CHAPTER-III

RESEARCH DESIGN

Proceeding chapters’ namely-Introduction and Review of the

Related Literature were concerned with origin of problem, statement of
the problem, objectives and hypotheses of the study and review of the
research literature, related to stress of teachers, and other professionals.
The chapter in hand, namely, Research Design is concerned with
research design, meaning thereby, the blueprint of the research study. The
purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of the research design of
the present study. In the words of Kerlinger. "Research design is the plan,
structure, strategy of the investigation conceived so as to obtain the
answers of the research questions and to control variance." Thus the
research design provides the structure and strategy that control the
investigation and extract dependable answers to the questions raised by
the research hypothesis. As a matter of fact no one design can answer all
the questions raised by the research problems. The nature of the problem
determines which design is most appropriate and how the design should
be tailored to meet the needs of the investigation. This chapter content
includes research methodology used, population of the study, sample and
sampling technique used for selection of sample units, variables involved
in the study, tools used in the study, collection of the data, scoring and
preparation of the master sheet, statistical techniques used and
computation for collection data of the research study and statistical
techniques used for analysing data.

113
3.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
There are various methods of study for investigating the
relationship between personality needs, adjustment and stress, and to find
out differences of stress among B.T.C. and Vishistha B.T.C., rural and
urban, Primary and Pre Secondary School teachers. It would be difficult
to say which of the method is most appropriate, as every one method has
its own merits and short comings. Moreover it cannot be said that the
research methods used in one study are superior or inferior to those used
in other researches. This has made the choice of research method
difficult. Methods of research are generally determined by the theory of
the topic under study, objective of the study, resources of researcher, etc.
These considerations have let the investigator to use the Normative
Survey Method of research for the present study. This method is also
known as descriptive research. Descriptive research describes "what is".
It involves description, recording, analysis and interpretation of
conditions that now exist. In the present investigation all the steps and
characteristics of the normative survey method have been used which are
essential for the normative survey method of research. On the ground of
discussion of the above, finally the researcher decided to apply Survey
Method of Research in his research study.

3.2 POPULATION OF THE STUDY

All the teachers of Primary and Pre Secondary Schools situated in
Agra Educational Region of U.P. constituted the population of the study.

SAMPLE OF THE STUDY

Sample is a small portion of the population selected for the study.
Validity and reliability of the study depends on the representativeness of

114
sample to a great extent. Results drawn on the basis of representative
sample can be true for whole population. Therefore, sample and sampling
are the most important component of a research study. The first step in
drawing the sample was to obtain the list of Primary and Pre secondary
schools situated in Agra Education Region. For this purpose, a list of
Primary schools was obtained from the concerning authority in the office
of Bashik Shiksha Vibhag The next task was to decide upon the best
sampling technique in order to draw a representative sample.
Stratified Proportionate Random Sampling Method was used to
select the sample units of the study. Thus, 360 Primary school teachers
and 360 Pre secondary school teachers were selected randomly by lottery
method. The structure of sample has been shown in the following tables–
Table 3.1
Showing the structure of sample at two levels of education

S.No. Levels of Education Total Number of Sample

Units

1. Primary Schools 360

2. Pre Secondary Schools 360

Total 720
Table 3.2
Showing the position of B.T.C and Vishith B.T.C. teachers

S.No. Sex Primary Schools Pre secondary School Total

1. B.T.C 180 180 360

2. Vishistha B.T.C. 180 180 360

115
 Total 360 360 720
Table 3.3
Showing the position of locality of the teachers

S.No. Locvality Primary Schools Pre Secondary School Total

1. Rural 180 180 360

2. Urban 180 180 360

Total 360 360 720

3.3 VARIABLES INVOLVED IN THE STUDY

The present study involved two kinds of variables namely–
A) Dependent variable, and
B) Independent variable
(A) Dependent variable– The dependent variable is the factor which is
observed and measured to determine the effect of independent variable.
In the present study, the dependent variable is 'stress'.
(B) Independent variable– The independent variable is that factor
which is measured, manipulated or selected by the experimenter to
determine the relationship to an observed phenomenon. In the present
study, the independent variables are personality needs and adjustment.
3.4 TOOLS USED
Having selected the sample, the next step was to choose suitable
data gathering instruments in order to accomplish the objectives of the
study. The selection of tools for a particular study depends upon various
considerations such as the objectives of the research, availabaility of
suitable tests, personal competence of the investigator, techniques of
scoring and interpretation and the like. Taking all these factors into
116
consideration a review of measuring tools needed for the study was made.
After a comprehensive review the following tools were either developed
by the investigator or used as made available for measuring the dependent
and independent variables:
1. Teachers' Stress Inventory (developed by the investigation)
2. Meenakshi Personality Inventory (developed by Meenakshi
Bhatnagar)
3. Teachers' Adjustment Inventory (developed by the investigation)
The other details of the aforesaid tools have been discussed in the
following lines.

3.4.1 CONSTRUCTION OF TEACHERS' STRESS INVENTORY

(TSI)
The following steps were followed for the construction of
Teachers' Stress Inventory–
1. Plan of the Test
2. Collection of the Items.
3. Selection of the Items.
4. Final Form of the Test
PLAN OF THE TEST
Planning is the most important stage in test development. At this stage the
test-constructor has to scrutinize carefully many aspects of the whole
project and has to take numerous decisions regarding the test to be
developed without which smooth sailing of the work is not possible.
Some of the most important tasks to be performed at this stage are
defining the trait to be measured, delimiting and break downing the area

117
to be involved, specifying the applicability of the test, its form and types
of items, etc.

DEFINING THE TRAIT

The perception of stress differs from person to person. Inspite of
the disagreement over its definition, term 'stress' is used widely and has a
popular appeal. For the present study, stress refers to those circumstances
that place physical or psychological demands on the teachers and to the
emotional reactions to these situations. These difficult situations result in
the tension which becomes stress in its severe form.
Some attempts have been made to define the trait stress, yet no
clear and commonly accepted definition has been formulated. Stress is a
new concept, in education still without an adequate definition. Although
there is a little variation in the definitions, given by some investigators, as
mentioned in chapter one.
Therefore, the definition of stress is accepted as "Stress is the
adverse consequence arising from failure to meet demands regarding
curriculum, decision and powerlessness, family, gender, group and
political pressures, responsibility, role ambiguity, role conflict, staff-
relations, student behaviour, time pressures and working conditions".
Many stress scales were surveyed and their application in the field
of stress was observed. Some of the scales studied were:-
1. Coping behaviour scale – C.D. Spielberger, R.L. Gorsuch and R.
Lushene
2. Occupational Role Stress Scale – Udai Pareek
3. Occupational Stress index – Dr. A.K. Srivastava & A.P. Singh

118
4. Presumptive Stressful Life Events – Singh, Kaur and Kaur
5. Role Stress Scale– Miriam Dornstein
6. School Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire
– Motilal Sharma
7. Stress Scale for Teachers – Sonika Rajan
8. State Trait Anxiety Inventory – C.D. Spielberger, R.L. Gorsuch and
R. Lushene
9. Teacher's Stress Scale – Kyriacou & Sutcliff
10. Teachers Stress Inventory – C.D. Spielberger, R.L. Gorsuch and R.
Lushene
It was observed that most of the scales deal with job related
variables only. There are many social and family factors which are
responsible for creating stress among teachers. The researcher could not
find any scale which considers for the present study. Therefore, it was
decided to construct a scale for measuring stress among teachers at the
Primary and Pre School levels.
THE AREA INVOLVED
The next step in the planning of a measuring device is the careful
delimitation and breakdown of the area involved. For this purpose, a
critical analysis of the concept of stress was made. Since the stress is a
global or multifactor trait, there may be several dimensions to measure
this trait. But, as discussed earlier, in case of most inventories and scale,
commonly the stress has been measured in terms of frustration anxiety,
conflict, pressure, etc. Obviously, these dimensions cover almost all other
specific traits that have been considered most characteristic of the stress.
It is these 16 global dimensions which seem to be most aspects of stress
of the teachers. Therefore, convincing with this view and, following the

