Relative Effectiveness of Two Methods of Teaching Personal Development to Homemaking Girls

39
standard qttqv to the aesn difference . Comparisons
are shown for the we-tests for Groups A and B, the end-
tests for Sroup®. A and B, the pre-test and end-test of
Group A, and the pre-test and eM-test of Group ®
Up
SIGNIFICANCE OF MBA* DIFFERENCES FGI VARIOUS '
gigs?® 111 mm w c/td
Comparison
Mean Difference
•d'
B/S|!
Pre-test, Groups A
and 1 .... *
3.75
3.0S
1.25
2nd-test, Groups A
end B « * mm
1.87
9.95
0.018
Pre-test and end-
test, Group A .
10.©
7.25
' 1.38
pre-test and end-
test, Group B .
u.as
7.7
1.54
■ Acsording to data In,fable 5, the rati® of the standard
error of difference to the mm difference of the pre-tests
for groups A and B shows a B/sd value of 1,25. leferenee to
Fisher*®, tables shows that the value of t for sixteen
samples should he 2,042 or 2.750 to he significant at the
five per «ent or one per sent levels, respectively.3 ■Siaee
the oaleulatlon of S/sg * 1.25 Is nueh saaller than this,
the mean difference in soore Is due to sampling errors only
ThM.

Fagg, Carmen Bernice. Relative Effectiveness of Two Methods of Teaching Personal Development to Homemaking Girls. Denton, Texas. UNT Digital Library. http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc130210/. Accessed July 11, 2014.