See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/371874362

Exploring Students' Attitudes, Learning Behaviors and their Effects on

Mathematics Achievements

Thesis · June 2023

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31101.13286

CITATION READS

1 4,215

1 author:

Rajendra Kunwar
Tribhuvan University
47 PUBLICATIONS 154 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Rajendra Kunwar on 27 June 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

EXPLORING STUDENTS' ATTITUDES, LEARNING BEHAVIORS AND

THEIR EFFECTS ON MATHEMATICS ACHIEVEMENTS

Rajendra Kunwar

A Dissertation for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education

Submitted to
Dean's Office
Faculty of Education, Tribhuvan University
Kathmandu, Nepal

March, 2022
 ii

EXPLORING STUDENTS' ATTITUDES, LEARNING BEHAVIORS AND

THEIR EFFECTS ON MATHEMATICS ACHIEVEMENTS

Rajendra Kunwar

A Dissertation for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education

Submitted to
Dean's Office
Faculty of Education, Tribhuvan University
Kathmandu, Nepal

March, 2022

TU Reg. No. 62138-88

UGC PhD Fellowship Award - HERP: 2072/73, Education.

 iii

ABSTRACT

The abstract of the dissertation presented by Rajendra Kunwar to the Faculty of

Education, Tribhuvan University on 27th March 2022 for the degree of Doctor of

Philosophy.

Title: Exploring Students' Attitudes, Learning Behaviors and their Effects on

Mathematics Achievements

Abstract approved: ……………………………

Prof. Lekhnath Sharma, PhD

Supervisor

The study entitled "Exploring Students’ Attitudes, Learning Behaviors, and their

effects on Mathematics Achievements" basically aims to analyse the grade X students'

attitudes levels; attitudes influence on the creation of learning behaviors, and ultimate

effects on students' achievements in mathematics and establish their relationships as

one of the achievement models. Bandura's social cognitive theory and Bem's self-

perception theory are major theoretical referents for this study. The study has

employed concurrent embedded mixed-method research design with a sample of 540

grade X students from 12 community schools in Nepal. The quantitative data were

collected using attitude towards mathematics inventory, classroom learning behavior

self-assessment inventory, and mathematics achievement test, and analyzed using

statistical tools such as mean, standard deviation, correlation, and regression. The

qualitative data related to learning behavior was collected through class observation

and semi-structured interviews. The qualitative information was analysed thematically

for drawing the categories and embedded with the results of the quantitative data
 iv

while analyzing and interpreting. As results of the study, most of the students' levels

of attitudes and learning behaviors were positive whereas the achievement level of the

students was found medium and differed between ecological regions and rural-urban

backgrounds. The result refutes that rural student lagged behind their urban

counterparts in achievement, and genderwise achievement difference was statistically

insignificant. The majority of the students preferred learning mathematics by using

more behaviorist attributes and credited the teacher for their success. Overall, the

effects of the students'attitudes and learning behaviors on achievements were found

positive and statistically significant. The positive correlations between attitudes,

learning behaviors, and achievements, suggest that a positive attitude towards

mathematics causes positive learning behaviors leading to higher achievements and

vice-versa.
 v

© Copyright

Rajendra Kunwar

All rights reserved 2022

 vi

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this Ph.D. dissertation entitled "Exploring the Students’

Attitudes, Learning Behaviors and their effects on Mathematics Achievements"

submitted to the office of the Dean, Faculty of Education, Tribhuvan University is an

entirely innovative work. The findings and conclusions embodied in this thesis are my

own work, and they have not been submitted anywhere else for the academic award of

any degree or for any other reason, except the work of my published article. I have

made due acknowledgments to all ideas and information borrowed from different

sources in the course of writing this dissertation. I shall be exclusively responsible if

any evidence is found aligned with my dissertation.

…………………

Rajendra Kunwar,

Degree candidate

March, 2022
 vii

DEDICATION

This Dissertation is dedicated to my mother (late) Nemukadevi Kunwar and

my father Shreekrishna Kunwar in honor of their contributions to making me what I

am now despite the adverse circumstance of life.

 viii

LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION

This is to certify that Mr. Rajendra Kunwar, a PhD candidate has prepared

the dissertation entitled Exploring students' attitudes, learning behaviors and their

effects on mathematics achievements under my guidance and supervision. He has

made all necessary revisions according to the comments and suggestions mentioned

by experts and reviewers. I, therefore, recommend the dissertation for acceptance,

evaluation, and award for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education with

Specialization in Mathematics Education.

……………………….

Prof. Lekhnath Sharma, PhD

Supervisor

Professor of Mathematics Education

Faculty of Education, University Campus, Kirtipur

Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal

Date: 27th March, 2022

 ix

APPROVAL LETTER

We certify that we approved the dissertation entitled Exploring students'

attitudes, learning behaviors and their effects on mathematics achievements

presented by Rajendra Kunwar to the Faculty of Education for the Degree of Doctor

of Philosophy in Education.

Prof. Chitra Bahadur Budhathoki, PhD ………………………….

Chair of Research Committee

Dean of Faculty of Education, Date: 27 th March, 2022

Tribhuvan University, Nepal

Prof. Lekhnath Sharma, PhD ………………………….

Tribhuvan University, Nepal

Supervisor Date: 27th March, 2022

Prof. Siddhi Prasad Koirala, PhD .…………………………

Tribhuvan University, Nepal

External Examiner Date: 27th March, 2022

Prof. Binod Prasad Dhakal, PhD …………………………..

Research Committee Member,

Director of Graduate School of Education Date: 27 th March, 2022

Faculty of Education, Tribhuvan University, Nepal

 x

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my

respected supervisor Professor Dr. Lekhnath Sharma, whose insightful feedback,

remarkable guidance; support, suggestions, and encouragement have ultimately led to

this result. I am extremely thankful for his vigorous efforts to this research work and

provided counseling at all stages of the study with continual back-up, friendly

behavior, constructive comments, and scholarly arguments.

I am equally indebted to Prof. Dr. Hari Prasad Upadhyay who supported me;

provided suggestions and encouragement that impressed me to this study. My sincere

gratitude goes to Prof. Dr. Hira Bahadur Maharjan, Former Vice Chancellor,

Tribhuvan University, for his guidance in the initial stage of the research and

continual inspiration for the completion of this study. I am grateful to Prof. Dr. Chitra

Bahadur Budhathoki, Dean, Faculty of Education, for his encouragement, motivation

and support to finalize the work. I would like to express sincere thanks to my external

evaluators, Prof. Dr. Siddhi Prasad Koirala, Tribhuvan University, Nepal and Prof.

Dr. André Rognes, Olso University, Norway for their invaluable comments and

suggestions for the improvement of this study. I owe profound gratitude to the

Research Committee, Dean ‘s Office, Faculty of Education for providing me with

critical comments and suggestions in the designing of the study and on the draft report

of the study for its further improvement. Similarly, I would like to extend my sincere

gratefulness to the University Grants Commission (UGC), Nepal for the Faculty

Fellowship (2016) which always proved real support for the continuation and

completion of the research.

I am significantly thankful to Prof. Uma Nath Pande, Prof Dr. Eka Ratna

Acharya, Prof. Dr. Bed Raj Acharya, and my Gurus who directed me in the right
 xi

direction with sensible advice and encouraging remarks. I am equally grateful to Dr.

Kamal Kumar Poudel, Associate Professor of English Education for the language

editing of this dissertation. I am equally thankful to Dr. Amrit Kumar Shrestha from

the Central Department of Political Science Education, Faculty of Education, T. U. for

his inspiration and technical support.

I would like to express my thanks to Mr. Yadav Bhardhoj and Mr. Dhan Bd.

Neupane Former Campus Chiefs, Mahendra Ratna Multiple Campus Ilam for their

support and cooperation during my study. Likewise, I would like to thank Dr. Kamal

Acharaya and Dr. Bed Prakash Dhakal for their support and encouragement during

my study. I am also thankful to Mrs. Hemlata, my wife, for her patience of going

thoroughly on the writing of the dissertation. Likewise, my grateful thanks go to my

respected Didi Nirmala Sharma for her timely encouragement and inspiration.

I am deeply grateful to my friend Mr. Narahari Neupane for his unforgettable

help at the time of data collection and the respondents as well as the institutions that

were involved in the study in providing necessary data/information. My genuine

appreciations go to my all colleagues, friends, and family members whose names

appear here, including Mr. Milan Chandra Sanyasi, Mr. Sitaram Ghimire, Mr. Krishna

Kumar Khatri, Mr. Dependra Prasad Dulal, Mr. Upendra Prasad Acharya, Mr. Shyam

Prasad Phuyel, Mr. Shatrudhan Basnet, my dear son, Bibek, and lovely daughter

Bijeta for their direct or indirect support.

Rajendra Kunwar, Author

 xii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………….………… iii

COPYRIGHT…………………..…………………………………………….………… v
DECLARATION…………………………………………………………….…………. vi
DEDICATION………………………………………………………………………….. vii
LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION………………………………………………….. viii
APPROVAL LETTER…………………..……………………………………………… ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………….……………………………….…………… x
CONTENTS …………………………………………………….……….……………... xii
LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………….……………….. xvi
LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………….………………….. xviii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS/ACRONYMS………….………………………………... xix
CHAPTER I …………………………………………………………………………….. 1
INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………...……………. 1
Background of the Study ……………………………………………….…………… 1
Statement of the Problem………………………………………….………………… 6
Significance of the Study …………………………………………………………… 9
Objectives of the Study …………………………………………………………..…. 12
Research Questions ………………………………………………………………… 13
Hypothesis of the Study…………………………………………………………...… 13
Delimitations of the Study ……………………..………………………………….... 14
Operational Definition of the Key Terms …………………………………………... 15
CHAPTER II ………………………………………………………………………...….. 19
LITERATURE REVIEW …………………………………………………………..…… 19
Introduction………………………………………………………………………..… 19
Conceptualizing Attitude and Its Relation to Mathematics Learning…………… 19
Student Attitudes towards Mathematics……………………………………..….. 21
Students' Positive Attitude towards Learning Mathematics…………………….. 29
Students' Negative Attitude towards Learning Mathematics……………………. 31
Attitude and Behavior Relation…………………………………………………. 33
Learning Behaviors and Learners' Category……………………………………. 36
Student Achievement in Mathematics…………………………………………... 45
Studies related to Student Attitudes and Learning Behaviors in Mathematics….. 48
Studies related to Student Attitudes and Achievements in Mathematics……….. 49
 xiii

Student Learning Behavior and Achievement in Mathematics…………………. 53

Gaps in the Literature……………………………………………………………….. 59
Theoretical Framework……………………………………………………………… 60
Conceptual Framework……………………………………………………………… 70
CHAPTER III ………………………………………………………………………....… 78
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ……………………………………………………….. 78
Introduction………………………………………………………………………….. 78
Philosophy of Inquiry……………………………………………………………….. 78
Research Paradigms…………………………………………………………………. 80
Pragmatists Research Paradigm………………………….……………………… 84
Mixed Method Research Design………………………………………………… 85
Theoretical Stance Adapted to the Study……………………………………………. 88
Design of the Study………………………………………………………………….. 92
Reasons for Selecting the Mixed Methods Research Approach………………….…. 95
Population of the Study……………………………………………………………… 97
Sample and Sampling Procedures………………………………………………. 97
Sample Size Determination……………………………………………………... 101
Variables of the Study………………………………………………………………. 102
Instrumentation……………………………………………………………………… 103
Development and Validation of the Different Survey Instruments ………………… 104
Attitude Measurement Instrument…………………………………………………... 104
Attitude towards Mathematics Inventory (ATMI), Adapted Version......................... 107
Piloting of the Adapted Version of the ATMI……………...…………………… 108
Observation and Result of the Pilot Test………………………………………... 109
Development of Response Scoring Scheme…………………………………….. 109
Mathematics Achievement Test…………………………………….……….…...….. 110
Development and Validation of Mathematics Achievement Test………………. 110
Classroom Learning Behavior Self-Assessment Inventory…………………………. 133
Development of Classroom Learning Behavior Self-assessment Inventory….… 133
Classroom Learning Behavior Checklist……………………………………………. 156
The Rationale for using Classroom Learning Behavior Checklist…………...…. 157
Semi-structured Interview…………………………………….………………...…… 158
Construction of Semi-Structured Interview Guide and Pilot Test……….……… 161
Instrumentation………………………………………………………………….. 162
Data Collection Procedures…………………………………………………..……… 164
 xiv

Quantitative Data Collection…………………………………………….….…… 164

Qualitative Data Collection..……………………………………………….……. 165
Qualitative Data Analysis and Interpretation Procedures…………………………… 171
The theoretical Category of the Students' Classroom Learning Behavior…………... 174
Procedures for Quantitative Data Entry and Analysis ……………………………… 176
The Statistical Analysis of the Likert Scale ………………………………………… 177
Ethical Considerations of the Study ………………………………………………… 178
Summary of Research Design and Variables Coding……………………………..… 180
CHAPTER IV……………………………………………………………………….….. 182
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA………………………….…... 182
Introduction …………………………………………………………………….…… 182
The Demographic Description of the Sample…………………………………..…… 183
Results and analysis of RQ i): What are the attitude levels towards learning
mathematics in grade X students of community schools in Nepal?...................... 185
Results and analysis of RQ ii): What is the status of grade X students'
achievements in mathematics?.............................................................................. 191
Results and analysis of RQ iii): What are the levels of student learning
behaviors they exhibit while learning mathematics?............................................. 200
Results and analysis of RQ iv): How do the students preferred to learn
mathematics aligning to the learning theories?..................................................... 207
Results and analysis of RQ v): What effects do students' attitudes and learning
behaviors have on students’ achievements?.......................................................... 226
Results and analysis of RQ vi): What is the relationship between students'
attitudes, learning behaviors, and achievements in mathematics as Variables?.... 234
CHAPTER V……………………………………………………………………….…… 243
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS.……………………...………………………….…… 243
Introduction………………………………………………………………………….. 243
Major Findings ……………………………………………………………………… 243
Summary of the Findings………………………………………………………….… 253
Discussion of the Results…………………………………………………….……… 255
Limitations of the Study……………………………………………….…………..… 273

CHAPTER VI ………………………………………………………………………….... 274

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS ……………………….……... 274
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………. 274
 xv

Summary of the Study……………………………………….……..….……………. 274

Conclusions………………………………….……………………………..…..…… 277
Implications……………………………………………………….…….…..…….…
…. 280
….. Educational Implications………...…………….…..…………………………… 281
Areas for Further Study……………………………………………………….... 282
REFERENCES ………………………………………………………...……………….
….Study………………………………………………………….………. 284
Appendix A………………………………………………………………………........... 331
Appendix B………………………………………………………………………........... 332
Appendix C………………………………………………………………………........... 334
Appendix D………………………………………………………………………........... 341
Appendix E………………………………………………………………………........... 348
Appendix F………………………………………………………………………............ 349
Appendix G……………………………………………………………………………... 350
Appendix H……………………………………………………………………………... 351
Appendix I………………………………………………………………………............ 352
Appendix J………………………………………………………………………............ 353
Appendix K……………………………………………………………………………... 354
Appendix L………………………………………………………………………............ 356
Appendix M………………………………………………………………………...…… 358
Appendix N………………………………………………………………………........... 360
Appendix O……………………………………………………………………………... 360
Appendix P………………………………………………………………………........... 264
Appendix Q………………………………………………………………………........... 366
 xvi

List of Tables

Table 1 District Wise Lists of Community Secondary Schools of Province No 1..……. 98

Table 2 List of Region and Location-wise Selected School……………………………… 100

Table 3 List of Sample Schools………………………………………………………………. 101

Table 4 ATMI Students Response Scoring Scheme…………………………………..……. 109

Table 5 Classification and Interpretation Level of Mean Scores of ATMI…………….. 110

Table 6 Content-wise Blueprint of Achievement Test……………………………………… 115

Table 7 Difficulty Level Interpretation Range of Different Types of Test Items……….. 120

Table 8 Discrimination Index Interpretation Range………………….………….............. 123

Table 9 Difficulty Level and Discriminating Power of the Test Items…………………… 125

Table 10 Power of Difficulty Level with Range of Interpretation……………….……….... 126

Table 11 Cronbach’s Alpha Test…………………………………………..………………..… 129

Table 12 Correlation Coefficient Value Description…………………………………..…… 130

Table 13 Types of Interview Questions and their Sample Questions……………………... 163

Table 14 Summary of Themes…………………………………………………….……………. 173

Table 15 Summary of Research Design………………………………………….….............. 180

Table 16 Summary of Variables and their Coding used in the Research………………… 181

Table 17 Descriptive Statistics of Demographics of the Sample…………………….……. 184

Table 18 Mean Scores Interpretation for Students Attitude Level………………………… 186

Table 19 Descriptive Statistics of the Students' Attitude Level by Ecological Region…. 188

Table 20 Descriptive Statistics of the Students' Attitude Level by Place of Residence…. 190

Table 21 Mathematics Achievement Test Scores…………………………………………….. 191

Table 22 Descriptive Statistics of the Students' Attitude Level by Ecological Region.… 192

Table 23 Descriptive Statistics of the Students' Achievement by Ecological Region

and Place of Residence………………………………………………………………
193
 xvii

Table 24 Tests of Normality of the Students by Place of Residence………………………. 198

Table 25 Analysis of Variance on Students' Achievement in Mathematics by Place. .…. 198

Table 26 Tests of Normality of the Students by Ecological Region……………………….. 199

Table 27 Analysis of Variance of Students Achievement in Mathematics by Ecological

Region…………………………………………………………………………………. 199
Table 28 Tests of Normality of the Students by Gender…………….……………………… 199

Table 29 Analysis of Variance on Students Achievement in Mathematics by Gender…. 200

Table 30 Students Learning Behavior Mean Scores and Level of Interpretation……….. 203

Table 31 Descriptive Statistics of the Students Learning Behavior Subscale by

Ecological Regions………………………………………………………………….... 204
Table 32 Descriptive Statistics of Students Learning Behavior Subscale by Place of
Residence………………………………………………………………………………. 205
Table 33 KMO and Bartlett's Test for Homoscedasticity…………………………………… 220

Table 34 Descriptive Statistics for Test of Normality………………………………………. 225

Table 35 Model Summary for Durbin-Watson Statistic…………………………………….. 226

Table 36 Model Summary……………………………………………………………………….. 227

Table 37 The Significance of Regression Model in F Ratio……………………………..… 228

Table 38 Regression Model Parameters for Students Attitude and Learning Behavior
on Achievement……………………………………………………………................ 228
Table 39 Correlation Coefficient Interpretation Range…………………………..………... 231

Table 40 Spearman Correlations between the Factors of Attitude, Learning Behaviror

and Achievement……………………………………………………………………… 235
Table 41 Correlations among Students Attitude, Learning Behavior, and their
Achievement…………………………………………………………………………… 236
Table 42 Correlations between Factors of Attitude and Achievement……………………. 237

Table 43 Correlations between Learning Behavior Factors and Achievement………….. 238

Table 44 Correlations between the Factors of Attitude and Learning Behavior……. 239

Table 45 Mathematics Classroom Learning Behavior Score Ratio and Percentage…… 241
 xviii

List of Figures

Figure 1 Mutual relation between personal, behaviora, and environmental

factors……………………………..……………………………………………… 67
Figure 2 Conceptual Framework.………………………………………………............. 77

Figure 3 A research framework- Interconnection of paradigm, design,

methodology, methods, and research problem…………...…………………. 87
Figure 4 A mixed method research paradigm: Flowchart of concurrent embedded
mixed method design…………………………………………………………… 91
Figure 5 Schematic Diagram of Mix-method Research Design………….………….. 93

Figure 6 Steps of Test Construction………………………………………..……………. 113

Figure 7 Predicted Student Achievement Score standardized by Student Attitude... 222

Figure 8 Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual…...…………….… 223

Figure 9 Histogram of Regression Standardized Residual………...………..……….. 224

 xix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS/ACRONYMS

AJOL African Journals Online

ANOVA Analysis of Variance
ATMI Attitude towards Mathematics Inventory
CBI Classroom Behavior Inventory
CDC Curriculum Development Center
CERID Centre for Educational Research, Innovation and development
CLBC Classroom Learning Behavior Checklist
CLBSI Classroom Learning Behavior Self-Assessment Inventory
ERIC Educational Resource Information Center
ETC Education Training Centre
ERO Education Review Office
GON Government of Nepal
GPA Grade Point Average
JSTOR Journal Storage
MAT Mathematics Achievement Test
MOE Ministry of Education
ERO Education Review Office
NCED National Centre for Educational Development
NCTM National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
Ph D Doctor of Philosophy
PISA Program for International Student Assessment
RQ Research Question
SCLT Social Cognitive Learning Theory
SEE Secondary Education Examination
SLC School Leaving Certificate
SLT Social Learning Theory
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Mathematics is taught as a fundamental subject in schools all over the world

and positioned as an important subject in the school curriculum. In the context of

Nepal, it is considered as one of the compulsory subjects from Basic Level to grade X

at the Secondary Level curricula. Regardless of the importance given to mathematics

at school curriculum, many students struggle to understand the subject (Mazana,

Montero & Casmir, 2019) and achieving poor (ERO, 2019). Many students think that

mathematics is a very difficult subject matter to learn (Capuno et al, 2019) and is

expressed as a difficult, tedious, and indefinable subject (Gafoor & Kurukkan, 2015).

Mathematics has eased almost all facets of our life. Human life is sure to be

very complicated in the absence of mathematics. Therefore, it has become a growing

interest for many people, literate or illiterate, that they have been using mathematical

elements in their day-to-day behaviors. Mathematics has the stand-in a key role in

shaping diverse spheres of personal, societal, and public life of individuals (Anthony

& Walshaw, 2009). In fact, the scope of mathematics is so broad that nobody can

escape its coverage and implications. Thus, the knowledge of mathematics could be of

assistance to resolve the numerous problems that everyone faces in their daily lives.

On the other hand, in reality, a large number of people, in particular, have an aversion

to mathematics. They do not appear to be very concerned in doing it.

Mathematics is a noteworthy subject by means of its wide applicability in the

people's daily life; so far it is repeatedly measured as a complex subject in schools

(Kaur, 2017). Numerous students consider mathematics as an uninteresting and

disengaging subject and they hatred mathematics and try to keep away from it by the
 2

cause of mathematics anxiety (Colgan, 2014). In recent times, the researchers in the

field of education have investigated the factors that affect the students'

accomplishment in mathematics. The main reasons for their dislikes are the frequent

stress to perform well, over-loaded tasks and assignments, unexciting lessons, and to

have low positive attitudes on the teachers' side (Mata et al., 2012). There is question

whether Nepalese students exhibit the same attitudes and learning behaviours as the

research in other parts of the world express and how attitude and learning behavior

affect on achievement. Students' attitudes and predisposition towards mathematics can

be assessed through their viewpoint, preference, choice, and insightful beliefs.

Students’ attitudes and behaviors are predictable on the basis of different variables

like teaching method, materials, classroom organization and emotional support of the

teacher etc. (Blazar & Kraft, 2017).

Despite trained teachers, curricular reforms, and management of need-based

training to the teachers in Nepal, students' achievement in mathematics are

comparatively poor. NASA (2019) shows that many students are at the

underperforming level in school level education especially in mathematics, and the

achievement of the students' is also in decreasing trends for some years. There may be

several causes need to be identified and treated to motivate students towards

mathematics and improve achievement.

Even in a single classroom, individual students need a different amount of

time and instruction to accomplish the goal (Schleicher, 2018). Some students require

additional instruction time; and some require different learning environments than

others according to their belief, self-efficacy, and potentialities (OECD, 2009). These

factors help to form their attitude towards mathematics. So, knowledge of students'

attitudes and their potential effects on students' classroom learning behaviors and
 3

ultimately impact on their achievement are urgent need to devise appropriate

instructional strategy in classroom for increasing the success rate in mathematics.

Usually, how mathematics is presented by the teachers in the classroom and perceived

by the students tends to alienate many students from mathematics even though the

teachers believe that they are giving authentic and contextual presentation in the

classroom (Barton, 2000).

Students' attitude towards learning mathematics is significantly related to the

students’ learning environment (Maat & Zakaria, 2010). Karjanto (2017) found that

student's attitudes towards mathematics result in a significant positive correlation to

their achievement in mathematics. This study has clearly stated the three variables'

relationships learner attitudes, which the learners have developed or brought into the

classroom environment; learner behaviors; which they emit in the classroom; and the

achievements in correlations between their attitudes and classroom behaviors.

According to Self-Perception Theory, a student who has a positive attitude creates a

willingness to learn the subject and helps in developing positive learning behaviors in

the subject (Bem, 1972), in turn, further results in positive learning behavior.

Considering Bandura's social-cognitive theory (Bandura, 1989), learners are very

likely to form such attitudes by interacting with other people in the environment-

mainly teachers, friends, family members, and community members.

From the discussion above, it comes to know that there is a need of

understanding the learner's attitudes towards mathematics and their learning

behaviours to suggest suitable strategies for the enhancement of pedagogy for

mathematics. Despite the continual efforts in the field of teacher development, the

cognitive aspect of learning and content organization, and timely amendments of the

curriculum targeted at education reform in the Nepalese context, but achievements in

 4

mathematics still seem to be at a lower place (Upadayay, 2001; Ghimire, 2010; ERO,

2013; Panthi & Belbase, 2017; Mahato, Morgan & Earnest, 2019 & ERO, 2019). It is

even more challenging that they are in a rather decreasing trends in recent years.

There is also a huge gap in mathematics achievement of the students over the

geographical region (MOE, 2015). The ERO report (2017) states that "… in

mathematics, the average achievement score is 57% in the institutional schools

whereas it is 26% in the community schools". This inconsistency in the achievement

of the institutional and community schools also shows the achievement gap by school

type in mathematics. The report also recommends that the achievement of the students

between urban and rural schools consists of the huge gap and it is about 24% in grade

8 (MOE, 2015). The gap of the students' achievement in school level education in

general and particularly in mathematics has been a fundamental issue in Nepalese

context. One can project that there may be different factors causing this, although the

exact cause of this underperforming mathematics is not clearly known (SLC Study,

2005).

Ther report (ERO, 2019) recommends that the ground reality behind such

decreasing students' achievement in mathematics require additional inquiry to get the

reality of such downfall of the students' achievement. Since, there are efforts to

improve teacher training, curriculum revision, teachers guide and reference materials

for the teachers, but the achievements of students are not improved. So, there is a need

to analyse, the missing aspect in the Nepalese context such as students' attitudes, their

classroom learning behaviors, teachers teaching and learning support to the students.

Students' attitudes are not inherent but developed over time as the

consequences of students' knowledge and understanding, that can be changed

gradually and have considerable effect on the performance of students in mathematics

 5

(Khoo & Ainley, 2005). Attitudes can change and develop over the time (Syyeda,

2016), and just the once when the student formed a positive attitude, it helps to

develop the students' learning behaviors (Mutai, 2011). Students' attitudes towards the

subject have a greater impact on academic achievements (Peteros et al., 2019). The

change of attitude through learning can occur, when such responses that are learned

can personalize through their observations, personal experiences, consciousness and

reflection (Maio & Haddock, 2014).

Among the different factors related to students learning mathematics, attitude

is considered by different researchers as a key source for making mathematics

performance to higher or lowers (Mohamed & Waheed, 2011; Mata et al., 2012;

Peixoto, 2012; Ngussa & Mbuti, 2017). A recent study, conducted in Tanzania shows

that the enhancement of the students' attitude towards positive direction can heighten

their mathematics performance (Ngussa & Mbuti, 2017). Conversely, the students'

negative attitudes hamper their learning effectively and accordingly influence their

overall performance or learning outcome (Joseph, 2013). From this study, one can

assume that students' attitude is a basic aspect that cannot be disregarded in teaching

and learning process at both school's level education and higher education.

The attitude associated to the earlier experiences or the contribution of the

consequential attitudes to future behavior, negative attitude always leads to reduce

motivation and positive attitude helps to overwhelm problems and thus support for

motivation (Rumbaugh et al., 2012). Hence, the consequence of students' attitude on

mathematics achievement might be positive or negative depending on the students'

individual knowledge and experiences. Such relationships between attitude and

motivation can respectively hinder or facilitate students' learning behaviors and thus

in their achievement. Since the prevalent literature showed the impact of students'
 6

attitudes towards students' achievements, how attitudes elicit students' learning

behaviors and the effect of learning behaviors in students' achievement is yet to be

explained academically. This prevalent knowledge gap in Nepalese mathematics

education indicates that there is a further need to explore and establish the relation

between students' attitudes, learning behaviors, and achievements. In response to this

gap, this study seeks to explore the status and association between the variables:

students' attitudes, learning behaviors, and their achievements. Furthermore, it brings

insights into the effects of students' attitudes and learning behaviors on their

achievements in mathematics in the context of Nepal.

Statement of the Problem

The nature of learning cannot be explained by just one theory. As discussed by

Belanger (2011), learning includes three theories: 'what' (behaviorism), 'why'

(cognitivism), and 'how' (constructivism). Based on these theories, efforts have also

been made to elucidate the nature of the learners and their learning atmosphere in and

outside the classroom. Basically, these theories of learning explain cognitive aspects

of learning process. In the researcher's years of experience as teacher educators has

got opportunity of observing teaching and learning of mathematics in Nepal, reveals

that the learners' traits chiefly are over-dependence on the teacher, rote learner,

avoidance of interaction and active participation, taken for granted

(reservation/silence) in the name of discipline, and imitation of the role-model.

According to Ballad and Clanchy (1991), the mentioned observations of the traits are

generally the traits of "passive learners". Despite substantial efforts in teacher

training, and the continuous assessment of student achievements (MOE, 2017),

progress in students learning outcomes is not attained at desired level in mathematics

at the school level. Systemic reform efforts have continually been placed in actions
 7

through teacher development, curriculum development, terminal testing, and

methodological improvement (MOE, 2017). However, these efforts have resulted in

minimal improvement in students' learning outcomes. Study on effects of teacher

training showed there is no special impact on the students' achievements or better

performance in the students’ results at the school level education (Gautam, 2016).

Also, a study report by Leung, Park, Shimizu, and Xu (2015) revealed that, in East

Asia, mathematics teaching needed the most comprehensive interpretation to make

easy for the learner. At practice level, most of the school mathematics teachers

believe on learning through memorizing and recalling accurate information given in

the textbook (Acharya, 2015). The students' interests and desires are ignored, and they

are treated as passive learners rather than active learners.

Learning is planned according to the teacher's desire and intention, paying less

attention towards students' learning attitude, behaviors, and interest. There have been

no studies in learner attitudes and behaviors, particularly in mathematics learning in

Nepalese context. Arguably, it can be said that one reason for this is that students'

perspectives are neglected in pedagogic practices in mathematics. However, the

literature reveals, learner attitudes and learner behaviors are also crucial variables

influencing learner achievements in mathematics.

Students who have more positive attitudes towards mathematics have the

higher level of achievement (Mestsamuuronen & Kafle, 2013). This indicates the the

role of attitude for higher achievement. In general, mathematics practitioners think

that students having positive attitudes towards mathematics will achieve better

(Berger, et al., 2020). Contrarily, it can be argued that the negative attitude towards

mathematics causes several problems in learning it. So, logically, I assume that

students' attitudes influence learner's behaviors in the classroom positively or

 8

negatively which ultimately reflects impact on student achievements. So, students'

attitudes towards mathematics can be considered as an issue to be addressed for the

improvement of students' learning outcomes in mathematics in school education in

Nepal.

Globally the education system is facing one of the key problems today is

learners' classroom behaviors (Andreason, 2011). Likewise, Rossouw's (2003) study

emphasized that the declining trends of the learners' active behavior may cause to go

down the effective teaching and learning processes. Hence, the learners' classroom

behavior can be considered as an alternative avenue to be investigated to deal with

this global concern to improve the mathematics performance at schools. Similarly,

there have been studies on different variables like socioeconomic status, gender, peer

influence, parental support, prior mathematics achievement, students' perception

about mathematics, etc that influence mathematics achievements, but very few

researches are made on how students' attitudes towards mathematics forms and impact

on students' overall learning behaviours to improve achievement in mathematics. In

the context of Nepal, there is no academic research on building knowledge how

students' learning behaviour elicit the desired learning behaviours for the

improvement of mathematics acheivement. Much is said about the cognitive, teachers,

and classroom management variables that influence students' achievements, but fewer

explanations are found regarding attitudes induced learning behaviors and their

impact on learning achievement even in international level too and no comprehensive

study is done in Nepal to date. Therefore, it seems necessary to bring insights on how

to develop, maintain and reinforce the learners' positive attitudes toward mathematics

and its considerations for improved classroom behavior, overall learning behavior,

and expecting good achievement in mathematics. Therefore, the present study is

 9

confined to the overarching research question and subsidiary questions to address the

above-mentioned issues. The overaching question is: How is the association between

student attitudes, students' learning behaviors towards mathematics and student

achievements? And the subsidiary questions are: Does the attitude towards

mathematics and mathematics learning behavior impact their achievement? Does the

student's achievement differ by gender, place of residence, and ecological region and

how is the relation among the three variables, namely students’ attitudes, learning

behavior, and achievement towards mathematics of secondary students of Nepal?

Significance of the Study

In the learning process, attitude is considered as a significant predictor of

achievement because the learner who encompasses more positive attitudes toward

school keep themselves more active participation in learning process and they keep it

up their effort longer to complete the difficult tasks (Reyes, 1984; Wilkins, 2004). The

present study has tried to explore and explain how the attitude induced learning

behaviours towards mathematics impact on students' achievements in the context of

Nepal. The study aims to investigate the attitude of students toward mathematics in

general and analyzes students' attitudes in terms of different categorical variables such

as student's demography, ecological region and place of residence. The results of this

study reveal that the early effect of the learners' attitude toward mathematics is on

their learning behaviour and learning behaviour affected their achievement. Thus, this

study has contributed a new knowedge to the relation of the existing knowledge

regarding students’ attitudes, learning, and achievement concerning to the school level

mathematics in Nepal. Furthermore, it also reveals the possible ways of creating

students' positive attitudes towards mathematics. These results are expected to be

useful for schoolteachers of mathematics for planning their lessons with different
 10

learning approaches and strategies addressing students' diversity in learning

behaviors.

Classroom learning in Nepal at the school level takes place in multilingual and

multicultural contexts in general since most of the students studying in school belong

with the different linguistic and cultural backgrounds (Panthi & Belbase, 2017).

Society is mostly influenced by the social and religious culture that denotes the

attitudes, beliefs, values, and behavior of the social group (Pokharel & Paudel, 2013).

In terms of the classroom learning perspective, Asian students are considered as

passive, obedient, and unquestioning learners (Raymond & Choon, 2017). The learner

attached to the Asian cultural background are still found to be passive and obedient

and are prone to respect to the seniors, older and with a higher rank people

(Thompson, 2009). In this sense, Asian students are differing from the students from

the West in their learning behavior and needs and thus a large group of students are

estimated to value their teachers, answers only the questions asked by teachers, show

a few involvements in small group activity and discussions, and hence considered as

passive learners (Raymond & Choon, 2017). The result of the study has similar facts

exhibited regarding learning behaviour and their engagement in learning. This implies

that the pedagogical theories developed within western cultural backgrounds may not

address the students learning behaviors. This is the matter of concern of anthropo-

cognitive and the anthropo-affective dimension of learning that needs to be

undertaken for improved learning behavior and achievement in mathematics. The

anthropo-cognitive dimension is concerned with the study of cultural variations

among different group of people in the world in which it focuses on how people

conceive of and thinks about events and objects and what they perceive (D'Andrade,

1995). It is the investigations of cognitive processes within a group of people with

 11

different cultural backgrounds. The anthropo-affective dimension is the study of the

relationship between human affective systems- emotions, feelings, and sentiments and

the different groups of people from various cultures that influence the behavior of the

people (Charland, 2001). This implicates that every learner of the society has

developed the indigenous values that directly impact their attitude and the learning

behavior. This study has analyzed the students' attitudes and behavior from the

perspectives of social variables and their implications in mathematics learning, and

achievement.

In the Nepalese context students are treated as passive listeners rather than

active learners (Dhakal, 2014). The student classroom learning is dominated by the

teacher and the way of teaching is also teacher-centered in Nepal. So, the classroom

learning culture needs to be reformed for effective learning and student

encouragement is needed for active participation in classroom learning (Pokharel &

Paudel, 2013). Cultural influence is the means we view the world (Ornek, 2015). So,

learning cannot be alienated from the existing society and the culture (Vygotsky,

1987). Thus, socio-cultural background influences the attitudes of the students toward

mathematics learning, learning behaviors, and thus mathematics achievement.

Therefore, to uplift the students' lower achievement in mathematics, it is necessary to

know the state of student attitudes and their learning behaviors. The results of the

study add an explanation to the existing knowledge of attitude, learning behaviors,

and mathematics achievement of secondary students. The results of the study can be

equally important for the educational planner and administrator to revisit on the

planning and program for ensuring quality improvement as well as enhancement of

the mathematics achievement.

 12

It is anticipated that the study has added a knowledge in the literature related

on teacher professional development that attitude and learning behaviour analysis skill

are necessary for teachers' profession courses. First, the research has generated

knowledge about how students' attitudes towards mathematics influence their

classroom behaviors and their learning achievements can provide ideas on how to

bring these components in teacher education and training courses. This may also

provide insights into instructional practices in mathematics and teacher adoption of

specific practices in other fields as well. Similarly, the instruments developed for

identifying the student's classroom learning behaviors is another significant

contribution of the study that this tool can be used to anlyse students' attitude and

learning behaviours. Hence, it can be expected to be helpful for identifying the real

situation of instructional practices and to explore the variables that influence the

instructional practices of school level mathematics teaching to ultimately improve

student achievements.

Objectives of the Study

The objectives of this study were as follows:

1. To explore the secondary level students' attitude towards mathematics,

learning behaviors, and achievements in Nepal;

2. To examine the students'preferred classroom behavior of learning

mathematics according to their attitudes considering the major learning

theories;

3. To analyse the status of students' achievements in relation to their

attitudes levels and learning behaviors; and

4. To establish the relationships between attitudes, learning behaviors,

and achievements as variables.

 13

Research Questions

The research study was carried out to answer the research questions (RQs) below:

i) What are the attitude levels of grade X students of community schools towards

learning mathematics in Nepal?

ii) What is the status of grade X students' achievements in mathematics?

iii) What are the levels of student learning behaviors that the student exhibit while

learning mathematics?

iv) How do the students preferred to learn mathematics aligning to the learning

theories?

v) What effect do the students' attitudes and learning behaviors have on the students'

achievements in mathematics?

vi) What is the relationship between students' attitudes, learning behaviors, and

achievements in mathematics as variables?

Hypotheses of the Study

The alternative hypotheses of the present study were as follows:

HA1: There is significant difference in the overall mean scores of the grade

X students' achievement in mathematics by ecological region.

HA2: There is significant difference in the overall mean scores of the grade

X students' achievement in mathematics by place of residence.

HA3: There is significant difference in the overall mean scores of the grade

X students' achievement in mathematics by gender.

HA4: There is significant effect of independent variables (attitudes and

learning behaviors in mathematics) on the dependent variable

(achievement in mathematics) of grade X students.

 14

HA5: There is significant positive correlation between the variables:

students' attitude, learning behavior, and achievement in mathematics

at grade X.

Delimitations of the Study

The study was carried out with some delimitations to make the research result

more realistic. First, the participants were limited to community schools' students and

the concerned mathematics teachers. The teachers and the students from the

institutional schools were not selected for this study. It is not logical to make

comparison as well as mix up the institutional schools in the group of community

schools because of the wider difference in per child investment cost, social and

economical categories of the students, teaching learning and physical environment of

the schools. A distinct study related to community schools was the concerned of the

study. Therefore, the findings of the study may not be generalizable to the privately

managed institutional schools of Nepal. Second, the researcher required 398

participants (Cochran 1977; Bartlett, Kortlik & Higgins, 2001; Yamane (1967) for

this study in the quantitative part. However, the participants were over-recruited (n =

540) to attain enough participants and more representativeness for this study. This

sample size was designed considering the internal validity (representativeness). Third,

the study was limited to the demographic variables as gender, place of residence, and

geographical region. Fourth, students' classroom behaviours were recorded using

classroom observation cheklist as reported by the subject teacher. So, there could be

the possibility of subjective judgement on the reported information. Fifth, there is a

common understanding among people and even among scholars that female students

are poorer in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics than male students.

Similarly, the school level achievement as reported in Education Review Office

 15

(ERO, 2019) reports shows that the female achievement in mathematics is lower than

that of the male students at schools in the context of Nepal. However, the result of this

study denies this fact. For this reason, a detailed, in-depth study on this issue is not

covered fully at this moment for this knowledge is unfolded in the present study and

an authentic explanation requires through a future study.

Operational Definitions of the Key Terms

The research study included the definitions of some key terms explain some

central concepts used to understand how they have used within the study framework.

Such definitions especially support to understand the problem and the overall

framework of the study. The operational definitions of the key terms used in this

study are presented as:

Achievement Level

In this study, to find the status and analyze the secondary level students'

achievement in mathematics, some benchmarks have been defined to compare the

achievement scores in mathematics. Thus, the achievement score of the students in

mathematics test was defined into three categories by using percentile. The score

above the 75th percentile was defined as the high achievement, below the 25th

percentile as the low achievement and the achievement between the 25th and 75th

percentile scores was defined as an average or moderate achievement.

Attitude

Attitude is the term used to state the conditions of the person's predisposition

or a tendency to respond positively, negatively, or neutrally to a certain object, idea,

person, or situation. Attitude manipulates the person's responses, choice of action,

challenges, rewards and incentives. In this study, the participants' choice, feeling,

belief, and actions about the mathematics of grade X students as expressed in the
 16

survey instruments are referred to as attitude. Attitudes are the experiences learned

through observing, modeling, and imitating the subjects in a person's behaviors.

Classroom Environment

Classroom environment is defined as the complete setting where the student

learning can take place. Classroom environment consists of physical and

psychological components (Kilgour, 2006) that affect students' attitudes, learning

behavior, and achievement. The physical component of the classroom environment

consists of all physical conditions such as the classroom, teaching materials, learning

facilities, furniture management, ventilation, air circulation, space, light, and internal

and external noise statuses. The psychosocial component is related to teacher-

student(s) and student(s)-student(s) interactions within their social norms and values.

Classroom Learning Behavior

A classroom learning behavior is conceived in this study as any activity that

the student exhibits as a response to the curriculum (cognitive), to others (social), and

to the self (emotional) in the mathematics classroom. It is an activity, desirable or

undesirable, emanated by the student(s) in the classroom, measurable with regard to

the classroom learning behavior questionnaire.

Community School

A community school is a school established and fully funded by the

Government of Nepal (GoN). All physical facilities and human resources in such a

school are provided by GoN and are run under the rules and regulations of GoN. The

community schools implement the curriculum and textbook prepared and approved by

the GoN.

Levels of Attitude Score

The levels of the attitude score are the self-defined levels or categories of

attitude score related to the grade X community schools mathematics students' attitude

towards mathematics obtained by implementing the adapted version of the attitude

 17

scale, attitude towards mathematics inventory (ATMI) developed by Tapia & Marsh

(2004). The levels of scoring consists of a numerical category with five-levels and the

range of scores are as highly positive (4.50-5.00), positive (3.50-4.49), neutral (2.50-

3.49), negative (1.50-2.49), and highly negative (1.00-1.49).

Levels of Learning Behavior Score

The levels of learning behavior score are the self-defined categories or levels

of students' classroom learning behavior score related to the grade X students

mathematics learning behaviors in the community schools obtained by using the self-

constructed Classroom Learning Behavior Self-Assessment Inventory (CLBSI) by the

investigator. The level of scoring consists of a numerical category with five-levels and

the range of scores are as highly negative (1.00-1.49), negative (1.50-2.49), neutral

(2.50-3.49), positive (3.50-4.49), and highly positive (4.50-5.00). The range of score

and the levels of learning behavior were adapted from Andamon and Tan (2018).

Location

In this study, the term location refers to a physical place to which the schools

or school children belong. For this study purpose, location is suggestive of urban and

rural areas/sites in all the three ecological regions- the Mountain, the Hill, and the

Terai.

Mathematics

The text book of compulsory subject, mathematics, used in secondary level

school for grade X and is prescribed by the Government of Nepal, MOE, prevailing

all community schools

Mathematics Achievement

In this study, the achievement of the students in mathematics test constructed

and validated by the investigator has been define by using the percentile score to find

their status of community school students' grade X mathematics achievement.

 18

School Location

In this study, school location has been defined as rural and urban on the basis

of the local government status in Nepal. The sampled secondary school located in the

Municipal area has been categorized as the school of urban location and the students

studying in such school as the students of urban location. In the same way, the

sampled school located in the rural municipal area has been categorized as the school

of rural location and the students studying in such school as the students of rural

location.

Student Achievement

Achievement is the score obtained by each of the students/participants in the

test constructed and administered by the researcher for this study. In this research,

student achievement refers to the marks obtained in the mathematics test by the

students of grade X designed by the researcher for the research proposes.

 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

This chapter is focused on literature review. The literature review is the

process of locating, obtaining, and evaluating the literature in the related area of the

research. The main purpose of reviewing the related literature is to obtain some ideas

to develop a proper research blueprint as well as methodology for the study and to

widen the knowledge of the researcher in the concerned field of research and to

rightly locate the problem. So, it is a fundamental part of the research and a way of

determining uncovered areas of research. The critically reviewed literature facilitates

the researcher to widen the understanding and insight into the present research study.

It also helps to avoid the same research area and the process that has already been

researched, and importantly it helps to find the research gap or search for unanswered

areas.

This chapter attempts to conceptualize the attitude, students' attitudes towards

mathematics, student learning behaviors, and achievement in mathematics at the

school, and higher levels based on theoretical literature and empirical research

studies. Under this section, the reviews are presented under different sub-sections

coverning major thematic areas with a special highlight of students' attitudes,

classroom behaviors, and achievements in relation to the reviewed literature.

Conceptualizing Attitude and Its Relation to Mathematics Learning

The construct attitude is considered as a French term originated from the

Italian word 'attitudine' and the Late Latin 'aptitudin', meaning

opinion, view, sentiment, or belief (American Heritage Dictionary of the English

Language, 2000; Venes, 2001). The concept of attitude has been evolving from its
 20

history. In the beginning, the concept of attitude has been considered as readiness to

respond to something. Continually the term has been developed as the integration of

the person's opinions, feelings, beliefs, actions and specific behaviors.

The term 'attitude' is an intangible concept and is used widely in the field of

education and social sciences. It was initiated to use at the beginning of the nineteenth

century. At the time of beginning stage, the construct 'attitude' was used in the field of

social psychology (Allport, 1935). In that period, it was also used to guess the

contextual problems and behaviors of the person when the person involved in the

choice/preference-based action such as voting or buying goods (Di Martino & Zan,

2014). The term was introduced by Allport (1947) nearly 74 years ago with the classic

definition as "mental and neural state of readiness, organized through experiences,

exerting a direct or dynamic influence upon the individual’s response to all objects

and situations with which it is related".

It is seen as an attribute of the person that has different dimensions and has a

direct influence on people's feelings, emotions, and behavior. The study about the

term attitude, in mathematics education, was appeared early in the middle of the 20th

century (Di Martino & Zan, 2014). The field of social psychology has been holding a

great role in the origin of the construct attitude, its characterization and the

development of the measurement and assessing techniques (Aiken, 1970). The

meaning of attitude has been changed from one-dimension to multi-dimensions in the

field of research. Since the attitudes are a person's mental states, they cannot be

observed directly. Hence attitude can be measured by using different methods directly

and indirectly.
 21

Student Attitudes towards Mathematics

In the national and international contexts, there have been several studies on

student attitudes and outcomes in mathematics. The term attitude is widely used in

different disciplines. Generally, attitude focuses on the favorability of reactions. The

influence of the students' attitudes towards mathematics depends upon their

performance and engagement in the subject (Moenikia & Zahed-Babelan, 2010). The

degree of attitude towards mathematics manifests with their level of satisfaction while

engaging in the related tasks. Hence, positive attitudes regarding mathematics are

essential to promote the student’s willingness to learn the subject and bring it in the

mathematics instruction (Vitanova et al., 2015). In the same way, a negative attitude

regarding mathematics would direct the learner at reluctance in the subject, that may

hamper the mathematics learning (Mata et al., 2012).

Students’ attitude is affected by numerous factors like using inappropriate

instructional materials, bad instructional practices, classroom management, and class

activities (Joseph, 2013; Enu et al., 2015). Such instructional practices that the teacher

utilize in the classroom and the students’ attitude regarding mathematics affect the

students learning and performance (Mazana et al., 2019). Thus, the study on students'

attitudes regarding mathematics together with allied factors and their relationship to

the educational achievement is definitely worth examining. In such consideration, it is

essential to locate the ways of improving the performance of the students. Different

researchers have also claimed that the attitudes of the students have the greater

influence on learning and their achievement. Students having positive attitudes

towards mathematics performed better but, even with the number being undersized,

however, students' negative attitudes have a greater negative effect on their

achievement and learning thus, it is necessary to be overlooked (Mazana et al., 2019).

 22

Attitude can be considered as an acquired behavioral temperament (Maio &

Haddock, 2010). According to them, when it is attained, it mainly affects the

cognitive emotion of the person to view somewhat and the person tend to perform

towards it. Hannula (2002) states that attitude belongs to an affective feeling of the

person as liking or disliking about anything and that influence the behavior. The

attitude of the students that are developed earlier can have influential impacts on their

efficient participation, engagement, as well as achievement in mathematics (Khun-

Inkeeree et al., 2016).

Attitude is the consequence of the experiences; it is not the inherent

characteristics and can be changed as the individual perceive the new situation and the

environment. Slightly incongruent with the definition operationalized in this research,

attitudes are regarded as more cognitive and more constant than feelings and emotions

(NCTM, 2007). However, students' attitudes are more flexible and influences on

student’s active participation in learning, as they are formed due to the impact of

teaching, curriculum and the curriculum, teaching practices, and managerial planning

(Khun-Inkeeree et al., 2016). Attitude cannot be observed directly and it emerges

indirectly from the observable behaviors of individuals (Solpuk, 2017). The formation

of attitude mainly starts from the beginning of childhood and mainly the peers and

parents influence to form the attitudes. Child experiences, their cultural background,

and social interactions mainly influence in the formation of attitude. From the above

discussion, it comes to our knowledge that attitudes can be changed as the time,

situation and the context changes or the experience of the individual changes due to

different reasons.

There are three main components of attitude: affective, cognitive, and

behavioral (Syyeda, 2016). The cognitive component concerned with the individual
 23

sense or believes in relation to the object. Similarly, affective component of attitude

comprises the individual's emotions and feelings related to the object. Likewise, the

behavioral component belongs to the person's tendency to respond to the object.

Therefore, all the three components of attitude, affective, cognitive and behavioral are

interrelated.

The working definition of attitude for this study is, as a state of emotion or

feeling concerning to the objects, beliefs, and knowledge about the object determining

a choice of action described as either of 'positive', 'negative', and 'neutral' or a

tendency to respond the object. Besides, attitudes towards mathematics have been

defined as a construct that decides the method of responding mathematics in the

certain contexts and situation. The working definition of attitude approximates the

definition of Hodges and Kim (2013) as, attitude results- liking or disliking, being

interested or not interested in mathematics learning. In the same way, the neutral state

is the condition of neither liking nor disliking learning mathematics.

In this very situation, attitudes have been defined in the different ways. Neale

(1969) defined attitude concerning to mathematics as “a liking or disliking of

mathematics, a tendency to engage in or avoid mathematical activity, a belief that one

is good or bad at mathematics, and a belief that mathematics is useful or useless”.

This definition of Neale was widely accepted and used (Ma & Kishor, 1997; Zan &

Di Martino, 2007).

Regardless of consent on attitude being a vague construct (Hannula, 2002;

Malmivuori, 2001; Zan & Di Martino, 2007), it would be better to investigate how the

researchers in the earlier and the current situation view it. In the broad sense, attitudes

are defined as “favorable or unfavorable dispositions” regarding the person, object,

activity or idea (Hart, 1989). Attitudes are usually measured as the construct that have
 24

been learned (White et al., 2006) and are somewhat stable (Ma & Willms, 1999) with

some level of stability.

As stated by George and George (2012), attitude always consists of the beliefs,

values and varying degrees of factual knowledge. Attitudes regarding mathematics

can refer to a positive or negative emotional temperament regarding it (Haladyna et

al., 1983). Attitudes describe “predispositions regarding certain sets of emotional

feelings-positive or negative in the mathematical contexts” (Ma & Willms, 1999). The

definition of Hart (1989) also align with the definition of Ajzen and Fishbein (2005)

that attitude is a temperament to respond favorably or unfavorably to an object,

person, institution, or event. Similarly, Morris (1996) defined attitude as a "relatively

stable organization of beliefs, feelings, and tendencies toward something, that is, the

attitude object". Furthermore, he stated that attitudes can envisage the learner's

behavior and can be attained through learning and experience.

In the field of mathematics education, there is not any clear and single

definition of the construct however, a large number of studies concerning to the

attitude has been done. It is normally defined as the effect due to the previous causes

and can be measured through an instrument (Leder, 1985; McLeod, 1992; Ruffell et

al., 1998; Daskalogianni & Simpson, 2000; Di Martino & Zan, 2003). Additionally,

the definition of attitude towards mathematics does not exist a single definition.

Analyzing the meaning of the construct on the basis of the different definitions

discussed in the field of social science and education, it can be categorized in to three

main types as:

 A simple definition of attitude that depicts positive or negative degree of affect

associated with mathematics (Haladyna et al., 1983).

 25

 A tripartite definition of attitude that introduces three components of attitude

as- emotional response toward mathematics, beliefs about mathematics, and

the behavior related to mathematics (Hart, 1989).

 A bi-dimensional definition of attitude consists of two components- emotions

and beliefs concerning to mathematics (Daskalogianni & Simpson, 2000).

Considering the above classification of the definition of the construct, only a

single definition of attitude cannot cover its broad area. In this regard, Kulm (1980)

suggests as "It is probably not possible to offer a definition of attitude toward

mathematics that would be suitable for all situations, and even if one were agreed on,

it would probably be too general to be useful". Thus, the number of definitions

concerning to attitude towards mathematics cannot be limited to a single definition

but can be enriched focusing on different constructs suggested in the definitions.

The major issue regarding attitude towards mathematics is related to the

classification of attitude as positive and negative. The simple definition of attitude

comprises the positive and negative degree of affect that is recognized with positive

(or negative) emotional disposition toward mathematics. However, the

multidimensional definitions of attitude refer to more than one component of attitude

as- emotional response, beliefs, or behavior related components towards mathematics.

This indicates that it may be the positive/negative degree of responses towards

mathematics, their confidence towards mathematics or behavioral activities of the

students towards mathematics.

Morris (1996) describes attitude as a comparatively constant association of

feelings, beliefs, and tendencies toward the object. He further states that, attitudes can

be attained through different learning situations and experiences and in turn can

change the individual's behavior. Similarly, Lefton (1997) recommends attitudes as a

 26

pattern of long-term feelings and beliefs about the ideas, objects, or people which are

related to the earlier experiences of the persons and help them to shape their

upcoming behavior. Such attitudes generally help to interpret the individual and guide

for the new behaviors around them to execute the certain function effectively. Lefton

(1997) further describes the three dimensions of attitude viz. cognitive, emotional, and

behavioral. All these attitude dimensions have a specific role to execute the certain

task. The cognitive aspect of an attitude is concerned to the thoughts and beliefs

system of an individual. The emotional aspect of an attitude belongs to such

evaluative feelings as: like or dislike. The third behavioral aspect of an attitude

establishes or shows the people's beliefs and feelings in their common activities.

There are several definitions for attitude howerever; the comprehensive definition is

given by Asch (1946) whichaligns to the definition of Lefton (1997). He defined

attitudes as lasting dispositions formed by previous experiences. The word

“dispositions” in this definition involves cognitive, emotional, and behavioral

components, where the cognitive component is based on information or knowledge;

the affective component is based on feelings, and the behavioral component is related

to the action or behave that we act or play. Thus, based on the above different

definitions of attitude, it can be concluded that attitude towards places, things,

situations, and people establishes the choices that individuals make.

Attitude toward mathematics has been observed comprehensively (Aiken,

1970; Aiken, 1976; Ma & Kishor, 1997). Numerous definitions regarding attitude

toward mathematics have been developed over years. Neale (1969) defines "attitude

toward mathematics as an aggregated measure of a liking or disliking of mathematics,

a tendency to engage in or avoid mathematics activities, a belief that one is good or

bad at mathematics, and a belief that mathematics is useful or useless". Similarly,

 27

Haladyna, et al. (1983) describe attitude toward mathematics as a "general emotional

disposition toward the school subject of mathematics". Ma and Kishor (1997) extend

Neale ‘s definition of attitude toward mathematics to include students' affective

responses to the easy/difficult dimension as well as the important/unimportant

dimensions of mathematics. As Tapia and Marsh (2000) suggest "society needs to

recognize that the importance of attitude and development of a positive attitude

toward a subject is probably one of the most prevalent educational goals". As Hannula

(2002) claims, the emotional disposition can also be seen as an attitude toward

mathematics. Hannula's definition comprises four components:

 The emotions of the student experiences during mathematics-related

activities;

 The emotions that the student automatically associates with the concept

'mathematics';

 Evaluation of situations that the student expects to follow as a

consequence of doing mathematics; and

 The value of mathematics-related goals in the student's global goal

structure.

As the literature reveals, different variables are determining significant

variations in the student attitudes towards learning mathematics and their

achievements in this subject. Similarly, several research studies have been conducted

in this area and noticed significant differences regarding learner attitudes toward

mathematics and the outcomes depending on the learners' sex (male and female

students). Specifically, there have been considerable gender differences in favor of the

prerofmance of males in complex mathematical tasks (Fennema, 1998).

 28

The literature on student attitudes also emphasizes that the nature of pedagogy

the students are exposed to has a paramount role in the formation of student attitudes.

The most mentionable of such modes/patterns of pedagogy are teacher-directed or

student-centered instruction (the lecture method and inquiry-based cooperative

learning respectively), contextual variables (viz. control environment in teaching,

facilitate the student to make active proper class size, and support of the department

for teaching), appropriateness of academic workload and learning space. Whatever,

the present research stands on the existing attitudes, behaviors, and achievements as

ontology because the purpose is to explore the relationships between these variables.

The varieties of definitions of attitude towards mathematics as stated above

have been discussed over years. Screening all the definitions, two major categories,

namely, one-dimensional and multi-dimensional are the comprehensive ones. One-

dimensional definition of attitude given by Allport (1935) covers “a mental and neural

state of readiness, organized through experience, exerting a directive and dynamic

influence upon the individual’s response to all subjects and situations with which it is

related”. McLeod (as cited in Ayob & Yasin, 2017) defined attitudes towards

mathematics as "emotional responses, which can be positive or negative feelings

based on specific reasons". Aiken (1970) “attitude refers to a learned predisposition or

tendency on the part of an individual to respond positively or negatively to some

object, situation, concept, or another person,” and McLeod (1992) just includes a

positive or negative emotional disposition towards mathematics, etc. These definitions

are not sufficient for recent research. So, the multi-dimensional definition of attitude

comprising the components such as beliefs, thoughts and attributes, emotions or

feeling, and behavior was adopted in this study.

 29

Students' Positive Attitude towards Learning Mathematics

Students' positive attitude towards mathematics reveals a positive affect

towards the subject (Berger et al., 2020). Positive attitude towards learning

mathematics shows the confidence, happiness, sincerity, and determination to the

students. Students positive attitude towards learning mathematics have a tendency to

enjoy, like, or to be interested in learning mathematics and are motivated to attain the

higher performance in mathematics (Hodges & Kim, 2013). As investigated by

Hodges and Kim (2013) about the improvement of the attitudes of the college

students on algebra, they found that students with positive attitudes towards

mathematics were excellent achievers and also developed more positive attitudes than

the low achievers.

A positive attitude is a condition that keeps a positive mindset and positive

belief about the attitude object, no matter whatever the situation. Positive attitude

brings strength, energy, motivation, and initiatives to every individual. This is to say

that a positive attitude towards mathematics reflects a positive emotional disposition

towards mathematics. Students who have positive attitudes be likely to take pleasure

and more concentrated in learning mathematics. As a result, the students with positive

attitude strengthen their study habits or learning activities that in turn helps to

improve their academic performance. Thus, the students with high study attitudes or

positive attitude towards the subject tend to achieve more in comparison to the

students having lower study attitudes (Guinocor et al., 2020). Thus, the students with

positive attitude help to motivate them to achieve better performance in mathematics.

When the attitude refers to positive emotions or feeling it normally perceived as

pleasurable. Likewise, when it refers to positive beliefs or thought, it is generally used

with the meaning shared by the experts or specialist. In the someway, when, the
 30

attitude refers to the positive behavior, it generally means successful (Zan & Di

Martino, 2007). Different research studies confirmed that students generally construct

positive attitudes of liking mathematics because of its importance, knowing their

potentiality and their self-confidence (Evans, 2007; Sirmaci, 2010).

A study to explore the college students' attitudes toward mathematics by Tahar

et al., (2010) found that the students were attracted to learn mathematics. This view of

the students suggests their positive interest and helps them to enjoy for learning

mathematics (Ashaari et al., 2011; Marchis, 2011). Such positive attitudes of the

students' lead to generate educational strategies that aimed at obtaining a better

eagerness from students towards the discipline, consequently, more improved

academic achievement can occur (Escalera Chavez et al., 2019).

The students' positive perceptions towards learning mathematics could

facilitate to increase a positive attitude towards the subject that will, in turn, direct to

the higher performance (Capuno et al., 2019). Perversely, students' negative

perceptions towards mathematics generate low performance in the subject (Mensah et

al., 2013). Therefore, there exists a considerable positive correlation between the

students' attitudes towards mathematics and their performance in mathematics

(Karjanto, 2017; Capuno et al., 2019). Such a positive correlation between the

students’ attitude and their performance in mathematics, and the relation of the

teachers' attitude and their students’ performance in mathematics further reveal that

attitude plays a fundamental role in student learning (Mensah et al., 2013); Capuno et

al., 2019). On this background, the present study is aimed at exploring secondary

level learners' attitudes towards learning mathematics and their achievements in the

context of Nepal.
 31

Student positive attitude towards mathematics reveals a positive emotional

disposition towards the subject and, on the other hand, a negative attitude towards

mathematics reflects to a negative emotional disposition (Mata et al., 2012). Student’s

positive attitude towards mathematics reveals a positive emotional disposition, self-

confidence, enjoyment, and value concerning to the subject. Contrary to this, a

negative attitude towards mathematics reveals to a negative emotional disposition,

self-confidence, enjoyment, and value (Atanasova-Pacemska et al., 2015). Such

attitude character has an effect on the behaviors of an individual, while it is expected

to achieve well in the subject that one enjoys, has confidence in, or finds it more

useful (Atanasova-Pacemska et al., 2015). Students' positive attitudes towards

mathematics can influence the willingness of the learner positively and benefits their

drives for the mathematics instruction (Atanasova-Pacemska et al., 2015). Thus, the

effect of the students’ attitudes toward mathematics on the learner depends on how

often or how well they do it, and how much they obtain or receive enjoyment from it

(Moenikia & Zahed-Babelanb, 2010). Although mathematics is a less preferred

subject for many students, and thus other students may have developed a negative

attitude of disliking the subject. So, it is discussed under the heading that follows.

Students' Negative Attitude towards Learning Mathematics

Several factors may cause in the formation of Students' negative attitude

towards mathematics. This a matter of concern for academics of every country in the

world to sort out and suggest appropriate therapy for reducing the negative attitude

towards mathematics for meaningful learning and better achievement in students.

Scholars from their study have referred different reasons for having negative feelings

about mathematics and their impact of learning. Students'self belief or confidence that

they are not good in mathematics is one of the reasons (Di Martino & Zan, 2014).
 32

Actually, students' belief and their self-concept help them to create interest in learning

mathematics. When the unfavorable attitudes are generated along with these negative

feelings, it creates the obstacles towards learning mathematics (Ganley & Lubienski,

2016). The difficulty about mathematics influences the students towards negative

attitudes either hate, disliking, or negative views about mathematics. Yilmaz et al.

(2010) research concluded that the students who do not have sufficient knowledge

regarding mathematics easily formed negative attitudes towards the subject. Likewise,

the established students' negative attitude towards the subject also affects their

achievement (Barkatsas et al., 2009). Similarly, students spend a lesser amount of

time on study, pay low attention and concentration in doing their work, and

participate with low motivation due to their effect of negative attitude. On the other

hand, in general, the students do not understand mathematics clearly so, they utilize

less time to study mathematics (McLeod, 1994). The students who do not like

mathematics and think it difficult are the consequences of the students' negative

attitude towards mathematics (Ignacio et al., 2006). This harms student’s behavior, so

they do not enjoy mathematics (Guinocor et al., 2020).

Mathematics is assumed by the number of the students as neither useful nor

practical although somewhat a subject that makes them discourages and frustrated

(Ignacio et al., 2006). In this line, the students who consider mathematics as a subject

that cannot make satisfaction were incompetent to utilize their knowledge and skills

related to mathematics while doing it (Amirali, 2010; Ignacio et al., 2006). Thus, the

student's negative attitudes and beliefs that already set a rigid knowledge which

restricts them to realize the value of mathematics in school and its application to their

daily lives (Ganley & Lubienski, 2016).

 33

Therefore, negative attitude is always articulated as emotional feelings such as

fear, frustration, anxiety, laziness, hating, and tediousness. This can always direct to

the negative behaviors. As expressed by Hodges and Kim (2013), "when negative

behaviors are fused with pessimistic belief, things will be perceived as gloomy,

unfavorable, or impossible with undesirable results or conditions". In the school

education, different researchers agreed that most of the students in the elementary

level exhibits positive attitude towards mathematics. However, when the grade level

of the students' increases and enter the secondary level, the number of students with

negative attitude towards mathematics and the level of negative attitude also

increases. Regardless of the number being small, negative attitudes towards

mathematics may have a greater consequence on students’ mathematics learning, thus

it should not be overlooked (Mazana et al., 2019).

