INFLUENCE OF APTITUDE AND PERSONALITY PROFILE ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS OF UAS, DHARWAD

Thesis submitted to the

University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Degree of

MASTER OF HOME SCIENCE

In

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

By

SUJATA K.

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COLLEGE OF RURAL HOME SCIENCE, DHARWAD

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES,

DHARWAD - 580 005

JANUARY, 2005

Advisory Committee DHARWAD JANUARY, 2005 (PUSHPA B. KHADI)

MAJOR ADVISOR

Approved by: Chairman: ____________________________ (PUSHPA B. KHADI) Members: 1) __________________________ (V. GAONKAR) 2) __________________________ (K. SAROJA) 3) _________________________ (ASHALATHA K. V.)

CONTENTS

Chapter No.

Title

I INTRODUCTION

II REVIEW OF LITERATURE

III MATERIAL AND METHODS

IV RESULTS

V. DISCUSSION

VI SUMMARY

VII REFERENCES

APPENDICES

LIST OF TABLES

Table No.

Title

1. Personal characteristics of undergraduate students

2. Familial characteristics of the undergraduate students

3. Reasons for choice of undergraduate programme by the undergraduate students

4. Personality factors of undergraduate students

5. Personality factors undergraduate students by faculty

6. Comparison of mean scores of personality factors of students by faculty

7. Association of levels of personality factors and faculty

8. Comparison of personality factors of girls of home science and agriculture students

9. Association of levels of personality factors and faculty

10. Comparison of mean scores of personality factors of boys of agriculture and marketing

11. Association of levels of personality factors and gender among agriculture students

12. Comparison of mean scores of personality factors between gender among agriculture students

13. Frequency distribution of aptitude of undergraduate students

14. Frequency distribution of levels of aptitude of undergraduate students by faculty

15. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of undergraduate students by faculty

16. Association of level of aptitude of students and faculty

17. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of girls of home science and agriculture

Contd…..

Table No.

Title

18. Association of level of aptitude of boys and faculty

19. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude between boys of agriculture and marketing

20. Association of level of aptitude and gender among agriculture students

21. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of boys and girls of agriculture

22. Academic achievement of undergraduate students

23. Frequency distribution of academic achievement of undergraduate students by faculty

24. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of students by faculty

25. Association of levels of academic achievement of girls by faculty

26. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of girls of home science and agriculture

27. Association of levels of academic achievement of boys and faculty

28. Comparison of academic achievement between boys of agriculture and marketing

29. Association of levels of academic achievement and gender

30. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of boys and girls of agriculture

31. Relation between personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate students

32. Relation between aptitude and academic achievement of undergraduate students

33. Relation between aptitude and personality factors of undergraduate students

33a. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among boys of agriculture

Contd…..

Table No.

Title

33b. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among girls of agriculture

33c. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among home science students

33d. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among students of marketing

34. Relation between socio-demographic characters and personality factors of undergraduate students

35. Relation between socio-demographic character and aptitude of undergraduate students

36. Relation between socio-demographic characters and academic achievement of undergraduate students

37. Career choice of undergraduate students of agriculture

38. Influence of personality factors on career choice of students of agriculture

39. Influence of aptitude on career choice of agriculture students

40. Influence of academic achievement on career choice of agriculture students

41. Career choice of students of home science

42. Influence of personality factors on career choice of students of home science

43. Influence of aptitude on career choice of students of home science

44. Influence of academic achievement on career choice of students of home science

45. Career choice of students of marketing

46. Influence of personality factor on career choice of students of marketing

47. Influence of aptitude on career choice of students of marketing

48. Influence of academic achievement on career choice of students of marketing

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No.

Title

1 Personality factors of undergraduate students

2 Comparison of personality factors between boys and girls of agriculture

3 Aptitude of undergraduate students

4 Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of boys and girls of agriculture

5 Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of students by faculty

6 Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of boys and girls of agriculture

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix No.

Title

I Second order personality factors

II Schedule

INTRODUCTION

Aptitude is a person's ability acquired or innate, to learn or develop knowledge or a skill in some specific area (Singh, 1987). Often we find the people who have some special abilities or potentialities which enable them to do well in certain fields of activity. Such people have special types of aptitude and therefore, they are able to learn and acquire the necessary skills in a specialised field. They are also interested in such activities as are of their liking, further success or achievement in a given field of knowledge or activity depends to a great extent upon attitude and interests.

Aptitude is inferred for relative levels of achievement. If individuals given comparable

opportunities to acquire a skill differ in the case of acquiring it or in the level of proficiency attained, then it is inferred that differ in their aptitude for a particular work. Aptitude is more or less specific. An individual may have a high degree of aptitude for one line of work and not for certain others.

There are of course people having a wide range of aptitudes. Some good scholars

are also versatile in other direction. A farmer may not only be good at farming but also a successful person in business, music, athletics etc. There are people with a very narrow range of aptitudes. These can do only a few things well. Those with high aptitudes for particular type of work and those with low aptitude are relatively few in number. Most people have an intermediate degree of aptitude and in a large unselective group.

Characteristics of aptitude • Aptitude can be both innate or acquired.

• Aptitudes generally remain constant.

• Aptitude are not usually unitary but are also pluralistic.

• Rapid learning is positively correlated with high ultimate capacity.

• High aptitude leads to ease in terms of low energy cost per unit of output.

• Interest and satisfaction in the exercise of potential ability are easily developed.

• Aptitudes are relatively specific or at most are related only within small groups.

The term personality comes from the latin word ‘persona’ meaning mask (Hurlock, 1978). Allport (1937) defines personality as the dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his/her unique adjustments to the environment.

Personality is a criterion reference for knowing, understanding or evaluating any

person. Personality depends on the psychophysical development of a person. It includes a persons nature, character, intelligence, interest, attitude, aptitude, expectation, ideals etc.

Personality of an individual is strongly determined by the genetics factors. But the

environmental factors cannot be ignored. The early experience in home, neighbourhood school and lay foundations for the personality. The personality pattern is the specific traits or a group of related or consistent reactions which characterize the individuals typical manner of personal and social adjustment. Each cultural group has established behavioural patterns appropriate for the members of two sexes. Within these culturally approved confine each individual is expected to develop a basic confirming personality pattern. Since personality is a product of cultural influences and is shaped by pressures from the social group. The individual normally comes to think of himself as a member of a particular group and his confirming behaviour becomes habitual.

Characteristics of personality • The personality is something unique and specific. Every one of us has an unique pattern

in ourselves. No two individuals not even identical twins, behave in precisely the same way over any period of time. Every one of us has specific characteristics for making adjustments.

• Personality exhibits self-consciousness as one of its main characteristics. Man is described as a person or to have a personality when the idea of self enters in to his consciousness.

• Personality includes everything about a person. It is all that a person has about him. It includes all the behaviour patterns i.e., conative, cognitive and affective and covers not only the conscious activities but goes deeper to semi conscious and unconscious also.

• It is not just a collection of so many traits or characteristics which is known as personality. It is organisation of some psycho-physical systems or some behaviour characteristics and functions as a unified whole.

• Personality is not static. It is dynamic and ever in process of change and modification. The process of making adjustment to environment is continuous. One has to struggle against the environmental as well as the inner forces throughout the span of his life.

• Every personality is the product of heredity and environment.

The institutions of learning especially the schools are principal means of socialization to develop children in to useful citizen so that they fit into adult roles and also different occupational roles. It is only students who are high in their scholastic achievement are the ones who can be moulded to occupy strategic position in society and thereby determine the destiny of society. Hence scholastic achievement occupies a very important place in education as well as in the learning process. High achievement in school creates self esteem and self confidence in the child. Grade placement whether in a slow or fast section promotion and marks are the criteria by which children assess their academic achievement. Success is ego inflating, failure is ego deflating. Failure not only damages the self concept but it encourages the development of patterns of behaviour that are harmful to personal and social adjustments. By contrast, success leads to favourable self concept which inturn leads to good personal adjustments and favourable social evaluations. These contribute heavily to good future adjustments.

Society and parent’s emphasize effective education because it forms the main basis

for admission to professional courses and for career development. Thus the academic achievement that has the highest prestige in the eyes of the members of the group with which the child is identified has the greatest influence on the personality development.

It is interesting to know whether aptitude makes a noticeable mark on academic

achievement. Research has revealed that personality factors such as persistence in completion task, procrastination and other factors have a mark on the accomplishment of an individual. In this contest it is imperative to know whether aptitude or personality or none of the two, but hard work decides the academic achievement of the students.

University of Agricultural Science is an educational center with multi faculties offering

undergraduate, post graduates programmes in various fields viz., Agriculture, Marketing, Home science, Veterinary and Agricultural Engineering. The study was therefore designed to know the influence of personality profile and aptitude of students of various faculties on academic achievement and also to know whether the differences exist between faculties.

The present study was conducted with the following objectives

1. To study the aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate students

2. To know the difference in aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of

undergraduate students by faculty 3. To study the inter-relation between aptitude, personality factors and academic

achievement of undergraduates 4. To study the influence of socio-demographic factors such as age, gender, ordinal

position, family size, family type educational and occupational levels of parents on aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate students

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Personality in the sum total of the psychological characters of the individuals. Aptitude is the ability to acquire a new skill or set of knowledge or to do well in some future learning situation. The biological factors like education and occupation of parents, family size, family type may influence the personality, aptitude and academic achievement of students.

The literature related to concepts and definitions and influencing factors on academic achievement of students are reviewed and presented under the following headings.

2.1 Aptitude

2.1.1 Concepts and definitions 2.1.2 Aptitude tool 2.1.3 influence of aptitude on academic achievement of students

2.2 Personality 2.2.1 Concept and definition 2.2.2 Personality of students 2.2.3 Personality of different professionals 2.2.4 Influence of personality profile on academic achievement of students 2.2.5 Relation between personality and vocational preferences 2.3 Academic achievement 2.3.1 Concepts and definitions 2.3.2 Effect of parent’s educational level on academic achievement of students 2.3.3 Effect of parent’s occupation on academic achievement of students 2.3.4 Influence of family size on academic achievement of students

2.1 APTITUDE 2.1.1 Concepts and definitions

Aptitude is defined in Warrens Dictionary as "A condition or set of characteristics regarded as symptomatic of an individual’s ability to acquire with training some (usually specified) knowledge, skill or set of responses such as the ability to speak a language, to produce music etc.

Bingham (1937) defines "Aptitude is a condition symptomatic of a persons general

fitness of which one aspect is his readiness to acquire proficiency, his general ability and another is his readiness to develop an interest in exercising the ability".

Mursell (1949) defines "Aptitude is the dynamic trend of the whole personality with

mental organisation that makes one good in learning and in performing a specialised type of work.

2.1.2 Aptitude tool

Deb (1965) conducted a study on 300 engineering students seeking admission in

college of engineering and techonology Jadavpur. The test standardised in western countries were consulted. The test consisted of 75 items, 20 minutes had been fixed as the time limit to complete the test. After application of Spearman-brown formula the reliability of the test becomes 89 which proves that the test is reliable. The correlation between engineering aptitude test and different engineering subjects shows definite relationship. Most of which having substantial relationship which proves that the test is valid one.

Agarwal (1977) conducted a study on sample of 1073 boys and 354 girls drawn from

23 institutions representing all the educational regions of UP. The sample was purposive. Tools used in this study were (1) verbal group test of intelligence (BPT-14) (2) Revised Minnesota paper form board (3) Reasoning test (4) Science information test (5) Science vocabulary test (6) Numerical ability test. The study concludes that, the battery is effective and can safely be used for predicting success in science courses. The battery can be employed for the relution of students for science courses in Class XI those, who desire to opt for mathematics in class XI can be screened with the help of the battery of tests.

2.1.3 Influence of aptitude on academic achievement of the students

Dey and Sinha (1968) conducted a study on 90 students studying in class VIII of a higher secondary multipurpose school of Bihar with science as their elective subject, served as subjects, tools used were (1) The Bihar test of general intelligence std. by Bihar Bureau of educational and vocational guidance (2) the science aptitude test (3) The objective achievement tests of physics and chemistry constructed by the same agency for class VIII of the schools of Bihar. The result showed that (1) intelligence was significantly correlated with examination marks (Science average) of the subjects of classes VIII and IX but its correlation with science average marks of subjects of class X though positive was not significant. (2) The science aptitude test had significant correlation with science average marks of students of class IX only. It had positive but insignificant correlation with the marks of the same students in class X and very low correlation with marks obtained in class VIII (3) The objective achievement tests of physics and chemistry had insignificant correlation with the marks obtained in science by the subjects in all the three classes.

Wray and Alexakos (1969) studied two types of factor analysis of study 21

measurements, 9 of aptitude and 12 of achievement. Sample size was 122 high school seniors. Results indicated that most aptitude variable could be considered distinct entities while most achievement variables clustered around a general achievement factor.

Dolke and Sharma (1975) the sample of the study consisted of randomly selected 70

students studying in the school of Architecture from third year onward classes. The mean age of the students was 21.14 yrs. The tool used was General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB) developed by the United States Department of Labour and Manpower Administration (1967, 1969). After curriculum analysis the following four aptitudes viz., general learning ability, verbal aptitude, spatial aptitude and form perception were found to be relevant with the architectural courses. GATB norms were established with multiple cut off method. The criterion distribution was dichotomized into low and high groups with the help of phi-coefficients computed between trial sets of norm and the criterion. Validity and effectiveness of the norm are also reported and it was concluded that the GATB was useful in predicting success of students in the school of architecture as scores on tests were associated with performance in the courses.

Chatterjee et al. (1978) conducted study on 115 boys reading in class X in three

different schools at Calcutta selected at random from Bengali medium higher secondary boys schools. Their ages ranged from 15 to 17 yrs. The tools used were (1) Scientific knowledge and Aptitude test (SKA) by Chatterjee (2) Chatterjee's non-language preference record (CNPR). The results proved that considering the score in scientific scale in CNPR along with the scientific aptitude score the prediction of the achievement in science can be significantly improved.

Dabir and Pandit (1988) the sample for the study was selected form schools in and around Nagapur. The sample consisted of 1080 students for standards 9, 10 and 11. The occupational aspiration scale (OAS) and differential aptitude test were administered to the sample. The result did not show that aptitudes have positive association with the vocational aspirations of the school going youth.

Schneider et al. (1989) studied in experiment 1 a total of 576 middle-class children

from 3rd

, 5th and 7

th graders from rural and urban schools. Tools used were a-13 item

questionnaire was used to assess children's knowledge about soccer children's scores on the verbal aptitude component of a German cognitive ability test fieller. Gadicks and Weinlader (1985) in experiment 2 a tool of 185 middle class children from 3

rd, 5

th and 7

th graders. Two

studies compared memory performance and text comprehension of groups that were equivalent on domain-specific knowledge but differed in overall aptitude, to investigate whether prior knowledge about a particular domain or overall aptitude level was more important when the task was to acquire and use new information in the domain of interest. Results shows that levels of soccer knowledge and of overall aptitude were varied in a factorial design. Neither study detected significant differences between high aptitude and low aptitude experts, regardless of their ages. Low aptitude expert outperformed high aptitude novices on all memory and comprehension measures. The results indicates that domain specific knowledge can compensate for low overall aptitude on domain related cognitive tasks.

Pillai (1990) conducted a study on the sample of 800 students studying in standard IX

of 20 secondary schools in Kerala. The tools used were (1) Achievement test in biology developed by Ayishabi and Sulatha (2) Kerala university science aptitude test std. by Nair and Ramanandan (3) Scale of attitude towards science developed by Anand and Pillai, F value for factor science aptitude is significant at 0.01 level indicating that the pupils of three different levels of science aptitude performed differently in biology achievement test. Similarly for factor attitude towards science also the F value is significant. The study reveals that biology achievement of secondary pupils may differ according to the differences in science aptitude or attitude towards science as the present study shows no interaction effect of science aptitude and attitude towards science. It may be possible that these two variables are contributing independently on biology achievement.

In the same year Swanson (1990) conducted a study children from 4 to 5 whose

cores were selected from 4 elementary schools additional information related to school aptitude was observed from the comprehension test of Basic Skills (CTBS 1978). A sample of 25 high aptitude and 25 low aptitude children were taken. A questionnaire modified from Krcutzer et al. (1978) was used to assess metacognition in the general domain of problem solving. The important findings were that high metacognitive individuals outperformed lower metacognitive individuals problem solving regardless of their overall aptitude test. In fact high metacognitive knowledge/low aptitude children preformed significantly better than low metacognitive knowledge children with higher overall aptitude scores.

Gallagher and Lisi (1994) conducted a study on participants who were junior and

seniors from one public and three private high schools in central New Jersey. The sample consisted of 25 male and 22 female students who scored at or above 670 on a recent SAT-M. The tool used for the study was, the problem set which consisted of 27 items from 5 different forms of the SAT-M. This study revealed that gender differences on SAT-M problems among high ability students in which female students outperformed male students on conventional problems and male students outperformed female students on unconventional problems.

Rothstein et al. (1994) conducted a study on totally 450 students of 2 year MBA

programme (357 men, 93 women). The sample comprised two Ist year classes (1989 and 1990) of 225 students each. Al students with in a section remain cohorts throughout their first year and take 9 compulsory courses taught by 9 different instructors. Tools used were personality form E of Jacksons (1984) PRF a-352 item questionnaire. Aptitude, verbal ability, quantitative ability and total GMAT percentile scores were available for each student. The result reported was (1) verbal and quantitative aptitudes make important contributions to student success in a variety of academic programs. (2) Personality variables also make

important contributions to scholastic success. (3) The relative contributions of congnitive abilities and personality factors to academic success depend on the criterion of performance. Burns (1980) examined one possible reason for the lack of consistent findings in aptitude. Treatment interaction research namely the instability of aptitude. Learning relations overtime. Four classes of predominantly 10

th grade students were taught an imaginary science over a 4

day period. Achievement measures were obtained each day. Students completed 14 aptitude measures prior to instruction and 5 additional aptitude scores were obtained from student records. Component scores from a derived principal. Components solution to the inter correlations of the aptitude scores were then correlated with each of the achievement scores. The results indicated that some aptitude achievement relations were not stable over time and that this instability was exhibited in different aptitudes being required at different points in time during instruction.

Rao (1995) conducted a study on A comparative study of scientific attitude, scientiifc aptitude and achievement in biology at secondary school level. The total sample of 600 students studying in 10

th class in secondary schools of Guntur district. Andhra Pradesh were

included age level of the students was 14 or 15 years. The tools used were scientific attitude scale of JK Sood and R.P. Sandhya and Kerala University science aptitude test of Nair et al. The marks in biology scored in the pre-public examiantion of the tenth class of the district were taken in to consideration to assess the achievement of pupils in biology. The study revealed that the association among scientific attitude, scientific aptitude and biology achievement was highly significant and positive.

Brody and Benbow (1990) conducted two studies to determine (a) whether differential

educational experiences contribute to differential growth on scholastic aptitude test (SAT) scores of (b) Whether such experiences must occur over a long rather than a short duration to have impact. Specific content knowledge in mathematics/science and verbal areas taught during a short time interval did not increase SAT-M and SAT-V scores even when t he content was of the type required to selves SAT problems. Exposure to academically rigorous educational experiences over a long time period (5 yrs) did relate to the development of abilities measured by SAT. In addition students who experienced very large gains on SAT over this 5 year period, in comparison with students with small gains, were achieving better in a more rigorous program of high school courses in mathematics and science for the SAT-M and in verbal areas for the SAT-V. Results support the position that educational experiences over time influence SAT scores.

2.2 PERSONALITY 2.2.1 Concepts and definitions

The personality comes from the Latin word "Persona" meaning mask (Hurlock, 1978). Allport (1937) defines personality as the dynamic organization within the individual of

those psycho-physical system that determine his/her unique adjustments to the environment. McGill (1949) defines personality as the organization of needs, abilities and

potentialities of an individual. Cattell (1950) defines personality as the sum total of the psychological characters of

the individuals. Eysenk (1952) states personality is more or less stable and enduring organization of

a person's character, temperament, intellect and physique that determines one's unique adjustment to the environment.

Cattell has grouped personality into a battery of 16 factors

A–Reserved-outgoing, B–Dull-bright, C–Emotionally stable-mature, E–Mild-Aggressive, F–Sober-enthusiastic, G–Disregards rules-moralistic, H–Shy-Socially bold, I - Self reliant-sensitive, L - Accepting condition-Suspicious, M – Practical-imaginative, N –Socially clumsy- socially aware, O-Secure-insecure, Q1 – Conservative-liberal, Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient, Q3 – Self conflict-controlled undisciplined , Q4 - Tense-Relaxed.

From these 16 personality factors four can be derived mathematically.

Second order personality factors Ext - Introversion-extroversion Anx - Low anxiety-high anxiety T.P. - Tender minded-tough poise Independent - Subduedness-independence

(1) Outgoing: Affertothymia, warm hearted, easy going, participating, good natured, emotionally expressive, ready to co-operate, attentive to people, kindly, adaptable. The person likes occupations dealing with people and socially impressive situations. He readily forms active groups is generous in personal relations, less afraid of criticism, better able to remember names of people. (2) Bright: More intelligent, abstract thinking, quick to grasp ideas, a fast learner. (3) Mature: Higher ego strength, emotionally stable, faces reality, calm better able to maintain solid group morale. (4) Aggressive: Dominance, assertive, independent, competitiveness, stubborn. Tends to be austere, a law to himself. Hostile or extrapunitive, authoritarian (managing others) and disregards authority. (5) Enthusiastic: Surgency, happy-go lucky, impulsive, lively, cheerful, active, talkative, frank, expressive, effervescent, carefree. Is frequently chosen as an elected leader impulsive and mercurial. (6) Moralistic: Stronger superego strength, conscientious, persevering, staid, rulebound, dominated by sense of duty, responsible, planful. Conscientious and moralistic and prefers hardworking people to witty companions. (7) Socially bold: Parmia, venturesome, uninhibited, spontaneous, ready to try new things and abundent in emotional responses, thick-skinnedness enables to face wear and tear in dealing with people and grueling emotional situations, without fatigue. Careless of detail, ignore, danger, signals and consume much time talking. Tends to be pushy and actively interested in the opposite sex. (8) Sensitive: Premsia, tenderminded, dependent, overprotected, day dreaming, artistic, fastidious, feminine. Demand attention and help, impatient, impractical, dislikes crude people and rough occupations. Tends to slow up group performance and upsets group morale by unrealistic fussiness. (9) Suspicious: Pretension, self opinionated, hard to fool, mistrusting and doubtful. often involved in own ego, is self opinionated and interested in internal, mental life. Usually deliberate in actions, unconcerned about other people, a poor team member. (10) Imaginative: Autia, wrapped up in inner urgencies, careless of practical matters, absent minded, unconventional, unconcerned over everyday matters. Bohemian, self-motivated Imaginatively creative, concerned with essentials and obvious of particular people and physical realities. Inner directed interests some times lead to unrealistic situations accompanied by expressive outbursts. Individuality tends to cause to be rejected in group activities. (11) Socially aware: Shrewdness, calculating, wordly penetrating, polished, experienced, hard headed and analytical, intellectual unsentimental approach to situations. (12) Insecure: Guilt pronenes, apprehensive, worrying, depressive, troubled, moody full of foreboding and brooding. childlike tendency to anxiety in difficulties, not fully accepted in groups or free to participate.

(13) Liberal: Radicalism, experimenting, critical, analytical, free thinking, interested in intellectual matters and has doubts on fundamental issues. Skeptical and inquiring regarding ideas, either old or new. Tends to be more well informed, less inclined to moralize, more inclined to experiment in life generally and more tolerant of inconvenience and change. (14) Self sufficient: Self sufficiency prefers own decisions, resourceful, temperamentally independent, accustomed to going own way. Making decisions, taking actions on own, discounts public opinion, but is not necessarily dominant in relations with others. Does not dislike people but simply does not need their agreement or support. (15) Controlled: High self concept control, socially precise, following, self image, strong control of emotions and general behaviour, is inclined to be socially aware and careful, sometimes tends, to be obstinate effective leader. (16) Tense: High ergic tension, frustrated, driven, over wrought, excitable, restless, fretful, impatient. Is often fatigued, but unable to remain inactive. In groups takes a poor view of the degree of unity, orderliness and leadership. Frustration represents an excess of stimulated, but undischarged drive.

The second order personality factors are defined as : (1) Extroversion: Socially outgoing, uninhibited person, good at making and maintaining interpersonal contacts. This can be very favourable in situations that call for this type of temperament ex: salesman, but should not be considered necessarily favourable as a general predictor ex: of scholastic achievement. (2) High anxiety: Need not be neurotic, since anxiety could be situational but it is probable that some maladjustment i.e., dissatisfaction with the degree to which one is able to meet the demands of life and to achieve what one desires. Very high anxiety is generally disruptive of performance and productive of physical disturbances. (3) Tough poise: Likely to be an enterprising, decisive and resilient personality. However one is likely to miss the subtle relationships of life and to orient their behaviour too much toward the obvious. If there are difficulties, they are likely to involve rapid action with insufficient consideration and thought. (4) Independence: The factor tends to be an aggressive, independent, daring, incisive, person. Seeks those situations where such behaviour is at least tolerated and possibly rewarded and is likely to exhibit considerable initiative.

2.2.2 Personality of students

Studies on personality of students are reviewed and presented under the specific personality traits/factors.

Socially bold

Krishna (1981) conducted a study on risk taking and adolescent personality. Two hundred adolescent (100 males and 100 females) of the XI standard from six high schools in Bihar were administered the choice dilemma questionnaire, eysenk personality inventory, security-insecurity inventory. Comprehensive test of anxiety and Gordon personal profile. The findings revealed that sex contributed significantly to variation in risk taking scores. Riskiness for males, exhibited significant positive relationship with extroversion, ascendancy and responsibility dimensions. While, for females if showed significant negative association with personality. Similar results were reported by Begum and Ahmed (1986) wherein they reported that male subjects were found to take greater risk than females in individual situation. They studied the individual risk taking and risky shift on 80 male and 80 female students of class X randomly drawn from 3 different schools of Dhaka city. To measure individual risk taking the students were administered the choice dilemmas questionnaire.

Similar results were obtained in the study on risk taking behaviour of male and female

adolescents conducted by Verma (1991) on a sample of 100 male and 100 female students of

XI class drawn from two higher secondary schools of Behror district, Alwar. Risk taking behaviour of the subjects was measured by administering risk-taking questionnaire of Sinha and Arora. The results of the study revealed that the male students exhibited significantly higher level of risk taking than the female students. Daftuar et al. (2000) conducted a study to examine the relationship of risk taking with academic achievement in students coming from different habitational background. A total of 384 students were selected for the study. Mohsins (1968) test of general intelligence was used to assess the intelligence level of students. A measure following Kogar and Wallaclis (1964) measure of risk taking behaviour was developed by the author. The marks of students in the two previous school examinations were obtained for academic achievement. Students having average levels of achievement in school examinations completed a measure of risk taking behaviour. It was found that non-tribal urban high achievers had greater risk taking tendency than their counterparts low achievers. Also rural students showed greater risk taking than urban students. Competitive

Miserandino (1996) conducted a study on "Children who do well in school. Individual differences in perceived competence and autonomy in above average children". Self determination theory and a motivational model of engagement were used to determine the impact of perceived competence and autonomy on engagement and performance in school of 77 third and seventh grade students from New York city identified as above average in ability by scoring above the median on the stanford achievement test. Despite this high ability, results showed that children who reported experiencing a lack of completeness (those less certain of their abilities) or a lack of autonomy (being extremely motivated) reported more negative effect and withdrawal behaviours than did children who perceived themselves as having or who perceived themselves to be autonomous.

Bhadra and Girija (1984) reported that high achievers show dominant characters in

competition than low achievers. T he sample consisted of 120 scheduled caste/tribe students admitted to the under graduate programmes of the University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Standard progressive matrices (Reven, 1949) and general mental ability test (Tandon, 1950) were used to measure non-verbal and verbal ability respectively. Twelve related personality scales from Edward personality inventory (Edward, 1967) and personal and interpersonal values (Gordon, 1960, 1967) were administered to assess personality characteristics and value patterns respectively.

Guilt proneness

Bharati Devi (1982) conducted a study on certain psychological factors of adjustment influencing achievement among school children. A sample of 35 high achievers (those with 80% and above marks) 40 low achievers (those with 50% and below) studying in class VIII were administered the psychological adjustment inventory developed by Reddy (1966). The results found that high achievers were low on neuroticism, guilt and inferiority feeling. Similarly, Sontakey (1988) reported that high achievers were self assured, confident and severe whereas the low achieving students were apprehensive, worrying and depressive i.e., they had guilt proneness stodgy in comparison to their low achieving counterparts. Self sufficiency

Norwich (1987) investigated the relation between self efficacy and mathematics achievement. Self efficacy was measured over 4 trials in a repeated measures design with 72 children aged 9 to 10 years. Regression analysis indicated small or no predictive relation between self efficacy and task performance. Results of the study lend one to doubt about a simple relation between self efficacy and task performance in the field of mathematics learning.

