back ground, 30% disagreed and 50% reminded neutral. The mean weightage of 3.1 indicates that it is a problem. Furthermore,
26 the researcher wanted to know about the characteristics and behaviors of the students. 73% were disagreed about the students are not disciplined, 17% of them were agree and only 10% of the teachers can‟t give any decision about the statement.
The mean weightage is 3.6 in rating scale. So it is a significance problem. On the same way 37% of teachers agreed, 40% disagreed and 23% remained neutral on that the students are not hard working. The mean weightage of 2.9 indicate that there is not problem in students laborious it means students are doing hard work to learn mathematics. Similarly, to know the interest of students 60% of teachers were disagreed but 17% agreed and 23% remained undecided that the students are not interested. The mean weightage 3.5 indicates that it as become a problem to them.
6. Coming on the 6tn statement, the researcher also tried to measure about the training teachers either it is a problem or not. For this 75% of the teachers were agreed for teachers training, only 5% of them disagreed and 20% were neutral about this. The mean average of 4.1 indicates that it is difficult to teach math if teachers are not train so it is a significant problem. On the same way 93% of them were about training, 4% of teachers were disagreed and 3% remained neutral, where as the mean weightage is 3.9.
Respondents Related to Supervision: By studying statement 7 th and 8 th the conclusion which was found on the research was given below:
27 Table 5 Table of Mean Weightage and Percentage Problems Relater to Supervision Mean S. N. Statements Agree Neutral Disagree Problem weightage 7 a. Supervisor should visit the 60% 23% 17% 2.6 No classroom frequently b. Supervisors help with problem 64% 26% 10% 3.5 Yes areas 8 a. Periodic homework reinforces 87% 10% 3% 2.0 No the learning b. Periodic home works are time 50% 33% 17% 2.7 No restricted c. Home works are influenced by 73% 20% 7% 3.8 Yes class strength
7. In response to the statement, 60% of the teachers agreed, 17% disagreed and 23% of them remained undecided about supervisor should visit the classroom frequently. The mean weightage of 2.6 indicates that it is not a problem. All the teachers are in the favor role supervisor. At the same time another statement was supervisors help with problem areas about this, 64% of them were agreed, 10% disagreed and 26% remained undecided. This shows the mean weightage 3.5 causing problem. So it is conclude that supervisor are not helping are particular problem areas in the schools.
8. To come on 8th statement, 87% of the teachers were agreed about periodic home work reinforces the learning. Only 3% of them were disagreed and 10% remained natural, causing the mean weightage 2.3. So to give regular homework for the students is not a problem for learning. It helps in learning activate.
28 Similarly, for the next periodic home works are time restricted, 50% of the teachers were agreed, 17% disagreed and 33% remained neutral. The mean weight age of 2.7 indicates it is not problems. For the statement home works are influenced by class strength, 73% of them were agreed, 7% disagreed and 20% remained neutral. The mean weightage of 3.8 indicate it create a problem in regulating home work by class strength.
Respondents Related to Teaching Method: By studying the 9 th and 10 th statement the conclusion which was found given below: Table 6 Table of Mean Weightage and Percentage Problem Related to Teaching Method Mean S. N. Statements Agree Neutral Disagree Problem weightage 9 The best teaching technique is Lecture method Inductive-deductive method 80% 13% 7% 2.0 No Others …………………. 10 The failure to complete the 20% 17% 63% 3.6 Yes course is because of its length
9. In response of 9th statement teachers gave different response, 80% of teachers were agreed about inductive and deductive method, 7% were disagreed about any method and 13% were neutral. The mean weightage is 2.50 it indicates teaching learning method is not major problem. Teachers who are teaching math in lower secondary level of both types schools level give more focus and self practice and teachers give the ideas on problem parts only on this statement more suggestion were found on which it was said that teaching subject matter.
29 10. On this statement, 20% were agreed and 63% of them disagree about the failure to complete the course in time because of its length and 17% were remaining neutral. The mean weightage 3.6 indicates it is a major problem to complete the course in time. If the course is lengthy then it can not complete in time. The detail of waightage mean and percentage and individual response of teachers from CBS and IBS are given in appendix-H, I and J.
To Identify Dissimilarity on Problems Faced by Teachers of CBS and IBS Schools: Separate mean response and problems of CBS schools and mean response and problems of IBS schools are given in the following table.
Table 7 Statement Wise Distribution of Mean Response of Teachers of the Community and Institutional Based Schools: Community schools teachers Institutional schools teachers Statement No Mean response Problem Mean response Problem 1. a 4 yes 4 Yes 1. b 4.1 Yes 4.1 Yes 1. c 4.4 yes 4.2 Yes 1. d 3.0 Yes 3.4 Yes 2 2.7 No 4.3 Yes 3 4.6 Yes 3.3 Yes 4. a 4.6 Yes 4.4 Yes 4. b 3.4 Yes 3.6 Yes 4. c 2.9 No 3.2 Yes 4. d 3.8 Yes 2.8 No 5. a 2.6 No 2.2 No 5. b 3.2 Yes 3 Yes 5. c 3.6 Yes 3.7 Yes 5. d 2.6 No 3.3 Yes 5. e 3.4 Yes 3.6 Yes 6. a 4.2 yes 3.6 Yes 6. b 4.4 Yes 3.4 Yes 7. a 2.9 No 2.4 No 7. b 3.5 Yes 3.6 Yes 8. a 1.8 No 2.2 No 8. b 2.9 No 2.5 Yes 8. c 3.7 Yes 3.9 Yes 9. 4.1 Yes 1.8 No 10 4.0 Yes 3.2 Yes
30 Table 7 shows that there exist difference to problems between mean responses noses of community school teachers and Institutional school teachers. The difference which is seen is given in the below.