119
above definition and these 16 dimensions, this investigator has developed
this inventory to measure stress of teachers at secondary school and
degree college levels.
These 16 dimensions of stress in teachers are as follows:
1. Curriculum, 2. Decision and Powerlessness, 3. Family, 4.
Gender, 5. Group & Political pressures, 6. Health. 7. Intrinsic
impoverishment, 8. Management, 9. Over workload, 10. Responsibility,
11. Role ambiguity, 12. Role conflict, 13. Staff-relations, 14. Student
behaviour, 15. Time pressure and 16. Working conditions.
APPLICABILITY OF THE TEST
The scale was designed for use with the teachers of Primary and
Pre secondary schools Agra Educational Region of U.P. Therefore, the
investigator decided to prepare the test in Hindi language for the
convenience of all the teachers.
TYPE AND NUMBER OF ITEMS
For measuring teachers' stress, it was decided to develop a Likert
type five point scale with alternatives: Strongly agree, agree, indifferent,
disagree and strongly disagree. It was also decided to have finally 64
items included in the inventory.
COLLECTION OF THE ITEMS
After having specified the nature of items and the mode of
responses, the statements pertaining to each dimension indicated earlier,
were prepared. At the initial level, the effort on the part of investigator
was to collect and prepare as many items as could be exhaustively
prepared and collected. For this purpose, the teachers working at Primary
and Pre secondary schools levels as well as the educators were consulted

120
to know their reactions about different aspects of teaching. They certainly
provided significant clauses for preparing the statements about teachers'
stress. These items were then, discussed with the supervisor and with
other experts at different intervals to determine the relevance of items.
During this discussion, the investigator made the best efforts to improve
the language, ambiguity, vagueness and subjectivity found in the terms
used in the inventory. The items which seemed to overlap with one
another were critically examined and the items conveying the idea most
clearly were retained. The language of the items was changed to make it
suitable to express the desired meaning. Several criteria were formulated
and followed in preparing the items:
– The statement of the item should be clear, explicit, definite, short
and as simple as possible.
– Statement should be related to the specific role in specific
dimension.
– Each statement should contain only one complete meaning.
– The statement should be linguistically correct.
– The use of double negatives should be avoided.
Thus, keeping in view the above criteria the items either collected
or prepared were 140 in all. The scrutiny of 140 items was done and then
12 items were deleted because of the poor communication,
meaningfulness and ambiguity. The remaining 128 items were arranged
serially in a random order. Thus a test of 128 items was prepared and
ultimately it was cyclostyled.
THE PRELIMINARY FORM OF THE TEST

121
 The Teachers' Stress Inventory (TSI) was comprised of 128 items
covering all the different dimensions of teacher stress. It is a Likert type
five point scale. Each item therefore contains five response alternatives
i.e. Strongly Agree, Agree, Indifferent, Disagree and Strongly Disagree.
It was decided to include both positive and negative items in the scale so
that an agreement with an item would not indicate in all cases only one
end of the dimension. This would help also to avoid halo effect.
SELECTION OF THE ITEMS
After collecting the test items, the next major step was that of
trying them out on a group of subjects who were representative of the
population for which the total score was being developed. Item selection
was done in two phases:
a) Pre-Tryout of the Test
b) Try-Out of the Test and Item Analysis
PRE-TRYOUT OF THE TEST
After collecting the items, the items were pre-tried out on 100
teachers of Primary and Pre secondary school levels. Lindquist held that a
pre-try-out is the preliminary administration of the tentative try-out units
on a small sample of examinees for the purpose of discovering gross
deficiencies but with no intention of analysing pre-try-out data for
individual items. The investigator administered this scale to know the
deficiencies of the scale and the difficulties of the teachers in responding
to the items. The scale was also sent to three experts in the field of
education, and psychology and comments offered by experts, minor
changes in languages and sentence construction in some of the items were
made and other 10 items were deleted from the scale.

122
TRY-OUT OF THE TEST
After pre-trying-out the instructions for administration and scoring
procedure were finalised. For the purpose of item analysis, the scale was
administered on a group of 220 teachers teaching at different level. It was
emphasized that no item should be omitted and that there was nothing
right or wrong about the items. The teachers were encouraged to answer
each item honestly by assuring them that their responses would be kept
confidential and will be used only for research purpose. There was no
time limit for the test. The scoring was based on a five points Likert type
scale. For positive items the marks were : Strongly Agree (4), Agree (3)
Indifferent (2), Disagree (1), Strongly Disagree (0), and for negative
items the marks were: Strongly Agree (0), Agree (1), Indifferent (2),
Disagree (3), and Strongly Disagree (4). The overall teachers' stress
inventory score was then computed as the sum of the item scores.
ITEM ANALYSIS
Item analysis is the process of analysing item's characteristics in
numerical form on the basis of which items are selected or rejected for
the test under construction. This is done by administering the test on a
representative sample of population on which the test is being built and
then responses of this sample subjects are statistically analysed with
respect to each item. There are 40 different methods of item analysis in
behaviour statistics. Some methods are highly restricted in this
applicability and others can be used universally. In fact the variation in
the item validity data from sample to sample is generally greater than that
among the different methods. For these reasons, the choice of the method
is often based upon the amount of labour required and availability of the

123
specific computation devices. Keeping in mind, the time, labour and
energy, the investigator applied t-test for item discrimination. The
discrimination index or item validity of an item is judged on the basis of
the extent to which the given item, discriminate among the subjects who
differ sharply in the function measured by the test as a whole.
Out of 220 answer sheets, only 200 answer sheets selected for the
item analysis, were arranged in order of the total scores. The top 27
percent of the answer sheets were selected as upper group and the bottom
27 percent of the answer sheets as the lower group.
The two groups were compared by employing the t-test (C.R.
Value). The obtained t-values for all the items are given in the table as
under:
Table 3.4
Item Analysis Data for Teachers' Stress Inventory
Ite Upper Group Lower Group t-Value Remarks
m
No. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
1. 4.36 0.82 3.66 0.89 4.04 S
2. 4.24 0.91 3.48 0.97 3.80 S
3. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.80 R
4. 3.66 1.22 1.92 1.02 7.78 S
5. 3.60 1.24 2.60 1.24 4.08 S
6. 4.48 0.50 2.34 1.09 6.58 S
7. 4.00 1.16 3.38 1.21 2.53 R
8. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.88 R
9. 4.43 1.05 2.80 1.32 6.12 S
10. 4.44 0.61 2.86 1.14 9.12 S
11. 3.74 1.27 3.32 1.18 1.71 R
12. 4.36 0.85 2.70 1.09 8.30 S
13. 3.00 1.21 2.94 1.15 0.24 R
14. 4.10 0.78 2.94 0.99 6.70 S
15. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.88 R

