ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE COLLECTED...

151

Chapter IV

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE

COLLECTED DATA

4.1 Introduction

In the previous chapter, the researcher has discussed

research methodology. In this chapter, data analysis and

interpretation of the results has been discussed .

Researcher has developed Sattvaguna Enrichment Programme

(SGEP) through different steps. While preparing the SGEP data

was collected and analyzed as per the requirement. Then, SGEP

was implemented on “Secondary School Teachers” and the

effectiveness of SGEP was measured. The analysis of the whole

data collected has been given in following tables.

4.2 Analysis and Interpretation of the data

Objective No.1 To identify the characteristics of Sattvaguni

person

For this , various scriptures were analyzed as follows .

152

Table No. 19

Content Analysis of Scriptures

Title of the Related

literature

Title of the

Chapter

Content related to Sattvaguna Characteristics of Sattvaguni person

according to the content

ƒ½ lkFkZ Jh nklcks/k

¼„‚‚ˆ½ leFkZ jkenkl

izdk’kd leFkZ lsok

eaMG lkrkjk

laiknd & izk-ds-fo-csyljs

Sarth Shri Dasbodh(2006)

Samarth Ramdas

Publisher – Samarth Seva

Mandal , Satara

Editor– Prof. K.V.Belsare

Language – Marathi

n’kd „ jk

lekl ‰ ok

lRoxq.k y{k.ks

Dashak- 2nd

Samas – 7th

‘Sattvaguna

Lakshana

Page No.70-80

ƒ½ vk/ksu vkf.k v/;kiuA Lo;s djh nkuiq.;A

„½ lnk lfUu/k foosdA …½ lgL= Hkkstus y{k

HkkstusA fofo/k izdkjhaph nkusA fu%dke djh rks

lRoxq.kAA†½ 'kCn dBh.k u cksysA vfruses pkysA

;ksxh ts.ks rks"kfoysAA rks lRoxq.k ‡½ lkaMwfu;k

vfHkekuA varjh nsokps /;kuAA rks lRoxq.k ˆ½

nsgkfHkeku xGsA fo"kbZ oSjkX; izcGsA feF;k ek;k

,sls dGsA rks lRoxq.k ‰½ 'kkarh {kek vkf.k

n;kA fu’p; mits t;kA lRoxq.k tk.kkok r;kA

varjh vkRek AA Š½ t;kl ukgh dkeukA ‹½

MGeGhuk T;kps fpÙk A ƒ‚½ Jo.k vkf.k euuA

fut /;kls lek/kkuA ƒƒ½ t;k jkgs ikBkarj ƒ„½

xzaFklkexzh tks djh ƒ…½ uhp mÙkj lgk.ks vkyk

Øks/k lkoj.ks ƒ†½ lRoxq.k lkfRod lalkj lkxjh

rkjd ;s.ks mits foosdA

1) Studious, eager to teach and preach,

2) Generous, liberal 3) Soft spoken, 4) Steady

minded 5) contented 6)Tolerant 7) Positive

minded 8) Devoted 9) Forgiving

10) Philanthropic 11) treating reason as the

ultimate authority 12) Sinless, tuned with the

supernatural power 13) having no pride and

prejudices 14) Kind , Calm 15) having no

desire 16) remembers most 17) writes to

express his views 18) has control over anger

19) Satisfied

153


literature

Title of the

Chapter

Content related to Sattvaguna Characteristics of Sattvaguni

person according to the content

„½ ea=xhrk&lar rqdkjke

¼ƒ‹‰…½

izdk’kd &

Mantra Gita -Saint Tukaram

(1973 )

Publisher –


foHkkx ƒ†

xq.k=; foHkkx

;ksx

Chapter – 14

Gunatray Vibhag

yog

Page No. 540 to

553

ƒ½ xq.kHkos izd`rhpsA mRirhps dkj.k

A lRo vkf.k jtreA iq#"kksÙke

lkax rw AA „½ jt rekal eksMwfuA

;s ok<wfu lRoka’kw A …½ QG fueZG

lRokyk A osn ts dkgh cksyyk AA

jtkps QG rs nq%[kA tjh#fp us ?ks

eq[k A m?kMs rekps [kkij A

vKkukpk f’kjksHkkj-

1) Studious, 2) Generous, 3) Soft

spoken, 4) Steady minded 5) contented

6) Tolerant 7) Positive minded,

8)Philanthropic 9) pure, clear & clean

, bright natured.

Jnaneswari – Saint Jnaneswar

Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan, Pune

Translator - Yardi M.R.

(1991)

Language – English

The three

qualities

Page No.

394 to 413

Sattva, Raj and Tama are qualities

born of Prakriti. Sattva is the best

quality.Sattva being pure is luminous

&wholesome.It binds by attachment

to happiness and to knowledge. When

Sattva increases a person say ‘I am

so happy’The light of knowledge

shines forth, Then one should

knowthat Sattva has increased.

1) Cheerful 2) contented 3) Satisfied

4) Balanced minded 5) Practical

minded 6) Studious 7) having positive

attitude 8) having state of self

realization 9) Luminous 10)

Discriminator 11) Pious

154


literature

Title of the Chapter Content related to Sattvaguna Characteristics of Sattvaguni


4) BhagvadGita

As It Is (1991)

Publisher – The

Bhaktivedanta Book

Trust, Mumbai

Editor – Shri Krishna

Bhavanamrut Sangh.

Language - English

Chapter - 14

The three modes of

material nature

Page No-

606 to 619

lRRokRlatk;rs Kkua jtlks yksHk

,o p AAizekneksgkS relkS

Hkorks· Kkueso p AA

Sattvaguna is illuminating ,

wholesome. It indicates

knowledge.Rajoguna indicates

greed & Tamoguna indicaties

sinful actions.

m/oZ xPNkfUr lRRoLFkk e/;s

fr"BkfUr jktlk%AA

t?kU;xq.kokfRrLFkk v/kks xPNfUr

rkelk%AA

Sattvaguna is most desirable

Rajoguna is of middle quality &

Tamoguna is inferior. One must

try to increase Sattvaguna.

1) Sinless 2) firm minded 3)

Steady minded 4) Wise 5) Blissful

6) Pious 7) illuminating 8) having

control over Basal instincts 9)

Contented 10) Satisfied 11)

Devoted 12) having goodness,

13) having positive attitude

156

Observation and Interpretation

From the above table it is clear that

i) Four scriptures were analyzed to identify the characteristics of Sattvaguni person .

ii) Two scriptures were in Marathi and two scriptures were in English.

iii) For the description of SattvaGuna, separate chapters were there .

iv) In those four scriptures , about 50 characteristics of Sattvaguni person are given. Some of them

are as follows

1) Studious 2) having positive attitude 3) Satisfied 4) Steady minded 5) eager to teach 6)

Philanthropic 7) Soft spoken 8) Sinless 9) Wise 10) Blissful 11) Cheerful 12) Contented 13) Kind,

Calm 14) remembers most. 15) having control over anger.

157

Table No. 20

Content Analysis of Related Books

Title of the Related literature Title of the Chapter Content related to Sattvaguna Characteristics of Sattvaguni


ƒ½ Hkkjrh; O;k[;kus

¼ƒ‹ŠŠ½ Lokeh foosdkuan

jked`".k eB & ukxiwj

Bhartiya Vyakhyane

(1988) Swami Vivekananda

Ramkrishana Math, Nagpur


ƒ½osnkUrkps fofo/k iSyw

Vedantache Vividh

Pailu

Page No- 356 to 359

vkgkj 'kq/nkS lRo’kqf/n % LkRo 'kq/nkS

/kqzok Le`fr%AA

vkgkj 'kq/n vlyk Eg.kts lRo’kqf/n

gksrs o lRo’kq/n >kys Eg.kts Le`fr

vpy o fLFkj gksrs- vUu v'kq/nh

dkj.ks

tkfrnks"k vkJ; nks"k fufeÙk nks"k

1) He who takes holy diet

(Morally & Spiritually pure) 2) He

who takes refined , balanced diet 3)

Having steady & balanced

memory. 4) Having pure nature.

