Post on 26-Feb-2023
PERSONALITY PROFILES OF OVER-AND UNDER-ACHIEVERS IN PROFESSIONAL COURSES
THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN
EDUCATION
BY
SHAMA RANI
Under the supervision of
Prof. Ramesh Chandra Deva
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY
ALIGARH
1994
I'/io'in: Fxi/ . 2J0A7 liifi . 8362
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY
ALIGARH. 202 002. U.P.
Dated c/^I^M
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis entitled
"Personality Profiles of Over-and Under-achievers in
Professional Courses' submitted by Miss Shatna Rani for
Ph.D. (Education) Degree of Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh is her original contribution. This thesis has been
ccnn|>ie ed under my guidance and supervision. In my humble
judgement, the work is fit for submission for the degree
of Ph.D. in Education and can be considered a contribution
to our knowledge of the subject.
\c^~J>
(Prof. R.C. Deva)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I feel profound elation in recording my deep sense
of gratitude to my learned supervisor, Prof. Ramesh
Chandra Deva, Department of Education, Aligarh Muslim
University, Aligarh for his unreserved help, omniscient
guidance, constructive criticism, unflagging interest and
unflinching support.
I owe my sincere thanks to Prof. All Akhtar Khan,
Chairman, Department of Education, Aligarh Muslim
University for providing me necessary facilities.
I wish to express my thanks to Dr. Najmul Haq and
Dr. C.P.S. Chauhafi for their invaluable help in the
present task.
I wish to place on record my indebtedness to my
father, aunt and grandmother for their affectionate
inspiration and constant encouragement.
I am also thankful to all the authorities and
students under whose cooperation the study proceeded
smoothly.
Delighted I feel to convey my sincere thanks to all
ray friends for helping me during the completion of my
work.
I am grateful to the Librarian, Maulana Azad
Library, A.M.U. and the Librarian, B.H.U. for providing
all kinds of facilities during the collection of research
studies. I am also thankful to Mr. Haleem Khan, Librarian,
Department of Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
I am also indebted to University Grants Commission
for awarding me scholarship without which the work could
not have been accomplished.
VJords go deep into sorrow when I recall my mother
who left me at the stage of childhood but these are her
blessings which always remain guiding light of my career.
SHAMA RANI
LIST OF CONTENTS
List of Contents
List of Tables
List of Figures
CHAPTER I INTRDUCTION
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.5.1
1.5.2
1.5.3
1.5.4
1.6
1.7
CHAPTER II
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
Need and Importance of the Problem
Statement of the Problem
Objectives of the Study
Hypotheses of the Study
Definition of Terms
Personality
Profile
Over-and Under-achievement
Professional Courses
Delimitations
Procedure in Outline
REFERENCES
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Page No.
1
vitl
X
1 - 3 8
1
10
11
11
18
19
21
21
24
24
25
27
Studies on Intelligence and Academic Achievement
Studies on Intelligence and Professional Courses
Studies on Personality Traits and Academic Achievement
Studies on Anxiety and Academic Achievement
Studies on Personality Traits and Professional Courses.
REFERENCES
39 - 113
39
46
51
74
84
100
ii
CHAPTER III
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.11.1
3.11.2
3.11.3
3.12
CHAPTER IV
4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 114-134
The Sample 114
Tools of the Study 115
Measure of Intelligence 115
Reliability of the Intelligence Measure 117
Validity of Intelligence Measure 117
The Measure of Achievement 118
Measure of Personality 119
Reliability of the Inventory 121
Validity of the Inventory 122
Administration of the Tests and 123 Collection of Data
Identification of Over-and Under- 124 achievement
Variability in Achievement at Constant 124 Level of Intelligence
Discrepancy Between Achievement and 125 Intelligence
Discrepancy between Observed and 127 Predicted Achievement
Procedure for Determining Group 130 Differences on Personality Factors
REFERENCES 132
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION 135-218 AND DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
Personality and Achievement in 142 Engineering Professional Courses
Factor I (Lively-Serious) 142
Factor II (Sociable-Reserved) 143
iii
4.1.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable) 144
4.1.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy) 145
4.1.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) 146
4.1.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) 146
4.1.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient) 148
4.1.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) 149
4.1.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experiment) 149
4.1.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) 150
4.1.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive) 151
4.1.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle-minded) 152
4.2 Personality and Achievement in Teaching 154 Professional Courses
4.2.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) 154
4.2.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved) 155
4.2.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable) 157
4.2.4 Factor IV ((Venturesome-Shy) 158
4.2.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) 159
4.2.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) 160
4.2.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient) 161
4.2.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) 162
4.2.9 Factor IX ((Conservative-Experimenting) 162
4.2.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) 163
4.2.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive) 164
4.2.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle-minded) 165
iv
4.3 Personality and Achievement in Law 167 Professional Courses
4.3.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) 167
4.3.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved) 168
4.3.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable) 169
4.3.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy) 170
4.3.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) 171
4.3.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) 172
4.3.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient) 173
4.3.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) 175
4.3.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting) 175
4.3.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) 176
4.3.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive) 177
4.3.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle minded) 178
4.4 Personality and Achievement in Business 180 Administration Professional Courses
4.4.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) 180
4.4.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved) 181
4.4.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable) 182
4.4.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy) 183
4.4.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) 184
4.4.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) 185
4.4.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient) 185
4.4.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) 186
4.4.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting) 187
4.4.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) 188
4.4.11 Factor XI (Coo|)craLlvc'-()l)sL rucLlve ) 188
4.4.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle minded) 189
4.5 Personality and Achievement in Medical 191 Professional Courses
4.5.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) 191
4.5.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved) 192
4.5.3 Factor III(Impulsive-Stable) 193
4.5.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy) 194
4.5.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) 195
4.5.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) 196
4.5.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient) 197
4.5.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) 198
4.5.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experiment) 198
4.5.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) 199
4.5.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive) 200
4.5.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle minded) 200
4.6 Comparisons of Personality Character- 201 istics of Over acbieversL in the Professional Courses
4.6.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) 203
4.6.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved) 204
4.6.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable) 205
4.6.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy) 206
4.6.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) 207
4.6.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) 207
vi
4.6.7 Factor VLL (ConscienLious-ExpodienL) 209
4.6.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) 209
4.6.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting) 210
4.6.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) 211
4.6.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive) 212
4.6.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle minded) 213
REFERENCES 215
CHAPTER V SUMMARY CONCLUSIONSAND SUGGESTIONS 219-237
5.1 Objectives of the Study 221
5.2 Hypotheses of the Study 222
5.3 Method 223
5.4 Sample 224 5.5 Tools 225 5.5.1 Measure of Intelligence 225
5.5.2 Measure of Achievement 225
5.5.3 Measure of Personality 225
5.6 Conclusions 226
5.6.1 Personality Characteristics of Over- 226 achievers in different Professional Courses.
5.6.2 Personality Characteristics of Under- 227 achievers in different Professional Courses.
5.6.3 Comparisons of Personality Characteristics 227 of Over-achievers in the Professional Courses.
5.7 Suggestions and Implications 230 «
5.8 Suggestions for Further Research 232
REFERENCES 236
vli
APPENDICES
Appendix I Test of "g" Culture Fair.
Appendix II Answer Sheet for Culture
Fair Test
Appendix III Vyaktitva Parakh Prashnavali
Appendix IV Answer Sheet for Vyaktitva
Parakh Prashanawali.
Appendix V 12 Personality Factors
Rating Scale.
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Description Page No,
1.1 Enrolment and Expenditure in Professional 2
Courses
1.2 Percentage of Ilird Divisioners and Failures. 3
A.l Significance of Difference between the Mean 141
Scores on Twelve Personality Factors obtained
by Over-and Under-achievers in Engineering
(B.Sc. Engineering) Professional Courses.
4.2 Significance of Difference between Mean 153
Scores on Twelve Personality Factors Obtained
by Over-and Under-achievers in Teaching
(B.Ed.) Professional Courses.
4.3 Significance of difference between Mean
Scores on Twelve Personality Factors Obtained
by Over-and Under-achievers in Law (LL.B.)
Professional Courses.
4.4 Significance of Difference between Mean 179
Scores on Twelve Personality Factors Obtained
by Over-and Under-achievers in Business
Administration (M.B.A.) Professional Courses.
4.5 Significance of Difference between Mean 190
Scores on Twelve Personality Factors obtained
by Over-and Under-achievers in Medical
(M.B.B.S.) Professional Courses.
ix
4.6 Comparisons of Mean Scores on Twelve 202
Personality Factors Obtained by Over-and
Under-achievers in Five Professional Courses
(Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business
Administration and Medical).
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Description Page No.
4.1 Personality Profiles of Over-and 142
Under-achiever in Engineering (B.Sc.
Engineering) Professional Courses.
4.2 Personality Profiles of Over-and 154
Under-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.)
Professional Courses.
4.3 Personality Profilesof Over-and Under- 167
achievers in Law (LL.B.) Professional
Courses.
4.4 Personality Profiles of Over-and 180
Under-achievers in Business
Administration (M.B.A.) Professional
courses.
4.5 Personality Profiles of Over-and 191
Under-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.)
Professional Courses.
.4.6 Comparisons of Mean Scores on Twelve 203
Personality Factors obtained by Over-
achievers in Five Professional Courses
(Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business
Administration and Medical).
CHAPTER -I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Need and Importance of the Problem:
Economic growth, welfare and prosperity of a nation
depends on its natural resources and the talents of its
citizens. But the talent of the people is perhaps more
important than natural resources. Natural resources like
coal and minerals, precious stones like diamonds, rubies
and pearls and the precious metals like gold, silver and
platinum may be the proud possessions of a nation but
perhaps more important than this is the human genuis that
can explore, locate and exploit these treasures and add to
the country's material and cultural growth and
development. This human resource is of paramount
importance for progress of a nation. Professional
education is the principal means of developing the human
resource. Professional training includes education and
training of engineers, teachers, lawyers, business
administrators, doctors,etc.
The nation spends large sums of money on
professional education and training of its citizens. Table
1.1 presents the enrolment of students in different
professional courses and the expenditure incurred on them.
It would be seen that the enrolment of students in degree
engineering college was about 159949.
Table l .J
Enrolment and Expenditure in p.rofessional Courses in
1985-86
Engineering Teaching Law Business f-tedicine
Admin.
Enrolment
Per Capita Expenditure
Total Expenditure
159949
1 2300
fe 3678.8 (laWis)
65683 121501 5808
Rs 1250 N.A.
fe 821.1 flal<hs)
N.A-
81678
Rs 4760
fe 3887.9 (lakhs)
* Extrapolated from Table 3.3, Chauhan, C.P.S. "Higher
Education in India". Ashish Publishing House, New Delhi,
1990.
The per capita expenditure on these students was
fe 2300. Thus the total expenditure on engineering
professional courses comes to about fe 3678.8 lakhs. The
per capita expenditure on professional courses in teaching
and medicine is fe 1250 and Rs 4760 respectively. Thus, the
total amount comes to about fe 41497.8 lakhs. Figures
regarding expenditure on law and M.B.A. professional
courses could not be included in the table 1.1 because of
non-availability of the data.
The table 1.2 shows the percentage of lllrd
divisioners and failures in different professional
courses.
Table 1.2
Percentage of Illrd Divisioners and Unsuccessful Students-
Professional Courses Ilird Division Failures
Engineering 'B.Sc. Engg.)
Teaching (B.Ed.)
Law (LL.B)
Business Administration (M.B.A)
Medicine (M.B.B.S.)
9 . 6
3 2 . 8
1 8 . 0
N.A.
N.A.
2 0 . 4
1 5 . 4
4 5 . 1
N.A.
4 4 . 1
Adapted from tables 5.4 and 5.6, Chauhan, C.P.S. "Higher
Education in India". Ashish Publishing House, New Delhi,
1990.
Students in professional courses securing third
division are not better than a failure because their
chances of employment and efficient work are very bleak.
Therefore, for the purpose of estimating the drain on
expenditure the third divisioners have been bracketed with
failures. Thus, it would be seen from the table 1.2 that
30 percent (9.6+ 20.4) of the engineering students have
shown performance below the required standard. In terms of
financial loss, the total amount of Rs 1103.6 lakhs is
wasted in the professional training of engineers alone.
Thus, the nation suffers a loss of Rs 3212.5 lakhs in the
professional training of engineers, teachers, lawyers and
doctors. This amount would have further been increased if
the data regarding expenditure for M.B.A. professional
course and students securing Ilird division in the
professional courses of doctors were available. A
developing country like India can ill afford this
collossal wastage. This is perhaps due to the admission of
unsuitable persons in these professional courses.
Therefore, it is imperative that only those students
should be admitted to these courses who are likely to
succeed in them.
The efficiency of a person in any profession
depends not only on educ?ition and training imparted to him
but also on his personality characteristics. One can not make
excellent furniture out of bad timber. The character
istics required for success in different professional
courses may include cognitive characteristics like
creativity and intelligence, personal characteristics like
confidence, perseverance, sociability, conscientiousness,
etc. Therefore, there is a need to investigate the
specific characteristics responsible for over and under-
achievement in professional courses.
A large number of studies have been undertaken In
India and abroad to investigate the relationship between
intelligence and achievement in academic courses. Some of
the important studies are: Franzen, 1920; Monroe and
Buckingham, 1920; Jordan, 1923; Peters, 1926; Edds and
McCall, 1933; Burt, 1937; Hartson Sprow, 1941; Durflinger,
1943; Kulshreshtha, 1956; Wellman, 1957; Rao, 1963; Crow
and Crow, 1964; Baquer, 1965; Rao, 1965; Singh, 1965
Ausubel, 1968; Sharrna 1971; McCandless Roberts, 1972
Saxena, 1972; Dhaml, 1974; Ravindar, 1977; Mlshra, 1978
Crano, Messe and Rice, 1979; Glossop and Appleyard, 1979
Joseph, 1979; Katlyar, 1979; David, Watkln and Estella
Astilla, 1980; Rai, 1980; Roberge and Flexer, 1984; Yule
Lansdown, 1982; Sharrna, 1982; Saxena, 1984; Singh, 1986;
Knarr Jo Anne, 1988 and Slnha, 1989.
Attempts have also been made to investigate the
relationship between intelligence and success in
professional courses. Some of the important studies in the
area are: Fryer, 1922; Deva, 1966; Mathur, 1966;
Kumaraiah, 1976; Patil, 1984 and Kazmi, 1986.
It will be seen that the researches conducted in
this area are few and far between particularly when they
are compared with the number of research conducted to
investigate the relationship between intelligence and
achievement in academic courses.
A perusal of these investigations reveals that the
relationship between intelligence and achievement obtained
in academic and professional courses ranges from .4 to .6.
Although these coefficients are fairly significant but at
the same time indicate that large amount of variance in
the criterion measure remains unexplained indicating that
there are other variables in addition to intelligence
which determine achievement in these courses.
Success in academic and professional courses is
dependent upon intelligence as well as personality of a
student. Intelligence determines what the person can do
and the personality determines what the person will do.
Personality is surely a forceful determinant of human
activities including achievement in academic and
professsional courses. Generally, the students with high
intellectual endowment achieve high but sometimes inspite
of their high intellectual capabilities they fail to do
so. This perhaps is due to certain personality
characteristics of a student. For example, personality
characteristics like fickle-mindedness and nervousness may
pull down the students of higher ability to a louer level
and personality characteristics like perseverance and
confidence may push up students with low ability to a
higher level. Oklahoma studies (1952) have also concluded that the
intellectual variable can function effectively only when
the personality function is properly integrated. Barrett
(1958) has demonstrated the importance of personality in
academic achievement. He is of the opinion that only by
careful and thorough study of each individual personality
we can find the reasons for his/her under-achievement. He
also found that a student with fairly high level of
intelligence may not be able to achieve high because of
lack of perseverance. Bishton (1957) expresses the same
idea when he writes, "Intelligence is a significant
determiner of scholastic achievement but many other
social, psychological and emotional factors affect the
nature and extent of school achievement!' Srivastava
(1976) holds the view that some of the students who fail
in the school examination obtain better scores on test of
intelligence and some of good achievers in earlier classes
unexpectedly lag behind the standard of achievement. It
shows that primary operant factor in academic achievement
is not only the intelligence alone. Personality
characteristics may play a fairly important role in this
regard.
Quite a few investigations have been attempted to
study the predictive validity of personality factors for
achievement in academic courses. Some of the important
studies conducted in India and abroad are: Flemming, 1930;
8
Gebhart and Hoyt, 1958; Lynn, 1959; Krug, 1959; Angclo and
Hall, 1960; Astington, 1960; Eysenck, 1960; Ja.nuar, 1961,;
Mishra, 1962; Centi Paul, 1952; Ridding, 1966; Rushton
1966; Ahluwalia, 1967; Bhatnagar, 196 8; Abraham, 1969;
Pandit, 19^9; Dhaliwal, 1971; Sharma, 1971; Patel and
Joshi, 1972; Srivastava, 1976; Reddy. 1978; Vora, 1978;
Siddiqui, 1979; Jahan Qamar, 1985; Singh, 1986; Haq, 1987;
Tuli, 1988; Smriti, 1989 and Neog,1990.
Personality factors are also important for success
in different professional courses. Quite a few studies
establishing relationship between these variables have
been undertaken both in India and abroad. Some of such
well known studies are presented below: Waggon and
Zeigler, 1946; Cattell and Dravedahl, 1955; Cole, 1961;
Deb Maya, 1968; Pal, 1969; Walsh and Palmer, 1970; Mishra,
1971; Gopal, 1975; Kumaraiah, 1976; Arora, 1982; Maxwell,
1983; Pervin, 1984; Vyas, 1987 and Mishra, 1988. Few of
the studies have been presented in more details.
Deb Maya (1968) attempted to find out the
predictive validity of personality traits success in
engineering. It was found that personality traits:
extraversion, dominance, absence of neurosis, sociability,
self-sufficiency, self- confidence and intelligence are
necessary for success in engineering profession.
Pal (1969) found out that engineering students
obtained significantly higher scores on economic and
aesthelic scales while medical students scored
significantly higher on theoretical and social scales.
Walsh and Palmer (1970) found that dominance was
the characteristic of both undergraduate students in
pre-law and third year law students.
Gopal (1975) sought to find out certain
differentiating personality characteristics of creative
and non-creative engineering students. He found that
creative engineering students in comparison to their less
creative peers were more reserved, emotionally stable,
assertive, sober, expedient, venturesone , toughminded,
suspicious, imaginative experimenting and self-
sufficient.
Mishra (198A) investigated personality traits of
original teachers. They were found to be emotionally
mature, stable, realistic about life, assertive, self-
assured, austere, dependent minded, hostile,extrapunitive,
authoritarian, cheerful, active, talkative, carefree,
impulsive, dominated by sense of duty & plan, responsible,
moralistic, sociable, bold, ready to try new things,
spontaneous, day-Jreaming, artistic and doubtful.
10
The above mentioned review of related research
reveals that sufficient number of studies investigating
the relationship between personality characteristics and
success in academic courses have been conducted, the
number of studies investigating relationship between
personality and professional courses has been inadequate.
These studies have generally been restricted to a single
profession (Burgess, 1953; Gebhart and Hoyt, 1958; Hishra,
1962; Deb Maya, 1968; Walsh and Palmer, 1970; Kaul, 1973;
Kumariah, 1976; Nagpal, 1979; Pervin, 198A and Vyas, 1987),
and only to some dimensions of personality (Mishra, 1962;
VJalsh and Palmer, 1970; Kumaraiah, 1976 and Pervin, 1984).
Therefore, there is a need to undertake an exhaustive
study including a larger number of professions and
employing a comprehensive personality inventory. The
present study is an attempt in this direction. The present
investigator has included five professional courses,
namely, Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.), Law
(LL.B), Business Administration (M.B.A.) and Medical
(M.B.B.S.) and has employed a comprehensive 12 factor
inventory which was constructed by the investigator as a
part of her M.Phil, course.
1.2 Statement of the Problem:
The present research proposes to study the
11
personality characteristics and draw the personality
profiles of over and underachievers in different
professional courses.
1.3 Objectives of the Study:
In specific terms the present research proposes to:-
(1) identity over- and under- achievers in the
following professional, courses: Engineering (B.Sc.
Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.B), Master of
Business Administration (M.B.A.) and Bachelor of
Medicine and Surgery (M.B.B.S.).
(2) study the personality characteristics of over and
underachievers in the above mentioned courses.
(3) draw personality profiles of overachievers in the
above mentioned courses.
(4) draw personality profiles of undarc-achievers in the
above mentioned courses.
(5) Compare the personality patterns of over- and under
achievers in each of the aforementioned
professional courses.
(6) Compare the personality patterns of over-achievers
in the above mentioned five professional courses.
(7) give suggestions regarding selection of the
candidates for admission in these courses.
1.4 Hypotheses of the Study:
A hypothesis is an informed or intelligent guess
12
with a reasonable chance of being right, formulated and
tentatively adopted to explain observed facts or
conditions and to guide in further investigation. A well
framed hypothesis serves as 'eye' of the investigator for
seeking solutions to the problems encountered ih the
research. It helps in deciding the right direction in
which the researcher has to proceed and deriving
appropriate conclusions. Emphasizing the importance of a
hypothesis Good (1966) cites the example of Charles Darwin
who in a letter to his contemporary^ Alfred R. Wallace,
wrote, "Without speculation there is no good observation."
Speculation or intuitive contemplation guided by past
discoveries, led Darwin to his famous observation as set
forth in Origin of Species. Thus,, past research coupled
with intuitive contemplation is of great importance in the
context of any research. Batra (1991) also reports, "A
researcher should formulate his hypotheses after carrying
out a critical survey of related literature.... analysis
of existing knowledge, observation and experience." Good
and Hall (1952) have rightly observed, "Without hypothesis
the research is unfocussed random empirical wandering."
Hypothesis is necessary link between theory and
investigation which leads to discovery of additional
knowledge .
13
Some investigators write the hypotheses in null
form. Such hypotheses may be useful in certain statistical
techniques but have little value for the purpose of
educational research because they do not point to any
direction and thus are of no help in deriving conclusions.
Batra (1991) while reporting the proceedings of a seminar
on "Emerging Issues in the Methodology of Educational
Research" held under the auspices of the NCERT, New Delhi,
also observed that some of the researchers write them
(hypotheses) in null form.... This is due to lack, of
understanding of the rationale underlying the process of
hypothesis testing. He also points out that the practice
of null hypothesis is being over-used or misused.... Null
hypothesis is essentially a statistical technique ,certain
data are amendable to such inferential statistics in which
the use of null hypothesis is appropriate and helpful.
Hypotheses should be stated clearly and exhibit clarity of
thought of the researcher and the position he/she takes.
The present research aims to identify the
personality characteristics of persons in different
professional courses. Therefore, the investigator decided
to formulate directional hypotheses based on the review of
previous researches and theoretical rationale.
14
On the basis of previous researches in the area and
theoretical rationale the following hypotheses have been
formulated. The previous researches which support the
personality characteristics hypothesised have been
mentioned against each. Some personality characteristics
for which the support from previous research was not
available have been included on the basis of theoretical
rationale. The rationale for such characteristics has been
presented in Chapter IV.
1. Overachievers in Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.) professional
courses are likely to be:
I Serious (Taylor, 1964 and Gawronski,
1965).
li Reserved (Dhaliwal, 1971 and Gopal,
1975).
III Impulsive (For theoretical rationale
see page 144 Chapter IV).
IV Venturesome (Jayagopala, 1974 and Jahan,
1985).
V Confident (Taylor, 1964 and Grawronski,
1965).
VI Dominant (Riding 1966 and Gopal, 1975)
VII Expedient (For theoretical rationale
see page 143, chapter IV).
VIII Suspicious (Gopal, 1975 and Neog, 1990).
15
IX Experimenting
X Harsh
XI Obstructive
XII Persevering!
(Ghuman, 1976).
(For theoretical rationale
page 150-51 Chapter IV).
(For theoretical rationale see
page 151-52 Chapter IV).
(Gupta, 1970 and Menon,
1973).
2. Overachievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses
are likely to be:
I Lively
II Reserved
III Stable
IV Venturesome
V Confident
VI Dominant
VII Conscientious
VIII Trusting
IX Conservative
X Kind
XI Cooperative
XII Persevering
(Fox, 1971 and Adaval, 1979).
(Dhaliwal, 1971 and Adaval,
1979).
(Deva, 1966 and tlishra,
1984).
(Rushfon,1966) .
(Deva,1966 and Rushton, 1966).
(For theoretical rationale
see page 160, chapter IV).
(Adaval, 1979 and Neog, 1990).
(Adaval, 1979).
(Mishra, 1988).
(Deva, 1966 and Neog, 1990).
(Fox, 1972 and Tutoo, 1975).
(Cook, 1972 and Wakefield,
1974).
16
3 . Overachievers in Law (LL.B)professional courses are l i k e l y to
be:
I Ser ious (For t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e
see page 1&7-C8 Chapter IV) .
(Dhal iwal , 1971) .
(For t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e
see page 169-70 Chapter IV) .
(Rushton, 1966) .
(Taylor,1964 and Somasundaran
1980).
(Ridding, 1966 and Rushton,
1966).
(For theoretical rationale
see page 173-74 Chaptar IV).
(For theoredtical rationale
see page 175 ChaTtor IV).
(For theoretical rationale
see page 175r76 Chapter IV).
(Neog, 1990).
(For theoretical rationale
see page 177-78 Chapter IV).
(Gupta, 1970 and Menon,
1973).
II Reserved
III Impulsive
IV Venturesome
V Confident
VI Dominant
VII Expedient
VIII Suspicious
IX Conservative
X Harsh
XI Obstructive
XII Persevering
17
4. Overachievers in Business Administration (M.B.A.)
professional courses are likely to be:
I Lively (Singh, 1972).
II Sociable
III Stable
IV Venturesome
V Confident
VI Dominant
VII Expedient
VIII Suspicious
IX 'Experimenting
X Harsh
XI Obstructive
XII Persevering
(For theoretical rationale see
page 131-02 Chai:.t'jr IV).
(Gopal, 1975 and Pervin, 1984).
(Rushton, 1966).
(Pervin, 1984).
(Ridding, 1966 and Rushton,1966).
(For theoretical rationale see
page 135-86 Chapter IV).
(For theoretical rationale see
page 133-37 Chapter IV).
(Jayagopala, 1974 and Ghuman,
1976).
(Ghuman, 1976 and Srivastava,
1976).
(For theoretical rationale see
page 188-89 c h a p t e r I V ) .
( G u p t a , 1 9 7 0 ) .
18
5. Overachievers in
courses are likely
I Serious
II Reserved
III Stable
IV Venturesome
V Confident
VI S u b m i s s i v e
VII E x p e d i e n t
V I I I T r u s t i n g
IX E x p e r i m e n t i n g
IX Kind
XI C o o p e r a t i v e
XII ' P e r s e v e r i n g
Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional
to be:
(Taylor, 1964 and Jensen, 1973).
(Srivastava, 1976).
(Ahluwalia & Narang, 1967).
(Rushton, 1966).
(Somasundaran, 1980).
(Haq, 1987)
(For theoretical rationale see
page 197-90chap te r I V ) .
(For theoretical rationale see
page 198 chapter IV).
(Ghuman, 1976).
(Jayagopala, 1974 '.
(For theoretical rationale see
page 200 chapter IV).
(Astlngton, 1960 and Bhagirath,
1978).
1.5 Definition of Terms :
An attempt has been made in the following
paragraphs to present the meaning of the term employed in
the present study in as unambiguous form as possible.
19
1.5.1 Personality: Human personality is a very complex
phenomenon. The word personality has been derived from a
latin word 'persona' which means mask. Greek actors used
to wear masks during theaatrical performance for creating
special effect. Thus, personality implies the influence
that the mask exerts on other people. Hence, personality
is the sum total of effects made by an individual upon
others. Prince (1924, p. 4) defines personality as "the
sum total of all biological, innate and acquired
dispositions, impulses, tendencies of the individual."
Jalota (1952, p. 329) has emphasized the social aspects of
personality. According to him "Personality represents the
peculiar attitudes and behaviour of an individual within a
social context." This definition envisages social
interaction, therefore,this cannot explain the personality
of the social isolates. Guilford (1959) defines
personality as a unique pattern of traits. A trait is any
distinguishable relatively enduring way in which one
individual differs from another. Cattell (1965, p. 18)
defines personality as that which tells what a man will do
when placed in a given situation. According to Ryckman
(1971, p. 4), "Personality is the dynamic scientific study
of individual differences in thou ht and behaviour that
occur under situation and circumstances. According to
Pervin (1984, p. 4), "Personality represents those
20
characteristics of the person or of people generally that
account for consistent patterns of behaviour." The most
comprehensive definition of personality is given by
Allport (1937, p. 48), "Personality is the dynamic
organisations ot aii those psycho-physical systems that
determine his unique adjustment to the environiiient." In
this definition the word 'dynamic' implies that
personality is undergoing a constant change but is still
organised; the word 'within the individual' focusses on
the inner aspects rather than superficial menifestations;
the word 'psycho-physical systems' reminds that personality
is neither exclusively mental nor physical, but an
interaction of the two,internal and external environments;
the v;ord 'determine' denotes that personality is dynamic
because latent psycho-physical systems when called to
action motivate or direct specific activities and thought
and the word 'unique adjustment of the individual to his
environment' means that each individual employs different
methods resulting in unique adjustment. Later on,Allport
(1961, p. 28) revised this definition as: "Personality is
the dynamic organisation within the individual of those
psycho-physical systems that determine his characteristic
behaviour and thought."
A perusal of the definitions of Allport, Guilford
(1959), Allport (1961) and Cattell (1965) reveals that
21
they emphasize on traits of the person. Cattell used the
most scientific method, i.e. fnctor nnnlyfllR for
constructing personality inventory. The present
investigator also constructed the personality inventory
employed in the present study by the help of factor
analytic technique.
1.5.2 Profile: Graphic representation of set of
characteristics of an individual has been termed as
personality profile.
1.5.3 Over-and Underachlevement: The present study seeks
to identify the personality characteristics of over- and
underachievcrs in different professional courses. The
academic achievement is also influenced by such variables
as intelligence ,creativity, achievement motivation, study
habits, socio-economic status, etc. Previous researches
have sho\;n that of the above variables intelligence exerts
the most profound influence. Harris (1940) points out,
"The correlation of intelligence with grades reported in
various investigation range from 0.37 to 0.69. It was
noted that at a number of places intelligence scores were
found to be the best single predictor of grades." Rao
(19S5) obtained 66 percent predictability of scholastic
performance on the basis of intelligence alone. Ther^^f^re,
it was decided that intelligence should be employed as
control variable in the present study.
?:?
A variety of approaches have been adopted by the
researchers for the purposes of controlling intelligence.
Some of the investigators (Shaw, 1957; Frankel, 1960;
James and Elmore, 1962 and Eugence, 1964) have sought to
control the effectofintelligence in the relationship
between different predictor variables and achievement by
employing subjects at constant level of intelligence. This
technique, thus, requires selection of subjects at a
particular level of intelligence. Obviously in this
procedure, it will not be possible to obtain a fairly
large sample. Moreover, the relationship at a particular
level of intelligence may be different from that at
another level of intelligence. Therefore, this technique
was not considered suitable for the present research.
Franzen (1920), Peters (1926) and Burt (1937) have
attempted to control the effect of intelligence on the
relationship between different predictors and academic
achievement by suggesting the concept of Achievement
Quotient (A.Q) and Intelligence Quotient (I.Q). A.Q. was
supposed to indicate whether the subject was achieving
according to his mental ability or not. This proposal
involves the use of data on educational age and
chronological age, etc. which are difficult to obtain and
y^
even when obtained are not dependable. Moreover, the
sample employed for deriving norms for mental age and
educational achievement are different and , therefore , not
comparable. Due to these defects this procedure was not
considered suitable.
The present research has employed the concept of
over and under-achievement suggested by Thorndike(1963). He
formulated a detailed methodology of controlling _the
effect of regression while predicting achievement on the
basis of intelligence. This technique is knovjn as
regression equation. He also differentiated the concept of
over and underachievement and high and low achievement.
High and low achievement represents arbitrarily accepted
levels of performance. He defined over and under
achievement as the positive and negative discrepancy of
actual achievement from the predicted value obtained on
the basis of relationship between intelligence and
achievement of the v;hole group. Students whose actual
achievement was one SD^ more than the predicted
achievement were designated as overachievers and those
whose actual achievement was one SDQ belov\; the predicted
achievement v/ere called under-achievers . This method of
controlling the effect of intelligence was adopted in the
present study.
9il
1.5.4 Professional Courses: Professional education
according to Blauch (1965) consists of those forms of
education that prepare men and women for practice of that
profession. It incorporates many forms of specialized
education for v hich special educational and training
institutions are maintained by the society. This education
covers the most vital area of social life as it prepares
men and women for different types of professional
services.
1.8 Delimitations:
1) Tae present study seeks to identify the personality
characteristics of oveir and under-achievers in different
professional courses. There could be a variety of
professional courses for this purpose but the present
researcher has restricted her investigation to the
following professional courses: Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.),
Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.B), Master of Business
Administration (M.B.A.) and Bachelor of Medicine and
Surgery (M.B.B.S.).
2) The competence of a person depends on many factors,
such as study habits, intelligence, socio-economic status,
motivational and personality factors. Personality
seems to be one of the important variablesin this regard.
Therefore, only this variable has been investigated in the
present research.
on
3) Relationship between porsoiiaLity and ochievotneiit in
different professional courses is influenced by such
factors as intelligence, study habits, environmental and
motivational factors. Therefore, in order to obtain true
relationship between personality and achievement in these
courses, the effect of these variables must be controlled.
It would be very difficult to control the effect of all
the above variables in a study like the present one.
Intelligence has been regarded as the most important
variable in this context. The present study has, therefore,
attempted to control only this variable.
4) A variety of methods of controlling the effect of
intelligence like analysis of variance, analysis of
convariance and partial correlation are available. The
present study has, however, employed Thorndike's
regression equation technique for the identification of
over-and under-achievers.
1.7 Procedure in Outline :
The present research is concerned with
investigating the relationship between personality
characteristics of over- and under-achievers in
professional courses of Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.),
Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.B), Master of Business
Administration (M.B.A.) and Bachelor of Medicine and
Surgery (M.B.B.S.). The sample consisted of 532 students
26
studying in these professional courses. The over- and
underachievers were identified on the basis of the
procedure suggested by Thorndike (1963). In this procedure
predicted achievement of the students is computed on the
basis of regression equation between intelligence and
achievement of the sample under study. If the obtained
achievement is one SDe or more above the predicted
achievement, the student is designated as overachiever.
Conversely, if the obtained achievement is one SDe or
more below the predicted achievement, he/she is termed as
under-achievers.
After identification of over- and under-achievers
their personality characteristics were measured by the
help of personality inventory constructed by the
investigator as a part of her M.Phil, work. Profiles of
over and underachievers in each of the professional
courses were drawn. On the basis of these profiles the
personality of over- and under-achievers was compared
Comparisons were also made among overachievers of all the
professional groups.
27 REFERENCES
a" Abraham, PA. (1969). An Experimental Study of Certain Personality Traits and Achievement of Scondary School Pupils. Doctor Thesis, Psy., Karnataka University.
siAdaval, SB. (1979). Quality of Teachers. Amitabh Prakashan, Allahabad.
Ahluwalia SP and Narang, S. (1967). A Study of Some of the Personality Characteristics of Good and Poor achievers. Indian Psychological Abstracts, 1975, 7, 85-86.
x'-Ahluwalia, S.P. and Narang, S. (1967). A Study of Some of the Personality Characteristics of Good and Poor Achievers. Indian Psychological Abstracts, 1975, 7, 85-86.
Allport, G.VJ. (1937). Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. Henry Holt, New York, p. 48.
Allport, G.W. (1961). Pattern and Growth in Personality. Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York.
Angelo, H.A. and Hall, R.L. (1960). Temperamental Factors in the High School Seniors. Psychol. Report, 7,
, 518.
Arora, R.K. (1981). An Investigation into the Problems of Students in Professional Courses of Medicine, Law, Engineering and Education in Relation to Personality Factors. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
„Astington,E. (1960). Personality Assessment and Academic Performance in a Boy's Grammar School. British Journal of Educational Psychol., 30, 3, 225.
Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View: Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York.
Baquer, M.(1965). Differential Factors in Pupil Success in Science, Arts and Commerce Courses at the Higher Secondary Stage. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Barrett, Harry, Q. (1958). Intensive Study of 32 Gifted Children. Personal and Guidance Journal, 36, 3, 193-194.
28
Batra (Editor, 1991). Emerging Issues in the Methodology of Educational Research. N.C.E.R.T., New Delhi.
^vBhagirath, G.S. (1978). Correlates of Academic Achievement as Perceived by the Teachers and Students of High School. Doctoral Thesis. In Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83), Buch, M.B. (Editor) 1986, 658-59.
Bhatnagar,R.P. (1968). A Study of Same of the Personality Factors as Predictors of Academic Achievement CIE Studies, Pub. No. 63.
Bishton, R. (1957). A Study of Some Factors Related to Achievement of Intellectual Superiors VIII Grade Children. Journal of Educational Research, 51, 3, 203-208.
Blauch, . .Lloyed, E. (1955). Education for the Professions, United States Office of Education, Publications, Government Printing Office, Washington.
\ Burgess, Elva (1953). Personality Factors of Over and Under-achievers in Engineering. Pinnsylvannla State University Abstract of Dissertation, 16, 536-43.
o Burt, c. (1937). The Backward Child. University of London Press, London.