In a nutshell, students' attitude is considered as a key factor that contributes to

the higher or lower performance in mathematics (Mohamed & Waheed, 2011; Ngussa

& Mbuti, 2017). Positive attitude always leads to success, creates the positive mind

set, drives the learner to have confidence about his/her own ability, and this in turn

enhance effective learning and the better performance. Similarly, negative attitude

always leads to failure; hampers the effective learning and that consequently affects

their performance (Joseph, 2013).

Attitude and Behavior Relation

In the early days, many the researchers accepted that human behavior is

guided by social attitudes (Ajzen & Fishbein, 2005). In the field of social

psychology, attitude was considered as the key to understanding human behavior

(Watson, 1927). There are two general considerations or assumptions about people's

attitudes and behaviors. The first assumption that people react (verbal or symbolic)
 34

gives insight into how people behave in the real world. This implies that people's

attitude guides their behaviors. Contrarily, in some cases, people might say one thing

and do another (La Piere, 1934). Thus, the prediction of the result or actual behavior

relying on attitudes usually not found consistent. However, it is still true to some

extent that the particular behaviors are mostly guided by a reasoned action approach

that most of the people's behaviors follow logically from their attitudes, beliefs, and

intentions. Human attitudes in some way, guide, influence, direct, shape, or predict

their actual behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 2005), and these attitudes can impact one’s

actions (Ajzen & Dasgupta, 2015).

Conventionally, it is accepted that person's inner state or attitude/belief drives

his/her behaviour. Contrary to this conventional knowledge, Bem's Self-perception

theory (1972) assumes that person's inner state or attitude/beliefs/perceptions are

formed by his/her own overt behaviourin the same way as the outsider evaluate other's

behaviours and makes the perception to the person. Bem's theory further elaborates

that the persons are fully aware while assessing their behaviours with the

circumstances under which the behaviours are elicited. This theory is more helpful in

educational setting to identify student's attitude with their overt behaviour in the

classroom and the impact of the overall learning environment in eliciting the

behavioursthat instigate students form attitude/belief towards person and thing. The

attitude of the person can be figured out through observing their behavior and draw

reasonable inferences. This assumption is related to Bem's Self Perception Theory

(1972) that suggests past behavior influences the learner's attitudes through mediating

their cognitive activity. This attitude-behavior relation gives the inference that

student's attitudes towards mathematics and learning of mathematics instigate to

create learning behavior in students. Bem's theory depicts the procedure in which the
 35

individual lacks the initial attitudes or emotional responses that they form or develop

through observing their own behavior and they come to the conclusions that what

attitudes must have driven that behavior. Self Perception Theory suggests usefulness

of the survey instrument to depict students’ attitudes towards mathematics through

their reporting of their learning behavours and perceptions and student classroom

learning behavior checklist to measure the students’ mathematics learning activity in

the mathematics classroom to assess their attitude. In the same way, as the students

have high achievement in mathematics, they develop a positive attitude towards it. So,

it can be used to describe students' attitudes towards mathematics, learning behaviors

and their corresponding achievement in mathematics. Nagaraju (as cited by

Mendezabal, 2013) claimed that good study habits and positive attitudes are

significant factors to attain good performance in school. Therefore, the teacher should

focus on addressing whatever the shortcomings of the student's positive attitude to

ensure the students learning inside the classroom. It is necessary to encourage the

students to develop positive attitudes as well as positive learning behaviors towards

the subject. In addition, the things or factors that would affect the students' attitudes

and learning behaviors should be reduced for the positive development of the learner

regarding these variables which may be observed (Capuno et al., 2019). It asserts that

people develop their attitude by observing their own behaviors and finally they

conclude that what must have caused for their attitudes. The cause of the behavior is

the behavior itself and the environmental forces working on the individual. In the

previous section, we discuss how students' attitude impacted mathematics learning

based on empirical studies, in the following sections, the discussion is focused on how

students' attitudes facilitate creating learning behavior in them.

 36

Learning Behaviors and Learners' Category

Students’ learning behaviors are the actions or activities related to learning

that enable them to access learning and interact with others in and out of the

classroom. Additionally, learning behaviors help the students to achieve their

curricular goals and to develop emotions, establishing and maintaining positive

relationships with their friends, and other essential life skills. A learning behavior can

be thought of as a behavior that is essential for a person to learn successfully in the

group setting of the classroom (Simon & Tod, 2015). Powell and Tod (2004)

recognized a set of learning behaviors that could usefully be used in school practice

particularly for learning any subjects taught in schools. These desired behaviors are:

 engagement,

 collaboration,

 participation,

 communication,

 motivation,

 independent activity,

 responsiveness,

 self-regard and self-esteem and,

 responsibility,

The listing of the behaviours was not intended to be definitive or exhaustive

but simply a consideration of the possible learning behaviors a teacher might seek to

promote in student for participation in learning. Of particular interest for mathematics,

educators are interested to find out the relationship towards mathematical affects,

cognition, learning, achievement, and participation (Grootenboer & Marshman,

2016). This relation is a difficult, and not essentially a well understood relational
 37

network, however, it is a serious one to comprehend and appreciate towards

mathematics education (McDonough & Sullivan, 2014; Zan et al., 2006). Therefore,

these all aspects of mathematics learning behaviors such as cognition, affect, learning,

and achievement that are necessary to exist jointly for the actual conceptualization

and exploration of its meaning. In the real sense, these all aspects of mathematics

learning are strongly inter-connected and in various respects, it is not easy to separate.

From the behaviourist perspective, learning is the process that leads to change

somewhat permanent way, we observe our environment, the way we deduce stimuli,

and hence, the way we perform the task together with others. The terms “learning

behaviors” have been used to describe learning strategies (Politzer & McGroarty,

1985), “cognitive processes” (Rubin, 1981), and “tactics” (Seliger, 1984; Ellis, 1994)

for the sake of acquiring knowledge, regulating learning, and to make more effective

learning. The term ‘learning behavior’ has been described by studies of the Evidence

for Policy and Practice Information and coordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre, 2004) in

diverse ways. The report recommends that learning behaviors always reflects the

learning activity in the school contexts and these all behaviors are influenced by the

interaction of different aspects such as personal, curricular, and social. Tokanand

Imakulata (2019) states that student's classroom learning, motivation within the

students in the school, and outside the school, can be considered as the students’

learning behavior. Thus, learning behaviors can be described as the learned activities

that facilitate the students to interact with each other's and access them for learning in

and outside of school. It is also the natural part of the learning and interacting so that

they can develop self understanding, positive relationships, and other essential life

skills.
 38

As recorded in the EPP-Centre’s review (2004) report, most of the terms that

were used or observed to study the students learning behaviors were positive. In this

report, the term ‘engagement’, participation, collaboration, motivation,

communication, independent activity, self-regard, responsiveness, responsibility and

self-esteem were used to describe learning behaviors. The terms collaboration,

engagement, and participation were most frequently observed learning behaviors of

the students having age group 5–10 years. In this review, social, cognitive, and

affective theories were included in the studies. This suggests that the use of these

three theories generally focus on the interest of the researches and the learning

behavior attributes.

As indicated by the several research studies, students' intelligence and their

behaviors are important predictors for their academic achievement (McLeod &

Kaiser, 2004). Different learning approaches such as the use of information

communication technology in teaching can influence the students learning behavior or

their learning activity. The main reason of implementing such approaches in teaching

is to encourage the students for active (positive) learning (Dabbagh & Kitsantas,

2012). Thus, students learning behaviors has a greater role in their learning and

performance because the positive learning behavior helps to enhance their learning

and performance. Students learning behaviors are measured or evaluated based on

their frequency and quality. The frequency of the learning behavior is how frequently

the learning behavior occurs or demonstrated by the student in and out of the school,

and quality of the learning behavior is how well or appropriately the behavior is

performed based on grade level. Ellis and Tod (2018) have categorized three types of

behavior for learning relationships in daily practice giving priority to protect and

enhance the students’ behaviors are as follows:

 39

 Relationships with the curriculum: mainly the cognitive component of

learning,

 Relationships with others: mainly the social component of learning,

 Relationships with self: mainly the emotional component of learning.

These three areas are reciprocally interrelated and interdependent. These three

relationships allow us to unpick and understand what and how the pupil is doing; how

they are feeling and who they are with, influencing their learning behavior. It also

permits teachers to employ one of the relationships to make another stronger. For

instance, the implementation of collaborative work (relationship with others) may

serve to get better a student’s relationship with the curriculum if they get chance of

learning in a more fun way by doing it with others. This requires the teacher to

maintain an attentive eye on these and look for chances through the curriculum, the

behavior they shape and their regular interactions with students to develop learning

behaviors. It is possible to identify some example characteristics of behavior for

learning classroom approaches and strategies to learning and behavior are preferred

and assessed beside their expected impact on the three relationships.

Ellis and Tod (2018) further state that the learning behavior should be

measurable as well as observable itself. This point needs to be qualified; in case it

encourages a focus on valuing what is measurable rather than measuring what is

valuable. Some learning behaviors may be quite broad. For example, we might want a

pupil who regularly says, ‘This is boring’ when setting a task, and/or engages in more

appealing distractions that may be available during the lesson, ‘to show an interest in

tasks set’. Learning behaviors are learned actions that enable the learner to access

learning and work together with others effectively in the classroom or outside. These

behaviors are developed in and outside of school. The effectiveness of the students’
 40

learning behaviors in the classroom depends upon how much and how well they learn,

and this also impacts their achievement. It is also related to the time consumption on

the learning activity and the quality of their learning behaviors. The efficiency or

success of the learning behaviors also depends upon the teacher's classroom

management and the manner that reinforces learning.

Solomon and Kendall (1976) found three types of students in the classroom

regarding their certain cognitive and motivational characteristics of fourth-grade

students. The result of the study was found by mix of paper-and-pencil measure and

observation. The descriptions of the students' type and their selected adjoining

variables to identify them are as follows:

 Low prior achievers who value compliance, lack self-confidence, and

intrinsic motivation, and feel powerless,

 Self-confident, motivated prior achievers who value structure and

direction, and

 Children who value autonomy, self-direction, and opportunity for self-

expression.

Thelen (1967), describes the students subjectively into four salient groups-

good, indifferent, bad and lost souls based on their class activity and performance. In

the same way, Silberman (1969) classify the students into four groups according to

their activity and performance- indifference, attachment, rejection, and concern.

Similarly, Good and Power (1976) found four types of students based on the

observation of the students’ behaviors and they also found that the teachers’ effects on

students are likely to differ according to the students’ types involved in the classroom.

The study was observed by using a test battery comprising the variables- instructional

aspects, students' classroom communication style, students' cognitive aspects, and

 41

their personality characteristics. Thus, the four types of students were as social,

success, alienated, and dependent. Among them, three types were like the

classification done by Silberman (1969): success-attachment, alienated-rejected, and

dependent-concern. A study conducted by Donald & Murray (1983) on the junior

high school students from the 11 junior high schools in a large urban school district in

Texas also found four types of students on the basis of their classroom behaviors. The

purpose of the study was to identify four syndromes of classroom behavior. The

instruments used in this study were a 24-item rating scale. Using the hierarchical

grouping method, four types of pupil behaviorgood, outgoing, rebellious, and

withdrawn were derived.

In the course of assessing the students according to their classroom behavior,

every instructor expects about their student's regular attendance and punctuality in the

class, active participation in the class, asking relevant questions, attentiveness, taking

notes, assignments in due time, and respectful manner and behavior (Landrum, 2011;

Parr & Valerius, 1999). Similarly, Galanes and Carmack (2013), states that students

having positive learning behaviors share the same expectations for their peers. They

expect punctuality and regularity, pay attention, taking notes, active participation

during the class, and supportive manner with the teacher from their pairs.

At the same time, some students do not behave alike in the classroom. These

types of behaviors can be measured as disruptive or destructive in the classroom

environment. Such behaviors can be considered as anti-citizenship or unsocial

classroom behavior (Ball et al., 1994). Regarding anti-citizenship behavior, different

researchers have paying attention on two complementary bodies of research- student

misbehaviors and student incivility (Scott et al., 2015). According to them, student's

active behaviors such as cheating and challenging to the teacher and the peers are
 42

considered as the misbehaviors. Students' passive behaviors such as not attentive and

concentrated in the class, sleeping during the class time, reading other materials like

newspaper and engage in others that detract from the classroom learning (Kearney et

al., 2006; Plax & Kearney, 1999). On the other hand, the student incivility consists of

those behaviors verbal or nonverbal in which students habitually or unconsciously

engages and that disrupt themselves or the classroom environment (Miller et al.,

2014).

Smith (1967) observes that, education is seen as the main area of application

within positive psychology. Seligman et al. (2009) defined as the emerging branch of

positive psychology that integrates positive psychology into the educational system to

promote the happiness and traditional skills. As stated by Seligman and Adler (2019),

positive education is the significant means for the students and the community to

deliver positive education in the classroom; delivering rigorous study for the students,

developing positive behaviors and good character, and enhances the students'

performance. The emergence of students' good character and their positive behaviors

has been emphasizing in the recent time (Seligman & Adler, 2019).

The students' positive behaviors in the classroom in turn help to achieve

higher grades. Goksoy (2017) found that there exists a direct relationship between the

students' happiness and their behaviors and choices in life. He further states that, the

students who are happier in their life, they perform positive behaviors and become

more successful. Therefore, the happier students in school always perform positive

behaviors, pay more attention and engagement, participate actively in learning, and

thus academically perform well. So that happiness creates positive behaviors and such

behaviors reinforce the academic achievement of the students and vice-versa

(Lyubomirsky et al., 2005).

 43

The relationship between the student and academic achievement is attributable

to positive behaviors that obviously promote academic learning (Medford &

McGeown, 2012). On the other hand, learning culture may also impact the students

learning behavior. Different researchers in the field of education and social sciences

have distinguished the learner into two groups. The learners or students from the

Eastern countries are considered as the passive learner, and the students from the

Western countries, as the active learners (Tran, 2012). In this context, the students

from Asian countries who have often been considered as the passive learners, and the

students from the Western countries have been described as the active learners having

more independent, self-directed, and well motivated in their learning (Dahlinan &

Watkins, 2000; Kumaravadivelu, 2003; Raymond & Choon, 2017).

In course of investigating different category of behavioral patterns of the

students learning behavior from the students having various group backgrounds such

as religion, culture, ethnic group have been frequently emphasized by recent

researchers. Littlewood (1999); Cortazzi and Jin (1996) credited to the Confucian

legacies to be the passive learning behaviors of the students of Asian groups or

students of eastern country due to their collectivist culture. On the other hand, Cheng

et al. (2011) approached this topic from the perspective of cognitive learning style.

Therefore, learning behaviors of the students from various cultures differ in their

cognitive styles and can have distinct classroom learning behaviors (Cheng, 2000;

Masuda & Nisbett, 2006). However, the learners from the Asian groups, who are

passive learners due to their cultural background, are found higher achievers from

PISA and TIMS in comparison to the western active learner. The high achievement of

the students in mathematics may cause their good discipline, their own work habit,
 44

and the well-practiced in defining, describing, listening, and writing skills as well as

their convergent thinking.

The word engagement/participation/involvement is borrowed from the field of

social sciences (Zeng, 2001). It illustrates a condition when an individual attach in a

group activity. It focuses on impartiality at the time of student teacher's interaction in

the education sector and improves their relationship. Different researcher argued that

students' engagement is a compound concept that includes emotional, cognitive, and

behavioral engagement (Kong, 2003). In this study, students’ participation refers to

the participation in learning mathematics; it mainly refers to students’ learning

behavior, but it can also reflect, to some extent, their social, cognitive, and emotional

behavioral participation. Differently stated, students' participation also includes their

involvement in learning or learning activity.

It is considered that the students’ activity and behavior in the mathematics

classroom should be active and participatory. Students can develop their mathematics

literacy through the classroom participation (Dong et al. (2014). Similarly, effective

mathematics learning can be done though the active engagement, continuing

discussion, and reflection on ones’ own and others’ actions (Gravemeijer, 1994). This

is mainly important in existing mathematics education, where skills and knowledge

are actively constructed through investigation, determination, and exploration on a

wide variety of challenging and complex problem-solving tasks (NCTM, 2000).

However, the relevance of these behaviors has still to be established in the particular

context of mathematics learning. So, this study brings a new angle of inquiry in

exploring what the student learning behaviorsactive or passiveimpact on their

achievement in Nepali context. Likewise, this also investigates whether the

corresponding learning behavior depends on the students' attitudes.

 45

The reviewed literature related to students’ behaviors indicates different types

of behaviors students exhibit in the classroom (in many cases outside the classroom

also) and show their relations to learning achievement. Contrary to this, none of the

studies so far reviewed has mentioned why such behaviors in students occur.

Literature also reveals that individuals do behave according to their attitude and that

positive learning behaviors favor better achievements in mathematics. Similarly,

attitude is an important predictor of the students learning activity that as the students

who have more positive attitudes toward school engage more in learning activities and

continue longer in their effort to complete the difficult tasks (Wilkins, 2003). This

shows that there is a strong relationship between students' attitudes and learning

activities in the classroom. Nonetheless, to the knowledge of the researcher, there are

plethora of studies about students’ attitudes towards mathematics, but no studies have

been made to show the relationship between attitudes, classroom behaviors, and

achievements in the Nepalese context. Therefore, it is necessary to investigate

whether and how students’ attitudes towards mathematics and their classroom

behaviors are related to their learning.

Student Achievement in Mathematics

The term student’s achievement is preferably used in the field of social

sciences and education. It is referred to as attainment, learning, or acquisition of

knowledge representation, sometimes depending on theoretical biases. Students’

achievement is used to measure the level of academic content or specified outcomes

of the student in the related field in a determined amount of time. Students’

achievement is used to determine the effectiveness of the teacher's class delivery and

to evaluate the proper sequence, integration, and organization of the subject matter in
 46

each grade level. It is essentially used to determine the learning goals of each grade

level and the students' performance.

Students’ achievement is normally referred as the outcome of the skills and

knowledge attained or developed in the school in any subject area. It is the

performance level of subject matter as exhibited by an individual. The test scores or

marks assigned by teachers in any subjects are the indicators of students' achievement

(Ogundokun & Adeyemo, 2010). Students' achievement can be defined by the

different point of view. In the cognitive perspective, it is a construct that encompasses

the different stages of knowledge acquisition. Achievement can be defined as the

mastering of major concepts and principles, facts and propositions, knowledge, skills,

and integration of knowledge (Algarabel & Dasí, 2001). Academic achievement is a

demonstration of the students' performance that specifies the level to which the

student has attained particular learning goals (Ali et al., 2013).

In short, achievement is the measure of capability or competency of a person

in relation to the specific knowledge domain. Such achievement can be observed

externally or measure by using difference measuring instruments according to the

nature of the subject matter. In such condition, to determine some specific level of

performance it may require complex cognitive instruments or strategies. The

measurement instruments or tools to determine the achievement must be relaiable,

valid and a high level of accuracy.

Education is a complex process where different variables are interrelated and

mathematics achievement is also a diverse and complex nature where different factors

are associated with it (Enu et al., 2015). Mathematics achievement can be influenced

by the internal and external factors (Papanastasiou, 2000). He further designates that

the internal factors are related to the test and the external factors are related to the
 47

environment that surrounds the individual or the learner, and the personal factors such

as family educational background, school climate, socio-economic level, language,

and students’ attitudes toward mathematics.

The factors related to mathematics achievement are cognitive, social, and

environmental factors that affect the particular student (Patterson et al., 2003). On the

other hand, Enu et al. (2015) establish that the success of mathematics learning

depends on a numerous factor such as students’ personal factors (motivation, entry

behavior, and attitude), socio-economic factors (parents’ education and their socio-

economic status), and school factors (school type, accessibility and usage of learning

materials, and teacher characteristics).

As the literature shows, attitudes and achievements are very intimately

connected with each other. The students who have more positive attitudes toward

school, engage more in learning activities and continue their effort to complete

difficult tasks longer (Wilkins, 2003). This shows that the students who have more

positive attitude towards school engage more in learning activities and also, they

continue their efforts, the students with positive attitudes towards mathematics also

engage more in learning behavior. Similarly, student engagement in learning tasks or

activities influenced their academic achievement (Cui et al., 2018). This shows that

when the students have a positive attitude towards school or the subject, they

participate actively as well as keep their effort long to complete the task. Such

engagement in the learning task also influences the students' achievement. As

mentioned by Brezavscek et al. (2020), the performance of the students in

mathematics are influenced by their attitude towards mathematics and mathematics

anxiety, engagement in learning activities, students background knowledge, and their

attitude towards ICT in teaching mathematics.

 48

Studies related to Student Attitudes and Learning Behaviors in Mathematics

Attitudes are considered as the cognitive and affective orientations or

dispositions regarding an idea, object, person, situation (Fiske & Taylor, 2008).

Concerning to the research on attitude on mathematics education, the

conceptualizations regarding attitudes are commonly included both self-concept

(beliefs concerning to one’s ability to learn and perform the tasks) and feelings of

tension that hamper learning processes and performance i. e. anxiety (Garcia, 2001;

Townsend & Wilton, 2003). Attitudes may possibly influence an individual’s

behavior in the existence of attitude-objects in predictable ways (Ajzen & Fishbein,

2005). Such relationship, however, does not always exist, and the possibility that

reveals behaviors corresponding with the predicted ones is higher when attitudes are

stable and strongly held. Both attitude and anxiety are rooted in the person's belief

system and concern a domain in which the person knows very well. They are created

from the personal appropriate experience and are considered essential by the

individual (Fiske & Taylor, 2008), basically if these attitudes are extremely positive

or negative (Shook et al., 2007). However, the lack of appropriate direct experience

may cause the low prediction of the behavior through such attitude.

Boekaerts and Minnaert (2003) described that the persons’ attitudes color their

experience in learning situations that affect their perception of competence to meet the

perceived task or self-efficacy. In other words, self-efficacy refers to the confidence

level of a person in his or her ability to perform a behavior successfully (Bandura,

1997). When a person expects to be able to meet the demands, he/she trigger intention

of learning by which they are prepared to invest effort in targeted learning behaviors.

A fundamental element of targeted or goal-oriented learning is the disposition

to act properly on the given instructional information so that the instructional aim will
 49

be accomplished (Rothkopf, 1981). It is mostly significant in mathematics education

of the recent time, where knowledge and skills are dynamically constructed through

investigation, exploration, and determination on a wide variety of challenging and

difficult problem-solving tasks (NCTM, 2000). As concluded by NCTM (2000), the

essential learning behaviors for the acquisition of mathematical knowledge and skills

are communication, investigation, reflection and purposefulness. However, it should

be cleared that, the importance of such learning behaviors has still to be determined in

the particular context of mathematics learning.

Thus, students' attitude towards both mathematics and particular context of

learning mathematics may influence their learning behaviors they carry out while

learning mathematics. In this context, the students having positive attitudes are more

likely to show targeted or goal-oriented learning behaviors and in the particular

learning context, while the students having negative attitudes are likely to ignore from

the particular mathematics learning process or they participate in learning

mathematics with the low motivation and concentrations.

Studies Related to Student’s Attitudes and Achievements in Mathematics

Different research studies related to the school level students' attitude towards

mathematics and their achievement done in different country and places have almost

shown the analogous result. The relation between these two variables students'

attitude and achievement seems to have the convergent relation. As stated by Mazana

et al., (2019), students’ aptitude and attributes have influence on their mathematics

achievement and enjoyment in learning mathematics. However, in the broad sense,

the affective variables- students' attitudes and beliefs are not only the influential

variables or the predictors of mathematics performance (Brezavscek et al., 2020).

Furthermore, Enu et al. (2015) states that mathematics learning depends on several
 50

factors such as students’ factors (entry behaviour, motivation, and attitude), socio-

economic factors (education of parents and their economic status), and school-based

factors (availability and usage of learning materials, school type, and teacher

characteristics). Similarly, Kushwaha (2014) divides the variables affecting the

students' mathematics achievement under three categories:

 Psychological variables: attitude towards mathematics, intelligence, math

anxiety, self-concept, study habits, mathematical aptitude, numerical ability,

achievement motivation, cognitive style, self-esteem, interest in mathematics,

test anxiety, reading ability, problem-solving ability, mathematical creativity,

educational and occupational aspiration, personal adjustment, locus of control,

emotional stability, and confidence in math.

 Social variables: socio-economic status, school environment, home

environment, parents’ education, parental involvement, parents’ occupation,

parents’ income, social status, social relations, type of school, teacher’s

expectation, and social maturity.

 Biographical and instructional variables: gender, locality, methods of

instructions, caste, birth order, teacher effectiveness, and home tutoring.

In the same way, Karjanto (2017) argued that negative attitude and fear about

the mathematics subject is known to influence negatively in learning and hence also

get low performance in the subject. A study on the secondary school students in West

Bengal, India, to assess the attitudes of the students of different three streams

(Science, Arts and Commerce) towards mathematics found significant association in

their attitude and achievement towards mathematics (Kundu & Ghose, 2016).

Similarly, a study on the secondary schools in Kenya that focused in assessing

the relationship of the students’ attitude and their performance in mathematics found
 51

that the students who alleged mathematics as a hard subject were less motivated to

learn the subject and more likely to do poorly in the subject (Karigi & Tumuti, 2015).

Similarly, Daninna1 (2017) concluded that there exists a considerable relationship

between students’ attitude and their academic achievement towards learning

mathematics and there are significant differences between girls and boys regarding

attitudes towards mathematics. Similar findings are drawn from a study on the

primary level students’attitude towards mathematics and their achievement in Sonklha

province of Thailand. In their study, Khun-Inkeeree et al. (2016) revealed that there

are positive relationships between student attitude and their achievement, and it was

also found that the achievement of both male and female students has almost the

same. In addition, positive attitudes towards both the subjects, mathematics and

science, were equally beneficial; more positive attitudes towards both subjects were

related with higher achievement in each; however, boys have a tendency to be more

positive towards both subjects and thus get higher achievement than girls (Berger et

al., 2020).

Shashaani (1995) advocates an extremely significant relationship between

attitudes, achievement toward learning mathematics. The students with positive

attitude towards learning mathematics will be more likely to understand the concepts

and in turn will help them to develop confidence for operating mathematical

operations (Furner & Berman, 2003). The result of the meta-analysis study carried out

to test the effect of attitude on student’s achievement, the relationship between the

student attitude and their achievement was examined in 90 research studies from the

different country including USA, Canada, Europe, Australia and Israel (Solpuk,

2017). According to this study, the effect of student’s attitude towards their

achievement was found moderate.

 52

It is suggested that the teachers who teach mathematics believe that when the

students get interested to learn mathematics, they learn mathematics more actively as

well as effectively and attain higher grades (Suydam & Weaver, 1975). They also

suggest that special attention should be given to create, develop, maintain, and

reinforce positive attitudes. Hence, it is essential to develop and maintain the students'

positive attitudes toward learning mathematics for student success. Thus, it has long

been assumed that there is a strong relationship between students' attitude and

achievement toward mathematics.

Negative attitudes affect the students' performance at the different levels of

learning in school education. Mathematics is, no doubt, a rather difficult area,

regarding both teaching and learning, with a diversity of attitudes (Rodríguez et al.,

2020). They further state that, the feeling of anxiety and unease towards mathematics

depends upon how the students perceive mathematics intrinsically either complex

knowledge or ease; it may one of the main causes of frustrations and negative

attitudes towards school (Rodríguez et al., 2020).

As Tapia and Marsh (2004) suggest "students with negative attitudes toward

mathematics have performance problems simply because of anxiety". When the

students enter in the elementary school, they have a more positive attitude towards

mathematics although, as the students promote or enter in the secondary level, their

attitude towards mathematics becomes negative (Mazana et al., 2019). Although the

number of students with negative attitude being small, it may have a larger effect on

students’ mathematics learning, thus it should not be overlooked. When the children

come to school, they usually ready to learn mathematics; they see mathematics as an

interesting, meaningful, and worthwhile subject (Curtis, 2006). He further states that
 53

the young children view mathematics as important and think that they can learn

(Curtis, 2006).

The research results concerning to the gender, some researchers have reported

gender convergence (Simpson, 2016). Skaalvik et al. (2015) concluded that boys are

more confident towards mathematical ability than girls. The studies from Mexico also

revealed that self-confidence found in favor of boys; however, the use of ICT has

helped the girl's students to increase positive attitudes towards mathematics (Gaisman,

2015).

Most of the research works about students' attitude towards mathematics show

that attitude plays a vital role in mathematics learning and achievements (Zan &

Martino, 2007) thus it decides the success for the students in mathematics. It

establishes their willingness and ability to learn the subject make positive to act the

assigned task. Most of the research studies conducted so far have aimed at examining

the relationships between student attitudes towards mathematics and their academic

achievements. Some of these studies accept the fact that there exists a positive

correlation between student attitudes towards mathematics and their academic

achievements.

In sum, the literature suggests that students' positive attitudes toward

mathematics result higher achievements. Differently put, positive attitudes, unlike the

negative ones, positively correlate with better achievements.

Student Learning Behavior and Achievement in Mathematics

Student's learning behavior is also significant aspect to determine the students'

academic achievement. It comprises the student's choice, attitude, efforts, and

determination in learning and how he/she relates to the people that make up the school

community (Rogel, 2012). Learning behavior is a kind of readiness of the students to

 54

learn that indicates their creativity, thinking and artistic activities, high interest for

reading and writing, love of learning, and having well psychological adjustment

inside the class and school (Saxena, 2002).

In general, students’ learning behavior consists of the cognitive, affective and

the behavioral aspects related to their classroom engagement. The cognitive aspects

concern with the use of cognitive strategies in the learning process that focuses on

cognitive engagement and activities like problem solving. Such cognitive engagement

makes them more interested in learning and also helps the students to achieve higher

levels of academic achievement (Bal, 2013; Green et al., 2004). The affective aspect

is related to the emotions of the students in the learning process such as interest in

learning mathematics. The students who engaged more affectively with positive

feelings in learning mathematics may achieve higher levels of academic achievement

(Sanders, 2010; Goldin et al., 2011). Similarly, the behavioral aspect comprises the

behaviorally engage activity of the students during learning process or activity in

classroom situation at school such as discussion. Such behavioral engagement helps

the students to attend the class regularly and put more effort in their class activity

(National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2009).

The study on the relationship between parental involvement, students’

motivation, and academic achievement of grade V student conducted by Coleman

(2009), shows that student’s motivation and academic achievement have a positive

correlation. Therefore, he concludes, “if a student is motivated to do well in school,

then he/she would be more likely to make an effort and therefore achieve higher

scores”. Prior success in a subject affects a student's motivation towards the subject.

Likewise, the study result of Tokan and Imakulata (2019) shows that, learning

behavior directly affects the learning achievement of the students in the subject,
 55

Biology. It shows that learning behaviors also affect the learning achievement of the

students in general, as Ellis and Tod (2015) states that a learner’s most influential

motivation to learn the subject comes from his or her prior success in that subject.

Since, student’s motivation and achievement have a positive correlation then they

have also the convergent relation. The more one increases, the more the other does,

too. Hence, the students who are well motivated and also successful will continue

their learning activity frequently, while students who do not get much motivated are

less likely to become successful.

Metriana’s (2014) study shows that motivation, learning behavior, and self-

efficacy give a positive effect on achievement significantly. Similarly, according to

Ellis and Tod (2015), motivation is a significant factor to promote students’ academic

success and should be implemented into classrooms practices to increase the students'

achievement, which in turn further motivates the students. Several research reports

claimed that the students with higher scores in mathematics reveal better and less

disruptive behavior.

Blazar (2015) carried out a study to explore the reciprocal relationship

between learning experiences and study behaviors to observe the comparative effect

of their learning experiences and study behaviors on university students’ academic

performance. Samples of 396 undergraduate students were chosen from Hong Kong

as the participants for the study. In this study, learning experiences of the students and

study behaviors were measured. The findings described that both study behaviors and

learning experiences were found to be significant. Furthermore, study behavior

(β = .36) and the learning experience (β = .29) significantly predicted the academic

performance of the students with a better role of the study behavior.

 56

A study carried out by Weber and Ruch (2012) about the positive classroom

behavior and character strengths using their Classroom Behavior Rating Scale,

assessing both social classroom behavior and their achievement-related aspect. The

result of multiple regression analysis showed the significant correlations with teacher-

rated positive classroom behavior and their character strength. Several studies have

recognized a relationship between negative behaviors and the students' academic

achievement (Akey, 2006; Kane, 2004). The research studies focusing on the

influencing factors on the students' academic achievement has been regarded as the

prioritize area since few decades (Akey, 2006; Kane, 2004).

Conventionally, students' positive behaviors such as expectations, compliance

with classroom rules, engaging in classroom activities, and mastery interested to learn

subject matter were related with positive academic outcomes (Birch & Ladd, 1997;

Feshbach & Feshbach, 1987), whereas negative behaviors such as distractibility,

inattention, and withdrawn behaviors were connected with negative academic

outcomes (Akey, 2006; Kane, 2004). Such negative behaviors that are usually

exhibited in the classroom can influence the quality as well as the amount of

instruction delivered by the teacher. Such negative behaviors of the students make the

class teacher hopeless, tedious, and apathetic.

Wentzel (1993) observed the effects of students' classroom behaviors in

relation to the academic achievement of middle school students. The students'

achievement was measured by using Stanford Test of Basic Skills. The independent

variables were included measures of antisocial, pro-social, and academically oriented

behavior. The results of the study showed that there existed a considerable

relationship between the students' academic achievement and academically oriented

behavior, pro-social behavior, and teacher preferences for behaviors. A study related
 57

to students' achievement conducted by Jimerson et al. (1999) revealed that students

behavior problems are related to decrease their achievement, even when controlling

for the earlier achievement level.

Negative or socially unaccepted students' behaviors have been connected with

negative academic outcomes; however, research has shown that positive and socially

accepted student behaviors such as appropriate classroom behavior, independence,

conformity with classroom rules, and socially accepted interactions with peers and

others contribute to positive academic achievement. Such positive interactions can

generate a more pleasant environment contributing to positive communications with

the student and teacher. Accordingly, teachers can involve more time in the learning

activity with their students; as a result, it makes the learner more motivated and

engages in learning activity in school (Wentzel, 1993; Akey, 2006).

Students' positive behavior has been related with the willingness to the class

activities and an increased ability through motivation to both the students and

teachers. It is recommended by various researchers that such positive behaviors help

to achieve higher academic outcomes for the reason that they support to academically

oriented behaviors such as listening actively, curiousness in academic aspect, and

interested in school activity (Waxman & Huang, 1997; Wentzel, 1993). Thus, it is

logically assumed that positive social interactions can help to promote academic

achievement independently still when there are various learning approaches among

students. Similarly, friendly behavior encourages the students' classroom learning

ultimately by assissting them to be motivated to achievement-oriented behavior

(Wentzel, 1993). Helpful and cooperative behaviors in class and outside can result

positive, and academically appropriate relations with teachers and peers (Waxman &

Huang, 1997; Wentzel, 1993).

 58

The study report performed by Cynthia (2008) about the influence of

behaviors exhibited in the classroom on reading and mathematics achievement in the

first, third, and eighth-grade students and the influence of teacher perceptions on

reading and mathematics achievement of African-Americans versus white students

and male versus female students was observed. The study observed standardized

measures of intelligence to predict reading and mathematics achievements and teacher

ratings of student behavior. The study utilized the Classroom Behavior Inventory

(CBI) to measure the students' classroom behaviors. The results showed that teacher’s

ratings were found better predictors of reading and mathematics achievement than the

standardized measures of intelligence. It was found that the students who were rated

as higher positive behaviors were also found higher achiever than the students who

were rated as higher negative behaviors. It was also observed that minor differences in

teacher ratings were found based on the race and gender concerning to the student's

classroom behavior. Thus, it can be concluded that students' behaviors either positive

or negative are better predictors or the influencing factors for their academic

achievement.

In the context of comprehensive literature review to identify the gap and plan

a way out for the research study, the investigator spent a large amount of time for

searching the recent and relevant literatures like digital open sources or database and

hard copy of books, journals, periodicals, research reports, reviews, and other

published and unpublished sources. Most of the literatures related to students' attitude

toward mathematics and achievement, the investigator found access to digital open

sources as well as hard copy of the related study conducted in national and

international level. Moreover, I tried to find access of such materials both in digital

and non digital libraries. Dealing with the literature concerning to the students’
 59

learning behavior, it made me very difficult to collect the recent and relevant sources

either digital or printed. While searching such literature, I mainly used the digital

achieves, searching through using key words in different library database, sometimes

I made request to the researcher and textbook writer seeking help through mail for

their digital copy of the books and reports and in some cases I got help from them. In

some cases, I used the quora blog platform to get some literature and the ideas for

searching related literature.

Particularly, I consulted TU Central Library for both physical and digital

databases. Similarly, I used AJOL, Academia, Crossref, ERIC, Google Scholar,

JSTOR, ResearchGate, Science Direct, ScienceOpen, Semantic Scholar,

SpringerLink, etc. Different articles mostly from peer reviewed journal archives,

books, digital copy of PhD dissertations and conference papers were also reviewed as

the literature. I usually chose the particular literature for my research by using key

word searching method.

Gaps in the Literature

What has been reviewed in the literature mostly represents the studies

conducted in western countries and a very few literatures concerned to the eastern

countries. Then clearly, the concerned opinions, ideologies, beliefs, and perspectives

are mostly based on the western context. Moreover, most of the studies on students'

attitudes and beliefs were conducted with the children of primary level and college

students (Amirali, 2010). Only a small number of studies were conducted with senior

high school students (Hodges & Kim, 2013; Francisco, 2013; Ignacio et al., 2006).

One of the major gaps observed from the reviewed literatures is that there

have been some studies on student attitudes and achievements in the wider context but

there have been no studies found in the internet archive searching through the
 60

different search engines in mathematics learning behaviors and attitudes of secondary

level students; nor have there been any studies aiming to examine their

interrelationships. On top of that, there have been no research works found at M.Phil

and Ph.D. level in this area in the context of Nepal. There is less knowledge

contribution through the research in knowledge domain related to students' attitude,

learning behavior and achievement from the Asian perspectives. Therefore, the

present study is an attempt to bridge the gap by exploring these variables and then by

examining their mutual relationships.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework is the guide or blueprint for research (Grant &

Osanloo, 2014). A theoretical framework is always based on the established theory in

the related field of investigation. It helps to guide the researcher to travel from a

particular location to its destination as the map path navigator does. Furthermore,

theoretical framework enables the researcher, not only to interpret the meaning found

in the data but also helps to judge the solutions he/she proposes for solving the

problem, as well as the recommendations for solving the problem and for future

research (Kivunja, 2018). It is the structure or framework in the research study that

supports its theoretical bases in the study. It also helps to introduce and explain the

theory that clarifies the existence of the research problem under study. It provides the

complete structure of study to present how a researcher defines his/her study

philosophically, epistemologically, methodology and analytically (Grant & Osanloo,

2014). The theoretical framework supports the researcher as a guide in situating and

contextualizing formal theories into their studies (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). As this

study aims to explore the relation of students'attitude towards mathematics, attitude

elicited learning behaviours and its impact onstudent's achievement, generally the
 61

study problem demands an eclectical theoretical framework for better understanding

of the research problem and making interpretation of the empirical results of the study

considering behaviourist, cognitive and social cognitive theories of learning.

Learning behaviours are categorized according to theories of learnings. In this

study, the three learning theories behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism are

specially used to measure the learning attributes of the learner while developing the

survey instruments for identifying the learning behaviours in the classroom and also

the theories of learning are applied in interpreting the results.As there are arguments

on students learning does not depend solely on student's individual guided learning

behaviors, this arguments have given space for the emergence of other theoretical

perspectives. At present it is believed pragmatically that learning can not be explained

through the perspectives of behaviorist, cognitivist and constructivist theory of

learning separately but with the eclectic perspective of different theories. The learners'

behaviors are not determined by either internal forces or environmental stimuli in

isolation; as an alternative, such behaviors are learned through the constant interaction

of personal and environmental determinants and the entire learning occurs from direct

experience of the individuals by observing the behaviors of the other people (Burton

et al., 1996). This perspective of how a human exhibit his behavior is connected to

social learning theory that integrates some aspects of behaviorist and cognitivist

learning theory.As the present study is connected to study of students' attitudes,

learning behaviors and achievement in mathematics, the theories that can better

explain how attitude and learning behaviors in students are formed must be

considered as the theoretical referent from the study and a framework should be

conceptualized for the study.

 62

According to Sfard (1998) and Borko (2004), theories of learning can mostly

be classified as either acquisitionist or participationist. Marschall and Watson (2019)

suggest that mathematics can not be learned purely by acquisitionist or participatory

theory. It means that mathematics can be learned effectively through integrated

approach. The cognitive or acquisitionist theory that utilize the cognitive approach to

acquire the knowledge and the other social, or the participationist theory that believes

on participation and interaction of the students in the society, culture, environment

where s/he is bestowed for the purpose of targeted learning, is considered as the main

source of knowledge. The social cognitive learning theory of Bandura (1986) which

covers both cognitive and social approaches of learning and the Bem's theory of Self-

perception are considered as the theoretical basis for this study. Hence, this study

mainly used the Bandura's social cognitive theory as the fundamental basis of the

theoretical framework backed up by Bem's theory of self-perception. Bandura's theory

assumes what the students act as learning behaviour is the result of what the student's

innerself feel, believe i.e students' attitude towards the subject (mathematics). Bem's

Self-perception Theory assumes that students' acts/behaviours indicate their attitude

towards the subject (mathematics). As the two theories seem they are opposing each

other, however they are complementing each other to understand the problem of the

study and interpret the results of the findings the study. Bem's theory supports in

understanding of attitude formation from the activities they exihibit and reflect in

reference to other's activities and Bandura's theory facilitates in understanding of

attitudes manifestation in form of learning behaviours.

The other rational of selecting Bandura's theory as the theroretical base for the

study is that mathematics learning is not possible only with the theory of acquisition

or participatory learning approaches. Mathematics learning can be explained through

 63

an integrated approach. Bandura's theory considers very well the two approaches

together can help on conceptualizing mathematics learning at school level.

Furthermore, this theory helps to explain the relation between student attitude towards

mathematics and its role in eliciting learning behavior suitable to mathematics

learning.

The Social Cognitive Learning Theory (SCLT) by Bandura (1986) is taken as

the theoretical framework for this study. This theory emphasizes on the critical role of

self-beliefs in human cognition, motivation, and behavior and enables the

individuals to work out over their thoughts, feelings, and actions. This unique feature

of this theory enabled the investigator to select this theory for this study. As stated by

Bandura (1989) the interaction of the people with their environment shapes their

behavior and vice versa. The social cognitive theory encompasses many aspects of the

learners such as learner’s home environment, parental involvement or interaction

among the parents and their children, student-teacher relationship, peer interactions

and skills like decision-making, communication, and social skills, that may be

included in the process of child developmental (Miller, 2005). Changes in an

individual in any of the aspects may influence on the overall strength of his/her

learning. Bandura (1997) emphasized that human interactions cannot exist

autonomously without interacting with each other. So, human interactions comprise

all those aspects involved in their daily function. In this study, interactions among

peers and teachers along with others who contribute to the formation of students’

attitudes, classroom learning behavior and achievement of the students have been

explored through the theoretical lens of social interaction with individuals,

environment and values associated to mathematics in culture.

 64

The social learning theory of Bandura (1977) particularly focused on social

interaction as the major means of expression of learning. Bandura (1977) emphasizes

that "all learning phenomena resulting from direct experience occur on a vicarious

basis by observing other people’s behavior and its consequences for them". As a

result, the behaviors are determined by the individuals that s/he determines which one

behavior is to be adopted and others are to be rejected without necessarily engaging in

the behavior themselves, based on whether or not they examine a self-assumed

positive result for others. In Banduras’ social learning theory (1977), the learning

principles are observation, imitation, and modeling.

 Observation

 Imitation

 Modeling

This theory highlights the instant social context where an individual observes,

interprets, and selects the model behavior of other people to adopt which in turn will

verify their behaviors. This process creates attitude, and the attitude is reflected in

behaviour, mainly in learning behaviour. Learning can not be measured only observed

change of behavior as behaviorists say, a limited understanding of learning as

permanent change in behavior. According to social learning theory, people can learn

in the course of observation and all learnings may not necessarily be shown in their

performance. Several behaviors can be learned through modeling (Ormrod, 1999).

The famous study of Bandura based on "Bobo doll", confirmed that children

learn and imitate behaviors by observing the behaviors of the other people. The three

basic models for observarional learning identified by Bandura are as:

1. Live model: this model consists of actual individual demonstration or

acting out behavior.

 65

2. Verbal instructional model: this model consists of the descriptions and

explanations of behavior.

3. Symbolic model: this model consists of real or fictional characters that

display the behaviors through online media, television programs, films or

books.

The major characteristics of Bandura’s SCLT (1986) are:

 People learn by watching what others do and their thought processes are

central to understanding personality.

 It provides a learning framework that helps to understand, predict, and

change the human behavior.

 It mainly focuses on cognitive concepts. It focuses on how children and

adults operate cognitively on their social experiences and how these

cognitions then influence behavior and development.

The main assumptions underlying Bandura’s SCLT (1986) are:

 People can learn by observing others,

 Learning is an internal process that may or may not result in a behavior

change,

 Learning can occur without a change in behavior (observation without

imitation),

 Behavior is directed toward particular goals,

 Behavior eventually becomes self-regulated,

 Cognition plays a role in learning,

 Reinforcement and punishment have indirect rather than direct effects on

learning and behavior.

 66

In this way, the learner determines the behaviors through the process to adapt.

Individual perceptions, behavior and decisions also find out the extent to which one

will persevere in any task which results in either success or a failure to accomplish the

task. As suggested by Bandura (1989), changes of some behaviors may be mediated

through the change of the model itself during role modeling, use of rewards and

reinforcement, and occasionally through influence. In order to attempt a modeled

behavior for an individual, he/she must value the observed outcome and perceive it as

successful (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2007).

SCLT considers the human behavior as a triadic, dynamic, and reciprocal

interaction of personal, behavioral and environmental factors. This model can help to

determine the human behaviors in terms of a three-way dynamic reciprocal model

where, personal factors, environmental factors, and behavior factor interact each other

continually and the interaction of these three variables causes the occurance of

learning. As depicted by Bandura (1986), SCLT learning occurs with a dynamic and

reciprocal interaction of the person, environment and behavior and it takes place in a

social context (Figure 1).

 67

Figure 1

Mutual Relation between Personal, Behavioral and Environmental Factors

Learning

The dotted circle represents the dependency within the three factors to acquire

the knowledge or learning. But it does not mean that all three factors work together

equally in scale as interaction for learning. Some time one pair reciprocity may be

thinner or not and other may work high and vice versa. Bandura's SLT claims that

learning always comes out when the social context occurs. This theory considers that

everyone can learn from one another, through imitation, observation and modeling.

As claimed by Bandura (1977), the effectiveness of classroom learning depends on

the type of classroom instruction delivered by the teacher and the interactions that

take place between teachers and students within the classroom. Such interactions

between individual, behavioural factors of the learner and the environment can have a

reciprocal effect. Therefore, the environment influences behavior and vice versa.

Here, the learner's 'environment' refers to other learners, teachers, and other physical

sources (Figure 1) i.e learning space created through the social interaction. This

process of influence to one another in the form of continuous reciprocal interaction is

 68

termed as reciprocal determinism. Such reciprocal interaction also takes place

between the personal and environment character.

According to Bandura, the basic idea of reciprocal determinism is the belief

that every body can influence their future, while at the same time people are not free

from their own determination. Therefore, people are neither driven by internal forces

nor formed automatically and controlled by the environment. They are developing

their knowledge, skills and attitudes from their motivation, interaction and behavior

(Bandura, 1977).

The social constructivist approach suggests that the individuals shape their

environment, and the environment shapes the individual: “Both people and their

environments are reciprocal determinants of each other” (Bandura, 1977). Thus, the

classroom environment, both physical set up and social dynamics are shaped by the

students and teacher themselves. Similarly, the students' home environment also

influences or shapes them. Thus, the Social Learning Theory emphasizes on the

instant social context and personal development through the social interaction

(Bandura, 1977).

The behaviorist approach focuses on measurable changes of behavior, which

occur as a result of repetition and practice (Booth, 2011; Reimann, 2018) and is not

involved in thinking or mental process behind the behavior. On the other hand, the

cognitive theory gives more significance to the mind and the acquisition of knowledge

(Booth, 2011) and focuses on internal processing (Reimann, 2018), and emphasizes

on learners' active participation during the learning process (Yilmaz, 2011).

The social cognitive theory encompasses both cognitive and behaviorist

learning theory. In this theory, people learn or attained knowledge by observing others

within the social context such as social activities and interactions. According to this
 69

theory, learning can occur in a social context with a dynamic and reciprocal

interaction of the person, environment, and behavior (Asekere & Asaolu, 2020). The

learner is placed as an active agent who influences and is influenced as well by the

environment. Particularly, the theory details the processes of observational learning

and modeling, and the influence of self-efficacy on the production of behavior

(Asekere & Asaolu, 2020). In the same way, people learn through their own

experiences along with observing other actions and the results of those actions. This

theory offers a learning framework that takes into account the personal factors such as

affection and cognition of the learner, their behavioral aspects and social environment

(Bandura, 1986, 2012). Bandura believes that people construct outcomes or

expectations for themselves by observing the action and the result of those actions

that surround them as well as the environmental events in which they participate, thus

through interaction. Hence Bandura's theory (1989) integrates social as well as

cognitive aspects with the behavioral one and is eclectic in this sense.

This study aims at exploring the students' attitudes, their learning behaviors as

well as their corresponding achievements based on the work of Bandura's principles

of social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) and social cognitive learning theory

(Bandura, 1989). The study of the relevant literature reveals that there has been a

considerable amount of research in the field of student attitudes and their relationships

with academic achievements in mathematics but the researcher did not find adequate

literature explaining the relationships between the classroom behaviors of the

learner(s) and their academic achievements in mathematics and almost none in the

Nepalese context. Inspired by this gap, the researcher has endeavored to research the

relationships between student attitudes, student learning behaviors and student

achievements in mathematics in the context of Nepal.

 70

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework arranges the research into the logical framework to

provide a visual display or a picture about how the ideas in a research study relate to

one another (Grant & Osanloo, 2014). It also illustrates the chain of actions that the

researcher intends to carry out in a research study (Dixon et al., 2001). The research

framework makes the study easier for the investigator and it helps to define and

specify the concepts within the problem of the study (Luse et al., 2012). Miles and

Huberman (1994), discourse that the conceptual framework can be either graphical or

in a narrative form stating the major constructs or variables to be studied and the

alleged relationships between them. The conceptual framework assists the researcher

to identify and construct their worldview on the phenomenon to be investigated

(Grant & Osanloo, 2014). It guides the researcher to perform the study in the simplest

way through which a researcher presents his/her claim under the study (Adom, 2018).

Mostly, the conceptual framework is used by the investigator while the

existing theories are not sufficient or applicable to create a framework for the study

(Adom et al., 2018). It comprises particular information concerning to the research

objectives, scope and the way of exploring and investigating the problem. This

includes the current issue, needs, research gaps, data collection instruments,

techniques, needs, etc.

The conceptual framework of the study mainly consists of three variables

attitude, learning behavior and achievement. This framework states the relationship

between the mentioned variables. No doubt students' attitudes play a very important

role in mathematics learning. The term 'attitude' has been defined by various

researchers and social psychologists in diverse ways. Some have emphasized the term

as the psychological tendency of an individual to respond negatively or positively,

 71

whereas some others have defined it simply as one's likes or dislikes or responding in

favorable or unfavorable manners. However, here in the study, it is classified and

described as positive, neutral, and negative depending on attitude score. As a variable

in this research, the term student/learner behavior is confined to the classroom

behaviors emitted by the students in the mathematics class while learning it. Different

researchers have identified different types of students according to their classroom

behaviors and interaction patterns with other students. These studies have most

commonly reported the existence of positive and negative or favorable and

unfavorable behaviors. Attending the class on time regularly, participating in

activities and contributing to the discussion, asking relevant and appropriate

questions, taking notes and paying attention, completing assignments on time, and

behaving in a respectful way (Landrum, 2011) are some of the features good or

positive classroom behavior. Some other researchers have also used the terms socially

appropriate/citizenship/academically oriented behavior to refer to the same concept.

In contrast, the students' destructive or disruptive behaviors are categorized as

bad or negative. In some other cases, such behaviors are also described as

inappropriate, anti-social or anti-citizenship behaviors. For the researcher's purpose,

student classroom behaviors have been described under three broad categories:

 Positive classroom behaviors: Positive classroom behaviors include two

aspects: socially appropriate and pedagogically favorable. Socially

appropriate behaviors consist of the behaviors like behaving in respectful

manners, responsiveness, cooperativeness to others, listening to others, and

obeying the class rules like not cheating, not eating, drinking sleeping,

over talking/side talking during the class, etc. The pedagogically favorable

behaviors are regularity in class, homework/class work, active

 72

participation in-class activities, discussion, asking relevant and appropriate

questions, eager to learn, pay attention in class, take notes, etc. Such

behaviors tend to facilitate attaining higher grades or high achievements.

 Neutral classroom behaviors: Neutral classroom behaviors are not anti-

social, disruptive, or destructive but are potentially exhibited by indifferent

and sluggish students (lost souls) or slow learners. Such learners neither

take personal initiatives for learning nor follow teacher instructions and

suggestions. It is the category of the learners that lies between those

exhibiting positive and negative classroom behaviors. In this category, the

learners do not enjoy learning but remain silent and do not put queries but

sit at the back and exhibit low participation, low cheerfulness and

concentration.

 Negative classroom behaviors: Negative classroom behaviors consist of

socially inappropriate and pedagogically unfavorable behaviors that

hamper other learners and as well as the learner himself/herself negatively

influence for attaining higher achievement themselves. The socially

inappropriate behaviors, such as aggressive behaviors (challenging the

teacher and others, loud speaking in the class), misbehaviors (cheating,

abuse to others, etc.), passive behaviors (sleeping during the class, reading

others like newspapers, comics, looking outside, etc.). Such behaviors

mainly include inattentiveness, irregularity in the class, not doing home-

work/class-work, restlessness, staring out of the window, whispers/making

a loud noise, inactiveness in class, etc.)

Students' achievement generally shows the students performance or the

knowledge representations in the related field. It is generally measured as the

 73

indicator of the developed skills, knowledge attained or the comprehension in the

related subject. It is the level of value given to the students' performance usually in

numbers or descriptors such as test scores, marks or grade points assigned by

teachers. In the literature, students' achievements are found to have been influenced

by the types of attitudes they carry and the types of behavior they exhibit in the

mathematics classroom. Such achievements are described as high or low scores.

In this study, the researcher has conceptualized the overall research processes

under a research gap observed from the review of the literature and the observed

phenomena of the crisis of students' achievement improvement in mathematics at

school education. Generally, researchers have identified the variables affecting

mathematics achievements categorized under teacher variables, curriculum variables,

students' variables connected to their cognitive to social-economic context. Despite

these, a considerable number of researches have been done to find out the students'

attitudes towards mathematics and their achievements and show there is a positive

correlation between these two variables. However, there is a missing link in making a

theoretical understanding of how learning behaviors are connected among them.

Learning behaviors are the students deliberately taken activities for their targeted

learning (Bem, 1972). According to self-perception theory, students' attitude towards

the learning objects is determined by how the person behaves to the targeted object

for learning. The theory focuses on the past behavior of the learner that influences

their attitude. The study has been guided mainly by Bandura's social cognitive theory.

Similarly, Bem's self-perception theory has also been used to compare the reverse

relationship of the variables- students learning behavior and attitude; i. e., behaviors

determine attitude or attitude determine behavior. The social cognitive theory

emphasizes the successive bi-directional relationships between students' attitude,

 74

learning behavior and achievement. This study has tried to explain how three

variables; students' attitudes towards mathematics, the learning behaviors and

student's achievement in mathematics are interconnected.

In the conceptual framework, students' personal factors or cognitive factors,

refer to the characteristics of the person, affect their learning and performance. Such

as knowledge, beliefs, expectations and attitudes are the cognitive factors. In this

framework, the variable student's attitude has been considered as the main component

of the personal factor. In this study, student attitude has been classified into three

categories as positive, negative and neutral according to their obtained attitude score.

Environmental factors or influences are the product of the physical, social and

attitudinal environment where people live and accomplish their lives. The factors such

as parental education, socio-economic status, culture, classroom environment,

teaching learning, instructions, feedback, social model, etc. are the environmental

factors. They are external to an individual and have positive or negative influences on

the person's performance, participation or function. In this study, classroom learning

behavior has been considered as the main component of the environmental factor. It

has been categorized according to their learning behavior score category performed in

the test taken by the investigator as positive, negative and neutral.

Behavioral factors refer to the activity related to human behavior. They might

be due to the person's characteristics, situation or reaction to the environment. The

behaviors related to a verbal response, motor response and social interactions that

might be related to skills (reading, writing, listening, speaking), practice, self

judgement, performance and self-efficacy. In the conceptual framework, the student's

achievement has been considered as the main component of the behavioral factor.

Similarly, student achievement has been classified into three categories as high,
 75

medium and low according to their achievement score obtained in the achievement

test taken by the investigator.

In this conceptual framework, the graphical symbol, the double arrow or the

bi-conditional arrow indicate the interrelationships between the variables attitude,

learning behavior and achievement. Here in the conceptual framework, the inter-

relationship between personal factors and the environmental factor that involve

cognitive competencies and beliefs are developed and modified by social influences.

The person's beliefs, thoughts and knowledge affect the social and physical

environment and thus also affect the students learning behaviors. Similarly, the social

and physical environment also influences a person's cognitive competencies. In the

same way, the interaction between the environmental factor and behavioral factor

involves the person's behavior that creates environment which finally also affects their

behavior. Thus, in this study, student achievement depends on the learning

environment and their behavior. Similarly, student achievement also affects their

learning environment. The interaction between the person's or cognitive factors and

their behavior is the product of their thought and action where the knowledge or

thought influence their behavior and the behavior also influences their cognitive

competencies.

Figure 2, the conceptual framework is the model of Bandura's (1977) Social

Learning Theory. The model has been transferred into the variables of the study by a

simple modification. In this framework, the theory incorporates both social and

cognitive aspects of learning with a reciprocal triadic association between the

personal (P), environmental (E), and behavioral (B) factors. The relation of the factors

personal, environmental, and behavioural can exist in the form of uni-direction. Thus,

in this study, the conceptual framework helps to establish the relationships between
 76

the variables student's attitude, learning behavior and their achievement towards

mathematics. i.e. (P)(E)(B).

These factors are considered as the equal and interlocking determinants of

each other (Bandura, 1973, 1977). He further states that all factors personal,

environmental and behavioral do not function as independent determinants, but they

determine each other. As illustrated in Figure 1, all the factors, personal in the form of

knowledge, expectations, attitudes, etc.; environmental as the social context, culture,

family, schools, and others, and behavioral in the form of skill, action, learning

behaviour, practice, performance, etc. are dependent determinants and influence each

other bi-directionaly (Bandura, 1977). i.e. (P)(E), (E)(B), and (B)(P).

Bandura (1977) believes that the person and the environment both are

influenced by behavior. The interaction between the person and the environment

determines their behavior. This means that the function between the personal factors

and environmental factors determine behavioral factors. In this study, it is considered

that the function of student attitude and their learning behavior determines student

achievement or their effects on student achievement. i.e., f (Attitude, Learning

Behaviour)  Achievement. Symbolically, f (P, E)  B.

 77

Figure 2

Conceptual Framework - PEB Linear Model

Personal Factors (P)

(Student Attitudes)

Behavioral Factors (B)

B (Student
Environmental Factors (E) E Achievements)
(Student Learning Behaviors)

In a nutshell, every learner enters the mathematics class with some kinds of

attitude, no matter from what sources the attitudes might have developed or come to

them. However, those attitudes do influence the learner's classroom behaviors

positively; neutral manner, or negatively, that in turn influences the learner's academic

achievements which can be high, medium, or low and viceversa. As learning occurs

under this framework is determined based on the achievement. The achievement

therefore is the product of the triadic relation of the students' attitude, learning

behaviour and the achievements they gained previously.

 CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Introduction

This chapter presents the philosophy of inquiry, the ontology, epistemology,

axiology and the paradigms employed in the study.It further details out the description

of the research design, population, sampling process and sample, instrumentation,the

methos of analysis of the collected data/information and ethical considerations.The

main goal of conducting research in education is to enhance the quality of education

and improve educational output (Denscombe, 2002) and research methodology is

shared according to broader goals of the discipline. This study attempts to explore the

students’ attitudes towards mathematics and their learning behavior and also their

relationship to students’ achievement in mathematics. The purpose of this study was

to draw implications for the improvement in mathematics achievement of the students

focusing on students' attitudes; attitude induced learning behaviours and learning

behaviours-based students' achievement in mathematics. Furthermore, the study has

tried to explain the factors responsible to form attitude towards mathematics and

establish a theoretical relation between attitude, learning behaviour and achievements

in mathematics targeting the secondary school students. So, the study demanded a

mixed-research approach with many new instruments of data/information collection.

The details are explained in the ensuing sections.

Philosophy of Inquiry

There is different understanding on research in social sciences and education

from the perspectives of making real knowledge. So, it is aked to take a clear picture

of the philosophy of inquiry in making a research-based knowledge. Philosophical

inquiry is the study that explains the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality or the
 79

existence of the knowledge, and the value system adopted in conducting the research.

These concerns are broadly revealed on ontology, epistemology and axiology of the

research paradigm used in the research study.

Ontology deals with the nature of reality or the study of being. It is a belief

system that constitutes the fact and its existence in the real world about which humans

can acquire knowledge. Ontology deals with what kinds of things exist. It helps the

researchers to identify how certain they can be about the nature and existence of

objects they are investigating. In this study, both positivist and interpretative

paragdigms are used; the ontology is based on both single reality and multiple

realities. It is believed that the attitude, learning behaviours and the achievement is

what is there already existed in the student’s community in the form of feeling,

commitment, practice and the achievement made by the students.

The next, epistemology is the study of knowledge. It deals with the nature and

kinds of the knowledge and show the relation of knower, knowledge and procedures

used to bridge the knower and knowledge. Its concern is focused with all aspects of

the validity, scope, and methods of acquiring knowledge. It focuses on what the

knowledge constitutes, how can knowledge be acquired or produced and how the

extent of its transferability can be assessed. It is important for the researchers to frame

their research to find out knowledge.

In this study, the quantitative parts follow the objective empistemology that

the researcher theorized the knowledge and expressed them through the tools and

verified empirically by the respondents' response to the researchers' proposed

knowledge categories. Knowledge verified from the test and observation is considered

as valid knowledge. Similarly, the verification of the the observed and tested

knowledge will further interpreted in multiple perpsectives to give the multiple

 80

meanings and tried to give the cross verfication of the the knowledge to make it valid

knowledge. Thus, epistemologically the student attitude, learning behaviors and

achievement on mathematics can be studied or observed both subjectively and

objectively and this subjectivity or objectivity depends on what is socially acceptable.

Another important aspect of the inquiry is connected to the axiology, is the

study of judgment about the value. Both value-free and value laden axiological

perspectives are considered in this study. Depending upon the above-mentioned

ontology and epistemological consideration values are adopted. The aim of the study

is to bring reform in the field of mathematics education, so perspectives of the

students in regard of learning mathematics as guided by the social surrounding and

their making from formal schooling and nonformal coaching in their context is the

values considered in this research.

Research Paradigms

Research paradigm is “the set of common beliefs and agreements shared

between scientists about how problems should be understood and addressed” (Kuhn,

1962). Research paradigms are the theoretical views which are very important

components for studying methodology that guide the research process (Crotty, 2003).

It is “a basic system or worldview that guides the investigator” (Guba & Lincoln,

1994). Several scholars further elaborate that a research paradigm helps to inform

researchers' world views or philosophical assumptions and their perspectives to assert

the knowledge and reality (Creswell, 2009; Menter et al., 2011). It provides a clearer

picture to the researchers about what is involved in the research process and decide

the type of research methodology that will guide the research process (Cohen et al.,

2011).
 81

Research paradigm has a systematic interconnection between the different

aspects of research. In the research activity, the research problem lies in the centre. It

is guided by research method; the research methods are directed by research design;

research designs are also bounded by research approaches and finally the research

approaches and the remaining all aspects of research are guided by research

philosophy/worldview or paradigm.

There exist two key paradigms, namely, positivist and interpretive (Lincoln &

Guba, 1985). The positivist paradigm adopts a quantitative approach while the

interpretive paradigm adopts a qualitative approach. There are also other burning

paradigms like critical/transformative and pragmatist. The critical/transformative

paradigm emphasizes on the issues related to social justice and social system. The

pragmatist paradigm focuses on solving practical problems or action-oriented

problems in the real world (Creswell, 2014; Shannon-Baker, 2016).

The worldviews or paradigm presents the common philosophical direction

about the world and the nature of research that a researcher carries for the study. It is

based on discipline orientations, researcher's and supervisor's preferences and their

past experiences related to research. Thus, in this study, the three paradigms such as

positivist, interpretive and pragmatist those are related to the research problems which

are discussed briefly.

Positivism refers to an earlier branch of philosophy propounded by the French

Philosopher Auguste Comte and Herbert Spencer during the early nineteenth century

(Parahoo, 2006). It is considered as 'a 'science research' or scientific method' and is

founded on the different schools of thought such as naturalism, empiricism,

behaviorism, etc. This paradigm assumes that there is a single reality, and the reality

exists independently of humans and can be measured using quantitative method. This
 82

paradigm usually adopts deductive approach. Positivism follows the concept and

methods of the natural sciences and associated with deductive logical reasoning. It

suggests the researchers to remain detached from the participants to maintain a

distance to make emotionally neutral feeling. When the data is quantifiable, positivist

paradigm is used to test a hypothesis and make predictions (Broom & Willis, 2007).

The positivists mainly use statistical methods to analyze the results and make the

generalizations about their findings (Basit, 2010).

The ontological position of positivists is realism, and the reality exists and is

driven by absolute natural laws and mechanisms (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). Thus, the

ontology of this paradigm is real, independent, and external. The ontological stance of

this paradigm takes realism, assuming there exists a single reality, and can be

measured and known. The epistemology of the positivist paradigm is objectivist. It is

fully scientific due to its observable and measurable nature. It is value free research.

