CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF DATA

4.1 INTRODUCTION
Research dealing with human traits often leads to data that require the special
analytical tools of the satisfaction. Beginning students of research may be confused and be
wildered by the necessity to deal with the abstract concept of statistics. As a result, there
may be a tendency for students to memorize formulas rigorously without understanding the
rationale upon which they are based whether an individual will become a researcher or a
consumer of research, he must command an understanding of the research data. The
researcher cannot design his studies properly if he doesnt have a thorough knowledge of
the analytical tools to be used. In addition, the research consumer cannot hope to evaluate
and apply research findings in his professional work if he doesnt understand the technical
methods and data handling used in reporting investigations.
Analysis of data means critical examination of the tabulated data to determine the
inherent facts and characteristic of the object under study. This, in turn, will help in
determining the patterns of relationship among the variables relating to it.
According to Krishnnaswamy (1993) analysis means, a critical examination of the
assembled and grouped data for studying the characteristics of the object under the study
and for determining the patterns or relationships among the variable relating it.
Analysis of data in a general way involves a number of closely related operations,
which are performed with the purpose of summarizing the collected data and organizing
these in such a manner that they answer the research questions. (C.R.Kothari, 1989).
4.2 ANALYSIS OF DATA
Analysis of data is one of the basic steps of research process. It is one of the
processes of collection, analyzing and interpreting the numerical data. It is studying the
tabulated material in order to determine the inherent factors or meaning. It involves

63

breakdown of existing complex factor into simple parts and putting the parts together in
new arrangements for the purpose of interpretation.
The analysis and interpretation of data represent the application of deductive and
inductive logic to the research process. The data are often classified by division into,
subgroups and are then analyzed and synthesized in such a way that hypothesis may be
verified or rejected. According to Gay (1976) Analysis of the data is important as any
other components of the research process.
In general process of analysis of research data, statistical methods contributed a
great deal, simple statistical calculation finds a place in almost any research study dealing
with large or even small group of individuals, while complex statistical computations form
the basis of many type of research. It maynt be out of place, therefore, to enumerate some
statistical methods of analysis used in educational research.
4.3 PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS
i.

INTRAPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE OF IX STANDARD STUDENTS

1. Level of Intrapersonal Intelligence of IX standard students.

TABLE 4.1
LEVEL OF INTRAPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE OF IX STANDARD
STUDENTS

Low

Average

High

20

6.7

272

90.7

2.7

It is inferred from above table that 6.7%, 90.7% and 2.7% of IX standard students
have low, average, high level of Intrapersonal Intelligence aspectively.

64

2. Level of Intrapersonal Intelligence of IX standard students with respect to back

ground variables.
TABLE 4.2
LEVEL OF INTRAPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE OF IX STANDARD STUDENTS
WITH RESPECT TO BACKGROUND VARIABLES
S.No

Back

Category

ground

Low

Average

High

Variables
1

Gender

Male

151

13

8.6

135

89.4

2.0

Female

149

4.7

137

91.9

3.4

121

4.1

113

93.4

2.5

179

15

8.4

159

88.8

2.8

Locality of Rural
school

Urban

It is inferred from the above table, 8.6%, 89.4%, 2% of male IX standard students have
low, average, high level of Intrapersonal Intelligence respectively.
4.7%, 91.9% 3.4% of female IX standard students have low, average, high level of
Intrapersonal Intelligence respectively.
4.1%, 93.4%, 2.5%, of rural IX standard students have low, average, high level of
Intrapersonal Intelligence respectively.
8.4%, 88.8%, 2.8%, of urban IX standard students have low, average, high level of
Intrapersonal Intelligence respectively.