To make the daily lesson plan and other plans related to teaching activities community schools and Institutional school teacher are agreed.
Community schools Institutional schools are encouraging to make and use instructional materials but funds in community school can not manage but in Institutional school it easy to get.
Community school teachers gave view that using instructional materials take more time and course can not be finished in teachers support to use instructional materials which help to understand the problem for students.
The students of community school are not hard warring that of Institutional schools.
About the teaching method different viewed are given by the community school teachers and Institutional school teacher. Institutional school teachers were given more focused in inductive deductive method as well as they give priority in child cent rod method also.
The students do not show any interaction with the teacher about their mathematics achievement in community schools than in Institutional schools. Teachers of community schools are not able to cheek the homework due to lock of sufficient time. The teachers of Institutional school anyway manage they time to cheek the students homework.
After the questionnaire, the researcher interacted with the teachers, they respond the following problems which are left to mention in questionnaire form.
31 The school administrations give the more priority to the higher class and junior class but not in lower secondary class. This shows teachers are facing more multiple problems.
Text books of institutional schools are more complex than community schools although they are designed according to the same curriculum.
Text books contain more complex mathematical problems regardless of student‟s capacity and use of daily life.
Teacher guide book are not easily available in most of the schools.
Institutional school teachers are not getting the training from government and any response from theirs school administration.
Making of dally lesson plan takes more time.
The Idea of student‟s evaluation of lower secondary level cannot get any related matter.
Evaluation system of lower secondary level is not found it is related to higher classes.
Analysis of Class of Observation form: The analysis of classroom observation is intended to find the problem that arises in the classroom while the actual teaching is running. The researcher was able to observe 30 mathematics teachers classroom at the time when they were taking theirs class in one period time.
32 Table 8
Analysis of Classroom Observation form Below Mean S.N. Observed Items Excellent Good Average Problem Average weaightag 1.1 Classroom strength 3 8 15 4 2.3 No 1.2 Cleanliness of 0 12 15 3 2.7 Yes classroom 1.3 Classroom environment 7 13 10 0 2.1 No 1.4 The Availability of 9 12 6 3 2.1 No furniture
1.5 Seat planning of 3 15 7 5 2.7 No
students 1.6 Arrangement of 0 9 15 6 2.9 Yes blackboard
1.7 Use of blackboard 0 19 11 0 2.3 No 1.Infrastructure 1.Infrastructure 1.8 Quality of blackboard 0 10 12 8 2.9 Yes 1.9 Mathematics lab 0 7 11 12 3.1 Yes 1.10 Light and ventilation 8 15 4 3 2.0 No 2.1 Teacher's lesson plan 0 5 12 13 3.2 Yes 2.2 Students' motivation 0 6 20 4 2.9 Yes 2.3 Confidence of teacher‟s 4 19 7 0 2.1 No in subject matter 2.4 Use of instructional 0 4 11 15 3.3 Yes materials 2.5 Voice clarity of teacher 7 17 4 2 2.0 No
2.6 Interaction with all 0 12 15 3 2.7 No students
2.7 Discipline of students 10 15 5 0 1.8 No
Instruction
2. 2.8 Neatness of teacher‟s 15 12 3 0 1.6 No
3.1 Summarization of the 0 8 12 10 3.0 Yes lesson 3.2 Evaluation as per 0 10 15 5 3.5 Yes
of the lesson the of objectives
3. Conclusion 3. 3.3 The quality of 3 12 9 6 2.6 Yes homework
33
By studying the class observation form the classroom strength is not problems. The cleanliness of classroom seems to be average in overall. The mean weightage is 2.7. It is a problem of cleanliness. However environment of classroom while teaching look to be satisfactory peaceful environment is there in every class which were observed by researcher. Similarly most of the schools black boards are shining but kept in the right position. The boards of some sample schools are white board and used marker pens in Institutional based school. Boards of community based schools are black color and fixed on the wall. The index from the data shows the most of the boards are not in appropriate place. The mean weightage of 2.9 shows a problem of boards. Like wise the quality of boards is not good. In the operating time the researcher found accept one or two schools has not a mathematics lab: Due to lab teacher were fell problems to teach mathematics. So it created the greater problem for all the teachers.
The major problem seems to the lack of lesson plan in each and every class while observing. All the teachers were prepared for class but they directly started heir‟s lesson and did not motivate the students for their„s lesson, so it was also a problem. However the subject matter and voice clarity of teachers were not the significant problem. Instructional materials were not made and used in sample schools. Teachers did not use the materials which are available in schools. All teachers were not done interaction with students, they used lecture method only. Teachers were not care all students either they are attenuation in study or not. So interaction with all students is a problem.
The teacher used same method up to the end of class. Finally teacher did not review their content and objects for that period. Most of teachers did not evaluate the students at the end of the lesson, teachers gave homework for the students what remain in lesson but they did not give any new questions as home work, they finished the class on time but the indication to the next lesson was not satisfactory.
34 Comparison of Problems of Mathematics Teachers in Community based Schools and Institutional based Schools: The second objective of the study was to compare the problems of teachers of community and institutional based school. In order to achieve the objective, the research hypothesis was formulated as “there is no significant mean difference between the problems of teachers of community based schools and institutional based schools”.
