The research problem is to compare the teaching aptitude scores among entry level applicants in an educational program with varying degrees of preference or interest in the educational field of work as measured by the Brainard Occupational Preference Inventory (BOPI). The predicted results are: 1. The mean teaching aptitude score will be highest for the group with the highest preference or interest in the educational field of work as their first choice in the BOPI (the 1st preference group). 2. The mean teaching aptitude score will be lower for the group with educational field of work as their second choice in the BOPI (the 2nd preference group). 3. The mean teaching aptitude score will be lowest for

1. Teaching Aptitude and Relative Interest Preference on the Educational Field of Work: A Case of One-Way ANOVA (Suarez, 2008)
PSY520M/PSY522M
Template for Project
Name: SUAREZ, FLORABEL S. DLSU ID# 10797637
INSTRUCTION:
1. Fill in the answers or details required in this template, but do not delete any instructions that the instructor has
written.
2. Staple the completed template and put it in a short brown envelope with your name on it.
3. Please submit the completed template on Tuesday of the fourteenth week of the term.
Analysis
What analysis has been assigned for you to do? (Please check.)
O one-way ANOVA with more than two IV categories
O repeated measures with more than two IV categories
O two-way ANOVA with one IV having more than two IV levels
O two-way chi-square with one variable having more than two categories
O multiple regression with three or more predictors
Table of Variables
List the variables Is the What is Fill in these columns for nominal variables. Fill in these columns for interval/ratio
in this column. variable the level variables.
Add more rows an IV or of List below the Describe the scheme or What do high Describe the test, material,
as needed. a DV? measurem categories of procedure you used for scores on the or procedure you used for
ent of the the variable. classifying respondents into the variable measuring the variables,
variable? categories. indicate or including computational
mean? procedures.
Interest IV Nominal First high (Between-subjects design)
Preference in preference Participants have all taken
Educational the Brainard Occupational
Work Second high Interest Inventory (BOPI).
preference From the BOPI Profile of Test
Results, students who
Third high reflected educational work as
preference one of their top three
occupational interests were
sampled and classified
according to their degree of
preference on educational
work.
Teaching DV Interval/ High Uses the standardized
Aptitude ratio teaching tool—Teaching
aptitude Aptitude Test (TAT),
means high raw scores generated
potential to were converted to
succeeding percentile ranks to
in a teacher indicate the teaching
training aptitude in comparison
program with the normative
group
Psy520M -- First Term, SY 2008-2009 Page 1

2. Teaching Aptitude and Relative Interest Preference on the Educational Field of Work: A Case of One-Way ANOVA (Suarez, 2008)
Participants
Mention pertinent sample characteristics and sample size. Be sure to follow the required minimum sample size.
The sample data was taken from the admission test results conducted for the College of Education during
SY2004-2005 and SY2006-2007 at Central Philippine University (Iloilo City). A purposive random sampling was
carried out in this study considering that this is the sole data forwarded to the researcher for this project. As
reflected in Table 1, almost 72% of student applicants from the population sample indicated an interest
preference for the educational field of work. Table 2 presents the frequency distribution of the population sample
according to interest preference in the field (based on the BOPI Profile). Based on the required minimum sample
size for this project, teaching aptitude scores of 50 students for each preference group (n=150) were utilized in
this study.
Table 1. Frequency of Student Applicants with Interest in the Educational Field of Work based on the Brainard Occupational
Preference Inventory
School Year Test Total Number of Student No. of Students w/ Interest in Educational Work
Conducted Applicants N %
SY04-05, 1st Sem 174 122 70.11
SY04-05, 2nd Sem 56 46 82.14
SY06-07, 1st Sem 148 103 69.59
Total 378 271 71.69
Table 2. Frequency Distribution of Sample Population according to Degree of Preference in the Educational
Field of Work
Number of Students Sample Size
w/ interest in educational SY04-05, 1st SY04-05, 2nd SY06-07, 1st
work Sem Sem Sem Subtotal n %
1st Preference 67 23 49 139 50 35.97
2nd Preference 34 7 37 78 50 64.10
3rd Preference 21 16 17 54 50 92.59
Total 271 150 55.35
Research Problem
1. State clearly the research problem.
From School Year 2001-2006, the researcher of this study (also the guidance counselor assigned
for the college) has been conducting an entry level admission testing for Education student applicants at
Central Philippine University, using the following standardized assessment tools: the Teaching Aptitude
Test (TAT) and the Brainard Occupational Interest Inventory (BOPI). Based on the admission results, a
corresponding recommendation is forwarded to the college and is used as one of the criteria for admission.
A profile of admission results is also maintained annually reflecting the teaching aptitude and the top-three
occupational interests of student applicants. It has been observed that majority of the student applicants
indicated a high interest preference for educational work (either as their first, second, or third highly-
preferred occupational field). This study is particularly interested in comparing the teaching aptitude among
entry level applicants in an educational program with varying preference or degree of occupational interest
on the educational field of work.
Psy520M -- First Term, SY 2008-2009 Page 2

