Factors Impacting Student Academic Performance

Letter of Transmittal
20thNovember, 2012
Md. Awal Al Kabir
Lecturer, Department of Management Studies
Jahangirnagar University
Subject: Submission of the assignment paper.
Dear Sir,
It is an honor and great pleasure for us to submit our assignment titled Students academic
performance and impact of relative factors .This report was assigned to us as compulsory
requirement of the course- Business Statics (Course Code MGT 206) in the 2 nd year, 2nd
semester.
In this research we tried to find out the cause and solution behind students poor academic
performance, as taking
sample from the universities of Dhaka city. We hope that our endeavor will meet your
expectation. We are looking forward to receive your cordial approval of our
submission.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
The Knights (Group)
Department of Management Studies,
Jahangirnagar University
Saver, Dhaka.
Abstract:
Poor Academic performances of the students depend on several factors existed surrounding
us. It is important to figure out there irritating elements and to terminate to ensure the
better academic performance and useful for future implications. We, here in this project are
keen to detect these elements that have a noticeable impact on the education and measure
the degree of its effects. And this will be helpful for the decision makers to take proper step
for a better result and practical ability of students, not in paper actually.
Students academic performance & impact of related factors
Introduction:
Dhaka, capital of Bangladesh, is the most densely populated city in the whole world. More
than twelve million people live in Dhaka city. Students are main part of this city.There are so
many educational institution and a huge number of students. In everyday life students are
facing lot of problems. We have tried to find out the overall problems in a students day to
day life and whether this problems hampers students academic performance. Regarding this
our main purpose is to find out the problems, reasons for these problems and their possible
solutions. We have surveyed in Dhaka city. Various private and public universities situated in
this city. So we have surveyed to the students of these institutions so that we can fulfill our
study. Our problem findings are financial problems, political problems, transportation
problems, load shedding problems, environmental problems, social, family & security
problems etc. Our utmost try is to know the impact of these problems in a students life.
Literature Review:
Farook, M.S. et al. (2011) conducted a study to examine different factors-those influence
the academic performance of secondary school students in a metropolitan city of Pakistan.
The students of class X comprising 300 male and 300 female were selected as respondents
for this study. Information was collected about different factors relating to academic
performance of students through questionnaire method. By the result of annual examination
of Class IX, the academic performance of the students was gauged. To investigate the effect
of different factors on students achievement, standard t-test and ANOVA were applied. The
study showed that socio-economic status (SES) and parents education have a significant
effect on students overall academic achievement. The high and average socio-economic
level dominates the performance more than the lower level. It was found that girls perform
better than the male students. The study concluded that the higher level of SES is the best
indicator contributing towards the quality of students achievement. Family characteristics
like socio economic status (SES) are significant predictors for students performance at
school besides the other school factors, peer factors and student factors.
The study of Capraro, M.M. et al. (2000) showed that above and beyond the other
demographic factors, the effects of socio economic status (SES) are still prevalent at the
individual level. The SES can be deliberated in a number of different ways; it is most often
calculated by looking at parental education, occupation, income, and facilities used by
individuals separately or collectively. Parental education and family SES level have positive
correlations with the students quality of achievement (Caldas & Bankston, 1997; Jeynes,
2002; Parelius, D., & Parelius, A., 1987; Mitchell & Collom, 2001; Ma & Klinger, 2000). Garzon
(2006), Kahlenberg (2006) and Kirkup (2008) found that the students with high level of SES
perform better than the middle class students and the middle class students perform better
than the students with low level of SES.
The studies of Duke (2000), Eamon (2005) and Lopez (1995) revealed that the low SES
level of parents is negatively correlated with the achievement of students because it hinders
the individual in gaining access to sources and resources of learning Low SES level strongly
affects the achievement of students, dragging them down to a lower level (Sander, 2001).
This effect is most visible at the post-secondary level (Trusty, 2000). It is also observed that
the economically disadvantaged parents are less able to afford the cost of education of their
children at higher levels and consequently they do not work at their fullest potential (Rouse
& Barrow, 2006).
The home environment also affects the academic performance of students. Educated
parents can provide such an environment that suits best for academic success of their
children. The school authorities can provide counseling and guidance to parents for creating
positive home environment for improvement in students quality of work (Marzano, 2003).
The academic performance of students heavily depends upon the parental involvement in
their academic activities to attain the higher level of quality in academic success (Barnard,
2004; Henderson, 1988; Shumox & Lomax, 2001).
Theory of Educational Productivity by Walberg (1981) determined three groups of nine