Cattell, R.B. (1965). The Scientific Analysis of Personality. Penguin, Baltimore.
Cattell, R.B. and Dravedahl, J.E. (1955). A Comparison of the Personality Profile (16 P.F)of Eminent Researchers with that of Eminent Teachers and Administrators of General Population. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 248-61.
<\->Centi, Paul. (1962). Personality Factors Related to College Success. Journal of Educational Research, 55, 4, 187.
Chauhan, C.P.S. (1990). Higher Education in India. Ashish Publishing House, New Delhi, pp. 42 & 100.
29
s^Chauhan, Poonam. (1993). Relative Contribution of Some Socio-cultural and Familial Variables to Over and Under-achievement in Science at Class VIII Level. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U.,
Cole
Aligarh.
D.L. (1961), Journal
The Prediction of Teaching Performance, of Edu. Research, 54, 345-348.
Cook, A.M. and Richards, H.C. (1972). Dimensions of Principal and Supervisor Rating of Teacher Behaviour. Journal of Experimental Education, 41, 2, 11-13.
v^Crano, W.D., Messe, S.R. and Rice, W. (1979). Evaluation of the Predictive Validity of Tests of Mental Ability, Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 2, 233-241.
v 'Crow, L.D. and Crow, A.E. (1964). Educational Eurasia Publishing House, Ram Nagar,
Psychology. New Delhi.
v.-vDavid, Watkin and Estella Astilla. (1980). Intellective and Non Intellective Predictors of Academic Achievement at Filipine University, 40, p.245.
-VDeb Maya. (1968). Personality Traits Engineers. Indian Journal of 6-10.
of Successful Psychology, 43,
vDeva, R.C. (1966). Prediction of Student Teaching Success. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
icDhaliwal, A.S. (1971). A Study of Some Factors Contributing to Academic Success and Failure Among High School Students : Personality Correlates of Academic Over-Under-Achievement. Doctoral Thesis Psychology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.
vvvDhara:i, G.S. (1974). Intelligence, Emotional Maturity and Socio-Economic Status as Factors Indicative of Success in Scholastic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Punjab University cited by Buch (Editor): Third Survey of Research in Education, 662-663,
vv Durflinger, G.V . (1943). Prediction of College Success. American Association of Collegiate Reeistr. 30, 251-264.
30
>v<«,Edcls, J.H., and McCall. (1933). Predicting the Scholastic Success of College Freshmen. JOurnal of educational Research, 27, 127-130.
i,<>> Eugence, S.E. (1964). A Normative Approach to the Measurement of Under-achievement. Journal of Experimental Education, 33, 2, 197-199.
Eysenck, H.J. and Cookson, D. (1964). Personality in Primary School Children. British Jour, of Edu. Psychol., 39, 109-121.
(." Franzen, R. (1920). The Accomplishment Quotient, A School Mark in Terms of Individual Capacity Trs. Col. Record 21, 432-440.
r -Fox, A.M.
vopFryer, D,
Brookshine. (1971). Defining Effective College Teaching Journal of Experimental Education, 42, 2, 37.
(1922). Occupational Intelligence Standards. School and Society, 16, 273-277.
tjGawronski, D.A. and Maths, C. (1965). Differences between Over-achieving normal - achieving and Underachieving high school students. Psychology in the Schools, 2, 152-155.
^Gebhart, G.G. and Hoyt, D.P. (1958). Personality Needs of Under and Over-achieving Freshmen. Journal of Appl. Psychol., 42, 2, 125-128.
^vGhuman, M.S. (1976). A Study of Aptitudes, Personality Traits and Achievement Motivation of Academic Over-achievers and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, Ravi Shankar University; In Third Survey of Research in Education 1978-83 : Buch, M.B. (Editor) N.C.E.R.T., pp. 664-66.
Glossop, J.A., Appleyard, R. and Roberts, S. (1979). Achievement Relative to Measure of General Intelligence. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 49, 249-257.
Good, C.V. (1966). Essentials of Educational Research Appleton Century-Crofts, New York, p. 112.
Good, W.J. and Hall, P.K. (1952). Methods Research. York.
Appleton-Century Crofts in Soqial Inc., New
31
, .Gopal,, A.K, (1975). Certain Differentiating Personality Variables of Creative and Non-Creative Science and Engineering Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.
Guilford. (1959). Personality. Mc Graw Hill Book Company, New York.
T,Gupta, H.G. (1970). A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of High and Low Achievers as Related to their Academic Achievement. Indian Psychological Abstract, 1975, 7, 87.
t^Harris, D. (1940). Factors Affecting College Grades: A Review of the Related Literature 1930-37, Psychological Bulletin, 37, 136-166.
.'ir'Hartson, L.D. and Sprow, A.J. (1941). The Value of Intelligence quotient obtained in Secondary School for Predicting College Education, Psychol. Measurement, 1, 387-98.
v^Haq, N. (1987). A Study of Certain Personality Correlates of Over-Under-Achievement in Different School Subjects. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
<iJahan, Q. (1985). Personality Profiles of Over and Under-achievers in Different Streams-Science, Arts and Commerce. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Jalota, S. (1952). A Text-book of Psychology, Hind Arts Press, Benaras, p. 329.
k^James, A., Elmore, K. (1962). Problems and Academic Achievement. Bui. Nat. Ass. Sec. School, Princ; ILVI, 359, 470-473.
Jamuar, K.K. (1961). Investigation of Some Psychological Factors Underlying Study Habits of College Students. Doctoral Thesis, Patna University.
.y(,Jayagopala, R. (1974). Personality Profile of the Under and High Achievers of Some of the Schools in the City of Madras. Second Survey of Research in Education 1972-78; Buch, M.B.(Editor),p. 184.
32
-!>> Jensen, A.R. (1973). Personality and Scholastic Achievement in Three Ethnic Groups. British Journal of Edu. Psychol., 43, 115-125.
*- »Jordan, A.M. (1923). Correlation of Four Intelligence Test with Grades. Jour, of Edu. Psychol. 13, 419-429.
v^ Joseph, T.T. (1979). A Study of Some Predictors of Achievement in Chemistry at the Pre-degree Level. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Kerala University.
v -i-Katiyar, P. (1979). A Study of Cognitive Functions in Relation to Achievement in Mathematics at High School Stage. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Gorakhpur University.
iKazmi, Q.S. (1986). A Study of Personality Profiles and Cognitive Factors of Academic Failures Amongst Science and Arts Students at various Levels. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
v>tlKharr, Jo Anne (1985). An investigation of the Relationship between Measures of Academic Achievement and Higher Cognitive Process in Sixth Grade Children. E.D.D. Temple University, Howard Blake, Dissertation Abstract International, Vol. 47, No. 5, Nov. 1986, p. 1601-A.
Krug, R.E. (1959). Over and Under Achievement and Edward Preference Schedule. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43, 133-136.
<<* Kulshreshtha, S.K. (1956). A Study of Intelligence and Scholastic Attainment of X and XI Class Students in Uttar Pradesh, Doctoral Thesis, Phil. Allahabad University.
•> Kumaraiah, V. (1976). Intellectual, Personal and Social Factors Realted to High and Low Achievement of Various Stages in Medical Education. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, B.H.U., Varanasi.
Lynn, R. (1959). Two Personality Characteristics Related to Academic Achievement. British Jour. of Educational Psychol. 29, 213-216.
33
»Mathur, M.B. (1966). A Comparative Study of Levels of Intelligence Among Professional Groups. Doctoral Thesis, A.M.U., Aligarh.
<v Maxwell,. H.C. (1983). A Study of Selected Personality Traits as Related to Self Paced Programme in Media Production Techniques. Doctoral Thesis', Georgia State University, Dissertation Abstract International, 44, 10.
M\ McCandless, B.R., Roberts, A. and Sterns (1972). Teachers' Marks, Achievement Test Scores and Aptitude Relations with Respect to Social Class, Race and Sex. Journal of Educational Psychol., 63, 153-159.
' '>Menon, S.K. (1973). A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of Over-achievers and Under-achievers of High Ability. Doctoral Thesis, Educatioin, Kerala University.
Mishra, H.G. (1971). Non-Intellectual Factors and Success in Engineering Education, Contributions to Psychology, Patna Institute for Social and Psychological Research.
v» Mishra, H.K. (1962). Personality Factors in High and Low Achievers in Engineering Education, Doctoral Thesis, Education ,IIT, Kharagpur.
KN Mishra, K.S. (1984). Personality Traits of Original Teachers, Indian Educational Review, 19, 14, Oct. 1984, 72-77.
l.». Mishra, S.P. (1978). A Comparative Study of High and Low Achievers in Science, Commerce and Arts on Creativity, Intelligence and Anxiety. In Third Survey of Research in Education, Buch, M.B. (Editor), N.C.E.R.T., p. 677.
t-iMonroe, W.S. and Buckingham, B.R. (1920). The Illionois Examinations, Bloomington Public School Publishing Co. cited by Crane A. R. 1959, .-.A Historical and Critical Account of the Accomplishment Quotient Idea, British Journal of Edu. Psychology, 29, 252-259.
34
^1- Neog, S . (1990). A Study of Personality Characteristics of Under-Achievers Across Any Two School Subjects. M.Phil. Dissertation, Edu., A.M.U., Aligarh.
Oklahoma Studies. (1952). Non-Intellectual Determinants of College Achievement. A Longitudinal Predictive, and Descriptive Study of the Freshmen Class of 1952, pp. 129-134.
VM Pal, S.K. (1969). Personality Study of Engineering, Law, Medical and Teachers Training Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Allahabad University.
iN Pandit, (1969). The Role of Anxiety in Learning and Academic Achievement of Children, Doctoral Thesis, Edu. A Survey of Researches in Education, Buch, tl.B. (Editor), p. 337.
v' ' Patel, A.S. and Joshi, R.J. (1972). Some Personality Traits of High Achievers and Low Achievers. Education and Psychology Review, 12, 3-4, 114.
<v^Patil, G.G. (1984). Intelligence, Interest and Attitude of B.Ed. Students as Contributory Factor Towards Their Achievement in the Compulsory Subjects! A Differential Study. Indian Educational Review, April 23, 2, 109.
^r^Pervin, L.A. (1984). Personality: Theory and Research. John Wiley & Sons. Inc., New York, p. 4.
t^Peters, C.C. (1926). A Method for Computing Accomplishment Quotient in the High School and College Levels, Journal of Educational Research, 16, 99-101.
Prince, M.(1924). The Unconscious (2nd edition) Macmillan, New York cited by Stagner, R. ; 1965 , Psychology of Personality McGraw Hill Book Company, New York.
^^oRai, J.G. (1980). A Study of Relationship Between Intelligence and Scholastic Achievement in Compulsory School Subjects, Journal of Voc. Edu. Guidance, 1, 4, 35.
-^xRao, D.G. (1965). A Study of Some Factors Related to Scholastic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Delhi University.
\»i.Rao
35
S.N. (1963). Students Performance and Adjustment. Doctoral Thesis, Shri Venkateshwara University, Tirupati.
Ravindar. (1977). The Effects of State Trait Anxiety Psychological Stress and Intelligence on Learning and Academic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis ,Psychology, Punjab University.
^t»Reddy, I.V.R. (1978). Academic Adjustment in Relation to Scholastic Achievmeent in Secondary School Pupils - A Longitudinal Study, Sri Venkateshwara University, Indian Dissertation Abstracts, 4, 3, 235-237
Ridding, L.VJ. (1966). An Investigation of Personality Measures Associated with Over and Under-achievement in English and Arithmetics. Abstract of Thesis, Psychol. Feb. 1967, 37, 397-398.
^"^Roberge, J.J. Flexier, B.K. (1981). Covariation of Field Achievement. British Journal 51, 235-236.
Re-examination of Independence and of Edu. Psychol.,
u'^Rushton, J. (1966). The Relationship between Personality Characteristics and Scholastic Success in Eleven Year Old Children. British Journal of Edu. Psychol. 36, 178-184.
Ryckman, R.M. (1978). Theories of Personality. D.Van Nostrand Company, New York.
\«»« Sax en a P.C. (1972). A Study of Interest, and Adjustment Problems of Over achievers. D.Phil., Education, University.
Need, Pattern and Under-
Allahabad
viw Saxena, S. (1984). Intellectual and Personality Variables as Predictors of Vocational Maturity. Doctoral Thesis Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor, Directorate of Education, Delhi Administration,Delhi. In Indian Educational Review, October 1989, 24, 4, 81.
v^Sharma, K.G. (1971). A Comparative Study of Adjustment of Over and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.
36
\' '•Sharma, S. (1982). A Study of Intellectual Factors and Academic Achievement in Arts, Science and Commerce Courses at Higher Secondary Stage. Doctoral Thesis, Edu, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Shaw, M.C. and Brown, D.J. (1957). Scholastic Under-achievement in Bright College Students. Pers. & Guid. J., 36, 195-199.
\•v Siddiqui, B.B. (1979). Effects of Achievement Motivation and Personality on Academic Success Doctoral Thesis, Psychol., Gujarat Univ. cited by Buch (Editor), Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-1983), 691.
\^ Singh, B.N.K. (1965). Some Intellectual Correlates of Academic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Arts, Patna University.
rv' Singh, R. (1986). An investigation into the Relationship between Achievement Motivation, Intelligence (General Mental Efficiency) Introversion-Extraversion, Achievement in Mathematics and a Comparison thereof between Haryana and Delhi Students belonging to various Socio-Cultural Strata. Doctoral Thesis. Jamia Millia Islamia Delhi, Indian Dissertation Abstracts, 15, 2, 159.
-1. Singh, S.C.P. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Management Students. Journal of Edu. and
• Psychol., 30, 2, 167-69.
^oxSinha, S., Trivedi, J.K., Gupta, S.C. and Sinha, P.K. (1989). Scholastic Achievement : A Study of High and Low Achievers with special reference to their Intelligence and Family Variables. Psychological Abstracts, American Psychological Association Inc., 76, 11, 3653.
v^-Somasundar.in, M. (1980). A Coiiipn raL i vc Study of CcrLaln Personality Variables Related to Over Normal and Under-achievement in Secondary School Mathematics. Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83) Buch, M.B., 1983, 693.
^^Srivastava, G.P. (1976). A Study of Personality Factors as Predictors of Academic Achievement of High School Students. Doctoral Thesis, B.H.U., Varanasi.
37
I'lSwarup, Smriti. (1989). Personality Characteristics of (Jiiclcr niul Ovcr-McliicvcTH. Jourtial of Psychological Researches, 33, 2, 22.
«,vTaylor, R.G. (1964). Personality Traits and Discrepant Achievement : A Review. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 11, 76-82.
-i.cThorndike,R.L. (1963). The Concepts of Over and Under-achievement. Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York.
Tuli, M.R.(1988). Mathematical Creativity and Personality.' Edu. Kumaun University. In Indian Educational Review, 23, 4, 144.
Tuli, S.P.(1990). A Report : Education in India. Vol. 1(C) Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Education, New Delhi, p. 32, 34,36.
sj-vTutoo, D.N. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Some Higher Secondary School Teachers of a Metropolitan City. Education and Psychology Review, 12, 1-2, 9.
Verma, R.K. and Verma, G. (1989). Research Methodology Commonwealth Publishers, New Delhi, 137.
^^^Vora, I. A. (1978). A Study of Reading Achievement in Relation to Sex, Attitude and Anxiety. Jour, of Edu. and Psychol. 36(1&2), 41-53.
vSVyas, R.P. (1987). A Study of the Teaching Success of Prospective Teachers on Some Selected Variables. Educational Review, March, 3, 55-58.
ivi Waggon, R.V . and Zeigler, T.W. (1945). Psychiatric Factors in Medical Students Who Fail Americal Journal of Psychiatry, 103, 369-376 cited by Pal, S.K., Personality Study of Engineering, Law, Medical and Teacher Training Students, 1969.
•i Wakefield, W.M. and Crowl , T.K. (1974). Personality CharactGrlstics of Special Educators. Journal of Experimental Education, 43, 87.
38
'-Walsh, W.B. and Palmer, D.A. (1970). Difference between Law and Non-Law Oriented Students. The Vocational Guidance, Quarterly, 19, 11-15.
lie Wellman, F.E. (1957). Differential Prediction of High-School Achievement Using Sing Scores and Multiple Factors Test on 'Mental Maturity Personnel and Guidance Jour., 35, 512-517.
TjvYule, W. , Lansdown, R. and Urbanowicz, M.A. (1982). Predicting Educational Attainment from WISCR in a Primary School Sample British Journal of Clinical Psychol, 21, 43-46.
CHAPTER -II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A review of previous researches in the area under
investigation helps the investigator to discover what Is already
known, what others have attempted to find out, what methods and
procedures have been promising and what problems remained
to be solved. Consequently, such a review is likely to be
of great help in designing the study avoiding the pitfalls
experienced by earlier investigators in the field.
1.1 Studies on Intelligence and Academic Achievement :
Intelligence plays a very significant role in
determining academic achievement. Dhaliwal (1971) also
writes, "Intelligence is the single most important factor
accounting for variation in academic achievement."
Therefore, it would not be out of place to give an account
of the studies investigating the relationship between
intelligence and academic achievement. Number of studies
conducted in this area are many. Some of such studies are
given below: Franzen, 1920; Monroe and Buckingham, 1920;
Jordon, 1923; Peters, 1926; Edds and McCall, 1933; Burt,
1937; Hartson and Sp row, 1941; Durflinger, 1943; Menon,
1949; Kulshreshtha, 1956; VJellman, 1957; Rao, 1963; Scott,
40
1963; Crow and Crow, 1964; Baquer, 1965; Ainsworth, 1967;
Ausubel, 1968; Roberts, 1972; Pathak, 1972; Sharma, 1972;
Saxena, 1972; Wlson and V atson, 1973; Reddy, 1973;
Chatterjee and Mukherjee, 1974; Dhami, 1974; Kumaraiah,
1976; Ravindar, 1977; Mishra, 1978; Crano, Messe and Rice,
1979; Joseph, 1979; Kevin, 1979; David VJatkin, and Estella
Astilla, 1980; Rai, 1980; Roberge and Flexer, 1981; Yule
Lansdown, 1982; Sharma, 1982; Saxena, 1984; Knarr Jo Anne,
1985 and Sinha Sanjay, 1989. It will not be possible to
mention the details of all the above studies. Details of
some of the important studies are being presented in the
following paragraphs.
Scott (1963) investigated the relationship between
intelligence and academic success in different subject
areas: Science, Arithmetic, Social Science and Reading.
The study revealed significant and positive correlation
between Intelligence and Arithmetic Reasoning, Social
sciences and Reading.
Ainsworth (1967) conducted a study to find out the
relationship between intelligence and school attainment
in different subjects. He selected 230 first year students
of mixed secondary modern school for the sample of the
study and obtained positive and significant (at .01 level)
41
coefficients of correlation between measures of
intelligence and academic achievement in different
subjects.
McCandless, Roberts and Sterns (1972) conducted a
valuable study of intelligence in relation to scholastic
achievement. The study was conducted on a large sample of
443 seventh grade school-children. California Test of
Mental Maturity was used as a measure of intelligence. The
correlation between intelligence and academic achievement
was found to be .56.
Chatterjee and Mukherjee (1974) conducted a study
to predict the achievement through the Differential
Aptitude Test Battery scores. The sample consisted of 1042
class VIII students. Highly significant relationship to
the extent of .01 level was found between the aptitude
scores and the total marks of the subjects.
Crano, Messe and Rice (1979) attempted to study the
validity of mental ability for predicting academic
achievement. The results showed a strong predictive
relationship between mental ability scores and class-room
performance.
42
Roberge and Flexer (1981) tried to find out the
relationship between intelligence and academic
achievement; The study revealed that both reading and
mathematics were correlated with intelligence. Mental
ability and scholastic performance were related with each
other. The coefficient of correlation thus obtained was
.58 to .61.
Yule, Lansdown and Urbanowicz (1982) conducted a
study to find out the prediction of educational attainment
through intelligence. The revised Weschler Intelligence
Scale for children was employed as a measure of
intelligence. The sample comprised of l&O children. The
study indicated high relationship between intelligence
scores and achievement scores. The dcoefficient of
correlation ranged from .475 to .911.
Knarr Jo Anne (1985) investigated the relationship
between measures of academic achievement and higher
cognitive processes. The purpose of this study was to
investigate and describe the relationship between academic
achievement as assessed by standardized group achievement
and test scores and teacher grades and the three highest
levels of cognitive skills, its analysis, synthesis and
evaluation as defined by Bloom (1956). Both the
comprehensive tests of basic skills, an achievement
43
measure and the Ross Test of Higher Cognitive processes, a
measure of higher level thinking skills, were administered
to two hundred and twenty sixth grade students. Analysis
of data revealed moderate correlation between the CTBS
academic subskills of language, Reading, Mathematics and
the higher cognitive functions of analysis.
The studies reported above were conducted in the
west. Some of the well known studies investigating
relationship between intelligence and academic achievement
were conducted in India also.
Ainsworth (1967) conducted a study to find out the
relationship between intelligence and school attainment in
different subjects. He selected 230 first year students of
mixed secondary modern school for the sample of the study
and obtained positive and significant (at .01 level)
coefficient of correlation between measures of
intelligence and academic achievement in different
subjects.
Pathak (1972) conducted a study on 105 high 100 low
achievers in Science. Jalota's Test of General Mental
Ability was employed as a measure of intelligence. It was
found that the high achievers had a significantly higher
mean I.Q., i.e. as compared to low achievers.
44
Thakur (1972) investigated the relationship between
intelligence and achievement. The sample consisted of 780
students studying in XI standard. The Bihar Verbal
Intelligence Test served as measuring tool for
intelligence. It was found out that intelligence and
academic achievement were significantly associated.
Chandra (1975) conducted a study to find out the
effects of intelligence on academic achievement. The
sample consisted of 1,107 students appearing at the High
School and Intermediate (U.P Board) examination. Hindi
version of Joshi's Intelligence test and achievement test
served as measuring tools. The study revealed that there
was positive correlation between intelligence and academic
achievement.
Lalithamma (1975) tried to find out the
relationship between intelligence and achievement in
Mathematics. The sample consisted of 732 pupils of
standard IX. Raven's Progressive Matrices and a standard
achievement test in Mathematics were employed as measures
of intelligence and academic achievement respectively.
Positive relationship was obtained between these two
variables.
4B
Ameer Jan Girja and Budra (1978) tried to find out
the relationship between general mental ability and
academic achievement. 224 freshmen of Agriculture and
Veterinary Science served as subjects. Raven's Progressive
Matrices was employed as a measure of mental ability. The
study revealed that academic achievement was significantly
related to general mental ability.
Mishra (1978) investigated the relationship of
intelligence and achievement in Science, Commerce and
Arts. It was found that the high achievers in Arts,
Science and Commerce were higher in their level of
intelligence.
Kevin (1979) examined relations between
intelligence and academic achievement scores at different
levels of socio-economic status and refined family
environment. The study revealed that at each environment
level increment in intelligence test scores are associated
with the increase in academic achievement.
Sharma (1982) attempted to find out the predictive
value of intelligence (verbal and non-verbal) and
creativity for success in Arts, Science and Commerce
courses at the higher secondary stage with anxiety, study
habits and socio-economic status as control variables. The
46
sample of the study comprised 750 male students studying
in class XI of nine Intermediate colleges in western Uttar
Pradesh. Analysis of covariance was employed to eliminate
the effects of intervening variables. The main findings
of the study were: (i) The students of the scientific
stream possessed a higher level of verbal intelligence
than those of the literary and commercial streams/iDTlie
students of the scientific and commercial streams
possessed a higher level of non-verbal intelligence.
Sinha, Trivedi and Gupta (1989) studied 50 high
achieving and 50 low achieving Mathematics undergraduates
and. administered the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices
and a semi structured interview on family and personal
variables was taken. Scholastic achievement was significantly
related to intelligence.
2.2 Studies on Intelligence and Professional Courses:
Attempts have also been made to study the
predictive validity of intellectual factors for success in
different professional courses. Some of the important
studies in this area are Fryer, 1922; HarveLl, 1945;
Steward, 1947; Johnson, 1948; Henoh, 1949; Venables,'
1955; Wilson and Watson, 1973; Kumaraiah, 1976; Patil,
1984 and Kazmi, 1986.
47 Menon (1949) mentions that in general the heads of
educational institution and other persons consider the
following qualities essential for success in teaching:
ability to maintain discipline, teaching skill,
intelligence, physical health, personality, resourceful
ness, scholarship, fiarness and cooperation.
Deva (1966) conducted a study on prediction of
student teaching success. The sample consisted of 546
student teachers preparing for the B.Ed, examination of
Agra University. Jalota's General Mental Ability,
VJashburne Scoail Adjustment Inventory, Saxena's Vyaktitva
Parakh Prashnwall served as a measure of intelligence and
personality. Pearson's Product Moment coefficient of
correlation between the predictor and criterion measure
were computed. Coefficient of correlation by the Fisher
Modification of Doolittle method was computed.
The contribution of different predictors in terms
of percentage of variance in the criterion were found to
be: Jalota's Test of General Mental Ability 1.8, Washburne
Social Adjustment Inventory 17.8, Saxena's Vyaktitva
Parakh Prashnawal, 5.8 Kuppuswamy's SES Scale 3.1 and
academic achievement 3.4.
Ilathur (1966) conducted a comparative study on
level of Intelligence among professional groups. The
sample comprised 1843 undergraduate students studying in
48
Arts, Science and Commerce Faculties of four teaching
university of Aligarh, Allahabad, Benaras and Lucknow.
Indian adaptation of psychological examination of American
Council of Education served as tool. It vi/as found out that
Engineering students were at the highest intellectual
levels. The group of Medicine received second position.
The other groups in descending order of their intellectual
levels were: Diploma in Engineering, Law and Teaching. The
difference between the performances at different
professional groups, except the difference between Law and
Teaching are statistically significant.
Wilson and Watson (1973) conducted a study on the
characteristics of effective college teachers as perceived
by their colleagues. Intellectual breadth was considered
one of the important characteristics of effective
teachers.
Kumaraiah (1976) investigated intellectual,
personal and social factors related to high and low
achievement of various stages in medical education. It was
found that intelligence, health adjustment, emotional
adjustment and overall general adjustment consistently
differentiated the high and low achievers at all the
stages in undergraduate medical education.
49
Patil (1984) conducted a study on
intelligence and attitude of B.Ed. students as
contributory factor towards their achievement in the
compulsory subjects. He found that intelligence and
achievement are positively and significantly related
(correlation : .28) with achievement.
Kazmi (1986) conducted a study on personality
profiles and cognitive factors of academic failure at
various levels. The sample consisted of 1000 failures (500
girls and 500 boys) of Arts and Science streams at High
School, Intermediate and Undergraduate levels.
Burnreuter's Personality Inventory (Hindi adaptation),
Raven's Progressive Matrices and some other tools were
used.' It was found that failures differ in their
personality characteristics and cognitive make-up. The
50
personality and cognitive factors were found to interact
on the failure's academic achievement.
A review of such studies revealed that the
researchers concerned with relationship between
intelligence and success in professional courses cited in
preceding paragraphs reveals that the measures of
relationship, though high, do not account for major
variance or the criterion variable. Therefore, variables
other than intelligence should be explored for
comprehensive prediction of success in these courses.
Personality seems to be an important factor in this
regard. While intelligence determines the degree to which
a person can be successful in these courses, personality
determines the degree to which the person will achieve.
51
Therefore, it was decided that attempts should be made to
investigate the relationship between different aspects of
personality and achievement in professional courses. Such
a study would necessitate a review of research
investisating the relationship between different aspects
of personality and achievement in professional courses.
Therefore, attempt has been made to review studies
concerned with the relationship between personality and
professional as well as academic courses. These reviews
have been presented in the paragraphs that follov;. ,
2.3 Studies on Personality Traits and Academic Achievement
Although Intelligence has been considered an
important correlate of academic achievement but empirical
evidences show that the relationship between the two is
not very high. In some studies insignificant relationship
between intelligence and academic achievement has been
obtained (VJedemeyer, 1955 and Porter, 1959).
Kundu (1988) has discussed intelligence and teacher
effectiveness in Indian Year Book on Teacher Education.
After review of studies he concluded, "The researches
reviewed above show that the relationship between teaching
success and intelligence is uncertain and inconclusive.
...~ -Tlierefore, it points to the need for further
investigation and research." This points out that
variables other than intelligence play a fairly important
52
role in determining achievement in academic and
professional courses. Personality, study habits and socio
economic status may play a significant role in this
direction. The present investigator is, however, mainly
concerned with the predictive validity of personality
dimensions, therefore, only those studies are proposed to
be reviewed which have attempted to investigate the
relationship between different dimensions of personality
and academic achievement. A large number of studies have
been undertaken in India artd abroad to investigate the
predictive validity of personality dimensions in academic
courses. Some such studies are reviewed below.
Astington (1960) conducted a study on personality
and academic performances in a Boy's Grammar School. He
found that at all levels, successful boys received
significantly higher ratings than unsuccessful boys for
persistence, independence and interest. Dominance seems to
have no consistent relatonship with academic achievement.
Successful boys showed a slight tendency to be nervous,
more emotionally stable, extraverted and sociable than
their unsucccjssfui class fellov s.
Centi Paul (1962) investigated personality factors
related to college success. The purpose of the
investigation v-jas to determine the differences between the
53
highest (H) and lowest (L) ranking students with respect
to their personality and adjustment as indicated by the
scores on the following two sets, (i) the Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) hypochondriasis
(HS), Psychopathic deviate (Pd), interest (MF), Paranoia
(Pa), Psychasthenia (Pt), Schezophrenia (Sc), hypomania
(Ha), depression (D) and hysteria (Hy).
On the College Inventory of Academic Adjustment the
subjects participating in this investigation were 64
full-time students enrolled during the 1955-56 school
year. The test scores of H and L students were tested for
significance by the analysis of variance technique and 't'
test of significance. Analysis of the scores on the
M.n.P.I. revealed that lowest ranking students in each
class in general, scored higher mean scores (indicating
poor adjustment) than the corresponding highest ranking
students. Tlie differences which were found to be
significant were those between the H and L. Juniors on the
following five scales: Hs (hypochondriasis), D
(depression), Hy (hysteria), Pt (Psychasthenia) and Sc
(Schezophrenia).
Rao (1953) investigated the role of certain aspects
of personality and academic adjustment for academic
performance of three hundred and five Arts and Science
54
students. He found that academic achievement and certain
aspects of personality like neurotic difficulties, morale
and sense of responsibility had a positive relationship.
Taylor (1964) conducted a study on the relationship
between personality traits and discrepant achievement. The
discrepant achievement, i.e. over-and under-achievement in
relation to the levels anticipated on the basis of
intelligence. The results revealed thatunder-achievers were
more likely to be characterized by positive self value,
self confidence, self acceptance, high self esteem,
acceptance of authority, conformity to expectation of
teachers and parents, positive interpersonal
relationships, higher power of self decision and
leadership, good study habits and high achievement
motivation and better control over anxiety. The
under-achievers were found to be characterized by negative
self concept, disrespect towards authority, poor
adjustment, excessive group dependence, interest in
pleasure seeking rather than academic activities,
unrealistic goal motivation or no goals.
Gawronski (1965) investigated differences between
overachieving, normal - achieving and underachieving high
school students (N=475). Students whose school achievement
5S
in English, Science, Mathematics and Social Science
exceeded the level expected on the basis of I.Qs. were
desij nated as oveti ahievers. Those whose performance was
around the expected level were termed as normal achievers
and those whose performance in these school subjects taken
together was below the expected level were considered as
under-achiever. The result revealed that overachievers had
better work habits and greater interest in school work.
They were also more persistent and more conscientious than
the normal and under-achiever Under-achiever on the other
hand, were more impulsive, more uninhibited more pleasure
seeking and interested in immediate results or rewards.y
Cattell, Sealey and Sweney (1966) investigated the
relationship between personality characteristics and
academic achievement. The sample of the study consisted of
563 students of VII and VIII grades. Cattell's 14 factor
personality questionnaire (H.S.P.Q.) and an achievement
test constructed by the investigator were employed as a
measure of personality and academic achievement
respectively. The study revealed that affectothymia,
superego strength, coasthenia, self-sufficiency, self-
sentiments are positively related to academic
achievement.
56
Ridding (1966) investigated personality
characteristics associated with over- and under- achievement
in English and Arithmetic. The sample consisted of 600
boys and girls, aged 12+, selected on the basis of test
results obtained from the total entry for one year in
Manchester schools. The sample was designed to prove for
comparisons between overachievers, under-achievers and
average achievers. The first two categories consisted of
pupils whose attainment scores deviated by at least half a
standard deviation from their verbal reasoning. Separate
groups were constituted for Arithmetic and English for
both sexes. The children completed From A and B of
Cattell's H.S.P.Q. yielding thirteen first-order and
second-order factors and also the children's questionnaire
adapted from Eysenck's M.P.I, which yields measures of
neuro'ticism and extraversion. He found that the
overachievers show more dominance, more surgency and
extraversion. No significant relationship was found
between anxiety and over or under-achievement.
Rushton (1966) attempted to investigate the
relationship between personality characteristics and
scholastic success. The sample of the study consisted of
458 students of elementary stage. The children Personality
Questionnaire and teachers' rating on 14 personality
57
factors and Moray House Test of Achievement were employed
as measure of personality and scholastic success. Ihe
study revealed that personality dimensions: sociability,
ego strength, dominance, surgency, conscientiousness,
adventurous, sensitivity, shrewdness and self-control are
positively related to academic achievement.
Ahluwalia and Narang (1967) attempted to
investigate the relationship between personality
characteristics and academic achievement. They found that
good achievers and poor achievers could be differentiated
on activity, hypomanic temperament and dominance. Good
achievers were found less unstable emotionally and marked
by less paranoid tendency, depressive tendency and
introversion and more of sensitiveness to moral values
than poor achievers.
Bhatnagar (1965) attempted to study the relation
ship between personality needs and academic achievement of
high school students. Age, sex and intelligence were
controlled. Personality needs were measured by Edward's
Personal Preference Schedule. It was found that need for
achievement, autonomy, intraception, succorance,
dominance, nurturance, endurance and aggression correlated
positively, and need for difference, affiliation and
abasement correlated negatively with academic achievement
of the students.
B8
, Abraham (1969) investigated the relationship
between certain personality traits and academic
achievement of secondary school pupils. The study
attempted to determine the influence of the personality
factors on academic achievement. The sample consisted of
pupils from standard X selected from twenty per cent
stratified randou sample of schools in the
Thiruvananthpuram, educational district. The personality
variaoles chosen were; intelligence introversion-
extraversion, neuroticism, adjustment and persistence,
level of aspiration, personal tempo and variability. The
scores obtained by the sample in Malayalam, English,Hindi,
Social Studies, General Science and General Mathematics
and on psychological tests of verbal intelligence,
non-verbal intelligence, introversion-extraversion and
neuroticism scales of senior M.P.I., persistence
inventory, personal tempo and school adjustment were taken
for the final investigation. It was found that the
influence at the temperamental dimensions of neuroticism
and introversion-extraversion on academic achievement
showed sex differences. The factor analysis of the
personality variables and academic achievement evolved a
factor pattern in which three factors could be
identified, viz., scholastic aptitude, neuroticism and
extraversioii-introversiou. lioys Vv/crc i DUIKI supcilor Lit
acadcniic achievciiiCMiL /IIKI doni 1 ii.inl pc r fionn i I I y i'nc\(>r<'..
59
Bachtold (1969) conducted a study of personality
characteristics of achieving and under-achieving bright
fifth grade students. Children Personality Questionnaire
was employed as the measure of personality
characteristics. Uner-. achievers were grouped on the basis
of low grades and low achievement test scores. Credulity,
self-confidence and self-control were related to
successful male achievement.Uhder-achieving female groups
differed in credulity, self-confidence, self-control and
excitability.
Gupta (1970) conducted a comparative study of the
personality characteristics of high and low achievers
(N=330) of class IX. Jalota's Group Test of Mental Ability
and Personality Traits Inventory was used for the
assessment of intelligence and personality
characteristics. Data was analysed with the help of a
't'test. Results showed that deference and persistence were
found to be determining factors in increasing one's
academic achievement. Paranoid tendency was found as a
deteriorating factor in academic achievement. Depressive
tendencies went a long way in adversely affecting the
students scholastic progress. Emotional male adjustment
and introversion contributed to lowering academic level.
60
^ Dhaliwal (1971) conducted a study on some of the
factors contributing to academic success and failure among
High School students. The study revealed that superior study
habits, rescrvedness, high verbal ability, home, emotional
and school adjustment and security feeling corresponded
with overachievement, i.e. academic success whereas
inferior study habits, outgoing tendencies, low verbal
ability, emotional stability, assertiveness, happy-go-
lucky temperament, poor adjustment in home, emotional and
school areas, good social adjustment and insecurity
feeling were associated with academic under-achievement,
i.e. academic failure.
Sharma (1971) conducted a comparative study of
adjustment of over and under-achievers. The study was
carried out in two phases:(l) The Preliminary Study, and
(2) Main Study.
1. Preliminary Study: I'he sample consisted of 98 students
of class VIII (aged 13 - 15 years). Regression equation
between marks obtained by the students on objective test
in 6 school subjects (Hindi, History, Geography,
Arithmetic, Algebra and Geometry) and scores on Prayag
Mehta's Verbal Intelligence Test was computed. The groups
of over-average and under-achievers were identified. These
groups were compared with regard to different areas of
61
adjustment. One-way analysis and 't' tests were employed
to see the significance of difference.
