128

CHAPTER IV

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.0 Introduction

Sheligar and Shohamy (1989) state that “data analysis refers to sifting,

organizing, summarizing and synthesizing the data so as to arrive at the

results and conclusions of the research” (p.201). This chapter presents

detailed analyses of the data collected through different tools followed by

interpretation of the same. The research questions for the study are reiterated

in the form of the hypotheses. Quantitative results from the data collected by

means of the tests are examined through different statistical procedures. In

addition to the quantitative analysis and a descriptive and qualitative

analysis is presented with the results of the speaking skills and of the

feedback on the programme.

4.1 Hypotheses

The study aimed at checking the effect of a multimedia package to enhance

communication skills of the students at the UG level in the digital language

laboratory.

129

The following null hypothesis guided the research study.

i. There will be no significant difference in the overall mean scores of the

pre-test and post- test of the students.

ii. There will be no significant difference in the mean scores of the pre-test

and post-test of the students in terms of gender.

iii. There will be no significant difference in the mean scores of the pre-test

and post-test of the students in terms of the discipline opted for at

higher secondary level.

iv. There will be no significant difference in the mean scores of the pre-test

and post-test of the students in terms of achievement in English at 12th

standard level.

v. There will be no significant difference in the mean scores of the pre-test

and post-test of the students in terms of SES.

vi. There will be no significant difference in the mean scores of the pre-test

and post test of the students in various language skills covered in the

programme.

4.2 Pre-test and post-test scores

In accordance with the requirement of the study, one-group pre-test, post-

test experimental research design was adopted as already explained in

Section 3.1. The pre-test was administered at the beginning of the

experiment as a regulatory means to control prior differences among

130

participants followed by the treatment and the post-test towards the end of

the experiment to measure the effectiveness of the treatment, that is, the new

materials. The statistical procedures of T-test were used to evaluate the

effectiveness of the treatment offered to the participants as part of the

experiment.

4.2.1 Descriptive analysis for overall pre-test and post-test scores

Before applying parametric test, the data were analyzed using descriptive

statistics to get the initial insights for further data analysis procedures. The

table 4.1 shows the initial figures used to establish need for the T-test.

The details collected revealed that the overall mean of the pre-test was 16.40

and the standard deviation was 2.01. The overall mean of the post test was

21.50 and the standard deviation was 2.30. Descriptive details of the pre-test

and post-test scores are given in the following table.

Table: 4.1 Paired Sample Statistics for overall test scores

Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Pair1

Post-test Score & Pre Test Score

21.50

16.40

20

20

2.30

2.01

.516

.450

131

In addition to this, a correlation analysis of the pre-test and post-test was

conducted to check the need for T-test. The following table shows that the

correlation between pre-test and post-test was 0.568. The correlation was

between 0 to 9 and showed that the overall scores of pre-test and post-test

were correlated.

Table: 4.2 Correlations Analysis for overall test scores

N Correlation Sig.

Pair1

Post-test Score & Pre-Test Score

20 .568 .009

4.2.2 T-test analysis

On the basis of the analysis obtained through descriptive statistics, further

analysis of the scores for the pre-test and post-test was done by means of the

t-test. Sheligar and Shohamy (1989) point out that “the t-test is used to

compare the means of two groups.”(p. 231). For the present study, the t-test

was used to the compare the means of the pre-test and the post-test. The t-

value obtained through the t-test helped the researcher determine that the

difference found between two set of scores is due to the treatment, not due

132

to chance. For the current study, the t-test analysis was conducted for the

first hypothesis set out in the study.

Table: 4.3 Paired Samples Test of the overall score

Paired Differences

Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Pair 1

Post-test Score-Pre-test Score

5.10 2.024 .452 4.15

6.05

11.271 19 .000

The T-value obtained from the analysis of the overall mean scores of the

pre-test and the post-test is 11.271. The mean of the paired difference is 5.10

with standard deviation 2.024. The details also reveal that the P-value or

value of significance is 0.000, at the level of 0.05. The analysis shows that

there was a significant difference between the overall mean scores of the

pre-test and post-test at 5% level of significance rejecting the first null

hypothesis: There will be no significant difference in the mean scores of

the pre-test and post- test of the students. The significance at 5% level

also suggests that the difference in the mean scores of the pre-test and post-

133

test is due to the effect of the materials and the programme, not due to

chance.

i) Difference in the mean scores in relation to gender

In order to get the difference between the pre-test and post-test in relation to

gender, Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances was applied. Before the

test a descriptive analysis of the Pre-test and post-test scores of Male and

Female participants was done to find out initial difference. The table ……

shows the group statistics of the subject according to their gender.

