Responde extrinsic

ntS group Math Science motivation

4 2 77 77 2.34 Hypotheses
6 2 78 78 2.34 Null Hypothesis: There are no significant diffe
8 2 77 77 2.13 were taught the traditi
(Ho :σ2traditi
11 2 66 88 2.43
13 2 77 77 2.45 Alternative Hypothesis: There is a significant
who were taught the traditional and the new
16 2 76 77 2.21
(Ho :σ2traditi
17 2 56 88 2.13
19 2 65 88 2.34
20 2 77 77 1.65
24 2 77 77 2.12 Hypotheses
26 2 66 88 2.98 Null Hypothesis: There are no significant diffe
27 2 77 77 2.96 students who were taught the traditional and
(Ho :σ2traditi
29 2 77 78 2.11
30 2 66 76 2.22 Alternative Hypothesis: There is a significant
32 2 77 87 2.34 between students who were taught the tradi
(Ho :σ2traditi
34 2 89 88 2.12
37 2 78 78 2.15
39 2 88 77 3.12
40 2 76 86 2.12
43 2 67 77 2.4
46 2 66 88 3.21
50 2 87 76 3.21
56 2 67 78 2.34
59 2 78 77 3.11
71 2 78 78 3.86
76 2 67 77 2.54
82 2 87 78 3.21
87 2 89 88 2
93 2 84 86 2
 re are no significant difference on the Science scores variances between students who
were taught the traditional and the new method of teaching.
(Ho :σ2traditional = σ2 new method)
sis: There is a significant difference on the Science scores variances between students
e traditional and the new method of teaching.
(Ho :σ2traditional ≠ σ2 new method)

re are no significant difference on the Extrinsic Motivation scores variances between

aught the traditional and the new method of teaching.
(Ho :σ2traditional = σ2 new method)

sis: There is a significant difference on the Extrinsic Motivation scores variances

ho were taught the traditional and the new method of teaching.
(Ho :σ2traditional ≠ σ2 new method)
Group 1 Group 2 Group 1 (new method) Group 2 (traditional)
88 77 Mean 80.2957746478873 80.7586206896552
86 78 Variance 25.6969818913478 25.2610837438427
88 77 count 71 29
77 88 df 70 28
76 77 F-statistic 1.01725571839773
88 77 p-value 0.496646789889027 alpha=0.05
86 88 decision do not reject the null hypothesis. This means that the groups are equal in
77 88 interpretation not significant
78 77 pooled variance estimator 25.5724395634892
76 77 standard deviation 5.06921906129019 5.02604056329062
86 88 df 98
77 77 Hypothesize mean 0
78 78 t-statistic 0.415315984992218
76 76 p-value 0.678818505900601 alpha=0.05
86 87 decision do not reject the null hypothesis. This means that the groups are equal in
77 88 interpretation not significant
77 78
86 77
77 86
77 77
76 88
88 76
77 78
78 77
86 78
77 77
77 78
78 88
77 86
86
88
77
77
86
88
77
78
76
77
86
88
77
86
88
77
77
76
77
86
88
77
86
88
77
77
76
77
86
86
77
77
78
76
77
88
77
77
78
77
74
68
 Table 1. Comparison of the variances and the means of the tw
Group Variance
Group 1 (n=71) 25.70
Group 2 (n=29) 25.26

Table 2. Comparison of the means and standard deviation of

Group Mean
at the groups are equal interms of variances Group 1 (n=71) 80.30
Group 2 (n=29) 80.76

Prior to the utilization of the independent samples t-test, an F

or not the variances of the population are equal. Results in Ta
group 1 (var=25.7) and group 2 (var=25.26) are the statistical
addition, independent samples t-test was used to show that t
with group 2. Table 2 revealed that the scores of group 1 (M=
as group 2 (M=80.76, s=5.03), t(98)=0.42, p>0.05. This indicat
at the groups are equal interms of sample means in math scores does not affect Science performance of student.
 the variances and the means of the two groups.
Mean F-stat p-value Interpretation
80.30
1.02 0.496 not significant
80.76

the means and standard deviation of the two groups.

Standard deviation t-stat p-value Interpretation
5.07
0.42 0.679 not significant
5.03

of the independent samples t-test, an F-test was used to determine whether

the population are equal. Results in Table 1 show that the variances of
group 2 (var=25.26) are the statistically same, F(70,28)=1.02, p>0.05. In
samples t-test was used to show that the scores of Science in group 1 differs
evealed that the scores of group 1 (M=80.30, s=5.07) is statistically the same
=5.03), t(98)=0.42, p>0.05. This indicates that the new method of teaching
performance of student.
Group 1 Group 2 Group 1 (new method) Group 2 (traditional)
4.5 2.34 Mean 3.78774647887324 2.48758620689655
4.3 2.34 Variance 0.654417706237421 0.25248325123153
1.45 2.13 count 71 29
4.34 2.43 df 70 28
3.54 2.45 F-statistic 2.5919252189814
3.54 2.21 p-value 0.003214948243827 alpha=0.05
4.23 2.13 decision reject the null hypothesis. This means that the variances of the group are
4.02 2.34 interpretation Significant
4.23 1.65
3.21 2.12 standard deviation 0.808960880535902 0.502477115132152
3.32 2.98 df 98
4.23 2.96 Hypothesize mean 0
3.65 2.11 t-statistic 9.71148955223638
4.02 2.22 p-value 5.11899983410324E-16 alpha=0.05
4.12 2.34 decision reject the null hypothesis. This means that the variances of the group are
3.91 2.12 interpretation significant
4.12 2.15
4.65 3.12
4.12 2.12
4.12 2.4
3.12 3.21
3.87 3.21
3.1 2.34
2.5 3.11
4.87 3.86
2.11 2.54
2.54 3.21
4.03 2
4.54 2
3.86
4.99
2.43
4.43
4.12
4.98
4.89
3.99
4.87
4.03
4.23
4.54
3.99
4.87
4.03
4.23
4.54
4.99
4.23
3.21
3.99
4.03
2.12
4.54
3.86
3.75
3.45
3.1
3.12
2
3.11
2.34
3.11
2
3.11
3.12
4.43
4
4
4
4
4
 Table 3. Comparison of the variances and the means of the two groups.
Group Variance Mean
Group 1 (n=71) 0.65 3.79
Group 2 (n=29) 0.25 2.49

Table 4. Comparison of the means and standard deviation of the two gro
Group Mean Standard deviation
hat the variances of the group are not equal. Group 1 (n=71) 3.79 0.81
Group 2 (n=29) 2.49 0.50

Prior to the utilization of the independent samples t-test, an F-test was u

whether or not the variances of the population are equal. Results in Tab
variances of group 1 (var=0.65) and group 2 (var=0.25) are the statistica
F(70,28)=2.59, p<0.05. In addition, independent samples t-test was used
scores of Extrinsic Motivation in group 1 differs with group 2. Table 2 rev
scores of group 1 (M=3.79, s=0.81) is statistically the not same as group
hat the variances of the group are not equal. s=0.5),t(98)=9.71, p<0.05. This indicates that the new method of teachin
Motivation performance of student.
d the means of the two groups.
F-stat p-value Interpretation

2.59 0.003 Significant

tandard deviation of the two groups.

t-stat p-value Interpretation

9.71 0.001 Significant

nt samples t-test, an F-test was used to determine

ulation are equal. Results in Table 3 show that the
up 2 (var=0.25) are the statistically not same,
pendent samples t-test was used to show that the
differs with group 2. Table 2 revealed that the
tistically the not same as group 2 (M=2.49,
that the new method of teaching affect Extrinsic