2. Main Study: The sample consisted of 525 students of
class VIII. The measures of expected academic achievement
were obtained by the help of regression equation between
measures of academic achievement and measures of
intelligence obtained through Prayag Mehta's Test of
Intelligence, Kuppuswamy'g S.E.S. Scale and past academic
achievement. Over and under-achievers were identified on
the basis of the method suggested by Thorndike. The data
was analysed with the help of two-way analysis of variance
and coefficient of correlation. The study revealed that
over and under-achievers are significantly different in
relation to school. Social, home and religious adjustment
areas, i.e. adjustment only in these areas tends to
influence over and under-achievement.
Patel and Joshi (1972) investigated some
personality traits of high achievers and low achievers.
The final sample consisted of 350 students of class IX, X
and XI. Personality Assessment Scale (P.A.S.) constructed
and standardized by the investigator was used to assess
personality traits such as extraversion vs.
introversion, reformist mind vs. conservative mind,
62
anxiety etc. It was found that on the whole low achievers
were more anxious than high achievers and high achievers
possessed leadership characteristics.
Saxena (1972) attempted an investigation into the
adjustment problems of over and under-achlevers. The
sample consisted of Science, Commerce and Arts stream
students of Higher Secondary Schools at Allahabad. The
over, normal and under-achievers were identified through
prediction by intelligence on the basis of regression
equation. Subjects showing positive discrepancy from the
predicted scores were overachievers and those closely
around the predicted scores were designated as normal
achievers. Mooney Problem Checklist served as the measure
of adjustment problem. The results clearly discriminated
between the over and under-achieving groups on adjustment
problems. The under-achicvers in all the streams showed
significantly greater number of adjustment problems than
the over-achievers.
y Tutoo (1972) conducted a study on personality
characteristics of some higher secondary school teachers
of metropolitan city. The study revealed that Indian male
and female teachers are somewhat more extravert than
British normals but more anxious than American and British
normals.
63
Jensen (1973) investigated the relationship between
extraversion, neuroticism and lie as personality factors
and academic achievement in the three ethnic group school
children, namely,White, Negro and Mexican American»Low but
significant correlations were found between all the three
personality variables and academic achievement for all the
three ethnic groups. Extraversion was found negatively
correlated with school achievement.
Menon (1973) conducted a comparative study of
personality characteristics of over and under-achievers of
high ability. The sample consisted of 1900 students. Over-
and under-achieving groups of students were selected
through stratified random sampling giving proportionate
weight to rural and urban boys, girls and co-educational
schools. The tools used were: (i) The General Mental
Ability Test, (ii) Personality Inventory, (iii) Motivat
ional Inventory, (iv) Interest Inventory, and (v) A
general data questionnaire. The results revealed that (i)
o\er- achieving groups of boys and girls of superior ability
as well as the general group were found to be less
extravert and maladjusted while overachieving boys of the
general groups were found to be less socially active and
masculinej (-'ii) over-achieving groups of boys and girls of
superior ability as well as the general group were found
64
to show greater academic interest and endurance; over-
achieving girls from general group and over-achieving boys
of both groups were also found to have greater general
ambition; overachieving boys and girls from high ability
and general group showed that their persistence was
greater; (iii) over-achieving girls of general group
showed strong interest than under-achievers in aesthetic,
social and mechanical activities and less interest in
outdoor, persuasive and clerical activities.
Abraham (1974) conducted a study on a certain non-
cognitive factors in relation to over-and under-
achievement in English at the secondary school level, the
results showed that the overachievers in English v;ere
superior to under-achievers on both social and personal
adjustment measures.
Jayagopala (1974) conducted a study on personality
profile of the lov\7 and high achievers. Cattell's 14
personality factor questionnaire, Form A, Tamil
translation (reliability .88 to .94), was administered to
275 students of standard IX from the high school
functioning in the lower socio-economic pockets of Madras
city. The results indicated that scholastic achievement
was related to personality characteristics (factor C:
affected by feeling D: Undemonstrative, F : Sober,
G : disregard rules, H : Shy, J : Zestful, 0 : Self-
65
assured, Q2 : Socially bold, Q3 : Uncontrolled and Q4 :
Relaxed. Low achievers were characterized by spontaneity,
vigour, spirit to associate with the group and
uninhibited.
Maria (1974) studied the case of a 15 year old boy
with poor scholastic achievement despite good intellectual
capacities. The investigator found that the boy was an
under-achiever as well as aggressive in his behaviour.
Further exploration yielded the findings that his
aggressive behaviour which emanated from certain socio-
psychological factors, was responsible for his lack of
concentration and persistence in studies rendering him
unable to achieve upto the level expected on the basis of
his intelligence.
Agrawal (1976) conducted a psycho-social study of
academic under-achievement. A random sample of 1408 rural
and urban students were administered Jalota's Verbal
Group of General Mental Ability and Hindi version of
Cattell's Jr., Sr. H.S.P.Q. by Kapoor and Mehrotra for
measurement of intelligence and personality, 't' test was
used for the analysis of results. It was found that two
groups differed on the eight factors; C (Affected by
feeling - emotionally stable) H (Shy - adventurous),
66
I (Tough minded - Tender minded), J (Zestful - circumspect
individualism), Q2 (Sociably group dependent - self
sufficient), Q3 (Uncontrolled - controlled) and Q4
(Relaxed - Tense) and did not differ significantly on
factors; A (Reserved - warmhearted), B (Less Intelligent -
tlore Intelligent), D (Undemonstrative - Excitable),
E (Obedient - Assertive), F (Sober - Enthusiastic) from
the normals.
Ghuman (1976) investigated aptitudes, personality
traits and achievement motivation of over and under-
achievers in academic courses. The sample of the study
consisted of 1948 students of both sexes studying in
grades IX, X and XI of the various higher secondary
schools of Raipur district of Madhya Pradesh opting for
different academic streams, namely, Humanities, Science,
and Commerce. The under or over-achievement of the
subjects was determined on the basis of the records of
their past three consecutive examinations. It was found
that male overachievers scored significantly higher than
the male under-achievers on factors; G (Disregard rules),
H (Shy) and I (Tough minded).
[lathew (1976) conducted a study on some personality
factors related to under-achievement in Science. The study
was conducted on 1076 secondary students of standard IX in
67
the district of Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala. The study
revealed that the mean scores of normal achievers for
variables like sense of personal worth, sense of personal
freedom, withdrawing tendencies and social standards, etc.
were significantly less than the mean scores of
under-achievers. In test anxiety and maladjustment, the
mean scores of overachievers significantly exceeded the
mean scores of under-achievers in cases of self-reliance,
sense of personal freedom, freedom from nervous symptoms,
social standard, social skills, freedom from antisocial
tendencies, family relations and community relations.
Srivastava (1976) investigated the predictive
validity of personality factors for academic achievement
of High School students. The sample consisted of 1,125
class tenth students. Jr. Sr. H.S.P.Q. (1968 edition)
translated into Hindi and standardized by the investigator
was used as a measure of personality factors.
It was found that (1) Rersonality factors, namely
A (Reserved) C (affected by feeling) and H (Shy) of
H.S.P.Q. were significantly and positively correlated at
.01 level with academic achievement in the Science group.
(2) Personality factors D (Undemonstrative), 0 (Self-
assured) and Q4 (Relaxed) were (significant at .05 level)
related with optional subjects in Science
68
group. (3) Personality factors A (Reserved), G (Disregard
rules), E (Obedient), J (Zestful) and q3 (Uncontrolled)
were negatively correlated with academic achievement in
Arts group. (4) Personality factors I (Tough minded) and
Q3 (Uncontrolled) were positively (significant at .01
level) correlated with academic achievement in Arts group
and factors A (Reserved), E (Obedient) and I (Tough
minded) were negatively correlated (significant at .05
level) in compulsory subjects of Arts group.
Iyer (1977) tried to investigate the factors
related to under-achievement in Mathematics of secondary
school subjects selected from standard IX of the
secondary schools of Thiruvananthapuram district of
Kerala. The study found that the following personality
factors: self-reliance, sense of personal freedom, feeling
of belongingness, withdrawing tendencies, nervous
symptoms, social skills, social relations, community
relations, general anxiety and test ability were most
effective in discriminating between all the achievement
pairs, viz., over-achievers(OA) and normal achievers (NA),
normal achievers and under-achievers and over-achievers and
under-achievers.
Bhagirath (1978) tried to find out the correlates
of academic achievement as perceived by the teachers and
69
students of High School. The study revealed that the
academic achievement correlated with intelligence,
character, emdotional adjustment, school and social
adjustment, punctuality, activeness, alertness, efficiency
and emotional adjustment.
Siddiqui (1979) investigated effects of Achievement
motivation and Personality on Academic Success. The sample
consisted of 450 student drawn randomly from various
colleges in the city of Ahmedabad. Data were collected
using Thematic Apperception Test, Mukherjee Choice Test of
Achievement Motivation, college examination marks of
students, Eysenck Personality Inventory and Progressive
Matrices Test. The data were analysed by recource to
frequency distribution, F-test and Chi-square test. It was
found that there was a mutual relationship between
intelligence J personality and achievement.
Datta (1930) investigated the relationship between
educational achievement and Ascendance-submission and
other variables. The sample consisted of 409 boys and 402
girls studying in class XI and XII of Intermediate college
in Lucknow. It was found that there was significant
relationship between ascendance-submission and educational
achievement.
70
Somasundaran (1980) conducted a comparative study
on certain personality variables related to over, normal
and under-achievement in secondary school mathematics. The
sample consisted of 123 over-achievers, 601 normal
achievers and 106 under-achievers. It was found that the
personality variables, namely, social standards,
introversion, family relations, social skills, self-
reliance, antisocial tendencies (freedom from) school
relations, nervous symptoms (freedom from), and community
relations had significant positive relationships with
achievement in mathematics while the variables of general
anxiety, test anxiety and masculinity had negative
relationship.
Kumari (1981) tried to identify the personality
characteristics of over-and under-achieving boys and girls
studying in science stream. Deva's 12 personality
factor inventory and examination marks were employed as a
measure of personality and academic achievement
respectively. The study revealed that over-achieving boys
were more shy, self-conscious, worried and sociable than
under-achieving boys. The over-achieving girls were more
sociable, jocular and lively, impulsive and more confident
than under-achieving girls.
71
Chopra (1982) investigated the relationship between
adjustment and academic achievement. A random stratified
sample consisting of 309 girls 598 boys (age range 15 to
16 years) studying in class X of twelve boys and five
girls schools were selected. Marks in High School
examination were taken as the criterion of academic
achievement. Home adjustment was found to be more related
to academic achievement than emotional health and social
adjustment.
Bunnell (1984) conducted a longitudinal study of
the personality traits of college students. The purpose of
the study was to determine the relationship between the
personality traits assessed by academic behaviour
inventory and the academic achievement and persistence of
college freshmen. Academic behaviour inventory produces a
profile of personality traits and is indicative of the
personal and social functioning of the individual. He
found out that students' academic achievement and
persistence in college can not be predicted safely by
means of the level of student academic ability.
Jahan (1985) attempted to draw personality profiles
of students studying in Pre-University classes in Science,
Arts and Commerce streams. Mehrotra's group test of
intelligence was employed as a measure o£ intelligence and
72
fourteen factors of H.SP.Q. prepared by CattelL served as
a measure of personality. Thorndlke's concept of over and
under-achievement was employed for controlling the effect
of intelligence on achievement. Over-achievers in general
were inclined towards the warm-heartedness. Over-achievers
in Science stream were more intelligent, emotionally
stable, excitable, obedient, sober, conscientious and shy
while under-ahievers were less intelligent affected by
feeling, undemonstrative, assertive, enthusiastic and
adventurous.
Singh (1986) attempted to investigate the relation
ship between introversion-extraverslon and achievement in
mathematics. The sample consisted of male students of
Class X studying in Governmment Secondary Schools. It was
found that relationship between introversion-extraverslon
and achievement in mathematics as expressed by Pearson's
Product Moment Coefficient of Correlation was significant.
Haq (1987) conducted a valuable study on
personality in relation to scholastic success. The study
was conducted on a large sample of 650 VIII and IX grade
73
school children from Aligarh Muslim University Boys' and
Girls' schools.
The investigator employed Cattell and Cattell's
Culture Fair Test (Scale 2, Form A) for testing
intelligence and for the achievement measure the
investigator had to depend upon the school records. The
Indian adaptation of Cattell and Beloff's H.S.P.Q. (Form
A) was employed for measuring personality. The results
showed that the male over-achievers in English were more
prone to be obedience, submissiveness and accommodating
temperament while the under-achievers in the same subject
were more inclined to be assertive competitive and
aggressive. Over-achieving boys in Hindi were found to be
more intelligent emotionally stable, adventurous and
individualistic Female over-achieverjp in Mathematics were
found to be more self sufficient than the under-achievers.
^Southward Paul (1989) conducted a study on
personality and performance in elementary mathematics. The
findings indicated that extraverted and stable boys and
girls achieve better than introverted and unstable
subjects.
Swarup (1989) investigated personality charact
eristics of under and over-achievers. The sample consisted
of 250 students of B.Sc. final class taken from the two
74
Associate Colleges of Allahabad University. 108 students
were taken from the Mathematics group and 142 belongs to
Biology group. The groups of under-achievers and over-
achievers differed significantly on factors; introversion
and extraversion, confidence in oneself and sociability.
Neog (1990) carried out a study on personality
characteristics of under-achievers across any two school
disciplines. The sample consisted of 302 students from X
class of boys and girls high and higher secondary schools
from Nagaon, Assam. The study revealed that over-achievers
in English were found more prone to be warmhearted, less
enthusiastic J less adventurous, less tenderminded,
socially group-dependent and less controlled than the
over-achievers in Mathematics. Over-achievers in English
were found to be emotionally less stable, assertive,
conscientious, less tenderminded, less apprehensive and
more controlled than the under-achievers in English.
2.4 Studies on Anxiety and Academic Achievement :
Freud (1933)regarded anxiety as a specific state of
unpleasure. It is the manifestation of some present and
future threats perceived by the individuals. Therefore, it
plays a very prominent role in all walks of life. An over
anxious student will show a low performance. Research
workers have dtherefore, regarded anxiety as an important
75
predictor of academic achievement. Anxiety as a clinical
phenomenon was first emphasized by Freud. Martin
emphasized that anxiety acts as one of the principal
causative agents for diverse behavioural consequences.
Quite a few studies have been conducted in this area. Some
of the well known studies are given below :
Stern, Stein and Bloom (1956) found that highly
anxious students ' tended to achieve low on measure of
academic achievement. The sample of their study comprised
of 138 students covering the age of elevent to fifteen
years. Saxena's General Anxiety Scale for children was
used as anxiety measure. The study revealed that students
possessing a high level of anxiety achieve less in
academic field than the students having low level of
anxiety.
Hallworth (1961) conducted a study on 900 children of
modern and grammar schools and measured their anxiety with
the help of eight self-rating questionnaires including
measure of self-blame, manifest anxiety scale, separation
anxiety etc. These eight type of self-rating
questionnaires possess high reliability indices. He
correlated the scores on the aforementioned measure with
76
attainment scores and obtained positive and significant
relationship.
Keller and Rowley (1964) conducted a study on the
relationship among anxiety, intelligence and scholastic
achievement in Junior High School children. Most of the
correlations between anxiety and school achievement were
negative.
Feldusen, Denny and Condon (1965) investigated the
relationship between anxiety and academic achievement. 100
high and 100 low anxiety male and female students studying
in class VII served as the sample. Sarason's General
Anxiety Scale and school and college achievement served as
a measure of anxiety and academic achievement respectively,
The results indicated that highly anxous males as well as
females were lower on the achievement test and the
students of low level of anxiety were high on achievement
tests.
Singh (1965) conducted a study on the effect of
anxiety on achievement. The sample comprised of 370 male
students of graduate courses. The academic achievement was
found to be negatively related with anxiety.
Sinha (1965) tried to Tind out the relationship
between anxiety and academic achievement at university
77
level. The sample consisted of 185 high achievers and 190
low achievers selected on the basis of last university
examination marks. Sinha's Anxiety Scale and examination
marks served as measure of anxiety and achievement
respectively. The study revealed that low achievers were
significantly more anxious than the high achievers.
Fatehpuria (1966) investigated the effect of
anxiety and academic achievement. The sample consisted of
70 children of Vllth grade of different Calcutta High
Schools. The results indicated that low anxiety children
tended to achieve comparatively more than the high
anxiety children because the former applied their mind to
the task more than the latter.
Sarason (1966) found that anxious students worked
faster and more with fewer errors and thus achieved higher
than low test anxiety students but failed to exhibit
higher retention scores.
Q. Reilly and Ripple (1967) attempted to find out
the relationship between anxiety and academic achievement.
The sample comprised sixth grade children. Correlation of
0.53 was found between tests of anxiety and academic
achievement.
78
Pandit (1969) investigated the role of anxiety in
learning and academic achievement of children. The sample
consisted of 145 grade V boys in one elementary school in
Delhi. The CIE Group Test of Intelligence (11 - 12) and
adaptation of four anxiety scales were used. The study
revealed that anxiety bore a negative relationship with
learning and academic achievement. Subjects having less
anxiety were found superior in learning and achievement,
irrespective of the task difficulty to those having more
anxiety.
Jha (1970) conducted a study to find out the
relationship between anxiety and academic achievement in
Science only. The manifest Anxiety Scale and average of
two preceding annual examination marks in Science were
employed to measure anxiety and achievement in Science
respectively. The researcher found negative relationship
between achievement in Science in case of boys and
combined sample, but not so in the case of girls.
Dhaliwal (1971) investigated personality correlates
of academic success and failure. The results revealed that
anxiety and need for achievement bore a curvilinear
relationship with over and under-ahievement, implying
thereby that both over-and under-achievement, go with a
79
higher need for achievement and a greater anxiety in
comparison to normal achievement.
Patel (1972) conducted a study of some personality
traits of high and low achievers. The sample consisted of
350 students from IX* , X*" and XI*"* class. The results
indicated that on the whole low achievers were more
anxious than high achievers.
Rai (1974) tried to find out the relationship between
anxiety and academic achievement on a large sample of 1000
Biology students. Sinha's Anxiety Scale was employed as a
measure of anxiety and the examination marks as
achievement measures. The results indicated a negative
relationship between anxiety and academic achievement.
High level of anxiety affected the subject's attainment
and the low level anxiety was related with high
achievement.
Chaudhari (1975) tried to investigate the factors
contributing to academic under-achievement of students.
Several measures including Sinha's Anxiety Scale were
80
administered. Negative correlation between anxiety and
achievement was obtained.
Mathew (1976) conducted a study on some personality
factors related to under-achievement. The sample consisted
of 1076 secondary students of standard IX in the district
of Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala. The results indicated that
mean scores of normal achievers were significantly less
than the mean scores of under-achievers in test anxiety.
Shankar and Brar (1976) conducted a study of the
relationship of anxiety with academic achievement. The
sample consisted of 85 post-graduate students. Anxiety
scale in intelligence tests were used as tools. For data
analysis Pearsonian Product Moment Coefficient of
Correlation was worked out. The results indicated that
there existed a negative relationship between anxiety and
academic achievment.
Ravindar (1977) investigated the effects of state
trait anxiety. Psychological stress and intelligence on
81
learning and academic achievement. He found that anxiety
as a main effect was not significantly related to academic
achievement except in the case of achievement in General
Science and Mathematics.
Soman (1977) conducted a study on some effective
correlates of Mathematics achievement of secondary school
students. It was found that personal adjustment variables
and anxiety variables had considerable influence on
Mathematics achievement.
Christian (1.978) attempted to find out the
relationship between anxiety and academic performance. The
sample consisted of 500 female students. The Self-Analysis
Scale by Badami was employed as a measuring tool of
anxiety. A significant negative correlation (r =-.1445)
between academic achievement and anxiety was obtained. It
means that if the anxiety was less, the achievement was
higher. On the other hand, highly anxious people were
found to be low achievers.
82
Vora (1978) attempted to investigate the relationship between
anxiety and academic achievement. The sample consisted of
200 students of class VIII. Patel's reading ability test
and test anxiety scale were used for obtaining relevant
data. The findings revealed that anxiety was negatively
correlated with reading achievement to a high statistical
significance.
Sharma and Ahuja (1979) tried to find out the
impact of anxiety on school performance. The sample
consisted of 116 X grade Science students of sixth english
medium higher secondary schools. He found that the low
anxiety students perform significantly better than the
high anxiety students.
Slddlqui and Akhtar (1983) studied the relationship
between anxiety and academic achievement. The study
revealed that there was a negative relationship between
anxiety and academic achievement.
George and Narayan (1989) conducted a study to find
the relationship between academic achievement and anxiety.
An anxiety self-analysis form administered to 30 high
school children. Subjects were classified into groups of
high, average and low achievers based on their previous
annual examination marks. Results of an analysis of
83
variance indicated no difference in the anxiety scores of
three groups.
A review of the studies investigating the
relationship between anxiety and academic achievement
presented in the preceding paragraphs reveals that most of
the researches that have been conducted, show that
anxiety exerts an adverse influence on academic
achievement (Stern, Stein and Bloom, 1956; Keller and
Rovjly, 1964; Feldusen, Denny and Condon, 1965; Singh,
1965; Sinha, 1965; Patel, 1972 and Siddiqui and Akhtar,
1983). However, some researchers have obtained positive
relationship between anxiety and academic achievement,
i.e. anxiety exerts a positive influence on achievement
Hallworth, 1961; and Sarason, 1966). The
diverse conclusions arrived at in the above two sets of
studies is perhaps due to the fact that while high level
of anxiety hampers academic achievement, a low level
anxiety motivates the learner to achieve high. Therefore,
it may be that the sample of the study in which the
anxiety was found to have a negative relationship was that
of highly anxious students, while the sample of the
studies which obtained positive relationship could be
possibly due because of comparatively less anxious
students. This conclusion finds supports in a study by
84
Dhaliwal (1971) in which he obtained a curvilinear
relationship that is upto a certain level the increase in
anxiety increases academic achievement but at a certain
level of anxiety the academic achievement starts
deteriorating.
2.5 Studies on Personality Traits and Professional Courses:
Professional institutions preparing engineers,
teachers, lawyers, business administrators, doctors etc.
play a vital role in national reconstruction and
development. They are perhaps more important for India
since our country is on its way to modern scientific and
technological advancement trying to match with ever
rising curve of scientific and technological progress on
the world graph. It is quite often that they have no real
aptitude for their profession. This feeling brings in
apathy, frustration and disappointment. Many of those who
take great interest during training later on find that
they can not meet the requirements of the profession for
which they have been trained. They feel that they lack the
personality structure suitable for dealing with human
problems in their respective vocations. Such feeling of
inadequacy which gives rise to the problems of wastage and
stagnation is quite acute in higher education and
professional courses like Engineering, Teaching, Law,
Business Administration and Medical.
85
A survey carried out by Planning Commission has
revealed that overall wastage is of the order of 25
per cent in Polytechnics. Studies conducted in foreign
countries also point out such talent loss. Hutchinson
(1966) found 9%, 40%, 51% drop out rates in the profession
of Medicine, Law and Engineering respectively. This
results in a colossal economic loss to the nation and
creates psychological problem for the students. The nation
spends large amounts of money for the professional
training of its citizens. Therefore, it is imperative that
only those students be admitted to such courses who
possess characteristics suitable for the respective
professional fields as to avoid failure or
underachievement.
In view of the importance of personality
characteristics for success in different vocational
courses, studies establishing relationship between these
variables have been undertaken both in India and abroad.
Some of such well-known studies are Lamke, 1951; Burgess,
1953; Ganesh, 1957; Gebhart and Hoyt, 1958; Cowan, 1967;
Flanagan, 1961; Marks Edmond and Zeigler Martin, 1962;
Torpey, 1964; Dutta, 1967; Deb Maya, 1968; Pal, 1969;
Walsh and Palmer, 1970; Cupta and Singhal, 1971; Kaul,
1972; Srivastava, 1972; Singh, 1972; Kaul, 1973;
86
Gopal, 1975; Kalra, 1975; Kumaraiah, 1976; Adaval, 1979;
Katiyar, 1979; Nagpal, 1979; Pines, 1981; Grewal, 1981;
Patnalk, 1982; Maxwell, 1983; Pervin, 1983; Mishra, 1984
and Vyas, 1987. Some of these studies have been described
in the following paragraphs.
Burgess (1953) conducted a study on personality
factors of over- and under-achievers in Engineering
courses. The tools employed in this study were Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Inventory, Thematic Apperception
Test, Rosenweigh Picture Frustration Test and Burnreuter's
Personality Inventory. It was found that Rorschach
variables failed to discriminate significantly betv;een the
two groups. One the T.A.T. over-achievers scored
significantly higher on achievement, aggression status and
under-achievers scored significantly higher on dependency
needs and to be more free of restraints. No significant
differences were found when Rosenweigh, M.M.P.I. or
Bernreuter's Test were employed. As a group over-achievers
were found to be more intellectually adaptable less
labile, more constricted and inhibited, more cautious and
realistic in approach to problems with greater need for
achievement and self-improvement.
Gebhart and Hoyt (1958) designed a study to
investigate some personality correlates of over-under-
87
achievement. The samples of over and under-achievers were
drawn from the students of the school of Engineering and
Arts separately at the Kansas State College during the
year 1955-56. The study found that over-achievers scored
significantly higher on the scale of personality needs of
achievement order, intraception and consistency whereas
under-achievers scored significantly higher on the scales
of nurturance, affiliation and change, meaning thereby
that the former four personality needs correlated
positively with over under-achievement and the latter
three personality needs showed negative correlation with
the phenomenon.
Considering school-wise (as between Engineering
schools and Arts schools) differences the study found that
the students of Engineering school scored significantly
higher on dominance. As regards differences in personality
needs of the groups formed on the basis of ability levels
the study found that high ability groups scored
significantly higher on the achievement exhibition,
autonomy, dominance and consistency scales, whereas the
low ability groups scored consistently and significantly
higher on dominance.
Mishra (1962) conducted a study on personality
factors in high and low achievers in Engineering
88
education. The study revealed that personality patterns of
the two groups differed in traits like anxiety, judgement
and neuroticism.
Deva (1986) conducted a study on prediction of student
teaching success. The sample consisted of 546 students,
teachers preparing for the B.Ed, examination of Agra
University. Jalota's General Mental Ability, Washburne
Social Adjustment Inventory, Saxena's Vyaktitva Parakh
Prashnawali served as a measure of intelligence and
personality. Pearson Product Moment Coefficient of
correlation between the predictor and criterion measure
were computed. Coefficient of correlation by the Fisher
Modification of Dcolittle method was computed. The two
adjustment inventories were found to be the best predictor
of teaching success. The account for 23.6per cent of tha
variance in the criterion. He found the personal qualities
of teachers to be impressive, kind energetic, cheerful,
confident, emotionally stable and diligent.
Deb Maya (1968) conducted a study to find out
personality characteristics which contribute to success
in Engineering profession. Data were collected from 300
successful engineers It was found that personality traits:
extraversion, dominance, absence of neurosis, sociability,
self-sufficiency, self-confidence and intelligence are
necessary for success in Engineering profession.
89
Pal (1969) conducted a study to find out
personality characteristics of students studying in
Engineering, Law, Medicine and Teaching professional
courses. The sample of the study consisted of 250 students
in the final year of training in each of the professional
groups. The Allport Vernon Lindzey Study of Values, the
Rorschach Ink-blot Test of T.A.T. were employed as a
measure of personality characteristics of students
studying in the four professional groups, 't' test was
employed to test the significance of difference between
the various measures. The study revealed that engineering
students obtained significantly higher scores on economic
and aesthetic scales while medical students scored
significantly higher scores on theoretical and social
scales.
Walsh and Palmer (1970) compared personality traits
of 140 Law and non-Law oriented students. The aim of the
study was to investigate the differences between Pre-Law,
Law and Non-Law oriented students on 14 personality
variables as measured by Edward Personal Preference
Schedule. The findings showed significant differences on
four of the scales; intraceptton, dominance, abasement and
heterosexuality. The significant finding on the
90
intraception scale suggested that the undergraduate
students in Pre-Law were more concerned with feeling and
understanding other than the third year students. The
significant results on the dominance scale suggest that
both the undergraduate students in Pre-law and third year
law tend to have a higher level of dominance.
Fox'''(1971) found effective teachers to be friendly,
mature and enthusiastic.
Cook and Richards (1972) conducted a study on the
dimensions of principal and supervisor rating of teacher
behavi our. They found that degree of teaching competence
related with good daily planning.
Lomax (1972) reviewed British researches in teacher
education. He has cited the studies of the researches
concerned v ith characteristics of teachers. For example,
Getzel and Jackson (1963) found the personality of a
teacher a significant variable in the class-room. After
thoroughly analysing the studies he was forced to
recognize the truth in Vernon's (1953) much quoted comment
that 'teachers are as diverse in their psychological
traits as any other occupation.'
91
Singh (1972) investigated personally character
istics of Management students (N = 87) studying in Indian
Institute of Management, Calcutta and compared them with
University students and successful businessmen. Eysenck
Personality Inventory was employed to measure personality
characteristics. Information concerning the students
academic qualification, geographical background and
parental occupation were also obtained. The management
students when compared with successful businessmen were
found to be more neurotic and extraverted. Tate and Music
(1954) remarked that students become somewhat less
neurotic and more extravert when they enter into the
occupation.
Tutoo (1972) studied the personality patterns of
teachers of some higher secondary schools of Metropolitan
city. The study based on a sample of 128 male and female
teachers. Maudsley Personality Inventory was administered
to these teachers to study extraversion-introversion and
neurotic dimensions of their personalities. The results
revealed that Indian male and female teachers are somewhat
more extravert than British normals. Married female
teachers also tend to be slightly higher on neurotic
scale.
92
Kaul (1973) studied the personality characteristics
of effective teachers and found that effective teachers
were more intelligent emotionally stable, tenderminded,
apprehensive, experimenting controlled and tensed.
Wakefield and Crowl (1973) conducted a study on
personality characteristics of special educators. They
found the ideal teacher as one who has the desire to
analyze the behaviour and motives of others, to predict
how others will act, to assist others, to sympathise and
show affection for the sick, to put in long hours of work
without interruption, to accomplish tasks requiring skill
and effort and to do a difficult job well.
Gopal (1975) sought to find out certain
differentiating personality variables of creative and non-
creative Science and Engineering students. The Wallach
Kogan test of creativity was employed for locating
creative and non-creative students. The Cattell's P.F.
questionnaire was used to measure personality factors. He
found that creative Engineering students in comparison to
their less creative peers were more reserved, emotionally
stable, assertive, sober, expedient, venturesome, tough
minded, suspicious, imaginative, shrewd, experimenting and
self-sufficient.
p.*
Kumaraiah (1976) investigated intellectual,
personal and social factors related to high and low
achievement of various stages in Medical education. A total
of 101 high achievers (highest quarter) 101 low achievers
(lowest quarter) of various stages in undergraduate
Medical educationat St. John's Medical College formed the
sample. Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices, Cattell's
Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire, Edward's
Personal Preference Schedule, the Kuder Preference Record
and Bell's Adjustment Inventory were administered to the
sample. It was found that intelligence, health adjustment,
emotional adjustment and overall general adjustment
consistently differentiated the high and the low achievers
at all the stages in undergraduate Medical education.
Soman (1977) conducted a study on some effective
correlates of mathematics achievement on Secondary School
students. It was found that personal adjustment variables
had considerable influence on mathematics achievement.
Adaval (1979) conducted a study on qualities of
teacher. He found effective teachers to be alert, cheerful
enthusiastic, exhibit, self-control fair and impartial,
sympathetic, friendly democratic, commends efforts
gives generous praise for work well done and encourage
others to do their best, fearless, confident, considerate,
trusting, gentle, kind, reserved and diligent.
04
Nagpal (1979) investigated non-intellectual
characteristics of over and under-achieving Engineering
students. Sixty over-achievers and thirty-seven under-
achievers were selected from the students enrolled in the
basic Engineering courses at the undergraduate level in
1971 and 1972 in the IIT for comparing the over-achievers
and under-achievers on the psycho-social questionnaire,
Chi-square test and 't' test were used for analysis. The
principal component analysis and varimax rotation analysis
were also done. It was found that ability measures
accounted for a limited proportion of the total variance
in academic achievement. The prevailing academic
adjustment was an important correlate of over or under-
achievement. Under-achievers reported a greater number of
emotional problems typical to youth. Over-achievers had a
personal orientation indicating fuller functioning that
average students. As a result of which they went through
life more independently, had a better realization of the
desirable hierarchical order of goals, had a more
constructive nature of man and were more successful in
striking a balance between play and work. Students better
adjusted to academic and other aspects of college life
exhibited greater interest in the subject matter, had
positive attitude towards the requirements of the
curriculum.
95
Arora (1981) investigated the problem of students
in professional courses of Medicine, Law, Engineering and
Education in relation to personality factors 800 boys and
girls preparing for the first professional degree in
Medicine, Law, Engineering and Education served as sample.
A student's problem check-list consisting of 10 areas,
measures of personality adjustment, self-concept, level of
aspiration and creative potential were used as tools, 't'
and Chi-square tests were employed for analysis of the
data. The study revealed that high problem students, in
general were found to have lower personality adjustment.
Medical students were found to be highest on personality
adjustment, creative potentiality and lowest on self-
acceptance and level of aspiration. Law students were
found to be highest in self acceptance and level of
aspiration but lowest on personality adjustment.
Engineering and teaching groups were found to be placed in
the middle on all personality variables in the middle on
all personality variables except self acceptance.
Engineering group had higher percentage of high self
accepting students than the teaching group. It was also
found that problems were negatively correlated with
personality adjustment (r = .65).
Grewal and Bansal (1981) investigated the value of
the personality characteristics as predictors of teaching
96
effectiveness of higher secondary school teachers and
concluded that effective teaching is the sum total of
positive influence of the various factors of their
personality.
Maxwell (1983) tried to investigate the relation
ship between personality traits as assessed by Cattell's
Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire with achievement
in a self-modularized paced programme of media production
techniques. It was revealed that students who demonstrate
a high self-concept can be expected to show higher levels
of achievement in a modularized self-paced programme of
media production techniques. Personality traits may be
used as indicator of students success in a programme of
modularized self-paced instruction of media production
techniques.
Pervin (1984) reported a study on the
characteristics of successful business executives. In this
study it was found that most demanding occupations have
their own kind of right stuff; the personality
characteristics or traits that, in addition to skill, make
for success. The study revealed that their senior
executives and chief executives showed considerable talent
and have remarkable strength as well as few significant
weaknesses. Those who fall short of their ultimate goal
frequently are found to be insensitive to others, untrust-
97
worthy, cold, aloof, arrogant, ambitious, moody, volatile,
under pressure and defensive. In contrast, the successful
executives are characterized by the traits of integrity.
Mishra (1984) investigated personality traits of
original teachers. They are found to be emotionally
mature, stable, realistic about life, assertive, self-
assured, austers, dependent minded, hostile, extra-
punitive, authoritarian, cheerful, active, talkative,
care free,impulsive, dominated by sense of duty, plan,
responsible, moralistic, sociable, bold, ready to try new
things, spontaneous, day dreaming, artistic and doubtful.
Vyas (1987) conducted a study on teaching success
of prospective teachers. Three different colleges of
education under Statutory Jurisdiction of University of
Rajasthan during the session 1983-84 formed the sample of
the study. Jalota's Mental Ability and Raven's Non-Verbal
Intelligence tests, M.S.L. Saxena's Personality Adjustment
Inventory, B.N. Mukherji's self-insight translated in
Hindi by the investigator, Jaiprakash's Teaching Aptitude
Test and Kulshrestha's Socio-economic Status Tests were
used to obtain scores for predictive variables. It was
found that there is positive relationship between teaching
success and academic achievement. Determinants like
intelligence (both verbal and non-verbal) and attitude
towards teaching play an important role for success of
prospective teachers.
98
The review of researches presented in the preceding
paragraphs reveals that a large number of researches have
been conducted on the cognitive, personality and
environmental correlates of academic achievement. Most of
the investigators have attempted to explore the
relationship between intelligence and academic
achievement. Attempts have also been made to study, the
predictive validity of intellectual factors for success in
professional courses. But the number of these researches
is much less than the studies conducted ind the area of
relationship between intelligence and academic
achievement.
A fairly large number of studies have also been
conducted for investigating the relationship between
personality characteristics and achievement in academic
courses; bnut the studies concerned with the relationship
between personality and success in professional courses
have attracted the attention of only few researchers.
These studies however, relate only to single profession or
few personality characteristics.
Professional courses are not less important than
the academic courses and the nation spends large ainounts
of money on professional courses. A look at the table 1.1
(presented in Chapter I) reveals that per capita per year
99
expenditure on engineering students alone is fe 3226.70.
The amount will enormously increase if all the professiion
are included. Therefore, in view of importance of
professional courses, there is a need to conduct a
comprehensive study for investigating the relationship
between personality and success in most of the important
professional courses.
REFERENCES
Abraham,M.(1974). Some Factors Relating to Under-achievement in English of Secondary School Pupils. Doctoral Thesis Education, Kerala University.
Abraham, P.A. (1969). An Experimental Study of Certain Personality Traits and Achievement of Secondary School Pupils. Doctoral Thesis,.Psy. Karnataka University.
Adaval, S.B. (1979). Quality of Teachers. Amitabh Prakashan, Allahabad.
Agarwal, S.K. (1976). A Psychological Study of Academic Under-achievement. Indian Dissertation Abstract, 1981, Vol. IX No. 3,4, 311-315.