124
16. 4.32 1.03 3.26 1.06 5.30 S
17. 4.10 0.93 3.28 1.61 4.10 S
18. 4.50 2.54 4.36 0.52 1.40 R
19. 4.16 0.91 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
20. 3.94 1.33 2.88 1.36 4.01 S
21. 4.56 0.76 2.74 1.41 8.14 S
22. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.22 R
23. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R
24. 3.90 1.18 2.86 1.06 4.65 S
25. 4.40 0.69 2.50 1.31 9.50 S
26. 3.98 1.07 3.24 1.47 2.80 S
27. 4.30 0.88 5.72 1.17 7.90 S
28. 4.64 0.52 4.12 0.68 3.68 S
29. 4.54 0.57 3.30 1.31 6.20 S
30. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.88 R
31. 3.62 1.15 2.06 0.99 6.98 S
32. 3.74 1.27 3.32 1.85 1.71 R
33. 4.48 0.50 3.34 1.09 6.58 R
34. 3.94 1.11 2.36 1.06 7.07 S
35. 4.02 1.18 2.48 1.18 6.29 S
36. 3.12 1.40 2.68 1.30 1.66 R
37. 3.84 1.13 1.96 0.83 9.40 S
38. 4.10 0.99 2.24 1.18 8.32 S
39. 4.36 0.87 2.62 1.14 3.80 S
40. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.79 R
41. 4.16 0.91 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
42. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.22 R
43. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R
44. 3.90 1.18 2.86 1.06 4.65 S
45. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.88 R
46. 4.28 0.80 2.80 1.21 7.40 S
47. 3.86 1.27 3.24 1.22 2.49 R
48. 4.18 0.72 2.58 1.18 8.00 S
49. 3.98 0.99 3.12 1.17 3.85 S
50. 3.76 1.18 2.22 1.18 6.25 S
51. 4.22 0.88 3.30 1.24 4.11 S
52. 4.74 0.48 3.74 1.38 4.81 S
53. 4.64 0.59 3.58 0.71 5.04 S
54. 3.70 1.21 2.60 1.35 4.16 S
125
55. 4.30 0.93 3.16 1.36 5.10 S
56. 3.74 1.27 2.84 1.18 1.69 R
57. 4.58 0.49 3.86 1.10 4.16 S
58. 3.64 1.27 3.06 1.13 2.37 R
59. 4.10 1.11 3.60 1.17 2.18 R
60. 4.12 0.94 3.28 1.32 3.76 R
61. 4.38 0.49 2.86 1.30 7.60 S
62. 4.72 0.49 4.40 0.78 2.44 R
63. 4.18 0.72 2.58 1.18 8.00 S
64. 2.02 1.31 1.66 0.93 1.59 R
65. 3.00 1.21 2.94 1.15 0.25 R
66. 4.60 0.61 4.28 2.70 2.26 R
67. 3.72 0.99 3.16 1.03 2.80 S
68. 4.28 0.97 3.54 1.64 3.93 S
69. 4.48 0.71 4.12 0.69 2.55 R
70. 4.38 0.60 3.66 0.85 5.09 S
71. 4.12 0.94 3.28 1.32 3.76 S
72. 4.20 0.70 3.62 1.12 3.35 S
73. 3.16 1.26 2.38 1.15 3.18 S
74. 4.54 0.65 2.66 1.24 9.40 S
75. 4.52 0.71 4.02 0.91 2.89 S
76. 4.52 0.57 3.22 1.31 6.50 S
77. 4.62 0.73 3.78 1.30 0.64 R
78. 4.38 0.69 3.36 1.08 5.89 S
79. 4.10 1.11 3.60 1.17 2.24 R
80. 3.92 1.32 2.90 1.32 3.86 R
81. 4.70 0.46 4.24 0.98 3.25 S
82. 4.72 0.49 4.40 0.78 2.26 R
83. 4.78 0.41 3.06 1.47 7.69 S
84. 2.70 1.34 1.72 1.01 4.00 R
85. 2.02 1.31 1.66 0.93 1.61 R
86. 4.02 1.16 2.72 1.34 5.31 S
87. 4.04 1.00 2.80 1.29 5.55 S
88. 3.72 1.27 1.88 1.18 7.51 S
89. 4.38 0.83 3.42 1.23 4.80 S
90. 3.74 1.27 3.32 1.18 1.69 R
91. 4.16 0.91 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
92. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.22 R
93. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R
126
 94. 4.50 0.54 4.36 0.52 1.31 R
95. 4.24 1.02 3.18 1.08 5.30 S
96. 4.36 1.66 3.92 1.41 1.43 R
97. 4.18 1.15 2.14 0.85 10.20 S
98. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.27 R
99. 4.46 0.50 3.56 0.73 6.36 S
100. 3.48 1.46 2.26 1.08 4.61 S
101. 3.74 1.70 3.02 1.64 2.16 R
102. 4.10 1.11 3.60 1.17 2.18 R
103. 4.36 1.37 3.96 1.43 1.78 R
104. 4.72 0.49 4.40 0.78 2.44 R
105. 4.84 0.78 2.86 1.73 7.39 R
106. 4.78 0.41 3.06 1.47 8.00 S
107. 4.82 0.62 2.74 1.60 8.56 R
108. 2.02 1.31 1.66 0.93 1.59 R
109. 2.70 1.34 1.72 1.01 4.14 S
110. 3.74 1.27 3.02 1.64 2.16 R
111. 3.72 1.70 1.88 1.18 7.51 S
112. 4.84 0.78 2.86 1.73 7.39 R
113. 4.40 0.83 2.86 1.16 7.62 S
114. 4.82 0.62 2.74 1.60 8.56 R
115. 4.60 0.49 3.38 1.10 7.13 S
116. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R
117. 4.36 0.82 3.66 0.89 4.12 S
118. 4.16 0.91 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
S = Selected
R = Rejected
On the basis of the foregoing table, the investigator found that t-
values ranged from 0.24 to 13.33. The investigator selected only items
which could show discrimination between the teachers who were highly
stressed and those who were least stressed at .01 level. From the table
values, items with t-value of 2.58 or more were regarded as fairly
satisfactory.

127
 As regards items 3,7,8,11,13,15,18,19,22,23,30,32,33,
36,40,41,42,43,45,47,56,58,59,60,62,64,65,66,69,77,79,80,82,84,
85,90,91,92,93,94,96,98,101,102,103,104,105,107,108,110,112,114, 116
and 118 were deleted. In these items some items having t-value of less
than 2.58 were not included in final test. At the same time some items
with significant t-values were rejected on the basis of experts' opinion.
Thus, combining the criteria, t-value and experts' opinions, the items for
the final form were selected.
In this way, out of 118 items in the try-out form, 64 items were
finally selected for the final form of the Teachers' Stress Inventory.
FINAL FORM OF THE TEST
The final form of Teachers' Stress Inventory contains 64 items. The
items in the final form were rearranged in systematic random order.
Dimension wise item distribution is shown in table 3.5 on next
page.
Table 3.5
Dimension wise item distribution of the Teachers' Stress Inventory.
S.No. Dimensions Item Numbers
Total Items
1. Curriculum 1 17 33 49 4
2. Decision & Powerlessness 2 18 34 50 4
3. Family 3 19 35 51 4
4. Gender 4 20 36 52 4
5. Group & Political pressures 5 21 37 53 4
6. Health 6 22 38 54 4
7. Intrinsic impoverishment 7 23 39 55 4