factors based on affective, cognitive and behavioral skills for optimization of learning that
affect the quality of academic performance: Aptitude (ability, development and motivation);
instruction (amount and quality); environment (home, classroom, peers and television)
(Roberts, 2007).
The relationship between gender and the academic achievement of students has been
discussed for decades (Eitle, 2005). A gap between the achievement of boys and girls has
been found, with girls showing better performance than boys in certain instances (Chambers
& Schreiber, 2004). Gender, ethnicity, and fathers occupation are significant contributors to
student achievement (McCoy, 2005; Peng & Hall, 1995).
Krashen (2005) concluded that students whose parents are educated score higher on
standardized tests than those whose parents were not educated. Educated parents can
better communicate with their children regarding the school work, activities and the
information being taught at school. They can better assist their children in their work and
participate at school (Fantuzzo & Tighe, 2000; Trusty, 1999).
Objective:
The broad purpose of our study is to find out the overall problems of the students of Dhaka
city. We will try to find out the reasons of these problems and the degree of the problems in
students academic performence. We need to know how these problems are interrelated. Also
our objective is to find out the correlation of these problems. And of course we need to figure
out how these problems are influencing in the life of the students such as in their academic
progress, in their personal life and ultimately in their professional lives and find out the
maximum solution to reduce these problems.
Hypothesis:
Academic Performance evaluation is very extensive job that requires a specialized effort.
There are no unique systems by which the performances off the all students can be
measured and evaluated. Evaluation system with target and goal is not always work to
ensure the performance. It requires a continuous effort to discover the mechanism to
measure the students academic performance. Therefor factors for evaluating academic
performance vary among the different nature of students of different institutions.
1. H01= Financial problem hamper study
2. Ha1= Financial problem does not hamper study
3. H02= Load shedding does not hamper study
4. Ha2= Load shedding hampers study
5. H03= Political problems hampers study
6. Ha3= Political problems does not hamper study
7. H04= Social, family or security problems hamper study
8. Ha4= Social, family or security problems does not hamper study
9. H05= Transportation problem does not hamper study
10. Ha5= Transportation problem hampers study.
Our Hypothesis is to find out whether there is a significant relationship between the stated
independent variables to the dependent variable students academic performance.
Methodology
Context of the Study
This study was conducted to know the impact of various factors including transportation
problem, load-sheding, financial problem, environmental problem, social and security
problems on the poor academic performance of the students of university in Dhaka district.
The CGPA achieved by the students was the tool to measure and compare the academic
performance.
Sampling
Our sample size is 600. The sample were the students from 24 universities in Dhaka district
including Dhaka University, BUET, National University, North South University, East West
University, Daffodil University, BGMEA University of Fashion & Technology, State University
of Bangladesh etc.
Data Collection and Analysis
We collected data randomly from male and female respondents with questionnaire based on
factors affecting academic performance. The collected data is analyzed by factor analysis,
correlation and regression using the SPSS (Superior Performing Software System).
Regression Model for Testing the Hypothesis
The study investigates the relationship between transportation problem, load-sheding,

financial problem, environmental problem, social and security problems and students poor
academic performance. For this research two sets of variables are selected
The dependent variable here is the CGPA of the Students.

The independent variables are transportation problem, load-sheding, financial
problem, environmental problem, social and security problems
The basic model being tested in this study therefore is:

Y=a+ b1X1+b2X2+b3X3+b4X4+b5X5
Here,
X1= Transportation Problem
X2= Social Problem
X3= Financial Problem
X5= Load-sheding
Factor Analysis
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity
.794
Approx. Chi-Square
2.423E3
Df
120
Sig.
.000**
At least, 95% significance is required**

KMO & Bartletts test measures the sufficiency of the variables. Here KMO value is 0.794 which shows the variable
are sufficient for this study. And we, accepted this Testing result cause the Sig. value is .000 . means this variable
set is highly significant.
Component Matrixa
Component
1
Tranportation problems hamper
study
Traffic_jam
.897
-.094
.228
-.116
.006
-.837
.129
.105
.077
-.035
Poor_Vehical_condition
.820
.294
-.318
.036
-.170
Poor_Road_condition
.788
.244
-.027
.289
-.347
-.773
.475
.043
-.134
-.109
Unfair_fare
.710
.088
.161
-.328
-.105
Social problems hamper study
.071
.933
.023
.122
.059
Eve_teasing
.213
.837
-.246
.131
-.094
Early_marriege
-.365
.668
.202
.045
-.012
Student_politics_hampers
-.226
.668
-.287
.529
-.138
Teachers_politics_hampers
.358
.608
.484
-.341
.108
Environmental problems
hamper study
.280
-.360
-.561
-.177
.393
Insufficient_bus
Lighting_ventilation
.143
.433
.560
.206
-.058
Noise
-.485
-.136
-.558
.066
.042
Accomodation problems hamper

study
-.205
-.363
.550
.238
.189
Hall_facility
-.265
.175
.547
.381
-.057
.425
.153
-.655
-.352
.246
.012
.123
.727
Financial problems hamper

one's study
Load shedding hampers ones
study
-.3
22
.460
Factors Elected
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Transportation factor
Social Factor
Environmental Factor
Financial Factor
Load Shedding Factor
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

a. 5 components extracted.
1
0
Total Variance Explained

Compon
ent
Initial Eigenvalues
Total
% of Variance
Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Cumulative %
Total
% of Variance
Cumulative %
5.463
28.753
28.753
5.463
28.753
28.753
4.350
22.897
51.650
4.350
22.897
51.650
2.427
12.773
64.423
2.427
12.773
64.423
1.472
7.749
72.172
1.472
7.749
72.172
1.154
6.072
78.244
1.154
6.072
78.244
.940
4.946
83.191
.764
4.021
87.212
.558
2.938
90.149
.440
2.317
92.466
10
.337
1.774
94.240
11
.282
1.482
95.722
12
.237
1.247
96.970
13
.170
.896
97.866
14
.138
.728
98.593
15
.099
.521
99.115
16
.082
.431
99.546
17
.043
.228
99.774
18
.030
.159
99.933
19
.013
.067
100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Those variable that obtained eigen values is more

that 1 are elected to form factors and according to
their nature Five Major Factors are selected.
Here, by Cumulative % column we assure that