Ahluwalia, S.P. and Narang, S. (1967). A Study of Some of the Personality Characteristics of Good and Poor Achievers. Indian Psychological Abstracts. 1975, 7, 85-86.
Ainsworth, M.E. (1967). The Relationship between Motivation, Personality, Intelligence and School Attainment in a Secondary Modern School. British Journal of Edul. Psychol., 135, 37.
Ameerjan, M.S. et al. (1978). Academic Achievement and its Relation to General Mental Ability, Academic Adjustment and Neuroticism. Journal of Edu. and Psychol. 36, 3, 107-112.
Arora, R.K. (1981). An investigation Into the Problems of Students in Professional Courses of Medicine, Law, Engineering and Education in Relation to Personality Factors. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.H.U., Aligarh.
Astington, E. (1960). Personality Assessment and Academic Performance in a Boy's Grammar School. British Journal of Educational Psychol., 30, 3, 225.
Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology : A Cognitive View; Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York.
Bachtold, L.M. (1969). Personality Differences Among High Ability Under-achievers. Journal of Edul. Research, 63, 1, 16.
101
Baquer, M. (1965). Differential Factors in Pupil in Science, Arts and Commerce Courses Higher Secondary Stage. Psychology, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Doctoral
Success at the Thesis,
Bhagirath, G.S. (1978). Correlates of Academic Achievement as Perceived by the Teachers and Students of High School. Doctoral Thesis. In Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83), Buch, M.B. (Editor) 1986, 658-59.
Bhatnagar, R.P. (1966). Personality Needs and Achievement Alumus, I, 2 Aug, 19-22.
Bhatnagar, R.P. (1968). A Study of Some of the Personality Factors as Predictors of Academic Achievement CIE Studies, Pub. No. 63.
Bunnel, Paul Gene (1984). A Longitudinal Study of the Personality Traits of College Students, Identified By Academic Achievement and Persistence. Dissertation Abstract International (The Humanities and Social Sciences) , Vol. 45, No. 5.
Burgess, Elva. (1953). Personality Factors of Over and Under-achievers in Engineering. Pinsylvannia State University Abstract of Dissertation, 16, 536-43.
Burt, C. (1937). The Backward Child. University of London Press, London.
Cattell, R.B., Sealey, A.P. and Sweney, A.P. (1966). What can Personality and Motivation Source Traits Measurements Add to the Prediction of School Achievement. British Journal of Edul. Psvchol., 32, 2, 10.
Centi, Paul.(1962). Personality Factors Related to College Success. Journal of Educational Research, 55, 41 187.
Chandra, P. (1975). A Study of the Problems of High School students in the Varanasi Educational Region of Uttar Pradesh and their Relative Effect on Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Gorakhpur University.
102
Chatterji and Mukherji (1974). Predictive Validity of a Differential Aptitude Test Battery : A Follow-up Study. Journal of Edu. and Psychol., 33, 2.
Chaudhari, V.P. (1975). Factors Contributing to Academic Under-achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, Nagpur University. In Third Survey of Research in Education, Buch, M.B. (Editor), p. 660.
Chopra S.L. (1982). Correlates Education,
A Study of Some Non-Intellectual of Academic -Achievement. D.Litt, Lucknow University. In Third Survey
of Researches M.B. (Editor),
in Education (1978-1983), Buch, N.C.E.R.T., New Delhi.
Christian, J.A. (1978). A Study of Fear Failure, Hope f Success, Achievement Motivation, Anxiety and Concern in the Girl Students of Sardar Patel University in RelaTtion to Their Socio-Econoraic Status and Performance. J. Edu. & Psychol., 363, 163-169.
Cook, A.M.and Richards, H.C. (1972)22. Dimensions of Principal and Supervisor Rating of Teacher Behaviour, 41, 2
Journal 11-13.
of Experimental Education,
Crano, W.D., Messe,S.R. and Rice, W. (1979). Evaluation of the Predictive Validity of Tests of Mental Ability, Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 2, 233-241.
Crow, L.D. and Crow, A.E. (1964). Educational Psychology. Eurasia Publishing House, Ramnagar, New Delhi.
Datta, N.K. (1967). Extraversion, Neuroticism and Teaching Success. Teacher Education, 1, 4, 39-42.
Datta, V. (1980). A Sudy of Ascendance - Subnission in Intermediate Students : Boys and Girls. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Lucknow University.
David Watkin and Estella Astilla (1980). Intellective and Non-Intellective Predictors of Academic Achievement at Phillppino University, 40, p. 245
Deb, Maya (1968). Personality Traits of Successful Engineers. Indian Journal of Psychologv, 43, 6-10. ' =. ' '
103
Deva, R.C. (1966). Prediction of Student Teaching Success. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Dhaliwal, A.S. (1971). A Study of Some Factors Contributing to Academic Success and Failure Among High School Students. Personality Correlates of Academic Over-Under Achievement. Doctoral Thesis Psychology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.
Dhami, G. S. (1974). Intelligence, Emotional Maturity and Socio-Economic Status as Factors Indicative of Success in Scholastic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Punjab University cited by Buch, M.B. (Editor) : Third Survey of Research in Education, 662-663.
Durflinger, G.W. (1943). Prediction of College Success. American Association of Collegiate Registr., 30, 251-264.
Edds, J.H. and McCall (1933). Predicting the Scholastic Success of College Freshmen. JOurnal of Educational Research, 27, 127-130.
Fatehpuria, B.S. (1966). Scholastic Backwardness in Calcutta High School (Class VIII). D.Phil, Edu. , Calcutta University.
Feldhusen, J.F. and Thurston, J.R. (1964). Personality and Adjustment of High and Low Anxious Children. The Journal of Educational Research, 57.
Flanagan, C.E. (1961). A Study of Relationship of Scores on the MMPI to success in Teaching as Indicated by Supervisory Rating. Journal of Experimental Education, 29, 329-354.
Fox, A.M. Brookshine (1971). Defining Effective College Teaching. Journal of Experimental Education, 42, 2, 37.
Franzen, R. (1920). The Accomplishment Quotient, A School Mark in Terms of Individual Capacity Trs. Col. Record 21, 432-440.
Freud (1933). New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, Norton, New York.
Fryer, D. (1922). Occupational In te l l igence School and Society, 16, 113-217.
104
Standards
Ganesh, G.A. (1957). Study of Personality Traits of Graduate Teacher Trainess in Madras State Masters Dissertation, University of Madras.
Gawronski, D.A. and Maths, C. (1965). Differences between Over-achieving, Normalachieving and Underachieving High School Students. Psychology in the Schools, 2, 152155.
Gobhart, G.G. and Hoyt, D.P. (1958). Personality Needs of Under and Over-achieving Freshmen. Journal of appl. Psychol., 42, 2, 125-128.
George, M. and Narayan, L. (1989). A Study on Academic Achievement in Relation to Anxiety. Psychological Abstracts, American Psychological association, 76, 8, 2631.
Ghuman, M.S. (1976). A Study of Aptitudes, Personality Traits and Achievement Motivation of Academic Over-achievers and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, Ravi Shankar University. In Third Survey of Research in Education 1978-83, Buch, M.B. (Editor) N.C.E.R.T., pp. 664-66.
Gopal, A.K. (1975). Certain Differentiating Personality Variables of Creative and Non-Creative Science and Engineering Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.
Gowan, J.C. (1957). A Summary of the Intensive Study of Twenty Highly Selected Elementary Women Teachers. Journal of Experimental Edu., 26, 115-124.
Grewal, et al. (1981). Personality Characteristics as Predictors of Teaching Effectiveness of Higher Secondary School Teachers. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 5, 2.
Gupta, B.S. and Singhal, W.R. (1971). Personality Adjustment Patterns of Pupils Teachers. Journal of Edu. and Psychology, October 1971, 29, 3, 230.
105
Gupta, H.G. (1970. A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of High and Low Achievers as Related to Their Academic Achievement. Indian Psychological Abstract, 1975, 7, 87.
Hallworth, H.J. (1961). Anxiety in Secondary School Children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 31, 281-291.
Harrell, T.W. and Harrell, M.S. (1945). A.G.C.T. Scores for Civilian Occupations. Educational Psychological Measurement, 5, 231-32.
Hartson, L.D. and Sprow, A.J. (1941). The Intelligence quotient obtained in School for Predicting College Psychol. Measurement, 1, 387-9.
value of Secondary Education.
Iyer, K.K.(1977). Some Factors Related to Under-achievement in Mathematics of Secondary School Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kerala University.
Jahan, Q. (1985). Personality Profiles of Over and (Jnder-achievers in Difference Streams Science, Arts and Commerce. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U. , Aligarh.
Jayagopala, R. (1974). Personality Profile of the Under and High Achievers of Some of the Schools in the City of Madras. Second Survey of Research in Education (1972-78), Buch, M.B. (Editor), p. 184.
Jensen, A.R. (1973). Personality and Scholastic Achievement in Three Ethnic Groups. British Journal of Edu. Psychol. 43, 115-125.
Jha, V. (1970). An Investigation into Some Factors Related to Achievement in Science by Students in Secondary Schools. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Patna University.
Johnson, D.M. (1948). to Social Psychology,
Applications of Standard Scores I.Q. Statistics. Journal of Social
27, 217-227.
Jordan, A.M. (1923). Correlation of Four Intelligence Test with Grades. Jour, of Edu. Psychol, 13, 419-429.
106
Joseph, T.T. (1979). A Study of Some Predictors of Achievement in Chemistry at the Pre-degree level. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Kerala University.
Kalra, Satish (1975). A Study of High Achievers in an Industrial Organisation. Indian Dissertation Abstract, p. 61.
Katiyar, P. (1979). A Study of Cognitive Functions in Relation to Achievement in Mathematics at High School Stage. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Gorakhpur University.
Kaul, Lokesh (1973). Personality Traits of Effective Teachers. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.
Kazmi, Q.S. (1986). A Study of Personality Profiles and Cognitive Factors of Academic Failures Amongst Science and Arts Students at various levels. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Keller, E.D. and Rawley, V.N. (1964). The Relations Among Anxiety, Intelligence and Scholastic Achievement in Junior High School Children. Doctoral Thesis, University of Jowa. In Journal of Educational Research, 48, 4, 167.
Kevin M. (1979). Intelligence, Social Environment and Academic Achievement : A Regression Surface Analysis. Journal of Experimental Education, 47, 4, 362.
Knarr Jo Anne (1985). An Investigation of the Relationship Between Measures of Acaflemic Achievement and Higher Cognitive Process in Sixth Grade Children. Ed.D. Temple University, Howard Blake, Dissertation Abstract International, Vol. 47, No. 5, Nov. 1986, p. 1601-A.
Kulshreshtha, S.K. (1956). A Study of Intelligence and Scholastic Attainment of X and XI Class Students in Uttar Pradesh, Doctoral Thesis, Phil^ Allahabad University.
Kumaraiah, V. (1976). Intellectual, Personal and Social Factors Related to High and Low Achievement of Various Stages in Medical Education. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, B.H.U., Varanasi.
107
Kumari, V. (1981). Personality Patterns of Over and Underachieving Science students at P.U.C. level. M.Ed. Dissertation, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Kundu, C.L. (Editor 1988). Indian Year Book on Teacher Education. Sterling Publishers Private Limited, New Delhi, p. 353.
Lalithamma K.N. (1975). Some Factors Affecting Achievement of Secondary School Pupils in Mathematics. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Karnataka University.
Lamke, T.A. (1951). Personality and Teaching Efficiency. Journal of Educational Research, 20, 217-59.
Lomax, D.E. (1972). A Review of British Research in Teacher Education. Review of Educational Research, 40, 3, 290.
Maria, N.B. (1974). The Disadvantages of Aggressive Children at School. Psychiatric, 23, 3, 99-102.
Marks Edmond et al. (1962). Scholastic Aptitude, Vocational Interest and Personality Characteristics of Journalism Students. The Pennsylvania State University. Journal of Educational Research, 56, 1, 37
'fvMathew, T. (1976). Some Personality Factors Related to Under-achievement in Science. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Karnataka University.
<b Mathur M.B. (1966). A Comparative Study of Levels of Intelligence Amono Professional Groups. Doctoral Thesis, A.M.U., Aligarh.
^Maxwell, H.C. (1983). A Study of Selected Personality Traits as Related to self Paced Programme in Media Production Techniques. Doctoral Thesis, Georgia State University. Dissertation Abstract International, 44, 10.
McCandless, B.R., Roberts, A. and Sterns. (1972). Teachers' Marks, Achievement Test Scores and Aptitude Relations with Respect to Social Class, Race and Sex. Journal of Educational Psychol, 63, 153-159.
1Q8
HoMenon, S.K. (1973). A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of Over-achievers and Under-achievers of High Ability. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kerala University.
Menon, T.K.N. (1949). Teachers and Educational Reconstruction. Indian Journal of Psychology, 24, 1-4.
vMishra, H.K. (1962). Personality Factors in High and Low Achievers in Engineering Education, Doctoral Thesis, Education IIT, Kharagpur.
\ Mishra, K.S. (1984). Personality Traits of Original Teachers, Indian Educational Review, 19, 14, Oct. 1984, 72-77.
Mishra, S.P. (1973). A Comparative Study of High and Low Achievers in Science, Commerce and Arts on Creativity, Intelligence and Anxiety. In Third Survey of Research in Education, Buch, M.B. (Editor), N.C.E.R.T., p. 677.
• Monroe, W.S. and Buckingham, B.R. (1920). The Illionois Examination, Bloomington Public School Publishing Co. cited by crane A.R. 1959, An Historical and Critical Account of the Accomplishment Quoitient Idea, British Journal of Edu. Psychology, 29, 252-259.
vvNagpal, R. (1979). A Study of Non-Intellectual Characteristics of Over and Under-achieving Engineering Students. Doctoral Thesis, Human IIT, New Delhi. In Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-1983), Buch, M.B. (Editor), p. 677.
s>?'Neog, S. (1990). A Study of Personality Characteristics of Under-achievers Across Any Two School Subjects. M.Phil. Dissertation, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Pal, S.K. (1969). Personality Study of Engineering, Law, Medical and Teachers Training Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Allahabad University.
Pandit (1969). The Role of Anxiety in Learning and Academic Achievement of Children. Doctoral Thesis, Edu. A Survey of Researches in Education, Buch, M.B. (Editor), p. 337.
109
Patel, A.S. and Joshi, R.J. (1972). Some Personality Traits of High Achievers and Low Achievers. Education and Psychology Review, 12, 3-4, 114.
Pathak, A.B. (1972). Factors Differentiating High and Low Achievers in Science^ Doctoral Thesis, Education, Udaipur University.
Patil, G.G. (1984). Intelligence, Interest and Attitude of B.Ed. Students as Contributory Factor Towards Their Achievement in the Compulsory Subjects* A Differential Study. Indian Educational Review, April, 23, 2, 109.
v.' Pervin, L.A. ((1984). Personality : Theory and Research. John Wiley & Sons. Inc., New York, p. 4.
c*Peters, C.C. (1926). A Method for Computing Accomplishment Quoitient in the High School and College Levels, Journal of Educational Research, 16, 99-101.
Pines, S.F. (1981). A Procedure for Predicting Under-achievement in Mathematics Among Female College Students. Educational and Psychological Measurement.
Porter, D. (1959). Some Effect of Year and Long Teaching Machines Instruction, Galeuter, E.(Ed.) Automatic Teaching, the State of Art, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Q. Reilly, R.P. (1969). The Relationship of Anxiety, Creativity, Intelligence and Prior Knowledge of Programmed Instruction Material. Dissertation Abstract.
Rai, J.G. (1980). A Study of Relationship Between Intelligence and Scholastic Achievement in Compulsory School Subjects, Journal of Voc. Edu. Guidance, 1, 4, 35.
Rai, P.N. (1974). A Comparative Study of a Few Differential Personality Correlates of Low and High Achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Agra University.
Rao, S.N. (1963). Students Performance and Adjustment » Doctoral Thesis, Shri Venkateshwara University, Tirupati.
110
Ravindar (1977). The effects of State Trat Anxiety Psychological Stress and Intelligence on Learning and Academic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis Psychology, Punjab University.
Reddy, I.V.R. (1978). Academic Adjustment in Relation to Scholastic Achievement in Secondary School Pupils - A Longitudinal Study, Sri Venkateshwara University, Indian Dissertation Abstracts, 4, 3, 235-237.
Ridding, L.W. (1966). An Investigation of Personality Measures Associated with Over and Under-achievement in English and Arithmatics. Abstract of Thesis Psychol. Feb. 1967, 37, 397-398.
' 'Roberge J.J. and Flexer, Coveriation Achievement.
B.K. (1981)
51, 235-236
Re-examination of of Field Independence and
British Journal of Edu. Psychol,
«,sRushton, J. (1966). The Relationship Between Personality Characteristics and Scholastic Success in Eleven Year Old Children. British Journal of Edu. Psychol 36, 178-184.
Ryans (1960). D.G. Characteristics of Teachers - Their Description, Comparision and Appraisal. American Council on Education, Washington.
Sarason, S.B. et al. (1966). Relation of Test Intelligence and
A Longitudinal Anxiety to Achievement
Study of the Performance on Tests. Monoar.,
Soc. Res. Child Develop., 29, 28,
Saxena, P.C. (1972). A Study of Interest, Need Pattern and Adjustment Problems of Over and Under-achievers. D.Phil., Education, Allahabad University.
Saxena, S.(1984). Intellectual and Personality Variables as Predictors of Vocational Maturity. Doctoral Thesis Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor, Directorate of Education, Delhi Administration, Delhi.
Scott, CM. (1963). The Relationship Between Intelligence quotient and Gain in Reading Achievement with Arithmetic Reasoning, Social Studies. Journal of Edul. Res., 56 , 6 , 322-326.
in
Shankar, U. and Brar, J.S. (1976). Study into the Relationship of Anxiety with Academic Achievement. Journal of Education and Psychology, 30, 4, 254-259.
Sharma, H.C. and Ahuja, M. (1979). Anxiety and Step-size as Correlates of Performance Through Programmed Instruction. Journal of Educational Psvchology, 36, 4, 173-179.
^*Sharma, K.G. (1971). A Comparative Study of Adjustnient of Over and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.
Sharma, S. (1982). A Study of Intellectual Factors and Academic Achievement in Arts, Scier.ce and Commerce Courses at Higher Secondary Stage. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., A.M.U., Aligarh.
Siddiqui, B.B. (1979). Effects of Achievement Motivation and Personality on Academic Success. Doctoral Thesis, Psychol., Gujarat University.
Singh, B.N.K. (1965). Some Non-Intellectual Correlates of Academic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Arts, Patna University.
>^Singh, R. (1986). An Investigation into the Relicionship Between Achievement Motivation, Intelligence (General Mental Efficiency) Intrcversion-Extraversion, Achievement in Matheratizs and a Comparison thereof between Haryana a~.d Delhi Students belonging to Various Sccio-Cultural Strata. Doctoral Thesis. Jamia Milia Islamia Delhi. Indian Dissertation Abstract, 15. 2, 159.
0Singh, S.C.P. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Management Students. Journal of Zzu. and Psychol. 30, 2, 167-69.
Sinha, S., Trivedi, J.K., Gupta, S.C. and Sinha, P.K. (1989). Scholastic Achievement : A Studj of High and Low Achievers with special reference to their Intelligence and Family Variables, Psychological Abstracts, American Psychological Association Inc., 76, 11, 3653.
112
Soman, K. (1977). Affective Correlates of Mathematics Achievement of Secondary School Students, Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kerala University; Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83); Buch, M.B. (Editor), 692.
« Somasundaran, M. (1980). A Comparative Study of Certain Personality Variables Related to Over Normal and Under-achievement in Secondary School Mathematics. Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83), Buch, M.B. 1983, 693.
'^Southward, Paul (1989). Personality and Performance in Elementary Mathematics with special reference to Skill Area. Psychological Abstracts, 76, 11, 3653.
v» Srivastava, G.P. (1976). A Study of Personality Factors as Predictors of Academic Achievement of High School Students. Doctoral Thesis, B.H.U., Varanasi.
Starr, J.W. and Nlchol, C. (1975). Creativity and Achievement in Nuffield . Physics. British Journal of Educational Psychology 45, 322-326.
Stern, G.C. et al. (1956). Methods in Personality Assessment Illionois, The Free Press, Glence.
Swarup, Smriti (1989). Personality Characteristics of Under and Over-achievers. Journal of Psychological Researches, 33, 2, 22.
<,\Taylor, R.G. (1964). Personality Traits and Discrepant Achievement : A Review. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 11, 76-82.
Thakur, R.S. (1972). A Study of the Scholastic Achievement of Secondary School Pupils in Bihar. D. Litt., Education, Bihar University.
Torpey, M.S. (1964). Personality Factors in Teacher Trainee Selection. Journal of Educational Research, 58, 138-39. In Indian Year Book on Teacher Education, Kundu, C. (Editor), Sterling Publishers, 1988.
Tuli, M.R. (1981). Study Habits as Correlates of Achievement in Mathematics. Journal of Edu. and Psychol., 38, 137-14.
113
?. Tutoo, D.N. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Some Higher Secondary School Teachers of a Metropolitan City. Education and Psychology Review, 12, 1-2, 9.
Vora, I.A. (1978). A Study of Reading Achievement in Relation to Sex, Attitude and Anxiety. Jour, of Edu. and Psychol. 36(1&2), 41-53.
. -Vyas, R.P. (1987). A Study of the Teaching Success of Prospective Teachers on Some Selected Variables. Educational Review, 63, 3, 55-58
Waggon, R.W. and Zeigler, T.W. (1945). Psychiatric Factors in Medical Students Who Fail.Americal Journal of Psychiatry, 103, 369-376 cited by Pal, S.K., Personality Study of Engineering, Law, Medical and Teacher Training Students, 1969.
' Wakefield, W.M. and Crowl, T.K. (1974). Personality Characteristics of Special Educators. Journal of Experimental Education, 43, 2, 87.
V*. Walsh, W.B. and Palmer, D A. (1970). Difference between Law and Non-Law Oriented Students. The Vocational Guidance, Quarterly, 19, 11-15.
Wederaeyer, C.A. (1953). Gifted Achievers and Non-Achievers. Journal of Higher Education, 24, 25-30.
Wellman, F.E. (1957). Differential Prediction of High-School achievement Using Scores and Multiple Factor Test on 'Mental Maturity' , Personnel and Guidance Jour, 35, 512-517.
Wilson, R.C., Dienst, E.R. and Watson, N.L. (1976). Characteristics of Effective College Teachers as Perceived by Their Colleagues. Journal of Educational Measurement, 10, 1.
Yule, W., Lansdown, R. and Urbanowicz, M.A. (1982). Predicting Educational Attainment from WISCR in a Primary School Sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychol, 21,
CHAPTER -III
DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
The present chapter is concerned with the
operational aspects of the investigation, the
methodological and procedural design of the study and
treatment of the data. In this chapter, a description of
the sample, tools and techniques adopted for the study has
been presented.
3.1 The Sample:
According to Ferguson (1976) it may be either
impractical or impossible for the investigator to produce
statistics based on all members because of large size of
many populations. A sample is any sub-group drawn by some
appropriate method from a population. A sample, thus is a
miniature population. To be true sample cust be
representative and adequate.
At the outset, the sample of 550 students was
collected for the present study from the different
professional courses,(Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business
Administration and Medical) of Aligarh Muslim University.
The number of cases however, was reduced to 53 2 (which
included 242 over-achievers and 290 under-achievers)due to the
115
occasional absence of the students on the days of
administration of the tests as well as due to the non
availability of achievement records of some of the
subjects who had missed exams. Since the subjects belonged
to the middle classes and were getting education under
similar circumstances, the sample was taken to be
reasonably homogenous from the socio-economic point of
view. It also caters students from the v ole country.
3.2 Tools of the Study;
The relevance and reliability of any research work
depends on the appropriateness, reliability and validity
of the tools and measures employed in the study. For
fulfilling this criteria the present study required the
follovjing tools and measures :
(i) a reliable test for measuring intelligence,
(ii) a comprehensive standard test of personality, and
(iii) dependable achievement scores of the students
involved in the study.
3.3 Measure of Intelligence:
For obtaining intelligence scores, the 'Culture
Fair' test of general ability constructed by Catell and
Catell (test of 'g' : Culture Fair, Scale 2, Form A) was
selected after a scrutiny of number of verbal and non
verbal tests of intelligence. This test was preferred
116
because it is a culture fair test. While emphasizing the
importance of this test the author claims that the test
measures individual intelligence in a manner designed to
reduce as much as possible, the influence of verbal
fluency cultural climate'. Another consideration for the
selection of this test was the ease of administration. The
test is so designed that it can be conveniently
administered in groups.
In order to avoid the influence of language the
tasks in the test are so structured that the subjects are
required only to perceive relationships in shapes and
figures.
Culture Fair Intelligence test consists of four
subtests. The first subtest has 12 series item and the
time allotted for it is three minutes. The second subtest
contains 14 classification items and the time allotted for
it is 4 minutes. The third subtest is constituted of 12
matrices and the allotted time is 3 minutes. The four
subtest has 8 topology items and the time allotted for it
is 2h minutes. Thus in all there are 46 items in four
subtests. It appears important to mention that both in the
arrangement of the four subtests and the order of items
within the subtests, psychological principle of moving
from easy to difficult operations is adhered to. Examples
117
are given before each subtests so that task requirements
are understood well by the subjects involved.
3.4 Reliability of the Intelligence Measure :
The reliability of a measuring instrument refers to
the stability of measure on repeated applications of the
instrument. In order to obtain dependability coefficient
and consistency coefficient of the Culture Fair Scale 2,
Form A, the test retest agreement method and split half
methods were employed by the author of the test. The
dependability coefficient ranged from .82 to .85 while the
odd even split half consistency coefficient ranged from
.95 to .97. (Technical Supplement for the Culture Fair
Intelligence Tests Scale 2 and 3, 1973, p. 2).
3.5 Validity of Intelligence Measure:
The validities of the four subtests in scale 2 have
been reported in the Technical supplement for the 12
series. The direct concept validity coefficient of first
subtest is .76, for the 14 classification items of the
second subtest the coefficient is .54, for the 12 matrices
of the third subtest it is .76 and for 8 topology items of
the fourth subtest .51. For the total test consistency of
46 items, the direct concept validity coefficient have
been reported to be .85. (Technical supplement, 1973).
118
The concrete validity coefficients for the scale 2
form A against 4 tests of intelligence namely Weschsler
Adler revised Beta, Otis Group Test and Coloured
Progressive Matrices was found to be .74, .75, .71 and .68
respectively (Technical supplement 1973, p. 18). The
average coefficient of concrete validity as determined
against these tests was found to be .70 (Manual, 1973,
p. 11).
3.6 The Measure of Achievement:
There are several possible means to obtain measure
of achievement such as standardized achievement tests or
records of examination marks. Due to the non-availability
of the standardized achievement tests, the investigator
had to depend on the records of examination of marks. The
achievement record of the final year have been taken for
the present purpose. It would have been, no doubt, for
better, if standardized achievement tests could have been
employed for this purpose, but no such tests were
available for the courses chosen for the study. The other
alternative was to construct an achievement test of one's
own and to standardize it to the extent that was possible.
In such case the reliability and validity of the
achievement was to be established. Due to paucity of time
and resources it was not possible to construct achievement
test for the present study. It was considered that since
119
the final examination theory and practical marks in all
the professional courses is the contribution of many
experienced and learned teachers and are awarded during
the academic session at different interval, therefore,
they are likely to be fairly valid measures and thus
suitable for a research study. Therefore, examination
marks records and results had to be employed for the
study.
In order to obtain better reliability of
achievement scores the result of final year examination
have been taken into account.
3.7 Measure of Personality:
For studying the personality characteristics of the
over and under achievers in the present study, the
personality inventory constructed by the investigator at
her M.Phil, level has been employed.
This inventory was found to be amply suited to the
purpose of this study. It was, in the first place,
suitable for the age group taken for study, secondly being
an Indian language, namely, Hindi, was easy to administer.
The inventory is also conveniently administrable to group
of students and can be completed within a class period.
120
This personality inventory was developed through
factor analysis technique. It consisted of 160 items
categorised in 12 factors. Each of the factors is
bi-polar, the high score representing one pole and the low
score the opposite of it. The poles are described
qualitatively in - terms of characteristics opposed
to each other and further explained with the help of
synonymous adjectives. However, none of the ends has a
necessary connotation of good or bad. A list of twelve
personality dimensions has been given below :
Lively
Sociable
Impulsive
Venturesome
Confident
Dominant
Conscientious
Trusting
Conservative
Kind
Cooperative
Persevering
- Serious
- Reserved
- Stable
- Shy
- Nervous
- Submissive
- Expedient
- Suspicious
- Experimenting
- Harsh
- Obstructive
- Fickle-minded
121
The number of items of these factors are given
below:
Factor Number of Items
I 17
II 17
III 15
IV 11
V 17
VI 17
VII 10
VIII 05
IX 15
X 15
XI 15
XII 06
3.8 Reliability of the Inventory:
There are different methods of establishing the
reliability of personality inventories. The reliability of
the present inventory was established through test and
retest method. Retesting was done after a gap of one month
and it was considered that a gap of month was neither too
small so that there was carry over from one administration
to the other and nor was too large so that changes in the
personality may occur. Pearson Product Moment coefficient
of correlation was computed between the scores of first
122
administration and second administration. The coefficient
of correlation for different factors ranged from .73 to
.96. Therefore, the reliability of the inventory can be
considered satisfactory.
3.9 Validity of the Inventory:
The personality inventory used for the present
study may be considered valid because the dimension were
evolved through the technique of factor analysis which
ensured construct validity. The index of concurrent
validity v as obtained by comparing the scores obtained on
the inventory with those obtained by the help of rating
scale. For this purpose rating scale was developed. The
dimension of this rating scale are bi-polar. Adequate
description of the two poles have been provided. The
description of the two poles of factor is presenuad
below:
Factor 1
Lively 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Serious
(High score description) (Low score description)
Carefree Cautious
Optimist Pessimist
Enthusiastic Indifferent
Warmhearted Apathetic
Humorous Mirthless
Happy go lucky Worrying
Cheerful Unhappy
123
Frank Secretive
Relaxing Thoughtful
Active Dull
Easy going Critical
For description of other factor see appendix V .
The validity indices obtained for different dimensions
ranged from .62 to .98. Therefore, the inventory .-nay be
considered fairly valid.
3.10 Administration of the Tests and Collection of Data:
The administration of the two tests i.e., Cattell's
Culture . Fair Intelligence Test and Personality Inventory
developed by the investigator herself took twelve days for
collection of data. Both the tests were administered to
the students of Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business
Administration and Medical. Strict adherence to the
instructions given by the authors of the tests was
maintained.
Scoring was done with the help of keys provided and
thus for each subject (case) scores on intelligence and
personality dimension were obtained. For achievement test
examinations marks were collected from the Registrar
office.
124
3.11 Identification of Over-and Under-Achievement:
The present research seeks to identify the
personality characteristics of over- and under-
achievers in different professional courses. Thus, one of
the most important problems concerned with the present
research was to identify over and under-achievers in
different professional courses. Achievement of a person in
academic and professional courses depends on a variety of
factors like intelligence, personality, socio-econoinic
status, home environment, school climate,, study, habits,
etc. Previous researches in the area have considered
intelligence as the most important variable in this regard
mainly because this variable yields high coefficient of
correlation with achievement (Harris, 1940; Rao, 1965;
Roberge and Flexer, 1981 and Singh, 198 6).
A review of previous researches reveals that the
approaches for identifying over-and under-achievers can be
classified into three groups.
3.11.1 Variability in Achievement at Constant Level of
Intelligence:
Some researchers have attempted to identify over
and under-achievers on the basis of their achievement at
constant level of intelligence. James and Elmore (1962)
tabulated achievement of students at constant levels of
intelligence. The students in the upper and lower 277, of
125
the dist;:ibution of achievement scores were designated as
over and under-achievers respectively.
Parsley (1967) computed mean of achievement scores
of 5 groups of students selected on the basis of
intelligence. 0.6 was added and substracted from each
group mean in order to locate the higher and lower limits.
The students falling above the upper limit, below the
lower limit and between these two limits were termed as
over, under and average-achievers respectively.
The above mentioned techniques require selection of
students at constant levels of intelligence. It will not
be possible to obtain sufficient number of subjects at a
particular level of intelligence. Therefore, number of the
subjects may be insufficient for a serious research.
3.11.2 Discrepancy between Achievement and Intelligence;
Franzen (1920) Pinter (1922), Peters (1926) and
Burt (1937) are some of the earliest researchers who
attempted to establish relationship between intelligence
and achievement. They advanced the concept of mental age
which represents the capacity to learn. Monroe and
Buckingham (1920) developed the concept of Achievement
Quotient (A.Q.) which is a ratio between achievement age
and mental age. Franzen (1920)came up with the concept of
Educational Quotient (E.Q.) which is a ratio between
12G
educational age and chronological age and the concept of
Achievement Quotient (A.Q.) & Intelligence Quotient
(I.Q.). This approach uses Mental Age for determining the
Educational Age, which is considered to be a more valid
index of learning capacity. Achievement Quotient indicated
whether the student was achieving upto his mental ability
or not. The following researchers have followed this
approach.
Frochlic and Hoyt (1959) and
Srivastava (196 7) computed means of the distribution of
intelligence and achievement scores. The students who were
below average intelligence but had achieved above average
in academic courses were designated over-achievers. On the
other hand, those students who were above average
intelligence but achieved below average in ac-TdGmic
courses ijcre called undcr-achievers inspite of being above average
intelligence.
The above procedures are not considered
satisfactory mainly because: (i) the population upon which
the educational achievement tests have been standardized
may not ho comparnblc wLth tliosc upon which Lhc norms of
intelligence tests have been used, (ii) examination marks
do not differentiate among pupils as does a sound test of
general intelligence. Due to this variability in the
distribution of scores the correlation between them is
127
attenuated. The above mentioned techniques also do not
take into account the regression effect on the
relationship between intelligence and achievement.
Torndike (1963, p. 35) writes, 'Failure to recognize this
regression effect has rendered questionable, if not
meaningless much of the research on achievement'.
3.11.3 Discrepancy between Observed and Predicted
Achievement:
Early researchers in the area designated high
achievers those who scored high on a test of achievement
and low achievers those who scored poor marks on the
test of achievement. This classification does not take
into account the potentiality and the consequent
achievement of the students. In order to obviate this
limitation Thorndike (1963) computed predicted achievement
scores on the basis of regression equation scores between
intelligence and achievement measures. He then calculated
the discrepancy between predicted and observed (actual)
scores. Accounting to him over and under-achievement is
the positive and negative discrepancy of actual
achievement from the predicted value obtained on the basis
of relationship between intelligence and achievement of
the whole group. Students whose actual achievement was
falling above the predicted achievement were designated as
128
over-achievers and those whose actual achievement was
below the predicted achievement were termed as
under-achievers. This concept of over and under-
achievement suggested by Thorndike is based on the fairly
high relationship between intelligence and achievement.
There are however, many other variables like aptitude,
study habits personality factors, socio-economic status
which influence the relationship between intelligence and
achievement. Therefore, for predicting achievement,
Thorndike later on suggested the use of group of factors
including intelligence, socio-economic status, past
achievement, sex and age) Chauhan, 1993, p. 40.
It may not be possible to employ all the above
factors for predicting achievement in professional courses
in an exhaustive study like the present one. Therefore,
intelligence which has been found to be highly correlated
with academic achievement, was employed for predicting
achievement.
In the present study optional prediction of
performance in professional courses is obtained of
performance in professional courses is obtained by
"regression equation" in which dthe measure of
intelligence has been employed as a predictor and the
degree of correlation between intelligence and the degree
of correlation between intelligence and achievement in
professional courses as dthe coefficient of predictive
validity of the measure of idntelligence. The formula for
129
Y = r ^^ (X - Mx) + My
(Garrett, 1981, p. 158)
in which
Y = the predicted value of criterion or dependent variable (achievement) •
r = the coefficient of correlation between the predictor
(Intelligence) and the criterion (achievement)
variables,
d* y = standard deviations of the criterion scores
(x = standard deviation of the predictor scores
X = Individual preidictor score
Y = Individual criterion scores
Mx = Mean of the predictor score
My = Mean of the criterion score y iZ. = regression coefficient O-x
For identifying the over and under-achievers more
precisely, i.e. unaffected by the statistical errors of
measurement, cases one SDc above their predicted
achievement scores were designated as over-achievers and
these one SDc below as under-achievers. The formula for
standard error of estimate is given below :
SDe = SD / 1 - ( r)2
(Garrett, 1981, p. 161)
130
Working along the above mentioned procedure, the
over-achievers and under-achievers were identified in the
five professional courses separately. These fell into the
following categories :
1. Over-achievers in Engineering professional courses.
2. Under-achievers in Engineering professional courses.
3. Over-achievers in Teaching professional courses.
4. Under-achievers in Teaching professional courses.
5. Over-achievers in Law professional courses.
6. Under-achievers in Law professional courses.
7. Over-achievers in Business Administration professional
courses.
8. Under-achievers in Business Administration professional
courses.
9. Over-achievers in Medical professional courses.
10. Under-achievers in Medical professional courses.
3.12 Procedure for Determining Group Differences on
Personality Factors:
In order to determine the differences between group
of over and under-achievers, in each of the five
professional courses on 12 personality dimensions the
't'test of significance of difference between means was
employed. For this, means and standard deviation were
worked out for each of the groups of over and
131
under-achievers in five professional courses (Engineering,
Teaching, Law, Business Administration and Medical) on
each of the twelve dimensions on personality. The 't'
values were obtained with the help of this formula :
M - M ^
(McNemar," 1962, p. 102)
The analysis of the results is discussed in the following
chapter (Chapter IV).
