MATHEMATICAL WEAKNESSES

AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL

STUDENTS

Prof. R. G. Kothari
Dr Prerana H Shelat
Dr.
Department of Education
F lt off Education
Faculty Ed ti andd Psychology
P h l
The M. S. University of Baroda
V d d
Vadodara
INTRODUCTION
‰ Mathematics is occupying a central
position since the ancient period and is
very important subject still it has not been
of interest to many students and majority
of the students have phobia for
mathematics.
th ti
‰ Even though many efforts have been
made but in reality
realit our efforts seems to be
short to reach the desirable level of
performance in mathematical
achievement.
‰ Rastogi (1991) “Inspite
Inspite of such
importance being given to the subject the
performance of students in mathematics
illustrates that our national performance
is quite below the desirable level”.
‰ Among the various factors responsible for
low achievement, the poor mathematical
basics play
pla a vital
ital role.
role
‰ The studies of Maniar (1961), Mehta
(1996), SIE Gujarat (1969), Ashar (1972),
Jain (1979), Thakore (1980), Sashidharan
(1992), George (2003) found that the poor
mathematical concepts, lack of mastery
over basic
b i mathematical
th ti l skills,
kill lack
l k off
knowledge related to basic principles, are
some of the most prominent aspects which
hamper progress of students at higher
stages
g of education.
‰ Arithmetic is the ABC of mathematics.
Addition, subtraction, multiplication, and
division are the basics of mathematics and
every mathematics operation known to
humankind depend on these basic
operations
ti only.
l
‰ In one way or another, every equation,
graph and an enormous amount of other
graph,
things can be broken down into the ABC's
of mathematics, the four basic operations.
‰ Mathematics is a language, and addition
subtraction, multiplication,
subtraction multiplication and division are
its alphabet.
‰ Rastogi (1991) observed that “Mathematics
Mathematics
happens to be one of the subjects in which
failure rate of Indian students is the
highest”. Much of the problems of failure of
students in mathematics, particularly at the
elementary level are due to lack of their
mastery of the basic arithmetical operations
of additions,
additions subtraction,
subtraction multiplication and
division.
‰ One of the other reasons for poor
performance of students is inadequate
understanding by most class room
teachers of the learning difficulties of
their students.
‰ Thus the weakness in arithmetic or
mathematics is the most important
problem which
hich has been of urgent
attention of the persons involved in the
educational research.
‰ FurtherRastogi (1991) observed that “Poor
Poor
achievement on basic arithmetic skills or
poor command over basic arithmetic skills
leads to the formation of unhealthy or
negative attitude towards mathematics”. He
also
l adds
dd that
th t there
th i a close
is l relationship
l ti hi
between basic arithmetic skills and
mathematics achievement.
achievement Improvement in
basic arithmetic skills will result in
improvement
p in mathematics achievement.
‰Thus the brainwave emerged to
the researchers to take up a
research
h on finding
fi di mathematical
th ti l
weakness among class VIII
students of Vadodara city.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:

Mathematical Weaknesses
among Secondary School
Students
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

‰ To study the mathematical weaknesses of students

with respect to types of school.
‰ To study the mathematical weaknesses of students
with respect to medium of instruction.
‰ To study the mathematical weaknesses of students
with respect to additional coaching (private tuition).
‰ To identify the most difficult and most easy items.
HYPOTHESES

‰ There will be no significant difference in mean score of

mathematical weaknesses with respect to types of school.
‰ Th
There will
ill be
b no significant
ig ifi t difference
diff i mean score off
in
mathematical weaknesses with respect to medium of
instruction.
‰ There will be no significant difference in mean score of
mathematical weaknesses with respect to additional
coaching.
‰ There will be no significant
g interaction between types
yp of
schools and medium of instruction on scores of mathematical
weaknesses.
‰ There will be no significant interaction between types of
schools
h l and d additional
dditi l coaching
hi on scores off mathematical
th ti l
weaknesses.
‰ There will be no significant interaction between medium of
instruction and additional coaching on scores of
mathematical weaknesses.
DEFINITION OF THE TERMS
Mathematical Weaknesses: For the present study
mathematical weaknesses has been measured with
the help of a test formally constructed by Kothari
and George (2000) and revised by Kothari and
Shelat (2010).

