Observation and Results

103

OBSERVATION AND RESULTS

There are 3 groups viz Group-I (EBM) Group-II (Email) and

Group III (Traditional) each containing 40, 39 and 39 student participants

respectively. Both the tools of measurements viz. California Critical Thinking

Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) and Alan’s EBM (Attitude Survey Questionnaire

(AEBM-ASQ) aimed at measuring the two objectives of the study were

administered both before the intervention and also after the intervention in all the

three groups. In case of Group-III (Traditional), since there was no intervention

of any kind, the tools were administered at different periods of time correlating

with the time of administration with other two Groups.

Table-1

DEMOGRAPHIC DATA

AGE AND SEX DISTRIBUTION

TOTAL

MALE FEMALE

EBM

GROUP

EMAIL

GROUP

TRADITIONAL

GROUP

EBM

GROUP

EMAIL

GROUP

TRADITIONAL

GROUP

118 17 18 17 23 21 22

Age of the students ranged between 21-25 years, in all 3 groups.

Table-1: shows the sex wise distribution of students between the 3 groups, the

difference amongst 3 groups statistically significant. Age of the students ranged

between 21-25 years in all the 3 groups.

Observation and Results

104

Table / Graph -2

CCTDI-Pre Test Score

Group-I Group-II Group-III

n (Number) 40 39 39

X (Mean) 273.03 273.36 274.85

SD 24.41 21.09 30.02

RANGE 227-340 231-335 214-328

40

273.03

24.4139

273.36

21.0939

274.85

30.02

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

n (Number) X (Mean) SD

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

CCTDI-Pre Test Score

Level of Significant at ( = 0.05)

Para metric approach: F2 115 = 0.057. p=0.945 (NS)

Non Parametric approach: X2=0.331, DF=2 p=0.847 (NS)

Difference between 3 groups, statistically not significant.

The above table / graph shows the Pre-Test CCTDI Scores of all the 3

groups. The scores between all the 3 groups were compared with each other.

The difference in score between the 3 groups has been found to be statistically

non significant, both by parametric as well as non parametric tests.

Observation and Results

105

Table / Graph -3

CCTDI-Post Test Score

Group-I Group-II Group-III

X 287 272.08 272.49

SD 27.83 23.81 29.25

Range 229-340 223-335 207-327

287

27.83

272.08

23.81

272.49

29.25

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

X SD Range

Group-1

Group-2

Group-3

CCTDI-Post Test Score

Parametric approach: F2, 115=3.910 p=0.023 (S)

Non-Parametric Approach X2=10.162 DF=2 p=0.006 (S)

(Kruskal- Wallis Test)

Group-1 with Group-2: p= 0.047 (S)

Group-1 with Group-3: p= 0.057 (S)

The above table / graph shows the Post-Test CCTDI scores of all the 3

groups. The difference in Post-Test CCTDI score between Group-I and Group-II

and between Group-I and Group-III has been found to be statistically significant.

Observation and Results

106

Table - 4

Difference between Pre & Post Total CCTDI score in 3 Groups

Group-I Group-II Group-III

Mean 13.97 -1.28 -2.36

SD 37.91 17.18 7.41

Parametric approach: F2, 115=5.487 p=0.005(S)

Non Parametric approach: X2=11.378 DF=2 p=0.003(S)

(Kruskal -Wallis test)

Group-1 with Group-II: p=0.020 (S)

Group-1 with Group-III: p=0.011 (S)

The above table shows the difference between Pre-test and Post-test

CCTDI score in all the 3 groups.

The difference in Pre-test and Post-test CCTDI score in Group-I was

found to be statistically significant when compared with the same in Group-II.

Similarly the difference in Pre and Post test CCTDI score in Group-I was

found to be statistically significant when compared with the same in Group-III.

The same values of Group-II and Group-III when compared were found to

be not statistically significant.

Observation and Results

107

Table / Graph -5

CCTDI Pre and Post Score Intra Group Comparison

Group X±SD Paired

t Test DF p value

WS

Rank

Test

p value

I 13.97±37.91 2.331 39 0.025(S) Z=2.528 p=0.011 (S)

II -1.28±17.18 0.466 38 0.644(NS) Z=.676 p=0.499(NS)

III -2.36±7.41 1.987 38 0.554(NS) Z=1.771 p=0.077(NS)

The above table / graph shows the intra group comparison of Pre-test and

Post test CCTDI scores in all the 3 groups.

The difference has been found to be statistically significant in Group-I

where as it is found to be statistically non-significant in Group-II and Group-III.