78.244% of dependent variable can be explained by
these factors.
Graphical presentation
of variables plotted
against eigen value
1
1
Hypothesis (s)
Transportation
1.
Ho: Transportation problem doesnt hamper students academic performance

Ha: Transportation problem hampers students academic performance
Social
2.
Ho: Social problem doesnt hamper students academic performance

Ha: Social problem hampers students academic performance
Environmental
3.
Ho: Environmental problem doesnt hamper students academic performance

Ha: Environmental problem hampers students academic performance
financial
4.
Ho: Financial problem doesnt hamper students academic performance

Ha: Financial problem hampers students academic performance
Load Shedding
5.
Ho: Load shedding problem doesnt hamper students academic performance

Ha: Load shedding hampers students academic performance
1
2
Hypothesis Testing
Transportation Factor Hypothesis testing
Ho: Transportation problem doesnt hamper students academic performance
Ha: Transportation problem hampers students academic performance
The hypothesis is tested from the ANOVA table.
ANOVA
Model
1
Sum of
Squares
Regressio
n
Residual
Df
Mean Square
9.110
1.822
106.389
594
.179
Sig.
10.172
.000(a)
Total
115.499
599
a Predictors: (Constant), INSUFFIC, POOR_ROA, TRAFFIC, POOR_VEH, UNFAIR_F
b Dependent Variable: GPA
ANOVA is used to compare variability of means.
Sum of Squares describes the variation which is attributed to the relationship

between dependent and independent variable which shows the explained variation
values. Here sum of squares is 9.110.
df shows the number of independent variable. Here degree of freedom of

regression is 5. In case of residual df = N-K-1= 600-5-1= 594
Mean Square means average deviation of degree of freedom of regression. It is the

ratio between sum of squares and df. Here,
Mean square (Regression) = Sum of squares/df
=9.110/ 5=1.822
Mean square (Residual) = Sum of squares/df
= 106.389/ 594= .179
F Test is the ratio between SSR (Regression) and MSE (Residual).
Significance Level is the most important part of this table. It shows how much error
occurred. Here significance is .000 which shows no error has occurred. So it is
1
3
statistically significant and null hypothesis is rejected. That means, alternative

hypothesis is accepted.
So, from the hypothesis testing, we can conclude that, transportation problem hampers
students academic performance.
Social Factor Hypothesis testing

Ho: Social problem doesnt hamper students academic performance
Ha: Social problem hampers students academic performance
The hypothesis is tested from the ANOVA table.

ANOVA(b)
Model
1
Sum of
Squares
Regressio
n
Residual
df
Mean Square
3.311
.828
27.740
207
.134
Sig.
6.177
.000(a)
Total
31.051
211
a Predictors: (Constant), TEACHERS, EARLY_MA, EVE_TEAS, STUDENT
b Dependent Variable: GPA

values. Here sum of squares is 3.311.
regression is 4. In case of residual degree of freedom is 207.
=3.311/ 4=.828
= 27.740/ 207= .134

So, from the hypothesis testing, we can conclude that, social problem hampers students
academic prerformance.
1
4
Environmental Factor Hypothesis testing

Ho: Environmental problem doesnt hamper students academic performance
Ha: Environmental problem hampers students academic performance
Hypothesis of the ANOVA table:
ANOVAb
Model
1
Sum of Squares
Regression
df
Mean Square
1.687
.422
Residual
25.862
132
.196
Total
27.548
136
F
2.152
Sig.
.078a
a. Predictors: (Constant), Accomodation problems hamper study, Hall_facility,

Lighting_ventilation, Noise
b. Dependent Variable: GPA

values. Here sum of squares is 27.548
=1.687/4=0.421
= 25.862/132=0.195

occurred. Here significance is .078 which shows few error has occurred. So it is
So, from the hypothesis testing, we can conclude that, environmental problem hampers
students academic performance.
1
5
4. Financial factor Hypothesis testing

Ho: Financial problem doesnt hamper students academic performance
Ha: Financial problem hampers students academic performance
ANOVAb
Model
1
Sum of Squares
Regression
df
Mean Square
2.218
2.218
Residual
113.183
596
.190
Total
115.402
597
F
11.681
Sig.
.001a
a. Predictors: (Constant), Financial problems hamper one's study

Here Significance value is .001 . It means that Impact of Financial problems on GPA is
significant. So, Null hypothesis is rejected so, alternative hypothesis is accepted.
Finally, Financial Problem hampers students academic performance
1
6
Load Shedding Hypothesis Testing