„½ osnkUr

Vedanta

Page No. 460

LoHkkorxr O;Drh v’kq/n nks"k nks"k xks"Vh T;kosGh O;Drhps lRoxq.kkr ifjorZu

gksrs R;kosGh vuar 'kDrh o ikfo™;

vf/kdkf/kd O;Dr gksrs Eg.kwup vkiys

yksd [kk.;kfi.;kps fu;e brD;k

dkVsdksji.ks ikGhr vlr-

158



„½ LokLF; f=dks.k

¼„‚‚ˆ½ & rstxq# rstikj[khth

Swasthya Trikon (2006)

Tejguru Tejparkheejee

Publisher – Happy Thought

Language - Hindi

ƒ½ LokLF; mfpr

vkgkj

Swasthya Uchit Aahar

Page No. 29 to 31

vkgkj iap’kjhj es ^vUue;

'kjhj *cgqr egRoiw.kZ

;ksx funzk gksrk gSA 'kjhj ds rhu

xq.kgS&reksxq.k]jtksxq.k]lRoxq.kAlRoxq.k

ykus ds fy;s gesa lgh vkgkj ij

dke djuk pkfg;sA lRoxq.kh yksxksadk

vkgkj larqfyr jgrk gSAtc vlyh

Hkw[k yxrh gS rc gh Hkkstu xzg.k

djrs gSA lRoxq.kh dk vkjke jke

gSA¼rst ekSu½A os dke esa jke dk

vkuan ysrs gSA

1) One who eats vegetarian, soft

food 2) He eats only when he is

really very hungry and takes sound,

timely but limited sleep 3) becomes

skilled, untiring, hardworker,steady

minded Sattvaguni person strikes a

balance among the three aspects

of the “Health Triangle” and attains

physical & mental health, thus

“Sattva-guna” in his life enriching.

…½ nklcks/kkps ekul’kkL=

¼„‚‚Š½Jh lqfuy fpapksydj

izdk’kd- leFkZ lsok eaMG lkrkjk

Dasbodhache Manasshastra

(2008) Shri. Sunil Chincholkar ,

Publisher–Samarth Seva Mandal, Satara


f=xq.k fopkj

Trigun Vichar

Page No. 76 to 104

O;fDreRokps rhu izdkj & lkfRod]

jktfld] rkefld lRoxq.kh euq";

usgeh lek/kkuh vlrks- nku dj.ks]

;ksX; fu.kZ; ?ks.ks ;k o`Rrh R;kP;kr

fnlwu ;srkr- rks bZÜojkfo"k;h izse

dj.kkjk o fLFkj cq/nhpk vlrks-

He is always satisfied, happy,

generous in his views , His

decisions are proper and correct .

He is stable minded and is in

deep love with God.

159



†½ Hkkjrh; ekul’kkL= vFkok lkFkZ

vkf.k lfooj.k ikraTty ;ksxn’kZu

¼ƒ‹Šƒ½

—".kkth ds’ko dksYgVdj

dukZVd eqnz.kky;] eqacbZ

Language - Marathi

1) lek/khikn lw= & „

Samadhipad Sutra 2

Page No-3-5-6

;ksxfÜpÙko`fÙk fujks/k %AA

fpÙkkps ewG ?kVd & lRo] jt] re

frUghaP;k rkjrE;keqGs lkfRod]

jktfld] rkel o`Ùkh vlrs-

lRoxq.kkpsa vf/kD; vlsy rj ,dkxzrk

lk/krs-

He has highest concentration of

mind. He is having blissful

temperament.

Bhartiya Manasshastra

Shri. K.K. Kolhatkar

Mumbai

„½lek/khikn lw= &ƒ‚

Samadhipad Sutra 10

Page No..29-31

jtks jDra pya rs"kqA lRoa 'kqDy

izdk’kde~A re% d`".k pkojdaaA l`f"V

fLFkR;argsro% AA

;krk;kra xrjlaA iwfr i;qZ"kfrap ;r~A

mfPN"Vefipkes/;aA Hkkstu

rkelfiz;e~AA

lkfRod vUu & jL; fLFkj] fLuX/k

ân;

vk;q"; fujksxh]cyoku]vkuanh gksrs-

lRoiq#"k;ks% 'kqf/nlkE;S dSoY;e~AA

izdk’kdRo Kku] lq[kkyrk gh

lRoxq.kkph oSf’k"V;s gksr-

Vegetarian , Hardworker, Steady or

Firm minded . One who eats when

really hungry untiring , Having

light sleep.

160

Title of the Related literature Title of the Chapter Content related to

Sattvaguna

Characteristics of Sattvaguni person

according to the content

5) True Psychology (1979)

Swami Abhedanand

Ramkrishna Vedanta Math,

Calcutta

Language - English

Power of concentration

Page No.119-121

There are four states of mind.

1) Ksipta 2) Mudha 3)

Vikshipta 4) Ekagra state. In

all these four states, There is

different proportion of Sattva,

Raja, Tama. In vikshipta state

(3 rd

state) Sattvaguna started

increasing and over powers

Raja and Tama.

Concentrated , having good attention of

mind , having control over basal instinct.

160


From the above table it is clear that

i) Five books related to Sattvaguna were analyzed

ii) Three books were in Marathi , One book was in Hindi and

One book was in English.

iii) In all the books for description of Sattvaguna separate

chapters were there.

iv) In Marathi books for the description of Sattvaguna ,

Sanskrit shlokas ¼’yksd½ were used.

v) In those five books, about 17 characteristics of Sattvaguni

person are given. Some of them are ---

1) Skilled 2) Untiring 3) Hardworking 4) Steady minded 5)

Soft spoken 6) Has blissful temperament 7) Takes limited,

balanced & pure food.

161

Table No . 21

Content analysis of Related Articles


literature

Title of the Chapter Characteristics of Sattva Guni person

according to the content.

1) Glimpses of Indian

Psychology (2003),

Article published in

proceedings of National

Seminar on Indian

Psychology Dhule

Language - English

Assessment of Sattva, Raja,

Tama, qualities within a person.

Author - Sujala Watve , Pune

Page No.37-44

Sattvaguni person

i) lives in harmony with others.

ii) shows understanding iii) is sympathetic

iv) tries to do good to others. v) has Steadiness of mind

vi) has positive attitude vii) has intellectual brilliance

viii) tries to impart knowledge

ix) continues learning throughout life


Psychology (2003), Article

published in proceedings of

National Seminar on Indian

Psychology, Dhule

Language – English

Relation of food with Psychology

Ayurvedic

Perpective

Author-Ravindranath Varma and

Anju bala Varma , Dhule

Page No.32-36

i) tries to do good to others.

ii) is sincere iii) is wise and sensible

iv) is happy minded. v) is gentle in behaviour vi) takes

balanced diet. vii) Is healthy and sound minded. vii) is

liberal in approach ix) has balanced personality.

162


literature

Title of the Chapter Characteristics of Sattva Guni person according to

the content


Psychology (2003)

Article published in

proceedings of National

Seminar on Indian

Psychology,Dhule

Language - English

Ayurved and Mind

Author- Bhupal Deshmukh, Dhule

Page No.27-31

i) has spiritual beauty.

ii) believes that salvation comes through the knowledge

of Brahma.

iii) takes food rich in Jal-tatva (liquid food)

iv) has intellectual abilities .

v) is kind & soft in approach.

vi) is honest & sincere to others.

vii) is stable minded.

viii) is dispassionate in nature

4) EDU- TRACKS (2005)

Neelkamal Publication ,

Hyderabad

Basis of Value Education

A Philosophical analysis

Author - Dr. G.S. Patil ,

Kolhapur

Page No. 19-20

i) is pure in character.

ii)is not lured by any temptation.

iii) is honest.

iv) has courage to face opposition & difficulties.

v) talks balanced and takes balanced food

vi) expects less from others.

163


i) Four articles related to characteristics of Sattvaguni person

were analyzed.

ii) All articles were in English

iii) Three articles were published in proceedings of ‘ National

Seminar on Indian Psychology’, Dhule. one was published

in ‘EDUTRACK’ a journal published in Hyderabad.

iv) In those four articles about 32 characteristics of Sattvaguni

person are given. Some of them are 1) Steady minded 2) Soft

spoken 3) Has blissful temperament 4) Takes limited,

balanced & pure food. 5) Liberal 6) Honest 7) Pure 8)

Sympathetic 9) Shows understanding 10) Has positive

attitude 11) Healthy 12) Kind 13) Satisfied.

Objective No.2 – To select five characteristics of Sattvaguni

person for preparing SattvaGuna Enrichment

Programme for Secondary School Teachers

(SGEP).

Objective No.3- To develop SattvaGuna Enrichment

Programme for secondary school teachers.

Objective No.2 and 3 were procedural objectives. The detailed

procedure to achieve the above two objective has been given in

chapter III.

164

Objective No.4 To study the effectiveness of Sattva Guna

Enrichment Programme

For this data was collected from pre and post tests administered

on control and experimental group. Analysis was done as follows.