128
 8. Management 8 24 40 56 4
9. Over workload 9 25 41 57 4
10. Responsibility 10 26 42 58 4
11. Role ambiguity 11 27 43 59 4
12. Role conflict 12 28 44 60 4
13. Staff-relations 13 29 45 61 4
14. Student behaviour 14 30 46 62 4
15. Time pressure 15 31 47 63 4
16. Working conditions 16 32 48 64 4
TOTAL 64
ADMINISTRATION
Teachers' Stress Inventory is self administering instrument. The
subjects were requested to read the instructions carefully and to ask the
tester, if there is any difficulty in understanding the instructions. It is
emphasized that no items should be omitted and there is nothing 'right' or
'wrong' about these items. It is also assured that their responses would be
kept confidential and would be used only for research purposes. No time
limit was fixed for responding to the inventory. However, it took about
half an hour to complete it.
RESPONSE MODE
There are five response categories for each item, i.e. Strongly
Agree, Agree, Indifferent, Disagree and Strongly Disagree. Subjects are
required to answer all the items in the scale.
SCORING SYSTEM
The scoring system is based on a five point Likert type scale
designed as: Strongly Disagree (0), Disagree (1), Indifferent (2), Agree

129
(3) and Strongly Agree (4). Before the score is computed, the direction of
item score is reversed for negative items, so that a response of Strongly
Agree is given a value of 0, Agree a value of 1 and so on. The sum of all
the items scores gives the overall stress score for the subject. The total
stress score varies from 0 to 256. Thus, the scale provides 0 as the lowest
mark and 256 as the highest mark, the higher score indicating higher
stress.
RELIABILITY
To establish the reliability of the present scale, the investigator
made an effort to determine the test-retest reliability coefficient for the
scale.
TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY
Repetition of a test on the same group is the simplest method of
determining an estimate of reliability. The test is given and repeated on
the same group and the correlation computed between first and second set
of scores provides an estimate of test-retest coefficient of reliability. The
test-retest method is open to several serious objections. But the great
drawback of test-retest method is that the human characteristics under
consideration, sometimes, change in the interval under retest. At the time
of second testing the changes in the traits of subjects take place and the
results change. Again the memory factor may also affect the subjects on
retesting. The scores of the subjects may change on the second-time
testing because of earlier practice with such items. The resulting effect is
to produce a counterfeit increase in the estimated reliability. It would be
worthwhile to see as to how the above objections are related to the
present scale.

130
 The human characteristics under consideration, teachers' stress
tendency is not likely to change during such a short period of two months.
The period of two months is sufficiently long to partial out the effect of
memory. Under these conditions, it was decided that the test-retest
method is the best and psychologically sound for computing the
reliability of the present scale.
In order to test the reliability of the scale, the scale was first
administered on 200 teachers and it was again repeated on the same
individuals after two months. The correlation between the scores in the
first and the second test gave the test-retest coefficients of reliability. The
test retest coefficient of reliability is given in Table-3.6.
Table 3.6
Test-Retest Reliability Coefficient of
Teachers' Stress Inventory (TSI)
No. of Items No. of Teachers Interval Reliability

64 200 2 Months 0.89

As the table 3.6 shows, the reliability coefficient for this scale has
come out to be 0.89 which is quite satisfactory.
Validity
It is never possible that a test measures wholly precisely the
characteristics for which it was designed. Thus, it is always necessary to
gather some sort of evidence which provides confidence that a test score
really represents what it appears to represent. The extent to which a test
measures the trait, for which it is designed, is called validity of the test.
Thus, in order to determine the validity of the present scale, the following
types of validities have been established by the investigator.

131
FACE OR CONTENT VALIDITY
This type of validity was demonstrated by 100 percent agreement
among the five judges (all educationists and psychologists) regarding the
relevance of the items content to the stress tendency of teachers being
measured by the scale.
DATA COLLECTION
After deciding the sample units of the study, the researcher
personally approached to the concerned teachers and told them the
purpose of his research and requested them for their co-operation. He
gave them Teachers' Stress Inventory and requested them to fill the
inventory. He assured them that the information written in Teachers'
Stress Inventory would not be disclosed to anyone and he would use them
for research purpose only.
DATA ORGANISATION
After scoring the Teachers' Stress Inventory the investigator
organised the data according to the hypotheses as formulated in the first
chapter. For accuracy, utility and completeness, whole data have been
checked before these were tabulated. The tabulated data has been
presented in Appendix.
All the computational work was done by computer.
MEASURING PERSONALITY NEEDS
Some psychologists have conceptualised personality on the basis of
psychological needs of the individual. For example, Murray has
postulated that due to the influence of environment, a special type of will,
need or psychological needs grows within the individual, which compels
him to behave in a specific direction. This influence of outer environment
on an individual is of different types: so, with the passage of time many

132
specific demands are developed and become permanent in the personality
of every person and take command of his entire behaviour. As for their
nature Murray says, "A need is a construct....... which stands for a force
(The physico-chemico nature of which is unknown) in the brain region, a
force which organizes perception, apperception, intellection, cognition
and action in such a way as to transform in a certain direction in existing
unsatisfying situation".
Murray has investigated such twenty main psychological needs on
the basis of his experiments. He calls them, manifest needs, because these
demands are manifested in the individuals' behaviours and we known
them, through these behaviours. Prof. Edwards of Washington University
of America prepared a questionnaire in 1954, which measures 15 main
needs out of these twenty. In 1966 Dr. R.P. Bhatnagar prepared and
adapted a Hindi version of this test. Meenakshi personality Inventory
(MPI) is a further refinement of that version. This inventory has the same
theoretical base and also measures the main psychological personality
needs. Although, in this inventory also the psychological needs are
defined in the same way, as defined by Murray and subsequently by
Edwards and Bhatnagar in the construction of their tests, but no statement
is taken in MPI from the letters' tests. This tool is well refined and
sophisticated to measure personality needs and found to be more suitable
for Hindi speaking primary school teachers of Gorakhpur region. Hence,
this tool was selected for the purpose of this study. The other details of
the tool have been given in the following sections:
DESCRIPTION OF MEENAKSHI PESONALITY INVENTORY

133
 The Meenakshi Personality Inventory (MPI) tests the following ten
psychological needs–
1. Need achievement
2. Need exhibition
3. Need autonomy
4. Need affiliation
5. Need succourance
6. Need dominance
7. Need abasement
8. Need nurturance
9. Need endurance
10. Need aggression.
Every need mentioned above is measured with a scale of twenty
statements. Every statement attempts to find out "what an individual
prefers or what he likes." In other words, every statement is a verbal
behaviour which points to the force of the type of psychological need an
individual has. This inventory tests the ten main needs of the personality.
Different needs of the personality. Different needs of the inventory are
explained as follows:
1. Need Achievement– This need is represented by different
statements that pertain to the will to do good deeds, to get success,
to write a good book, to get fame, to be a high officer, to be a great
man, to pass a good life, to get social regard in the society, to be a
successful political leader etc.
2. Need Exhibition- This need reflects one's desire to show off one's
intelligence and one's speaking power, to wear beautiful clothes, to

134
 attract others' attention, to live with great pomp and show, to use
such words as are not understood by others, to be praised by others,
to show off one's greatness, to participate in such activities as may
be praised by everyone, etc.
3. Need Autonomy- This need is defined as the will to work according
to one self, not to accept anyone's slavery, to be of free nature, not to
accept interference, not to like obligation of others, to like such
activities as are full of freedom to do unconventional activities, no
hitch in opposing others on right ground, not to accept
subordination, not to accept bonds of legislation, not to like to be a
'Yes' man, etc.
4. Need Affiliation- This need is represented by the will to have many
friends, to pass more and more time with one's friends, to write
letters to one's friends, to show fast friendship, not to like to be
alone, to like more nearness with others, to like to have good
relations with others, not to tolerate the annoyance of his mates, to
have love and affection from others, etc.
5. Need Succourance– The statements of this need reflect the will to
have sympathy of the friends in situation of failure, to expect help
from friends in every situation, to expect help from relatives in hard
times, to expect help in difficulties, to expect from everybody to do
something for oneself, to be praised by the friends of one's activities,
etc.
6. Need Dominance– The will to be the convener of any committee, to
advise others, to be a leader, to settle the quarrels of others, to order
rather than obey, not to tolerate in obedience, to be accepted as a