The mean and standard deviation calculated of community based schools is ( X1 ) 83.93 and ( s1 ) is 7.07 respectively which was calculated from the response collected from 15 teachers of CBS. Similarly, mean and standard deviation of institutional based schools is ( X 2 ) 83.00 and ( s2 ) 6.09 respectively which was calculated from the response from 15 teachers of IBS
t n n t were as 2 , 1 2 -2 = 0.025, 28 = 2.048 The calculation of mean and standard deviation are given in appendix-K and L Table 9 Mean and Standard Deviation of Community and Institutional based School Teachers No. of Calculated Tabulated Type Mean S. D. Remarks teachers value value
Community S1 = 7.07 N1 = 15 Accept H x1 = 0 school teachers 83.93 0.55 2.048 Institutional S2 = 6.09 N2 = 15 x2 = school teachers 83.00 The calculation shown in appendix-M
The mean and standard deviation of CBS and IBS are 83.93, 7.07, 83.00 and 6.09 respectively. The calculated value i.e 0.55 is less then the critical value 2.048 for a two tailed test at 0.05 level of significance and 28 degree of freedom. Therefore the null hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that the extent of problems felt by community school teachers is same as that of institutional school teachers.
35 Chapter-V
SUMMARY, FINDING, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter mainly deals within four sub-sections; summary, findings, conclusion and recommendations for the further study.
Summary: The main purpose of the study is to identify problems faced by mathematics teachers in teaching mathematics at lower secondary level of Kaski district and to compare the problems faced by the teachers of community based schools and Institutional based schools. The main objectives of the study were: To identify the problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics in lower secondary level of Kaski district. To compare the problems faced by teachers in teaching mathematics in CBS and IBS.
For the convenience of the study, problems were categorized into different areas. This study was descriptive, comparative and analytic in nature. The set of questionnaire concerned with making teaching plan, use of instructional materials, motivation, supervision and teaching method. The class observation forms were divided in three parts such as infrastructure, instruction and conclusion of the lesson. A questionnaire under the guidance of supervisor and a class observation from were used as the main tools of study. The responses were collected from different teacher selected from random sampling method. For this, thirty teachers from different schools, 15 from CBS and 15 from IBS were selected. The collected data were quantified on Likert five point scales. Open questionnaire was induced in each category of problems.
36 The researcher visited the corresponding schools and met the authorities, explained in detail the purpose of the visit and requested to observe the classroom teaching and also requested to fill up the questionnaire prepared statistical indicators such as percentage, weightage mean and t-test were used for the analysis of the problem.
Findings: From the statistical analysis of the collected data it was found that teachers had been facing numerous problems during the course of teaching mathematics in lower secondary level. On the basis of analysis and interpretation of data, the findings of this study are presented below.
Problems Related to Making Teaching Plan, Instructional Materials, Motivation, Supervision, and Teaching Method. 1. Most of the teacher are agreed to use lesson plan that 80% agree for lesson plan, 94% for unit plan 94% for yearly plan. 2. 80% of teachers give their view without making any plans certain chapters are difficult to teach. 3. 100% teachers were agree about use of instruction materials. 4. 93% of teachers are agree training helps to teach and learn. 5. 87% of teachers are given there view regular homework reinforce the students to learn. 6. 80% of teachers are choused inductive-deductive method is best then others method to teach mathematics.
Problems between Teachers of Community based Schools and Institutional based Schools: Community based schools are not encouraging to make and use instructional materials where as institutional based schools is doing hard working about this.
37 The funds and the required materials are not available in community based school but it is easy to manage in institutional based schools. Teachers of community based schools gave the viewed that using instructional materials takes more time and course can not be completed in time but institutional based school teachers supporting instructional materials in order to help to clear the subject matter. Community based school students are found less laborers than the students of Institutional based schools. Most of the teachers of Community based schools got training but Institutional based school teachers are not get such chance.
Conclusion: On the basis of finding the following have been pointed out as the conclusion of the study. Majority of the teachers from both based schools seemed to be more conscious in making daily lesson plan, unit plan, yearly plan, and proper use of instructional materials, not encourage making instructional materials, fund not required, motivation of students, trained teachers, supervisor help with problems areas and teaching methods are mean problems. Different problems faced by CBS teachers but not IBS teachers are without making plan certain chapter will be difficult to teach, instructional materials and funds are not available to get, students are not interested in study and regular homework kill the times. Problems faced by IBS teachers are not faced by CBS teachers, use of instructional materials takes more time and only inductive-deductive method is not teaching method. Mathematics lab, teacher's plan, use of instructional materials, summarization of lesson and evolution as per objectives are also problems faced by the teachers.
38 Textbook of institutional based schools are more complex then community based schools even they are designed by same curriculum. Many of problems based by community based schools and institutional based schools teachers are same.
Recommendations: On the light of the findings described the researcher makes the following suggestions. To make the lesson plans should be encouraged. The number of the students should be minimized in the classes of Community based schools. Laboratory approach should be used to teach the selected topics of mathematics in lower secondary level. Reference books and teacher‟s guide book should be managed. Resources and reference materials for teachers and students should be redesigned. Physical facilities should be well managed in the classroom. Workload allocated to the teachers should be reduced. Evaluation system should be more precise and scientific. Every mathematics teachers should use teaching materials to give the basics concept of new topics. Technologies in the curriculum should be introduced.
Recommendations for the further research: The researcher makes the following recommendations: Similar studies should be extended in other parts of Nepal as well as other subject area. Proper immediate remedies should be taken into consideration to address the concerns and to minimize the problems felt by the lower secondary level mathematics teachers thereby uplifting and upgrading the lower secondary level mathematics programs of Nepal.
39 Bibliography:
Baral S.K. (2000). A study of the problems faced by mathematics teacher in implementation of compulsory mathematics curriculum in grade Ix. Master's thesis faculty of education T.U. Kirtipur.
Baral, K.R (2011). A Study on Secondary Teachers Classroom Practices on Problems Solving in Mathematics: Master Thesis, Department of Mathematics Education P.N.C T.U Pokhara, Nepal.
Basnet (2003). Teaching problems faced by mathematics teachers in existing curriculum of grade 8. Masters thesis, faculty of education. T.U Kirtipur.