REFERENCES
Burt, C. (1937). The Backward Child. University of London Press, London.
Cattell, R.B. and Cattell, M.D. (1973). Measuring Intelligence with the Culture Fair Tests, Manual for Scale 2 & 3, The Psychology Centre, New Delhi.
Cattell, R.B. and » Cattell, M.D. (1973). Technical Supplement for the Culture Fair Intelligence Tests. Manual for Scale 2 & 3. The Psychology Centre, New Delhi.
Chauhan, Poonam (1973). Relative Contribution of Some Socio-Cultural and Famitial Variables to Over and Under-achievement in Science at Class VIII Level. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Eugence, S.E. (1964). A Normative Approach to the Measurement of Under-achievement. Journal of Experimental Education, 33, 2, 197-199.
Ferguson, G.A. (1976). Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education. McGraw Hill, Kagakusha Ltd., pp. 9-10.
Franzen, R. (1920). The accomplishment Quotient, A School Mark in Terms of Individual Capacity. Trs. col. Record 21, 432-440.
Froehlick, C.P. and Hoyt, K.B. (1959). The Scatter Diagran as an Aid to Diagnosis Guid. Testing S.R.A., Inc. Chicago, Chapter 8.
Garrett, H.E. (1981). Statistics in Psychology and Education, Vakils, Feffor and Simons Ltd., Bombay.
Harris, D. (1940). Factors affecting College Grades : A Review of the Related Literature 1930-37, Psychological Bulletin, 37, 136-166.
James, A.and Elmore, K. (1962). Problems and Academic Achievement. Bui. Nat. Ass. Sec. School, Princ, ILVI, 359, 470-473.
133
McNemar, Q. (1962). Psychological Statistics. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York.
Monroe, W.S. and Buckingham, B.R. (1920). The Illionois Examination, Blooraington Public School Publishing Co. cited by Crane A.R., 1959, An Historical and Critical account of the Accomplishment Quotient Idea, British Journal of Edu. Psychology, 29, 252-259.
Parsley, K.M. and others (1967). Further Investigation of Sex and Difference in Achievement of Under Average and Over-achieving Students Within Five I.Q. Group in Grades Four Through Eight. Journal of Educational Research, 57, 5, 268-269.
Peters, C.C. (1926). A Method for Computing Accomplishment Quotient in the High School and College Level, Journal of Educational Research, 16, 99-101.
Pinter, R. and Marshall, H. (1921). A Combined Mental Educational Survey, Journal of Education, Psychol, 12, 32-43.
Rani, S. (1990). Development of Personality Inventory. M.Phil. Dissertation, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Rao, D.G. (1965). A Study of Some Factors Related to Scholastic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Delhi University.
Roberge, J.J. and Flexer, B.K. (1981). Re-examination of Covariation of Field Independence and Achievement. British Journal of Edu. Psvchol., 51, 225-236.
Singh, R. (1986). An Investigation into the Relationship between Achievement Motivation, Intelligence (general Mental Efficiency) Introversion-Extraversion, Achievement in Mathematics and a Comparison thereof between Haryana and Delhi Students belonging to various Socio-Cultural Strata. Doctoral Thesis. Jamia Milia Islamia Delhi. Indian Dissertation Abstract, 15, 2, 159.
Srivastava, A.K. (1967). An Investigation into the Factors Related to Under-achievement. Doctoral Thesis Psychol. Patna University.
1J4
Thorndike, R.L. (1963). The Concepts of Over and Under-achievement. Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York.
Thorndike, R.L. and Hagen, E. (1969). Measurement and Evaluation in Psychology and Education. John Wiley & Sons Inc.; New York.
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION OF
THE RESULTS
The next step in the process of research is
presentation, analysis, interpretation and discussion of
the data and derivation of conclusions and generalizations
to get meaningful information from the data collected.
Analyses and .interpretation of data forms the most
important part of the study. All the efforts are discussed
to discover something new which must have the support of
the scientific reasoning and comes through experimentation
or observation or through both.
Analyses of the data means studying the tabulated
material in order to determine meanings. It involves
breaking down the existing complex factors into simplest
parts and putting them together in new arrangements for
the interpretation. The process requires an alert,
flexible and open mind. No similarities, differences,
trends and outstanding factors should go unnoticed.
The present investigation is concerned with
exploring personality characteristics of over-and under-
achievers in different professional courses, namely,
13B
Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business Administration and
Medical.
Means and standard deviations of the distribution
of scores obtained by these over and under-achievers on 12
personality dimensions were calculated to obtain 't'
values for the differences between them. These values have
been reported in Table 4.1 to 4.6.
In the above mentioned tables the name of each
personality dimension includes the names of the two ends
(terminal anchors) of a personality continuum for example
Lively — Serious. The initial name of each personality
dimension indicates high score end of the continuum and
the last name of the personality dimension indicates the
low score end of the continuum. The 12 personality
continua, their two terminal names/anchors and further
elaboration of each are given below :
Factor, l:: LIVELY
Carefree
Optimist
Enthusiastic
Warmhearted
Humorous
Happy-go-lucky
Cheerful
SERIOUS
Cautious
Pessimist
Indifferent
Apathetic
Mirthless
Worrying
Unhappy
137
Frank
Relaxing
Active
Easy going
Factor II SOCIABLE
Participating
Socially Skillful
Socially Bold
Expressive
Wide Interest
Responsive
Talkative
Factor III
Gregarious
IMPULSIVE
Intuitive
Lack Introspection
Affected by Feeling
Uneasy
Impatient
Excitable
Vague
Acts on the Spur of the Moment
FactorlV VENTURESOME
Uninhibited
Daring
Secretive
Thoughtful
Dull
Critical
RESERVED
Detached
Socially Clumsy
Timid
Quiet
Narrow Interest
Aloof
Taciturn
Seclusive
STABLE
Logical
Introspective
Emotionally Stable
Calm
Deliberate
Phlegmatic
Exact
Prudent
SHY
Restrained
Easily Frightened
138
Factor V
Energetic
Vigorous
CONFIDENT
Self-possessed
Self-sufficient
Self-assured
Poised
Contended
Responsible
Serene
Languid
Innert
NERVOUS
Over-anxious
Group-dependent
Apprehensive
Diffident
Ruffled
Frivolous
Dissatisfied
Factor VI DOMINANT Boastful
Factor VII
Prefers own Decision
Forceful
Independent
Aggressive
Stubborn
Outspoken
Ascedent
CONSCIENTIOUS
Rule-bound
Dependable
Trustworthy
Fair-minded
SUBMISSIVE Modest
Sound Follower
Meek.
Conforming
Humble
Mild
Introvert
Submissive
EXPEDIENT
Evades Rules
Undependable
Untrustworthy
Partial
139
Factor VIII TRUSTING
Credulous
Agreeable
FactorIX CONSERVATIVE
Conventional
Conservative
Tolerant of Traditions
Respects Established Ideas
Staid
Rigid
Unenquiring
Factor X KIND
Tenderminded
Sensitive
Gentle
Generous
Compassionate
Factor XI COOPERATIVE
Tolerant
Caplaisant
Friendly
Understanding
Accommodating
SUSPICIOUS
Doubting
Fault-finding
EXPERIMENTING
Experimental
Radical
Free Thinking
Introduces New Ideas
Broad Minded
Flexible
Curious
HARSH
Tough-minded
Crude
Hostile
Hard
Inhuman
OBSTRUCTIVE
Intolerant
Pugnacious
Belligerent
Torpid
Bellicose
140
Factor XII PERSEVERING
Determined
Steady
Studious
Firm
FICKLE-MINDED
Indecisive
Quitting
Lacks Concentration
Volatile
Thus, the dimension Lively-Serious indicates that a
person scoring high on this dimension is lively, i.e.
he/she is carefree, optimistic, warmhearted, enthusiastic,
easy going, etc. and the person scoring low on this
dimension is serious, i.e. he/she is cautious, worrying,
unhappy, indifferent, secretive, thoughtful and critical.
In the same way, the dimension Sociable-Reserved indicates
that a person scoring high on this dimension is sociable,
i.e. he/she is participating, socially bold, talkative,
gregarious, expressive, has wide interests, etc. and the
person scoring low on this dimension is reserved, i.e.
he/she is detached, socially clumsy, timid, aloof taciturn
etc. Remaining dimensions may be interpreted similarly.
Table 4.1 presents the 't' values indicating the
differences between the mean scores of over and under-
achievers in Engineering courses on 12 personality
factors .Figure 4.ipresents the personality profiles of these
candidates.
>y Xi
X)
a c . f^ « (0 Q)
4J U 43 ^. O D
o to c j J-" 0 r H 4J CO O C cO O
Cn ' H W
>>» W 4J CU M-l t W
,-1 0 A >-• 1= a. 0 (0 - -^ >-• no (U C
O- - H V J
CU (u p> (U
r- l C (U - H 3 CO
E- C a
c 0 •
o en en OJ . J-" PQ
O —' o
CO 0 0
c ' C -H
CO U
0) <U 2: <u
c (U - H
x : CO JJ C
w e (U C (1» - H 3
i J W 0 ) >-i
J2 0) >
(U CU CJ - H C JC (U 0 V-. CO
CU 1 V4-t V J
u-i <u
3 IW 0 T3
c <U CO
U 1 c »-CO 0 )
u > M-t 0 I W
^ c CJO
T 4
<u 0 c CD
IM U 0 -H
«4-( . - 1 - H Q) C > 00 (U f - l
H J W
CU D
r - l CO
> -• u
-
in )-• 0)
> <u m
• H T H
J : T H
CJ II CO 2 1
u 0
• u r-
•—
Q C/3
C CO CU
s
en V-CU
> a
1-1 f *
0 CO 1 ^
1 3 0 !-< II CJ Z > c
Q CO
c CO CU
^
y3
\^ 0
0 r3 U*
> XJ T- l
r-* CO
c 0 tn
CX
• H 0
m i n
T H
<r
CO 0
m
f n CN
0 0 CM
i n rv.
CVJ
i n CT>
0 ^H
cn D 0
M-l
>-> CU
CO 1
>> 1—1
CU
> 1-1
J
^
•H 0
i n T H
0 0 cn
r^ i n
cn
0 0 0
r^ CM
0 r^
CN
T- t
<f
0 T H
-o CU
> CU cn CU CC 1 CU
1—1
Xi CO
• H 0 0
CO
CM
T H
0
0 0
• VO
0 • < ! •
CN
0 0
T - l
T - l
CN i n
• cn
0 c
c 0 0
a r—1
CO
• u
CO 1 CU
> •r-l cn
r - l
3 a E
l-H
cn
i -<
0
i n <f
o Csl
CO T - l
CN
vD
• 0 0
CN 0 0
CN
r^ t ^
0 0 T - l
CO 1 CU B 0 cn CU u d u c CU
>
"^
T H
0
r>. r^
0 cn
0 0 0 0
CM
i n <3^
0 T - l
i n 0 0
<
0 r^
r^ CN
01 3 0 > U CU 2 1
• U
c CU
T3 •r-l •4-1
c 0
CJ
i n
T - l
0
0 0
CM cn
T-H
VO
CM
<t T H
0 T H
i n
m
m
-<r CO
0 0 CN
CU
> ••-(
cn cn
T I
E
^ 3
CO 1
4J
c to
c 1-1
E 0 Q
vO
T H
0
T H
CM
cn CN
r^ 0 0
CM
CJ 0
v£> T H
cn 0 0
T - l
i n CJN
r>»
•u c CU
T-l XI CU
a X
1 cn 3 0
•i-< OJ C CU
1-4
0 cn c 0 0
r^
r-\
0
rv. 0 0
r«. T H
m <f
r-4
CJ cn
0 0
T - l
cn
T - l
r^ 0 0
^
cn 3 0
1-1
0 •r-l
a cn 3
CO 1 0 0
c 1-1
• U
cn 3 u
f -
0 0
T H
0
<r cn
m T H
0 vO
0 ^
r^ CN
r^ CM
C3 0 0
CM
v l -0
T - l T-4
cp c
1-1
c 0 E
• H >-•
1
^ 1-1 U CO
cn c cS <J^
T-<
0
0 m 0 0
CN 0 0
• T - l
CM r^
r>« CM
CO 0 0
CN
C3 <f
0 T H
x: cn u CO X
1 T3 C
•r-l &>!i
• 0 T-l
T H 0
0 0 C30
T-4 <f
CM 0 0
CN
v£) CN
CM
<f 0 0
0 T - l
^ 1-1 U
a E cn
J 3
? 1-1 OJ CO
>->
1 q CJ
T-i
T ^
0
0 0 <t
• CM CM
VO CN
•!-{
T-t
0 0
• < ! •
v f 0
CN
cn 0
0 T - l
1 1 * _
5 '^ •^^•B
CO
•1-1 V'
^ cn )-• CU
Ci.
CN T-l
141
LU > LiJ
I O <
I
CC LU G
O (3 Z LU
CO
cc LU > UJ I O <
I
CC LU >
o d z UJ
I CO > - <u > O) W
O.E 3 I- O
S - - " © O) C — C O
o ^ «
>, CO o
_ 0) Q. CO (1) ^ c .i^ o ^ so o >- <
• XJ "* ^ _ UJ ^ LU oc-o • ^ c o
- m u_ ^
0
c
c
in CO
o lo o 00 CM CM
142
4.1 Personality and Achievement in Engineering
Professional Courses:
4.1.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious).
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 10.95 and 28.23 respectively. The 't' value for
this difference is found to be 41.55 which is highly
significant. This shows that over-achievers in Engineering
are serious and under-achievers are lively.
A perusal of the sub-dimensions of factor I
indicates that over-achievers are serious, i.e. they are
cautious, thoughtful and critical. The under-achievers are
found to be lively, i.e. they are carefree, happy-go-lucky
relaxing and easy going. The above result may be justified
because thoughtfulness and cautiousness seems to be
essential for over-achievement. Under-achievement is well
known to be associated with happy-go-lucky type. The
present finding has been supported by Taylor (1964) and
Gawronski (1965). They also found under-achievers to be
pleasure-seeking rather than involved in academic activi
ties. However, Deb Maya's (1968) study seems to contradict the
findings of the present research. In this study extraversion and
sociability were found to be related to success in
Engineering profession. It may be pointed out that the
present study is concerned with personality
143
characteristics of over and under-achievers in Engineering
courses while Deb Maya's study was concerned with the
personality characteristics of successful engineers. The
personality of a person successful in a course of study is
quite likely to be different from that of a person
successful in the profession. Thus, the present research
corroborates the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering) professional courses are
likely to be serious' presented in chapter I which was
generated after a thorough review of previous research.
4.1.2 Factor II (Sociable - Reserved) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 10.41 and 27.80 respectively. The 't' value
showing the significance of difference between the two
means has been found to be 38.15 which is very
significant. This indicates that over-achieving
Engineering students are reserved i.e. they are quiet
socially clumsy, possess narrow interests and are
detached while under-achievers are sociable,i .e. they are
participating, socially skillful, expressive, responsive,
talkative and gregarious. The present finding seems to be
justified because it is well known that high achievement
requires continuous and involved studies for which a
reserved personality (aloof, quite, detached) is
144
imperative. This finding has been supported by Dhaliwal
(1971) and Gopal (1975) who found that reservedness is the
essential characteristic of over-achievers. The hypothesis
that over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering)
professional courses are likely to be reserved is
supported by the present study.
4.1.3 Factor III (Impulsive - Stable):
The mean scores of over-achievers and under-
achievers on this factor are 30.00 and 11.06 respectively.
The 't' value is 6.08 which is significant at .01 level.
The result thus clearly shows that over-achievers are
impulsive, i.e. uneasy, impatient, affected by feeling and
act on the spur of the moment. On the other hand, under-
achievers are stable, i.e. introspective, exact
phlegmatic, prudent and emotionally stable. This is also
borne out of the evidence provided by the life histories
of eminent scientists. Sometimes, the behaviours of these
persons have been found unpredictable and unnatural. They
act on the spur of the moment. Stability is not found in
their behaviour. Thus,the hypothesis that 'over-achievers
in Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering) professional courses
are likely to be impulsive' is corroborated by the present
result.
145
4.1.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy):
The difference between over-and under-achievers is
highly significant (t = 29.45). The over-achievers have
obtained mean score of 18.77 and the mean score of under-
achievers is 8.56. This shows that over-achievers are
venturesome i.e. they are energetic and vigorous and the
under-achievers are shy, i.e. they are restrained and
ineit. The result seems to be quite logical. Energy and
vigour should be associated with over-achievement and
ineit and restrained dispositions can be logically
considered to be a characteristic of under-achievement.
Thus, the present research corroborates the hypothesis that
'over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering)
professional courses are likely to be venturesome'.
However, this finding is not supported by Jayagopala
(1974), Ghuman (1976) and Jahan (1985). Jayagopala (1974-
found that scholastic achievement is related to shyness.
Ghuman (1976) also found that over-achievers are of shy
nature. Jahan (1985) found under-achievers in science to
be adventurous. The above mentioned studies are concerned
with achievement in academic courses. The personality
characteristics of over-achievers or under-achievers in
academic courses may be different from the students in
professional courses.
146
4.1.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) :
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 27.70 and 10.95 respectively. The 't' value is
30.77 which is significant at .01 level. This shows that
over-achievers in Engineering courses are confident ,i.e.
self-sufficient self-possessed, contended, responsible and
serene while under-achievers are nervous, i.e. they are
over-anxious, group-dependent, apprehensive, diffident,
ruffled, frivolous and dissatisfied. It seems to be quite
obvious that personality characteristics,like confidence
and self-sufficiency are important in spurring achievement
and as such should be the characteristic of over-
achievers. Contrariwise , high level of anxiety and such
characteristics as diffidence and dependence should lead
to underachievement. The findings of the present research
and the theoretical rationale presented above are
supported by related studies (Taylor; 1964, Gawronski.
1965; Rushton, 1966; Jayagopala, 1974; and Agarwal, 1976).
Thus the hypothesis 'over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc.
Engineering) professional courses are likely to be
confident' has been supported by the present research.
4.1.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive):
The mean score of over-achievers on this factor is
28.85. This is significantly higher than the mean score of
147
under-achievers, i.e. 10.15. The 't' value is 32.00 which
is highly significant. This shows that the over-achievers
are dominant, i.e. they are forceful, independent,
outspoken, stubborn, ascendant, boastful and prefer their
own decision, while under-achievers are found to be
submissive, i.e. they are sound followers, modest, mild,
conforming, humble, meek and introverts. The present
•finding has been supported by Ridding (1966), Rushton
(1966) and Gopal (1975). Ridding (1966) found over-
achievers in Arithmetic, which is highly related to
Engineering, to be dominant, Gopal (1975) found creative
engineers who are likely to be over-achievers, to be
assertive. Rushton (1966) found over-achievers in
academic courses to be of dominant nature. Thus,the present resu
supports the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Engineering
(B.Sc. Engineering) professional courses are likely to be
dominant' presented in Chapter I. However, this finding
has been contradicted by Dhaliwal (1971) and Jahan (1985).
They found over-achievers to be obedient. It may, however,
be mentioned that these studies were concerned with
overall academic achievement. Therefore, these findings
may not be applicable to the Engineering profession. It
will also not be out of place to mention the conclusions
derived in the studies conducted by Gobhert and Hoyt
(1959) who found Engineering students to be fairly
dominant.
148
4.1.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient) :
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 7.95 and 16.09 respectively. The 't' value is
23.21 which is significant at .01 level. It can be
inferred from the results that over-achievers are
expedient, i.e. they tend to do things that are likely to
be useful for a given purpose, though contrary to the
principles. On the other •'hand, under-achievers are found
to be conscientious, i.e. they are rule-bound, dependable,
trustworthy and fair-minded. Thus , the hypothesis that
'over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering)
professional courses are likely to be expedient' has been
supported by the present research. However, this result is
not in agreement with the findings of Rushton (1966) and
Jahan, Qamar (1985) who found over-achievers in academic
courses to be conscientious. It may be pointed out that
personality characteristics of over-achievers in academic
courses may be different from those of students in
professional courses like Engineering. Neog (1990) also
found over-achievers in Mathematics which is highly
related to Engineering courses to be of conscientious
type. The study by Neog (1990) ho\ ever, seems to positively refute the
results of the present research. Further research in the
area is needed.
149
4.1.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) :
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factors are 4.87 and 8.39 respectively, 't' value is 17.87
which is very significant. Over-achievers are found to be
suspicious, doubting and fault-finding. Under-achievers,
on the other hand, are found to be trusting, i.e.
agreeable and credulous. This contention is supported by
Neog (1990). She found over-achievers in Mathematics to be
apprehensive. Gopal (1975) also supports this finding. He
found creative engineers to be of suspicious nature.
Personality characteristics necessary for success in
Mathematics and Engineering courses may be similar.
Therefore, these researches may be considered comparable.
The investigator could not find any study which did
not support the results of the present research. Thus the
hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc.
Engineering) professional courses are likely to be
suspicious' stands accepted.
4.1.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting):
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 11.04 and 27.27 respectively. The 't' value is
15.34 which is highly significant. The result thus clearly
indicates that under-achievers are conservative, i.e. they
150
are conventional, tolerant of traditions, respect,
established ideas and are rigid. On the other hand, over-
achievers are found to be experimenting, i.e. they are
radical, unconventional, broad-minded, flexible and
curiuous. The finding of the present study seems to be
justified because this course is based on experimentation.
It has also been observed in daily life that engineers are
found to be experimenting. It is on the basis of this
characteristic that they create new ideas, laws and
theories. This result is also In agreement with the
finding of Ghuman (1976) that over-achievers disregard
rules, i.e. they are not conservative. Thus, the
hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc.
Engineering) professional courses are likely to be
experimenting' has been supported by the present research.
4.1.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) :
The means of over-achievers and under-achievers or.
this factor are 10.49 and 27.72 respectively. The 't'
value is 8.50 which is significant at .01 level. The
result thus shows that over-achievers are harsh, i.e.
hard, crude and hostile. Contrariwise, under-achievers are
found to be kind, i.e. compassionate and sensitive. The
present finding has been contradicted by Neog (1990). She
found that under-achievers in mathematics are less
151
tenderminded. However,this contention may be justified by
the theoretical rationale. This type of course and later
on the related profession requires toughness in dealings,
that is, being harsh, crude and hard. Thus, the present
result corroborates the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering) professional courses are
likely to be harsh.'
4.1.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 10.84 and 26.67 respectively. The 't' value is
41.88 which is highly significant. It can therefore, be
interpreted that over-achievers are obstructive, i.e. they
are intolerant, pugnacious, belligerent, torpid and
bellicose. On the other hand under-achievers are found to
be cooperative i.e. they are tolerant, complaisant,
friendly, understanding and accommodating.
It may be that over-achievers in Engineering
courses have to devote so much time in their studies that
they do not get sufficient time for cultivating
friendship and tend to be obstructive whenever their
efforts for deep studies are thwarted. It is, perhaps, on
the grounds of theoretical rationale that the results of
the present research can be justified. Thus, the result of
152
the present research corroborates the hypothesis that
'over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering)
professional courses are likely to be obstructive*.
4.1.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle-minded) :
The mean scores of over-achievers and under-
achievers on this factor are 10.03 and 4.81 respectively.
The 't' value is 22.48 which is highly significant. It can
thus be concluded that over-achievers are persevering^i.e.
they are determined, steady, studious and firm.
Contrariwise, under-achievers are found to be fickle-
minded, i.e. they are indecisive, volatile and lack
concentration. This result is corroborated by Gawronski
(1965), Gupta (1970) and Menon (1973). They found
over-achievers in academic courses to be of persistent
nature. The result seems to be justified on the ground
that this course requires constant mental preoccupation.
It has also been observed that perseverence spurs the
level of achievement more than the intelligence does.
Punctuality which is an important component of
perseverance has also been considered very important
correlate of over-achievers. Thus the present result
corroborates the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Engineering professional courses (B.Sc. Engineering) are
likely to be persevering' presented in Chapter I.
•w y 0
1-1
CO O
• H
a)u-i >
en (U P
t—1 CO
>
1, C/D
1
cn >-< (U > cu
•r-l
0 in CO
1 II
<u •^ T3 C 13
u (U > 0)
x: Or--CO -d"
O
w )-i o J_t o to
>,
CO c o
a.
01
CO
en
c CO
o o o o o o o o o o o o
O N T H v o i n o o v o i - i r ^ v O k O O O
<t f^ O^ <f 00 TH r^ CM 00 CM in 00
00
en o o O en 00 vt O TH o 00
C M 0 0 C M C M C N J C S I C M C M C O < f C O
v £ 5 0 0 v O O < N O C M < J - O v O C M o m > ; J • O v D ^ ^ o ^ v o c c M l n c M
in 0^ O O 0^ CNJ
i n CM VO
vO 0 0 CM CM C^ a ^ O <)• CT\ CM r-4 CM O O
a ^ T-( VJO T H vO in in in r^ r^
C ^ C M m C N ^ O C ^ T H - ^ C N - d -
o in ON vt vo CM O ^ 00 1-1 O TH
T-i vo <T> in CO o m o 00 vD a\ 00
0 0 T H
03
D O
• H U (U
CO 1
>. r - l
0)
> •r-l H J
0 0
1 3 0)
> )-. (U (A 0)
Qe: 1 0)
I - l
J 3 CO
•r-l o o
CO
CM CN
(U t—1 X I CO 4J CO
1 (U
> • H tfl
f - (
3 Q ,
e M
CT> T-4
>, X CO
1 (U E
o (0 (U
w 3 u c (U
>
r CM
(A 3 0 > >-> a 2
1 4J
c 0 ) TJ •i-l iw C o
CJ
0 0
0)
> 1-1 en en
f -<
e Xi 3
CO 1
XJ
c CO
c • H E
o Q
r
•U c cu
T-l
-a 0)
a X
u 1 U3
3 O
• H 4J
c <u
1-i
o w c o
CJ
0 0
m 3 O
• H O
•^ a en 3
CO 1 OJ)
c t - l
• u en 3 W H
<1-CM
0 0
C •H 4J c (U E
•i-l > -0. X u
1 (U
> •w 4 J CO
a) en e 6
ON
X (0
>-• CO
X 1
T3 C
1-1
:>:: •
o
<!• CM
•r-l U
g u en
X I
? 1-1 j - i CO
5 ,q
• T - l
CJ
<U TD r- l (U
^ -o CJ C 1-1 -H fc E
1
CO c
•1-1 I "
i en I-l
0)
cu •
CM
153
T - l C M c n < l • m v o ^ ^ o o c J ^
CO
111 > UJ X o < I
cc LLI Q
z •
T3 HI
cd
CO
LU > LU
< 1
LLI >
q LU CD
O T3
> m
OcQ
to > (0
*- o a- C O >.' _ * - CO (0
«- o iJ ® < o
^?
2D
17 «J
154
4.2 Personality and Achievement in Teaching Professional
Courses:
Table 4.2 presents the means and standard
deviations of the distribution of scores of over and under-
achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses on
twelve personality dimensions. 't' values are also
presented for showing the difference between ithe means of
scores obtained by over and under-achievers.
4.2.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) :
The means of over-and under-achievers are 18.00 and
11.00 respectively. The 't' value is 4.91 which is highly
significant at .01 level.- The result thus indicates that
over-achievers in B.Ed, course are lively, i.e. they are
optimist, carefree, enthusiastic, warmhearted, humorous,
cheerful, frank and relaxing. On the other hand, the
under-achievers are serious, i.e. they are pessimist,
apathetic, indifferent, mirthless, worrying and dull.
Quite a few studies have attempted to investigate
the personality characteristics of effective teachers.
Some such studies are: Deva (1966), Fox (1971), and Adaval
(1979). Deva (1966) found effective teachers as cheerful
and energetic. Fox (1971) and Adaval (1979) found teachers
to be energetic and enthusiastic. Tutoo (1972) found
155
teachers to be extraverted. Mishra (1984) also found them
to be carefree. These researches support the result of the
present investigation.
The finding of the present research can also be
justified on the grounds of theoretical rationale.
Effective teachers should be lively, i.e. warmhearted and
enthusiastic so that they can deal effectively with young
students. Such teachers create an atmosphere in the
classroom which is condusive to learnin3. Some studies
conducted on over and under-achievers in different
academic courses have found that over-achievement is
related with extraversion. Some of these studies are
Astington (1960), Taylor (1964), Gawronski (1965), Ridding
(1966), Jayagopala (1974), Mathew (1976), Jahan (1985) and
Southward (1989). Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-
achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses are
likely to be lively' stands accepted by the results of the
present research.
4.2.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved):
The means of over-and under-achievers on the factor
are 8.65 and 25.58. The 't' value is found to be 13.14
which is significant at .01 level. The result thus shows
that over-achievers are reserved, i.e. they are detached,
socially clumsy, timid, quiet, aloof, seclusive and
156
taciturn. On the other hand, under-achievers are
sociable, i.e. they are socially skillful, socially bold,
responsive, participating, talkative, expressive and
gregarious.
The result is supported by Adaval (1979) who also
found reservedness as an essential character of successful
teacher. However, Mishra (1984) found that effective
teachers are sociable.
The sample of the study consisted of teachers under
training which involves both academic^practice teaching
courses. Success in academic courses of this training
would perhaps require the same personality characteristics
as are needed for success in any other academic courses.
Therefore, the studies concerned with over-achievers in
academic courses may be cited here to support or
contradict the result. Dhaliwal (1971) who studied the
personality characteristics of over-achievers in academic
courses also found that they are 'reserved'. Thus, the
result of the present research corroborates the hypothesis
that 'over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional
courses are likely to be reserved'.
157
4.2.3 Factor H I (Impulsive-Stable)
The means of over and under-achievers on this
factor are 22.89 and 9.46 respectively. The 't' value is
15.63 which is highly significant. The result indicates
that over-achievers are impulsive, i.e. uneasy, intuitive,
impatient and act on the spur of the moment. On the other
hand, underachievers are stable, calm, phlegmatic and
prudent- Thus,the results of the present research are not
in agreement with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses are likely to be
stable*' presented in Chapter I. The result of the present
study are also not supported by the previous researches
(Deva, 1966; Adaval, 1979 and Mishra, 1984). Deva's research
was concerned with pupil teachers but that of Adaval and
Mishra was concerned with the teachers in the profession.
The findings of Adaval and Mishra may therefore be
evaluated with this point of view in mind.
The findings that over-achieving student teachers
are impulsive does not seem to be justified when
considered superficially, but a careful observation of
high achievers in different fields reveals that most of
them have been impulsive and emotionally unstable. Terman
(1953) found that literary geniuses were mostly lov; in
emotional stability. Taylor (1963) also quotes examples of
scientists who had low ratings on emotional stability.
158
In view of this discussion it may safely be concluded that
overerachieving student teachers may also be impulsive.
4.2.4 FactorIV (Venturesome-Shy) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 19.14 and 9.00 respectively. The 't' value is
22.56 which is highly significant. The result shows that
overachievers are venturesome, i.e. they are uninhibited,
daring, energetic and vigorous. On the other hand, the
under-achievers are of shy nature, i.e. they are
restrained, easily frightened, languid and inert. This
finding has been supported by Deva (1966), Wakefield
(1974) and Adaval (1979). Deva (1966) found effective
teachers to be energetic which is a related characteristic
of the dimension, i.e. venturesomeness. Wakefield (1974)
also found that ideal teachers readily make efforts to do
difficult jobs. Adaval (1979) found fearlessness an
important quality of teachers.
As pointed out earlier, the teachers' training
courses of the subjects under study had academic work as
an important component. Therefore, studies concerned with
the personality of high achievers in academic courses can
also be quoted to support or contradict the findings of
this research. In this connection it may be pointed out
that Rushton (1966) also found over-achievers in academic
159
courses as adventurous. Thus, the present result is in
agreement v;ith the hypothesis that 'overachievers in
Teaching (B.Ed. ) professional courses are likely to be
venturesome.'
4.2.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) ;
The means of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 27.06 and 9.62 respectively. The 't' value is
17.85 which is highly significant. Thus, it is evident
that over-achievers are confident, i.e. self-sufficient,
self-assured, poised, contended, responsible and serene
and the under-achievers are group-dependent, over-anxious,
ruffled, apprehensive and diffident. The result seems to
be quite reasonable because confidence does not only
provide background for intensive studies but is also
essential for facing the class and to become effective
teacher. Some of the researchers who conducted
investigation in the area of teaching competence have
confirmed the present finding (Deva, 1966; and Adaval,
1979). On the other hand, nervousness is likely to impede
high achievement. This result also finds support by the
researches concerned with academic achievement (Taylor,
1964; Gawronski, 1965; Rushton, 1966; Jayagopala, 1974;
and Agarwal, 1976). The present result corroborates the
hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.)
professional courses are likely to be confident^.
160
4.2.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 18.12 and 9.70 respectively. The 't' value is
5.61 which is significant at .01 level. The result
indicates that over-achievers are dominant i.e. they are
forceful, independent ascendant and prefer their own
decision. Under-achievers are found to be submissive i.e.
they are sound follower, meek, conforming humble, mild and
introvert.
This result seems to be reasonable because this
course as well as the concerned profession requires a
capacity to control the class effectively. The teacher
should therefore be dominant, submissiveness on the part
of the teacher is likely to breed indiscipline among the
students and consequently affect the efficiency adversely.
Mishra (1984) who specifically conducted investigation on
characteristics of original teachers, found them to be
assertive. The researchers concerned with over-achievement
in academic courses (Rushton, 1966 and Gopal, 1975) also
found over-achievers in English and Arithmetic to be
dominant. Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses are likely to be
dominant' stands accepted.
161
4.2.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient).
The means of over-and under-achievers are 17.51 and
7.92 respectively. The 't' value is 21.10 which is
significant at .01 level. This indicates that
over-achievers are conscientious, i.e. they are rule-bound
dependable, trustworthy and fairminded. The under-
achievers are found to be expedient, i.e. they are
undependable, evade rules and are partial.
Adaval (1970) who specifically conducted an
investigation into the qualities of a successful teacher,
also found them to be impartial and just which is a
related characteristic of this dimension. Even in daily
life experiences effective teachers are regarded as the
most conscientious persons.
The result is also in consonance with the findings
of Rushton (1966), Jahan (1985) and Neog (1990). Jahan
(1985) found over-achievers in science to be conscientious.
Neog (1990) found over-achievers in mathematics to be of
conscientious type. Thus, the hypothesis that
'over-achi evers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses
are likely to be conscientious' has been supported by the
result of the present research.
162
4.2.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 8.06 and 5.64 respectively. The 't' value is
5.75 which is quite significant. Thus^the over-achievers
are trusting, i.e. they are credulous and agreeable.
Contrariwise, the under-achievers are found to be
suspicious, i.e. doubting and fault finding. The results
find support in the studies of Adaval (1979) who found
successful teacher to be considerate which by implication
means that they are trusting. The present findings may
also be justified by theoretical rationale because the
student teachers in practice teaching and later on
effectiveness in this profession requires this
characteristic. They should have an agreeable attitude
towards the opinion and statements of the students. Thus,
the result of the present research corroborates the
hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.)
professional courses are likely to be trusting'.
4.2.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting)'.
The means of over—and under-achieirvers on this
factor are 24.89 and 11.00 respectively. The 't' value is
found to be 17.65 which is highly significant. The result
indicates that over-achievers are conservative, i.e. they
163
are conventional and tolerant of traditions. On the other
hand, under-achievers are experimenting, i.e. they are
curious, flexible, broad-minded and introduce new ideas.
Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Teaching
(B.Ed.) professional courses are likely to be
conservative' has been supported by the result of the
present research.
However, the conclusions of the research conducted
by Mishra (1984) contradict the present conclusion. He
found original teachers to be ready to try new things.
It is, however, not surprising to find the student
teachers in trainings to be conservative. If we analyse
the role of a teacher, we will find that the very basic
responsibility of a teacher is acculturation, i.e. the
teacher transmits the vital elements of culture to its
young generation, thereby helps to conserve the culture
and therefore, he should be somewhat conservative.
4.2.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) ;
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 9.65 and 24.26. The 't' value is 20.63 which is
highly significant. It can be inferred from the results
that over-achievers are harsh, i.e. they are toughminded,
hostile, hard and crude. Contrariwise, the under-achievers
are found to be kind,i.e. tenderminded, sensitive, gentle
164
and generous. These results are contrary to hypothesis
that 'over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional
courses are likely to be kind' presented in chapter I and
does not find support by some previous researchers (Deva,
1966 and Adaval, 1979). Deva (1966) found teachers
training students to be kind and Adaval (1979) found
successful teachers as gentle and kind. However, some
previous researches support- the present conclusions.
Mishra (1984) found original teachers to be of hostile
nature. Neog (1990) found over-achievers in academic
courses to be less tenderminded.
The present investigator feels that effective
student teachers should be kind and considerate. The
present results that student teachers are harsh, hostile
and crude seem to have been obtained because the teaching
profession has become the last refuge and thus the person
entering this profession are highly frustrated resulting
in their hostile and crude behaviour.
4.2.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive):
The mean scores obtained by over- and under-
achievers on this factor are 24.93 and 9.52 respectively.
The 't' value is 19.06 which is significant at .01 level.
It thus clearly brings out that over-achievers are
co-operative, i.e. they are tolerant, complaisant,
165
friendly, understanding , and accommodating while under-
achievers are obstructive, i.e. intolerant, pugnacious,
torpid, belligerent and bellicose. The present finding is
supported by Fox (1971), Tutoo (1975), Adaval (1979) and
Ilishra (1984). All these researchers fourid co-operative-
ness, sociability and friendliness related to over-
achievers. Thus, the present result is in agreement with
the Vypothesis that 'over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.)
professional courses are likely to be co-operative'.