Ho: Load shedding doesnt hamper study.
Ha: Load shedding hampers study
ANOVA table
ANOVAb
Model
1
Sum of Squares
Df
Mean Square
Regression
225.000
225.000
Residual
721.119
598
1.206
Total
946.118
599
F
186.585
Sig.
.000a
a. Predictors: (Constant), Duration of load shedding in a day

b. Dependent Variable: Loadshedding hampers the study

values. Here sum of squares is 225.
= 225/1 =225
= 721.119/598 = 1.206
F Test is the ratio between SSR and MSE.
statistically significant.
So from ANOVA table we can interpret that significant value is .000. That means its highly
significant.
So null hypothesis is REJECTED. And we ACCEPTED alternative hypothesis. We can
conclude that load shedding hampers students academic performance.
1
7
Multiple regression:
Model Summary
Model
R Square
.646a
Adjusted R
Std. Error of the
Square
Estimate
.716
.669
.36788
a. Predictors: (Constant), Transportation factor, Social factor,

environmental factor, Financial factor , Load shedding factor
ANOVAb
Model
1
Sum of Squares
Df
Mean Square
Regression
5.810
.794
Residual
4.549
41
.135
Total
9.519
46
Sig.
.000a
5.867
a. Predictors: (Constant), Transportation factor, Social factor, environmental factor, Financial

factor , Load shedding factor
Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model
1
Std. Error
(Constant)
3.277
2.045
Transportation Factor
-.195
.354
.083
Environmental Factor
Coefficients
Beta
Sig.
61.061
.000
.429
3.602
.000
.149
.087
1.525
.135
-.202
.254
.046
3.733
.231
Financial Problem
-.017
.171
-.327
.310
.000
Load shedding
-.004
.261
.238
.080
.001
Social Factor
a. Dependent Variable: CGPA

Notice that , In coefficient table we observe that Social factor and environmental factor has sig. value .135 and .
231
1
8
That means that in 1000 trial 135 and 231 time it is wrong, So to draw a regression line we will just ignore these
two factors
Regression line:
Y= a+b1X1 +b4X4+b5X5
= 3.277+ (-.195)Transportation factor + (-.017)Financial Factor +
(-.004)Load shedding Factors
Here,
Y= CGPA (As performance scale of students)
X1= Transportation Problem
X2= Social Problem
X3= Environmental Problem
X5= Load-shedding
This regression shows the impact of such influencing factors on dependent variable.
It shows the degree of change in GPA will occur resulted by the change of
Transportation, Financial and Load shedding factor.
1
9
Compare of students
public institutions:
of
public and
non
In this part we will discuss about the overall satisfaction of the student of public
university and private university. In this part our H a is students of Pubic institutes
are more satisfied than students of Private institute. But our hypothesis is wrong
because we found that students of Private institute are more satisfied than the
students of Pubic institutes.
2
0
But the question is that why institutes of private institutions are more satisfied than
public institutes. The answer we can find from the following Regression analysis:
Regression analysis for Students of Public Institutions:
Descriptive Statistics
Mean
Std. Deviation
Overall Problems hamper study
3.53
1.165
106
Financial problems hamper one's study
2.92
1.651
106
Load shedding hampers the study
2.07
1.282
106
Politics hampers study
3.46
1.212
106
Hall politics hampers
3.55
1.015
106
Environmental problems hamper study
2.77
.969
106
Hall facility
3.24
1.029
106
2.85
.944
106
Security problems hamper study
3.62
.810
106
Transportation problems hamper study
2.61
1.118
106
Here shows the averages of the variables. Here we can find the average
dissatisfaction level of overall problems is 3.53 and political problems, hall politics
and security problems are standing near the overall problems.
Model Summary
Model
1
R Square
.697a
Adjusted R Square
.485
Std. Error of the Estimate

.437
.874
a. Predictors: (Constant), Tranportation problems hamper study, Hall_politics_hampers, Social problems hamper study, Environmental problems hamper
study, Hall_facility, Security problems hamper study, Loadshedding hampers the study, Financial problems hamper one's study, Politics hampers study
Here we can find the correlation (R) among the dependent and independent
variable which is .697 (Moderate correlation)
2
1
And the value of R2 Indicating that the dependence of Dependent variable overall
problems that hampers study on Independent variables can be explained 48.5%
ANOVAs
Model
1
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
Regression
69.120
7.680
Residual
73.295
96
.763
142.415
105
Total
Sig.
.000a
10.059
a. Predictors: (Constant), Tranportation problems hamper study, Hall_politics_hampers, Social problems hamper study, Environmental problems hamper
study, Hall_facility, Security problems hamper study, Loadshedding hampers the study, Financial problems hamper one's study, Politics hampers study
b. Dependent Variable: Overall_Problems_hamper_study
From this table we can find that our research is significant which shows that the
model is good significant in predicting the outcome of the variables.
2
2
Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized
Standardized
Coefficients
Coefficients
1 (Constant)
Std. Error
-1.768
.630
-.003
.060
Load shedding
.102
Politics
95% Confidence Interval for B
Beta
Sig. Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Correlations
Zero-order Partial
-2.806 .006
-3.019
-.517
-.005
-.055 .957
-.123
.116
.271
.074
.112
1.377 .172
-.045
.249
-.011
.139
.10
.300
.092
.313 3.277 .001
.118
.482
.378
.317
.24
Hall politics
.216
.100
.188 2.160 .033
.017
.414
.373
.215
.15
.105
.093
.088 1.129 .262
-.080
.290
.208
.115
.08
Hall facility
.099
.088
.087 1.120 .266
-.076
.273
.237
.114
.08
Social problems
.144
.095
.117
1.514 .133
-.045
.333
.203
.153
.11
Security problems
.353
.112
.246 3.151 .002
.131
.576
.415
.306
.23
Transportation
.378
.083
.363 4.548 .000
.213
.544
.371
.421
.33
Financial problems
-.006 -.00
a. Dependent Variable: Overall Problems hamper

study
From this table we can draw regression equation.
Correlations
Overall
Financial
Load
Hall
Problems problems shedding Politics