The interpretive or constructivist research paradigm is considered as an anti-

positivist. This paradigm is considered that it was emerged from the philosophy of

Edmund Husserl's phenomenology and other interpretive understanding of the

German philosophers' and Wilhelm Dilthey's (Mertens, 2005). The main theme of this

paradigm is "the reality is socially constructed" (Mertens, 2005) and the real

knowledge and truth is rooted internally in the subjective form (Cohen et al., 2011).

Interpretive paradigm believes that human beings themselves construct the meaning

by attaching to their behavior, actions and experiences. In this paradigm, there is no

single reality or truth, and the truth is not absolute and thus needs to be interpreted.

Truth and reality are created, not discovered. Thus, the qualitative approach is used to

investigate the reality and this paradigm usually adopts inductive approach.
 83

The ontology of the interpretive paradigm is a relativist. In this paradigm,

realities exist in the multiple forms and vague based on experience, specific, local,

and dependent (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). The epistemology of interpretive philosophy

is subjective and transactional, or the social world can be interpreted in a subjective

manner. In this paradigm, people/knower cannot be separated from their knowledge.

The interpretive methodology provides the required knowledge and skills to deal with

social phenomena to the researcher (Cohen et al., 2007). The main objective of the

interpretive methodology is to fully implement the social phenomena and contexts in

the study.

In this study, both positivist and interpretativist paradigm come into existence

explore the attitude and learning behaviours and their effects on mathematics

achievement as learning. The attitude, learning behaviours and achievement used the

quantitative information and learning behaviours were examined using qualitative

information and meaning making of the drawn quantitative results are explained with

the help of the experiences and narrative stories of the the students while learning

mathematics. The research paradigm used in this study is pragmatist paradigm, a mix

of both positivist and interpretative approach, the mixed method research design. For

understanding the learning condition in the mathematics classroom, an interpretive

paradigm has been used to capture the students' learning behavior concerning to

mathematics. It is believed that an interpretive paradigm can guide the study by

enabling the researcher to have interactions with students to capture their learning

behavior and slightly provide interpretations about the issue investigated. Inductive

paradigm uses the inductive approach to analyze the data.

 84

Pragmatists Research Paradigm

The term pragmatism was derived from the Greek word 'pragma' that means

'action' and 'result of an action'. This word paradigm was started to use from the

United States in the late 19th century. Pragmatism can be seen as a practical

alternative to positivistic and anti-positivistic schools of thought. This paradigm

accepts as a flexible approach to solve the research problems. This paradigm believes

that single view only cannot always represent the whole picture of the problem and

that there may exists multiple realities. Pragmatism is outcome-oriented or focusing

product-oriented research (Biesta, 2010). It does not completely rely on interpretive

approach and on the positivist approach, it deals with the facts and focus on the

problem. This paradigm follows both inductive and deductive approach.

The ontology of pragmatism is that there exist different perspectives

concerning to the social reality; every person notices the actual reality or truth

depending upon their own standards and beliefs. The epistemology of pragmatism is

either subjective or objective depending upon the research phase and inquiry

(Creswell & Clark, 2011). Pragmatism tries to find out the knowledge consistent with

the situation and the existing phenomenon. They believe that the people can have

varied views concerning the real world. So, this paradigm suggests a balance

approach between subjectivity and objectivity reality during the research.

Thus, this paradigm combines both positivism and interpretivism for the sake

of addresing the research problems. Consequently, the pragmatist paradigm would

recommend a mixed-method approach to study the research problem. This paradigm

is mainly appropriate for mixed methods research (Morgan, 2014). Similarly, Johnson

& Gray (2010) suggest pragmatism as a suitable paradigm to conduct the mixed
 85

method studies. In this study, the pragmatic philosophy can be the best philosophical

assumption and mixed-method research design is the appropriate research desings.

Mixed Method Research Design

To answer the mentioned RQs of the study, it is equally essential to select the

proper research design as well as implement the appropriate methods to collect and

analyze the data (Muijs, 2010). The methods used in this study are divided into two

approaches: qualitative (class observation and interview) and quantitative (survey

questionnaires). This approach is called ‘mixed-methods’ (Teddlie & Tashakkori,

2009). In a mixed-method, content can be measured by employing quantitative

methods, whereas context can be judged by qualitative methods (Albright et al.,

2013). Attitude formation depends upon both context and contents as explained in the

earlier chapter. As the study tries to explain the relationship between the three

variables attitudes towards mathematics, mathematics learning behaviors, and

mathematics achievements of the students, demands a mixed method research design.

The mixed-method combines both qualitative and quantitative techniques, methods

and designs to explore a single research topic (Cropley, 2019). This approach

provides the most authentic and reliable findings. The reason for using mixed method

is to provide more confidence and a holistic view to reach the conclusions (Cohen &

Manion, 1994) both of which are sought for this study.

A mixed-method design or strategy can be defined as the class of research

where the researcher combines or mixes both qualitative and quantitative methods,

approaches, techniques, concepts, and language into a single study (Johnson &

Onwuegbuzie, 2004). It can be used pleasantly for the most areas of research due to

its remarkable benifits by combining both qualitative and quantitative research

approaches and techniques into the particular study systematically (Cohen et al.,
 86

2011). Varied number of research design and strategies can be used to generate the

data in mixed method design (Terrell, 2015). Thus, in the mixed-method approach,

variety of research designs can be implemented to study the research problem. In this

context, Creswell and Clark (2011) have presented the different ways of blending

both qualitative and quantitative methods such as convergent parallel design,

exploratory sequential design, embedded design, explanatory sequential designand

multi phase design.

Creswell (2005), states that research methodology can be used for generating

the data and to make interpretations about the problem they want to find. Therefore,

under the pragmatic paradigm, the mixed-method approach was preferred to this

study. As advocated and presented by the different researchers, the interconnection of

the research framework has been adapted for this study ( Crotty, 1998; Creswell, 2014;

& Al-Ababneh, 2020). The research framework for this study is presented in Figure 3.
 87

Figure 3

A Research Framework- Interconnection of Ontology, Epistemology, Axiology,

Paradigm, Design, Methodology, Methods, and Research Problem

Thus, the ontology of the research follows that the reality or truth is based on

the persons own standards and beliefs. In this study, student’s attitude, learning

behaviors and achievement on mathematics do exist in the learner. The epistemology

of this research follows both the objectivist and subjectivist views and exists the

multiple realities. In other word, student’s attitude, learning behaviors and

achievement on mathematics can be studied or observed both subjectively and

objectively; Subjectivity or objectivity depends on what is socially acceptable. The

research philosophy is based on pragmatism and the research approach is used as

mixed method. It follows the concurrent embedded survey design as the research
 88

strategy or design. Similarly, this research consists of the survey as the research

methodology and quantitative method of statistical analysis and qualitative method of

thematic analysis as research methods.

Theoretical Stance Adopted to the Study Method

A theoretical perspective refers to the researcher’s philosophical position that

supports or guides the research methodology (Crotty, 1998). The theoretical

perspectives adapted to this research were mainly the positivist paradigm, interpretive

paradigm and pragmatist paradigm. The pragmatic philosophical assumption utilizes

the mixed method approach. In this study, some RQs can be best dealt by using

quantitative approach and that also have the well tested inventory (test instrument) to

measure or for research investigation but one of the RQs that is related to the human

behaviors is more subjective and can be best dealt by the use of qualitative approach.

Thus, the mixed method research approach is needed to achieve the objectives and the

RQs of the study. This study comprises two independent variables i.e, student attitude

and learning behavior, and one dependent variable i.e, student achievement in

mathematics. To measure the student attitude towards mathematics, there are varied

well tested test instruments available and the variable student attitude towards

mathematics is being studied in the different places and contexts even in Nepal. Thus,

the investigator has given less priority to use qualitative approach to measure the

student attitude towards mathematics even it is subject in nature due to the access of

different relevant standardized test instruments to measure the students' attitude, and

its common practice of using the quantitative test scale to measure attitude. Thus, the

investigator's position here is positivist and uses a quantitative approach to find out

the student attitude towards mathematics. In the same way, students' achievement is

quantifiable and can be measured objectively. Thus, there exists a single reality and
 89

can be measured. Thus, here in this study, the ontology for the student attitude and

achievement in mathematics is absolutist or exists single reality and the researcher's

position here is positivist.

Similarly, student learning behaviors could be measured quantitatively. The

existence of human learning is socially constructed and more subjective by nature. So,

the student learning behaviors have been lanced through both relativist and absolutist

ontology. Hence, the researcher here was interpretive in the sense of examining

situations through the eyes of the participants using class observation and interviews.

Similarly, the students learning behaviors were measured quantitatively using

standardized inventory viewing objectively. Thus, in this point, the study is lanced

through the mixed-method approach.

More explicitly, the investigator gathered the information regarding students'

attitudes towards mathematics, their learning behaviors and mathematics achievement

in the light of pragmatic worldview. Likewise, the investigator uses the quantitative

approach to find out the relationship between the variables attitude, learning behavior

and achievement, and the effects of students' attitude towards mathematics and

learning behavior on their mathematics achievement. In the same way, he used a

semi-structured interview for collecting the qualitative data related to the classroom

learning behaviors of the students. Similarly, for the cross-validation, he used another

class observation checklist as a teacher rating instrument for collecting the qualitative

data. After collecting the information using these instruments, data triangulation was

held. This type of mixed-method should enhance the value of the research (Johnson et

al., 2014). In this research, students’ feelings and their consequence behaviors were

measured by using qualitative approach. Similarly, the quantitative data as student

attitude and achievement was analyzed through quantitative approach. So, both single
 90

and multiple realities were accepted, either jointly or separately in the pase of the data

collection, analysis and interpretation.

Thus, the research has utilized the pragmatic paradigms with the mixed-

method approach which is guided by different types of ontology and epistemology as

suitable to the RQs. The research is rooted in the epistemology that there exist

multiple ways of learning or diverse ways of understanding since there exists multiple

realities. The knowledge of the multiple realities can be achieved through integrating

the several research methods encompassing both qualitative and quantitative research

methods. The pragmatist worldview incorporates both the designs of quantitative and

qualitative research and falls with the mixed method research design (Creswell, 2014).

This worldview utilizes different methods to collect and analyze the data (Creswell,

2014). The flowchart of the mixed-method research paradigm has been given to

elucidate the way of utilizing the mixed-method in this research in Figure 4.

 91

Figure 4

A Mixed Method Research Paradigm: Flowchart of Concurrent Embedded Mixed

Method Design

QUAN qual

QUAN: Data collection qual: Data collection

Student attitude Student learning behavior

Instrument: Attitude survey (ATMI) Instrument: Semi-structured interview

Student learning behavior

Instruments: Learning behavior survey (CLBSI)
Classroom learning behavior checklist(CLBC)

Student achievement
Instrument: Mathematics achievement test (MAT)

QUAN: Data analysis qual: Data analysis

Student achievement
Descriptive statistics
Differential analysis

Effect and variables relationships

Regression analysis
Correlation analysis

Student attitude and learning behavior Student learning behavior

Descriptive, inferential statistics Thematic analysis

Mixed method data analysis

Comparison of QUAL and quan results of
Student's learning behavior
 92

Design of the Study

A research design is a detailed plan for collecting and analyzing data to

answer a RQ. It helps to set out the guidelines for gathering useful information for

collecting data, interpretation and forecast of the issue or phenomena (Cohen et al.,

2011). It covers different aspects such as understanding the methodology, data

collection instruments, enhancement of quality, ethical concerns and data analysis.

This research was carried out with a mixed-method research design including

instruments like class observation checklist, a semi-structured interview, use of

attitude scale, learning behavior scale and achievement test. In this study, the survey

method was applied to collecting information directly from the

respondents/participants about their ideas, feelings, plans, beliefs, backgrounds and

desires as well as the facts that could be observed (Sharma, 2007). For this purpose,

multiple sources of information like observations, interviews and surveys were used

to reveal the study. Through a behavior checklist and semi-structured interviews,

attempts were made to reveal the condition of secondary school mathematics students'

learning behavior in Nepal. The descriptive component helped the researcher to probe

into the views of the participants on the identified forms of classroom learning

behavior and their impact on achievements in mathematics. Therefore, this study

takes a concurrent embedded mixed-method exploratory research design (Figure 5).

 93

Figure 5

Schematic Diagram of Mix-method Research Design

Students' Attitudes Students' Classroom Students'

towards Mathematics Learning Behavior Achievements

Attitude Scale:  Observation: Checklist  Achievement test:

 ATMI  Semi-structured interview  Questionnaire
 (QUAN)  Survey: CLBSI  (QUAN)
(qual)

Results Results Results

(Attitude category) (Learning behavior (Achievement
category) category)

Analysis and
interpretation
Based on
QUAN-qual

The mixed methods research design, in its simplest terms, refers to the

integration of both quantitative and qualitative research dataset in a single study to

obtain enriched results (Creswell, 2014). The fundamental assertion of mixed method

design is the use of qualitative and quantitative approaches jointly to draw out the

better result of the research problems. Mixed methods research collects both

qualitative and quantitative data, integrates the data and uses unique designs: parallel,

sequential, and embedded (Creswell, 2014). The overarching research designs for this

study combines qualitative and quantitative research data with parallel or concurrent

sampling. Creswell et al. (2003) have stated six well-known but different types of

mixed method design such as concurrent triangulation or convergent parallel,

concurrent nested, concurrent transformative, sequential explanatory, sequential

 94

exploratory and sequential transformative. Among them, I adapted concurrently

nested one (concurrent embedded) which is the basic mixed method exploratory

research design, used because of the need of the problem of the study.

In this design, both quantitative and qualitative data are collected and analyzed

by using the respective instruments and the results obtained from each of the dataset

are then triangulated i.e., compared to corroborate or conform the findings of the

study during the interpretation and discussion phase (Creswell, 2009). In this study,

the investigator was tending towards the use of quantitative technique to some extent

considering the research variables. The major reason tending towards using

quantitative technique was the avaiablity of reliable and well-tested inferential

statistical tests (Tabchnick & Fidell, 2013), such as factor analysis, t-tests, ANOVA

test, regression and correlation analysis. The student learning behavior could be

measured quantitatively, however, it is a socially constructed attribute and more

subjective by its nature too. Similarly, the problem related to subjective nature can be

extracted through in-depth insights from the participants (Gray, 2013). So, the

investigator emphasized to utilize both the relativist and absolutist ontology. On the

other hand, the utilization of this design is believed to help the investigator to cross-

validate, corroborate and confirm the results of the study. Hence, the investigator

believed that this research design can overcome the weaknesses of one research

method with combining the strengths of the other (Creswell, 2003; Dornyei, 2007;

Bryman & Bell, 2015) and the results of the study give valid conclusion.

The concurrent embedded design is a mixed-method exploratory research

design where one data set offers a supportive minor role in the study based mainly on

the other data type (Creswell et al., 2003). This design is useful when there requires

both quantitative and qualitative data to address the issues of the research problem
 95

and make comprehensive analysis. While conducting this design, the investigator

collects both qualitative and quantitative data at the same time and afterward

combines the information for the interpretation and to achieve the overall results. This

study, thus, has employed the QUAN + qual approach, quantitatively driven

concurrent design and supported by small qualitative parts. The primary method,

quantitative, mainly guides the research and a secondary or minor database or the

method that helps to support and verify the procedures (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2009).

The less prioritized minor method is embedded. In another word, the investigator has

embedded small data set of qualitative information into the larger data set of

quantitative information so as to deal with the research problem. This process of

embedding of secondary or minor method, the qualitative addresses different RQ than

the primary method and tried to analysis combining. Here, in this study, the acronyme

'QUAN + qual' states that the qualitative part or method is contained within the

quantitative method. The qualitative and quantitative data collection is presented in

separate sections however, while seeking similarities or convergence of the results,

the analysis and interpretation the two forms of data are merged (Creswell, 2009) as

required.

Reasons for Selecting the Mixed Methods Research Approach

There are some key reasons to take the decision for adopting a mixed method

research approach in this study. Student’s classroom learning behaviors are multi-

dimensional constructs. Many researchers such as Creswell and Clark (2007);

Dornyei (2007); and Teddlie and Tashakkori (2009) suggest that researcher can target

a study of a complex construct by employing a single suitable approach. Thefore, it is

necessary to adopt the mixed method research approach to study the complex

construct like attitude and learning behavior. The use of a mixed-method design helps
 96

to find out the student’s learning behavior through different instruments and

techniques. This design is helpful for finding out the complex dynamic theory's

perspectives (Dornyei et al., 2015). He further highlights that only a particular

research approach may not be enough to provide a deeper understanding of the

socially constructed attribute. Similar to this, present study constitutes three different

variables with different constructs relating to different theories to explain the

constructs, and then such complex theoretical as well as methodological blending

demands mixed method. Thus, the investigator also believes that a single or a

particular research approach, quantitative or qualitative only does not suitably

represent to find out the results of such a combination of the different variables for the

study.

There is a pragmatic reason stated by Morgan (2007) about adopting the

mixed-method research that, this research method can work far better for providing

the detailed picture of the research objectives and the RQs in a preferable and

acceptable way. In addition, Bryman and Bell (2015) claim that this research method

can make stronger the result of a study, as it attempts to reduce the weaknesses of the

single research method. In the lights of the logical explanation of the mentioned

authors, the investigator was enthusiastic to draw out the idea about establishing

knowledge and the detailed picture of the students' learning behaviors in mathematics

at the school level adapting the mixed methods research approach. Similarly, this

study may potentially be a point of reference for future studies about student learning

behavior in mathematics and other subjects within the context of research. Dornyei

(2007) and Creswell (2003) further argue that mixed-method research can help

considerably to enhance the validity of the research results in the related field.
 97

Population of the Study

Population deals with all members of a clearly defined group of people with

the potential focus of an investigation (Drew et al., 2008) upon which the results of

the investigation can be applied. The students who have passed grade IX and enrolled

at grade X in 2075 B. S. and the teachers of mathematics who taught at grade X in the

respective community schools of Province No. 1 were considered as the population of

the study. In other words, the population for the study is a group of the education

sector community, a mix of students and teachers of grade X in community secondary

schools in Province No. 1.

Sample and Sampling Procedure

It is not possible to include all the population in a single study because of the

time and expense-related constraints. In this study, the multistage sampling procedure

was implemented. According to Levy and Lemeshow (2008), the stratified random

sampling technique can be utilized to ensure the presence of the key subgroup within

the sample and save an excessive amount of time, money, and effort for the

researcher. Stratified random sampling uses different groups or strata to achieve

representativeness or to make sure that a certain number of elements from each group

are selected. In this study, the population was divided into non-overlapping ‘strata’ or

homogeneous subgroups.

In random sampling, the probability of appearing any element in the sample

must be known. The sample is selected from the ‘list’ containing the elements of the

population. Such a list is called a sampling frame. A sampling frame does not have to

list all elements in the population (Levy & Lemeshow, 2008). The sampling frame of

the study is presented in Table 1.

 98

Table 1

District Wise Lists of Community Secondary Schools of Province No 1

Ecological regions No. of community No. of schools No. of schools

and districts secondary schools from rural areas from urban areas
Mountain Region
1. Taplejung 55 47 8
2. Solukhumbu 39 29 10
3. Sankhuwasabha 63 19 44
Total 157 95 62
Hill Region
1. Panchthar 81 60 21
2. Ilam 79 37 42
3. Tehrathum 46 30 16
4. Dhankuta 73 39 34
5. Bhojpur 66 46 20
6. Khotang 90 61 29
7. Okhaldhunga 72 57 15
Total 507 330 177
Terai Region
1. Jhapa 113 40 73
2. Morang 158 54 104
3. Sunsari 95 24 71
4. Udayapur 113 37 76
Total 479 155 324

Nepal has a great variation in geographic structures, languages, ethnic groups,

religions, cultures, and occupations. In this context, every study needs to focus on the

social and cultural realities of the school (Acharya, 2012). Nepal has the vast physical

diversity with its unique geographical position and altitude variation. The area of

Nepal is sparsely populated (Metsamuuronen & Kafle, 2013). So, it is better to

describe concerning main three geographical regions as the Hills, the Terai (plains),

and the Mountains each stretching from the South to the North. In this study, the basic

unit for the sampling is the community secondary school. Thus, the schools should
 99

represent Province No. 1 as well as the whole country as broadly as possible and each

selected students could represent the schools as well as the whole country.

The representativeness of the sample of the students has been established

using the stratified random sampling technique. It was also ensured that everyone in

the targeted population have an equal and independent chance of selection as a

member of the sample (Best & Kahn, 1998). Then, a random sampling technique was

implemented to each stratum.

In stratified random sampling, stratification ensures a proper representation of

the important sub-population group without biasing the selection procedure.

Considering these facts, the disproportional stratified random sampling procedure was

used in this study. The population under the study was divided or stratified into three

'strata,' or homogeneous subgroups after categorizing the ecological zones (Mountain,

Hill, and Terai), which are mutually exclusive and include all items in the population.

The districts of Province No. 1 are classified into three ecological regions.

 Mountain region (Taplejung, Solukhumbu, and Sankhuwasabha)

 Hilly region (Panchthar, Ilam, Tehrathum, Dhankuta, Bhojpur, Khotang

and Okhaldhunga)

 Terai region (Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari and Udayapur)

The sample was drawn not only considering from the population viewpoint; it

also depends upon the society or community, climatic conditions, the location of

school and economic activities (Metsamuuronen & Kafle, 2013). A sample without

the minimum sampling error is considered as a good representativeness of the

population. Bigger sample may have the chances of lesser sampling errors. Thus,

when a sample survey tends to the census survey, the sampling error also tends to zero

but it is more expensive than smaller ones. Alternatively, smaller samples have less
 100

chance of being non-sampling error and are easier to manage. When the sample size

increases the non-sampling error also increases. The detailed procedure of sample and

sample size determination is presented under the heading that follows. In the first

stage, six districts out of 14 from Province No. 1 containing two districts from each

ecological region, namely, Panchthar and Okhaldhunga districts from the Hill region,

Taplejung and Solukhumbhu districtsfrom the Mountain region, and Jhapa and

Sunsari districts from the Terai region were chosen by applying the stratified random

sampling technique. Thus, this study follows the multistage sampling procedures. In

the first stage, two districts from each ecological region were selected by using simple

random sampling. The details of the selected number of schools within the ecological

region are presented in Table 2.

Table 2
List of Region and Location-wise Selected School

Ecological Region
Mountain region Hill region Terai region Total
Place of
residence No. of rural schools 76 117 64 257
No. of urban schools 18 36 144 198
Total 94 153 208 455

Similarly, in the second stage, the secondary level community schools of the

selected districts were categorized in two groups considering the division of Nepal

Government Local Levels. The schools located in the rural municipal areas were

considered as rural school and the school located in the urban areas were considered

as urban school in each district to make sample homogeneous by the place of

residence. Then using stratified random sampling two schools from each selected

district containing one from rural area and other from urban area were selected
 101

randomly. Thus, altogether 12 schools were chosen as the sample for the study (Table

3).

Table 3
List of Sample Schools
Ecological Region
Mountain region Hill region Terai region Total
Place of Rural schools 2 2 2 6
residence
Urban schools 2 2 2 6
Total 4 4 4 12

Sample and Sample Size Determination

In the sample-based countrywide student assessments, the usual maximum

sample size lies below 5% of the total population (Bartlett et al., 2001; Cochran,
1977). According to Yamane (1967) for finite population, sample size can be
N
determined by applying the Yamane’s simplified formula where, e is the
1  N (e) 2
sampling error and N is the population size. The sample size at 95% confidence level
with sampling error equal to (0.05), applying the Yamane’s simplified formula, the
57089
sample size becomes . Therefore, the required sample size for this
1  57089(0.05) 2
study is 398. According to Yamane (1967) and Glenn (1992), sample size table,
when the population is greater than 100,000 then the sample size will be 400 at 95%
confidence level.
At the beginning, I estimated that the sample size of the total of 57089

students of grade X at 95% confidence level with ± 5% level of precision it was found

to be 398. So, considering the Yamane (1967) and Glenn (1992) sample size table,

this study considered the sample of 400 students for the study. This sample is

considered to be the representative of the student population of Province No 1

studying at grade X in community schools, covering the wide range of ecological

regions and socio-economic backgrounds.

 102

In this study, in the second stage, a total of 12 secondary schools from six

districts containing each 2 from the Hills, the Mountains and the Terai were chosen by

using the stratified random sampling technique considering the place of residence. As

stated in the above sampling frame, one school from a municipal area and other

school from a rural municipal area were selected based on the stratified

disproportionate random sampling technique to recognize the homogeneity within and

between the strata to ensure a greater level of representation. Thus, the sampling was

carried out independently within each stratum (Levy & Lemeshow, 2008). To do so,

the list of secondary schools from the three ecological regions or all of the districts of

Province No 1 was made of two categories, viz. schools from rural municipalities and

schools from municipalities. The list of schools by ecological region and location is

given in Appendix Q.

More specifically, considering the theory of selecting sample size

recommended by statisticians, samples are drawn equally from the three ecological

regions (Mountains, Hills and Terai). The total number of sample size was 540

consisting of 45 grade X students from each of the 12 sampled schools. In the case of

more than 45 students in a single class/section, all of them were involved as

participants and the questionnaires were administered. While tabulating, however, 45

students were entered according to their serial number and the remaining students

above the serial number were excluded.

Variables of the Study

Both independent and dependent variables were chosen for this study. They

are separately discussed under the headings below.

 103

Dependent Variable

The variable being affected or considered to be affected by any other variables

is called the dependent variable. In this study, the achievement test score of the

secondary level grade X students in mathematics has been treated as the dependent

variable.

Independent Variables

The independent variable is that aspect or factor which can be selected and

manipulated to determine the relationship to an observed phenomenon by the

experimenter or the investigator. In this study, the students’ attitudes towards

mathematics, classroom learning behavior, age, gender, ethnicity, religion, parental

occupation and education, place of residence and ecological division have been

regarded as the independent variables. However, the students’ attitudes towards

mathematics and their learning behaviors have been treated as major categories of

independent variables in the analysis.

Instrumentation

Instruments or other tools used to collect data in educational research could be

tested. The study comprises different survey instruments to measure students' attitudes

towards mathematics, their learning behaviors and mathematics achievements of

grade X students. Likewise, to find out the students' classroom learning behavior, the

instrument, mathematics learning behaviors checklist was used. In this research, an

instrument to measure the students' attitudes towards mathematics called ATMI,

which was developed by Tapia & Marsh (2004), was adopted. Similarly, the

researcher himself developed a Classroom Learning Behavior Self-Assessment

Inventory (CLBSI) to measure the students' learning behavior, and Mathematics

Achievement Test (MAT) was prepared to find the students' achievement level in
 104

grade X mathematics. The students' classroom learning activity was measured by the

teacher using the rating scale named Classroom Learning Behaviors Checklist

(CLBC). In the same way, the Semi-structured Interview Questionnaire was also

developed by the researcher himself to draw out the student's mathematics classroom

learning behavior. All together five instruments were employed in the study.

Development and Validation of the Different Survey Instruments

In this study, two different survey instruments were developed, tested, and

validated before using them for collecting the data. The instruments to survey

students' learning behaviors and test the students' mathematics achievements were

developed by the investigator. The four-factor instrument ATMI developed by Tapia

and Marsh (2004) was adapted and employed to measure the students' attitudes

towards mathematics. The details of the instruments are discussed below.

Attitude Measurement Instrument

Varieties of the instrument to measure the student’s attitudes towards

mathematics have been proposed. In the beginning, measurement of attitude was

impossible. American psychologist, Thurston was the first one who advocated that the

feelings, dispositions, and ideas can be measured using numerical scale and developed

the scale. Thurstone (1928) first developed formal technique to measure an attitude.

According to him behaviors that are often or always unobservable to others could be

quantified. Since, Thurston's work in the early 1900s, there has been numerous

attempts to reliably measure attitudes toward mathematics (Adelson & McCoach,

2011; Aiken, 1974; Fennema & Sherman, 1976; Tapia & Marsh, 2004). Thereafter,

there have been many improvements to measure attitudes toward mathematics.

Aiken (1974) developed two of the first measures of attitudes towards

mathematics with reliability and validity evidence. The original measure of attitudes
 105

towards mathematics was Likert-type self-report and uni-dimensional in nature. Aiken

(1974) later revised this measure and proposed that attitudes were multi-dimensional.

The measure of Mathematics Attitude Inventory, included two dimensions: enjoyment

and value of mathematics (Aiken, 1974). After two years Fennema & Sherman (1976)

developed the most influential measure of attitudes toward mathematics which is still

widely used in research. The Mathematics Attitudes Scales were developed to

measure attitudes towards mathematics among middle and high school students. The

measure has nine scales; some are related to student perceptions of the teacher,

parents, and gender attitudes. Thirty years later, Tapia and Marsh (2004) developed

another instrument to measure students’ attitudes towards mathematics. Yet like

Fennema and Sherman's Mathematics Attitudes Scales, the ATMI aimed to measure

attitudes toward mathematics among high school students. This scale included 40

items and yielded factors of the value of mathematics, self-confidence, enjoyment,

and motivation to mathematics. The scale showed evidence of high internal

consistency reliability and test-retest reliability suggesting that attitudes were

relatively stable over time.

In order to measure students' attitudes towards mathematics, varieties of

instruments were developed. The first instrument of Aiken 'mathematics attitude scale'

was based on one-dimensional definitions of attitude (Aiken, 1974). After few years,

another attitude scale concerning to multi-dimensional definitions came to exist by

Fennema-Sherman Mathematics Attitude Scales (Fennema & Sherman, 1976) and

became the most popular and accepted instrument to study the attitudes towards

mathematics for over three decades. This scale consisted of a collection of nine

instruments namely: (1) Attitude towards Success in Mathematics Scale, (2)

Mathematics as a Male Domain Scale, (3) Mother Scale, (4) Father Scale, (5) Teacher
 106

Scale, (6) Confidence in Learning Mathematics Scale, (7) Mathematics Anxiety

Scale, (8) Effectance Motivation Scale in Mathematics and (9) Mathematics

Usefulness Scale. The questionnaire was the combination of 108 items alltogether and

the 45 minutes of time was fixed to complete the questionnaire. Validity and

reliability of this scale has been determined through the extensive research (McLeod,

1994). However, many studies also questioned about the reliability of its scores.

As a result, Tapia and Marsh (2004) developed a more revised and even

shorter scale or instrument with a basic factor structure. They developed one of the

latest instruments having four factors ATMI consisting of 40-items, a 5-points Likert

scale ranging from 'strongly agree’ to 'strongly disagree' (Chamberlin, 2010). Both

positive and negative items were incorporated in the instrument. The reliability

coefficient of the instrument, alpha of 0.97 was calculated with a standard error of

measurement of 5.67 (Tapia, 1996; Tapia & Marsh, 2004). Cronbach alpha was also

determined to ascertain the internal consistency and the reliability of the scores on the

four subscales or factors of each. The factor analysis was also calculated, and alpha

values were found 0.89, 0.89, 0.88, and 0.95 for the enjoyment, value, motivation, and

self-confidence measures respectively. The test-retest reliability was calculated by

using Pearson Correlation Coefficient at four-month duration and it was administered

to 64 students. The test-retest coefficient of the total scale was 0.89, and the

coefficients of the subscales were as: Enjoyment 0.84; Value 0.70; Self-confidence

0.88; and Motivation 0.78.

In this study, the specific attitude considered by Tapia and Marsh (2004) on

the revised ATMI was adapted and employed. This ATMI inventory comprises 40-

items, 5-points Likert scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The

inventory consists of four factors associated with attitudes towards mathematics

 107

together with self-confidence having 15 items, value having 10 items, enjoyment

having 10 items, and motivation having 5 items. In this inventory, the factor self-

confidence is defined as students’ self-concept and confidence in their mathematics

performance. The factor, 'value' measures the students’ beliefs about the relevance,

usefulness and worth of mathematics in their lives now and in the future. The factor

'enjoyment' is used to measure the degree of students' enjoyment while working with

mathematics and their degree of enjoyment in mathematics classes in general. The last

factor 'motivation' measures the students’ interest in mathematics and their desire to

pursue further studies in mathematics.

Attitude towards Mathematics Inventory (ATMI), Adapted Version

In this study, the adapted version of ATMI developed by Tapia & Marsh

(2004) was used as the research instrument to collect data. In this instrument, there

were two sections. In the first section, demographic information such as age, gender,

parental education, religion and ethnicity were asked. The second section included the

adapted 40 ATMI Likert type items with attitude scales.

To ensure that the adaptation of the ATMI questionnaire was culturally and

contextually relevant, a pilot test was conducted in two schools of Ilam district, one

from urban areas and the other from rural areas and to ensure the required reliability

and validity of the instrument. The ATMI questionnaire, which was used, was the

same but it was translated into Nepali. Before piloting, the ATMI questionnaire was

translated into Nepali so that the students would better understand the term of

mathematics and it was examined by an English Nepali translator to maintain the

original spirit of the questionnaire. The English version of ATMI is given in

Appendix A.
 108

Piloting of the Adapted Version of the ATMI

Formal consent was taken from the headmaster of each school and the students

before piloting the adapted version of the ATMI. The survey was administered by the

investigator himself. Before conducting the survey, the investigator introduced

himself and made clear about the reason of the study and requested the students to

feel comfortable and to complete the survey honestly at their own pace and they were

also requested to ask the meaning of the difficult terms or words encountered in the

questionnaire if any. The students were also informed that it was not the test and that

there was no right or wrong answer to any of the questions. Further, the investigator

allocated five minutes' time for the students to understand and answer the first section

of the questionnaire. Participation in this test was voluntary with no assumptions at all

to the school or the student. The questions asked by the students at the time of

administering the test were counted and recorded for the improvement of the

questionnaire.

Thus, the translated questionnaire was pre-tested on the group of 100 students;

50 students of grade X in Ilam district studying at schools located in urban areas and

50 students studying at schools from rural areas for the language convenience and

contextual relevance before the final test. After piloting the questionnaire, some terms

(words) in the questionnaire were changed so that the students would feel easy, and

they would understand the questions easily. After completing the survey, they were

asked for feedback on the questionnaire with a particular focus on any ambiguity or

difficulty of the challenging item. Feedback and comments were collected from the

students on the survey questionnaire. They were also documented for the refinement

of the survey. Catching sight of the feedback, necessary changes were made for the

final use of the survey questionnaire to be used in this study.

 109

Observation and Result of the Pilot Test

During the administration of the survey in both rural and urban-based schools,

the students only asked the meaning of some difficult terms and they were helped by

writing the meaning of the difficult word(s) on the board by the researcher himself.

They asked only why the question was not either yes or no. It was difficult to choose

the exact right answer from the given five scales. According to Evans (1996), the

absolute value of Cronbach’s Alpha () score of 0.8 is a strong correlation. During

the piloting of the questionnaire, the Cronbach’s Alpha reliability score of 0.86 was

recorded. It indicated that the questionnaire had a strong correlation. It was observed

that the survey took about 45 minutes to accomplish all the items including the first

section for the average students.

Development of Response Scoring Scheme

The items of the survey with four different factors having the five Likert-type

scale from 'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree', each positive item was scored as

Strongly Agree = 5; Agree = 4; Not Sure = 3; Disagree = 2; & Strongly Disagree = 1.

Likewise, the score of each negative item was reversed such as, Strongly Agree = 1;

Agree = 2; Not Sure = 3; Disagree = 4; and Strongly Disagree = 5.

Table 4
ATMI Students Response Scoring Scheme
ATMI Sub Scales No. of Positive Items No. of Negative Items
Value (10) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 -
Engagement (10) 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 20
Self-Confident(15) 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29
Motivation (5) 36, 37, 38, 39 40
Scoring Scheme Response category Score Response category Score
A 5 A 1
B 4 B 2
C 3 C 3
D 2 D 4
E 1 E 5
 110

In determining the level of students' attitudes towards mathematics, the

classification and interpretation of the attitude level were based on the range of the

mean scores of the ATMI Scale shown in Table 5 as adapted by Andamon & Tan

(2018). The final Nepali version of ATMI is given in Appendix B.

Table 5
Classification and Interpretation Level of Mean Scores of ATMI
Rating Range of Mean Score Qualitative Description Interpretation Level

1 1.00-1.49 Strongly Disagree Highly negative

2 1.50-2.49 Disagree Negative
3 2.50-3.49 Uncertain Neutral
4 3.50-4.49 Agree Positive
5 4.50-500 Strongly Agree Highly Positive

Mathematics Achievement Test

Mathematics Achievement Test (MAT) was especially designed to find grade

X students' achievement levels in mathematics. MAT was developed in line with the

Specification Grid (Mathematics) developed by CDC Nepal for SEE. This test

consists of fifty mathematics questions covering four domains: knowledge,

comprehension, application, and skill. The construction and validation process of the

MAT is given in the topic that follows.

Development and Validation of Mathematics Achievement Test

An achievement test is constructed to measure the students' knowledge, skills,

and understanding, in a specified subject or group of subjects. In short, it is

considered that the achievement test is a successful means of determining to what

level the student has attained a certain degree of improvement on the way to the

desired goal (Freeman, 2010). Achievement tests often measure the learner's cognitive
 111

trait and are constructed to measure the specific knowledge of any subject or grade-

level.

It is an important instrument in school level education for evaluation and has

also great impact in measuring the instructional progress in the different subject areas

of the learner (Mehrens & Lehmann, 1973). The actual meaning or the term

'achievement' is one’s learning proficiencies, attainments, accomplishments, etc. that

are directly connected to the student’s status of educational enhancement. It is a

systematic procedure to measure the students' capability learned through instruction

(Gronlund, 1990). It gives an exact picture of students’ skills and knowledge in the

concerned subject area or knowledge domain being tested. The exact data or

achievement of the students is very important for planning, implementing, and

evaluating the curriculum.

The purpose of an achievement test is to assess some aspects of the academic

proficiency of the students that they have learned to do or to know. Teachers utilize an

achievement test to determine the students' academic performance in their area of

study. Similarly, the employers use the achievement tests to determine the capabilities

of potential employees. In the same way, professional associations utilize

achievement tests to select the best fitted qualified applicants for the required

profession. In any circumstance, the achievement test is used to select competent

persons in the required field. It is used to decide a person's level of skill and

knowledge about a certain subject or certain area. Thus, it is specially designed to

evaluate the person's knowledge, skill level and success in the specific area.

The achievement test is considered as the significant instrument to evaluate

the school education program. The school’s teacher should decide their students'

capabilities in the different subject areas to upgrade and improve their learning. The
 112

students may differ significantly in their ability among themselves according to

knowledge domain due to different background and causes. Therefore, to evaluate the

students' ability, diverse forms of achievement tests are used to determine their skill,

knowlwdge and attitude in the related field. Downie (1961) defines achievement test

as "the test that measures the attainments or accomplishments of an individual after a

period of training or learning".

The achievement test constructed to measure the capabilities of the students in

mathematics in this study consisted of multiple-choice item test. Such test can assess

both knowledge and understanding level (Gronlund, 1976; Osadebe, 2013). In

addition, the test has the advantage of covering the wide range of contents of the

mathematics curriculum and measures different aspects of the cognitive level.

In this research, the achievement test was developed to find out grade X

students' achievements in mathematics. It was developed to gather the achievement

score due to the unavailability of the standardized achievement test of mathematics in

Nepal. The achievement test instrument developed by the researcher consists of the

test items with multiple-choice questions. This instrument covers a wide range of

contents (total syllabus of Grade X mathematics).

The developing process of the achievement test questionnaire included the

preparation of the test blueprint, test items, developing the scoring key; try out of test

items, item analysis, establishing reliability coefficient, test validation, norms, and

development of the final format of the test. Thus, the tenth-grade standardized

mathematics achievement test instrument was developed. These steps for developing

the test are discussed in greater detail below.

 113

Conceptual Framework of Test Construction

This test was constructed in line with the objectives and grade X mathematics

curriculum. The test items were prepared from using the curriculum of Grade X with

the textbook prescribed by Curriculum Development Center (CDC), Nepal. The

achievement test was designed to measure the students' knowledge, skills,

comprehension, and application in mathematics. The achievement test was prepared

through a systematic process. The basic five steps process of the test construction

stated by Rani and Anisha (2017) were adapted viz. test conceptualization, test

construction, item scoring and analysis, reliability and validity, and test

standardization (Figure 6).

Figure 6

Steps of Test Construction

Preparation and Construction of Test Specifications and Blueprints

A specification chart is a detailed plan of any action or outline. Preparing the

specification table of the test is sometimes referred to as the test blueprints (Stuart-

Hamilton, 2007). It provides the researcher with a bird's eye view of the entire test

and provides the users with basic instructions on the rationale for the process of

creating the blueprint. According to AlFallay (2018), there is a slight difference

between test specification and blueprint where a test specification offers the

guidelines to the item writers about how the items should be written and what content

may be tested. On the other hand, test blueprint is the sketch or outline for the test

design that consists of the number of questions to be tested, and score category. This

shows that the construction of test specifications is the precondition to prepare the test
 114

blueprints. Thus, a test blueprint is the preliminary draft of the test that is the initial

phase and can be modified if necessary to make the final version of the test (AlFallay,

2018).

As defined by Stuart-Hamilton (2007), test specification is the compilation of

factors that helps to appraise the test. In the educational field, the table of the

specification provides students an interactive approach to education planning,

curriculum expectation and learning objectives. Noveanu (2015) argued that test

specification is the design of a plan that can be used to develop the evaluation system

representing the main features to be covered. It ensures an appropriate item

representation of content with weightage. In the specification table, we can see the

content area, unit-wise topics, the item-wise weighting of contents by objectives,

number of items distribution of scores (marks) and their mutual relationships

(AlFallay, 2018). It is the basis for test construction.

Generally, an achievement test measures the cognitive level in mathematics.

Bloom (1956) has categorized the cognitive domain into six levels- knowledge,

comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Considering the

objectives of the secondary level curriculum and the mathematical skills that students

required to attain, mathematical skill level items were also included in the test

blueprint. To determine the weightage of each of the different content areas relating to

the objectives of the secondary level mathematics, the weightage prescribed by grid

prescribed by CDC, Nepal was used. Considering the prescribed grid and textbook,

the item's weightage of the content by objectives was developed with the weightage of

20% from knowledge, 30% from comprehension, 30% from the application and 20%

from skills. The number of items from each was determined by their length.

Altogether 60 items were developed in the first draft of the test. Among them, 10
 115

items were omitted after the item analysis. The details of the test after the second try

out (final preparation) are given in the form of a test blueprint. The test blueprint is

given in Table 6.

Table 6

Content-wise Blueprint of Achievement Test

S. Content Area Unit Item wise Weightage of Content by Objectives No. of Marks
Items
N. Knowledge Comprehension Application Skill
1. Sets i) Sets 1 1 - - 2 2
2. Arithmetic ii) Tax and Money 1 1 1 - 3 3
Exchange
iii) Compound Interest 1 1 1 - 3 3

iv) Population Growth - 1 1 - 2 2

and Development
10 10
3. Menstruation v) Plane Surface - 2 1 - 3 3

vi) Cylinder and Sphere 1 1 - 1 3 3

vii) Prism and Pyramid - - 2 1 3 3
9 9
4. Algebra viii) HCF and LCM - 1 1 - 2 2

ix) Surds and Radicands - 1 1 1 3 3

x) Indices - 1 1 1 3 3

xi) Algebraic Functions 1 - 1 1 3 3

xii) Equation 1 - 1 1 3 3
14 14
5. Geometry xiii) Area of Triangle 1 1 1 1 4 4
and Parallelogram
xiv) Construction - 1 1 - 2 2
xv) Circle 1 - 1 1 3 3
9 9
6. Trigonometry xvi) Trigonometry 1 1 1 - 3 3
7. Statistics xvii)Statistics 1 1 - 1 3 3
8. Probability xviii) Probability - 1 - 1 2 2
Total 10(20) 15(30) 15(30) 10(20) 50 50

Development of Scoring Key

In the item scoring for multiple choice items, the answer key ensures

objectivity and uniformity to the examinees. Likewise, it helps the examinees for their

tiny confusion which sometimes occurs. The multiple-choice items had four
 116

distracters. In each item, 1 mark was assigned for each correct response and 0 for an

incorrect response. There was no provision given for the fractional marking system

because there were not partly right and wrong answers to choose from. The item was

not given any mark or score if the students responded to more than one option/answer

for the item. There was no provision of minus marking in case of the incorrect

responses.

Preliminary Tryout

In the standardization process, for the preliminary tryout of the achievement

test item along with the specification chart, five different senior professors of

Mathematics Education from Tribhuvan University, four Ph.D. fellows, two subject

experts at MOE, two school mathematics teachers teaching at Grade X (one each from

an urban and rural school in Ilam district) and the supervisor for checking the

coverage of the content according to their weightage, appropriateness of the

distracters, level of difficulty, language clarity and directions, ambiguity of the terms

used in the test items and the sequence of the test items were consulted. Finally, the

test item was given to a language expert to check the appropriateness and complexity

of language.

The suggestions given by the subject experts, guide, Ph.D. fellows, and the

school’s teachers were taken into consideration. After receiving their opinions and

suggestions, some corrections and items in difficult language were modified to

simpler language statements. Some items were revised considering the suggestions for

further clarity, avoiding the ambiguity and appropriateness. Some items were revised

before piloting the test. The test was first administered (prior tryout) to a group of 10

students before piloting. The prior tryout of the test was intended for further
 117

improvement of the test paper. Some terms of the test were slightly changed, and

some items were revised after the result of the tryout.

Pilot Testing

The pilot testing was adminstered to a sample of 50 grade X students (25

studying in urban area schools and 25 studying in rural area schools) selected on the

purposive sampling basis. The selection of the students was done using the incidental

method in which the students who were available at the test time were selected. The

test results of only 25 students were taken for the item analysis purpose. The total

time taken for completing the test was recorded. In the first draft, the number of

students was kept small because the test was utilized to check the ambiguity of items

and appropriateness of language. After the administration of the initial draft, the major

suggestions were taken from these students in terms of their understanding of the

language appropriateness, statements, repetition and if any. After this first try out

(tested), some statements were modified based on observation and the students'

suggestions. The edited scale consisted of sixty items. The pilot test provided a good

experience for the investigator to administer the final test.

Item Analysis

Item analysis is a statistical and expert judgmental procedure to assess the tests

based on the quality of each item, item sets and the whole sets of items, along with the

relationship of each item by means of the other items (McCowan & McCowan, 1999).

It examines the performance of each item either concerning some external norm or

about the remaining items of the test (Kline, 1986). The technique of item analysis

was first described by Paul Kline in his book Psychometrics Primer. He further states

that it is an effective and simple process of test construction so; various famous tests

have been developed by utilizing this approach.

 118

Item analysis is the item-wise analysis that helps the analyst to detect the

strength and weaknesses of each test item. It is a post-administration examination of a

test. Item analysis refers to the quality of the test item. It helps to find out the

difficulty of the test item (Gronlund, 1990). Item analysis helps to find out how well

the item discriminates between high and low scores in the test. It also helps to screne

specific technical or procedural faults and as a result, it provides more information to

improve the test items (Gronlund, 1990). In the same way, it also assists to select the

best items for the final test, discard poor items, and modify the weak items (Freeman,

2010).

So, it is the most important instrument to enhance the effectiveness of the test.

It is necessary to examine the effectiveness of the items whether they can measure the

fact, concepts, or idea for which they were intended. It is considered as a scientific

method of improving the test quality and test items (Freeman, 2010). Item analysis

provides three major kinds of information concerning the quality of test items.

 The difficulty level of each item: it indicates an item whether it is too easy

or too hard.

 Discrimination power of each item: it is a measure of an item signifying

whether it can discriminate between the students who know subject matter

well and those who do not know.

 Effectiveness of the alternatives: it is the efficiency of the alternatives that

can determine whether the distracters are believable but wrong tend to be

marked by the less able students and not by more able students.

According to Gronlund (1990); Ebel and Frisbie (1991), item analysis can be

carried out by utilizing two constricting test groups comprised from the lower and

upper 27% of the answer sheets or examinees in which the test items are administered
 119

as a trial. In the test, the lower and upper 27% scorers are the better estimate of the

actual discrimination value. They are significantly different range of values and the

scores of the remaining or middle values do not sufficiently discriminate. In the item

analysis process, the scored or graded test papers are arranged from the lowest to

highest score in the acending order or the decending order. Then, the highest 27% of

the papers are selected from the top and the lowest 27% from the bottom and the

middle test papers are omitted for analysis. Thus, the two extreme groups of 27 low

scorers and high scorers formed as the group for the analysis of the power of

difficulty level and discrimination indices of the test items.

Difficulty Level of the Items. The difficulty level of the items is simply the

percentage of students who answered an item correctly (Gronlund, 1993). It is defined

as the proportion of the percentage of the examinees who have answered the item

correctly (Guilford, 1988). The relation of the proportion suggests that the higher the

proportion, the lower is the difficulty. The difficulty level describes the percentage of

students who correctly answered the item. The higher percentage denotes the easier

item and vice versa. It ranges from 0-100 %. The recommended range of difficulty is

from (30-70) % (Sahoo et al., 2017). The relationship of the difficulty level of the

items exists in an inverse relation. Hence, the higher the difficulty of an item, the

lower is its index (Wood, 1960). Item difficulty can be calculated by dividing the

number of students responding the item correctly by the total number of students

responding the item. The proportion for the item is generally symbolized by P and is

called item difficulty (Crocker & Algina, 1986). The difficulty level of items is also

known as the power of difficulty level or item difficulty, in short P-Level. An item

responded correctly by 75% of the examinees would have an item difficulty, or P-

 120

Level of 0.75, while an item responded correctly by 40% of the examinees would

have a lower item difficulty or P-Level of 0.40.

The following is the formulae for calculating difficulty level or item difficulty

(P-Level) propounded by Gronlund (1990); Garret & Woodworth (1991).

R
p= x 100
N

Where;

P = the percentage of the examinees who answered items correctly (P – Level).

R = the number of examinees who answered the items correctly.

N = total number of examinees who tried the items.

The interpretation range of the difficulty level of the test items suggested by (Katz,

1959) is given in Table 7.

Table 7
Difficulty Level Interpretation Range of Different Types of Test Items
Types of Items Difficulty Level (P-Level)
Long answer type 50%
Questions with 5 alternatives 60%
Questions with 4 alternatives 62%
Questions with 3 alternatives 66%
Questions with 2 alternatives 75%

If the multiple-choice question with 4 alternatives have been tested and the

difficulty level is calculated at 62 or less, then the question will be selected.

However, if the difficulty level is more than 62, then the question will be rejected or

removed (Table 7).

Discriminating Power of the Items. The discriminating power of the test is

the ability to measure the efficiency of each item to the respective students who differ

in their level of knowledge in the concern subject matter tested and also their ability
 121

to utilize it. The power of discrimination concerns with the extent to which an item

differentiates between the students having low and high ability (Brown, 2004). The

discrimination power as defined by Gajjar et al. (2014) as the "ability of an item to

differentiate between students of higher and lower abilities”. When a test item is

responded correctly from most of the high ability group of the students and

responded incorrectly by most of the low ability group of students, then it means that

such item discriminates between the high and low ability group of students. In other

words, the power of discrimination of an item indicates that a test item discriminates

between those students who respond correctly on the overall test and those who do not

respond correctly on the overall test. Thus, discrimination power of an item is the

difference between the correct percentages for these two groups. Discriminating index

is the ability of an item based on the discrimination of the students made between

superiors and inferiors (Blood & Budd, 1972). In discriminating items, the high value

is close to perfect 1 and the items with low discrimination value are close to zero

(Brown, 2004).

The discriminating power of an item can be determined by analysing the

number of students getting high scorers who responded the item correctly with the

number of students getting low scores who responded the same item correctly. The

discrimination power of an item is also known as the discriminating index. In short, it

is written as (D), (D-Level), or (DI). In computing the discrimination index, D, can be

determinded by grading the students concerning to their total score obtained in the test

and then selecting 27 % of the highest scorer and 27% of the lowest scorer. Gronlund

(1990); Ebel and Frisbie (1986) argued that "27% is used because it has shown that

this value will maximize differences in normal distributions while providing enough
 122

cases for analysis". Similarly, Kelly (as cited in Popham, 1981), states that use of 27%

maximizes these two characteristics.

Discrimination index (D) is also defined as the number of students in the

upper group who responded the item correctly minus the number of students in the

lower group who responded the item correctly, divided by the total number of

students in the upper or lower group (Wood, 1960). The higher discrimination index

denotes the better test item. Good discriminating index differentiates the students who

respond correctly in the test and those who do not respond correctly (Wood, 1960).

The formula for computing discriminating power or discriminating index (Gronlund,

1990); (Ebel & Frisbie, 1986) is given below.

Where;

D = Discrimination index

RU = Correct response given by the upper group

RL = Correct response given by the lower group

NU = Total number of students in the upper group

NL = Total number of students inthe lower group

The rule of thumb, or range of interpretation of discrimination index is given

by (Ebel and Frisbie, 1986) for determining the discriminating value of the items (D I)

or D – Level is given in Table 8.

 123

Table 8
Discrimination Index Interpretation Range
Range of D-Level Grade Recommendations
DI > 0.39 Excellent Preserve
DI = 0.30-0.39 Good Possibilities for improvement
DI = 0.20-0.29 Average Need to verify/review
DI = 0.00-0.20 Poor Reject or review in-depth
DI < -0.01 Worst Remove

So, if the value of discriminating index DI is greater than 0.39, then it is

considered as the best and that between 0.30 - 0.39 is considered as possibly needing

improvement, and the one between 0.20 - 0.29 or below, then it needs improvement or

rejection.

Effectiveness of the Alternatives. The effectiveness or the appropriateness of

the alternatives is the most important feature in the multiple-choice test items. This

feature can be made appropriate by observing the pattern of responses to the given

distracters. Thus, the efficiency of a multiple-choice item depends on its distracters to

a great extent. In the multiple-choice item, if two distracters out of four are

improbable, then the question or item becomes just a true and false item because there

exist only two distracters to be identified for the right answers. Hence, it is essential

for the teachers to examine that how the students choose each distracter and also

necessary to modify those distractors that draw less or no attention. Considering these

things, the use of “none of the above” and “all of the above” is generally discouraged.

To construct the effectiveness and appropriateness of the distracters, it is

necessary to be cautious at the item developing stage. The most familiar way of

developing distracters is the way that focuses on a list of probable but incorrect

alternatives existing in thinking, reasoning and problem-solving (Moreno et al., 2015;

Rodriguez, 2016). Another way of developing effective distracters is to focus on

 124

similarity. The distracters should be similar in terms of content and structure relative

to the correct option (Lai et al., 2016). The content similarity of the distracter includes

incorrect but similar options that are comparable with but different from the correct

option.

When the alternatives are doubtful and the students fail every time to select

definite multiple-choice alternatives, then it should be modified. The discrimination

index should be obtained for everyone alternative so as to establish usefulness of each

distracter (Millman & Greene, 1993). Where the value of discrimination of the right

answer should be positive, the values of the discrimination for the distracters should

be lower and, preferably, negative. The distracters should be cautiously observed

when items show positive large D - values.

In multiple-choice items, sometimes slight blind guessing is probable to occur.

There may be several guesses. When most of the answers are given without complete

certainty is called a guess. So, sometimes students answer by guessing. To manage the

student guessing, the formula propounded by Guilford (1971) can be used as the best.
W
S =R -
N-1

Where;

S = Right score

R = Number of the right response

W = Number of wrong responses

N= Number of options used in the item

Preparation of Final Test

After the first try out of the MAT, it was administered (piloted) in a group of

25 students of grade X from the schools in urban areas and another group of 25

students from the school's rural areas, the test administration was conducted on the
 125

same day and at the same time. The same process of the first tryout was followed

while administering the test. Before the test administration, a rapport was established

by the investigator to the respondents and the purpose of the test was explained to

them. Then the instruction and statement of the test were explained in the class. The

marking scheme was also communicated to the students as one mark for each correct

answer and zero marks for a wrong answer. Based on the second tryout (piloted) test,

the difficulty level of the items and discriminating power of the items were calculated.

The difficulty level (P-Level) and discriminating power (D-Level) of the test items are

given in Appendix L.

Selection Procedure of the Test Items

The test items decided after the second tryout (piloting), having calculated

their P-Level and D-Level are presented in Table 8. The items lying at the acceptance

level (excellent and good levels) comparing with the range of interpretation for

calculating P-Level and the D-Level to select 50 test items for the final draft are

presented as the summary of the test items separately in Table 9 and Table 10.

Table 9

Power of Difficulty Level with Range of Interpretation

Range of P-Level No. of Items Total Remarks

P = (30 - 70) % 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 15, 57 56 items were accepted

(Accept) 16, 17, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36 1 item was rejected

37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48

49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60

P  30% (Reject) - - -

P  70% (Reject) 34, 43, 54 (Rejected Items) 3 3 items were rejected

Total Items 60
 126

Table 3

Discrimination Index with Range of Interpretation

Range of P-Level No. of Items Total Remarks

1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17,

DI > 0.39 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 29, 34, 35, 37, 38, 40, 44 38 Excellent

43, 44, 46, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58

59, 53

12, 18, 19, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31 Good

DI = 0.30 - 0.39 16
32, 33, 36, 41, 45, 47, 48, 55

DI = 0.20-0.29 42, 60 02 Average

DI = 0.00 - 0.20 4, 13, 23, 39 04 Poor

DI < - 0.01 -

Total Items 60

When the difficulty level of multiple-choice questions with 4 distracters is

62% or less than it is acceptable (Katz & Stotland, 1959). As the meaning of difficulty

level as described before, a higher percentage of the students correctly answered the

item means the item was easy and a lower percentage of the correctly answered item

means that it was a hard item. So, the acceptable range of the items lies between 30-

70% (Ebel & Frisbie, 1986). Likewise, the test item should have a higher

discrimination index to be a better test item. The interpretation of a range of

discriminating indices given by Ebel and Frisbie (1986) is that the test items were

selected for the final draft of the test.

In this study, altogether 50 items were chosen for the final test. In the process

of item analysis, the difficulty level of the item, item discrimination and efficiency of

the distracter were examined. Thus, it can be concluded that the analysis of the items

of the multiple-choice test seemed to be efficient regarding difficulty level and

 127

discrimination index. Only 4 items (4, 13, 23 & 39) were found to be inefficient (lies

in the poor range of difficulty level) and were rejected. The majority of the items were

acceptable in terms of difficulty level which means that the items' difficulty level was

appropriate for the students. Likewise, the responses of both high and low-ability

level students also seemed to be distributed evenly. Three of the items (34, 43 & 54)

were not discriminating enough between low and high ability students and they were

rejected.

In doing so, the probable negative wash back effect of the exam or the impact

of tests on teaching and learning for high ability students could be reduced or even

inhibited. Similarly, for obtaining 50 test items, three other items were likely to be the

average, i.e., 2 items (42 & 60) having an average discrimination index of (0.21) and

(0.26) respectively, were rejected. Question no. 56 had a difficulty level in the

acceptance range but in the border of the interpretation range, was also rejected for

the final draft of the test. In the process of analysis of the results, some distracters

were found to be inefficient and some were changed with new alternatives for future

use. If the process of item analysis is used, a positive wash back effect can be ensured

to the students as well as the institution.

Moreover, the students who participated in the pilot testing were also

interviewed about the difficulty level and discrimination power of the test items and

the efficiency of the distracters. Considering the feedback given by the examinees, the

analysis of the test items was focused more and the final draft of the test was

constructed. Hence, the final form of the test consisted of 50 items with 50 full marks.

Reliability of the Test

Reliability denotes the quality of measurement that provides consistent results

with equal values (Blumberg et al., 2005). It measures consistency, precision,

 128

repeatability and trustworthiness of research (Chakrabartty, 2020). According to him,

the degree of consistency in a test score is called reliability. So, reliability is a

measurement procedure that produces identical (or nearly identical) results when it is

used repeatedly to measure the same individual under the same conditions (Gravetter

& Forzano, 2018).

Reliability is used to calculate the stability of the measures administered at

different times to the same individuals and the equivalence of sets of items from the

same test (Chakrabartty, 2020). The coefficient of reliability lies between 0 and 1,

where 1 indicates the perfect reliability and 0 indicates no reliability. It means the

internal consistency of the test result and uniformity or stability of results over some

time. According to Kerlinger (1986), synonyms for reliability include dependability,

stability and consistency.

The method of determining reliability or its types are categorized differently

by various writers. Considering the meaning of reliability, according to Kerlinger

(1986), we can categorize three ways of determining it viz. parallel forms reliability,

test-retest reliability and internal consistency reliability. Each of them is separately

elaborated under the headings that follow.

Cronbach alpha () reliability. This method was developed by Cronbach

(1951). It is frequently used to measure the internal consistency of the test. It utilizes

the variance of even, odd and the total scores of the items to calculate reliability. It

provides us a simple way to compute whether or not a score is reliable. It can be

calculated by using the formula of Kuder Richardson - KR20, and Kuder Richardson -

KR21.Since the test retest method is used to validate the items, then the formula KR21

was used to calculate the internal consistency or alpha.

 129

In this study, the test was administered to measure the students’ mathematics

achievement and repeated on the same group of 50 students after a time interval of 40

days. The test was divided to measure the four domains or scales namely knowledge,

comprehension, application, and skill each consisting of 10 items, 15 items, 15 items

and 10 items respectively. The coefficient of correlation was calculated between the

first and second sets of scores and was found to be 0.798. Cronbach alpha (α) and the

four scale-wise internal consistency were found to be at an acceptable level with

scores 0.726, 0.719, 0.736 and 0.704 respectively. Likewise, the total exam internal

consistency was calculated and had a high level with a total score of 0.785. The

internal consistency of the test in different four scales with the number of items is

given in Table 11.

Table 4
Cronbach’s Alpha Test
Scales No. of Items Cronbach's Alpha Number of students
Knowledge 10 0.726
Comprehension 15 0.719
Application 15 0.736 50
Skill 10 0.704
Total 50 0.785

As stated by Evans (1996), correlation is an effect size, so interpretation

guideline is necessary to describe the strength verbally of the correlation for the

absolute value of r that is presented in Table 12.

 130

Table 5

Correlation Coefficient Value Description

Range of Correlation Interpretation

0.80 − 1.00 Very strong positive correlation

0.60 − 0.79 Strong positive correlation

0.40 − 0.59 Moderate positive correlation

0.20 − 0.39 Weak correlation

0.00 − 0.19 Very weak correlation

A good achievement test can have a reliability coefficient of 0.90 or higher in

most condition. In this case, the reliability coefficient of 0.89, lies on a very strong

positive correlation range as in Table 12. Likewise, Cronbach’s α = 0.87 indicates

very good internal consistency in the test.

Validity of the Test

Validity of the test indicates the quality of the test that is essential

characteristic of the test. The meaning of the term validity is the accuracy of the test

to measure what it claims to measure. In other words, validity is the measure of test

that it claims to measure when compared with other accepted criteria (Freeman,

1960). Anastasi and Urbina (2007) define validity as a test that concerns what the test

measures and how well it does so. Therefore, validity of a test is the degree to which

the measurement process measures the variable that it claims to measure’ (Gravetter

& Forzano, 2015). In the same way, validity of a research instrument measures what it

is designed to measure (Robson, 2011). The coverage of the content in any

achievement test can be best determined by experts through a detailed judgment.

In the area of research, validity has two important parts: credibility and

transferability. Credibility denotes the internal validity that contains the proper

selection and implementation of the internal parts like selection of the group,
 131

recording the data, process of analysis etc. Thus, it focuses on whether a study can be

replicated (Broom & Willis, 2007). Transferability denotes the external validity or

implication that illustrates whether the results of any study are transferable to other

groups of interest or one to another.

As stated by Creswell (2005); Pallant (2016), validity of the test is mainly

divided into four groups: i) content validity, ii) face validity, iii) construct validity iv)

criterion-related validity.

Content Validity. Content validity principally depends upon the logical

reasoning and the judgment of the expert, and commonly empirical research. Content

validity of a test mainly depends on the logical representativeness of the test items

covering the related skills and the areas of contents to be learned. Content validity is

the representativeness of the questions on the instrument representing all possible

questions that could be asked concerning to the content or skill (Creswell, 2005). It

requires high levels of internal consistency, representativeness and relevance. There is

no any absolute statistical test to calculate content validityso content validity usually

depends on the expert's judgment on the related field.

In this study, the content validity of the achievement test is reasonably valid.

Content validity of the test can be ensured by the adequacy of each item through the

careful planning of the test, satisfying the sampling adequacy of the test items as well

as the careful analysis of the test items by the subject experts. The draft of the test was

provided before pilot testing to different mathematics teachers and experts, and it was

also agreed by the supervisor. The content validity of the test items included in the

test was compared with the content areas and their relative weightage. So, it can be

claimed that the test has got content validity. So, it is claimed that the validity of the

achievement test used in the study is reasonably valid.

 132

Face Validity. Face validity is also called logical validity. It depends on the

subjective assessment of the researcher's presentation and relevance of the measuring

instrument as to whether the items in the instrument appear to be relevant,

unambiguous and reasonable and clear (Oluwatayo, 2012). A measuring instrument or

a test can be defined to have face validity if it 'looks like' it is going to measure what it

is supposed to measure. It is an unempirical form of validity established when a

measurement procedure superficially appears to measure what it claims to measure

(Gravetter & Forzano, 2018). The test having content validity is assumed to have face

validity, but face validity does not guarantee the content validity. It is generally

considered as the low validity type.

The dichotomous scale can be used to examine the face validity with the

categorical options of “Yes” and “No” which indicate a favorable and unfavorable

item respectively. The data can be analyzed by using Cohen’s Kappa Index to

determines the face validity of the instrument introduced by Cohen (2013). The

minimal acceptable value of Kappa is 0.60 for inter-rater agreement. In this study, the

proposed instrument was given to the experts to judge whether it measures what it is

constructed or not. Likewise, Cohen's Kappa index was also calculated and found to

be 0.64. This lies in the acceptable range of face validity.

Conclusion

Achievement tests can be used in school level education for different

purposes; such as to measure the students' progress, grading, selection and

certification. It has been widely used in different areas and occupations as well as

guidance and counseling. It can be used in remedial teaching programs as well. Thus,

it can be used for formative as well as summative evaluation in school education. The

test is mainly constructed to evaluate the students completing the course of grade X in
 133

the prescribed secondary level curriculum of Nepal. In the Nepalese context, this sort

of objective (multiple choice types) question may be more powerful to evaluate the

students’ achievement level. So, it was assumed that the achievement test was useful

as the evaluation instrument for the students of mathematics at grade X.