3. Teaching Aptitude and Relative Interest Preference on the Educational Field of Work: A Case of One-Way ANOVA (Suarez, 2008)
2. State the predicted results
NOTE:
If you are doing an ANOVA, the predictions should be statements about comparisons of means (which means are
greater). Also, if you choose to do a two-way ANOVA, it would be good if you can predict about the presence of an
interaction, again making statements about comparisons of means (not simply saying that you predict an interaction).
If you are doing a two-way chi-square, state what you predict to be percentages of responses for the different cells
across each column (if you are analyzing column percentages) or across each row (if you are analyzing row
percentages). For example, you can say: in rural areas (the first row), there is a larger percentage of adolescents
who drink only than those who smoke only; on the other hand, in urban areas (the second row), there is a larger
percentage of adolescents who smoke only than those who drink only.
If you are doing a multiple regression, state what you predict to be the directed relationship between each criterion or
independent variable on the one hand and the criterion/dependent variable on the other hand. For example, it is
predicted that motivation for studying would increase as parental support increases, etc.
The following are the predicted result of this study:
1. Student applicants with educational work as their first highly-preferred occupational field have greater
mean teaching aptitude scores than those who have chosen educational work as their second highly-
preferred interest.
2. Student applicants with educational work as their first highly-preferred occupational field have greater
mean teaching aptitude scores than those who have chosen educational work as their third highly-
preferred interest.
3. Student applicants with educational work as their second highly-preferred occupational field have greater
mean teaching aptitude scores than those who have chosen educational work as their third highly-
preferred interest.
Review of Literature
Get some references (e.g., journal articles or reference books) about the predictions you described above or, at
least, references that are related to, if not directly about, this prediction.
Mention in this section important details, explaining their relevance to your research problem. If you can or if it is
appropriate, point out any connections among the references.
Hence, you should write not only about what you read in these references, but also about your research problem.
Maximum length for the review of literature is 3 medium-length paragraphs.
In the Philippines, enrolment in teacher training appears to be one of the biggest sectors in
enrolment at the tertiary level after Commerce/Business Administration and Engineering and Technology
(Santos, No Date). It was asserted that the quality of future teachers will greatly determine the quality of the
students who will come under the sphere of their influence. According to Sharma (2006), “schools and
teachers are the crucial agents for bringing out the desirable changes in the system.” Considering that
teachers have the fundamental concerns and moral responsibilities to gear all the activities of the school in
the positive direction, they have to attain the attitude, aptitude, interest, values and certain competencies of
the teaching profession to ensure the fulfillment of the expected assignments. For this reason, teacher-
training institutions are expected to provide training to prospective teachers. Consequently, aptitude tests
for students wishing to be teachers needed to be developed and administered to students to help them
determine whether they will be successful in the teaching profession.
Psy520M -- First Term, SY 2008-2009 Page 3

