t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means

Variable 1 Variable 2
Mean 40.44 19.84
Variance 40.50667 39.64
Observatio 25 25
Pearson Co 0.139086
Hypothesiz 0.05
df 24
t Stat 12.36965
P(T<=t) one3.326E-12
t Critical o 1.710882
P(T<=t) two6.652E-12
t Critical t 2.063899
 t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means
No. of items: 50

Mean
Trainees Pretest Post test Variance
1.Ella miranda 14 27 Observations
2. Jan Eleazar 15 29 Pearson Correlation
3 Jan ishmael 12 28 Hypothesized Mean Difference
4 Eller Nuyda 23 48 df
5 Elsa Bonafe 35 46 t Stat
6 Eloisa Bongalbal 30 41 P(T<=t) one-tail
7 Jonathan Blancaflor 22 34 t Critical one-tail
8 Jonnel Diaz 14 46 P(T<=t) two-tail
9 Charmie De los Reyes 20 40 t Critical two-tail
10 apolinario mabini 22 47
11Bea Binene 18 43
60
12Charles Jovel 20 41
13 juvilyn Taberdo 16 44 50
14 Luisa Taberdo 12 48
15 Ricardo Octemia 10 47 40
16 Jose Garcia 20 39 30
17 Nemia Olaguer 16 40
18 Mela Bilo 19 39 20
19 Mafe Bitara 23 31
10
20 Jean Belo 35 40
21 Carmen De Dios 20 44 0
22 Bon Verda 20 49 a r el a fe al
and eaza ma uyd na alb
23 Don Meda 22 39 ir El ish r N Bo ng an
lla m Jan Jan Elle Elsa a Bo Bl
24 Hailey Go 21 40 E 2. 5 lois han
1. 3 4
t
E
25 Honey dee 17 41 6 Jona
HIGHEST 35 49 7 9
LOWEST 10 27

Pre-Test & Post Test Analysis

Interpretation of Data

The table above shows that pre-test scores ranged from 10 to 35 while post test
means an increase of scores as shown in the gap between the maroon line (post test) and blu
showed an average of 40.44 for posttest and 19.84 for pre-test.

Analysis
The table reveals that the t Stat is equal 12.3696464 , this is the mean difference
scores. The p-value is 3.32623E-12 which is less than .05 which means that the test scores
 means an increase of scores as shown in the gap between the maroon line (post test) and blu
showed an average of 40.44 for posttest and 19.84 for pre-test.

Analysis
The table reveals that the t Stat is equal 12.3696464 , this is the mean difference
scores. The p-value is 3.32623E-12 which is less than .05 which means that the test scores

Conclusion

As revealed by the foregoing analysis of the data, the interventions made during th
DRESSMAKING NC II has effective effect with the trainees.

Recommendation

Competency-Based Training for DRESSMAKING NC II is therefore recommended t

1. CBLM contain sufficient information and relevant to the objectives.
2. Methods are appropriate with the training need.
3. All activities are effective.

Elaine Boncodin
 e for Means

Variable 1 Variable 2
40.44 19.84
40.5066666666668 39.64
25 25
0.139086488412804
0.05
24
12.3696464045628
3.32622851822E-12
1.71088207990943
6.65245703645E-12
2.06389856162803

l l or i l
za
r
ae da afe ba iaz yes in ne ve do do ia cia uer ilo ara elo ios rda da Go ee
ea shm Nuy Bon gal ncafl el D Re mab Bine s Jo ber ber ctem Gar lag la B Bit n B e D Ve Me iley ey d
i on la s o Ta Ta O Me afe Jea n D on on Ha on
n er a nn lo i a rle O se
Ja Ell Els isa B an B 8 Jo De nar 1Be Cha ilyn uisa rdo 6 Jo mia 18 M 20 me 2 B 3 D 24 5 H
4 5 lo h ie oli 1 2 juv 4 L ca 1 e 9 r 2 2 2
E t 1 i N 1 Ca
6 Jona arm ap 1 3 1 5
R 1 7
2 1
7 Ch 10 1
9

Analysis

35 while post test scores ranged from 27 to 49 which

(post test) and blue line (pretest). Statistical Analysis

he mean difference between the post test and pres test

hat the test scores are significantly different at 5% level.
(post test) and blue line (pretest). Statistical Analysis

he mean difference between the post test and pres test

hat the test scores are significantly different at 5% level.

ns made during the Competency-Based Training(CBT) for

re recommended the following:

 Column B
Column C

lo os da da o ee
Be e Di Ver Me ey G y d
D n n ail ne
en 2 Bo 3 Do 4 H Ho
m 2 2 2 25