Classroom Learning Behavior Self-Assessment Inventory

The classroom learning behavior self-assessment inventory (CLBSI) is a self-

assessment instrument for assessing the students’ mathematics classroom learning

behavior. The instrument incorporates 30 questions from six different constructs:

engagement, motivation, independence, responsiveness, collaboration and

participation containing three learning theories: behaviorism, cognitivism and

constructivism. A five-point Likert scale ranging from strongly agree (SA), agree (A),

neutral (N), disagree (D), and strongly disagree (SD) were used for positively

structure question, the score ranges from SA = 5, A = 4, N = 3, D = 2 and SD = 1 and

reversly for the negative structure question. The questions on every six constructs

consist of five items each. The construction of the questionnaire with six thematic

areas and the process of validation were done with the help of the experts and the

research supervisor. The process of questionnaire construction, development and

validation has been discussed below.

Development of Classroom Learning Behavior Self-assessment Inventory (CLBSI)

Learning behaviors are defined as the observable patterns of behavior

demonstrated by the students at the learning situations and reaction to academic tasks

(Chao et al., 2018). Learning behaviors (also called approaches-to-learning and

learning-to-learn behaviors) are positively related to desirable academic outcomes

(Schaefer & McDermott, 1999; Yen et al., 2004). Additionally, positive learning

behaviors have been found to act as protective factors against behavioral

 134

maladjustment (Rikoon et al., 2012). Learning styles or behaviors are influenced by

both the learner’s experiences and by the environment where the learning takes place,

and as such are context-dependent (Chao et al., 2018). They further express that

positive learning behaviors can have a direct impact on academic performance. The

philosophies and the cultural expectations normally set the norms for motivations and

attitudes that follows both perception and behavioral expression and would differ

across cultures.

The CLBSI is a self-assessment instrument for assessing students' learning

behaviors employed by them in the classroom. It is a student self-rating scale that

measures the dimensions of the social and emotional behaviors of the learner. The

main implication of this inventory is to assess the students' learning behavior in the

classroom by providing a list of learning behavior attributes concerning the different

learning camps. The inventory was designed as multidimensional measures of

learning behaviors as positive, negative and neutral. The CLBSI consisted of 30

learning behavior items that are constructed in the form of first-person statements.

Each item was to be rated with a 5-point Likert-style scale (from consistently to

never) that are the five items from six thematic areas as engagement, motivation,

independence, responsiveness, collaboration, and participation. These thematic areas

comprise three theoretical stances of learning: behaviorism, cognitivism, and

constructivism.

Most of the inventories related to study students' learning behavior are

teacher-rated scales. The classroom behavior inventory (CBI), developed by Schaefer

and Edgerton (1978) is a teacher rating scale which was used to study students’

classroom behaviors on reading and mathematics with different sub-tests. This

inventory has been used particularly with many learning-disabled populations to

 135

investigate the relationship between emotional and social behavior patterns of

classroom and academic competency. Some inventories are used to study the

antisocial behavior or negative behaviors of the students.

Most of the behavior inventories are used by the other observers that used the

rating scale by some sort of behavior observation of the organism. In such inventories,

the observer should be more experienced and have more knowledge about the

organism or should observe for a long time which in some sense may not be

appropriate and the result may be misleading. So, considering these weaknesses, this

inventory is designed as a self-assessment inventory in which the organism's

(learners') own selfdecided social and emotional behavior and measures are

evaluated through self-assessment based on the given rating scales.

Self-assessment is a process of assessing one's own activity and behavior in

the learning process. This process of assessment helps the student to assess the quality

of their behavior in learning and thinking. Moreover, self-assessment is considered as

the blended form of three components as: self-evaluation, self-monitoring, and

identification and implementation of instructional correctives. This helps to enhance

the student's knowledge, skill and attitude for the expected performance. Self-

monitoring is a skill that is necessary for effective self-assessment and involves

focused consideration to some aspect of behavior or thinking (Chunk, 2012). In self-

monitoring, students pay conscious attention to what they are doing, often in relation

to external standards. Thus, self-monitoring is the awareness of thinking and progress

as it occurs, and as such, it identifies part of what students do when they self-assess.

The second component of self-assessment is self-evaluation that involves identifying

progress toward the targeted performance. Finally, the identified decision will be

implemented in the instructional process.

 136

Objectives of Constructing the Instrument

The main objective of constructing the CLBSI scale was to measure the

classroom learning behaviors exhibited by the grade X students in the mathematics

classroom in Nepal. This is a students' self-rating scale used to examine their own

classroom behaviors in the classroom which directly affects the learning environment.

In the classroom learning situation, students exhibit different behaviors. They

can show positive behaviors like, agreement with classroom rules and expectations,

interest and engagement in-class activities, and the mastery of the subject matter,

which have been related with positive academic outcomes (Birch & Ladd, 1997;

Wentzel, 1993). In the other hand, negative behaviors such as inattentiveness,

withdrawn behaviors and distractibility have been related with negative academic

outcomes (Akey, 2006; Kane, 2004). Thus, students' positive behaviors always

contribute to their positive academic outcomes through promoting academically

oriented behavior, such as active listening, intellectual curiosity and interest in

schoolwork (Waxman & Huang, 1997). On the other hand, teachers can develop

negative insights about the students who are always disruptive. Such teacher’s insight

or perceptions can influence the students, and their thoughts, feelings, and actions.

The Rationale for Constructing the Instrument

The only performance of the students provides limited information about the

students, which does not fully explain their intellectual capacity and behavioral

aspects. So, nobody can input the intervention for their potential development.

Likewise, the development of classroom learning behavior inventory is necessary to

find out different associated behaviors of the students in learning, such as listening

attentively, participating in classroom activities, accepting correction, sticking to tasks

until completed etc. It is also essential that the teacher should treat the students
 137

according to their learning behavior to get the expected outcome of the curriculum. In

this regard, how learners learn mathematics is a crucial question that every teacher

can ask. What are the learners’ social and emotional conditions of learning

mathematics? What condition of perception about learning mathematics? So, this

inventory was useful for finding out the students' mathematics learning conditions and

assists to decrease the students' negative behaviors and subsequently increase positive

behaviors for better academic achievement.

Need for the Instrument

In every investigation, instruments play a vital role in the solution of the

research problem. They are, in a way, the backbone of the whole research work. In the

present research work, the instrument CLBSI was required to assess the students'

learning behavior in the mathematics classroom. It was also a test scale that could be

used to draw out the students' classroom learning characteristics in the mathematics

classroom. The instrument helped the investigator to find out the learning behaviors

of the students by rating themselves in their actual behavior. So, it was an unbiased

rating learning behavior scale or a psychological test. A"psychological test is a

systematic procedure for obtaining samples of behavior, relevant to cognitive,

affective or interpersonal functioning, and for scoring and evaluating those samples

according to standards" (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2014).

Philosophical Bases of Student Learning Behavior

Student’s learning behavior is the significant factor to determine their

academic achievement. It comprises the students' view, choice, efforts, determination

and their relationship to the people that make up the school community (Rogel, 2012).

It is related to the mental readiness of the students to learn that requires creative

thinking, resourcefulness, interest in reading, love of learning, writing and also need
 138

enhanced psychological adjustment in the class and school (Saxena, 2002). Among a

variety of factors affecting students' classroom learning behaviors, students' academic

behavior is one that plays a major role in academic achievement. Some behaviors like

talking to each other during the class or interrupt the teacher while teaching lessons

and whispering etc. affect negatively to the entire classroom (Jim & Shelly, 2007).

Psychologists have developed several theories and concepts about the different

issues and cases that are relevant to classroom learning. Learning theories can be

grouped into different models according to the focus given by the theory in the field

of learning (how learning occurs and what aspects of learning they focus on). The

learning theories that are mostly implemented in the classroom learning can be

categorized as behaviorist model, cognitivist model and constructivist model

according to the way of generating knowledge or process of acquiring knowledge

depending on whether they focus on action or change in behavior; thinking or making

a thought; and interpreting or creating meaning. Learning theory is a well-organized

set of principles describing how individuals acquire, retain and recall knowledge.

Learning is the permanent change of behavior, or the capacity to behave in a given

fashion which results from practice or other forms of experience (Chunk, 2012).

The principle of the learning theories can be used as guidelines to help select

instructional tools, techniques and strategies that promote learning (Kelly, 1991). So,

the framework of the inventory is based on the three models of learning theory.

Behaviorist Model

The possible constructs of the behaviorist theory that the students follow

during their learning activity was used while constructing the instrument. Two factors

engagement and motivation related to the students learning attributes were selected

from this theory. To measure the students’ learning behavior, the construct like drill
 139

and practice, constant repetition, different form of behaviors associated with this

theory, association between stimulus and response to acquire new behaviors or

changes in behaviors, motivation, reinforcement, etc. were chosen in order to prepare

the instrument.

Cognitivist Model

The cognitive learning theory was also used while constructing the instrument.

The two factors, independence and responsiveness related to the students learning

attributes concerning to the cognitive learning theory, were selected. Similarly, the

learning activity related to this theory such as the process of knowledge acquisition,

formation of mental structure, information processing, ways of acquiring new

knowledge and skill, learners’ participation in learning, etc. were included while

constructing the instrument.

Constructivist Model

The constructivist theory was also the part of the student’s learning behavior

instrument. The construct related to this theory that the students follow while learning

mathematics was incorporated while constructing the measuring instrument. From this

theory, two factors- collaboration and participation relating to the students learning

attributes were selected. The students’ mathematics learning behaviors like learner's

participation in mathematics learning, learner’s role in constructing knowledge,

learner’s interactions and meaning making, independence in learning, use of past

experiences, etc. were incorporated while preparing the instrument.

Selection of Learning Behavior Themes

The inventory was designed considering the developmental characteristics of

the high school students, the thematic areas of the scales, and their practical

applications in the classroom learning situations. The thematic areas (factors) of

 140

student learning behavior were selected equally from each of the three models of

learning theory (behaviorist, cognitivist, and constructivist). Each of the models

comprised two themes and five sub-scales. Engagement and motivation were included

as the central thematic areas from the behaviorist model which focuses on what

students do and know about the content. Likewise, independence and responsiveness

were included from the cognitive model which focuses on how the learner processes

the information to acquire new knowledge. Similarly, collaboration and participation

were incorporated from the constructivist model which focuses on how the learner

interprets and creates the meaning independently to construct knowledge from his/her

past experiences.

Defining the Learning Behavior Thematic Areas and Subscales

The thematic areas of the inventory as stated above were considered to

investigate and explore the classroom learning behavior of grade X students as they

would rate themselves by using the self-assessment inventory. To ensure the students'

learning activities and their traits, the 6 factors from the three models of learning

theorybehaviorist model, cognitivist model and constructivist modelwere

categorically listed and each of them was divided into 5 subscales according to their

thought and principles of the corresponding learning theories. Thematic areas and

their corresponding subscales as defined by this research are given below.

Engagement

Student engagement denotes the level of concentration, optimism, curiosity

and interest, that the students demonstrate when they are learning or being taught. It

also helps the learner to motivate in learning so that they can progress or develop their

performance in the related field. Defining students' engagement in teaching and

learning is very challenging due to complex construct which is influenced by various

 141

factors. As identified by Fredericks et al. (2004), engagement consists of three

dimensions: cognitive, behavioral, and emotional. Each of them is slightly highlighted

below.

Cognitive Engagement. Cognitive engagement denotes the students’

motivation and self-regulation to engaging for their learning.

Behavioral Engagement. It is the students’ participation in the educational

fieldthat consists of the academic, social and extracurricular activities related to

school.

Emotional Engagement. It refers to the students’ emotional responses in the

classroom or a sense of connectedness or belonging to the school.

According to McDonald (2013), students' engagement focuses on the students'

cognitive interaction with the content. According to him, “learning occurs through the

cognitive engagement of the learner with the proper subject matter knowledge".

Engagement can take place when students listen to the teacher and engage themselves

in their learning task in the classroom. A well-managed classroom and an encouraging

classroom environment can help to facilitate the engagement process (Parsons &

Taylor, 2011). As defined below, five subscales of engagement as a thematic area, are

recognized.

Imitation. The act of copying somebody or something by the students or when

someone or something imitates another person or thing.

Doing classroom activity. Engaging in classroom activities related to the

mathematics task.

Enjoying the mathematics class. The act of getting pleasure or enjoyment in

mathematics class activities.

 142

Drill and practice. Repeated activity, especially related to a mathematical task

and skill carried out by the students.

Engagement in unsocial behavior. An act of engaging in uncivil or unwanted

behavior in the classroom while the class is going on.

Motivation. In classroom teaching and learning, motivation refers to students’

readiness to learn or desire to do some learning activities in the classroom. Student

motivation consists of different levels for each distinct task and subject area.

Motivation can be classified into two distinct constructs: intrinsic and extrinsic.

Intrinsic motivation refers to an energizer of behavior (Deci et al., 1989). Intrinsically

motivated students can learn mathematics or science in the interesting and enjoyable

way (Deci et al., 1989). However, theoretically, all human beings have intrinsic

motivation to learn by birth and, home and school facilitate their inborn motivation.

Extrinsic motivation denotes the drive or forces that appear from the external

rewards such as success, praise, money and other incentives. Intrinsic motivation is

more closely related to achievement than extrinsic motivation (Becker et al., 2010).

Indeed, some research finds external rewards as agents that dampen a student’s

intrinsic motivation (Deci et al., 1999). However, most students do not have an

intrinsic motivation to learn all subjects, and therefore it is necessary to develop

motivation through extrinsic rewards. The subscales of the thematic area, motivation

include the following.

Activity concentration. Care intensely about the classroom activity or think

carefully about the activity; to be attentive in the classroom activity.

Like to do something. Intend to do any mathematical task or to experience

attraction toward the mathematical task.

 143

Attention. To watch, listen or think about mathematics carefully or with

interest; a quality or feature that evokes interest, liking or desire to perform the task.

Curiosity. An eager, excitement or wish to know or learn about something; the

desire to learn or know about anything.

Enthusiasm. It is the active feeling of interest in a particular subject or

activity. It consists of intense excitement, an eagerness to be involved or eager to

interest, enjoyment or approval.

Independence. Students' independence in the classroom means that students

take control of their learning and become active participants. This can be difficult for

both teachers and the students. According to Forster (1972) as cited by Candy, 1991)

"Independent study is a process, a method and a philosophy of education in which a

student acquires knowledge by his or her own efforts and develops the ability for

inquiry and critical evaluation". It incorporates freedom of choice to determine the

objectives within the certain criteria of program. It develops the ability and

confidence to the students and they can perform any activity better with minimum

instructions. In the independence learning, the role of the teacher is always passive

and a back seat. It is sometimes denoted as “self-directed learning” “self-regulated

learning” or “learning how to learn” (Meyer et al., 2008).

The key role of teachers in independent learning is to assist the students to

involve in active learning. The teacher provides feedback and support to the students

when necessary; they provide the students self-monitoring opportunity, scaffolding,

and offers models of behavior and communication development so that they can

develop confidence and working skills independently. The students establish the way

of receiving feedback from others through self-monitoring. According to Kingston

and Folland (2008), whatever methods used or implemented, focusing on independent

 144

learning should encourage lifelong learning. The subscales of the thematic area of

independence are the following.

Individual Work. It is the involvement of a single or a particular person in

learning. It is a specific work/task or assignment given to a student or group

of students that should be done individually.

Self-direction. It is the state of being directed or

guided by oneself, especially as an independent participant. Doing something by self-

decision or without being influenced by others.

Exploration. Exploration is the act of searching or exploring for the discovery

of information or resources; a search to find out something or to discover owns self.

Self-practice. Self-practice is also a kind of self-directed learning. It is an

action done continuously by oneself to improve a specific skill and/or knowledge. An

action that is usually or regularly done by oneself.

Autonomous learning. The approach of learning where the learners have right

to regulate and control their learning activities and the learning activities are self-

guided, independent, is reffered to as autonomous learning.

Responsiveness. The term 'responsiveness' is defined as making a positive and

quick reaction to something or someone in the existing situation. It is the immediate

act or response of the students in a particular situation in the classroom.

The term responsiveness is sometimes used as a classroom approach. This

approach began in 1981 with a group of community school educators (Ottmar et al.,

2013). This approach mainly offers four interconnected domains namely; engaging

academics(lessons, assignments, and activities for meaningful learning); effective

management(organize physical spaces and schedules, so that the students can work

with autonomy and focus); positive community(creating the learner feelling respected,
 145

safe, and included fully in learning); and developmental awareness(child

developmental knowledge for effective teaching, and regular observations of students

for creating appropriate learning environment) (Ottmar et al., 2013).

Responsiveness consists of a set of social, cultural, emotional and academic

competencies of the students. Such competencies help the students to create new

relationships; maintain positive relation as well as friendships; keep away from social

isolation and resolve conflicts. It helps to identify and regulate their emotions,

thoughts and behaviors to be successful.

The academic aspect ot the students help themselves for supporting their

success in school issues like: arriving in time, regular attendance, paying attention,

readiness to work, active participation in instructional activities and class discussions.

The subscales of the thematic area, responsiveness include:

Competitiveness. Having a strong desire to win or be the best at something; as

good as or better than others of the same kind to compete successfully with others;

competing to others or to compete against each other.

Keeping silence. To keep silence in the classroomnot expressing anything; a

state of not speaking or not making noise or completely quiet.

Support to peers. Support to peers can be defined as the give-and-take

relationship between peers about the concerned subject matter, classroom learning,

experiences and different skills or to give encouragement to someone or to help

someone emotionally or physically.

Reaction to the teachers and peers. It is type of behavior, opinion, a feeling,

or an action that is a direct result of something else, which the learner immediately

reacts when something happens.

 146

Accountable. Fully responsible for what one does and should be capable to

give an acceptable reason for it.

Participation. Studentparticipation is a significant aspect of learning. When

students talk about any subject matter in the class, they are learning about expressing

the ideas and remaining others understand something. Student participation consists

of the role of both the students and teacher as a partnership; students play an active

role and the teacher plays the passive role and students are acting as agents of

educational change (Bergmark & Westman, 2016; Bovill, 2014). The culture of

teacher dominance or teacher center method in the classroom can affect the students'

active participation in learning and also hamper to develop their skills and creativity.

Organizational structures can also be an interruption to student participation (Bovill et

al., 2016). On the other hand, it is also necessary to challenge the roles of traditional

teacher and student that support to democratize the educational process (Bovill et al.,

2016).

Classroom participation can help the students to foster learning with energy

and enthusiasm in the classroom learning. Student participation is considered as

positively impacting ability and student achievement rate, which are central factors in

quality measurements (Broucker et al., 2018).

Participation in the classroom helps the students to express ideas, build

common understandings, engage with contents and helps to create an energetic

learning environment. It helps the students to take part actively in the classroom

discussions by which they improve their oral communication skills. Such active

participation may be open for critical active citizenship as well as students’ social

well-being, beyond measurable outcomes and high achievement (Zepke, 2015). It

supports students to prepare for classes, engage in readings, preparing materials and
 147

project work. The subscales of the thematic area, participation in this study are the

followings.

Participation. It is the extent to which students participate or involve

themselves in classroom activity; or to take part or become involved in the learning

activity.

Involvement. The student is involved with or participating in the classroom

learning situation. It is the act of taking part in the learning process.

Non-instructional talking. The students using different inappropriate words in

the classroom or student talking beside the current subject matter when the class is

running; the act of non-teaching formal learning activities inside the classroom.

Concentration. The total effort and attention about the classroom teaching-

learning situation without thinking of other things; complete attention on particular

classroom learning.

Talks and whispers with friends. Speaking or talking noisily and very quietly

respectively with friends in the classroom so that this disturbs the classroom teaching-

learning environment.

Collaboration. Collaborative learning is an emerging specialized classroom

design of learning. The term 'collaboration' is defined as two or more people working

together to create or achieve the same thing. According to Johnson & Johnson (1989),

collaboration is group work in which students work together to accomplish the shared

goals. An effective collaboration can be done in a small heterogeneous group. It can

be defined as a set of teaching and learning strategies promoting student collaboration

in small groups (two to five students) in order to optimize their own and each other’s

learning (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). Implementing an effective collaborative

classroom also requires a well-managed classroom.

 148

The role of the teacher in collaborative classroom teaching is facilitating,

modeling and coaching the students. Different factors can affect the implementation

of effective collaborative learning (Van Leeuwen et al., 2013; Webb, 2009). The

general difficulties for implementing collaboration are the students’ lack of

collaborative skills, free-riding, competence status and friendship (Ha Le & Theo,

2018). The teachers can facilitate for effective implementation of collaborative

learning by creating learning tasks. These tasks consist of students high-level thought

processes such as problem-solving and decision making which are best suited factor

in collaboration. These tasks facilitate the students and also associates to the real-

world events, objects and situations and tap their various perspectives and

experiences.

Facilitating denotes generating fruitful environments and activities to link

new information to previous knowledge, to provide opportunities for problem solving

and collaborative work and to offer students a variety of reliable learning tasks. The

process of modeling provides the learner to share about the content to be learned and

the process of communication and demonstration. Coaching can also facilitate the

students that involve providing cues or hints, feedback, redirecting students for efforts

and help them to use appropirate strategy. The subscales of the thematic area

collaboration are stated below.

Group work. Group work consists of the students working in a group on the

set tasks, inside or outside the classroom. It comprises any teaching and learning

tasks, activities or assessment tasks which involves students working in groups.

Group discussion. Group discussion involves a group of students

with similar interest gathering either formally or informally to bringing up ideas,

 149

solving problems, giving comments or talking about something and sharing ideas or

opinions in the group.

Interaction. The act involves students talking or doing things among one

another or reacting to each other on any object, issue, or matter.

Cooperativeness. This is the act of unconditional acceptance of others,

empathy with others' feelings and willingness to help without a desire for selfish

domination. It is the act of working or acting together willingly to achieve a common

purpose or benefit.

Teamwork. It is the activity involving a group of students working well

together as a team. It is normally understood as the eagerness of a group of students to

work together to achieve a common aim.

Development of Behavioral Statement

The behavioral statements/items, which were intended to ascertain the

students’ learning behavior on six factors from the three learning camps, were

prepared. Seven items for each factor were constructed. The items were prepared in

English language at the beginning. They were collected by reviewing the available

literature, similar questionnaires, and personal discussions were also implemented

with the research fellow, other researchers, subject experts and supervisors based on

subscales of the thematic area as stated above. The items were developed in the form

of statements with the five-point Likert scale. Thus, the instructions for respondents

were constructed and consequently scoring procedure was also developed.

Editing and Revising the Statements

After formulating the initial draft of the learning behavior questionnaire, 30

items were edited and revised by considering the opinion and suggestions of the

researcher, expert and supervisor. The consideration was based on the remarks given
 150

by the experts and coverage of the content. The investigator also discussed personally

with the experts about all the items. In this process, some items were modified

because of expert opinions, and some were slightly changed. In addition, language

expert was requested for the assistance to remove any type of linguistic doubt

contained in the items. All the suggestions given by the experts were considered and

essential changes were made on the line. Thus, the preliminary draft of the learning

behavior questionnaire was developed comprising 30 items. In this inventory, all

items were positive.

Participants' Selection and Administering the Instrument

After making the preliminary draft of the questionnaire, 30 items were

included in the test. Then it was conducted to a representative sample of 90 students,

45 from each of the two secondary schools Ilam districts with 62 girls and 28 boys

altogether. The participants ranged in age from 15 to 19 years. The selection was

made purposivelyone from the rural area and the other from the urban area,

according to the convenience of the investigator. The selected schools were

community schools. The instrument was translated into Nepali by a Nepali translator.

The translation was reviewed by two English and Nepali subject experts to ensure the

actual intended meaning of the items maintained in the translation. Then, the

instrument was administered to the students of grade X during their mathematics

class.

In the process of test administration, the grade X mathematics class teacher of

the concerned school was asked to assist in the distribution of the instrument. Before

the test was administered, the students were given instructions on how to respond to

the test items, and the instructions given in the instrument were read out and

explained by the researcher himself at the time of administering the test. Before the
 151

distribution of the instrument to the participants, it was also assured that the data were

only for academic purposes and the ethical consideration would be maintained. It was

also informed that there was no correct and incorrect response to any item. The right

answer depended on the behavior generally emitted by the students themselves in the

classroom learning or learning process. The students were encouraged to respond to

each statement in accordance with their own beliefs and individual dispositions. Some

terms used in the questionnaire, which they thought were difficult, were explained

with examples for their convenience to choose the appropriate answer. They were

given 45 minutes to complete the questionnaire. The average time taken to complete

the instrument was recorded.

After the completion of the response, the questionnaire was collected and

scoring was done with the 5-point Likert type scale ranging from the positive items to

the negative ones (Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree, and Strongly

Disagree), thus carrying 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 respectively. For negative items, the scale was

used (Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree) carrying

1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 respectively.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Internal Consistency

Factor analysis helps us to reduce many variables or scale items down to a

smaller, further convenient number of factors (Pallant, 2016). Confirmatory factor

analysis is a multivariate statistical process that is utilized to test how well the

considered variables represent the number of constructs. In confirmatory factor

analysis, researchers can determine the required number of factors for the data

through thematic analysis. It is used to test (confirm or reject) the pre-specified

relationship or the factors and their relationships.

 152

Some psychometric and statistical research has proposed that exploratory

factor analysis is not as scientifically rigorous (Henson & Roberrts, 2006). So, while

constructing this instrument, the investigator prioritized the construction of the

different factors and their sub-scales by analyzing the different learning theories. So,

the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to verify either the different

variables or items were within the identified factors or not by using SPSS software

version 22. The principal component analysis method was performed using a fixed

number of factor extractions to examine the factor loading and the factor structure.

The interactions among the six factors were abstracted from the learning

behavior thematic areas and the respective variables (items) were identified and were

found to be positive. Standardized regression-weighted estimates, such as the

standardized loading factor, signify that the observed variables, which are the items,

representative of their latent construct (Brown, 2006). The factor loading denotes the

correlation between each variable and a new variable formed by making a linear

combination of two or more variables from a data set and its interpretation is similar

to the bivariate correlation coefficient. The correlation between the item and its factor

is called the factor loading (Mayers, 2013). The factor loading or the correlation

coefficient between the variables and the factors was calculated, and it was found to

be correlated. The internal consistency (Cronbach's Alpha coefficient) for the six

subscales were also calculated and found in the range between 0.68 to 0.79 as shown

in Appendix K.

The reliability coefficient of the scale 'collaboration' (0.79) shows the highest

Cronbach Alpha whereas ‘Engagement’ shows the lowest alpha (0.68) [Appendix K].

The lowest alpha (0.68) is not such a strong correlation although it is acceptable.

Nevertheless, mathematics is a multidimensional concept and when Cronbach’s Alpha

 153

test is applied to multi-dimensional concepts the alpha value would be low (Taber,

2018). It shows that all the thematic areas considered in the composition of classroom

learning behavior inventory and the items are acceptable. The item factor loading

values should be reasonably high, and not less than 0.5, in their respective constructs

to indicate convergent validity (Hair et al., 2009). Since the factor loading values were

in the range between 0.51 and 0.72 for their corresponding factors then it is

considered that the inventory signifies convergent validity. Then this is considered as

the strong correlation between the items and the corresponding factors.

Establishing Validity and Reliability

Validity

The validity of a test is the extent to which the test measures what it is

supposed to measure. Therefore, the validity of the measurement process is the

degree to which the measurement procedure measures the variable that it claims to

measure’ (Gravetter & Forzano, 2015). There are different methods to evaluate the

validity of the test such as consistency relationship, concurrent validity and face

validity. In this study, the method of face validity was used to determine the validity

of the questionnaire.

Face validity is defined as the degree of the expert judgment responses to

which items of measurement is appropriate to the targeted objectives of the

assessment and constructs (Hardesty & Bearden, 2004). It is based on subjective

judgment and is difficult to quantify. Measuring the content of the test, its internal

structure and the important features of the test, the specification of thematic areas, and

the learning attributes on behaviorist, cognitivist and constructivist learning theory,

was prepared and finally the expert judgment was employed.

 154

Descriptive reviewer feedback was also obtained based on the experts’

feedback and some of the repetitive items were removed whereas some were

reworded to make simpler and unambiguous. A suggestion was also offered to include

a section on demographic information.

Finally, the questionnaire consisting of 30 items was prepared to be pilot

tested before being administered with the research sample. A correlation coefficient

between the constructs of less than 0.85 was considered to be an indicator of good

discriminant validity (Brown, 2006). So, all of the six factors had good discriminant

validity in the inventory having a correlation ranging from 0.51 to 0.72. In addition,

30 items were standardized with a factor loading of more than 0.5, suggesting an

adequate level of convergent validity (Hair et al., 2009). So, the results are shown in

Appendix K which supports discriminant validity and convergent validity of the

instrument.

Reliability

Reliability is a measure that produces similar results under similar conditions.

More specifically, the degree of reliability of a test depends on (i) the extent to which

differences in the test scores can be attributed to real differences and (ii) the extent to

which such differences depend on measurement errors (Furr & Bacharach, 2008). In

other words, a measurement process is supposed to have reliability if it produces

identical (or nearly identical) results when it is used repeatedly to measure the same

individual under the same conditions (Gravetter & Forzano, 2018). Reliability of the

test can be determined by using different measures. Among them, Cronbach’s alpha can

be the important measure to assess internal consistency, or reliability of a set of test

items. The reliability of the test also refers to the measurement of consistency. This
 155

method is conventionally defined as an item-level approach because it considers each

item of a test as a separate test.

In this study, the reliability analysis confirmed that the final inventory

consisting of 30 items with six factors showed satisfactory to a high level of internal

consistency with the Cronbach’s alpha ranging between 0.68 and 0.79. Likewise, the

overall reliability coefficient (Cronbach’s α coefficient) was found to be 0.82. The

value of Cronbach’s alpha higher than 0.7, is considered as high internal consistency

and the values between 0.6 and 0.7 are considered as satisfactory internal consistency

(Streiner & Norman, 2008). The reliability of the instrument was judged sufficient

because the alpha value was well above 0.60 (Nunnally, 1967) which is the minimum

requirement.

Final Preparation of the Inventory

The learning behavior inventory was prepared as the final form of the

instrument. The inventory was tested by using confirmatory factor analysis and

determination of the reliability coefficient. Likewise, establishing the validity and

other aspects that were likely to affect the students directly or indirectly such as time,

instructions, language, and words used in the test were re-organized or managed

properly through the experience of the first tryout. Thus, the final test consisted of the

30 items with 6 factors each having 5 items. The final form of CLBSI is given in

Appendix E. Similarly, the Nepali version of CLBSI is given in Appendix F.

Conclusion

The instrument 'student's learning behavior self-assessment inventory' was

constructed to seek information about students' general attitudes towards the teacher,

classmates, subjects, teaching strategy, materials and the classroom environment. This

inventory was constructed considering the new approach that is beyond the hallow
 156

effect on the informants and the bias of the inventory raters. So, it was expected to be

helpful to achieve the actual information about the learners of different attitudes and

feelings in the learning context. So, it can be concluded that the instrument comprises

the students' responses to questions about the classroom, classroom learning activities,

and learning process that actually happens in the classroom. It is hoped that the self-

assessment inventory will be quite useful to teachers, supervisors and educational

administrators to address the classroom learning problem.

The pupils, after all, know more about their classroom learning problems, their

teachers' performance and about the physical condition of the classroom than

occasional visitors who may observe unrepresentative behavior. This inventory with

students' learning behavior items concerning the different learning theories is easy to

apply and very economical. It is also possible to determine how much of a student

response is determined by his/her feelings and behavior for the classroom learning

situation and the necessary response can be addressed in time for the betterment of the

teaching-learning process.

Classroom Learning Behavior Checklist

The student classroom learning behavior checklist (CLBC) is a closed-ended

survey questionnaire used to represent the students’ mathematics learning activity in

the mathematics classroom. It is the students' classroom learning behavior checklist

rated by the mathematics teachers. The checklist consists of 24 items containing

expressions about students' classroom learning behaviors covering different learning

camps. These items were constructed considering the thematic areas of CLBSI with

positive and negative statements. Of those items, 13 were concerned with positive

behavior and the remaining 11 were concerned with negative student learning

behaviors. The checklist was prepared in a format in which each item in the list
 157

related to the students learning behavior could be marked with the tick mark ( ). The

prepared checklist was examined by the research experts and also tested on two

primary school teachers. As a result, some items were revised and some items

containing the same meaning were combined and expressed as a single item. No item

was removed from the form but some items were rearranged to get the language and

expression right. If any item in the checklist is not related to the student, then no tick

mark should be done. The final form of the CLBC is given in Appendix G.

The checklist forms were given to the secondary school mathematics teachers

teaching at grade X to fill out on the basis of their observation of their students in the

mathematics class. The mathematics teachers were requested to select the students

randomly from the class. In this process, only 1 student from each selected school

selecting randomly were used. Thus, the classroom learning behavior observation

checklist was used for 12 students. The mathematics teacher was informed and

explained about the use and importance of the student behavior checklist before the

observation. The secondary school’s teachers filled out the forms voluntarily.

The statements on the checklist were thought to help those teachers to

understand the theme of the students' mathematics classroom learning behavior. It

was also aimed to reveal some students having highly positive classroom learning

behavior and extremely negative behavior via the checklist. Some items were also

included with a target of addressing the students' neutral behavior.

The Rationale for using Classroom Learning Behavior Checklist

CLBC was another important instrument for the survey used in this study.

This survey instrument was used to collect the data relating to students' classroom

learning activities through the class teacher's observations. To find out the learning

behavior of the students in the classroom, there may be many ways. Of them, the
 158

collection of the personal views of the learner through the questionnaire was

reasonably less time-consuming. However, it was better to find out the students'

behavior through observation. It was supposed that schoolteachers were relatively

more accurate, reliable, unobtrusive and cost-beneficial observers of classroom

learning behavior of the students when they have had sufficient opportunity to

observe.

In light of the above cases, the researcher planned to develop a questionnaire

to measure the student classroom learning behaviors reliably and validly using teacher

observation. So, in this research, the researcher utilized the mathematics subject

teachers' experiences about their students' classroom learning behaviors.

Semi-structured Interview

Student interview is a dialogue that is a flexible or structured questioning

approach, and a conversation with a specific purpose. It is possibly one of the

effective ways for understanding student's thinking and khowledge level for the

educators. It is based on the belief that students' thinking is demonstrated through

conversation and it could be investigated through observation. A semi-structured

interview is generally conducted by the interviewer with the help of the checklist of

questions that the respondent is asked to address (Stuckey, 2013). It is more flexible

and always begins with general questions or topics and possibly number of questions

may appear during the time of interview within a pre determined framework. In this

process, the interviewer is encouraged to explore and to draw out the respondents'

feelings and behaviors in their own words.

Semi-structured interview is one of the prominient and broadly used methods

of data collection in the areas of social sciences (Bradford & Cullen, 2012). It is

mainly helpful in research because it allows the researchers to draw out the subjective
 159

viewpoints (Flick, 2009) and also helps to gather in-depth accounts of the experience

of the individuals. Normally, an interview schedule is used to facilitate the researcher

to address a defined topic whilst allowing the respondent to answer in their own terms

and to discuss issues and topics pertinent to them (Choak, 2012). The interview

schedule also guides the interview and also permits to develop other relevant themes

throughout the interview (Choak, 2012). In this line, the interview should be similar to

a ‘flowing conversation’ (Rubin & Rubin, 2005; Choak, 2012).

The semi-structured interview is mainly used to consider the participant's

experience, meanings and reality of their experiences as they can be used to explore

how these experiences, meanings and realities might be informed by ideas or

assumptions and discourses which exist in wider society (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

It is a widely used instrument in the qualitative research. In qualitative

research, observation and recording the people's behavior can determine either by

participant observation in natural settings or by recalling themselves utilizing various

kinds of narratives such as interviews (Cropley, 2019). The most common sources of

qualitative data include interviews, observations and documents (Creswell, 2014).

Qualitative data can provide a range of rich insights and different viewpoints for the

research problem. Such insights can provide some ideas that can help to overcome the

problem. In qualitative research, most of the qualitative data exist in the form of

narrative or text scripts, normally gathered from survey questions, existing

documents, interviews and observations.

Semi-structured Interviews for the Study

The semi-structured interview was selected for the qualitative part of the

study. Compared with other survey instruments, interviews have appeared the most

extensively used to collect qualitative data in various fields (Robson, 2002, Richards,
 160

2003 & Creswell, 2014). The main cause of extensive use of this interview is to

enable the researcher to draw out the subjective ideas and opinions of the participants

through interview. Considering these facts, to conduct the instrument, semi-structured

interview was chosen by the investigator to provide the participants for expressing

their feelings about mathematics learning behaviors. In other words, the quantitative

survey questionnaires developed and adapted to this study had some major restrictions

such as inable to survey thoroughly to investigate the issue at hand, its nature of

limiting responses of the participants, and unable to obtain detailed insights about

difficult issues, as indicated by Silverman (2005). As a result, the investigator thought

that there might be certain unidentified but potentially important aspects in the

selected area of study that could be made clear in greater detail through utilizing the

semi-structured interviews.

The role of interview in the research study is also to obtain the detailed

information about the participants. In this line, Cohen et al., (2011) suggests that

interviews can either be used as a single method or including other instruments to

strengthen the results of a particular study. In this study, the semi-structured

interviews involved some open-ended questions that were based on students'

classroom learning behaviors and other related phenomenon of the study.

Reasons for Selecting the Semi-Structured Interview as an Instrument

There are different types of interviews used in practice in the field of

education and social sciences. Among them, the investigator selected the semi-

structured interviewfor this study. This can be categorized as the middle or it lies

between structured and unstructured interviews by its nature. The structured

interviews are more focused on the study areas, whereas unstructured interviews are

more exploratory (Robson, 2011). However, the investigator has chosen the middle
 161

type of interview or semi-structure interview. In this study, the investigator

chosedsemi-structure interview because it is difficult to afford the the unnecessary

and highly unfocused data produced by unstructured interviews and secondly due to

the limitations of time, money and labour. In the same way, the researcher believed

that the structured interviews, with specific, well-prepared and domain-specific

questions, would also control the participants to express the reality of the context.

Thus, this type of interview also reveals nearly the same limitations as already

described in this study.

Hence, in this study, the investigator preferred to use the semi-structured

interview with the belief that he would be able to be benifited from the certain

advantages for this study. Semi-structured interviews have some positive aspects,

particularly in inquiring and establishing a close rapport so that it would be helpful to

acquire more insightful data for the study. So, the use of the semi-structured interview

was helpful to narrow down the possible weaknesses of the questionnaire in the study.

Moreover, the data collection through this method can be used as face-to-face mode

so that the implementation of semi-structured interview would make the participants

more comfortable and hence ultimately can achieve the rich data.

Construction of Semi-Structured Interview Guide and Pilot Test

The semi-structured interview guide was prepared for the effective

implementation of the interview under the research study. The semi-structured

interview guide consists of the aspects related to student learning behavior

particularly their attitudes, orientation and key factors that may develop their

classroom activity. The guide was open-ended consisting of some possible inquiry

questions for obtaining participants’ in-depth feeling and opinion about the

mathematics classroom learning behaviors.

 162

The interview guide was piloted at related similar but two different places.

The reason of employing the pilot testing of the interview guide was to further

refinement of the interview guide before applying it on the real data collection

process, as suggested by Dornyei (2007). It was piloted by conducting interviews with

two students studying in class X in community secondary schools; one at the school

of the urban area and the other was on the school of the rural area. The researcher

believed that those students from two different demographic areas were able to

indicate some typical issues in the interview among those chosen students for the pilot

test of the questionnaire. They recommended making some easier and shorter

questions and it was included accordingly in the interview guide. The main purpose of

piloting of the guide was to make sure that the questions were understood by the

participants under study, and to confirm other key issues such as the smooth flow of

conversation and to determine the actual time in the interview guide which were

understandable as recommended by Cohen et al., (2011). Thus, on the basis of the

feedback of the pilot test, the final semi-structured guideline was developed. In

addition, the researcher also gained the required skills for the successful conduction of

the interviews with the participants, as recommended by (Marshall & Rossman, 2010)

by the use of the pilot testing.

Instrumentation

To collect the qualitative data, the questions for the interview were prepared

so as to measure the students' mathematics learning behavior. The draft of the

interview questions was verified by the research expert. After the approval by the

expert, the question was piloted from the participants in the community secondary

schools located in both the demographic areas. After finalizing the question, semi-

structured interviews were conducted. The interview guideline was constructed

 163

incorporating three types of questions for the interview, namely, introductory, key and

closing questions. At the beginning of the interview, the introductory question was

asked and in the mid-session, the key/main questions were asked and at the end, the

closing questions were asked. Considering the students' learning behavior category,

ten open-ended questions were formed in the final form of the question. The semi-

structured interview questions form and their types are given in Table 13.

Table 13

Types of Interview Questions and their Sample Questions

Types of Questions Number of Interview Questions

Introductory question Are the classes going regularly these days?

(Background question)
i) What do you actually do while learning in the mathematics
Key questions class?
(Focused on research) ii) What would you feel about mathematics and what makes
mathematics class pleasant or unpleasant in comparison to
other classes?
iii) What do you think about making mathematics learning in
classroom fun?
iv) How can we succeed in mathematics learning in the class?
v) What makes mathematics easy or difficult for you? How a
teacher can help the students in mathematics?
vi) What do you think when your teacher asks questions during
mathematics class?
vii) How much time on average do you spend practicing
mathematics at your home and school per day?
viii) What do you feel when you are presenting something in front
of the mathematics class?
ix) How do you pass your time in the mathematics class?
x) What do you prefer, sitting at the first or last, in the
mathematics classroom?
Closing question xi) Do you have anything to say about mathematics classroom
(Reflection) learning behavior?
 164

Data Collection Procedures

This study comprises both quantative and qualitative data. The processes of

collecting the data are discussed below.

Quantitative Data Collection

The researcher visited the sampled schools before the actual administration of

the research instruments and data collection. At the same time, the investigator

discussed with the headmaster for the purpose of visiting and the research objectives.

Similarly, the discussion was also held with the mathematics teachers, and their

assistance towards administration and collection of students test items was sought.

They were also asked to assist in filling up the student classroom learning behavior

checklist.

The data for the study related to students' attitudes were collected from the

sampled students from the selected schools using the "attitudes toward mathematics

inventory" (ATMI) scale adapted from Tapia and Marsh (2004) with necessary

validation in the context of Nepal. Visiting the selected schools by the investigator

himself, the survey of the students' classroom learning behavior was conducted using

the classroom learning behavior self-assessment inventory. In the same way, the

survey about the grade X students' mathematics achievement test was administered by

using the mathematics achievement test prepared and piloted by the investigator.

A total of 540 students have participated in each survey in which student

learning behavior and achievement test instruments were administered. In the same

way, 24 students participated in the semi-structured interview. On the other hand, 12

mathematics class teachers of grade X of the selected schools also participated in

filling up the student classroom learning behavior checklist. All of these tasks were
 165

conducted at the time agreed upon by the concerned school authority, mathematics

teacher and the students to avoid inconveniencein the school timetable.

All the test instruments were administered by the investigator himself to the

selected schools. Since it was not possible to conduct the test in all sampled schools at

a time, thus, all the test instruments related to student attitude, learning behavior, and

achievement in mathematics were conducted at different times as scheduled. The

scores obtained by the students of the sampled were utilized as the primary data in the

study. The student classroom learning behavior checklist forms were given to fill the

concerned mathematics teacher and it was returned one week laterhaving filled up.

The students were assured through the instructions about the confidentiality and

anonymity regarding the different test after which they were given enough time to fill

in the questionnaire.

However, during the administration of the achievement test and preparing the

attitude inventory, all students in the class/section were included for some ethical

reasons, but the scores of the test and inventory obtained by the observed students

were only included during their analysis. Likewise, 12 teachers of mathematics, one

from each school, who are teaching mathematics in the respective class in the selected

secondary schools, were also selected for the survey purpose.

Qualitative Data Collection

The data collection process in qualitative research is usually a process

simultaneously involving more than just one thing. The process of data collection in

the qualitative study involves making notes, recordings or memos. The notes or

memos trace the thinking of the researcher and help guide a final conceptualization

that answers the research problem. In the qualitative part of the research, the semi-

structured interviews were carried out to the selected students. The semi-structured
 166

interviews were administered with 24 students from the 12 secondary schools which

were selected for the study. Two students from each school were chosen purposively

so as to contain one boy and one girl from each of the selected schools. The students

were chosen according to the marks obtained in the half-yearly examination in the

school. According to their scores in mathematics, one student scoring highest marks

and other scoring lowest were chosen for the semi-structured interview. If the higher

scorer was a boy, then the lower scorer was selected from among the girls and vice

versa. Thus, the interviewees were selected considering gender and the mathematics

test score (high/low) in the first term examination conducted by the selected school.

The highest achievers were alternatively (a boy and then a girl or vice versa, for

example) selected. In this way, in the final selection, 12 boys and 12 girls were

selected for the interview. So, the data for the interview were selected considering the

ecological regions (the Mountains, the Hills, and the Terai), as well as gender

(male/female) and school demography (urban/rural).

Thus, the semi-structured interview was conducted according to the semi-

structured interview question form in the single face-to-face organizing form. The

interviews were conducted in the one-to-one, a student and the interviewer mode. The

interview was conducted at the school break time. The semi-structured interviews

were taken during the break or leisure time with the consultation to the interviewee on

a one-to-one basis.

The students (interviewees) were informed about the interview program the

day before. During the interview, the students were asked 12 listed open-ended

questions and their answers were recorded in a recorder and later the interview

records of the students were transcribed. Thus, based on voluntary participation, the

qualitative data were collected using the semi-structured interview with the students
 167

of the selected secondary schools. The researcher started the interview by

thanking/appreciating the interviewee for his/her voluntary participation; by

requesting him/her for help; and then by assuring the confidentiality of their

information. The investigator visited the selected schools from July 2018 to March

2019 in order to collect the data through a face-to-face semi-structured interview.

Considering the basic assumptions for rapport building during an interview,

the investigator requested the participants to discuss or to share their personal

experiences about their classroom learning behavior. The participants were informed

about the need of audio-recording of the interview by the investigator. All the

participants were interviewed in Nepali and complete freedom was given to them to

express their mathematics classroom learning behaviors. During the interview, the

investigator observed various probes, such as non-verbal cues (like nodding of the

head), verbal and also repeated prompts (e.g., repeated their key and last words) as

recommended by Dornyei (2007), that helped the participants to express and explain

their views more frequently and easily.

The investigator also noted-down the keywords expressed by the participants’,

which helped the investigator to find the additional information in the succeeding

analysis as well as to survey the in-depth views of the participants’ on given topics.

The participants were provided enough time and opportunities to express their

thoughts whatever they wanted and was also recorded their views properly using the

audio-recorder by the investigator. Before completing the interview, the overall views

of the participants were summarized for the additional comments. The recording of

the interview on the audio-recorder after completing the interview was also checked.

Thus, the interviews of all the participants were conducted easily as well as

effectively. Approximately, 10-15 minutes time was taken to complete the interview
 168

for each participant, depending on the amount of data provided and the participants’

capacity to carry on the interview. The Nepali version of the semi-structured

interview questions is given in Appendix H.

Qualitative Data Transcription

Data transcription is almost certainly a way of generating meaning by listening

to the audio recorded interview used to organize and analyze the qualitative data. In

this study, the Nepali language of communication during the interview was used

because most of the participants felt more comfortable in Nepali than in any other

language during the conversation. Thus, the interviews were recorded and at last the

data were transcribed into English. A large amount of scattered interview data from

the 24 participants was organized very carefully through the manual work by the

investigator and, was transcribed for analysis. The interviews of all the participants in

Nepali was translated into English and got these translations checked by a university

teacher of English. This fundamental process of transcribing was followed, as

recommended by Denzin and Lincoln (2000), enabled the researcher to read and re-

read the data very carefully, line by line, highlighting the transcripts as a whole,

which I did several times to get a general sense of the participants’ views. The

students (interviewees) were also coded considering their ecological region, place of

residence and gender. The codes for the interviewees from the Hill, the Mountain and

the Terai have been used the initial capital letter H, M, and T respectively. Likewise,

the rural schools were referred to as 'R' and the students from urban schools with the

capital letter 'U'. Similarly, to distinguish gender boys were coded by capital letter 'B'

and girls by the capital letter 'G'. In coding, the first letter was assigned for the

ecological region, the second letter was assigned for the place of residence and the

third letter was assigned for gender and the remaining numerals were used for
 169

showing the order of the participants (Appendix J). After transcribing, the data were

categorized into common themes and patterns. As suggested by Creswell (2003), the

investigator also started to write notes about any initial ideas along the margins of the

transcribed data, which helped to save the time as well as facilitated the coding

process to the investigator.

In this way, the investigator completed the coding process, which involved

labeling or attaching names to the key relevant portions of data in the study. These

included the keywords, sentences, phrases and paragraphs that correspond to the

participants' views about the various aspects of classroom learning behavior such as

students' attitudes, orientations and the key factors which are considered essential to

enhance their classroom activities. The investigator considered some key points while

coding the relevant portions of data from the dataset, as suggested by Creswell

(2014). The investigator observed the repetitions of the coded portions by the

participant in different places including some unpredicted points that the participants

had highlighted themselves. In addition, the investigator varified his notes regularly

while coding the portions of the data. Thus, the coding process helped the investigator

to facilitate further organizing and reducing the data. Finally, the investigator came up

with various codes from the dataset.

As suggested by different researchers as Richards (2003); Richards & Morse

(2007); Robson (2011), the investigator created the primary categories also named as

themes, which was obtained by collecting at least two or more important, but

interrelated codes together. While in the process of creating specific themes, certain

key steps were considered. Particularly, the investigator went through the process as

recommended by Dornyei (2007), as previously created codes, reread them and

marked the similarities and dissimilarities very carefully. At the time of creating the
 170

themes, the investigator thought that the emerged constructs that were also established

quantitatively during this study, that included the attitudes of the participants towards

classroom learning, their perceptions and orientations towards classroom activities

that are regarded as important for enhancing classroom learning activities. At last, the

investigator considered similar themes and concepts, as recommended by Creswell

(2014) related to the students’ classroom learning behavior during the thematic coding

process of the data.

Establishing Validity and Reliability in the Qualitative Data Transcription

The validity of the qualitative data is concerned with examining the accuracy

of the findings of the study. The validity can be established by utilizing certain

procedures such as using a rich and thick context description, clarifying personal

biases, triangulation of different data sources, using peer de-briefing, presenting

negative information and many more (Creswell, 2014). In this study, the investigator

adapted the first two procedures to establish the validity of the qualitative data. The

investigator compared the themes from the various transcriptions of the participant's

interview and also compared with the previously well-defined themes that had

emerged from the factor analysis. The investigator also attempted to clarify the

possible personal bias in the findings. This included a detailed geo-social context of

Nepal.

Finally, the investigator tried to confirm the reliability of the qualitative data,

which is related to a researcher's ability to consistently follow the procedures of the

other key researchers' recommended procedures in a given study. The investigator

followed the best suggested procedures as selecting the qualitative research

instrument, developing the piloting phase when conducting the interviews,

 171

transcribing the data and creating themes, as suggested by the popular researcher such

as as Creswell (2014); Bryman & Bell (2015).

Qualitative Data Analysis and Interpretation Procedures

The qualitative part of this study was a means of obtaining data related to the

students' classroom learning behaviors in mathematics at secondary level in a natural

setting. The transcribed data obtained through semi-structured interviews were

arranged according to the themes and the RQs. The detailed process of organizing and

analyzing the qualitative data are discussed under the heading that follows.

Thematic analysis.

Thematic analysis is a process of identifying, analyzing and reporting patterns

of the theme within the data. Thematic analysis accepts the recorded messages (i.e.,

the texts) as the data, and codes are developed by the investigator during the close

examination of the texts as salient themes emerge inductively from the texts

(Neuendorf, 2019). Such codes mainly comprise the short phrases or words that

symbolically assign "essence-capturing, and/or evocative attribute"(Saldana, 2016)

and are viewed interactively, to be modified throughout the coding process by the

investigator. It simply describes and organizes the data set in detail form. On the other

hand, it also frequently goes further and interprets different aspects of the research

topic.

The thematic analysis attempts to categorize patterns of themes from the data

obtained from interview. It is widely used and focuses on how that data is to be

analyzed. It is a generic skill across qualitative method and that builds directly on this

skill (Braun et al., 2015). Thematic analysis is a process used in analyzing qualitative

data that involves identifying and describing themes or patterns systematically from a

qualitative data set. Cohen et al., (2011) recommends that thematic analysis permits
 172

the researcher to note down the patterns and organize themes into categories. The

important characteristic of analyzing data is to have a constant reflection, asking

analytical questions and making interpretive judgments of the information before

reporting (Creswell, 2005). It is the elementary part of thematic analysis. It offers a

useful and flexible research instrument, that helps to provide a rich and detailed, so far

complex account of data (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

In this study, the thematic analysis technique is used to analyze data obtained

from semi-structured interviews. In this phase, data were coded and analyzed into

similar categories from the emerging themes in relation to students' learning behavior.

In this study, the six steps approach familiarization, generating initial codes, searching

for themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes and producing the report

(Braun & Clark, 2006; Braun et al., 2015) was implemented.

In the beginning, the researcher became close to the data during transcribing

and reading interview responses. The data corpus was collected and transcribed by the

investigator himself that also helped him in familiarizing the data. The transcription

process in the thematic analysis is the most important stage that permits the researcher

to have close attention of the data, supporting interpretation and analysis (Braun et al.,

2015). During this stage, the researcher also assigned codes to the data where some

interesting descriptions were found. It is a process of labeling the highlighted sections

of the text to describe their content. As defined by Braun and Clarke (2013), “a code

is a word or brief phrase that captures the essence of why you think a particular bit of

data may be useful”. The coding process can be done by using the software or

manually. It is the key process of developing themes. The process of coding organizes

the data into meaningful groups. After assigning the codes, the researcher started to

sort into categories or themes. Themes are generally broader than codes. Most of the
 173

time more than one code is contained in a single theme. This process involves

combining and organizing the initial codes into potential themes and assembling the

entire relevant data. Then the data were categorized into broad themes that were

chosen on the basis of the exact coded data. The codes were categorized into each

theme. The initial themes were then reviewed and examined to make sure that they

successfully correspond to the data set and coded extracts. The summary of the

themes and the sub-themes are presented in Table 14.

Table 14
Summary of Themes
Theoretical Category
1. Learning through behavioral
process
(Behaviorist attributes)
2. Learning through the
cognitive process
(Cognitivist attributes)
3. Learning through
constructivist process
(Constructivist attributes)
Empirical Category
Themes Codes/Sub-themes
 Increment in personal initiation
Motivation  Receiving positive feedback
 Encouragement & Inspiration
 More participation in learning
Engagement  Enjoy in mathematics learning
 Repeatedly involve in drill and
practice
 Increase in personal initiatives
Prior  Prior experience & knowledge
knowledge  Background knowledge
 Pre-existing knowledge
Active  Active involvement in classroom
participation learning
 Encourage and support
 Orientation to interaction and
cooperation
 Collaborative learning

The thematic analysis process summarized above led to draw out four

overarching themes about the student mathematics classroom learning behavior in

which four themes consist of the different sub-themes to support the main theme.
 174

The Theoretical Category of the Students' Classroom Learning Behavior

As stated earlier, the researcher transcribed and coded the main chunks of the

24 participants' interviews on students' classroom learning behaviors from the 12

different secondary schools containing two students from each school. The semi-

structured interview was conducted applying 10 structured open-ended questions

related to student classroom learning behaviors. In this process, the researcher drew

out different theoritical and empirical categories, also called themes and codes which

emerged by combining at least two or more related codes and keywords respectively.

In this course, he found a number of explicit words while analyzing the participants'

interviews.

The analysis and interpretation of the qualitative data were based on the four

emerged thematic categories. Thus, the data from the semi-structured interview on

student classroom learning behaviors yielded the main themes that are presented in

the text that follows.

Theme 1: Motivation

The theme motivation in terms of classroom learning refers to the willingness

of the students to do some activity in classroom learning. It is an increment of

personal initiations, which comes from within an individual. So, it promotes the

learning activity of the students such as engaging in work, practice and more

concentration on the learning activity. According to Theobald (2006), when the

students are motivated to learn, they are more likely to achieve the goals set for them,

either by themselves or by the teacher. Teacher helps to motivate the students to learn

by employing positive feedback to develop proficiency and facilitate them to control

over their own learning and a sense of belief about their abilities (Nazifah et al.,

2012).
 175

Theme 2: Engagement

The theme 'engagement' in classroom learning denotes the attention level,

interest, optimism, curiosity and enthusiasm that students demonstrate when they

are being taught, or learning that widens the level of motivation they have to progress

in their education and attempt to learn. Student engagementbelongs to the relations

between effort, time and appropriate resources invested by both the institutions as

well as students to optimize their experience and enhance the learning outcomes

(Trowler, 2010). So, student engagement in mathematics classroom learning is a

must. Without engaging the students in learning activities and mathematics practice, it

is difficult for them to learn mathematics.

Theme 3: Prior Knowledge

Prior knowledge in classroom learning refers to the knowledge that the

learner already has gained before getting new information. It makes easier for the

learner to learn new things before they learn more. Learning new things automatically

connects to what we have already learned and have in our brain. The prior knowledge

always makes the link to form new knowledge or learning. Thus, it is something like a

bridge between the old and the new. This broad, pre-existing knowledge that could

affect the learners while receiving, understanding and organizing new beliefs, skills,

and attitudes is regarded as prior knowledge. As suggested by David (2017), prior

knowledgeis inactive, insufficient and inaccurate, and could hamper the learning of a

person. That connection about different subject matters makes learning easier. So,

prior knowledge helps the learner in the sense of concept formation or procedures for

problem-solving in mathematics, the concept being something heard, seen, or

experienced beforehand and is similar.

 176

Theme 4: Active Participation

The theme 'active participation' in classroom learning refers to the student's

involvement or learning to the directily related contents by writing, talking or doing

something. It is a way of learning whereby students engage actively themselves in

such activities reading, writing, and discussion or problem-solving in the class that

promote analysis, synthesis and evaluation of class content (Debele & Kelbisa, 2017).

Student's active participation keeps all the students engaged, collaborates with each

other making them more likely to retain and process the content and make the lessons

more fun and interesting for the entire learner. It keeps the students alert for learning,

to think about, discuss the content, encourage to practice and helps them to

comprehend the content. Student active participation consists of listening,

memorizing, analyzing an argument and applying the concept to a real-world

situation.

Procedures for Quantitative Data Entry and Analysis

The quantitative data collected by using the different survey instruments were

entered into the SPSS version 22. The researcher established the overall consistency

of the questionnaire which was above 0.60, as is accepted in the social sciences

(Pallant, 2016). In addition, descriptive statistical means and standard deviations were

used to check the strengths of the items in the questionnaire in relation to the sample.

The achievement test score of the students was analyzed by one-way analysis of

variance to find out the distribution of the mean score of the achievement of the

students by place of residence, ecology, region and gender. To find out the relation

between attitude, learning behavior and achievement, multiple correlation analysis

was used. Multiple regressions were used to find out the information about how well a

whole set (attitude and learning behavior) jointly predict values on the dependent
 177

variable (achievement). Likewise, multiple correlations were used to find out the

relationships explaining how well a model fits the data and how much variation is in

the dependent variable. All the quantitative data were thus analyzed by using the

SPSS software. In the same way, the students' achievement scores were analyzed by

using a one-way ANOVA test by the ecological region, place of residence and gender.

The data through CLBC was analyzed by comparing the students' behaviors score as

they exhibit in the classroom.

The Statistical Analysis of the Likert Scale

In the course of reviewing various research studies, the controversy between

different views was observed when using the Likert scale in the statistical analysis.

Likert scale was first introduced by Rensis Likert in 1932 in an article entitled, ‘‘A

Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes’’ in Archive of Psychology (Edmondson,

2005; Likert, 1932). It was designed to simplify the complex form of the Thurstone

scaling technique (Edmondson, 2005). In both univariate and multivariate analysis,

the Likert items can sum and analyze the summations parametrically (Carifio & Perla,

2007). On the other hand, Gardner and Martin (2007) argue that Likert data are of an

ordinal or rank order nature so only non-parametric tests will yield the suitable results.

Conversely, Norman (2010) suggests that parametric tests such as regression analysis

and Pearson correlation can be used with Likert data without fear of coming to the

wrong conclusion.

It is, therefore, perfectly suitable to sum up the ratings created from Likert

scales using means and standard deviations, and can use parametric techniques like

ANOVA, Pearson correlation coefficients and multiple regression using the

summative ratings from Likert scales. Carifio and Perla (2008) argued that Likert

scales are perfectly correct to use the summed scales to perform parametric tests. Pell
 178

(2005) suggests that parametric tests can perfectly be performed on the summed

scores of Likert scale data provided that the assumptions are clearly stated and the

data is of the proper shape and size. So, in this study, the investigator has also used

the Likert scale data for parametric statistics as ANOVA, regression and correlations.

In this study, the inferential statistics was used by converting the ordinal or

categorical variables into one or more dummy variables using SPSS Software Version

22.

Ethical Considerations of the Study

This study focused on students' attitudes towards mathematics, learning

behaviors and their achievements in mathematics. In this study, the investigator was

fully aware about the challenges that may appearwhile considering the ethical

problems related to this topic. The investigator constructed both the questionnaires

and the semi-structured interview form very carefully. The investigator used quite

simple and acceptable words in Nepali for the survey instrument. The investigator

confirmed both of these instruments with the support of the colleagues, experts and

the assistance of the supervisor before administering the final version to the

participants.

While preparing the research instruments, (questionnaire, interview form and

checklist) research ethics like avoiding gender-biased language, personal and

academic privacy and confidentiality about the informants and institutions were

strictly maintained. The rights to privacy of the participants indicates the protection of

their identity such as personal life, experiences or interests (Cohen et al., 2011; Basit,

2010) from community awareness. It means that the rights to privacy of the

participants should be respect and protected by the investigator during the research

process (Cohen et al., 2011). Thus, it is obligatory to ensure and protect the rights and
 179

interests of the participants throughout the research study by the investigator (Rodie,

2011).

The investigator collected the data via open-ended and closed-ended

questions, which concerned to those factors that participants' beliefs would enhance

their learning behaviors in the classroom. Moreover, the translated version of the

questionnaires and the semi-structured interview form in Nepali were used; thus, the

participants did not feel uncleared and uncomfortable while answering to those

questions. The formal verbal consent or approval from the participants was taken

before administering the survey by the investigator. The participants were well

instructed about why the study is being conducted, the construction of the

instruments, the research problem, its aim and the result. Similarly, the participants

were also ensured about the protection of personal and academic privacy and the

survey does not create a personal problem and threat due to participation. In the same

way, the participants were also well instructed that participation in the survey is not

compulsory for all the students and if they participate in the survey, they could

withdraw the task at any time they like.

In addition, the investigator adapted various measures to make sure that their

secrecy and privacy during and after the research would be maintained. The

investigator also indicated that the data would not be released to anybody and that the

other person would not know their responses. In course of the analysis and discussion

of the data too, privacy and anonymity were strictly maintained regarding such

matters as the names of the respondents, their attitudes, behaviors, their scores and the

names of the institutions.

 180

Summary of Research Design and Variables Coding

In this study, the different instruments for collecting the data, the process of

instruments construction and validation, and the data analysis procedures of each RQ

utilized by the investigator are presented as the summary of the research design

(Table 15). In the same way, the variables, items, code and coding used in this

research are given in Table 16.

Table 15

Summary of Research Design

RQs Instruments used Instrument Data analysis

for data collection construction and procedures
validation
1. What are the attitude levels Attitude Towards Adapted and Descriptive
towards learning Mathematics (standardized by statistics with
mathematics in grade X Inventory (ATMI) Tapia & Marsh) Qualitative
students of community Interpretation
schools in Nepal?
2. What is the status of grade X Mathematics Constructed and Descriptive
students' achievements in Achievement Test validated by the statistics, One way
mathematics? (MAT) Investigator ANOVA
3. What are the levels of Classroom Constructed and Descriptive
student learning behaviors Learning Behavior validated by the statistics with
that the student exhibit while Self-assessment Investigator Qualitative
learning mathematics? Inventory (CLBSI) Interpretation
Semi-structured Constructed and Thematic Analysis
Interview Question tested by the with 4 major
Investigator themes
Classroom Constructed and descriptive
Learning Behavior tested by the frequencies
Checklist (CLBC) Investigator (percentage)
4. What effects do the student's ATMI, Constructed and Multiple
attitudes and learning MAT & CLBSI, tested by the Regression
behaviors have on the Investigator Analysis
students’ achievements?
5. What is the relationship ATMI, Constructed and Multiple
between students' attitudes, MAT & CLBSI, tested by the Correlation
learning behaviors, and Investigator Analysis
achievements in
mathematics as variables?
 181

Table 16
Summary of Variables and their Coding used in the Research
Variables Instruments Items Scale Code Coding
Attitude Attitude Toward Ordinal
4 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Negative :1, 2
Mathematics 40 (1- 40.) Neutral: 3
Inventory Positive: 4, 5
(ATMI)
Student Classroom Learning 30 Ordinal 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Negative :1, 2
Learning Behavior Self- (1- 30) Neutral: 3
Behavior assessment Positive: 4, 5
Inventory (CLBSI)
Achievement Mathematics 50 Continuous - -
Achievement Test
(MAT)
Learning Classroom Learning 24 Nominal - -
Behavior Behavior Check List
(CLBC)
Learning Semi-structured 11 Nominal - -
Behavior Interview
Place of 2 Nominal 1, 2 Urban: 1
Residence Rural: 2
Geobelt 3 Nominal 1, 2, 3 Mountain: 1
Hill: 2
Terai: 3
Sex 2 Nominal 0, 1 Male: 1
Female: 0
Types of 2 Nominal 1, 2 Joint: 1
Family Nuclear: 2
Parents 4 Nominal 1, 2, 3, 4 Illiterate: 1
Education Basic: 2
Secondary: 3
Higher education: 4
Parents 5 Nominal 1, 2, 3 ,4, 5 Agriculture: 1
Occupation Business: 2
Government job: 3
Foreign employ: 4
Others: 5
Religion 5 Nominal 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Hindu: 1
Baudha: 2
Muslim: 3
Christian: 4
Others: 5
Ethnicity 4 Nominal 1, 2, 3, 4 Bhrahman/Kshatri: 1
Dalit: 2
Janjati: 3
Others: 4
 CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA

Introduction

This chapter presents the findings of both the quantitative and qualitative data.