4. Teaching Aptitude and Relative Interest Preference on the Educational Field of Work: A Case of One-Way ANOVA (Suarez, 2008)
In the matter of vocational interests, people differ in the readiness with which they exhibit
enthusiasm and in terms of the nature and completeness of their understanding of what a particular job
means with respect to the activities and conditions of work. Within the occupational domain, interests in
specific occupations, in broad occupational fields, and in general types of fields have been assessed. To
date, measures of specific interest such as the Brainard Occupational Preference Inventory (BOPI Manual,
1959) have been more useful than measures of general interest in predicting future choices and future
satisfaction (Murphy, and Davidshofer, 1994). The BOPI includes educational work (which includes teaching
as one of its related jobs) under the professional field of work.
Varied research were conducted to explore the nature of teaching aptitude and/or occupational
interest. In one study conducted by Kaur (2007) regarding teaching aptitude in predicting success in terms
of achievement, teacher educator rating and school teacher rating, teaching aptitude was found to have
positive correlation with almost all the success parameters, thus efforts should be made to test it more
comprehensively in the admission test and its weight may also be increased. In another study, Sharma
(2006) explored the relationship between the aptitude of teaching and professional interest among
prospective teachers. This study found out that general teaching competence and professional interest of
the pupil teachers significantly affect their teaching aptitude. A relative study was conducted by Agcaoili of
Ateneo de Manila University (in Santos, No Date) which aimed to determine the possibility of predicting
success among first year college students on the basis of interest on a field as well as other factors (e.g.,
mental ability, academic aptitude, academic achievement in high school, socio-economic status, and age). It
was found out that an aptitude for and a high interest in a particular field does play a positive role in
determining a student’s success in the field. Given these pertinent information, the present study appears to
be a novel investigation which aims to explore the variation in teaching aptitude when student applicants
differs to a certain degree in their preference on the educational field (with some applicants having chosen
educational work as their first highly-preferred occupational field while others have it as their second or third
preference over other occupational fields).
Raw Data
In the format that STATISTICA will accept
Interest Preference Teaching Aptitude
1 First high preference 27.9
2 First high preference 54.7
3 First high preference 62.7
4 First high preference 57.2
5 First high preference 71.5
6 First high preference 74.9
7 First high preference 41.7
8 First high preference 99.5
9 First high preference 5.7
10 First high preference 19.0
11 First high preference 36.8
12 First high preference 71.5
13 First high preference 15.6
14 First high preference 33.8
15 First high preference 57.2
16 First high preference 1.0
17 First high preference 57.2
18 First high preference 88.9
19 First high preference 5.7
Psy520M -- First Term, SY 2008-2009 Page 4

5. Teaching Aptitude and Relative Interest Preference on the Educational Field of Work: A Case of One-Way ANOVA (Suarez, 2008)
20 First high preference 36.8
21 First high preference 1.0
22 First high preference 2.0
23 First high preference 41.7
24 First high preference 25.1
25 First high preference 76.8
26 First high preference 13.8
27 First high preference 36.8
28 First high preference 19.0
29 First high preference 87.2
30 First high preference 21.3
31 First high preference 14.6
32 First high preference 17.4
33 First high preference 76.8
34 First high preference 1.0
35 First high preference 25.1
36 First high preference 1.7
37 First high preference 1.0
38 First high preference 21.3
39 First high preference 7.0
40 First high preference 13.8
41 First high preference 27.9
42 First high preference 15.6
43 First high preference 1.5
44 First high preference 2.5
45 First high preference 51.3
46 First high preference 43.4
47 First high preference 5.7
48 First high preference 57.2
49 First high preference 25.1
50 First high preference 7.0
51 Second high preference 21.3
52 Second high preference 44.6
53 Second high preference 25.1
54 Second high preference 15.6
55 Second high preference 1.7
56 Second high preference 19.0
57 Second high preference 41.7
58 Second high preference 7.0
59 Second high preference 15.6
60 Second high preference 9.4
61 Second high preference 7.0
62 Second high preference 39.1
63 Second high preference 1.5
64 Second high preference 9.4
Psy520M -- First Term, SY 2008-2009 Page 5