135
 leader by others, not to live as subordinate to anybody, etc.,
demonstrates this need.
7. Need Abasement– To feel inferior to others, to feel guilty, to feel
unlucky, to have faith on fate, to be unhappy on one's mistakes, to
be frustrated and disappointed, to feel oneself incapable on one's
failure, to feel want of courage, to accept defeat instead of fighting
with the circumstances, to feel lack of confidence in the midst of
more able persons, etc. provide evidence of need abasement.
8. Need Nurturance– This need is defined as the will to have
sympathy with others, to contribute something for the promotion of
others, to work with friends, to serve old persons, to help others, to
try to provide maximum facilities to others, to help others in
difficulties, not to disappoint any one, to do social service, to do
something for the source less persons, to start a good school for the
children, etc.
9. Need Endurance– This need is defined as the desire not to leave the
work even if there is no hope of success, to work continuously, not
to do anything unless the work undertaken is completed, not to be
disappointed even on failures, not to leave the desired work even in
troubles, to forget every thing while engaged in an activity, to
perform every work with great zeal and enthusiasm, not to feel
fatigued even on working continuously for hours, not to refuse hard
work to reach the goal, etc.
10. Need Aggression– This need means the will to beat others and
using ill words, to accept the policy for 'tit for tat', not to hesitate in
insulting others, to feel pleasure in harming others, to defame others,

136
 to threaten others, not to tolerate harsh words of others, to be angry
frequently, to have a feeling of revolt, criticise others on having
differences, to feel pleasure in killing and hunting, to instigate others
to quarrel, to fight with others on not accepting one's views, etc.
RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF MPI
The reliability of MPI was found out by its author through split -
half method. The reliability of the half tests thus, obtained, was corrected
by applying Spearman Brown prophecy formula for each separate need.
In this way ten co-efficient of reliability were obtained. The reliability
study of the scales was based on 100 answer sheets of a sample of 100
respondents selected from a total of 500 hundred, the method of selection
being random. Needless, to say that these reliability indices provide
evidence of internal consistency of the scales.
The author further, claims that the above reliability co-efficient are
very similar in size to those obtained by the author of the EPPS
(Edwards) and also quite close to the EPPS (Hindi) developed and
standardized by Bhatnagar.
The co-efficient of reliability of Meenakshi Personality Inventory
are given in the table on the next page:
Table 3.7
Reliability of MPI
Personality Needs Reliability Co-efficient (revised)

1. Need achievement .70

2. Need exhibition .62
3. Need autonomy .74
4. Need affiliation .76

137
5. Need succourance .72
6. Need dominance .85
7. Need abasement .80
8. Need nurturance .70
9. Need endurance .85
10. Need aggression. .76
N = 100 —
In view of the fact that the characteristics of the sample of the
present study and the characteristics of the sample used for establishing
reliability of the MPI, are same, no need was felt to establish reliability of
this tool afresh.
The validity of the inventory was established on three different
sub-samples, comprising the students of intermediate, B.A./B.Sc. and
M.A./M.Sc. classes. To set up the validity of the inventory, EPPS (Hindi)
of Bhatnagar, which is a properly standardized and valid tool, was
accepted as a criterion. By correlating obtained scores on ten sub-parts of
the present inventory with those on the same ten sub-parts of EPPS
(Hindi), the validity co-efficient were computed. They are given in the
table on the next page.
Table 3.8
Reliability of MPI

Co-efficient
Need Scale Intermediate Graduate Post-Graduate

1. Need achievement .70 .66 .62

2. Need exhibition .65 .48 .56
3. Need autonomy .53 .59 .50

138
 4. Need affiliation .49 .50 .42
5. Need succourance .42 .46 .40
6. Need dominance .56 .60 .55
7. Need abasement .40 .55 .46
8. Need nurturance .61 .58 .50
9. Need endurance .45 .62 .48
10. Need aggression. .67 .48 .45
N = 100 N = 100 N = 100

SCORING AND INTERPRETATION OF MPI

After collecting all the response sheets the scoring of each sheet
was done in the manner given in the manual of the MPI by its author. The
method is stated as below:
(i) An oblique line was drawn from item No. 1 AB to 100 AB
on response sheet from upper left corner to lower right corner, crossing
item No. 5, 9, 43, 48, 53, 58, 92 and 96.
(ii) A second oblique line crossing item Nos. 71, 75 and 79, a
third oblique line crossing items 22, 26 and 30 and a fourth one, crossing
item 10, 14 and 18 were drawn.
(iii) A horizontal line was drawn from item No. 18 to 21.
(iv) Item Nos. 1-71, 5-75, 7-79, 10-43, 14-48, 18-53, 21-58, 20-
92, 26-96 and 30-100 were compared to see whether the respondent had
encircled the same type of the two items or whether he/she had encircled
1A and 71A or 1B and 71B, or whether one A was encircled and in
seventy one B was encircled. If in both, the same type of the responses,
(both A or both B) were encircled, the researcher put a right mark ()
under that column, and if it was found differing, then a cross mark (X)

139
was put there. In this manner all the columns were evaluated and marked,
then the total right marks were counted only those response sheets were
accepted as reliable which had more than seven right marks on each
columns.
(v) Next, in the first row, leaving only that paired item which falls
on oblique line all encircled 'A' s were counted and then total was written
in column 'R' on the right side in the front of the row of response sheet.
This score will exceed nine. In a like manner, in first column, leaving the
paired item out by oblique line all encircled were counted and their total
was written in column C in the right side in the front of the first row of
the response sheet. The grand total of both columns (R & C) was written
in the column 'T'. This was the score of the first need. In this way total
score of As and Bs on second row and second column were written in the
front of 2nd row. This was the score of second need. In this way scores of
all the ten needs of personality were computed.
3.4.3. CONSTRUCTION OF TEACHERS' ADJUSTMENT
INVENTORY (TAI):
The following steps were followed for the test construction of
teachers' adjustment inventory. (1) Plan of the Test, (2) Collection of the
Items, (3) Selection of the Items and (4) Final Form of the Test.
PLAN OF THE TEST
For measuring teachers' adjustment, the researcher tried his best to
find out any available and suitable tool. For this purpose he reviewed all
the available tests on adjustment. Although he found a number of
adjustment scales, one of them was found to be suitable for the present
purpose. All the available adjustment scales, except a few, were
applicable mostly to the students. In the beginning the researcher thought

140
to use 'Teachers' Adjustment Inventory' designed by Mangal, but
afterwards he found that this tool also was not suitable for the purpose in
hand. Therefore, the researcher decided to construct his own scale for
measuring adjustment of teachers. The teachers' adjustment inventory
used in this study for measuring the adjustment of teachers was
constructed by the researcher himself. The same steps as were followed in
the construction of the teachers' stress inventory were followed for the
development of this scale also.
DEFINING THE TRAIT
Teachers' adjustment for the present study has been defined as the
degree to which a teacher is suited, on the basis of personality, interests
and training to his occupation or the degree to which his vocational
aspiration permit him to achieve basic life satisfaction regarding
administration, classroom students, colleagues, curriculum, economical,
health, home, institution, library and social areas.
THE AREAS INVOLVED
A critical analysis of the concept of adjustment was made to
delimit and breakdown the areas involved. In case of most inventories
and scales, generally the adjustment in six areas (viz. Home, Health,
Emotional, Social, School and Economical) has been measured. But here
some important areas have also been added i.e. administration, classroom
students, colleagues, curriculum, economical, health, home, institution
and library. The main dimensions for the development of this inventory
were: administration, classroom students, colleagues, curriculum,
economical, health, home, institution, library and social areas. These ten
dimensions of adjustment, for the purpose of this study.