The quantitative data is concerned with the students’ attitudes towards mathematics,

mathematics learning behaviors and achievement in mathematics. Similarly, the

qualitative data is mainly concerned with the student's mathematics learning

behaviors. The analysis of this study is presented in the sequential order of the RQs.

At first, a brief demographic description of the participants is presented. In the

previous chapter, data collection and analysis techniques are described. The analysis

of the qualitative and quantitative data was conducted separately and then the findings

were subsequently merged for additional analysis. The quantitative data were

analyzed with descriptive and inferential statistics. The descriptive statistics included

percentages, means, standard deviations, and inferential statistics including one-way

ANOVA, multiple regression, and multiple correlation analysis.

This study was focused to explore the students’ attitudes towards mathematics,

student's classroom learning behaviors, and their impact on mathematics achievement

of the secondary level students. The analysis is made on the status of the concerned

variables – students' attitude towards mathematics, the learning behaviours and the

achievement in the first level under different categories of the students, and in the

second level, the cause-and-effect relation established among the variables

considering achievement the outcomes of the learning as dependent variable and

student's attitudes, and attitudes induced learning behaviours in class and general in a

mathematical model. This study also analysed students' attitudes towards

 183

mathematics, mathematics learning behaviors and their achievement by gender, place

of residence and ecological region.

This study presents the analysis and interpretation of the quantitative and

qualitative data using concurrent embedded mixed method survey design. The

collection and analysis were done together both the quantitative and qualitative data.

Qualitative inquiry was imbedded in some cases to quantitative inquiry produced data

while analysing the data to draw finings and make interpretation. The analysis and

interpretation are presented according to the RQs associated thematic variables. The

quantitative data sets are the major part, and the qualitative data provides a supportive

role so as to provide a comprehensive analysis of the study. The identifying themes

that emerged from the interview were embedded in the respective RQs. This

embedding process addresses different aspects of the primary method or search for

information at a diverse level of analysis and makes the result valid and more reliable.

The analysis and interpretation of the study begin continuously in harmony with the

RQs. The qualitative part of this study embeds RQ (iii) “How do the students

preferred to learn mathematics aligning to the learning theories?” for the best

representative and more valid answers to this question. The analysis and interpretation

of each RQ were done after a short glimpse of the statistics used and the collected

quantitative data was examined to answer each RQs.

The Demographic Description of the Sample

In this study, the secondary level students studying in grade X in community

schools were chosen equally as the informants for this study. Similarly, consideration

was given to the informants by their place of residence and gender. A total of 540

students from 12 different secondary schools were chosen for the study purpose. The

numbers of male students were 72, 70 and 69 from the Mountains, the Hills, and the
 184

Terai respectively. Similarly, the numbers of female students were 108, 110 & 111

selected from the Mountains, the Hills and the Terai respectively. However, the

gender-based demography of the participants was not considered. In the same way,

the number of male students in urban areas was 107, and that of the female students

was 163. Likewise, male students in rural areas were 104, and female students were

166. The scenario of gender distribution in the study by the ecological region and

place of residence showed that a greater number of participants were from the female

category. Table 17, displays the demographic description of the sample used in this

study.

Table 17

Descriptive Statistics of Demographics of the Sample

Ecological Location Mountain Region Hill Region Terai Region Total

Demography Category Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total
Age (14-15) Yrs 55 67 122 60 56 116 42 43 85 323
(16-17) Yrs 31 22 53 29 29 58 45 41 86 197
(18-19) Yrs 4 1 5 1 5 6 3 6 9 20
Gender Male 37 35 72 38 32 70 32 37 69 211
Female 53 55 108 52 58 110 58 53 111 329
Religion Hindu 34 68 102 72 60 132 69 78 147 385
Buddhist 30 21 51 5 7 12 20 12 32 95
Muslim 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 3
Christian 8 4 12 3 2 5 0 0 0 13
Others 14 0 14 10 20 30 0 0 0 44
Parents Agriculture 65 73 138 62 65 127 60 53 113 378
Occupations Business 12 9 21 9 14 23 6 0 6 50
Government job 4 5 9 11 5 16 13 21 34 59
Foreign Employ 3 2 5 4 2 6 9 11 20 31
Others 6 1 7 4 4 8 2 5 7 22
Parents Illiterate 19 39 58 8 3 11 11 6 17 86
Education Basic 59 32 91 75 85 160 53 46 99 350
Secondary 11 17 28 7 2 9 16 11 27 64
 185

Higher Education 1 2 3 0 0 0 10 27 37 40
Ethnicity Brahman/Kshatri 16 45 61 39 41 80 25 46 71 212
Dalit 9 0 9 12 8 20 5 14 19 48
Janjati 65 45 110 39 41 80 58 29 87 277
Others 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 3
Types of Joint 52 54 106 68 58 126 53 81 134 366
Family Nuclear 38 36 74 22 32 54 37 9 46 174

Analysis and Results

Results and analysis of RQ i): What are the attitude levels towards learning

mathematics in grade X students at community schools in Nepal?

The secondary school students' attitude levels are presented in four thematic

categories: the descriptive statistic of students' attitudes towards mathematics in

general, students' attitudes towards mathematics and their level of interpretation,

students' attitudes by ecological region and the student attitude by place of residence.

The numerical calculations for the analysis for each of them was performed by using

the Software, SPSS Version 22 and compared in the way as below:

Students' Attitudes towards Mathematics and their Level of Interpretation

The scores of the students' attitudes towards mathematics were compared and

interpreted with the help of the attitude score level of interpretation. Based on their

responses in the 5 points Likert type scale, the mean scores of the students were

classified into five categories. The score category of the students’ attitudes towards

mathematics was based on the range of the score adapted from Andamon & Tan

(2018). Table 18 shows the range of mean score or range of interpretation, qualitative

description, and students' attitude level. In this study, the range of negative and highly

negative students' attitude level was considered as the negative level and the range of

positive and highly positive attitude level is considered as a positive level.

 186

Table 18
Mean Scores Interpretation for Students Attitude Level
Range of Mean Score Qualitative Description Attitude Level
1.00-1.49 Strongly Disagree Highly negative
1.50-2.49 Disagree Negative
2.50-3.49 Uncertain Neutral
3.50-4.49 Agree Positive
4.50-5.00 Strongly Agree Highly Positive

Descriptive Statistics of Students' Attitude towards Mathematics

The descriptive statistics of the students’ attitude towards mathematics

through the four factorsATMI Scale (an adapted version of Tapia & Marsh, 2004),

the students’ item wise mean scores, their standard deviations and the overall mean

score and standard deviation of the factorsare presented in Appendix M. The ATMI

Scale consists of four factors- value, enjoyment, confidence, and motivation with 40

Likert type items. The scale contains 11 negative items, out of 40, with five possible

response options, namely, Strongly Disagree (SD), Disagree (D), Not Sure (N), Agree

(A), and Strongly Agree (SA) ranging from 1 to 5. So, the lowest possible score was

40 and the highest score was 200. The scores of the students' attitudes towards

mathematics of grade X through the attitude scale were scored and tabulated.

The overall factor-wise mean scores of the students and their corresponding

attitude level shows that the mean scores of the factors, i.e., value, enjoyment, and

motivation are at the positive attitude level with the scores (4.17), (4.00), and (3.68)

respectively. In the same way, the mean score of the factor i.e., self-confident (3.28)

lies on a neutral attitude level. This range of the mean scores of the students' attitude

toward mathematics shows that the students were most positive in the factor valuing

mathematics and they were also positive in the factors namely enjoyment and

motivation. They were neither positive nor negative in the factor 'self-confident' and
 187

the other remaining factors. Overall, the students were not found completely self-

confident in mathematics.

The item-wise mean scores of the students in ATMI Scale shows that in most

of the items, altogether 25, viz.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,

19, 20, 22, 26, 27, 33, 37, & 38, students were found to be at the positive attitude

level. In 14 items, (21, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 39, 40) the students

were found to be at the medium attitude level and in one and only one item 10, the

students were found at a low attitude level. This high level of attitude of the students

shows that most of the students were at a positive attitude level in the ATMI Scale.

The medium level of attitudes of the students in the ATMI Scale shows that the

students were neither positive nor negative in the 14 items. It means that they were at

a neutral attitude level. The overall mean score of the students' attitudes towards

mathematics was found to be positive with a score of 3.78 (Appendix M). This shows

that, on average, the mean score of all the factors indicates that the students were

positive. Separately, item 10, (A strong math background could help me in my

professional life.) in which the students mean scores of 1.76 fell on a low attitude

level, this not only shows the students had a negative attitude, but also shows that a

strong math background could not help them in their professional life. The meaning of

the negativity of this question may be the negative attitude towards mathematics, too.

In Table 19, the number of students with a positive attitude level and highly

positive attitude level altogether were 398. At the neutral attitude level 109 students

were found and 33 students were found at the negative attitude level. This indicates

that the majority of the students had positive attitudes towards mathematics. Students

with a neutral attitude level towards mathematics were found more than those with a

negative attitude level.

 188

Table 19
Students Attitude Mean Scores Interpretation Level of ATMI

No of Students Range of Mean Score Qualitative Description Attitude Level

- 1.00-1.49 Strongly Disagree

Negative
33 1.50-2.49 Disagree
109 2.50-3.49 Uncertain Neutral
341 3.50-4.49 Agree
Positive
57 4.50-500 Strongly Agree

Students' Attitudes towards Mathematics with Qualitative Description

The students' attitudes towards mathematics had an overall mean of 3.78 and a

standard deviation of 1.04(Appendix N) which can be described as the range of

'Agree', meaning, the students were positive towards mathematics. In Appendix M,

the item-wise mean score of the attitude subscale, item no. 1 to 9 were positive and

item no 10 'A strong math background could help me in my professional life' was

negative with a mean score of 1.76 in the attitude subscale 'value'. In the attitude

subscale 'enjoyment', the average score of all items lies at a positive level. In the

subscale 'self-confidence', the average score of items 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 31, 33 & 34

lies at the positive level. In the same way, the average score of items 21, 24, 28, 29,

30, 32 & 35 with the mean scores 3.30, 3.29, 3.48, 3.24, 3.44, 3.14 & 3.37

respectively lay at the neutral level. The students' attitude towards mathematics at the

neutral level indicates the fair means neither positive nor negative. In the 'motivation'

subscale, the mean scores of items 37, 38 and 40 lays at the positive level, and the

mean scores of items 36 and 39 with mean scores 3.40 and 3.49 respectively lay at the

neutral level.
 189

Students' Attitude Level by Ecological Region

The descriptive statistics of the students' attitude level by ecological regions,

as shown in Table 20, indicate that the factors of the ATMI Scale at the attitude level

except 'engagement', the mean scores of the Hills region were found higher than the

Mountains and the Terai region. In the same way, the mean scores of the factor

'engagement' in the Mountain region (3.64) lie at the moderate level. Similarly, the

mean score of the factor 'engagement' (3.36) in the Hill region lies at a moderate level.

In the Terai region, the mean scores of the same factor (3.45) and those of 'motivation'

(3.58) both lie at a moderate level. The overall mean score of the factor of the Hill

region (3.84) is higher than those of the Mountain (3.83) and the Terai (3.79) regions.

The greater mean score of the Hill region indicates that the students of the Hill

region have more positive attitudes towards mathematics than the students of the

Mountain and the Terai regions. The mean score at the moderate level indicates that

the students of all three regions have neither positive nor negative attitudes regarding

the factor 'engagement'. Similarly, in the Terai region, the students were seen neither

positive nor negative in the factor 'motivation'. This means that the students were

neutral in the factor 'engagement' and 'motivation'. The overall mean scores of the

students' attitudes towards mathematics were found at 3.82. This indicates that the

students were found at a positive attitude level toward learning mathematics.

 190

Table 20
Descriptive Statistics of the Students' Attitude Level by Ecological Region
Ecological Regions
Mountain Region Hill Region Terai Region

Attitude Levels M SD M SD M SD
Confidence 4.12 0.81 4.21 0.71 4.16 0.70
Value 3.89 1.0 4.04 0.9 3.98 1.02
Engagement 3.64 1.25 3.36 1.21 3.45 1.81
Motivation 3.68 1.24 3.76 1.1 3.58 1.09

Total 3.83 1.07 3.84 0.98 3.79 1.15

Students' Attitude Level by Place of Residence

The descriptive statistics of the students' attitude level by their place of

residence, as displayed in Table 21, shows that the mean score of each factor of the

ATMI Scale in the attitude level of the students at the rural location was greater than

the mean score of the urban students. In the same way, the mean score in the factor

'engagement' (3.41) in the urban location lie at a moderate level. Similarly, the mean

scores of the factors, 'confidence', value and motivation (4.18), (4.03) and (3.76)

respectively of the rural students lie at the positive level. The mean score of the factor

'engagement' (3.59) lies at a moderate level. Similarly, the mean scores of the factors,

'confidence' and the 'value' of attitude level (4.18) and (3.92) respectively of the urban

students lies at the positive level. The mean scores of the factors 'engagement' (3.41)

and 'motivation' (3.58) in urban, students' attitudes toward mathematics lie at a

moderate level.

The greater mean scores of the rural location indicate that the students of the

rural location had more positive attitudes towards mathematics than the students from

the urban location. The mean score of the moderate level indicates that the students of

the urban location or the rural locations had neither positive nor negative attitudes
 191

towards mathematics. This means that the students were neutral regarding the factors,

'engagement' and 'motivation' in both urban and rural locations.

Table 21

Descriptive Statistics of the Students' Attitude Level by Place of Residence

Place of Residence
Rural Urban
Attitude Levels M SD M SD

Confidence 4.18 0.37 4.18 0.37

Value 4.03 0.65 3.92 0.69
Engagement 3.59 0.67 3.41 0.74
Motivation 3.76 0.75 3.58 0.84

Total 3.89 0.61 3.77 0.66

Results and analysis of RQ ii): What is the status of grade X students' achievements

in mathematics?

The results of the student achievement status in mathematics were addressed

by conducting mathematics achievement test. The students’ mathematics achievement

level in percentage was calculated. The achievement level of the students by

ecological region and place of residence has been discussed using descriptive

statistics. Similarly, the test of the significant difference between the mean scores of

the students by place of residence, ecological region, and gender was calculated and

also analyzed by using one way ANOVA.

Mathematics Achievements of the Students

To analyze the status of the mathematics achievement of the students of the

secondary level, some benchmarks are necessary to compare the results. Thus, to

analyse the grade X students' status towards mathematics achievements of secondary

school was categorized into three categories by using the percentile. The score above
 192

the 75th percentile constituted a high achievement level; below the 25th percentile

score constituted a low achievement level and those between the 25th and 75th

percentile scores constituted an average or moderate achievement level. Table 22

shows the position of secondary school students’ mathematics test scores in grade X.

Table 22
Mathematics Achievement Test Scores
Mathematics Achievement Number of Students Percentage
Higher Achievement 134 24.81
Average Achievement 271 50.19
Low Achievement 135 25
Total 540 100

It becomes clear from Table 22 that out of total sample of 540 grade X

students' achievement in mathematics, 134 (24.81%) of them got high achievements

in mathematics; 271 (50.19%) got an average achievement and 135 (25%) got low

achievements. So, it can be concluded that the majority of the students got an average

achievement (50.19%). The number of students (24.81%) with high achievements in

mathematics was slightly smaller than those (25%) with low achievements.

Students' Achievements by Ecological Regions and Place of Residence

The descriptive statistics of the students' achievements by ecological regions

and place of residence (Table 23) display the achievement scores obtained by the

students of the Mountains, the Hills and the Terai regions. Table 23 also depicts the

achievement scores of the students from urban and rural areas. The mean achievement

score of the students of the Hill region (36.68) was found greater than those from the

Mountain region (31.35) and the Terai region (33.78). The students' achievements

from the Mountain region were found in a comparatively lower range than those of

the Tarai and the Hill regions. This shows that the achievement of the students from

the Hill region in mathematics is much better than the other regions.
 193

In the same way, the students' mean achievement score in mathematics from

rural areas (35.29) was higher than those of from the urban areas (32.58). In the

Mountain region, the mean achievement score of the students of rural areas (32.86)

was found higher than those of urban areas (29.84). In the Hill region, the mean

achievement score of the students of rural areas (37.52) was higher than the mean

achievement scores of the students from urban areas (35.85). Similarly, in the Terai

region, the mean achievement score of the students from rural areas (35.51) was

higher than those of urban areas (32.06). This indicates that the mean achievement

scores in the rural areas of the Mountain, the Hill, and the Terai regions were higher

than the mean achievement scores of the urban areas. The level of achievement of all

the students by place of residence and ecological regions was found at the medium

level. Similarly, the overall mean score of the students' achievement in mathematics

was found at 33.94. This follows that the students' achievement in mathematics was

low and also lay on the average achievement level.

Table 23
Descriptive Statistics of the Students' Achievement by Ecological Region and Place of
Residence
Place of Gender No. of Mean Standard Level of
Ecological Region
Residence Male Female Students Deviation Achievement
Urban 37 53 90 29.84 7.25
Mountain Region Rural 35 55 90 32.86 11.31
Total 72 108 180 31.35 9.28 Medium Level
Urban 52 38 90 35.85 7.98
Hill Region Rural 32 58 90 37.52 10.35
Total 84 96 180 36.68 9.16 Medium Level
Terai Region Urban 32 58 90 32.06 10.94
Rural 37 53 90 35.51 13.52
Total 69 111 180 33.78 12.23 Medium Level
Urban 121 149 180 32.58 8.72
Grand Total Rural 104 166 540 35.29 11.72
 194

One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Test

A one-way ANOVA is an instrument used to compare the two means obtained

from two independent (distinct) groups of samples using the F-distribution. One-way

ANOVA examines the relationship between a quantitative response variable and a

factor (Fox, 2016). It is also known as a single factor analysis of variance as there

exist only one independent variable or factor. ANOVA is a null and alternative

hypothesis-based test. It estimates the impact of a single factor on a single response

variable and decides whether the samples are the same. In this study, ANOVA was

used to examine whether there were statistically significant differences between the

means of the groups (students by gender, location, and ecological regions) concerning

mathematics achievements. The F-Ratio was calculated to measure if the means of

different samples were significantly different or not. In ANOVA, the lower F-ratio

indicates a more similar sample means. The assumptions for the use of a one-way

ANOVA are normality, independent observations, homogeneity, and continuous

dependent variable. Normality refers to the samples that are taken from a normally

distributed population. As a guideline, for sample sizes less than 30, the assumption of

normality of the distribution should be checked and not needed for reasonably large

samples n >100 (Baghban, Younespour, Jambarsang, Yousefi, Zayeri & Jalilian,

2013). The samples have been drawn independently. The variance of the dependent

variable must be equal in each group.

Homogeneity is only needed for unequal sample sizes. In this

case, homogeneity of variance is evaluated using Levene's test for equality of

variances. When the value of p of Levene's test is above .05 then, the homogeneity of

variance meets. If Levene's test results a p-value less than .05, then the assumption of

homogeneity of variance is said to be violated. Homogeneity of variance basically

 195

makes certain that the distributions of the outcomes in every independent group are

comparable and/or equal. When the independent groups are different in this matter,

wrong findings can be produced. ANOVA on continuous variables violates the

assumption of homogeneity of variance. Thus, it can not be calculated on continuous

variables.

In the same way, the assumption of the variance in the different samples is the

same. One way ANOVA compares the means of the two or more than two groups of

the samples to establish whether there is a difference between them. The value of

effect size suggested by Cohen (1988) are small effect (f = 0.01), medium effect

(f = 0.06), and large effect (f = 0.14).

One-way ANOVA can use to compare the means of several groups of samples

to check whether they are equal or not. To establish the significance differences

between the means statistically, it is needed to compare the p-value to the significance

level to test the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis shows the equal population

means. A level of significance (indicated as α) of 0.05 usually indicates a 5% risk of

concluding that a difference exists when there is no actual difference. The t-test also

compares the means of two groups of samples when the variances are not equal, but it

compares only two groups. ANOVA can have one or more independent variables, but

it always has only one dependent variable. It compares the systematic variance

amount to the unsystematic variance amount.

The P-value in ANOVA tests the null hypothesis that all the populations have

the same means or not. When the p-value is less than the significance level or , then

the null hypothesis is rejected and can conclude that not all of the population means

are equal. It indicates that there is no relationship between the two variables being

studied or one variable does not affect the other. Similarly, when, the p-value is
 196

greater or equal to α, or significant level, then the null hypothesis is rejected and the

alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that the effect is statistically significant.

An ANOVA generates an F-statistic (F-value) that is the ratio of the model to

its error or the ratio of two mean square values. It assesses the significance difference

of the group means on the dependent variables. It is based on the assumption of same

standard deviations that the data are sampled from population. This assumption can be

obtained from Bartlett's test in SPSS. ANOVA partitions the variability among all the

values into one component that is due to variability among group means and another

component that is due to variability within the groups. Variability within groups is

computed as the sum of squares of the differences between each value and its group

means. This is the residual sum of squares. Each sum of squares is related with a fixed

degrees of freedom and the mean square is calculated by dividing the sum of squares

by the fixed degrees of freedom. ANOVA depends on the following assumptions:

 The dependent variable is continuous (interval or ratio level)

 The independent variable is categorical (two or more groups)

 The samples are independent and randomly selected (independence of

observations)

 Each sample is taken from approximately a normally distributed population

(normality of samples)

 Variances are similar across groups (homogeneity of variances)

Analysis of Variance of Students' Achievements by Place of Residence, Ecological

Regions and Gender

In this study, the comparisons of the students' achievements have been made

by using the one-way ANOVA analysis by taking the demographic properties and the

achievements of the students. The one-way ANOVA was conducted to compare the
 197

effect of the students' place of residence, ecological region, and gender on the

students' achievement in mathematics.

Analysis of Variance of Students' Achievement by Place of Residence

As per the assumptions for performing ANOVA applied to this study, the

dependent variable (achievement score) is continuous, and the independent variables

(students' attitudes and learning behaviors) are ordinal. Similarly, the observations are

random, and the samples taken from the population are independent of each other.

The test for homogeneity of variance in terms of students' place of residence was

significant, i.e., Levene statistic F (1, 538) = 3.931, p .05. In Table 25, there are two

test statistics. For the data (n  2000), the researcher used the Shapiro-Wilk test. If

not, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test is used. While the sample size is 540 so, the

Shapiro-Wilk test was used in this case. Table 25 shows that the p-value of the

Shapiro-Wilk test is .000. Since the test statistics of the urban and rural locations are

0.625, 0.634 respectively, which shows that  is less than the p-value. Hence, the null

hypothesis is accepted, and it is concluded that the data come from a normal

distribution. Hence the assumptions of the one-way ANOVA exist. The test of

ANOVA, achievement test scores of the students by place of residence using the

alpha level of .05, the test scores are given in Table 25, revealed a statistically not

significant result, i.e., F (1, 538) = 1.08, p .05 indicating that the calculated value

0.298 is less than the tabulated value F (1, 538) = 1.08. Hence, the students from both

urban and rural locations resulted in the same standard test score. So, the null

hypothesis that there is no significant difference between the achievements scores of

the students from rural and urban locations was accepted.

 198

Table 24

Tests of Normality of the Students by Place of Residence

Place of residence Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Score Urban 0.387 270 0.000 0.625 270 0.000
Rural 0.364 270 0.000 0.634 270 0.000
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Table 25

Analysis of Variance on Students' Achievement in Mathematics by Place of Residence

Source of variation Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 0.267 1 0.267 1.084 0.298

Within Groups 132.333 538 0.246

Total 132.600 539

Analysis of Variance of Students Achievement by Ecological Region

The sample selection by the ecological regions (the Mountain, the Hill, and the

Terai) was random and the samples were also independent in this study. The test for

homogeneity of variances of the students of the Mountain, the Hill, and the Terai was

significant. i.e., Levene statistic F (2, 537) = 5.594, p .05. As can be seen in Table

25, the p-value of the Shapiro-Wilk test is significant for the Mountain, the Hill and

the Terai. Hence, it can be concluded that all data from the Mountain, the Hill and the

Terai are normally distributed. Hence the assumptions of the one-way ANOVA exist.

As shown in Table 26, the ANOVA achievement test scores of the Mountain,

in the Hill, and the Terai are at the alpha .05 level of significance. It reveals a

statistically significant result. i.e., F (2,537) = 10.473, p  .05 indicates that the

students from the Mountain, the Hill and the Terai regions resulted in the different test

scores. Hence, the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between the
 199

mean achievement score of the students of the Mountain, the Hill and the Terai

regions is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is accepted. So, there is a significant

difference between the mean of the students from the Mountain, the Hill and the

Terai.

Table 26

Tests of Normality of the Students by Ecological Region

Ecological Region Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic Df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Score Mountain 0.421 180 0.000 0.600 180 0.000

Hill 0.375 180 0.000 0.630 180 0.000

Terai 0.398 180 0.000 0.618 180 0.000

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Table 27
Analysis of Variance of Students Achievement in Mathematics by Ecological Region
Source of Variance Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 4.978 2 2.489 10.473 0.000
Within Groups 127.622 537 0.238

Total 132.600 539

Analysis of Variance of Students Achievement in Mathematics by Gender

The sample selection of the study was random and the samples were also

independent. The test for homogeneity of variances of the study by gender was

significant. i.e., Levene statistic F (1, 538) = 1.695, p .05. In Table 28, the p-value of

the Shapiro-Wilk test is significant for gender. Hence, it can be concluded that the

students by gender were normally distributed. Hence the assumptions of the one-way

ANOVA exist.
 200

The ANOVA achievement test scores of boys and girls at alpha .05 level of

significance revealed statistically not significant (Table 29), i.e., F (1,538) = 0.479,

p  0.05 indicating the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between

the mean score of the students' achievement in mathematics by gender, which means

that it is accepted. Hence, the mean achievement scores of the girls and boys are not

statistically different.

Table 28
Tests of Normality of the Students by Gender
Sex Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Score Female 0.382 316 0.000 0.627 316 0.000
Male 0.366 224 0.000 0.633 224 0.000
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Table 29
Analysis of Variance on Students Achievement in Mathematics by Gender

Source of Variance Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 0.118 1 0.118 0.479 0.489

Within Groups 132.482 538 0.246
Total 132.600 539

Results and analysis of the RQ iii): What are the levels of student learning

behaviors they exhibit while learning mathematics?

The data extracted with this RQ were analyzed by using quantitative data set

through descriptive statistics of students' learning behaviors in general and student

mathematics classroom learning behavior in particular. The descriptive statistics of

the students learning behaviors were also calculated in terms of the ecological regions

and their place of residence. Likewise, the qualitative data obtained from the semi-

structured interview were also used to provide some grounding of student learning
 201

behaviors. The use of the qualitative data set makes the study more reliable, reaches,

and provides a comprehensive view of the problem at hand. The analysis and

interpretation of the qualitative part of the study have been embedded continuously

after the quantitative part.

Description of Students Learning Behaviors in Mathematics

Students' learning behaviors in mathematics was measured under the six broad

categories of learning behaviours called factors through the use of CLBSI Scale. In

the course of analysis, the item-wise mean scores of the students, standard deviations,

and the overall mean score and the standard deviation of the factors were calculated

and presented in Appendix O. The Scale consists of six factors (engagement,

motivation, independence, responsiveness, collaboration, and participation) with 30

Likert-type items. The items in the scale contained five possible response scales,

which were Consistently (A), Frequently (B), Sometimes (C), Rarely (D) and Never

(E) ranging in scores from 5 to 1. Hence, the possible lowest score was 30 and the

highest score was 150. The scores of the students' classroom learning behaviors of

grade X mathematics through the scale were scored and tabulated in Appendix O.

Based on their responses of the students in the 5 points Likert type scale, the mean

scores of the students were classified into three groups as given in Appendix O. The

levels of the students' classroom learning behaviors are interpreted with the help of

the learning behaviors category.

The item-wise mean scores of the students' learning behaviors show that

(Appendix O), 22 out of 30 items, items 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19,

20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27 & 29 lie at the positive level of learning behavior category. The

three items 11, 12, and 25 with mean scores (3.60), (3.06), and (2.64) respectively lie

on the moderate level of learning behavior category. The remaining five items 5, 17,

26, 28, and 30 having mean scores (1.80), (2.27), (1.84), (2.30), and (1.97)
 202

respectively lie on the negative learning behavior category. The items response by the

students in the negative learning behavior category, i.e., 5, 17, 26, 28 and 30 are all

related to slightly negative classroom learning behaviors. Hence, it is important that

the students' learning behaviors in the mathematics class were not so bad or negative.

In the same way, overall factor-wise or theme-wise mean scores of the

students' learning behaviors show that the two learning behavior factors i.e.,

engagement (3.66) and participation (2.82) lie at the moderate level of learning

behavior category and the remaining learning behavior factors i.e., motivation (4.22),

independence (3.69) responsiveness (3.77) and collaboration (3.84) lie on the positive

level of learning behavior category. This range of mean scores of the given learning

behavior factors of the students shows that the students were most positive in the four

factors i.e., motivation, independence, responsiveness and collaboration. The overall

mean score of the students' learning behavior was found at 3.64. The mean score lies

at the level of the moderate learning behavior category. Similarly, they have relatively

low or moderate learning behaviors in the two factors i.e., engagement and

participation.

The results obtained from CLBSI that was designed by integrating different

learning attributes relating to the three learning camps show that the theme wise mean

scores related to the behaviorist attributes 'engagement' and 'motivation' was found

3.94. Likewise, the mean scores in the themes related to the cognitivist attributes,

independence and responsiveness, and constructivist attributes, collaboration, and

participation were found 3.73 and 3.33 respectively. This shows that the students were

more likely to choose the behaviorist learning process, which means that they

preferred more to learn mathematics using behaviorist attributes. Similarly, they

learned mathematics with the least preference of the constructivists' learning process

or learning attributes.
 203

Students' Mathematics Classroom Learning Behavior

To explore and assess the level of students' mathematics classroom learning

behaviors, the instrument CLBSI was used and scored and tabulated. Based on their

responses in the 5 points Likert type scale, the students' learning behavior category

was classified into five levels. This student learning behaviors score categories were

used based on the range of the score adapted from Andamon and Tan (2018). Table

29 shows the students learning behavior categories and their learning behavior

interpretation level. In Table 30, the number of students in a highly positive level is 5,

the positive level is 402, the neutral level is 90 and the negative level is 43.

Table 30
Students Learning Behavior Mean Scores and Level of Interpretation
No of Students Range of Mean Score Qualitative Description Behavior Category/Level

- 1.00-1.49 Never Highly negative

43 1.50-2.49 Rarely Negative
90 2.50-3.49 Sometimes Neutral
402 3.50-4.49 Frequently Positive
5 4.50-500 Consistently Highly Positive

It was found that many of the students had positive mathematics learning

behaviors. Students with neutral mathematics learning behavior were more in number

than those with negative mathematics learning behavior and a small number of the

students were highly positive in mathematics learning behavior. However, the range

of mean scores and the level of interpretation were combined to make three levels of

interpretation namely, negative, and highly negative at the negative level of

interpretation and positive and highly positive at the positive level of interpretation.
 204

Students' Classroom Learning Behaviors by Ecological Regions

The descriptive statistics of the students' learning behavior by ecological

regions are presented in Table 31. The overall mean scores of the student learning

behavior of the Hill region (3.68) were greater than those of the Mountain region

(3.61) and the Terai region (3.63). In the same way, the factor wise mean score of the

factors viz. engagement, independence, responsiveness and participation of the

students from the Hill region was found greater than those from the Mountain and the

Terai regions. Yet, the mean score of the learning behavior of the factor 'participation'

in the three regions was found at a moderate level. The mean scores of the students'

learning behavior of all the ecological regions indicate that the behavior was more

positive among the students in the Hill region than the other regions and the student

learning behaviors of the Hill region were more positive in terms of factor wise mean

scores. In the factor 'motivation,' the mean score among the students from the

Mountain region (4.25) was found more positive than those from the other regions.

Similarly, the mean score of the factor 'collaboration' (3.84) was higher among the

students in the Terai region than of those from the other two regions.

Table 31

Descriptive Statistics of the Students Learning Behavior Subscale by Ecological

Regions

Learning Behavior Ecological Regions

Categories Mountain Region Hill Region Terai Region

M SD M SD M SD

Engagement 3.61 0.85 3.69 0.94 3.67 0.89

Motivation 4.25 0.79 4.24 0.85 4.18 0.78
Independence 3.67 1.03 3.76 1.01 3.59 1.02
Responsiveness 3.72 1.01 3.83 0.97 3.74 0.96
Collaboration 3.74 1.11 3.61 1.00 3.84 0.97
Participation 2.69 1.15 2.95 1.09 2.81 1.02
Total 3.61 0.99 3.68 0.97 3.63 0.94
 205

Students' Learning Behaviors by Place of Residence

The descriptive statistics of working out the classroom learning behaviors of

the students by the place of residence is given in Table 32. The students' classroom

learning behavior mean score in this respect lies at a positive level. The overall mean

score of the students from rural areas (3.72) was higher than those from the urban area

(3.60). This indicates that students' learning behavior in a rural location was slightly

more positive than that of the students from the urban location. The factor wise mean

score of the student learning behavior of rural location in terms of engagement' (3.72),

'motivation' (4.35), 'independence' (3.79), 'responsiveness' (3.77), 'collaboration

'(3.87) and 'participation' (2.84) was found higher than the mean score of those from

the urban location. This indicates that the students' learning behavior in each factor of

the rural location is slightly more positive than those from the urban location.

However, in respect of the factor 'participation', the mean score of the rural location

(2.84), and urban location (2.80) both were found at the neutral level of the learning

behavior category.

Table 32
Descriptive Statistics of Students Learning Behavior Subscale by Place of Residence
Learning Behavior Place of Residence
Categories Rural Urban

M SD M SD
Engagement 3.72 0.51 3.60 0.55
Motivation 4.35 0.52 4.10 0.60
Independence 3.79 0.66 3.59 0.74
Responsiveness 3.77 0.50 3.76 0.50
Collaboration 3.87 0.51 3.80 0.58
Participation 2.84 0.52 2.80 0.53

Total 3.72 0.53 3.60 0.58

 206

Explanation of Student Learning Behavior in Mathematics

Students' learning behaviours were assessed using quantitative measures and

the qualitative measures and interpreted them in this section. Students' learning

behavior in mathematics had an overall mean of 3.66 and a standard deviation of 1.08.

This can be described as the range of frequency meaning that the students had positive

learning behavior in mathematics. The item-wise mean of the learning behavior under

the subscale 'engagement'(items 1, 2, 3, and 4) were found positive and item no. 5 was

found negative with a mean score of 1.08 (Appendix O). The average scores under the

factor 'motivation' (items 6, 7, 8 and 9) were found positive and the mean score of

items 10 i.e. 'I feel excited when I can solve new mathematical problems' was found

highly positive with a mean score of 4.54. This shows that student learning behaviors

were highly positive. The items under the factor 'independence'(items 11, 13, 14 and

15) were found positive but item12 was found neutral with a mean score of 3.06. This

indicates that the students were found fair under the item 'I make several attempts to

solve mathematical problems regularly in the classroom without any instruction from

other(s)'. The mean scores of the items under the factor 'responsiveness' (16, 18, 19

and 20) were found positive and item 17 'I remain silent in the math class rather than

asking questions' with a mean score of 2.27 was found negative. In the subscale

'collaboration', items 21, 22 and 23 were found positive; item 24 with a mean score of

4.58 was found highly positive and item 25 was found neutral. The items under the

factor 'participation'(items 27 and 29) were found positive but items 26, 28 and 30

with the mean scores of 1.84, 2.30 and 1.97 were found negative.
 207

Results and analysis of RQ iv): How do the students preferred to learn

mathematics aligning to the learning theories?

In addition to the quantitative data, the views of the participants were elicited

through the semi-structured interview about how the students preferring to learn

mathematics in the classroom aligning to the learning theories to find out the students'

mathematics classroom learning behavior in terms of major learning theories. The

study tried to find out the types of learning attributes in the mathematics classroom.

The qualitative data shed light on the above quantitative findings, especially

on the students' classroom learning behaviors in mathematics are concerned within the

different four themes under the three learning processes/perspectives as stated in

Table 13. Under the theme 'motivation', the participants from ecological regions,

places of residence and gender expressed that motivation is the most important thing

and they believed that the learner when motivated from the beginning of the class, and

then he/she can learn effectively. The students with low concentration in learning

mathematics should be engaged in the learning activity using different motivational

and developmental learning activities with a special focus on the inclusive learning

approach. In this line, a view exposed by the participants follows as:

Mathematics is a very difficult subject. However, it can be learned if the

teacher teaches in an interesting way involving more drill and practice and

motivate students to engage to learn. The teacher should focus more on the

weaker students rather than the talented ones who always seat at the front of

the class. (Participants: MUB1, MUG1 & TUB1)

The above statement highlights that the students who know mathematics as an

essential and important subject seem learning oriented. In this sense, the mathematics

teacher should be a model as well as a special motivator who can stimulate and

engage especially with the weak learner through drill and practice. The teacher should
 208

equally care and inspire the whole students of the class for learning. The view

expressed by these participants relates fundamentally to the behaviorist learning

perspective.

In the same way, the students could understand mathematics easily when the

teacher delivered the class in as simple and clear manners as possible. It makes them

more engaged, motivated and caring. Students wanted to be responded for the query

and concerns of learning by the teacher. Students' expectation from their teachers was

more engaged and interactive instructional approach which is according to their

desired learning behaviour. This encourages them for effective learning. One of the

participants (TUG1) clearly expressed, "I am very poor at mathematics. The teacher

doesn't care to my question, and they do not explain my problem in detail".

A slow, simple, and detailed explanation about the problem makes it easy and

effective for the learner. The views of the students approaching the way of delivery by

the teacher in the class were:

Mathematics can be learned from the teacher who makes the explanation

simple and clearto the understanding level of the learner. Such an

explanation makes learning interesting, engaging, and easy. The teacher

should motivate the slow learners too and should explain the difficult problem

repeatedly so that we also can understand. Sometimes, I learn mathematics

better from my classmates rather than the teacher. When the teacher‘s

explanation is not clear, I ask my friends and they explain to me in a simple

way and slowly in detail. Then I easily grasp them. (Participants: HRB1 &

HRG2)

The above statement clearly reflects that the delivery approaches used by the

teacher play an important role in learning mathematics. When the teacher presents the
 209

subject matter in detail and slowly, the weak students can also understand that subject

matter easily. Otherwise, such weak students cannot follow their teacher and thus,

creates a learning problem. The above views reveal a close approximation to the

behaviorist learning perspective. This also indicates that the learner also like to learn

in the collaborative way. This also indicates that students did have inclination

cognitive learning theory based instructional approach. Similarly, this indicates there

are two expected learning behaviors of the students as collaborative learning and peer

learning but with clear explanation and illustration at the cognitive level of the

student. A mixed approach of classroom instruction is desired. Students expects

explanation and illustration on the mathematical concepts, principles and problems

before they enter into collaborative learning/peer consultations.

Under the theme 'engagement', the studentsboth by gender and place of

residenceviewed engagement as a priority. The role of the teacher is equally

important to create an effective learning environment in the classroom so; all students

can engage themselves in learning. It also provides opportunities for all students to

engage themselves equally in every classroom learning activity.

Some other participants even shared the experience of learning mathematics in

the classroom that they never got high marks in the final examination. According to

them an encouraging classroom learning environment as well as motivation and

feedback are essential for effective learning. The teacher should use both talk and

chalk while teaching and students should be focused on engaging themselves in the

learning activity. The experiences stated by the participants were:

I like mathematics although I never get high marks in the subject in the final

exam. Sometimes, some of my friends laugh at me for my mistakes and my

teacher gets them to shut and encourages me. All my friends always talk to
 210

each other and always cry. They do not listen to the teacher in the classroom.

The maths class should be interesting and encouraging to engage each

learner. The teacher should focus all the learners for active participation.

Student motivation and feedback is necessary for effective classroom learning.

(Participants: HRB2, & HUG1)

The above statement indicates that the teacher should always be cautious to

create an interesting and encouraging classroom environment for the effective

engagement of the learner in the learning activity. While the student engages in

classroom learning activity, mathematics learning becomes easier. The use of both

chalk and talk creates effective teaching which in turn encourages the learner to

engage in teaching-learning activity. This view, too, reflects the behaviorist learning

perspectives.

Additionally, some participants were also found that they were closely

associated with different learning processes, materials, and learning environments. As

they thought, the teacher was a motivator as well as a guide, and engagement was a'

must' for learning. Hard work and study make mathematics learning easy. This view

was reflected in the following statement:

Mathematics can be learned if the teacher explains repeatedly, uses materials

and the learning environment is peaceful. While learning, the learner should

be engaged in mathematics every time and the teacher should help each

learner's problem. The relationship between the teacher and students should

be close enough. Hard work and studies make mathematics easy.

(Participants: MUB2, MRG1, TUB1 & TRG1)

The above view reflected by the participants' shows that they emphasized the

learning process, materials, and the classroom environment as well as the role of the

teacher as a guide too and a motivator for learning mathematics. They also viewed
 211

that hard work means a lot of practice in doing mathematics. Exercise, assignments,

classwork, and studies make mathematics learning easy, but the learner should always

engage him/herself in learning. Such a case reveals that it is a broader behaviorist's

view related to engagement that is achieved through hard work and studies, but it may

also relate to other learning perspectives.

Under the theme ' prior knowledge', one of the participants (HRG1) expressed

her views:

Mathematics is my favorite subject from the very beginning. It helps me to

secure more marks than other subjects. Mostly, I practice mathematics when I

am free. I think, students should be motivated to learn mathematics.

The students also claimed that students' prior knowledge and teacher hints

would help to learn mathematics. In the same way, regular practice and basic

computational skills are also important for learning mathematics. The participants

expressed their views about classroom learning behaviors as such:

Mathematics is so hard subject, so it needs motivation, good concepts, regular

practice, and also basic computational skills. Students' prior knowledge and

teacher's hints make it easy to learn mathematics and drill and practice make

learning permanent. Participants: MUG2 & TRB1)

The above lines shows that the participants' understanding of the classroom

learning of mathematics, prior knowledge and good concept of mathematics are both

essential for effective learning. They also claimed that student’s motivation and the

teacher's hints make their learning easy, and drill and practice keeps learning in a long

run. Considering their views, they learn mathematics from a cognitivist learning

perspective and they also reflect behaviorist learning perspectives.

Furthermore, some other participants (MRB2) claimed about the role of the

teacher and students for mathematics learning. As they expressed, the teacher should
 212

focus to develop the concept teaching so that students could feel easy to learn.

Likewise, the students need to have pre-requisite knowledge before learning more

about it. If the students have pre-requisite knowledge and clear mathematical concept,

he/she can learn independently. They shared the ideas in this way:

I find mathematics not so difficult to learn but it depends on the teacher and

the learner. Conceptual teaching and pre-requisite knowledge of the learner is

essential for every learner to understand it. Drill and practice only cannot

make the learner's strong base. If the students have a good concept of

mathematics and have appropriate pre-requisite knowledge, he/she can learn

mathematics independently.

Considering these lines, the role of the teacher and students are more

important in learning mathematics. The knowledge which we have heard, seen or

experienced, before something similar, is easier to learn than a new one. In the same

way, concept learning is necessary to learn mathematics further. This statement

viewed by the participants completely lies in the cognitivist learning perspective .

Besides this, some participants had a different view of learning mathematics.

They claimed that no one can learn mathematics without a good mathematical

background. In the beginning, the concept of any subject matter should be clear so

that the learner can alert to learn more or show a willingness to learn mathematics.

The participants expressed their view on learning mathematics by saying:

Mathematics is very hard and cannot be learned effectively without a good

mathematical background. Students should know the concept at the very

beginning. Mathematical base and skill are necessary for the learners to

understand the mathematical problems. In such a case, concrete models and

materials make learning interesting and easy to understand and one may study
 213

mathematics independently and can do better at it. (Participants: HUG2,

TRG2 & TUG2)

This saying shows that the subject matter background is essential for learning

mathematics. Learners' mathematical background and basic skills help the learner for

their further learning. A conceptual understanding of the mathematical subject matter

is more important. More concrete, interactive instructional materials that can support

for meaningful understanding of mathematical contents were expected to be an

autonomous learner in learning mathematics. These views also focus on the

cognitivist learning approach.

Regarding the theme 'active participation', the participants were also

convinced about the effective classroom environment having different instructional

materials and physical arrangements. An appropriate classroom environment helps to

create students' creativity and encourage active participation in learning. In this line,

two participants reported:

I spend more time studying mathematics than other subjects. The classroom

environment needs to be encouraging and supportive to promote creativity

and keep the student engaged and collaborate with each other. The learners'

active participation is necessary to develop creativity and comprehend the

content. The role of the mathematics teacher should be active and cooperative.

(Participants: FSU2 & MSR5)

As noted by the participants in the above statement, mathematics classroom

learning can be carried out effectively if the classroom environment is encouraging

and supportive. Students' active participation encourages engaging the learner and

helps to develop the creativity of the learner so that they can comprehend the lesson

easily. This expression implies that the way teacher presented in the class was not

according to the students' style of the learning. Students want to be constructivist to a

 214

level, but teachers' role is more directed to demonstrator and explainers. It does not

mean that students want to be fully independent costructivist learner, they wanted to

be a guided constructivist learner.

Moreover, in mathematics learning, interaction, and active participation of the

students and the teacher is very important. It helps to develop new skills and ideas for

the learner. Sharing students' mathematical ideas and skills make their learning

effective. Two of the participants expressed their views in this way:

Learning can be made more interesting and effective when both instructors

and students interact and actively participate in learning activities. It helps to

develop mathematical skills and ideas in the learners. Students should have

multiple opportunities to learn and share ideas and engage in discussions.

Using teaching materials, drill and practice makes learning easy, interesting,

and permanent. (Participants: FSR1 & MSR4)

Observing these lines, it comes to know us that teacher and students'

interaction and their active participation makes mathematics learning effective. In the

same way, sharing different skills and ideas among students and the teacher also

makes learning effective. Classroom discussion also contributes to learning more and

the use of teaching materials and other instruments make learning interesting and

promote learners' engagement in mathematics. The expectation is similar to Bandur's

views that a learning space is created by three important components as personal

traits, environment and behaviour.

The qualitative data (arguments) on student classroom learning behaviors in

mathematics discussed above reveal two important results associated with student

learning behavior perspectives: student learning behaviors by learning

process/attributes, and student learning behaviors by ecological, residential and

gender coverage. The summary table of the semi-structure interview analysis is given

in Appendix I
 215

Qualitative Analysis of the Students Learning Behaviors: Learning Attributes

Twelve out of 24 participants of the semi-structured interview preferred

learning mathematics choosing themes related to the behaviorist learning process or

learning attributes. Seven participants out of 24 showed their views which were close

to the cognitive attribute or cognitive learning process. The remaining 5 participants'

views were close to constructivist learning attributes. These views of the participants

on their mathematics classroom learning behaviors show that most of the students

were found learning mathematics through the behaviorist learning process. Some of

the participants held both behaviorist and cognitive attributes to learning mathematics.

A very small number of participants preferred learning through constructivist learning

attributes. They also gave credibility to the teacher for their effective classroom

teaching, motivating students, and encouraging them for active participation in

classroom activities. So, the teachers need to bring change in their methods and

practices in mathematics classroom teaching and learning. This may be helpful for

making a broad choice of students' preferences of learning attributes or learning

process.

Some of the participants expressed the mixed learning attributes representing

all the three learning camps: behaviorist, cognitivist and constructivist learning. Some

of them expressed emphasizing behaviorist and cognitivist attributes but some others

represented one of them. This also shows that the majority of the students mostly used

the behaviorist approach to learning mathematics. Some of them reported that they

learned through the mix of the behaviorist and the cognitive; behaviorist and

constructivist approach. A small minority preferred to use constructivist learning

attributes while learning mathematics in the classroom. As they viewed, very few

participants expressed that they were highly motivated towards mathematics learning.
 216

This qualitative result reveals similarities and differences among the

participants. The qualitative data provides some explanation of these results. The

result supports the quantitative results, and the emerging qualitative data suggest some

grounding for understanding. The qualitative data relating to students' mathematics

learning behaviors also reveal that they do not equally use the all learning attributes

from the different learning camps, but some students aligned with behaviorist

attributes, some others used the mixed attributes from different learning perspectives

according to their mathematical knowledge background, teachers teaching styles,

instructional methodology, prior-knowledge, motivation and the condition of the

classroom environment.

Analysis of Students' Learning Behaviors: Ecological, Residential and Gender

Coverage

Most of the students who expressed mathematics as easy, or they liked it, were

relatively more from the Hill region. Similarly, the participants who disliked

mathematics and viewed themselves as weak at mathematics were relatively more

numerous from the urban location of the Mountain and the Terai regions. In the same

way, the participants from rural locations of the Hill region claimed mathematics as

an easy and interesting subject which were relatively more numerous there than in the

other regions and locations. Therefore, it can be concluded that the participants from

the rural location of the Hill region had comparatively more positive learning

behaviors than the other participants. All the participants by gender found no

remarkable differences in their views about liking/disliking or good/poor performance

and learning behaviors in mathematics.

Multiple Regression Analysis

Multiple regression denotes the relationship between two or more independent

or predictor variables and single dependent or criterion variable. It is also known as

 217

an expansion of simple linear regression. It is used to predict the value of a single

variable based on the value of other two or more variables. The variable that we want

to predict is denoted as the dependent or criterian variable. The dependent variables

are also denoted as the target or outcome variable. The variables that we use to predict

the value of the dependent variable are known as the independent variables. The

independent variables are also denoted by the explanatory or predictor variables.

Pallant (2016) defines multiple regression as a refined extension of correlation that is

used to explore the predictive ability of a set of independent variables on the

dependent variable.

Multiple linear regression analysis can be used mainly for three aspects: causal

analysis, forecast an effect and trend predicting. Firstly, it is used to identify the

power of the effect of the independent variables towards dependent variable.

Secondly, it is used to predict the impacts of changes or effects. It shows the changing

relationship that how much the dependent variable will change when the independent

variable changes. Thirdly, it predicts future values and trends. Thus, it can be used to

obtain point estimates.

The main function of multiple regression is the explanation and prediction of

the variable relationship. To explain the relationship between the variables by using

multiple regressions the effects or influences of the independent variables on the

dependent variable should be calculated (Keith, 2019). In the variable relationship,

each explanation includes prediction. If one can explain a phenomenon well, then one

can generally predict it well, but the reverse does not hold true. However, being able

to predict something does not mean one can explain it. In multiple regression, it is

relatively easy to analyze categorical, or nominal, variables by converting the

categorical variable into one or more dummy variables. Multiple regression

 218

determines the fit on the whole of the model and the relative role of each predictor to

the total variance. In this study, the students' achievement could have been affected by

the students' attitudes and learning behaviors toward mathematics or may have had

the relative contribution of each independent variable to the dependent variable.

The statistics of regression output "the Model Summary" measures the

goodness of fit. In Table 34, R is the multiple correlation coefficients. R squared (R2),

is called the coefficient of determination. While computing the multiple regression,

the coefficient of determination (R2) is calculated to determine the amount of

variability between two variables. R2 may be tested for statistical significance by

comparing the variance explained (regression) to the variance unexplained (residual)

using the model summary Table 34. R2 presents the whole information concerning the

regression. The adjusted (Adj R2) evaluates the descriptive power of regression

models including two or more variables that comprise different number of

independent or predictor variables. When the number of independent variables is

added to a model then the R2 value also increases and never decreases it and seems to

be a better fit. Likewise, when the value of the R2 is lower than there exists fewer

chance of correlating the two variables one another. According to Rumsey (2009),

where one variable (X) shows a greater variability in another variable (Y), R2 lies

between 0.70 and 0.90, where one variable (X) helps to show to some extent the

variability in (Y), R2 lies between 0.30 and 0.70, and where one variable (X) does not

help to show greater variability in (Y), R2 lies between 0 and 0.30.

The unstandardized regression coefficient is generally symbolized as b. It

denotes an estimate of the possible change in the dependent variable for each unit

change in the independent variable. In the regression line, b is equal to the slope, and

it can also be tested using a simple t-test for the statistical significance. This 't' simply
 219

tests whether the regression coefficient is statistically different from zero. More

interestingly, it is also possible to determine whether the b differs from values other

than zero, either using a modification of the t-test.

A standardized coefficient compares the relative importance or strength of

each coefficient in the regression model. It compares the strength of the effect of each

independent variable with the dependent variable. It is also known as beta coefficient

in the form of intercept and represents the predicted score on the dependent variable

when all the independent variables have a value of zero. The statdardized regression

coefficient can be defined as a change of 1 standard deviation in X is associated with a

change of β standard deviations of Y. The regression coefficients and the intercept can

be combined into a regression equation e.g., Y  c + b1X1 + b2X2 + … This can be

used to predict someone’s score on the outcome from the independent variables. The

spread of data points about the regression line shows the accuracy of the prediction

and its errors. The errors of prediction are also known as residuals. It can be

calculated by subtracting the predicted outcome scores from outcome scores.

Assumptions of Multiple Regression

Multiple linear regression may be a statistical technique that uses several

explanatory variables to predict the result of a response variable. The goal of

multiple linear regression is to model the relationship between the dependent and

independent variables. The major assumptions for multiple linear regressions are as

follows:

Level of Measurement. The dependent variable should be a normally

distributed interval or ratio variable or continuous. Similarly, two or more

independent variables with normally distributed interval or ratio or dichotomous/

dummy variables are also needed.

 220

Linearity. The relationship between dependent and independent variables

should always be linear. The linearity or the independent variables linear relationship

can be observed through more or less giving a shape to a line in the scatter plots. If

the residuals are normally distributed and homoscedastic then the condition of the

linearity can exists.

Homoscedasticity. There should be homoscedasticity/homogeneity or equal

variance within the regression model. In other words, the spread of the residuals

should be fairly constant at each point of the independent variables. To confirm

homoscedasticity, we make a plot of residual values on the y-axis and therefore the

predicted values on the x-axis. Tabachnick and Fidell (2007) explain the residuals (the

difference between the obtained dependent variable and the independent variable

scores) and the variance of the residuals should be an equivalent for all predicted

scores (homoscedasticity). If this is often true, the hypothesis is met and therefore the

scatter plot approximately takes the form of a rectangular; scores are going to be

concentrated within the center about the 0 points and distributed during a rectangular

pattern. The scores are going to be randomly scattered towards the horizontal line.

The result of Bartlett’s Test, as in Table 33, at 95% level of Significance, α = 0.05, the

p-value (Sig.) of .000 < 0.05, i.e., p  0.05 then there is a significant difference in the

variances. Hence, in this research, it was assumed that there was no violation of the

homoscedasticity assumption.

Table 33
KMO and Bartlett's Test for Homoscedasticity
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .691
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 408.580
Sphericity df 3
Sig. .000
 221

Sample Size. The quantity of observations should be larger than the quantity

of independent variables. Adequate data are required to provide reliable estimates of

the correlations. It can be checked directly by looking at our data set only. Tabachnick

and Fidell (2007) have suggested the way of determining sample size by using the

formula as 50 + 8(k) for testing an overall regression model where, k is the predictor

variable.

Multi-Collinearity. Multiple linear regression supposes that there is no

multicollinearity within the data. Multi collinearity normally arises when there are

high correlations between two or more independent variables. Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin

(KMO) measures multi-collinearity. When the KMO sampling adequacy is 0.500, it

means poor collinearity, above 0.800 is extremely good; and above 0.900 is

great multicollinearity (Mayers, 2013). We will check multicollinearity by using the

variance inflation factor. Hign variance inflation factor for a predictor

variable creates more chance that the variable is already explained by other

independent variables. As suggested by Tabachnik and Fidell (2007), the

specified sample size for predictor variables should be a minimum of 62 participants

(N > 50 + 8  2). In this study, the size of the sample consisted of 540 grade X

secondary school students, which satisfies the sample size assumption. For multi-

collinearity assumptions, the analysis disclosed that a bivariate correlation among

predictor variables was not above 0.7. Hence, multi-collinearity assumptions were

not violated (Tabachnik & Fidell, 2007).

Normally Distributed Residuals. Multiple linear regression analysis

requires that the errors between observed and predicted values (i.e., the residuals of

the regression) should be normally distributed. This assumption could also

be checked by observing a histogram, Scatter plot or normal probability plot (P-P

 222

plot). When there is no scatter plot in any pattern, the histogram is

normally distributed or if the P-P plot falls along the diagonal line then the

residuals are going to be normally distributed. If points lie exactly on the line, it

is perfectly a normal distribution. The Scatter Plot in Figure 7 shows the normality.

Figure 7
Predicted Student Achievement Score standardized by Student Attitude

Similarly, the distribution along the diognal line in the P-P plot in Figure 8

shows the normally distributed residuals.

 223

Figure 8
Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual

Absence of Outliers/Influential Cases. An outlier may be a kind

of influence that interrups the pattern of disproportionate influence over the

regression model. It is a data point that's very far, other, from the remainder of the

data. A regression outlier is an observation with an unusual response-variable value

given its combination of explanatory-variable values (Fox, 2016). When

we do regression modeling, in fact, we don’t really mind about whether some data

point is far from the remainder of the data, but whether it interrups a pattern, the

remainder of the data seem to follow. An outlier may be a data point or case

that does not conform to the overall pattern of the data. Outliers can bias statistical

analysis and cause incorrect conclusions being drawn, then they need to be

identified and removed in additional detail. An influential case is an outlier that

significantly affects the slope of the regression line. Where Cook's distance may be

a statistic which provides a sign of what proportion influence one case has over a

regression model. As a rule, cases with a Cook's distances of a value greater than

one should be investigated further otherwise are going to be used.A couple

 224

of outliers in any study might be ignored with a large sample size (Tabachnik &

Fidell, 2007). Similarly, Cook's distances of a value greater than one should be

explored further and fewer than the one are going to be used. Hence, during

this case, Cooks's distance (maximum) was 0.051, i.e. less than one. Thus, the

outlier assumption was also assured.

Normality. The normality of the data is measured by different statistical

calculations. It can be tested by calculating skewness and kurtosis. According to

George & Mallery (2016), the acceptable value of kurtosis and skewness lies between

2. It can also be checked by a histogram with a normal curve. In Figure 9, the

histogram with normal curve shows the normality of the data.

Figure 9
Histogram of Regression Standardized Residual

Similarly, the negative value of skewness (-0.794) of student attitude

recommends that the data are skewed to the left then distribution is approximately

symmetric (Table 34). In the same way, the excess kurtosis (0.721) is slightly

greater than zero. This suggests that the distribution is slightly leptokurtic. So, the

observation results in the conclusion that the students' attitude scores are normally

distributed. The negative value of skewness (-1.300) of student learning behavior

 225

suggests that, data are skewed to the left and therefore the distribution is

approximately symmetric. The positive kurtosis with (1.763), larger than zero,

shows that the distribution is slightly leptokurtic. Hence, the observation results

in the conclusion that student learning behavior scores are normally distributed. In

the student achievement, the positive value of skewness (1.132) recommends that

data are skewed to the proper and therefore the distribution is approximately

symmetric. Similarly, the positive kurtosis (0.667) is slightly bigger than

zero, which means that the distribution is slightly leptokurtic. The

observation results in the conclusion that student achievement scores are normally

distributed. Hence, it had been concluded that the normality assumption was

guaranteed for all the independent and dependent variables.

Table 34
Descriptive Statistics for Test of Normality
N Skewness Kurtosis
Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Std. Error
Student Attitude 540 -.794 .105 .721 .210
Learning Behavior 540 -1.300 .105 1.763 .210
Achievement 540 1.132 .105 .667 .210

Independence of Observation. Multiple regression needs observations. One

among the assumptions of regression is the independent observation. The

assumption of independence observations are often examined by using the Durbin-

Watson statistic in SPSS Software Version 22.0, before calculating multiple

regression. The value of the Durbin-Watson statistic approximately 0 to 4 indicating

that there's no correlation between residuals (Laerd Statistics, 2015). If the value of

the Durbin-Watson statistic lies between the given ranges, then the

assumption deduced that there was the independence of observations.The

independence of observation was checked using the Durbin-Watson statistic. Since

 226

the value of the Durbin-Watson statistic 1.336 (Table 35) indicates that the Durbin-

Watson statistic lies between 0 and 4. Therefore, the data are not auto correlated.

Hence, the test of this assumption concluded that there was the independence of

observations with the predictor variables student attitudes and learning behaviors and

achievement as the criterion variable.

Table 35
Model Summary for Durbin-Watson Statistic
Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the Durbin-Watson
Square Estimate
1 0.619a 0.383 0.381 10.74354 1.336
a. Predictors: (Constant), Attitude, Learning Behavior
b. Dependent Variable: Achievement Score
Hence, all the tests of assumptions about the multiple linear regression

analysis such as linearity, normality, multi-collinearity, homoscedasticity of

residuals, outliers, normality were found satisfied. Thus, the test related to multiple

linear regression analysis can be performed.

Results and analysis of RQ v): What effects do students' attitudes and learning

behaviors have on students’ achievements?

To address the consequences or effects of the students' attitudes towards

mathematics and mathematics learning behaviors on the students' mathematics

achievement, multiple regression analysis was implemented. The main goal of this

statistical procedure is to model the linear relationship between the independent

variables (attitude and learning behavior) and the dependent variable (achievement).

Similarly, it had been also used to determine the relative contribution of every of the

independent variables on the dependent variable.

 227

Multiple Regression Analysis: Results

To explore the role of students' attitudes towards mathematics and

mathematics learning behaviors for predicting achievements within the mathematics

of grade X students, the test of assumptions for multiple regression analysis was

performed. In Table 36, the column "R" represents the value of R, the multiple

correlation coefficients. R is often considered to be one measure of the quality of the

prediction of the dependent variable. During this study, the value of R = 0.493

indicates a good level of prediction. The column "R Square" represents the R2 value,

which is the proportion of variance within the dependent variable which will be

explained by the independent variables. The value of R2 = 0.243, the coefficient of

determination describes that 24.3% of the entire variance or variability within

the dependent variable (students' achievements in mathematics) is contributed by the

independent variables (students' attitudes and learning behaviors). The remaining

75.7% is to be accounted for by other factors that are not included during this study.

Table 36
Model Summary
Model R R2 Adjusted R2 Std. Error Change Statistics

R2 Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F

Change
1 0.493a 0.243 0.241 0.43223 0.243 86.387 2 537 .000
a. Predictors: (Constant), students’ attitudes, students learning behavior
Statistical Significance. The F-ratio within the ANOVA tests whether the

overall regression model may be a good fit of the data. Table 37 shows that the

independent variables are statistically significant for the reason that they predict

the dependent variable, F(2, 537) = 86.387, p < .005. Then F is significant. This

suggests that the regression model may be a good fit for the data. Hence the

model is better to predict the result than another (arbitrary) method. It indicates
 228

that there is a significant contribution of the independent variables (students'

attitudes and learning behaviors) on the dependent variable (students' achievements

in mathematics).

Table 37
The Significance of Regression Model in F Ratio
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 32.278 2 16.139 86.387 .000b

Residual 100.322 537 .187
Total 132.600 539
a. Dependent Variable: Achievement score
b. Predictors: (Constant), attitude towards mathematics, mathematics learning behavior

Estimated Regression Equation and Model Parameters

The general form of the equation to predict students' achievement by the

students' attitudes towards mathematics and learning behaviors in mathematics can be

formed as according to the Table 38.

Table 38
Regression Model Parameters for Students Attitude and Learning Behavior on
Achievement
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.
b Std. Error 
1 Constant -1.864 .186 -10.017 .000
Learning .289 .056 .228 5.172 .000
behavior
Attitude .319 .042 .334 7.594 .000
Dependent Variable: Students' Achievement Scores

Predicted (Achievement Score) = 1.86 + (0.289  Learning behavior) + (0.319  Attitude)

Alternatively, the multiple regression equation can be given as:

Y = -1.86+ 0.289(X1) + 0.319(X2)

 229

Where;

X1 = Learning behavior in mathematics

X2 = Students' attitudes towards mathematics

The unstandardized coefficients indicate to what degree the dependent

variable differs from an experimental variable when all other independent variables

are held constant. Considering the effect of learning behavior, the unstandardized

coefficient, b1, for learning behavior is equal to 0.289 (Table 38). This

suggests that along with the increase in the learning behavior of the students, there

is also an increase in the achievement score of 0.289. Similarly, the unstandardized

coefficient, b2, attitude is equal to 0.319. This suggests that the increase along

with the students' attitude towards mathematics there is also an increase in students'

achievement scores of 0.319. Hence there is a positive relationship between the

independent and dependent variables. In short, from the beta value, it had

been found that students' learning behavior (0.289) and their attitudes towards

mathematics (0.319) contribute positively to the students' achievements in

mathematics.

In other words, it suggests that for every unit, when the learning behavior

scores increase, the students' achievement scores also increase by 0.289 point.

Similarly, for every unit when the student attitude scores increase, the students'

achievement scores also increase by 0.319 point. The significance of that gradient is

shown by the t scores. In this case, the t score of learning behavior, t = 5.172,

p = 0.000 and attitude, t = 7.594, p = 0.000. Therefore, learning behavior and attitude

scores significantly contribute to the dependent variable, achievement score. Thus, the

students' attitudes towards mathematics have a stronger association with students'

achievements in mathematics in comparison to the student learning behavior.

 230

Statistical Significance of the Students' Attitudes and Learning Behaviors

The test of statistical significance of every independent variable at 0.05 level

of significance, whether the standardized or unstandardized coefficients are equal

to 0, since p < .05, it is often concluded that the coefficients are statistically

significant (Table 37). So, it can be concluded that the multiple regression runs to

predict the students' achievements in mathematics from their attitudes towards it and

their mathematics learning behaviors. These variables predicted significantly the

students’ achievement score, F (2,537) = 86.387, P  .005, R2 = 0.243. Both the

variables added significantly to the prediction of the students' achievements in grade

X mathematics at p  0.05.

