Research Paper

On

A CIRITICAL STUDY OF IMPACT OF ACADEMIC ANXIETY ON

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF CLASS IXth STUDENTS

Author

* N. Rohen Meetei
(Assistant Professor: Dept. of Education)

M.Sc. (Botany), B. Ed and M.Ed. (RIE-NCERT, Bhubaneswar), M. Phil. (Education)

Ph.D. in Education (Pursuing), IDGC (Pursuing), RIE-NCERT, Bhopal, (M.P.)
Member of AIATE-WERA, NORRAG-GENEVA and ACA-USA

Institute of Professional Studies,

College of Education, Gwalior, (M.P.)
E-mail: rohan.meetei12@gmail.com

1
A CIRITICAL STUDY OF IMPACT OF ACADEMIC ANXIETY ON
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF CLASS IXth STUDENTS

Introduction:
Today, anxiety is a common phenomenon of everyday life. It plays a crucial role in human life

because all of us are the victims of anxiety in different ways. Generally, anxiety can be either a trait

anxiety or a state anxiety. A trait anxiety is a stable characteristic or trait of the person. A state anxiety

is one which is aroused by some temporary condition of the environment such as examination,

accident, punishment etc. Academic anxiety is a kind of state anxiety which relates to the impending

danger from the environments of the academic institutions including teacher, certain subjects like

Mathematics, English etc.

Anxiety is considered as a block to an activity. A person who suffers from anxiety may not be able to

devote his full energy -in the performance of a task. It is, therefore, considered by many that anxiety

interferes with the activity and so learning is impeded. This notion is, however, based on an erroneous

understanding of the role of anxiety. In fact, anxiety might deter learning or might also stimulate it.

Attention is a primary factor in learning. Attention may result because of desire for reward, desire to

escape punishment, curiosity etc. but basic to attention is anxiety. Bugelski considers that the task of

the teacher is of creating the necessary degree of anxiety. It is a difficult question to answer as how

much anxiety is to be created, for if the anxiety is too much, it would create a need to avoid the

learning situation and too little anxiety would result in a lack of attention. Bugelski suggests that by

arousing student's curiosity the anxiety is created because curiosity is a disguised form of anxiety. The

children's curiosity must be aroused and they should be given initial task in which they are successful.

Anxiety is a multi-system response to a perceived threat or danger. It reflects a combination of

biochemical changes in the body, the patient's personal history and memory, and the social situation.

As far as we know, anxiety is a uniquely human experience. Other animals clearly know fear, but

2
human anxiety involves an ability, to use memory and imagination to move backward and forward in

time, that animals do not appear to have. The anxiety that occurs in post-traumatic syndromes

indicates that human memory is a much more complicated mental function than animal memory.

Moreover, a large portion of human anxiety is produced by anticipation of future events. Without a

sense of personal continuity over time, people would not have the "raw materials" of anxiety.

Need of the Study:

Travers mentions that research has shown that in the learning of very simple responses, such as a

typical conditioned reflex, the speed of learning is greater for high anxiety subjects than for low

anxiety subjects. On the other hand, when the subjects are required to learn in a more complex manner

which involves the selection of response from two or more that are available, then the reverse occurs;

the high anxiety subjects learn at a lower rate than the low-anxiety subjects. Travers considers this

situation to be consistent with that is known about motivation. He says that "if motivation is raised

beyond a certain level, then too many responses are raised above the level at which they become

available and confused behaviour results." This much of understanding attract the educationist to study

more and more in it. Many studies have been conducted but in Gwalior-Chambal region of M.P. state,

it will be a first stepping-stone in research work as beginner.

Objectives of the Study:

(i) To study the academic anxiety level of class IX students of Gwalior city schools of M.P.
state.
(ii) To study the difference between the government schools and private school students with
respect to the academic anxiety and academic achievement.
(iii) To study the difference between the boys and girls students with respect to the academic
anxiety and academic achievement
(iv) To study the inter-relationship between the academic anxiety on academic achievement of
the students.
(v) To understand the academic achievement level of the students.

3
Hypotheses:
(i) "There is no significant difference in Academic Anxiety level of Govt. School boys and
Private School boys"
(ii) "There is no significant difference in Academic Anxiety level of Govt. School Girls and
Private School Girls"
(iii) "There is no significant difference in academic Anxiety level of Govt. School Boys and
Govt. School Girls"

Methodology:
The sample consisted of 120 students of class IX drawn randomly from high schools of Gwalior city
(Madhya Pradesh).The tool Academic Anxiety Scale for Children (AASC) by Dr. A.K. Singh and
Dr. (Ms). A Sengupta has been used in this study. Academic Achievement scores had been
collected from school annual exam record.