Mature

Tiwari and Poornachand (1995) conducted a study to findout emotional adjustment among high and low achieving adolescents. The sample consisted of 50, 10

th and 11

th class

students of Pantnagar and Rudrapur. The questionnaire of adjustment developed by Kumar was administered to the students. For measure of academic achievement, results in the PU board examination of 1991 was considered. Results showed that high achievers were significantly high in emotional adjustment than low achievers.

However, the study conducted by Vashishtha (1991) on sample of 140 pupils both

boys and girls, studying in the final year of the high secondary level (class 11) from Delhi revealed that high achieving girls demonstrated poor emotional adjustment as compared to low achieving girls. High and low achieving boys were observed to be alike in emotional adjustment. On the basis of the annual examination results of the precoding year, academic achievement was measured. Data were collected by administering the adjustment inventory for college students (AICS) constructed and standardized by Sinha and Sinha.

2.2.3 Personality of different professionals Mahamood (1981) conducted a study on personality profiles of sportsmen and non-

sportsmen. The subjects were 124 male students from two colleges in Calicut, of these 62 mere active participants in sports activities and 62 were selected randomly for purpose of comparison. The mean age of the sample was 21 years. Tools used were personal data schedule and 16 PF questionnaire (Cattels, 1962). The results suggested that sportsmen in comparison to non-sportsmen were warm hearted, outgoing and conservative in respect of established ideas. This is relatively incongruent with the aggressive, stubborn, uninhibited, tough-minded and spontaneous behaviour of sportsmen. Non sportsmen were found to be shy, timid, apprehensive and tense. This implies that some distinguishing personality characteristics were assimilated by sportsmen in to their personality structure for a successful sports career.

Ajwany and Upadhyay (1982) conducted a study on personality as a determinant of

problem solving behaviour. A group of 800 boys and girls from each of the three age groups 10-11 years (5

th class), 14-16 years (10

th class) and 19-23 years (final graduation and post

graduation classes) was selected as the primary sample for the present study. These 2400 subjects were given Cattel's personality questionnaires suitable for the respective age group (16 PF, HSPQ or CPQ). The results showed that high scholastic mental capacity (Factor B high), high ego strength (Factor C high) practicability (Factor I low) untroubled adequacy with a mature and anxiety free confidence (Factor O low), low ergic tension (Factor Q4 low) and tendency of being regulated by external realities (Factor M low) were found to facilitate the problem solving behaviour considerably while the opposite traits were observed to hinder problem solving behaviour.

Chakrabarti and Kundu (1984) carried out a study on personality profile of

management personnel. The 16 PF (Cattell, 1970) test was administered to 56 management personnel of an industrial concern in Calcutta. They were divided into 3 groups, according to their educational background and nature of management. Results showed that the management personnel were warm hearted, attentive, trustful and easy going. They were insightful, fast learning, intellectually adaptable and persevering. They were emotionally mature, stable and could adjust readily with facts.

Goyal (1984) conducted a study on personality correlates of creativity in secondary

school teachers under training. The subjects were 500 teacher trainers, 200 male and 300 female enrolled in the B.Ed. course randomly selected form 5 teacher training colleges in Punjab state. The mean age of the sample was 21.83 years ranging from 18 to 47 years. The tools used were Form A of the Torrance tests of creative thinking verbal and figural (Research edition, 1966) and form A of the Cattell's 16 PF (1968). Both the tests were translated in to Punjabi. The results indicated that intelligence (factor B) was the only factor which discriminated between the high and low creatives. The high creatives being higher on it.

Shukla and Chauhan (1987) conducted a study on personality characteristics and

motives of young women pursuing traditional and non traditional career courses. Among 60 young women who participated in the study, 33 of them were pursuing the TCC Bed (n=11) Med (n=14), libse (n=6) and MBBS (n=2). The remaining 27 were pursuing the NTCC, MBA (n=14) M.Sc. Maths (n=5), M.Com (n=3), CA (n=2), BE (n=2) MCA (n=1). All the respondents were in the first year of their courses. Their age ranged from 19 years to 23 years. The results showed that the two groups significantly differed on 7 personality factors (B, C, E, F, H, M, N) i.e., concrete/ abstract intelligence, emotional instability or stability. Humble/assertive, sober/happy go lucky, shy/venturesome, practical/ imaginative and forthright/shrewd

respectively. The difference between the two groups of sample was also large on Q1 (Liberal-conservative) dimension but it failed to reach the significance level.

Srivastava (1989) conducted study on decision making and personality traits. The two

public sectors industrial organizations, the Bhilai steel plant and the HSCL situated in the Durg district of Madhya Pradesh constituted the universe of the study and the sample was drawn out from the managers category. The total sample comprised of 110 managers selected randomly from both the organizations. The tools used were decision making scale developed by Blankeship and Mles (1968) and 16 PF questionnaire by Cattell and Eber (1962). Among 16 factors, 2 personality factors. Factor I, tough minded and factor M practical (counterparts) showed significant relationship with decision making.

Jain and Chouhan (1989) conducted a study on development of personality and

vocational preference of students at various stages of adolescence. The sample consisted of 900 students studying in VI and XI grade of both urban and rural areas of Udaipur district. The age of the subjects varied between 12 to 18 years. The Hindi version of Cattell's higher secondary personality questionnaire (HSPQ) developed by Kapoor and Srivastava (1985) was used to measure personality of students. Results indicated that personality factors less intelligent vs more intelligent (B), phlegmatic temperament vs excitability (D) submissiveness vs dominance (E), expedient vs conscientious (G) tough minded Vs tender minded (I). Group dependent vs self sufficient (Q2) and uncontrolled vs controlled respectively changed with age. The vocational preferences of students also changed during adolescence period of life.

Singh (1990) conducted a study on affiliation motive as related to personality ergs

and sentiments. The subjects were 200 undergraduate students whose mean age was 18.5 years. Subjects were administered an adapted version of Mcclelland's TAT developed by Mcclelland, Atkinson Clark and Lowell (1953), 16 personality questionnaire (16PF Cattell and Eber 1962). Motivation analysis test developed by MAT Cattell and Horn (1964). The results showed significant correlations of nAffiliation with factor ‘A’ (warm hearted participating), Factor N (forthright), Factor M (venturesome), Factor I (sensitive) drive for self assertion and chronological age. These correlations suggest that high scores on the projective measure of affiliation motive tended to be participating, warm hearted, forthright, venturesome, sensitive and assertive.

Roy (1992) conducted a study on personality traits of Antarctica expertitioners. Data

were collected from 8 Antarctica expeditioners who started for Antartica on 27th November,

1991 and returned to India on 24th March, 1992, safely. Their age ranged from 25.9 to 44

years. Tools used was 16 PF test developed by Cattell (1987). The results suggests that expeditioners were aloof, objective, intelligent, independent, problem solver, optimistic, cheerful, self sufficient, resourceful, careless of social rules and had little inhibition to environmental threat.

In the same year Ashraf (1992) conducted a study on personality characteristics of

heavy and mild cigarette smokers. The sample comprised of 300 male postgraduates drawn equally from three groups of heavy smokers, mild smokers and non-smokers. The three groups of the subjects were matched in terms of their age (range 20-30) and socio-economic status (middle class). Tools used were (1) Personal Data Schedule (PDS) for assessing personal characteristics and family background of the respondents and antecedents of cigarette smoking (2) Smoking problem check list (SPC) developed and used to assess the underlying problems of smoking behavior (3) Hindi version (Kapoor, 1972) of Cattell 16 personality factor questionnaire (16 PF) for assessing personality characteristics of the subjects. The findings of this study was against one way analysis of variance. It was found that heavy smokers, mild smokers and non smokers differed significantly in terms of their scores on each factor of personality as measured through Cattell 16 PF.

Barnes and Srinivas (1993) conducted a study on personality traits of self actualised

women. This study included the sample of 64 females age ranging from 35 to 55 years with a minimum of XII std. Education, with income above Rs. 1500 per month, consisting of varied marital and occupational categories was selected for the study. Tools used were 16 PF questionnaire (Cattell, 1966) and the personal orientation inventory (Schostrom, 1980). The

results showed that the factors that facilitated women’s self actualization have been reflected by time, competency and inner directedness and show significant personality traits of being reserved, cool, good ego strength and emotional stability, independence, adventurousness, assertiveness, imaginative and cordial interpersonal relationships.

Shukla et al. (1994) conducted a study on personality characteristics of Indian sports

women of individual and team sports. The sample comprised 150 college sports women, further divided into two categories individual sports athletes (27) and team sports. This included 4 sports specialists, Hockey (33), Foot ball (30), Volley ball (30) and cricket (30) who have represented in state of UP, Bihar, Bengal and Punjab provencies. Equal number of subjects (150) were randomly selected as the control who never participated in the extramwar sports from women college Hossal, BHV Cattles (1967) 16 PF questionnaire was used as a tool. The results revealed that significant difference was observed through 'F' ratio (ANOVA Test) on four factor A (outgoing), H (venture some), Q (controlled) and Q4 (tense) when compared with team and individual sports. The highest value Q2 (self sufficient) while lowest in F (sober). There were significant differences among athletes and non athletes on 14 traits out of 16 traits analysed in this study.

Roy (1995) conducted a study on differences in personality factors of experienced

teachers, physicians, bank managers and fine artists. Data were collected from 95 teachers of well known private and public schools 68 physicians of major govt. hospitals, 72 bank managers of different branches, 51 fine artists of renowned govt. colleges of the 4 metropolitan cities of Calcutta, Delhi, Bombay and Madras. The mean age of the sample was 43-69 years. Cattell's 16 PF questionnaire was used for collection of data. Results showed that teachers were significantly more extroverted and anxious, physicians were more intelligent, introverted and anxious. Bank managers were more extroverted, relaxed, tough minded and intelligent artists were introverted and tender minded.

Singh (1996) conducted a study on some personality characteristics of school

adolescents in relation to their mother’s employment. The sample of the study consisted of 200 students reading in degree classes in the colleges located in Ara (Bihar). Out of these 100 of them belonged to both mothers and father as earning members and 100 of them whose mothers, were housewives and father was earning member. Both male and female sample of age group 18-21 years were taken for study. Tool used in this study was Hindi adaption of 16 personality factor questionnaire (Cattell's 16 PF 1967-68 edition Hindi version). The results revealed that the two groups of adolescents differed significantly on personality factors measured. The results indicated that sample of working group of mothers generally seemed to be outgoing, open minded, emotionally more stable, bold, venturesome, adaptive to change, independent in taking decisions and actions. While students of non-working groups of mothers were found more reserved, less outgoing, easily moved by emotions and feelings, shy, conservative, with drawing, tradition oriented and depending on others to take decisions and actions.

Sridevi and Rao (1998) conducted a study on temporal effects of meditation and

personality. This study included the subjects who participated in the study and were drawn from the female employees of two pharmaceutical companies located in Andhra Pradesh. The age of the subjects ranged from 20-28 years. The tool used in this study was 16 personality factors questionnaire (Cattell, 1968) as a measure of personality. The sample size was 140 female employers. The results revealed a significant increase in the positive personality growth as a function of length of meditation practice, across groups. The long term meditator group seems to have acquired more positive personality characteristics compared to any other group. The increase appears to be linear even though the amount of meditation practice was not continuously spread out across the groups.

Roy (2002) conducted a study on personality differences across four metropolitan

cities of India. Data were collected from Calcutta (N=93), Madras (N=78), Bombay (N=64) and Delhi (N=51). The mean age of the sample was 43.69. They were employed in different govt. schools. govt. hospitals, Nationalised banks and art colleges. The Cattells 16 PF (Form A) was used for assessment of personality patterns. A large number of people in Calcutta and Madras prefer academic and cultural activities. They were high on factors B. I and Q2, i.e.,

intelligent, tough minded and group dependent respectively comparing with Calcutta and Madras. Samples of Delhi and Bombay were less intelligent (B-) conventional (E-) tough minded (I-) and group dependent (Q2). So these places were viable for establishments of conventional.

2.2.4 Influence of personality factors on academic achievement of students Sinha (1973) conducted a study on extroversion and neuroticism in relation to

academic achievement. Eysenk hypothesized that a good educational attainer should score high on the neuroticism scale and low on extroversion scale sample consisted of two extreme groups in the achievement continum range of 200 subjects each. The mean age of students were 13.6 and 14.3 years. It was found that extroversion scores were negatively related to achievement scores at 0.05 level of confidence and that upon extraversion scores, high and low achievers could be substantially differentiated. Neuroticism scores were positively related to achievement scores at 0.05 level of confidence and also upon neuroticism scores, high and the low achievers could be substantially differentiated.

Gupta (1973) conducted a study on relative importance of some correlates of

academic achievement. Sample of the study was, students of class IX have been considered students were divided in to high, medium and low scoring groups by a method developed by Mathur (1966). The upper group comprises of scores 45 and above and lower group 32 and below. The results were found that intelligence seemed to be the best single predictors of academic success. Other variables among those considered that contribute to academic success through of small magnitude were achievement motivation and fathers expectation. Socio-economic status was independent of academic achievement.

However, Parmeshs (1976) study revealed that personality dimensions did not affect

scholastic achievement. He conducted a study on dimensions of personality and achievement in scholastic subjects. The eysenk personality inventory was administered to 155 high school boys with a mean age of 16.14. on the basis of the median scores they were divided in to 4 groups representing EN, En, eN and en levels of extroversion and neuroticism. The scholastic achievement of these subjects as represented by their marks in the curriculum subjects obtained at the secondary school leaving certificate public examination was analysed as related to the personality dimensions.

Dhillon and Beri (1983) study on academic achievement and emotional security

across five groups of students, technical, polytechnical, humanities and social sciences, medical and sciences. The sample compressed each group of 60 students of which 30 were males and 30 females total sample comprised of 300 students studying in different colleges and departments of Delhi University and other institutions in Delhi. The tools used were personal information. The security, insecurity inventory by Maslow (1952) was adapted academic achievement was taken as percentage of marks obtained by the students. ANOVA results revealed significant differences in the level of achievement among the five groups and students. There was significant differences in emotional security of medical students and students of the other four academic courses.

Sontakey (1988) conducted a study on personality factors of high achievers and low

achievers in biological sciences. A sample of 295 was selected for which 195 were high achievers and 100 low achievers (boys and girls together). These high and low achievers were identified from grades IX, X and XI of high school and higher secondary schools situated in Nagapur district. The junior-senior HSPQ form A by cattell adopted by Kapoor in Indian conditions was administered to the students. The study concludes that high achievers were more intelligent, possess brighter overall personality disposition, tended to be less exitable. Besides, they found to tough minded self retiant, realistic in comparision to low achievers. The high achieving boys were also intelligent, tended to be less exitable and vigorous and zestful than their counterparts i.e. the low achieving boys. The high achieving girls were also found to possess brighter over all personality disposition. They tended to be more conscientious and persevering. Besides they were more apprehensive and worrying than the low achieving girls.

Shanmuga (1989) conducted a study on urban rural difference in academic

achievement and achievement related factors. The sample of the study included 490 final

year degree class students from 14 colleges affiliated to University of Madras. 291 were from the colleges located in the urban areas and 199 were from the colleges located in the rural areas. Tools used for the study were final university examination marks obtained by the students were used as the criteria of academic achievement. Self concept was measured by using Mahsin’s self concept scale. Taylors manifest anxiety scale was used to measure the manifest anxiety. Ravens progressive matrices test was used to measure the intelligence. Adjustment problem was measured by using Reddy’s adjustment problem check list. Mehrabian’s achieving tendency scale was used to measure the achievement motivation. The study revealed that high achieving rural students were having higher achievement motivation than the urban students. Low achieving rural students were positive self concept and higher manifest anxiety low achieving urban students were higher intelligence and higher adjustment problems.

Sharma and Bansal (1991-92) conducted a study on Academic achievement and

intelligence of extrovert and introvert adolescent girls. The study was taken up during the period 1989-90 with a view of compare their academic achievement and level of intelligence. XI class students of G.G.I.C (Pantnagar) and Sanatan Knaya Inter College (Rudrapur). The total number of students was 426 extroversion and introversion questionnaire were distributed among 426 girl students. On the basis of their answers 66 girls were extrovert, 41 were introvert and remaining were ambivert. A random sample of 30, 30 each form extrovert and introvert group was selected by chit lottery method. The result revealed that an extrovert adolescent girls differ significantly in their attitudes towards level of intelligence. However, they were almost similar in their academic achievements on the whole the extrovert adolescents girls were more intelligent than introverts.

Goel (2003) conducted a study on feeling and security and educational achievement

of the college students. The aim of the present study is to assess the relationship between security, insecurity and academic achievement. Security-insecurity inventory was administered to a sample of 500 girls of graduate and post graduate classes from different colleges in Agra. For measuring the educational achievement aggregate of marks obtained in the public examination by the students were taken into consideration. Results revealed hat the feeling of insecurity had adverse effect on the students educational achievement. Low achievement has a positive relationship with the feeling of insecurity whereas the students who had average and high achievements had positive relationship with the feeling of security. The results indicated that students who had the feeling of security made high educational achievement and students who had the feeling insecurity have made low educational achievement.

Intelligence

Pandey and Singh (1978) conducted a study on correlational study of school examination marks intelligence and achievement scores on a sample of 120 male students selected randomly from high schools of Chapra (Bihar) studying in class 8

th with the mean

age of 12.5 years where in the half yearly examination marks represented the achievement and intelligence was measured by verbal intelligence test developed by Mahsin. The results revealed a significant positive correlation between school examination marks and verbal intelligence.

Stipek and Gralinkis (1996) conducted a study to know the associations among the

children's belief about intelligence and effort goal orientations, self reported learning strategies and academic achievement. Assessment of all variables were conducted twice over one school year on 319 children in grades 3

rd to 6

th. Results indicated that the belief that

intelligence is global in its effects on performance. This set of belief was differentiated from the belief that effort has positive effects on intelligence and performance children's belief to intelligence as fixed and affecting performance were negatively associated with academic achievement.

Begum and Phukan (2001) conducted a study to know the relation between academic

achievement and intelligence in both boys and girls separately. Studying in English medium schools at Jorhat district, Assam. The sample consisted of 180 students of class IX out of which 118 were male and 62 were female. Group test of intelligence (13+17

7) developed by

Ahuja (1976) was administered to obtain their intelligence scores. Differences in correlation between academic achievement and intelligence with respect to boys and girls were observed separately. Results revealed that the correlation was greater (r=0.78) in case of girls than that of boys (r=0.63).

Anxiety

Upamanyu et al. (1980) administered Cattell's anxiety scale to 100 male post graduate students of the faculty social sciences. The mean percentage of marks in the MA part I and II was obtained to measure academic achievement. The results showed that anxiety was associated negatively with academic achievement and intelligence. Similar results were found by Srivastava et al. (1980) in the same year they studied on 100 male undergraduate students of age 16 to 19 years form rural area of Varanasi. Examination anxiety questionnaire (EAS) developed by author was used for ascertaining degree of anxiety. Marks obtained at the high school examination anxiety and academic achievement were negatively correlated to the extent of 0.66 which was significant at 0.01 level. Singh and Asha (1984) study on neuroticism anxiety and academic achievement. It showed that more numbers of high achievers were high on anxiety in comparison to low achievers. It was found to be highly significant where in high achievers. It was found to be highly significant where in high achievers had high anxiety. The sample consisted of 70 male and 70 female undergraduate students and were administered Kapoor's anxiety scale (1966). Marks obtained in the previous examination were considered for academic achievement.

Sudhir's (1989) study on a sample of 440 students of classes IX and X selected from

a high schools. It showed that students with high test anxiety were found to have higher mean score on achievement motivation than those having low test anxiety. The mean difference was statistically significant at 0.05 level indicating that test anxiety was positively related to achievement motivation Rao's achievement motivation scale and test anxiety scale (1989) developed by author was used similarly Mishra (1992) found that academic achievement was associated with test anxiety. The sample consisted of 88 boys selected from three different schools and were administered test anxiety scale. The results showed that 80-85 per cent of academic achievement was due to test anxiety, self concept and study habits.

Shanmuga (1995) conducted a study on "The effect of anxiety on academic

achievement". The sample for this study consisted of 170 final year Arts and Science post graduate students, studying in various courses at Annamalai University. Out of 170 there were about 129 male and 41 female students. The average age of final year post graduate student was 22 years. Taylor's manifest anxiety scale was used to measure the level of anxiety. The final semester marks of the students were obtained from the university records and treated as the achievement scores of the students. Personal data sheet was used to elicit personal information of the respondents. The results were found that there was negative relationship between anxiety and academic achievement of students. Low anxiety students were high academic achievers and high anxiety students were low academic achievers.

Sud and Prabha (2003) conducted study on "Academic performance in relation to

perfectionism test procrastination and test anxiety of high school children. This study examined the relationship of academic performance with perfectionism, test procrastination and test anxiety (and its worry and emotionality) components among high school boys and girls. Total sample was 200 aggregate of annual academic scores were taken from the school records of previous year. Correlational analysis revealed that academic performance was significantly and negatively related to self oriented perfectionism, procrastination, test anxiety worry and emotionality. Test procrastination and test anxiety turned out to be most effective variables in this regard.

2.2.5 Relation between personality and vocational preferences

Jain and Chouhan (1989) conducted a study to examine developmental pattern of personality and vocational preferences during adolescence period. For this 900 students between the age group (12 to 18) more divided in three group of each 300 subjects (Preadolescents (12 to 14 yrs), midadolescents (14-16 yrs). Hindi version of HSPQ developed by Kapoor, Srivastava and Srivastava (1985) and self prepared vocational preferences record

were used to measure personality and vocational preferences and students. Results indicated that personality factors less intelligent vs more intelligent (B), phlegmatic temperament vs Excitability (D). Submissiveness vs dominance (E), expedient vs conscientious (G) tough minded vs tender minded (I). Group dependent vs self sufficient (Q2) and uncontrolled vs controlled (Q3) changed with age and vocational preferences of students also changed during adolescence period of life.

Mehta and Sewani (1995) conducted a study to see the effect and interactive effect of

vocational maturity and need for achievement upon the personality pattern of adolescent girls of X std. A sample of 230 girls of Kendriya Vidyalaya, Jaipur were administered vocational attitude maturity scale. Murray's 20 need for achievement and need for abasement, items and HSPQ. Results were found that (1) High vocationally mature girls were significantly more warm hearted, outgoing, emotionally stable, individualistic, internally restrained. Self sufficient, resourceful decisive, relaxed, tranquil, unfrustrated less excitable in comparison to low vocationally mature girls (2) Subjects having high need for achievement were significantly more emotionally stable, excitable, assertive, independent, happy go lucky, impulsive, lively, self-sufficient, resourceful and decisive (3) High vocational maturity along with high need for achievement found to be leading to more warm heartedness, emotional stability, individualistic tendencies, self control, less tension and frustration in comparison to other groups.

2.3 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT 2.3.1 Concepts and definitions

According to Crow and Crow (1964) academic achievement means the extent to which a learner is profiting from the instructions in a given area of learning i.e., achievement is reflected by the extent to which a skill or knowledge has been acquired by a person from the training imparted to him.

2.3.2 Effect of parent’s educational level on academic achievement of children

Of the various home conditions, parents educational attainment is vital so far as the academic achievement of the children is concerned. The general indifference towards education of the uneducated parents often puts the child in a position of handicap for intellectual growth of development.

Krishnan (1977) conducted a study on 180 students from class 6

th to 9

th studying in

central school, Tirupati. The sample was divided into 3 groups depending upon their parents education as high, middle and low groups. The results showed that parents educational status had significant influence on the academic achievement of the children.

In the same year Saini (1977) conducted a study on academic achievement as a

function of economic status and educational standard of parents. The sample consisted of 196 students from 4 colleges of Chandigarh. The findings revealed that the economic status as well as educational standard of parents had significant effect on the academic achievement of arts and science students at the college level.

Similar results were reported by Singhal (1983) he conducted a study to find the

relationship between educational level of parents and academic achievement of their children. The sample consisted of 276 primary school children from Delhi and Culcutta. The children were classified in to 3 groups (high, medium and low) on the basis of parents education. The educational status of both the parents was taken depending on whether they finished elementary school, high school or college education. The results revealed that differences in educational background of parents contributed to difference in the performance of their children.

Sharma (1984) also conducted a study to examine the effect of parents education on

academic achievement of children. The sample consisted of 237 students of 9th class and the

level of educational attainment of both the parents were assessed. The result revealed that parental education was positively correlated with the academic achievement of their sons and daughter.

Similarly Bhatnagar and Sharma (1992) carriedout a research to investigate the

relationship between education of parents and academic achievement of students in a semirural setting. A total of 85 students of Rajasthan city were related. The results revealed that, the children whose parents attended school performed higher academic performance than the children whose parents not attended the school indicates parental education was significantly related to the academic achievement of students.

Panda and Jena (2000) conducted a study on "effect of some paternal characteristics

of class IX students achievement motivation". The study was designed to findout the effect of place of residence. Occupation and educational qualification of fathers on the achievement motivation of 200 IX class students selected from 6 secondary schools located in the headquarters of Jaipur and Kalahandi districts. Critical ratios (t-values) were computed to compare students scores on Rao achievement motivation test. The students belonging to fathers of Jaipur district, service group and high educational qualification category were found to have significantly better achievement motivation as compared to their counterparts.

2.3.3 Effect of parent's occupation on the academic achievement of the students

Parents occupation is an important variable which determines the economic status of

the family. Higher occupational level of the parents indicate better economic condition and this results in material support for the education of their children.

Georgewill (1987) conducted a study to findout the effect of parental occupation on

their children's academic achievement. The sample consisted of 500 parents in Port Hartcourt city. The results revealed that civil servants children perform better followed by children of business parents. But the poorest performance came from farmer's children.

Gill and Sidhu (1988) carriedout a study on intelligence of academic achievement in

the children belonging to different socio-economic groups in rural Punjab. The sample consisted of 80 students studying in 9

th class. On the basis of information collected from the

students, the subjects were divided in to three socio-economic groups i.e., servicemen. Agriculturists and labourers. The total marks obtained in 8

th standard verbal intelligence

scores and non verbal intelligence scores were taken. The results showed that highest marks were obtained in the service group, followed by agriculturists and then labourers. Verbal intelligence scores were highest in agriculturists followed by servicemen and labour class. Hence, the results showed that occupation of parents influenced the school performance of children.

Budhdev (1999) conducted a study on "Academic achievement among children of

working and non working mother. The study was designed to compare academic achievement among children of working and non working mothers, studying in secondary schools of Saurashtra region sample included 307 boys and 343 girls of working mothers and same number of boys and girls of non working mothers. Academic achievement score was collected from the annual worksheet of schools. It is described that academic achievement of the children of working mother is greater than the children of non-working mothers.

2.3.4 Influence of family size on academic achievement

Sunanda Raj and Krishnan (1980) carried out a study to determine the relationship between academic achievement with family size. The sample consisted of 300 pupils (149 boys and 151 girls) studying in standard IX of 8 secondary schools in Trivendrum city. The results revealed that the correlation between academic achievement and family size was negative and significant.

Cherian (1990) conducted a study on family size and academic achievement of children. The sample consisted of 369 boys and 652 girls in the age range of 13 to 17 years who represented total 7 standard population in Transkei. The marks obtained by the pupils at the standard 7 external examination conducted by the Department of Education of the Government of Transkei was taken. The results revealed a negative relationship between family size of children and their academic achievement.

III. MATERIAL AND METHODS

A study on "Influence of aptitude and personality profile on academic achievement of undergraduate students of University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad", was conducted during 2003.

This chapter presents the procedure followed for conducting the study. This section is

described under the following sub headings.

3.1 Research Design 3.2 Variables included in the study 3.3 Population and sample 3.4 Tools used for data collection 3.5 Grouping and quantifying the variables 3.6 Data collection procedure 3.7 Statistical analysis 3.8 Hypothesis

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

A correlation research design was employed as the study aimed to know the influence of aptitude and personality profile on academic achievement of undergraduate students of UAS Dharwad. An attempt has also been made in comparing aptitude, personality profile and academic achievement of students from different faculties for which a differential research design is adapted.