Chaulagain R.K (2005). A Study Problems Faced by Secondary School Mathematics Teachers in Teaching Geometry of Kathmandu District on Published Thesis Submitted, Master Thesis T.U.
Dahal, Hukum, Pd (2010), Maths in Action Book-8 Kalanki Ktm. United Publication (P). Ltd
Dhital, K.P (1985). A Study of Problems Facing the Teaching of English at Lower Secondary Level in Dhankuta District. Master's Thesis: Faculty of Education, T.U Kritipur.
Doranga N.S ( 2010). Problems Faced by Teachers in Teaching Mathematics in Primary Level of Syangja District. Master Thesis, Department of Mathematics Education P.N.C T.U Pokhara Nepal.
Educational condition (2068), District Education Office of Kaski
HMG(2057 B.S) Mathematics Curriculum of Lower Secondary Education Ministry of Education, Education Department, Curriculum Development Center, Sanothimi.
Kaski Educational forum (2069), District Education office of Kaski
Lamichhane, H.N (2001). A Study of Problems Faced by the Secondary Level Mathematics Teachers in Teaching Mathematics. Master's Thesis, Department of Mathematics Education, T.U, Kritipur.
40 Ministry of education, mathematics curriculum of secondary level. CDC sanothimi.
Ministry of Education, Mathematics Curriculum of Lower Secondary Level CDC Sanothimi.
MITRA (2001). A Study on Teaching Materials and Subject wise Classroom Observation, Kathmandu : RDSDE.
Pandit, R.P (1999). Problems Faced by Mathematics Teacher Education in the Implementation of Three Years B.Ed Level Mathematics Curriculum. An Unpublished Thesis Submitted, Master's Thesis, T.U.
Pathak, B.R (1986). A Study on the Problem Faced by the Teachers in Kathmandu District in the Implementation of Mathematics Curriculum for Lower Secondary School. Master's Thesis Department of Mathematics Education, T.U Kritipur.
Paudel, D.P (2007). A Study of Problem Faced by Lower Secondary School Mathematics Teachers in Teaching Geometry. Master's Thesis Department of Mathematics Education, T.U Kritipur
Pokhrel, G.P (2000). A Study of Present States and Current Problems in new Curriculum of Grade VII Mathematics in Gorkha District Master's Thesis, Department of Mathematics Education, T.U, Kritipur.
Pokharel K.P (2005) teacher attitude towards problem soling approach in mathematics class room. Master degree thesis T.U Katmandu.
Sapkota P (2011), A study of attitude of Gurung students towards mathematics in secondary level and its relationship with their achievement.
Sharma, Deepak (2011), A Study a Problem Face by Students and Teachers in Teaching Learning Vectors. Master's Thesis Department of Mathematics Education P.N.C T.U Pokhara Nepal.
41 Sharma, Nilkanta (2011), The Problems Face by Students of Secondary Level in Learning Mathematics. Master's Thesis, Department of Mathematics Education P.N.C T.U Pokhara Nepal.
Sharma, S.N. (2000). A Study on the Availability and use of Instructional Materials in Teaching Mathematics at the Primary School of Parbat District of Nepal. Master's Thesis, Department of Mathematics Education, T.U Kritipur.
Sidhu, K.S. (1950). Teaching of Mathematics. New Delhi: Sterling Publishers Company Fourth Edition.
Subedi, P.D. (2012). Effective of Classroom Management of Mathematics Teaching. Master Thesis, Department of Mathematics Education P.N.C T.U Pokhara Nepal.
Subedi, T.R. (2008). Problems Faced by Female Teachers in Teaching Mathematics at Primary Level in Chiwan District. Master Thesis, Faculty of Education T.U Kritipur.
Thapa, P.K. (2005) Problem Faced by Teacher in Teaching Mathematics at Primary Level. Master Thesis, Faculty of Education T.U, Kritipur.
Thapa, Saroj (2012), A Study of Problems at by Secondary Schools Maths Teachers in Teaching Geometry. Master's Thesis, Department of Mathematics Education P.N.C T.U Pokhara Nepal.
Upadgyay, H.P. (2061). Teaching Mathematics, Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar, Nepal.
Some web address: http : // www. thesis abstract.com. http : // www. thesis unlimited.com. http : // www. mathgoodies.com/articles problem solving. html. http : // www. googl.com.np/social research methods.net.
