251
Table 7.4.7: Division of pupils feeling happy with teachers’ praise with higher agreement
and lower agreement
5th graders__________________ |
8th graders | |||
Lower happiness |
Higher |
Lower happiness |
Higher | |
Better results than others |
M=3.39,SD=1.34,Mediaπ=4.00 |
M=3.64,SD=1.29,Median=4.00 | ||
49.3%__________ |
50.7% |
40.4% |
59.6% | |
Improvement results than |
M=3.71,SD=1.26,Median=4.00 |
M=3.96,SD=1.19,Median=4.00______ | ||
37.3%_________ |
62,7%_________ |
26.1%_________ |
73.9% ______ | |
More effort than others |
M=3.51,SD=1.30,Median=4.00 |
M=3.49,SD=1.24,Median=4.00______ | ||
45.1%_________ |
54.9% |
47.5% |
52.5% | |
More effort than before |
M=3.82,SD=1.29,Median=4.00 |
M=3.80,SD=1.23,Median=4.00 | ||
33.6%__________ |
66.4%_________ |
33.4%_________ |
66.6%_________ |
Table 7.4.8: Pupils’ perceptions of the frequency Ofdeployment Ofteaching methods and
affective attitudes promoted by these teaching methods according to their feeling happy
with the teacher’s praise
Enjoyment |
Motivation |
Sense Ofsecurity |
Sense of progress_________ |
Deployment | |||
Happy Better results |
5⅛ |
p<.01 |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
RT1TE1IW1IH |
Other |
UC,WD |
IW___________ |
PW,UC,WD,GD~ | ||||
8th |
p<.01 |
UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
RT,TE, | |
Other |
PW |
PW,UC,GD | |||||
Happy |
^5s |
p<,01 |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,RT,TE, |
Other |
UC_________ |
UC__________ |
UC_________ |
UC_________ |
UC | ||
^gS |
p<.01 |
PW,UC,RT, TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT, TE, |
PW,UC,RT, TE, |
PW,RT, TE, | |
Other |
UC | ||||||
Happy More effort than |
p<.01 |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,RT,TE, |
"τξ | |
Other |
UC_________ |
UC__________ |
UC________ |
UC_________ |
PW,UC,RT,GD | ||
^8s |
p<.01 |
PW,UC,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,RT,TE, | |
Other |
RT |
UC1IW | |||||
Happy More effort than |
p<.01 |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW1RT1TE1 IW1IH1WD1GD | |
Other |
UC_________ |
UC__________ |
UC_________ |
UC_________ | |||
8lh |
p<.01 |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW,UC,RT,TE, |
PW1UC1RT1TE1 IW1IH1WD1 GD | |
Other |
IW |
NB. Teaching methods in bold are those where there were significant differences
between the groups. Full details see Appendices 7.4.9-7.4.16.
Table 7.4.8 indicates that there were significant differences in relation to the deployment
and perceived effects on attitudes in relation to almost every teaching method between
pupils who were happy to receive praise.
251
More intriguing information
1. ISO 9000 -- A MARKETING TOOL FOR U.S. AGRIBUSINESS2. The name is absent
3. Agricultural Policy as a Social Engineering Tool
4. Expectation Formation and Endogenous Fluctuations in Aggregate Demand
5. The name is absent
6. Does Presenting Patients’ BMI Increase Documentation of Obesity?
7. Modelling the Effects of Public Support to Small Firms in the UK - Paradise Gained?
8. Une Gestion des ressources humaines à l'interface des organisations : vers une GRH territoriale ?
9. The name is absent
10. The name is absent