65

FIGURE 4.1
LEVEL OF INTRAPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE OF IX STANDARD STUDENTS WITH RESPECT TO BACKGROUND
VARIABLES
Low

Average

High

2.8%
8.4%

91.9%

8.6%

4.1%

2.5%
89%

88.8

4,7%
3.4%

2.0%

93.4%

Male

Femle

Rural

66

Urban

4.4 HYPOTHESES TESTING

Hypotheses 1-5
There is no significant difference between a) boys and girls b) Tamil and English c) rural
and urban school d) days scholar and hosteller e) nuclear and joint family IX standard
students in their Intrapersonal Intelligence.
TABLE 4.3
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A) BOYS AND GIRLS B) RURAL AND
URBAN SCHOOL C) DAYS SCHOLAR AND HOSTELLER F) NUCLEAR AND
JOINT FAMILY IX STANDARD STUDENTS IN THEIR INTRAPERSONAL
INTELLIGENCE
Background

Category

Mean

S.D

Variables

Calculated

Remark

t value

at
level

Gender

Medium

Boys

151

21.34

5.45

Girls

149

22.89

7.05

245

22.02

6.82

55

22.49

3.45

of urban

121

22.83

5.65

Rural

179

21.63

6.73

of Days

220

22.18

6.20

of Tamil

Instruction
Locality

English

School
Nature

Accommodation

Nature of family

scholar
Hosteller

80

21.93

6.70

Nuclear

211

22.62

7.22

Joint

89

20.91

3.16

67

2.14

0.73

NS

1.67

NS

0.29

NS

2.85

5%

(At 5% level of significance, the table value is 1.96)

It is inferred from the above table that the calculatedt value (2.14) is greater than the table
value, with regard to gender, the null hypothesis is rejected and there is a significant
difference between boys and girls IX standard students in their Intrapersonal Intelligence.
With regard to medium of instruction, the calculatedt value (0.73) is less than the table
value, hence the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant difference between
Tamil and English Medium IX standard students in their Intrapersonal Intelligence.
With regard to locality of School, the calculatedt value (1.67) is less than the table value,
hence the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no a significant difference between urban
and rural of IX standard students in their Intrapersonal Intelligence.
With regard to place of study, the calculated t value (0.29) is less than the table value, the
null hypothesis is accepted and there is a significant difference between days scholar and
hostel IX standard students in their Intrapersonal Intelligence.
With regard to nature of family, the calculatedt value (2.85) is greater than the table
value, the null hypothesis is rejected and there is a significant difference between nuclear
and joint family IX standard students in their Intrapersonal Intelligence.

68

Figure 4.2
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENT BETWEEN GENDER AND NATURE OF FAMILY IX STANDARD STUDENTS IN THEIR
INTAPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE

22.89

22.62

21.34
20.91

Boys

Girls

Nuclear

Gender

Joint

Nature of family

69

Hypothesis-6
There is no significant difference among boys, girls, and co-Education IX standard
students in their Intrapersonal Intelligence.
TABLE 4.4
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG BOYS, GIRLS, CO-EDUCATION IX
STANDARD STUDENTS IN THEIR INTRAPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE
Source of
Variation

Degrees of Sum
of Mean
freedom
Squares
Square
Variance

Between

164.31

Within

297

11905.06

Calculated
F value

Remark at
5% level

2.05

NS

82.16
40.08

(At 5% level of significance, the table value for (2,297) df is 3.03)

It is inferred from the above table that the calculated F value (2.05) is less than the table
value for (2,297) df, the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant difference
among boys, girls, and co-education IX standard students in their Intrapersonal
Intelligence.

70

Hypothesis -7
There is no significant difference among government, private, aided IX standard
students in their Intrapersonal Intelligence.
TABLE 4.5
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG GOVERNMENT, PRIVATE, AIDED, IX
STANDARD STUDENTS IN THEIR INTRAPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE
Source of Degrees of Sum
of Mean
Variation
freedom
Squares
Square
Variance
Between

218.36

109.18

Within

297

11851.02

39.90

Calculated
F value

Remark at
5% level

2.74

NS

(At 5% level of significance, the table value for (2,297) df is 3.03)

It inferred from the above table that the calculated F value (2.74) is less than the table
value for (2,297) df, hence the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant
difference among government, aided, private IX standard students in their Intrapersonal
Intelligence.