4.2.12 (Factor XII (Persevering -Fickle minded) :
The mean scores obtained by over- and under-
achievers on this factor are 9.80 and 6.02 respectively.
The 't' value is 10.08 which is significant at .01 level.
The results clearly indicate that over-achievers are
perservering, i.e. they are determind, steady, studious
and firm. While the under-achievers are found to be
fickle-minded, i.e. indecisive, quitting, volatile and
lack concentration. This finding has been confir-ed by
Deva (1966), Cook (1972), Wakefield (1974), Adaval (1979)
and Mishra (1984). Deva (1966) found diligence as an
important characteristic for success in teaching. Cook
(1972) found good daily planning related with teaching
competence which by implication means that perseverance is
one of the important characteristic characteristic of
CO t
o 1-1
<U C A 4J -Q O
(n >-O 4J O CO cn fa <U
J-" 2
to
o 'o (0
a.
•2s
• o .
t n j
O 3 O « C/lJ c c CO-0)
<U CO
c c (U )-> <u IW
14-1
CO 1 l-i
o > Q
o
o c CO
o
c 00
CO
u C CO
M-l O 0 - H
IW i - l T H
0) C > 00 0) -H iJ W
3 4J CO
- >
cn V' <u > (U
• H X o coa^ 1 St U 11 0 ) 2 -o c D
3 /)
c CO 0
s
CO u (U > o
• H jcrv. c j in CO II 1 2
) - i
(U > o
3 Zl
c CO Q)
s
o j j o CO
a c o cfl
o
166
oooooooooooo
o ^ o ^ ^ ^ T H O ^ ^ ^ a ^ c ^ l O O ^ ^ c ^ J
0^0^<)•• lHCMO O O c n m ^ O C M
OOOCO<»CT>CO •rHonsJlOOOOO
or^oocxjvo^m-sj-rHCNJcncM • • • • • • • • • • • •
>>or • ' O O v o • 't— lO • OJCNJO>r^T- lT- l rHOOOOCvJCMin
CMro<t rOfO< l - C M T H C O C N P O T H
. • • • • • o o o » » » » T - I O i O t ^ O O l ^ • ' V O O O O TH,-ICNTHCMCMr^<tCNTHrHT-(
0) >
T3 tn 1-1 <u CJ d w > r- l > ^ O U)
m >-• JD j r > 1-1 3 0) CO W ) - S O CO XJ 1 0) J3
1-1 <U CO <U 2 3 >- Oi 1 E 1 CO (U 1 0) O -U 1
cn 0) > (fl C -U 1 ,-j -r-i oj a c >,Xi tfl vi -a CO
I—1 CO r - l 3 1-t C (u 1-1 3 - u y- i 1-1
> o a c c E •H O E <U O O
eo c
1-1 u ^ c c r, <u ^
:?1 - >J Cfl !-i
3 M Ci O p >
• H r n 1-1
C OO CO CU C >
£ C/] u CO
1-1 T-l I - X o 4J <y cn cn cfl C 3 C O t- 0
1 T3 C r-l
T3 (U
(UT3 > C
•r^ 1-1 • U E O 1 3 <U 1-1 r-l O J ^ CO O
j a - r 4 o u .
1 1 (U 00 > c •1-11-1
•U U CO OJ u > <U 0) fX tn O V-O (U
J C / 3 H H > O Q C J H O i « J C J C L
• • •
iHCNJCO<fm<J3r>xOOONTH^,H
CO a: lU > LLj
I o <
Q: LU G
z D tn
CO IT LU > LU
X o <
i LU > o cd
c (0 I
o ^ > CQ O J H 1 CO O ^ <D ,n > W W CO »-0) I 13
.— o
^ > o
CO x : w
C O <D
o < o CO 1 Z
LL
167
competent teachers. Thus^ the result of the present
research corroborates the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses are likely to be
persevering'.
4.3 Personality and Achievement in Law Professional
Courses:
Table 4.3 presents the means and standard
deviations of the distribution of scores obtained by over-
and under-achievers in Law courses on the 12 personality
dimensions, 't' values are also presented for showing the
significance of the difference between the means of scores
obtained by them.
4.3.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious)
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 11.76 and 26.87 respectively. The 't' value is
found to be 18.93 which is highly significant. The result
thus clearly shows that over-achievers in Law courses are
serious, i.e. they are cautious, pessimist, mirthless,
worrying, thoughtful and critical. On the other hand,
under-achievers are found to be lively, i.e. they are
humorous, warmhearted, cheerful, frank, relaxing active
and easy going. Thus, the hypothesis that'over-achievers
in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are likely to be
168
serious' is in agreement with the result of the present
research.
Sufficient researches have not been conducted en
over and under-achievement in Law courses that may be
quoted to support or contradict the result. It may also be
pointed out here that this course requires theoretical
background and deep knowledge and understanding of the
subject. One can excell in this profession only when
he/she is a voracious reader. This by implication requires
seriousness. Therefore, the characteristics which are
needed for success in theoretical (academic) courses may
be similar for success in Law courses. The present result
has been supported by Taylor (1964) and Gawronski (1965).
They found under-achievers Co be pleasure seeking rather
than involved in academic activities. However, the result
of some earlier researches (Astington, 1960; Mathew, 1976;
and Paul 1989) seem to contradict the present finding.
But a deeper understanding would reveal that this
professional course requires this characteristic.
Therefore, seriousness may be considered one of the
important characteristics of over-achievers in Law (LL.B.)
professiuonal courses.
4.3.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved)
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 10.28 and 27.31 respectively. The 't' value is
found to be 20.99 which is highly significant. The result
thus shows that over-achievers are reserved, i.e. they are
169
detached, quiet, aloof, socially clumsy and seclusive. On
the other hand, under-achievers are found to be
participating, expressive, responsive, talkative and
gregarious. The present finding has been supported by
Dhaliwal (1971) who found reservedness related to over-
achievement in academic courses. The result may also be
justified on theoretical grounds because reservedness is
the characteristic which in turn provides more tine for
studies. Contrariwise, the social persons who are busy
mixing with the people, are unable to devote much time for
studies. Therefore, reservedness may be considered
characteristic of over-achievers in academic and
professional courses. Thus, the present result is in
consonance with the hypothesis that 'aver-achievers in Lav;
(LL.B.) professional courses are likely to be reserved'.
4.3.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable);
The mean scores of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 25.35 and 9.29 respectively. The 't' value is
23.47 which is highly significant. This shows that over-
achievers are impulsive, i.e. they are uneasy, impatient,
intuitive and act on the spur of the moment. On the other
hand, under-achievers are found to be stable, i.e. they
are exact, prudent, logical and emotionally stable. The
170
present result is in agreement with the hypothesis that
tover-achievers in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are
likely to be impulsive ..'
However, the present investigator could not find
any research study conducted on over and under-
achievement in Law courses on this dimension,
i.e.Impulsive-stable. The present investigator feels that
due to scant chances of job opportunities the over-
achievers in Law professional courses become uneasy and
impatient. Therefore, they are likely to become impulsive.
Further, research in the area on this dimension is
required.
4.3.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy) :
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 17.98 and 7.57 respectively. The 't' value is
18.11 which is highly significant. It can thus be inferred
that over-achievers are venturesome, i.e. they are daring,
energetic and vigorous, and the under-achievers are shy,
i.e. they are languid, restrained, easily frightened and
inert. Thus, the result of the present research is in
agreement with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Law
(LL.B.) professional courses are likely to be
venturesome'.
171
The present result has also been supported by
Rushton (1966) who found adventuresomeness positively
related to academic achievement. The present result
appears to be justified because shyness is not likely to
help in achieving the success in the course and the
related profession.
It has already been mentioned that studies of
personality patterns of students in Lav? course and
practicing lawyers have not been conducted on this
dimension. Therefore, the support, or the otherwise, of
the present research has been attempted to be sought from
studies of success in academic courses. The studies by
Jayagopala (1974) and Ghuman (1976) have shown that
successful students in academic courses are shy. The
investigator feels that comparison of this characteristic
for students in Law course is not justified. A shy student
in purely academic course is likely to succeed. But the
nature of this course and the subsequent profession is
different. A shy person can never succeed at least in the
legal profession and therefore, such students are not to
seek admission in Law course.
4.3.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 28.85 and 10.53 respectively. The 't' value is
172
29.29 which is significant at .01 level. This indicates
that over-achievers are confident, i.e. they are self-
sufficient, self-assured, poised, contended and serene. On
the other hand, under-achievers are found to be of nervous
type, i.e. they are over-anxious, group-dependent,
apprehensive, ruffled, frivolous and dissatisfied. Thus,
the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Law (LL.B.)
professional courses are likely to be confident' has been
corroborated by the result of the present study.
The present finding has been supported by investi
gation on academic achievement (Taylor, 1964; Cattell,
Sealey and Sweney, 1965 and Somasundaran, 1980). They
found over-achievers, self-confident, self-sufficient and
free from nervous symptoms.
The present finding that over-achievers are more
confident than under-achievers can be justified because
this professional course and related job demand sufficient
confidence on the part of the students who want to excel.
It is observed in daily life experiences that the
successful lawyers and advocates are confident, self-
sufficient and self-assured.
4.3.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive):
The means of over ~ and under-achievers on this
173
factor are 27.35 and 10.37 respectively. The 't' value is
23.07 which is highly significant. The result thus clearly
shows that over-achievers are dominant, i.e. they are
independent, outspoken, forceful and prefer their own
decision. Contrariwise, under-achievers are found to be
submissive, i.e. they are meek, conforming, sound
followers, introvert and modest. Thus,the hypothesis that
'over-achievers in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are
likely to be dominant' is in consonance with the result of
the present research.
The present finding is also in agreement with the
results of earlier investigators. Ridding (1966), Rushton
(1966), and Gopal (1975) found over-achievers in academic
courses to be dominant. This result may also be justified
because successful law 'ers are found to be outspoken,
forceful and they prefer their own decision. On the other
hand, if the lawyers are of submissive type, they will not
be able to argue the case. Therefore, this characteristic
may be considered essential for over-achievers in the
mentioned course.
4.3.7 Factor VII (Cpnscientious-Expedient) :
The mean scores of over—and under-achievers on this
factor are 7.03 and 16.37 respectively. The 't' value is
21.89 which is highly significant. The result thus
174
indicates that over-achievers arc expedient, i.e. they arc
undependable, untrustworthy, partial and evade rules.
Contrariwise, under-achievers are found to be dependable,
trustworthy, fair-minded and rules-bound. The present
result is also in agreement with the hypothesis that
'over-achievers in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are
likely to be expedient' presented in chapter I.
However, the review of related literature
concerning over and under-achievers in academic courses
does not support this result (Gawronski, 1965 and Rushton,
1966). They found over-achievers to be conscientious. It
may be that since law courses attract only those who have
not been very successful in other walks of life. The
students entering this course try every possible method to
get through and therefore they tend to be expedient.
Success in the profession that follows the course, i.e.
the legal professions, perhaps also depends upon
expediency rather than conscientiousness. Students
entering this course of study are likely to become
practising lawyers after successfully complotini^ the
course, as such they are expected to possess personality
characteristics which makes a person suited to the
profession. Therefore, the present result may be
considered valid.
175
4.3.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) :
The mean scores of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 4.82 and 8.38 respectively. The 't' value is
found to be 13.32 which is highly significant. The result
thus indicates that over-achievers are of suspicious
nature, i.e. they are doubting and fault-finding.
Under-achievers J on the other hand, are found to be
trusting, i.e. they are credulous and agreeable. Thus, the
present result is in agreement with the the hypothesis
that 'over-achievers in Law (LL.B.) professional courses
are likely to be suspicious' presented in chapter I.
The present result may also be justified by
theoretical rationale because daily observation reveals
that a successful lawyer has to deal with the cases in the
court and reach the truth of the matter. In this way,
they are likely become suspicious.
4.3.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting) :
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 26.10 and 8.92 respectively. The 't' value is
24.50 which is highly significant. The result thus clearly
shows that over-achievers are conservative, i.e. they are
conventional, tolerant of traditions, staid and rigid.
Under-achievers, on the other hand, are found to be
experimenting, i.e. they are radical, broadninded,
176
flexible, curious and introduce new ideas. Thus, the
present result corroborates the hypothesis that 'over-
achievers in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are likely
to be conservative- presented in chapter I.
The present conclusion also seems to be realistic
as far as personality of students entering this course of
study is concerned. As pointed out earlier, the course of
study attracts students of average capabilities and as
such they are likely to be conservative, conventional and
conformist. Only the experimenting among then are,
perhaps, able to climb upper rungs of professional ladder
and others remain in the lower courts after joining the
profession.
4.3.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) :
The mean scores of overhand under-achievers on this
factor are 10.17 and 27.44 respectively. The 't' value is
35.40 which is highly significant. The result thus shows
that over-achievers are harsh, i.e. they are toughninded,
crude, hostile and hard. On the other hand, under-
achievers are found to be kind, i.e. they are
tenderminded, sensitive, gentle, generous and
compassionate. Thus, the present result is in agreement
with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Law (LL.B.)
professional courses are likely to be harsh'.
177
The result is not in agreement with the finding
concerned with over-achievement in academic courses. Neog
(1990) found under-achievers less tender-minded. However,
in view of the conditions obtained in the legal
profession, personality characteristic of being tough-
minded seems to be essential for dealing with clients. If
a person is kind, it will create emotional and sentimental
problems and will affect the efficiency of the cases to be
discussed. Therefore, the present result that the over-
achievers in Law courses are harsh and tough -lay be
considered valid.
4.3.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive) :
The mean scores over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 10.17 and 25.94 respectively. The 't' value is
28.07 which is highly significant. The result thus clearly
indicates that over-achievers are obstructive, i.e. they
are intolerant, torpid and bellicose. On the other hand,
under-achievers are found to be co-operative, i.e. they
are tolerant, friendly, understanding and accomraodaeing.
These conclusions do not find any support in the
investigations of over and under-achievers in academic
courses (Rushton, 1966; Mathew, 1976; Southward Paul, 1989
and Somasundaran, 1980). These conclusions, however,
appear appropriate for the aspirants of legal profession.
178
This course which leads to the legal profession itself has
become over-competitive with the result that the persons
concerned tend to cultivate the traits of obstructiveness
as opposed to co-operativeness, probably because they
think that persons with this trait have better chances of
survival in the profession. Thus, the hypothesis that
'over-achievers in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are
likely to be obstructive' stands accepted.
4.3.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle-minded) :
The mean scores of over- and under-achievers on
this factor are 10.00 and 5.12 respectively. The 't' value
is 18.22 which is highly significant. It can be inferred
from the result that over-achievers are persevering i.e.
they are determined, steady, studious and firni. On the
other hand, under-achievers are found to be of
fickle-minded type, i.e. they are indecisive, volatile,
quitting and lack concentration. Thus, the present result
is in consonance with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers
in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are likely to be
persevering'presented in chapter I.
The present finding has been supported by studies
of over and under-achievers in academic courses (Astington.
1960; Gawronski, 1965; Gupta, 1970; Menon, 1973 and
Bhagirath, 1978).
Xi CO
> JQ
"O (U c 1-1 CO
u j Q
O (0
(0 0) 01 M
3 o
>- O o
• U . -1
o cd (^
>^ u 1-1 r- l CO
c o en u (U a.
CO
c o
1-1 en en (U
iw o p a,
^ •
<
(U PQ
0)
• ^ O
O CO >-i
cn -u 0) cn M -T-l o c O -H
CO E
c CO 0) s
s: • u
C 0) OJ s • u (U
^
T3 < cn tn (U c
1-1 cn 3
CQ
C • H
cn u cu > (U
(U 1-1
o x: c <u u Q)
<4-l
o CO 1
v-> <u
U-l T3 1-1 c Q =3
IW O
(U
c CO
O •r-l 1 1 1
•r-l
c 00
T3 c CO 1 u
>
o
CO
0) o c CO
o (M 1-1 O «4-l
.-m <u c > 00 c; 1-1
.-J CO
<u 3
i - i
CO >
cn u <u > Q)
i - (
x : ( N CJ (>J CO II
1 Z u (U
TD c s
Q CO
c CO (U s
cn )-4
(U > Q)
1-1
X o r ^ CO CN4
1 11 1- 2 CD >
O
Q CO
c CO (U
rr"
cn >-i
o u u
CO
>
CO C o in u 0)
Cu
O O O O O O O O O O O O
oo<t<fvocj>,Hrxcr>Ovom<j-<3N
cx) o >d->^ CO o CN o o CO on • C^4C^4CMT^r^CMCN^^C^JC^JC^JC3^
c o c v J > d ' c * i r o < T > r v . r o r ^ O v O ' r H
cgCMCMCMCMCM^T-HCMmCNCSJ
ro T-i o m r vo 1^ ^o^n^ocJ^oo^J<^o^^cn^^oo
•<3" ' l O ' 1 ^ • •v t • • • T - H O • O • O • r • vo ^ vo • T-^<3^•r^00r-^CT^1H00CMC^^CSlCJ^
m • r ^ m c 3 ^ c M n t ^ o o < X 3 o O T H ^ ^ moocn<^l^mvoc^JvovOT-lO^
( n c n C N J C M i n r O T H T - H C M r H C M O
or^LOOvoco vooon • < l • r ^ m O < 3 ^ 0 • ^ H C ^ ^ ^ £ ) ^ - ^ C O < t
• • • • • • T — I C S I * • • " ^ O^00^•^CT^^^CT^ • ' O O O • C s l C v j r N j T H ( N C M v O < t T - l ' r - l T - H > : t
1-4 • U
^ C c (y 0 S
• H ^ (U "O tn VJ > o 3 OJ
• O W 1-1 (X, O Q , cu cj 3 cn X -r^ X > r - i > > 0 c n u o t J
cn >-i x i j C > T H 1 . H . 3 c u t o c o i - ' 2 c n a , i O c n x j i C J , Q 3 c n < u • r ^ c u c o ( y 2 : 3 0 3 > u m 1 s 1 co-Hcoi- ix : O 1 O O U 1 J-l 1 U
c o c ; > c n c t j c o o c o l r - I . H ( U ( U C < U C >
cn J-CO
> s . £ i in )-. - 3 CO . H T^ u -J: r - I C 0 r - l 3 . r - I C O 4 J a J o-r-i 3 u i i - i . F ^ <n tn cn > o a c c = c 3 c
1
-0 c • r ^ O C O J O O O J - l O l - *
J C O i - H > U Q C J H C J v ^
• r-l
T3 CU
tu -o > c
• H 1-1 XJ E
o ' 3 Q) J-i . - t
u ^ w o
, O . H O bn
1 1 OJ 0 0
> c • H 1 ^ XJ U CO 0) V- > 0) 0) Ci- cn o u O 0) u a.
• •
179
, - ^ C ^ I 0 O N ; l • m ^ O ^ ^ C » < 3 ^ 1 - l T - l T H
CO
cc o o if >-
O CO
cc LU
> Q.
CO LU CC O O CO
> LU
X
o <
I DC \n Q z < CD
> UJ
X o <
cc LU >
O <
•o C I
Q>
^ E =3 ^ -D O
< o 0) w — = w 2 ' ^ 0) c: o c o ' - . _ —
CL (0 W 3 (0
— c o
W <D <
0) <D CD
^ : ^
Si-2 3
< 111
CO O CO
in Cvi
I
o CNI
lO 1 _ in
180
4.4 Personality and Achievement in Business Administration:
Table 4.4 presents the means and standard
deviations of the distribution of scores on 12 factors
obtained by over - and under-achievers in Business
Administration course, 't' values are also presented for
the difference between the means of the scores. The means
and the 't' values for the different factors have been
discussed in the preceding paragraphs.
4.4.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) ;
The means scores of over-achievers and under-
achievers on this factor are 29.40 and 10.63 respectively.
The 't' value is 28.82 which is significant at .01 level.
This clearly shows that over-achievers in Business
Administration courses are lively, i.e. they are
enthusiastic, warmhearted, humorous, cheerful, optimist,
active and frank. Contrariwise, the under-achievers are
found tp be serious, i.e. they are cautious, apathetic,
secretive, dull, mirthless, indifferent and pessimist. The
present finding has been supported by Singh
(1972). Ho found extraversion as one of
the personality characteristics of management students.
Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Business
Administration (M.B.A.) professional courses are likely to
181
be lively' has been supported by the result of the present
research.
Since Business Administration course is directly
related to the academic courses, therefore researches
showing the relationship between personality character
istics and over- and under-achievement in academic courses
have also been quoted here. Some such studies, have
supported the present finding (Astington, 1960; Taylor,
1964; Gawronski, 1965; Ridding, 1966: Jayagopal, 1974;
Mathew, 1976; Jahan, 1985 and Southward Paul, 1989). They
found extraversion and pleasure seeking activities related
to high achievement.
4.4.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved);
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 28.77 and 9.45 respectively. The 't' value is
20.43 which is highly significant. The result clearly
indicates that over-achievers are sociable, i.e. they are
talkative, gregarious, responsive, expressive, socially
bold, participating and have wide interests. On the other
hand, under-achievers are taciturn, seclusive, timid,
quiet and detached. Thus, the present result is also in
agreement with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Business Administration (M.B.A.) professional courses are
likely to be sociable'.
182
As sociability is a related characteristic of
extraversion, therefore the justification mentioned in the
case of the personality dimensions lively-serious also
hold good for this dimension.
4.4.3 Factor III(Impulsive-Stable) :
The neans of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 27.55 and 10.31 respectively. The 't' value is
24.44 which is highly significant. Thus,over-achievers are
impulsive, i.e. they are uneasy, impatient, affected by
feeling and act on the spur of the moment. Contrariwise,
under-achievers are stable, i.e. they are calm,
phlegmatic, prudent and emotionally stable. This result is
not in agreement with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers
in Business Administration (M.B.A.) are likely to be
stable' presented in chapter I. The present investigator
could not find any research concerned with over-achievers
in Business Administration and the mentioned personality
dimension.
The hypothesis generated in chapter I was based on
the results of researches concerned with personality
characteristics of over-achievers in academic courses
(Gopal, 1975 and Neog, 1990). This was done on the
presumption that achievement in Business Administration
183
course i s similarly determined by the same personality character
i s t i c s . This presumption does not find support by the previous
researches. I t may be that students in Business Administration
courses are also frustrated because of rampant unemplojrment in the
country which has caused high level of frustration in the over-
achievers which has led to their impulsive and impatient nature.
4 . 4 . 4 F a c t o r IV (Venturesome-Shy):
The means of o v e r " and u n d e r - a c h i e v e r s on t h i s
f ac to r a r e 19.00 and 8.59 r e s p e c t i v e l y . The ' t ' va lue i s
14.64 which i's h igh ly s i g n i f i c a n t . The . r e s u l t i n d i c a t e s
t h a t o v e r - a c h i e v e r s a re venturesome, i . e . they are
e n e r g e t i c , d a r i n g , v igorous and u n i n h i b i t e d . On the o t h e r
hand, u n d e r - a c h i e v e r s a re found to be shy , i . e . they are
r e s t r a i n e d , l a n g u i d , i n e r t , and e a s i l y f r i g h t e n e d . Thus,
the p r e s e n t r e s u l t i s in consonance wi th the hypo thes i s
t ha t ' o v e r - a c h i e v e r s in Business Admin i s t r a t i on (M.B.A.)
p r o f e s s i o n a l courses a re l i k e l y to be ven tu re some . '
I t has a l ready been pointed out t h a t t h i s course
inc ludes academic work as an impor tan t component,
t he r e fo re the r e sea rches emphasizing the p e r s o n a l i t y
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of over - and unde r - ach i eve r s i n academic
courses may be quoted t o support or c o n t r a d i c t the p re sen t
f i nd ing . The p re sen t f ind ing seems t o be reasonab le
because adventurous persons are ready to try new things and want
184
to make news contracts, as a result of which the business
flourishes. Obviously, shy person will not be able to do
the same. Therefore, venturesomeness may be considered an
important characteristics of over-achievers in Business
Administration courses.
4.4.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) :
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 27.97 and 10.00 respectively. The 't' value is
13.92 which is highly significant. This clearly indicates
that over-achievers in M.B.A. courses are confident, i.e.
they are self-sufficient, self-possessed, self-assured,
contended, responsible and serene. On the other hand,
under-achievers are found to be nervous, i.e. they are
over-anxious, group-dependent, apprehensive, diffident,
ruffled and frivolous. The present finding has been
supported by Pervin (1984). He found that unsuccessful
business executives work under pressure which is akin to
nervousness. It may also be pointed out that confidence
engenders qualities like good adjustment and
warmheartedness which may help them to be successful
business administrators. Thus, the present result is in
consonance with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Business Administration (M.B.A.) professional courses are
likely to be confident'.
185
4.4.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 29.03 and 9.72 respectively. The 't' value is
found to be 20.11 which is highly significant. The result
thus shows that over-achievers are dominant, i.e. they are
forceful, ascendant, outspoken and prefer their own
decision. Contrariwise, under-achievers are found to be
submissive, i.e. they are sound followers, meek,
conforming, humble and mild. Thus, the hypothesis that
'over-achievers in Business Administration (M.B.A.)
professional courses are likely to be dominant' is
corroborated by the result of the present research.
The present finding has been supported by Ridding
(1966), Rushton (1966) and Gopal (1975). They found over-
achievers in academic courses to be dominant. The present
result also seems justified because characteristics of
ascendence and forcefulness are likely to be associated
with success in business administration courses in which
such qualities may be very helpful.
4.4.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 6.11 and 17.45 respectively. The 't' value is
found to be 22.71 which is highly significant. It can thus
be concluded that over-achievers are expedient, i.e. they
186
prefer to adopt procedures that are likely to help in
achieving a given purpose, though contrary to the
principles. Under-achievers are found to be conscientious,
i.e. they are rule-bound and fair-minded. Thus, the
present result is in agreement with the hypothesis that
'over-achievers in Business Administration (M.B.A.)
professional courses are likely to be expedient.* Thus,
results is also in consonance with practical situations of
the profession. Successful business executives do adopt
procedures which are of help in achieving the purpose
irrespective of the fact that the procedure is contrary to
the established principles.
4.4.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 4.22 and 8.40 respectively. The 't' value is
found to be 10.93 which is significant at .01 level. The
result thus clearly indicates that over-achievers are of
suspicious nature. On the other hand, under-achievers are
found to be of trusting nature, i.e. they are credulous
and agreeable. Thus, the result of the present research
corroborates the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Business Administration (M.B.A.) professiuonal courses are
likely to be suspicious .
187
The present result can be justified on rational
grounds. Successful business executives though feign to
be trusting, but in their heart of hearts, they do not
tend to believe people on the face values and their
suspicious nature compels them to always know the real
state of success in the organisation they are working.
4.4.9.Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting) :
The means of over-achievers and under-achievers on
this factor are 10.66 snd 26.77 respectively. The 't'
value is found to be 20.06 which is highly significant.
The result thus shows that over-achievers are
experimenting, i.e. they are radical, broad-minded,
flexible, curious and introduce new ideas. On the other
hand, under-achievers are found to be conservative, i.e.
they are conventional, tolerant of traditions, staid,
rigid and unenquiring. The present finding has been
supported by Jayagopala (1974) & Ghunan (1976). He found
that over-achievers in academic courses disregard rules,
i.e. they are not conservative. It also seems reasonable
because the success in the profession requires qualities
like flexibility, experimentation , curiosity, etc. Thus,
the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Business
Administration (M.B.A.) professional courses are likely to
be experimenting' stands accepted.
188
4.4.10 Factor X(Kind-Harsh);
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 10.18 and 26.86 respectively. The 't' value is
found to be 23.68 which is highly significant. It can be
inferred from the result that over-achievers are harsh,
i.e. they are tough-minded, hard, crude and hostile. On
the other hand, under-achievers are found to be kind, i.e.
they are gentle, generous and compassionate. The result is
supported by Ghuman (1975) and Srivastava (1976) who found
over-achievers to be tough-minded. Neog (1990) also found
under-achievers in academic courses (Mathematics) less
tenderrainded.
This result can also be justified on rational
grounds. A successful administrator should be slightly
tough-minded. Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Business Administration (M.B.A.) professional courses are
likely to be harsh' is supported by the result of the
present research.
4.4.11 Factor XI (Co-operative-Obstructive) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 10.33 and 26.77 respectively. The 't' value is
found to be 23.55 which is highly significant. It can,
therefore, be concluded that over-achievers are
o b s t r u c t i v e , t o r p i d , i n t o l e r a n t , pugnacious and
b e l l i g e r e n t . Con t r a r iw i se , u n d e r - a c h i e v e r s are found to be
c o - o p e r a t i v e , i . e . they are t o l e r a n t , compla isan t ,
f r i e n d l y , unders tanding and accomodating.
The present finding has not been supported by the previous
studies. I t may be that the students in this course are so over
worked and because of the scant chances of job opportunities, after
passing the course, try to achieve as high as possible. Because of
high competition among them to get the best grade, they tend to be
obstructive i . e . intolerant, quarrelsome,belligerent, e tc . Thus, the
hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Business Administration ^M.B.A.)
professional courses are likely to be obstructive' stands accepted.
4 .4 .12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle-minded) :
The means of ove r - ach ieve r s and under -ach ieve r s are
4 .44 and 9.18 r e s p e c t i v e l y . The ' t ' va lue i s 9.94 which i s
s i g n i f i c a n t a t .01 l e v e l . The r e s u l t thus i n d i c a t e s t h a t
ove r - ach i eve r s are f i ck le -minded , i . e . they are
i n d e c i s i v e , q u i t t i n g and v o l a t i l e . On t h e o ther hand,
u n d e r - a c h i e v e r s are found to be p e r s e v e r i n g . The
hypo thes i s t h a t ' o v e r - a c h i e v e r s in Business Adminis t ra t ion
(M.B.A.) p r o f e s s i o n a l courses are l i k e l y to be
p e r s e v e r i n g ' i s not co r robora ted by the p r e s e n t r e s u l t .
This r e s u l t i s a l so not in consonance with the
previous s t u d i e s and t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e . Under-
ach ieve r s cannot be expected to be p r e s e r v i n g . I t may.
lO
<;f 0
i-i 43
>> J3
TJ (U
c T^ CO
U Xi
o (0 ) - i
0 4J O « fe
> 4J 1-1 i - l rt C o ( 0 CO
>-• <u <u w a, i-«
3 <u 9 > ^
t—1 <U ' - <
3 ?
_ •>-< 5 M O tn
CO U- l 0 O
0 CU
o
c w to -J (U =3 E J
ca <U -r
x: C •U
1—1 C CO (U CJ (U 1-1 S T3 4J U
<U S Xi
c <1) "^
o .
^ s <u ^ <w <u IM "d •- -^ Q ^ CO
<^ I O (jj
t3 (U C o :D c CO -0
o c M-l CO <4-l 1 • H VJ
c o 00 >
TH O w
(4-1
0) o c CO
u O -H
r- l 0) >
«4-l 1-1
c 00
a> 1-1 H J w
(U 3
I - l CO
>
CO
>-> (U > 0)
1-1 X <!• o m CO II
1 S >-> (U
"O c D
Q CO
c CO
<u S
pooooooooooo
voiOi-(vor»<.<3M>»r^Ocovo
• CMCXDI^CX)CO I T I T H V O O I N ^ k n T H i H i H T H T H T H ^ i - I C M C N l T H
r > j T H m c N j v o < f c o T H < f O v o c o
3^^DfOC^J^O^n C S I T H C M en Ol -r-t
tM m t ^ CNi<f TH VO r>. CO KtCOOOOCVJvOC^OCOs^CXJvOvO
CO
)-• (U > (U
1-1
x; o o CO e n 1 II
u s (U > o
Q CO
c CO
0) ^
CO
o • u o CO
CO C O CO u (U
• v£> >m U-isOvO ' T H O V O • V C O I H • | r g C S I C ^ J O O T H C N j , H v f C M T - l T H L n
^Jcx^^^^o^noo^^vovococo<l •
L o v o O O O O cocncnvD [ ^ ^ v O < T ^ v O C 3 ^ c n C O f O l O V O O T H
O T - H * • • •
,H o w r^ ^ • • TH m vo o | r H T - l r - l T - I C N J , - H C : O O O i - I C M C > g T H
00
c •r-l
(U
> (0 M 3 <U 0 (0 1-1 (U I-OS 0) I 1 r-4 >>o
I - l CO
> o , H O Mco
t—I , Q CO u CO I
> • H (0
r - l
3
r
I -
> to 1-1 3 CO
> » 0 to x >1 - l c/2 I-l e I (UX) <u S 3 E I CO O -U I to c -u 0 (U C W TJ « 3 i ^ C 4-1 I M 1-1 C C S
o o
a, X
^ .
T3 to 0) 3 C O X •r^ w o I 1-1 CO a I 3 to (U O 3 > •r-l tn •H U I i J C 00 CO 0) C >
•r^ 1-1 I-l 0 4 - 1 0 to to to C S C O U
to u CO
a: I
T3 c
O •H O H CJ t^
0 0 T3 > c
1-11-1 4J B
3 d) I-" , - 1 u^ to o
XI 1-1 OClH 1 I 0 OO > c
1-11-1 4J U CO 0
>- > 0 0 Q, to O u O 0
CJ CL
190
O T - I CM T-icvjco>^m>i>r^cocT> TH^- IT-H
>
X o < I
DC LU D Z D CO od CQ
> UJ
X o <
I cc LU >
o CO CD
od
M- O O • - CO
^ > c ~ 0 O to ^ w C O CO O < 0) CO , '*r i_ i_ p CD 0) ; r Q. T3 °-
5 = 5 T3 CD
o
191
however, be possible that over-achievers may be of a
volatile temper and their indecisive nature may be
attributed to the prevailing circumstances i.e. acute
unemployment due to which more intelligent may feel the
pinch more acutely than to their less endowed counterparts
consequently J making them fickle-minded etc. Further study
is, however, needed to establish the validity of the
observation.
4.5 Personality and Achievement in Medical Professional
Courses #
Table 4.5 presents the means and standard
deviations of the distribution of scores on twelve
personality dimensions obtained by over and under-
achievers in M.B.B.S. courses. 't' values are also
presented for showing the difference between the means of
scores obtained by them.
4.5.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious)
The mean scores of over and under-achievers on this
factor are 11.46 and 21.42 respectively. The 't' value is
5.59 which is significant at .01 level. The result thus
clearly shows that over-achievers are serious, i.e. they
are cautious, thoughtful, secretive and critical. On the
other hand, under-achievers are found to be lively, i.e.
they are carefree, optimist and happy-go-lucky.
192
The present finding has been supported by Gawronski
(1965), Ahluwalia and Narang (1976) and Neog (1990) . They
found over-achievers in academic courses to be introvert
and less enthusiastic. Thus, the result is in agreement
with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Medical
(M.B.B.S.) professional courses are likely to be serious.'
Studies by Taylor (1964) and Jensen (1973) also
support the present research. They found that under-
achievers were pleasure seeking which by implication means
that the over-achievers are serious. This can also be
justified on theoretical grounds because studious persons
are likely to be more serious and introspective. The
profession under investigation requires that the
practitioners should be thoughtful, cautious, critical and
serious so that they may be effective in their profession.
4.5.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved):
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 11.66 and 26.33 respectively. The 't' value is
12.16 which is highly significant. The result thus clearly
shows that over-achievers are reserved, i.e. they are
detached, clumsy, quite and seclusive. On the other hand,
under-achievers are sociable, i.e. they are participating,
socially skillful, socially bold, talkative and
gregarious. Thus, the present result also supports the
193
hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.)
professional courses are likely to be reserved'..
The investigator could not find sufficient
researches conducted in this area; therefore, the studies
related to over and under-achievement in academic courses
have been cited to support or contradict the results. The
following studies (Ahluwalia and Narang, 1967; Dhaliwal,
1971; Jensen, 1973 and Srivastava, 1976) have supported
the result. Srivastava (1976) found over achievers in
science courses to be of reserved nature. Dhaliwal (1971)
found reservedness related to over-achievement in academic
courses. However, Astington (1960) and Rushton (1966)
have contradicted the finding.
The justification for the results of present study
may also be sought from theoretical rationale also. It is
a coraraonday experience that persons who are sociable
generally do not find sufficient time for serious studies;
thus they are not over-achievers. It is quite reasonable
that the over-achievers in Medical courses are reserved.
4.5.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable) :
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 10.90 and 26.07 respectively. The '4:' value is
18.25 which is highly significant. The result thus
indicates that over-achievers are stable, i.e. they are
194
logical, introspective, calm, phlegmatic and prudent.
Contrariwise, under-achievers are impulsive, i.e. they are
uneasy, affected by feeling, impatient-excitable and act
on the spur of the moment.
The present result is in consonance with the
studies of Ahluwalia and Narang (1967), Dhaliwal (1971),
Bhagirath (1978), Jahan (1985), Haq (1987) and Southward
Paul (1989). They found over-achievers in academic courses
to be stable. This can also be justified by theoretical
rationale. A real understanding of the course and related
profession demand stability.
If a medical practitioner is not stable, he can not
diagnose the diseases effectively and suggest appropriate
remedial measures. Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-
achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses are
likely to be stable' has been accepted by the result of
the present research.