42 Appendix-A SAMPLE TEACHER PROFILE Sample List of Community Based Schools Teacher Teaching S.N. Schools’ Name Address Qualification Trained Name Experience 1. Dilip Paneru Shree Shivashakti Pokhara-11, B.Sc./B. ed 15 Year T. Higher Secondary Phoolbari School. 2. Shreekanta Barmarupa Higher Lekhanath-13, B.A. 20 Years T. Pandit Secondary School Rajako Chhautara 3. Dhaka Mahan Nawa Prabat Pokhara-9, M.A./B.ed 17 Year T. Baral Secondary School Nayabazar 4. Bhishnumani Bal Mandir Higher Pokhara-3, M.ed 18 Year T. Lamichhane Secondary School Nadipur 5. Raju Baral Shree Amarsingh Pokhara-12 B.A. 8 Year T. Model Higher Ramghat Secondary School 6. Govinda Raj Navin Higher Pokhara-4 M.Ed 10 Year T. Gautam Secondary School Gairapatan 7. Nabaraj Shree Mahendra Pokhara-9, M.Ed 8 Year T. Acharya Higher Secondary Nayabazar School 8. Kamala Kalika Higher Pokhara-10, I.Ed 2 Year T. Gurung Secondary School Rambazar 9. Upendra Shree Bhadrakali Pokhara-13, M.Ed 6 Year T. Subedi Higher Secondary Kundahar School 10. Rajendra Giri Shree Siddha Pokhara-15, M.Ed 15 Year T. Higher Secondary Phalepatan School 11. Mukti Nath Janajyoti Higher Kalika V.D.C- M.Ed 29 Year T. Adhikari Secondary School 4, Kaski 12. Ganesh Ram Jyoti Higher Lekhanath-7, I. Sc. 7 Year T. Adhikari Secondary School Kaski 13. Shalikram Janapraksh Higher Lekhanath-1, I. Sc. 4 Years T. Subedi Secondary School Bhandardik 14. Sanjay Laxmi Adarsha Lekhanath-8, B.A/B.ed. 15 Year T. Adhikari Higher Secondary Sishuwa School 15. Purushotam Gyan Bhumi Pokhara-3 M.Ed 10 Year T. Sapokata Secondary School Nadipur
43 Appendix-B SAMPLE TEACHER PROFILE Sample List of Institutional Based Schools
S.N. Name Schools’ Name Address Qualification Experience Trained 1. Amar Khanal Lotus Academic School Pokhara-9, B.E 2 Year U Nayabazar 2. Shivalal Rimal West Point Boarding Pokhara-11, M.ed 12 Year T School Ranipauwa 3. Rajan Pariyar New Light Higher Lekhanath B.A 3 Year U Secondary School Sishuwa 4. Surya Poudel Small Heaven Academy Lekhanath-13, B.A 5 Years U Kaski 5. Govinda K.C SOS Hermann Gmeiner Pokhara-4, B.Sc 15 Year T School Gharipatan 6. Chitra Bahadur Little Step Higher Pokhara-8, B.A 17 Year T Adhikari Secondary School Simalchaur
7. Khem Raj Kanchanjunga English Pokhara-11, B.ed 7 Year T Bhattarai Boarding School Phoolbari
8. Ram Chandra Siddhartha English Pokhara-11, B.A 16 Year T Pandey Boarding School Ranipauwa 9. Ram Chandra Sagarmatha Nikten Pokhara-9, M.A 5 Year U Thapa School Nayabazar 10. Krishna Raj Baseline Academy Pokhara-13, M.A/Bed 15 Year T Bhattarai School Kundahar 11. Uma Acharya Pokhara United Pokhara-12, B.Sc 7 Year U Academy Kundahar 12. Narayan Bethany Higher Pokhara-10, B.A/B.ed Prasad Secondary School Kundahar 17 Year T Adhikari 13. Ek Narayan Rainbow Academic Pokhara-15, B.Sc 5 Year U Thapa Homes Kolpatan 14. Khadagraj Gandaki Boarding Pokhara-16, M.Ed 10 year T Adhikari School Lamachhaur 15. Yagya Prasad Sainik Awasiya Pokhara-11, M.A 12 Year T Pandey Mahaviddhyalaya Phoolbari
44 Appendix-C
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHER
Dear teachers, To conduct a research entitled on "A study on Problems Faced by Teachers in Teaching Mathematics in Lower Secondary Level of Kaski District" for the partial fulfillment of Master's Degree of Education in Mathematics, the study can not be effective without addressing the real and factual problems of teachers related to teaching. So to complete this thesis, a questionnaire is prepared. I am very much thankful for your valuable help, and would like to express gratitude to you and your institution. Researcher Dilliram Tiwari M. Ed Roll No: 14/061 Department of Mathematics Faculty of Education Prithvi Narayan Campus Pokhara
Please, read each of the statements and put tick mark (√) against the appropriate location. Your responses will be kept secret and used only for the study.
Teacher's Name: ……………………………………………. Years of experience: ……………. Qualification: …………………… Training: Trained/Untrained School's Name: ……………………………………………… School's Address …………………………………………….
45
Problems Related to Teaching Learning Activities, Instructional Materials,
Methods and Techniques
S. N. Statements
agree
Agree
Neutral
disagree
Strongly Strongly Disagree 1 a. Daily lesson plan should be made b. Unit plan should be made c. Yearly plan is helpful to achieve the objective of curriculum d. Preparing lesson plan leads to heavy teaching load 2 Lack of planning makes the certain chapters difficult to teach 3 Reflective teaching is interfering 4 a. Frequent use of instructional materials motivates students to have them understand the problem more easily b. The school does not encourage to make and use instructional materials c. The materials are not available and funds required are not easy to get. d. Use of instructional materials consumes more time and course can not be completed in time. 5 a. Motivation to learn mathematics is gender based b. Students do not have competent background c. Students are not disciplined d. Students are not hardworking e. Students are not interested 6 a. The teacher is trained. b. Training helps in overall teaching and learning 7 a. Supervisor should visit the classroom frequently b. Supervisors help with problem areas 8 a. Periodic homework reinforces the learning b. Periodic home works are time restricted c. Home works are influenced by class strength 9 The best teaching technique is Lecture method Inductive-deductive method Others …………………………………. 10 The failure to complete the course is because of its length
46
If there are remarks under the following terms, please mention:
(a) Curriculum: …………………………………………………………………………...... ……………………………………………….………………………………….. .…...... ………………………….……………………………………………………..
(b) Textbooks: …………………………………………………………………………………………...... ………………………………………………………………………………….. .…...... ………………………………………………………………………………...
(c) Teacher's guidebooks: …………………………………………………………………………………………...... ………………………………………………………………………………….. .…...... ………………………………………………………………………………...
(d) Making of plans: …………………………………………………………………………………………...... ………………………………………………………………………………….. .…...... ………………………………………………………………………………...
(e) Student Evaluation: …………………………………………………………………………………………...... ………………………………………………………………………………….. .…...... ………………………………………………………………………………...