Thus, the results reveal that the linear combination of the independent

variables (student attitudes and learning behaviors were significantly associated to the

scores of the students' achievement [F (2, 537) = 86.387,  .005]. That is, the

presented model consisted of independent variables (students' attitudes and learning

behaviors) and the dependent variable (achievement scores). Therefore, there exists a

significant influence of the students' attitudes and learning behavior on the students'

mathematics achievements.

Simple and Multiple Correlation: Results

Simple correlation is a measure used to compute the strength and direction

of the association between two variables. Correlation analysis measures the strength

of the association or relationship between two variables and also the direction of the

connection between them. In the context of the strength of the association, the

value of the coefficient of correlation varies between +1 and -1. A value of ± 1

indicates a perfect degree of association between the two variables. As the values of

the coefficient of correlation inclined towards 0, the association between the

 231

two variables is going to be weaker. The direction of the association is indicated by

the positive sign of the coefficient, which indicates a positive relationship and

therefore the negative sign indicates a negative relationship. A positive

correlation coefficient occurs when values change within the same direction and

a negative correlation coefficient occurs when values change within the other

way (Mayers, 2013). The standard effect sizes of the coefficient of correlation given

by different psychologists and statisticians i.e., Cohen (1988), Evans (1996),

(Cohen, West & Aiken, 2003) and (Brace et al., 2006) are often used to evaluate

the coefficient of correlation to work out the strength of the association or the effect

size for simple correlation (Table 39).

Table 39
Correlation Coefficient Interpretation Range
Coefficient Category Interpretation Range
Cohen (1988) Evans (1996) Cohen et al. (2003) Brace et al. (2006)
Weak 0.10 – 0.29 0.00 – 0.39 0.10 – 0.29 0.00 – 0.29
Moderate 0.30 – 0.49 0.40 – 0.59 0.30 – 0.49 0.30 – 0.69
Strong 0.50 – Above 0.60 – Above 0.50 – Above 0.70 – Above

Multiple correlation coefficient is an instrument to show how well the given

variables are predicted employing a linear function of a group of other variables.

A multiple correlation coefficient (R) yields the highest degree of linear

relationship which will be obtained between two or more independent variables

and one dependent variable (Jensen, 2006). Correlation analysis generally focuses

on the strength of the association between two or more variables. R is never signed

as positive or negative. R2 represents the proportion of the entire variance within

the dependent variable which will be accounted for by the independent

variables. It's measured by the square root of the coefficient of determination but

under the particular assumptions that an intercept is included in which the

 232

best possible linear predictors are used, whereas the coefficient of determination is

defined for more general cases, including those of nonlinear prediction and

people during which the predicted values haven't been derived from a model-fitting

procedure. Correlation analysis often wants to examine the possibility of an existing

relationship between the variables (Dornyei, 2007). The coefficient of multiple

correlations takes values between 0 and 1; a higher value signifies better

predictability of the dependent variable from the independent variables, with a

value of 1, indicating that the predictions are accurately correct and a value of 0,

indicating that no linear combination of the independent variables may be a better

predictor than is that the fixed mean of the dependent variable. In multiple

correlations, we study three or more variables at a time.

There are some methods to determine the coefficient of correlation. Of them,

the Pearson correlation method and therefore the Spearman rank correlation

methods are mostly utilized in calculating the coefficient of correlation. However,

the parametric and non-parametric tests like Pearson and Spearman's conducted on

the Likert scale data don't affect the conclusions drawn from the results (Murray,

2016). While accessing the significance level within the calculation of

the coefficient of correlation, a normally misinterpreted area should be

considered. The level of statistical significance doesn't indicate how strongly the

two variables are associated, but as an alternative. It indicates what proportion of

confidence we should always have within the results obtained (Pallant, 2016). The

significance of r or rho ( ) is strongly impacted by the size of the sample. During

a small sample (e.g., n = 30) the moderate correlations don't reach statistical

significance at p <.05 level. But in large samples n  100, very small correlations
 233

(e.g., r = 0.2) may reach statistical significance. So, we should focus on the strength

of the relationship while observing the statistical significance.

Pearson Product Moment Correlation. The Pearson coefficient of

correlation measures the linear association between two continuous variables. It

measures the strength of the linear association between two variables (Rumsey,

2009). An association is linear when a change in one variable is related to a

proportional change within the other variable. Pearson coefficient of correlation is

to be +1, when one variable increases then the other variable increases by a

uniform quantity. This association forms a perfect line. The Pearson correlation is

mainly suitable for measurements taken from an interval scale. Pearson’s

correlation is often used where both variables are parametric (Mayers, 2013).

Spearman Rank Correlation. Spearman rank correlation may be a non-

parametric test used to compute the degree of relationship between two variables.

Spearman rho ascertains whether two variables are independent (Rumsey, 2009).

The Spearman rank correlation test doesn't hold any assumptions about the

distribution of the data and is that the proper correlation analysis when the variables

are calculated on a scale that's at least ordinal.

The Spearman correlation coefficients only compute the monotonic

association between two continuous or ordinal variables. During a monotonic

association, the variables have a tendency to change together, but not necessarily

at a constant rate. The Spearman coefficient of correlation is based on the ranked

values for every variable instead of the raw data. Spearman correlation is

usually used to evaluate associations involving ordinal scales (rank orders, the

spectrum of values i.e., agree, neutral, disagree). However, in a large sample, the

correlation coefficients will be similar in both Pearson's and Spearman's correlation.

 234

The differences will be seen in a small sample size. Spearman’s correlation can be

used when at least one of the variables is not parametric (Mayers, 2013). Hence, in

this study, the Spearman correlation method was used to calculate the correlation

coefficient.

Results and analysis of RQ vi): What is the relationship between students' attitudes,

learning behaviors, and achievements in mathematics as Variables?

This RQ was addressed by performing the multiple correlations between the

students' attitudes, learning behaviors and achievements in mathematics. The

connection between the students' attitudes, learning behaviors and achievements in

mathematics was analyzed in the way that follows:

Correlations between Students Attitudes, Learning Behaviors and Achievements

Correlation is usually used to investigate the association between a group of

variables, instead of just two (Pallant, 2016). The association between the factors of

students' attitudes towards mathematics and classroom learning behaviors as well

as their achievement scores was investigated using the Spearman coefficient of

correlation. The violation of the assumptions of normality, linearity, and

homoscedasticity (Pallent, 2016) of the data was ensured within the previous

section.

The correlations between the factors are presented in Table 40. It was found

that there's a significant correlation between students' attitudes and learning

behaviors as well as students' achievements apart from the factor 'participation' at

the 0.01 level of significance 2-tailed and N  540. The range of correlations between

the variables lies in between 116- 624. The factor participation is significant to the

factors i.e., achievement with score of 0.126, engagement with score of 0.170,

motivation (L) with score of 0.131, independence with score of 0.170 and
 235

collaboration with score of 0.270 at 0.01 level of significance and N  540. Likewise,

the factor 'participation' is significant to the factor i.e., value with score of 0.095 at

0.05 level of significance and N  540. In the same way, this factor is not significant

to the factors i.e., engagement with score of 0.052, confidence with score of 0.074,

motivation (A) with score of 0.037 and motivation (L) with score of 0.078. This

confirms that there is a weak association between the factor participation and the

other factors.

Table 40
Spearman Correlations between the Factors of Attitude, Learning Behaviror and
Achievement
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1. Achievement 1.000

2. Value .320** 1.000

3. Enjoyment .418** .558** 1.000

4. Confidence .378** .285** .624** 1.000

5. Motivation(A) .338** .359** .577** .534** 1.000

6. Engagement .340** .283** .473** .336** .409** 1.000

7. Motivation(L) .359** .327** .531** .423** .498** .566** 1.000

8. Independence .351** .325** .457** .340** .462** .506** .516** 1.000

9. Responsiveness .281** .333** .374** .168** .282** .440** .417** .313** 1.000

10. Collaboration .247** .384** .295** .116** .272** .293** .348** .308** .396** 1.000

11. Participation .126** .095* .052 -.074 .037 .170** .078 .131** .170** .270** 1.000

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Correlations between Students' Attitudes, Leaning Behaviors, and Achievements

As observed in Table 40, the results of correlation analysis between the

students' attitudes, learning behaviors, and achievements in secondary school grade X

mathematics indicate that there exist positive and statistically significant correlations
 236

with ** P < .01 and N = 540. The correlation between attitudes and learning behaviors

(0.487), between attitudes and achievements (0.464), and between achievements and

learning behaviors (0.436), all were more or less equal. Very slightly the correlation

between attitudes and learning behaviors was stronger than the other two. As

presented in Table 40, the interpretation of the correlation coefficient indicates that,

there exists a moderate correlation between attitudes, learning behaviors and

achievements. In the other words, the results of the study clearly reveal that student

attitudes learning behaviors and achievements of grade X mathematics went hand in

hand and student attitudes and learning behaviors were powerful determinants of

deciding the achievements of students in mathematics. This means that an increase in

positive attitudes enhances positive learning behaviors. This in turn will lead to better

achievements in mathematics. This shows that the students' higher positive attitudes

towards mathematics imply more positive learning behavior and this in turn the

students perform higher achievement in mathematics.

Table 41
Correlations between Students Attitude, Learning Behavior, and their Achievement
Variables Attitude Learning Behavior Achievement
Attitude 1.000 0.487** 0.464**
Learning Behavior 0.487** 1.000 0.436**
Achievement 0.464** 0.436** 1.000

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). (Spearman’s correlation)

P < .001

Correlations between the Factors of Attitude and Achievement

The correlations between the factors of attitude and achievement are presented

in Table 42 which shows the correlation between all the factors was statistically

significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) and N  540. The range of correlation

coefficient of the factors lies between 0.285 and 0.624. The correlations of the factors,
 237

'engagement' and 'value' (0.558), 'engagement' and 'confidence' (0.624), 'enjoyment'

and 'motivation'(0.577) and the factors 'confidence' and 'motivation' (0.534) are

strongly correlated at the 0.01 level of significance (2-tailed) (Cohen, 1988 & Evans,

1996). This shows that there exists a strong association between the factor

'engagement' to the factors, 'achievement', 'confidence' and 'motivation'. According to

Cohen et al., (2003) the factors 'confidence' and 'motivation' have a strong relationship

and the other remaining factors exist with a moderate relationship.

Table 42
Correlations between Factors of Attitude and Achievement
Achievement Value Enjoyment Confidence Motivation
Achievement 1.000
Value .320** 1.000
Enjoyment .418** .558** 1.000
Confidence .378** .285** .624** 1.000
Motivation .338** .359** .577** .534** 1.000
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
N = 540
Correlations between Learning Behaviors and Achievements

The correlations between the factors,' learning behaviors' and 'achievement

scores' are presented in Table 43. The correlations were significant except the

correlation between motivation and participation (0.078) at 0.01, level of significance

(2-tailed). The correlation between 'motivation and 'independence' (0.516),

'motivation' and 'engagement' (0.566) and 'independence' and 'engagement' (0.506)

were significantly strong correlations. It means that there exists a strong association

between the factors. Similarly, the correlations of the factors between ‘engagement'

and 'responsiveness'(0.440), 'motivation' and 'collaboration' (0.348), 'motivation' and

'achievement' (0.359), 'engagement' and 'achievement' (0.340), 'independence' and

'responsiveness' (0.313), 'independence' and 'collaboration' (0.308), 'independence'

 238

and 'achievement' (0.351), and 'responsiveness' and 'collaboration' (0.396) were found

moderately positive correlation. The remaining factors were found to be at a low

correlation level. This shows that there exists a weak association between the factors.

Table 43
Correlations between the Factors of Learning Behavior and Achievement
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Engagement 1.000
2. Motivation .566** 1.000
3. Independence .506** .516** 1.000
4.Responsivenes .440** .417** .313** 1.000
5. Collaboration .293** .348** .308** .396** 1.000
6. Participation .170** .078 .131** .170** .270** 1.000
7. Achievement .340** .359** .351** .281** .247** .126** 1.000
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
N = 540
Correlations between Attitudes and Learning Behaviors

In the Table 44, the factor 'motivation' represents the factors of both student's

attitude and students learning behavior instruments. Hence the factor is symbolized by

using the symbol (A) for factor of attitude and (L) for the factor for learning behavior

in the Table 44 and also in the text. The correlations between the factors attitudes and

learning behaviors i.e., value and enjoyment (0.558), enjoyment and confidence

(0.624), enjoyment and motivation (A) 0.577, motivation (A) and confidence (0.534),

motivation (L) and enjoyment (0.531), motivation (L) and engagement (0.566),

independence and engagement (0.506) and independence and motivation (L) 0.516

were found to be in positively strong correlations at the significance level of 0.01

(Table 43). In the same way, the factors i.e. value and confidence (0.285), value and

engagement (0.283), responsiveness and confidence (0.168), responsiveness and

motivation(A) 0.282, collaboration and enjoyment (0.295), collaboration and

confidence (0.116), collaboration and motivation(A) (0.272), collaboration and

 239

engagement (0.293), participation and value (0.095), participation and engagement

(0.170), participation and independence (0.131), participation and responsiveness

(0.170) and participation and collaboration (0.270) were found at a low level of

significant correlation at the 0.01 significance level (2-tailed). This indicates that the

relation between these factors exists with a weak relationship.

Similarly, the factors participation and enjoyment (0.052), participation, and

confidence (-0.074), participation and motivation (A) 0.037, and participation and

motivation (L) 0.078 exist with no significant correlation. This indicates that there

exists no significant association between these factors. The correlation between

participation and value (0.095) exists significantly in low correlation. The correlations

of all factors with participation are relatively lower than with other factors.

Table 44
Correlations between the Factors of Attitude and Learning Behavior
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. Value 1.000
2. Enjoyment .558** 1.000
3. Confidence .285** .624** 1.000
4. Motivation(A) .359** .577** .534** 1.000
5. Engagement .283** .473** .336** .409** 1.000
6. Motivation(L) .327** .531** .423** .498** .566** 1.000
7. Independence .325** .457** .340** .462** .506** .516** 1.000
8. Responsiveness .333** .374** .168** .282** .440** .417** .313** 1.000
9. Collaboration .384** .295** .116** .272** .293** .348** .308** .396** 1.000
10. Participation .095* .052 -.074 .037 .170** .078 .131** .170** .270** 1.000
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
N = 540
Student Classroom Learning Behavior Checklist

The classroom learning behavior checklist form was constructed by

comprising the learning attributes of three different learning theories, namely,

 240

behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism. The CLBC form was designed to be

filled up by the mathematics teacher of grade X from each school. So, the form was

filled up by the teacher based on his/her previous experiences about the students'

classroom learning behaviors, or activity and also the observation of the student after

getting the observation form. The process of filling up the observation form was

explained to the teacher before its distribution to him/her. The classroom observation

records of the 12 students, one student from each school, through classroom

observation are recorded in Appendix G.

When the response is in the form of a certain task performance then we can

transform these responses into a number and for each correct response, a score of one

can be given (Suen, 2009). In this study, each correct response of the observer was

transformed into a score of one. This process of transforming responses into scores is

referred to as scaling. The qualitative data gathered from the class observation were

transformed into descriptive frequencies by applying the scaling technique. The

scores were changed into a ratio and the percentage value was also calculated (Table

45).

The learning behaviors score obtained from the CLBC form after transforming

the qualitative data into quantitative data were found comparatively more fitted into

the behaviorist learning attributes. The checklist score relating to behaviorist learning

behavior attributes was 77.5%.; 67.5% of them were associated with the cognitive

attributes and 60.5% of them were associated into the constructivist attributes. Thus,

the observer responded highly consistent with the behaviorist attributes and poorly

with the constructivist attributes. This means that the report of the CLBC form shows

that comparatively more students were found to be infavour of learning mathematics

 241

through the behaviorist attributes and relatively a smaller number of students were

found to be in favour of learning mathematics through the constructivist attributes.

This result of CLBC supports the results of CLBSI. The mean score of CLBSI

in line with the behaviorist attributes, 3.94 (78.8%), is equivalent to the score of

CLBC in line with the behaviorist attributes, 77.5%. The score of CLBC favoring

cognitive attributes, 70 %, and favoring constructivist attributes, 62.5%, is relatively

equivalent to the mean scores of the CLBSI relating to the cognitive attributes,

3.73(74.6%), and constructivist attributes, 3.32(66.5%) respectively (Table 45).

Table 45
Mathematics Classroom Learning Behavior Score Ratio and Percentage
SN Student behavior expressions Behavior Score in Theme wise
percentage
score ratio percentage
1. Engagement
1. Learns math concepts and items by CLBC Score = 75%
imitation. CLBSI factor wise
2. Always practices math exercises. score
3. Enjoy doing exercises in the math class. 30/40 3.66 = 73.2%
4. Follows teachers' instructions and
suggestions.
77.5%
2. Motivation
5. Shows great concern for learning. CLBC Score = 80%
6. Always talks about non-instructional CLBSI factor wise
topics. 32/40 score
7. Is inattentive. 4.22 = 84.4%
8. Does not do classwork and homework.
3. Independence
9. Likes to practice math alone.
10. Seems to be restless. 28/40 CLBC Score = 70%
11. Takes personal initiatives to solve the CLBSI factor wise
problem. score
12. Can do mathematics activities 3.69 = 73.8%
independently.
 242

4. Responsiveness 70%
13. Likes to compete to do math with peers.
14. Remains silent and don't put a query. 28/40 CLBC Score = 70%
15. Sits at the back and stare out of the CLBSI factor wise
window. score
16. Seats in the front and shares ideas with 3.77 = 75.4%
peers.
5. Collaboration
17. Feels joyful in-class discussion.
18. Whispers/mutters/makes loud noises. 28/40 CLBC Score = 70%
19. Likes to do mathematical activities in CLBSI factor wise
the group. score
20. Don't follow the class rules. 3.83 = 76.6%
6. Participation 62.5%
21. Involves actively in the classroom. CLBC Score = 55%
22. Low-class participation. 22/40 CLBSI factor wise
23. Is inactive and puts head on the desk. score
24. Low cheerfulness and concentration. 2.82 = 56.4%
 CHAPTER V

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

Introduction

This chapter presents and discusses the major findings drawn from the

analysis and interpretation of this study which gives a new insight to the researcher

for heading towards the conclusion. This chapter also concentrates on the findings

connected to the research objectives and RQs. Besides, the discussion is tied back to

the relevant literature and theories related to this research. The major findings have

been categorized in line with the objectives of the study. Then, the discussion has

been presented accordingly.

Major Findings

This section presents the major findings of the study. So, the main aim of this

study was to explore the students' attitudes, learning behaviors and their effects on

mathematics achievements. After completing the analysis and interpretation of both

qualitative and quantitative data using concurrent embedded mixed methods design,

the major findings of the study have been presented. The findings of the study have

been generated from a descriptive, differential, correlation and regression analysis

depending on the RQs. The section starts with the demographic descriptions of the

sample used in the study. The major findings of the study have been given as the

order of the RQs in the following subsections.

The findings based on the RQ i), relating to the students' attitude levels

towards learning mathematics at the secondary level are stated under the subheadings.

The descriptive findings delineate the properties of the sample and help to reduce

piles of data to a manageable size. The findings are based on the ATMI self-

assessment inventory adapted from Tapia and Marsh (2004). The general and factor-
 244

wise descriptive statistics of the students' attitudes towards mathematics and students'

attitude level by ecological regions and place of residence are presented below.

Students' Attitude towards Mathematics (general and factor-wise)

The factor-wise mean score of the students' attitude towards mathematics of

the factors: value, enjoyment, and motivation were found at a high attitude level with

scores (4.17), (4.00), and (3.68) respectively. The mean score of the factor, 'self-

confident' was found at the medium attitude level with a score of 3.28. The mean

scores of the students' attitudes toward mathematics showed that the students were

most positive in value, enjoyment, and motivation factors. Nonetheless, they were less

positive in the factor of self-confidence than the value, enjoyment and motivation

factors. Hence, they were not found self-confident in mathematics learning. Similarly,

the overall mean score of the students' attitudes towards mathematics was found at a

positive level with a score of 3.78.

Students' Attitude Level by Ecological Regions and Place of Residence

The mean scores of the students' attitude level of the factors except

'engagement' in the Hill region were higher than in the Mountain and the Terai

regions. The mean score of the factor 'engagement' was at the moderate level in all the

three regions: the Hill (3.36), the Mountain (3.64) and the Terai (3.45). The overall

mean score of the factors of the Hill region (3.84) was higher than the mean scores of

the Mountain (3.83) and the Terai (3.79) regions. The mean score of the students'

attitude of the rural location (3.89) was found higher than that of the urban location

(3.77). The mean score of the factor engagement (3.59) was found at a moderate level

in the rural location.

Similarly, the mean scores of the factors such as confidence, value, and

motivation in the rural location were (4.18), (4.03) and (3.76) respectively and the
 245

factors confidence (4.18) and value (3.92) at the urban location were found at a

positive level. The mean scores of the factor 'engagement' from the rural location

(3.59) and from the urban location (3.41) were found at a moderate level. The mean

score of the factor 'motivation' in the urban location (3.58) was found at a moderate

level. The students of the rural location were found to have had more positive

attitudes towards mathematics than the students of an urban location.

The findings based on the RQ ii) about the students' achievement status in

grade X mathematics are presented in form of descriptive as well as differential

analysis. The students' achievement on mathematics was measured by using MAT, the

self developed achievement test instrument. The differential analysis involves the

determination of the statistical significance of the differences between the groups

regarding selected variables. In this study, the test of analysis of variance (ANOVA)

was employed. The overall descriptive statistics of the students' achievements by

ecological regions and the place of residence were declared. Similarly, differential

statistics of the students' achievement by place of residence, ecological regions and

gender are stated below.

Students' Achievements by Ecological Regions and Place of Residence

The mean score of the student's achievement of 540 students sampled from

grade X, 134 (24.81%) achieved high-level scores in mathematics; 271 (50.19%)

achieved at the average level and 135 (25%) achieved low level scores in

mathematics. The majority of the students (50.19%) were found average achievers in

mathematics and 24.81% were high achievers. The high achievers slightly less

numbered than the low achievers (25%) in mathematics. The mean achievement

scores of the students from the Hill region were (36.68%) followed by those from the

Mountain (31.35) and then from the Terai region (33.78) out of 100 marks. The mean
 246

achievement score achieved by the students from the Mountain region was found

comparatively lower than those from the Terai and the Hill region. The mean score of

the students in mathematics from the rural areas (35.29) was slightly higher than that

of the students from the urban areas (32.58).

Similarly, the mean score of the students from the rural area of Hill region

(37.52), the Mountain (32.86) and the Terai (35.51) was found higher than the mean

scores of the students of urban area of those reasons 35.85, 29.84 and 32.06

respectively. The mean scores of the students of the rural areas from all ecological

regions were found higher than the scores of the urban areas. The level of students'

achievements by place of residence and ecological regions was found at the medium

level.

ANOVA Test of Students Achievement by Place of Residence, Ecological Region

and Gender

Regarding the test of ANOVA, the achievement test scores of the students by

place of residence at  = 0.05, the test score revealed statistically not significant, i.e.,

F (1, 538) = 1.08, p  .05 indicating that the critical value 0.298 is less than the

tabulated value F (1, 538) = 1.08. The achievement scores of the students from the

rural and urban locations were not found statistically significant. The achievement test

scores of the students from the Hill, the Mountain, and the Terai at  = 0.05 level of

significance, which was statistically significant, i.e., F (2,537) = 10.473, p  0.05

indicating that the students from the Hill, the Mountain, and the Terai regions resulted

in different test scores. The achievement test scores of boys and girls at  = 0.05 level

of significance were statistically not significant, i.e., F (1,538) = 0.479, p  0.05,

indicating that there was no significant difference between the score of the
 247

studentsachievement in mathematics by gender. The mean achievement scores of the

girls and boys were not significantly different.

In this RQ iii), the findings of the levels of students learning behavior were

measured by using the self-developed survey instruments CLBSI. The findings were

achieved through quantitative methods. The quantitative results were measured

instruments and CLBC. As the quantitative result, the overall descriptive results from

CLBSI and the result from the CLBC are presented below.

Overall Descriptive Statistics of Students' Learning Behaviors in Mathematics

The mean scores of the students' learning behaviors represented by 22 items

(1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27 & 29) were

found at the positive level of the learning behavior category. Three items (11, 12 &

25) with mean scores 3.60, 3.06, and 2.64 respectively were found at the moderate

level of the learning behavior category and the remaining five items (5, 17, 26, 28 &

30) with mean scores 1.80, 2.27, 1.84, 2.30 and 1.97 respectively were found at the

negative level of the learning behavior category. The items in the negative learning

behavior category, i.e., 5, 17, 26, 28 and 30 were found slightly negative classroom

learning behaviors. The students' learning behaviors in the mathematics class were not

found so bad or fully negative. The mean scores of the two factors of students'

learning behavior engagement (3.66) and participation (2.82) were found at the

moderate level and the remaining learning behavior factors motivation (4.22),

independence (3.69), responsiveness (3.77) and collaboration (3.84) were found at the

positive level of learning behavior category.

The data obtained from transforming the qualitative data into quantitative data

drawn from the classroom observation checklist, the mean score of the students'

learning behavior under the factors engagement and motivation that lies on the
 248

behaviorist attributes and was found 3.94. Likewise, the mean scores of the students

learning behavior under the factors 'independence and responsiveness' that lies on the

cognitive attributes, was found 3.73, and the factors collaboration and participation

that lies on the constructivist attributes were found 3.33. The average mean scores of

the three different learning attributes showed that a larger number of students were

found preferring to learn through the behaviorist learning process or they preferred

comparatively more to learn mathematics using behaviorist attributes. Similarly, they

were found with the least preference to learn mathematics using the constructivist

learning attributes. The average mean scores of the students on the factors such as

engagement, and motivation (3.94), and independence and responsiveness (3.73) were

found at the positive level and the average mean scores of the factors: collaboration

and participation (3.33) were found at the moderate level.

Students Learning Behavior by Place of Residence and Ecological Region

The mean score obtained by the students from the Hill region under the

factors: engagement, independence, responsiveness, and participation were found

higher than the mean score of the Mountain and the Terai regions. The mean score

obtained by the students under student learning behavior from all three regions under

'participation' was found at a moderate level. The mean scores of the students'

learning behavior from the Hill region (3.68) were found higher than those from the

Mountain (3.61) and the Terai region (3.63). This means that the learning behavior of

the students from the Hill region was more positive than that of the students from the

Mountain and the Terai region. The overall mean score of the students from the rural

areas (3.72) was found higher than of those from urban areas (3.60). This indicates

that students learning behavior in rural locations were slightly more positive than in

the students from an urban location. Similarly, the mean scores of the student
 249

learning behavior from the rural location were as: engagement (3.72), motivation

(4.35), independence (3.79), responsiveness (3.77), collaboration (3.87) and

participation (2.84). Indeed, these were higher than the mean scores of the students

from the urban location in the corresponding factors. This indicates that the students'

learning behavior in each factor in the rural location was slightly more positive than

that of the student from the urban location. The mean score under the factor

'participation' in the rural location (2.84) and the urban location (2.80) both were

found at the neutral level of the learning behavior category.

Students Learning Behavior by Learning Attributes

The mean scores of the students' learning behavior belonging to the

behaviorist attributes (engagement and motivation) (3.94) were higher than those

belonging to the cognitive attributes (independence and responsiveness) (3.73) and

the constructivist attributes (collaboration and participation) (3.33). This shows that

the students were more likely to choose the behaviorist learning process. In other

words, they preferred learning mathematics using behaviorist attributes and gradually

turned towards the cognitive and constructive learning processes.

An overall mean (3.64) and standard deviation (1.08) of the students' learning

behaviors in mathematics were found at the positive level of the learning behavior

category. The item-wise mean of the learning behavior subscale 'engagement'(item

no. 5) was found negative with a mean score of 1.08. The mean score of the item in

the sub-scale responsiveness, item no. 17 (2.27), was found negative. The items in the

sub-scale 'participation'(26, 28 & 30) with the mean scores 1.84, 2.30 and 1.97

respectively were found negative too. Item No.12 of the sub-scale (independence)

with a mean score of 3.06 and item no. 25 (participation) with the mean score of 2.64

were found at the neutral level. The other items were found at a positive level.
 250

Out of the 24 participants involved in the semi-structured interview, 12 were

found preferring to learn mathematics choosing themes related to the behaviorist

learning process/attributes. Seven participants' out of those 24 showed their views

close to the cognitive attribute/learning process. The remaining 5 participants' view

was close to the constructivist learning attributes. Most of the students preferred

learning mathematics through the behaviorist learning process. Some of the

participants preferred both behaviorist and cognitive attributes. The smallest number

of them preferred learning in harmony with the constructivist learning attributes.

Some of the participants were found learning through mixed learning attributes

associated with all the three learning camps: behaviorist, cognitive and constructivist

learning. Most of the participants from the Hill region expressed mathematics as an

easy subject meaning that it can be learned easily.

Similarly, the participants who disliked mathematics or evaluated themselves

as 'weak in mathematics or having poor performance in mathematics' were found

relatively more from the urban location of the Mountain and the Terai regions. The

participants who claimed that 'mathematics is an easy and interesting subject', were

relatively more from the rural location of the Hill region than from the other

locations/regions. The students from the rural location of the Hill region were found

possessing comparatively more positive learning behaviors than the participants from

the other locations/regions. No any remarkable difference was investigated in terms of

liking/disliking or good/poor performance and learning behaviors in mathematics

based on gender.

Results of the Student Classroom Learning Behavior Checklist

The findings based on the RQ iv) concerning to the students preference to

learn mathematics aligning to the learning theories has been measured by using semi-
 251

structured interview and CLBC. Thus, the qualitative results were extracted out from

both the tools semi-structured interview and CLBC about the students' learning

behaviors. In this course, the qualitative result obtained from the tool CLBC was also

transformed into quantitative data by using scaling techniques to compare with the

quantitative result obtained from the tool CLBSI.

The student learning behavior score after scaling the checklist to quantitative

data was found comparatively more inclined towards the behaviorist learning

attributes. The checklist score after the scaling was found inclined to behaviorist

learning attribute by 77.5%. The checklist score orientation to the cognitive attributes

was 67.5% whereas it was oriented towards the constructivist attributes by 60.5%.

The checklist responded by the observer was found comparatively high in the

behaviorist attributes and low in the constructivist attribute. This means that a

majority of the students preferred to learn mathematics by using the behaviorist

attributes, an average number of students learned it using the cognitive attributes and

a relatively least number of students preferred to learn mathematics using the

constructivist attributes. It was found that the result of CLBC supports the result of

CLBSI. The mean score of CLBSI in the behaviorist attributes, 3.94 (78.8%), was

equivalent to the score of CLBC in behaviorist attributes, 77.5%. The score of CLBC

in cognitive attributes was 67.5% and constructivist attributes (67.5%) were found

relatively equivalent to the mean scores of the CLBSI in the cognitive attributes,

3.73(74.6%), and the constructivist attributes, 3.32(66.4%), respectively.

The findings concerning to the RQ v) about the effect of students' attitudes

and learning behaviors on students' achievement in mathematics was drawn out

through the utilization of multiple regression analysis method. Multiple

regression analysis method helps to seek out out the effect of the independent
 252

variables on the dependent variable. Thus, obtained results about the consequences of

independent variables on the dependent variable are mentioned below.

Multiple Regression Analysis: The Effect of Independent Variables on Dependent

Variables

In association with the assumptions for the test of multiple regression analysis,

sample size, multi-collinearity, linearity, outliers, normality of the residuals,

homoscedasticity and normality were worked out. Each of them was found to be

existed to perform multiple regression analysis. The value of multiple correlation

coefficients R= 0.493 was found in regression analysis which indicates a good level of

prediction. The value of the proportion of variance in the dependent variable

R2 = 0.243 was found. The R2 value explains the 24.3% of the variability of the

dependent variable (students' achievements) over the independent variables (students'

attitude and learning variables). This means that the liability to change in the students'

achievement by was found 24.3% due to effect of the students' attitude and learning

behavior.

Similarly, the F-ratio in the regression model found that the independent

variables were statistically significant to predict the dependent variable,

i.e., F (2, 537) = 86.387, p < .0005. This means that the regression model may be

a good fit to the data and therefore the model was found better for predicting the

students' achievements in mathematics. In another word, the contribution of the

students' attitude and learning behaviors on students' achievement was found

remarkable. The regression model parameters for students' attitude and learning

behavior on achievement indicated that at every unit when the learning behavior

scores increase, the students' achievement scores also increase by 0.289 of a point.

Similarly, for every unit when the student attitude scores increase, the students'

achievement scores also increase by 0.319 of a point.

 253

The findings based on the RQ vi), the relationship between the variables such

as students' attitudes, learning behaviors and achievement in mathematics were drawn

out through the use of correlation analysis. Where, correlation analysis helps to find

out the relationship between the two variables. The findings extracted out from

correlation analysis have been mentioned on the following heading.

Correlation Analysis: The Relationship between the Variables Students' Attitudes,

Learning Behaviors, and Achievements in Mathematics

The results of the correlation coefficient among the factors of attitude, learning

behavior and achievement, there was a significant correlation found except the factor

participation at 0.01level of significance (2-tailed), and sample size N  540. The

range of correlations among the variables was 0.116 - 0.624. Correlations between

students' attitudes, learning behavior, and achievement were found positive and were

statistically significant with ** P < 0.01 and N = 540. The correlation between

attitude and learning behavior was 0.487; the correlation between attitude and

achievement was (0.464) and the correlation between achievement and learning

behavior was (0.436).The result related to the correlation between the variables

student attitude and learning behavior was found as the powerful determinant of

student achievement in mathematics.The factors motivation and independence

(0.516), motivation and engagement (0.566), and independence and engagement

(0.506) were found strongly correlated. The results of the correlation show that all the

three variables attitude, learning behavior and achievement are interrelated to each

other. These variables are dependent to each other.

Summary of the Findings

The study was an attempt to explore the secondary level community school

students’ attitudes, learning behaviors and achievements in mathematics in the

Nepalese context. It also tried to analyze the status of the students' achievements in
 254

terms of ecological regions, places of residence and gender. The study further

examined the relationships among the students' attitudes, learning behaviors and

achievements in mathematics as variables. On the whole, the mean score of the

students' attitudes towards mathematics was found 3.82. The students studying at

grade X mathematics were found possessing a positive level of attitude towards

learning mathematics. The students' attitudes towards learning mathematics from the

Hill region were found more positively intense than those of the students from the

Mountain and the Terai regions. Likewise, the students' attitudes towards learning

mathematics from the rural location were more intense in comparison to those of the

students from the urban location.

In the same way, the overall mean score of the students' achievement in

mathematics was found 33.94. The achievements score of the students from the rural

locations found slightly higher than the urban locations, however not found

statistically significant. The achievement scores by gender were found not statistically

significant. In other word, the achievement scores of the boys and girls were found

equivalent, or more or less the same. The achievement of the students from the Hill

region in mathematics was found higher and statistically significant than the students'

from the Mountain and the Terai regions.

The overall mean score of the students' learning behaviors was found at 3.64.

The learning behavior of the Hill region students was found more positive than that of

the students from the Mountain and the Terai regions. Likewise, the learning behavior

of the students from rural locations was slightly more positive than that of the students

from an urban location. The first preference of the students to learn mathematics in

the classroom was found to be the use of the behaviorist learning process/attributes.

The second and third preferences were the cognitive and constructive learning

processes, respectively. The regression model was found as a good fit for the data: the
 255

independent variables (attitudes and learning behaviors) and the dependent variable

(achievements) and the model was found to predict better about the dependent

variable; students' achievement in mathematics.

The association between the dependent and independent variables were found

as such, for every unit, when the learning behavior scores increase, the students'

achievement scores also increase by 0.289 of a point. Similarly, for every unit when

the student attitude scores increase, the students' achievement scores increase by

0.319 of a point. The correlations among the variables attitude and learning behavior,

learning behavior and achievement and, attitude and achievement found positive and

statistically significant. The students' higher positive attitude towards mathematics

implies higher positive learning behaviors and this in turn results in higher

achievements. This suggests that having a positive attitude towards mathematics

implies better learning behavior in mathematics further leading to higher

achievements in mathematics.

Discussion of the Results

This chapter is concertrated on the results of the study and their discussion in

relation to the previous studies, related theories and interacts within the results

critically. The focus of the study was to explore grade X students' attitudes, learning

behaviors and their achievement in mathematics at the secondary level and establish

the relationship between these three key factors. This study established the effects of

students' attitudes and learning behaviors on their achievement in mathematics. The

discussion of the results, therefore, mainly concentrates on the main findings of the

study. In this section, the main findings are discussed considering the RQs in

association with their corresponding hypothesis below.

The study is especially guided by the social cognitive theory of Bandura

(1986), where human behavior is taken into account as a triadic, dynamic and
 256

reciprocal interaction of personal, behavioral and environmental factors. Whereas

the cognitive or personal factors include the person's knowledge and thought,

expectations, beliefs & attitudes, self-efficacy, and goals. Similarly, the environmental

factors include the physical surroundings, social influences, instructions, feedback,

observation, and activity. Likewise, the behavioral factor consists of skill, practice,

motivation, goal progress, and outcomes. In this study, these three factors are

supposed as the student's or learner's attitude (personal factor/cognitive factor), the

classroom learning behavior (environmental factor, and student outcomes or student's

achievement during learning process) and achievement scores derived as summative

assessment as final product of the learning the behavioral factor. Similarly, Bem's

theory of self-perception is the supporting theory to interpret how the manifested

behaviours show the attitude of the students towards mathematics and learning

mathematics. The theory says people are what they do. The identification of the

students' attitude is based upon this principle using the attitude scale survey and the

results are interpreted accordingly.

Bandura's (1986) social cognitive theory is relevant to this discussion

regarding students' attitudes towards mathematics, their classroom learning behaviors,

and achievement in mathematics. In this theory, the enthusiasm of the student to

learn the subject can help to promote learning behavior within the subject to

which the student features a positive attitude (Nagaraju as cited in Mendezabal,

2013). The theory assumes that learning occurs during a social context in dynamic

and reciprocal interaction with the person, the environment and behavior (Asekere &

Asaolu, 2020). The students' classroom can also be considered as a mini-society, and

it may also create a social context. The learner is placed as an active agent who

influences and is influenced as well by the environment (Bandura, 1986). Thus, the
 257

learners' attitudes impact their learning behavior and thus they learn progress or

achieve the goal (achievement). In the learning process, Bandura's (1989) social

cognitive theory integrates the varied aspects of learning-social, cognitive, and

behavioralwhich evenly happen in the classroom learning situation.

Bandura's social cognitive learning theory helps to develop the students'

positive attitude by providing them a model class or model behavior in learning

mathematics. It can be also used to engage the students in their learning behavior

using model behaviors. This theory also helps to incorporate the essential attributes of

the study variablesstudents' attitudes, learning behaviors, and achievements in

mathematics. Thus, it can be used as the relevant theory for this study.

This RQ i) was related to the attitude level of the students of grade X towards

mathematics. This question consists of the mean scores of students' attitudes towards

mathematics belonging to the Mountain, the Hill and the Terai regions. In the same

way, it also belongs to the mean scores of the students' attitude level by places of

residence (rural and urban locations).

In this study, the overall mean score of the students' attitudes towards

mathematics was at a positive level under the 'students' attitudes' category with a

mean score of 3.82 out of 5. The mean score above 3.0 indicates a positive attitude

level. The result indicates that the students were positive towards learning

mathematics. As stated by Upadayay (2001), the earlier findings of the study in the

context of Nepal, the average students were found with positive attitudes towards

learning mathematics. The earlier finding of the study conducted in Turkey (Yasar,

2016) indicated that the attitudes of the high school students towards mathematics are

at a medium level which contradicts with the result of this study.

 258

The study conducted in India by Bora and Ahmed (2018) for the students'

(grades IX & X) attitudes towards mathematics oppose to the findings. They found

that the mean scores of the students' attitudes towards mathematics were below the

average. They explained that the cause of the decrease in attitude could be the lack of

self-confidence, interest, and ability to learn and perform well in mathematics.

However, the recent result of a study conducted in Tanzania by Mazana et al., (2019)

to investigate students’ attitudes towards learning mathematics, corroborates the

results that the overall mean score (3.74 out of 5) of the secondary level students'

attitude towards mathematics was found positive. Thus, from this discussion, it is

observed that student's attitudes towards mathematics are not the same in different

countries context. As the attitude is measured using a scale through the students’ own

judgement that people become aware of their inner states (attitude, beliefs) by

assessing their own behaviours and the circumstances under which this behavior

occurs Bem (1972, as cited in Mohebi & Bailey, 2020), the causes of the variation

would be the environment in which they are exposed and the idea they make based

upon what others are making towards mathematics.

On the other side, the students from the Hill region were found to have more

positive attitudes towards mathematics than the students of the Terai and the

Mountain regions. Although the mean differences of the students' attitude towards

mathematics among the three regions are very low, the mean score of the Hill region

was higher than the other regions. According to Ntibi and Edoho (2017), the influence

of location on the academic sector is not the same. Also, in every community school

of Nepal, the students are comparatively freer to learn, play and practice mathematics

in school. All the community schools have similar rules and regulations, educational

practices and school facilities. Hence, the similarity of teaching-learning facilities and
 259

availability of other resources in mathematics teaching among the community

secondary schools located in all the ecological regions but resulted different attitude

level. The environmental factors and the internalization of the environment in which

the belief towards mathematics is formed might be the cause of different attitudes

towards mathematics as described by Bem (1972) in self-perception theory.

The study also reveals that there is no ecological effect in the students' attitude

towards learning mathematics. Thus, it indicates that the Hill students' attitudes

towards learning mathematics were relatively higher than those of the students from

the Mountain and the Terai regions. This difference in students' attitude towards

learning mathematics indicates that personal internalization process of the views,

inclination, values differ even in the similar inputs in schooling which validates the

theory of self-perception in the formation of attitude.

In the same way, it was found that the students of the rural locations were

found to possess more positive attitudes towards mathematics than the students of

the urban locations. Conversely, the results of this study contradict the findings

conducted in India by Jayarani (2019), who found that there is a major difference in

attitude towards mathematics between the students from urban and rural areas. The

mean score of the urban students was above those of the rural location students.

Moreover, Anjana’s (2018) study reveals that both urban and rural secondary

school students show almost similar attitudes towards mathematics. The results also

correspond with the results of the studies by Ntibi and Edoho (2017) and Mareesh

(2017). They examined that there is no significant difference between the

mathematical attitude of rural and urban secondary school students. They further

claimed that the reason behind this might be that the students of urban and rural

schools get an equally proper environment, educational facilities, and opportunities

 260

to develop their personality. One more reason could also be that the parents of both

in rural and urban areas are conscious of their children’s education.

As reviewed by Ntibi and Edoho (2017), the influence of location on

academic performance is not significant. During this study, the rationale for the

result that the mean score of the rural students is above that of the urban students at

the secondary level may have been caused by the greater value imposed by the

teachers and education community to mathematics in rural community. It is

observed that mathematics teachers are best valued compared to other teachers and

similarly, mathematics itself is considered as much valued subject. This beliefs

towards mathematics and mathematics teacher might have impacted the rural

students internalize high value to mathematics, and so did high attitude level in

them. So, every student has different capabilities within the community to study in

similar community schools leading to the event of positive attitudes towards

learning mathematics within the students.

Thus, the result established that the mean score of the students' attitudes towards

mathematics from the rural area is comparatively more positive than the urban area.

The RQ ii) is related to the overall achievements in

mathematicsachievements of grade X students from all the three ecological regions

(the Hills, the Mountains and the Terai), locations/place of residence (rural and urban)

and gender (female and male) in the subject. In this study, the majority of the

secondary level grade X students (50.19%) had an average achievement level in

mathematics. The number of students getting a high achievement level and those

getting a low achievement level was somehow the same (24.81% & 25.81%

respectively). The overall result of the students studying at secondary level

mathematics was found at the average level.

 261

In the present situation, mathematics achievement in schools, especially at the

secondary level, is poor and gradually degrading. The result of the Controller Office

of Nepal (2015) shows that there is only 47.39 percent success rate in the School

Leaving Certificate (SLC) examination. As stated in the report of Educational Review

Office (ERO) (2017), the average score in grade VIII mathematics was 49.2.

Likewise, 37.55 percent of students achieved above "Grade C” in Secondary

Educarion Examination (SEE) (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology

(MOEST), 2018). According to the report (ERO, 2018), only 29% of the students had

adequate knowledge and skills in mathematics aimed at by the curriculum, indicating

high inequality in the classroom. These facts clearly indicate that mathematics

achievement at the secondary level in Nepal is very low. Consistent with these results,

the results of the study show that most of the secondary level students' achievements

in mathematics lie around the average achievement level. Hanushek and Ettema

(2017) emphasized mathematics achievement by the line; differences in countries'

economic growth can be predicted by achievement on international assessments of

mathematics and science. The causes behind the low achievement of the students in

mathematics at the secondary level may be lacking in creating positive attitudes

towards mathematics and the creation of the environment for proper learning behavior

for the students to develop their skills and attitudes. Because children’s skills in

mathematics are not only important for them as individuals, but also for the society of

which they are a part (Mahato et al., 2019). Hence, the overall mean score of the

students of secondary level mathematics achievement is at the average achievement

level.

The findings of the achievement related to the ecological regions, the

achievement test scores at alpha 0.05 level of significance, the test of ANOVA,
 262

reveals a statistically significant [F (2,537) = 10.473, p  0.05] indicating that

students from the Mountain, the Hill and the Terai regions obtained the different test

score. So, the alternative hypothesis (HA1) is accepted. In other words, the mean

achievement score of the students from the Hill region (36.68) is higher than the mean

score of the students from the Mountain (31.35) and the Terai region (33.78). The

mean scores of the students' achievement from all the three ecological regions were

found relatively at a lower level. However, the result also confirms that the overall

average achievement of the students towards mathematics lies at the average

achievement level.

The students' mathematics achievement may have differed due to various

factors. As stated in the ERO report (2019), student achievement in mathematics in

Province 2 was found the highest (521) of the seven provinces, while student

achievement in Province 5 was found to be the lowest (486). The district-wise

variation was also consistent with the province-wise variation. It was also found that

the students' achievement in mathematics from Province 1, 5, and 6 was lower than

the national average (500). A study conducted by Pangeni (2014) indicates that

students from lowland (the Tarai) were found to have performed better than those

from the Hill areas and the students of the Hill areas were found to have performed

better than those from the Mountain areas.

As stated by Ntibi and Edoho (2017), the geographical location of a

student does not affect the achievement of the students in mathematics provided the

student possesses a positive attitude towards mathematics if he/she wishes to be

academically very high. A positive attitude towards the subject may help to

study and solve mathematics more often than other subjects. This agrees with the

findings of Ibitoye (2003) and Bosede (2010) who assert that understanding and
 263

performance in mathematics and basic science are independent of location, cultural

affiliation, and family backgrounds. He also emphasizes that anybody can

understand mathematics and basic science if proper opportunity in terms of the

quality of teachers, instructional materials and methods is given.

The reason for the higher achievement from the students of the Hill region in

mathematics may be equal access to teaching and learning facilities. Another reason

may be the heterogeneous enrolment of the students (students with different ability) in

the schools of Hill region due to the low access of well facilitated institutional

schools. Similarly, the higher positive attitude level of the students may also result the

high achievement. It is also the theoretical assumption of this study. Due to their

difficulty of life in the rural area, they can improve the self-improvement motive

(Sedikides & Strube, 1997). Generally, they do not have equal modern facilities

related to technology and life patterns that students get places of engagement to invest

their time, they use most of their spare time for study. As it is discussed in the

previous RQ that the students of hill region have high positive attitude compared to

students from the Mountain and the Terai, this factor may be responsible for their

motivation towards learning and increased achievement scores. Similarly, the whole

community seems to be responsible to manage the good learning environment at

school because all their children go to the same school. Hence, there exists a

significant difference in the mean scores of mathematics achievements between the

secondary level grade X students belonging to this ecological region and thus, the

achievement of the students from the Hill region was found higher than that of the

students from the Mountain and the Terai regions.

The test scores according to the places of residence using the alpha level of

0.05, the test of ANOVA [F(1, 538) = 1.08, p  .05], reveals not statistically
 264

significant result. However, the mean score of the rural location (35.29) was higher

than the mean score of the urbanlocation (32.58). Hence, the alternative hypothesis

(HA2) is rejected that there is no statistically significant difference between the

achievement scores of the students from the rural and the urban locations. This

indicates that both rural and urban students show a statistically similar level of

mathematical achievement.

Regardless of the often-expressed belief that the students from the rural area

lag behind their urban counterparts, the literature reveals inconsistent results. Some

studies have found that rural students have a tendency to have a lower achievement

(Jayarani, 2019; Pangeni, 2014; Khanal, 2015 & Nepal, 2016). Some others have

found that both urban and rural secondary school students show almost similar level

of mathematical achievements (Mareesh 2017, as cited by Kayla 2018; Ntibi, &

Edoho, 2017; Anjana, 2018). Similarly, the socio-economic condition,

educationalbackground and language backgrounds have a direct effect on the students'

learning achievements, however, there was no significant difference in the

achievements of girls and boys in the urban and rural school students in mathematics

(Rijal et al., 2018) while others have found that rural students perform better in

mathematics at secondary level than the urban students (Ajai & Imoko, 2013; Kayla,

2018; & Pokherel, 2018). Likewise, Ajai & Imoko (2013) found that rural students

had a more positive family environment than urban students and that those from

positive family environments performed better academically based on examination

scores. Again, Ntibi and Edoho (2017) state focusing on the rural location that the life

of rural area is homogenous, uniform, and easier than urban life, among cultural

diversity, that is frequently suspected to affect the academic achievement of the

students.
 265

From this result, it can be concluded that the students' location whether rural

or urbandoes not affect their mathematics achievement if the students have positive

attitudes towards learning mathematics. The reason for this study result may be that

both the urban and rural schools provide equal educational facilities like textbooks,

teachers with the same qualification and training, learning environment, library, etc.

The result of the students' achievements in mathematics by gender at alpha

0.05 level of significance, the test of ANOVA [F(1,538) = 0.479, p  0.05], was not

statistically significant hence the alternative hypothesis (HA3) is rejected and the null

hypothesis is accepted. Hence, the boys' and girls' achievements in mathematics were

statistically the same. In some studies, significant difference was found between

female and male students' mathematics achievements (Githua & Njubi, 2013; Poku,

2019). Male students were found better to perform at primary, lower secondary, and

college level mathematics and the female students were found better to perform in

upper secondary schools at basic applied mathematics (Mazana et al., 2020). This

reveals that female students are as capable as male students; just

some circumstances hamper their academic development in mathematics. In

the study conducted within the three districts of Nepal, the entire mean score of

female students' achievement in mathematics was 40.91 and of male students' was

42.58 (Nepal, 2016). The analysis of the data from a gender lens (ERO, 2019) was

that the achievement of male students' scores (501) was above the mean score of

female students' scores (499). Thus, boys have outperformed girls by a 2 scale score.

Moreover, the achievement of male students was 1 score less than the national mean

(500) and therefore the female students were 1 score above the national mean.

Although the difference of scores between boys and girls was found statistically

significant at p < 0.05, the effect size Cohen's f = 0.003, it confirms that the difference
 266

was very narrow. From the equity perspective, such narrow effect size indifference in

the learning performance of boys and girls was very close to a gender parity level

(Jayarani, 2019).

The results based on the RQ iii), the overall mean score of the students'

learning behavior in mathematics was found at 3.64. The result shows that the mean

score of the student learning behavior lies at the moderate level of the

learning behavior category (Table 34). Hence, the overall mean score of the

students' mathematics learning behavior at the secondary level grade X is at a

positive level. Thus, the mean score of the students' mathematics learning behavior

lies at the moderate level of the classroom learning behavior category. As stated by

Wiener (2006), attitudes are related to our feelings, knowledge, and behavior and

that they may influence future behavior of an individual. They are highly

complex and can affect learning broadly. Thus, the result reveals that the impact of

the students' attitude towards mathematics was found in their learning behaviors. As

stated by Tokan and Imakulata (2019), students learning behavior and their learning

achievement are affected directly by the intrinsic motivation. Similarly, they further

state that students' achievements are directly affected by the students learning

behaviors. On the other hand, there exists a significant association between the

study habits and mathematics achievement (Odiri, 2015). In the same way, learning

behavior is affected by motivation, attitude, and knowledge (Tokan, 2016; Tokan &

Imakulata, 2019). Thus, the above findings confirm that different variables affect the

students' mathematics learning behaviors and finally they affect the students'

achievements in mathematics.

Thus, the result of the study on secondary level students' mathematics learning

behaviors in terms of the ecological regions, the mean score of the students from the
 267

Hill region (3.68) found relatively higher than that from the Terai (3.63) and the

Mountain regions (3.61). The result shows that the mean score of the Hill region

students lies at the level of the positive learning behavior category and the other two

regions' mean scores lie at the level of the moderate learning behavior category.

Tokan and Imakulata (2019) stress that the indications of intrinsic

motivation, like interests, ideals and ability directly affects the learning behavior

of the students, which comprise the habit of following such as lectures, reading

books, visiting the library, readiness to take the exam and searching the web. They

also focus on student learning behavior which is suffering from motivation, attitude

and knowledge. Mazana et al., (2019) concluded that attitudes affect students'

learning and performance. The above research result shows that students learning

behaviors are affected by the learners' intrinsic motivation, knowledge and attitude

and they also affect their achievement.

The reason behind the result of the study, as stated earlier, it focuses that

everything is changing and is in the process of continuous development. Many studies

related to developmental regions and place of residence are becoming outdated due to

the expansion of various facilities such as access of road, electricity, internet, and

access of resources and other infrastructural development. Thus the development of

different aspects in the society is shifting away from the urban to the rural; people

from different ecological regions are mixed up due to the access to roads. Despite the

often-expressed belief that the students of the Mountain and the Terai lag behind the

students of the valley, the result of the study shows that the students of the Hill region

were found higher achievers in mathematics. So, they are more self-motivated to learn

mathematics in comparison to those from the Mountain and the Terai regions.
 268

The results of the students' mathematics learning behavior belonging to the

places of residence show that the mean score of the students from the rural location

(3.72) was found slightly higher than the mean score of the students from the urban

location (3.60). Thus, the result confirms that the mean scores of the rural location is

slightly higher than the urban location and the mean scores of the rural location lie at

the level of the positive learning behavior category and the mean score of the urban

location lies at the level of a moderate learning behavior category.

Some studies found that superior children exhibit more positive learning-

related behaviors and are more attentive and engaged, hence, take part well in

lessons (Brock et al., 2009; Garner & Waajid, 2012). Here, the superior children

denote the talented and high scorer in mathematics achievement test. Both extrinsic

and intrinsic motivations together affect the students' learning behavior and

therefore the learning behavior directly affects the students' achievement (Tokan &

Imakulata, 2019). Dennis (2011) states that highly positive attitude creates the

chance for learning and motivation that results in success in mathematics no

matter of the past performance. The reason for this result may be as stated earlier.

Meanwhile, the attitude level of the students towards mathematics from the Hill is

higher than that from the Mountain and the Terai which may also be the impact of the

positive attitude towards mathematics on the students' learning behavior.

The result concerning to RQ v), the effect of the independent variables

(attitudes towards mathematics and learning behaviors in mathematics) on the

dependent variable (achievement in mathematics) of secondary level students had a

significant effect on their achievements. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis (HA4) is

accepted, and the null hypothesis is rejected. The coefficient of determination (R2) =

0.243, explains that 24.3% of the total variability in the dependent variable (students'
 269

achievement in mathematics) is contributed by the independent variables (students'

attitudes and learning behavior). Similarly, the effect of learning behavior (b1) = 0.289

and the students' attitudes (b2) = 0.319 on students' achievement in mathematics were

obtained. It reveals that, for each unit, the increment in the independent variable, and

the students' achievement score increases by the corresponding beta ( ) value. Hence

there is a positive relationship between dependent and independent variables. In short,

from the beta value, it is inferred that the students' attitudes towards mathematics

(0.319) and the students' learning behavior (0.289) contribute positively to the

students' achievement in mathematics.

In this study, [F(2, 537) = 86.387, p < 0.005], shows the significant prediction

or effect of independent variables namely students' attitudes towards mathematics and

mathematics learning behavior, on their mathematics achievement of secondary level

grade X students. It indicates that there exists a significant effect of the independent

variables (students' attitude and learning behavior) on the dependent variable (student

achievement in mathematics).

Despite this result, the literature reveals consistent results. Mareesh (2017),

states that problem-solving ability and mathematical attitudes have a linear effect on

mathematical achievements. The finding is like that of Anjana (2018) who found a

significant effect of the independent variables (problem-solving ability, mathematical

attitude, and mathematical anxiety) on the dependent variable (mathematical

achievement of secondary level students). A study conducted in Australian Grade VIII

students on mathematics and science found that the students’ attitudes towards

mathematics and science were aligned and more positive attitudes were associated

with better achievement (Berger et al., 2020). The finding by Sakirudeen and Sanni

(2017) is similar to the present result that the study habits like notetaking, usage of
 270

the library, study time allocation affects their academic performance. Moenikia and

Zahed-Babelan (2010) acknowledged that attitudes of students towards mathematics

would influence their achievement.

The findings of this study are supported by the study carried out by Osa-

Edoh & Alutu (2012), and Bashir & Mattoo (2012) which found that study habits

are highly correlated with the educational performance of the secondary students. It

is a wide-spread belief that students' positive attitudes towards mathematics will

automatically result higher achievements in mathematics (Capuno et al., 2019). It

can therefore be said that attitude towards mathematics is one among the important

predictors of the achievement in the subject. Furthermore, a positive learning

behavior is more likely to flourish a trust, positive feeling, and self-confidence and

eventually develop self-efficacyin the learner that finally supports the positive

outcomes or achievement .

The results associated with RQ v), the data related to their relationships

between the variables students' attitudes towards mathematics, mathematics learning

behaviors, and their achievements at the secondary level were found in significantly

positive relationships. Concerning their relationships, the correlation coefficient

between students' attitudes towards mathematics and mathematics learning behavior;

mathematics learning behaviors, and achievements and; students' attitudes and

students' achievements were found positive and significant statistically at the 0.01

level. Thus, the alternative hypothesis (HA5) that there is significant positive

correlation between students' attitudes, learning behaviors and achievements in

mathematics at the secondary level is accepted. Hence, it is concluded that the

correlations between the variables attitudes and learning behaviors, learning behaviors

and achievements, and attitudes and achievements are positive and are statistically

significant.
 271

The result, that the positive correlation between mathematical achievements

and mathematical attitudes is also validated by Ajisuksmo & Saputri (2017); Karjanto

(2017); Solpuk (2017); Anjana (2018); Jayarani (2019); & Poku (2019). Moreover,

this finding is also supported by Capuno et al. (2019); and Peteros et al.'s (2019) study

which found that there was a positive correlation between the students' attitudes

towards mathematics and their achievements. Thus, it can be concluded that students'

attitudes towards the subject have a larger impact on mathematics achievements. This

shows that students who have a positive attitude towards mathematics are more likely

to achieve greater success in mathematics. This implies that there is a significant

relationship between student's attitude scores and achievement scores at the secondary

school level.

Regarding the students' learning behavior and achievements of the students at

the secondary level, Mutai (2011) concluded that the students' attitudes towards

mathematics affected their learning of the subject and their performance. In the same

way, Tokan and Imakulata (2019) state that learning behavior and motivation are two

important factors that determine the students’ achievements in learning, and those

students are motivated by a desire to accomplish certain goals or achievements

(Winardi, 2011). Thus, it can be judged from the above results that the students'

mathematics achievements are affected by their learning behaviors.

With regard to the students' attitudes towards mathematics and mathematics

learning behavior at the secondary level, the students' attitudes obtained from prior

experience in the subject, and from parents, teachers, and peers influence their

learning and the study has identified the connection between attitudes, learning and

performance (Mutai, 2011). The positive perceptions of students in learning

mathematics could help to increase a positive attitude towards the topic, which

can in turn, result better performance (Capuno et al., 2019). The results confirmed
 272

that study habits and attitudes were firmly associated with the achievement of

students in mathematics.

The reasons for the above-mentioned results on the variables' relationship may

be explained on the ground that the students' positive attitudes towards mathematics

can be enhanced with motivation, active engagement in learning, and providing

effective classroom teaching. Such positive attitudes strengthen the students' learning

behaviors and that in turn, they perform better achievements. Similarly, students'

learning behaviors and higher achievements in mathematics increase motivation that

also helps to develop positive attitudes and improve the overall cognitive abilities of

the learner (Bem, 1972). Another reason for the above-mentioned results may be that

if we have positive attitudes towards mathematics, it helps in creating more interest to

learn, leading to more practice, and attaining more achievements. As stated by the

Bandura (1986), social cognitive theory, the cognitive factors where student's attitude

lies, have dynamic and reciprocal interaction or relation towards the behavioral

factors that student interact, act, practice, motivate, use the strength of their mind,

make choices, etc. to each other, or they perform learning behaviors according to their

attitude level. Similarly, such students' learning behaviors impact for determining

their outcome or they achieve the result (achievement) according to their strength of

interaction, practice, choices, motivation, and their mind as they existed in the

physical and social context (environmental factors).

Thus the students' higher positive attitude towards mathematics implies higher

positive learning behavior and this, in turn, results in higher achievements. This

suggests that having a positive attitude towards mathematics implies better learning

behaviors in mathematics that could lead to high achievement in the subject.

Limitations of the Study

Limitations are the restrictions connected to the study that is not under the

control of the researcher. In the research study, limitations are the possible
 273

weaknesses that could not be controlled by the researcher (Simon, 2011). Due to

limited resources and constraints, the study has had some limitations. First, the study

was limited to the data collected by the self-reported responses from the participants.

Using large sample, it was attempted to minimize the socially desired type of

responses, however it cannot be neglected the possibility of some bias and reporting

consciously the desired response. The second limitation was related to the selection of

the sample from only community schools of Nepal but not from the institutional

schools. There is a great difference between community and institutional schools

regarding the teaching-learning environment and other physical facilities too. So,

there is limitation that the results of the study may not be generalized for all schools in

Nepal. One more comparative study may add value to the findings of the present

study. Third, the data collection of the study was limited to the survey questionnaire

and semi-structured interview for a limited number of students only. A complete

picture of classroom activities and changes in the teacher's attitude towards

mathematics and its teaching learning can accurately figure out using longitudinal

study. It demands students’ classroom observation for a reasonably appropriate

duration of time to find the students’ learning behaviors. Because of these

methodological differences, sometime there could be difference in the findings. The

fourth limitation was related to the impact of students' socio-economic conditions and

other demographic variables like age, ethnicity, parental education, parental

occupation, etc. may affect the attitude, learning behaviors, and achievement of the

learner. Nonetheless, these variables were not considered in this study. Fifth, this

study does not explain the effects of other variables on achievements, which are

considered as effects on achievement except for students' attitudes and learning

behavior.
 CHAPTER VI

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Introduction

This chapter is divided into three main sections: summary, conclusions, and

recommendations. The aim of the study, the methodology in short and the major

findings are highlighted first. The conclusion includes the main issues of the

study, the reasons for choosing these issues, the development and design of the

methods utilized to obtain the results and discussion of those findings. Similarly, the

'implications' section covers two aspects: the implications of the study for the

improvement of mathematics education derived from the findings and the areas for

additional studies to be conducted in the future.

Summary of the Study

The present study was an attempt to explore the secondary level grade X

students' attitudes, learning behaviors, and achievements in mathematics in Nepal.

The objectives were: to analyze the status of students' achievements in terms of their

attitudes and learning behaviors in Nepal; to find out the extent to which whether the

relationships between the students' attitudes, learning behaviors, and achievements

exist as variables; to investigate the effect of students' attitudes and learning behaviors

on their achievements; and to assess the alignment of the students' preferred attributes

of learning mathematics in relation to learning theories.

Bandura's (1986) social cognitive theory and Bem's (1972) self- perception

theory were the main theoretical references for this study. The study was based on the

concurrent embedded mixed-method survey research design and was limited to 540

secondary level grade X students from six districts and twelve community schools of

Province No. 1, Nepal.

 275

The multistage sampling procedure was applied to the selection of the samples

of the study, and quantitative and qualitative survey, observation, and interview

methods were employed to obtain the primary data. In the first stage, the stratified

random sampling was applied, considering the three ecological regions: the Mountain,

the Hill, and the Terai, and six districts, comprising two districts from each region. In

the second stage, 12 community secondary schools, representing both urban and rural

locations, were chosen from each district. In the third stage 45 students, containing

both male and female, were selected from each of those 12 schools using the simple

random sampling method for the quantitative study purpose.

In the same way, 24 students were selected from the 12 previously decided

schools for the semi structured interview. This sample comprised one boy and one

girl purposively selected from each school considering gender and their mathematics

test scores (high/low) secured in the first term examination held at the respective

schools for a semi-structured interview. The higher scorers were selected on the

adverse alternative gender basis. Nonetheless, mathematics CLBC was also used for

12 students, one from each of the selected schools, to find out the students' classroom

learning behaviors.

To collect the data concerning the students' attitudes towards mathematics, the

Tapia and Marsh's (2004) ATMI scale was adapted with necessary validation in the

context of Nepal. Besides, a set of tools constructed and validated by the researcher

himself, were also used. The data related to the students' learning behaviors were

collected using SLBSI. Similarly, the achievements-related data were collected using

MAT. For the qualitative data, a semi-structured interview was administered and the

students' classroom learning behaviors were observed using CLBC.

 276

Based on the results of the descriptive study it was found that the grade X

community school students of mathematics had positive attitudes towards learning

mathematics. The attitude level of the students from the Hill region was found to be

higher than those from the Mountain and the Terai regions. Likewise, the overall

mean score of the students' attitudes towards learning mathematics was found 3.82,

out of 5, which indicates towards a positive attitude level. From the perspective of the

place of residence, the students from the rural location outscored the students of the

urban location.

The overall mean score of the students' achievement (33.94) remained at the

medium achievement level. Using the descriptive analysis, although the students from

the rural locations outscored those from the urban locations, the result was not

statistically significant upon applying differential or inferential analysis. The

achievement scored by the girls and boys was not significant statistically. However,

the Hill region students' achievements were higher and also statistically more

significant than those of the students from the other two regions.

The overall mean score of the students' learning (3.64) was found at a positive

level. The results based on the descriptive statistics show that the Hill region students'

learning behaviors were more positive than those of the rest. Similarly, the learning

behaviors of the rural location students were slightly more positive than those of the

students from the urban location.