Observation and Results

108

Table - 6

Intra Group Analysis of 7 Attributes of CT in EBM Group (using

Parametric Test)

Attributes Pre Post Difference Paired t Test

Truth Seek 28.80±6.56 34.67±6.44 5.87±9.08 0.000 (S)

Open Minded 34.02±4.17 38.50±4.11 4.48±5.76 0.000 (S)

Analyticity 44.20±6.28 45.02±6.83 0.82±8.76 0.555 (NS)

Systematicity. 38.00±5.95 43.35±5.69 5.35±7.82 0.000 (S)

Confident. 45.27±6.46 43.85±9.01 -1.42±11 0.418 (NS)

Inquisitive 48.02±4.65 42.77±5.05 -5.25±7.61 0.000 (S)

Maturity 34.70±6.09 38.82±4.96 4.12±7.53 0.001 (S)

The above table shows intra group analysis of the difference in Pre-and

Post test scores in each of the 7 attributes of Critical Thinking using parametric

test.

The difference between Pre and Post test Scores as regards the attributes

of Truth Seeking Open-mindedness, Systematicity, and Cognitive maturity was

found to be enhanced in a statistically significant way. Where as the

enhancement was not statistically significant as regards the attributes of

Analyticity. The attribute of confidence of Critical Thinking was found to be

reduced in a non significant way. The attribute of inquisitiveness was found to be

decreased in a statistically significant way.

Observation and Results

109

Table -7

Intra Group Analysis of 7 Attributes of CT in EBM Group

(using Non-Parametric Test)

Attributes Pre Post Difference WSR Test

Truth Seek 28.80±6.56 34.67±6.44 5.87±9.08 0.001 (S)

Open Minded 34.02±4.17 38.50±4.11 4.48±5.76 0.000 (S)

Analyticity 44.20±6.28 45.02±6.83 0.82±8.76 0.346 (NS)

Systematicity. 38.00±5.95 43.35±5.69 5.35±7.82 0.000 (S)

Confident. 45.27±6.46 43.85±9.01 -1.42±11 0.596 (NS)

Inquisitive 48.02±4.65 42.77±5.05 -5.25±7.61 0.000 (S)

Maturity 34.70±6.09 38.82±4.96 4.12±7.53 0.002 (S)

The above table shows intra group analysis of the difference in Pre and

Post test scores in each of the 7 attributes of Critical Thinking using non

parametric tests.

The difference between Pre and Post test scores as regards the attributes

of Truth Seeking, Open mindedness, Systematicity and cognitive maturity was

found to be enhanced in a statistically significant way where as enhancement was

not statistically significant as regards the attributes of Analyticity. The

confidence of critical thinking was found to be reduced but the same was not

statistically significant. The attribute of inquisitiveness was found to be

decreased in a statistically significant way.

Observation and Results

110

Table / Graph - 8

Alan’s EBM Survey

Pre Test Scores in 3 Groups

Group N X SD Range

I 40 119.08 17.25 78-163

II 39 115.74 21.32 78-181

III 39 117.15 9.63 104-140

Alan’s EBM Survey Pre Test Scores in 3 Groups

40

119.08

17.25

39

115.74

21.32

39

117.15

9.630

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

N X SD

Group I

Group II

Group III

Parametric approach: F2, 115=5.487 p=0.676(NS)

Non Parametric approach: X2 =01.072 DF=2 p=0.585(NS)

(Kruskal -Wallis test)

The above table / graph shows the Pre-Test AEBM-ASQ scores of all 3

groups. The scores of all the 3 groups were compared with each other. The

difference in score between the 3 groups has been found to be statistically non

significant both by parametric as well as non parametric tests.

Observation and Results

111

Table / Graph - 9

Alan’s EBM Survey

Post Test Scores in 3 Groups

Group n X SD Range

I 40 145.82 7.09 197-157

II 39 126.44 28.98 80-234

III 39 119.31 11.57 94-114

Parametric approach: F=22.007 p=0.000

Non Parametric approach: x2=48.36 DF=2 p=0.000

(Kruskal Wallis Test)

Group-I with Group-II p=0.002(S)

Group-I with Group-III p=0.000(S)

Group-II with Group-III p=0.270(NS)

Alan’s EBM Survey Post Test Scores in 3 Groups

40

145.82

7.09

39

126.44

28.9839

119.31

11.57

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

n X SD

Group I

Group II

Group III

The above table / graph shows the Post-test AEBM-ASQ scores in all the

3 groups. The difference in score between Group-I and Group-II and between

Group-I and Group-III has been found to be statistically significant where as the

difference between Group-II and Group-III has been found to be non-significant.