(f) Administrative support: …………………………………………………………………………………………...... ………………………………………………………………………………….. .…...... ………………………………………………………………………………...
47 Appendix-D
CLASSROOM OBSERVATION FORM Below S.N. Observed Items Excellent Good Average Average 1.1 Classroom strength 1.2 Cleanliness of classroom 1.3 Classroom Environment 1.4 The availability of furniture 1.5 Seat planning of students
1.6 Arrangement of blackboard
1.7 Use of blackboard 1.8 Quality of blackboard 1.9 Mathematics lab
1.10 Light and ventilation 1. Infrastructure Infrastructure 1. 2.1 Teacher's lesson plan 2.2 Students' motivation 2.3 Confidence of teacher‟s in subject matter 2.4 Use of instructional materials
2.5 Voice clarity of teacher 2.6 Interaction with all students
2.7 Discipline of students
Instruction
2. 2.8 Neatness of teacher‟s
3.1 Summarization of the lesson 3.2 Evaluation as per objectives
3.3 The quality of homework
3. Conclusion 3. lesson the of
48 Appendix-E NUMBER OF TEACHERS PRESENTED IN CBS & IBS Problems Related to Making Plan, Instructional Materials, Motivation and Method Strongly Agre Strongly S. N. Statements Neutral Disagree agree e disagree 1 a. Daily lesson plan should be made 9 15 5 0 1 b. Unit plan should be made 7 21 1 1 0 c. Yearly plan is helpful to achieve the 14 14 0 1 1 objective of curriculum d. Preparing lesson plan leads to heavy 6 5 6 10 3 teaching load 2 Lack of planning makes the certain 17 9 1 3 0 chapters difficult to teach 3 Reflective teaching is interfering 0 11 12 4 3 4 a. Frequent use of instructional materials 16 14 0 0 0 motivates students to have them understand the problem more easily b. The school does not encourage to 1 7 6 7 9 make and use instructional materials c. The materials are not available and 3 9 4 11 3 funds required are not easy to get. d. Use of instructional materials 4 4 5 12 5 consumes more time and course can not be completed in time. 5 a. Motivation to learn mathematics is 0 1 7 15 7 gender based b. Students do not have competent 0 6 15 7 2 background c. Students are not disciplined 0 5 3 17 5 d. Students are not hardworking 2 9 7 11 1 e. Students are not interested 0 5 7 16 2 6 a. The teacher is trained. 9 13 6 2 0 b. Training helps in overall teaching and 19 9 1 0 1 learning 7 a. Supervisor should visit the classroom 7 11 7 4 1 frequently b. Supervisors help with problem areas 2 17 8 3 0 8 a. Periodic homework reinforces the 8 18 3 1 0 learning b. Periodic home works are time 1 14 10 4 1 restricted c. Home works are influenced by class 6 16 6 1 1 strength 9 The best teaching technique is Lecture method Inductive-deductive method 5 19 4 0 0 Others …………………………… 10 The failure to complete the course is 0 6 5 13 6 because of its length
49 Appendix-F SCORING PROCEDURE OF TEACHERS IN CBS & IBS
S. Statements Strongly N. agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 1 a. Daily lesson plan should be made 45 40 15 0 1 b. Unit plan should be made 35 84 3 2 0 c. Yearly plan is helpful to achieve 70 56 0 2 1 the objective of curriculum d. Preparing lesson plan leads to 6 10 18 40 50 heavy teaching load 2 Lack of planning makes the certain 85 36 3 6 0 chapters difficult to teach 3 Reflective teaching is interfering 0 44 36 8 3 4 a. Frequent use of instructional 80 56 0 0 0 materials motivates students to have them understand the problem more easily b. The school does not encourage to 1 7 18 28 45 make and use instructional materials c. The materials are not available 3 18 12 44 15 and funds required are not easy to get. d. Use of instructional materials 4 8 15 48 25 consumes more time and course can not be completed in time. 5 a. Motivation to learn mathematics 0 4 21 30 7 is gender based b. Students do not have competent 0 12 45 28 10 background c. Students are not disciplined 0 10 9 68 25 d. Students are not hardworking 2 18 21 44 5 e. Students are not interested 0 10 21 64 10 6 a. The teacher is trained. 45 52 18 4 0 b. Training helps in overall teaching 95 36 3 0 1 and learning 7 a. Supervisor should visit the 7 22 21 16 5 classroom frequently b. Supervisors help with problem 10 68 24 6 0 areas 8 a. Periodic homework reinforces the 8 36 9 4 0 learning b. Periodic home works are time 1 28 30 16 5 restricted c. Home works are influenced by 30 64 18 2 1 class strength 9 The best teaching technique is Lecture method Inductive-deductive method 25 76 12 0 0 Others …………………………… 10 The failure to complete the course is 0 12 15 52 30 because of its length
50 Appendix-G
Statistical Formulae used for Data Analysis:
Total Rank scoreof statement 1. Average Rank = Number of teachers
Total number of responseteachers 2. Percentage Total number of teachers
3. Mean Response of CBS teachers is denoted by x1 and Summationof meanresponseof teachers of CBS x = 1 Number of teachers of CBS
4. Mean Response of IBS teachers is denoted by x2 and Summationof meanresponseof teachers of IBS x = 2 Number of teachers of IBS
2 2 2 x x1 5. Variance of CBS teachers is s1 and s1 = n1 1
2 2 2 x x2 6. Variance of IBS teachers is s2 and s2 = n2 1
2 2 2 (n1 1)s1 (n2 1)s2 7. Sp = n1 n2 2
(x1 x2 ) (1 2 ) 8. t = , μ1 and μ2 are parameter of to populations some 1 1 s p n1 n2 specified values.