71

Hypothesis 8-10
There is no significant association between fathers education, fathers occupation,
fathers monthly income of IX standard students in their Intrapersonal Intelligence.
TABLE 4.6
SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATION BETWEEN FATHERS EDUCATION, FATHERS
OCCUPATION, AND FATHER MONTHLY INCOME OF IX STANDARD
STUDENTS IN THEIR INTRAPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE
Back
ground
Variables

Category

Low

Average

High

Fathers
Education

Illiteracy

7(10)

135(132)

4(4)

SSLC

8(6)

76(77)

1(2)

HSC

3(3)

45(44)

0(1)

UG and above

2(1)

16(19)

3(1)

Coolie

7(9)

121(120)

4(4)

Business

2(3)

38(38)

2(1)

Private

5(4)

61(61)

1(2)

Government

6(4)

52(53)

1(2)

Below Rs.5000

7(6)

86(88)

4(3)

Rs.5000-10000

2(3)

49(46)

0(1)

Fathers
Occupation

Fathers
monthly
Income

Rs.1000020000

4(5)

68(67)

2(2)

Above
Rs.20000

7(5)

69(71)

2(2)

Calculated Remark
2 value
at
5%
level

15.22

3.12

NS

5.92

NS

(At 5% level of significance, the table value for 6 df is 12.59)

72

It is inferred from the above table that the calculated 2 value (15.22) is greater than the
table value for 6 df, with regard to fathers education, hence the null hypothesis is rejected
and there is a significant association between fathers education and Intrapersonal
Intelligence of IX standard students.
As the calculated

value (3.12) is less than the table value for 6 df, with regard to

fathers education, hence the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant
association between fathers occupation and Intrapersonal Intelligence of IX standard
students.
As the calculated

value (3.82) is less than the table value for 6 df, with regard to

fathers income, hence the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant
association between fathers income and Intrapersonal Intelligence of IX standard students.

73

Hypothesis 11-13
There is no significant association between mothers education, mothers
occupation and mothers monthly income and Intrapersonal Intelligence of IX standard
students.
TABLE 4.7
SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATION BETWEEN MOTHERS EDUCATION,
MOTHERS OCCUPATION, MOTHERS MONTHLY INCOME AND
INTRAPERSONAL INTELLIGENCE OF IX STANDARD STUDENTS
Back
ground
Variables

Category

Low

Average

High

Mothers
Education

Illiteracy

7(9)

125(121)

2(4)

SSLC

5(5)

65(63)

2(2)

HSC

5(4)

53(53)

1(2)

UG and above

3(3)

32(34)

3(1)

Coolie

2(4)

55(54)

2(2)

Business

8(7)

100(100)

2(3)

Private

2(3)

41(42)

3(1)

Government

4(3)

45(45)

0(1)

Below
Rs.5000

4(4)

55(55)

2(2)

Rs.5000-10000 7(6)

84(84)

2(2)

Rs.1000020000

4(5)

76(73)

0(2)

Above 20000

5(4)

57(60)

4(2)

Mothers
Occupation

Mothers
monthly
Income

Calculated
2 value

Remark
at
5%
level

5.92

NS

5.99

NS

3.82

NS

(At 5% level of significance, the table value for 6 df is 12.59)

74

It is inferred from the above table that the calculated 2 value (5.92) is less than the table
value for 6 df, with regard to mothers education, hence the null hypothesis is accepted and
there is no significant association between mothers education and Intrapersonal
Intelligence of IX standard students.
As the calculated

value (5.90) is less than the table value for 6 df, with regard to

mothers occupation, hence the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant
association between mothers occupation and Intrapersonal Intelligence of IX standard
students.
As the calculated

value (5.99) is less than the table value for 6 df, with regard to

mothers monthly income, hence the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant
association between mothers monthly Income and Intrapersonal Intelligence of IX
standard students.

75

SELF CONFIDENCE OF IX STANDARDSTUDENTS

ii)

PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS

1) Level of Self-confidence of IX standard students

TABLE 4.8
LEVEL OF SELF CONFIDENCE OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
Low

Average

High

50

16.7

214

71.3

36

12.0

It is inferred from the above table 16.7%, 71.3%, 12.0% of IX standard students have low
average, high level of Self-confidence respectively.