141
APPLICABILITY OF THE TEST
The inventory was designed for use with the teachers of Agra
Educational Region (U.P.). Therefore, the investigator decided to prepare
the test in Hindi language for the convenience of all the teachers.
TYPE OF ITEMS
For measuring teachers' adjustment, it was decided to develop a
Likert type five point scale with alternatives: Strongly agree Agree,
Indifferent, and Disagree and Strongly disagree. It was also decided to
have finally 60 items included in the inventory.
COLLECTION OF THE ITEMS
Keeping in view all the dimensions, discussed earlier, different
behaviours representing the various areas were identified and ultimately
more than two hundred items were prepared covering all the behaviours.
These items were then, discussed with the supervisor and other experts at
different intervals to determine the relevance of items in a particular
teaching situation of the teachers. During this discussion, the investigator
made the best efforts to improve the language and remove ambiguity,
vagueness and subjectivity found in the items. The overlapping of items
was critically examined.
The investigator also took help in writing the items statement from
other readymade tools and questionnaires. But it was found that there was
no scale for teachers belonging to Primary and Pre secondary school. All
the available adjustment scales were applicable mostly to the students.
Hence, they were only consulted so as to gain insight into the situations
which could form the basis of item-writing. The tests consulted for this
purpose were mainly as follows:

142
 1. P. Kumar: Revised Adjustment Inventory, 1983,
2. A.K.P. Sinha and R.P. Singh : Adjustment Inventory for School
Students.
3. A.K.P. Sinha and R.P. Singh : Adjustment Inventory for College
Students.
4. Roma Dutt and N.K. Jangira : Student Adjustment Inventory,
5. V.K. Mittal : Adjustment Inventory College or School.
6. R.C. Deva : Social Adjustment Inventory,
7. H.M. Singh : Marital Adjustment Inventory, For literate wives and
husbands.
8. S.K. Mangal :Teacher Adjustment Inventory,
9. G.P. Mishra :Primary School Teacher Adjustment Scale

The list of items collected through various sources was then

combined. The items were thoroughly checked and edited after screening;
all items were arranged serially in random order. Thus, a test of 180 items
was prepared and ultimately it was cyclostyled.
THE PRELIMINARY FORM OF THE TEST
The Teacher Adjustment Inventory (TAI) is comprised of 180
items covering all the different dimensions of adjustment. It is a Likert
type five point scale. Each item, therefore, contains five responses
alternatives i.e. Strongly Agree, Agree, Indifferent, Disagree and Strongly
Disagree. It was decided to include both positive and negative items in
the scale so that an agreement with an items would not indicate in all
cases only one end of the dimension. This would help also to avoid
hallow effects.
SELECTION OF THE ITEMS

143
 After collecting the test items, the next major step was that of
trying them out on a group of subjects who were representative of the
population for which the total score was being developed. Item selection
was done in two phases:
a) Pre-Tryout of the Test
b) Try-Out of the Test and Item Analysis
PRE-TRY-OUT OF THE TEST
After collecting the items, the items, were pre-tried-out on 100
teachers of Primary and Pre secondary schools. The investigator
administered this inventory to know the deficiencies of the inventory and
the difficulties of the teachers in responding to the items. The inventory
was also sent to three experts in the field of education and psychology for
their comments and opinions. In view of criticism and comments offered
by experts, minor changes in language and sentence construction in some
of the items were made and other 15 items were deleted from the scale.
TRY-OUT OF THE TEST
After Pre-Try-Out the instructions for administration and scoring
procedure were finalised. For the purpose of items analysis the scale was
administered on a group of 220 Primary and Pre secondary school
teachers. It was emphasized that no items should be omitted and there is
nothing right or wrong about the items. The teachers were encouraged to
answer each item honestly by assuring them that their responses would be
kept confidential and will be used only for research purpose. There was
no time limit for the test. The scoring was based on a five point Likert
type scale. For positive items the marks were: Strongly Agree (4), Agree
(3), Indifferent (2), Disagree (1), Strongly Disagree (0); and for negative

144
items the marks were: Strongly Agree (0), Agree (1), Indifferent (2),
Disagree (3) and Strongly Disagree (4). The overall teachers' adjustment
inventory was then computed as the sum of the items scores.
Out of 220 returned answer scripts, only 200 answer sheets were
found to be in order for the purpose of item analysis. Top 27% and
bottom 27% of these were selected for item-analysis. The itemwise
means were calculated in each of the top-bottom group.
ITEM ANALYSIS
The procedure used to judge the quality of an item is called items
analysis. The judgment is made on the basis of discrimination- power,
difficulty level and content validity of the item. Normally the item writer
makes some 'gut level' decisions (he may incorporate the view of others)
about content relevance, but difficulty and discrimination indices require
some quantitative evidence. For this purpose, the 200 answer sheets,
selected for the item analysis, were arranged in the descending order of
the total scores. The top 27% of the answer sheets were selected as upper
group and the bottom 27% of the answer sheets as the lower group.
The two groups were compared by employing the t-test. The
obtained t-values for all the items are given in the table on next page.

Table 3.9
Item Analysis Data for Teachers' Adjustment Inventory

Ite Upper Group Lower Group t- Remar

m Value ks
No. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
1. 3.90 1.67 2.38 1.70 4.51 S
2. 4.74 0.48 3.74 1.38 4.81 S

145
 3. 3.74 1.27 3.32 1.85 1.71 R
4. 4.18 0.91 3.04 1.27 5.14 S
5. 4.48 0.50 3.34 1.09 6.58 R
6. 3.00 1.21 2.94 1.15 0.25 R
7. 4.24 1.02 3.18 1.08 5.30 R
8. 3.72 1.62 3.54 1.49 0.58 R
9. 4.64 0.59 3.98 0.71 5.04 S
10. 4.36 1.66 3.92 1.41 1.43 R
11. 2.96 1.79 2.36 1.41 1.86 R
12. 4.22 1.30 3.58 1.46 2.31 R
13. 4.68 1.08 2.84 1.85 6.34 S
14. 4.10 0.11 3.60 1.17 2.10 R
15. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R
16. 3.92 1.32 2.90 1.33 3.85 S
17. 4.02 1.16 2.72 1.34 5.20 S
18. 4.38 0.69 3.36 1.08 5.57 S
19. 2.70 1.34 1.72 1.01 4.14 S
20. 4.70 0.46 4.24 0.98 3.03 S
21. 4.78 0.41 3.06 1.47 8.00 S
22. 4.10 1.11 3.60 1.17 2.18 R
23. 2.02 1.31 1.66 0.93 1.59 R
24. 4.72 0.49 4.40 0.78 2.44 R
25. 4.04 1.00 2.80 1.29 5.39 S
26. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R
27. 4.38 0.83 3.42 1.23 4.68 S
28. 3.74 1.27 3.32 1.18 1.71 R
29. 4.48 0.50 3.34 1.09 6.58 R
30. 2.26 1.10 1.86 0.90 1.88 R
31. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.22 R
32. 4.36 0.82 3.66 0.89 4.12 S
33. 3.74 1.27 2.84 1.18 1.69 R
34. 4.18 0.91 3.04 1.27 5.14 S
35. 3.66 1.22 1.92 1.02 7.77 S
36. 3.00 1.21 2.94 1.15 0.25 R
37. 4.72 0.49 4.40 0.78 2.44 R
38. 4.82 0.79 3.82 1.40 4.42 S
39. 4.52 1.22 2.78 1.47 6.42 S
40. 4.10 1.47 3.02 1.66 3.48 S