6. Teaching Aptitude and Relative Interest Preference on the Educational Field of Work: A Case of One-Way ANOVA (Suarez, 2008)
65 Second high preference 87.2
66 Second high preference 97.0
67 Second high preference 8.0
68 Second high preference 19.1
69 Second high preference 1.7
70 Second high preference 1.0
71 Second high preference 99.7
72 Second high preference 13.8
73 Second high preference 92.8
74 Second high preference 41.7
75 Second high preference 19.0
76 Second high preference 9.4
77 Second high preference 83.7
78 Second high preference 41.7
79 Second high preference 33.8
80 Second high preference 25.1
81 Second high preference 36.8
82 Second high preference 51.3
83 Second high preference 51.3
84 Second high preference 1.0
85 Second high preference 62.7
86 Second high preference 25.1
87 Second high preference 51.3
88 Second high preference 57.2
89 Second high preference 25.1
90 Second high preference 27.9
91 Second high preference 25.1
92 Second high preference 9.4
93 Second high preference 36.8
94 Second high preference 25.1
95 Second high preference 15.6
96 Second high preference 67.2
97 Second high preference 7.0
98 Second high preference 33.8
99 Second high preference 57.2
100 Second high preference 84.2
101 Third high preference 7.0
102 Third high preference 57.2
103 Third high preference 87.8
104 Third high preference 15.6
105 Third high preference 4.5
106 Third high preference 33.8
107 Third high preference 36.8
108 Third high preference 21.3
109 Third high preference 41.7
Psy520M -- First Term, SY 2008-2009 Page 6

7. Teaching Aptitude and Relative Interest Preference on the Educational Field of Work: A Case of One-Way ANOVA (Suarez, 2008)
110 Third high preference 51.3
111 Third high preference 67.2
112 Third high preference 33.8
113 Third high preference 15.6
114 Third high preference 41.7
115 Third high preference 33.8
116 Third high preference 9.4
117 Third high preference 62.7
118 Third high preference 88.3
119 Third high preference 7.0
120 Third high preference 15.5
121 Third high preference 7.0
122 Third high preference 67.2
123 Third high preference 83.7
124 Third high preference 99.5
125 Third high preference 41.7
126 Third high preference 27.9
127 Third high preference 71.5
128 Third high preference 84.3
129 Third high preference 67.2
130 Third high preference 62.7
131 Third high preference 25.1
132 Third high preference 44.6
133 Third high preference 9.4
134 Third high preference 82.7
135 Third high preference 44.6
136 Third high preference 19.0
137 Third high preference 44.6
138 Third high preference 67.2
139 Third high preference 7.0
140 Third high preference 33.8
141 Third high preference 15.5
142 Third high preference 87.8
143 Third high preference 36.8
144 Third high preference 71.5
145 Third high preference 27.9
146 Third high preference 25.1
147 Third high preference 9.4
148 Third high preference 99.5
149 Third high preference 4.5
150 Third high preference 57.2
Statistical Software Output
As in the handout
Psy520M -- First Term, SY 2008-2009 Page 7

8. Teaching Aptitude and Relative Interest Preference on the Educational Field of Work: A Case of One-Way ANOVA (Suarez, 2008)
ANOVA Table
Univariate Tests of Significance for Teaching Aptitude (Spreadsheet1)
Sigma-restricted parameterization
Effective hypothesis decomposition
SS Degr. of MS F p
Effect Freedom
Intercept 201857.4 1 201857.4 258.8394 0.000000
Interest Preference 3148.7 2 1574.3 2.0188 0.136485
Error 114638.8 147 779.9
Table of Means
Interest Preference; LS Means (Spreadsheet1)
Current effect: F(2, 147)=2.0188, p=.13648
Effective hypothesis decomposition
Interest Preference Teaching Aptitude Teaching Aptitude Teaching Aptitude Teaching Aptitude N
Cell No. Mean Std.Err. -95.00% +95.00%
1 First high preference 33.21800 3.949318 25.41323 41.02277 50
2 Second high preference33.67600 3.949318 25.87123 41.48077 50
3 Third high preference 43.15800 3.949318 35.35323 50.96277 50
Graph of Means
In te re s t P re f e re n c e ; L S M e a n s
C u rre n t e f f e c t: F (2 , 1 4 7 )= 2 .0 1 8 8 , p = .1 3 6 4 8
E f f e c t iv e h y p o t h e s is d e c o m p o s it io n
V e r t ic a l b a r s d e n o t e 0 . 9 5 c o n f id e n c e in t e r v a ls
55
50
45
Teaching Aptitude
40
35
30
25
20
F ir s t h ig h p r e f e r e n c e T h ir d h ig h p r e f e r e n c e
S e c o n d h ig h p r e f e r e n c e
In te re s t P re f e re n c e
ANOVA Summary Table:
Source of variation/ df SS MS F p
Effect
Psy520M -- First Term, SY 2008-2009 Page 8