76

2) Level of Self-confidence of IX standard students with respect to background

variable
TABLE 4.9
LEVEL OF SELF CONFIDENCE OF IX STANDARD STUDENTS WITH
RESPECT TO BACKGROUND VARIABLES

S.No

Back
ground
Variables
Gender

Category

Low

Average

High

Male

151

26

17.2

109

72.2

16

10.6

Female

149

24

16.1

105

70.5

20

13.4

Locality of Rural
school

121

14

11.6

83

68.6

24

19.8

Urban

179

36

20.1

131

73.2

12

6.7

It is inferred from the above table that 17.2%, 72.2%, 10.6%, of male IX standard students
have low, average, high level of Self-confidence respectively.
16.1%, 70.5%, 13.4% of female IX standard students have low, average, high level of
Self-confidence respectively.
11.6%, 68.6%, 19.8%, of rural IX standard students have low, average, high level of Selfconfidence respectively.
20.1%, 73.2%, 6.7%, of urban IX standard students have low, average, high level of Selfconfidence respectively.

77

FIGURE 4.3
LEVEL OF SELF CONFIDENCE OF IX STANDARD STUDENTS WITH RESPECT TO BACKGROUND VARIABLES
Low

Average

High
6.7%
20.1%

70.5%

17.2%

11.6%
19.8%

72.2%
10.6%

Male

73.2%

16.1%
13.4%

68.6%

Female

rural

78

urban

Hypotheses 1-5
There is no significant difference between a) boys and girls b) rural and urban school c)
Tamil and English d) rural and urban e) days scholar and hosteller f) nuclear and joint
family IX standard Students in their Self-confidence.
TABLE 4.10
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A) BOYS AND GIRLS B) RURAL AND
URBAN SCHOOL C) TAMIL AND ENGLISH D) RURAL AND URBAN E) DAYS
SCHOLAR AND HOSTELLER F) NUCLEAR AND JOINT FAMILY IN THEIR
SELF CONFIDENCE OF IX STANDARD STUDENTS
Background
Variables

Category

Gender

Medium
Instruction

Mean

S.D

Boys

151

57.21

10.18

Girls

149

58.13

11.22

245

57.01

10.83

of Tamil
English

Locality
School

60

60.58

9.67

of Urban

121

61.05

10.05

Rural

179

55.38

10.55

Days
Scholar

220

58.71

10.44

Hosteller

80

54.79

10.94

Nuclear

211

57.22

11.09

Joint

89

58.72

9.70

Residence

Nature of Family

Calculated
t Value

Remark
at 5%
level

0.75

NS

2.42

4.70

S
2.78

1.17

(At 5% level significance, the table value is 1.96)

79

NS

It is inferred from the above table that the calculatedt value (0.75) is less than the table
value, with regard to gender. Hence the null hypothesis is accepted and there is a
significant difference between boys and girls IX Standard students in their Self-confidence.
With regard to Medium of Instruction, the calculated t value (2.42) is greater than the
table value, the null hypothesis is rejected and there is significant difference between Tamil
and English medium IX Standard students in their Self-confidence.
With regard to locality of school, the calculatedt value (4.70) is greater than the table
value, the null hypothesis is rejected and there is a significant difference between urban
and rural IX Standard students in their Self-confidence.
With regard to residence, the calculatedt value (2.78) is greater than the table value, the
null hypothesis is rejected and there is a significant difference between days scholar and
hostel IX Standard students in their Self-confidence.
With regard to Nature of Family, the calculatedt value (1.17) is less than the table value,
the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant difference between nuclear and
joint family IX Standard students in their Self-confidence.