4.5.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy):
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on the
factor are 18.60 and 8.68 respectively. The 't' value is
17.91 which is highly significant. It can be inferred from
the result that over-achievers are venturesome, i.e. they
are uninhibited, daring, energetic and vigorous. On the
other hand, under-achievers are of shy nature, i.e. they
195
are restrained, easily frightened, languid and inert. The
present result has been supported by Rushton (1966). He
found adventuresomeness positively related to academic
achievement. This result also seems to be justified
because success in most of the professional courses
demands venturesomeness. A shy person can not achieve
success in his/her profession. It has been observed in
daily life experience that doctors have to attend their
pCitxe-ats aX. any -tjjiie. Energy and - vrgpuje
are also essential for courses leading to medical practice
in which they have to devote long hours attending
patients. Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses are likely to be
venturesome' has been supported by the present result.
4.5.5. Factor V (Confident-Nervous) :
The means of over- and under-achievers on this
factor are 27.90 and 11.22 respectively. The 't' value is
18.26 which is highly significant. It can be inferred from
the results that over-achievers are confident, i.e. they
are self-possessed, self-sufficient poised, contended,
responsible and serene. On the other hand, under-
achievers are of nervous type, i.e. they are diffident
ruffled, group-dependent and over-anxious. The present
result is in agreement with the findings of earlier
196
investigator (Taylor, 1964; Cattell, Sealey and Sweney,
1965 and Somasundaran, 1980). They found over-achievers
and self-confident J self-sufficient and free from nervous
symptoms. It may also be argued that nervousness results
in poor written and oral expression and consequently
under-achievement. Thus, the present result has
corroborated the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses are likely to be
confident' presented in chapter I.
4.5.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive):
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 11.30 and 26.64 respectively. The 't' value is
13.87 which is highly significant. Thus,over-achievers are
submissive, i.e. they are sound followers, modest and
meek. On the other hand, under-achievers are found to be
dominant, i.e. they are outspoken, ascendant forceful and
agressive. Thus the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in
Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses are likely to be
submissive' is in consonance with the result of the
present research.
The present finding has also been supported by
Taylor (1964), Dhaliwal (1971), Jahan (1985) and Haq
(1987). They found over-achievers in academic courses
obedient, which is a related characteristic of this
197
dimension. A close study of the persons engaged in this
course also reveals that they tend to be submissive in the
presence of the teachers and seniors. This is particularly
true of the successful persons in the profession. However,
some of the investigators (Ridding, 1966; Rushton, 1966;
and Gopal, 1975) have contradicted the result. These
researches are concerned with success in academic course.
These findings may, therefore, be attributed to the
differences in nature of the courses investigated in the
studies.
4.5.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient):
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 8.03 and 16.81 respectively. The 't' value is
13.87 which is highly significant. This shows that over-
achievers are expedient, i.e. undependable, and evade
rules. Contrariwise, under-achievers are found to be
conscientious, i.e. trustworthy and fair-minded. Thus, the
hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.)
professional courses are likely to be expedient' has been
corroborated by the result of the present research.
The review of related literature does not support
this result. The over-achievers in academic courses are
found to be conscientious (Rushton, 1966; Jahan, 1965 and
Neog, 1990). However, in view of the heavy load of work of
both theoretical and practical courses and keen
198 competition among the over-achievers, they tend to be expedient
and adopted shor t -cut methods of covering the course. Thus,
th i s personal i ty dimension of over-achievers in t h i s course can
be j u s t i f i ed on r a t i ona l grounds.
4.5.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) ;
The mean scores of over- and under-achievers on th is
factor are 8.13 and 4.53 respect ively . The ' t ' value is
indicates that over-achievers are t r u s t i n g , i . e . they are
credulous and agreeable. On the other hand, under-achievers are
found to be suspic ious , i . e . doubting and f au l t f inding. This
resul t i s in consonance with the hypothesis tha t 'over-
achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses are
l ike ly to be t r u s t i n g .
Studies concerned with th i s personal i ty dimension and
professional courses were not avai lable to the present
inves t iga to r . However, i t may be that Medical student should
have agreeable and t r u s t i n g a t t i tude towards the pa t i en t in
order to e s t ab l i sh rappor t . This wi l l u l t imate ly help in
knowing the rea l causes of the i l l n e s s .
4.5.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting)';
The means of over- and under-achievers on th is
factor are 11.53 and 26.66 respect ively, ' t ' value i s 16,77
vMch is highly significant. I t can thus be inferred from the results that
over-achievers are experimenting, i .e . they are curious, flexible, broad-
minded and introduce new/contrariwise, under-achievers are conservative,
i . e . they are conventional , to le rant of t r a d i t i o n s , s t a id and
199
rigid. Thus, the present result has confirmed the
hypothesis that ' over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.)
professional courses are likely to be experimenting'.
The present finding has also been supported by
Jayagopala (1974) and Ghuman (1976). They found that
over-achievers in academic courses disregard rules,
i.e.they are not conservative. This result may also seen
to be realistic because the success in any scientific area
depends on exploration of alternatives for which
experimenting nature is imperative.
4.5.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh):
The mean scores of over- and under-achievers on
this factor are 25.63 and 10.87 respectively, 't' value is
20.10 which is highly significant. It can thus be inferred
that over-achievers are kind, i.e. tender-minded,
sensitive, gentle and generous. On the other hand,
under-achievers are found to be harsh, i.e. tough-minded,
hostile, hard and crude. The result of the present
research has confirmed the hypothesis that 'over-achievers
in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses are likely to
be kind ' presented in chapter I.
The present result has also been supported by
Jayagopala (1974). He found . scholastic achievement
positively related to characteristic 'affected by feeling'
which by implication means kindness. The result also see::s
convincing because the successful persons in this course
and related profession should be sympathetic and kind so
200
that they are able to diagnose the diseases properly.
4.5.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive):
The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this
factor are 26.03 and 11.68 respectively, 't' value is
22.83 which is highly significant. The result clearly
shows that over-achievers are co-operative, i.e. they are
tolerant, friendly and understanding, while underachievers
are obstructive, i.e. intolerant, pugnacious, torpid
belligerent and bellicose.
Co-operativeness as an exclusive personality
dimension has not been investigated for success or
otherwise in any course or profession.Therefore, the
results of the present study could not be supported or
rejected on the basis of previous researches. It, however,
seem that co-operativeness is essential for success in this
course and the related profession. A medical practitioner,
if not co-operative, will not be able to establish rapport
with the patients for the purpose of diagnosis. Thus the
present result corroborates the hypothesis that
'over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses
are likely to be co-operative.'
4.5.12 Factor XII (Persevering - Fickle-inded):
The mean scores of *over-and under- achievers on
this factor are 10.16 and 5.64 respectively, 't' value is
201
11.76 which is hlgnly significant. The result indicates
that over-achievers are persevering, i.e. they are
determined, steady, studious and firm, while the under-
achievers are found to be fickle-minded, i.e. indecisive,
volatile, quitting and lack concentration. Thus, the
present result is in consonance with the hypothesis that
'over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses
are likely to be persevering' presented in chapter I.
The present finding is also in agreement with the
result of earlier investigators (Astington, 1960; Taylor,
1964; Gawronski, 1965; Gupta, 1970; Dhaliwal, 1971; Menon,
1973 and Bhagirath, 1978). It may also be pointed out here
that success in this course and the related profession
requires thorough knowledge and study of the subject which
will obviously demand perseverance on the part of the
students.
.6 Comparisons of Personality Characteristics of Over-
achievers in the Professional Courses :
After comparing over- and under-achievers in
different professional courses on the twelve personality
•dimensions presented in the preceding paragraph, attempts
have also been made to compare the personalitv
characteristics of over-achievers in these five
professional courses. Table 4.6 presents the mean scores
obtained by over and under-achievers in professional
vO
0)
X I
f-
1 1-1 Q)
-a c
D
'0 C
m
(/) tn (U
c • r ^
U)
:3 CQ
s;:5
X) . d
CO f-> •U
O „ 00 .
C ^ 1-c «
4-J <U O O (U -r-l ra c X)
i-l <U
c
o
U H
U X)
to C u) O Q) in u)
>
o •u
w c
o
CU rt E s e x )
H O < • H W 10 QJ
U-l W O Q) ^ v-" a, o o
t ^ (U
> C -r-l CO ( i ,
z c
o
C o in
(/) 01
CO a x ; G O O CO
c« O
•r-l X3 (U
*«—<
tn 1
w en (U -rH C C
•r-l • H
cn e PX)
PQ <
C O
•H 4-1 CO
>-. 4J
3 CO
00 c
• H x; o CO OJ
H
0 0 c
•rl u QJ CU C
•r^ 00 C
W
tn >-> QJ > QJ
• i - l
QJ > QJ
•rH
o < : CO < CO • I • 1 O »^D )_ , -_ - a) ._^ CJ X I > c
o :D
tn y-> o u u
CO
> • r ^ , - 1 CO C O tn ^ < QJ
a.
-;l f ' l I -• c ) a^ o ^ vo o-> c J c) ^D o fxj TH in in OD VO CO O MD TH -<f
^ ^ • r H v O O v D C X ) C O r ^ T H T H v D O O v O C X 3 < t T H v O m O v D T H O l O • rHC^T- iCNiT- tcMT- i C N I T - I T H C N I •t- T-^<^^cN^,-tcNlT-^•^-^
OfOr^ inLOT- iOc r i vooncMT- i i ncN jo or--oo>X)c^r^<joo
202
c r ' O o o c h r ^ o t T > o o r - N O c r > c 3 ^ v . D r ^ - < ) - o o C N T - H C N | C N I T - H T H CMiHCM r-\
O v D O v O O v D < t C J ^ T-H C N T - l C M T-H CVJ
r^c30rs)nmcMcr>tnc» innrooooooro T-{a^r-\<tr-\a^OT^
rHvOOi^Loc r i r ^ r - ^ coo t ^o t ^vo -c foo v o o o o r ^ o m o m T H C N I - I C N J O J T H C N | , H C M T - I ^ CM T H C M ^ C N I T H
O v £ > i O C O C r > v D < t O v O C N l C N O T H C M v X ) v : f C r > O l O v D m C N J O C N O O ' . 0 L O 0 0 < l " ' r H O O v 0 T - l t ^ i n 0 > O v D C O O > - O C N | C r \ i n o O O
C O r H O O m c M C r > C T i C T ' r - ^ < T > C X D C r i r ^ l ^ C O L r i < J • • r ^ C ^ < t < } • C T ^ C J ^ v O • r H T - l r s l C N j , H CNj -r^ r - l O l r - I CNlC-J
a^c^ l< toooor^mr •^ lnoOT^c7^oco^^ ocvi-cfr^oovoocxD
O coor^OT-ioocOT^oooor^v£)-<)-oo T - i r v l i H C N l n ^ r H C M T - I C S I ' T H •<-<
r^ O r^ O vO O <J-CNl ^ C M T - l C M T-H
< < < < < < < < < < < < ; < < : < < : < < < < < < i : < < 3 • ^
o P O D o ^ o t D o o o : 3 0 D o t 3 0 t r ) o : 3 o : z ) o a
in
:3 o
• t - l
>-l
QJ
cn 1
>^ r-< 0)
> •r^
^
X) QJ
> »•< 0)
cn QJ
c i 1 QJ
r - l X I CO
•iH O O
cn
QJ I - l r Q CO 4-1 CD
1 QJ
> •r-l in
>—1
P a e
I - l
>. x; CO 1 QJ E
o in QJ >-•
p 4-» C QJ
>
in :3
o > !-. QJ
IS 1
4-1
c CJ
X) •t-l "4-1
c o
u
QJ
> •r4 in in
•i-J E
XJ :3
cn 1
4J
c CO
c •H E O
Q
4J c QJ
•rH X3 QJ
a X
u 1 in :3
o •r-l 4J
c QJ
• H O in C
o o
in
D O
• H
o •r-l
a in
0 CO
1 CO
c •r-l 4J in
3 >-i
H
00 C
•r-l 4-1 c o
•H t-. CJ D H X
bJ 1 QJ
> • H 4J CO
> V-QJ in
c o o
x: in
u CD
X 1
X)
c •r4
• o
QJ >
•r4 4-1
o p >-• 4J in
X I
O 1 QJ
> • H 4J CO 1-. QJ CL,
o o
CJ)
•r-l
X3 QJ
X3 C
•rH E 1
QJ f—1
,i«:
o •r-l UH 1 00
c •r4
>-. QJ
> QJ in
>-. QJ
, • CM
CM CO i n v£) 0 0 CT>
2^ 0) >
n o O o
a E
30 M
25
M E
M
0) e o c
•o •»— c o O
c o c e o o
in 3 O
c o o
L E
" L
O) c 3
"5 2: Q> c o O
L T
•D C
>
0) a o o U
c
>
0) Q.
D T
20 M E
T D
15
10 L E P L
E T E
L M
D,D
]M
f^jY^. •^'^
M
3 q ®
CO
0 O
>» £ (O
(/) 3 O ^ a>
z
(i> >
'M (A
E 3
CO
c 0)
a X
w 3 O O
mmim
Q. in 3
CO
0) c c 0) E n X
i i in h_ O
0 > O 3
X3 O
•D 0 T3 c E 1
0 M O
Engineering=EJeaching=T,LciwsL, M.B.A=M & M.B.B.S.=D
FIGURE 4.6 Comparisons of Mean Scores on IWelve Personality Factors Obtained by over-Actiivers in Five Professional Courses (Engineering,
Teactiing,Law.Business Administration and Medical)
203
courses (Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business
Administration and Medical) on twelve personality
dimensions. Figure presents the relative position of the
over-achievers in different professional courses on each
of the twelve personality continua. The following
paragraphs present the comparison of the over-achievers in
different professional courses on these twelve personality
characteristics.
4.6.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) ;
It will be seen from the table 4.6 and figure 4.5 that the
means of scores obtained by over-achievers of Engineering,
Teaching, Law, Business Administration and Medical on this
personality continua are 10.95, 18.00, 11.76, 29.40 and
11.46 respectively. It is , thus , evident that over-
achievers in Business Administration professional courses
are more lively than the members of all other professional
group. It also indicates that over-achievers in Teaching
are more lively than over-achievers in Law, Engineering
and Medical courses. The students in Engineering, Law and
Medical' have obtained nearly similar scores on this
dimension which is indicative of their seriousness.
The studies emphasizing the•importance of related
personality characteristics and achievement in different
courses have already been cited while justifying the
204
relationship of achievement with respective dimensions.
The present result may be justified on theoretical
grounds. Over-achievers in Business Administration and
related profession have to deal with people, i.e. their
success is dependent on good rapport with people. This
requires cheerfulness and frankness which is a related
characteristic of liveliness. In the same way, a teacher
who is^not cheerful and humorous, will be a less effective
teacher. Therefore, the teacher should be lively. On the
other hand, over-achievers in Engineering, Law and Medical
courses and in related profession, should be involved in
serious studies for success in respective professions.
Therefore, it appears that the average scores obtained by
over-achievers of these professional courses are very
much justified.
4.6.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved):
The means of over-achievers in Engineering,
Teaching, Law, Business Administration and Medical courses
are 10.41, 8.65, 10.28, 28.77 and 11.66 respectively.
This clearly shoves that over-achievers in Business
Administration courses on this factor are most sociable of
all the professional group taken into consideration.
Medical students occupy second. Engineering third, Law
205
fourth and teaching the last position. The over- achievers
of Engineering, Teaching, Law and M.B.B.S. courses are
clustered around low scoring pole of this dimension which
shows that over-achievers of all these groups are
reserved.
The present finding may be justified because the
nature ,,. of the profession related to Business
Administration course is such that sociability is
indispensable for success in the profession. The students
in Business Administration courses have to establish
rapport with the persons of different organizations.
Unless, they are sociable, they would not be able to
succeed in their professions. On the other hand, the over-
achievers of Engineering, Teaching, Lav; and Medical
courses have to be reserved because these courses demand
intensive studies which is possible for persons who are
reserved in nature.
4.6.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable):
The means of over-achievers in Engineering,
Teaching, Law, M.B.A. and M.B.B.S. on this factor are
30.00, 22.89, 25.35, 27.55 and 10.90 respectively. It can
be inferred from the result that over-achievers in
Engineering professional course are most inpulsive in
206
comparison to other professional courses. It also
indicates that over-achievers in Engineering, Teaching,
Law and Business Administration are impulsive. The over-
achievers in Medical professional courses are found to be
stable.
This may be justified on the ground that the nature
of professional courses are such that it requires
characteristics like excitability, and impatience. It is
common day experience as well as the conclusion of
authentic research that eminent persons behave in
unpredictable and impulsive manner, i.e. they ace on the
spur of the moment. Therefore, the impulsive nacure of
over-achievers in Engineering, Teaching, Law and Business
Administration courses may be justified.
Over-achievers in Medical professional courses are
found to be stable which is quite justified. A doccor has
to be very serious and stable in the diagnosis of diseases
and prescribing remedies. They have also to be very stable
by performing delicate observations. Thus, stable
personality is an essential requirement of Medical
profession.
4.6.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy) :
The mean scores of over-achievers in Engineering,
207
Teaching, Law, Business Administration and Medical courses
on this factor are 18.77, 19.14, 17.98, 17.00 and 18.60
respectively. These scores show that over-achievers in all
the professional courses are venturesome. The difference
among the scores obtained by the professional groups are
very small to warrant any differential inferences. All
these professional groups require interaction with other
persons; therefore, if a person is shy, he/she will not be
able to succeed in it. Therefore, the inference mentioned
above that over-achievers in these groups are venturesome
is well justified.
4.6.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) :
The means obtained by over-achievers in Engineering.
Teaching, Law, Business Administration and Medical courses
on this factor are 27.70, 27.06, 28.85, 27.96 and 27.90
respectively. The above figures show that over-achievers
in these professional courses are confident and their
level of confidence to succeed is almost at the same
level. This finding is also justified because the
components of confidence like self-sufficiency,
responsibility and serenity are essential for excelling in
the professional courses under study.
4.6.6. Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) :
The means of over-achievers in Engineering,
208
Teaching, Law, M.B.A. and M.B.B.S. on this factor are
28.84, 18.12, 27.35, 29.03 and 11.30 respectively. It can
be inferred from the result that over-achievers in
Engineering, Law and M.B.A. are very dominant and those in
teaching are also dominant but not to that extent. The
over-achievers in Medical courses are submissive. This is
borne out of every day observation that the engineers,
lawyers and business executives would not excel unless
they possess the characteristics of dominance. Over-
achievers in the teaching profession also require the
characteristics of dominance. But the dominance in the
case of teachers should not be as high as that required for
Engineering, Law and Business Administration courses
because they have to deal with very young person i.e. the
student of secondary level. The finding that the student
in the Medical professional course are submissive
apparently seems to be unconvincing but a close
observation of the condition obtained in the profession
reveals that if a doctor has a dominating attitude, he
will not be able to establish a rapport with his patients,
which is essential for valid diagnosis. Therefore, for the
sake of professional competence an attitude of
submissiveness seems essential.
209
4.6.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient):
The mean scores obtained by over-achievers in
Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business Administration and
Medical courses on this factor are 7.95, 17.51, 7.03, 6.11
and 8.03 respectively. These results clearly show that
over-achievers in Engineering, Law, Business Administration
and Medical courses are expedient and those in the
Teaching professional courses are conscientious. It is
also evident from every day observation that almost in all
the professions the people try to be expedient, i.e. they
adopt any method for success in the profession. Over-
achieving student teachers have been found to be
conscientious. This finding is highly justified on the
ground that it is the only profession where values are
given their due importance and conscientiousness is highly
valued; at least the over-achievers in this profession
should possess these characteristics.
4.6.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious):
The mean scores obtained by over-achievers in
Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business Administration and
Medical on this factor are 4.87, 8.06, 4.82, 4.22 and
8.13 respectively. It is evident from these figures that
over-achievers of Engineering, Law and Business
210
Administration courses are of suspicious nature, i.e.they
do not trust others. Their professional requirements also
warrant such an attitude. For example, if a lawyer trusts
all what a client says about his case, he will not be able
to get the justice done. He will have to probe into the
circumstances to find out the true state of affairs.
Obviously, this would require suspicious nature. In the
same way, engineers and business executives should also be
suspicious if they want to excel in their professions.
Over-achievers in Teaching and Medical professional
courses have been found to be trusting. Success in these
professional courses depends on a good rapport with the
students/patients. This obviously requires a trusting
attitude. Therefore, the trusting nature of over-achievers
in these professional courses is very much justified.
4.6.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting) :
The mean scores obtained by over-achievers in
Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business Administration and
Medical courses on this factor are 11.04, 24.89, 26.10,
10.66 and 11.53 respectively. This indicates that over-
achievers in teaching and law courses are conservative.
This result may be justified because teachers and lawyers
have to conserve the culture and already established
theories and laws. On the other hand, over-achievers in
211
Engineering, Business Administration and Medical courses
have been found to be of experimenting nature. This result is
also justified because engineers, business administrators
and doctors can not be efficient in their professions if
they base their conclusions on the basis of conservative
ideas. They have to be experimenting, in order to ahead in
their own fields.
4.6.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) :
The mean scores obtained by over-achievers in
Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business Administration and
Medical courses on this factor are 10.42, 9.65, 10.17,
10.18 and 25.63 respectively. It can be inferred from this
data that over-achievers in all the professional courses,
except Medical courses are harsh. This result for
engineers, lawyers and business administrators seem
justified because these professions require toughness in
dealing for obtaining good performance in some situations.
But this result for the teachers does not seem convincing.
Quite a few researches have shown that effective teachers
should be kind (Deva, 1966 and Kaul 1973). However, in
view of the circumstances obtained now in the educational
institutions where students' indiscipline is the order of
the day, teachers may not remain kind.
212
The over-achievers of the Medical courses have very
rightly been found to be kind. A good doctor should be
kind with his/her patients. Unless one possess this
characteristic, he/she can not excel in the Medical
profession.
4.6.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive):
The mean scores obtained by over-achievers in
Engineering, Teaching, Business Administration and Medical
courses on this factor are 10.84, 24.93, 10.17, 10.3 and
26.03 respectively This shows that over-achievers in
Medical and Teaching professional courses are cooperative
i.e. they are friendly and accommodating.
This result is justified on the ground that
teachers have to deal with the students and create a
condusive and congenial environment in the class for which
co-operative nature is essential. This result for Medical
students is also convincing. A doctor should possess
friendly and understanding nature which will help him in
establishing rapport with the patients, so that he is able
to know about the real cause of the ailment and is able to
correctly diagnose the disease and suggest suitable
remedies.
213
The over-achievers in Engineering, Law and Business
Administration are found to be obstructive, i.e. they are
intolerant, belligerant and torpid. The over-achievers
Engineering, Law and Business Administration courses have
to operate in quite different situations from those
required for teachers and doctors. They have to get the
work done efficiently by whatever means it is possible.
Therefore,over-achievers of these professional courses can
not afford to be highly co-operative in all situations.
Sometimes they have to be intolerant and belligerent.
4.8.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle-minded) :
The mean scores obtained by over-achievers in
Engineering, Law, Business Administration and Medical
courses on this factor are 10.03, 9.80, 10.00, 4.44 and
10.16 respectively. This reveals that over-achievers in
all the professional courses except in Business
Administration courses, are persevering. The result is
justified because success in almost all walks of life
requires perseverance. History is replete with the
examples of successful persons who had been highly
persevering. The finding that over-achievers in Business
Administration courses are fickle-minded appears to be
apparently strange but the conditions obtained in most of
the business establishments warrant a tact and expediencv
214
rather perseverance. It may also be recalled that
over-achievers in Business Administration courses were
found to be expedient rather than conscientious on factor
VII of the present inventory.
REFERENCES
Adaval, S.B. (1977). Quality of Teachers. Amitabh Prakashan, Allahabad.
Agarwal, S.K. (1976). A Psychological Study of Academic Under-achievement.Indian Dissertation Abstract, 1981, Vol. X No. 3,4, 311-315.
Ahluwalia,S.P. and Narang, S. (1967). A Study of Some of the Personality Characteristics of Good and Poor Achievers. Indian Psychological Abstracts, 1975, 7, 85-86.
Astington, E. (1960). Personality Assessment and Academic Performance in a Boy's Grammar School. British Journal of Educational Psychol., 30, 3, 225.
Bhagirath, G.S. (1978). Correlates of Academic Achievement as Perceived by the Teachers and Students of High School. Doctoral Thesis. In Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83), Buch, M.B. (Editor) 1986, 658-59.
Cattell, R.B., Sealey, A.P. and Swenly, A.P. (1966). What can Personality and Motivation Source Traits Measurements Add to the Prediction of School Achievement. British Journal of Edul. Psychol., 33, 2, 10.
Cook, A.M and Richards, H.C. (1972). Dimensions of Principal and Supervisor Rating of Teacher Behaviour. Journal of Experimental Education, 41, 2, 11-13.
Deb, Maya (1968). Personality Traits of Successful Engineers. Indian Journal of Psychology, 43, 6-10.
Deva, R.C. (1966). Prediction of Student Teaching Success. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Dhaliwal, A.S. (1971). A Study of Some Factors Contributing to Academic Success and Failure Among High School Students^ Personality Correlates of Academic Over-Under-Achievement. Doctoral Thesis Psychology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.
Fox, A.M., Brookshine. (1971). Defining Effective College Teaching. Journal of Experimental Education, 42, 2, 37.
216
Gawronski, D.A. and Maths, C. (1965). Differences between Over-achieving, Normal achieving and Underachieving High School Students. Psychology in the Schools, 2, 152-155.
Gebhart, G.G. and Hoyt, D.P. (1958). Personality Needs of Under and Over-achieving Freshmen. Journal of appl. Psychol., 42, 2, 125-128.
Getzels, J.W. and Jackson, P.W. (1963). The Teachers's Personality and Characteristics. Hand-book of Research on Teaching (N.L. Gage, Editor). Rand McNally and Co., Chicago.
Ghuman, M.S. (1976). A Study of Aptitudes, Personality Traits and Achievement Motivation of Academic Over-achievers and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, Ravi Shankar University. In Third Survey of Research in Education 1978-83, Buch, M.B. (Editor) N.C.E.R.T., pp. 664-66.
Gopal, A.K. (1975). Certain Differentiating Personality Variables of Creative and Non-Creative Science and Engineering Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.
Gupta, H.G. (1970). A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of High and Low Achievers as Related to their Academic Achievement. Indian Psychological Abstract, 1975, 7, 87.
Haq, N. (1987). A Study of Certain Personality Correlates of Over-Under-achievement in Different School Subjects. Doctoral Thesis, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.
Jahan, Q. (1985). Personality Profiles of Over and Under-achievers in Different Streams - Science, Arts and Commerce, Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Jayagopala, R. (1974). Personality Profile of the Under and High Achievers of Some of the Schools in the City of Madras. Second Survey of Research in Education (1972-78), Buch, M.B. (Editor), p.184.
Jensen, A.R. (1973). Personality and Scholastic Achievement in Three Ethnic Groups. British Journal of Edu. Psychol., 43, 115-125.
217
Kaul, L. (1973). Personality Traits of Effective Teachers. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.
Mathew, T (1976). Some Personality Factors Related to Under-achievement in Science. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Karnataka University.
Menon, S.K. (1973). A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of Over-achievers and Under-achievers of High Ability. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kerala University.
Mishra, K.S. (1984). Personality Traits of Original Teachers, Indian Educational Review, 19, 14, Oct. 1984, 72-77.
Neog, S. (1990). A Study of Personality Characteristics of Under-Achievers Across Any Two School Subjects. M.Phil. Dissertation, Edu., A.M.U., Aligarh.
Pervin, L.A. (1984). Personality : Theory and Research. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
Ridding, L.W. (1966). An Investigation of Personality Measures Associated with Over and Under-achievement in English and Arithmetics. Abstract of Thesis, Psychol. Feb. 1967, 37, 397-398.
Rushton, J. (1966). The Relationship between Personality Characteristics and Scholastic Success in Eleven Year Old Children. British Journal of Edu. Psychol. 36, 178-184.
Singh, S.C.P. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Management Students. Journal of Edu. and Psychol., 30, 2, 167-69.
Somasundaran, M. (1980). A Comparative Study of Certain Personality Variables Related to Over Normal and Under-achievement in Secondary School Mathematics. Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83) Buch, M.B., 1983, 693.
Southward, Paul (1989). Personality and Performance in Elementary Mathematics with Special Reference to Skill Area. Psychological Abstracts, 76, 11, 3653.
218
Srivastava,. G.P. (1976). A Study of Personality Factors as Predictors of Academic Achievement of High School Students, Doctoral Thesis, B.H.U., Varanasi.
Taylor (1963). Scientific Creativity : It's Recognition and Development. John Wiley & Sons Inc., pp. 121-122.
Taylor, R.G. (1964). Personality Traits and Discrepant Achievement : A Review. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 11, 76-82.
Terman, L.M. (1954). Scientist and Non-Scientist in Group of 800 Gifted Men. Psychol. Monog., 68, No. 7.
Tutoo, D.N. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Some Higher Secondary School Teachers of a Metropolitan City. Education and Psychology Review, 12, 1-2, 9.
Wakefield, W.M. and Crowl, T.K. (1974). Personality Characteristics of Special Educators. Journal of Experimental Education, 43, 2, 87.
CHAPTER -V
SUMMARY, CONCmSIONSAND SUGGESTIONS
Welfare and prosperity of a nation depends on its
natural and human resources. Human resource is perhaps
more important than the natural resources because the
latter can only be exploited if the former is efficient.
Thus, human resource is of paramount importance for
progress of a country. Professional courses like
Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.B.),
Business Administration (tl.B.A.) and Medical (M.B.B.S.)
are organised for development of human resource. The
nation spends large amounts of money for this
purpose. It is estimated that the per capita per year
expenditure on Engineering student alone is fe 3226.70. It
has also been found that there is large scale failure and
poor achievement in most of the professional courses.
Thus, huge amounts of money go down the drain in the
organisation of the professional courses.
The above mentioned wastage is mainly due to
improper selection of students for admission to these
courses. Therefore, it is imperative that only those
students should be admitted to these courses v/ho are
220
likely to succeed in these courses and the related
professions.
Success of the students in any course depends on
his cognitive and personality characteristics and
environmental variables. A review of previous researches
has shown that some attempts have already been made to
identify the cognitive characteristics of successful
students in different professional courses. (Deva, 1966;
Mathur, 1967; Sharma, 1971; Kumaraiah, 1976; Patil, 1984
and Kazmi, 1986). It has also been observed that inspite
of having intellectual capabilities the students are
unable to achieve upto the mark. It indicates that there
are other variables in addition to intelligence which
determine achievement in academic and professional
courses. Personality characteristics may be considered
important in this connection. It may push up students with
low ability to a higher level. Few attempts have also been
made to identify the personality characteristics of over-
achievers in professional courses.Some of the attempts
made in this regard are: Burgess, 1953; Mishra, 1963; Pal
1969; Kaul, 1973; Arora, 1981; Maxwell, 1983; Pervin,
1984; Mishra, 1988 and Vyas, 1987.
A perusal of these studies reveals that these investigators
have restricted to only isolated personality characteristics (Mishra,
1962; Walsh and Palmer) and limited number of
221
professional courses (Burgess, 1953; Kaul 1973
and Pervin, .1984). Therefore, there is a need to
undertake a comprehensive study involving all the
personality characteristics and most of the professional
courses. The present study, therefore, seeks to identify
the personality characteristics of over and under-
achievers in different professional courses viz..
Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.B.),
Master of Business Administration (M.B.A.) and Bachelor of
Medicine and Surgery (M.B.B.S.).
5.1 Objective of the Study :
In specific terms present study seek to :
1) identify over and under-achievers.
Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.}, Lav;
(LL.B.), Business Administration (M.B.A.! and
Medical (M.B.B.S.)•
2) draw personality profiles of over-achievers in the
above mentioned courses.
3) draw personality profiles of under-achievers in the
above mentioned courses.
4) compare the personality patterns of over and under-
achievers in each of the aforementioned
professional courses.
5) Compare the personality patterns of over-achievers
in the above mentioned five professional courses.
222
6) give suggestions regarding selection of the
candidates for admission in these courses.
5.2 Hypotheses of the Study :
The common tendency of researchers in education is
to present the hypothesis in null form. The present
investigator is of the view that a null hypothesis is
essentially a statistical technique and is applicable only
on certain data which are amendable to some inferential
statistics. Thus, it is not suitable as a hypothesis for
educational research. Research hypothesis should be stated
explicitly and exhibit clarity of thought of the
researcher and the position he/she takes regarding the
tentative conclusions of the research. The investigator
has, therefore ,formulated the hypotheses in directional
form based on previous research and theoretical rationale.
These hypotheses are :
1) The over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.)
professional courses are likely to be serious,
reserved, impulsive, venturesome, confident,
dominant, expedient, suspicious, experinenting,
harsh, obstructive and persevering.
2) The over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional
courses are likely to be lively, reserved,
impulsive, venturesome, confident, dorinant,
223
conscientious, trusting, conservative, harsh,
cooperative and perserving.
3) The over-achievers in Law (LL.B.) courses are
likely to be serious, reserved, impulsive, venture
some, confident, dominant, expedient, suspicious,
conservative, harsh, obstructive and persevering.
4) Over-achievers in Business Administration (M.B.A.)
are likely to be lively, sociable, impulsive,
venturesome, confident, dominant, expedient,
suspicious, experimenting, harsh, obstructive and
fickle-minded.
5) Over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional
courses are likely to be serious, reserved, stable,
venturesome, confident, submissive, expedient,
..trusting, experimenting, kind, cooperative and
persevering.
5.3 Method :
The present study proposes to identify the
personality characteristics of over-and under-achievers in
different professional courses viz., Engineering 'B.Sc.
Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.S.), Business
Administration (M.B.A.), and Medical (M.B.B.S.) . The over
and under-achievers in all the five professional courses
under study were identified with the help of procedure
suggested by Thorndike (1963). In this procedure
regression equation for relationship between intelligence
and achievement is computed. This equation helps to
predict achievement on the basis of intelligence. After
obtaining the predicted achievement scores discrepancies
between the actual and predicted achievement scores are
calculated. If the predicted achievement of a person was
one SDe (standard error of estimate) above the actual
achievement score, he was designated as over-achievers. On
the other hand whose actual achievement was one SDe
(standard error of estimate) belovj the predicted
achievement achievement were called under-achievers. In
this way, over and under-achievers in different
professional courses were identified. A personality
inventory based on factor analyses technique constructed
by the investigator as a part of her M.Phil, research was
administered to identify the personality characteristics
of over and under-achievers in the above mentioned
professional courses. Personality profiles of over and
under-achievers were constructed on the basis of the
scores obtained by under and over-achievers in these
courses.
5.4 Sample :
The present study was conducted on a representative
sample of 53 2 (242 over-achievers and 290 under-
achievers) students studying in different professional
225
courses viz., Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.),
Law (LL.B.), Business Administration (M.B.A.) and Medical
(M.B.B.S.).
5.5 Tools :
The following measures were employed in the present
study :
5.5.1 Measure of Intelligence :
Intelligence scores were obtained by the help of
'Culture Fair' test of general ability constructed by
Cattell and Cattell (test of 'g' Culture Fair, Scale 2
Form A). This test was preferred over others because it is
free from the influence of verbal ability and culture. It
can also be easily administered.
5.5.2. Measure of Achievement :
The present study employed final examination marks
which are a total of sessional, theory and practical
examination marks as measure of achievement. The measure
was considered fairly valid because it is a composite of
several components and is continuously evaluated by
several learned and experienced teachers who are well
acquainted with the subjects.
5.5.3 Measure of Personality :
A personality inventory constructed by the present
226
investigator as a part of her M.Phil, work was employed as
a measure of personality. It has been developed through a
scientific and objective technique of factor analysis. It
was found to be very reliable and valid.
5.6 Conclusions :
The study leads to the following conclusions :
5.6.1 Personality Characteristics of Over-achievers in
different Professional courses :
1) Engineering : serious,reserved, impulsive, venturesome,
confident, dominant, expedient, suspicious, experi
menting, harsh, obstructive and persevering.
2) Teaching : lively, reserved, impulsive, venturesome,
confident, dominant, conscientious, trusting,
conservative, harsh, cooperative and persevering.
3) Law :serious, reserved, impulsive, venturesome,
confident, expedient, suspicious, conservative, harsh,
obstructive and persevering.
4) Business Administration : lively, sociable, impulsive,
venturesome, confident, dominant, expedient,
suspicious, experimenting, harsh, obstructive and
fickle-minded.
5) Medical : serious, reserved, stable, venturesome,
confident, submissive, expedient, trusting,
experimenting, kind, cooperative and persevering.
227
5.6.2 Personality Characteristics of Under-achievers in
different Professional Courses :
1) Engineering : lively, sociable, stable, shy, nervous,
submissive, conscientious, trusting, conservative, kind
cooperative and fickle-minded.
2) Teaching : serious, sociable, stable, shy, nervous,
submissive, expedient, suspicious, experimenting, kind,
obstructive and fickle-minded.
3) Law : lively, sociable. stable, shy, nervous,
submissive, conscientious, trusting, experimenting,
kind, cooperative and fickle-minded.
4) Business Administration : serious, reserved, stable,
shy, nervous, submissive, conscientious, trusting,
conservative, kind, cooperative and persevering.
5) Medical : lively, sociable, impulsive, shy, nervous,
dominant, conscientious, suspicious, conservative,
harsh obstructive and fickle-minded.
5.6.3 Comparisons of Personality Characteristics of Over-
achievers in the Professional Courses :
Factor I Lively-Serious :
Over-achievers in Business Administration
professional course are most lively in comparison to all
other professional courses. Over-achievers in teaching are
less lively than over-achievers in Business Administration
228
professional course. Over-achievers in Engineering, Law
and Medical courses cluster around more or less the same
level on the low score pole of this continuum i.e.
serious.