Table No. 22

Pre Test scores in SRT Test ( Sattva-Raja-Tama Test )

Sr.No Control Group Expt. Group

1 21 17

2 19 18

3 21 25

4 12 22

5 24 16

6 23 26

7 25 23

8 22 25

9 28 19

10 27 22

11 22 25

12 29 21

13 23 17

14 22 22

15 24 23

16 19 19

17 19 23

18 16 19

19 15 24

20 18 11

21 22 13

22 22 19

23 22 19

24 22 18

25 21 20

26 23 25

27 21 19

28 28 27

29 23 20

30 25 18

31 25

32 19

33 22

165

Mean Scores

Control Group Experimental Group

21.93 20.63

Control Expt

Group

10

15

20

25

30

Average marks

Graph 1 Comparision of Mean Pre Test Scores of Control and

Experimental Group in SRT Test


Here from graph it is clear that mean pre-test scorcs of control

group and experimental group in SRT test are almost same .

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean pre-test scores of control and

experimental group in SRT test.

Table No.23

Analysis of the Pre Test scores in SRT test SRT N Mean Variance Df t-cal t-tab Decision

Control 30 21.93 14.06

Expt 33 20.63 13.73 61 1.37

2.000

at 5%

level

Accept

Null Hypothesis

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

166

Observation

i) Total number of participants in Control group &

Experimental group are 30 & 33 respectively.

ii) Mean scores of control & experimental group are 21.93 &

20.63 respectively.

iii) Degrees of freedom (df) is 61

iv) Calculated value of t is 1.37 and Table value of t is 2.000 at

5% level.

v) Calculated value of t is less than table value at 5% level .

Interpretation

There is no significant difference in the means of pre test

scores of control & experimental group in SRT test.

Result

Null hypothesis is accepted .

167

Table No.24

Post Test scores in SRT test (Sattva-Raja- Tama test)

Sr.No. Control Group Expt. Group

1 20 26

2 19 25

3 21 26

4 11 24

5 22 27

6 23 30

7 25 28

8 22 27

9 27 25

10 27 23

11 22 25

12 29 24

13 23 22

14 22 27

15 24 29

16 19 26

17 19 30

18 16 23

19 15 27

20 17 20

21 22 25

22 22 26

23 22 24

24 20 25

25 21 24

26 23 29

27 21 25

28 28 31

29 23 22

30 25 24

31 26

32 27

33 28

168

Means Scores


21.66 25.75

Graph 2 - Comparision of Mean Post Test Scores of Control and

Experimental Group in SRT Test


Here from graph it is clear that mean post test scores of control

guoup and experimental group are not same.

Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for enriching SattvaGuna among

the participant teachers.

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean post test scores of control and

experimental group in SRT test.

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

169

Table No. 25

Analysis of the Post test scores in SRT test

SRT N Mean Variance df t-cal t-tab Decision

Control 30 21.66 14.71

Expt 33 25.75 6.18 61 5.06

2.390 at

1% level

Reject Null

Hypothesis


Observation




25.75 respectively.


iv) Calculated value of t is 5.06 and Table value of t is 2.390

at 1% level.

v) Calculated value of t is greater than table value at 1%

level.

Interpretation

Mean score of the experimental group in SRT test is

significantly higher than the mean score of control group.

Result

Null hypothesis is rejected and research hypothesis is

accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for enriching the Sattvaguna among

Secondary School Teachers.

170

Table No.26

Pre- Test scores in Introspection scale

Sr.No. Control Group Expt. Group

1 54 47

2 57 61

3 50 70

4 64 55

5 63 45

6 71 50

7 62 72

8 80 67

9 58 55

10 61 53

11 59 32

12 66 50

13 55 49

14 53 53

15 54 58

16 74 52

17 64 53

18 60 48

19 58 51

20 62 56

21 72 54

22 70 45

23 67 49

24 62 60

25 67 54

26 59 57

27 72 65

28 65 66

29 69 54

30 57 73

31 70

32 49

33 77

171

Mean scores


62.83 56.06

h 3 - Pre Test scores in Introspection scale

Control Expt

Group

50

55

60

65

Average marks

Graph 3 - Comparision of Mean Pre Test Scores of Control and

Experimental Group in Introspection Scale


Here from graph it is clear that mean pretest scores of control

group and experimental group are not same.

Null Hypothesis : There is no difference in mean pre-test scores of

control and experimental group in Introspection test.

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

172

Table No.27

Analysis of the Pre-Test scores in Introspection scale

Intro N Mean Variance df t-cal t-tab Decision

Control 30 62.83 49.38

Expt 33 56.06 93.43 61 3.15

2.000 at

5% level

Reject

Null

Hypothesis

Observation




56.06 respectively.



at 5% level.

v) Calculated value of t is greater than table value at 5% level.

Interpretation

There is significant difference in the means of pre-test

scores of control & experimental group in Introspection Scale .

Result

Null hypothesis is rejected.

Because the Control & Experimental groups differ in pre-

test , it is essential to calculate ANCOVA

ANCOVA

Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for enriching SattvaGuna among

participant teachers.

173

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean post-test scores of control

experimental group in Introspection scale.

Table No. 28

Analysis of covariance for scores in Introspection Scale Experimental Group Control Group

IntrospectionSr.no PreE PostE X1*Y1 PreC PostC X2*Y2

1 47 68 3196 54 55 2970

2 61 62 3782 57 57 3249

3 70 77 5390 50 50 2500

4 55 71 3905 64 64 4096

5 45 62 2790 63 63 3969

6 50 71 3550 71 70 4970

7 72 77 5544 62 62 3844

8 67 68 4556 80 81 6480

9 55 68 3740 58 58 3364

10 53 67 3551 61 61 3721

11 32 45 1440 59 59 3481

12 50 68 3400 66 66 4356

13 49 60 2940 55 55 3025

14 53 66 3498 53 53 2809

15 58 60 3480 54 54 2916

16 52 60 3120 74 74 5476

17 53 67 3551 64 63 4032

18 48 78 3744 60 60 3600

19 51 67 3417 58 58 3364

20 56 74 4144 62 62 3844

21 54 65 3510 72 73 5256

22 45 64 2880 70 70 4900

23 49 74 3626 67 67 4489

24 60 68 4080 62 62 3844

25 54 67 3618 67 67 4489

26 57 72 4104 59 59 3481

27 65 67 4355 72 72 5184

28 66 69 4554 65 65 4225

29 54 77 4158 69 69 4761

30 73 77 5621 57 57 3249

31 70 75 5250

32 49 76 3724

174

Experimental Group Control Group

IntrospectionSr.no

PreE PostE X1*Y1 PreC PostC X2*Y2

33 77 78 6006

Sum 1850 2265 128224 1885 1886 119944

Average 56.06061 68.63636 62.83333 62.86667

For these two groups

sum(x) 3735

Sum(x^2) 13950225

sum(y) 4151

sum(Y^2) 17230801

sum(xy) 248168

Step 1: Correction terms

Cx 221432.1

Cy 273504.8

Cxy 246095

Step 2-4: SS

TSS Among Between

x 13728792.86 720.8117 13728072

y 16957296.22 523.1192 16956773

xy 2073 -614.061 2687.061

Step 5: Analysis of variance of x and y scores taken separately,

SV DF SSx Ssy MSx(Vx) Msy(Vy)

Among

group 1 720.8117 523.1192 720.8117 523.1192

Between

group 61 13728072 16956773 225050.4 277979.9

Total 62 13728793 16957296

F ratio

Fx= 0.003202891

Fy= 0.00188186

175

From table F(0.05,1,61)=3.99

F(0.01,1,61)=7.06

F is not significant at both the levels.

Step 6: Computation of adjusted SS

Adjusted SS

TSS 16957295.91

Bet SS 16956772.68

Among SS 523.2319821

Analysis of Covariance

SV df SSx Ssy Sxy Ssy.x Msy(Vy) Sdy.x

Among

group 1 720.8117 523.1192 -614.061 523.232 523.232

Between

group 60 13728072 16956773 2687.061 16956773 282612.9 531.6135

Total 61 13728793 16957296 2073 16957296

Fy.x= 0.00003

From table F(0.05,1,60)=4.001

F(0.01,1,60)=7.077

Step 7: Correlation and regression

r b

Among group -1 -0.8519

Between

group 0.000176117 0.000196

Total 0.000135864 0.000151

Step 8: Calculation of adjusted Y means

Group N Mx My My.x

Expt 33 56.06061 68.63636 68.63687

Cont 30 62.83333 62.86667 62.86616

Mean - 118.8939 131.503

176


Experimental Group in Introspection Scale

Step 9: Significance of difference among adjusted Y means.

SDy.x=531.61

SE My.x=94.72

SEd between any two adjusted means

=134.1

From table t(0.05,60)=2

t(0.01,60)=2.66

Significant difference at 0.05 level=2*134.1=268.25

0.01 level=2.66*134.1=356.76

Observation

i) Adjusted Y means for experimental group - Mx is

56.06061 and My is 68.63636

ii) Adjusted Y means for control group Mx is 62.83333 and

My is 62.86667

177

iii) Significant difference of scores of experimental group and

control group at 0.01 level is 356.76

iv) There is significant difference in calculated t value of

experimental and control group.