3.2 VARIABLES INCLUDED IN THE STUDY

1) Independent variables – Aptitude of the students – Personality profile of the students – Personal characteristics of the students

2) Dependent variables – Academic achievement of the students

3.3 POPULATION AND SAMPLE OF THE STUDY

The population for the study comprised of undergraduate students studying in I, II, III and IV years of Agriculture, Marketing and Home Science degree programme in the University of Agricultural Sciences Dharwad, College of Agriculture and Marketing are co-educational colleges but Home Science is only for girls. Initially 185 students were considered for the research but after deleting incomplete questionnaires and incomplete participation finally 160 students were recruited for the study.

Stratified random sampling method was used for the sample selection.

Selection plan

Agriculture Marketing Home Science Degree

programme in years

Strength of

class boys

Selected boys

Strength of

class girls

Selected girls

Strength of

class boys

Selected boys

Strength of

class girls

Selected girls

Strength of

class girls

Selected girls

I years 80 15 20 10 23 12 7 - 25 12

II years 86 15 17 10 21 11 7 - 26 13

III years 83 15 25 10 7 7 2 - 10 10

IV years 91 15 23 10 19 10 4 - 17 10

Total 340 60 85 40 70 40 20 - 78 45

Sample selected

Agriculture Marketing Home Science Class

Boys Girls Boys Girls Total

I years 10 10 10 12 42

II years 12 10 10 11 43

III years 11 10 7 10 38

IV years 10 7 10 10 37

Total 43 37 37 43 160

3.4 TOOLS USED FOR THE DATA COLLECTION (a) Differential aptitude test: Developed by Bennet et al. (1993) (b) 16 personality factors - developed by Cattell and IPAT (1982) (c) Socio-economic status inventory developed by Khadi et al. (2002) (d) Marks secured in the previous semester which represented in academic achievement

was obtained from the academic office

Description of the tools used for data collection

(a) Differential aptitude test

The aptitude scale developed by Bennett et al. (1993) was first published in 1947 and has undergone a number of revisions.

The tool consist of 7 subtests and the approx time allowed for each test is indicated

below.

Sl. No. Components Time required

1. Verbal reasoning 30 minutes 2. Numerical ability 30 minutes 3. Abstract reasoning 25 minutes 4. Space relations 30 minutes 5. Mechanical reasoning 30 minutes 6. Clerial speed and accuracy Part I 3 minutes Part II 3 minutes

7. Language usage Part I spelling 10 minutes Part II sentences 25 minutes

There are separate answer sheets which can be scored either by hand or by an IBM

test scoring machine. If the test papers are to be scored by an IBM test scoring machine the pupils must use special electrographic pencils.

The scoring procedure is described below

Sl. No.

Test Max. scor

e Formula

Hand keys

Machine keys

Notes

1. Verbal reasoning 50 R Rights only

Rights only One mark for each item number

2. Numerical ability 40 R-1/4 W Rights & wrongs

Rights & elimination

One mark for each item number

3. Abstract reasoning 50 R-1/4 W Rights & wrongs

Rights & elimination

One mark for each item number

4. Space relations 100 R-W Rights & wrongs

Rights & elimination

Multiple marks are permitted for each

item number

5. Mechanical reasoning 68 R-1/2 W Rights & wrongs

Rights & elimination

One mark for each item number

6. Clerial speed & accuracy 100 R Rights only

Rights only One mark for each item number only

Part II scored same key for forms A&B

7. Language usage

Part I 100 R-W Rights & wrongs

Rights and elimination

One mark for each item number

Part II 95 R-W Rights & wrongs

Rights and elimination

Multiple marks are permitted for each

item number

After obtaining the raw scores, these raw scores are converted in to percentiles by

using standard norms. This is separate for boys and girls based on their age. Based on these percentile scores the students are categorized in to

Category Score Code

High 80-99 1 Above average 55-75 2 Average 50 3 Below average 25-45 4 Low 1-20 5

For general scholastic aptitude index the sum of scores on verbal reasoning VR + on

numerical ability NA and VR+NA gives a composite score which is transferred in to the percentile rank, which gives an index of general scholastic aptitude or index of mental ability.

2) 16 personality factors

The 16 PF scale developed by Cattell RB and IPAT (1982) is an objectively scorable test derived by basic research in psychology to give the most complete coverage of personality possible in a brief time. The test was designed for use with individuals aged

sixteen and above. This tool is most appropriate for literate individuals whose education level is roughly equivalent to that of the normal high school students. The test can be scored by hand or by machine.

The 16 personality factors that are assessed using this tool are given below (primary

factors).

The primary source traits covered by the 16 PF test

Sl. No. Factor Low sten score description (1-3) High sten score description (8-10)

1. A Reserved, detached, critical, aloof, stiff, Sizothymia

Outgoing, warmhearted, easygoing, participating, Affatothymia

2. B Dull, low intelligence Bright, High intelligence

3. C Affected by feelings, emotionally less stable, easily upset, changeable, lower ego strength

Emotionally stable, mature, faces reality, calm, higher ego strength

4. E Hatnable, mild, easily led, docile accommodating, submissiveness

Assertive, aggressive, competitive, stubborn, dominance

5. F Sober, taciturn, serivous, desurgency Happy go lucky, enthusiastic, surgency

6. G Expedient, disregards rules, weaker superego strength

Conscientions, persistent, moralistic staid, stronger superego strength

7. H Shy, timid, threat, sensitive, threctia Venturesome, uninhibited, socially bold parmia

8. I Toughminded, selfretiant, realistic, harria,

Tenderminded, sensitive, clinging, over protected, premsia

9. L Trusting, accepting conditions alaxia Suspicious, hard to fool protention

10. M Practical, down-to-earth concerns, praxernia

Imaginative, bohemian, absentminded, autia

11. N Forthright, unpretentious, gemine but socially clumsy, artlessness

Astute, polished, socially aware shrowdness

12. O Self-assured, placid, secured, complacent, serene, untroubled adequacy

Apprehensive, self reproaching insecure worrying troubled, guilt proneness

13. Q1 Conservative, respecting traditional ideal, conservativism of temporament

Experimenting, liberal, free humbing radicalism

14. Q2 Group dependent a joiner and sound follower group adherence

Self sufficient, resourceful, prefers own decisions, self sufficiency

15. Q3 Undisciplined self conflict low follows own urges careless of social rules, low self sentiment integration

Controlled, excting will power, socially precise, compulsive, following self image, high strength of self sentiment

16. Q4 Relaxed, tranquil, torpid, unfrustrated composed, low ergic tension

Tense frusted, drived over wrought, high ergic tension

From the 16 factors further four secondary order factors can be derived viz., using a

mathematical formula (Appendix I).

1. Introversion vs extraversion 2. Low anxiety vs high anxiety 3. Tender minded, emotional vs Tough poise 4. Subduedness vs independence 5.

This tool consists of 187 statements which covers 16 personality dimensions. Each of the statement has 3 choices from which the subject has to select one answer.

Each answer scores 0, 1 or 2 points except the factor B for intelligence, where in

answers are scored 0 for incorrect or 1 for correct. The score of each item contributes to one factor total.

The standardization tables convert raw scores to sten scores (the term comes from

standard ten) that are distributed over ten equal interval, standard score points from 1 through 10. Based on sten scores students are categorized in to two levels as

Category Score

Low 1-3 High 8-10

By using sten scores of 16 primary factors. Second order factors could be further

calculated. The formula is different for male and female (Appendix I). The second order scores are categorized into

Category Score

Above average >5.5 Below average <5.5

3) Socio-economic status inventory

The inventory developed by Khadi et al. (2002), Venkataramaiah (1989) and Aaron et al. (1969) was used to assess the socio-economic status of students.

4) Academic achievement

The level of academic achievement was determined by taking cumulative grade point average (CGPA) of the students and categorised as follows.

Category Score

Fail <6.00 Pass >6.00 Fair >7.00 Average >8.00 High >9.00

3.5 GROUPING AND QUANTIFYING OTHER INDEPENDENT

VARIABLES (1) Age

Date of birth of the students was obtained from students itself and classified as follows.

Age Category

17-18 yrs Late adolescence 19-20 yrs Youths 21 & above Adults

(2) Gender

The students were classified as males and females.

(3) Ordinal position The grouping was done as follows.

Category

First born Middle born Last born

(4) Family type

The students were grouped into two categories of family type viz., nuclear family and joint family based on composition of the family.

Category Family type

Nuclear Family with only parents and their children Joint Family with more than two couples and their children

(5) Size of the family

The information collected regarding size of the family was categorized as follows.

Category Family members

Small family <4 Medium family 5-7 Large family 8 and above

(6) Number of siblings

The information collected regarding number of siblings was categorized as follows

Category Score

No sibling 0 One sibling 1 Two sibling 2 Three siblings 3 Four siblings 4 Five and above siblings 5

(7) Education of the parents

According to level of education of the parents (Father and mother) the categorisation and quantification was made as shown below using Venkataramiah's (1983) scale.

Category Score

Illiterate 0 Can read only (5

th) 2

Can read and write (7th

) 5 Middle + high school 10 College 12 Graduate 15 Post graduate, MBBS, BE 18 Advance education 20

(8) Occupation of the parents

Based on the occupation of the parents (Father and mother) classification was as follows and quantified according to Aaron et al. (1969) SES scale.

Category Score

Unemployed 0

Labourer 2

Caste occupation 5

Small business, shop cultivation 10

Business, clerks, elementary school teachers 15

High school teachers, technicians 18

Land lords, high government officials, professionals 20

(9) Choice of professional courses by students was quantified as follows.

Category

Out of interest 6 Good course 5 Better academic accomplishment 4 Better job opportunities 3 Less expenditure 2 Out of compulsion 1

3.6 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE

Prior permission of the Heads of the institution was sought for approaching the teachers and students. The students list was taken from the academic office to know the strength of the students and for selection of the sample. The class teachers were requested to spare one practical class for administering the aptitude and personality factors scales and for eliciting the auxilary information of the students through questionnaire.

Students were made to sit comfortably and provided the assessment material. They

were asked to fill the personal information sheet which includes general information and education background of the students. The questionnaires were self administered to the students who were selected randomly by enlisting the students from Agriculture, Marketing and Home Science courses. The necessary instructions were given to the respondents before filling the questionnaires. The example given in the test booklet were duly illustrated. Before starting the test all doubts of students were clarified. The questionnaire was administered in two sessions on the same day with a gap of 15-20 min to avoid mental fatigue, as the test was very lengthy. The tests were administered on the same day which to avoid chances of absentism, is likely to occur if the other part of the questionnaire was given on another day. It took totally 16 visits to collect the information. It took 3 hours and 6 minutes to administer aptitude scale and one hour to administer personality profile.

Few students were ommitted because they did not completely attend all the tests.

They appeared for only one or two tests. Final CGPA of the students was recorded from the records of students maintained by

academic office to know the Academic achievement of the students.

3.7 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (1) To know the differences in the personality profile and academic achievement among

students Agriculture, Marketing and Home Science 't' test was carried out using the formula as follows.

x1-x2 t = 1 1 S

2 +

√

n1 n2 Where (n1-1)S

21 + (n2-1)S

22

S² = n1 + n2 - 2

x1 = Mean of the first group

x2 = Mean of the second group

S²1= Variance of the first group

S²2= Variance of the second group

n1 = Number of observations in the first group

n2 = Number of observations in the second group

S²= Pooled variance of S1 and S2

Which is having students 't' distribution with n1 + n2-2 degrees of freedom.

(2) Distribution pattern of students by level of aptitude, personality profile and academic achievement was tested by chi-square (x²) test using the formula.

∑(Oi - Ei)² X²= Ei

Oi = Observed frequency

Ei = expected frequency

The chi-square value was compared with the table values for (r-1) (c-1) degrees of

freedom (d.f.) 'r' denoting the number of rows, 'c' denoting number of columns in the contingency table.

(3) Factor analysis was done to compare the aptitude, personality profile and academic

achievement between gender and faculty. (4) Karl Pearson's product moment correlation coefficient analysis was used to measure the

relationship between dependent and independent variables using the formula. n∑xy-∑x∑y r = √

{n∑x² - (∑x)²} {n∑y² - ∑y)²}

Where,

r = Simple correlation coefficient

x = Independent variable

y = Dependent variable

∑x = sum of x values

∑y = sum of y values

∑x² = sum of square x values

∑y² = sum of square y values

∑xy = sum of xy

To test the significance of the correlation values, 't' test was used with the help of

following formula.

r √n-2 t = √1-r²

t ≈ n-2

3.8 HYPOTHESIS SET FOR THE STUDY (1) Aptitude does not vary among the graduates of different faculties. (2) Socio-demographic factors do not influence the personality profile, aptitude and academic

achievement of students. (3) There is no inter-relation between aptitude, personality profile and academic achievement

of the students.

IV. RESULTS

The results of the present study are presented under the following headings.

4.1 Personal and socio-demographic characteristics of undergraduate students 4.2 Reasons for choice of undergraduate program by the undergraduate students 4.3 Personality factors of the undergraduate students 4.4 Aptitude of undergraduate students 4.5 Academic achievement of the undergraduate students 4.6 Interrelation of aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of undergraduate

students 4.7 Influence of socio-demographic factors on aptitude, personality factors and academic

achievement of undergraduate students 4.8 Influence of aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement on choice of post

graduate courses

4.1 PERSONAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

4.1.1 Personal characteristics of the undergraduate students

The table 1 shows, the age of the students ranged between 17-23 years. More number of students (56-88%) were in the age range of 21-23 years. Majority of students of Home Science were in the age range of 21-23 years (60.47%) and only few students were in the age range of 17-18 years (2.5%). More number of students were firstborn (53.75%), followed by second born (28.75%) and last born (17.5%). About 37 per cent of students had two siblings. Only 2 per cent students had five siblings equal proportion of students were form rural (50%) and urban (50%) education background.

4.1.2 Familial characteristics of the sample

The table 2 shows, more than half of the students had medium size family (63.75%). Least number of students were from large size family (3.13%). Most of them (93%) were from nuclear family. Only 6 per cent of them were from joint family.

Majority of the fathers were graduates (44.38%) whereas about 2.5 per cent were

illiterates and 12.50 per cent were postgraduate. Only 1.25 per cent of the mothers were postgraduates and majority of the group had parents with education upto high school (36.25%). Only 9.38 per cent of them were graduates, 8.12 per cent of mothers were illiterates.

Majority of the fathers (43.13%) were businessman, clerks or elementary school

teachers, while 38.12 per cent of them were small business, shopkeepers and cultivators. About 10 per cent of them were landlords, high government officials or undergraduates.

Majority of (92.50%) the mothers were house wives and only 6.3 per cent of mothers

were elementary school teachers and 0.6 per cent each worked as labourer and as high school teachers.

Table 1. Personal characteristics of undergraduate students

Agriculture Sl. No. Character Category

Boys Girls

Home Science

Marketing Total

1. Gender Male 43 (26.88)

-

-

37 (23.12)

80 (50.00)

Female -

37 (23.12)

43 (26.88)

-

80 (50.00)

Total 43 (26.88)

37 (23.12)

43 (26.88)

37 (23.12)

160 (100.00)

2. Age 17-18 yrs -

-

4 (9.30)

-

4 (2.50)

19-20 yrs 19 (44.19)

20 (54.05)

13 (30.23)

13 (35.13)

65 (40.62)

21 & above 24 (55.81)

17 (45.95)

26 (60.47)

24 (64.87)

91 (56.88)

3. Ordinal position First 21 (48.83)

19 (51.40)

29 (67.40)

17 (45.94)

86 (53.75)

Second 13 (30.23)

10 (27.00)

8 (18.60)

15 (40.54)

46 (28.75)

Last 9 (20.94)

8 (21.60)

6 (14.00)

5 (13.52)

28 (17.50)

4. No. of siblings 0 3 (6.98)

1 (2.70)

2 (4.70)

-

6 (3.75)

1 10 (23.26)

9 (24.32)

15 (34.90)

12 (32.43)

46 (28.75)

2 15 (34.88)

13 (35.14)

16 (37.20)

16 (43.25)

60 (37.50)

3 12 (27.90)

11 (29.72)

8 (18.60)

8 (21.62)

39 (24.37)

4 3 (6.98)

1 (2.70)

1 (2.30)

1 (2.70)

6 (3.75)

5 -

2 (5.41)

1 (2.30)

-

3 (1.88)

5. Rural 28 (65.10)

19 (51.40)

11 (25.60)

22 (59.50)

80 (50.00)

Education background in rural/urban

Urban 15 (34.90)

18 (48.60)

32 (74.40)

15 (40.50)

80 (50.00)

Table 2. Familial characteristics of the undergraduate students

Agriculture Sl. No. Character Category

Boys Girls

Home Science

Marketing Total

1. Family size Small 13 (30.24)

10 (27.00)

17 (39.54)

13 (35.10)

53 (33.12)

Medium 29 (67.44)

25 (67.60)

25 (58.14)

23 (62.20)

102 (63.75)

Large 1 (2.32)

2 (5.40)

1 (2.32)

1 (2.70)

5 (3.13)

2. Type of family Nuclear 38 (88.40)

35 (94.60)

42 (97.70)

35 (94.60)

150 (93.75)

Joint 5 (11.60)

2 (5.40)

1 (2.30)

2 (5.40)

10 (6.25)

3a. Education of father

Illiterate 2 (4.70)

-

1 (2.30)

1 (2.70)

4 (2.50)

5th -

-

1 (2.30)

1 (2.70)

2 (1.25)

7th -

1

(2.70) -

3 (8.12)

4 (2.50)

High school 8 (18.60)

8 (21.62)

4 (9.30)

9 (24.32)

29 (18.12)

PUC 8 (18.60)

10 (27.02)

5 (11.62)

5 (13.51)

28 (17.50)

Graduate 21 (48.80)

14 (37.85)

23 (54.58)

13 (35.14)

71 (44.38)

Post graduate

3 (7.00)

4 (10.81)

8 (18.60)

5 (13.51)

20 (12.50)

Ph. D 1 (2.30)

-

1 (2.30)

-

2 (1.25)

3b. Education of mother

Illiterate 2 (4.70)

1 (2.70)

3 (7.00)

7 (18.90)

13 (8.12)

5th 2

(4.70) 3

(8.10) 1

(2.30) 2

(5.40) 8

(5.00)

7th 6

(14.00) 11

(29.70) 8

(18.60) 7

(18.90) 32

(20.00)

High school 18 (41.80)

11 (29.70)

16 (37.20)

13 (35.20)

58 (36.25)

PUC 12 (27.80)

7 (18.90)

9 (20.90)

4 (10.80)

32 (20.00)

Graduate 3 (7.00)

4 (10.90)

4 (9.30)

4 (10.80)

15 (9.38)

Post graduate

-

-

2 (4.70)

-

2 (1.25)

Ph. D -

-

-

-

-

Table 2 . Contd…..

Agriculture Sl. No. Character Category

Boys Girls

Home Science

Marketing Total

4a Occupation of father

Unemployed

2 (4.70)

-

1 (2.30)

1 (2.70)

4 (2.50)

Labourer -

-

-

-

-

Caste occupation

-

-

-

-

-

Small business

16 (37.20

)

17 (45.90)

10 (23.30)

18 (48.60)

61 (38.12)

Business, clerks

17 (39.50

)

12 (32.40)

25 (58.10)

15 (40.60)

69 (43.13)

High school teachers

3 (7.00)

2 (5.40)

2 (4.70)

2 (5.40)

9 (5.63)

Land lords 5 (11.60

)

6 (16.30)

5 (11.60)

1 (2.70)

17 (10.62)

4b Occupation of mother

Unemployed

40 (93.00

)

35 (94.60)

36 (83.80)

37 (100.00)

148 (92.50)

Labourer -

-

1 (2.30)

-

1 (0.60)

Caste occupation

-

-

-

-

-

Small business

-

-

-

-

-

Business, clerks

3 (7.00)

2 (5.40)

5 (11.60)

-

10 (6.30)

High school teachers

-

-

1 (2.30)

-

1 (0.60)

Land lords -

-

-

-

-

4.2 REASONS FOR CHOICE OF UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM BY THE UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

The table 3 shows, the reasons reported by students selecting respective

undergraduate courses. About 39.7 per cent of students selected the course out of interest, while 26.25 per cent of students chose the course as it was a good course. About 17 per cent joined the course because of many job opportunities, 6.87 per cent selected the course for better academic accomplishment, while 3.75 per cent selected the course out of compulsion and 2.5 per cent joined the course as it was inexpensive. About 4 per cent of students mentioned that they joined because there was no other way, due to friends or due to proximity to house.

This indicated that 66 per cent of students showed inclination for the course i.e. they

selected either out of interest or an assumption as good course while 34 per cent did not have interest nor ability was considered for selection of the course.

4.3 PERSONALITY FACTORS OF THE UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

The Table 4 and Fig. 1 gives information regarding the percentage distribution of the

students by their level of personality factors. It is seen from the Table that most of the students were in average category in all 16 personality factors ranging form 58 to 86 per cent. About 13 to 36 per cent of students were in low category in the factors A, B, C, E, F, H, Q3 and Q4 which indicated these students were low in negative factors like reserved, dull and less intelligent, emotionally less stable, mild, sober, shy, undisciplined self conflict and also low in positive factor like relaxed. Similarly equal proportion (13 to 34%) of students were in high category in the factors G, I, L, N and O which indicated that these students were high in positive characters like moralistic, sensitive, socially aware and also high in negative factors like suspicious and insecure.

When the mean scores of personality factors of students were compared, it was

observed that the means ranged from 3.68 to 6.56, with highest mean scores of 6.56 in the factor 'O' indicating more insecurity and least mean score of 3.68 in the factor 'F' indicating the group was sober. The result indicated that the rest of the personality factors had mean scores between 4.36 to 6.51 that is in the average category.

In the second order personality factors most of the students were in average category

in all 4-second order personality factors ranging from 79 to 87 per cent. The means ranged from 4.36 to 5.74, with highest mean score of 5.74 in the factor 'Anxiety' indicating that, students were more anxious and had least mean score of 4.36 in the factor 'Introversion/Extraversion' indicating the group was more introvert.

4.3.1 Frequency distribution of levels of personality factors of undergraduate students by faculty

The Table 5 gives information regarding the percentage distribution of students by

their level of personality factors facultywise. Incase of boys of agriculture students, most of the students were in average category ranging from 51 to 91 per cent. Incase of girls of agriculture students, most of the students were in average category (65.97%) in all the personality factors except the factor 'F' and 'O'. In the factor 'F' most of the students were in low category indicating soberness of the students and in the factor 'O' most of the students were in high category indicating feeling of more insecurity.

Incase of Home Science students, most of the students were in average category

(47-95%) in all the personality factors except the factor 'E'. In this factor most of the students were in low category indicating they were mild.

Table 3. Reasons for choice of undergraduate programme by the

undergraduate students

Agriculture

Category

Boys Girls

Home Science

Marketing Total

Proximity to house, friends, no other choice

1 (2.30)

2 (5.40)

2 (4.70)

2 (5.40)

7 (4.37)

Out of compulsion 2 (4.70)

2 (5.40)

1 (2.30)

1 (2.70)

6 (3.75)

Less expenditure 1 (2.30)

-

1 (2.30)

2 (5.40)

4 (2.50)

Job opportunities 7 (16.30)

6 (16.20)

8 (18.60)

6 (16.20)

27 (16.87)

Better academic achievement 6 (14.0)

3 (8.10)

-

2 (5.40)

11 (6.87)

Good course 10 (2.30)

6 (16.20)

20 (46.50)

6 (16.20)

42 (26.26)

Interest 16 (37.10)

18 (48.70)

11 (25.60)

18 (48.70)

63 (39.38)

Table 4. Personality factors of undergraduate students

Mean sten scores Sl. No. Personality factors Low

(1-3) Medium

(4-7) High (8-10)

Mean and S.D.

1. A - Reserved-outgoing 42 (26.25)

114 (71.25)

4 (2.50)

4.57±1.52

2. B - Dull-bright 40 (25.0)

116 (72.50)

4 (2.50)

4.63±1.73

3. C - Emotionally less stable-mature 35 (22.00)

117 (73.12)

8 (5.00)

4.76±1.62

4. E - Mild-Aggressive 38 (23.75)

119 (74.37)

3 (1.87)

5.23±1.39

5. F - Sober-enthusiastic 58 (36.25)

92 (57.50)

10 (6.25)

3.68±1.39

6. G - Disregards rules-moralistic 10 (6.25)

130 (81.25)

20 (12.50)

5.96±1.69

7. H - Shy-Socially bold 20 (12.50)

133 (83.12)

7 (4.37)

5.37±1.27

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 14 (8.75)

117 (73.12)

29 (18.12)

5.32±1.82

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 9 (5.62)

128 (80.00)

23 (14.37)

6.21±1.56

10. M - Practical-imaginative 14 (8.75)

128 (80.00)

18 (11.25)

5.07±1.34

11. N - Socially clumsy- socially aware 13 (8.12)

92 (57.50)

55 (34.37)

6.51±1.92

12. O - Secure-insecure 12 (7.50)

107 (66.87)

41 (25.62)

6.56±2.00

13. Q1 - Conservative-liberal 10 (6.25)

138 (86.25)

12 (7.50)

5.88±1.51

14. Q2 - Group dependent-self sufficient

16 (10.00)

128 (80.00)

16 (10.00)

5.49±1.63

15. Q3 - Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

29 (8.12)

123 (76.87)

8 (5.00)

5.73±1.60

16. Q4 – Tense-Relaxed 33 (20.62)

121 (75.62)

6 (3.75)

4.83±1.67

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 18 (11.25)

130 (81.25)

12 (7.50)

4.36±1.18

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 5 (3.12)

127 (79.37)

28 (17.50)

5.74±1.30

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 23 (14.37)

135 (84.37)

2 (1.25)

5.05±1.79

4. Subduedness-Independent 21 (13.12)

139 (86.87)

0 (0.00)

4.98±1.04

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4

Me

an s

ten

sco

res

Personality factorsSecond order

personality factors

LEGEND

Personality factors

1. A-Reserved-outgoing

2. B-Dull-bright

3. C-Emotionally less stable-mature

4. E-Mild-Aggressive

5. F-Sober-enthusiastic

6. G-Disregards rules-moralistic

7. H-Shy-Socially bold

8. I-Self reliant-sensitive

9. L-Accepting condition- Suspicious

10. M-Practical-imaginative

11. N-Socially clumsy- socially aware

12. O-Secure-insecure

13. Q1-Conservative-liberal

14. Q2-Group dependent-self sufficient

15. Q3-Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

16. Q4–Tense-Relaxed

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety

3. Tender minded-Tough poise

4. Subduedness-Independent

Fig. 1. Personality factors of undergraduate students

Fig. 1. Personality factors of undergraduate students

Table 5. Personality factors undergraduate students by faculty

Boys of agriculture N=43 Girls of agriculture N=37 Home Science N=43 Marketing N=37 Sl. No. Category

Low (1-3) Med (4-7) High (8-

10) Low (1-3) Med (4-7)

High (8-10)

Low (1-3) Med (4-7) High (8-

10) Low (1-3) Med (4-7)

High (8-10)

1. A–Reserved-outgoing 8 (18.60) 34 (79.10) 1 (2.30) 13 (35.00) 24 (65.00) 0 (0.00) 16 (37.20) 27 (62.80) 0 (0.00) 5 (13.50) 29 (78.40) 3 (8.10)

2. B–Dull-bright 8 (18.60) 34 (79.10) 1 (2.30) 7 (18.90) 29 (78.40) 1 (2.70) 7 (16.20) 34 (79.10) 2 (4.70) 18 (48.60) 19 (51.40) 0 (0.00)

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 10 (23.20) 31 (72.20) 2 (4.70) 8 (21.60) 27 (73.00) 2 (5.40) 7 (16.20) 34 (79.10) 2 (4.70) 10 (27.00) 25 (67.60) 2 (5.40)

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 1 (2.30) 41 (95.40) 1 (2.30) 3 (8.10) 32 (86.50) 2 (5.40) 29 (67.40) 14 (32.50) 0 (0.00) 5 (13.50) 32 (86.50) 0 (0.00)

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 21 (48.80) 22 (51.20) 0 (0.00) 24 (65.00) 13 (35.00) 0 (0.00) 3 (6.90) 30 (69.80) 10 (23.30) 10 (27.00) 27 (73.00) 0 (0.00)

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 2 (4.70) 35 (81.40) 6 (13.70) 4 (10.80) 27 (73.00) 6 (16.20) 0 (0.00) 41 (95.30) 2 (4.70) 4 (10.80) 27 (73.00) 6 (16.20)

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 3 (6.90) 35 (81.50) 5 (11.60) 1 (2.70) 36 (97.30) 0 (0.00) 15 (34.40) 28 (65.10) 0 (0.00) 1 (2.70) 34 (91.00) 2 (5.40)

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 2 (4.70) 31 (72.10) 10 (23.20) 9 (24.30) 28 (75.70) 0 (0.00) 3 (6.90) 30 (69.80) 10 (23.30) 0 (0.00) 28 (75.70) 9 (24.30)

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 3 (6.90) 35 (81.50) 5 (11.60) 0 (0.00) 25 (67.50) 12 (32.40) 5 (11.60) 38 (88.40) 0 (0.00) 1 (2.70) 30 (81.10) 6 (16.20)

10. M – Practical-imaginative 3 (6.90) 36 (83.80) 4 (9.30) 4 (10.80) 32 (86.50) 1 (2.70) 0 (0.00) 30 (69.80) 13 (30.20) 7 (19.00) 30 (81.00) 0 (0.00)

11. N –Socially clumsy- socially aware 5 (11.60) 26 (60.50) 12 (27.90) 2 (5.40) 26 (70.30) 9 (24.30) 3 (6.90) 20 (46.55) 20 (46.55) 3 (8.10) 20 (54.10) 14 (37.80)

12. O-Secure-insecure 8 (18.60) 29 (67.50) 6 (13.90) 2 (5.40) 15 (40.50) 20 (54.10) 0 (0.00) 35 (81.40) 8 (18.60) 2 (5.40) 28 (75.70) 7 (18.90)

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 2 (4.70) 39 (90.60) 2 (4.70) 1 (2.70) 36 (97.30) 0 (0.00) 2 (4.70) 38 (88.40) 3 (6.90) 5 (13.50) 25 (67.50) 7 (19.00)

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient 5 (11.60) 36 (83.70) 2 (4.70) 3 (8.10) 29 (78.40) 5 (13.50) 0 (0.00) 34 (79.10) 9 (20.90) 8 (21.60) 29 (78.40) 0 (0.00)

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

3 (6.90) 39 (90.80) 1 (2.30) 0 (0.00) 31 (83.80) 6 (16.20) 13 (30.23) 29 (67.47) 1 (2.30) 13 (35.20) 24 (64.80) 0 (0.00)

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 12 (27.90) 26 (60.50) 5 (11.60) 7 (18.90) 29 (78.40) 1 (2.70) 8 (18.60) 35 (81.40) 0 (0.00) 6 (16.20) 31 (83.80) 0 (0.00)

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 4 (9.30) 38 (88.40) 1 (2.30) 6 (16.20) 31 (83.80) 0 (0.00) 4 (9.30) 28 (65.10) 11 (25.60) 4 (10.80) 33 (89.20) 0 (0.00)

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 0 (0.00) 40 (93.10) 3 (6.90) 2 (5.40) 26 (70.30) 9 (24.30) 3 (6.90) 29 (67.50) 11 (25.60) 0 (0.00) 32 (86.50) 5 (13.50)

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 8 (18.60) 34 (79.10) 1 (2.30) 1 (2.70) 36 (97.30) 0 (0.00) 3 (6.90) 40 (93.10) 0 (0.00) 11 (29.70) 25 (67.60) 1 (2.70)

4. Subduedness-Independent 0 (0.00) 43 (100.00) 0 (0.00) 2 (5.40) 35 (94.50) 0 (0.00) 16 (37.20) 27 (62.80) 0 (0.00) 3 (8.20) 34 (91.80) 0 (0.00)

Incase of Marketing students, most of the students were in average category in all the 16 personality factors, ranging from 51 to 91 per cent.