Analysis and Interpretation:

H-01: "There is no significant difference in Academic Anxiety level of Govt. School boys and Private
School boys"
Table-01
Difference in Academic Anxiety level of Govt. School boys and Private School Boys

Group Interval Mean Std. Dev. t value

Government School Boys 30 11.9 2.65
Private School Boys 30 11.83 2.58 0.103

These two values are greater than the calculated value of t = 0.103. Hence it is not significant. So the
null hypothesis is accepted. It means there is no significant difference in Academic Anxiety
level of Govt. School Boys and Private School Boys.

H-0 2: "There is no significant difference in Academic Anxiety level of Govt. School Girls and
Private School Girls."
Table-02
Difference in Academic Anxiety level of Govt. School Girls and Private School Girls
Group Interval Mean S. D. t value
Private School Girls 30 12.77 2.66
4.84
Government School Girls 30 10.7 2.40

4
This value of calculated t = 4.84 is greater than the standard value of t =2.00 at 0.05 level and t = 2.66
at 0.01 level hence it is significant at both level and the difference in academic anxiety level of Govt.
School Girls and Private Schools Girls is significant. So, the null hypothesis is not accepted. It means
that there is significant difference in academic anxiety level of Govt. School Girls and Private School
girls.

H-0 3: "There is no significant difference in academic Anxiety level of Govt. School Boys and Private
School Girls"
Table-03
Difference in academic Anxiety level of Govt. School Boys and Private School Girls
Group Interval Mean S. D. t value
Private School Girls 30 12.77 2.66
1.8
Government School Boys 30 11.9 2.65

The calculated valued t = 1.8 is less than standard value of t =2.00 at 0.05 level and t = 2.66 at
0.01 level is not significant. Therefore there is no significant difference in academic
anxiety level of Govt. School Boys and Govt. Schools Girls. Hence the null hypothesis no.
3 is verified.

Major Findings of the Study:

(i) There is no significant difference in anxiety score of Govt. school boys and Private
School Boys.
(ii) The academic anxiety level of the Govt. school Girls and Private School Girls differs
significantly. Govt. school girls have lower academic anxiety than private school Girls.
(iii) There is no significant difference in academic anxiety score of Govt. School Boys and
Govt. School Girls.
Implication and Conclusion:

5
References:

1. Buch, M.B. "A Survey of Educational Research 4th Survey NCERT. N.D.
2. Con. F.N. (1960). "Correlates of General and the t-Test Anxiety Children"
Austrl J. Psychol 12 164-77, 308.
3. Davis, M. (1992). The role of the amygdala in fear and anxiety. Annual
Review of Neuroscience, 15, 353-75.
4. Dr. Asthana Bipin (2007). Measurements and Evolution in psychology and
Education, Agra Vinod Pustak Mandir.
5. Foldhusen T.F. (1963). "Anxiety Intelligence and Achievement in Children
of low average and high intelligence" Children Development, 33: 403-409.
6. Goodstein, L.D. & Lanyon, R.I. (1975). "Adjustment Behaviour and
Personality." Addision Weekly Publishing Company Inc.
7. Kerlinger, F.N. (2006). "Foundation of Behavioural Research,
p-603.
8. Le Doux, J. E. (1995). Emotion: clues from the brain. Annual Review of
Psychology, 46, 209-35.
9. LeDoux, J. E. (1998). The emotional brain. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London.
10. Mathur S.S.(1988) Educational psychology, Agra Vinod Pustak Mandir
11. Sarason S.B. (1960). Annxiety in Elementary School Children" A Report
of Research, N.Y. Wiley, 210, 308.
12. Travers R.W.M., (1963). Essential of Learning, New York Macmillan Pvt.
Ltd.

6
 14
11.9 11.83
12 Government School Boys

10 Private School Boys

4
2.65 2.58
2

0
Mean S.D.

Graph-01 Difference in Academic Anxiety level of Govt. School boys and Private School Boys

14 12.77 P rivate S c hool G irls

12 10.7 G overnm ent S c hool G irls

10

4
2.66 2.4
2

0
M ean S . D.

Graph-02 Difference in Academic Anxiety level of Govt. School Girls and Private School Girls

14 12.77
11.9
12
P rivate S c hool G irls
10 Governm ent S c hool B oy s

4
2.66 2.65
2

0
M ean S . D.

Graph-03 Difference in academic Anxiety level of Govt. School Boys and Private School Girls