Interpretation

Mean Post test score of the experimental group in

Intropection scale is significantly higher than the mean score of

control group.

Result


accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for enriching the Sattvaguna amoung


178

Table No. 29

Pre Test scores in Family Opinion Scale

Sr.No Control Group Expt.Group

1 56 46

2 58 69

3 53 72

4 68 58

5 65 49

6 73 53

7 64 75

8 80 65

9 66 56

10 58 50

11 70 39

12 65 52

13 58 51

14 49 68

15 55 56

16 74 54

17 67 58

18 58 56

19 55 55

20 75 58

21 69 53

22 68 49

23 54 68

24 65 58

25 63 53

26 51 60

27 74 61

28 68 61

29 72 55

30 60 76

31 68

32 51

33 75

179

Mean scores


63.7 58.42

Control Expt

Group

45

55

65

75

Average marks


Experimental Group in Family Opinion Scale


Here from graph it is clear that means pre-test scores of control

group and experimental group are almost same.

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean pre-test score of control and

experimental group in Family Opinion Scale.

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

180

Table No. 30

Analysis of the Pre-Tests Scores in Family Opinion Scale

Family N Mean Variance df t-cal t-tab Decision

Control 30 63.7 63.66

Expt 33 58.42 80.31 61 2.45

2.65

at 1 %

level

Accept

Null

Hypothesis


Observation

i) Total number of participants in Control group and

Experimental group are 30 and 33 respectively.

ii) Mean scores of control and experimental group are 63.7 and

58.42 respectively.



at 1% level.

v) Calculated value of t is lessr than table value at 1% level.

Interpretation

There is no significant difference in the means of post test

scores of control & experimental group in Family Opinion Scale.

Result


181

Table No. 31

Post -Test scores in Family Opinion Scale

Sr.No. Control Group Expt.Group

1 58 58

2 58 75

3 53 78

4 68 74

5 65 65

6 73 74

7 64 79

8 80 71

9 67 68

10 58 57

11 70 51

12 65 62

13 58 63

14 49 75

15 55 59

16 74 76

17 67 68

18 58 70

19 55 69

20 75 71

21 68 67

22 68 66

23 55 75

24 66 65

25 63 72

26 51 74

27 74 64

28 68 65

29 72 71

30 60 80

31 74

32 78

33 79

182

Graph of average marks

Mean Scores


63.83 69.48

Graph 6 - Comparision of Mean Post Test Socres of Control Group and

Experimental Group in Family Opinion Scale



group and experimental group are not same.

Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for enriching the SattvaGuna

among participant teachers.

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean post test scores of control and

experimental group in Family Opinion Scale.

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

183

Table No.32

Analysis of Post Test Scores in Family Opinion Scale


Control 30 63.83 62.07

Expt 33 69.48 50.5 61 2.99

1.67 at 5%

level

Reject Null

Hypothesis


Observation



ii) Mean scores of control and experimental group are 63.83 and

69.48 respectively.


iv) Calculated value of t is 2.99 and Table value of t is 1.67 at 5

% level.

v) Calculated value of t is greater than table value at 5% level .

Interpretation

Mean score of the experimental group in Family Opinion

Scale is significantly higher than the mean score of control

group.

Result


accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for enriching the Sattvaguna among


184

Table No. 33

Pre-test scores in GTC (General Teaching Competancy) Scale


1 84 110

2 87 106

3 73 98

4 77 85

5 80 103

6 98 99

7 95 111

8 102 93

9 103 82

10 101 80

11 98 78

12 85 81

13 87 107

14 80 99

15 76 88

16 96 79

17 101 75

18 92 83

19 90 89

20 83 98

21 81 78

22 75 75

23 71 77

24 78 90

25 77 89

26 73 94

27 75 110

28 82 102

29 103 77

30 105 101

31 112

32 98

33 105

185

Mean Scores


86.93 92.48

Control Expt

Group

70

80

90

100

110

Average marks


Experimental Group in General Teaching Competancy


Here from graph it is clear that mean pre-test scores of control

group and experimental group are almost same.

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean pre-test scores of control and

experimental group by using GTC test.

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

186

Table No.34

Analysis of the Pre-test scores in GTC (General Teaching

competancy

GTC N Mean Variance df t-cal t-tab Decision

Control 30 86.93 117.23

Expt 33 92.48 144.57 61 1.91

2.000 at 5%

level

Accept Null

Hypothesis


Observation



ii) Mean scores of control and experimental group are 86.93 &

92.48 respectively.



at 5% level.

v) Calculated value of t is less than table value at 5% level .

Interpretation

There is no significant difference in the means of pre test

scores of control & experimental group in GTC Scale.

Result


187

Table No.35

Post-Test Scores in GTC(General Teaching Competancy) Scale


1 84 112

2 87 107

3 73 100

4 77 92

5 80 103

6 97 110

7 95 112

8 101 95

9 103 98

10 101 89

11 97 90

12 85 92

13 87 107

14 80 100

15 76 89

16 96 84

17 100 88

18 92 98

19 90 102

20 83 104

21 81 91

22 75 88

23 71 89

24 77 102

25 77 99

26 74 109

27 75 111

28 81 105

29 102 91

30 104 103

31 112

32 109

33 107

188

Mean Scores


86.7 99.63

Graph 8 - Comparision of Mean Post-Test of Control Group and

Experimental Scores in General Teaching Competancy

Scale


Here from graph it is clear that mean post-test scores of

control group and experimental group are not same.

Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for enhancing the teaching competence

among the participant teachers.

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean Post-test scores of control and

experimental group in GTC scale.

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

189

Table No.36

Analysis of the Post test Scores in GTC Scale

GTC N Mean Variance df t-cal t-tab Decision

Control 30 86.7 111.59

Expt 33 99.63 73.61 61 5.35

2.390 at

1% level

Reject Null

Hypothesis


Observation



ii) Mean scores of control & experimental group are 86.7 and

99.63 respectively.


iv) Calculated value of t is 5.35 and Table value of t is 2.390 at

1% level.

v) Calculated value of t is greater than table value at 1%

level.

Interpretation

Mean score of the experimental group in GTC Scale is

significantly higher than the mean score of control group.

Result


accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for enhancing the teaching compentence

among the Secondary School Teachers.

190

Table No. 37

Pre Test Scores in Sattvik Diet Component

of the Introspection Scale

Sr.No. Control Group Experimental Group

1 12 19

2 13 20

3 15 23

4 20 18

5 18 12

6 21 18

7 17 22

8 23 22

9 17 23

10 20 16

11 18 10

12 20 13

13 14 17

14 13 19

15 16 18

16 20 14

17 20 20

18 15 19

19 15 12

20 17 17

21 21 14

22 20 11

23 19 16

24 16 21

25 19 16

26 16 17

27 22 18

28 19 20

29 20 13

30 15 22

31 20

32 17

33 23

191

Pre C Pre E

Group

10

15

20

25

Average Marks


Experimental Group in Sattvik Diet Component of the

Introspetion Scale

Here from graph it is clear that mean pretest scores of control

and experimental group are same.

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in the mean pretest scores of Control

group and Experimental group in Sattvik Diet Component of

Introspection Scale.

Mean Scorcs Control Group Experiment Group

17.7 17.57

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

c

s

192

Table No.38

Analysis of the Pre-Test Scores in Sattvik Diet Component of

the Introspection Scale

Intro N Mean Variance df t-cal t-tab Decision Control

Group 30 17.7 8.28

Experimental

Group 33 17.57 13.37

61 0.148 2.000 at

5% level

Accept Null

Hypothesis

Observation



ii) Means scores of Control and Experimental group are 17.7

and 17.57 respectively.

iii) df is 61

iv) Calculated value of t is 0.148 & Table value of t is 2.000

at 5% level.

v) Calculated value of t is less than table value, at 5 % level .

Interpretation

There is no significant difference in the means pretest

scores of Control & Experimental group in Sattvik Diet

Component of the Introspection Scale.

Result

Null hypothesis is accepted.

193

Table No. 39

Post Test scores in Sattvik Diet Component of the

Introspection Scale


1 12 25

2 13 20

3 15 24

4 20 21

5 18 17

6 20 24

7 17 24

8 24 22

9 17 26

10 20 21

11 18 14

12 20 21

13 14 21

14 13 23

15 16 20

16 20 18

17 19 20

18 15 25

19 15 20

20 17 21

21 22 20

22 20 21

23 19 23

24 16 26

25 19 21

26 16 24

27 22 20

28 19 22

29 20 21

30 15 22

31 23

32 20

33 23

194

Mean Scores Control Group Experimental Group

17.7 21.6


Experimental Group in Sattvik Diet Component of the

Introspection Scale

Research Hypothesis -

SGEP will be effective for creating awareness about the

Sattvik Diet among the participant teachers.