Factor II Sociable-Reserved :
Over-achievers in M.B.A. professional courses are
most sociable. Over-achievers in Medical, Engineering, Law
and Teaching professional courses are found to be
reserved.
Factor III Impulsive-Stable :
Over-achievers in Engineering professional courses
are most impulsive. Over-achievers in Business
Administration, Law and Teaching are also found to be
impulsive but less than over-achievers in Engineering
courses. Over-achievers in Medical courses are stable.
Factor IV Venturesome-Shy :
Over-achievers in all the professional courses are
venturesome.
Factor V Confident-Nervous :
Over-achievers in all the professional courses are
confident.
Factor VI Dominant-Submissive :
Over-achievers in Engineering, Law and Business
229
Administration are very dominant. Over-achievers in
Teaching professional courses are also found to be
dominant but not to that extent. Over-achievers in Medical
professional courses are found to be submissive.
Factor VII Conscientious-Expedient :
Over-achievers in teaching professional
courses are consciencious. Over-achievers in
Engineering, Law, Business Administration and Medical
professional courses are found to be expedient.
Factor VIII Trusting-Suspicious :
Over-achievers in ' "Teaching " "and "Medical
professional courses are found to be trusting. Over-
achievers in Engineering, Lav; and Business Administration
are of suspicious nature.
Factor IX Conservative-Experimenting :
Over-achievers in Teaching and Law professional
courses are conservative. Over-achievers in Engineering,
Business Administration and Medical professional courses
are found to be experimenting.
Factor X Kind-Harsh:
Over-achievers in all the professional courses
except Medical courses are found to be harsh.
230
Factor XI Cooperative-Obstructive :
Over-achievers in Medical and Teaching courses are
cooperative. The mean scores of over-achievers in
Engineering, Law and Business Administration cluster
around the low scoring pole of this dimensions.
Factor XII Persevering-Fickle-minded :
Over-achievers in all the professional courses
except in Business Administration are found to be
persevering.
5.7 Suggestions and Implications :
Most of the tools employed for selecting students
to professional courses include cognitive measures only.
The selection interview has also a high loading of
cognitive factors. Cognitive factors determine what a
person will be able to do but what a person will actually
do depends on the personality factors. The present
research has identified personality characteristics of
over-achievers in different professional courses. If this
measure is also incorporated in the battery of selection,
it may help perhaps more effectively to identify persons
who are likely to succeed in their respective professions.
The present study reveals that there are some personality
dimensions which characterize successful person in all
231
the professional courses for example, confidence and
venturesomeness.
There are some personality characteristics which
are present in the over-achievers in most of the
professional courses. Such personality characteristics
and the courses are given below :
Personality characteristics Professional Courses
a) Reservedness Engineering, Teaching, Law
and Medical.
b) Impulsiveness Engineering, Teaching, Law
and Business Administration.
c) Dominance Engineering, Teaching, Law
and Business Administration.
d) Expediency Engineering, uaw, Business
Administration and Medical.
e) Harshness Engineering, Teaching, Law
and Business Administration.
f) Perseverance Engineering, Teaching, Law
and Medical.
There are also some personality characteristics
which are specific for the over-achievers in some
particular courses. Such personality characteristics and
courses for which they are specific are given below :
232
Personality characteristics Professional Courses
a) Conscientiousness Teaching
b) Sociability and Fickle- Business Administration
mindedness
c) Stability, Submissiveness Medical
and kindness.
5.8 Suggestions for Further Research :
(1) The present study has identified the over-and
under-achievers on the basis of procedure suggested by
Thorndike (1963). This is essentially a technique for
controlling the effect of intelligence. Variables other
than intelligence like study habits, achievement
motivation and environmental variables also affect
achievement. Therefore, for identifying personality
characteristics of over-and under-achievers the above
mentioned variables should have been included as control
variables. A design incorporating all these variables as
control variables would have become very complex and could
not be undertaken because of paucity of time and resources
available to the present investigator.
A comprehensive research project involving these
control variables may be undertaken for more depenodoie
results.
233
(2) The measure of achievement employed in the present
study are students' achievement scores at the final theory
and practical examination. Such measures are notorious for
their subjectivity. The present investigator is also of
the view that standardized theory and practical tests
would have served better. Construction of standardized
test for theory as well as practical examination would
have been a collssal task beyond the resources available
to the investigator. Since the final examination theory
and practical marks in all the professional courses are the
contribution of many learned and experienced teachers and
are awarded during the academic session at different
levels at different intervals therefore, they are likely to
be fairly valid measures and thus suitable for a research
study. It is suggested that a conprehensive research
project may be designed in which standardized achievement
test may be used for identifying over-and under-achievers.
(3) The sample of the study includes students studying
in five professional courses (Engineering, Teaching, Law,
Business Administration and Medical) of Aligarh Muslim
University. The conclusions arrived at are applicable to
similar situations only. Since A.M.U. caters students from
the whole country and the syllabi can also be favourably
compared with those of other universities, it may,
therefore, be safely assumed that the conclusions of the
234
present research are applicable Co students studying in
other universities. For more dependable results a
representative sample comprising of students from
different regions may be taken.
(4) The present study has employed five professional
courses (Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business Administra
tion & Medical ). Personalitycharacteristicsaf stufents in other
professional courses like veterinary and Agriculture may
also be explored.
(5) The present study has employed the personality
inventory constructed by the investigator as a part of her
M.Phil, course. This inventory is fairly comprehensive,
valid and reliable. It has been constructed on the basis
of factor analysis technique. However, the previous
researches have shown that sone personality variables like
perseverance, achievement motivation, level of aspiration
etc. appear very promising for predicting success. While
the personality characteristic perseverance is a component
of the personality inventory employed in the present
study, measures of achievement motivation, level of
aspiration should be incorporated in future research
design. It is also suggested that more comprehensive
measure of perseverance should be constructed and its
predictive validity be explored.
235
The investigator is conscious of the various
shortcomings and defects of the present scudy, but it is
being submitted with the hope that it will motivate others
to take up further research in the area which has not been
sufficiently explored.
REFERENCES
Burgess, Elva (1953). Personality Factors of Over and Under-achievers in Engineering. Pinnsylvannia State University Abstract of Dissertation, 16, 536-43.
Deb, Maya (1968). Personality Traits of Successful Engineers. Indian Journal of Psychology, 43, 6-10.
Deva, R.C. (1966). Prediction of Student Teaching Success. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.
Gebhart, G.G. and Hoyt, D.P. (1958). Personality Needs of Under and Over-achieving Freshmen. Journal of Applied Psychology, 42, 2, 125-128.
Kaul, Lokesh (1973). Personality Traits of Effective Teachers. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.
Kazrai, Q.S. (1986). A Study of Personality Profiles and Cognitive Factors of Academic Failures Amongst Science and Arts Students at Various Levels Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.
Kumaraiah, V. (1976). Intellectual, Personal and Social Factors Related to High and Low Achievement of Various Stages in Medical Education. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, B.H.U., Varanasi.
Mathur, M.B. (1966). A Comparative Study of Levels of Intelligence Among Professional Groups. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., A.M.U., Aligarh.
Maxwell, H.C. (1983). A Study of Selected Personality Traits as Related to Self Paced Programme in Media Production Techniques. Doctoral Thesis, Georgia State University, Dissertation Abstract International,44, 10.
Mishra, H.K. (1962). Personality Factors in High and Low Achievers in Engineering Education, Doctoral Thesis, Education IIT, Kharagpur.
237
Mishra, K.S. (1984). Personality Traits of Original Teachers. Indian Educational Review, 19, 14, 72-77.
Nagpal, R. (1979). A Study of Non-Intellectual Characteristics of Over and Under-achieving Engineering Students. Doctoral Thesis, human IIT, New Delhi. In Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-1983), Buch, M.B. (Editor), p. 677.
Pervin, L.A. (1984). Personality : Theory and Research. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York.
Sharma, K.G. (1971). A Comparative Study of Adjustment of Over and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.
Vyas, R.P. (1987). A Study of the Teaching Success of Prospective Teachers on Some Selected Variables. Educational Review, March, 63 , 3, 55-58.
Walsh, W.B. and Palmer, D.A. (1970). Difference between Law and Non-Law Oriented Students. The Vocational Guidance, Quarterly, 19, 11-15.
APPENDIX I
D AT Test of "g'': CULTURE FAIR
Scale 2, Form A Pnpand fey R. S. Ca«t»// ond A. K. S. Coffe//
Name.
Name of School (or Address).
Sex. Last (Write M or F]
Today's Date. Class
Date of Birth. Month Day Year
Age. Years Months
Test
1
2
3
4
Score Remarks
Total Score
M..
Do n«r..turn Hw. p«9«. yntirtolcl^to' do so>'
An<rwe:
o 0 o
o • • \ >
(
1 1
o o o
oo o
1
a D n ^A
X X X
X X
t 1^
Pl V
1
• - I I
^Ud'-k-
Z) ^ £X / ii r \ • L
t t ^ (f 0 (X r c
E;H1 of R-s." /
2.
STOP! Oo nof >ur/j ffct pog* unW/ told to do MO.
Examp es 1
^ ^
1
#
2
M^n
2 •
O
3
m 3
o
4
4
O
5
f^SSM
5 o Answers
0
n
^ I
5.
6.
n
n
D
D
\
a
D
Co en to tha n»Kt pagm,
' 1
7.
1
J.
<«
J ( (
- \ ^ ( )
D
v\ /v V
I)
< >
ZJ(
End 01 Test J
l^'
( y
v_y
c I r'
) (
/ :
J
> ; ; <
AnsNv ers
D
a
STOPI Do not turn fh* pag, until told to tfe sa7
TEST 3 r . . x , ! i ; i ;
r 1 (
-, I T
I I . - J r
T 1
I <
© ®© ® (?
2 3
if 4
\
5
i 1 2
< - ' ' ^
3 f 4
*^&
5
Answer;
0
D
D
1 . I
Jl.
A
I ^ I
1 .
)
\
X:^-f' + r V!
2_
x J
X
1
SisM
2 3
11 4 5
1
A
2
A 3
A 4
A
5
A
1 2
-
3
/
4
\
5
\
+
a
D
n
D
a Go on to the next page.
TEH D
r 1
I I I I
7. •JO
1 r 1 • ; L I
8.
O r 1 I I I I I I 1 J
9.
11 J
10. 210 111 J
QBE •00 00LJ
12.
EM?.
o
1
1%]
It
0.
ffl ffi
D
^
Enrf o/" Test 3
• o
^ \ ^
ffi
5 Answers
B DB a s] ai
d]
101
5
•
5
5
5
0
C
n
D
D
n
o
TtiyT 4
Examples 4
D o
^2,
Q
1.
© 3
V V fe
3.
I I
r -C^ . < ) ^
y
( ^ ( ) .
r >
T
fvi(/ o/ 'C'sl I 7.
X
w a, a, <
(J
'J o 0 1
o
t7i
r--i o
rj EH
0)
l )
n
I I
• )
o l )
p . r5 u u o
<n
u rT-;
o
at CO
o or
(A
ta r - l o
a
U ^N • H -o Q) r, ,ci n ftf U -H W
r-l (!) fS
u) c -H c: ,n I' p. n)
n
< 1 r- l 1 d
o
o
VD
i n
ro
CM
O O
o
n P I
n n. S o r i n
r i ;ji n H
3 H C1
' 1 1,1 11
r-l
s: ui cu w .p < ^ f
r, ''I ,;-< O t" >i
•cl "I -.-I O
(1) U) •
d w o r. ( ) O f j fl)
! l
n o H C)
• ifj
r-l <1) ' > ij
'('} O
o
tJ O
ri O 'o ;: c
Q) -
I) rO
rQ .C •(J
0) O .C ,Q
o ci : i o p I) 1.1
(IJ ' d W • r i c: U) (J t l n ('1 o ,r.
rH 1)
. I T i H ft)
C) i;-i .G •rl l l
C -r)
•H X
u -J
' I -H O J^
oj O .- CJ . 0 -V - . ,c;
<> -• p o -.ij CO a"; ^n
s ( > -rl n CM ,
FJ (M
0) M ^ n 0) C5 'rt a :• . 0 'II
M C O i-l
: . +j G w t-i d ::)£•: X
M-l 0) i-l
PH L.-I aj -P U
X C)
c o r: x:
r i i
u
o > 1
CO H a' 1 1
H
i U ' l')";
Fi C) ,
fr; Q £ : t/:
R O
u n
o
o
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^- ^ ^ ^ , 1
^,, ^ _ ^- , - , . - , ^ . .-. . - . K ) I (H J-
^ - ^ v _ ^ ^ ^ w - . _ ^ - _ - ^ ^
' J ' _ ^ . ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ i.T
r-;
-, _ ^ ^ ^ ^ ,--- ^ ^ ^ ^ _ _ y ^: ^ . . . ^ . - . , - . . ^ _ ^ .. ^ ^ ?
n r o _ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^'
,-1
ro -vf
1 r- ^ ^ ^ ^ X
Ss ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ tX l ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ - . ^ ^ ^ ,- . ^ , j .
rH oo n i-o i-o r-^ i D O'. '~i
PPENDIX I I I
^'^fcf ^ T % I ?fT Ji^^RfA ^ ^HV vJrf=f?FR'y jrii T ^Fi^ % f a ^ ^35 5T;^ | I STCT: 5 ^ sr ^ r ^r ^TTTT
^i\ 3f|[T n m ^q^TSRT ^JiT 3Tiq% fg?r ^ I I ariq^t 5^ »w"li ^T ^XTK 3 ^ ? : q ^ q^ 5 ^ | 1 H r q ^ ^
r TJ r f 3TT11 q fT q f ? ^ JTH? w R ^ t ^xTX '51' ii ^^i ^> eft §r % ^ i f i ^^x, ^^? a i iq^ i 3? .^ '?r' ^
cil '3rr^r?,?cT' % ^rf f 3TtT if)?rr # ^ ^'tr^r^ 1
( t ) 5 ^ f^Tf^ca: vft TfT q«?5r I 1
(^) 5 11?^ ^ q | q^^JTi q?rf^ ^TcTT 1 1
3TtT n!?fi (j1f^ r^irr I 5^t sr^TT ir^ f^^ SHJ T 570 (^) * r ^^^ '^' | 3?CT: ^ ^ T q ? H ^^IIT'JT JT?^
(^) % ]^^ •^' % :Erfi f 3f\;[ ifi^fy gy=^ Hjai 1 ^t^ ffi^ 3 5 ^ ;to (^) ^FT ^J^T; arf^fji^n | 1 ar r:
^TTT q^ ^?rfTOT sr5?f ?fo (^) % ?Trq% arrfTf tT % ^ R f ^ T n>?rr ^ 1 ^ f rzir 1
gT^e^ OT9T tffl fi d^T 91 AT T5?l Sfto r T TT ^ R ? r ^ ^ m fVTWI 5TR?T fjC^IiT
: ^ ' -
\. ^iff ?^ITcT ^^\i]^ i\ csTRr JTg^ T ^ ; ^ I 1
'3. t | T 7 f "Y |.(3> ^^^x fq-ir "Y 5<sr> ^ srrcrr f i
?!(. Jj?? ^T frqrsr q?T?? 1 1
1^. r??TT m% ?rq^ ^]^ ^T^ & q i i ^rtr ST^HT f^qf simr 1 1
R». ^ f?rq? n r ? ^ -JTV sAf^q % ^rir qj^^f qg?^ ^:f^^^ | i
^H. ^ 3T%^ g> roTfit^TfTUt f-^WfTT q(T?^ - cTT | I
Rx. ni) ?=5i5f T cfV I fq? j f l^ ?fiq g t ^fcq^ot ?riTH i
.^it ^ r ^ q n cTT q r qjtr'sq | fqi gf 1v^\ frq? q^ '> ^^^\ T | I
R^. ^ qftf ^qi qji^ ^r^ crqr ^ft ^m | ^ ^ rq? fq* 5 ^ ^^rqii nqr^^r "Pr ^^ fgr^qiq ^ ft 1
^ c . ?f q^cq^ot sqfrR q ^ J q^T^ ^ fsr^r^ ^r^^^r qr cTT f 1
^ £ . ^ ^^^ ^ cf>TT?T q TcT tTq;"f ^ 5Tiqr ^ T^cTI ^ I
^o i] ilt rr^ q ^ q t q ^n qi iqi ari^qt Hq?tT ^Tl^T | 1
?9. 5?t qrvft-qr 'y ^qV qj VY% % ? H qg^ ^ I ^^ get q?t fq^ qqi% iry qgrr «»BiT TRffy ^ ,
3W. f 5fY ^ ^q i f l ^ q ^ 3{q^ aiiq 'Y ^> fjy g i
?x. ^ sTfcT fif>g-?Tq?T^T^frRi q?'"3r ^ !
^^ ^^t 2-?5r ^ p t I fqr J[ ^rqil^T'T v^tif % q;rq J?T^ I VS it^') ^fqqt OT?^ q PT CFlrf> ^ I
H . ^ q t !qrxfiq"> qr ^ Is rrq^r q^ niq "ftt^ - Vq? «ifTi $ i
Yo. ?T *| srrs qr^^ ^ 551 (T^>^ q|^ ?") i | ?fr| q^ ^^^Ir <?;•) qrq«?? ^t 1
: ^ J
Y^. ^ mmUm ^mx\^ ir ^5?^ mxm T ^ " ; «PTCII | i
!<:?. ^?r 'i"'m1f ^ ^^r tr^ifir ^T^TI q*?;? n^^ ^[^^-fi ? J | ^ T I H I ^ I li. 3Tq% ^rrf'^qf % isfll- TT ie frrir ^ ^ ^ I T 5 ^ ai^eir ?ificTr | 1
UK t F^?fr qT iT?iTt!T f i% qT 3^^^i f ^ f t a ^ ^ a t 1 1
^^3. 53T^> 3TI5TT q i? r^ ?n> srftwT a r i^ t ^^\ a i f u ^ q n ? ? ^ T ^ T f 1
K^. ^ m x ^ f ^ tTH\ cTrcT ^ t^ ' t I 5T"I T^^l^ ^ q ^ ^ ^ m ^ x 1 1
^ o . # ?r^ ^ M q f%fl7 e?r5 9r> q f q ^ qry H ^ W ^^ ^ F ^ ^ T f ) 7 | ^ r q^T?? ^Tc i r i I
^^. If ?!??! ?i 3^^> ^qfirraff % ^t\ ^ sfis^^ ^x^j q??:5r ^ixm 1 1
^^. ^ m^ 3Tiq^"t r^q^ qrrq % ^rqqj ^gVirqsFai f 1 Vi'. t q^q iTfqqiq fT?r qi?T qqV qrcif?TFq"t q s? :^^ ^ r q ^rar ^ 1 ^i( ? fqqqr ? ^ q ^l ' aFqeri qTqFpsf* qqFT")g1f q ?rqq j s i R q r qe^^r ^ ^ ' q r 1 %% - i\^€\ iriTx^r ^-^^ it t ^^\ q |?i ^^cfi 1 1 \^. 5H q^aTTF^oT q^:5[ q^H 1 1 ^^. S' 3T?ffT qrH^ 3frr? q qq^K^rq^ci? % ^ q q ^qfipqci |1CTI | J \£. HTqqgVq aqft^qf % f T^ f ^ ^ T ^ ^ t t q^^ an^T T^ar I ' l 'v3o. ^ q?% ^i«T q^T^i^ffT ^7qT q q j ^ 1 1 \5l ^ q ^ ^ r q ^-r "JTF fq^ir firqF ^^ ^qTF ^ F q ^^ ^ T ICTI ^ 1 \ 3 ^ . ^ ^^n] ^ ^^?l1q ?5TT % ^otqqiTT ^ |«ift | ) TFcTT ^ 1 o ^ t qsrr-T qrr T^rqr r'Tqf?rfr f t r g'V arFqs^r gsiciF ^ i \3Y.. PfJ'Tf % r^T^q % ^ h giT q> q 3rq^ f ^ ^ i f ) q i sjzfi T^CTI g i •<iV ft fffr'A if: ^jqiQiff Pr;'^ k - i t T r j - i qriq h « * q ^ ^ T (iTcTf g I V 3 ^ i r f t ?^?5F X^€) ^ HF q ^ f q q ^ST q q ^ F q ^ q i qF4> qqfT I \3'3 ifxt s^sgr T cfy I fq? ^ t fqq ^T> qHf^ q ^.iq ^ t I vje: . 5?f ^qr qrrq qr^qr ar^sr crqar | Hqqq ^^f ^cT?qar ^t i \5E. »t ^q q iq ^ q^'^q T^qar g f gf^qr % WBFqr •q'> f^r?^! 1 1 CO, ^!T 4Fq^ u q % U'^ixi ^ *if a ^ i^ ^ i
t;^. 5 ^ q^ 9T I % Jr^ fk^z fq^ if> qls q)^ Jrfr f r i f q T 11
t;e. t T' sTMr mff Tsr GTRT qe?? ^"^cii ^
£^. arqrTnqrcrl' i> ^\mi\ ^ vi'Y ;3fq*'> tfl*Ti7?iT> ^ x^ w?\ kit ^TQT ^^a') | i
^e- ^ q^ ^^^i) qi Tf i=r f^^t ^r^ ^it fz^ qicri ^ i
To"i. t %6Tr ^t 3rr3rrqi5r'r arq rr ^TT'SIT ««5T5rr |" i I'?. ^ ^i^-fg?/? ir ?fErr ^ffff q^ gR"V T CTT g" i
ToH. i rfqrGg % F?r& | ^ qffr ^^r*^ T¥nf q^ '? ^Tcrr g' i
^oq. it ?TT5r n 3[qi?f> w>fiV «pr «rt ^rri »II?OJT jjfri g'' i loe- ? ^^V^^'y ^fs^ qft' TR f-* ^ FsTRr ^iq;^ ?r^ai f i ?*io ^ friry sfJT 7=?RT qff'? ^ii ^^'^Ti c3T> tTq> aTi?i?y fj ar^ri 5" 1
<1?«. J ij^qiT ^^ r ii'lt ^ ;jq^iT 8f ^(^ ^^ ?raf f' 1 tn. '^'\f\ Hf« qiT <«iT% if g?T 3T ^r ar^qr^r ^^] 11
11^. 5 ?iminxr^ t s ^ if ^T ^ 3fr "5c vft arm #3% ^?TI ^ri^i ^ 1 11^. ^ ^T4 ^ T ^ " ^ ^ f Wqqf aiq^f^r T^^T ^ 1 '\H- 55T n m ^ arfti^ mfff qfy antifTr T^CTI § 1
( ^ )
n ? . nz^tqx qfr r^nr? qr^r^T f^^^r ff ^'^^ ^T.^ ir 5^ traTrsr qf y 11
W^. nit ^xe5,r TSci> t np f;^Oi ^ sr^sgr ^ur ^^~ i !:?«. if 3T^HT 5cT?rr vratrlfcT "l ^n^ir g" F^ n 'V ^ ' ) ^ g ^ ^ ?i;icf> | 1 t^^. 5 ^ ^^"T ^TT? STHI ^^I" 3T^m ?r^fi[ 3r^t Hrirqi £t ^ 'E I^T qri^r mx^j q-l 1 n ^ - ^ 3T3r F jff ^ 9ft£T 'rqsrq tr mfn^ g""i ^IFTT g' 1 , HV3. t F*?T) ^"ri^ qrsf qr) STT^TRI ^ ?T^?I ^^r ?CTI g' 1
^30. Jf sr^^? fTTcfr i F P F^^r F^IHV arq^i^ %g> 55T ? a j F^iri ^srnr | 1 <i^!. FTfrrfrrT ir f; gr ^TZT ^^CT ^g?ri jar q^f; nft 11 l^R. Jf arq^ ^iT Tff qT srjjT 5i2fy 7g^i g I 13? ^ srq^l 3TTJTT qffr ^f?f^?r ^ii ^^^ ^ T E^rfl ^ I
?3W. i=[ TtFcf-FT^R")' % Fi Piiq^ ^r^T ^^^ r FSTST^ ^^ 1 1
n ^ ^ 'V ?^t3r T??fV I F^ r T rV sr^jT ^'t^r^ n ^RFCT q^?;' 1
Ivo . t ?f\Tff (J Fq?!^ qT srH?^frr ^ i ar^^r^ ^^cfT ^ 1
?V^ t ^IIT ?PT JT^icTr T^rTJ f 3ffT ^T? if 3 ? ^ ^ iT^^cI ^ 1 % S ^ ^TI 'FTai |
?«y. t ^ i g ^^^ 3p\ si^m ^ ) ^ ^ \ ^T^\ sffu^ q^^g^ot HfiSTcir ^ r ?«K. ni\ ^=5g[ T^at I F^ ^\ ^ ^ f #ffr C' H ^ ^ t' i \\i%. t ^i^iTi I F^ 5 ^ «rf r q^ Fq^ i ?av9 ir?cf> 5t 3rr^ q i 5 ^ irg^fr gl^j | F-P I ;^ arq^m F^qi 1 1
?ye. ^ f t ^^^T. ^]m ^car f;T?r ^ t ?^c»r "Iffr ^ 1 ^Ko ^ ?TrqiF3iqi jce ailf IT ^iR" 'y 3? 5Tr ^^ q i ^t Tf^rr q^?^ ^TffT | 1
r-(9- ^'^ 'sTTR %) 3rr% qT Jr ' 3fq^ qiFqjfr ?> f u M??T f; ^ qft ?^eiT TgcO ^ 1
'\X\ JJ^ r?rq ^ s r i qFr'STH ?T£r?r srft q^r g>ff) 1 n^3. ^^r "^rq ar^HT ?CT^I ? ^ ? 5 I ft ^fcrr | f ^ ^ i ^ ^F^^I f ^ T ^ 3 T g 1
\ ^ o . t i r q i ^ qt> ^qi ^ q ^^ ^ {'m qqc^5T)?T T^crt ^ 1
1.
^ .
^
y-
X-
% •
^.
c-
e.
lo-
"W-
V.
\^.
iy.
n-
'\%
1^3
1= .
U .
Ro.
^"1.
^ ^ .
^ ^ .
' ^ V .
t
| f
?t
?r
f
?
t
^f
5
?L
r
?T
t
gr
^^
ir
?
5J
^i
?f
5
ir
5t
qrwf
5
^
JT
fT
JT
^
^
^
^
fT
^
JT
^
H
J7
?T
^
^
?r
^
^
^
JT
^
f^cfc^
3ir^f5=5{c[
3Tf?inj=^cT
arr^rft^^cT
arf^ft^a-
3Tf^r5=^cT
3rr?irji=?^
arf^r^^cT
3Tf?rf!7=^cT
3Tr^r5=^cT
^T^Tw^^i
3T r^r?^^?
sTr r?= cT 3Tr?Tn5=?
3?r?ir!?= cf
s^rfrnf^er
sTfi nj ^cf
srF r ^ cT
sTf^fs^ar
arfRfif fr
STf rf ^ cT
arfTrnj cf
3Tn=fn< cr
arf^rft cT
airnfuqa
VI.
^ ^ .
R\3.
R^.
H.
^ 0
^?-
^9.
^^
?a.
^!(.
H-
^ ^
?'=.
H.
Vo.
e t
v^.
v^
vv.
y:<.
v^.
v\s.
vt;.
5f
r
t
fr
?t
t
gr
t
5t
| t
^t
§r
| t
5t
5r
?t
?t
V
T
^f
?f
?r
§t
?t
^
^
^
^
^
^
r?
^
^
^
H
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
M
^
^
^
JT
q>?
3 5T5^Mc5T
aif^fiRcT
arf fs cT
afHrnj cT
sTf r ^cT
arfirnj cT
arf^rti^^
3Tr^r?^ci
arf^ft^^cr
arr^fs'ia^
arfRf^^cr
arf^nj^cT
3fpTr9= fr
air^Tfy^cT
arf^ft^cT
aTftn?^^
arf^ft^cT
^^^f^^^Ki
3T r^rj^cT
3in^nj^cT
3ir^f5=^cT
arf^r^^cT
^M^'^n
arf^ft^cl
ainiro^cT
ye.
«.o.
n-^R-
U-
Vi-
XX.
'X\>
X.V3.
X'^.
x^.
^ 0 .
%v
^'^'
^ i
^v.
^'<-
\%
^"3.
S^.
\£.
V3o.
V5^
^ ^ .
r
?t
?t
^^
^f
?t
ir
r
5t
| i
r
?r
^^
t
§r
| t
?T
5f
5t
§f
^ j
^ j
5t
5t
T
fT
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
H
5T
^
JT
^
?l
?T
?r
^
^
JT
^
^
^
^
APPENDIX I V
3Tr?irq=qrcT
aif nj sfcT
a r fu^cT
sfr^fj^cT
sif^nj^^rT
arf^nJ^cT
3?^^^=^^!
3rr?rr? cT 3Tr r9^cT
1
STf rfi cT
3Tr r??cT
3Tf r?=qcT
arffrft cT
3<r?!r5^cT
3?n7r?^cr s^r^n?^?^
3?r^r7=3[^
3Tr?Tr"wcT 3Tf?(ft cT
s n r ^ cT arf'tr ^ fT
a{r?(r3 cT 3?r^r!j^a
V 9 ^ .
vsv.
\3V
V3^
V3\3.
| A ^
V95.-
C o .
z,'\.
q ^
c;^
c:y.
=;!<.
^ ^ .
t;\3.
C d .
ce.
£o .
e ' l .
^ ^ .
i^.
T£« .
S:(.
rv
£^-
£=:.
5.^.
«\<1Q»
^oV
X'R-
^t
^f
^ f
^ f
^t
^f
ft.
^t
^^
r
r
^t
^t
Q^
It
It
| t
It
|t
| t
It
1^
| t
|t
|t
It
|t
^^
| t
5t
5T
^
?r
^
?i
:T
JT
^
^
fT
^
?T
5T
^
^
JT
^
^
^
^
nT
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
ai f^ fT^^
ajf^n?^^
air^ft^cT
aif ru' TcT
ainTfuqff
arr rnq cT
arnrHf^cl
3?f^ft=jrci
astf^f?^^
arr^fif^a
aiPrfifqcT
arr^r^^cT
arr r ^cT
3?r^r7^cT
atf^ff^^r
arf fy^cT
sTnTfy^cT
arr^rf j^^
ajFi^fj^cT
aTfj^fT^cl
arfRff^cr
3Tr^r?^cr
arfRfirqcT
aTr n?^?^
3fr^r?^cT
arffrf^^^
ajfiiftqw
a^r^oj^^
arf nf cT
arf^Hj^a
Xo\.
Toy.
?oK..
! o ^ .
1oV3.
t o q .
<^o^
no
W'^.
'\'\R.
n^.
"W^.
n^.
u\-
n^-
M«^.
'iH
IRo
\R\
l^^
n^
uy
?^^
t^^.
?R
n^
'\Ri
V->^
nt
n^
V
|t
| t
I t
| t
5t
I t
| t
^ ^ •
| t
. ^ ^
| t
I t
| t
| t
| t
| t
It
I t
| t
| t
It
I t
|t
. | t
• | t
| t
. ^ t
• | t
I t
^
?r
JT
^
'T
^
^
^
^
^
?r
JT
^
^
?T
^
^
JT
JT
^
fT
^
^
^
^
^
R
•T
^
fT
sir^if^^?!
3{r r?=5r
afr^f?^^!
air^fp^cT
aifiirDqcr
arnrOf^c!
aiftOi^^
sif^rsRci
atfrcfu^er
3?f^n?qcT
3{r n?gcT
ar f ^ r?^^
atf^f^^cf
arffiru^qa
a ffifs cT
3?rfif9^a
3iffl:nRfr
orf^nj^cT
3{nTfFEr=T
3?rilf5^cT
3Tr?rr!?= cr
orf^r^^cT
arr^nr^cr
a^nrfT^cf
aff nj cT
ar f^ f^^
aif^fv^^
air^r?^^
arftOy^cT
SlRlft^Cl
n^-
i^y.
{Vl-
uv t^o.
t?q .
\H.
^«o.
m.
l^R-
m-
!V«.
"in.
i'^\.
1«v3.
t«c;.
?y£.
n»
U'i.
u^.
IX?.
?!(».
tX^.
(X^-
?X.V9.
U^.
ue.
1 ^ 0 -
|t
| f
| t
| f
| f
| t
| t
| t
| t
|t
| t
| t
|t
| t
| t
|t
| t
| t
| t
|t
1^
| t
| t
| t
| t
|t
|t
It
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
JT
fT
^
^
^
^
^
^
H
^
^
^
^
JT
fT
^
JT
^
a^r^f'^T
a i r^Fw^
3Tf^n;q^
arrRf'^'i
a i r ^ f s^^
afffTrcq r
3Tr^r-^=T
3Tf f ^=T
3{r?Tn?^=T
STfRf i :^?
air^r:^^^
aff rfs^^T
aif^fa^^n
3?fqf'/ =r
3{r?(F!7^=T
aTfnryq^
3Tr^r?=^5
3Tr?rr?=3"=r
aif^fft^^T
3lf f5=^H
^fnf^^cT
arf^in?^?
3rf^r3=?cT
3T f f i f r ^ ?
3Tr?ff!7qrT
atrfTfj^qcT
air^fn^iT
arrnfy^cT
PERSONALITY FACrOR<; RAriMG SCALE Appendix-V
LIVELY
C a r e f r e e
O p t i m i s t
E n t h u s i a G t i c
VIarrT\hearted
Huirorous
Happy go lucky-
c h e e r f u l
? r a n k
R e l a x i n g
A c t i v e
Easy g o i n g
^ ^ l A B L E 7
Participating
Socially skillful
Socially bold
Expressive
V/ide interests
-".SiDsponsivc
TrJkative
•gregarious
FACTOR - 1
5 4 3
FACTOR
IMPULSIVE 7 6 5 ^
Intuitive
Lacks introspection
Affected by feeling
Uneasy
l i n p a t i i i u t
E x c i t a b l e
Vague
Act s on t h e spur o f t h e uonvant
2JiillOUS_
C a u t i o u s
P e s s i n i i s t
I n d i f f e r e n t
A p a t h e l i c
M i r t h l e s s
W o r r y i n g
Unhappy
^ e c r o t i / G
T h o u g h t f u l
D u l l
C r i t i c a l
ilESS:i7ED
D e t a c h e'-J
S o c i a l l y c lu r r sy
r i m i d
Q u i e t
Narro' . / i n t e r e s t :
Alcbof
T a c i t u r n
S e c l u s i v G
Cr_A13LE
Lo j j c: a 1
In t ro . ' j pGCt i ' / o
E i . i o t i o n a l l y s t a b l '
Colin
D c l i b o r a t r
r h l c j M a L i c
E x a c t
p r u d e n t
FACrOR - 4
VElirU1E30r:E
uninhibited
Daring
Energetic
/igorous
Res t r a ined
Canily f r i g h t e n e d
Ir3nguid
I n n c r t
FACT011 - 5
S e l f p o s s e s s e d
Z~lf s u f f i c i e n t
•3elf a s s u r e d
Poised
Contended
i l e s p o n s i b l e
S e r e n e
pOI;2JJANT 7 t
B o a s t f u l
p r e f e r s own d e c i s i o n
i r 'orceful
I n d e p e n d e n t
A g g r e s s i v e
S t u b b o r n
O u t s p o k e e
A j c e n d a n t
CONSClENnOUS 7
, sUl-j bound
Oependnb le
r r u s t ' . ; o r t h y
F a i r minded
TiUrSTING
C r e d u l o u s
A g r e e a b l e
FACTOR - 6
FACTOR^
5 4
FAcrq:^
5 4
a
Cr/er a n x i o u s
Group d e p e n d e n t
A p p r e h e n s i v e
D i f f i d e n t
R u f f l e d
F r i ' ' ' o l o u s
D i s s a t i s f i e d
H o i e s t
•lound f o l l o v / e r
Me 2k
Conforming
Huirble
Hi Id
In t rovoSf t
".ubmis t^ivo
EvTides R u l e s
Undr>p3nJablo
Untru.iL'./orLhy
P n r t i - i l
GjJS£I£l£Up_
D o u b t i n g
r a u l t f i n d i n g
FAcroa - 9
COMSE. VAnVE 7 6 5
C o n v e n t i o n a l
C o n s e r v a t i v e
f o l c r a n t o f t r a d i t i o n s
?vespocts e s t a b l i s h e d i d e a s
S t a i d
R i g i d
Unen'-Luiring
KI:-ID
renderypdnded
S e n s i t i v e
G e n t l e
Generous
Compass iona te
COOPSilAfivs
T o l e r a n t
C o n p l a i s a n t
F r i end ly -
U n d e r s t a n d i n g
Accomodat ing
PE?.SEVSR1NG
De te rmined
S t e a d y
S t u d i o u s
F i rm
FACTOR - 10
5 4 3
FACTOR - 12
uxpERiricnniiG
U n c o n v e n t i o n a l
i l a d i c a l
Free thinking
I n t r o d u c e s IJew
Broad minded
F l c r . i b l c
C u r i o u s
H A ? ^
lou ' j h i i a n u e l
C rude
H o s t i l e
H£;rd
Inhuman
OB^TllUCTIVS
I n t o l e r a n t
p u g n a c i o u s
B e l l i g e r e n t
r o r p i i
B e l l i c o s e
FICKLZ MItlDED
I n d e c i s i v e
Q u i t t i n g
Lachn Concen t re
• / o l ' i t i i e
UAI'!:: 0 . ' i'llE CAtJDlDAL'li
ROLL l-JO.
CLASS
NAKE OF THE OBSERVER
DAIE