Table:4.4 Mean difference of post-test and pre-test in respect to Gender

Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Female

Male

8

12

5.13

5.08

1.126

2.503

.398

.723

The table shows that the difference in the mean scores of the pre-test and the

post-test of Female participants is 5.13. The difference in the mean scores of

Male participants is 5.08. Following negligible initial difference, Levene’s

Test for Equality of Variances was applied to test the hypothesis. The table

4.5 shows the details of test.

134

Table: 4.5 Differences in pre-test and post-test scores with respect to

gender

Levene's Test for Equality of Variances T-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. T df Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean Difference

Std. Error Difference

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Upper Lower

Equal variances assumed 3.421 0.081 0.04418 0.965 0.04 0.949 -1.952 2.035

Equal variances not assumed 0.05116.3280.960 0.04 0.825 -1.704 1.788

An analysis of pre-test and post-test scores in relation to gender showed that

the P-value or the significance value corresponding to the F-test of equal

variances assumed is 0.081 which is less than 0.05. This suggested that the

independent two sample T-test with unequal variance should be used to

compare the mean scores of the pre-test and the post-test with respect to

gender. The P-value of t-test with unequal variance was 0.965, which was

greater than 0.05. This meant that there was no significance difference in

mean score of pre-test and post-test with respect to gender at 5% level of

135

significance. As a result, the finding suggested that since there was no

significant difference to be found in the mean scores of the pre-test and the

post-test with respect to gender.

ii) Difference in the mean scores in relation to discipline opted at

higher secondary level

The subjects of the study were undergraduate level students of Arts and

Commerce stream. One of the objectives of the study was to investigate the

achievement level of the participants in respect to their discipline of study at

higher secondary level. The data was analyzed using Levene’s Test or

Independent Sample t-test. The table 4.6 shows the descriptive statistics in

terms of discipline of the sample.

Table 4.6 Mean difference of post-test and pre-test with respect to

discipline of study

Discipline N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Arts

Commerce

10

10

5.70

4.50

1.829

2.121

.578

.671

The details in the table indicate that there is a mean difference of 5.70 and

standard deviation of 1.829 between the score of post-test and pre-test of

Arts’ students. The mean difference in the scores of post-test and pre-test of

136

Commerce students is 4.50 with standard deviation 2.121. Following the

descriptive analysis, a T-test analysis was carried out. The table 4.7 shows

the details of T-test analysis.

Table 4.7 Differences in pre-test and post-test scores with respect to the

discipline of the study

Levene's Test for Equality of Variances T-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. T Df Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean Difference

Std. Error Difference

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Upper Lower

Equal variances assumed 0.581 0.456 1.35518 0.192 1.20 0.886 -0.661 3.061

Equal variances not assumed 1.355 17.6180.193 1.20 0.886 -0.664 3.064

An analysis of pre-test and post-test scores in relation to discipline of the

study shows that the P-value or the significance value corresponding to the

F-test of equal variances assumed is 0.456 which is greater than 0.05. This

suggests that there was no significant difference in mean score of pre-test

and post-test with respect to the discipline of the study (Arts & Commerce)

opted for at higher secondary level at 5% level of significance. Since there is

137

no significant difference found in the mean scores of the pre-test and the

post-test, it can be concluded that the materials had similar and equal effect

on Arts as well as Commerce students.

iii) Difference in the mean scores in relation to achievement in

English in 12th Standard

Since the students pass a qualifying exam to join higher education, one of

the objectives of the study was to investigate difference in the mean scores

of the pre-test and the post-test with respect of their achievement in English

at 12 standard level. The following descriptive statistical analysis was

carried out before the T-test.