Null Hypothesis -

There is no difference in the mean post test scores of Control

& Experimental group in sattvik diet component of Introspection

Scale.

Table No. 40

Analysis of the Post Test scores in Sattvik Diet Component

of the Introspection Scale


PostC 30 17.7 8.63

PostE 33 21.6 6.43 61 5.66

2.390 at

1% level

Reject Null

Hypothesis

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

195

Observation





iii) df is 61


at 1% level.

v) Calculated t is greater than table value, at 1 % level .

Interpretation

Mean score of the experimental group in Sattvik Diet

Compnent of the Introspection Scale is significantly higher than

the mean score of control group.

Result

Null hypothesis is rejected. and research hypothesis is

accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for creating awareness about the

Sattvik Diet among Secondary School Teachers.

196

Table No. 41

Pre Test Scores in Sattvik Diet component of the Family

Opinion Scale


1 15 19

2 16 23

3 14 22

4 19 19

5 19 17

6 20 15

7 19 23

8 23 19

9 20 20

10 14 13

11 20 12

12 20 16

13 16 14

14 14 17

15 17 15

16 20 11

17 22 16

18 15 15

19 15 17

20 21 12

21 19 14

22 19 13

23 15 19

24 17 18

25 17 16

26 15 18

27 20 18

28 22 19

29 22 12

30 19 21

31 20

32 16

33 21

197


18.13 16.96

Pre C Pre E

Group

10

15

20

25

Average Marks


Experimental Group in Sattvik Diet component of the

Family Opinion Scale



Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in the mean pretest scores of

Control and Experiment Group in Sattvik Diet component of the

Family Opinion Scale.

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

198

Table No. 42

Analysis of the Pre Test scores in Sattvik Diet Component of

the Family Opinion Scale.


PreC 30 18.33 7.42

PreE 33 16.96 10.84 61 1.51

2.000 at 5%

level

Accept Null

Hypothesis

Observation





iii) df is 61


at 5% level.


Interpretation

There is no significant difference in the means pre test

scores of Control & Experimental group in Sattvik Diet

Component of the Family Opinion Scale.

Result


199

Table No.43

Post Test socres in Sattvik Diet component of the

Family opinion scale


1 17 23

2 16 25

3 14 24

4 19 24

5 19 19

6 20 23

7 19 24

8 23 21

9 21 26

10 14 16

11 20 14

12 20 20

13 16 18

14 14 20

15 17 17

16 20 19

17 22 19

18 15 21

19 15 22

20 21 17

21 18 20

22 19 19

23 16 23

24 18 21

25 17 20

26 15 22

27 20 20

28 22 20

29 22 20

30 19 22

31 22

32 23

33 23

200

Mean Scores


18.26 20.81

Graph 12 Comparision of Mean Post Test Socres of Control and

Experimental Group in Sattvik Diet component of the

Family opinion scale


and experimental group are different.

Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for creating awareness about Sattvik

Diet among the participant teachers.

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference between in mean post test scores of

control and experimental group in Sattvik Diet Component of


M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

201

Table No. 44

Analysis of the Post Test Scores in Sattvik Diet Component of



PostC 30 18.26 7.03

PostE 33 20.81 7.15 61 3.79

2.390

at 1%

level

Reject

Null

Hypothesis

Observation





iii) df is 61


at 1% level.


Interpretation

Mean score of the experimental group in Sattvik Diet

Component of Family Opinion Scale is significantly higher than


Result


accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for creating awareness abount Sattvik

Diet among Secondary School Teachers.

202

Table No. 45

Pre Test Scores in Positive Attitude Component of the

Introspection Scale


1 13 12

2 16 16

3 13 18

4 17 16

5 18 11

6 19 13

7 19 16

8 19 15

9 17 10

10 18 17

11 16 8

12 18 16

13 16 10

14 11 11

15 14 16

16 18 13

17 14 16

18 16 14

19 14 19

20 15 17

21 18 13

22 16 15

23 15 13

24 16 16

25 17 13

26 14 18

27 17 17

28 15 19

29 16 16

30 15 18

31 16

32 14

33 19

203

PreC PreE

Group

5

10

15

20

25

Average Marks


Experimental Group in Positive Attitude Component of the

Introspection Scale



Null Hypothesis

Tthere is no difference in the mean Pretest Scores of control

group and experimental group in Positive Attitude Component of


Table No. 46

Analysis of Pretest Scores in Positive Attitude Component of

the Introspection Scale. Intro N Mean Variance df t-cal t-tab Decision

PreC 30 16 3.93

PreE 33 14.87 8.04 61 1.8

2.000 at

5% level

Accept Null

Hypothesis


16 14.87

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

204

Observation



ii) Means scores of Control and Experimental group are 16 and

14.87 respectively.

iii) df is 61

iv) Calculated value of t is 1.8 & Table value of t is 2.000 at

5% level.

v) Calculated t is less than table value, at 5 % level .

Interpretation


scores of Control & Experimental group in Postive Attitude

Component of the Introspection Scale.

Result


205

Table No. 47

Post Test Scores in Positive Attitude Component of the

Introspection Scale


1 13 17

2 16 18

3 13 18

4 17 17

5 18 15

6 19 18

7 19 17

8 19 15

9 17 17

10 18 17

11 16 10

12 18 18

13 16 11

14 11 15

15 14 16

16 18 15

17 14 17

18 16 19

19 14 22

20 15 17

21 18 14

22 16 18

23 15 17

24 16 17

25 17 14

26 14 19

27 17 17

28 15 20

29 16 20

30 15 18

31 17

32 21

33

19

206

Mean Scores

Control

Group

Experimental

Group

16 16.96



Introspection Scale



Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for developing Positive Attitude


Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in the mean Post test Scores of control



M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

207

Table No. 48

Analysis of Post Test Scores in Positive Attitude Component of

Introspection Scale

Intro N Mean Variance Df t-cal t-tab Decision

PostC 30 16 3.93

PostE 33 16.96 6.15 61 1.7

1.67

at 5%

level

Reject Null

Hypothesis

Observation




16.96 respectively.

iii) df is 61


5% level.

v) Calculated t is less than table value, at 5 % level .

Interpretation

Mean score of the experimental group in Positive Attitude

Component of Introspection Scale is significantly higher than the

mean score of control group.

Result


accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for developing Positive Attitude among


208

Table No. 49

Pre Test Scores in Positive Attitude Component of the Family

Opinion Scale


1 13 8

2 15 18

3 13 18

4 16 15

5 15 15

6 19 13

7 15 18

8 19 17

9 18 15

10 13 15

11 16 8

12 15 14

13 15 14

14 12 17

15 12 17

16 19 13

17 18 15

18 16 17

19 14 13

20 17 17

21 18 10

22 17 15

23 15 18

24 17 15

25 15 15

26 11 17

27 18 16

28 15 18

29 17 17

30 15 19

31 18

32 13

33 18

209

Mean Scores


15.6 15.33

PreC PreE

Group

5

10

15

20

25

Average Marks

Graph 15 - Comparision of Mean Pre Test Scores of Control Group

and Experimental Group in Positive Attitude Component of

the Family Opinion Scale

Here from graph it is clear that of mean pretest scores of

control and experimental group are same.

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in the mean Pretest Scores of control



Table No. 50

Analysis of the Pre test Scores in Positive Attitude Component

of Family Opinion Scale.


PreC 30 15.6 4.8

PreE 33 15.33 7.6 61 0.421

2.000 at 5%

level

Accept Null

Hypothesis

M

e

a

n

s

S

c

o

r

e

210

Observation





iii) df is 61

iv) Calculated value of t is 0.421 and Table value of t is

2.000 at 5% level.

v) Calculated t is less than table value, at 5 % level ..

Interpretation


scores of Control & Experimental group in Postive Attitude

Component of the Family Opinion Scale.

Result

Null hypothesis is accepted

211

Table No.51 Post Test Scores in Positive Attitude Component of


Sr.No Control Group Experimental Group

1 13 11

2 15 20

3 13 19

4 16 20

5 15 17

6 19 18

7 15 19

8 19 19

9 18 17

10 13 17

11 16 14

12 15 17

13 15 18

14 12 19

15 12 17

16 19 19

17 18 18

18 16 19

19 14 16

20 17 20

21 18 14

22 17 19

23 15 17

24 17 17

25 15 19

26 11 21

27 18 16

28 15 20

29 17 18

30 15 20

31 19

32 19

33 19

212

Means Scores Control Group Experimental Group

15.6 17.93




Here from graph it is clear that mean Post test Scores of

control and experimental group are different.

Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for developing Positive Attitude

among the participant teachers

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in the mean Post test Scores of control


Family Opinion Opinion Scale.

M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

213

Table No.52

Analysis of the Post Test Scores in Positive Attitude

Component of Family Opinion Scale


Post C 30 15.6 4.8

Post E 33 17.93 4.24 61 4.36

2.390

at 1% level

Reject Null

Hypothesis

Observation





iii) df is 61

iv) Calculated value of t is 4.36 , & t table value of t is

2.390 at 1% level.


Interpretation

Mean score of the experimental group in Positive Attitude

Component of Faminly Opinion Scale is significantly higher than


Result


accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for developing Positive Attitude among


214

Table No. 53

Pre Test Scores in Satisfaction Component of the

Introspection Scale


1 14 8

2 12 15

3 12 15

4 14 14

5 12 14

6 19 9

7 15 18

8 19 15

9 11 12

10 16 14

11 17 8

12 15 10

13 16 7

14 16 12

15 11 11

16 17 16

17 17 12

18 12 9

19 14 12

20 16 12

21 16 13

22 17 11

23 17 10

24 14 10

25 16 13

26 14 9

27 16 15

28 15 17

29 17 13

30 13 20

31 13

32 10

33 17

215

Mean Scores


15 12.54


Experimental Group in Satisfaction Component of the

Introspection Scale

Here from graph it is clear that mean Pretest Scores of control


Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in the mean Pretest Scores of Control

group and Experimental group in Satisfaction Component of


M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

216

Table No. 54

Analysis of the Pre test Scores in Satisfaction Component of



Control

Group 30 15 4.82

Experimental

Group 33 12.54 9.69

61 3.58 2.000 at

5% level

Reject Null

Hypothesis

Observation




12.54 respectively.

iii) df is 61


at 5% level.

v) Calculated value of t is greater than table value, at 5 %

level .

Interpretation

There is significant difference in the means pretest scores

of Control & Experimental group in Satifaction Component of the


Result

Null hypothesis is rejected .

Because the Control & Experimental groups differ in

pretest, it is essential to calculate ANCOVA

217

ANCOVA

Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for developing Satisfaction on mind


Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean post-test scores of control &

experimental group in Satisfaction Component of the Introspection

Scale.

218

Table No. 55

Analysis of covariance with respect to Satifaction observed in

Introspection Scale

Experimental Group Control Group

Sr.No. PreE PostE x1*y1 PreC PostC x2*y2

1 8 13 104 14 14 196

2 15 15 225 12 12 144

3 15 17 255 12 12 144

4 14 16 224 14 14 196

5 14 19 266 12 12 144

6 9 14 126 19 19 361

7 18 19 342 15 15 225

8 15 17 255 19 19 361

9 12 13 156 11 11 121

10 14 14 196 16 16 256

11 8 12 96 17 17 289

12 10 15 150 15 15 225

13 7 13 91 16 16 256

14 12 16 192 16 16 256

15 11 11 121 11 11 121

16 16 17 272 17 17 289

17 12 14 168 17 17 289

18 9 18 162 12 12 144

19 12 15 180 14 14 196

20 12 20 240 16 16 256

21 13 15 195 16 16 256

22 11 14 154 17 17 289

23 10 16 160 17 17 289

24 10 11 110 14 14 196

25 13 15 195 16 16 256

26 9 14 126 14 14 196

27 15 15 225 16 16 256

28 17 17 289 15 15 225

29 13 19 247 17 17 289

30 20 20 400 13 13 169

31 13 14 182

32 10 17 170

33 17 19 323

Sum 414 514 6597 450 450 6890

Average 12.54 15.57 15 15

219

For these two group,

sum(x) 864

Sum(x^2) 746496

sum(y) 964

sum(Y^2) 929296

sum(xy) 13487


Cx 11849.14

Cy 14750.73

Cxy 13220.57

Step 2-4: SS

TSS Among Between

x 734646.8571 94.67532 734552.2

y 914545.2698 5.209235 914540.1

xy 266.4285714 -22.2078 288.6364



Among group 1 94.67532 5.209235 94.67532 5.209235

Between

group 61 734552.2 914540.1 12041.84 14992.46

Total 62 734646.9 914545.3

F ratio

Fx= 0.007862198

Fy= 0.000347457

From table F(0.05,1,61)=3.99

F(0.01,1,61)=7.06


220


Adjusted SS

TSS 914545.1732

Bet SS 914539.9695

Among SS 5.203707674



Among

group 1 94.67532 5.209235 -22.2078 5.203708 5.203708

Between

group 60 734552.2 914540.1 288.6364 914540 15242.33 123.4598

Total 61 734646.9 914545.3 266.4286 914545.2

Fy.x=0.0000057

From table F(0.05,1,61)=4

F(0.01,1,61)=7.077


r b

Among group -1.00056 -0.2345

Between group 0.000352 0.000393

Total 0.000325 0.000363


Group N Mx My My.x

Expt 33 12.54545 15.57576 15.57624

Cont 30 15 15 14.99952

Mean - 13.77273 15.28788 15.28788

221


SDy.x=123.45

SE My.x=21.99


=31.14


t(0.01,60)=2.66


0.01 level=2.66*31.14=82.85

Observation


12.54545 and My is 5.57576

ii) Adjusted Y means for control group Mx is 15 and My is

15



222



Interpretation


Satisfaction Component of Intropection scale is significantly

higher than the mean score of control group.

.

Result


accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for developing Satisfaction of mind

among Secondary School Teachers.

223

Table No. 56

Pre Test Scores in Satisfaction Component of the Family

Opinion Scale

SR.No Control Group Experimental Group

1 15 8

2 13 17

3 14 15

4 17 12

5 16 14

6 17 13

7 16 18

8 19 17

9 15 10

10 16 10

11 18 11

12 16 13

13 13 10

14 12 16

15 13 11

16 17 14

17 12 14

18 14 13

19 13 13

20 19 17

21 17 15

22 16 12

23 12 16

24 15 13

25 15 12

26 13 13

27 19 14

28 16 15

29 16 16

30 18 18

31 15

32 10

33 19

224

Mean Scores


15.4 13.75

Graph 19 - Comparision of Pre Test Scores of Control and Experimental

Group in Satisfaction Component of the Family Opinion

Scale



Null Hypothesis


group and Experimental group in Satisfaction Component of Family

Opinion Scale.

M

e a

n

S

o

r

e

s

225

Table No.57

Analysis of the Pre Test Scores in Satisfaction Component of



Control

Group 30 15.4 4.59

Experimental

Group 33 13.75 7.31

61 2.65 2.000 at 5%

level

Reject Null

Hypothesis

Observation





iii) df is 61


5% level.


level .

Interpretation


of Control & Experimental group in Satifaction Component of the


Result




ANCOVA

226

Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for developing Satisfaction on mind


Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean post-test scores of

control &experimental group in Satisfaction Component of the


Table No. 58

Analysis of Covariance with respect to Satisfaction observed

in Family Opinion Scale

Experimental Group Control Group Sr.no


1 8 11 88 15 15 225

2 17 18 306 13 13 169

3 15 17 255 14 14 196

4 12 16 192 17 17 289

5 14 15 210 16 16 256

6 13 17 221 17 17 289

7 18 19 342 16 16 256

8 17 19 323 19 19 361

9 10 12 120 15 15 225

10 10 11 110 16 16 256

11 11 15 165 18 18 324

12 13 15 195 16 16 256

13 10 12 120 13 13 169

14 16 17 272 12 12 144

15 11 12 132 13 13 169

16 14 20 280 17 17 289

17 14 16 224 12 12 144

18 13 14 182 14 14 196

19 13 16 208 13 13 169

20 17 20 340 19 19 361

21 15 17 255 17 17 289

22 12 16 192 16 16 256

23 16 17 272 12 12 144

227



24 13 14 182 15 15 225

25 12 17 204 15 15 225

26 13 16 208 13 13 169

27 14 15 210 19 19 361

28 15 16 240 16 16 256

29 16 18 288 16 16 256

30 18 19 342 18 18 324

31 15 17 255

32 10 17 170

33 19 19 361

Sum 454 530 7464 462 462 7248

Average 13.75758 16.06061 15.4 15.4


sum(x) 916

Sum(x^2) 839056

sum(y) 992

sum(Y^2) 984064

sum(xy) 14712


Cx 13318.35

Cy 15620.06

Cxy 14423.37

Step 2-4: SS

TSS Among Between

x 825737.7 42.39019 825695.3

y 968443.9 6.85772 968437.1

xy 288.6349 -17.0499 305.6848



Among

group 1 42.39019 6.85772 42.39019 6.85772

Between

group 61 825695.3 968437.1 13535.99 15876.02

Total 62 825737.7 968443.9

228

F ratio

Fx= 0.003132

Fy= 0.000432

From table F(0.05,1,61)=3.99

F(0.01,1,61)=7.06



Adjusted SS

TSS 968443.8

Bet SS 968437

Among

SS 6.853317



Among

group 1 42.39019 6.85772 -17.0499 6.853317 6.853317

Between

group 60 825695.3 968437.1 305.6848 968437 16140.62 127.0457

Total 61 825737.7 968443.9 288.6349 968443.8

Fy.x=0.0000071


F(0.01,1,60)=7.077


r b

Among group -1 -0.40221

Between group 0.000342 0.00037

Total 0.000323 0.00035

229


Group N Mx My My.x

Expt 33 13.75758 16.06061 16.06089

Cont 30 15.4 15.4 15.39971

Mean - 29.15758 31.46061

Graph 20 - Comparison of Mean Post test Scores of Control and

Experimental Group in Satisfaction Component of Family

Opinion Scale


SDy.x=127.04

SE My.x=22.63


=32.05


t(0.01,60)=2.66

230


at 0.01 level = 85.26

Observation


13.75758 and My is 16.06061

ii) Adjusted Y means for control group Mx is 15.4 and My is

15.4





Interpretation


Satisfaction Component of Family Opinion scale is significantly


Result


accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for developing Satisfaction of mind


231

Table No. 59

Pre Test Scores in Steadiness Component of the Introspection

Scale


1 16 7

2 16 8

3 10 17

4 13 7

5 15 8

6 12 10

7 13 16

8 19 14

9 13 10

10 9 6

11 10 6

12 13 11

13 12 15

14 13 11

15 13 13

16 19 9

17 13 9

18 17 6

19 15 8

20 14 10

21 17 14

22 17 9

23 16 10

24 16 13

25 15 12

26 15 13

27 17 15

28 16 10

29 16 12

30 14 13

31 15

32 10

33 17

232

Mean Scores


14.46 11.03


Experimental Group in Steadiness Component of the

Introspection Scale



Null Hypothesis


group and Experimental group in Steadiness Component of


M

e

a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

233

Table No.60

Analysis of the Pre Test Scores in Steadiness Component of



Control

Group 30 14.46 6.18

Experimental

Group 33 11.03 10.4

61 4.69 2.000 at

5% level

Reject Null

Hypothesis

Observation





iii) df is 61


5% level.


level

Interpretation


of Control & Experimental group in Steadiness Component of the


Result




ANCOVA

Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for developing Steadiness of mind

among the participant teachers .

234

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean post-test scores of control

and experimental group in Steadiness Component of the


Table No. 61

Analysis of Covariance with respect to Steadiness observed in

Introspection Scale



1 7 12 84 16 16 256

2 8 9 72 16 16 256

3 17 18 306 10 10 100

4 7 17 119 13 13 169

5 8 13 104 15 15 225

6 10 15 150 12 12 144

7 16 17 272 13 13 169

8 14 14 196 19 19 361

9 10 12 120 13 13 169

10 6 15 90 9 9 81

11 6 9 54 10 10 100

12 11 14 154 13 13 169

13 15 15 225 12 12 144

14 11 13 143 13 13 169

15 13 13 169 13 13 169

16 9 10 90 19 19 361

17 9 10 90 13 13 169

18 6 16 96 17 17 289

19 8 10 80 15 15 225

20 10 16 160 14 14 196

21 14 16 224 17 17 289

22 9 11 99 17 17 289

23 10 18 180 16 16 256

24 13 14 182 16 16 256

25 12 17 204 15 15 225

26 13 15 195 15 15 225

27 15 15 225 17 17 289

28 10 10 100 16 16 256

29 12 17 204 16 16 256

30 13 13 169 14 14 196

31 15 16 240

235



32 10 18 180

33 17 17 289

Sum 364 465 5265 434 434 6458

Average 11.0303 14.09091 14.46667 14.46667


sum(x) 798

Sum(x^2) 636804

sum(y) 899

sum(Y^2) 808201

sum(xy) 11723


Cx 10108

Cy 12828.59

Cxy 11387.33

Step 2-4: SS

TSS Among Between

x 626696 185.5636 626510.4

y 795372.4 2.218759 795370.2

xy 335.6667 20.29091 315.3758



Among

group 1 185.5636 2.218759 185.5636 2.218759

Between

group 61 626510.4 795370.2 10270.66 13038.86

Total 62 626696 795372.4

F ratio

Fx= 0.018067

Fy= 0.00017

236

From table F(0.05,1,61)=3.99

F(0.01,1,61)=7.06



Adjusted SS

TSS 795372.2

Bet SS 795370.1

Among

SS 2.164023



Among

group 1 185.5636 2.218759 20.29091 2.164023 2.164023

Between

group 60 626510.4 795370.2 315.3758 795370.1 13256.17 115.1354

Total 61 626696 795372.4 335.6667 795372.2

Fy.x=0.0000027


F(0.01,1,60)=7.077


r b

Among group 1 0.109347

Between group 0.000447 0.000503

Total 0.000475 0.000536


Group N Mx My My.x

Expt 33 11.0303 14.09091 14.09183

Cont 30 14.46667 14.46667 14.46575

Mean - 25.49697 28.55758

237

Graph 22 - Comparison of Post Test Scores of Control and

Experimental Group in Steadiness Component of Family

Opinion Scale


SDy.x=115.13

SE My.x=20.51


=29.04


t(0.01,60)=2.66


0.01 level=2.66*=77.26

Observation

i) Adjusted Y means for experimental group - Mx is 11.0303

and My is 14.09091

ii) djusted Y means for control group Mx is 14.46667 and My

is 14.46667

238





Interpretation


Steadiness Component of Introspection scale is significantly


Result


accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for developing Steadiness of mind


239

Table No.62

Pre test Scores in Steadiness Component of the Family

Opinion Scale


1 13 11

2 14 11

3 12 17

4 16 12

5 15 13

6 17 12

7 14 16

8 19 12

9 13 10

10 15 12

11 16 8

12 14 9

13 14 13

14 11 18

15 13 13

16 18 16

17 15 13

18 13 11

19 13 12

20 18 12

21 15 14

22 16 9

23 12 15

24 16 12

25 16 10

26 12 12

27 17 13

28 15 9

29 17 10

30 18 18

31 15

32 12

33 17

240

Graph 23 - Comparision of Mean Pre test Scores of Control and

Experimental Group in Steadiness Component of the Family

Opinion Scale



Null Hypothesis


group and Experimental group in Steadiness Component of Family

Opinion Scale.

Mean Scores


14.9 12.63

M

e a

n

S

c

o

r

e

s

241

Table No. 63

Analysis of the Pre Test Scores in Steadiness Component of



Control

Group 30 14.9 4.36

Experimental

Group 33 12.63 7.05

61 3.73 2.000 at 5%

level

Reject

Null

Hypothesis

Observation





iii) df is 61


5% level.


level .