When the means score of personality factors were compared (Table 6) between the

faculties using one way ANOVA it was observed that significant differences were found in the factors A, B, F, I, O and Q3.

Boys of agriculture students were significantly higher than the girls of agriculture and

Home Science students, in the factor 'F' and 'I' which indicated they were more enthusiastic and sensitive compared to girls of agriculture and Home Science students.

Girls of agriculture students were significantly higher than the Home Science and

Marketing students in the factor 'B' which indicated they were more intelligent. They were also significantly higher than boys of agriculture and Marketing students in the factor 'O' indicates they were feeling more insecure.

Home Science students were significantly higher than the boys of agriculture and

Marketing students in the factor 'O' indicating more insecurity. They were also significantly higher than all the faculties in the factor 'Q3' which indicated they were high on self control than the others.

Marketing students were significantly higher than all the faculties in the factor 'A' and

'F' which indicated they were more outgoing and enthusiastic. They were also significantly higher than girls of agriculture and Home Science students in the factor 'I' indicating they were more sensitive. However these students were significantly lower compared to others in the factors 'B' and 'Q3' indicates they were less intelligent and undisciplined self conflict compared to others.

In the remaining factors C, E, G, H, L, M, N Q1, Q2, and Q4 i.e., there was no

significant differences between students of different faculties. In case of second order personality factors (Table 5) a higher percentage of boys of

agriculture (79-100%), girls of agriculture (70-97%), Home Science (63-93%) and Marketing (68-92%) students were in average category in all the four second order personality factors.

When the means score of second order personality factors were compared (Table 6) between the faculties, it was observed that significant difference was found in factors I, III and IV.

Boys of agriculture students were significantly higher compared to Home Science and

Marketing students, in the factors I and IV respectively. which indicated that they were extroverts and independent.

Girls of agriculture students and Home Science students were significantly higher

compared to boys of agriculture and Marketing students in the factor III which indicated they were tough minded.

Marketing students were significantly higher than the girls of agriculture and Home

Science students in the factor I which indicated they were extrovert while their counterparts girls of agriculture and Home Science students were introverts.

There was no significant difference in factor II (anxiety) between the students of

different faculties.

4.3.2 Comparison of personality factors between faculty

(a) Home Science and girls of agriculture students

Table 7 shows the comparison of levels of personality factors of girls between the faculty of Home Science and Agriculture. The analysis revealed that there was a significant association with the levels of the factors E, F, G, H, I, L, M, O and Q3 and faculty, indicating

Table 6. Comparison of mean scores of personality factors of students by faculty

Boys of agriculture

Girls of agriculture

Home Science (only females)

Marketing (only males)

Sl. No. Category

Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

F S.Em± CD

1. A–Reserved-outgoing 4.98 1.39 3.95 1.31 3.95 1.25 5.43 1.59 11.34 0.12 0.24*

2. B–Dull-bright 4.95 1.53 5.08 1.83 4.81 1.69 3.57 1.48 6.87 0.14 0.27*

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 4.67 1.54 4.86 1.69 4.98 1.54 4.51 1.74 0.63 0.13 NS

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 5.56 1.26 5.27 1.30 5.14 1.58 4.92 1.34 1.51 0.11 NS

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 3.81 1.28 3.35 1.11 3.23 1.27 4.38 1.62 5.94 0.11 0.22*

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 5.93 1.62 6.11 1.65 6.33 1.67 5.41 1.74 2.15 0.13 NS

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 5.44 1.62 5.03 1.01 5.26 1.24 5.76 0.98 2.25 0.10 NS

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 6.33 1.74 4.35 1.30 4.09 1.34 6.54 1.32 31.52 0.14 0.27*

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 5.74 1.62 6.57 1.42 6.33 1.64 6.27 1.47 2.05 0.12 NS

10. M – Practical-imaginative 5.63 1.45 4.84 1.17 4.93 1.28 4.81 1.29 3.66 0.11 NS

11. N –Socially clumsy- socially aware 6.09 2.01 6.35 1.72 6.93 1.67 6.65 2.23 1.52 0.15 NS

12. O-Secure-insecure 5.72 1.92 7.24 2.15 7.00 2.13 6.35 1.36 5.17 0.16 0.31*

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 5.67 1.39 6.03 1.44 6.12 1.37 5.68 1.83 0.96 0.12 NS

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient 5.47 1.68 5.76 1.64 5.77 1.41 4.95 1.70 2.18 0.13 NS

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled 5.47 1.22 6.24 1.32 6.60 1.33 4.51 1.74 16.90 0.13 0.26*

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 4.84 1.86 4.95 1.78 4.58 1.72 5.00 1.22 0.50 0.13 NS

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 4.62 1.11 4.05 1.14 3.97 1.17 4.80 1.09 5.18* 0.254 0.68

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 5.45 1.04 5.95 1.44 5.63 1.64 5.96 0.85 1.48 0.290 0.78NS

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 4.42 1.47 5.89 1.51 5.94 1.58 3.89 1.69 17.31* 0.351 0.94

4. Subduedness-Independent 5.44 0.83 4.93 1.07 4.91 1.08 4.58 1.00 5.07* 0.224 0.60

Table 7. Association of levels of personality factors and faculty

Home Science (N=43) Girls of agriculture (N=37) Sl. No. Category

Low Medium High Low Medium High χχχχ²

1. A–Reserved-outgoing 16 (37.20) 27 (62.80) 0 (0.0) 13 (35.00) 24 (65.00) 0 (0.00) 0.04

2. B–Dull-bright 7 (16.20) 34 (79.10) 2 (4.70) 7 (18.90) 29 (78.40) 1 (2.70) 0.29

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 7 (16.20) 34 (79.10) 2 (4.70) 8 (21.60) 27 (73.00) 2 (5.40) 0.41

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 29 (67.40) 14 (32.50) 0 (0.00) 3 (8.10) 32 (86.50) 2 (5.40) 29.86**

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 3 (6.90) 30 (69.80) 10 (23.30) 24 (65.00) 13 (35.00) 0 (0.00) 32.75**

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 0 (0.00) 41 (95.30) 2 (4.70) 4 (10.80) 27 (73.00) 6 (16.20) 8.47*

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 15 (34.40) 28 (65.10) 0 (0.0) 1 (2.70) 36 (97.30) 0 (0.00) 12.86**

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 3 (6.90) 30 (69.80) 10 (23.30) 9 (24.30) 28 (75.70) 0 (0.00) 12.67**

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 5 (11.60) 38 (88.40) 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) 25 (67.50) 12 (32.40) 19.34**

10. M – Practical-imaginative 0 (0.00) 30 (69.80) 13 (30.20) 4 (10.80) 32 (86.50) 1 (2.70) 13.96**

11. N –Socially clumsy- socially aware 3 (6.90) 20 (46.55) 20 (46.55) 2 (5.40) 26 (70.30) 9 (24.30) 4.73

12. O-Secure-insecure 0 (0.0) 35 (81.40) 8 (18.60) 2 (5.40) 15 (40.50) 20 (54.10) 14.76**

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 2 (4.70) 38 (88.40) 3 (6.90) 1 (2.70) 36 (97.30) 0 (0.00) 2.96

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient 0 (0.00) 34 (79.10) 9 (20.90) 3 (8.10) 29 (78.40) 5 (13.50) 4.10

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

13 (30.23) 29 (67.47) 1 (2.30) 0 (0.00) 31 (83.80) 6 (16.20) 16.27**

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 8 (18.60) 35 (81.40) 0 (0.00) 7 (18.90) 29 (78.40) 1 (2.70) 1.19

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 4 (9.30) 28 (65.10) 11 (25.60) 6 (16.20) 31 (83.80) 0 (0.00) 11.16**

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 3 (6.90) 29 (67.50) 11 (25.60) 2 (5.40) 26 (70.30) 9 (24.30) 0.12

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 3 (6.90) 40 (93.10) 0 (0.00) 1 (2.70) 36 (97.30) 0 (0.00) 0.77

4. Subduedness-Independent 16 (37.20) 27 (62.80) 0 (0.00) 2 (5.40) 35 (94.50) 0 (0.00) 11.53**

Table 8. Comparison of personality factors of girls of home science and agriculture students

Home Science (N=43)

Girls of agriculture

(N=37) Sl. No.

Personality factors

Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

't' value

1. A–Reserved-outgoing 3.95 1.25 3.95 1.31 0.04

2. B–Dull-bright 4.81 1.69 5.08 1.83 1.04

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 4.98 1.54 4.86 1.69 -0.40

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 5.14 1.58 5.27 1.30 0.72

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 3.23 1.27 3.35 1.11 0.75

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 6.33 1.67 6.11 1.65 -0.80

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 5.26 1.24 5.03 1.01 -1.45

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 4.09 1.34 4.35 1.30 1.36

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 6.33 1.64 6.57 1.42 1.18

10. M – Practical-imaginative 4.93 1.28 4.84 1.17 -0.46

11. N –Socially clumsy- socially aware 6.93 1.67 6.35 1.72 -2.14*

12. O-Secure-insecure 7.00 2.13 7.24 2.15 0.85

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 6.12 1.37 6.03 1.44 -0.36

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient 5.77 1.41 5.76 1.64 0.01

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

6.60 1.33 6.24 1.32 -1.74

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 4.58 1.72 4.95 1.78 1.44

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 3.97 1.17 4.05 1.14 0.50

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 5.63 1.64 5.95 1.44 1.53

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 5.94 1.58 5.89 1.51 -0.15

4. Subduedness-Independent 4.91 1.08 4.93 1.07 0.15

that, number of students falling in low, medium and high category differed significantly between the two groups.

A higher percentage of Home Science students were in low level in the factors E, H

and Q3. Average level in the factor G and high level in the factors I and M compared to Agriculture students, indicating that they were mild, shy, undisciplined self conflict, neither moralistic nor disregards rules, sensitive and imaginative.

A higher per cent of girls of agriculture students were in low level in the factor 'F' and high level in the factors 'L' and 'O' indicating that they were sober, suspicious and insecure compared to Home Science students.

When the mean scores of personality factors (Table 8) of students were compared

between these two faculties the 't' value showed significant difference between these two faculties only in factor 'N', where in Home Science students were higher indicating they were more socially aware than the Agriculture students.

Incase of second order personality factors (Table 7) comparison of students of these

two faculties by their level of personality factors showed that there was a significant association with the levels of the factors I, IV, indicating that, number of students falling in various category differed significantly between the two groups.

A higher percent of Home Science students were in the low level in the factor IV and

high level in the factor I indicating that Home Science students were extrovert and independent compared to Agriculture students.

When the mean scores of second order personality factors (Table 8) of students were

compared between these two faculties, there was no significant difference in any of the four factors.

(b) Boys of agriculture and Marketing students

The Table 9 shows the comparison of levels of personality factors of male students

between Agriculture and Marketing faculty. The chi-square (χ²) test of association revealed that there was a significant association between the levels of the factors B, Q1, Q3 and Q4 with faculty indicating that number of students falling in low, medium and high category differed significantly between two groups.

Agriculture students were in higher percentages in low level in the factor Q4 indicating

they were relaxed. Marketing students were in higher percentage in low level in the factors B and Q3,

high level in the factor Q1 indicating that they were dull or less intelligent, undisciplined self conflict and liberal compared to agriculture students.

In the remaining factors A, C, E, F, G, H, I, L, M, N O and Q2, there were no

significant differences between students of the two faculty. When the mean scores of personality factors (Table 10) of students were compared

the 't' value showed significant difference between these two faculties, in the factors A, B, E, F, G, L, M, O, Q2 and Q3 wherein Agriculture students had higher mean scores in the factors. B, E, G, M and Q2 indicating that they were brighter or more intelligent, Aggressive, Moralistic, Imaginative and self sufficient compared to Marketing students. Marketing students had high mean scores in the factors A, F, L, O and Q3 indicating that they were outgoing, enthusiastic, suspicious, insecure and controlled compared to Agriculture students.

In the remaining factors C, H, I, N, Q1 and Q4 there was no significant difference

between the two faculty. Incase of second order personality factors there was no significant association was

found.

Table 9. Association of levels of personality factors and faculty

Boys of agriculture (N=43) Marketing (N=37) Sl. No. Category

Low Medium High Low Medium High χχχχ²

1. A–Reserved-outgoing 8 (18.60) 34 (79.10) 1 (2.30) 5 (13.50) 29 (78.40) 3 (8.10) 1.65

2. B–Dull-bright 8 (18.60) 34 (79.10) 1 (2.30) 18 (48.60) 19 (51.40) 0 (0.00) 8.66*

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 10 (23.20) 31 (72.20) 2 (4.70) 10 (27.00) 25 (67.60) 2 (5.40) 0.19

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 1 (2.30) 41 (95.40) 1 (2.30) 5 (13.50) 32 (86.50) 0 (0.00) 4.79

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 21 (48.80) 22 (51.20) 0 (0.00) 10 (27.00) 27 (73.00) 0 (0.00) 3.99

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 2 (4.70) 35 (81.40) 6 (13.70) 4 (10.80) 27 (73.00) 6 (16.20) 1.25

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 3 (6.90) 35 (81.50) 5 (11.60) 1 (2.70) 34 (91.00) 2 (5.40) 1.87

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 2 (4.70) 31 (72.10) 10 (23.20) 0 (0.00) 28 (75.70) 9 (24.30) 1.76

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 3 (6.90) 35 (81.50) 5 (11.60) 1 (2.70) 30 (81.10) 6 (16.20) 1.03

10. M – Practical-imaginative 3 (6.90) 36 (83.80) 4 (9.30) 7 (19.00) 30 (81.00) 0 (0.00) 5.78

11. N –Socially clumsy- socially aware 5 (11.60) 26 (60.50) 12 (27.90) 3 (8.10) 20 (54.10) 14 (37.80) 0.99

12. O-Secure-insecure 8 (18.60) 29 (67.50) 6 (13.90) 2 (5.0) 28 (75.70) 7 (18.90) 3.26

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 2 (4.70) 39 (90.60) 2 (4.70) 5 (13.50) 25 (67.50) 7 (19.00) 6.72*

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient 5 (11.60) 36 (83.70) 2 (4.70) 8 (21.60) 29 (78.40) 0 (0.00) 3.01

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

3 (6.90) 39 (90.80) 1 (2.30) 13 (35.20) 24 (64.80) 0 (0.00) 10.37**

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 12 (27.90) 26 (60.50) 5 (11.60) 6 (16.20) 31 (83.80) 0 (0.00) 7.02*

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 4 (9.30) 38 (88.40) 1 (2.30) 4 (10.80) 33 (89.20) 0 (0.00) 0.89

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 0 (0.00) 40 (93.10) 3 (6.90) 0 (0.00) 32 (86.50) 5 (13.58.) 0.94

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 8 (18.60) 34 (79.10) 1 (2.30) 11 (29.70) 25 (67.60) 1 (2.70) 1.42

4. Subduedness-Independent 0 (0.00) 43 (100.00) 0 (0.00) 3 (8.20) 34 (91.80) 0 (0.00) 3.60

Table 10. Comparison of mean scores of personality factors of boys of agriculture and marketing

Boys of agriculture (N=43)

Marketing (N=37)

Sl. No.

Personality factors

Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

't' value

1. A–Reserved-outgoing 4.98 1.39 5.43 1.59 -2.05*

2. B–Dull-bright 4.95 1.53 3.57 1.48 5.97-

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 4.67 1.54 4.51 1.74 0.76

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 5.56 1.26 4.92 1.34 3.38*

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 3.81 1.28 4.38 1.62 -2.85*

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 5.93 1.62 5.41 1.74 2.19*

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 5.44 1.62 5.76 0.98 -1.27

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 6.33 1.74 6.54 1.32 -0.74

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 5.74 1.62 6.27 1.47 -2.09*

10. M – Practical-imaginative 5.63 1.45 4.81 1.29 3.75*

11. N –Socially clumsy- socially aware 6.09 2.01 6.65 2.23 -1.69

12. O-Secure-insecure 5.72 1.92 6.35 1.36 -2.10*

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 5.67 1.39 5.68 1.83 0.04

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient 5.47 1.68 4.95 1.70 2.11*

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

5.47 1.22 4.51 1.74 5.24*

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 4.84 1.86 5.00 1.22 -0.52

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 4.62 1.11 4.80 1.09 -1.03

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 5.45 1.04 5.96 0.85 -3.20

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 4.42 1.47 3.89 1.69 2.44*

4. Subduedness-Independent 5.44 0.83 4.58 1.00 6.82*

When the second order mean scores of personality factors (Table 10) of students were compared the 't' value showed significant difference between in factor III and IV indicating Agriculture students had high means scores in the factors III and IV indicating they had toughpoise and were independent in comparison with Marketing students.

In the remaining factors I and II there was no significant difference between the two

faculties.

4.3.3 Comparison of personality factors between gender among students of agriculture

The Table 11 shows the comparison of level of personality factors of agriculture

students between gender made by chi-square (χ²) test of association, revealed that there was a significant association in the factors I, L, O and Q3 indicating that, the number of students falling in low, medium and high category differed significantly between the two groups. A higher per cent of boys were in high group in the factor I and a higher per cent of girls were in high group in the factor L, O and Q3.

When the mean scores of personality factors (Table 12 and Fig. 2) of students were

compared, the 't' value showed, significant difference between these two groups, in factor A, F, I, L, M, O and Q3. Which indicated boys had higher mean in the factors A, F, I and M which revealed boys were outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive and imaginative compared to girls.

Whereas girls had higher mean in the factors L, O and Q3 which indicated girls were

suspicious, insecure and controlled compared to boys. Incase of second order personality factors (Table 11) comparison between levels of

personality factors made by chi-square (χ²) test revealed that there was significant association in factors II and III where in a higher per cent of boys were in low group in the factor III (tender minded) and a higher per cent of girls were in high group in the factor II (high anxiety).

When the mean score of second order personality factors (Table 12) were compared,

the 't' value showed the significant difference in all the factors, which indicated boys had higher mean in the factors extroversion and independence and girls had higher mean in high anxiety and toughpoise.

4.4 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF APTITUDE OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

An examination of Table 13 and Fig. 3 shows the frequency distribution of aptitude of

undergraduate students. Most of the students were in low group (51-100%) in verbal reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, language spelling and sentences. Majority of students were below average (29-43%) in numerical ability and abstract reasoning. In clerical sped and accuracy more number (41%) of students were in high group than the rest of the categories.

When the mean scores of aptitude of students were compared, it was observed that

there was a wide range in the mean scores ranging from 3.0 to 67.7 with the highest mean score of 67.7 in clerical speed and accuracy and least mean (3.0) in language (sentences). The rest of the areas of aptitudes viz., verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning and language spelling the mean scores were between 9.36 to 49.13 i.e., in average category.

Table 11. Association of levels of personality factors and gender among agriculture students

Boys of agriculture (N=43) Girls of agriculture (N=37) Sl. No. Category

Low Medium High Low Medium High χχχχ²

1. A–Reserved-outgoing 8 (18.60) 34 (79.10) 1 (2.30) 13 (35.00) 24 (65.00) 0 (0.00) 3.48

2. B–Dull-bright 8 (18.60) 34 (79.10) 1 (2.30) 7 (18.90) 29 (78.40) 1 (2.70) 0.02

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 10 (23.20) 31 (72.20) 2 (4.70) 8 (21.60) 27 (73.00) 2 (5.40) 0.04

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 1 (2.30) 41 (95.40) 1 (2.30) 3 (8.10) 32 (86.50) 2 (5.40) 2.00

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 21 (48.80) 22 (51.20) 0 (0.00) 24 (65.00) 13 (35.00) 0 (0.00) 2.08

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 2 (4.70) 35 (81.40) 6 (13.70) 4 (10.80) 27 (73.00) 6 (16.20) 1.26

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 3 (6.90) 35 (81.50) 5 (11.60) 1 (2.70) 36 (97.30) 0 (0.00) 5.58

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 2 (4.70) 31 (72.10) 10 (23.20) 9 (24.30) 28 (75.70) 0 (0.00) 14.23**

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 3 (6.90) 35 (81.50) 5 (11.60) 0 (0.00) 25 (67.50) 12 (32.40) 7.14*

10. M – Practical-imaginative 3 (6.90) 36 (83.80) 4 (9.30) 4 (10.80) 32 (86.50) 1 (2.70) 1.73

11. N –Socially clumsy- socially aware 5 (11.60) 26 (60.50) 12 (27.90) 2 (5.40) 26 (70.30) 9 (24.30) 1.27

12. O-Secure-insecure 8 (18.60) 29 (67.50) 6 (13.90) 2 (5.40) 15 (40.50) 20 (54.10) 15.23**

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 2 (4.70) 39 (90.60) 2 (4.70) 1 (2.70) 36 (97.30) 0 (0.00) 1.83

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient 5 (11.60) 36 (83.70) 2 (4.70) 3 (8.10) 29 (78.40) 5 (13.50) 2.09

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

3 (6.90) 39 (90.80) 1 (2.30) 0 (0.00) 31 (83.80) 6 (16.20) 7.08*

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 12 (27.90) 26 (60.50) 5 (11.60) 7 (18.90) 29 (78.40) 1 (2.70) 3.71

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 4 (9.30) 38 (88.40) 1 (2.30) 6 (16.20) 31 (83.80) 0 (0.00) 1.66

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 0 (0.00) 40 (93.10) 3 (6.90) 2 (5.40) 26 (70.30) 9 (24.30) 7.55*

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 8 (18.60) 34 (79.10) 1 (2.30) 1 (2.70) 36 (97.30) 0 (0.00) 6.06*

4. Subduedness-Independent 0 (0.00) 43 (100.00) 0 (0.00) 2 (5.40) 35 (94.50) 0 (0.00) 2.37

Table 12. Comparison of mean scores of personality factors between gender among agriculture students

Agriculture

Boys (N=43) Girls (N=37) Sl. No.

Personality factors

Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

't' value

1. A–Reserved-outgoing 4.98 1.39 3.95 1.31 4.91*

2. B–Dull-bright 4.95 1.53 5.08 1.83 -0.47

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 4.67 1.54 4.86 1.69 -0.73

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 5.56 1.26 5.27 1.30 1.55

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 3.81 1.28 3.35 1.11 2.39*

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 5.93 1.62 6.11 1.65 -0.66

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 5.44 1.62 5.03 1.01 1.69

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 6.33 1.74 4.35 1.30 7.51*

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 5.74 1.62 6.57 1.42 -3.31*

10. M – Practical-imaginative 5.63 1.45 4.84 1.17 3.61*

11. N –Socially clumsy- socially aware 6.09 2.01 6.35 1.72 -0.77

12. O-Secure-insecure 5.72 1.92 7.24 2.15 -5.07*

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 5.67 1.39 6.03 1.44 -1.64

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient 5.47 1.68 5.76 1.64 -1.06

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

5.47 1.22 6.24 1.32 -4.09*

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 4.84 1.86 4.95 1.78 -0.30

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 4.62 1.11 4.05 1.14 3.40*

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 5.45 1.04 5.95 1.44 -3.10*

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 4.42 1.47 5.89 1.51 -6.50*

4. Subduedness-Independent 5.44 0.83 4.93 1.07 4.60*

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4

Boys of agriculture

Girls of agriculture

Me

an

ste

n s

co

res

Personality factorsSecond order

personality factors

LEGEND

Personality factors

1. A-Reserved-outgoing

2. B-Dull-bright

3. C-Emotionally less stable-mature

4. E-Mild-Aggressive

5. F-Sober-enthusiastic

6. G-Disregards rules-moralistic

7. H-Shy-Socially bold

8. I-Self reliant-sensitive

9. L-Accepting condition- Suspicious

10. M-Practical-imaginative

11. N-Socially clumsy- socially aware

12. O-Secure-insecure

13. Q1-Conservative-liberal

14. Q2-Group dependent-self sufficient

15. Q3-Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

16. Q4–Tense-Relaxed

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety

3. Tender minded-Tough poise

4. Subduedness-Independent

Fig. 2. Comparison of personality factors between boys and girls of agriculture

Fig. 2. Comparison of personality factors between boys and girls of agriculture

Table 13. Frequency distribution of aptitude of undergraduate students

Sl. No. Category

Low (1-20)

Below avg (25-

45)

Average (50)

Above avg (55-

75)

High (80-99)

Mean

S.D.

1. Verbal reasoning 147 (91.88)

13 (8.12)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

9.36 8.2

2. Numerical ability 27 (16.88)

46 (28.75)

29 (18.12)

42 (26.25)

16 (10.00

)

46.51 22.1

3. Abstract reasoning 17 (10.63)

68 (42.50)

10 (6.25)

38 (23.75)

27 (16.87

)

22.74 14.75

4. Space relations 92 (57.50)

59 (36.88)

3 (1.87)

6 (3.75)

0 (0.0)

49.13 24.4

5. Mechanical reasoning

120 (75.00)

33 (20.62)

1 (0.63)

6 (3.75)

0 (0.0)

22.98 12.9

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

9 (5.63)

20 (12.49)

4 (2.50)

61 (38.13)

66 (41.25

)

14.56 14.4

7. Spelling 82 (51.25)

69 (43.13)

6 (3.75)

3 (1.87)

0 (0.0)

67.7 22.0

8. Sentences 160 (100.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

24.3 13.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Verbal

reasoning

Numerical

ability

Abstract

reasoning

Space

relations

Mechanical

reasoning

Clerical speed

and accuracy

Spelling Sentences

Perc

en

tile

score

s

Aptitude

Fig. 3. Aptitude of undergraduate students

Fig. 3. Aptitude of undergraduate students

4.4.1 Frequency distribution of levels of aptitude of undergraduate students by faculty

An examination of Table 14 shows the percentage distribution of aptitude of

undergraduate students by faculty. Incase of boys of agriculture students most of the students were in low group (53-100%) in verbal reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, language (sentences). More number of students were below average group (47-70%) in numerical ability, abstract reasoning and language spelling. An equal proportion of students (44%) were above average and high in clerical speed and accuracy.