Regarding the students' mathematics learning behaviors scores obtained from

the CLBSI scale, no remarkable difference was found between the classroom

observation and the semi-structured interview techniques. However, a majority of the

students preferred learning mathematics under more of the behaviorist attributes than

under the cognitive and constructive learning attributes, although some students used
 277

mixed learning attributes, and credited the teacher for their effective classroom

teaching, motivating students, and encouraging them for active participation in

classroom activities.

Multiple regression analysis was used to analyze the data with reference to the

effect of the students' attitudes and learning behaviors on their achievements. The

result established that the regression model was a good fit for the data and the effect

of the students' attitudes and learning behaviors on achievements in mathematics, and

was found positive and statistically significant. The effect of learning behaviors

(B1) = 0.289 and attitudes (B2) = 0.319 on students' achievements in mathematics were

found. Similarly, the coefficient of determination (R2) = 0.243 explains that 24.3% of

the total variability in the dependent variable is contributed by the independent

variables. However, other variables might also have affected the achievements.

The correlations between the variables considered in this study were

calculated and were found positive and statistically significant. These associations

between the independent variables (students' attitudes and learning behaviors) and the

dependent variable (achievement) reveal higher positive attitudes towards the subject.

It indicates a higher degree of positive learning behaviors and this in turn causes

higher achievements in mathematics. This in turn suggests that the more positive

attitudes towards mathematics the more they heighten positive learning behaviors. As

a result, the more they are likely to achieve higher achievements in mathematics.

Conclusions

This study conducted with the secondary level grade X students of

mathematics in community schools aimed to explore the students' attitudes, learning

behaviors and their effects on mathematics achievements concludes that attitudes and

learning behaviors are significant factors that affect their achievements. The main
 278

issue of this study was that the secondary level students perform, as a trend, a low

level of achievements in mathematics compared to other subjects. The study results

indicate that students' attitude and learning behaviours are crucial considerations

given that their achievement and, overall, their future learning behavior is to be

improved.

This issue had been chosen in this study to answer questions related to the

improvement of mathematics achievements as well as addressing the factors affecting

higher achievements in the subject at the secondary level. The study mainly focused

on the existing condition of students' attitudes, learning behaviors and achievements

in mathematics, and the impact of those variables on students' achievements. The

study has revealed the relationships among the students' attitude, learning behavior

and achievement in mathematics. It also suggests the ways to improve the students'

mathematics achievement level by providing a proper classroom learning

environment, specifically interactive learning activities.

As the descriptive statistics show, the students' attitudes and behaviors towards

learning mathematics were found at a positive level. However, the students'

achievements in mathematics were found at the medium level only. This is the

evidence which implies that students' achievements in mathematics can be improved

by focussing on their learning activities according to their preferred learning

behaviour. Yet, for sure, there are other variables that can affect students'

achievement. An important as well as balanced, integrated approach suggested in the

theoretical framework, personal, environmental, and behavioural aspects of the

students was validated to improve the achievements of the students in mathematics.

As this study concludes, there is no significant effect of ecological region,

place of residence and gender on the students' achievements in mathematics.

 279

However, the hill region students outscored the students from the rest of the regions.

This reveals that the students of the Hill region were equally benefiting from the

teaching-learning process. The study also shows that, though statistically not

significant, the students from the rural location were also found as higher achievers

than those from the urban location in their attitudes towards mathematics learning

behaviors, and achievements. That rural students are poor achievers - a conventional

belief formed from the past studies - is refused. The gender-based result, being

statistically not significant, shows that gender does not reflect on individual

achievements in mathematics. Another important factor of preferred learning

behaviour of the students has come to be known that a majority of the students

preferred to learn mathematics under more of the behaviorist attributes than the

cognitivist and the constructivist learning attributes. The students also credited the

teacher for their effective classroom teaching, motivating students and encouraging

them to actively participate in classroom activities.

The study also established a significant correlation between the students'

attitudes towards mathematics and their achievements in the subject. This

suggests that the students who have positive attitudes towards mathematics are more

likely to perform better in mathematics than the other way around. Similarly,

mathematics learning behaviors and achievements were also found to be

significantly correlated. The result implies that positive learning behaviors result in

higher achievements. The study also found a significant correlation between the

students' attitudes and their learning behaviors. Such significant correlations

between the variables have a greater impact on achievements in mathematics.

The findings of this study have given comprehensive knowledge to educators

regarding the levels of students' attitudes towards mathematics; how students behave
 280

towards the subject; how the variables mutually relate and how the relations affect

their mathematics achievements at the secondary level. The result relating to the

effect of the independent variables on the dependent variables brings into light a

crucial fact that other variables also affect the students' achievements. Hence, to

address the problem, further research is needed.

Thus, in this study, the conceptual framework applying Bandura's PEB Linear

Model was found successful to establish empirically the relationships between

student's attitudes, learning behaviours, and their achievements in mathematics. It is

concluded that there exists a uni-directional relationship between these variables i.e.,

(P)(E)(B). Similarly, the bi-directional relationship between them, i.e. (P)(E),

(E)(B), and (B)(P) also exists. In the same way, the effect of the independent

variables on the dependent variables was also found to exist and was significant, i.e. f

(P, E)  B. Finally, it is claimed that the issues addressed by this study (students'

attitudes and learning behaviours) can address the decreasing achievement scores in

mathematics at the secondary level provided that the overall other conditions related

to the phenomenon remain the same.

Implications

The study was focused on the attitudes, learning behaviors and achievements

of the grade X students of mathematics from community schools in Nepal. It also

explored the existing level of the students' attitudes, learning behaviors and

achievements and their effects on their achievements in mathematics covering

ecological regions, places of residence and gender. On the basis of the findings and

the empirical evidence, the following implications have been made for the policy

makers, research scholars and other academicians.

 281

Educational Implications

On basis of the aforementioned findings and conclusions of the study, the

following educational implications have been drawn for the concerned institutions;

teachers and students. Some compulsory curricular components must be incorporated

so as to promote the students' positive attitudes and learning behaviors in mathematics

for their better achievements. The Education Review Office (ERO), teacher training

centers, and other educational research centers should prioritize the study to other

related factors that affect the students' mathematics achievements in the school level

education.

The teachers' knowledge of mathematics and teaching proficiency is directly

related to the students' mathematics achievements. The teacher's good concept,

knowledge, and good teaching skills will automatically increase the students' ability

and confidence in mathematics. Thus, the teacher's subject knowledge, mathematical

concepts and good teaching skills are crucially essential for good mathematics

achievements in students. Therefore, teachers must possess sound knowledge of the

subject matter as well as ways of effective delivery. Mathematics teachers should also

recognize their immense role to enhance the students' positive attitude towards

learning mathematics and also it is necessary for them to engage the students in

learning activities that will inspire and motivate them to learning mathematics.

The results of this study are equally useful for educational planners,

curriculum planners and textbook writers to address the issues of students' attitudes,

learning behaviors and achievements in mathematics and their effects on the learner

for successful mathematics achievements. Students' personal factors need to be

considered well in preparation of the curriculum and classroom activities. Teacher

preparation curriculum should give a due value to the improvement of teachers'

 282

attitudes towards mathematics and mathematics teaching learning associating them

with students' learning behaviour. The important implications to the pedagogical

reform from the results of the study is to be focused on learning experiences, contents,

and approaches to mathematics teaching harnessing to attitudes-induced learning

behaviours. The teacher is required to identify the students' needs and attitudes

towards mathematics to adopt effective as well as student-friendly teaching methods.

Students can learn from the teacher's model behaviors and effective classroom

teaching-learning skills. So, teachers are expected to help their students with full

support and in a helpful manner, particularly for the poor achievers. in the

mathematics class. According to Bim's theory of self-perception, attitudes and

feelings are the consequences of behavior. So, students need to be prepared to work,

engage and learn effectively from the classroom activity, which, in turn, makes the

students positive towards mathematics, thereby bringing about better learning

outcomes.

Areas for Further Study

The areas for the further studies are derived from the delimitations and

limitations of this study discussed in previous chapter basically connected to

methodological, and some of the findings issues that contradict to the present

common understanding and study results related to students achievement, gender and

urban rural phenomena. The uncovered areas by this study have been suggested for

the areas for further studies. The findings of the study also provide insights and

suggest a need for future research and practice.

The study findings suggest that the variables 'students' attitudes' and 'learning

behaviors' were not the entire causes of low achievements of the secondary level

students in mathematics. Thus, the impact of factors such as motivation, prior

 283

knowledge, teacher's competencies, etc. on students' achievement in mathematics can

be considered as the variables for further studies. If the impact of the other variables

in achievement of the students is identified, it will give a complete picture of one of

the achievement models of mathematics learning at secondary level in Nepal. This

study could be a complementary to the present study to add its value. An elaborated

study could be conducted to find the effects of the independent variables (students'

attitudes, learning behaviors, motivation, engagement, prior knowledge, etc.) on the

dependent variable (achievements of the students). Similarly, the present study has

unfolded a new knowledge that gender and urban rural phenomena-based

achievement difference which show the female has poor achievement and rural

students have poor achievement in mathematics is contradicted. A level of analysis is

done in this study, neverthless this study is not a detail and in-depth to explain the

causes. So, a focused detailed study on gender, rural urban phenomena, and

achievement in mathematics at secondary school level could enrich the present study

conclusion to make it a good model of explaining students' achievement in

mathematics in Nepal.
 References

Acharya, B. R. (2012). A study on the mathematical classroom practices at primary

school in Nepal: A multicultural perspective. Mathematics Education Forum,

16(1), 13-16.

Acharya, B. R. (2015). Relevance of primary level mathematics education in Nepal: A

cultural perspective [Unpublished PhD Dissertation], Tribhuvan University,

Kirtipur, Kathmandu.

Adelson, J. L., & McCoach, D. B. (2011). Development and psychometric properties

of the Math and Me Survey: Measuring third through sixth graders' attitudes

toward mathematics. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and

Development, 44(4), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175611418522

Adom, D., Hussein, K. E. & Adu-Agyem, J. (2018). Theoretical and conceptual

framework: mandatory ingredients of a quality research. International Journal

of Scientific Research, 7(1), 438-441.

Aiken, L. R. (1974). Two scales of attitude toward mathematics. Journal for Research

in Mathematics Education, 5(2), 67-71.

Aiken, L. R. (1970). Attitudes toward mathematics. Review of Educational Research,

40, 551–596.

Ajai, J. T. & Imoko, B. I. (2013). Urban and rural students’ academic achievement

and interest in geometry: A case-study with games and simulations method.

Taraba State University Journal of Education Research and Production, 1(2),

56-63.

Ajisuksmo, C. R. P., & Saputri, G. R. (2017). The Influence of attitudes towards

mathematics and metacognitive awareness on mathematics achievements.

Creative Education, 8, 486-497. https://doi.org/10.4236/ ce.2017.83037

 285

Ajzen, I., & Dasgupta, N. (2015). Explicit and implicit beliefs, attitudes, and

intentions: The role of conscious and unconscious processes in human

behavior. Oxford Scholarship Online.

https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190267278.001.0001

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The Influence of Attitudes on Behavior. In D.

Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of

attitudes (pp. 173–221). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Akey, T. M. (2006). School context, student attitudes and behavior, and academic

achievement: An exploratory analysis. William T. Grant Foundation and Bill

and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Al-Ababneh, M. M. (2020). Linking ontology, epistemology and research

methodology. S cie n c e & P h i l o s o p h y , 1 ( 8 ) , 75-91.

https://doi.org/ 10.23756/sp.v8i1.500

Albright, K., Gechter, K., & Kempe, A. (2013). Importance of mixed methods in

pragmatic trials and dissemination and implementation research. Academic.

AlFallay, I. S. (2018). Test specifications and blueprints: Reality and expectations.

International Journal of Instruction, 11(1), 195-210.

https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11114a

Algarabel, S. & Dasí, S. (2001). The definition of achievement and the construction of

tests for its measurement: A review of the main trends. Psicologica, 22(1), 43-

66.

Allport, G. W. (1935). Attitudes. In C. A. Murchinson (Ed.) A Handbook of social

psychology (p. 798-844). Clark University Press.

Allport, G. W. (1947). Scientific models and human morals. Psychological Review,

54(4), 182–192. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0059200

 286

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association,

National Council on Measurement in Education, Joint Committee on

Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (U. S.). (2014).

Standards for educational and psychological testing.

Amirali, M. (2010). Students’ conceptions of the nature of mathematics and attitudes

towards mathematics learning. Journal of Research and Reflections in

Education, 4(1), 27-41.

Anastasi, A. & Urbina, S. (2007). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Pearson Education

Inc.

Andamon, J. C. & Tan, D. A. (2018). Conceptual understanding, attitude and

performance in mathematics of Grade 7 Students. International Journal of

Scientific & Technology Rresearch, 7 (8), 96-105.

Andreason, E. (2011). Educational strategies for improving students’ behavior.

[Unpublished Doctoral Thesis] Babes-Bolyai University of Cluj-Napoca,

Romania.

Anjana, S. (2018). Mathematical achievement in relation to problem solving ability,

mathematical attitude & anxiety of secondary school students [Unpublished

PhD Dissertation]. Department of Education. Kurukshetra University,

Kurukshetra.

Anthony, G., & Walshaw, M. (2009). Characteristics of effective teaching of

Mathematics: A view from the West. Journal of Mathematics Education, 2(2),

147-164.

Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. The Journal of Abnormal and

Social Psychology, 41(3), 258–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0055756

 287

Asekere, O. F., & Asaolu, O. R. (2020). Health Education and Indigenous Language

Media: Issues, Trends, and Perspectives. In K. O Oyesomi, & A. Salawu,

(Eds.), Emerging Trends in Indigenous Language Media, Communication,

Gender, and Health (pp. 227-241). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-

7998-2091-8.ch012

Ashaari, M. F., Ismaila. Z., Puteha, A., Samsudina, M. A., Ismaila, M., Kawangita,

R., Zainala, H., MohdNasira, B., & MohdIsmath, R. (2012). An assessment of

teaching and learning methodology in Islamic studies. Procedia - Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 59, 618 – 626.

Atanasova-Pachemska, T., Lazarova, L., Arsov, J., Pacemska, S., & Trifunov, Z.

(2015). Determination of the factors that form the students’ attitude towards

mathematics. Istraživanje Matematičkog Obrazovanja, 7(12), 1-8.

Ayob, A., & Yasin, R. M. (2017). Factors affecting attitudes towards mathematics.

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences,

7(11), 1100-1109. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i11/3548

Baghban, A. A., Younespour, S., Jambarsang, S., Yousefi, M., Zayeri, F., & Jalilian,

F. A. (2013). How to test normality distribution for a variable: A real example

and a simulation study. Journal of Paramedical Sciences (JPS), 4(1), 73-77

Bal, A. P. (2013). Investigating undergraduate students’ assessment preferences in

mathematics course and learning strategies. International Online Journal of

Educational Sciences, 5(1), 242–257.

Ball, G. A., Trevino, L. K., & Sims, H. P., (1994). Just and unjust punishment:

Influences on subordinate performance and citizenship. Academy of

Management Journal, 37, 299–322. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.2307/256831

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.

 288

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive

theory. Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child

development.Vol.6. JAI Press.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.

Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy

revisited. Journal of Management, 38(1),9–44.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410606

Barkatsas, A., Kasimatis, K., & Gialamas, V. (2009). Learning secondary

mathematics with technology: Exploring the complex interrelationship

between students’ attitudes, engagement, gender and achievement. Computers

& Education, 52(3), 562–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.001

Bartlett, J. E. II, Kortlik, J. W. & Higgins, C. C. (2001). Organizational research:

Determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information

Technology, Learning and Performance Journal, 19(1), 43–50.

Barton, A. C. (2000), Crafting multicultural science education with pre-service

teachers through service-learning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(6), 797-

820.

Bashir, I., & Mattoo, N. H. (2012). A study on study-habits and academic

performance among adolescents (14-19) years. International Journal of Social

Science Tomorrow, 1(5), 1-5. https://bit.ly/2U5vvZD.

Becker, M., Mc Elvany, N., & Kortenbruck, M. (2010). Intrinsic and extrinsic reading

motivation as predictors of reading literacy: A longitudinal study. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 102(4), 773–785.

 289

Bélanger, P. (2011). Three Main Learning Theories. In Theories in Adult Learning

and Education (pp. 17-34). Opladen; Farmington Hills: Verlag Barbara

Budrich. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvbkjx77.6

Bem, D. J. (1970). Beliefs, attitudes, and human affairs. Brooks/Cole.

Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. Advances in Experimental Social

Psychology, 6, 1-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60024-6

Berger, N., Mackenzie, E. & Holmes, K. (2020). Positive attitudes towards

mathematics and science are mutually beneficial for student achievement: A

latent profile analysis of TIMSS 2015. The Australian Educational Researcher

47, 409–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-020-00379-8

Bergmark, U., & Westman, S. (2016). Co-creating curriculum in higher education –

promoting democratic values and a multidimensional view on learning.

International Journal for Academic Development, 21(1), 28–40.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2015.1120734

Best J. W. & James V. Kahn (2010). Research in education (7th ed.). Prentice Hall of

India Pvt. Ltd.

Biesta, G. (2010). Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods

research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed

methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed.) (pp. 95-118). Sage.

Birch, S. H. & Ladd, G. W. (1997). The teacher-child relationship and children's early

school adjustment. Journal of School Psychology, 35, 61-79.

Blazar, D. (2015). Effective teaching in elementary mathematics: Identifying

classroom practices that support student achievement. Economics of Education

Review, 48, 16-29.

 290

Blazar, D., & Kraft, M. A. (2017). Teacher and teaching effects on students’ attitudes

and behaviors. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1), 146–

170. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373716670260

Blood, D. F., & Budd, W. C. (1972). Educational measurement and evaluation.

Harper & Row.

Bloom, B. S. (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook: The cognitive

domain. David McKay.

Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. R. & Schindler, P. S. (2005). Business research methods.

McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead.

Boekaerts, M., & Minnaert, A. (2003). Measuring behavioral change processes during

an ongoing innovation program: Scope and limits. In E. De Corte, L.

Verschaffel, M. Boekaerts, N. Entwistel, & J. V. Merriënboer (Eds.), Powerful

learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions (pp.

71–81). Pergamon.

Booth, C. (2011). Reflective teaching, effective learning: Instructional literacy for

library educators. American Library Association.

Bora, A., & Ahmed, S. (2018). Secondary school students’ attitude towards their

learning geometry: A survey of Diphu town secondary schools. International

Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews(IJRAR), 5(3), 265-267.

Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the

terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.

https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033008003

Bosede, J. O. (2010). Sex difference in verbal performance discrepancies. The Social

Sciences (TSS), 5(4), 340 – 345.

 291

Bovill, C. (2014). An investigation of co-created curricula within higher education in

the UK, Ireland and the USA. Innovations in Education and Teaching

International, 51(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.770264

Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., Felten, P., Millard, L., & Moore-Cherry, N. (2016).

Addressing potential challenges in co-creating learning and teaching:

Overcoming resistance, navigating institutional norms and ensuring inclusivity

in student–staff partnerships. Higher Education, 71(2), 195–208.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9896-4

Brace, N., Kemp, R. & Snelgar, R. (2006). SPSS for Psychologists: A guide to data

analysis using SPSS for Windows (3rd edn). Routledge.

Bradford, S., & Cullen, F. (2012). Research and research methods for youth

practitioners. Routledge.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative

Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Brezavscek, A., Jerebic, J., Rus, G., & Znidarsic, A. (2020). Factors influencing

mathematics achievement of university students of social sciences.

Mathematics, 8(12), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8122134

Brock, L. L., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Nathanson, L., & Grimm, K. J. (2009). The

contributions of “hot” and “cool” executive function to children’s academic

achievement, learning-related behaviors, and engagement in kindergarten.

Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24, 337–349.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.06.001

Brondizo, E., Leemans, R., & Solecki, W. (2014). Current opinion in environmental

sustainability. Elsevier Press Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cosust.2014.11.002

 292

Broom, A., & Willis, E. (2007). Competing paradigms and health research. Rowman

and Littlefield.

Broucker, B., De Wit, K., & Verhoeven, J. C. (2018). Higher education for public

value: Taking the debate beyond new public management. Higher Education

Research & Development, 37(2), 227-240.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1370441

Brown, T. A. (2004). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied sciences. The Guilford

Press.

Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business research methods (4th ed.). Oxford

University Press.

Burton, J., Moore, M., & Magliaro, S. (1996). Behaviorism and instructional

technology. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational

communications and technology (pp. 46-73). Macmillan.

Candy, P. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning: A comprehensive guide to

theory and practice. Jossey Bass.

Capuno, R., Necesario, R., Etcuban, J. O., Espina, R., Padillo, G., & Manguilimotan,

R. (2019). Attitudes, study habits, and academic performance of junior high

school students in mathematics. International Electronic Journal of

Mathematics Education, 14(3), 547-561. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5768

Carifio, J., & Perla, R. (2008). Resolving the 50-year debate around using and

misusing Likert scales. Medical Education, 42(12), 1150-1152.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03172x.

Carifio, J., & Perla, R. J. (2007). Ten common misunderstandings, misconceptions,

persistent myths and urban legends. Journal of Social Sciences 3(3), 106-116.
 293

Chakrabartty, S. N. (2020). Reliability of test battery. Methodological Innovations.

https://doi.org/10.1177/2059799120918340

Chamberlin, G. (2010). Googling the present. Econ Lab Market. 4, 59–95

https://doi.org/10.1057/elmr.2010.166

Chao, J. L., McDermott, P. A., Watkins, M. W., Rhoad, A. M., Worrell, F. C., & Hall,

T. E. (2018). The learning behaviors Scale: National standardization in

Trinidad and Tobago. International Journal of School and Educational

Psychology, 6(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2016.1261055

Chase, W. G. & Ericsson, K. A. (1981). Skilled memory. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.),

Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 141-189). Erlbaum.

Cheng, H. Y., Andrade, H. L., & Yan, Z. (2011). A cross-cultural study of learning

behaviors in the classroom: From a thinking style perspective. Educational

Psychology, 31(7), 825–841. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2011.608526.

Cheng, X. (2000). Asian students’ reticence revisited. System, 28(3), 435–46.

Choak, C. (2012). Asking questions: Interviews and evaluations. In S. Bradford, & F.

Cullen (Eds.), Research and research methods for youth practitioners (pp. 90–

112). Routledge.

Chunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective. (6th ed.).

Pearson Education, Inc.

Cochran, W. G. (1963). Sampling techniques (2nd ed.), John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). Wiley & Sons.

Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (Revised ed.).

Academic Press.
 294

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple

regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. (3rd ed.).

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994) Research methods in education (4th ed.). Routledge

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th

ed.). Routledge.

Coleman, B. (2009). From home to school: The relationship between parental

involvement, student motivation, and academic achievement (Honors Thesis).

University of Southern Mississippi, Department of Curriculum, Instruction,

and Special Education.

Colgan, L. (2014). Making math children will love: Building positive mathitudes to

improve student achievement in mathematics. What works? (Research into

Practice Research Monograph 56). Student Achievement Division, Ontario

Ministry of Education.

Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. Gutmann, M. & Hanson, W. (2003). Advanced

mixed methods design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.). Handbook of

mixed method research in the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 209-240).

Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods

approach (2nd ed.). Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among

five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods

approach (3rd ed.). Sage.

 295

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approach (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed

methods research. Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V., L. 2011. Designing and conducting mixed

methods research (2nd ed.). Sage.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of

tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555

Cropley, A. J. (2019). Qualitative research methods: A practice-oriented introduction

for students of psychology and education. Riga. Zinātne. http://

10.13140/RG.2.1.3095.6888)

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in

the research process. Sage.

Cui, Y., Lei, H., & Zhou, W. (2018). Changes in school curriculum administration in

China. ECNU Review of Education, 1(1), 34-57.

Curtis, K. M. (2006). Improving student attitudes: A study of a mathematics

curriculum innovation [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]. Kansas State

University.

Cynthia, J. (2008). Predicting academic achievement from classroom behaviors

(Unpublished doctoral thesis). Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State

University, USA.

Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media,

and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and

informal learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3-8.

 296

Dahlin, B., & Watkins, D. (2000). The role of repetition in the processes of

memorizing and understanding: a comparison of the views of German and

Chinese secondary school students in Hong Kong. British Journal of

Educational Psychology, 70(1), 65–84.

https://doi.org/10.1348/000709900157976.

D'Andrade, R. (1995). The development of cognitive anthropology. Cambridge

University Press.

Daninna1, A. A. (2017). Students’ attitude towards mathematics as a predictor of their

academic achievement in the subject. Journal of Creative Writing, 3(2), 1- 22.

Daskalogianni, K., & Simpson, A. (2000). Towards a definition of attitude: The

relationship between the affective and the cognitive in pre-university students.

In T. Nakahara, & M. Koyama (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Conference of

the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (3),

217–224.

David, M. (2017). Principles of learning that works. College of Public Affairs and

Development, University of the Philippines Los Banos.

Debele, E. T., & Kelbisa, E. M. (2017). The Role of active learning methods for

classroom participation: The case of first year students of sociology in Samara

University. Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 22(7), 11-18.

https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-2207131118

Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a work

organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 19–43.

Deci, E.L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M., (1999). A meta-analytic review of

experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation.

Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627-668.

 297

Dennis, H. (2011). Starting out in community college. McGraw-Hill Division of

Student Development and Enrollment Services.

Denscombe, M. (2002). Ground rules for good research. Open University Press.

Department of Education. (2014). Flash I report 2071 (2014-015).

Dhakal, H. R. (2014). Classroom discourse in Nepalese schools: A cultural

perspective [An unpublished PhD dissertation]. Tribhuvan University.

Di Martino, P., & Zan, R. (2014). The construct of attitude in mathematics education.

In B. Pepin, B. Roesken-Winter (eds.), From beliefs to dynamic affect systems

in mathematics education, advances in mathematics education (pp.51-72).

Springer International Publishing Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-

319-06808-4_3

Dixon, J. A., Gibbon, D. P., & Gulliver, A. (2001). Food and agriculture

organization of the United Nations., & World Bank. Farming systems and

poverty: Improving farmers' livelihoods in a changing world. FAO.

Donald, J. V., & Murray, W. (1983). Types of student classroom behavior. The

Journal of Educational Research, 76(4), 204-209.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1983.10885451

Dong, L., Seah, W., & Clarke, D. (2014). Teacher questioning in mathematics classes

in China and Australia: A case study. In J. Vincent, G. Fitz Simons, & J. Steile

(Eds.), The proceedings of the MAV 51st annual conference, La Trobe

University, Melbourne, 4–5 December. The Mathematics Association of

Victoria.

Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative

and mixed methodologies. Oxford University Press.

 298

Dornyei, Z., MacIntyre, P., & Henry, A. (2015). Motivational dynamics in language

learning. Multilingual Matters.

Downie, N. M. (1961). Fundamentals of measurement. Oxford University Press.

Drew, C. J., Hardman, M. L., & Hosp, J. L. (2008). Designing and conducting

research in education. Los Angeles, Sage.

Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1986). Essentials of educational measurement. Prentice-

Hall.

Edmondson, D. R. (2005). Likert scales: A history. CHARM, 12, 127–133.

Education Review Office (2013). Report of National Assessment of Student

Achievement 2011, Grade 8. https://www.ero.gov.np/category/10

Education Review Office (2015). Report of national assessment of student

achievement 2012, Grade 3 and 5.

https://www.ero.gov.np/upload_file/files/post/1595312046_227114569_NAS

A_2012_Report_Grade_3_5.pdf

Education Review Office (2017). Report of national assessment of student

achievement 2015, Grade 3 and 5. https://www.ero.gov.np/category/10

Education Review Office (2019). Report on the national assessment of student

achievement 2018 in Mathematics and Nepali for Grade 5.

https://www.ero.gov.np/category/10

Education Review Office. (2017). Report on national assessment of student

achievement 2017, Grade 5: Mathematics and Nepali.

Education Review Office. (2019). A report on performance audit of community

secondary schools, 2019.

Ellis, S., & Tod, J. (2015). Promoting behavior for learning in the classroom:

Effective strategies, personal style and professionalism. Routledge.

 299

Ellis, S., & Tod, J. (2018). Behaviors for learning promoting positive relationships in

the classroom (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Enu, J., Agyman, O. K., & Nkum, D. (2015). Factors influencing students’

mathematics performance in some selected colleges of education in Ghana.

International Journal of Education Learning and Development, 3(3), 68-74.

EPPI-Centre (2004). A systematic review of how theories explain learning behavior in

school contexts. EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit.

Escalera Chavez, M. E., Moreno Garcaa, E., & Rojas Kramer, C. A. (2019).

Confirmatory model to measure attitude towards mathematics in higher

education students: Study case in SLP Mexico. International Electronic

Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(1), 163-168.

https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/3984

Evans, J. D. (1996). Straight forward statistics for the behavioral sciences.

Brooks/Cole Publishing, Pacific Grove.

Fennema, E. (1998). The study of affect and mathematics: A proposed generic model

for research. In McLeod & Adams (Eds.), Affect and mathematical problem

solving (pp. 205-219). Springer Verlag.

Fennema, E., & Sherman, J. A. (1976). Fennema-Sherman Mathematics Attitudes

Scales: Instruments designed to measure attitudes toward the learning of

mathematics by females and males. Journal for Research in Mathematics

Education, 7, 324-326. https://doi.org/10.2307/748467

Feshbach, N., & Feshbach, A. (1987). Affective processes and academic achievement.

Child Development, 51, 1149-1156.

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2008). Social cognition: From brains to culture.

McGraw-Hill.
 300

Flick, W. E. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. SAGE Publishing.

Fox, J. (2016). Applied regression analysis and generalized linear models. (3rd ed.).

Sage.

Fredericks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement:

potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational

Research, 74, 59-109.

Freeman, S. (2010). Theory and practice of psychological testing (3rd ed.). Oxford &

IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Fulton, S., & Krainovich-Miller, B. (2010) Gathering and appraising the literature. In

G. LoBiondo-Wood, & J. Haber, (Eds.), Nursing research: Methods and

Critical Appraisal for Evidence-Based Practice (7th ed., pp.56-80). St Louis,

MO: Mosby Elsevier,.

Furner, J. M., & Berman, B. T. (2003). Math anxiety: Overcoming a major obstacle to

the improvement of student math performance. Childhood Education, 79(3),

170-175.

Furr, R., & Bacharach, V. R. (2008). Psychometric: An introduction. Sage

Publications.

Gafoor, K. A., & Kurukkan, A. (2015). Why high school students feel mathematics

difficult? An exploration of affective beliefs. Paper presented at UGC

Sponsored National Seminar on Pedagogy of Teacher Education- Trends and

Challenges at Farook Training College, Kozhikode, Kerala.

Gaisman, M. T., (2015). Gender and mathematics education in Maxico. In S. J. Cho

(Ed.), The Proceeding of the 12th International Congress of Mathematics

Education: Intellectual and attitudinal challenges (pp. 145-170). Springer

open. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12688-3
 301

Gajjar, S., Sharma, K. R., & Rana, M. (2014). Item and test analysis to identify

quality multiple choice questions (MCQS) from an assessment of medical

students of Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Indian Journal of Community Medicine, 39,

17-20.

Galanes, G. J., & Carmack, H. J. (2013). He’s really setting an example: Student

contributions to the learning environment. Communication Studies, 64, 49–65.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2012.731464

Ganley, C. M., & Lubienski, S. T. (2016). Mathematics confidence, interest, and

performance: Examining gender patterns and reciprocal relations. Learning

and Individual Differences, 47, 182–193.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.01.002

Garcia, R. (2001). Stress, hippocampal plasticity, and spatial learning. Synapse, 40(3),

180–183. https://doi.org/10.1002/syn.1040

Gardner, H. J., & Martin, M. A. (2007). Analyzing ordinal scales in studies of virtual

environments: Likert or lump it! Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual

Environments, 16(4), 439-446.

Garrett, H. E., & Woodworth, R. S. (1973). Statistics in psychology and education.

Vakils, Feffer and Simons Private Ltd.

Gautam, G. R. (2016). Teacher training in Nepal: Issues and challenges. Tribhuvan

University Journal, 30, 43-56.

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2016). IBM SPSS statistics 23 step by step: A simple guide

and reference (13th ed.). Routledge.

George, M. & George, R. (2012). Factor contributing to students' poor performance in

mathematics at Kenya certificate of secondary Education in Kenya. American

international Journal of contemporary research, 2(6), 87-91.

 302

Githua, B. N., & Njubi, J. N. (2013). Effects of practicing mathematical creativity

enhancing learning/teaching strategy during instruction on secondary school

students' mathematics achievement by gender in Kenya's Nakuru

Municipality. Asian Journal of Management Sciences & Education, 2, 113-

124.

Glenn, D. (1992). Sampling the evidence of extension program impact: Program

evaluation and organizational development. University of Florida.

Goksoy, S. (2017). Situations that make students happy and unhappy in schools.

Universal Journal of Educational Research 5(12A), 77-83.

https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.051312

Goldin, G. A., Epstein, Y. M., Schorr, R. Y., & Warner, L. B. (2011). Beliefs and

engagement structures: Behind the affective dimension of mathematical

learning. ZDM Mathematics Education, 43(4), 547–560.

Good, T. L., & Power, C. N. (1976). Designing successful classroom environments

for different types of students. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 8, 45-60.

Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a

theoretical framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for

house. Administrative Issues Journal: Connecting Education, Practice and

Research 4(2), 12-25. https://doi.org/10.5929/2014.4.2.9

Gravetter, F., & Forzano, L. A. (2018). Research methods for the behavioral sciences.

Cengage, Boston.

Green, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K. L. (2004).

Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement and achievement:

Contributions of classroom perception and motivation. Contemporary

Educational psychology, 29(4), 462–482.

 303

Gronlund, N. E. (1976). Measurement and evaluation in teaching. Macmillan

Publishing Co. Inc.

Gronlund, N. E., & Linn, R. L. (1990) Measurement and evaluation in teaching.

McMillan Company.

Guilford, J. P. (1971). Psychometric methods. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing

Company Ltd.

Guinocor, M., Almerino, P., Mamites, I., Lumayag, C., Villaganas, M. A., &

Capuyan, M. (2020). Mathematics performance of students in a Philippine

State University. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education,

15(3), 1-14. em0586. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/7859

Ha Le, Jeroen, J., & Theo, W. (2018) Collaborative learning practices: Teacher and

student perceived obstacles to effective student collaboration, Cambridge

Journal of Education, 48(1), 103-122.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2016.1259389

Hair, J. J., Black, W. F., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data

analysis. Upper saddle river, Pearson Prentice-Hall.

Haladyna, T., Shaughnessy, J., & Shaughnessy, J. M. (1983). A causal analysis of

attitude toward mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,

14(1), 19-29.

Hannula, M. S. (2002). Attitude towards mathematics: Emotions, expectations and

values. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49(1), 25-46.

Hanushek, E. A., & Ettema, E. (2017). Defining productivity in education: Issues and

illustrations. The American Economist, 62(2), 165–

183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0569434516688207
 304

Hardesty, D. M., & Bearden, W. O. (2004). The use of expert judges in scale

development: Implications for improving face validity of measures of

unobservable constructs. Journal of Business Research, 57(2), 98-107.

Hart, L. E. (1989). Describing the affective domain: Saying what we mean. In D. B.

McLeod & V. M. Adams (Eds.), Affect and mathematical problem solving: A

new perspective (pp. 37-45). Springer-Verlag.

Henson, R. K., & Roberts, J. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in

published research: Common errors and some comment on improved

practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 393–

416. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282485

https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2017.1285060

Ibitoye, E. (2003). Effect of attitudes and beliefs on mathematics achievement.

Studies in educational evaluation 26(3) 27-42.

Ignacio, N. G., Nieto, L. J. B., & Barona, E. G. (2006). The affective domain in

mathematics learning. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics

Education, 1(1), 16-32.

Jayarani, R. N. (2019). Mental alertness, attitude towards mathematics and parental

encouragement of higher secondary students in relation to their achievement

in mathematics [Unpublished PhD Dissertation]. Annamalai University.

Jensen, A. R. (2006). Clocking the mind: Mental chronometry and individual

differences. Elsevier.

Jensen, A. R. (2006). Clocking the mind: Mental chronometry and individual

differences. Amsterdam: Elsevier Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(1), 99–

102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207310434
 305

Jim, W., & Shelly. F. (2007). Practical strategies of successful classrooms: Managing

classroom behavior and discipline. Shell Education.

Jimerson, S., Egeland, B., & Teo, A. (1999). A longitudinal study of achievement

trajectories: Factors associated with change. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 91(1), 116-126.

Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. B. (2017). Educational research: Quantitative,

qualitative, and mixed approaches. SAGE Publications, Inc

Johnson, B., & Gray, R. (2010). A history of philosophical and theoretical issues for

mixed methods research. In Sage handbook of mixed methods in social &

behavioral research (pp. 69-94). SAGE Publications, Inc.,

https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Making cooperative learning work. Theory

into Practice, 38(2), 67-73. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849909543834

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and

research. Interaction Book Company.

Johnson, I., Siegel, J. T., & Crano, W. D. (2014). Expanding the reach of vested

interest in predicting attitude-behavior consistency. Social Influence, 9, 20-36.

https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2012.738243

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2006). Mixed methods research: A research

paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.

Joseph, G. (2013). A study on school factors influencing students’ attitude towards

learning mathematics in the community secondary schools in Tanzania: The

case of Bukoba Municipal Council in Kagera Region [Unpublished Master's

dissertation]. The Open University of Tanzania.

 306

Kane, T. (2004). The impact of after-school programs: Interpreting the results of four

recent evaluations. William T. Grant Foundation. Macmillan.

Karigi, W. M., & Tumuti, S. P. (2015). Students and teachers attitude factors

contributing to poor performance in mathematics in K. C. S. E. in selected

public secondary schools in Kiambaa division of central province, Kenya. The

Strategic Journal of Business and Change Management, 2(58), 316-332.

Karjanto, N. (2017). Attitude toward mathematics among the students at Nazarbayev

University Foundation Year Programme. International Journal of

Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. 48(6), 849-863.

Katz, D., & Stotland, E. (1959). A preliminary statement to a theory of attitude

structure and change. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science: Vol.

3 formulations of the person and the social context (pp. 423-475). McGraw-

Hill.

Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (Eds.) (2014). Essentials of psychological testing.

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Kaur, G. (2017). Math phobia: Causes and remedies. International Journal for

Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology, 5(6), 1248-1250.

Kayla, M. (2018). Urbanicity in Kentucky: A study on academic achievement in urban

versus rural students [Unpublised Senior Honors Thesis]. University of

Louisville.

Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., & McPherson, M. B. (2006). Student incivility and

resistance in the classroom. In T. P. Mottet, V. P. Richmond, & J. C.

McCroskey (Eds.), Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and

relational perspectives (pp. 235–251). Allyn & Bacon.

 307

Keith, T. Z., (2019). Multiple regression and beyond. An introduction to multiple

regression and structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Taylor & Francis

Group.

Kelly, G. A. (1991). The psychology of personal constructs. Norton Routledge.

Khanal, B. (2015). Learning strategies of mathematics students [Unpublished PhD

Dissertation]. Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu.

Khoo, S., & Ainley, J. (2005). Attitudes, intentions and participation. LSAY research

reports. Longitudinal surveys of Australian youth research report, n. 41.

https://research.acer.edu.au/lsay_research/45

Khun-Inkeeree, H., Mohd Omar-Fauzee, S., & Mohamad Othman, K. H., (2016).

Students’ attitude towards achievement in mathematics: A cross-sectional

study of year six students in Songklha Province, Thailand. European Journal

of Education Studies, 2(4), 89-99.

Kilgour, P. W. (2006). Student, teacher and parent perceptions of classroom

environments in streamed and un-streamed mathematics classroom

[Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis]. Curtin University of Technology, Sydney,

Australia.

Kingston, E., & Forland, H. (2008). Bridging the gap in expectations between

international students and academic staff. Journal of Studies in International

Education, 12(2), 204-221.

Kline, P. (1986). A handbook of test construction. Methuen

Kong, Q. (2003). Student engagement in mathematics teaching Shanghai: East China

Normal University Publisher.

Kulm, G. (1980). Research on mathematics attitude. In R. J. Shumway (Ed.),

Research in mathematics education (pp. 356-387). NCTM.

 308

Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Problematizing culture stereotypes in TESOL. TESOL

Quarterly, 37, 709–16. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588219.

Kundu, A., & Ghose, A. (2016). The relationship between attitude towards and

achievement in mathematics among higher secondary students. International

Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 3(6), 69-74.

Kushwaha, S. S. (2014). Trend in researches on mathematics achievement. Journal of

Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME), 4(6), 53-62.

Lai, C. K., Nosek, B. A., Sartori, G., Shin, J. L., Marini, M., & Rubichi, S. (2016).

Reducing implicit racial preferences: II. Intervention effectiveness across time.

Journal of Experimental Psychology,145 (8), 1-30.

https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000179

Landrum, R. E. (2011). Faculty perceptions concerning the frequency and

appropriateness of student behaviors. Teaching of Psychology, 38, 269–272.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628311421328

LaPiere, R., T. (1934). Attitudes vs. actions. Social Forces, 13 (2), 230–237.

https://doi.org/10.2307/2570339.

Leder, G. (1985). Measurement of attitude to mathematics. For the Learning of

Mathematics,34 (5), 18-21.

Lefton, L. A. (1997). Psychology (6th ed). Allyn & Bacon.

Leung, F. K. S., Park, K., Shimizu Y., & Xu, B. (2015). Mathematics education in

East Asia. In: Cho S. (Eds.) The Proceedings of the 12th International

Congress on Mathematical Education. Springer.

Levy, P. S., & Lemeshow, S. (2008). Sampling of populations: Methods and

applications, (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

 309

Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of

Psychology, 22(140), 1–55.

Linn, R. L. (1998). Validating inferences from National Assessment of educational

progress achievement-level reporting. Applied Measurement in Education, 11,

23-47.

Littlewood, W. (1999). Hong Kong students and their English: LEAP Report.

Macmillan Publishers.

Luse, A., Mennecke, B.E., & Townsend, A. (2012). Selecting a research topic: A

framework for doctoral students. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7,

143-152.

Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive

affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803-

855.

Ma, X., & Kishor, N. (1997). Assessing the relationship between attitude toward

Mathematics and achievement in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Journal for

Research in Mathematics Education, 28(1), 26-47.

Ma, X., & Willms, J. D. (1999). Dropping out of advanced mathematics: How much

do students and schools contribute to the problem? Educational Evaluation

and Policy Analysis, 21(4), 365- 83.

Maat, S., & Zakaria, E. (2010). The learning environment, teacher’s factor and

students’ attitudes towards mathematics amongst engineering technology

students. International Journal of Academic Research, 2(2),16–20.

Mahato, R. Morgan, C., & Earnest, D. (2019). Early grade mathematics in Nepal:

Steps toward a stronger foundation. UNICEF, World Education.

http://nepal.worlded.org
 310

Maio, G., & Haddock, G. (2014). The psychology of attitudes and attitude change.

(2nd ed.) Sage Publications. https://doi.org/doi.org/9781446272268

Maio, G., & Haddock, G. G. (2009). Psychology of attitudes and attitude change.

London, England: Sage.

Malmivuori, M. L. (2001). The dynamics of affect, cognition, and social environment

in the regulation of personal learning processes: The case of mathematics

department of teacher education, Research Report 172. Helsinki University

Press.

Marschall, G., & Watson, S. (2019). Social cognitive theory as an integrated theory

of mathematics teachers’ professional learning. Conference of the

International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME-

43). 1, Pretoria, South Africa. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.38991

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2010). Designing qualitative research (5th ed.).

Sage.

Masuda, T., & Nisbett, R. E. (2006). Culture and change blindness. Cognitive

Science, 30(2), 381–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s16049-014

Mata, M. D., Monteiro, V., & Peixoto, F. (2012). Attitudes towards mathematics:

Effects of individual, motivational, and social support factors. Journal for

Research in Mathematics Education, 28 (1), 26–47.

https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/876028

Mayers, A. (2013). Introduction to statistics and SPSS in psychology. Pearson

Education Limited.

Mazana, M. Y., Montero, C. S., & Casmir, R. O. (2019). Investigating students’

attitude towards learning mathematics. International Electronic Journal of

Mathematics Education, 14(1), 207-231. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/3997

 311

Mazana, M. Y., Montero, C. S., & Casmir, R. O. (2020). Assessing students’

performance in mathematics in Tanzania: The teacher’s

perspective. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education,

15(3), em0589. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/7994

McDonald, T. (2013). Classroom management: Engaging students in learning.

Oxford University Press.

McDonough, A. M., & Sullivan, P. A. (2014). Seeking insights into young children's

beliefs about mathematics and learning. Educational Studies in

Mathematics, 87(3), 279- 296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9565-z

McLeod, D. (1992). Research on affect in mathematics education: a re-

conceptualization. In D. Grows (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics

teaching and learning (pp. 575-596). McMillan Publishing Company.

McLeod, D. (1994). Research on affect and mathematics learning in the JRME: 1970 to

the present. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25(6), 637-647.

https://doi.org/10.2307/749576

McLeod, D. B. (1992). Research on affect in mathematics education: A

reconceptualization. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on

mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of

Teachers of Mathematics (p. 575–596). Macmillan Publishing Co, Inc.

McLeod, J. D., & Kaiser, K. (2004). Childhood emotional and behavioral problems

and educational attainment. American Sociological Review, 69(5), 636-

658. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900502

Medford, E., & McGeown, S. P. (2012). The influence of personality characteristics

on children’s intrinsic reading motivation. Learning and Individual

Difference 22(6), 786–791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.06.002

 312

Mehrens, A., & Lehmann, J. (1973). Measurement and evaluation in education and

psychology. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Mendezabal, M. J. N. (2013). Study habits and attitudes: The road to academic

success. Open Science Repository Education.

https://doi.org/10.7392/Education.70081928

Mensah, J., Okyere, M., & Kuranchie, A. (2013). Student attitude towards

mathematics and performance: does the teacher attitude matter? Journal of

Education and Practice, 4(3), 132–139.

Menter, I., Elliot, D., Hulme, M., Lewin, J., & Lowden, K. (2011). A guide to

practitioner research in education. SAGE Publications Ltd,

https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957770

Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San

Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Mertens, D.M. (2005). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating

diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches. (2nd ed.) Sage.

Metriana, M. (2014). Comparative study of effects of motivation, learning behavior,

self-efficacy and academic achievement against job status between students

and students working and not working. Semarang, University of Diponegoro.

Metsamuuronen, J., & Kafle, B. D. (2013). Where are we now? Student achievement

in Mathematics, Nepali and Social Studies in 2011. Education Review Office,

Ministry of Education, Kathmandu.

Meyer, B., Haywood, N., Sachdev, D., & Faraday, S. (2008). Independent learning

literature review, research report (DCSF-RR051). Department for Children

Schools and Families.

 313

Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded

sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage.

Miller, A. N., Katt, J. A., Brown, T., & Sivo, S. A. (2014). The relationship of

instructor self-disclosure, nonverbal immediacy, and credibility to student

incivility in the college classroom. Communication Education, 63, 1–16.

https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2013.835054

Miller, J. G. (2005). Essential role of culture in developmental psychology. New

Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 109, 33–41.

https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.135

Millman, J., & Greene, J. (1989). The specifications and development of tests of

achievement and ability. In: R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd

ed.). American Council on Education.

Ministry of Education (2015). Nepal education in figures 2015: At -a- glance.

Ministry of Education (2016). School Level Educational Statistics of Nepal

consolidated report.

Ministry of Education (2017). A study on factors of student learning achievements

and dynamics for better learning conditions: A case study focused to grade

five in some selected schools. Ministry of Education, Government of Nepal.

Ministry of Education (MOE). (2015). Report on national assessment of student

achievement.

Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (2018). Educational brochure 2017.

Moenikia, M., & Zahed-Babelan, A. (2010). A study of simple and multiple relations

between mathematics attitude, academic motivation and intelligence quotient

with mathematics achievement. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, 2,

1537-1542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.231
 314

Mohamed, L., & Waheed, H. (2011). Secondary students’ attitude towards

mathematics in a selected school of Maldives. International Journal of

humanities and social science, 1(15), 277-281.

Moreno, R., Martínez, R. J., & Muñiz, J. (2015). Guidelines based on validity criteria

for the development of multiple-choice items. Psicothema, 27(4), 388–394.

Morgan, D. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological

implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of

Mixed Methods Research,1(1), 48-76.

Morgan, D. L. (2014). Pragmatism as a paradigm for social research. Qualitative

Inquiry, 20(8), 1045–1053. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800413513733

Morris, C. G. (1996). Psychology: An introduction (9th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Morse, Janice, M., & Linda, N. (2009). Mixed method design: Principles and

procedures. Left Coast Press.

Muijs, D. (2011). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS (2nd ed.).

SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849203241

Murray, J. (2016). Likert data: What to use, parametric or non-parametric?

International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(11), 258-264.

Mutai, K. J. (2011). Attitudes towards learning and performance in mathematics

among students in selected secondary schools in Bureti district, Kenya.

[Unpublished Master's Dissertation]. Kenyatta University.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for

school mathematics. The Council.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2007). Curriculum focal points for

prekindergarten through grade 8 mathematics: A quest for coherence.

 315

National Research Council & Institute of Medicine (2009). Adolescent health

services: Missing opportunities. The National Academies Press.

Nazifah, H. Shafiq, H., & Nur Farhinaa, O. (2012). Enhancing students’ motivation

by providing feedback on writing: The case of international students from

Thailand. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 2(6), 591-

594.

Neale, D. (1969). The role of attitudes in learning mathematics. The arithmetic

teacher, 16, 631–641.

Nepal, B. (2016). Impact of gender and location on mathematical thinking and

mathematics achievement. Journal of Advanced Academic Research (JAAR,

3(3), 11-21. https://doi.org/10.3126/jaar.v3i3.16803

Ngussa, B. M., & Mbuti, E. E. (2017). The influence of hunour on learners’ attitude

and mathematics achievement: A case of secondary schools in Arusha City,

Tanzania. Journal of Educational Research, 2(3), 170 -181.

Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the ‘‘laws’’ of

statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education Theory and Practice, 15(5),

625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y.

Noveanu, G. (2015). Assessment framework. In: R. Gunstone, (Ed.) Encyclopedia of

science education (pp. 214-246). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-

007-2150-0_18

Ntibi, J. E., & Edoho, E. A. (2017). Influence of school location on students’ attitude

towards mathematics and basic science. British Journal of Education, 5(10),

76-85.

Nunnally, J.C. (1967). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.

 316

Odiri, O. E. (2015). Relationship of study habits with mathematics

achievement. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(10), 168-170.

OECD (2009), Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results

from TALIS, TALIS, OECD Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264068780-en

Ogundokun, M. O., & Adeyemo, D. A. (2010). Emotional intelligence and academic

achievement: The moderating influence of age, intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation. The African symposium: An Online Journal of the African

Educational Research Network, 10, 127–141.

Oluwatayo, J. A. (2012). Validity and reliability issues in educational

research. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 2(2), 391-400.

Oppenheim, A. N. (1992). Questionnaire design interviewing and attitude

measuremen. Pinter Publishers.

Ormrod, J. E. (1999). Human learning (3rd ed.). Prentice-Hall.

Ornek, F. (2015). Culture’s effect on students’ attitudes towards science. Education

Policy, Management Quality,7(1), 27-44.

Osadebe, P. U. (2013). Evaluation techniques, DELSU. Journal of Educational

Research and Development, 12(1), 33-45.

Osa-Edoh, G. I., & Alutu, A. N. G. (2012). A survey of student’s study habits in

selected secondary schools: Implication for counseling. Current Research

Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 228-234.

Oskamp, S., & Schultz, P. W. (2005). Attitudes and opinions (3rd ed.). Lawrence

Earlbaum Associates.

Ottmar, E. R., Rimm-Kaufman, S, E, Berry, R. Q. & Larsen, R. A. (2013). Does the

responsive classroom approach affect the use of standards-based mathematics

 317

teaching practices? Results from a randomized controlled trial. The

Elementary School Journal, 113(3), 434-457. https://doi.org/10.1086/668768

Pallant, J. (2016) SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using

the SPSS program (6th ed.) Allen & Unwin, Berkshire.

Pandey, A. (2017). Traditional learning theories and how they can be used in

eLearning. https://www.eidesign.net/three-traditional-learning-theories.

Pangeni, K. P. (2014). Factors influencing quality of education: A case study of

eighth grade students’ mathematics learning achievement in Nepal.

[Unpublished PhD Dissertation]. Nagoya University, Japan.

Panthi, R. K., & Belbase, S. (2017). Teaching and learning issues in mathematics in

the context of Nepal. European Journal of Educational and Social Sciences,

2(1), 1-27.

Papanastasiou, C. (2000). Internal and external factors affecting achievement in

mathematics: Some findings from TIMSS. Studies in Educational Evaluation,

26, 1–7.

Parahoo, K. (Ed.) (2006). Nursing research: Principles, process and issues (2nd (ed.).

Palgrave Macmillan.

Parr, M. G., & Valerius, L. (1999). Professors' perceptions of student’s

behaviors. College Sudent Journal, 33(3), 414-424.

Parsons, J. & Taylor, L. (2011). Student engagement: What do we know and what

should we do? Alberta Education.

Patterson, M., Perry, E., Decker, C., Eckert, R., Klaus, S., Wendling, L., &

Papanastasiou, E. (2003). Factors associated with high school mathematics

performance in the United States. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29(2),

91-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-491X(03)00017-8
 318

Pell, G. (2005). Use and misuse of likert scales. Medical Education, 39(9), 970-981.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365- 2929.2005.02237.x.

Peteros, E., Columna, D., Etcuban, J. O., Almerino, Jr., P., & Almerino, J. G. (2019).

Attitude and academic achievement of high school students in mathematics

under the conditional cash transfer program. International Electronic Journal

of Mathematics Education, 14(3), 583-597.

https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5770

Pokharel, A. K., & Paudel, J. (2013). Cultural factors causing differences in quality

education. Researcher, 1(2), 1-10.

Pokharel, J. K. (2018). Low achievement factors in learning mathematics among

secondary school students. IMPACT: International Journal of Research in

Applied, Natural and Social Sciences, 6(5), 11-18.

Poku, D. A. (2019). Analysis of JHS students’ attitudes toward mathematics and its

effect on the academic achievement: The case of Asunafo South District.

[Unpublished MPhil Dissertation]. University of Ghana.

Politzer, R. L., & McGroarty, M. (1985). An exploratory study of learning behaviors

and their relationship to gains in linguistic and communicative competence.

TESOL Quarterly, 19(1), 103-123. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586774

Powell, S., & Tod, J. (2004). A systematic review of how theories explain learning

behaviour in school contexts. University of London.

Powell, S., & Tod, J. (2015). Promoting behavior for learning in the classroom

contexts: Effective strategies, personal style and Professionalism. Routledge.

Rani, R., & Rani, A. (2017). Educational quest: Construction and standardization of

mathematics achievement test for 9th grade students. An International Journal

 319

of Education and Applied Social Science, 2(8), 651-655.

https://doi.org/10.5958/2230-7311.2017.00115.5

Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual,

theoretical, and methodological. SAGE Publications, Inc.

Raymond, L. C. Y., & Choon, T. T., (2017). Understanding Asian students learning

styles, cultural influence and learning strategies. Journal of Education &

Social Policy, 7(1), 194-210.

Redmond, B. F. (2010). Self-efficacy theory: Do I think that I can succeed in my

work? Work attitudes and motivation. Pennsylvania State University.

Reimann, A. (2018). Behaviorist learning theory. The TESOL Encyclopedia of

English language teaching, Wiley Online Library.

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0155

Reyes, L. (1984). Affective variables and mathematics education. The Elementary

School Journal, 84(5), 558-581.

Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative inquiry in TESOL. Palgrave Macmillan.

Richards, L., & Morse, J. M. (2007). Users guide for qualitative methods (2nd ed.).

Sage.

Rijal, R. R., Paudel, N. P., Gautam, S., Bista, S. K., Dahal, D., Khatiwada, T. R., &

Chongbang, K. B. (2018). A study on factors of student learning achievements

and dynamics for better learning conditions: A case study focused to grade

five in some selected schools. Department of Education.

Rikoon, S. H., McDermott, P. A., & Fantuzzo, J. W. (2012). Approaches to learning

among Head Start alumni: Structure and validity of the Learning Behaviors

Scale. School Psychology Review,41, 272–294.

 320

Robson, C. (2002). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and

practitioner-researchers (2nd ed.). Blackwell.

Robson, C. (2011). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and

practitioner-researchers (3rd ed.). Wiley.

Rodríguez, S., Regueiro, B., Piñeiro, I., Valle, A., Sánchez, B., Vieites, T., &

Rodríguez-Llorente, C. (2020). Success in mathematics and academic

wellbeing in primary-school students. Sustainability, 12, 3796-3811.

Rogel, I. R. (2012). Academic behavior and performance of third year students of

general emilioaguinaldo national high school. Emilio Aguinaldo National

High School Division of Cavite.

Rossouw, J. P. (2003). Learner discipline in South African public schools: A

qualitative study. Koers Journal, 68(4), 413-435.

Rothkopf, E. Z. (1981). A macroscopic model of instruction and purposive learning:

An overview. Instructional Science, 10, 105–122.

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00132513

Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data.

SAGE Publishing.

Rubin, J. (1981). Study of cognitive processes in second language learning. Applied

Linguistics, 11, 117-123.

Ruffell, M., Mason, J., & Allen, B. (1998). Studying attitude to mathematics.

Educational Studies in Mathematics, 35 (1), 1-18.

Rumsey, D. (2009). Statistics II for dummies. Wiley Publishing Inc.

Sakirudeen, O. A., & Sanni, B. K. (2017). Study habits and academic performance of

secondary school students in mathematics: A case study of selected secondary

schools in Uyo local education council. Research in Pedagogy, 7(2), 283-297.

 321

Saldanna, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Qualitative

Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 12(2),

169-170. https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-08-2016-1408

Sanders, M. R. (2010). Adopting a public health approach to the delivery of evidence-

based parenting interventions. Canadian Psychology, 51(1), 17–23.

Saxena, C. P. (2002). Student learning behavior scale. Social Science, 4(12), 57-59.

Schaefer, B. A., & McDermott, P. A. (1999). Learning behavior and intelligence as

explanations for children’s scholastic achievement. Journal of School

Psychology, 37, 29–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405(99)00007-2

Schaefer, E. S., & Edgerton, M. (1978). Classroom

behaviorinventory [Unpublished manuscript]. University of North Carolina.

Schleicher, A. (2018). What makes high-performing school systems different in world

class: how to build a 21st-century school system, OECD Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264300002-3-en

Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2007). Influencing children's self-efficacy and

self-regulation of reading and writing through modeling. Reading and Writing

Quarterly, 23, 7-25.

Scott, A. M., Zachary, W. Goldman, Hannah Ball, Shannon, T., Carton, J. A.,

Melissa, F., Tindage, A. & Anderson, A. (2015). Assessing college student use

of anti-citizenship classroom behavior: Types, reasons, and association with

learning outcomes. Communication Teacher, 29(4), 234-251,

https://doi.org/10.1080/17404622.2015.1064984

Sedikides, C., & Strube, M. J. (1997). Self-evaluation: To thine own self be good, to

thine own self be sure, to thine own self be true, andto thine own self be better.

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 206-269.

 322

Segal, C. (2013). Misbehavior, education, and labor market outcomes. Journal of the

European Economic Association, 11(4), 743-779.

Seligman, M. E., Ernst, R. M., Gillham, J., Reivich, K., & Linkins, M.

(2009). Positive education: Positive psychology and classroom

interventions. Oxford Review of Education, 35(3), 293–311.

https://doi.org/10.1080/03054980902934563

Seligman, M., & Adler, A. (2019). Positive education. In J. F. Helliwell, R. Layard, &

J. Sachs (Eds.), Global happiness and wellbeing policy report: 2019. (pp. 52 -

71). Sustainable Development Solutions Network.

Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one.

Educational Researcher, 27, 4–13.

Shannon-Baker, P. A. (2016). Making paradigms meaningful in mixed methods

research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10, 319 - 334.

Sharma, L. (2007). A study of curriculum standards: Implications of the desired and

existing standards for the reform of mathematics education in Nepal [Doctoral

Dissertation]. Tribhuvan University.

Shashaani, L. (1995). Gender differences in mathematics experience and attitude and

their relation to computer attitude. Educational Technology, 35(3), 32–38.

Shook, N. J., Fazio, R. H., & Eiser, J. R. (2007). Attitude generalization: Similarity,

valence, and extremity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(4),

641–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.06.005

Silberman, M. L. (1969). Behavioral expression of teachers' attitudes toward

elementary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 60(5), 402–

407.

Silverman, D. (2005). Doing qualitative research (2nd ed.). Sage.

 323

Simon, M. K., & Goes, J. (2011). Dissertation and scholarly research: Recipes for

success. College Grove, Ore.? Dissertation Success, LLC.

Simpson, A. (2016). Are adolescent views of mathematics changing due to

environment in a single sex mathematics classroom? Paper presented in

NCTM. Research Conferences San Francisco, USA.

Sirmaci, N. (2010). The relationship between the attitudes towards mathematics and

learning styles. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 644-648.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.211

Skaalvik, E.M., Federici, R. A., & Klassen, R., M. (2015). Mathematics achievement

and self- efficacy: Relation with motivation for mathematics. International

Journal of Educational Research, 72, 129-136.

SLC Study (2005). Study on student performance in SLC. Ministry of Education and

Sports Education.

Smith, G. M. (1967). Usefulness of peer ratings of personality in educational

research. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 27, 967–984.

Solomon, D., & Kendall, A. J. (1976). Individual characteristics and children’s

performance in “open” and “traditional” classroom settings. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 68, 613–625.

Solpuk, N. (2017). The effect of attitude on student achievement. The Factors

Effecting Student Achievement. 57–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-

56083-0_4

Statistics (2016). School leaving certificate examination statistics 2015. Ministry of

Education, Office of the Controller of Examination. The Government of

Nepal.
 324

Streiner, L. D., & Norman, G. R. (2008). Health measurement scales: A practical

guide to their development and use. Oxford University Press.

Stuart-Hamilton, I. (2007). Dictionary of psychological testing, assessment and

treatment. Second edition. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Stuckey, H. L. (2013). Three types of interviews: Qualitative research methods in

social health. Journal of Social Health and Diabetes, 1(2), 56-59.

https://doi.org/10.4103/2321-0656.115294

Suen, H. K. (2009). Principle of test theories. eBook, Digital printing by Routledge

Education.

Suydam, M. N., & Weaver, J. F. (1975). Research on mathematics learning. In J. N.

Payne (Ed.), Mathematics learning in early childhood: thirty-seventh

yearbook (pp. 44–67). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Syyeda, F. (2016). Understanding attitudes towards mathematics (ATM) using a

multimodal modal model: An exploratory case study with secondary school

children in England. Cambridge Open-Review Educational Research e-

Journal,3, 32-62.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.).

Pearson.

Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting

research instruments in science education. Research in Science

Education, 48, 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2

Tahar, F., Ismail, Z., Zamanic, N., & Adnan, N. (2010). Students’ attitude toward

mathematics: The use of factor analysis in determining the criteria. Procedia

Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 476–481.

 325

Tapia, M., & Marsh, G. (2000). Attitudes toward mathematics instrument: An

investigation with middle school students. Paper presented at the annual

meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association (Bowling Green,

KY, November 15-17, 2000).

Tapia, M., & Marsh, G. (2004). An instrument to measure mathematics attitudes.

Academic Exchange Quarterly, 8, 1–8.

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research:

integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and

behavioural sciences. Sage.

Terrell, S. R. (2015). Writing a proposal for your dissertation: Guidelines and

examples. The Guilford Press.

The American Heritage dictionary of the English language.(2011). Houghton Mifflin.

Thelen, H. A. (1967). Classroom grouping for teachability. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Theobald, M. A. (2006). Increasing student motivation: Strategies for middle and

high school teachers. Corwin Press.

Thompson, J. (2009). Changing chalk and talk: The reform of teaching methods in

Vietnamesse higher education. The George Washington University.

Thurstone, L. L. (1928). Attitudes can be measured. American Journal of Sociology,

33, 529-54.

Tokan, M. K., & Imakulata, M. M. (2019). The effect of motivation and learning

behaviour on student achievement. South African Journal of Education,

39(1):1-8. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v39n1a1510

Townsend, M., & Wilton, K. (2003). Evaluating change in attitude towards

mathematics using the “then-now” procedure in a cooperative learning

 326

programme. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(4), 473–

487. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709903322591190

Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. Lancaster University, The

higher Education Academy.

Upadayay, H. P. (2001). Effect of constructivism on mathematics achievement of

grade V students in Nepal [Unpublished PhD Dissertation]. Punjab University.

Van Leeuwen, A., Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Brekelmans, M. (2013). Teacher

interventions in a ynchronous, co-located CSCL setting: Analyzing focus,

means, and temporality. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1377–1386.

Vitanova, V., Atanasova-Pachemska, T., Iliev, D., & Pachemska, S. (2015). Factors

affecting the development of ict competencies of teachers in primary schools.

Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1087–1094.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.344

Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber, & A. S. Carton (Eds.),

The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky 1, problems of general psychology (pp.

39-285). Plenum Press.

Watson, J. B. (1927). The origin and growth of behaviorism. Archiv for Systematische

Philosophie und Sociologie, 30, 247-262.

Waxman, H. C., & Huang, S.L. (1997). Classroom instruction and learning

environment differences between effective and ineffective urban elementary

schools for African- American students, urban education, Psychological

Bulletin, 111, 127-155.

Webb, N. M. (2009). The teacher’s role in promoting collaborative dialogue in the

classroom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 1–28.

 327

Weber, M., & Ruch, W. (2012). The role of a good character in 12-year-old school

children: Do character strengths matter in the classroom? Child Indicators

Research, 5, 317–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-011-9128-0

Wentzel, K. R. (1993). Does being good make the grade? Social behavior and

academic competence in middle school. Journal of Educational Psychology,

85, 357-364.

White, A. L., Way, J., Perry, B., & Southwell, B. (2006). Mathematical attitudes,

beliefs and achievement in primary pre-service mathematics teacher

education. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 7, 33-52.