Table 4.8 Mean difference of post-test and pre-test with respect to

achievement in English at 12 standard level

Achievement in English N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

00 to 50 Marks

51 to 100 Marks

10

10

4.50

5.70

2.014

1.947

0.637

0.616

The details in the table indicate that there is a mean difference of 4.50 and

standard deviation of 2.014 between the score of pre-test and post-test of the

subjects who scored marks between 00 to 50 in English at 12th Standard

138

level. The mean difference in the scores of pre-test and post-test of the

students who scored between 51 to 100 is 5.70 with standard deviation of

1.947. Following the descriptive analysis, a T-test analysis was carried out.

The table 4.9 shows the details of T-test analysis.

Table 4.9 Differences in pre-test and post-test scores with respect to

achievement in English at 12th standard level

Levene's Test for Equality of Variances T-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. T Df

Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean Difference

Std. Error Difference

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Upper Lower

Equal variances assumed 0.290 0.597

-1.355 18 0.192 -1.20 0.886 -3.061 0.661

Equal variances not assumed

-1.355 17.9790.192 -1.20 0.886 -3.061 0.661

An analysis of pre-test and post-test scores in relation to achievement of the

subject in English at 12th standard level shows that the P-value or the

significance value corresponding to the F-test of equal variances assumed is

0.597 which is greater than 0.05. The P=value significance of the T-test is

139

0.192 which is greater than 0.05. This suggests that there was no significant

difference in mean score of pre-test and post-test with respect to

achievement of the students in English in 12th standard at 5% level of

significance. Based on the analysis it can be concluded that the materials

had equal effect on those who score above as well as below 50 marks in 12th

Standard English.

iv) Difference in the mean scores in relation to the socio-economic

status

It was decided to investigate the impact of SES on performance in English.

The difference in the mean scores of the pre-test and post-test with respect

to the economic condition of the family of the participants was analyzed to

test the hypothesis. Before carrying out T-test analysis, a descriptive

statistical analysis was done. The table 4.10 shows descriptive statistical

analysis with respect to SES.

Table 4.10 Mean difference of pre-test and post-test with respect to

annual income of the family

SES N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Annual Income Upto

1 Lakh

Annual Income above 1 Lakh

11

09

5.09

5.11

1.973

2.205

0.595

0.735

140

The details in the table indicate that there is a mean difference of 5.09 and

standard deviation of 1.973 between the scores of pre-test and post-test of

the subjects whose family income is upto 1 Lakh. The mean difference in

the scores of pre-test and post-test of the students with above 1 Lakh family

income is 1 Lakh is 5.11 with standard deviation of 2.205. Following the

descriptive analysis, a T-test analysis was carried out. The table 4.11 shows

the details of T-test analysis.

Table 4.11 Differences in pre-test and post-test scores with respect to SES

Levene's Test for Equality of Variances T-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. T Df

Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean Difference

Std. Error Difference

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Upper Lower

Equal variances assumed 0.015 0.905

-0.022 18 0.983 -0.02 0.934 -1.983 1.943

Equal variances not assumed

-0.021 16.3120.983 -0.02 0.945 -2.021 1.981

141

An analysis of pre-test and post-test scores with respect to SES of the

subjects shows that the P-value or the significance value corresponding to

the F-test of equal variances assumed is 0.905 which is greater than 0.05.

The P=value significance of the T-test is 0.983 which is greater than 0.05.

This suggests that there was no significant difference in mean score of pre-

test and post-test with respect to SES at 5% level of significance.

v) Difference in the mean scores with respect to the language

skills

The materials aimed at developing three major language skills: Listening,

Speaking and Reading. The pre-test and post-test scores in each skill was

analyzed through paired sample T-test to determine the effect of the

materials on individual skills.

a. Listening

Table 4.12 Difference in the mean scores of listening skill

Language Skill N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Listening Post-test

Listening Pre-test

20

20

15.40

10.90

1.903

1.861

0.426

0.416

The table shows that the mean of listening skill score of the post-test is

15.40 with standard deviation of 1.903. The mean of pre-test listening skill

142

score is 10.90 with standard deviation of 1.861. The difference in the mean

scores of pre-test and post test is 4.50. In addition to this, a correlation

analysis of the pre-test and post-test was conducted to check the need for T-

test. The following table shows the correlation between pre-test and post-test

scores.

