I I|GSF hr tt.l.rt!.t tn.!. tr tlltbi - Higher Education Commission

appropnaie when uring lhe pos<strong>tn</strong>e$ only contol gtoup design, a!
the case js in the study in ndd (Tu.knar.1979:3l) [See AppeDdu
41.
4.7.2 Th€ Qusstionnaire:
As shom iD the qu€stiornaite she€! [Se€ aPFDdiLs] rherc
are two sels ofqustions; set (a) contais clos.+ded queslions in
which a fou-poitri $ale is us.d. Here, respoM were r€corded
according to tleii ftEquency uder each scale. Sel(b) is an openenden
rype of questioN- Hqe th€ respoNs were r€corded
accordinS to the nmber oftines a oe<strong>rt</strong>ain response wss sharcd by
othe. students. The itd that got the hiSb€st sc!re wa Put the tut
dd so fonh. In olher words, lh. rcsponts were r€.rrded acording
!o then fie{uency. ths, of cou6e' was dole with the tespoDss
wh€thq w€re th€y tu or agaiNt the exp€rimt (s.. section 6.12)-
4.7.3 Chssroom Olx€rvations:
The dala galhered from cla$room obseraations were put nto
two nain categpri€s (for efuple positive and legative) Ihis
nEa6 th.t &y obsred event that went ur favor of leadler_
colered approach rcqoirement! was Pul under ihe Posi$ve cltegory
ud thar which was agaist was classified uder lhe negative
't
category- The obseflatios oblair€d eer€ listed acc.rdjnS to tleir
nequency. This procedN was to the t<strong>hr</strong>ee schools As this was
doDq pmper explanation was gjver to each Elevet iteD. [S@
se4don 6.I .31
To end this chaprer, one can say thaL LIE experirne *as
cani€d out .c.ordinA to the plan 5nd as indicated in tlF proposal lt
must be remember that alrbst all the headings thal are included h
the bethodolos/ chaptd wqe based on prcvioB exp€tience fomd
in rcs€rch books of social sci€nce. The difier€nc€, if any, ftom
olt|er rcselrch studies of lhis n6<strong>hr</strong>e, was a rcsult of th€
GquircN s of the stDdy irself ed of iti specific contcn. Fo.
sanpl€, thc ldapratioD iteD Ey not b€ fourd b other r€*arch
s<strong>hr</strong>di€s of rhjs B?e, bla ib inclusion herc qa r€cessary to lhe
s@exs of tlc rhis sildy.