Incase of girls of agriculture students most of the students were in low group (62-100%) in verbal reasoning, mechanical reasoning, language spelling and sentences. More number of students were below average group (57-59%) in space relation. More number of students were above average group (38.46%) in numerical ability and abstract reasoning. More number of students were high group (38%) in clerical speed and accuracy.

Incase of Home Science students most of them were low group (54-100%) in verbal

reasoning, language spelling and sentences. More number of students were below average group (24-47%) in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning. More number of students were above average group (37%) in clerical speed and accuracy.

Incase of Marketing students most of them were low group (59-100%) in verbal

reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, language sentences. More number of students were below average group (32-76%) in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, language spelling. More number of students were high group (59%) in clerical speed and accuracy.

The comparison of mean scores of aptitude area and between faculties made through

factorial ANOVA (Table 15) revealed that the main factor 'faculty' and area was found to be statistically significant indicating that the mean scores differed significantly by faculty and area of aptitude. The interactionary effect was also significant indicating that the significant differences in area of aptitude was observed only in few faculties.

4.4.2 Comparison of aptitude between faculty

(a) Home Science and girls of agriculture students

The Table 16 shows the comparison of levels of aptitude of girls between the faculty

of Home Science and Agriculture. The chi-square (χ²) test of association revealed that there was a significant association with the levels of numerical ability, abstract reasoning, indicating that number of students falling in low, below average, average, above average and high category differed significantly between the two groups. Where in a higher percentage of Home Science students had below average aptitude in abstract reasoning compared to Agriculture.

A higher percentage of Agriculture students were above average aptitude in

numerical ability. When the mean scores of aptitude (Table 17) of students were compared between

these two faculties, the 't' value showed significant difference between these two faculties in all aptitude categories except for language sentences.

Home Science students had higher mean scores in verbal reasoning and mechanical

reasoning than Agriculture students. Agriculture students had higher mean scores in numerical ability, scholastic ability,

abstract reasoning space relations, clerical speed and accuracy, language spelling than Home Science students.

Table 14. Frequency distribution of levels of aptitude of undergraduate students by faculty

Boys of agriculture (N=43) Girls of agriculture (N=37) Home science (N=43) Marketing (N=37)

Category Low

(1-20)

Below avg

(25-45)

Average (50)

Above avg (55-75)

High (80-99)

Low (1-20)

Below avg

(25-45)

Average (50)

Above avg

(55-75)

High (80-99)

Low (1-20)

Below avg

(25-45)

Average (50)

Above avg

(55-75)

High (80-99)

Low (1-20)

Below avg

(25-45)

Average (50)

Above avg

(55-75)

High (80-99)

Ve 38 (88.37

)

5 (11.63)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

33 (89.19)

4 (10.81)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

40 (93.03)

3 (6.97)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

36 (97.30)

1 (2.70)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

Nu 5 (11.63

)

20 (46.51)

8 (18.60)

9 (20.94

)

1 (2.32)

3 (8.11)

4 (10.81)

6 (16.22)

17 (45.95)

7 (18.91

)

9 (20.94)

10 (23.26)

9 (20.94)

7 (16.26)

8 (18.60

)

10 (27.03)

12 (32.43)

6 (16.22)

9 (24.32)

0 (0.0)

Ab. 7 (16.28

)

24 (55.81)

5 (11.63)

5 (11.63

)

2 (4.65)

1 (2.70)

11 (29.73)

1 (2.70)

14 (37.84)

10 (27.03

)

6 (13.97)

18 (41.86)

2 (4.65)

7 (16.26)

10 (23.26

)

3 (8.11)

15 (40.54)

2 (5.41)

12 (32.43)

5 (13.51)

Sp 35 (81.40

)

8 (18.6)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

13 (35.14)

21 (56.75)

0 (0.0)

3 (8.11)

0 (0.0)

18 (41.87)

19 (44.19)

3 (6.97)

3 (6.97)

0 (0.0)

26 (70.27)

11 (29.73)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

Me 43 (100.0

)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

23 (62.16)

11 (29.73)

1 (2.70)

2 (5.41)

0 (0.0)

19 (44.19)

20 (46.51)

0 (0.0)

4 (9.30)

0 (0.0)

35 (94.59)

2 (5.41)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

CSA 0 (0.0)

2 (4.65)

3 (6.97)

19 (44.19

)

19 (44.19)

4 (10.80)

6 (16.22)

0 (0.0)

13 (35.14)

14 (37.84

)

5 (11.63)

11 (25.58)

0 (0.0)

16 (37.21)

11 (25.58

)

0 (0.0)

1 (2.70)

1 (2.70)

13 (35.14)

22 (59.46)

Spel 10 (23.26

)

30 (69.77)

2 (4.65)

1 (2.32)

0 (0.0)

31 (83.78)

6 (16.22)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

36 (83.72)

5 (11.63)

2 (4.65)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

5 (13.51)

28 (75.67)

2 (5.41)

2 (5.41)

0 (0.0)

Sente 43 (100.0

)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

37 (100.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

43 (100.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

37 (100.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

Table 15. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of undergraduate students by faculty

Agriculture

Boys Girls

Home Science

Marketing Total Sl. No.

Category

Mean

S.D. Mea

n S.D.

Mean

S.D. Mea

n S.D.

Mean

S.D.

1. Verbal reasoning 11.16

8.23 9.59 8.90 9.60 8.76 6.73 6.21 9.36 8.2

2. Numerical ability 41.4

0

16.7

4

58.11

21.29

48.40

26.28

38.6

5

18.0

9

46.51

22.1

3. Abstract reasoning 37.6

5

19.8

8

60.43

23.42

50.37

27.24

49.73

21.37

49.13

24.4

4. Space relations 16.81

6.64 30.0

8

13.8

7

27.3

7

15.7

4

17.95

7.81 22.98

12.9

5. Mechanical reasoning 4.28 3.84 19.30

16.12

25.4

9

15.0

3

9.08 6.90 14.56

14.4

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

72.95

14.88

63.38

25.82

57.70

24.53

77.32

15.64

67.7 22.0

7. Spelling 31.2

8

11.2

9

16.46

7.55 15.91

12.55

33.8

6

12.8

3

24.3 13.9

8. Sentences 4.16 4.22 1.70 1.43 1.81 1.80 4.19 3.98 3.0 3.0

ANOVA

‘F’ SE CD (5%)

Faculty (A) 6.34** 0.776 2.13

Aptitude category (B)

308.10** 1.21 3.32

A x B 9.66** 2.32 6.41

Table 16. Association of level of aptitude of students and faculty

Home Science (N=43) Girls of agriculture (N=37) Sl. No.

Category

Low Below avg.

Average Above avg.

High Low Below avg.

Average Above avg.

High

χχχχ²

1. Verbal reasoning 40 (93.03)

3 (6.97)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

33 (89.19)

4 (10.81)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0.36

2. Numerical ability 9 (20.94)

10 (23.26)

9 (20.94)

7 (16.26)

8 (18.60)

3 (8.11)

4 (10.81)

6 (16.22)

17 (45.95)

7 (18.91)

10.02**

3. Abstract reasoning 6 (13.97)

18 (41.86)

2 (4.65)

7 (16.26)

10 (23.26)

1 (2.70)

11 (29.73)

1 (2.70)

14 (37.84)

10 (27.03)

7.52*

4. Space relations 18 (41.87)

19 (44.19)

3 (6.97)

3 (6.97)

0 (0.00)

13 (35.14)

21 (56.75)

0 (0.00)

3 (8.11)

0 (0.00)

3.58

5. Mechanical reasoning 19 (44.19)

20 (46.51)

0 (0.00)

4 (9.30)

0 (0.00)

23 (62.16)

11 (29.73)

1 (2.70)

2 (5.41)

0 (0.00)

4.29

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

5 (11.63)

11 (25.58)

0 (0.00)

16 (37.20)

11 (25.58)

4 (10.80)

6 (16.22)

0 (0.00)

13 (35.14)

14 (37.84)

1.82

7. Spelling 36 (83.72)

5 (11.63)

2 (4.65)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

31 (83.78)

6 (16.22)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

2.01

8. Sentences 43 (102.0)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

37 (100.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0.00

Table 17. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of girls of home science and agriculture

Home Science girls (N=43)

Girls of agriculture (N=37)

Sl. No.

Aptitude tests

Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

't' value

1. Verbal reasoning 9.60 8.76 9.59 8.90 2.07*

2. Numerical ability 48.40 26.28 58.11 21.29 21.66*

3. Abstract reasoning 50.37 27.24 60.43 23.42 22.87*

4. Space relations 27.37 15.74 30.08 13.87 7.98*

5. Mechanical reasoning 25.49 15.03 19.30 16.12 3.59*

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

57.70 24.53 63.38 25.82 17.71*

7. Spelling 15.91 12.55 16.46 7.55 4.73*

8. Sentences 1.81 1.80 1.70 1.43 -0.42

(b) Boys of agriculture and Marketing students

The Table 18 shows the comparison of levels of aptitude of male students between

Agriculture and Marketing faculty. The chi-square (χ²) test of association revealed that there was a significant association between the levels of abstract reasoning indicating that, number of students falling in low, below average, average, above average and high category differed significantly between two groups.

A higher percentage of agriculture students were in below average level in abstract

reasoning. When the mean scores of aptitude (Table 19) of students were compared, the 't'

value showed, significant difference between these two faculties, in all aptitude categories except for language sentences and space relations.

Agriculture students had higher mean scores in verbal reasoning, numerical ability

compared to Marketing. Marketing students had higher mean scores in abstract reasoning, mechanical

reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy, language spelling compared to Agriculture.

4.4.3 Comparison of aptitude between gender among students of agriculture

The Table 20 shows the comparison of levels of aptitude of Agriculture students

between gender. The chi-square (χ²) test of association revealed that there was a significant association in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy language spelling indicates that, the number of students falling in low, below average, average, above average and high category differed significantly among the both groups.

A higher per cent of boys were in below average and a higher per cent of girls in

above average category in numerical ability. A higher per cent of boys were in below average category in abstract reasoning, low

category in space relations and mechanical reasoning, above average category in clerical speed and accuracy.

A higher per cent of girls were in low category in language spelling compared to boys. When the mean scores of aptitude (Table 21 and Fig. 4) of students were compared,

the t-value showed significant difference between these two groups in all aptitude categories. Boys had high mean scores in verbal reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy,

language spelling and sentences. Girls had high mean scores in numerical ability, abstract, reasoning, space relations

and mechanical reasoning compared to boys.

4.5 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF THE UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

A glance at Table 22 shows that the academic performance of the students. In total

group most of the students were in fair group (39%) followed by average group (27%) and pass (25%) group and least score was observed in high group (1%). The total mean CGPA was 7.32.

Table 18. Association of level of aptitude of boys and faculty

Boys of agriculture (N=43) Marketing (N =37) Sl. No.

Category

Low Below avg.

Average Above avg.

High Low Below avg.

Average Above avg.

High

χχχχ²

1. Verbal reasoning 38 (88.37)

5 (11.63)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

36 (97.30)

1 (2.70)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

2.28

2. Numerical ability 5 (11.63)

20 (46.51)

8 (18.60)

9 (20.94)

1 (2.32)

10 (27.03)

12 (32.43)

6 (16.22)

9 (24.32)

0 (0.00)

4.56

3. Abstract reasoning 7 (16.28)

24 (55.81)

5 (11.63)

5 (11.63)

2 (4.65)

3 (8.11)

15 (40.54)

2 (5.41)

12 (32.43)

5 (13.51)

8.76*

4. Space relations 35 (81.40)

8 (18.6)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

26 (70.27)

11 (29.73)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

1.36

5. Mechanical reasoning

43 (100.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

35 (94.59)

2 (5.41)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

2.37

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

0 (0.00)

2 (4.65)

3 (6.97)

19 (44.19)

19 (44.19)

0 (0.00)

1 (2.70)

1 (2.70)

13 (35.14)

22 (59.46)

3.77

7. Spelling 10 (23.26)

30 (69.77)

2 (4.65)

1 (2.32)

0 (0.00)

5 (13.51)

28 (75.67)

2 (5.41)

2 (5.41)

0 (0.00)

1.62

8. Sentences 43 (100.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

37 (100.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0

Table 19. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude between boys of agriculture and marketing

Boys of agriculture (N=43)

Marketing students (N=37) Sl.

No. Aptitude tests

Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

't' value

1. Verbal reasoning 11.16 8.23 6.73 6.21 4.57*

2. Numerical ability 41.40 16.74 38.65 18.09 9.92*

3. Abstract reasoning 37.65 19.88 49.73 21.37 8.36*

4. Space relations 16.81 6.64 17.95 7.81 0.52

5. Mechanical reasoning

4.28 3.84 9.08 6.90 -6.81*

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

72.95 14.88 77.32 15.64 4.69*

7. Spelling 31.28 11.29 33.86 12.83 2.95*

8. Sentences 4.16 4.22 4.19 3.98 0.38

Table 20. Association of level of aptitude and gender among agriculture students

Agriculture

Boys (N=43) Girls (N =37) Sl. No.

Category

Low Below avg.

Average Above avg.

High Low Below avg.

Average Above avg.

High

χχχχ²

1. Verbal reasoning 38 (88.37)

5 (11.63)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

33 (89.19)

4 (10.81)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0.02

2. Numerical ability 5 (11.63)

20 (46.51)

8 (18.60)

9 (20.94)

1 (2.32)

3 (8.11)

4 (10.81)

6 (16.22)

17 (45.95)

7 (18.91)

18.05**

3. Abstract reasoning 7 (16.28)

24 (55.81)

5 (11.63)

5 (11.63)

2 (4.65)

1 (2.70)

11 (29.73)

1 (2.70)

14 (37.84)

10 (27.03)

21.29**

4. Space relations 35 (81.40)

8 (18.6)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

13 (35.14)

21 (56.75)

0 (0.00)

3 (8.11)

0 (0.00)

18.56**

5. Mechanical reasoning

43 (100.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

23 (62.16)

11 (29.73)

1 (2.70)

2 (5.41)

0 (0.00)

19.7**

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

0 (0.00)

2 (4.65)

3 (6.97)

19 (44.19)

19 (44.19)

4 (10.80)

6 (16.22)

0 (0.00)

13 (35.14)

14 (37.84)

10.5**

7. Spelling 10 (23.26)

30 (69.77)

2 (4.65)

1 (2.32)

0 (0.00)

31 (83.78)

6 (16.22)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

29.46**

8. Sentences 43 (100.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

37 (100.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

0

Table 21. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of boys and girls of agriculture

Agriculture

Boys (N=43) Girls (N=37) Sl. No.

Aptitude tests

Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

't' value

1. Verbal reasoning 11.16 8.23 9.59 8.90 3.39*

2. Numerical ability 41.40 16.74 58.11 21.29 5.70*

3. Abstract reasoning 37.65 19.88 60.43 23.42 7.31*

4. Space relations 16.81 6.64 30.08 13.87 -7.91*

5. Mechanical reasoning 4.28 3.84 19.30 16.12 -18.63*

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

72.95 14.88 63.38 25.82 22.24*

7. Spelling 31.28 11.29 16.46 7.55 10.15*

8. Sentences 4.16 4.22 1.70 1.43 3.88*

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Verbal

reasoning

Numerical

ability

Abstract

reasoning

Space

relations

Mechanical

reasoning

Clerical speed

and accuracy

Spelling Sentences

Boys of agriculture

Girls of agricultureP

erc

entile

score

s

Aptitude

Fig. 4. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of boys and girls of agriculture

Fig. 4. Comparison of mean scores of aptitude of boys and girls of agriculture

4.5.1 Frequency distribution of levels of academic achievement of undergraduate students by faculty

A glance at Table 23 shows that the academic performance of the students faculty

wise. A higher percentage of boys of agriculture students were in fair group (47%). None of the students were in high group.

A higher percentage of girls of agriculture students were in average group (43%).

None of the students were in fail group and high group. A higher percentage of Home Science students were in fair group (44%), least

percentage of students were in high group (5%). A higher percentage of Marketing students were in pass group (32%). None of the

students were in high group. The chi-square test of association also revealed significant association indicating that

the faculty and level of achievement were associated, with more number of failures among Marketing students and more number of boys of agriculture students were in fair group.

When the mean scores of students academic achievement was compared (Table 24

and Fig. 5), it was found significant indicating that girls of agriculture had higher mean scores (7.67) compared to others, followed by Home Science students (7.44) and least was scored by Marketing students (6.83).

4.5.2 Comparison of academic achievement between faculty

(a) Home Science and girls of agriculture students

From the Table 25 it is clear that majority of Home Science students fell under fair category. A higher percentage of Agriculture students fell under average category. The chi-

square (χ²) test of association also revealed significant association indicating that the number of students falling in various categories differed significantly among both the groups.

When mean scores of academic achievement of both the groups (Table 26) were

compared. It was observed that, significant difference was found between both the groups where in Agriculture students had better academic performance than the Home Science students.

(b) Boys of agriculture and Marketing students

From the Table 27 it is clear that, the chi-square test of association revealed significant association between two groups indicating that a higher percentage of Agriculture students were in fair category and a higher percentage of Marketing students were in pass category differed significantly among both the groups.

When the mean scores of academic achievement of both the groups (Table 28) were

compared, significant difference was found which indicated that Agriculture students had higher mean than the Marketing students.

4.5.3 Comparison of academic achievement between gender among students of agriculture

(a) Boys of agriculture and girls of agriculture students

From the Table 29 it is clear that, the chi-square test of association revealed significant association between two groups indicating that a higher per cent of boys were in fair category and a higher per cent of girls were in average category, differed significantly among both the groups.

Table 22. Academic achievement of undergraduate students

Academic achievement

Faculty

Fail Pass Fair Average High

Total

Total 13 (8.10)

40 (25.00)

62 (38.80)

43 (26.90)

2 (1.30)

160 (100.00)

Table 23. Frequency distribution of academic achievement of undergraduate students by faculty

Academic achievement Sl. No.

Faculty

Fail Pass Fair Average High

Total

1. Boys of agriculture

2 (4.70)

13 (30.20)

20 (46.50)

8 (18.60)

-

43 (100.00)

2. Girls of agriculture

-

7 (18.90)

14 (37.80)

16 (43.20)

-

37 (100.00)

3. Home Science

3 7.00

8 (18.60)

19 (44.20)

11 (25.60)

2 (4.70)

43 (100.00)

4. Marketing 8 (21.60)

12 (32.40)

9 (24.30)

8 (21.60)

-

37 (100.00)

χ²=28.17**

Table 24. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of students by faculty

Sl. No.

Faculty N Mean S.D. S.Em± F

1. Boys of agriculture

43 7.32 0.80 0.12

2. Girls of agriculture

37 7.67 0.67 0.11 5.90*

3. Home Science 43 7.44 0.93 0.14

4. Marketing 37 6.83 1.11 0.18

Total 160 7.32 0.93 7.37E-02

Table 25. Association of levels of academic achievement of girls by faculty

Group Fail Pass Fair Average High Total χχχχ²

Home science 3 (7.00)

8 (18.60)

19 (44.20)

11 (25.60)

2 (4.70)

43

Girls of agriculture

0 (0.0)

7 (18.90)

14 (37.80)

16 (43.20)

0 (0.00)

37

6.33*

6.4

6.6

6.8

7

7.2

7.4

7.6

7.8

Boys of agriculture Girls of agriculture Home Science Marketing

Cum

ula

tive

gra

de p

oin

t avera

ge

Faculty

Fig. 5. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of students by faculty

Fig. 5. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of students by faculty

Table 26. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of girls of

home science and agriculture

Faculty Mean S.D. 't' value

1. Home Science 7.44 0.93

2. Girls of agriculture 7.68 0.67

2.27*

Table 27. Association of levels of academic achievement of boys and faculty

Group Fail Pass Fair Average High Total χχχχ²

Boys of agriculture

2 (4.70)

13 (30.20)

20 (46.50)

8 (18.60)

0 (0.00)

43

Marketing 8 (21.60)

12 (32.40)

9 (24.30)

8 (21.60)

0 (0.00)

37

7.39*

Table 28. Comparison of academic achievement between boys of agriculture and marketing

Faculty Mean S.D. 't' value

1. Boys of agriculture 7.33 0.80

2. Marketing 6.83 1.11

4.05*

When the mean scores of academic achievement of both the groups (Table 30 and Fig. 6) were compared, significant difference was found, which indicated that girls had higher mean compare to boys.

4.6 INTERRELATION OF PERSONALITY FACTORS, APTITUDE AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

4.6.1 Relation between personality factors and academic achievement

The influence of personality factors on academic achievement was studied through correlation analysis (Table 31) it revealed that when the total group was considered the factors A, B and Q3 were found significantly related. The factor 'A' reserved outgoing was negatively and significantly related, which indicated that as the score of the factor increased reserved to outgoing academic achievement of student decreased and vice versa. The factors 'B' dull-bright and 'Q3' undisciplined self conflict. Controlled were positively and significantly related.

Incase of boys of agriculture the factor Q4 relaxed tensed was negatively and

significantly related with academic achievement of students which indicates that as the tension of students increased, academic achievement decreased and vice versa. The remaining factors were not significantly related.

But in case of boys of agriculture and Marketing students there was no significant

relation between personality factors and academic achievement of students. Incase of Home Science students, the factor 'G' disregards rules moralistic was

positively and significantly related with academic achievement of students.

Second order scores of personality factors

When the total group was considered independence was positively and significantly related with academic achievement of the students.

Incase of boys of agriculture anxiety was negatively and significantly related, which

indicates as the score of anxiety increased academic achievement decreased and vice versa. Incase of girls of agriculture and Home Science students there was no significant

relation between personality factors and academic achievement. Incase of Marketing students the factor independence was positively and significantly

related, which indicates, as the independence increased academic achievement also increased.

4.6.2 Relation between aptitude and academic achievement

The influence of aptitude on academic achievement was studied through correlation analysis (Table 32). It revealed that, when the total group was considered verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations were positively and significantly related.

Incase of boys of agriculture space relation was positively and significantly related with academic achievement.

There was no significant relation between aptitudes and academic achievement of

the students incase of girls of agriculture. Incase of Marketing students verbal reasoning, abstract reasoning and space

relations were positively and significantly related.

Table 29. Association of levels of academic achievement and gender

Group Fail Pass Fair Average High Total χχχχ²

Boys of agriculture

2 (4.70)

13 (30.20)

20 (46.50)

8 (18.60)

0 (0.00)

43

Girls of agriculture

0 (0.0)

7 (18.90)

14 (37.80)

16 (43.20)

0 (0.00)

37

7.1*

Table 30. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of boys and girls of agriculture

Faculty Mean SD ‘t’ value

Boys of agriculture 7.33 0.80

Girls of agriculture 7.68 0.67

-2.86*

7.1

7.2

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.6

7.7

Boys of agriculture Girls of agriculture

Cum

ula

tive

gra

de p

oin

t avera

ge

Faculty

Fig. 6. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of boys and girls of agriculture

Fig. 6. Comparison of mean scores of academic achievement of boys and girls of agriculture

Table 31. Relation between personality factors and academic achievement of

undergraduate students

Agriculture

Sl. No.

Category Boys N=43

‘r’

Girls N=37

‘r’

Marketing N=37

‘r’

Home Science

N=43 ‘r’

Total N=160

‘r’

1. A–Reserved-outgoing -0.03 0.00 -0.11 -0.04 -0.17*

2. B–Dull-bright 0.10 0.22 0.30 0.21 0.28**

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature -0.04 0.04 0.22 0.11 0.12

4. E–Mild-Aggressive -0.05 -0.01 0.06 0.12 0.07

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 0.17 -0.01 0.03 -0.18 -0.09

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 0.12 0.04 -0.09 0.31* 0.14

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 0.10 -0.18 0.17 -0.01 -0.03

8. I–Self reliant-sensitive 0.11 0.25 0.26 0.04 -0.04

9. L–Accepting condition-Suspicious -0.08 0.14 0.14 -0.19 0.00

10. M–Practical-imaginative -0.14 0.07 0.24 0.20 0.09

11. N–Socially clumsy- socially aware -0.19 0.18 0.18 -0.11 0.00

12. O–Secure-insecure -0.15 -0.26 0.03 0.05 -0.01

13. Q1–Conservative-liberal 0.01 -0.25 0.13 0.21 0.09

14. Q2–Group dependent-self sufficient

0.01 -0.12 0.16 -0.21 0.08

15. Q3–Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

0.17 0.06 0.30 0.13 0.29**

16. Q4–Tense-Relaxed -0.34* -0.16 0.07 0.06 -0.10

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 0.06 0.00 -0.07 -0.13 -0.12

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety -0.33* -0.17 -0.14 -0.03 -0.14

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 0.01 -0.04 -0.11 -0.16 0.07

4. Subduedness-Independent 0.03 0.14 0.36* 0.19 0.22**

Incase of Home Science students verbal reasoning abstract reasoning, space relation, language spelling were positively and significantly related with academic achievement.

4.6.3 Relation between aptitude and personality factors of the students

The correlation coefficient analysis (Table 33) to know the relation between aptitude and personality factors was made for the whole sample. It revealed that, the factors 'B' dull-bright and 'Q3' undisciplined self conflict-controlled were positively and significantly related with verbal reasoning. But the factors 'F' sober enthusiastic and 'O' secure-insecure were negatively and significantly related with verbal reasoning.

Again the factors 'B' dull-bright and 'Q3' undisciplined self conflict-controlled were

positively and significantly related with numerical ability. But the factor 'I' self reliant-sensitive was negatively and significantly related with numerical ability, indicating that self reliant was higher on numerical ability.

The factor 'G' disregards rules-moralistic and 'L' accepting condition-suspicious were

positively and significantly related with the abstract reasoning. The factor 'F' sober enthusiastic was negatively and significantly related with abstract reasoning.

The factor 'B' dull-bright, 'G' disregards rules-moralistic, 'O' secure-insecure and 'Q3'

undisciplined self conflict-controlled were positively and significantly related with space relations. But the factors 'A' reserved-outgoing and 'I' self reliant-sensitive were negatively and significantly related with space relations.

The factors 'A' reserved-outgoing, 'F' sober-enthusiastic and 'I' self reliant-sensitive

were negatively and significantly related with mechanical reasoning. But the factor 'Q3' undisciplined self conflict-controlled was positively and significantly related with mechanical reasoning.

Again the factors 'A' reserved-outgoing, 'F' sober-enthusiastic, 'I' self reliant-sensitive

were positively and significantly related with clerical speed and accuracy. But the factor 'Q3' undisciplined self conflict-control was negatively and significantly related with clerical speed and accuracy.

The factors 'A' reserved-outgoing, 'F' sober-enthusiastic, 'I' self reliant-sensitive were

positively and significantly related with language spelling. The factors 'L' accepting condition-suspicious and 'O' secure-insecure were related negatively and significantly with language spelling.

The factors A, F, H, I, M and Q4 reserved-outgoing, sober-enthusiastic, shy-socially

bold, self reliant-sensitive, practical-imaginative and related-tensed respectively were positively and significantly related with language sentences. And the factors like 'L' and 'Q1' accepting condition-suspicious and conservative-liberal were negatively and significantly related with language sentences.

Second order personality factors

Anxiety was negatively and significantly related with verbal reasoning. Extroversion was negatively and significantly related with mechanical reasoning and it was positively and significantly related with language spelling and sentences. Tough poise was positively and significantly related with both space relation and mechanical reasoning. But, it was negatively and significantly related with both clerical speed and accuracy and language spelling-sentences. The factor subduedness-independence was not significant with aptitude categories.

Table 32. Relation between aptitude and academic achievement of

undergraduate students

Agriculture

Sl. No.

Category

Boys ‘r’

Girls ‘r’

Marketing ‘r’

Home Science

‘r’

Total ‘r’

1. Verbal reasoning 0.16 0.12 0.41* 0.43** 0.33**

2. Numerical ability 0.00 0.27 0.18 0.23 0.25**

3. Abstract reasoning -0.02 -0.03 0.41* 0.36* 0.19*

4. Space relations 0.32 0.09 0.33* 0.54** 0.34**

5. Mechanical reasoning -0.03 0.01 0.30 -0.02 0.15

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

-0.01 -0.26 -0.07 0.27 -0.11

7. Spelling 0.25 0.07 0.07 0.44* -0.02

8. Sentences -0.11 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00

Table 33. Relation between aptitude and personality factors of undergraduate students

Sl. No.