Pears Overall Problems
on
Correl
ation
Par
Environment
politics_ al problems
Hal
facility
Social
Security
problems problems
Tranportation
problems
1.000
.271
-.011
.378
.373
.208
.237
.203
.415
.371
Financial problems
.271
1.000
-.155
.434
.335
.226
.214
.181
.047
.065
Load shedding
-.011
-.155
1.000
-.375
-.277
-.195
.010
-.133
.033
.191
Politics
.378
.434
-.375
1.000
.473
.268
.217
.170
.102
-.183
Hall politics hampers
.373
.335
-.277
.473
1.000
.224
.249
.196
.091
-.047
2
3
Correlations
Environmental
.208
.226
-.195
.268
.224
1.000
.064
.098
.084
-.055
.237
.214
.010
.217
.249
.064
1.000
-.032
.028
.072
.203
.181
-.133
.170
.196
.098
-.032
1.000
.149
-.083
.415
.047
.033
.102
.091
.084
.028
.149
1.000
.248
.371
.065
.191
-.183
-.047
-.055
.072
-.083
.248
1.000
problems hamper
study
Hall facility
Social problems
hamper study
Security problems
hamper study
Transportation
problems hamper
study
Here we can find the correlation among the variables. Here we can see that
the most important factors that have the most positive correlation with
overall problems that hampers study for students of public institutes are
Security problems, politics, hall politics and transportation problems.
Regression analysis for Students of non public Institutions:
2
4
Mean
Std. Deviation
Overall Problems hamper study
3.23
1.130
639
2.33
1.447
639
3.04
1.231
639
3.12
1.313
639
3.15
1.131
639
2.45
.965
639
2.65
1.058
639
3.56
1.221
639
dissatisfaction level of overall problems is 3.23 and political problems, Load shedding
problem, Environmental problems and Transportation problems are standing near
the overall problems.
Model Summary
Model
1
R Square
.739a
Adjusted R Square
.547

.542
.765
a. Predictors: (Constant), Transportation problems hamper study, Security problems hamper study, Environmental problems hamper study,
Load shedding hampers the study, Social problems hamper study, Financial problems hamper one's study, Politics hampers study
b. Dependent Variable: Overall Problems hamper study
variable which is .739 (Moderate correlation) and the value of R 2 Indicating that the
dependence of Dependent variable overall problems that hampers study on
Independent variables can be explained 54.7% which is good.
2
5
ANOVAb
Model
1
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
Regression
445.188
63.598
Residual
369.069
631
.585
Total
814.257
638
Sig.
.000a
108.734
a. Predictors: (Constant), Transportation problems hamper study, Security problems hamper study, Environmental problems hamper
study, Load shedding hampers the study, Social problems hamper study, Financial problems hamper one's study, Politics hampers study
b. Dependent Variable: Overall Problems hamper study
model is good significant in predicting the outcome of the variables. Here we can
see that the total variance of data set is 445.188
Coefficientsa
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Model
Standardized Coefficients
Std. Error
(Constant)
1.128
.144
Financial problems
-.118
.025
Load shedding
.037
Politics
Beta
Correlations
t
Sig.
Zero-order
Partial
7.818
.000
-.151
-4.803
.000
.124
-.188
.028
.041
1.340
.181
.172
.053
-.026
.028
-.030
-.923
.356
.102
-.037
-.156
.030
-.156
-5.245
.000
.002
-.204
Social problems
.012
.037
.010
.326
.745
.068
.013
Security problems
.071
.033
.067
2.138
.033
.098
.085
Transportation problems
.736
.028
.796 26.356
.000
.697
.724
a. Dependent Variable: Overall Problems hamper study
From this table we can make regression equation and the equation will be:
Y=1.128*(-.118x1)*(-.156x4)*(.736x7)
2
6
Correlations
Pearson Overall Problems

Correlati
on
Overall
Financial
Problems
problems
Load
Environmental
shedding Politics
problems
Social
Security Transportation
problems problems
problems
1.000
.124
.172
.102
.002
.068
.098
.697
Financial problems
.124
1.000
.247
.359
.351
.141
.025
.411
Load shedding
.172
.247
1.000
.356
.232
.231
.198
.251
Politics
.102
.359
.356
1.000
.323
.241
-.102
.284
.002
.351
.232
.323
1.000
.177
.012
.262
Social problems
.068
.141
.231
.241
.177
1.000
.426
.096
Security problems
.098
.025
.198
-.102
.012
.426
1.000
.027
.697
.411
.251
.284
.262
.096
.027
1.000
From this table we can find that the overall problems that hamper the study of
students of non public institutions are Transportation problems, Load shedding
problems and financial problems.
2
7
Impacts of the factors On female students:

We found that female students are more dissatisfied than male students. We have
used a satisfaction scale to measure their problems that hampers their study.
The below graphs are showing the levels of overall problems that hampers the
study of both male and female.
Here, we can see 50.65% female students feel that overall problems that hampers
their study greatly. But the percentage for male is only 16.67%.
We can see the overall problems that hamper the study of female students properly
in the following chart:
2
8
But the question is why they are dissatisfied? We can reveal the answer of
the question by regression analysis.
Mean
Std. Deviation
Overall Satisfaction that hampers study
4.00
1.151
309
3.68
1.211
309
Early Marriage
2.68
1.230
309
Eve teasing
3.54
1.257
309
3.69
1.412
309
3.98
1.187
309
3.30
1.205
309
2.83
1.204
309
1.99
1.348
309
3.02
1.235
309
dissatisfaction level of overall problems is 4.00 and Social problems, security
problems, Transportation problems, Environmental problem & Eve teasing are
standing near the overall problems.
2
9
Model Summary
Model
R Square
.669a
Adjusted R Square
.447

.430
.869
a. Predictors: (Constant), Load shedding hampers the study, Early Marriage, Security problems hamper study, Social problems
hamper study, Politics hampers study, Environmental problems hamper study, Financial problems hamper one's study,
Transportation problems hamper study, Eve teasing
variable which is .669 (Moderate correlation) and the value of R 2 Indicating that the
dependence of Dependent variable overall problems that hampers study on
Independent variables can be explained 44.7% which is good.
ANOVAb
Model
1
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
Regression
182.417
20.269
Residual
225.583
299
.754
Total
408.000
308
Sig.
26.865
.000a
a. Predictors: (Constant), Load shedding hampers the study, Early Marriage, Security problems hamper study, Social
problems hamper study, Politics hampers study, Environmental problems hamper study, Financial problems hamper
one's study, Transportation problems hamper study, Eve teasing
b. Dependent Variable: Overall Satisfaction that hampers study
model is good significant in predicting the outcome of the variables. Here we can
see that the total variance of data set is 182.417
3
0
Coefficientsa
Model
1
Unstandardized
Standardized
Coefficients
Coefficients
Std. Error
Beta
Correlations
t
Sig.
Zero-order Partial
Part
(Constant)
.242
.290
.835
.404
.355
.048
.373 7.314
.000
.517
.390
.315
Early Marriage
.022
.043
.023
.495
.621
.156
.029
.021
Eve teasing
.318
.048
.348 6.582
.000
.442
.356
.283
Security problems
.089
.037
.109 2.415
.016
.220
.138
.104
Social problems
.130
.044
.134 2.957
.003
.314
.169
.127
-.030
.048
-.623
.534
.276
-.036
-.027
.081
.044
.085 1.826
.069
.119
.105
.079
-.143
.040
-.168 -3.544
.000
.054
-.201
-.152
.191
.043
.205 4.396
.000
.187
.246
.189
Politics
Financial problems
Load shedding
-.031
a. Dependent Variable: Overall Satisfaction that hampers study
From this table we can make regression equation and the equation will be:
Y=.242*(-.335x1)*(.318x3)*(.130x5)*(-.143x8)*(-.191x9)
Correlations
Pearson
Overall
Correlation Problems
Transportation
problems
Early
Marriage
Eve teasing
Overall
Transportatio
Problems
n problems
Early
Eve
Security
Social
Marriage teasing problems problems
Environmental
Financial
Load
problems
Politics problems shedding
1.000
.517
.156
.442
.220
.314
.276
.119
.054
.187
.517
1.000
.156
.324
.088
.212
.415
.217
.264
.139
.156
.156
1.000
.252
.143
.165
.238
.023
.270
.000
.442
.324
.252
1.000
.293
.251
.320
-.100
.209
-.218
3
1
Correlations
Security
problems
Social
problems
Environmental
problems
Politics
Financial
problems
Load
shedding
.220
.088
.143
.293
1.000
.101
.103
-.093
.102
-.064
.314
.212
.165
.251
.101
1.000
.172
-.005
.075
.080
.276
.415
.238
.320
.103
.172
1.000
.075
.210
.149
.119
.217
.023
-.100
-.093
-.005
.075
1.000
.227
.192
.054
.264
.270
.209
.102
.075
.210
.227
1.000
.053
.187
.139
.000
-.218
-.064
.080
.149
.192
.053
1.000
From this table we can find that the overall problems that hamper the study of
female students are Transportation problems, Eve teasing, Social problems, Security
problems, and environmental problems
3
2
Impacts of the factors that hamper study on

students in Hostel/Hall/Mess:
In public universities students admit from different districts. Most of them stay in
hall of the university. Not only university students but also college students and
school students stay in institutions hostel or in mess. They also face many problems
that hamper their study. We will try to reveal the factors that hamper their study in
this part.
In the below chart we can see the major problems that a residential student face.
The chart is showing his/her problems that hampers their study most.
3
3
From this chat we can see that the students have much negative impact of
politics, accommodation and hall political problems that hamper study most
13.53%, 13.4%, 12.35%. After that students have hall facility, security
problems, environmental problems and financial problems.
Impacts of factors on the students involved in