Interpretation


of Control & Experimental group in Steadiness Component of the


Result




ANCOVA

242

Research Hypothesis

SGEP will be effective for developing Steadiness of mind


Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in mean post-test scores of

control & experimental group in Steadiness Component of the


Table No. 64

Analysis of Covariance with respect to Steadiness observed in




1 11 13 143 13 13 169

2 11 12 132 14 14 196

3 17 18 306 12 12 144

4 12 14 168 16 16 256

5 13 14 182 15 15 225

6 12 16 192 17 17 289

7 16 17 272 14 14 196

8 12 12 144 19 19 361

9 10 12 120 13 13 169

10 12 13 156 15 15 225

11 8 8 64 16 16 256

12 9 10 90 14 14 196

13 13 15 195 14 14 196

14 18 19 342 11 11 121

15 13 13 169 13 13 169

16 16 18 288 18 18 324

17 13 15 195 15 15 225

18 11 16 176 13 13 169

19 12 15 180 13 13 169

20 12 14 168 18 18 324

21 14 16 224 15 15 225

22 9 12 108 16 16 256

23 15 18 270 12 12 144

24 12 13 156 16 16 256

25 10 16 160 16 16 256

26 12 15 180 12 12 144

243



27 13 13 169 17 17 289

28 9 9 81 15 15 225

29 10 15 150 17 17 289

30 18 19 342 18 18 324

31 15 16 240

32 12 19 228

33 17 18 306

Sum 417 483 6296 447 447 6787

Average 12.63636 14.63636 14.9 14.9


sum(x) 864

Sum(x^2) 746496

sum(y) 930

sum(Y^2) 864900

sum(xy) 13083


Cx 11849.14

Cy 13728.57

Cxy 12754.29

Step 2-4: SS

TSS Among Between

x 734646.9 80.52078 734566.3

y 851171.4 1.092208 851170.3

xy 328.7143 9.377922 319.3364



Among

group 1 80.52078 1.092208 80.52078 1.092208

Between

group 61 734566.3 851170.3 12042.07 13953.61

Total 62 734646.9 851171.4

244

F ratio

Fx= 0.006687

Fy= 7.83E-05

From table F(0.05,1,61)=3.99

F(0.01,1,61)=7.06



Adjusted SS

TSS 851171.3

Bet SS 851170.2

Among SS 1.064933



Among

group 1 80.52078 1.092208 9.377922 1.064933 1.064933

Between

group 60 734566.3 851170.3 319.3364 851170.2 14186.17 119.1057

Total 61 734646.9 851171.4 328.7143 851171.3

Fy.x=0.0000012


F(0.01,1,60)=7.077


r b

Among group 1 0.116466

Between group 0.000404 0.000435

Total 0.000416 0.000447

245


Group N Mx My My.x

Expt 33 12.63636 14.63636 14.63687

Cont 30 14.9 14.9 14.89949

Mean - 27.53636 29.53636

Graph 24 - Comparison of Mean Post test Scores of Control

and Experimental Group in Steadiness Component of the



SDy.x=119.10

SE My.x=21.22


=30.05


t(0.01,60)=2.66

246


0.01 level=2.66*30.05=79.93

Observation


12.63636 and My is 14.63636

ii) Adjusted Y means for control group Mx is 14.9 and My is

14.9





Interpretation


Steadiness Component of Family Opinion Scale is significantly


Result


accepted.

Finding

SGEP is effective for developing Steadiness of mind


247

Objective No.5 - To study the reactions of participants

towards SattvaGuna Enrichment

After the programme, participants were asked to write or

to tell the opinions about SGEP. Reactions regarding the selected

five characteristics were taken into consideration and they were

analyzed characteristicwise as follows –

I) Sattvik diet -

i) The participants awareness about food intake, food habits,

food items was increased.

ii) Their regularity in timetable of food intake was achieved.

iii) The participants started preferring milk to tea & coffee.

iv) There proportion of fruits, leafy and raw vegetables, fresh

buttermilk was increased.

v) They developed habit of cleaning vegetables thoroughly

before cooking .

vi) They were convinced of the importance of prayer . They

never forgot prayer everyday before meals.

vii) They understood the benefit of positive thinking and

satisfaction while preparing and taking food.

viii) Their interest in discussion about sattvik diet with family,

staff, society, students was increased . There freshness and

enthusiasm was increased

ix) They decreased proportion of salty, oily, spicy and nonveg

food.

x) They understood the role of sattvik diet in the development

of personality.

248

Observation and Interpretation –

From above analysis of reactions about sattvik diet, it is clear

that

1. Participants’ regularity in following timetable of food intake,

food habits, praying before meals, cleanliness of food

items, awareness of selection of food items was

increased consideralbly.

2. The proportion of milk, fruits, leafy and raw vegetables,

beet carrot, buttermilk etc. was increased considerabley.

3. The proportion of salty, spicy, oily , nonveg food was

decreased.

4. Their interest in discussion about sattvik diet was increased.

5. The level of freshness & enthusiasm was increased.

II) Positive attitude -

i) Orientation Programme made a great impact on participants

so they decided to attend the SGEP.

ii) Their proportion of success , understanding, self respect,

awareness about their duties, healthyness of mind increased.

iii) Their thoughts about human relations, positive thinking

improved.

iv) They learnt how to improve relations & how to think about

difficulties of others & self.

v) They understood that good behaviour should begin from

ourselves only.

vi) They understood how to reach to the root cause of the

student’s problem & how to solve it.

249

vii) They demanded that this type of programmes (like SGEP)

should be arranged regularly. This will enable them to

continue on the path of progress.

viii) They discussed the details of the programme with their

family and staffmembers also .

ix) Due to positive thinking pessimistic thoughts were removed

complectly from their thinking.

x) They experienced that life will be smooth if our attitude is

positive.


From above analysis about Positive attitude, it is clear that

1. Participant’s level of human relationship was improved

with reference to thoughts, self-respect, understanding,

feelings for reassembly, self duties.

2. Their interest in discussion about relationships, root causes

of their problems, difficulties and their solutions, power of

thought was increased.

3. There was a positive change in the overall personality of

the participants.

4. Positive impact on mental condition was observed.

5. Their healthiness of mind was achieved.

III) Satisfaction of mind

1. The participants understood the power of ‘Trigunas’- Sattva,

Raja, Tama.

2. Their level of satisfaction , happiness was increased.

3. They understood the importance of satisfaction in the life

and also how to make others happy and how satisfaction

plays important role in personolity development.

250

4. They felt that the thoughts expressed in the programme

were mind blowing & simple.

5. Their satisfied –mindedness during eating food was

increased.

6. They felt love, satisfaction among family members &

campus.

7. They experienced satisfaction in working for others. Efforts

were made in that direction. They felt change in behaviour.

8. They understood the importance of participation in fulfilling

the needs of others.

9. Their participation in grieves & sorrows of friends,

neighbours collegues was increased . This habit automatically

increased thier satisfaction.

10. The frequency of meetings with friends was increased . This

increased also the level of satisfaction.

11. Some of the participants forgot their illness during the

programme. They felt the utility value of the programme.

12. They donated money, things, to orphanage . They taught

orphaned.


From the above analysis about satisfaction of mind , it is

clear that

1. The participants level of satisfaction , empathy, love,

happiness was increased.

2. Their participation in family programmes, donation

programmes was increased.

3. Participants’ patience was increased.

4. Their personality improved as satisfaction level increased.

251

IV) Steadiness of mind -

1. The participants started daily practice of yoga, dhyan &

Pranayam.

2. Their concentration of mind was increased.

3. They used different strategies to achieve steadiness.

4. Their awareness towards concentration was increased.

5. During writing, study their steadiness was increased.

6. Their confidence level was increased.

7. Their ability of mind to solve problems of students was

increased.

8. Their false ego, anger, fatigue was decreased.

9. Their calmness , control of mind were increased.

10. They understood different concepts like sahajyog , stress

reduction model.

11. Their tendency to avoid reactions was increased.

12. Their relationships were improved.


From the analysis about steadiness of mind, it is clear that

1. Concentration of mind was increased.

2. Positive impact on mental condition was observed.

3. Stability of mind was achieved.

4. Yoga, Dhyan, Pranayam were used to develop steadiness.

5. Relationships were improved.

V) Teaching competency -

1. Their involvement in students problem was increased.

2. They used different CD’s from the programme for teaching .

3. Their ability of guidance & counselling was increased.

252

4. Due to enrichment of Sattvaguna their teaching competency

was increased. This was used to control the class.

5. They used different posters for teaching and also hanged on

the wall.

6. Their enthusiasm was increased.

7. They used dramatization and situational discussions in

teaching.

8. They read different books related to Sattvaguna and

Education field. They felt that reading was very important.

9. Their reading ability was increased.

10. They used stress reduction model for students.

11. They used Yoga, Dhyan, Pranayam for students.


From above analysis about teaching competency, it is clear

that –

1. The participant’s interest in using CDs, casettes during

teaching was increased.

2. Techniques like dramatization, poster presentation, stress

reduction were used in the class.

3. Ability of ‘guidance and counselling’ was improved.

4. Work efficiency and enthusiasm increased.

5. Level of class control was increased.

Finding

From the participant teacher’s reactions about SattvaGuna

Enrichment Programme it was clear that -

● Regularity of participants in praying before meals, following

fixed timings of meals increased. They see to it that the

atmosphere in the kitchen remains clean and pleasant.

253

● Spicy, oily, nonveg , salty food items were replaced by non

oily and non spicy food items.

● Due to the food awareness of the participants their family

members also started becoming more and more aware about

their own food selection.

● The participants now look at the things more positively.

They don’t take undue tensions. Their power of “ trouble

- shooting” ¼leL;k fujkdj.k½ has increased remarkably.

● The participants interrelations with their family members have

been strengthened.

● The participants are living tension free , satisfied and smooth

life. They enjoy the feeling of helping others.

● They have started using Yoga, Dhyana, Pranayama to attain

Steadiness of mind.

● They are experiencing improved concentration of mind. They are

not getting disturbed by minor day to day problems of life.

● They have started using various techniques of teaching. Their

overall performance as a teacher is getting better day by day.

In this way, in the fourth chapter analysis of data and

interpretation is given. In the next chapter findings and

recommendations are described.

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE COLLECTED...

Documents

Transcript of ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE COLLECTED...