If the students scores 50 marks then it can be said

that his/her achievement on the test is 50 marks.
Since the total scores one can achieve is 70 so his/her
weakness is 20.
Additional
dd t o a Coac
Coaching: g:
Assistance received by the students either in the
private coaching classes or private tutor individually
or in a small group beyond the school hours.
hours
POPULATION
SAMPLE
‰ The sample was drawn using stratified
proportionate sampling method.
‰ Of the different strata’s shown in the figure, schools
from each stratum were selected randomly and thus
in all there were twenty nine schools selected.
‰ All the VIII standard students of the selected school
constituted the sample. The students were selected
using
i cluster
l sampling.
li T l 800 students
Total d were
selected to study the mathematical weaknesses from
y
the Vadodara city.
‰ Finally the complete data was available from 737
students as some of them were absent on the day of
d t collection.
data ll ti
RESEARCH TOOL
‰ The data was collected with the help of a
mathematical weakness test constructed by Kothari
& Shelat (2010).
(2010)
‰ This test is based on topics from class V, VI and VII
which are directly applicable in class VIII, IX and X.
‰ There are a total of 70 items. The items are based
on the mathematical operations addition,
subtraction, multiplication and division of integers
and fractions, decimals, algebraic expression,
exponents and BODMAS rule.
‰ Each item is based on the basic skills and
fundamental processes related to the above stated
topics. The items are arranged in the increasing
order of difficulty.
DATA COLLECTION

‰ Data was personally collected by the

investigators by administering the constructed
test on the assigned dates
DATA ANALYSIS
‰ Frequency
q y tables were drawn and mean,,
standard deviation was computed for the entire
group. To study the differences with respect to
types of school,
school medium of instruction and
additional coaching analysis of variance was
computed.
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
MEAN ACHIEVEMENT AND STANDARD ERROR
OF THE TYPES OF SCHOOLS
MAJOR FINDINGS
‰ The mean of the students from CBSE schools is 51.35
followed by the students from grant in aid type
school 38.04.
‰ The
Th least
l t mean is
i that
th t off students
t d t from
f non grantt in
i
aid schools and is 30.67.
‰ Performance of Students from CBSE School was
better as compared to the other types of schools
which means that the students of CBSE schools have
least weaknesses on test of mathematics.
mathematics
‰ The mean p performance of students in English
g
Medium School on mathematical weaknesses is 44.76
and that in Gujarati Medium is 36.50 so it can be
inferred that students with English Medium had less
weaknesses.
‰ However in non grant in aid school performance of
English Medium Students is 22.28. This needs to be
examined further.
‰ The mean of the students from CBSE board
going to tuition is 50.22 and that not
attending any tuition classes is 52.48.
‰ Similar was the trend in case of grant in aid
and non grant in aid schools.
‰ Thus additional coaching had no impact on
performance of students on mathematical
weaknesses.
k
‰ Performance of English
g Medium Students from
Grant in Aid School is better than Gujarati
Medium whereas Performance of Gujarati
Medium Students from Non Grant in Aid is
better than English medium.
‰ Thestudents found it difficult to arrange the
given decimals with same value before
decimal and different after the decimal point
in ascending order rather they considered
them equivalent as whole numbers.

Students Conceptual misunderstandings of

d i l leads
decimals l d to the
h adoption
d i off rote rules
l
and computational procedures that often are
incorrect.
incorrect
‰ This adoption occurs despite a natural
connection of decimals to whole numbers,
both in notation and computational
procedures. The place value analogs
between whole numbers and decimal
numbers
b are useful
f l for
f l
learning,
i b t
but
children often focus directly on the whole
number aspects and fail to adjust for the
decimal aspects.
‰ For example a common error is a students
ordering of decimal numbers as if they were
whole numbers, claiming 0.56 greater than
0.7 just because 56 is greater than 7.
‰ Even while reading the decimal numbers the
common mistake done is the reading of
decimal numbers seemingly as whole number
e g “point
e.g. point five
fi e six
si ” as “point
point fifty
fift six
si ” which
hich
contributes to the above said error.
‰ There was lack of clarity
y among
g the students for
the concept Least Common Multiple.

‰ Students found it difficult to identify greater

fraction if there were two fractions both with
negative signs.

‰ The students had difficulty with the sums

involving decimal point whether the sum
involved multiplication or division of decimals.
decimals
‰ Only 435 students could correctly solve ((-3/2)
3/2)
whole square here the students did not
understand that square of negative turns out
to be positive.

‰ Only 332 students could correctly solve (-113-

(-120).Here the students were to open the
bracket making 120 positive and then add it to
−113.
113
CONCLUSION
‰ When performing arithmetic operation,
students who make mistake “do not make
them at random, but rather operate in terms
of meaning systems that they hold at a given
time’.
‰ Therefore, teachers’ feedback should not
focus on the students being “wrong”, rather
teacher should identify
identif the students
students’
misunderstandings which are displayed
“rationally
rationally and consistently
consistently”..
‰ Thisis possible if the teachers after taking
the achievement test take the diagnostic test
on the concept on which majority of the
students have gone wrong.