80

FIGURE 4.4
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION, LOCALITY OF SCHOOL, AND RESIDENCE
OF IX STANDARD STUDENTS IN THEIR SELF CONFIDENCE

60.58

61.05

58.71
57.01
55.38
54.79

Tamil

English

Medium of Instruction

Urban

Rural

Locality of School

81

Days Scholar

Hosteller

Residence

Hypothesis 6
There is no significant difference among boys, girls, co-education IX Standard students in
their Self-confidence.
TABLE 4.11
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG BOYS, GIRLS, CO-EDUCATION IX
STANDARD STUDENTS IN THEIR SELF CONFIDENCE
Source
of Degrees of Sum
of Mean
Variations
freedom
Squares
square
Variance
Between

1582.13

791.06

Within

297

32866.63

110.66

Calculated
F Value

Remark at
5% level

7.15

(At 5% level of significance, the table value for (2,297) df is 3.03)

It is inferred from the above table that the calculated F value (7.15) is greater than the
table value for (2,297) df, hence the null hypothesis is rejected and there is a significant
difference among boys, girls, and co-education IX Standard students in their Selfconfidence.
FIGURE 4.5
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG BOYS, GIRLS, CO-EDUCATION IX
STANDARD STUDENTS IN THEIR SELF CONFIDENCE
64.43
58.2
56.75

Boys
Girls
CO-Education

82

Hypothesis 7
There is no significant difference among government, private, aided, IX standard students
in their Self-confidence
TABLE 4.12
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG GOVERNMENT, PRIVATE, AIDED, IX
STANDARD STUDENTS IN THEIR SELF CONFIDENCE
Source
of Degrees
Variation
freedom

of Sum
Squares

of Mean
Square
Variance

Between

2512.38

1256.19

Within

297

31936.38

107.53

Calculated
F Value

Remark at
5% level

11.68

(At 5% level of significance, the tale value for (2,297) df is 3.03)

It inferred from the above table that the calculated F value (11.68) is greater than the
table value for (2,297) df, hence the null hypothesis is rejected and there is a significant
difference among government, private, aided IX Standard students in their Self-confidence.
Figure 4.6
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG GOVERNMENT, PRIVATE, AIDED, IX
STANDARD STUDENTS IN THEIR SELF CONFIDENCE
GOVERNMENT

PRIVATE

AIDED
60.58

59.18

53.35

GOVERNMENT

PRIVATE

83

AIDED

Hypotheses 8-10
There is no significant association between fathers education, fathers occupation, fathers
monthly income and Self-confidence of IX Standard school students
TABLE 4.13
SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATION BETWEEN FATHERS EDUCATION, FATHERS
OCCUPATION, FATHERS MONTHLY INCOME OF IX STANDARD
STUDENTS IN THEIR SELF CONFIDENCE
Back
ground
Variables

Fathers
Education

Category

Low

Average

High

Illiteracy

28(24)

105(104)

13(18)

SSLC

13(14)

63(61)

9(10)

HSC
UG
above

Fathers
Occupation

Fathers
monthly
Income

4(8)

33(34)

11(6)

and 5(4)

13(15)

3(3)

Coolie

24(22)

97(94)

11(16)

Business

8(7)

30(30)

4(5)

Private

10(11)

48(48)

9(8)

Government 8(10)

39(42)

12(7)

Below
Rs.5000

(16)

75(69)

3(12)

Rs.500010000

(9)

39(36)

6(6)

Rs.1000020000

(12)

47(53)

13(9)

Above
Rs.20000

(13)

53(56)

14(9)

Calculated

Value

Remark
at
5%
level

9.86

NS

6.33

NS

13.83

(At 5% level of significance, the table value for 6 df is 12.59)

84

It inferred from the above table that the calculated 2 value (9.86) is less than the table
value for 6 df, with regard to fathers education, the null hypothesis is accepted and there
is no significant association between fathers education and Self-confidence of IX Standard
Students.
As the calculated 2 value (6.33) is less than the table value for 6 df, with regard to
fathers occupation, the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant association
between fathers occupation and Self-confidence of IX Standard Students.
As the calculated 2 value (13.83)is greater than the table value for 6df, with regard to
fathers monthly income, the null hypothesis is rejected and there is a significant
association between fathers monthly income and Self-confidence of IX Standard students.