Table 4.13 Correlations Analysis

Listening Skill N Correlation Sig.

Pair1

Post-test Score & Pre-Test Score

20 .606 .005

The analysis shows that the correlation between pre-test and post-test scores

in listening skills is 0.606. The correlation, which is between 0 to 9 and the

significance value 0.05 shows that the overall scores of pre-test and post-test

are highly correlated. For further analysis T-test was carried out. The table

4.14 shows the T-test analysis.

143

Table 4.14 Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Pair 1

Listening Skill Post-test Score-Listening Skill Pre-test Score

4.50 1.670 0.373 3.72 5.28

12.049 19 .000

The T-value obtained from the analysis of the mean scores of the pre-test

and the post-test of listening skill is 12.049. The mean of the paired

difference is 4.50 with standard deviation 1.670. The details also reveal that

the P-value or value of significance is 0.000, at the level of 0.05. The

analysis shows that there was a significant difference between the mean

scores of the pre-test and post-test of listening skill at 5% level of

significance rejecting the first null hypothesis: There will be no significant

difference in the mean scores of the pre-test and post test of listening

skill. The significance at 5% level also suggests that the difference in the

mean scores of the pre-test and post-test of listening skills is due to the

effect of the materials and the programme, not due to chance.

144

b. Reading

The pre-test and post-test scores in reading skill were analyzed through

paired sample T-test to determine the effect of the materials on development

of reading skills.

Table 4.15 Difference in the mean scores of reading skill

Reading Skill N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Listening Post-test

Listening Pre-test

20

20

6.10

5.50

1.252

0.827

0.280

0.185

The table shows that the mean of reading skill score of the post-test is 6.10

with standard deviation of 1.252. The mean of pre-test reading skill score is

5.50 with standard deviation of 0.827. The difference in the mean scores of

pre-test and post test is 0.60. In addition to this, a correlation analysis of the

pre-test and post-test was conducted to check the need for T-test. The

following table shows the correlation between pre-test and post-test scores.

Table 4.16 Correlations Analysis

Reading Skill N Correlation Sig.

Pair1

Post-test Score & Pre-Test Score

20 .102 .670

145

The analysis shows that the correlation between pre-test and post-test scores

in listening skills is 0.102. The correlation is between 0 to 9 and shows that

the overall scores of pre-test and post-test are correlated. For further analysis

T-test was carried out. The table 4.17 shows the T-test analysis.

Table 4.17 Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Pair 1

Reading Skill Post-test Score-Reading Skill Pre-test Score

0.60 1.429 0.320 -0.07 1.27

1.878 19 .076

The T-value obtained from the analysis of the mean scores of the pre-test

and the post-test of reading skill is 1.878. The mean of the paired difference

is 0.60 with standard deviation 1.429. The details also reveal that the P-

value or value of significance is 0.076 which is greater than 0.05. The

analysis shows that there was no significant difference between the mean

scores of the pre-test and post-test of reading skill at 5% level. Thus the null

hypothesis: There will be no significant difference in the mean scores of

the pre-test and post test of reading skill is accepted. Based on the

146

analysis, it can be concluded that the materials have been more effective in

developing listening skills in comparison to reading skills.

c. Speaking

One of the objectives of the study was to investigate the effect of the

materials on speaking skills. A qualitative analysis was carried out to assess

the difference in the pre-test and post-test performance in speaking skills. A

set of criteria to assess speaking skills was used to assess the performance in

speaking. The table 4.18 gives description of the participants’ performance

in the pre-test and post-test of speaking.

