academic perf romance of regular scheme students is 1

8/9/2019 Academic Perf Romance of Regular Scheme Students is 1

1/19

ACADEMIC PERFROMANCE ACADEMIC PERFROMANCEOF REGULAR SCHEMEOF REGULAR SCHEME

STUDENTS IS BETTER THANSTUDENTS IS BETTER THANSELF FINANCE SCHEMESELF FINANCE SCHEMESTUDENTS OF GENERALSTUDENTS OF GENERAL

NURSING DIPLOMANURSING DIPLOMAPROGRAMME 2ND YEARPROGRAMME 2ND YEAR


2/19

CHAPTER # ICHAPTER # IINTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION

Nursing schools are responsible for producing wellNursing schools are responsible for producing welleducated, knowledgeable, and skilled nurses whoeducated, knowledgeable, and skilled nurses who"can make reasoned and informed patient"can make reasoned and informed patientoriented decisions in a variety of health careoriented decisions in a variety of health care

delivery settings". Traditionally, admissiondelivery settings". Traditionally, admissioncriteria have been considered good predictors ofcriteria have been considered good predictors ofstudents' success and have been used to screenstudents' success and have been used to screenout applicants in various academic andout applicants in various academic andprofessional programmes including nursing,professional programmes including nursing,medicine, teaching, and other fields. Studies havemedicine, teaching, and other fields. Studies have

found that certain academic and nonfound that certain academic and non- -academicacademicfactors such as age, gender, ethnic background,factors such as age, gender, ethnic background,preadmission qualification, and performance inpreadmission qualification, and performance inaptitude tests could predict the academicaptitude tests could predict the academicperformance of the students in variousperformance of the students in variousprofessional programmes.professional programmes.


3/19

CHAPTER # 3CHAPTER # 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGYRESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Study Setting:3.1 Study Setting:

This study was conducted at school of This study was conducted at school of nursing sir C J institute of psychiatrynursing sir C J institute of psychiatryHyderabad.Hyderabad.


4/19

STUDY DESIGNSTUDY DESIGN

D escriptive comparative study wasD escriptive comparative study wasconducted from April 20, 2009 to July 04,conducted from April 20, 2009 to July 04,2009.2009.

POPULATIONPOPULATIONThe population of this study was all maleThe population of this study was all male

students of general nursing diplomastudents of general nursing diplomaProgramme in school of nursing sir c jProgramme in school of nursing sir c jinstitute of psychiatry Hyderabad.institute of psychiatry Hyderabad.


5/19

SAMPLE SIZESAMPLE SIZE

Total 40 participants selected : 20 were inTotal 40 participants selected : 20 were inregular scheme and 20 were in self regular scheme and 20 were in self finance scheme of 2finance scheme of 2 ndnd year class in generalyear class in generalnursing diploma Programme.nursing diploma Programme.

SAMPLE TECHNIQUESAMPLE TECHNIQUE

Convenience sampling technique.Convenience sampling technique.


6/19

Instrument:Instrument:

The instrument was used self developedThe instrument was used self developedquestionnaire.questionnaire.PROCEDURE PROCESSPROCEDURE PROCESS

The data was analyzed in SPSS (StatisticalThe data was analyzed in SPSS (StatisticalProgram for Social Science) 16.0 versions.Program for Social Science) 16.0 versions.


7/19

CHAPTER # 4CHAPTER # 4

RESULTRESULT ANALYSIS ANALYSIS


8/19

Figure:5Qualification

5%

40%

2.50% 2.50%

12.50%

30.00%

5%

2.50%0%5%

10%

15%

20%25%

30%

35%

40%45%

m a t r i

c u l a

t

i n t e

r m e d

i a

b a c h

e l o r

d e g

m

a s t e

r d e g

r

regularself finance


9/19

45%

27.50%

5%

22.50%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Public Private

Figure: 7Type of school

Regular

Self finance


10/19

40%

22.50%

10%

17.50%

0%

10%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

0-4yrs 5-9 yrs 10-14yrs

Figure: 8Time lapse

Regular

Self finance


11/19

Figure: 13Teaching faculties according to need

37.50%

12.50%

20%

30%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

yes no

regular

self finance


12/19

Figure: 14Relationship among collegues

27.50%

12.50%10%10%

30%

10%

0.00%

5.00%10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

better good average

regular

self finance


13/19

P< 0.01P< 0.01

Figure: 28Class test score

20.00%

10.00%12.50%

2.50%5.00%

0.00%0%

5.00%

15.00%17.50%

10.00%

2.50%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

90-100%

80-90%

70-80%

60-70%

50-60%

below50%

regular

self finance


14/19

SUGGESTIONSUGGESTION


15/19

F urther research is warranted to identify theF urther research is warranted to identify thefactors responsible for remaining amount factors responsible for remaining amount of variance in the academic performance,of variance in the academic performance,as a large amount of variance in theas a large amount of variance in theacademic performance of the studentsacademic performance of the students

remained unexplainable. Research needsremained unexplainable. Research needsto be conducted to explore the factorsto be conducted to explore the factorsresponsible for the difference in academicresponsible for the difference in academicperformance of the regular scheme andperformance of the regular scheme andself finance scheme students in theself finance scheme students in theschools of nursing. Research studiesschools of nursing. Research studiesshould also be conducted to identify theshould also be conducted to identify the

reasons of student failure and attrition.reasons of student failure and attrition.


16/19

ConclusionConclusion

The study concluded that the academicThe study concluded that the academicperformance of the regular schemeperformance of the regular schemenursing students is better than the self nursing students is better than the self finance scheme nursing students in thefinance scheme nursing students in thegeneral nursing diploma Programme 2ndgeneral nursing diploma Programme 2ndyear. My first hypothesis is proved andyear. My first hypothesis is proved andnull hypothesis is rejected due to datanull hypothesis is rejected due to datadidn t support the null hypothesis.didn t support the null hypothesis.


17/19

References:References: Ali PA, Admission criteria and subsequent Ali PA, Admission criteria and subsequent academic performance of general nursingacademic performance of general nursingdiploma students. Nurs stud. JPMA 2008, March:diploma students. Nurs stud. JPMA 2008, March:58:12858:128--131.131.

Ali PA, Gavino M, Memon AA. Predictors of Ali PA, Gavino M, Memon AA. Predictors of academic performance in the first year of basicacademic performance in the first year of basicnursing diploma programme in Sindh, Pakistan. Jnursing diploma programme in Sindh, Pakistan. JPak Med Assoc 2007; 57: 202Pak Med Assoc 2007; 57: 202- -4.4.Ostrye ME. Predicting NCLEX Ostrye ME. Predicting NCLEX--PN performancePN performance

for practical nursing students. Nurse Educ 2006;for practical nursing students. Nurse Educ 2006;26:17026:170--4.4.Kaplin WA, Lee, BA. The law of higherKaplin WA, Lee, BA. The law of highereducation. A comprehensive guide to legaleducation. A comprehensive guide to legalimplication of administrative decision. Theimplication of administrative decision. TheJournal of Higher Education.1996; 67: 366Journal of Higher Education.1996; 67: 366- -6.6.


18/19


19/19

academic perf romance of regular scheme students is 1

Documents