12Aug 2018

AN INVESTIGATION INTO NUMBER CONSERVATION ABILITY AMONG GIRLS OF COED AND SINGLE-SEX PRIMARYSCHOOLS IN KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA.

Crossref Cited-by Linking logo

  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • Cite This Article as
  • Corresponding Author

The aim of this study was to investigate number conservation ability among girls of co-educational (Coed) and single-sex primary schools. Two major objectives of the study were: 1) To investigate number conservation ability of girls belongs to Coed and single-sex primary schools; 2) To compare girls of Coed and single-sex primary schools on number conservation ability. The study was based on three null hypotheses: 1) Girls (age group of 3 to 5) of Coed and single-sex primary schools are not number conservers; 2) Girls (age group of 6 to 8) of Coed and single-sex primary schools are not number conservers; 3) There is no significance of difference in the frequency of Coed and single-sex primary schools? girls. All the government primary schools (Coed & single-sex) of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were the population of the study. A total of 240 girls students from Coed & single-sex primary schools were taken as a sample of the study. Empirical research design was taken as research design. Observation sheets were developed for data collection. Statistical tools such as percentage and t-test were applied for the analysis of data. Girls (age group 3 to 5) were not found to be number conservers. It was found from the results that girls (age group 6 to 8) were number conservers. It was also found that girls from Coed schools performed better (found to be number conservers at the age of 6) than those of single-sex schools (found to be number conservers at the age of 7). Hence it is recommended that girls are to be allowed and encouraged to study in Coed (boys? primary schools), government and other agencies should take serious steps in this regard.

  1. Ahmad, A. (2017). An Investigation into Number Conservation Ability among Primary Scholol Children of Pakistan According to Piaget's Theory of Cognitive Development Theory (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis). Nowshera: Northern
  2. Ahmad, A., Tabassum, R., & Farooq, R. A. (2017). An investigation of curriculum relevancy with the cognitive development (number conservation ability) during early childhood education. Journal of Early Childhood Care and Education, 1, 1-
  3. Bastick, T. (2000). Mediation of anti-social adolecent behavior by single-sex and coeducational schooling. Western Psychological Association Convention. Portland: Oreg.
  4. Datnow, A., Hubbard, L. (2002). Gender in policy and practice: Perspectives on single-sex and co-educational schooling. London: Routledge Falmer.
  5. Goldstein, H. (1987). Multilevel Models in Educational and Social Research . New York: Oxpord University Press.
  6. Hawley, R. (1993). The case for boys' school. In D.K. Hollinger and R. Adamson (Eds.). Single-sex schooling: Propenents speak. Washington, DC: US Department of
  7. Hudley, C. (1995). Assesing the impact of separate schooling for African American male adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 15, 38-57.
  8. Malik, R. (2013). Differential Effects of Single Sex versus Coed Education on the Personality Development of Primary School Students. Pakistan Journal of Social ???? Sciences, 33 (1), 149-162.
  9. Malik, R., & Mirza, M. S. (2014). Gender Differential Academic Achievement of Students in Single-sex and Coeducational Primary Schools in Pakistan. Bulletin of ?????????????? Education and Research, 36 (1), 1-14.
  10. Marsh, H. W. (1989). Effects of attending single-sex and co-educational high schools on achievement, attitudes, behaviors and sex differences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 70-85.
  11. Marsh, H. W. (1991). Public, Catholic single-sex Catholic coeducation high schools: their effect on achievement, affect and behaviors. American Journal of Education, 99, 320-356.
  12. Mooney, C. G. (2000). An Introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget, and St. Paul, MN: Red Leaf Press.
  13. Pakhtoonkhwa, G. o. (2014). Annual Statistical Report of Govt: Schools. Peshawar: Elementary & Secondary Education Department KPK.
  14. Piaget, J. (1977). The Essential Piaget. New York: Basic Books.
  15. Price, E., & Rosemier, R. (1972). Some cognitive and effective outcomes of same-sex versus coeducational grouping in first grade. Journal of Experimental Education, 40 (4), 70-77.
  16. Rahman, F. (2011). Assesment of Science Teachers Metacognitive Awareness and its Impact on the Performance of Students. Islamabad: Allama Iqbal Open University .
  17. Reisman, D. (1991). A margin of difference: The case for single-sex education. In Blau, J. R. (Ed.), Social roles and social institutions. Boulder: Westview Press.
  18. Riordan, C. (1994). Single-gender schools: outcomes for African and Hispanic Americans. Research in Sociology of Education and Socialization, 10, 177-205.
  19. Robinson, P., & Smithers, A. (1999). Should the sexes be separated for secondary education- comparisons of single-sex and co-educational schools. Research Papers in Education, 14, 23-49.
  20. Sax, L. (2005). Why Gender Matters. New York: Doubleday.
  21. Yates, S. M. (2004). Aspirations, progress and perceptions of boys from a single-sex school following the changeover to co-education. International Education Journal, 4, 167-176.

[Ayaz Ahmad and RabiaTabassum. (2018); AN INVESTIGATION INTO NUMBER CONSERVATION ABILITY AMONG GIRLS OF COED AND SINGLE-SEX PRIMARYSCHOOLS IN KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA. Int. J. of Adv. Res. 6 (Aug). 480-486] (ISSN 2320-5407). www.journalijar.com

Dr. Ayaz Ahmad
Assistant Professor Department of Education Northern University Nowshera Pakistan

DOI:

Article DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/7545      
DOI URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/7545

Download Full Paper

Download PDF No. of Downloads: 11 | No. of Views: 100