9. The level of significance α is 5%
51 Appendix-H
CALCULATION OF MEAN WEIGHTAGE AND PERCENTAGE
S. N.
Statements
Mean
Agree
Neutral
Problem
Disagree weightage 1 a. Daily lesson plan should be made 80% 70% 3% 4 Yes b. Unit plan should be made 94% 3% 3% 4.1 Yes c. Yearly plan is helpful to achieve the 94% 6% 4.3 Yes objective of curriculum d. Preparing lesson plan leads to heavy 37% 20% 43% 3.8 Yes teaching load 2 Lack of planning makes the certain chapters Yes 87% 3% 10% 4.3 difficult to teach 3 Reflective teaching is interfering 37% 40% 23% 3.0 Yes 4 a. Frequent use of instructional materials motivates students to have them understand 100% 4.5 Yes the problem more easily b. The school does not encourage to make and 27% 20% 53% 3.5 Yes use instructional materials c. The materials are not available and funds 40% 13% 47% 3.0 Yes required are not easy to get. d. Use of instructional materials consumes more time and course can not be completed in 27% 17% 56% 3.3 Yes time. 5 a. Motivation to learn mathematics is gender 3% 23% 74% 2.4 No based b. Students do not have competent 20% 50% 30% 3.1 Yes background c. Students are not disciplined 17% 10% 73% 3.6 Yes d. Students are not hardworking 37% 23% 40% 2.9 No e. Students are not interested 17% 23% 60% 3.5 Yes 6 a. The teacher is trained. 75% 20% 5% 4.1 Yes b. Training helps in overall teaching and 93% 3% 4% 3.9 Yes learning 7 a. Supervisor should visit the classroom 60% 23% 17% 2.6 No frequently b. Supervisors help with problem areas 64% 26% 10% 3.5 Yes 8 a. Periodic homework reinforces the learning 3% 87% 10% 2.0 No
b. Periodic home works are time restricted 50% 33% 17% 2.7 No c. Home works are influenced by class 73% 20% 7% 3.8 Yes strength 9 The best teaching technique is Lecture method Inductive-deductive method 80% 13% 7% 2.0 No Others …………………………………. 10 The failure to complete the course is because of 20% 17% 63% 3.6 Yes its length
52 Appendix-I
PROBLEMS OF TEACHERS IN COMMUNITY BASED SCHOOLS
S. N. Statements
agree
Mean
Agree
Neutral
disagree
Strongly Strongly Problem
Disagree Weightage
1 a. Daily lesson plan should be 6 6 2 0 1 4.0 Yes made b. Unit plan should be made 3 11 1 0 0 4.1 Yes c. Yearly plan is helpful to 6 9 0 0 0 4.4 Yes achieve the objective of curriculum d. Preparing lesson plan leads to 3 2 3 6 1 3.0 Yes heavy teaching load 2 Lack of planning makes the 8 5 1 1 0 4.3 Yes certain chapters difficult to teach 3 Reflective teaching is interfering 0 4 6 2 3 2.7 No 4 a. Frequent use of instructional 9 6 0 0 0 4.6 Yes materials motivates students to have them understand the problem more easily b. The school does not 0 4 4 3 4 3.4 Yes encourage to make and use instructional materials c. The materials are not available 1 6 3 3 2 2.9 No and funds required are not easy to get. d. Use of instructional materials 0 2 3 6 4 3.8 Yes consumes more time and course can not be completed in time. 5 a. Motivation to learn 0 0 2 10 3 2.6 No mathematics is gender based b. Students do not have 0 2 8 4 1 3.2 Yes competent background c. Students are not disciplined 0 3 2 8 2 3.6 Yes d. Students are not hardworking 1 7 4 2 1 2.6 No e. Students are not interested 0 2 6 6 1 3.4 Yes 6 a. The teacher is trained. 6 7 2 0 0 4.2 Yes b. Training helps in overall 12 3 0 0 0 4.4 Yes teaching and learning 7 a. Supervisor should visit the 4 5 3 3 0 2.9 No classroom frequently b. Supervisors help with 2 7 3 3 0 3.5 Yes problem areas 8 a. Periodic homework reinforces 4 10 1 0 0 1.8 No the learning b. Periodic home works are time 0 6 6 3 0 2.9 No restricted c. Home works are influenced by 3 7 4 0 1 3.7 Yes class strength 9 The best teaching technique is Lecture method Inductive-deductive method 5 7 3 0 0 4.1 Yes 7 Others ……………………………. 10 The failure to complete the course 0 2 2 5 6 4.0 yes is because of its length
53 Appendix-J
PROBLEMS OF TEACHERS IN INSTITUTIONAL BASED SCHOOLS
S. N. Statements
agree
Mean
Agree
Neutral
disagree
Strongly Problem
Strongly