Category P-ve

‘r’ P-Nu

‘r’ P-Ab

‘r’ P-Sp

‘r’ P-Me

‘r’ PCSA

‘r’ P-Spel

‘r’ P-senle

‘r’

1. A–Reserved-outgoing -0.12 -0.04 -0.14 -0.26** -0.26** 0.16* 0.22** 0.26**

2. B–Dull-bright 0.25** 0.19* 0.10 0.27** 0.16* -0.14 0.03 -0.10

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.10 0.12 0.09 -0.03 -0.11

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 0.05 -0.06 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.01 -0.02 0.01

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic -0.16* -0.02 -0.20* -0.15 -0.25** 0.17* 0.24** 0.29**

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 0.13 0.14 0.23** 0.26** 0.16 0.00 0.02 -0.01

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 0.08 -0.06 -0.09 -0.02 -0.14 0.03 0.18* 0.21**

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive -0.04 -0.16* -0.12 -0.32** -0.33** 0.23** 0.43** 0.28**

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious -0.03 -0.06 0.19* 0.11 0.04 -0.04 -0.23** -0.16*

10. M – Practical-imaginative 0.11 0.05 0.10 -0.06 0.01 0.05 0.11 0.18**

11. N –Socially clumsy- socially aware 0.01 0.01 -0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.06

12. O-Secure-insecure -0.18* 0.03 0.07 0.17* 0.15 -0.02 -0.24** -0.11

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 0.05 0.09 0.07 0.11 0.14 0.10 0.04 -0.23**

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient -0.10 0.03 -0.07 -0.01 0.09 -0.09 -0.10 -0.05

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled 0.25** 0.19* 0.09 0.22** 0.29** -0.19* -0.14 -0.10

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed -0.01 -0.06 0.01 0.06 -0.02 0.04 0.06 0.16*

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion -0.02 -0.05 -0.13 -0.08 -0.28** 0.09 0.24** 0.28**

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety -0.17* 0.00 0.02 0.05 -0.01 0.08 -0.08 0.05

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 0.00 0.03 0.05 0.24** 0.16* -0.26** -0.31** -0.19*

4. Subduedness-Independent 0.15 0.02 -0.01 -0.04 -0.02 0.05 0.13 0.01

4.6.4 Relationship between aptitude and personality factors of the students faculty wise

(a) Boys of agriculture

The correlation coefficient analysis (Table 33a) to know the relation between aptitude and personality factors was made, which revealed that the factors 'F' and 'H' sober-enthusiastic and shy-socially bold respectively were negatively and significantly related with abstract reasoning. The factor 'G' disregards rules-moralistic was positively and significantly related with abstract reasoning. The factor 'I' self reliant-sensitive was positively and significantly related with mechanical reasoning. The factor 'H' shy-socially bold was positively and significantly related with language sentences.

Incase of second order personality factors. The factor III tender minded-toughpoise

was negatively and significantly related with abstract reasoning.

(b) Girls of agriculture

Incase of girls of agriculture the factors 'G' disregards rules-moralistic was positively and significantly related with verbal reasoning, the factor 'Q2' group dependent-self sufficient was negatively and significantly related with verbal reasoning (Table 33b).

The factor 'F' sober-enthusiastic was negatively and significantly related with abstract

reasoning and the factor 'N' socially clumsy-socially aware was positively and significantly related with abstract reasoning.

The factors 'B' dull-bright and 'C' emotionally less stable-mature were positively and

significantly related with space relations. The factors 'E' mild-aggressive was negatively and significantly related with space relations.

The factor 'A' reserved-outgoing was negatively and significantly related with

mechanical reasoning. The factor 'G' disregards rules-moralistic was positively and significantly related with

language sentences. The factor 'O' secure-insecure was negatively and significantly related with language sentences.

Incase of second order personality factors the factor subduedness-independence was

negatively and significantly related with space relations.

(c) Home Science students

Incase of Home Science students, the factors 'A' and 'O' reserved-outgoing and secure-insecure respectively were negatively and significantly related with verbal reasoning (Table 33c).

The factors 'G' disregards rules-moralistic and 'M' practical- imaginative were

positively and significantly related with abstract reasoning. The factor 'A' reserved-outgoing was negatively and significantly related with space

relations. The factor 'G' disregards rules-moralistic was positively and significantly related with space relations.

The factor 'F' sober-enthusiastic and factor 'M' practical-imaginative were significantly

related negatively and positively respectively with mechanical reasoning. Incase of second order personality factors, the III factor tender minded-toughpoise

was negatively and significantly related with numerical ability.

Table 33a. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among boys of agriculture

Sl. No.

Category P-ve

‘r’

P-Nu ‘r’

P-Ab ‘r’

P-Sp ‘r’

P-Me ‘r’

PCSA ‘r’

P-Spel

‘r’

P-senle

‘r’

1. A–Outgoing-reserved 0.01 0.06 0.04 178.00

0.16 -0.09 0.24 0.09

2. B–Dull-bright 0.19 -0.12 0.14 -0.09 0.13 0.10 0.06 -0.25

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature -0.11 0.05 -0.04 0.01 0.19 0.29 0.01 -0.10

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 0.01 0.05 0.09 0.12 0.17 -0.11 -0.04 -0.14

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic -0.21 0.11 -0.32* 0.09 0.23 0.14 -0.01 0.15

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 0.00 0.05 0.43* 0.16 0.04 -0.03 0.22 -0.09

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 0.09 -0.08 -0.43* -0.07 -0.20 -0.09 -0.10 0.31

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 0.11 -0.09 0.23 -0.02 0.38*

-0.12 0.02 0.15

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious

0.16 -0.09 0.20 0.08 0.17 -0.02 -0.19 -0.18

10. M – Practical-imaginative 0.04 -0.11 0.00 0.06 -0.23 -0.16 0.18 0.16

11. N – Secure-socially aware 0.11 -0.10 -0.12 -0.10 -0.17 -0.07 -0.22 -0.18

12. O-Secure-insecure -0.27 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.16 0.13 -0.05 -0.11

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 0.01 -0.09 -0.08 0.30 0.16 0.04 0.02 -0.45*

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient

-0.15 0.00 -0.02 -0.20 -0.29 0.10 -0.04 0.10

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

0.14 0.02 -0.16 -0.28 -0.21 0.33*

-0.26 -0.15

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed -0.13 -0.19 -0.04 -0.15 0.11 0.01 0.11 0.18

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion -0.05 0.02 -0.26 0.12 0.19 0.00 0.09 0.24

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety -0.18 -0.03 0.22 -0.10 0.15 0.09 0.11 0.06

3. Tender minded-Tough poise -0.19 -0.06 -0.34* -0.05 -0.26 0.11 -0.07 0.13

4. Subduedness-Independent 0.16 -0.03 -0.12 -0.08 -0.13 -0.05 -0.03 -0.10

Table 33b. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among

girls of agriculture

Sl. No.

Category P-ve

‘r’

P-Nu ‘r’

P-Ab ‘r’

P-Sp ‘r’

P-Me ‘r’

PCSA ‘r’

P-Spel

‘r’

P-senle

‘r’

1. A–Outgoing-reserved -0.12 0.04 -0.03 0.02 -0.39*

0.01 -0.04 0.08

2. B–Dull-bright 0.17 0.11 0.15 0.38* 0.20 -0.20 0.11 0.15

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 0.07 -0.07 0.17 0.34* 0.29 -0.24 0.17 0.04

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 0.13 -0.07 0.06 -0.43* -0.11 -0.02 -0.24 0.13

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic -0.20 0.32 -0.34* 0.14 -0.15 0.09 -0.05 0.16

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 0.35* 0.16 0.32 0.11 0.22 0.13 -0.04 0.39*

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 0.13 -0.09 0.14 0.11 -0.08 0.05 -0.24 0.10

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive -0.21 0.04 -0.13 -0.13 -0.09 0.03 0.14 -0.08

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious

-0.04 0.11 0.11 0.08 -0.14 -0.11 -0.32 -0.09

10. M – Practical-imaginative 0.06 0.31 0.04 -0.16 0.11 -0.09 -0.07 0.17

11. N – Secure-socially aware 0.04 0.32 0.37* 0.11 0.05 0.03 0.11 0.01

12. O-Secure-insecure -0.03 -0.22 -0.15 0.19 -0.07 -0.10 -0.04 -0.38*

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 0.00 -0.11 -0.20 -0.16 0.19 0.15 -0.04 0.04

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient

-0.34* -0.07 -0.17 -0.20 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.15

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

0.29 0.05 -0.03 -0.05 0.24 -0.05 0.04 0.05

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 0.20 -0.04 -0.10 0.04 -0.11 0.06 0.00 -0.05

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 0.17 0.09 0.05 -0.03 -0.28 0.02 -0.23 0.15

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 0.03 -0.05 -0.13 -0.02 -0.22 0.10 -0.13 -0.19

3. Tender minded-Tough poise

0.09 -0.01 0.06 -0.02 -0.08 -0.01 -0.26 0.06

4. Subduedness-Independent -0.06 -0.06 0.27 -0.38* 0.09 0.03 -0.03 0.25

Table 33c. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among home science students

Sl. No.

Category P-ve

‘r’ P-Nu

‘r’

P-Ab ‘r’

P-Sp ‘r’

P-Me ‘r’

PCSA ‘r’

P-Spel

‘r’

P-senl

e ‘r’

1. A–Outgoing-reserved -0.32*

0.27 -0.25 -0.39**

0.10 -0.06 -0.08 0.13

2. B–Dull-bright 0.14 0.16 0.10 0.21 0.10 -0.14 0.12 0.01

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 0.20 0.00 0.04 -0.07 0.01 -0.02 0.14 -0.05

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 0.04 -0.18 0.05 0.04 -0.09 0.01 0.01 -0.07

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic -0.22 -0.21 0.00 -0.15 -0.43**

-0.02 0.15 -0.02

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 0.13 0.15 0.34* 0.45** 0.08 0.11 0.18 0.09

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 0.00 -0.13 0.21 0.03 -0.15 -0.14 0.18 -0.19

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive -0.23 -0.08 -0.12 -0.13 -0.02 0.04 0.10 0.08

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious

-0.18 0.23 0.12 0.06 -0.11 -0.11 -0.22 -0.27

10. M – Practical-imaginative 0.10 0.01 0.44**

0.01 0.40** 0.16 -0.11 0.13

11. N – Secure-socially aware 0.03 0.03 -0.27 -0.08 -0.19 -0.01 0.12 0.04

12. O-Secure-insecure -0.30*

0.02 0.02 -0.04 -0.06 0.08 -0.21 -0.03

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 0.00 0.03 0.14 0.01 -0.04 0.29 0.16 -0.02

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient

0.08 0.01 -0.22 0.02 0.06 -0.29 0.01 -0.26

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

0.16 -0.10 0.10 0.08 -0.03 -0.14 0.23 0.08

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed -0.07 -0.01 0.11 0.09 0.05 -0.04 -0.02 0.07

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion -0.20 -0.13 0.01 -0.11 -0.28 0.13 0.04 -0.08

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety -0.28 0.06 -0.04 0.04 0.00 -0.02 -0.18 0.02

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 0.02 -0.36*

0.13 0.12 -0.12 -0.20 -0.01 -0.29

4. Subduedness-Independent 0.11 -0.10 0.25 0.05 0.10 0.11 0.10 -0.07

Table 33d. Relation between aptitude and personality factors among students of marketing

Sl. No.

Category P-ve

‘r’ P-Nu

‘r’ P-Ab

‘r’ P-Sp

‘r’ P-Me

‘r’

PCSA ‘r’

P-Spel

‘r’

P-senle

‘r’

1. A–Outgoing-reserved 0.05 -0.05 0.01 -0.02 0.10 0.25 -0.26 0.22

2. B–Dull-bright 0.40* 0.41* 0.07 0.32 0.14 0.16 0.54**

0.12

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature -0.06 0.01 -0.09 -0.02 -0.24 -0.14 -0.12 -0.13

4. E–Mild-Aggressive -0.13 -0.01 -0.10 0.41* -0.03 0.17 0.03 0.16

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 0.12 0.22 -0.15 0.52**

0.15 0.16 0.16 0.43**

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic -0.09 0.06 -0.20 0.01 -0.06 0.06 0.18 0.10

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 0.31 0.57**

-0.10 0.32 0.18 0.15 0.50**

0.15

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 0.30 0.30 0.09 -0.01 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.03

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious

0.02 -0.18 0.12 -0.06 0.06 0.41* -0.12 0.00

10. M – Practical-imaginative 0.13 0.23 0.24 0.25 -0.01 0.16 0.16 0.14

11. N – Secure-socially aware -0.22 -0.21 -0.13 -0.11 -0.12 0.26 -0.38*

0.09

12. O-Secure-insecure -0.03 -0.03 -0.15 -0.01 0.14 0.36* -0.14 0.39*

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 0.20 0.39* 0.27 0.29 0.12 0.12 0.34* -0.14

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient

-0.08 -0.06 0.04 -0.01 -0.13 0.00 -0.01 -0.02

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

0.38* 0.37 0.16 0.42**

0.22 -0.11 0.55**

0.29

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.56**

0.32 0.09 0.07 0.35*

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 0.16 0.31 -0.15 0.59**

0.19 0.12 0.31 0.36*

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety -0.11 -0.21 -0.10 0.16 0.28 0.34* -0.16 0.37*

3. Tender minded-Tough poise -0.10 -0.01 -0.18 0.07 -0.14 -0.31 0.14 -0.05

4. Subduedness-Independent 0.27 0.40* 0.32 0.53**

0.04 0.14 0.50**

-0.01

(d) Marketing students

Incase of Marketing students the factors 'B' dull-bright and the factor 'Q3' undisciplined self conflict-controlled were positively and significantly related with verbal reasoning (Table 33d).

The factors 'B' dull-bright, 'H' shy-socially bold, and 'Q1' conservative-liberal were

positively and significantly related with numerical ability. The factors 'E' mild-aggressive, 'F' sober-enthusiastic, 'Q3' undisciplined self conflict-

controlled, 'Q4' relaxed-tensed were positively and significantly related with space relations. The factors 'L' accepting condition-suspicious, 'O' secure-insecure were positively

and significantly related with clerical speed and accuracy. The factors 'B' dull-bright, 'H' shy-socially bold, 'Q1' conservative-liberal, 'Q3'

undisciplined self conflict were positively and significantly related with language spelling. The factor 'N' socially clumsy-socially aware was negatively and significantly related with language spelling.

The factors 'F' sober enthusiastic, 'O' secure-insecure, 'Q4' relaxed-tensed were

positively and significantly related with language sentences. Incase of second order personality factors the factor subduedness-independence was

positively and significantly related with numerical ability. The factors introversion-extroversion and subduedness-independence were positively

and significantly related with space relations. The factor low anxiety-high anxiety was positively and significantly related with

clerical speed and accuracy. The factor subduedness-independence was positively and significantly related with

language spelling. The factor introversion-extroversion and low anxiety-high anxiety were positively and

significantly related with language sentences.

4.7 INFLUENCE OF SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS ON PERSONALITY FACTORS, APTITUDE AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

4.7.1 Correlation coefficient between socio-demographic characters and

personality factors

When the students personal and familial characters were correlated with personality factors (Table 34). It revealed that age of the student was negatively and significantly related with the factor 'F' sober-enthusiastic.

Ordinal position of the student was positively and significantly related with the factor

'C' emotionally less stable-mature. Size of the family of students was negatively and significantly related with the factors

'B' dull-bright and 'G' disregards rules-moralistic.

Table 34. Relation between socio-demographic characters and personality factors of undergraduate students

Sl. No.

Personality factors Age ‘r’

O-position ‘r’

F size ‘r’

Edu F ‘r’

Edu M ‘r’

Occu. F ‘r’

Occu M ‘r’

1. A–Reserved-outgoing 0.10 0.02 -0.05 -0.11 -0.05 -0.12 -0.07

2. B–Dull-bright 0.05 0.05 -0.16* 0.16* 0.10 0.16* 0.08

3. C–Emotionally less stable-mature 0.03 0.17* -0.14 0.07 0.0 0.11 0.02

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 0.10 -0.03 0.05 -0.11 -0.02 -0.13 -0.07

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic -0.18* -0.09 -0.08 0.0 0.03 -0.08 -0.05

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 0.04 -0.01 -0.16* 0.07 0.06 0.08 -0.06

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- -0.11 -0.02 -0.08 -0.02 -0.06 0.02 -0.16

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 0.09 0.04 0.04 -0.13 -0.10 -0.07 -0.11

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 0.10 0.06 0.07 -0.12 -0.21** -0.03 -0.20*

10. M – Practical-imaginative 0.04 -0.03 0.0 0.10 0.0 0.10 0.10

11. N –Socially clumsy- socially aware 0.03 -0.03 0.02 0.07 -0.04 0.01 -0.02

12. O-Secure-insecure 0.12 -0.01 0.13 -0.02 -0.10 -0.04 0.01

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 0.06 -0.08 0.08 0.10 -0.04 0.02 -0.17*

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient -0.07 -0.02 -0.14 0.23** 0.13 0.21** 0.16*

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled -0.03 0.03 -0.01 0.05 0.10 0.11 0.09

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 0.06 0.07 0.09 0.12 0.0 0.06 -0.03

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion -0.10 0.01 -0.08 -0.10 -0.05 -0.08 -0.16

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 0.06 -0.04 -0.11 0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.06

3. Tender minded-Tough poise -0.23** -0.03 -0.15 0.14 0.10 0.12 0.05

4. Subduedness-Independent 0.03 -0.10 -0.04 0.05 0.06 0.03 0.02

Education and occupation of the fathers were positively and significantly related with the factor 'B' dull-bright and 'Q2' group dependent-self sufficiency. Education of the mother was negatively and significantly related with the factor 'C' accepting condition-suspicious. While occupation of mother was negatively and significantly related with the factors 'L' and 'Q1'.

Accepting condition-suspicious and conservative-liberal respectively. But occupation

of mother was positively and significantly related with the factor 'Q2' group dependent-self sufficient.

Second order personality factors

Age of the student was negatively and significantly related with toughpoise.

4.7.2 Relation between socio-demographic characters and aptitude

The Table 35 shows the correlation co-efficient analysis between socio-demographic characters and aptitude. Age of the student was negatively significant with numerical ability and positively related with clerical speed and accuracy.

Education of the father was positively and significantly related with verbal reasoning, where as education of the mother was positively and significantly related with verbal reasoning and occupation of the mother was significantly related with mechanical reasoning of the students.

4.7.3 Relation between socio-demographic characters and academic achievement

The Table 36 shows the correlation analysis between socio-demographic characters

and academic achievement which revealed that there was no significant relation.

4.8 INFLUENCE OF APTITUDE, PERSONALITY AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT ON CHOICE OF POSTGRADUATE COURSES

4.8.1 Agriculture students

The Table 37 shows the students choice of postgraduate courses incase of Agriculture students. Majority (21%) of the students were interested in Genetics course, followed by Horticulture course (11-23%). Equal number of students (7 each) were interested in Biotech and Entomology courses 6 each interested in Seed Technology, Pathology, Soil Science, Microbiology. 3 in Crop Physiology. 2 each were interested in Extension and Agronomy, 9 students were not interested in postgraduates courses.

Comparison between choice of postgraduates courses of students personality

The Table 38 shows the comparison between Genetics and Horticulture students. There was only significant difference found in the factor 'F' it indicates Genetics students were higher than the Horticulture students which shows that Genetics students were more enthusiastic than the Horticulture students.

Comparison between choice of postgraduate courses of students aptitude

The Table 39 shows the comparison between aptitude of Genetics and Horticulture students. There was significant difference found in verbal reasoning and language sentences.

Horticulture students were higher in both verbal reasoning and language sentences.

Table 35. Relation between socio-demographic character and aptitude of undergraduate students

Sl. No. Category

Age ‘r’

O-position ‘r’

F size ‘r’

Edu F ‘r’

Edu M ‘r’

Occu F ‘r’

Occu M ‘r’

1. Verbal reasoning 0.10 -0.03 -0.01 0.19* 0.19* 0.11 0.05

2. Numerical ability -0.23** -0.08 -0.14 0.08 0.07 -0.03 -0.01

3. Abstract reasoning 0.07 0.04 0.02 0.05 -0.03 0.08 0.06

4. Space relations 0.06 0.03 -0.03 0.03 0.11 0.06 0.11

5. Mechanical reasoning 0.06 0.05 -0.04 0.10 0.01 0.08 0.17*

6. Clerical speed and accuracy 0.18* -0.03 -0.08 -0.04 -0.03 -0.15 0.10

7. Spelling 0.07 0.02 -0.05 0.03 0.11 -0.01 -0.02

8. Sentences 0.02 0.08 -0.08 0.08 0.02 0.03 0.08

Table 36. Relation between socio-demographic characters and academic achievement of undergraduate students

Category

Age ‘r’

O-position

‘r’

F size ‘r’

Edu F ‘r’

Edu M ‘r’

Occu F ‘r’

Occu M ‘r’

AA 0.08 -0.04 -0.01 0.08 0.11 0.12 0.07

Table 37. Career choice of undergraduate students of agriculture

Sl. No.

Category Total

1. Genetics 17 (21.25)

2. Horticulture 9 (11.25)

3. Biotech-entomology 14 (17.50)

4. Seed Tech + Pathology + Soil Science + Microbiology 24 (30.00)

5. Crop physiology 3 (3.75)

6. Extension + Agronomy 4 (5.00)

7. Not interested 9 (11.25)

Table 38. Influence of personality factors on career choice of students of agriculture

Genetics (N=17)

Horticulture (N=9)

Sl. No.

Category

Mean S.D Mean S.D

't' value

1. A–Outgoing-reserved 4.53 1.62 4.78 1.56 -0.68

2. B–Dull-bright 4.35 2.08 4.00 1.22 0.54

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 4.53 1.87 4.00 1.11 0.91

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 5.35 1.27 5.78 1.20 -0.85

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 4.00 1.17 3.00 1.00 2.28*

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 5.82 2.01 6.11 2.08 -0.34

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 4.76 1.09 5.33 1.41 -1.06

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 4.59 1.37 5.22 1.78 -0.93

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 6.47 1.46 6.44 1.88 0.04

10. M – Practical-imaginative 5.00 1.54 5.89 1.54 -1.40

11. N – Secure-socially aware 5.76 1.82 6.77 1.86 -1.33

12. O-Secure-insecure 6.59 2.31 5.77 1.72 1.02

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 6.05 1.19 5.56 1.59 0.81

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient

6.05 1.08 5.44 1.81 0.92

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

5.88 1.16 5.78 1.99 0.14

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 4.65 1.80 5.11 1.61 -0.66

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 4.29 1.07 4.32 0.91 -0.08

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 5.80 1.36 5.77 0.58 0.08

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 5.82 1.17 5.19 2.06 0.85

4. Subduedness-Independent 5.45 0.87 5.56 0.87 -0.31

Table 39. Influence of aptitude on career choice of agriculture students

Genetics (N=17) Horticulture (N=9) Sl. No.

Category

Mean S.D Mean S.D

't' value

1. Verbal reasoning 7.06 5.72 17.33 9.5 -2.97*

2. Numerical ability 54.71 17.54 49.44 15.50 0.79

3. Abstract reasoning 42.71 24.33 50.56 31.37 -0.65

4. Space relations 21.65 12.29 22.2 9.39 -0.13

5. Mechanical reasoning 13.12 17.03 8.67 9.60 0.85

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

68.76 22.58 72.22 15.43 -0.46

7. Spelling 21.06 11.17 28.89 15.16 -1.37

8. Sentences 2.06 1.60 5.89 4.68 -2.38*

Table 40. Influence of academic achievement on career choice of agriculture students

Genetics (N=17) Horticulture (N=9)

Category

Mean S.D Mean S.D

't' value

A.A 7.64 0.58 7.05 0.99 1.64

Comparison between choice of postgraduate courses of students academic achievement

The Table 40 shows there was no significant difference found between Genetics and Horticulture students in their academic achievement.

4.8.2 Home Science students

The Table 41 shows the students choice of postgraduate courses. Incase of Home Science students, more number (33%) of students were interested in Human Development followed by Food Science and Nutrition (28%). About 12 per cent of students were interested in Extension, 3 students were interested in Textile and not interested and only 1 was interested in MBA course. 8 students were not interested in postgraduate courses.

Comparison between choice of postgraduate courses of students personality and academic achievement

The Tables 42, 43 and 44 shows comparison between personality, aptitude and academic achievement of Human Development and Food Science and Nutrition students. There was no significant difference found in all the cases.

4.8.3 Marketing students

The Table 45 shows the students choice of postgraduate courses. Incase of Marketing students, majority (35%) of the students were interested in Agricultural Marketing course and followed by MBA (24%). About 22 per cent of students were interested in Agricultural Extension and only 3 per cent of students were interested in Statistics.

Comparison between choice of postgraduate courses of students personality, aptitude and academic achievement

The Tables 46, 47 and 48 shows the comparison between personality, aptitude and academic achievement of Agricultural Marketing and MBA students. There was no significant difference found in all the cases.

Table 41. Career choice of students of home science

Sl. No. Category Home Science

1. Human development 14 (32.60)

2. Foods and Nutrition 12 (27.80)

3. Extension 5 (11.60)

4. Textile 3 (7.10)

5. MBA 1 (2.30)

6. Not interested 8 (18.60)

Table 42. Influence of personality factors on career choice of students of home science

Human Development

(N=14)

Food Science Nutrition (N=12)

Sl. No.

Category

Mean S.D Mean S.D

't' value

1. A–Outgoing-reserved 3.86 1.40 4.16 1.46 -0.53

2. B–Dull-bright 4.64 1.33 5.25 2.09 -0.87

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 4.21 1.31 4.75 1.71 -0.89

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 5.21 1.81 5.00 1.48 0.33

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 3.50 1.61 2.83 1.03 1.28

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 6.42 1.55 6.58 1.83 -0.24

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 5.07 1.07 5.25 1.48 -0.35

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 4.50 1.51 4.25 1.21 0.47

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 7.21 0.89 6.00 2.21 1.78

10. M – Practical-imaginative 4.50 1.34 5.17 1.11 -1.39

11. N – Secure-socially aware 7.29 1.59 6.67 1.87 0.90

12. O-Secure-insecure 7.21 1.92 6.91 2.39 0.35

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 5.71 1.20 6.33 1.23 -1.30

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient

5.29 1.59 5.83 1.33 -0.94

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

6.50 1.45 6.58 0.90 -0.17

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 4.93 1.54 4.25 1.76 1.04

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 4.25 1.24 3.71 1.33 1.06

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 6.12 1.27 5.68 1.88 0.69

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 6.56 1.02 5.31 1.79 2.14

4. Subduedness-Independent 4.76 1.06 5.09 1.24 -0.72

Table 43. Influence of aptitude on career choice of students of home science

Human Development (N=14)

Food Science Nutrition (N=12)

Sl. No.

Category

Mean S.D Mean S.D

't' value

1. Verbal reasoning 11.29 10.30 9.42 10.80 0.45

2. Numerical ability 48.21 26.14 55.25 26.50 -0.68

3. Abstract reasoning 50.28 28.66 57.67 23.01 -0.73

4. Space relations 32.40 13.69 27.08 13.56 0.99

5. Mechanical reasoning 22.35 15.21 27.50 15.15 -0.86

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

55.71 19.99 63.25 25.91 -0.82

7. Spelling 18.64 14.90 18.00 15.63 0.11

8. Sentences 1.71 1.49 2.58 2.81 -0.96

Table 44. Influence of academic achievement on career choice of students of home science

Human Development (N=14)

Food Science Nutrition (N=12)

Category

Mean S.D Mean S.D

't' value

A.A 7.37 0.76 7.90 0.78 -1.75

Table 45. Career choice of students of marketing

Sl. No. Category Marketing

1. Agri. marketing 13 (35.20)

2. MBA 9 (24.30)

3. Extension 8 (21.60)

4. Statistics 1 (2.70)

5. Not interested 6 (16.20)

Table 46. Influence of personality factor on career choice of students of marketing

Agri marketing (N=13)

MBA (N=9) Sl. No.