Table 4.18 Difference in performance in speaking skill

Test 0 A1 A1+ A2 A2+ B1 B1+ B2 B2+

Pre-test

Number of studetns

02 16 - - 01 - 01 - -

Post-test

Number of students

00 04 06 06 02 - 02 - -

The table shows that 80% (16/ 20) of the participants were at A1 proficiency

level in the pre-test. 10% participants (02/20) were at 0 level and 5% each at

A2+ and B2+ level in the pre-test. As compared to that there are 30%

participants each at A1+ and A2 level. 20% participants are there in A1

level and 10% each in A2+ and B1 level. There is no one at 0 level in the

147

post test. The table shows that there is an observable advancement in the

speaking proficiency level of the participants in the post test. Thus, the null

hypothesis: There is no significant difference in the mean scores of pre-

test and post-test of speaking skills is rejected. It can be concluded that the

material prepared has been effective in developing speaking skills. The

figure 4.1 shows the difference.

Figure 4.1 Participants’ performance in speaking

vi) Self evaluation checklist and feedback questionnaire

As stated in 3.2.5, a short term programme brings attitudinal changes that

motivates the learners to learn the target language. To measure attitudinal

changes, a 20 item self evaluation checklist was developed from

communicative objectives defined by the British Council on the basis of

CEFR proficiency indicators was given to the participants. In addition to

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

0 A1 A1+ A2 A2+ B1 B1+ B2 B2+

Pre-test

Post-test

this, to evaluate the effectiveness of the multimedia materials’ package, a

programme evaluation technique was adopted in the form of a questionnaire.

a. Descriptive analysis of the self evaluation checklist

All 20 participants responde

The participants responded to a three point scale to the checklist at the

beginning and at the end of the programme. The participants responded to a

three point scale: Always, Sometimes and Not sure on a list

statements.

To the checklist administered at the beginning of the programme, the

response to the Always

Sometimes and 56% to

responses in each scale.

Figure 4.2 Distribution of responses to the Self evaluation checklist at

Not sure

this, to evaluate the effectiveness of the multimedia materials’ package, a

programme evaluation technique was adopted in the form of a questionnaire.

Descriptive analysis of the self evaluation checklist

All 20 participants responded to the feedback at the end of the experiment.

The participants responded to a three point scale to the checklist at the

beginning and at the end of the programme. The participants responded to a

three point scale: Always, Sometimes and Not sure on a list

To the checklist administered at the beginning of the programme, the

Always on the “Can do” statement was 13% with 31% to

and 56% to Not sure. The figure 4.2 shows the distribution of the

responses in each scale.

Figure 4.2 Distribution of responses to the Self evaluation checklist at

the beginning of the programme

Always

13%

Sometimes

31%Not sure

56%

148

this, to evaluate the effectiveness of the multimedia materials’ package, a

programme evaluation technique was adopted in the form of a questionnaire.

Descriptive analysis of the self evaluation checklist

d to the feedback at the end of the experiment.

The participants responded to a three point scale to the checklist at the

beginning and at the end of the programme. The participants responded to a

three point scale: Always, Sometimes and Not sure on a list of “Can do”

To the checklist administered at the beginning of the programme, the

on the “Can do” statement was 13% with 31% to

shows the distribution of the

Figure 4.2 Distribution of responses to the Self evaluation checklist at

The checklist of comparative difficulty level administered at the end of the

programme showed

42% to Sometimes and 19% to

Figure 4.3 Distribution of responses to the Self evaluation checklist at

The decrease in the percentage of the responses in

programme shows that the participants’ confidence to learn and use English

has increased significantly.

b. Descriptive analysis of the feedback questionnaire

In addition to the pre

the multi-media materials’ package in terms of the enhancement of language

skills, a questionnaire for feedback on the multimedia materials was also

administered to evaluate the package. The analysis of the data collected

through feedback questionnaire revea

The checklist of comparative difficulty level administered at the end of the

programme showed that the participants’ response to Always

and 19% to Not sure.

istribution of responses to the Self evaluation checklist at

the end of the programme

The decrease in the percentage of the responses in Not sure

programme shows that the participants’ confidence to learn and use English

has increased significantly.

