Page 220 - IJET_July2021_final
P. 220

1.  To study  the  existing  level  of  and Socioeconomic status parameters.
            scientific  creativity  among  high  Based on scores on the Test of General
            school students.                    Mental Ability, these 583 students were
                                                further  divided  into  three groups  i.e.
        2.  To  study  the  effect  of  EduSat
            lectures  on  different  dimensions   high, average, and low intelligence levels
            of  scientific  creativity  among  high   group, Similarly, all 583  students  were
            school students.                    also enlisted into three groups having a
                                                high, average, and low Socio-economic
        3.  To study the effect of EduSat lectures   status based  on  their Socio-economic
            on overall scientific creativity among   Status  Scale  scores. The  further
            high school students.               analysis showed that 42 students were
                                                common to the  high  intelligence  as
        Hypotheses                              well  as high  socioeconomic status.
        The    following   hypotheses    were   These 42  common subjects/students
        generated for the study:                were divided randomly into two groups
                                                equally i.e. 21 to the control group and
        1.  After the exposure to EduSat        21 to the experimental group. The same
            lectures,  there  is  no  significant   procedure  was followed  while  dividing
            difference  between  pre-test  and   the  students  into  the  control group
            post-test levels of scientific creativity   and  the experimental group  from the
            among high school students.         average group  (92  students)  and  the
        2.  After the exposure to EduSat        lower group (72 students) of intelligence
            lectures,  there  is  no  significant   and  socio-economic  parameters. Out
            difference  between  the  scientific   of these 206 common subjects in high,
            creativity of experimental and      average, and low groups of intelligence
            control group students.             and  socio-economic  parameters, 200
                                                were selected by weeding  out two
        Methodology                             students  from the high,  average, and
                                                low groups.  Hence, in this way, a sample
        Sample
                                                of 200 students was obtained randomly
        A sample of 200 science students from  divided  into  control  and  experimental
        the IXth class of two urban and two rural  groups 100 each. Through equating and
        area government schools of the Sonipat  matching  of  subjects,  an  attempt  was
        district of Haryana was drawn randomly.  made to eliminate systematic bias and
        In  the  first  instance,  20  schools  were  minimize  the  effect  of  the  intervening
        approached  for the experiment but  variables. Thereafter, dividing  the
        finally, four schools agreed to cooperate.  subjects to the control and experimental
        In total, 583 students were studying in  group  randomly, the measures of two
        the IXth class of those four schools. All  intervening  variables  (intelligence  and
        the 583 students were administered to  socio-economic status) between the
        Jalota’s (1972)  Group  Test of  General  control and the experimental groups
        Mental Ability (Hindi)  and  Socio-     were  tested  statistically, to  ensure
        economic  Status  Scale  by  Kulshreshta  the  equivalence  of  the  two  groups.
        (1972)  to equate  them on  intelligence  The ‘t’-test was applied to find out the

         210                                        Indian Journal of Educational Technology
                                                              Volume 3, Issue 2, July 2021
   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225