32

CHAPTER-4

Analysis of Data and Result of the Study

Data were collected with the help of the standard tools

were found reliable, valid and accurate. However, for

systematic presentation in this chapter, the raw data need to be

organized in such a way so that they can be classified,

tabulated and analyzed systematically for meeting the

worthwhile purpose of the study. The present chapter is,

therefore, devoted to analyze and interpret the data for reaching

at a definite conclusion

Findings

Table no. 1

Comparison of Arms and Shoulder Strength among the

Engineering and Pharmacy students

Subjects

Engineering

Pharmacy

Mean

8.90

8.39

Std.

Deviation

1.05

0.96

Mean Difference

0.51

D.f

38

t value

1.78*

* Insignificant at 0.05 level of significance (38)(0.05)= 2.042

33

Table no.1 shows that mean scores of engineering and

pharmacy students are 8.90 and 8.39 respectively, whereas

standard deviation of engineering and pharmacy students

are1.05and .96 respectively. Here the calculated t-value1.78is

lesser than required‘t’ value 2.042. Hence there is no

significant difference between Pharmacy and Engineering

students in relation to arm and shoulder strength at 0.05 level

of significance.

Mean Std. Deviation0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

EngineeringPharmacy

Fig. no. 1 Mean and standard deviation value of medicine

ball throw. 

34

Table no. 2

Comparison of Muscular Strength and Endurance among

the engineering and pharmacy students

Subjects

Engineering

Pharmacy

Mean

41.35

36.70

Std.

Deviation

5.44

4.52

D.f.

38

Mean Difference

4.65

t value

2.94

* Significant at 0.05 level of significance (38)(0.05)= 2.042

Table no.3 shows that mean scores of engineering and

pharmacy students are 41.35 and 36.70 respectively, whereas

standard deviation of engineering and pharmacy students are

5.44 and 4.52 respectively. Here the calculated t-value 2.94 is

higher than required ‘t’ value 2.042. Hence there is significant

difference between Pharmacy and Engineering students in

relation to muscular strength and endurance at 0.05 level of

significance.

35

Mean Std. Deviation0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

engineering Pharmacy

Fig no. 2: Mean and standard deviation value of bent knee

sit-ups.

Table no. 3

Comparisons of agility among the Engineering and

Pharmacy students

Students

Engineering

Pharmacy

Mean

16.82

16.64

Std.

Deviation

3.30

3.39

Mean

Difference

0.18

Df

38

T

value

0.174*

* Insignificant at 0.05 level of significance (38)(0.05)= 2.042

36

Table no.3 shows that mean scores of engineering and

pharmacy students are 16.82 and 16.64 respectively, whereas

standard deviation of engineering and pharmacy students

are3.30 and 3.39 respectively. Here the calculated t-value 1.74

is lesser than required ‘t’ value 2.042. Hence there is no

significant difference between Pharmacy and Engineering

students in relation to agility at 0.05 level of significance.

Mean Std. Deviation0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

EngineeringPharmacy

Fig no. 3 Mean and standard deviation value of 4×10

shuttle run.

37

Table no. 4

Comparison of Explosive Legs Strength among the

Engineering and Pharmacy students

Students

Engineerin

g

Pharmacy

Mean

2.13

2.07

Std.

Deviation

0.11

0.15

Mean

Difference

0.60

Df

38

t value

1.30*

* Insignificant at 0.05 level of significance (38)(0.05)= 2.042

Table no.4 shows that mean scores of engineering and

pharmacy students are 2.13 and 2.07 respectively, whereas

standard deviation of engineering and pharmacy students are

0.11 and 0.15 respectively. Here the calculated t-value1.30 is

lesser than required ‘t’ value 2.042. Hence there is no

significant difference between Pharmacy and Engineering

students in relation to explosive leg strength at 0.05 level of

significance.

38

Engineering 2.1310

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Engineeringpharmacy

Fig no.4 Mean and standard deviation value of

Standing Broad Jump.

Table no.5

Comparison of Speed of Engineering and Pharmacy

students

Students

Engineering

Pharmacy

Mean

6.80

8.36

Std.

Deviation

0.50

1.01

Mean

Difference

0.44

Df

38

t value

6.17*

* Significant at 0.05 level of significance (38)(0.05)= 2.042

39

Table no.5 shows that mean scores of engineering and

pharmacy students are 6.80 and 8.36 respectively, whereas

standard deviation of engineering and pharmacy students are

0.50 and 1.01 respectively. Here the calculated t-value 6.17 is

higher than required ‘t’ value 2.042. Hence there is significant

difference between Pharmacy and Engineering students in

relation to speed at 0.05 level of significance.

Mean Std. Deviation0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

EngineeringPharmacy

Fig no.5 Mean and standard deviation value of 50 Meters

Dash.

40

Table no.6

Comparison of Cardiovascular Endurance among the

Engineering and Pharmacy students

Students

Engineerin

g

Pharmacy

Mean

2.25

3.06

Std.

Deviation

0.29

0.29

Mean

Difference

0.81

Df

38

t

value

8.73

* Significant at 0.05 level of significance (38) (0.05) = 2.042

Table no.6 shows that mean scores of engineering and

pharmacy students are 2.25 and 3.06 respectively, whereas

standard deviation of engineering and pharmacy students are

0.29and 0.29 respectively. Here the calculated t-value 8.73 is

higher than required ‘t’ value 2.042. Hence there is significant

difference between Pharmacy and Engineering students in

relation to cardio vascular endurance at 0.05 level of

significance.

41

Mean Std. Deviation0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

EngineeringPharmacy

Fig no.6: Mean and standard deviation value of 600 Meters

Run/Walk 

42

Discussion of Finding

1. It was found that there was no significance difference in

relation to arm and shoulder strength between Engineering and

Pharmacy. This may be due to many factors that influence the

performance level of students.

2. It was found that there was significance difference in relation

to muscular strength and endurance between Engineering and

Pharmacy. This may be due to many factors that influence the

performance level of students.

3. It was found that there was no significance difference in

relation to agility between Engineering and Pharmacy. This

may be due to many factors that influence the performance

level of students.

4. It was found that there was no significance difference in

relation to explosive leg strength between Engineering and

Pharmacy. This may be due to many factors that influence the

performance level of students.

5. It was found that there was significance difference in relation

to speed between Engineering and Pharmacy. This may be due

43

to many factors that influence the performance level of

students.

6. It was found that there was significance difference in relation

to cardio vascular endurance between Engineering and

Pharmacy. This may be due to many factors that influence the

performance level of students.