Descriptive analysis of the feedback questionnaire

In addition to the pre-test, the post-test that measured the effectiveness of

media materials’ package in terms of the enhancement of language

skills, a questionnaire for feedback on the multimedia materials was also

administered to evaluate the package. The analysis of the data collected

through feedback questionnaire revealed that all the students realised that it

Always

39%

Sometimes

42%

Not sure

19%

149

The checklist of comparative difficulty level administered at the end of the

Always was 39% with

istribution of responses to the Self evaluation checklist at

Not sure at the end of the

programme shows that the participants’ confidence to learn and use English

Descriptive analysis of the feedback questionnaire

test that measured the effectiveness of

media materials’ package in terms of the enhancement of language

skills, a questionnaire for feedback on the multimedia materials was also

administered to evaluate the package. The analysis of the data collected

led that all the students realised that it

150

was easy to learn through computers. All the students agreed that that the

instructions were clear to execute the tasks. 20% students were not sure

about the navigation between the slides while taking CALL tasks. However,

50% participants agreed to the ease of navigation and 30% strongly agreed.

15% participants couldn’t make up their minds about the relevance of the

situations used with the real life situations. However, 50% strongly agreed

and 50% agreed to the point that the samples of language were useful in day

to day life. So far as interest level of the contexts used for language practice

is concerned, Strongly agree and agree got 40% responses each with 20%

participants Not sure about it. 40% participants found that the grammar and

vocabulary were highly useful in day to day life and 20% expressed that

they were Not sure about the same. 15% participants disagreed to the

adequacy of time to complete computer based tasks and 15% could make up

their minds about the same. It was also significant to note that 70%

participants found that all the skills did not get equal time for practice.

However, 30% participants found they got equal time to practice all the

skills covered. So far as individual CALL tasks were concerned, 30%

participants realised that the time was insufficient whereas 40% strongly

agreed and 30% agreed to that they got adequate time period for the same.

60% students agreed that they got immediate feedback on the tasks that they

submit. Considering the responses the questions on enjoyment of the

151

programme, 100% participants agreed to it. The table 4.19 shows the

detailed analysis of the feedback on the programme.

Table 4.19 Distribution of the responses to the questionnaire

No. Item Strongly agree

Agree Not sure

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

1 It was easy to use computers for learning English.

35% 65% 0 0 0

2 The instructions provided in the units were easy to follow.

60% 40% 0 0 0

3 It was easy to take computer based tasks.

35% 65% 0 0 0

4 The instructions for navigation were clear.

30% 50% 20% 0 0

5 The situations/contexts were real life like.

25% 60% 15% 0 0

6 The samples of language were useful in day to day life.

50% 50% 0 0 0

7 The grammar and vocabulary were useful in day to day life.

40% 40% 20% 0 0

8 The situations/contexts for language practice were interesting.

40% 40% 20% 0 0

9 The time given for computer based task was adequate.

40% 30% 15% 15% 0

10 I got equal time to practice listening, speaking and reading.

0 30% 0 70% 0

152

4.3 Conclusion

This chapter has outlined the methodological approach and procedures

including the research design best suited to address the research hypotheses.

The first section of the chapter included a restatement of the research

No. Item Strongly agree

Agree Not sure

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

11 I could finish the tasks in the given time-frame.

40% 30% 0 30% 0

12 I got immediate feedback in computer based tasks.

0 60% 15% 25% 0

13 I learnt correct answers against the wrong ones while doing computer based tasks.

10% 60% 10% 20% 0

14 I enjoyed working in pairs and groups.

45% 55% 0 0 0

15 Feedback from my classmates during group and pair works helped me improve the language.

30% 60% 10% 0 0

16 Use of multimedia makes language learning interesting.

20% 60% 20% 0 0

17 I learnt fast using computers. 30% 50% 20% 0 0

18 Multimedia materials were useful in practicing listening and speaking.

40% 60% 0 0 0

19 The materials were enjoyable and useful.

35% 65% 0 0 0

20 I enjoyed learning language through computer based tasks.

40% 60% 0 0 0

153

hypotheses. The subsequent section analysed the data collected through the

pre-test and the post-test with the interpretations. The pre-test and the post-

test analyses has been followed by the descriptive analysis and interpretation

of the self evaluation checklist and the feedback questionnaire for the

evaluation of the multimedia materials.