146
41. 3.90 1.51 2.76 1.46 3.83 S
42. 4.96 0.20 4.24 1.34 3.75 S
43. 4.42 1.25 2.70 1.55 6.12 S
44. 3.72 1.62 3.54 1.49 0.58 R
45. 4.22 1.30 3.58 1.46 2.31 R
46. 2.96 1.79 2.36 1.41 1.86 R
47. 4.04 1.37 3.04 1.64 3.30 S
48. 3.86 1.27 3.24 1.22 2.49 R
49. 2.02 1.31 1.66 0.93 1.59 R
50. 4.36 1.16 3.92 1.41 1.70 R
51. 4.92 0.34 3.96 1.36 4.87 S
52. 4.48 0.71 4.12 0.69 2.55 R
53. 4.08 1.59 3.28 1.47 2.60 S
54. 4.62 0.73 3.70 1.30 0.64 R
55. 4.36 1.66 3.92 1.41 1.43 R
56. 4.64 1.02 3.46 1.55 4.49 S
57. 4.24 1.02 3.18 1.08 5.30 R
58. 4.90 0.80 3.94 1.45 3.66 S
59. 3.74 1.27 3.32 1.18 1.69 R
60. 2.02 1.31 1.66 0.93 1.61 R
61. 4.64 0.59 3.98 0.71 5.04 S
62. 4.10 1.11 3.60 1.18 2.24 R
63. 4.44 0.61 2.86 1.14 8.68 S
64. 2.70 1.34 1.72 1.01 4.00 R
65. 3.74 1.27 3.32 1.18 1.69 R
66. 4.84 0.78 2.86 1.73 7.83 R
67. 4.54 0.73 2.88 1.09 8.92 S
68. 4.16 0.91 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
69. 4.36 1.37 3.86 1.43 1.78 R
70. 4.44 0.92 2.56 1.18 8.87 S
71. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.22 R
72. 4.82 0.62 2.74 1.60 8.56 R
73. 3.74 1.70 3.02 1.64 2.16 R
74. 3.48 1.46 2.26 1.08 4.73 S
75. 4.46 0.50 3.56 0.73 7.20 S
76. 4.24 1.02 3.18 1.08 5.02 S
77. 4.84 0.78 2.86 1.73 7.39 R
78. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R

147
 79. 4.16 0.91 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
80. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.88 R
81. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R
82. 4.16 091 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
83. 4.50 0.54 4.36 0.52 1.31 R
84. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.80 R
85. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.88 R
86. 3.60 1.24 2.60 1.24 4.08 R
87. 3.12 1.40 2.68 1.30 1.60 R
88. 4.82 0.62 2.74 1.60 8.56 R
89. 2.52 1.70 2.92 1.49 1.25 R
90. 3.74 1.27 3.32 1.85 1.71 R
91. 3.74 1.70 3.02 1.64 2.16 R
92. 4.90 2.02 3.62 1.41 3.67 S
93. 4.86 0.60 4.00 1.52 3.72 S
94. 4.88 0.32 3.92 1.62 4.12 S
95. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.88 R
96. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R
97. 3.64 1.27 3.06 1.13 2.37 R
98. 4.12 0.94 3.28 1.32 3.76 R
99. 4.36 1.29 2.70 1.35 6.29 S
100. 4.12 0.94 3.28 1.32 3.76 R
101. 3.93 1.32 2.90 1.32 3.86 R
102. 4.72 0.49 4.40 0.78 2.26 R
103. 4.50 0.54 4.36 0.52 1.31 R
104. 4.36 1.37 3.86 1.43 1.78 R
105. 4.16 0.91 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
106. 4.36 1.66 3.92 1.41 1.43 R
107. 4.84 0.41 3.92 1.41 4.44 S
108. 4.84 0.78 2.86 1.73 7.38 R
109. 4.22 1.42 2.56 1.66 5.38 S
110. 4.56 0.70 3.06 1.33 7.04 S
111. 4.16 0.91 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
112. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.22 R
113. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.22 R
114. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R
115. 3.74 1.70 3.02 1.64 2.16 R
116. 4.72 0.49 4.40 0.78 2.44 R

148
117. 2.02 1.31 1.66 0.93 1.59 R
118. 4.24 1.02 3.18 1.08 5.02 S
119. 4.82 1.62 2.74 1.60 8.56 R
120. 4.10 0.83 3.28 1.16 3.19 S
121. 4.04 1.00 2.90 1.29 5.55 S
122. 4.10 1.11 3.60 1.17 2.18 R
123. 2.06 1.18 1.86 0.83 0.98 R
124. 3.94 1.33 2.88 1.36 4.00 S
125. 4.24 0.65 3.06 1.28 6.15 S
126. 3.94 1.33 2.28 1.36 4.01 R
127. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.22 R
128. 4.30 0.76 3.16 1.09 6.03 S
129. 4.10 0.78 2.94 0.99 6.70 R
130. 4.16 0.94 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
131. 4.26 0.85 2.66 1.17 7.88 S
132. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.79 R
133. 4.10 1.11 3.60 1.17 2.18 R
134. 3.00 1.21 2.94 1.15 0.25 R
135. 4.36 0.82 3.66 0.89 4.04 S
136. 3.86 1.27 3.24 1.22 2.49 R
137. 3.98 1.07 3.24 1.47 2.90 S
138. 3.74 1.27 2.84 1.18 1.69 R
139. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.22 R
140. 4.54 0.57 3.30 1.31 6.20 S
141. 3.60 1.24 2.60 1.24 4.08 R
142. 4.10 0.78 2.94 0.99 6.70 R
143. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.80 R
144. 4.34 1.09 4.12 0.65 1.22 R
145. 4.26 0.85 2.66 1.17 7.88 S
146. 3.94 1.33 2.88 1.36 4.01 R
147. 4.16 0.91 1.92 0.75 13.33 R
148. 4.28 0.80 2.80 1.21 7.18 S
149. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.88 R
150. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.88 R
151. 3.98 1.07 3.24 1.47 2.90 S
152. 2.26 1.20 1.86 0.90 1.88 R
153. 4.64 0.52 4.12 0.68 4.37 S
154. 4.54 0.57 3.30 1.31 6.20 S

149
155. 4.02 1.13 2.48 1.03 7.16 S
156. 4.48 0.71 4.12 0.69 2.55 R
157. 4.62 0.73 3.70 1.30 0.64 R
158. 4.10 1.11 3.60 1.17 2.24 R
159. 3.80 1.37 2.42 1.52 4.76 S
160. 3.74 1.27 3.32 1.18 1.69 R
161. 4.36 1.66 3.92 1.41 1.43 R
162. 3.82 1.49 2.80 1.46 3.46 S
163. 4.82 0.79 3.82 1.40 4.40 S
164. 3.74 1.27 3.32 1.18 1.69 R
165. 4.54 0.50 4.24 0.82 2.12 R
S = Selected
R = Rejected
On the basis of the foregoing table, the investigator found that t-
values ranged from 0.25 to 13.33. The investigator selected only items
which could show discrimination between the teachers who were highly
adjusted and those who were least adjusted at 0.01 level. From the table
value, items with t-value of 2.58 or more were regarded as fairly
satisfactory.
As regards items 3,5,6,7,8,10,11,12,14,15,22,23,24,26,28,29,
30,31,33,36,37,44,45,46,48,49,50,52,54,55,57,59,60,62,64,65,66,68,69,7
1,72,73,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,95,96,97,98,100,1
01,102,103,104,105,106,108,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,119,122,123,
126,127,129,130,132,133,134,136,138,139,141,142,143,144,146,147,149
,150,152,156, 157,158,160,161,164 and165 were deleted. In these items
some items having t-value of less than 2.58 were not included in final
test. At the same time some items with significant t-value were rejected
on the basis of experts' opinion. Thus, combining the criteria, t-value and
experts' opinions, the items for the final form were selected.