Disagree Weightage 1 a. Daily lesson plan should be 3 9 3 0 0 4.0 Yes made b. Unit plan should be made 4 10 0 1 0 4.1 Yes c. Yearly plan is helpful to 8 5 0 1 1 4.2 Yes achieve the objective of curriculum d. Preparing lesson plan leads 3 3 3 4 2 3.4 Yes to heavy teaching load 2 Lack of planning makes the 9 4 0 2 0 4.3 Yes certain chapters difficult to teach 3 Reflective teaching is 0 7 6 2 0 3.3 Yes interfering 4 a. Frequent use of instructional 7 8 0 0 0 4.4 Yes materials motivates students to have them understand the problem more easily b. The school does not 1 3 2 4 5 3.6 Yes encourage to make and use instructional materials c. The materials are not 2 3 1 8 1 3.2 Yes available and funds required are not easy to get. d. Use of instructional materials 4 2 2 6 1 2.8 No consumes more time and course can not be completed in time. 5 a. Motivation to learn 0 1 5 5 4 2.2 No mathematics is gender based b. Students do not have 0 4 7 3 1 3.0 Yes competent background c. Students are not disciplined 0 2 1 9 3 3.7 Yes d. Students are not hardworking 1 2 3 9 0 3.3 Yes e. Students are not interested 0 3 1 10 1 3.6 Yes 6 a. The teacher is trained. 3 6 4 2 0 3.6 Yes b. Training helps in overall 7 6 1 0 1 3.4 Yes teaching and learning 7 a. Supervisor should visit the 3 6 4 1 1 2.4 No classroom frequently b. Supervisors help with 0 10 5 0 0 3.6 Yes problem areas 8 a. Periodic homework 4 8 2 1 0 2.2 No reinforces the learning b. Periodic home works are 1 8 4 1 1 2.5 No time restricted c. Home works are influenced 3 9 2 1 0 3.9 Yes by class strength 9 The best teaching technique is Lecture method Inductive-deductive method 0 12 3 0 0 1.8 No Others ……………………………. 10 The failure to complete the course 0 4 3 8 0 3.2 Yes is because of its length
54 Appendix -K INDIVIDUAL SCORE OF COMMUNITY SCHOOLS TEACHERS: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O 1.a. 4 1 4 4 4 5 3 5 5 4 5 5 3 4 5 1.b. 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 3 4 1.c. 4 5 4 4 5 5 5 4 4 4 5 5 4 4 4 1.d. 4 1 4 2 3 1 2 3 4 1 4 5 4 4 3 2. 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 3 5 3. 2 1 2 2 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 4.a. 4 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 4 4 5 4.b. 3 5 4 3 2 4 5 3 3 2 5 5 2 4 2 4.c. 2 2 4 2 4 2 2 3 4 1 5 5 1 3 3 4.d. 4 2 3 3 4 5 4 5 4 2 5 5 3 4 4 5.a. 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 2 1 5.b. 4 4 2 2 4 4 3 2 3 2 3 5 3 3 3 5.c. 4 4 2 2 4 4 4 3 4 4 5 5 4 4 2 5.d. 2 4 2 2 2 4 3 3 1 2 5 2 2 4 3 5.e 4 4 2 2 3 4 4 2 2 3 5 4 3 4 3 6.a. 4 5 4 4 5 5 5 4 4 4 5 5 4 3 4 6.b. 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 7.a. 2 1 1 2 4 2 3 4 2 1 1 2 3 2 3 7.b. 4 4 5 2 4 4 3 2 3 5 5 4 4 4 3 8.a. 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 3 1 1 8.b. 2 4 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 4 2 3 8.c. 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 5 4 5 1 4 3 4 5 9. 3 4 2 2 3 3 4 3 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 10. 4 4 4 2 4 5 4 5 2 3 5 5 3 5 5 Sum 80 80 76 76 85 90 86 86 79 77 97 101 81 83 82
X = 83.93 S.D = 7.07
55 Appendix-L INDIVIDUAL SCORE OF INSTITUTIONAL SCHOOLS TEACHERS: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O 1.a. 5 4 5 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 5 4 4 4 1.b. 5 4 5 2 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 1.c. 5 4 4 1 5 5 4 5 4 2 4 5 5 5 5 1.d. 4 3 2 5 5 1 1 2 4 4 2 1 4 3 3 2. 5 2 5 5 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 3 4 4 2 3. 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 2 4.a. 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 5 5 4 4 4.b. 5 4 5 5 5 2 4 2 4 1 3 4 3 2 4 4.c. 4 4 4 5 4 2 3 1 4 4 2 4 2 1 4 4.d. 1 2 4 5 4 1 1 4 4 2 3 2 4 1 3 5.a. 1 3 1 3 2 3 3 1 4 1 2 2 2 3 2 5.b. 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 4 5 4 3 2 3 3 3 5.c. 5 4 4 4 4 2 3 4 5 5 4 4 2 4 4 5.d. 4 4 4 4 3 1 3 4 4 2 4 2 4 4 3 5.e. 4 4 4 4 4 2 3 4 4 2 4 2 5 4 4 6.a. 5 4 3 3 5 4 5 4 4 2 4 2 3 3 4 6.b. 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 1 3 4 7.a. 2 2 2 1 3 2 4 5 2 1 2 3 3 1 3 7.b. 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 8.a. 1 2 1 3 1 1 2 4 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 8.b. 2 3 3 1 2 2 3 2 5 2 2 2 4 2 3 8.c. 2 4 4 3 4 5 4 4 2 5 5 4 4 4 3 9. 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 10. 2 4 4 3 3 4 2 2 4 4 3 4 4 2 4 Sum 84 82 88 84 90 74 82 93 95 77 80 78 83 74 81
X = 83.00 S.D = 6.09
56 Appendix-M CALCULATION OF THE T-VALUE x1 = Mean weightage of teachers of Community school teachers x2 = Mean weightage of teachers of Institutional school teachers
S1 = Sample standard deviation of teachers of Community schools
S2 = Sample standard deviation of teachers of Institutional schools
2 2 (x1 x2 ) (1 2 ) n1 1s1 n2 1s2 t = , where Sp = 1 1 n1 n2 2 s p n1 n2
- = 83.93 – 83.00 = 0.93, 1 2 0 ,
1 1 1 1 = = 0.258 n1 n2 15 15
(15 1)49.9849 (15 1)37.0881 Sp = 15 15 2
699.7886 519.2334 = 28
1219.022 = 28
= 43.5365
= 6.5982
0.93 t = 6.59 0.258
= 0.55
t t 0.025,28 ,n1n2 2 2 = 2.048
57