Wiener, C. (2006). An instrument to measure mathematics attitudes. Academic

Exchange Quarterly. 8(2) 130-143.

Wilkins, J. (2004). Mathematics and science self-concept: An international

investigation. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72(4), 331-346.

Wilkins, J. L. M., & Ma, X. (2003). Modeling change in student attitude toward and

beliefs about mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 97(1), 52–63.

Winardi, J. (2011). Motivation and motivating in management. Raja Grafindo

Persada.

Wood, R. & Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory of organizational

management. Academy of Management Review,14, 361-384.

Woods, W. A. (1960). Psychological dimensions of consumer decision. Journal of

Marketing, 24(3), 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224296002400303

Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics: An introductory Analysis (2nd ed.), Harper and Row.

Yasar, M. (2016). High school students' attitudes towards mathematics. Eurasia

Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(4), 931-945.

 328

Yen, C., Konold, T. R., & McDermott, P. A. (2004). Does learning behavior augment

cognitive ability as an indicator of academic achievement? Journal of School

Psychology, 42, 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2003.12.001

Yilmaz, K. (2011). The cognitive perspective on learning: Its theoretical

underpinnings and implications for classroom practices. Journal of

Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 84 (5), 204-212.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2011.568989

Zan, R., & Di Martino, P. (2007). Attitude toward mathematics: Overcoming the

positive/negative dichotomy. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 3, 157-

168.

Zan, R., & Martino, P. (2008). Attitude toward mathematics: Overcoming the

positive/negative dichotomy. In B. Sriraman, (Ed.), The Montana mathematics

enthusiast: Monograph series in mathematics education, (pp. 197–214). Age

Publishing. The Montana Council of Teachers of Mathematics. PISA.

Zan, R., Brown, L., Evans, J., & Hannula, M. S. (2006). Affect in Mathematics

Education: An Introduction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(2), 113–

121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-9028-2

Zeng, Q. (2001). Student engagement and its developmental values. Teaching School

Subjects, 1, 4–7.

Zepke, N. (2015). Student engagement research: Thinking beyond the mainstream.

Higher Education Research & Development, 34(6), 1311–1323.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1024635

Weber, M., & Ruch, W. (2012). The role of a good character in 12-year-old school

children: do character strengths matter in the classroom? Child Indicators.

Research, 5, 317–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-011-9128-0

 329

Wentzel, K. R. (1993). Does being good make the grade? Social behavior and

academic competence in middle school. Journal of Educational Psychology,

85, 357-364.

White, A. L., Way, J., Perry, B., & Southwell, B. (2006). Mathematical attitudes,

beliefs and achievement in primary pre-service mathematics teacher

education. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 7, 33-52.

Wiener, C. (2006). An instrument to measure mathematics attitudes. Academic

Exchange Quarterly. 8(2) 130-143.

Wilkins, J. (2004). Mathematics and science self-concept: An international

investigation. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72(4), 331-346.

Wilkins, J. L. M., & Ma, X. (2003). Modeling change in student attitude toward and

beliefs about mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 97(1), 52–63.

Winardi, J. (2011). Motivation and motivating in management. Raja Grafindo

Persada.

Wood, R. & Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory of organizational

management. Academy of Management Review,14, 361-384.

Woods, W. A. (1960). Psychological dimensions of consumer decision. Journal of

Marketing, 24(3), 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224296002400303

Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics, An Introductory Analysis (2nd ed.), Harper and Row.

Yasar, M. (2016). High school students' attitudes towards mathematics. Eurasia

Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(4), 931-945.

Yen, C., Konold, T. R., & McDermott, P. A. (2004). Does learning behavior augment

cognitive ability as an indicator of academic achievement? Journal of School

Psychology, 42, 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2003.12.001

 330

Yilmaz, K. (2011). The cognitive perspective on learning: Its theoretical

underpinnings and implications for classroom practices. Journal of

Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 84 (5), 204-212.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2011.568989

Zan, R., & Martino, P. (2008). Attitude toward mathematics: overcoming the

positive/negative dichotomy. In Beliefs and Mathematics, B. Sriraman, (Ed.),

The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast:Monograph Series in Mathematics

Education,(pp. 197–214). Age Publishing . The Montana Council of Teachers

of Mathematics. PISA.

Zan, R., & Di Martino, P. (2007). Attitude toward mathematics: Overcoming the

positive/negative dichotomy. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 3, 157-

168.

Zan, R., Brown, L., Evans, J., & Hannula, M. S. (2006). Affect in Mathematics

Education: An Introduction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(2), 113–

121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-9028-2

Zeng, Q. (2001). Student engagement and its developmental values. Teaching School

Subjects, 1, 4–7.

Zepke, N. (2015). Student engagement research: Thinking beyond the mainstream.

Higher Education Research & Development, 34(6), 1311–1323.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1024635
331
 Appendix A

ATTITUDES TOWARD MATHEMATICS INVENTORY

Name of the Student: School:
Directions: This inventory consists of statements about your attitude toward mathematics. There are no
correct or incorrect responses. Read each item carefully. Please think about how you feel about each
item. Enter the letter that most closely corresponds to how each statement best describes your feelings.
Use the following response scale codes to respond to each item in the alongside box.
(1) E- Strongly Disagree (2) D-Disagree (3) C-Neutral (4) B-Agree (5) A-Strongly Agree
01 Mathematics is a very worthwhile and necessary subject.
02 I want to develop my mathematical skills.
03 Mathematics helps develop the mind and teaches a person to think.
04 Mathematics is important in everyday life.
05 Mathematics is one of the most important subjects for people to study.
06 Math courses would be very helpful no matter what I decide to study.
07 I can think of many ways that I use math outside of school.
08 I think studying advanced mathematics is useful.
09 I believe studying math helps me with problem-solving in other areas.
10 A strong math background could help me in my professional life.
11 I get a great deal of satisfaction out of solving a mathematics problem.
12 I have usually enjoyed studying mathematics at school.
13 I like to solve new problems in mathematics.
14 I would prefer to do an assignment in math to writing an essay.
15 I really like mathematics.
16 I am happier in a math class than in any other class.
17 Mathematics is a very interesting subject.
18 I am comfortable expressing my own ideas on how to look for solutions to a
19 Idifficult problem in
am comfortable math. questions in math class.
answering
20 Mathematics is dull and boring.
21 Mathematics is one of my most dreaded subjects.
22 When I hear the word mathematics, I have a feeling of dislike.
23 My mind goes blank, and I am unable to think clearly when working with
24 mathematics.
Studying mathematics makes me feel nervous.
25 Mathematics makes me feel uncomfortable.
26 I am always under a terrible strain in a math class.
27 It makes me nervous to even think about having to do a mathematics problem.
28 I am always confused about my mathematics class.
29 I feel a sense of insecurity when attempting mathematics.
30 Mathematics does not scare me at all.
31 I have a lot of self-confidence when it comes to mathematics.
32 I am able to solve mathematics problems without too much difficulty.
33 I expect to do fairly well in any math class I take.
34 I learn mathematics easily.
35 I believe I am good at solving math problems.
36 I am confident that I could learn advanced mathematics.
37 I plan to take as much mathematics as I can during my education.
38 The challenge of math appeals to me.
39 I am willing to take more than the required amount of mathematics.
40 I would like to avoid using mathematics in college.
 332

Appendix B

गणितप्रततको अभिवत्तृ ि सूची

विद्यार्थीको नामः उमेरः कक्ाः

विद्यालयको नामः ललङ्गः
जिललाः िात ः
लको सच
ू ीमा गणि प्रत पाईको धारिा सम्बधी कर्थनहरु दिइएका छन ्। उक् कर्थनहरु आफैमा सही िा गल भन्न
नसककने खालका छन ्। प्रत्येक कर्थनलाई ध्यानपूिक
व पढ्नुहोस्र उक् कर्थन पाईको सन्िभवमा कत
लागू हुन्छ भन्ने
अनभ
ु ू गरी ल दिइएका िााँया फवका खाली कोठामा पाई पूिस
व हम भए A, सहम भए B, टस्र्थ भए C, असहम भए
D, र पूिव असहम भए E, लेख्नुहोस ्।

नोटःप्रस् ु प्रश्नािली विद्यािाररधध अध्ययनका लाधग यार गररएको हो। थ्याङ्कको प्रस् ु ीकरि र्था विश्लेषि गने
क्रममा उत्तरिा ाको नाम र्थर गोप्य राणखनेछ।

१. गणि धेरै मल
ू यिान र आिश्यक विषय हो ।
२. म आफूमा गणि ीय सीपको विकास गनव चाहन्छु ।
३. गणि ले हाम्रो दिमागको विकास गनव मद्ि गछव र सोच्न लसकाउाँ छ ।
४. हाम्रो िैतनक िीिनमा गणि महत्िपूिव छ ।
५. मातनसका लाधग गणि अध्ययन गनैपने महत्िपूिव विषय मध्ये एक हो ।
६. मैले िे अध्ययन गने तनिवय गरेपतन गणि विषय धेरै सहयोगी हुन्छ ।
७. विद्यालय बादहर गणि कसरी प्रयोग गनव सककन्छ भन्ने बारे म सोच्न सक्छु ।
८. उच्चस् रको गणि को अध्ययन गनुव उपयोगी हुन्छ भन्ने मलाई लाग्छ ।
९. गणि अध्ययन गनावले अन्य क्ेत्रमा पतन सहयोग पग्ु छ भन्ने मेरो विश्िास छ .
१०. गणि को सबल पष्ृ ठभलू म भएमा पेशाग िीिनमा सहयोग लमलिछ ।
११. गणि को समस्या समाधान गिाव मलाई ठूलो सन् जु ष्ट लमलछ ।
१२. विद्यालयमा गणि अध्ययन गिाव मलाई प्रायः आनन्ि लाग्छ ।
१३. मलाई गणि का नयााँ समस्या हल गनव मन पछव ।
१४. म तनबन्ध लेख्नु भन्िा गणि को काम गनव रुचाउछु ।
१५. म साच्चै नै गणि मन पराउाँ छु ।
१६. म अरु विषयको कक्ामा भन्िा गणि को कक्ामा खस
ु ी हुन्छु ।
१७. गणि साह्रै चाख लाग्ने विषय हो ।
१८. गणि का िदटल समस्याको समाधान खोज्ने क्रममा मेरा आफ्नै सोच विचार ब्याक् गनव पाउाँ िा
मलाई सहि महसुस हुन्छ ।
१९. गणि को कक्ामाा प्रश्नको उत्तर दिएर म आनजन्ि हुन्छु ।
२०. गणि भद्िा र दिक्क लाग्िो हुन्छ ।
२१. मेरा लाधग गणि त्रासपूिव विषय हो ।
२२. गणि भन्ने शब्ि सुन्नासार्थ मलाई तिन लाग्छ ।
२३. गणि को काम गिाव मेरो दिमाग शुन्य हुन्छ र स्पष्ट साँग सोच्न सम्म सजक्िन .
२४. गणि को अध्ययन गिाव मलाई आवत्तएको महसस
ू हुन्छ ।
२५. गणि ले मलाई असहि महसूस गराउाँ छ ।
२६. गणि को कक्ामा म सधै नािमा हुन्छु ।
२७. गणि को काम गनुव पछव भन्ने सोचाइले मात्रै पतन मलाई दिग्िारी लाग्छ ।
२८. गणि को कक्ामा म सधै अलमलमा पछुव ।
२९. गणि गिैगिाव म आफूलाई कमिोर ठान्छु ।
३०. गणि साँग मलाई डर लाग्िैन ।
३१. गणि को सिालमा मसाँग प्रशस् आत्मविश्िास छ ।
 333

३२. कुनै कदठनाइ बबना नै म गणि को समस्या समाधान गनव सक्छु ।

३३. मैले पढे का गणि का कुनै पतन कक्ाहरुमा म राम्रै गनव सक्छु भन्ने मलाई विश्िास छ ।
३४. म सजिलै लस गणि लसक्छु ।
३५. गणि ीय समस्या समाधान गनवमा म अब्बल छु भन्ने कुरामा मेरो विश्िास छ .
३६. उच्चस् रीय गणि लसकाइ गनव सक्छु भन्ने कुरामा म ढुक्क छु ।
३७. मैले पढुन्िेल गणि विषय सकेसम्म धेरै ललन चाहन्छु ।
३८. गणि ीय चुनौत सामना गनव पाउाँ िा खस
ु ी लाग्छ ।
३९. म चादहने ित भन्िा बिी गणि ललन इच्छुक छु ।
४०. क्याम्पसमा गएपतछ म गणि विषय छोडडदिने सरू मा छु ।
 334

Appendix C

Grade 10 Mathematics Achievement Test, 2018

Read each question carefully first and then look at the information (if given). Consider
the question(s) carefully and tick (√) the best alternative given below each question.
1. ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ in the given Venn diagram?
Which one of the following is the value of n(𝐴𝑈𝐵)
U
A B

a
h m c
e o
p d
f

a) {a,h} b) {m,e} c) {c,o,p} d) {d,f}

2. ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ in the given figure?
Which of the following is the value of n(𝐴𝑈𝐵)
P Q U
10 11
2
4 12
1 7
5
6 8 9
15 3

16 13 14
17
R

a) 3 b) 4 c) 5 d) 6
3. If M is the marked price and D is a discount then which of the following is the selling
price?
a) M b) D c) M+D d) M-D
4. If a pen was brought at Rs.100 and sold at Rs. 80 after 2 years, then what amount was
depreciated in the two years?
a) Rs. 20 b) Rs. 80 c) Rs. 110 d) Rs. 110
5. What is the selling price of a book whose marked price is Rs.100 and 13% VAT is
added?
a) Rs.110 b) Rs.113 c) Rs.87 d) Rs.115
6. With a discount of 20 %, a customer got the watch at Rs.80. Then what is the marked
price of the watch?
a) Rs.80 b) Rs.100 c) Rs.60 d) Rs.120
7. A customer bought a radio for Rs.1130 including 13% VAT. What is the price of the
radio without VAT.
a) Rs.1143 b)Rs.1117 c)Rs.1000 d) Rs.1100
8. The population of a village is 10,000. If the population growth rate is 10% per annum,
what will be the population after 2 years?
a) 11000 b) 12000 c) 10010 d) 12100
9. How much of the Qatar Riyal is equal to $ 1?(1$ =Rs.100, 1 Qatar Riyal = Rs.25).
a) 3 b) 4 c) 5 d) 6
2
10. If the surface area of a sphere is 5544cm , what is its volume?
a) 38880cm2 b)38800cm2 c) 5544cm2 d) 38808cm2
11. What is the area of the right-angle triangle with a base of 4cm and a height of 3 cm?
a) 2cm2 b) 3cm2 c) 4cm2 d) 6cm2
 335

12. What is the volume of the given hemisphere?

r = 10cm

a) 2095.24cm2 b) 2095cm2 c) 2096cm2 d)2095.25cm2

13. What is the total surface area of the given cone?

24cm

25cm

a) 704cm2 b) 703cm2 c) 702cm2 d) 701cm2

14. If the area of the rectangular surface and the height of a triangular prism are 600cm2
and 20 cm respectively, what is the perimeter of its base?
a) 20cm b) 25cm c) 30cm d) 35cm
15. What is the curved surface area of the given cylinder?

20cm

4cm

a) 1760cm2 b) 1700cm2 c) 1730cm2 d) 1740cm2

16. What is the area of the given triangle?
A

20cm 13cm

B 21cm

a) 106cm2 b) 116cm2 c) 126cm2 d) 136cm2

17. If the volume of the given prism is 2520cm3, what is the height of the prism?
24cm

25cm

a) 30cm b) 40cm c) 50cm d) 60cm

18. Simplify: 5x2×y×xy-2
5𝑥 2 5𝑥 3
a) b) c) 5𝑥𝑦 3 d) 5𝑥 2 𝑦
𝑦 𝑦
 336

𝑥 𝑦
19. Simplify: + 𝑥+𝑦
𝑥+𝑦
a) 0 b)(x + y)2 c) x+ y d) 1
20. Find the HCF of: (x2+xy) and (x2-y2)
a) x+y b) (x+y)(x- y) c) (x+y)2 d) x2-y2
21. What is the LCM of a +2ab+b2 and (a+b)2?
2

a) (a+b) b) (a+b)2 c) (a+b) (a- b) d) (a-b)2

43 62
22. Which one of the following is the value of × 32
25
a) 2 b) 4 c) 6 d) 8
3𝑥+2 +3𝑥
23. Simplify:
5.3𝑥
a) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4
𝑥 1
24. Solve: 5 =
25
a) 2 b)-1 c) 1 d)-2
25. Simplify: √125 − √45 + √5
a) √5 b) 2√5 c) 3√5 d) 4√5
26. If 5 is added to the square of a natural number, the result will be 41. Then what is the
number?
a) 3 b) 4 c) 5 d) 6
27. If a number is added to its 1/3, it will be 40. Then what is the number?
a) 10 b) 20 c) 30 d) 40
28. If the age of the son is 1/4 the age of his father and their sum of the ages is 50 years.
Then what is the father's age?
a) 8 b) 16 c) 32 d) 40
Which one of the following is the multiplication of the given surds:√2√2
3
29.
a) 2 b) 4 c) 6 d) 8
30. If the area of the given parallelogram ABCD is 25cm2, then what is the area of ABC?
A D

B C

a) 25cm2 b) 12.5cm2 c) 50cm2 d) 5cm2

31. Which one of the following is the area of the given ABC?
A

3cm

B C
4cm

a) 2cm2 b) 3cm2 c) 4cm2 d) 6cm2

 337

32. In the given figure, if AOB=700, what is the measure of ACB?

C

700
A B

a) 150 b) 250 c) 350 d) 450

33. In the given circle, AOB is the diameter and CBA=550. What is the measure of
CAB?
C

O B
A

a) 350 b) 400 c) 450 d) 600

34. What is the area of the parallelogram ABCD given in the figure?
E
D C

4 cm

A B
5cm

a) 10cm2 b) 15cm2 c) 20cm2 d) 25cm2

35. If the area of ABC is 6cm2, then find the height of AB.
A

B C
4cm

a) 3cm b) 4 cm c) 5cm d) 6cm

36. In the given square ABCD, if the length of each side is 2cm then find the length of the
diagonal BD.
2
D C

A B

a) 2√2 cm b) √2 cm c) 2 cm d) 4 cm
 338

37. In the given figure, APB = 450. Find the measure of AQB.
P
Q

A C
B

a) 400 b) 450 c) 600 d) 750

38. What is the measure of ABC in the given figure?
B

A C

a) 450 b) 600 c) 750 d) 900

39. If PQRS is a cyclic quadrilateral and PRS = 800, then what is the value of PQR?
S

R
P

Q
0
a) 80 b) 900 c) 1000 d) 1200
40. In the given figure, PQRS is a trapezium. If PQ = 10cm, SR = 16cm and PQSR, then
what is the area of the trapezium PQRS?
10cm
P Q

10cm

S
R
16cm

a) 102cm2 b) 104cm2 c) 106cm2 d) 108cm2

41. In the given figure, X = 300. Then find the measure of y.

a) 450 b) 600 c) 750 d) 900

 339

42. In the adjoining figure, L is the center of the circle, MN is the diameter and M is the
point of contact. If MCL = 550, then what is the measure of CLN?
C
0 0 0 0
a) 125 b) 135 c) 145 d) 155

N M
L
43. What is the mean of 10 and 12?
a) 10 b) 11 c) 12 d) 13

44. What is the cumulative frequency of the following data?

X 5 10 15 20 25
Y 5 10 7 11 13
a) 13 b) 26 c) 36 d) 46

45. If 𝑋̅ = 90 and ∑ 𝑓𝑥 = 900 then what is the number of frequency?

a) 5 b) 10 c) 15 d) 20
46. When a coin is tossed twice, what is the probability of getting H both times?
1 1 1 2
a) b) c) d)
2 3 4 4
47. What is the total sample space of a dice?
a) 2 b) 4 c) 6 d) 8

48. Which one of the following is the area of the given ABC?
A


B C
a

1 1
a) ac sin b) sin c)ac sin d)AC sin
2 3

49. What is the area of the triangle in the given figure?

A

12cm

0
B 45
C
15 2cm

a) 45cm b) 75cm c) 90cm d) 110cm

 340

50. In the given triangle ABC, ABC = 300, BC = 12cm and the area of the ABC =
27cm2. Then what is the length of AB?
A

0
B 30
C
1 2cm

a) 6cm b) 15cm c) 12cm d) 9cm

Answer Key

1. (d) 2. (a) 3. (d) 4. (a) 5. (b)

7. (c) 8. (d) 9. (b) 10. (d)
6. (b)
12. (a) 13. (a) 14. (c) 15. (a)
11. (c)
17. (a) 18. (b) 19. (d) 20. (a)
16. (c)
22. (a) 23. (b) 24. (d) 25. (c)
21. (b)
27. (c) 28. (d) 29. (b) 30. (b)
26. (d)
32. (c) 33. (a) 34. (c) 35. (a)
31. (d)
37. (b) 38. (d) 39. (c) 40. (b)
36. (a)
42. (c) 43. (b) 44. (d) 45. (b)
41. (b)
47. (c) 48. (a) 49. (c) 50. (d)
46. (c)
 341

Appendix D

कक्षा १० गणित त्तवषयको उपलब्धि परीक्षा २०७५

ल दिइएका प्रत्येक प्रश्नलाई सािधानीपि
ू क
व पढी प्रश्नमा सोधधएका कुरालाई राम्ररी सोच विचार र्था मनन ् गरी
दिईएका ४ िटा विकलपहरू मध्ये सही विकलप छानी उक् विकलपमा (√) धचन्ह लगाउनुहोस ् ।

१) दिइएको धचत्रमा n̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅

(𝐴𝑈𝐵) बरािर लका विकलपमध्ये कुन ठीक हो ?
U
A B

a
h m c
e o
p d
f

a) {a, h} b) {m, e} c) {c, o, p} d) {d, f}

२) दिइएको धचत्रमा ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ को मान लका विकलप मध्ये कुन चाही हो ?
n(𝑃𝑈𝑄𝑈𝑅)
P Q U
10 11
2
4 12
1 7
5
6 8 9
15 3

16 13 14
17
R
a) 3 b) 4 c) 5 d) 6
३) यदि M अंकक मल
ू य र D छूट रकम भए बबक्रयमूलय कत हुन्छ ?
a) M b) D c) M + D d) M - D
४) यदि एउटा कलम रू १०० मा ककनेर २ िषव पतछ रू ८० मा बेच्िा कत रकम ह्रास हुन्छ ?
a) Rs. 20 b) Rs. 80 c) Rs. 120 d) Rs. 110
५) अंकक मूलय रू १०० भएको पस्
ु कमा १३ भ्याट लगाउाँ िा िम्मा बबक्रय मल
ू य कत हुन्छ ?
a) Rs. 110 b) Rs. 113 c) Rs. 87 d) Rs. 115
६) २० छुट दिई एउटा िडी बबक्रीगिाव ग्राहकले रू ८० मा उक् िडी पायो भने उक् िडडको अंकक मल
ू य
कत होला ?
a) Rs. 80 b) Rs. 100 c) Rs. 60 d) Rs. 120
७) एउट ग्राहकले एउटा रे डडयो १३ भ्याट सदह रू १३२० मा ककन्यो भने उक् रे डडयोको भ्याट बाहे कको
मूलय कत होला ?
a) Rs.1143 b) Rs. 1117 c) Rs. 1000 d) Rs. 1100
८) एउटा गाउाँ को िनसंख्या १०,००० छ । यदि उक् गाउाँ को बावषवक िनसंख्या बद्
ृ धधिर १० भए २ िषव
पतछको िनसंख्या कत होला ?
a) 11,000 b) 12,000 c) 10,010 d) 12,100
९) १ अमेररकन डलरको क ारी ररयल कत हुन्छ ?(१ अमेररकन डलर बरािर रू १००, १ क ारी ररयल
बरािर रू २५)
a) 3 b) 4 c) 5 d) 6
१०) यदि कुनै गोलाको स हको क्ेत्रफल ५४४४ िगव से.लम. भए उक् गोलाको आय न कत होला ?
2 2 2
a) 38880 cm b) 38800 cm c) 5444 cm d) 38808 cm2
११) आधार ४ से.लम. र उचाइ ३ से.लम. भएको समकोि बत्रभुिको क्ेत्रफल कत हुन्छ ?
2 2 2
a) 2 cm b) 3 cm c) 4 cm d) 6 cm2
 342

१२) दिइएको धचत्रमा अधव गोलाको आय न कत हुन्छ ?

r = 10cm

a) 2095.24 cm2 b) 2095 cm2 c) 2096 cm2 d) 2095.25 cm2

१३) दिइएको सोलीको परू ा स हको क्ेत्रफल कत हुन्छ ?

24cm

25cm

a) 704 cm2 b) 703 cm2 c) 702 cm2 d) 701 cm2

१४) एउटा बत्रभि
ु ाकार वप्रज्मको आय ाकार पाटाहरूको क्ेत्रफल ६०० िगव से. लम. र उचाइ २० से. लम. भए
आधारको पररलमत कत हुन्छ ?
a) 20 cm b) 25 cm c) 30 cm d) 35 cm
१५) साँगैको धचत्रमा दिइएको िेलनाको बक्रस हको क्ेत्रफल कत हुन्छ ?

20cm

4cm

a) 1760 cm2 b) 1700 cm2 c) 1730 cm2 d) 1740 cm2

१६) दिइएको बत्रभि

ु को क्ेत्रफल कत हुन्छ ?
A

20cm 13cm

B 21cm
2
a) 106 cm b) 116 cm2 c) 126 cm2 d) 136 cm2
१७) दिइएको वप्रज्मको आय न 2520cm भए उक् वप्रज्मको उचाइ कत हुन्छ ?
3

24cm

25cm

a) 30 cm b) 40 cm c) 50 cm d) 60 cm
 343

१८) दिइएको समस्या 5x2× y × xy-2 को सरलीकरि लका मध्ये कुन हुन्छ ?
5𝑥 2 5𝑥 3
a) b) c) 5𝑥𝑦 3 d) 5𝑥 2 𝑦
𝑦 𝑦
𝑥 𝑦
१९) दिइएको समस्या + सरलीकरि गिाव कत हुन्छ ?
𝑥+𝑦 𝑥+𝑦
a) 0 b)(x + y)2 c) x + y d) 1
२०) दिइएका अलभब्यन्िकहरू (x + xy) / (x - y ) को म. स. कत हुन्छ ?
2 2 2

a) x + y b) (x + y)(x - y) c) (x + y)2 d) x2- y2

२१) दिइएका अलभब्यन्िकहरू a2+ 2ab + b2 र (a + b)2 को ल. स. कत हुन्छ ?
a) (a + b) b) (a + b)2 c) (a + b) (a - b) d) (a - b)2
43 62
२२) दिइएको िा ाङ्क सम्बन्धी समस्या 5
× को मान कत हुन्छ ?
2 32
a) 2 b) 4 c) 6 d) 8
3𝑥+2+3𝑥
२३) िा ाङ्क सम्बन्धी समस्या को मान लका मध्ये कुन हुन्छ ?
5.3𝑥
a) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4
1
२४) सलमकरि 5𝑥 = 25, हलगिाव x को मान लको मध्ये कुन हुन्छ ?
a) 2 b)-1 c) 1 d)-2
२५) दिइएको सडव सम्बन्धी समस्या √125 − √45 + √5 को मान कत हुन्छ ?

𝑎) √5 b) 2√5 c) 3√5 d) 4√5

२६) कुनै प्राकृत क संख्याको िगवमा 5 िोड्िा 41 हुन्छ भने उक् संख्या कत होला ?
a) 3 b) 4 c) 5 d) 6
२७) कुनै संख्यामा यसको 13 िोडिा 40 हुन्छ भने उक् संख्या कत होला ?
a) 10 b) 20 c) 30 d) 40
२८) छोराको उमेर बाबुको उमेरको 14 छ । उनीहरू िब
ु क
ै ो उमेरको योग 50 िषव भए बाबक
ु ो हालको उमेर
कत होला?
a) 8 b) 16 c) 32 d) 40
√2√2
3
२९) तनम्न सडव को गुिनफल लको मध्ये कुन हो ?

a) 2 b) 4 c) 6 d) 8
३०) दिइएको समानान् र च भ
ुव ि
ु ABCD को क्ेत्रफल 25 cm भए ABC को क्ेत्रफल कत हुन्छ ?
2

A D

B C
2
a) 25 cm b) 12.5 cm2
c) 50 cm2 d) 5 cm2
३१) दिइएको बत्रभि
ु ABC को क्ेत्रफल लका मध्ये कुन हो ?
A

3cm

B C
4cm
a) 2 cm2 b) 3 cm2 c) 4 cm2 d) 6 cm2
 344

३२) दिइएको धचत्रमा AOB = 700 भए ACB को मान कत हुन्छ ?

C

700
A B

a) 150 b) 250 c) 350 d) 450

३३) दिइएको ित्त
ृ मा AOB व्यास हो र CBA = 550 भए CAB को मान कत हुन्छ ?
C

O B
A

a) 350 b) 400 c) 450 d) 600

३४) दिइएको समानान् र च भ
ु ुि
व ABCD को क्ेत्रफल कत हुन्छ ?
E
D C

4 cm

A B
5cm
2
a) 10 cm b) 15 cm2 c) 20 cm2 d) 25 cm2
३५) दिइएको बत्रभि
ु ABC को क्ेत्रफल 6 cm भए उचाइ AB कत होला ?
2

B C
4cm
a) 3 cm b) 4 cm c) 5 cm d) 6 cm
३६) दिइएको िगव ABCD मा प्रत्येक भि
ु ाको नाप 2 cm भए विकिव BD को नाप कत होला ?
2
D C

A B
a) 2√2 cm b) √2 cm c) 2 cm d) 4cm
 345

३७) दिइएको धचत्रमा APB = 450 भए AQB को मान कत होला ?

P
Q

A C
B

0
a) 40 b) 450 c) 600 d) 750
३८) दिइएको धचत्रमा ABC को नाप कत हुन्छ ?
B

A C

a) 450 b) 600 c) 750 d) 900

३९) यदि PQRS चक्रीय च भ
ु ि
ुव हो र PRS = 80 भएPQR को मान कत हुन्छ ?
0

a) 800 b) 900 c) 1000 d) 1200

S

R
P

४०) दिइएको समलम्ि च भ

ु ि
ुव PQRS मा PQ = 10 cm, SR = 16 cm र PQSR भए PQRS को
क्ेत्रफल कत हुन्छ ?
10cm
P Q

10cm

S
R
16cm

a) 102 cm2 b) 104 cm2 c) 106 cm2 d) 108 cm2

४१) दिइएको धचत्रमा X = 30 भए y को मान कत हुन्छ ?
0

a) 450 b) 600 c) 750 d) 900

४२) धचत्रमा, L ित्त
ृ को केन्र विन्ि ु MN ब्यास र M स्पशवविन्ि ु छ । यदि MCL = 55 भए CLN
0

कत होला ? C

a) 1250 b) 1350 c) 1450 d) 1550

N M
L
 346

४३) 10 र 12 को मध्यविन्ि ु कत हुन्छ ?

a) 10 b) 11 c) 12 d) 13
४४) दिइएको थ्याङ्कको संजचच बारम्बार ा कत हुन्छ ?
X 5 10 15 20 25
Y 5 10 7 11 13
a) 13 b) 26 c) 36 d) 46
४५) यदि 𝑋̅ = 90 र ∑ 𝑓𝑥 = 900 भए बारम्बार ा कत हुन्छ ?
a) 5 b) 10 c) 15 d) 20
४६) एउटा लसक्कालाई 2 पटक उफाविा ििु ै पटक H आउने सम्भािना कत हुन्छ ?
1 1 1 2
a) b) c) d)
2 3 4 4
४७) एउटा िनाकार डाइस उफाविा आउन सक्ने िम्मा नमूना क्ेत्र लको मध्येक कुन हो
a) 2 b) 4 c) 6 d) 8
४८) दिइएको बत्रभि
ु ABC को क्ेत्रफल लका मध्ये कुन हो ?
A

B  C
a
1 1
a) ac sin b) sin c)ac sin d)AC sin
2 3
४९) दिइएको बत्रभि
ु को क्ेत्रफल कत हुन्छ ?
A

12cm

0
45 C
15 2

a) 45 cm b) 75 cm c) 90 cm d) 110 cm
५०) दिइएको ABC मा ABC = 30 , BC = 12cm र ABC को क्ेत्रफल 27cm भए भि
0 2
ु ा AB को
लम्बाइ कत हुन्छ ?
A

0
30
C
1 2cm

a) 6 cm b)15 cm c) 12 cm d) 9 cm









 347

उिर कुब्जिका


1. (d) 2. (a) 3. (d) 4. (a) 5. (b)
6. (b) 7. (c) 8. (d) 9. (b) 10. (d)
11. (c) 12. (a) 13. (a) 14. (c) 15. (a)
16. (c) 17. (a) 18. (b) 19. (d) 20. (a)
21. (b) 22. (a) 23. (b) 24. (d) 25. (c)
26. (d) 27. (c) 28. (d) 29. (b) 30. (b)
31. (d) 32. (c) 33. (a) 34. (c) 35. (a)
36. (a) 37. (b) 38. (d) 39. (c) 40. (b)
41. (b) 42. (c) 43. (b) 44. (d) 45. (b)
46. (c) 47. (c) 48. (a) 49. (c) 50. (d)
 348

Appendix E

Classroom Learning Behavior Questionnaire

Name of the Student: Age:

Name of the School: Sex:
District: Ethnicity:
Carefully read the following classroom behavior types that students might exhibit and write
inside the box with the alphabet indicating to what degree you exhibit or match the behaviors
you do. Use the following response scale codes to respond to each item in the alongside box.
A- consistently B- frequently C- sometimes D- rarely E- never
01 I learn mathematical concepts and items by imitating them as given by the
teacher.
02 I like to practice the problem related to the exercise with the help of teachers’
hints in the math class.
03 I enjoy practicing and doing exercises in the math class.
04 I learn mathematical concepts, structures, and formulae through constant
repetitions.
05 It is my experience that we can learn math even without keeping quiet (e.g.
playing with objects, sticking a 'tail' to friends' back, throwing objects,
destroying objects, instruments, books, etc.).
06 I feel comfortable and have fun while learning new things in the math class.
07 I like to go to the front of the class to share my ideas with peers to solve the
problem in the math class.
08 I listen and follow the teachers' instructions and suggestions very attentively
while practicing mathematical problems.
09 New and challenging mathematical problems make me engaged for a long.
10 I feel excited when I am able to solve new mathematical problems.
11 I like to practice math alone with my own effort.
12 I make several attempts to solve mathematical problems regularly in the
classroom without any instruction from other(s).
13 In doing math, I usually try to find out ideas for solving problems through
personal initiatives.
14 I am used to solving mathematical problems at home and at school.
15 I do mathematical activities best when I am independent.
16 I like practicing and learning math by competing with my peers.
17 I remain silent in the math class rather than asking questions.
18 I help my friends and also take help them when necessary in the math class.
19 I react immediately against the teacher or friends if they ignore my issue(s).
20 I think I like to do mathematical activities in the class with full
responsibilities.
21 I can do mathematical activities best as group work.
22 I feel joyful to take part in classroom discussions in the math class.
23 I feel it easy to learn some math problems through interaction rather than
other method (s).
24 I like working in cooperation with my peers in the classroom.
25 I hesitate to work in a team while learning mathematical problems
26 It is interesting to sit at the back of the classroom and stare out of the window.
27 I learn math with active involvement mainly by doing tasks in the classroom.
28 I talk about non-instructional/private topics in math classes.
29 In the math class, I immediately ask the teacher for clarification when I am
confused.
30 I also participate with neighboring friends talking and whispering in the class.
 349

Appendix F

कक्षाकोठामा त्तवद्यार्थीहरुको गणित भसकाइ धयवहारसम्बजिी प्रश्नावली

विद्यार्थीको नामः उमेरः कक्ाः

विद्यालयको नामः ललङ्गः जिललाः िात ः
लका व्यिहारहरुको अध्ययन गरी गणि विषयको कक्ामा पाईले िेखाउने िा पाईसाँग लमलने ब्यिहारमध्ये
ल दिइएका बााँया फवको खाली कोठामा सधै गने भए A, बारम्िार गने भए B, कदहलेकााँदह गने भए C, अललकत
मात्र गने भए D र कदहलयै नगने भए E लेख्नुहोस ् ।
नोटः प्रस् ु प्रश्नािली विद्यािाररधध अध्ययनका लाधग यार गररएको हो । थ्याङ्कको प्रस् ु ीकरि र्था
विश्लेषि गने क्रममा उत्तरिा ाको नाम र्थर गोप्य राणखने छ ।
०१ म गणि का धारिा र समस्यालाई लशक्कले गरे को आधारमा अनक
ु रि गरे र लसक्छु ।
०२ म कक्मा गणि ीय समस्या समाधान गिाव लशक्कले दिएका संके का आधारमा अभ्यास गनव रुचाउाँ छु ।
०३ मलाई कक्ाकोठामा गणि क लसकाइ र्था अभ्यास गिाव आनन्ि लाग्छ ।
०४ म गणि का धारिा, संरचना र सूत्रहरुलाई पटकपटक िोहो¥याएर लसक्छु ।
०५ कक्ाकोठामा शान् एिम ् जस्र्थर नभएर (िस् ःै सार्थीलाई पुच्छर लगाइदिने, चीिविि, सामान, कक ाि आदि
भााँच्ने, च्यात्ने, फालने िस् ा काम गरे र) गणि पतन लसक्न सककने मेरो अनुभि छ ।
०६ मलाई कक्ा कोठामा गणि का नयााँ कुराहरु लसक्िा सहि र रमाइलो लाग्छ ।
०७ गणि ीय समस्या समाधान गिाव कक्ाकोठाको अतिजल र गएर सार्थीहरुसाँग छलफल र्था गणि सम्बन्धी
आफ्ना विचार आिानप्रिान गनव रुचाउाँ छु ।
०८ गणि ीय समस्या समाधान गिाव म लशक्कले दिएको तनिेशन र सझ
ु ािलाई ज्यािै ध्यानपि
ू क
व सन्
ु छु र
पालना गछुव ।
०९ नयााँ र चन
ु ौत पूिव गणि ीय समस्या भएका खण्डमा म लामो समयसम्म पतन लागीपरेर लसककरहन सक्छु ।
१० नयााँ गणि ीय समस्या समाधान गनव सक्िा असाध्यै खश
ु ी हुन्छु ।
११ म एकान् मा एक्लै र आफ्नै प्रयासले गणि ीय अभ्यास गनव रुचाउछु ।
१२ म सधै कक्ामा अरु कसैको तनिेशनविनै आफैले अनेक प्रयत्न गरे र गणि ीय समस्या समाधान गछुव ।
१३ म गणि ीय समस्या समाधान गिाव आफ्नै प्रयत्नले हल गने ौर ररकाहरु पत्ता लगाउने कोलशश गछुव ।
१४ िर र विद्यालयमा गणि ीय समस्याको आफै अभ्यास गने मेरो बानी छ ।
१५ स्ि न्त्र ापूिक
व लसक्ने अिसर पाएमा म गणि ीय कक्रयाकलाप राम्ररी गनेगछुव ।
१६ मलाई सहपाठीहरुसाँग प्रत स्पधाव गिै गणि अभ्यास र लसकाइ गनव मनपछव ।
१७ गणि को कक्ामा प्रश्न सोध्नभ
ु न्िा बरु म चप
ु लागेर बस्छु ।
१८ आिश्यक परेमा म कक्ामा सार्थीहरुसाँग सहयोगको आिानप्रिान गछव .
१९ मैले उठाएको कुरालाई लशक्क र सार्थीहरुले बेिास् ा गररदिएमा म ुरुन् प्रत कक्रया गछुव ।
२० म कक्ामा गणि ीय कक्रयाकलाप गिाव पूिव जिम्मेिारीका सार्थ गनव रुचाउाँ छु ।
२१ समह
ू मा गणि ीय कक्रयाकलाप गिाव म राम्ररी गनव सक्छु ।
२२ गणि विषयको कक्ामा छलफलमा सहभागी हुाँिा मलाई आनन्ि आउाँ छ ।
२३ केही गणि ीय समस्याहरु अरु ररकाले भन्िा अजत क्र् रयाका माध्यमले लसक्िा सजिलो लाग्छ ।
२४ मलाई कक्ाकोठामा अरु सार्थीहरुसाँग एक–आपसी सहयोगले काम गनव मन पछव ।
२५ गणि ीय समस्या लसकाइ गिाव सार्थीहरुसाँगको टोलीमा रहेर काम गनव मलाई धक लाग्छ ।
२६ कक्ाकोठाको पछाडड बसेर झ्यालिाट बादहर हेन व खूब आनन्ि आउाँ छ ।
२७ म कक्ामा सकक्रय संलग्न ाका सार्थ कायव गरे र गणि लसक्छु ।
२८ म गणि कक्ामा तनिी विषयमा पतन गफगाफ (सार्थीहरु साँग) गने गछुव ।
२९ गणि कक्ामा कुनै कुरा निानेमा िा िवु िधा भएमा म ुरुन् लशक्कलाई सोध्छु .
३० कक्ाकोठामा छे उछाउमा बस्ने सार्थीहरुले कानेखस
ु ी र गफगाफ गिाव म पतन सरीक हुने गछुव ।
 350

Appendix G

Classroom Learning Behavior Checklist

Name of the school: Name of the Teacher:
Read carefully the following student behavior expressions that are likely to be exhibited by students in
mathematics class and, in each case, tick ( ) the box indicating the presence of the given behavior that
the above-mentioned student exhibits in the class. Note that you need not tick if the behavior is absence in
the student.
Mathematics Classroom Learning Behavior Checklist
Students
SN Student behavior expressions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1. Learns math concepts and items by -      -    - 
imitation.
2. Always practices math exercises. -   -  -     - 
3. Enjoy doing exercises in the math -  -  -   - -   -
class.
4. Follows teachers' instructions and    -  - -  -  - 
suggestions.
5. Shows great concern for learning. -           
6. Always talks about non-instructional  -  -     - - - 
topics.
7. Is inattentive. -  -  -  -     
8. Does not do classwork and      - - - -  - -
homework.
9. Likes to practice math alone. - -    -     - -
10. Seems to be restless.  - - -  - -  - - - -
11. Takes personal initiatives to solve the -          - -
problem.
12. Can do mathematics activities -   -        -
independently.
13. Likes to compete to do math with -          - 
peers.
14. Remains silent and don't put query.  - - -  - - - -  - 
15. Sits at the back and stare out of the  - - -   - - - -  
window.
16. Seats in the front and shares ideas -    -   -   - 
with peers.
17. Feels joyful in-class discussion. -    -      - 
18. Whispers/mutters/makes loud noises.  - - -  -      
19. Likes to do mathematical activities in -    -       -
the group.
20. Don't follow the class rules.  - - - - - - - - - - 
21. Involves actively in the classroom. -  -  -  - -   - -
22. Low-class participation.   -  - - - - -   -
23. Is inactive and puts head on the desk.  - -  - - - - -  - 
24. Low cheerfulness and concentration.   -   -  - -   
 351

Appendix H

अिध सम्रचचत त्तवद्यार्थी अजतरधवाताध सम्बब्जि प्रश्नावली

१. कक्ाकोठामा गणि लसक्िा पाई के गनुव हुन्छ (कसरी लसक्नु हुन्छ) ?

२. पाईको विचारमा कक्ाकोठामा गणि लसकाइलाई के ले रमाइलो बनाउाँ छ ?
३. कक्ाकोठामा गणि लसकाइलाई सफल बनाउन के गनुव पिवछ ?
४. पाईलाई के ले गणि सजिलो िा अपठ्यारो बनाउछ ? लशक्कले कसरी गणि लसकाइमा
सहयोग गनव सक्नह
ु ु न्छ ?
५. गणि कक्ामा लशक्कले प्रश्न सोध्िा पाईलाई कस् ो महशुस हुन्छ ?
६. पाई बढी िसो कुन ररकाले गणि लसकाइ गनव रुचाउनु हुन्छ ? सम्स्यालाई बारम्बार
गरे र/एक्लै सोचबबचार र अभ्यास गरे रअरुसाँग अत कक्रया गरे र ।
७. गणि कक्ामा अगाडड गएर केदह कुरा प्रस् ु गिाव पाईलाई कस् ो महशुस हुन्छ ? ककन ?
८. गणि कक्ामा धेरै िसो समय पाई कसरी (के गरे र) बब ाउनु हुन्छ ?
९. गणि कक्ामा पाई कहााँ(अगाडड, बीच, पछाडड)बस्न रुचाउनु हुन्छ ? ककन ?
१०. गणि विषय अझै राम्ररी लसक्ने सम्बन्धमा पाईको केदह सुझाि छ कक ?
 352

Appendix- I

Semi-structure Interview Analysis Summary Table

Learning Thames No. of Distribution Distribution Symbol Used for

Camps Participant by Place of by Ecology Participant
Residence
Behaviorist  Motivation 3+4+3+2=12 Rural = 3 Hill = 5 FSU1, FSU3, FSU4,
Activities  Engagement Urban = 4 Mountain = 3 MSU2, MSU4, FSR2,
Rural = 2 Tarai = 4 FSR4, MSR1, MSR3,
Urban = 3 MSR6, FSR5
Cognitivist  Prior 3+3+2=8 Rural = 4 Hill = 2 FSU2, FSU5, MSU1,
Activities knowledge Urban = 4 Mountain = 4 MSU5
Tarai = 2 MSU6, FSR3, FSR6,
MSR2, MSR4
Constructivist  Active 2+2=4 Rural = 3 Hill = 2 FSU6, MSU5, FSR1,
Activities participation Urban = 1 Mountain = 1 MSR5
Tarai = 2
 353

Appendix J

Codes of Semi structured Interview Participants

Hill Mountain Tarai

Ecological region
Place of residence Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban
Boys HRB1 HUB1 MRB1 MUB1 TRB1 TUB1
Gender

HRB2 HUB2 MRB2 MUB2 TRB2 TUB2

Girls HRG1 HUG1 MRG1 MUG1 TRG1 TUG1
HRG2 HUG2 MUG2 MUG2 TRG2 TUG2
Total 4 4 4 4 4 4
 354

Appendix K

Internal Consistency Reliability for Six Sub-scales and their Factor Loadings

Extracted Items Factor Reliability

constructs loadings co-efficient
Engagement  I learn mathematical concepts and items by 0.61
imitating them as given by the teacher.
 I like to practice the problem related to the 0.68
exercise with the help of teachers’ hints in the
math class. 0.64
 I enjoy practicing and doing exercises in the 0.68
math class. 0.62
 I learn mathematical concepts, structures and
formulae through constant repetitions. 0.53
 It is my experience that we can learn math even
without keeping quiet (e.g. playing with objects,
sticking a 'tail' to friends' back, throwing objects,
destroying objects, instrument, books, etc.),
Motivation  I feel comfortable and have fun while learning 0.51
new things in the math class.
 I like to go to the front of the class to share my 0.66
ideas with peers to solve the problem in the
math class. 0.76 0.75
 I listen and follow the teachers' instructions and
suggestions very attentively while practicing
mathematical problems. 0.70
 New and challenging mathematical problems
make me engaged for a long. 0.71
 I feel excited when I can solve new
mathematical problems.
Independence  I like to practice math alone with my own effort 0.61
 I make several attempts to solve mathematical 0.65
problems regularly in the classroom without any
instruction from other(s).
 In doing math, I usually try to find out ideas for 0.66 0.76
solving problems through personal initiatives.
 I am used to solving mathematical problems at 0.67
home and at school.
 I do mathematical activities best when I am 0.71
independent.
Responsiveness  I like to practicing and learning math by 0.72
competing with my peers.
 355

 I remain silent in the math class rather than 0.62

asking questions. 0.78
 I help my friends and also take help them when 0.68
necessary in the math class.
 I react immediately against the teacher or friends 0.72
if they ignore my issue(s).
 I think I like to do mathematical activities in the 0.52
class with full responsibilities.
Collaboration  I can do mathematical activities best as group 0.64
work. 0.64
 I feel joyful to take part in classroom
discussions in the math class. 0.63
 I feel it easy to learn some math problems
through interaction rather than another method 0.72
(s).
 I like working in cooperation with my peers in 0.66 0.79
the classroom.
 I hesitate to work in a team while learning
mathematical problems
Participation  It is interesting to sit at the back of the 0.72
classroom and stare out of the window.
 I learn math with active involvement mainly by 0.66
doing tasks in the classroom. 0.76
 I talk about non-instructional/private topics in 0.71
math classes.
 In the math class, I immediately ask the teacher 0.54
for clarification when I am confused.
 I also participate with neighboring friends 0.61
talking and whispering in the class.
 356

Appendix L

Difficulty Level (P-Level) and Discriminating Power (D-Level) of the Test Items

No. of Items No of the examinees giving

correct response P-Level D-Level Remarks
Upper group Lower group
1 42 23 62 0.45 Accepted
2 34 22 54 0.65 Accepted
3 35 23 66 0.72 Accepted
4 28 21 68 0.15 Rejected
5 43 23 61 0.78 Accepted
6 48 24 62 0.87 Accepted
7 45 23 61 0.88 Accepted
8 42 23 65 0.74 Accepted
9 41 20 56 0.89 Accepted
10 43 23 65 0.76 Accepted
11 39 20 66 0.88 Accepted
12 26 18 68 0.33 Accepted
13 30 22 64 0.19 Rejected
14 39 21 57 0.77 Accepted
15 41 23 67 0.91 Accepted
16 38 21 56 0.89 Accepted
17 42 23 58 0.68 Accepted
18 36 21 56 0.31 Accepted
19 24 22 61 0.33 Accepted
20 38 18 56 0.56 Accepted
21 36 16 56 0.48 Accepted
22 41 18 65 0.67 Accepted
23 36 20 60 0.18 Rejected
24 42 23 65 0.78 Accepted
25 38 17 64 0.55 Accepted
26 37 24 65 0.33 Accepted
27 24 11 55 0.33 Accepted
28 26 14 44 0.38 Accepted
29 39 17 57 0.54 Accepted
30 42 23 66 0.39 Accepted
31 28 24 65 0.34 Accepted
32 43 23 68 0.39 Accepted
33 41 18 55 0.32 Accepted
34 22 20 71 0.19 Rejected
 357

35 44 24 65 0.93 Accepted

36 31 22 54 0.33 Accepted
37 36 22 56 0.73 Accepted
38 39 18 65 0.78 Accepted
39 28 23 54 0.12 Rejected
40 38 17 66 0.73 Accepted
41 42 24 61 0.34 Accepted
42 34 21 52 0.21 Rejected
43 39 21 72 0.28 Rejected
44 41 23 68 0.81 Accepted
45 34 22 63 0.31 Accepted
46 37 22 61 0.69 Accepted
47 27 16 65 0.34 Accepted
48 36 14 68 0.36 Accepted
49 41 23 61 0.84 Accepted
50 45 21 60 0.94 Accepted
51 34 20 56 0.77 Accepted
52 39 23 62 0.73 Accepted
53 41 22 58 0.69 Accepted
54 36 21 76 0.28 Rejected
55 32 23 56 0.33 Accepted
56 28 22 30 0.27 Rejected
57 37 14 46 0.46 Accepted
58 32 14 45 0.53 Accepted
59 34 23 65 0.79 Accepted
60 31 22 60 0.26 Rejected
 358

Appendix M

Descriptive Statistics of Students' Attitudes (Item wise and Subscale) towards

Mathematics

Attitude Subscales Response Scales Item wise Subscale

Value SD D N A SA M SD M SD
01 Mathematics is a very worthwhile 2 2 15 55 466 4.82 0.52
and necessary subject.
02 I want to develop my mathematical 3 5 39 134 359 4.56 0.71
skills.
03 Mathematics helps develop the mind 3 9 30 127 371 4.58 0.72
and teacher a person to think.
04 Mathematics is important in everyday 2 6 20 91 421 4.71 0.62
life.
05 Mathematics is one of the most 3 12 38 123 364 4.54 0.76
important subjects for people to study.
06 Math courses would be very helpful no 4 16 69 190 261 4.27 0.85 4.17 0.77
matter what I decide to study.
07 I can think of many ways that I use 15 23 121 240 141 3.87 0.94
math outside of school.
08 I think studying advanced mathematics 7 19 89 186 239 4.17 0.91
is useful.
09 I believe studying math helps me with 8 10 45 163 314 4.42 0.83
problem-solving in other areas.
10 A strong math background could help 261 184 66 20 9 1.76 0.92
me in my professional life.
Enjoyment
11 I get a great deal of satisfaction out of 10 11 57 152 310 4.37 0.88
solving a mathematics problem.
12 I have usually enjoyed studying 12 20 92 223 193 4.05 0.93
mathematics at school.
13 I like to solve new problems in 6 17 73 198 246 4.22 0.87
mathematics.
14 I would prefer to do an assignment in 19 39 155 201 126 3.70 1.01
math to writing an essay.
15 I really like mathematics. 19 31 109 191 190 3.93 1.04
16 I am happier in a math class than in any 16 37 130 227 130 3.77 0.98
other class.
17 Mathematics is a very interesting 19 32 109 189 191 3.93 1.05 4.00 0.97
subject.
18 I am comfortable expressing my ideas 9 33 100 202 196 4.00 0.97
on how to look for solutions to a
difficult problem in math.
 359

19 I am comfortable answering questions 19 24 87 183 227 4.06 1.03

in math class.
20 Mathematics is dull and boring. 37 71 109 101 222 4.06 1.03
Self Confidence
21 Mathematics is one of my most 64 112 122 81 161 3.3. 1.39
dreaded subjects.
22 When I hear the word mathematics, I 28 54 77 88 293 4.04 1.24
have a feeling of dislike.
23 My mind goes blank, and I am unable 51 86 102 104 197 3.57 1.36
to think clearly when working with
mathematics.
24 Studying mathematics makes me feel 65 111 109 112 143 3.29 1.36
nervous.
25 Mathematics makes me feel 49 86 108 117 180 3.54 1.33
uncomfortable.
26 I am always under a terrible strain in a 52 62 97 118 211 3.69 1.34
math class.
27 It makes me nervous to even think 29 64 104 150 193 3.77 1.20
about
having to do a mathematics problem.
28 I am always confused about my 49 84 115 143 149 3.48 1.28 3.28 1.24
mathematics class.
29 I feel a sense of insecurity when 86 90 113 110 141 3.24 1.41
attempting mathematics.
30 Mathematics does not scare me at all. 58 63 126 170 123 3.44 1.25
31 I have a lot of self-confidence when it 37 47 158 182 116 3.54 1.12
comes to mathematics.
32 I can solve mathematics problems 61 82 174 168 55 3.14 1.14
without too much difficulty.
33 I expect to do fairly well in any math 27 41 143 201 128 3.67 1.07
class I take.
34 I learn mathematics easily. 35 60 154 192 99 3.48 1.10
35 I believe I am good at solving math 39 62 179 179 81 3.37 1.09
problems.
Motivation
36 I am confident that I could learn 42 70 149 189 90 3.40 1.14
advanced mathematics.
37 I plan to take as much mathematics as I 31 46 93 180 190 3.84 1.16
can during my education.
38 The challenge of math appeals to me. 24 34 105 167 210 3.94 1.11
39 I am willing to take more than the 49 57 140 169 125 3.49 1.21
required amount of mathematics. 3.68 1.19
40 I would like to avoid taking 53 49 112 101 225 3.73 1.34
mathematics in college.
 360

Appendix N

Qualitative Descriptions of the Students' Attitudes towards Mathematics

Attitude Subscales
Value Mean Descriptive Qualitative
01 Mathematics is a very worthwhile 4Meaning Interpretation
and necessary subject. 4.82 Strongly agree Highly positive
02 I want to develop my mathematical skills. 4.56 Strongly agree Highly positive
03 Mathematics helps develop the mind and teaches 4.58 Strongly agree Highly positive
a person to think.
04 Mathematics is important in everyday life. 4.71 Strongly agree Highly positive
05 Mathematics is one of the most important subjects 4.54 Strongly agree Highly positive
for people to study.
06 Math courses would be very helpful no matter 4.27 Agree Positive
what I decide to study.
07 I can think of many ways that I use math outside 3.87 Agree Positive
of school.
08 I think studying advanced mathematics is useful. 4.17 Agree Positive
09 I believe studying math helps me with problem- 4.42 Agree Positive
solving in other areas.
10 A strong math background could help me in my 1.76 Disagree Negative
professional life.
Enjoyment
11 I get a great deal of satisfaction out of solving a 4.37 Agree Positive
mathematics problem.
12 I have usually enjoyed studying mathematics at 4.05 Agree Positive
school.
13 I like to solve new problems in mathematics. 4.22 Agree Positive
14 I would prefer to do an assignment in math to 3.70 Agree Positive
writing an essay.
15 I really like mathematics. 3.93 Agree Positive
16 I am happier in a math class than in any other 3.77 Agree Positive
class.
17 Mathematics is a very interesting subject. 3.93 Agree Positive
18 I am comfortable expressing my ideas on how to 4.00 Agree Positive
look for solutions to a difficult problem in math.
19 I am comfortable answering questions in math 4.06 Agree Positive
class.
20 Mathematics is dull and boring. 4.06 Agree Positive
Self Confidence
21 Mathematics is one of my most dreaded subjects. 3.30 Uncertain Neutral
22 When I hear the word mathematics, I have a 4.04 Agree Positive
 361

feeling of dislike.
23 My mind goes blank, and I am unable to think 3.57 Agree Positive
clearly when working with mathematics.
24 Studying mathematics makes me feel nervous. 3.29 Uncertain Neutral
25 Mathematics makes me feel uncomfortable. 3.54 Agree Positive
26 I am always under a terrible strain in a math class. 3.69 Agree Positive
27 It makes me nervous to even think about having 3.77 Agree Positive
to do a mathematics problem.
28 I am always confused about my mathematics 3.48 Uncertain Neutral
class.
29 I feel a sense of insecurity when attempting 3.24 Uncertain Neutral
mathematics.
30 Mathematics does not scare me at all. 3.44 Uncertain Neutral
31 I have a lot of self-confidence when it comes to 3.54 Agree Positive
mathematics.
32 I can solve mathematics problems without too 3.14 Uncertain Neutral
much difficulty.
33 I expect to do fairly well in any math class I take. 3.67 Agree Positive
34 I learn mathematics easily. 3.48 Agree Positive
35 I believe I am good at solving math problems. 3.37 Uncertain Neutral
Motivation
36 I am confident that I could learn advanced 3.40 Uncertain Neutral
mathematics.
37 I plan to take as much mathematics as I can 3.84 Agree Positive
during my education.
38 The challenge of math appeals to me. 3.94 Agree Positive
39 I am willing to take more than the required 3.49 Uncertain Neutral
amount of mathematics.
40 I would like to avoid using mathematics in 3.73 Agree Positive
college.
 362

Appendix O

Descriptive Statistics of Students Learning Behavior (Item Wise and Subscale)

Learning Behavior Subscales Response Scales Item wise Subscale

Engagement E D C B A M SD M SD
01 I learn mathematical concepts and items 1 7 109 208 215 4.16 0.80
by imitating them as given by the
teacher.
02 I like to do practice the problem related 3 19 80 173 265 4.26 0.87
to the exercise with the help of teachers’
hints in the math class. 3.66 1.19
03 I enjoy practicing and doing exercises in 11 18 88 163 260 4.19 0.96
the math class.
04 I learn mathematical concepts, 10 23 135 211 161 3.91 0.93
structures, and formulae through
constant repetitions.
05 It is my experience that we can learn 325 91 61 33 30 1.80 1.19
math even without keeping quiet (e.g.
playing with objects, sticking a 'tail' to
friends' back, throwing objects,
destroying objects, instrument, books,
etc.),
Motivation
06 I feel comfortable and have fun while 5 12 60 173 290 4.35 0.83
learning new things in the math class.
07 I like to go to the front of the class to 4 29 131 163 213 4.02 0.95
share my ideas with peers to solve the
problem in the math class.
08 I listen and follow the teachers' 3 16 57 176 288 4.35 0.82 4.22 0.87
instructions and suggestions very
attentively while practicing
mathematical problems.
09 New and challenging mathematical 9 34 134 204 159 3.87 0.96
problems make me engaged for a long.
10 I feel excited when I can solve new 4 13 49 97 377 4.54 0.81
mathematical problems.
Independence
11 I like to practice math alone with my 48 46 144 140 162 3.60 1.24
effort.
12 I make several attempts to solve 56 92 196 153 43 3.06 1.08
mathematical problems regularly in the
classroom without any instruction from
other(s). 3.69 1.06
13 In doing math, I usually try to find out 23 63 131 166 157 3.69 1.13
 363

ideas for solving problems through

personal initiatives.
14 I am used to solving mathematical 14 46 147 170 163 3.78 1.05
problems at home and at school.
15 I do mathematical activities best when I 3 15 68 166 288 4.34 0.84
am independent.
Responsiveness
16 I like practicing and learning math by 17 28 99 145 251 4.08 1.06
competing with my peers.
17 I remain silent in the math class rather 218 94 127 68 33 2.27 1.27
than asking questions.
18 I help my friends and also take help 3 14 47 133 343 4.48 0.80 3.77 1.02
them when necessary in the math class.
19 I react immediately against the teacher 11 22 147 172 188 3.93 0.98
or friends if they ignore my issue(s).
20 I think I like to do mathematical 11 31 85 184 229 4.09 0.99
activities in the class with full
responsibilities.
Collaboration
21 I can do mathematical activities best as 16 55 107 177 185 3.85 1.09
group work.
22 I feel joyful to take part in classroom 10 28 85 197 220 4.09 1.96
discussions in the math class.
23 I feel it easy to learn some math 10 25 116 171 218 4.04 0.98 3.84 1.25
problems through interaction rather than
another method (s).
24 I like working in cooperation with my 10 11 30 90 396 4.58 0.84
peers in the classroom.
25 I hesitate to work in a team while 176 78 120 98 68 2.64 1.41
learning mathematical problems
Participation
26 It is interesting to sit at the back of the 306 103 69 34 28 1.84 1.17
classroom and stare out of the window.
27 I learn math with active involvement 27 32 96 182 203 3.93 1.11
mainly by doing tasks in the classroom.
28 I talk about non-instructional/private 197 115 129 67 32 2.30 1.24 2.82 1.14
topics in math classes.
29 In the math class, I immediately ask the 19 30 97 136 258 4.08 1.09
teacher for clarification when I am
confused.
30 I also participate with neighboring 245 139 100 38 18 1.97 1.10
friends talking and whispering in the
class.
 364

Appendix P

Students Learning Behavior with Descriptive Measures and Qualitative Description

Learning Behavior Subscales

Engagement Mean Descriptive Qualitative
meaning description
01 I learn mathematical concepts and items by imitating them as 4.16 Frequently Positive
given by the teacher.
02 I like to do practice the problem related to the exercise with the 4.26 Frequently Positive
help of teachers’ hints in the math class.
03 I enjoy practicing and doing exercises in the math class. 4.19 Frequently Positive
04 I learn mathematical concepts, structures, and formulae through 3.91 Frequently Positive
constant repetitions.
05 It is my experience that we can learn math even without 1.80 Rarely Negative
keeping quiet (e.g. playing with objects, sticking a 'tail' to
friends' back, throwing objects, destroying objects, instrument,
books, etc.),
Motivation
06 I feel comfortable and have fun while learning new things in the 4.35 Frequently Positive
math class.
07 I like to go to the front of the class to share my ideas with peers 4.02 Frequently Positive
to solve the problem in the math class.
08 I listen and follow the teachers' instructions and suggestions 4.35 Frequently Positive
very attentively while practicing mathematical problems.
09 New and challenging mathematical problems make me engaged 3.87 Frequently Positive
for a long.
10 I feel excited when I can solve new mathematical problems. 4.54 Consistently Highly
Positive
Independence
11 I like to practice math alone with my effort. 3.60 Frequently Positive
12 I make several attempts to solve mathematical problems 3.06 Sometimes Neutral
regularly in the classroom without any instruction from other(s).
13 In doing math, I usually try to find out ideas for solving 3.69 Frequently Positive
problems through personal initiatives.
14 I am used to solving mathematical problems at home and at 3.78 Frequently Positive
school.
15 I do mathematical activities best when I am independent. 4.34 Frequently Positive
Responsiveness
16 I like practicing and learning math by competing with my peers. 4.08 Frequently Positive
17 I remain silent in the math class rather than asking questions. 2.27 Rarely Negative
18 I help my friends and also take help them when necessary in the 4.48 Frequently Positive
 365

math class.
19 I react immediately against the teacher or friends if they ignore 3.93 Frequently Positive
my issue(s).
20 I think I like to do mathematical activities in the class with full 4.09 Frequently Positive
responsibilities.
Collaboration
21 I can do mathematical activities best as group work. 3.85 Frequently Positive
22 I feel joyful to take part in classroom discussions in the math 4.09 Frequently Positive
class.
23 I feel it easy to learn some math problems through interaction 4.04 Frequently Positive
rather than another method (s).
24 I like working in cooperation with my peers in the classroom. 4.58 Consistently Highly
Positive
25 I hesitate to work in a team while learning mathematical 2.64 Sometimes Neutral
problems
Participation
26 It is interesting to sit at the back of the classroom and stare out 1.84 Rarely Negative
of the window.
27 I learn math with active involvement mainly by doing tasks in 3.93 Frequently Positive
the classroom.
28 I talk about non-instructional/private topics in math classes. 2.30 Rarely Negative
29 In the math class, I immediately ask the teacher for clarification 4.08 Frequently Positive
when I am confused.
30 I also participate with neighboring friends talking and 1.97 Rarely Negative
whispering in the class.
 366

Appendix Q

Region and Location wise name of Schools Selected for the Study

Urban Location Rural Location

Mountain Solukhumbhu Janajagriti S. S. Solu Mahendrodaya S. S. Salyan

Region Taplejung Janta S. S. Hangdewa Ambegudin S. S. Raja

Hill Panchthar Phidim S.S. Phidim Jalshing S.S Chimphula

Region Okhaldhunga Janajagriti S.S. Okhaldhunga Bhagawoti S. S. Manebhanjayang

Terai Jhapa Adarsha S.S. Ghailadubba Bijaya S.S. Sunmai

Region Sunsari Sarashoti S.S. Itahari Sarashoti S.S. Gadhi

View publication stats