Category

Mean S.D Mean S.D

't' value

1. A–Outgoing-reserved 5.23 1.88 5.15 1.55 0.11

2. B–Dull-bright 3.62 1.50 3.45 0.91 0.33

3. C–Emotionally stable-mature 4.53 1.45 3.81 0.93 1.42

4. E–Mild-Aggressive 5.15 1.28 5.27 1.49 -0.20

5. F–Sober-enthusiastic 4.15 1.86 3.39 1.61 1.02

6. G–Disregards rules-moralistic 6.38 1.80 5.80 1.68 0.77

7. H–Shy-Socially bold- 5.76 0.72 5.72 0.70 0.13

8. I - Self reliant-sensitive 7.00 1.41 7.25 1.04 -0.48

9. L - Accepting condition-Suspicious 6.77 1.48 7.10 1.46 -0.52

10. M – Practical-imaginative 4.53 1.19 4.69 1.16 -0.31

11. N – Secure-socially aware 6.92 2.25 7.61 1.85 -0.79

12. O-Secure-insecure 6.54 1.20 6.70 0.70 -0.39

13. Q1 – Conservative-liberal 6.31 1.54 6.54 1.76 -0.32

14. Q2 – Group dependent-self sufficient

5.70 1.65 5.71 1.58 -0.01

15. Q3 – Undisciplined self conflict-controlled

4.46 1.66 4.43 1.17 0.05

16. Q4 - Tense-Relaxed 4.92 1.25 4.74 1.03 0.37

Second order personality factors

1. Introversion-Extroversion 4.60 1.25 4.11 1.05 0.99

2. Low anxiety- High anxiety 6.16 0.82 6.25 0.80 -0.26

3. Tender minded-Tough poise 3.60 2.08 2.97 1.41 0.85

4. Subduedness-Independent 4.78 0.87 4.98 0.60 -0.64

Table 47. Influence of aptitude on career choice of students of marketing

Agri marketing (N=13)

MBA (N=9) Sl. No.

Category

Mean S.D Mean S.D

't' value

1. Verbal reasoning 4.76 3.34 5.22 3.24 -0.32

2. Numerical ability 34.61 17.97 35.57 16.14 -0.13

3. Abstract reasoning 43.85 17.10 48.61 19.45 -0.59

4. Space relations 15.85 8.72 15.86 8.80 0.00

5. Mechanical reasoning 5.85 4.10 5.98 4.50 -0.07

6. Clerical speed and accuracy

76.85 16.40 74.61 15.25 0.33

7. Spelling 29.85 13.40 32.48 6.56 -0.61

8. Sentences 3.54 2.40 2.82 1.31 0.90

Table 48. Influence of academic achievement on career choice of students of marketing

Agri marketing (N=13)

MBA (N=9)

Category

Mean S.D Mean S.D

't' value

A.A 6.69 1.05 6.86 0.64 -0.47

V. DISCUSSION

The results of the present study are discussed in this chapter under the following headings.

5.1 Aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of professional students 5.2 Interrelation of aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of students 5.3 Influence of socio-demographic factors on aptitude, personality factors and academic

achievement

5.1 APTITUDE, PERSONALITY PROFILE AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL STUDENTS This is further presented under the following headings.

5.1.1 Aptitude of students

The present study reveals that most of the students were in lower range of aptitude. The aptitude was low in verbal reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, language (spelling and sentences). More number of students had aptitude low average in numerical ability and abstract reasoning. More number of students were high in clerical speed and accuracy.

Forty-one per cent of students were high on clerical speed and accuracy. This may

be because of the prevalence of the examination system with a high tendency on objective type of answers. A high percentage of students were from rural background. Learning environment created by educational, social and cultural influences sessm to be is favourable for the students. The classrooms are teachers centered where the students appear to have a very passive role. The curriculum is an examination driven nature and teachers have to finish the prescribed course content in a given frame of time in order to produce results. Less emphasis is given for reasoning, creativity and practicability. Hence these students were low on verbal reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, language (spelling and sentences).

The mean scores and standard deviation of aptitude of students indicated that there

was a wide range in mean scores with the highest mean in clerical speed and accuracy and lowest in language (sentences).

Rao (1995) found that the scientific aptitude in the secondary school pupils was

average. Jose (1987) found that 70 per cent of 9th class pupils were with average scientific

aptitude. This may be because the development of scientific aptitude is dependent on a variety of factors like the presence of certain study skills. Persistence in learning and motivation, satisfaction derived from learning a subject, evaluation procedures that are followed in education, cultural background, Socio-economic factors, interests, attitudes are some of the important factors that promote scientific aptitude.

5.1.1.1 Aptitude of Agriculture students

In case of boys of agriculture students, most of the students were with low aptitude (53-100%) in verbal reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, language (sentences). More number of students were below average (47.70%) in numerical ability, abstract reasoning and language spelling. An equal proportion of students (4.4%) were average and high in clerical speed and accuracy.

Incase of girls of agriculture students most of the students were with low aptitude (62-

100%) in verbal reasoning, mechanical reasoning, language (spelling and sentences). More

number of students were below average group (57-59%) in space relation. More number of students were above average (38-46%) in abstract reasoning and numerical ability and more number of students were high (38%) in clerical speed and accuracy.

5.1.1.2 Aptitude of Home Science Students

Incase of Home Science students most of them were with a low aptitude (54-100%) in verbal reasoning, language (spelling and sentences). More number of students were below average (24-47%) in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning. More number of students were above average (37%) in clerical speed and accuracy.

5.1.1.3 Aptitude of marketing students

Incase of Marketing students most of them were low (59-100%) in verbal reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, language sentences. More number of students were below average (32-76%) in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, language (spelling). More number of students were high (59%) in clerical speed and accuracy.

5.1.1.4 Comparison of aptitude of students by faculty

When comparisons were made between faculties it was observed that girls of agriculture students were higher than the rest in numerical ability (46%) and abstract reasoning (38%). These girl students also had hailed form rural schools and from better home environment. They were from upper caste group. The encouragement and drive to achieve and attain the target might have resulted in they being better than the rest.

Among Home Science students, boys of agriculture students and Marketing students

similar trend was observed. They were high on clerical speed and accuracy and low on verbal reasoning, mechanical, space and numerical ability. This trend may be because of the mode of examination and pattern of learning inculcated over the period of 1 to 4 years of the degree programme and also due to the similar pattern that has been continued since their schooling and college education. The Indian education lays a strong emphasis on examination and coaching is of examination driven nature teachers have to finish the prescribed course content in a given frame of time in order to produce results. There is very little scope for creativity, reasoning, discussion, problem solving tasks. The teacher plays a role in giving trend of information and students receive and reproduce. There is very little or no scope for problem solving tasks, capacity building in terms of creating new structures product with less of creativity, reasoning, designing new structures, mechanical and spatial relationships in either Agriculture. The selection of students are also on the basis of academic achievement which might have recruited such children who had an aptitude in clerical speed and accuracy.

5.1.1.5 Comparison of aptitude of students by gender

The results of present study indicated that boys and girls differed significantly in all categories of aptitude, in which boys were higher on verbal reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy, language (spelling and sentences) compared to girls, while girls were higher on numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations and mechanical reasoning compared to boys.

Many aptitudes have been associated with male female differences in scientific

reasoning, spatial ability which has been reported by Harris (1978), Mauoby and Jacklin (1974) and Saarni (1973), Formal reasoning ability by Karplus et al. (1977), Lawson (1978), Linn and Pulos (1981). The difference in scientific reasoning may be because of the difference in the encouragement and opportunity thereby interest and practice.

Rao (1995) found that the scientific aptitude was similar in boys and girls and both the

group were in average range.

5.1.1.6 Influence of age on aptitude The results of the present study revealed that age of the student was negatively

related with numerical ability but positively related with clerical speed and accuracy. As the age of student increased the capacity for numerical ability decreased, but clerical speed and accuracy increased. However, Sharma (1973), Brabeck (1984) found increase in the abilities (verbal and reasoning) with the increase in age. It may be because of experiences will increase the knowledge.

5.1.2 Personality profile of the students

The result of the study indicated that most of the students were in average category in all 16 personality factors. Few of them (13 to 36%) were reserved, less intelligent, emotionally less stable, mild, sober, shy-undisciplined self conflict and relaxed and same proportion (13 to 34 %) of them were moralistic, sensitive, socially aware, suspicious and insecure. The mean scores and standard deviation of personality factors indicated the highest mean scores in insecurity and lowest in soberness. It may be because of the upbringing practices.

The results of the present study is in accordance with the results of the study

conducted by Mundaragi (1999) who observed that majority of students were in the average category in 14 personality traits viz., adaptability, academic motivation, guilt proneness, mental health, morality, sensitivity, self sufficiency, social warmth, while in few personality dimensions such as boldness, individualism, leadership, maturity, self control, they were in high category and in only one dimension i.e., innovation were in low category. However there are very few studies that are reported on each of the personality factors of students.

5.1.2.1 Personality factors of Agriculture students

Incase of boys of agriculture student, most of the students were in average category. Incase of girls of agriculture students, most of the students were in average category in al the personality factors except the factor 'F' and 'O'. In the factor 'F' most of the students were in low category indicating soberness of the students and in the factor 'O' most of the students were in high category indicating feeling of more insecurity.

Incase of second order personality factors both boys of agriculture and girls of

agriculture were in average category in all four second order personality factors.

5.1.2.2 Personality factors of Home Science students

Most of the Home Science students were in average category in all personality factors except the factor 'E'. In this factor most of the students were in low category indicating they were mild.

In second order personality factor most of the students were in average category in

all four second order personality factors.

5.1.2.3 Personality factors of Marketing students

Marketing students were in average category in all 16 primary personality factors and 4 second order personality factors.

5.1.2.4 Comparison of personality factors of students by faculty

When the comparisons between faculty were made it was observed that significant difference was found in the factors A, B, F, I, O and Q3.

Boys of agriculture students were significantly higher than the girls of agriculture and

Home Science students, in the factor 'F' and 'I' which indicated they were more enthusiastic

and sensitive. In second order personality factors they were significantly higher compared to Home Science and Marketing students in the factors I and IV respectively which indicated they were extroverts and independent.

Girls of agriculture students were significantly higher than the Home Science and

Marketing students in the factor 'B' which indicated they were more intelligent. They were also significantly higher than boys of agriculture and Marketing students in the factor 'O' and factor III indicates they were feeling more insecure and tough minded.

Home Science students were significantly higher than the boys of agriculture and

Marketing students in the factor 'O' and III indicating more insecurity and tough minded. They were also significantly higher than all the faculties in the factor 'Q3' which indicated they were high on self control than the others.

Marketing students were significantly higher than all the faculties in the factor 'A' and

'F' which indicated they were more outgoing and enthusiastic. They were also significantly higher than girls of agriculture and Home Science students in the factor I and Ist they were more sensitive and extrovert.

Which instills respects for elders, submissiveness, dependence. The emotional

stability was low which may be due to the developmental stage which would improve with increase in age and experience and as they step in to adulthood.

5.1.2.5 Comparison of personality factors of students by gender

The results indicated that boys and girls differed significantly in 11 out of 20 personality factors. Boys were outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive, imaginative, extravert and independent. While girls were suspicious, insecure, self controlled and had higher anxiety and tough poise compared to boys. This may be due to hereditary or environmental affect. One of the earliest educationist Pearson studied the resembleness of brothers and sisters and found boys are more athletic, more noisy, more self conscious and quicker tempered, girls are more inclined to be shy and more conscientious. Kapoor (1964) reported that the average male college students as compared to female group is more sociable, warm, easygoing, ready to co-operate, more dominant aggressive, self assumed, assertive, bold, shrewd, sophisticated, polished, experience and unsentimental. Kakkar (1964) also reported that boys were more aggressive and curious about new knowledge while girls were shy, withdrawn and nervous. Deroleir et al. (1994) found that males were seen as significantly more aggressive and acting out and less withdrawn than females.

But Mundaragi (1999) found that boys were significantly better in mental health and

sensitivity than girls. While girls were better in boldness, competition, creativity, maturity and self sufficiency than the boys. Similar results were reported by Sinha and Verma (1972) that girls were better in maturity, creativity than boys, this may be because girls attain maturity slightly ahead than boys such trend was observed the boys were better in mental health which may be because of the differential upbringing patterns employed by parents.

5.1.2.6 Comparison of personality factors of students by age

The present study revealed that age of the student was negatively related with the factors enthusiastic and tough poise indicating that as age increased enthusiasm and tough poise decreased.

Schaie (1966) observed significant changes with age on factors A-reserved-outgoing,

C-emotionally less stable-mature, D-phlegmatic temperament-excitability, E-submissive-dominance, F-sober-enthusiastic, N-socially clumsy-socially aware, O-secure-insecure, I-self reliant-sensitive, J-zepple-coasthenia.

Jawa (1973) observed no relationship between age and anxiety in 9

th and 10

th class

girls. Blyth and Traeger (1983) reported increase in the self esteem of youth as they grow

from early adolescence to late adolescence. Studies of Jogwar (1983) and Pal and Karim (1984) also indicated similar results.

Jain and Chouhan (1989) found that during adolescence phase of life, the personality factors less intelligence vs more intelligent (B), phlegmatic temperament vs excitability (D), submissiveness vs dominance (E), expedient vs conscientious (G), tough minded vs tender minded (I), group dependent vs self sufficient (Q2) and uncontrolled vs controlled (Q3) significantly changed between the age of 12 to 18 years. The intelligence increased. It may be because of the fact that as knowledge and awareness gradually increases intelligence score also increased. This result is similar to Sharma (1973), Braback (1980) and Sandhu (1984). The mean values with regards to factor 'D' of students show that preadolescents were mid and late adolescents. The reason of it can be that with increase in age during adolescence an individual grows physically and socially which facilitates him to be patient, less excitable, less demanding and mature. This finding is similar with Schaie (1966) study. The mean scores on factor 'E' indicates that mid and late adolescents were comparatively submissive, obedient, accommodating expressive conventional and humble than preadolescents. It may be due to the fact that at age of mid and late adolescent a student recognizes his responsibilities becomes sincere so they are more submissive than preadolescents who experience of emotion and with transition they adjust to the social demands and responsibilities to the society However Schaie (1966) reported that there was an increase in dominance with age. Mid adolescents were comparatively conscientious, persistent, moralistic, responsible, consistently, ordered and emotionally disciplined. This can be attributed to the fact that individuals of 14 years and above are more mature, sober, sincere and take care of their responsibilities. Therefore they are more conscientious and conventional. Schaie (1966) found no difference with age on this factor. Students of age 16-18 years were comparatively tender minded, sensitive, dependent, insecure, expect affection and attention. Seek help and sympathy and were kind and gentle. The increasing trend in the mean values from pre to late adolescence implies that score on factor 'I' increased as age increased. This result is in contradiction with Schaie (1966) who reported that score on factor 'I' decreased as age increased. The contrary result may be due to the cultural difference of the sample. Where in more of dependence, cohesiveness, respect for elders and collectivist nature is imbibed and transferred to the young in the eastern countries unlike autonomy in western cultures.

An increasing trend of scores on factor 'Q2' (group dependent- self sufficient) was

observed with increase in age of adolescent students. The late adolescents were found to be comparatively self sufficient, resourceful than preadolescents. The probable cause for this trend can be attributed to the fact that with maturity of a person one tends to be resourceful and self sufficient. However, Schaie (1966) found no change in this factor with age.

The mean values on factor Q3 (undisciplined self conflict – controlled) indicated that

late adolescents were comparatively more controlled than pre-adolescents. This result may be because of society’s expectations more refinement behaviour at the later adolescence and efforts to confirm to the norms of the society, so more of controlled behaviour to seek social recognition.

5.1.3 Academic achievement of students

The present study shows that most of the students had fair level of academic achievement (39%) followed by average group (27%) and pass (25%) group and least number of students were in high group (1%). This may be because of the passing marks being 6.00 CGPA.

5.1.3.1 Academic achievement of Agriculture students

A higher percentage of boys of agriculture students were in fair groups (47%). None of the students were in high group.

A higher percentage of girls of agriculture students were in average group (43%).

None of the students were in fair group and high group. This may be because of their intelligence is high.

5.1.3.2 Academic achievement of Home Science students

A higher percentage of Home Science students were in fair group (44%) and least percentage of students were in high group (5%).

5.1.3.3 Academic achievement of Marketing students

A higher percentage of Marketing students were in pass group (32%) and equal number of students had failed and were of average group (22%) but none of the students were in high group.

5.1.3.4 Comparison of academic achievement of students by faculty

When the academic achievement was compared between faculty. It was found significant indicating that girls of agriculture had higher mean scores (7.67) compared to others, followed by Home Science students (7.44) and least was scored by marketing students (6.83).

5.1.3.5 Comparison of academic achievement of students by gender

The results of the present study showed that academic achievement of girls was slightly higher than that of boys. This may be because of change in trend. Girls may be more interested and have higher aspiration and motivation. They may be achieving high and also working hard. The findings on aptitude also showed that they were significantly higher on numerical ability, mechanical reasoning and space relations. Similarly Vijayalaxmi and Natesan (1992) reported that girls had higher mean academic achievement, compared to boys. However, Mundaragi (1999) reported that boys were slightly higher in academic achievement compared to girls. Similarly Pattnaik (1993) reported that with regard to academic achievement. It was found that in both English, mathematics and in total percentage of marks, boys secured better marks than the girls. The author says it or speculates may be because of difference in expectations and treatment by the parents.

5.1.3.6 Comparison of academic achievement of students by age

The present study revealed that there was no significant relation between age and academic achievement. This may be because of the age range of students (18-20).

5.2 INTERRELATION OF APTITUDE, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF STUDENTS

5.2.1 Relation between aptitude and academic achievement of students

The findings of the present study showed that verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations had significant influence on academic achievement of students. This clearly exemplifies that the educational system still has scope for the higher level of aptitudes to excell academically. Students with higher level of abilities such as verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning and space relations were significantly better in academic achievement among the entire group of professional undergraduates i.e. faculty combined. But with the segmentation of the group by faculties such trend was not observed which might be due to small sample size.

Dey and Sinha (1968) found that the science aptitude had significant correlation with

science average marks of students. Similarly studies by Pillai (1982), Sudha (1981), Joseph (1979) and Nair and Joseph (1978) revealed a positive influence of science aptitude on science achievement. Jose (1987), Sujatha (1987), Thompy (1984) found that there was a significant positive association between biology achievement and scientific aptitude. Thompson (1950) conducted a study with a sample of 51 senior stduetns majoring in

Architecture at the University of Florida. Aptitude, G-intelligence, V-verbal aptitude, N-numerical aptitude had significant correlation with the criterion.

5.2.2 Relation between personality factors and academic achievement of students

The findings of the present study showed that intelligence had significant influence on

academic achievement of students. Dey and Sinha (1968), Gupta (1973), Pandey and Singh (1978), Upamanyu et al. (1980), Jarial (1981), Sharma (1987), Sontankey (1988), Stipek and Gralinkis (1996), Begum and Phukan (2001) have reported significant positive relationship between intelligence and academic achievement. This clearly indicates that intelligence is the basis for academic achievement.

The study also revealed that the other factors viz., reserved, self controlled and

independence influenced the academic achievement which implies that those students who had a definite goal of achievement, put in hard work, not distracted by other activities (self controlled) or not led by others (independent) were better achievers. It is needless to say that persistence, hard work, seriousness in studies, goal setting, regular study habits, strong motive to achieve and above all a baseline capacity of intelligence are important characteristics of good achievers.

Freud (1941) the founder of psychoanalysis, formulated the hypotheses that

fundamentally all anxiety arise either out of fear of losing love or the fear of being physically hurt in some way. A normal anxiety arises out of unrealistic situation that threatens one's basic sense of security. The present study reveals that there was no significant relation between anxiety and academic achievement. But Singh et al. (1950) found that anxiety was an important source of variation not only in achievement but also in health, happiness and efficiency. Similarly Bradshow and Gaudry (1968) Morris and Liebert (1970) showed the relationship between test anxiety (examination) and academic achievement. Similarly Srivastava et al. (1980), Shanmuga (1995), Sud and Prabha (2003) have also reported that the effect of anxiety on academic achievement was negative and significant.

Maslow (1954) believes that a child is psychologically healthy when he feels that he is

loved. He says that just as food is needed for physical growth and health, a feeling of security is essential for emotional and social growth. In fact, he has placed security needs just above the physical needs in his classical hierarchy of needs.

The present study reveals that there was no significant relation between insecurity

and academic achievement, which is supported by Dhillon and Beri (1983) who reported that the relationship of academic and emotional security was not significant. But Goel (2003) reported that feeling of security was an effective variable in determining the academic achievement.

Eysenk's (1947) hypothesis that a good educational attainer should score high on

neuroticism and low on extraversion. Hypothesis was supported by a number of empirical studies namely Child (1964), Jamuar (1961), Kline (1966). However, Bigg (1962) reported that if neuroticism is synonymous to emotional instability. Then it has not always been found to be associated with high academic achievement.

The present study shows that there was no significant relation between extraversion

and academic achievement. Similarly Pandey (1981) and Sundarghan (1989) reported that extroverts and introverts are not significantly high on academic achievement. But Sinha (1973) found that academic achievement was positively related with into introversion while extraversion was negatively related.

5.2.3 Relation between aptitude and personality factors of students

The results of the study indicated that verbal reasoning was positively related with personality factors, intelligent and self control but negatively related with enthusiastic, insecurity and anxiety.

Numerical ability was related with intelligence and control positively but negatively

related with sensitivity. Abstract reasoning was positively related with morality suspiciousness and negatively related with enthusiasm.

Space relation was positively related with intelligence, morality, insecurity, self control

and tough poise but negatively related with outgoing, sensitivity. Mechanical reasoning was positively related with intelligence, self control and tough

poise but negatively related with outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive and extraversion. Clerical speed and accuracy was positively related with outgoing, enthusiastic,

sensitive but negatively related with self control and tough poise. Language spelling was positively related with outgoing enthusiastic, sensitive and

extroversion, but negatively related with suspicious, insecure and tough poise. Language sentences was positively related with outgoing, enthusiastic, socially bold, sensitive, imaginative, tensed, extroversion but negatively related with liberal and tough poise.

This is mainly because of heredity factors and environmental factors such as parental

education, occupation, school and home environment may also affect the aptitude and personality factors of students.

5.3 INFLUENCE OF SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS ON APTITUDE, PERSONALITY FACTORS AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

5.3.1 Relation between socio-demographic characters and aptitude of

students

The present study shows education of father and mother was positively related with verbal reasoning of students. Occupation of the mother was positively related with mechanical reasoning. This may be because of the fact that educated parents tend to encourage the children. They support and guide them in timely and provide them all the required facilities.

5.3.2 Relation between socio-demographic factors and personality factors of students

The present study shows that ordinal position of the student was positively related

with emotional maturity where in later borns were more mature than the first borns. But, Singh et al. (1989) reported that emotional maturity was found to be independent of birth order.

Size of the family was also negatively related with intelligence and morality, indicating

that as the size of the family increased intelligence and morality decreased. This may be due to lack of care and attention for children.

Education and occupation of the father was positively related with the factors

‘intelligent’ and ‘self sufficiency’. Education of mother was negatively related with the factor ‘suspicious’, indicating that as the level of education increased the suspiciousness decreased among children.

Bayley (1954), Bonney (1955), Gill and Sidhu (1988) reported that children of well

educated and socio-metric class had higher intelligence.

However, Sudhir (1989) and Singh et al. (1989) also reported that emotional maturity was found to be independent of education of economic status of family.

Occupation of the mother was negatively related with factors ‘suspicious’ and ‘liberal’

but positively related with ‘self sufficient’. This was a blessing in disguise which trained the adolescence to be self sufficient because of working of mother.

Kothari (1982) and Pattnaik (1993) reported that mothers academic qualification and

maternal employment influenced the moral concepts and academic competence of the child.

5.3.3 Relation between socio-demographic factors and academic achievement of students

The present study revealed that there was no significant relation between socio-

demographic factors and academic achievement of students. The result is in contradiction with the result of Hunter (1972), Hemakumari (1977),

Saini (1977), Singhal (1983), Sharma (1984), Bhatnagar and Sharma (1992), Panda and Jena (2000) who reported that parents educational level had a significant effect on the academic achievement of children.

Krishnan (1977), Geogrewill (1987), Gill and Sidhu (1988), Budhdev (1999), Singh

(1996) reported that parental occupation had a significant effect on the school performance of the child.

This trend may be because of a strong influence of parental support in child's

education and academic achievement. Educated mothers and fathers tend to watch and lay foundations for proper learning when young. As children grow the involvement of parents may not be needed as much as when children are young and tender. However, these students being in hostel and grown up such influence of parental involvement may not had greater impact on learning. But the aptitude and personality factors may have had stronger influence on their academic performance.

VI. SUMMARY

The study on "Influence of personality and aptitude on academic achievement of professional students of University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad" was undertaken during 2002-03 with the following objectives. Firstly to know the personality profile, aptitude and academic achievement of students. Secondly to know the difference in personality profile, aptitude and academic achievement of students by faculty. Thirdly to know the interrelation between aptitude, personality factors and academic achievement of students and finally to find out the influence of socio-demographic factors such as age, gender, ordinal position, family size, family type, educational and occupational level of parents on aptitude, personality and academic achievement of the students.

The present study was conducted by drawing the sample of undergraduate students

of University of Agricultural Sciences, studying in I, II, III and IV year of Agriculture, Marketing and Home Science degree programmes. College of Agriculture and Marketing are co-educational colleges but Home Science is only for girls. Initially 185 students were considered for the study but after deleting incomplete questionnaire and incomplete participation, finally 160 samples were recruited for the study. Stratified random sampling method was used for the sample selection.

The aptitude scale developed by Bennett et al. (1993) consisting of 7 subtests viz.,

verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy, language (spelling and sentences) was employed. Personality factors of students was measured by the 16 personality factors questionnaire (16 PF) developed by Cattell (1982) which measures 16 primary personality factors and 4-second order personality factors, viz., A-reserved-outgoing, B-dull-bright, C-emotionally less stable-mature, E-mild-aggressive, F-sober-enthusiastic, G-disregards rules-moralistic, H-shy-socially bold, I-self reliant-sensitive, L-accepting condition-suspicious, M-practical-imaginative, N-socially clumsy-socially aware, O-secure-insecure, Q1-conservative-liberal, Q2-group dependent-self sufficient, Q3-undisciplined self conflict-controlled, Q4-relaxed-tensed, introversion-extroversion, low anxiety-high anxiety, tender minded-tough poise, subduedness-independence. The marks secured in the previous semester which represented the academic achievement of students was obtained from the academic office. Socioeconomic inventory developed by Khadi et al. (2002), Venkataramaih (1983), Aaron (1969) were used to collect the information regarding age, gender, ordinal position, size and type of family, occupation and education of parents, income of family. The educational background of students, reasons for choice of course, choice of post graduate programme was elicited. The data were

quantified, categorised, tabulated and analysed using the statistical measures ‘χ²’ (chi-square), 't' test, correlation ‘r’ and analysis of variance.

The results of the present study are as follows.

• Majority of students were in the average category in all 16 personality factors. Few students (13-36%) were in reserved, less intelligent, emotionally less stable, mild, sober, shy, undisciplined self conflict and relaxed and same proportion (13-34%) of them were moralistic, sensitive, socially aware, suspicious and insecure. As per second order personality factors, most of the students were also in average category in all four-second order personality factors i.e., introversion-extraversion, low anxiety-high anxiety, tender minded-tough poise, subduedness-independence.

• The mean scores of personality factors of student was highest in insecurity and lowest in sober. In the second order personality factor, students were highest in anxiety and lowest in introversion.

• Home Science and Girls of agriculture students differed significantly in only one personality factor, N-socially clumsy-socially aware, where in Home Science students were higher indicating they were more socially aware than the Girls of agriculture students. In the second order personality factors there was no significant difference between the two groups.

• Boys of agriculture students were significantly higher than Marketing students in intelligence, aggressive, moralistic, imaginative and self sufficient, Marketing students were significantly more outgoing, enthusiastic, suspicious, insecure and controlled.

• Majority of the students were in the lower level of aptitude in all seven areas. They were low in verbal reasoning, space relations, mechanical reasoning, language (spelling and sentences). In numerical ability and abstract reasoning higher percentage (46.68) of students were in below average group.

• Higher percentage (41.25%) of students had high aptitude in clerical speed and accuracy. However there was a wide range of mean scores of aptitude in all areas with the highest mean score in clerical speed and accuracy and lowest in language (sentences).

• Home Science and girls students of agriculture differed significantly in all aptitude categories except for language (sentences). Home Science students had significantly higher mean scores in verbal reasoning and mechanical reasoning compared to girls students of agriculture. These students had significantly higher mean scores in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations, clerical speed and accuracy and language (spelling) compared to Home Science students.

• Boys of agriculture and Marketing students differed significantly in all aptitude categories except for space relations and language (sentences) Agriculture students had higher mean scores in verbal reasoning, numerical ability compared to Marketing students. Marketing students had higher mean scores in abstract reasoning, mechanical reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy, language (spelling) compared to Agriculture students.