85

Hypotheses 11-13
There is no significant association between mothers education, mothers occupation and
mothers monthly income and Self-confidence of high school students.
TABLE 4.14
SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATION BETWEEN MOTHERS EDUCATION,
MOTHERS OCCUPATION AND MOTHERS MONTHLY INCOME OF IX
STANDARD STUDENTS IN THEIR SELF CONFIDENCE.
Back
ground
Variables

Category

Low

Average

High

Calculated

Value

Remark
at
5%
level

Mothers
Education

illiteracy

21(22)

99(96)

14(14)

8.06

NS

SSLC

9(12)

55(49)

5(5)

HSC

13(10)

35(42)

11(7)

25(27)

6(5)
6.82

NS

10.47

NS

UG
above
Mothers
Occupation

Mothers
monthly
Income

and 7(6)

Coolie

11(10)

43(42)

5(7)

Business

(18)

81(79)

10(13)

Private

10(8)

28(33)

8(5)

Government 4(8)

38(38)

7(6)

Below
Rs.5000

8(10)

47(44)

6(7)

Rs.500010000

16(16)

68(68)

9(11)

Rs.1000020000

15(13)

59(57)

6(10)

Above
Rs.20000

11(11)

40(47)

15(8)

(At 5% level of significance, the table value for 6 df is 12.59)

86

As the calculated

value (8.06) is less than the table value for 6 df, with regard to

mothers education, the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant association
between mothers education and Self-confidence of IX Standard Students.
As the calculated

value (6.82) is less than the table value for 6 df, with regard to

mothers occupation, the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant association
between mothers occupation and Self-confidence of IX Standard Students.
As the calculated

value (10.47) is less than the table value for 6 df, with regard to

mothers monthly income, the null hypothesis is accepted and there is a significant
association between mothers monthly income and Self-confidence of IX Standard
students.

87

4.5 Relationship between Intrapersonal Intelligence and Self-confidence of high

school students.
Hypothesis 1
There is no significant relationship between Intrapersonal Intelligence and Self-confidence
of IX Standard students.
TABLE 4.15
SIGNIFICANCE

RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN

INTRAPERSONAL

INTELLIGENCE AND SELF CONFIDENCE OF IX STANDARD STUDENTS

N

X2

Y2

300

6633

17300

158725

1032082 379335

XY

Calculated Remark
Value 5%level
0.155

at

(at 5% level of significance, the table value for 298 df is 0.113)

It is inferred from the above table that the calculated value of (0,155) is greater than the
table value (0.113) for 298 df, the null hypothesis is rejected and there is a significant
relationship between Intrapersonal Intelligence and Self-confidence of IX Standard
students.

88

Relationship between Intrapersonal Intelligence and Self-confidence of IX Standard

students.
Hypotheses 2-5
TABLE 4.16
SIGNIFICANT

RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN

INTRAPERSONAL

INTELLIGENCE AND SELF CONFIDENCE OF IX STANDARD STUDENTS

WITH RESPECT GENDER AND LOCALITY OF SCHOOL
Category N

X2

Y2

XY

Calculated
value

Tabl
e
valu
e

Rema
rk at
5%lev
el

Boys

151

3222

8638

73238

509782

182608

0.204

0.15
9

Girls

149

3411

8662

85487

522300

196727

0.133

0.15
9

NS

Urban

121

2762

7387

66914

463193

169370

0.109

0.15
9

NS

Rural

179

3871

9913

91811

568889

209965

0.347

0.17
7

With respect to boys, the calculated value of (0.204) is greater than the table value
(0.159) for 149 df, hence the null hypothesis is rejected and there is a significant
relationship between Intrapersonal Intelligence and Self-confidence of IX Standard boys
students.
With respect to girls, the calculated value of (0.133) is less than the table value (0.159)
for 147 df, hence the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant relationship
between Intrapersonal Intelligence and Self-confidence of IX Standard girls students.
With respect to urban students, the calculated value of (0.109) is less than the table
value (0.159) for 119 df, hence the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant
89

relationship between Intrapersonal Intelligence and Self-confidence of IX standard urban

students.
With respect to rural students, the calculated value of (0.347) is greater than the table
value (0.177) for 117 df, hence the null hypothesis is rejected and there is a significant
relationship between Intrapersonal Intelligence and Self-confidence of IX standard rural
students.

90