150
 In this way, out of 165 items in the try-out form, 60 items were
finally selected for the final form of the Teachers' Adjustment Inventory.
FINAL FORM OF THE TEST
The final form of Teachers' Adjustment Inventory contains 60
items. The items in the final form were rearranged in systematic random
order.
Table 3.10
Dimension wise item distribution of the Teachers' Adjustment
Inventory
S.No. Dimensions Item Numbers Total Items

1. Administration 1 11 21 31 41 51 6
2. Class room students 2 12 22 32 42 52 6
3. Colleagues 3 13 23 33 43 53 6
4. Curriculum 4 14 24 34 44 54 6
5. Economical 5 15 25 35 45 55 6
6. Health 6 16 26 36 46 56 6
7. Home 7 17 27 37 47 57 6
8. Institution 8 18 28 38 48 58 6
9. Library 9 19 29 39 49 59 6
10. Social 10 20 30 40 50 60 6

TOTAL 64
ADMINISTRATION
Teachers' Adjustment Inventory is self administering instrument.
The subjects are requested to read instructions carefully and to ask the
tester, if there is any difficulty in understanding the instructions. It is

151
emphasized that no item should be omitted and there is nothing 'right' or
'wrong' about these items. It is also assured that their responses would be
kept confidential and would be used only for research purposes. There is
no time limit for the instrument. However, it takes about 45 minutes to
complete it.
RESPONSE MODE
There are five response categories for each item, i.e. Strongly
Agree, Agree, Indifferent, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree. Subjects are
required to answer all the items.
SCORING SYSTEM
The scoring system is based on a five point Likert type scale
designed as: Strongly Disagree (0), Disagree (1), Indifferent (2), Agree
(3) and Strongly Agree (4). Before the score is computed, the direction of
item scores is reversed for negative items so that a response of Strongly
Agree is given a value of 0, Agree a value of 1 and so on. The sum of all
the items scores gives the overall adjustment score for the subject. The
total adjustment score varies from 0 to 240. Thus, the scale provides 0 as
the lowest mark and 240 as the highest mark. The higher score indicates
higher adjustment.
RELIABILITY
To establish the reliability of the present inventory the investigator
made an effort to determine the test-retest and split-half reliability
coefficients for the inventory.
TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY
In order to test the reliability of the scale, the scale was first
administered on 200 teachers and it was again repeated on the same

152
individuals after two months. The correlation between the scores in the
first and the second test gave the test-retest coefficients of reliability. The
test-retest coefficient of reliability is given in table 3.11.
Table 3.11
Showing Coefficients of Reliability of Teachers' Adjustment
Inventory
Name of Coefficient of test-retest Coefficient of split-half
the test reliabiality after two months reliability (N=200)
(N=200)

Teachers' .72 .88*

Adjustment
Inventory
* Calculated by Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula
SPLIT-HALF RELIABILITY
For the purpose of calculating the split-half reliability of the scale,
a sample of 200 teachers was used. The scale was divided into two equal
parts, the first half (even items) and the second half (odd items). In this
way, the total adjustment score was divided into two equal parts. Then the
product moment correlation coefficient was computed between these two
parts and was corrected by applying the Spearman-Brown Prophecy
Formula. The obtained split-half reliability coefficient is given in Table
3.11.
VALIDITY
In order to determine the validity of the present inventory the
following types of validity have been established by the investigator.
(i) Face or Content Validity

153
 This type of validity was demonstrated by 100 percent agreement
among the five judges (all educationists and psychologists) regarding the
relevance of the items' content measuring adjustment of Primary and Pre
secondary school teachers being measured by the inventory.
(ii) Concurrent Validity
Teachers' Adjustment Inventory by Mangal is a standardized
instrument for measuring the adjustment of teachers. Therefore, for
estimating the degree of concurrent validity the coefficient of correlation
was calculated between the scores of Teachers' Adjustment Inventory and
present inventory. The correlation was found to be 0.71 for a group of
200 teachers. This validity index show that the present scale has a fair
degree of concurrent validity.
STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES USED:
In the present investigation following statistical techniques have
been used:
1. Significance of the difference between two means (t-test)
The t-test is the statistical test that allows the investigator to
compare two means to determine the probability that the difference
between the means is a real difference rather than a chance difference. It
involves the computation of the ratio between observed variance
(observed difference between two means) and error variance (the
sampling error variance). The value of ratio is computed by the formula

where,
M1 = mean of first group

154
 M2 = mean of second group
1 = S.D. of first group
2 = S.D. of second group
N1 = Number of cases of first group.
N2 = Number of cases of second group.

2. The Coefficient of correlation:

"A coefficient of correlation is a single number that tells us to what
extent two things are evaluated, to what extent variations in one go with
the variation in the other." Guildford warns that the following conditions
must be observed before using the Pearson's Product Moment correlation:
1. The trend of relationship between X and Y be rectillinear. This can
be determined as a rule, by inspection of the scatter diagram.
2. Second condition of r is the of homoscedasticity. When columns
(and rows) are relatively homoscedastic, the person r can be
computed. This condition will prevail generally when two
distributions are fairly symmetrical within themselves; thus we need
not go so far as to compute standard deviation of columns and rows
in order to find in out.
3. The number of cases should be large. It should be more than 30.
The above mentioned conditions have strictly been followed in the
present investigation. Investigator has used the Pearson's Product
Moment correlation with full confidence. The basic formula for
computing Pearson's Product Moment Coefficient of correlation is

Where
x = Sum of the x scores

155
 x2 = Sum of the squared x scores
y = Sum of the y scores
y2 = Sum of the squared y scores
xy = Sum of the products of x and y scores
N = Number of paired score
3. Multiple correlations
The multiple correlation analysis provides an analysis or relations
among a single criterion measure and two or more predictor measures.
The result of the analysis yields an equation for the unknown criterion
score of a new subject from his known set of predictors scores.
The obtained equation for predicting the criterion is called the
multiple regression equation. The another result of the analysis is a
coefficient of multiple correlation. The multiple correlation equation,
represented by R, is defined as the simple correlation coefficient between
observed values of the dependent variable and those values estimated
from the multiple regression equation. The multiple correlation
coefficient has been computed from the zero order r's or partial r's. For
two independent variables the formula from multiple R is

R1.23=
or
R1.23=

Where
R1.23 = The multiple correlation coefficient between variable 1 and

variable 2 and 3.
r12 = The correlation coefficient between variable 1 and 2
r13 = The correlation coefficient between variable 1 and 3

156
r23 = The correlation coefficient between variable 2 and 3
r13.2 = The coefficient of partial correlation between 1 and 3 after

partialling out the variable 2.

4. Level of significance
Acceptance or rejection of null hypothesis depends upon some
level of significance. This level of significance depends upon the
probability that the given difference could have arisen by chance.
In educational and psychological research, the 5 percent and 1 percent
level of significance is frequently used as a standard for rejecting a null
hypothesis. .01 level of significance is more exact than .05 level.

157