• Majority of students were in ‘fair’ category of academic achievement followed by average and pass and least marks were in high category.

• Home Science and girls students of agriculture differed significantly in academic achievement wherein girls students of agriculture were better than Home Science students.

• Boys of Agriculture and Marketing students differed significantly in academic achievement wherein boys of agriculture students had better academic performance than Marketing students.

• Boys and girls of Agriculture students differed significantly in personality factors. Boys were more outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive and imaginative compared to girls. While girls were more suspicious, insecure and controlled compared to boys. In second order personality factors, boys and girls differed significantly in all factors. Boys were extrovert and independent and girls had higher anxiety and tough poise.

• Boys and girls students of Agriculture differed significantly in all aptitude categories. Boys had higher approach in verbal reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy, language (spelling and sentences), girls were with an aptitude in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, space relations and mechanical reasoning compared to boys.

• Boys and girls students of Agriculture differed significantly in academic achievement, where in girls were higher academic achievement compared to boys.

• The personality factors outgoing, bright, self controlled were influencing factors for academic achievement of students. Among the second order personality factors independence was an influencing factor on academic achievement of students.

• The aptitude in the area of verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning and space relations were significant factors influencing the academic achievement.

• The personality factors bright, enthusiastic, insecure, self controlled anxiety were factors influencing the verbal reasoning.

• The factors bright, sensitive, self controlled were factors influencing the numerical ability.

• The factors ‘enthusiastic’, ‘moralistic’, ‘suspicious’ were influencing abstract reasoning.

• The personality factors outgoing, bright, moralistic, sensitive, insecure, self controlled and independence influenced space relations.

• The personality factors outgoing, bright, enthusiastic, sensitive, controlled, extraversion, tough poise influenced mechanical reasoning.

• The factors outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive, controlled, tough poise influenced clerical speed and accuracy.

• The factors outgoing, enthusiastic, sensitive, suspicious, insecure extraversion, tough poise influenced language (spelling).

• The factors outgoing, enthusiastic, socially bold, sensitive, suspicious, imaginative, liberal tensed, extraversion and tough poise influenced language (sentences).

• Young students were more enthusiastic and tender minded than the older students.

• Later borns were more mature than the first borns.

• Children from small family were more bright and moralistic than the children from large family.

• Students of nuclear family were more mature compared to students of joint family.

• The factors ‘bright’ and ‘self sufficient’ were related with education and occupation of father.

• The factor suspicious was related with education of mother.

• The factors ‘suspicious’, liberal, self sufficient were related with occupation of mother.

• Younger students were good in numerical ability and older students were better in clerical speed and accuracy.

• Students of nuclear family were better in space relation compared to students of joint family.

• Verbal reasoning was related with education of father and mother.

• Mechanical reasoning was related with occupation of mother.

• There was no significant relation between socio-demographic factors and academic achievement of students.

• The students who opted for Genetics and Horticulture, differed significantly in only one factor indicating that students of Genetics were more enthusiastic than the students of Horticulture.

• Genetics and Horticulture students differed significantly in verbal reasoning, language (sentences), where in students of horticulture had higher mean scores in verbal reasoning and language (sentences).

• There was no significant difference between students who opted for Human Development and Food Science and Nutrition students in personality factors, aptitude and academic achievement.

• There was no significant difference between students who opted for Agricultural, Marketing and MBA students in personality factors, aptitude and academic achievement.

IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The present study shows that personality factors like reserved, bright, self control and independence were associated with achievement. Such qualities need to be strengthened/nurtured among undergraduate students and the factors which lead to low achievement need to be minimized. There is a need for guidance and counseling for parents, teachers and students to enable them to imbibe these qualities.

The aptitude verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning and space

relations were related with academic achievement. This implies that students need to be identified by counseling and guiding for their career. So prior to selection of professional courses conducting aptitude test is vital. This would be helpful to both student and teacher in effective participation in educational programmes. It could ease the learning in students and in imparting education by the teacher.

The socio-demographic factors viz., parental education and occupation and socio-

economic status of family also influenced the personality, aptitude and academic achievement of students. This implies that there is an utmost need to counsel and guide under privileged students and their parents and teachers of such group to facilitate in the learning process.

The results revealed that aptitude and personality factors had a strong influence on

the academic achievement of students of Home Science faculty, as well as marketing students, unlike the Agriculture students. So there is a need to provide an educational programme that would enrich the reasoning and problem solving capacities and creativity.

Most of the students had an aptitude for clerical speed and accuracy. This may be

because of the type of evaluation system which is enforced. This sort of educational trend may have less scope for the growth of abilities such as verbal and abstract reasoning. There is a need to reorient the educational program giving scope for such that would promote reasoning, problem solving capacity and creativity.

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY 1. Studies on aptitude and academic achievement may be extended to the other educational

levels viz., primary high school and college 2. Studies may be conducted on personality, aptitude and academic achievement either

independently or combindly at different professionals like medical, dental, engineering 3. Longitudinal study is required in the area of personality aptitude

VII. REFERENCES

AARON, P.G., MATIHAL, V.G. AND MALTESH, R.N., 1969, A common socio-economic status for rural and urban areas monograph No.3. The Pshychometric Lab, Department of Pf. Ed., Karnatak University, Dharwad.

AGARWAL, K.K., 1977, Prediction of scholastic success in science subjects. A battery of

psychological tests. Indian Journal of Psychology, 52(1): 95-97. AJWANY, J.K. AND UPADHYAY, S.N., 1982, Personality as a determinant of problem solving

behaviour. Psychological Studies, 27(2): 44-46. ALLPORT, G.W., 1937, Pattern and Growth in Personality Halt, Windston, New York. ANASTASIA, 1968, Psychological Testing. The MacMillan Company Collier MacMillan Ltd.

London, 3rd

Edition, pp.319-370. ASHRAF, S.H., 1992, Personality characteristics of heavy and mild cigarette smokers. Indian

Psychological Review, 38(6-7): 31-33. BARNES, B. AND SRINIVAS, R., 1993, Personality traits of self actualised women.

Psychological Studies, 38(1): 7-9. BAYLEY, N., 1954, Some increasing parent child similarities during the growth of children.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 45: 1-21. BEGUM AND AHMED, E., 1986, Individual risk taking and risky shift as a function of co-

operation competition proneness and subjects. Psychological Studies, 31(1): 21-25.

BEGUM, T.S. AND PHUKAN, M., 2001, Academic achievement and intelligence : A

correlational study in boys and girls. Indian Psychological Review, 56(2): 103-106. BENETT, G.K., SEASHORE, H.G. AND WESMAN, A.G., 1993, Differential aptitude test form

A. Manasayan S-524 school block Shakarpur, Delhi. BHADRA, B.R. AND GIRIJA, P.R., 1984, A study of ability, study habits and skills, values and

personality characteristics of high and low achieving scheduled caste and tribe students. Psychological Studies, 29(1): 13-17.

BHARATIDEVI, 1982, Certain psychological factors of adjustment influencing achievement

among school children. Indian Journal of Psychology, 57: 143-153. BHATNAGAR, J.K. AND SHARMA, M., 1992, A study of the relationship between parental

education and academic achievement in a semi rural setting. Psychological Studies, 37(2-3): 126-129.

BIGGS, I.B., 1962, The relation of neuroticism and extraversion to intelligence and

educational attainment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 32(2): 188-195. BINGHAM, W.V.D., 1937, Aptitudes and Aptitude Testing. Harper and Brothers, New York. BLYTH, D.A. AND TRAEGAR, C.M., 1983, The self concept and self esteem of early

adolescents. Theory in to Practice, 22(2): 91-97. BONNEY, M.E., 1955, The study of constancy of socio-economic ranks among college

students over a two year old period. Sociometry, 8: 531-542.

BRABECK, M.M., 1984, Longitudinal studies of intellectual development during adulthood: Theoretical and research models. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 17(3): 12-27.

BRADSHAW, G.D. AND GAUDRY, E., 1968, The effect of a single experience of successor-

failure on test anxiety. Australian Journal of Psychology, 20: 219-223. BRODY, L.E. AND BENBOW, C.P., 1990, Effects of high school course work and time on

SAT scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4): 866-875. BUDHDEV, P.V., 1999, Impact of medium of instruction on the achievement of high intelligent

and low intelligent students. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 32(2): 195-201.

CATTELL, R.B., 1950, Handbook for the Culture Fair Intelligence Test. Scale 3 Forms A and

B Champaign, Illinois 1 PAT. CATTELL, R.B., 1982, Sixteen Personality Factors. The Psycho-centre New Delhi Press. CHAKRABARTI, P.K. AND KUNDU, 1984, Personality profiles of management personnel.

Psychological Studies, 29(2): 143-146. CHANDRAKANDAN, K., VENKATAPIRABU, J., SEKAR, V. AND ANANDAKUMAR, 2001,

Tests and Measurements in Social Research. APH Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, pp.241-263.

CHATTERJEE, S., MUKHERJEE, M. AND MITRA, S.K., 1978, Higher secondary science

achievement as related to scientific interest and aptitude. Indian Journal of Psychology, 53(3): 125-129.

CHATURVEDI, S.C. AND PRAKASH, B., 1989, Risk-taking and academic achievements.

25(3): 131-135. CHERIAN, V.I., 1990, Family size and academic achievement of children. Journal of Family

Welfare, 36(4): 56-59. CHILD, D., 1964, The relationship between introversion-extroversion, neuroticism and

performance in school examinations. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 34: 187-197.

CROW, L.P. AND CROW, A., 1964, Human development and learning, Eurasia Publishing

House Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, p.46. DABIR, D. AND PANDIT, K.L., 1988, A study of vocational aspirations and aptitudes among

the school going youth. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 25(2): 78-84.

DAFTUAR, C.N., SINHA, C. AND DAFTUAR, L.C., 2000, Academic achievement and risk

taking among tribal and non-tribal students of rural and urban areas. Psychological Studies, 45(1-2): 103-105.

DEB, M., 1965, An Indian engineering aptitude test. Indian Journal of Psychology, 40(4): 161-

165. DERSIER, E.M., KUPERSMIDT AND PATTERSON, J., 1994, Children's academic and

behavioural adjustment of a function of the chronicity and proximity and peer rejection. Child Development, 64: 1799-1813.

DEY, B. AND SINHA, P.C., 1968, Psychological tests as predictors tools for school pupils

achievement in science. Indian Journal of Psychology, 43(1-4): 74-80.

DHILLON, P.K. AND BERI, B., 1983, Academic achievement and emotional security in

relation to choice of academic course: A comparative study. Indian Journal of Psychology, 58: 95-104.

DOLKE, A.M. AND SHARMA, R.S., 1975, General aptitude test battery (GATB) as a predictor

of academic success in architectural courses. Indian Journal of Psychology, 50(2): 163-173.

EYSENK, H.J., 1947, Dimension of personality. Routledged and Kegan Poul. London. FREUD, S., 1941, Introductory lectures on psychoanalysis, London, George Allen and Unwin

Ltd. GALLAGHER, A.M. AND LISI, R.D., 1994, Gender differences in scholastic aptitude test

mathematics problem solving among high ability students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2): 204-211.

GEORGEWILL, J.W., 1987, Nigerian parental influence on the academic performance of

children. Child Development, 58(5): 1244-1257. GILL, T.K. AND SIDHU, H.S., 1988, Intelligence and academic achievement in the children

belonging to different socio-economic groups in rural Punjab. Indian Psychological Review, 33(4-5): 50-54.

GOEL, S.P., 2003, Feeling of security and educational achievement of the college students.

Journal of Community Guidance and Research, 20(1): 49-55. GOYAL, R.P., 1984, Personality correlates of creativity in secondary school teachers under

training. Psychological Studies, 29(1): 1-3. GREWAL, H.P. AND SINGH, H.B., 1987, Relationship of achievement motivation and

academic performance of rural and urban high school students. Indian Psychological Review, 32: 1-5.

GUPTA, S.C., 1973, Relative importance of some correlates of academic achievement. Indian

Journal of Psychology, 48(1): 75-80. HARRIS, L.I. 1978, Sex differences in spatial ability: Possible environmental, genetic and

neurological factors. In: M. Kinsbourne (Ed.) Asymmetrical functions of the brain. London: Oxford University Press.

HEMAKUMARI, T.A., 1977, Role of mother and educational achievement of the child. Manual

of Education, 5: 16-21. HUNTER, C.F, 1972, Mothers education and working effect on the school child. Journal of

Psychology, 82: 27-37. HURLOCK, B.E., 1978, Personality development. Child Development Mc. Graw Hill, KOGA,

KUSHA Ltd, New Delhi, pp.524. JAIN, K. AND CHOUHAN, V.L., 1989, A study of development of personality and vocational

preference of students at various stages of adolescents. Indian Psychological Review, 34(1&2): 16-22.

JAMUAR, K.K., 1961, Personality and achievement. Psychological Studies, 6: 59-65. JARIAL, G.S., 1981, Creativity, intelligence and academic achievement their relationship and

differences with references on sex and academic subjects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 39: 91-96.

JAWA, M.S., 1973, Birth order and age related changes in anxiety among adolescents. Indian Journal of applied Psychology, 10(1): 6-11.

JOGWAR, V.V., 1983, Development of self concept during adolescence. Asian Journal of

Psychology and Education, 9(1): 3-7. JOSE, K.M., 1987, A comparative study of the Biology achievement of high average and low

science aptitude of secondary school pupils. Master of Education Thesis, University of Calicut.

JOSEPH, T.T., 1979, A study of some predictors of achievement in chemistry at the pre-

degree level. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Kerala. KAKKAR, A., 1964, Adjustment problems of adolescents, Doctoral Dissertation in Education.

Allahabad University. KAPOOR, S.D., 1964, The personality differences between the sexes (VKKJ). Proceedings

Indian Science Congress, 51st Session, Part III.

KARPLUS, R., KARPLUS, E., FORMISANO, M. AND PAULSEN, A., 1977, A survey of

proportional reasoning and control of variables in seven countries. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14: 411-417.

KHADI, P.B., NANDWANA, S., SHUBANGNA, MAYURI, K., JURI, B., BANGALE, J., VIG, D.,

MANOCHA, A., AHUJA, A. AND ASHALATHA, K.V., 2002, Socio-economic status inventory. Technical Report, All India Co-ordinated Research Project (CD), Dharwad.

KLINE, P.W., 1966, Extroversion neuroticism and academic performance among Ghanaian

University students, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 36(1): 92-94. KOGAR, N. AND WALLACLIS, M.A., 1964, Risk-taking : A study in Cognition and Personality,

New York, Holt. KOTHARI, S., 1982, Mother's academic qualifications (MAS) and the development of the

moral concepts of her child. Indian Journal of Psychology, 57: 135-139. KRISHAN, A.P., 1977, Non-intellectual factors and their influences on academic achievement.

Psychological Studies, 22(1-7): 25-31. KRISHNA, K.P., 1981, Risk taking and adolescent personality. Psychological Studies, 26(2):

110-112. LAWSON, A.E., 1978, The development and validation of a classroom test of formal

reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15: 11-24. LIN, M.C. AND PULOS, S., 1981, Male-female differences in predicting displaced volume

strategy usage. Aptitude relationships and experience influences. Journal of Education Psychology, 75(1): 87-95.

MAHAMOOD, M., 1981, Personality profiles of sportsmen and non-sports men. Psychological

Studies, 26(1): 5-7. MASLOW, A.H., 1954, Motivation and Personality, New York, Harper. MAUOBY, E.E. AND JACKLIN, C.N., 1974, The psychology of gender differences, Palo Alto,

Calif: Stanford University Press. MAYURI, K. AND DEVI, L.U., 2001, Personality development of rural adolescents of Andhra

Pradesh. Indian Psychological Review, 56(1): 25-37.

MEHTA, M. AND SEWANI, G., 1995, The effect of vocational maturity and need for achievement upon the personality pattern of adolescent girls. Indian Psychological Review, 44(3-4): 18-33.

MEHTA, P., 1977, Level of achievement in high school boys. Indian Educational Review, 2:

36-70. MISERANDINO, M., 1996, Children who do well in school: individual differences in perceived

competence and autonomy in above average children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(2): 203-214.

MISHRA, K.N., 1992, Adjustment, self concept, test anxiety and desirable study habits as

predictors of academic achievement. The Asian Journal of Psychological Education, 25(7-8): 21-26.

MOHSINS, S. M. 1968, Manual of General Intelligent Test. Patna : Aerovoice. MORRIS, L.W. AND LIEBERT, R.M., 1970, Relationship of cognitive and emotional

components of test anxiety to physiological arousal and academic performance. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35: 332-337.

MUNDARAGI, G., 1999, Personality traits and academic achievement among rural and urban

adolescents. M.H.Sc. Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. MURSELL, J.L., 1949, Psychological Testing, Longmans Green and Company, 2

nd Edition.

NAIR, A.S. AND JOSEPH, 1978, An experimental study of the overlap of intelligence and

science aptitude with educational outcomes in Biology measured using Host's Taxonomy. Department of Education, University of Kerala.

NORWICH, B., 1987, Self efficacy and achievement motivation: A study of their relaiton.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4): 384-387. PAL, R.L. AND KARIM, S., 1984, Developmental changes in self concept during middle

school childhood. Indian Psychological Review, 26(4): 1-4. PANDA, M. AND JENA, A.K., 2000, Effect of some parental characteristics on class IX

students achievement motivation. Indian Psychological Review, 54(3): 129-133. PANDEY, R.P., 1981, Academic achievement as a function of neuroticism and extroversion.

Indian Psychological Review, 20: 1-4. PANDEY, R.P. AND SINGH, R.A., 1978, A correlational study of school examination marks

intelligence and achievement scores. Asian Journal of Psychology and Education, 3(2): 6-8.

PARAMESH, C.R., 1976, Dimensions of personality and achievement in scholastic subjects.

Indian Journal of Psychology, 51(4): 302-306. PATTANAIK, S., 1993, Maternal employment and children's behavioural and academic

competence. Research Highlights, 3(4): 232-238. PILLAI, K.S., 1986, The relative efficiency of science aptitude and intelligence of predict

biology achievement. Experiments in Education, 14: 171-175. PILLAI, K.S., 1990, Interactive effect of science aptitude and attitude towards science and

biology achievement. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 26(4): 206-210.

PRADHAN, G.C., 1994, A comparative study of differential aptitudes of higher secondary school students studying in vocational and different general education (academic) streams. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 31(1): 39-49.

PRAKASH, V., 1993, Effect of negative marketing on the scores of the scholastic aptitude

tests. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 30(1): 8-15. RAO, D.B., 1995, A comparative study of scientific attitude. Scientific aptitude and

achievement in biology at secondary school level. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 31(4): 221-238.

REVEN, J.C., 1949, Guide to Standard Progressive Matrices, Loars and Co, London. ROTHSTEIN, M.G., PAUNONEN, S.V., RUSH, J.C. AND KING, G.A., 1994, Personality and

cognitive ability predictors of performance in graduate business. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4): 516-530.

ROY, D.D., 1992, Personality traits of Antartica expenditioners. Psychological Studies, 37(2-

3): 95-98. ROY, D.D., 1995, Differences in personality factors of experienced teachers, physicians.

Bank managers and fine artists. Psychological Studies, 40(1): 51-56. ROY, D.D., 2002, Personality differences across four metropolitan cities of India. Indian

Psychological Review, 58(2): 71-78. SAARNI, C.I., 1973, Piagetion operations and field indepences as factors in children’s

problem solving performance. Child Development, 44: 338-342. SAINI, B.K., 1977, Academic achievement as a function of economic status and educational

standard of parents. Psychological Studies, 22(2): 24-26. SANDHU, T.S., 1984, An investigation of sex differences in the development of formal

operational thought. Asian Journal of Psychology and Education, 8(1): 39-44. SCHAIE, K.W., 1966, Year by year changes in personality from eight to sixteen years.

Multivariate Behavioural Research, 1: 293-305. SCHNEIDER, W., KORKEL, J. AND WEINERT, F.E., 1989, Domain specific knowledge and

memory performance : A comparison of high and low aptitude children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3): 306-312.

SHAH, D.B. AND PATEL, K.M., 2001, A study of personality of graduate and post-graduate

students of south Gujarat University Surat. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 38(1): 51-55.

SHANMUGA, G.V., 1995, The effect of anxiety on academic achievement. Journal of

Educational Research and Extension, 31(3): 154-167. SHANMUGA, S.R., 1989, "Urban-rural difference in academic achievement and achievement

related factors". Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 25(3): 121-129. SHARMA, A., 1973, Stabilization of abilities during adolescence II (cross sectional study).

Indian Education Review, 8(2): 97-163. SHARMA, M.K., 1984, Academic achievement of school students vis-à-vis their parents

education. Indian Journal of Psychology, 59(1): 33-40. SHARMA, R. AND BANSAL, I., 1991-92, A study of academic achievement and intelligence

of extrovert and introvert adolescent girls. Indian Psychological Review, 37: 11-14.

SHARMA, R.K., 1987, Intelligence and achievement of destral; mixed destral and mixed shistral students. Indian Education Review, 2: 32-37.

SHUKLA, A. AND CHAUHAN, M., 1987, Personality characteristics and motives of young

women pursuing traditional and non-traditional career courses. Psychological Studies, 32(2): 71-76.

SHUKLA, N.B., SHARMA, S.S., PANDEY, S., BHUSHAN, S., 1994, Personality

characteristics of Indian sports women of individual and team sports. Indian Psychological Review, 42(9-10): 10-14.

SINGH, A.K., 1987, Test Measurements and Research Methods in Behavioural Sciences.

Tabe McGraw Hill Publishing Company Ltd., London. SINGH AND ASHA, 1984, Neuroticism, anxiety and academic achievement. Indian

Psychological Review, 26(3): 15-19. SINGH, BEAR AND KUMAL, 1950, A study of relationship between anxiety and achievement.

Journal of Psychological Studies, 36: 350-355. SINGH, M.P. GILL, S. AND CHARMA, H., 1989, Emotional maturity and rural and urban

adolescent in Ludhiana district. Indian Psychological Review, 34(5,6,7): 23-29. SINGH, S., 1990, Affiliation motive as related to personality ergs and sentiments.

Psychological Studies, 35(3): 151-156. SINGH, S., 1996, A study of some personality characteristics of school adolescents in relation

to their mothers employment. Indian Psychological Review, 46(9-10): 173-176. SINGHAL, S., 1983, Environmental variants and intellectual performance of young children.

Asian Journal of Psychology, 22(19): 73-80. SINHA, D. AND VERMA, M., 1972, Knowledge of moral values in children. Psychological

Studies, 17(1&2): 1-6. SINHA, N.C.P., 1973, Extraversion and neuroticism in relation to academic achievement.

Indian Journal of Psychology, 48(1): 28-32. SONTAKEY, V.V., 1988, Personality factors of high achievers and low achievers in biological

sciences. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 25(1): 12-23. SRIDEVI, K. AND RAO, P.V.K., 1998, Temporal effects of meditation and personality.

Psychological Studies, 43(3): 95-105. SRIVASTAVA, P., 1989, Decision-making and personality traits. Indian Psychological Review,

34(11&12): 17-29. SRIVASTAVA, S.N., SINGH AND THAKUR, 1980, Examination anxiety and academic

achievement as a function of socio-economic status. Psychological Studies, 25(2): 108-112.

STIPEK, D. AND GRALINKIS, J.H., 1996, Children’s beliefs about intelligence and school

performance. Indian Journal of Psychology, 88(3): 397-407. SUD, A. AND PRABHA, C., 2003, Academic performance in relation to perfectionism, test

procrastination and test anxiety of high school children. Physiological Studies, 48(3): 76-81.

SUDHA, V., 1981, Intelligence and science aptitude as predictors of achievement in natural

science. M.Ed. Dissertation, University of Calicut.

SUDHIR, M.A., 1989, A study of achievement motivation in relation to select personality and socio-educational factors. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 25(4): 198-208.

SUJATHA, B., 1987, The relative efficiency of science aptitude, science interest and attitude

towards science in predicting Biology achievement of secondary school pupils. Master of Education Thesis, University of Calicut.

SUNANDARAJ, S.H., KRISHNAN, R., 1980, Intelligence socio-economic status and family

size as correlated achievement. Journal of the Institute of Educational Research, 4(3): 1-5.

SUNDARAGAN, S., 1989, Extroversion-introversion and academic achievement. Experiment

in Education, 17: 131-133. SWANSON, H.L., 1990, Influence of metacognitive knowledge and aptitude on problem

solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 52(2): 306-314. THAMPY, M.P., 1986, A study of the interaction of science aptitude and attitude towards

science on Biology achievement of secondary school pupil. Master of Education Thesis, University of Calicut.

THOMPSON, J.W., Jr, 1950, An evaluation of the General aptitude test battery as an aid in

selecting architectural students. Unpublished Masters Thesis, University of Florida.

TIWARI, S. AND POORANCHAND, L.J., 1995, A study of adjustment amgo high and low

achieving adolescents. Indian Psychological Review, 144(1-2): 37-40. UPAMANYU, V.V., SUSHMA AND VASUDEV, P.N., 1980, Factor analytical study of

measures of anxiety, neuroticism. Psychotism intelligence and academic achievement. Indian Psychological Review, 25(2): 90-97.

VASHISHTHA, K.K., 1991, A comparative study of the adjustment of high and low achieving

Indian pupils at higher secondary level. Journal of Educational Research and Extension, 27(3): 181-191.

VERMA, B.P., 1990, A study of the relationship of cognitive style with anxiety and academic

achievement. The Journal of Education and Psychology, 48(3-4): 156-161. VERMA, B.P., 1991, An investigation into the risk taking and behaviour of male and female

adolescents. Indian Psychological Review, 36(3-4): 1-4. VIJAYALAXMI, O. AND NATESAN, H., 1992, Factors influencing academic achievement.

Research Highlights, 2: 62. WRAY, S.R. AND ALEXAKOS, C.E., 1969, Overlap between achievement and aptitude

scores. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 2(3): 157-167.

APPENDIX I

Secondary order personality factors

APPENDIX II

SCHEDULE

General information

1. Name of the respondent : 2. Class : Section : Batch : 3. Date of birth : Age : 4. Gender : Ordinal position : 5. Native place/ Locality : 6. Type of family : Nuclear / Joint 7. Family composition

Sl. No.

Name Relation with respondent

Age Sex Education Occupation Income/month

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

8. Other sources of income : 9. Details about education of the respondent :

Sl. No. Standard Class obtained Year of pass Rural Urban

1. Nursery school 2. Primary school

a. 1st

b. 2nd

c. 3

rd

d. 4th

3. Middle school e. 5

th

f. 6th

g. 7th

4. High school h. 8

th

i. 9th

j. 10th

5. PUC I PUC II

6. B.Sc. III

10. Why did you select this course

� Out of interest � Out of compulsion � Better score � Better job opportunities � Less expenditure � Good course � Any other

11. What do you want to take up for postgraduate programme

INFLUENCE OF APTITUDE AND PERSONALITY PROFILE ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS OF UAS, DHARWAD

SUJATA K. 2005 Dr. (Mrs.) PUSHPA B. KHADI MAJOR ADVISOR

ABSTRACT

UAS Dharwad students Aptitude and personality factors and its relation on academic performance revealed that, the personality factor viz., outgoing, bright, self controlled and independence significantly influence academic achievement of students. Verbal reasoning, numerical ability, abstract reasoning and space relations significantly influenced academic achievement of students. Most of the personality factors had a significant influence on aptitude of the students.

Majority of students were in the lower range of all seven areas of aptitude. Home

Science students were significantly higher in verbal reasoning and mechanical reasoning, while girl student’s of agriculture were significantly higher in numerical ability, abstract reasoning, clerical speed and accuracy and language.

Majority of students were in moderate range of all 16 personality factors Home

science students were more socially aware than the rest of the students. Agriculture boys were significantly higher in the factors viz., aggression, moralistic, imagination self sufficient and intelligence. Marketing students were significantly more outgoing enthusiastic, suspicious, insecure and self controlled than the other two groups.

Majority of students were in fair category of academic achievement. Girls and boys of

agriculture were better in academic achievement compared to the other two faculties. Young students were more enthusiastic tender minded and better in numerical ability

than older students, while older students were better in clerical speed and accuracy. Later borns were more mature than first borns. Students from small than large families were more bright and moralistic. Students of nuclear than joint families were more mature and significantly better in space relation.

The aptitude scale developed by Bennett et al. (1993), 16 personality factors

questionnaire developed by Cattell (1982), socio-economic inventory developed by AICRP(CD) (2002) were used. The marks secured in the previous semester represented the academic achievement of the students. Student‘t’ test, chi-square test, factor analysis, Karl pearson’s correlation coefficient analysis were used to analyse the data.