Observation and Results

112

Table / Graph -10

Alan’s EBM Survey

Groups Table-9 Pre-Post Mean Difference

N X SD

Group-I 40 26.75 17.49

Group-II 39 10.69 28.84

Group-III 39 2.15 11.19

Parametric approach: F=14.694 p=0.000(S)

Non-Parametric approach: X2

=32.261 DF=2 p=0.000(S)

Kruskal Wallis Test

Group-I with Group-II p=0.002(S)

Group-I with Group-III p=0.000(S)

Group-II with Group-III p=0.205(NS)

Alan’s EBM Survey Pre and Post Test Mean Difference

40

26.75

17.49

39

10.69

28.84

39

2.15

11.19

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

N X SD

Group I

Group II

Group III

The above table / graph shows the difference between means of Pre-test

and Post-test AEBM-ASQ scores of 3 groups. The difference between Group-I

and Group-II and between Group-I and Group-III has been found to be

statistically significant whereas the difference between Group-II and Group-III is

found to be non-significant.

Observation and Results

113

Table-11

Alans EBM Survey Intra group comparison Difference between Pre and

Post Test.

Group Wilcoxon Signed

Ranks Test Paired t Test

I z=5.310; p=000(S) p=0.000(S)

II 2=2.159; P=.028(S) p=0.026(S)

III 2=2.690; P=.091(NS) p=0.237(NS)

The above table shows the difference between Pre and Post test scores of

AEBM-ASQ in each of the 3 groups. (intra group comparison). The difference in

scores has been found to be statistically significant in Group-I and Group-II

where as it is found to be statistically non significant.

The reliability of the results obtained through AEBM-ASQ as regards the

attitude towards (EBM) was further authenticated by calculating the Cronbach’s

alpha (CA). The CA is a reliability index that estimates the internal consistency

or homogeneity of the tool viz AEBM-ASQ consisting of 25 different questions.

Internal consistency is the degree to which the sub parts or components of the

instrument measure the same attribute or dimension as a measure of the

instruments reliability. The formula to calculate CA is as follows.

CA=(M)X(r ) where M is number of items in the tool and r is the average

of M (m-1)/2 correlations between each pair of items.

A value of CA more than 0.6 is considered acceptable and a value of more

than 0.8 is excellent.

Observation and Results

114

Table-12

Cronbach’s Alpha

Pre-Test

CA

Post-Test

CA

All groups combined 0.68 .083

Group-I EBM 0.64 0.85

Group-II Email 0.82 0.83

Group-III Traditional 0.59 0.68

Table-12 shows the values of Cronbach’s Alpha calculated in each of the 3

groups and also all the 3 groups combined together.

Observation and Results

115

Results

EBM Group:

There was statistically Significant Enhancement in over all Critical

Thinking Abilities in EBM group (Group-I) as compared to the two groups viz

Email group (Group-II) and Traditional group (Group-III).

However there was enhancement in Critical Thinking Abilities in Email

Group (Group-II) as compared to Traditional group (Group-III), which was not

statistically significant.

There was no change at all in Critical Thinking abilities in Traditional

Group and the change was not statistically significant, both when compared to

other two groups and also intra group analysis.

Intra group analysis CT Attributes of CT EBM Group:

In the intra group analysis the Post-test score of CCTDI in EBM group

was enhanced in a statistically significant way, when compared to Pre-test score

of the same group. The Post-test score in Email group though was enhanced as

compared Pre-test score of the same group, it was found to be non significant.

As regards the intra group analysis of Group-I (EBM), there was

significant improvement in four of the seven attributes of critical thinking viz

Truth Seeking, Open mindedness, Systematicity and Cognitive maturity.

Analytical skills were found to be improved marginally whereas there was no

change or non significant decrease in confidence of critical thinking.

Observation and Results

116

The attribute of inquisitiveness was found to be decreased in a significant

way. These changes in all the seven attributes of critical thinking were found to

be similar by both parametric as well as non parametric tests.

Email Group:

There was significant improvement in Truth seeking attribute whereas in

Open mindedness there was non significant improvement.

There was no change in four of the attributes viz Systematicity, Cognitive,

maturity, Analytical skill and confidence of Critical thinking.

The attribute of inquisitiveness was found to be decreased in a significant

way.

Traditional Group:

There was no change at all in all of the seven attributes of Critical

Thinking in Group-III.