9. Teaching Aptitude and Relative Interest Preference on the Educational Field of Work: A Case of One-Way ANOVA (Suarez, 2008)
Between-groups q – 1=3-1=2 3148.7 3148.7/2 1574.35/779.86 0.13648
variation (BG) =1574.35 =2.02
Within-groups N – q = 150-3=147 114638.8 114638.8/147 xxxxxxx xxxxxxx
variation: (WG) =779.86
Or Error
Total N – 1=150-1=149 117787.5 xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx
Analysis of Output
Answer the same questions as in the handout for the analysis that you are doing, but omit the questions/exercises
that require some manual computations to verify some statistics from the STATISTICA output.
A table of questions and answers, following the format in the hand-out.
Questions regarding results of analyses:
1 What is the independent variable? Interest Preference
2 What is the dependent variable? Teaching Aptitude
3 What is the null hypothesis for the F-test?
H 0 : µ First = µ Second = µThird
4 What is the alternative hypothesis for the There are at least two population means that are
F-test? not equal to each other.
There are at least two interest preference groups
with different (population) mean teaching aptitude
scores.
5 Should the null hypothesis be rejected? No, do not reject the null hypothesis
F(2, 147) = 2.02, MSE = 779.9, p = .13648.
6 Are there significant differences among No. There are no significant differences among
the means? the means.
7 Do you recommend doing multiple No.
comparison tests?
Discussion of Results
Discuss the results in any sensible and substantive way that you deem appropriate. Do not explain the process of
hypothesis-testing that you did, rather discuss the relationships of variables analyzed.
Psy520M -- First Term, SY 2008-2009 Page 9

10. Teaching Aptitude and Relative Interest Preference on the Educational Field of Work: A Case of One-Way ANOVA (Suarez, 2008)
Having compared the teaching aptitude of entry level applicants in an educational program with
varying preference or degree of occupational interest on the educational field of work, results of this study
indicate that at alpha level of .05, the mean teaching aptitude percentile score among the three groups (i.e.,
groups with first-high preference, second-high preference, and third-high preference on educational work)
did not differ significantly, F(2,147)=2.02, p=.13648. This means that on the average, the teaching aptitude
of the student applicant’s for the College of Education at Central Philippine University is not related to their
degree of interest preference on educational work when such field belongs to one of their top-three choices.
Whether educational work is considered either as their first-, second-, or third-preferred occupational field, on
the average, their potential to succeed in the teacher training program remains the same.
References
Brainard Occupational Preference Inventory Manual (1959). The Psychological Corporation.
Kaur, Dushyant. (2007). Academic achievement, teaching aptitude, and the personality traits as the predictors of
success in elementary teacher training: A study. Accessed at
http://jmi.nic.in/Research/ab2007_iase_dushyant.pdf on August 22, 2008.
Murphy, K.R. and Davidshofer, C.O. (1994). Psychological Testing: Principles and Applications (3rd Ed.).
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall International, Inc.
Santos, Zenaida. (No Date). Standardized Aptitude Test for Teachers Manual. Quezon City: Behavioral Dynamics,
Inc.
Sharma, Parveen (2006). A study of teaching aptitude in relation to general teaching competency, professional
teaching and academic achievements of B. Ed. pupil teachers. Article retrieved from
http://jmi.nic.in/Research/ab2006_education_parveensharma.htm on August 23, 2008.
Psy520M -- First Term, SY 2008-2009 Page 10