economical activities:
At present many students are self dependent. We have surveyed 109 university
students who are involved in any economical activities. And we found that their
economical activities have not much impact on academic performance. We can see
this impact by the following chart
Most of the students results are in the range of CGPA 3.0-3.6 out of 4.
Most of the students are very dissatisfied with the transportations factor.
Some of them complained that most often they reach to the workplace late.
We have researched about the actual and estimated time to go to their
workplace.
3
4
Here the graph shows that 35 despondences said that the estimated time to
go their workplace is less than half hour and the actual time is also half hour.
29 said the estimated time is .5>1 hour and actual is less than half hour. 5
despondences told that their estimated time is 1.5>2 hour but the actual
time is .5>1 hour. 13 told that estimated time is 1-1.5 hour and actual time is
.5>1 hour. 19 told that estimated time is .5>1 hour and actual time is .5>1
hour.
3
5
Most of the students are doing tuitions as economical activities. Age group
21-25 do this job the most.
Impact of time to go to institute:

Most of the students face problems to go to institutions. In our country
transportation is one of the major problems. Students are the one of the most
sufferer of this problem. We found that actual time to go to the institutions most
often is less than the time generally passes to go institutions.
We found that most of the students use public bus as their transport to go to
institutions. So we can recommend the improvement of public bus service to
develop transport system as well as to reduce hampers cause of
transportation.
3
6
To find out what transportation problems hampers their study we have asked
to mark some problems and the result is shown below:
3
7
From the chart we can see that most of students think that Traffic jam,
insufficient bus, poor road and vehicle condition and many types of
harassments are the main problem of our transportation system.
3
8
Impact of political problems:

Politics is one of the core factors of human life. It has both advantages and
disadvantages too. Unfair politics practice can destroy a nation. On the other hand
fair political practices can develop the country to the pick of success. But what
students think about student politics? Is it necessary for students?
We asked 830 students that about student politics can contribute in national
development. And they answered us in likeness scale.
29.14% of students are neutral with the statement. 27.46% agreed, 10 %

strongly agreed, 14.46% disagreed and 18.92% strongly disagreed.
We have tried to find out which political activities hamper their study much.
We have covered some question and find out the following answers:
3
9
From this table we found that all types of political activities hampers the study of
the students much. Among them strikes and unfair student politics hampers them
much.
4
0
Impact of environmental problems:

In many cases environmental cases hampers study. Many of the factors can be
hampers study. The overall environmental problems that hamper study can be
found by the following chart:
Here we can see that students of private institutions have most problems
concerning environment.
But what type of environmental problems hampers study. We can define that
by the below chart.
4
1
Here we can find that noise, dust in class room, building facilities and the
most important washroom facilities are the main factor considering
environmental problem.
4
2
The solution we need first:

Here the ranking of the problems that should be solved orderly. This order is
manipulated by the response of the respondents. They ranked these problems
serially solved in order of impacts
43% respondents agrees that Transportation problem has greater impact on the hamper of
study, so it got much importance and ranked in peak position to be solved.
Then latterly Load shedding problem is ranked 2 , to be solved
Financial problems are ranked 3rd with 19%
Social and environmental factors are less importance grabber by 7% & 5% respectively
4
3
Remarks
We worked with 38 variables in this research and finally ended with 5 most influencing factor
that make a clear impact on our dependant variable (GPA). Here GPA was the scale we
selected as to measure the academic performance of students.
The factors, like social an environment factors had really a few or no impact on the
performance of the academic result. Where 3 major influence factors are transportation,
Financial and load shedding.
4
4
REFERENCES
Barnard, W. M. (2004) Parent involvement in elementary school and educational attainment . Children
and Youth Services Review, 26, 39- 62.
Caldas, S. J., & Bankston, C. L. (1997) The effect of school population socioeconomic status on
individual student academic achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 90, 269-277.
Capraro, M. M. et al. (2000) An investigation of the effect of gender, socioeconomic status, race and
grades on standardized test scores. Paper presented at the meeting of the Southwest Educational
Research Association, Dallas, TX.
Chambers, E. A., & Schreiber, J. B. (2004) Girls academic achievement: Varying associations of
extracurricular activities. Gender and Education, 16(3), 327-346.
Duke, N. (2000) For the rich its richer: Print environments and experiences offered to first-grade
students in very low- and very high-SES school districts. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2),
456457.
Eamon, M. K. (2005). Social demographic, school, neighborhood and parenting influences on academic
achievement of Latino young adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34(2), 163-175.
Eitle, T. M. (2005). Do gender and race matter? Explaining the relationship between sports participation
and achievement. Sociological Spectrum, 25(2), 177-195.
Fantuzzo, J., & Tighe, E. (2000). A family involvement questionnaire. Journal of Educational Psychology,
92(2), 367-376.
Farook, M.S. et al. (2011) Factors Affecting Students Quality of Academic Performance: A
Case Study of Secondary Education School Level, Journal of Quality and Technology
Management Volume VII, Issue II, December, 2011, Page 01 14
Garzon, G. (2006) Social and cultural foundations of American education. Wikibooks. Retrieved from
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Social_and_Cultural_Foundations_of _ Am eri can_ Edu cation/
Chapter_10_Supplemental_Materials/What_factors_ influence_curriculum_design %3F_1
Henderson, A. T. (1988). Good news: An ecologically balanced approach to academic improvement.
Educational Horizons, 66(2), 60-67.
Jeynes, W. H. (2002) Examining the effects of parental absence on the academic achievement of
adolescents: The challenge of controlling for family income. Journal of Family and Economic Issues,
23(2), 56-65.
Kahlenberg, R. D. (2006) Integration by income. American School Board Journal. Retrieved from
http://www.equaleducation.org/commentary.asp?opedi d=1332
Kirkup, J. (2008). Middle-class children resentful at being pushed to succeed. Telegraph. Retrieved from
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3330301/Mid dleclass-children-resentful-at-being-pushed-tosucceedpoll-shows.html
Krashen, S. (2005). The hard work hypothesis: Is doing your homework enough to overcome the effects
of poverty? Multicultural Education, 12(4), 16-19.
4
5
Lopez, O. S. (1995). The effect of the relationship between classroom student diversity and teacher
capacity on student performance: Conclusions and recommendations for educational policy and
practice. Austin, TX: The Strategic Management of the Classroom Learning Enterprise Research Series.
Ma, X., & Klinger, D. A. (2000). Hierarchical linear modeling of student and school effects on academic
achievement. Canadian Journal of Education, 25(1), 41-55.
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action? Retrieved from
http://pdonline.ascd.org/pd_online/whatworks/marzano2003_ch13 .html
McCoy, L. P. (2005). Effect of demographic and personal variables on achievement in eighth grade
algebra. Journal of Educational Research, 98 (3), 131-135.
Mitchell, D. E., & Collom, E. (2001) The determinants of student achievement at the academy for
Academic Excellence. CA: School of Education University of California.
Parelius, R. J., & Parelius, A. N. (1987) Sociology of education. USA: Prentice Hall International.
Peng, S. S., & Hall, S. T. (1995) Understanding racial-ethnic differences in secondaryschool science
and mathematics achievement (NCES No. 95710). Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Roberts, G. A. (2007) The effect of extracurricular activity participation in the relationship between
parent involvement and academic performance in a sample of third grade children. Retrieved from
https://www.lib.utexas.edu/etd/d/2007/ robertsg11186/robertsg 11186.pdf
Rouse, C. E., & Barrow, L. (2006) U.S. elementary and secondary schools: Equalizing opportunity or
replicating the status quo? The Future of Children, 16(2), 99-123.
Sander, W. (2001) Chicago public schools and student achievement. Urban Education, 36(1), 27-38.
Shumox, L., & Lomax, R. (2001) Parental efficacy: Predictor of parenting behavior and adolescent
outcomes. Parenting, 2(2), 127-150.
Trusty, J. (1999) Effects of eighth-grade parental involvement on late adolescents' educational
expectations . Journal of research and development in education, 32(4), 224-233.
Trusty, J. (2000) High educational expectations and low achievement: Stability of educational goals
across adolescence. Journal of Educational Research, 93, 356- 366.
Walberg, H. J. (1981). A psychological theory of educational productivity. In F. H. Farley & N. U. Gordon
(Eds.), Psychology and education. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
4
6

Factors Impacting Student Academic Performance

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Factors Impacting Student Academic Performance

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Letter of Transmittal

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Theory of Educational Productivity by Walberg (1981) determined three groups of nine

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Regression Model for Testing the Hypothesis

The study investigates the relationship between transportation problem, load-sheding,

The dependent variable here is the CGPA of the Students.

The basic model being tested in this study therefore is:

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

At least, 95% significance is required**

Social problems hamper study

Accomodation problems hamper

Financial problems hamper

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Total Variance Explained

Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Those variable that obtained eigen values is more

Here, by Cumulative % column we assure that

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Ho: Transportation problem doesnt hamper students academic performance

Ho: Social problem doesnt hamper students academic performance

Ho: Environmental problem doesnt hamper students academic performance

Ho: Financial problem doesnt hamper students academic performance

Ho: Load shedding problem doesnt hamper students academic performance

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

ANOVA is used to compare variability of means.

Sum of Squares describes the variation which is attributed to the relationship

df shows the number of independent variable. Here degree of freedom of

Mean Square means average deviation of degree of freedom of regression. It is the

F Test is the ratio between SSR (Regression) and MSE (Residual).

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

statistically significant and null hypothesis is rejected. That means, alternative

Social Factor Hypothesis testing

The hypothesis is tested from the ANOVA table.

ANOVA is used to compare variability of means.

F Test is the ratio between SSR (Regression) and MSE (Residual).

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Environmental Factor Hypothesis testing

a. Predictors: (Constant), Accomodation problems hamper study, Hall_facility,

ANOVA is used to compare variability of means.

F Test is the ratio between SSR (Regression) and MSE (Residual).

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

4. Financial factor Hypothesis testing

a. Predictors: (Constant), Financial problems hamper one's study

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Load Shedding Hypothesis Testing

a. Predictors: (Constant), Duration of load shedding in a day

ANOVA is used to compare variability of means.

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Std. Error of the

a. Predictors: (Constant), Transportation factor, Social factor,

a. Predictors: (Constant), Transportation factor, Social factor, environmental factor, Financial

a. Dependent Variable: CGPA

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Students academic performance & impact of related factors

Students academic performance & impact of related factors